arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 1 Sep 2014

Transcription

1 SOME GENERALIZED NUMERICAL RADIUS INEQUALITIES FOR HILBERT SPACE OPERATORS MOSTAFA SATTARI 1, MOHAMMAD SAL MOSLEHIAN 1 AND TAKEAKI YAMAZAKI arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 1 Sep 014 Abstract. We generalize several inequalities involving powers of the numerical radius for product of two operators acting on a Hilbert space. For any A,B,X B(H ) such that A,B are positive, we establish some numerical radius inequalities for A α XB α and A α XB 1 α (0 α 1) and Heinz means under mild conditions. 1. Introduction Let (H,, ) be a complex Hilbert space and B(H ) denote the C -Algebra of all bounded linear operators on H. An operator A B(H ) is called positive if Ax,x 0 for all x H. We write A 0 if A is positive. The numerical radius of A B(H ) is defined by w(a) = sup{ Ax,x : x H, x = 1}. It is well known that w( ) defines a norm on B(H ), which is equivalent to the usual operator norm. In fact, for any A B(H ), Also if A B(H ) is self-adjoint, then w(a) = A. 1 A w(a) A. (1.1) An important inequality for w(a) is the power inequality stating that w(a n ) w n (A) for n = 1,,... Several numerical radius inequalities improving the inequalities in(1.1) have been recently given in [, 3, 9]. For instance, Dragomir proved that for any A,B B(H ), w (A) 1 w(a ( )+ A ), (1.) 010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 47A1, 47A30, 47A63 47B47. Key words and phrases. Heinz means, numerical radius, positive operator, operator norm. 1

2 M. SATTARI, M. MOSLEHIAN, T. YAMAZAKI and w r (B A) 1 (A A) r +(B B) r (1.3) for all r 1. The above inequalities can be found in [3, 1], respectively. Some other interesting inequalities for numerical radius can be found in [9, 10, 11]. In section of this paper, we first generalize inequalities (1.) and (1.3). Our generalization of inequality (1.3) in a particular case is sharper than this inequality. In section 3 we obtain numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators A α XB α and A α XB 1 α under conditions A,B 0 and 0 α 1. We also find a numerical radius inequality for Heinz means.. Numerical radius inequalities for products of Two operators To prove our generalized numerical radius inequalities, we need several wellknown lemmas. The first lemma is a simple consequence of the classical Jensen and Young inequalities (see [5]). Lemma.1. For a,b 0, 0 α 1 and p,q > 1 such that 1 p + 1 q = 1 (a) a α b 1 α αa+(1 α)b [αa r +(1 α)b r ] 1 r for r 1, ( )1 (b) ab ap p + aq a pr q p + bqr r for r 1. q The second lemma follows from the spectral theorem for positive operators and Jensen s inequality (see [8]). Lemma. (McCarty inequality). Let A B(H ), A 0 and let x H be any unit vector. Then (a) Ax,x r A r x,x for r 1, (b) A r x,x Ax,x r for 0 < r 1. The third lemma is known as the generalized mixed Schwarz inequality (see[8]). Lemma.3. Let A B(H ) and x,y H be any vector. (a) If 0 α 1, then Ax,y A α x,x A (1 α) y,y, (b) Iff,g are nonnegativecontinuous functionson [0, )satisfyingf(t)g(t) = t, (t 0), then Ax,y f( A )x g( A )y.

3 NUMERICAL RADIUS INEQUALITIES 3 Now we are in a position to state the main result of this section. First of all, we generalize inequality (1.) for any r 1. We use some strategies used in [3] to prove it. Theorem.4. If A B(H ), then for any r 1. w r (A) 1 ( w r (A )+ A r) (.1) Proof. We recall the following refinement of the Cauchy Schwarz inequality obtained by Dragomir in [4], see also. It says that a b a,b a,e e,b + a,e e,b a,b, (.) where a,b,e are vectors in H and e = 1. From inequality (.) we deduce that 1( a b + a,b ) a,e e,b. Put e = x with x = 1, a = Ax and b = A x in the above inequality and use Lemma.1 (a) to get Ax,x 1 Ax A ( x + A x,x ) ( Ax r A x r + A x,x r whence )1 r, Ax,x r 1 ( Ax r A x r + A x,x r). (.3) Taking the supremum over x H with x = 1 in inequality (.3) we obtain the desired inequality. The next result reads as follows. Proposition.5. Let A B(H ) and f,g be nonnegative continuous functions on [0, ) satisfying f(t)g(t) = t, (t 0). Then w r (A) 1 ( A r + 1 p fpr ( A )+ 1 ) q gqr ( (A ) ). (.4) for all r 1, p q > 1 with = 1 and qr. p q

4 4 M. SATTARI, M. MOSLEHIAN, T. YAMAZAKI Proof. Let x H be a unit vector. We have A x,x r f( A )x r g( (A ) )x r (by Lemma.3 (b)) = f ( A )x,x r g ( (A ) )x,x r 1 p f ( A )x,x pr + 1 q g ( (A ) )x,x qr (by Lemma.1 (b)) 1 p fpr ( A )x,x + 1 q gqr ( (A ) )x,x ( 1 = p fpr ( A )+ 1 ) q gqr ( (A ) ) x,x. (by Lemma. (a)) It follows from inequality (.3) that Ax,x r 1 ( ( Ax r A x r 1 + p fpr ( A )+ 1 q gqr ( (A ) ) ) ) x,x. Taking the supremum over x H with x = 1 in the above inequality we deduce the desired inequality (.4). Inequality (.4) induces several numerical radius inequalities as special cases. For example the following result may be stated as well. Corollary.6. If we take f(t) = t α,g(t) = t 1 α and p = q = in inequality (.4), then w r (A) 1 for any r 1 and 0 α 1. ( A r + 1 ) A 4αr + A 4(1 α)r In addition, by choosing α = 1 we get wr (A) A r for any r 1, which is a generalization of the second inequality in (1.1). An operator A on a Hilbert space H is said to be a paranormal operator if for any unit vector x H. Ax A x. Therefore if A B(H ) be a paranormal, then we get A A A. On making use of above inequality and power inequality for numerical radius, we have the next result.

5 NUMERICAL RADIUS INEQUALITIES 5 Corollary.7. If A B(H ) is paranormal and f,g be as in Proposition.5, then w r (A) 1 ( A r + for all r 1, p q > 1 with 1 p + 1 q 1 p fpr ( A )+ 1 ) q gqr ( A ). = 1 and qr. Proof. It is enough to use w(a ) w (A) and then replacing A by A in the inequality (.4). The next result is an extension of (1.3) and is a kind of Young s inequality for operators. In fact in [10], the authors proved the following proposition: Proposition.8. Suppose A,B,X B(H ) and f,g are nonnegative continuous functions on [0, ) satisfying f(t)g(t) = t for all t 0. Then w r (AXB) 1 p [ Af ( X )A ] pr + 1 [ B g ( X )B ] qr (.5) q for all r 0 and p,q > 1 with 1 p + 1 q = 1 and pr,qr. They then deduce the following result: Proposition.9. Let A,B B(H ). Then w r (B A) 1 p A pr + 1 q B qr holds for all r 0 and p,q > 1 with 1 p + 1 q = 1 and pr,qr. Proposition.9 is given by putting X = I and f(t) = g(t) = t in Proposition.8. Now we show that Propositions.8 and.9 are equivalent. To see this, we have only to prove Proposition.8 from Proposition.9. Proof of Proposition.8. Let X = U X be the polar decomposition of X. Put S = f( X )U A and T = g( X )B. Then by Proposition.9, we have w r (S T) 1 p S pr + 1 q T qr w r (AXB) 1 p [ Af ( X )A ] pr + 1 [ B g ( X )B ] qr. q The following theorem gives an upper bound for w(b A).

6 6 M. SATTARI, M. MOSLEHIAN, T. YAMAZAKI Theorem.10. Let A,B B(H ). Then w r (B A) 1 4 (AA ) r +(BB ) r + 1 wr (AB ) for all r 1. By Theorem.10 and inequality (1.3), we have w r (B A) 1 4 (AA ) r +(BB ) r + 1 wr (AB ) 1 (AA ) r +(BB ) r. Hence if both A and B are normal operators, then Theorem.10 is a sharper inequality than (1.3). To prove Theorem.10, we use the famous polarization identity as follows: x,y = x+i k y i k (.6) k=0 holds for all x,y H. Proof of Theorem.10. First of all, we note that w(t) = sup Re(e iθ T), (.7) θ R where ReX means the real part of an operator X, i.e., ReX = X+X. Because Tx,x = supre{e iθ Tx,x } θ R and sup θ R Re(e iθ T) = supw(re(e iθ T)) = w(t). θ R

7 NUMERICAL RADIUS INEQUALITIES 7 For a unit vector x H, we have Re e iθ B Ax,x = Re e iθ Ax,Bx = 1 4 (eiθ A+B)x 1 4 (eiθ A B)x (by (.6)) 1 4 (eiθ A+B)x 1 4 eiθ A+B = 1 4 e iθ A +B (by X = X ) = 1 4 (e iθ A +B ) (e iθ A +B ) (by X = X X ) = 1 4 AA +BB +e iθ AB +e iθ BA 1 4 AA +BB + 1 Re(eiθ AB ) 1 4 AA +BB + 1 w(ab ) (by (.7)). Now taking the supremum over x H with x = 1 in the above inequality produces w(b A) 1 4 AA +BB + 1 w(ab ). For r 1, since t r and t 1 r are convex and operator concave functions, respectively, we have ( 1 w r (B A) AA +BB + 1 ) r w(ab ) 1 AA +BB r + 1 wr (AB ) 1 ( (AA ) r +(BB ) r )1 r r + 1 wr (AB ) = 1 (AA ) r +(BB ) r + 1 wr (AB ). Hence Theorem.10 is proven. The next corollary is an extension of an inequality shown in [11, Theorem.1]. Corollary.11. Let T B(H) and T = U T be the polar decomposition of T, and let T(α) = T α U T 1 α be the generalized Aluthge transformation of T.

8 8 M. SATTARI, M. MOSLEHIAN, T. YAMAZAKI Then we have w r (T) 1 4 T rα + T r(1 α) + 1 wr ( T(α)) holds for r 1. Proof. Put A = T α and B = T 1 α U in Theorem.10. Then we have w r (B A) 1 4 A r + B r + 1 wr (AB ) w r (T) 1 4 T rα + T r(1 α) + 1 wr ( T(α)). 3. Numerical Radius Inequalities for Product of operators The main purpose of this section is to find upper bounds for A α XB α and A α XB 1 α forthecasewhen0 α 1. Alsowefindanumericalradiusinequality for Heinz means. The following theorem gives us anew boundfor powers of thenumerical radius. Theorem 3.1. Suppose A,B,X B(H ) such that A,B are positive. Then w r (A α XB α ) X r 1 p Apr + 1 q Bqr α for all 0 α 1, r 0 and p,q > 1 with 1 p + 1 q = 1 and pr,qr. Proof. For any unit vector x H and by the Cauchy Schwarz inequality we have A α XB α x,x r = XB α x,a α x r XB α x r A α x r X r A α x,x r B α x,x r ( 1 X r p Aα x,x pr 1 + q Bα x,x qr X r ( 1 p Apr x,x α + 1 q Bqr x,x α ) ) (by Lemma.1 (b)) (by Lemma. ) X r ( 1 p Apr x,x + 1 q Bqr x,x ) α (by the concavity of t α ) ( 1 = X r p Apr + 1 ) q Bqr x,x α.

9 NUMERICAL RADIUS INEQUALITIES 9 Now by taking the supremum over x H with x = 1 in the above inequality we infer that Theorem 3.1. Corollary 3.. Let T = T 1 U T 1 be the Aluthge transformation of T such that U is partial isometry. Then w( T) T. Proof. If we take r = 1, α = 1, p = q =, A = B = T and X = U in Theorem 3.1, then w( T) 1 T + 1 T 1 = T 1 = T. Our next result is to find an upper bound for power of the numerical radius of A α XB 1 α under assumption 0 α 1. Theorem 3.3. Suppose A,B,X B(H ) such that A, B are positive. Then for all r and 0 α 1. w r (A α XB 1 α ) X r αa r +(1 α)b r Proof. Let x H be a unit vector. Then A α XB 1 α x,x r = XB 1 α x,a α x r X r B 1 α x r A α x r = X r B (1 α) x,x r A α x,x r X r A r x,x α B r x,x 1 α (by Lemma.) X r (αa r +(1 α)b r )x,x (by Lemma.1(a)) (3.1) Taking the supremum over x H with x = 1 in the above inequality we deduce the desired inequality. Noting that our inequality in previous theorem is a generalization of the second inequality (1.1) when we set A = B = I. Now assume that A,B,X B(H ). the Heinz means for matrices are defined by H α (A,B) = Aα XB 1 α +A 1 α XB α in which 0 α 1 and A,B 0, see [6]. Our final result in this section is to find a numerical radius inequality for Heinz means. For this purpose, we use Theorem 3.3 and the convexity of function f(t) = t r (r 1).

10 10 M. SATTARI, M. MOSLEHIAN, T. YAMAZAKI Theorem 3.4. Suppose A,B,X B(H ) such that A, B are positive. Then w r (A ( 1 1 XB ) w r A α XB 1 α +A 1 α XB α ) ( ) A X r r +B r w ( αa X r r +(1 α)b r + (1 α)a r +αb r ). for all r and 0 α 1. To prove Theorem 3.4, we need the following lemma. Lemma 3.5. Let A,B B(H ) be invertible self-adjoint operators and X B(H ). Then ( ) AXB 1 +A 1 XB w(x) w. Proof. First of all, we shall show the case A = B and X is self-adjoint. Let λ σ(x). Then Since λ R, we have λ σ(x) = σ(axa 1 ) W(AXA 1 ). λ = Reλ ReW(AXA 1 ) = W(Re(AXA 1 )). So we obtain ( ) AXA w(x) = r(x) w(re(axa 1 1 +A 1 XA )) = w. Next we shall show this lemma for arbitrary ( ) X B(H )( and invertible ) selfadjoint operators A and B. Let ˆX 0 X = and X 0  = A 0. Then ˆX 0 B and  are self-adjoint. Hence we have ) ( w( ˆX) ˆX 1 w + 1 ˆXÂ. Here w( ˆX) = w(x) and ) ( ) ( ˆX 1 w + 1 ˆX = 1 w( 0 AXB 1 +A 1 XB ) BX A 1 +B 1 X A 0 = 1 w(axb 1 +A 1 XB). Therefore we obtain the desired inequality.

11 NUMERICAL RADIUS INEQUALITIES 11 Proof of Theorem 3.4. We may assume that A and B are invertible. By Lemma 3.5, we have w r (A 1 XB 1 ) w r ( A α 1 A 1 XB 1 B 1 α +A 1 α A 1 XB 1 B α 1 = w r ( A α XB 1 α +A 1 α XB α ). On the other hand, by inequality (3.1), for any r we have Hence we have A α XB 1 α x,x r X r (αa r +(1 α)b r )x,x. ) Aα XB 1 α +A 1 α XB α x,x r ( A α XB 1 α x,x + A 1 α XB α x,x Aα XB 1 α x,x r + A 1 α XB α x,x r X r ) r ( by the convexity of t r ) { (αa r +(1 α)b r )x,x + ((1 α)a r +αb r )x,x } = X r Ar +B r x,x. Therefore we obtain ( ) A w r α XB 1 α +A 1 α XB α ( ) A X r r +B r w X r = X r (w(αa r +(1 α)b r )+w((1 α)a r +αb r )) ( αa r +(1 α)b r + (1 α)a r +αb r ). Acknowledgment. The authors would like to express our cordial thanks to Professor Fumio Hiai to giving us a crucial comment.

12 1 M. SATTARI, M. MOSLEHIAN, T. YAMAZAKI References 1. S. S. Dragomir, Power inequalities for the numerical radius of a product of two operators in Hilbert spaces, Sarajevo J Math. 5(18) (009), no., S. S. Dragomir, Reverse inequalities for the numerical radius of linear operators in Hilbert spaces, Bull. Austral. Math. Soc. 73 (006), no., S. S. Dragomir, Some inequalities for the norm and the numerical radius of linear operators in Hilbert Spaces, Tamkang J. Math. 39 (008), no. 1, S. S. Dragomir, Some refinements of schwarz inequality, Simposional de Math Si Appl polytechnical Inst Timisoara, Romania, 1 (1985), G. H. Hardy, J. E. Littlewood and G. Polya, Inequalities, nd ed, Cambridge Univ. press, Cambridge, R. Kaur, M. S. Moslehian, M. Singh and C. Conde, Further refinements of the Heinz inequality, Linear Algebra Appl. 447 (014), F. Kittaneh, Norm inequalities for certian operator sums, J. Funct. Anal. 143 (1997), no., F. Kittaneh, Notes on some inequalities for Hilbert Space operators, Publ Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 4 (1988), no., M. Omidvar, M. Moslehian and A. Niknam, Some numerical radius inequalities for Hilbert space operators, Involve (009), A. Salemi and A. Sheikhhosseini, Matrix young numerical radius inequalities, Math. Inequal. Appl. 16 (013), no. 3, T. Yamazaki, On upper and lower bounds of the numerical radius and an equality condition, Studia Math., 178 (007), Department of Pure Mathematics, Center Of Excellence in Analysis on Algebraic Structures (CEAAS), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, P. O. Box 1159, Mashhad 91775, Iran address: moslehian@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir address: Msattari.b@gmail.com Department of Electrical, Electronic and Computer Engineering Toyo University, Kawagoe-Shi, Saitama, Japan address: t-yamazaki@toyo.jp