Diagonalizability of $A in M_{n}(Bbb{R})$ (Upper traingular matrix) with all diagonal entries 1 and $A neq...












2












$begingroup$


If $A in M_{n}(Bbb{R})$ is an Upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $1$ such that $A neq I$, then what can we say about the diagonalizability of $A$ ?



I know that if the matrix has distinct eigenvalues or the set of eigenvectors are linearly independent then the matrix is diagonalizable.



And that the eigenvalues of the triangular matrices are given by the diagonal elements like here and here, but they work nocely if we had distinct elements on the main diagonal.



But in my case I have same value 1 on the main diagonal, how can I approach about the diagonalizability of the matrix?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It depends. Refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_normal_form
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Cheung
    Dec 20 '17 at 4:39
















2












$begingroup$


If $A in M_{n}(Bbb{R})$ is an Upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $1$ such that $A neq I$, then what can we say about the diagonalizability of $A$ ?



I know that if the matrix has distinct eigenvalues or the set of eigenvectors are linearly independent then the matrix is diagonalizable.



And that the eigenvalues of the triangular matrices are given by the diagonal elements like here and here, but they work nocely if we had distinct elements on the main diagonal.



But in my case I have same value 1 on the main diagonal, how can I approach about the diagonalizability of the matrix?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    It depends. Refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_normal_form
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Cheung
    Dec 20 '17 at 4:39














2












2








2





$begingroup$


If $A in M_{n}(Bbb{R})$ is an Upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $1$ such that $A neq I$, then what can we say about the diagonalizability of $A$ ?



I know that if the matrix has distinct eigenvalues or the set of eigenvectors are linearly independent then the matrix is diagonalizable.



And that the eigenvalues of the triangular matrices are given by the diagonal elements like here and here, but they work nocely if we had distinct elements on the main diagonal.



But in my case I have same value 1 on the main diagonal, how can I approach about the diagonalizability of the matrix?










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




If $A in M_{n}(Bbb{R})$ is an Upper triangular matrix with diagonal entries $1$ such that $A neq I$, then what can we say about the diagonalizability of $A$ ?



I know that if the matrix has distinct eigenvalues or the set of eigenvectors are linearly independent then the matrix is diagonalizable.



And that the eigenvalues of the triangular matrices are given by the diagonal elements like here and here, but they work nocely if we had distinct elements on the main diagonal.



But in my case I have same value 1 on the main diagonal, how can I approach about the diagonalizability of the matrix?







linear-algebra matrices diagonalization






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Dec 20 '17 at 4:37









BAYMAXBAYMAX

2,86621123




2,86621123












  • $begingroup$
    It depends. Refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_normal_form
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Cheung
    Dec 20 '17 at 4:39


















  • $begingroup$
    It depends. Refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_normal_form
    $endgroup$
    – Brian Cheung
    Dec 20 '17 at 4:39
















$begingroup$
It depends. Refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_normal_form
$endgroup$
– Brian Cheung
Dec 20 '17 at 4:39




$begingroup$
It depends. Refer to: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jordan_normal_form
$endgroup$
– Brian Cheung
Dec 20 '17 at 4:39










2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















2












$begingroup$

It isn't diagonalizable. Your matrix is of the form $I+N$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and $N$ is strictly upper triangular. You can check that being strictly upper triangular means that $N^n=0$, since if the $e_i$ are the basis vectors, and $E_m$ is the subspace spanned by $e_1,ldots,e_m$, with $E_0=0$ then you can check that $NE_m subseteq E_{m-1}$, so $N^nE_n = E_0=0$. However since $Ane I$, $Nne 0$. Now suppose $M$ diagonalizes $A$, so $MAM^{-1} = D$ for $D$ a diagonal matrix. Then $M(I+N)M^{-1}=MIM^{-1}+MNM^{-1} = D$, but $MIM^{-1}=I$, so we in fact have $MNM^{-1}=D-I$, so in fact $N$ must be diagonalizable. However we still have $(MNM^{-1})^n=0$, so if $D-I$ has elements $lambda_1,ldots,lambda_n$ on the diagonal, then $lambda_i^n=0$, which implies $lambda_i=0$, hence $D-I=0$. Thus we would have that $D=I$, and $N=0$, contradicting the assumption that $Ane I$, so $Nne 0$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
    $endgroup$
    – BAYMAX
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:43










  • $begingroup$
    Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:45










  • $begingroup$
    Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
    $endgroup$
    – BAYMAX
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:47










  • $begingroup$
    Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:48



















0












$begingroup$

Since the matrix is upper triangular with all diagonal entries $1$, its characteristic equation is $(1-lambda)^n=0$. This give an eigenvalue of $1$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Also, finding the corresponding eigenspace through the null space of $A-lambda I$ tells us that it is generated by a single vector $[1,0,...,0]^T$. Thus its geometric multiplicity is $1$, different from $n$ and hence it is not diagonalizable.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$













    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "69"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: true,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: 10,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });














    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2574046%2fdiagonalizability-of-a-in-m-n-bbbr-upper-traingular-matrix-with-all-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    2












    $begingroup$

    It isn't diagonalizable. Your matrix is of the form $I+N$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and $N$ is strictly upper triangular. You can check that being strictly upper triangular means that $N^n=0$, since if the $e_i$ are the basis vectors, and $E_m$ is the subspace spanned by $e_1,ldots,e_m$, with $E_0=0$ then you can check that $NE_m subseteq E_{m-1}$, so $N^nE_n = E_0=0$. However since $Ane I$, $Nne 0$. Now suppose $M$ diagonalizes $A$, so $MAM^{-1} = D$ for $D$ a diagonal matrix. Then $M(I+N)M^{-1}=MIM^{-1}+MNM^{-1} = D$, but $MIM^{-1}=I$, so we in fact have $MNM^{-1}=D-I$, so in fact $N$ must be diagonalizable. However we still have $(MNM^{-1})^n=0$, so if $D-I$ has elements $lambda_1,ldots,lambda_n$ on the diagonal, then $lambda_i^n=0$, which implies $lambda_i=0$, hence $D-I=0$. Thus we would have that $D=I$, and $N=0$, contradicting the assumption that $Ane I$, so $Nne 0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:43










    • $begingroup$
      Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:45










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:47










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:48
















    2












    $begingroup$

    It isn't diagonalizable. Your matrix is of the form $I+N$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and $N$ is strictly upper triangular. You can check that being strictly upper triangular means that $N^n=0$, since if the $e_i$ are the basis vectors, and $E_m$ is the subspace spanned by $e_1,ldots,e_m$, with $E_0=0$ then you can check that $NE_m subseteq E_{m-1}$, so $N^nE_n = E_0=0$. However since $Ane I$, $Nne 0$. Now suppose $M$ diagonalizes $A$, so $MAM^{-1} = D$ for $D$ a diagonal matrix. Then $M(I+N)M^{-1}=MIM^{-1}+MNM^{-1} = D$, but $MIM^{-1}=I$, so we in fact have $MNM^{-1}=D-I$, so in fact $N$ must be diagonalizable. However we still have $(MNM^{-1})^n=0$, so if $D-I$ has elements $lambda_1,ldots,lambda_n$ on the diagonal, then $lambda_i^n=0$, which implies $lambda_i=0$, hence $D-I=0$. Thus we would have that $D=I$, and $N=0$, contradicting the assumption that $Ane I$, so $Nne 0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:43










    • $begingroup$
      Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:45










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:47










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:48














    2












    2








    2





    $begingroup$

    It isn't diagonalizable. Your matrix is of the form $I+N$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and $N$ is strictly upper triangular. You can check that being strictly upper triangular means that $N^n=0$, since if the $e_i$ are the basis vectors, and $E_m$ is the subspace spanned by $e_1,ldots,e_m$, with $E_0=0$ then you can check that $NE_m subseteq E_{m-1}$, so $N^nE_n = E_0=0$. However since $Ane I$, $Nne 0$. Now suppose $M$ diagonalizes $A$, so $MAM^{-1} = D$ for $D$ a diagonal matrix. Then $M(I+N)M^{-1}=MIM^{-1}+MNM^{-1} = D$, but $MIM^{-1}=I$, so we in fact have $MNM^{-1}=D-I$, so in fact $N$ must be diagonalizable. However we still have $(MNM^{-1})^n=0$, so if $D-I$ has elements $lambda_1,ldots,lambda_n$ on the diagonal, then $lambda_i^n=0$, which implies $lambda_i=0$, hence $D-I=0$. Thus we would have that $D=I$, and $N=0$, contradicting the assumption that $Ane I$, so $Nne 0$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$



    It isn't diagonalizable. Your matrix is of the form $I+N$ where $I$ is the identity matrix and $N$ is strictly upper triangular. You can check that being strictly upper triangular means that $N^n=0$, since if the $e_i$ are the basis vectors, and $E_m$ is the subspace spanned by $e_1,ldots,e_m$, with $E_0=0$ then you can check that $NE_m subseteq E_{m-1}$, so $N^nE_n = E_0=0$. However since $Ane I$, $Nne 0$. Now suppose $M$ diagonalizes $A$, so $MAM^{-1} = D$ for $D$ a diagonal matrix. Then $M(I+N)M^{-1}=MIM^{-1}+MNM^{-1} = D$, but $MIM^{-1}=I$, so we in fact have $MNM^{-1}=D-I$, so in fact $N$ must be diagonalizable. However we still have $(MNM^{-1})^n=0$, so if $D-I$ has elements $lambda_1,ldots,lambda_n$ on the diagonal, then $lambda_i^n=0$, which implies $lambda_i=0$, hence $D-I=0$. Thus we would have that $D=I$, and $N=0$, contradicting the assumption that $Ane I$, so $Nne 0$.







    share|cite|improve this answer












    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer










    answered Dec 20 '17 at 4:46









    jgonjgon

    13.5k22041




    13.5k22041












    • $begingroup$
      $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:43










    • $begingroup$
      Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:45










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:47










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:48


















    • $begingroup$
      $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:43










    • $begingroup$
      Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:45










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
      $endgroup$
      – BAYMAX
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:47










    • $begingroup$
      Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
      $endgroup$
      – jgon
      Dec 20 '17 at 5:48
















    $begingroup$
    $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
    $endgroup$
    – BAYMAX
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:43




    $begingroup$
    $N^{n} = 0$ for some $n$ means that it is Idempotent , then does this mean that we can give Upper triangular matrices as examples of Idempotent matrices?
    $endgroup$
    – BAYMAX
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:43












    $begingroup$
    Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:45




    $begingroup$
    Err, $N$ is nilpotent (nilpotence means that some power of something is 0). Idempotence is the property that $P^2=P$, where say $P$ is some matrix. Examples of idempotent operators are projections (say $(a,b)mapsto (a,0)$). But strictly upper triangular matrices are nilpotent, if that's the question you were asking, then yes.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:45












    $begingroup$
    Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
    $endgroup$
    – BAYMAX
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:47




    $begingroup$
    Here $n$ is the order of the matrix ? then is it possible that $N^{k} =0$ for $k < n$?
    $endgroup$
    – BAYMAX
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:47












    $begingroup$
    Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:48




    $begingroup$
    Here $n$ is the dimension of the vector space. It is certainly possible that $N^k=0$ for $k<n$, but we can guarantee that it will become 0 by the time we reach $N^n$. An example with $N^k = 0$ for $k<n$ is $begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 1 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ 0 & 0 & 0 \ end{pmatrix}$, which squares to 0.
    $endgroup$
    – jgon
    Dec 20 '17 at 5:48











    0












    $begingroup$

    Since the matrix is upper triangular with all diagonal entries $1$, its characteristic equation is $(1-lambda)^n=0$. This give an eigenvalue of $1$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Also, finding the corresponding eigenspace through the null space of $A-lambda I$ tells us that it is generated by a single vector $[1,0,...,0]^T$. Thus its geometric multiplicity is $1$, different from $n$ and hence it is not diagonalizable.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      0












      $begingroup$

      Since the matrix is upper triangular with all diagonal entries $1$, its characteristic equation is $(1-lambda)^n=0$. This give an eigenvalue of $1$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Also, finding the corresponding eigenspace through the null space of $A-lambda I$ tells us that it is generated by a single vector $[1,0,...,0]^T$. Thus its geometric multiplicity is $1$, different from $n$ and hence it is not diagonalizable.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        0












        0








        0





        $begingroup$

        Since the matrix is upper triangular with all diagonal entries $1$, its characteristic equation is $(1-lambda)^n=0$. This give an eigenvalue of $1$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Also, finding the corresponding eigenspace through the null space of $A-lambda I$ tells us that it is generated by a single vector $[1,0,...,0]^T$. Thus its geometric multiplicity is $1$, different from $n$ and hence it is not diagonalizable.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Since the matrix is upper triangular with all diagonal entries $1$, its characteristic equation is $(1-lambda)^n=0$. This give an eigenvalue of $1$ with algebraic multiplicity $n$. Also, finding the corresponding eigenspace through the null space of $A-lambda I$ tells us that it is generated by a single vector $[1,0,...,0]^T$. Thus its geometric multiplicity is $1$, different from $n$ and hence it is not diagonalizable.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 30 '18 at 15:47









        RhaldrynRhaldryn

        309414




        309414






























            draft saved

            draft discarded




















































            Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2574046%2fdiagonalizability-of-a-in-m-n-bbbr-upper-traingular-matrix-with-all-d%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            Bundesstraße 106

            Verónica Boquete

            Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten