arXiv reader

Norm and numerical radius inequalities for operator matrices

Fuad Kittaneh, Hamid Reza Moradi and Mohammad Sababheh

arXiv
2206.12966v1 · PDF · 26 June 2022
Categories
math.FA
Licence
CC0 1.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

Operator matrices have played a significant role in studying Hilbert space operators. In this paper, we discuss further properties of operator matrices and present new estimates for the operator norms and numerical radii of such operators. Moreover, operator matrices whose real and imaginary parts are positive will be discussed, and sharper bounds will be shown for such class.

Items 27

Lemma

Lemma 1.1

GXL2

[3, Theorem 3.7] Let X,Y,Z,W\in\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}). Then

\omega\left(\left[\begin{array}{cc}X&Y\\Z&W\end{array}\right]\right)\geq \max\left(\omega(X),\omega(W),\frac{\omega(Y+Z)}{2},\frac{\omega(Y-Z)}{2}\right)

and

\omega\left(\left[\begin{array}{cc}X&Y\\Z&W\end{array}\right]\right)\leq \max\left(\omega(X),\omega(W)\right)+\frac{\omega(Y+Z)+\omega(Y-Z)}{2}.
Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 1.2

52RE

[3, Lemma 3.1] Let A_i\in\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) for i=1,2,3,4. Then

\omega\left(\left[\begin{array}{cc} A_1&A_2\\A_3&A_4\end{array}\right]\right)\geq \max\left\{\omega\left(\left[\begin{array}{cc} A_1&O\\O&A_4\end{array}\right]\right),\omega\left(\left[\begin{array}{cc} O&A_2\\A_3&O\end{array}\right]\right)\right\}.
Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 1.3

M1CV

[johnson, Theorem 1] Let X=\left[ \begin{matrix} a & b \\ c & d \\ \end{matrix} \right] with a,b,c,d\in \mathbb{R}. Then

\omega \left( X \right)=\frac{\left| a+d \right|+\sqrt{{{\left( a-d \right)}^{2}}+{{\left( b+c \right)}^{2}}}}{2}.
Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 1.4

1YB7

[04, Lemma 1] Let A,B,C\in \mathcal B\left( \mathcal H \right) be such that A,B\geq O. Then

\left[ \begin{matrix} A & C \\ {{C}^{*}} & B \\ \end{matrix} \right]\ge O\Leftrightarrow {{\left| \left\langle Cx,y \right\rangle \right|}^{2}}\le \left\langle Ax,x \right\rangle \left\langle By,y \right\rangle,\forall x,y\in\mathcal{H}.
Used by Proof
Lemma

Lemma 1.5

8AHQ

Let {{T}_{i}}\in \mathcal B\left( \mathcal H \right) for i=1,2,3,4 be such that \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ T_{2}^{*} & {{T}_{3}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\geq O. Then \left[ \begin{matrix} t{{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ T_{2}^{*} & \frac{{{T}_{3}}}{t} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\geq O for all t>0.

Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 1.5

Recall that if T\geq O and if A\in\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}) is arbitrary, then ATA^*\geq O. Then the result follows immediately noting that

\left[ \begin{matrix} t{{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ T_{2}^{*} & \frac{{{T}_{3}}}{t} \\ \end{matrix} \right]=\left[ \begin{matrix} \sqrt{t} & O \\ O & \sqrt{\frac{1}{t}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ T_{2}^{*} & {{T}_{3}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\left[ \begin{matrix} \sqrt{t} & O \\ O & \sqrt{\frac{1}{t}} \\ \end{matrix} \right].
Lemma

Lemma 2.1

OLIQ

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be partitioned as in (?). Then

\left\|{{A}_{12}} \right\|\le \omega \left( T \right).
Used by Proof
Proof of Lemma 2.1

Noting that \left[\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}&A_{12}\\A_{12}^*&A_{22}\end{array}\right] is self-adjoint (and hence is normal), we have \omega\left( \left[\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}&A_{12}\\A_{12}^*&A_{22}\end{array}\right] \right)=\left\| \left[\begin{array}{cc}A_{11}&A_{12}\\A_{12}^*&A_{22}\end{array}\right] \right\|. Then

\begin{aligned} \left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\| &=\omega \left( \left[ \begin{matrix} O & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & O \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right) \\ & \le \omega \left( \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right) \quad \text{(by\;Lemma\;\ref{lem_w_diag})} \\ &=\left\|\left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\right\|\\ &\leq \omega(T)\quad({\text{by}}\;\eqref{eq_real}). \end{aligned}

This completes the proof.

Uses Lemma 1.2
Theorem

Theorem 2.1

5WUH

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be partitioned as in (?). Then

\frac{1}{4}\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{12}} \right|}^{2}}+{{\left| T_{21}^{*} \right|}^{2}} \right\|\le {{\omega }^{2}}\left( T \right).
Proof of Theorem 2.1

It follows from Lemma 2.1 that

\left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|\le \omega \left( \mathcal RT \right)\;\text{ and }\;\left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\|\le \omega \left( \mathcal IT \right).

We then obtain

\begin{aligned} \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{12}} \right|}^{2}}+{{\left| T_{21}^{*} \right|}^{2}} \right\|&=\left\| {{\left| {{A}_{12}}+\textup i{{B}_{12}} \right|}^{2}}+{{\left| {{A}_{12}}-\textup i{{B}_{12}} \right|}^{2}} \right\| \\ & =2\left\| {{\left| {{A}_{12}} \right|}^{2}}+{{\left| {{B}_{12}} \right|}^{2}} \right\| \\ & \le 2\left( {{\left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|}^{2}}+{{\left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\|}^{2}} \right) \quad \text{(by the triangle inequality)}\\ & \le 2\left( {{\omega }^{2}}\left( \mathcal RT \right)+{{\omega }^{2}}\left( \mathcal IT \right) \right) \quad \text{(by \eqref{11})}\\ & \le 4{{\omega }^{2}}\left( T \right) \quad \text{(by \eqref{eq_real})}, \end{aligned}

and the proof is complete.

Uses Lemma 2.1
Theorem

Theorem 2.2

R03U

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be accretive-dissipative partitioned as in (?). Then

\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{12}} \right|}^{2}}+{{\left| T_{21}^{*} \right|}^{2}} \right\|\le {{\omega }^{2}}\left( T \right).
Theorem

Theorem 2.3

V840

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be accretive-dissipative partitioned as in (?). Then

\omega \left( {{T}_{12}} \right)\le \frac{1}{2}\left\| {{A}_{11}}+{{A}_{22}}+{{B}_{11}}+{{B}_{22}} \right\|,

and

\omega \left( {{T}_{12}} \right)\le \sqrt{\left\| {{A}_{11}}+{{B}_{11}} \right\|\left\| {{A}_{22}}+{{B}_{22}} \right\|}.

Further, both inequalities are sharp.

Proof of Theorem 2.3

Since T is an accretive-dissipative matrix, then, by Lemma 1.4, we have

\left| \left\langle {{A}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle \right|\le \sqrt{\left\langle {{A}_{11}}x,x \right\rangle \left\langle {{A}_{22}}x,x \right\rangle }\;\text{ and }\;\left| \left\langle {{B}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle \right|\le \sqrt{\left\langle {{B}_{11}}x,x \right\rangle \left\langle {{B}_{22}}x,x \right\rangle }

for any unit vector x\in \mathcal H. Therefore,

\begin{aligned} \left| \left\langle {{T}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle \right|&=\left| \left\langle \left( {{A}_{12}}+\textup i{{B}_{12}} \right)x,x \right\rangle \right|\\ &=\left| \left\langle {{A}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle +\textup i\left\langle {{B}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle \right| \\ & \le \left| \left\langle {{A}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle \right|+\left| \left\langle {{B}_{12}}x,x \right\rangle \right| \\ & \le \sqrt{\left\langle {{A}_{11}}x,x \right\rangle \left\langle {{A}_{22}}x,x \right\rangle }+\sqrt{\left\langle {{B}_{11}}x,x \right\rangle \left\langle {{B}_{22}}x,x \right\rangle }. \end{aligned}

On the other hand, by the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality, we know that

\sqrt{\left\langle {{A}_{11}}x,x \right\rangle \left\langle {A}_{22}x,x \right\rangle }+\sqrt{\left\langle {{B}_{11}}x,x \right\rangle \left\langle {{B}_{22}}x,x \right\rangle }\le \frac{1}{2}\left\langle \left( {{A}_{11}}+{{A}_{22}}+{{B}_{11}}+{{B}_{22}} \right)x,x \right\rangle.

Combining this with the inequality (Proof), gives the inequality (2.3).

For the inequality (2.3), sine T is accretive-dissipative, it follows from Lemma 1.5 that \left[ \begin{matrix} t{{T}_{11}} & {{T}_{12}} \\ {{T}_{21}} & \frac{{{T}_{22}}}{t} \\ \end{matrix} \right] is accretive-dissipative for all t>0. Now applying the inequality (2.3) to S=\left[ \begin{matrix} t{{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & \frac{{{A}_{22}}}{t} \\ \end{matrix} \right]+\textup i\left[ \begin{matrix} t{{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & \frac{{{B}_{22}}}{t} \\ \end{matrix} \right], we have

\begin{aligned} \omega \left( {{T}_{12}} \right)&\le \frac{1}{2}\left\| t{{A}_{11}}+\frac{{{A}_{22}}}{t}+t{{B}_{11}}+\frac{{{B}_{22}}}{t} \right\| \\ & \le \frac{1}{2}\left( t\left\| {{A}_{11}}+{{B}_{11}} \right\|+\frac{1}{t}\left\| {{A}_{22}}+{{B}_{22}} \right\| \right) \end{aligned}

for all t>0. Now taking the minimum over all t>0, we have

\omega \left( {{T}_{12}} \right)\le \sqrt{\left\| {{A}_{11}}+{{B}_{11}} \right\|\left\| {{A}_{22}}+{{B}_{22}} \right\|},

as required. Sharpness of the inequalities can be seen using the matrix T=\left[\begin{array}{cc}1&1\\1&1\end{array}\right].

Uses Lemma 1.4, Lemma 1.5
Theorem

Theorem 2.4

CBSO

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be partitioned as in (?). Then

\max \left( \alpha ,\beta \right)\le \omega\left(T\right),

where

\alpha =\max \left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|,\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\|,\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}+A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2},\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}-A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2} \right),

and

\beta =\max \left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|,\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\|,\frac{\left\| {{B}_{12}}+B_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2},\frac{\left\| {{B}_{12}}-B_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2} \right).

Further, the inequality is sharp.

Proof of Theorem 2.4

We know that \left\| \mathcal RT \right\|,\left\| \mathcal IT \right\|\le \omega(T). In consequence,

\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|,\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|\le \omega(T).

On the other hand, by Lemma 1.1, we have

\begin{aligned} & \max \left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|,\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\|,\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}+A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2},\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}-A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2} \right) \\ & =\max \left( \omega \left( {{A}_{11}} \right),\omega \left( {{A}_{22}} \right),\frac{\omega \left( {{A}_{12}}+A_{12}^{*} \right)}{2},\frac{\omega \left( {{A}_{12}}-A_{12}^{*} \right)}{2} \right) \\ & \le \omega \left( \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right) \\ & =\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|, \end{aligned}

i.e.,

\max \left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|,\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\|,\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}+A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2},\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}-A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2} \right)\le \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|.

Combining the inequalities (Proof) and (Proof), gives

\max \left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|,\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\|,\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}+A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2},\frac{\left\| {{A}_{12}}-A_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2} \right)\le \omega(T).

In a similar way,

\max \left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|,\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\|,\frac{\left\| {{B}_{12}}+B_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2},\frac{\left\| {{B}_{12}}-B_{12}^{*} \right\|}{2} \right)\le \omega(T).

The desired inequality follows by (Proof) and (Proof). Sharpness of the obtained inequality can be verified using the matrix T=\left[\begin{array}{cc}1&0\\0&0\end{array}\right]. This completes the proof.

Uses Lemma 1.1
Corollary

Corollary 2.1

CCET

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be accretive-dissipative partitioned as in (?). Then

2\max \left( \left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|,\left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\| \right)\le \omega(T).
Proof of Corollary 2.1

By the inequalities (Proof) and (?), we infer that

2\left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|\le \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|\le \omega\left( \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{11}} & {{T}_{12}} \\ {{T}_{21}} & {{T}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right)

i.e.,

2\left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|\le \omega(T).

In a similar way we can prove

2\left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\|\le \omega(T).

These inequalities prove the assertion.

Uses Proof
Theorem

Theorem 3.1

UHMZ

Let T\in\mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be partitioned as in (?). Then

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{11}} & {{T}_{12}} \\ {{T}_{21}} & {{T}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\|+\sqrt{{{\left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|-\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}+4{{\left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|}^{2}}} \right) \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\|+\sqrt{{{\left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|-\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}+4{{\left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\|}^{2}}} \right). \end{aligned}
Proof of Theorem 3.1

Using the triangle inequality, then noting that \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] and \left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] are self-adjoint, we have

\begin{aligned} & \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{11}} & {{T}_{12}} \\ {{T}_{21}} & {{T}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\| \\ & =\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]+\textup i\left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\| \\ & \le \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|+\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\| \\ & =r\left( \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right)+r\left( \left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right) \\ & \le r\left( \left[ \begin{matrix} \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\| & \left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\| \\ \left\| A_{12}^{*} \right\| & \left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\| \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right)+r\left( \left[ \begin{matrix} \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\| & \left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\| \\ \left\| B_{12}^{*} \right\| & \left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\| \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right) \quad({\text{by}}\;\eqref{eq_r})\\ & =\frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\|+\sqrt{{{\left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|-\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}+4{{\left\| {{A}_{12}} \right\|}^{2}}} \right) \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\|+\sqrt{{{\left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|-\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}+4{{\left\| {{B}_{12}} \right\|}^{2}}} \right), \end{aligned}

where we have used Lemma 1.3 to obtain the last equation. This completes the proof.

Uses Lemma 1.3
Theorem

Theorem 3.2

D1TC

Let {{T}_{i}}\in \mathcal B\left( \mathcal H \right) for i=1,2,3,4. Then for any 0\le t\le 1,

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\| \right) \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right). \end{aligned}
Used by Remark 3.1, Remark 3.2
Proof of Theorem 3.2

Let \mathbf x=\left[ \begin{matrix} {{x}_{1}} \\ {{x}_{2}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] and \mathbf y=\left[ \begin{matrix} {{y}_{1}} \\ {{y}_{2}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] be any two unit vectors in \mathcal H\oplus \mathcal H. Then

\begin{aligned} & \left| \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf y \right\rangle \right| \\ & =\left| \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & O \\ O & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf y \right\rangle +\left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} O & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & O \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf y \right\rangle \right| \\ & \le \left| \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & O \\ O & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf y \right\rangle \right|+\left| \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} O & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & O \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf y \right\rangle \right|\quad \text{(by the triangle inequality)} \\ & \le \sqrt{\left\langle {{\left| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & O \\ O & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right|}^{2t}}\mathbf x,\mathbf x \right\rangle \left\langle {{\left| {{\left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & O \\ O & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]}^{*}} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}\mathbf y,\mathbf y \right\rangle } \\ &\quad +\sqrt{\left\langle {{\left| \left[ \begin{matrix} O & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & O \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right|}^{2t}}\mathbf x,\mathbf x \right\rangle \left\langle {{\left| {{\left[ \begin{matrix} O & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & O \\ \end{matrix} \right]}^{*}} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}\mathbf y,\mathbf y \right\rangle } \quad\text{(by the mixed-Schwarz inequality \cite{kato})}\\ & =\sqrt{\left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}} & O \\ O & {{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf x \right\rangle \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} & O \\ O & {{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf y,\mathbf y \right\rangle } \\ &\quad +\sqrt{\left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} & O \\ O & {{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf x \right\rangle \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} & O \\ O & {{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf y,\mathbf y \right\rangle } \\ & \le \frac{1}{2}\left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} & O \\ O & {{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf x \right\rangle \\ & \quad+\frac{1}{2}\left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} & O \\ O & {{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf y,\mathbf y \right\rangle\\ &\qquad\text{(by the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality)} \\ & \le \frac{1}{2}\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} & O \\ O & {{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\| \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} & O \\ O & {{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\| \\ & =\frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\| \right) \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right), \end{aligned}

which yields that

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\| \right) \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right), \end{aligned}

as required.

Remark

Remark 3.1

RENZ

From Theorem 3.2 it is immediate that

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ T_{2}^{*} & {{T}_{3}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}}^* \right|}^{2t}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| T_{2} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\| \right) \\ &\quad +\frac{1}{2}\max \left( \left\| {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\|,\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{2}}^* \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right). \end{aligned}
Uses Theorem 3.2
Remark

Remark 3.2

J9PS

It follows from Theorem 3.2 that

\begin{aligned} \max \left( \left\| {{T}_{1}}+{{T}_{2}} \right\|,\left\| {{T}_{1}}-{{T}_{2}} \right\| \right)&=\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{2}} & {{T}_{1}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\| \\ & \le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\|+\left\| {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right). \end{aligned}

In particular (see [had, Theorem 6])

\max \left( \left\| {{T}_{1}}+{{T}_{2}} \right\|,\left\| {{T}_{1}}-{{T}_{2}} \right\| \right)\le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| \left| {{T}_{1}} \right|+\left| {{T}_{2}} \right| \right\|+\left\| \left| T_{1}^{*} \right|+\left| T_{2}^{*} \right| \right\| \right).

Notice that the inequality

\left\| {{T}_{1}}+{{T}_{2}} \right\|\le \left\| \left| {{T}_{1}} \right|+\left| {{T}_{2}} \right| \right\|

is not true for all {{T}_{1}},{{T}_{2}}; see [1, (1.42)]. The above inequality holds when {{T}_{1}},{{T}_{2}} are normal operator.

Uses Theorem 3.2
Theorem

Theorem 3.3

TAL7

Let {{T}_{i}}\in \mathcal B\left( \mathcal H \right) for i=1,2,3,4. If f, g are nonnegative continuous functions on \left[ 0,\infty \right) satisfying f(x)g(x) =x, (x \ge0), then

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{1}} \right| \right)+{{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{3}} \right| \right) \right\|+\left\| {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{1}^{*} \right| \right)+{{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{2}^{*} \right| \right) \right\| \right. \\ &\qquad \left. +\left\| {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{2}} \right| \right)+{{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{4}} \right| \right) \right\|+\left\| {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{3}^{*} \right| \right)+{{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{4}^{*} \right| \right) \right\| \right). \end{aligned}

In particular, for any 0\le t\le 1,

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{\left| {{T}_{1}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{3}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\|+\left\| {{\left| T_{1}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{2}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right. \\ &\qquad \left. +\left\| {{\left| {{T}_{2}} \right|}^{2t}}+{{\left| {{T}_{4}} \right|}^{2t}} \right\|+\left\| {{\left| T_{3}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}}+{{\left| T_{4}^{*} \right|}^{2\left( 1-t \right)}} \right\| \right). \end{aligned}
Proof of Theorem 3.3

Let \mathbf x=\left[ \begin{matrix} {{x}_{1}} \\ {{x}_{2}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] and \mathbf y=\left[ \begin{matrix} {{y}_{1}} \\ {{y}_{2}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] be any two unit vectors in \mathcal H\oplus \mathcal{H}. Then

\begin{aligned} & \left| \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\mathbf x,\mathbf y \right\rangle \right| \\ & =\left| \left\langle \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]\left[ \begin{matrix} {{x}_{1}} \\ {{x}_{2}} \\ \end{matrix} \right],\left[ \begin{matrix} {{y}_{1}} \\ {{y}_{2}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\rangle \right| \\ & =\left| \left\langle {{T}_{1}}{{x}_{1}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle +\left\langle {{T}_{2}}{{x}_{2}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle +\left\langle {{T}_{3}}{{x}_{1}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle +\left\langle {{T}_{4}}{{x}_{2}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle \right| \\ & \le \left| \left\langle {{T}_{1}}{{x}_{1}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle \right|+\left| \left\langle {{T}_{2}}{{x}_{2}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle \right|+\left| \left\langle {{T}_{3}}{{x}_{1}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle \right|+\left| \left\langle {{T}_{4}}{{x}_{2}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle \right| \\ &\qquad \text{(by the triangle inequality)}\\ & \le \sqrt{\left\langle {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{1}} \right| \right){{x}_{1}},{{x}_{1}} \right\rangle \left\langle {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{1}^{*} \right| \right){{y}_{1}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle }+\sqrt{\left\langle {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{2}} \right| \right){{x}_{2}},{{x}_{2}} \right\rangle \left\langle {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{2}^{*} \right| \right){{y}_{1}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle } \\ &\quad +\sqrt{\left\langle {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{3}} \right| \right){{x}_{1}},{{x}_{1}} \right\rangle \left\langle {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{3}^{*} \right| \right){{y}_{2}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle }+\sqrt{\left\langle {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{4}} \right| \right){{x}_{2}},{{x}_{2}} \right\rangle \left\langle {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{4}^{*} \right| \right){{y}_{2}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle } \\ &\qquad \text{(by \cite[Theorem 1]{04})}\\ & \le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\langle \left( {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{1}} \right| \right)+{{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{3}} \right| \right) \right){{x}_{1}},{{x}_{1}} \right\rangle +\left\langle \left( {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{1}^{*} \right| \right)+{{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{2}^{*} \right| \right) \right){{y}_{1}},{{y}_{1}} \right\rangle \right. \\ &\qquad \left. +\left\langle \left( {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{2}} \right| \right)+{{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{4}} \right| \right) \right){{x}_{2}},{{x}_{2}} \right\rangle +\left\langle \left( {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{3}^{*} \right| \right)+{{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{4}^{*} \right| \right) \right){{y}_{2}},{{y}_{2}} \right\rangle \right) \\ &\qquad \text{(by the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality)}. \end{aligned}

We therefore have

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{1}} & {{T}_{2}} \\ {{T}_{3}} & {{T}_{4}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&\le \frac{1}{2}\left( \left\| {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{1}} \right| \right)+{{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{3}} \right| \right) \right\|+\left\| {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{1}^{*} \right| \right)+{{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{2}^{*} \right| \right) \right\| \right. \\ &\qquad \left. +\left\| {{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{2}} \right| \right)+{{f}^{2}}\left( \left| {{T}_{4}} \right| \right) \right\|+\left\| {{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{3}^{*} \right| \right)+{{g}^{2}}\left( \left| T_{4}^{*} \right| \right) \right\| \right). \end{aligned}

This proves the first desired inequality. The second inequality follows by letting f(x)=x^{t} and g(x)=x^{1-t}, 0\leq t\leq 1 in the first inequality.

Theorem

Theorem 3.4

0M35

Let T\in \mathcal{B}(\mathcal{H}\oplus\mathcal{H}) be accretive-dissipative partitioned as in (?). Then

\|T\|\le \sqrt{{{\left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}+{{\left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}}.
Proof of Theorem 3.4

It is known that if X is accretive-dissipative operator, then [mir]

{{\left\| X \right\|}^{2}}\le {{\left\| \mathcal RX \right\|}^{2}}+{{\left\| \mathcal IX \right\|}^{2}}.

Using this fact and the inequality (?), we have

\begin{aligned} \left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{T}_{11}} & {{T}_{12}} \\ {{T}_{21}} & {{T}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|&= {{\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right]+\textup i\left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|}^{2}}\\ &\qquad \text{(by the second inequality in \eqref{14})}\\ & \le {{\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{A}_{11}} & {{A}_{12}} \\ A_{12}^{*} & {{A}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|}^{2}}+{{\left\| \left[ \begin{matrix} {{B}_{11}} & {{B}_{12}} \\ B_{12}^{*} & {{B}_{22}} \\ \end{matrix} \right] \right\|}^{2}} \\ & \le {{\left( \left\| {{A}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{A}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}+{{\left( \left\| {{B}_{11}} \right\|+\left\| {{B}_{22}} \right\| \right)}^{2}}, \end{aligned}

from which the result follows.

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:2206.12966v1 by Fuad Kittaneh, Hamid Reza Moradi and Mohammad Sababheh, under the licence CC0 1.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2206/2206.12966.jsonl.