I'm working my way through this paper: Down with Determinants!
In Section 2 (pretty much right off the bat) he gives his determinant-less proof that every finite-dimensional complex linear operator has an eigenvalue. First he says that a vector and its images under the transformation, repeated n times, can't be linearly independent, and defines $a_i$ to be the coefficients of the linear combination.
$$ a_0v + a_1Tv + \cdots + a_nT^nv=0 $$
Then he makes a (non-matrix) polynomial of those coefficients and factors it.
$$ a_0 + a_1z + \cdots + a_nz^n = c(z-r_1)\cdots(z-r_m) $$
The above holds for any complex number $z$. I understand everything so far, but then he has this step, which seems to use the first equation as a polynomial of matrices:
$$ 0=(a_oI + a_1T + \cdots + a_nT^n)v = c(T-r_1I)\cdots(T-r_mI)v $$
This seems totally non-obvious to me. I can sort of see this as an analogy with the factorization of the regular polynomial, and I verified it by hand with a generic 2-dimensional T, but I'm not sure why it works in the general case.
My main questions:
- What justifies the last step? Does it necessarily use the 2nd equation, or is that just sort of by analogy?
- In the last part, we've basically factored a polynomial of matrices. The "roots" are all constants times the identity matrix. Is this always true, or could the roots be any matrix?