GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ 1, D. BAKIĆ 2 AND M. S. MOSLEHIAN 3 arxiv:0905.3509v1 math.oa 21 May 2009 Abstract. Let (X,, ) be a semi-inner product module over a C -algebra A. For arbitrary n N and x 1,...,x n X we study the so-called n n Gram matrix x i, x j with entries in A, construct a non-decreasing sequence of positive matrices in M n (A ) which is majorized by x i, x j and apply it to obtain generalizations of covariance variance inequality, an extension of the Ostrowski inequality and an improvement of the Kantorovich inequality involving operator means. 1. Introduction In this paper we study the so-called Gram (or Gramian) matrix x i, x j M n (A ), where x 1,...,x n are arbitrary elements in a semi-inner product module (X,, ) over a C -algebra A. In case when X is an inner-product space this matrix becomes exactly the Gram matrix of n vectors. Our main result is Theorem 3.2, where we establish some inequalities in M n (A ) for Gram matrix in semi-inner product C -modules. It is known that the matrix x i, x j is a positive element of the C -algebra M n (A ) (see 8, Lemma 4.2). Considering X as a semi-inner product C -module with respect to another semiinner product, we get a new inequality which generally improves the initial one. Namely, in a semi-inner product A -module (X,, ) we can, for every z X, define a new semi-inner product by, z : X X A, x, y z := z 2 x, y x, z z, y. Observe that x, x z 0 for x, z X is equivalent to the Cauchy Schwarz inequality x, z z, x z 2 x, x (x, z X ), (1.1) 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46L08; Secondary 26D15, 46L05, 46C50, 47A30, 47A63. Key words and phrases. C -algebra; semi-inner product C -module; Gram matrix; covariance variance inequality; Ostrowski inequality; Kantorovich inequality; operator mean; operator inequality. 1
2 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN which generalizes the classical Cauchy Schwarz inequality stating that for any two elements x and y of a semi-inner product space (X, ( )) it holds (x y) 2 (x x)(y y); cf. 8. a b Recall that a matrix M b 2 (A ) with invertible c A (resp. a A ) c is positive if and only if a 0, c 0 and bc 1 b a (resp. a 0, c 0 and b a 1 b c); see 4. Therefore, (1.1) applied to x, y X and, z is equivalent to x, x z x, y z 0, (1.2) x, y z y, y z e where A is assumed to have a unit e. In the special case where n = 2 and m = 0 Theorem 3.2 gives x, x z x, y z 0. (1.3) y, x z y, y z This obviously improves Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, which is also known in the literature as the covariance variance inequality. In Section 4 we define the covariance cov z (x, y) between x and y with respect to z and variance var z (x) of x with respect to z and prove the generalized covariance variance inequality. In the case when X is a semi-inner product space we get some covariance variance inequalities. The interested reader is referred to 2, 6, 10, 12 for some generalizations of covariance variance inequality. Another consequence of Theorem 3.2 is an improvement of the Ostrowski inequality, which is recently obtained in 1 for elements of an inner-product C - module (see references in 1 for information on the Ostrowski inequality in innerproduct spaces). Also, we obtain a Kantorovich inequality for Hilbert C -modules and unital positive mappings. 2. Preliminaries An element a of a C -algebra A is called positive (we write a 0) if a = b b for some b A. If a A is positive, then there is a unique positive b A such that a = b 2 ; such an element b is called the positive square root of a and denoted by a 1/2. For every a A, the positive square root of a a is denoted by a. For two self-adjoint elements a, b, one can define a partial order by a b b a 0. For n N, M n (A ) denotes the matrix C -algebra of all n n
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 3 matrices with entries from A. For more details on matrix algebras we refer the reader to 13, 19. A (right) semi-inner product A -module is a linear space X which is a right A -module with a compatible scalar multiplication (λ(xa) = x(λa) = (λx)a for all x X, a A, λ C) endowed with an A -semi-inner product, : X X A such that for all x, y, z X, λ C, a A, it holds (i) x, x 0; (ii) x, λy + z = λ x, y + x, z ; (iii) x, ya = x, y a; (iv) x, y = y, x. Obviously, every semi-inner product space is a semi-inner product C-module. We can define a semi-norm on X by x = x, x 1 2, where the latter norm denotes that in the C -algebra A. A pre-hilbert A -module (or an inner-product module) is a semi-inner product module over A in which defined as above is a norm. If the norm is complete then X is called a Hilbert C -module. If A is a C -algebra, then it can be regarded as a Hilbert A -module via a, b = a b (a, b A ). When X is a Hilbert C -module, we denote by B(X ) the algebra of all adjointable operators on X. Throughout the paper, A stands for the minimal unitization of A, i.e. if A is unital then unital then A = A and if A is non-unital then A = A C with (a, λ) (b, µ) = (ab + λb + µa, λµ) and (a, λ) = (a, λ). By e we denote the unit in A. If X is an A -module then it can be regarded as an A -module via xe = x. For every x X the absolute value of x is defined as the unique positive square root of the positive element x, x of A, that is, x = x, x 1 2. Some standard references for C -algebras and C -modules are 8, 11, 14, 19. 3. The main result In this section we prove some inequalities in M n (A ) concerning some Gram matrices. We start our work with the following useful result, in whose proof the positivity of the Gram matrix x i, x j is shown for the convenience of the reader. Proposition 3.1. Let A be a C -algebra and (X,, ) be a semi-inner product A -module. Let n N and x 1,, x n X. Then for every z X we have z 2 x i, x j x i, z z, x j. (3.1)
4 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN Proof. It is enough to see that the matrix x i, x j is positive, because then we can take C -semi-inner product, z instead of, and get x i, x j z 0, which is exactly (3.1). So, let us prove that x i, x j 0. Since, is a semi-inner product on X it holds that Then n x i a i, i=1 n x i a i 0, (a 1,...,a n A ). i=1 n a i x i, x j a j 0, (a 1,...,a n A ). (3.2) i,j=1 By 17, Lemma IV.3.2 we know that a matrix c ij M n (A ) is positive if and only if n i,j=1 a ic ij a j 0 for all a 1,, a n A. Therefore, (3.2) means that the matrix x i, x j is positive. Now, we are ready to state our main result. Theorem 3.2. Let A be a C -algebra, (X,, ) be a semi-inner product A - module, n N and x 1,, x n X. For every a A, assume the sequence ( fm (a) ) to be defined in A by f 0 (a) = a, f m (a) = f m 1 (a) f m 1 (a) (f m 1 (a)) 2 (m 1); and for every m N {0} such that f m (a) 0, let p 0 (a) = 1 a e, p m (a) = 1 a e + m l=1 ( 1 l k=0 f k(a) l 1 ( fk (a) e f k (a) ) ) 2 Then for all m N {0} and z X such that f m ( z, z ) 0 it holds k=0 (m 1). x i, x j x i, z p m ( z, z ) z, x j. (3.3) Proof. Let a A be positive. Then f m (a) A is also positive for every m. If f m (a) 0 for some m, then obviously f k (a) 0 for all k {0,..., m}, so p m (a) is indeed well defined if f m (a) 0. We will prove by induction that for every m N and every semi-inner product on X the inequality (3.3) holds. Let m = 0 and z X be such that z, z 0. Since p 0 ( z, z ) = 1 z 2 e, (3.3) is equivalent to (3.1).
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 5 Suppose now that (3.3) holds for some m N and for every semi-inner product on X. Let us prove it for m+1. We use the same trick as in Proposition 3.1, i.e., we apply the assumption to the semi-inner product x, y z = z 2 x, y x, z z, y on X. So, let z X such that f m+1 ( z, z ) 0. This means that f m ( z, z z ) 0 and we have xi, x j z xi, z z p m ( z, z z ) z, x j z, that is, z 2 x i, x j x i, z z, x j + x i, z z p m ( z, z z ) z, x j z. (3.4) Observe that z, z z = f 1 ( z, z ), so z 2 e z, z and p m ( z, z z ) commute. Therefore x i, z z p m ( z, z z ) z, x j z = ( z 2 x i, z x i, z z, z )p m ( z, z z ) ( z 2 z, x j z, z z, x j ) = x i, z ( z 2 e z, z ) 2 p m ( z, z z ) z, x j. It is easy to see that e + ( z 2 e z, z ) 2 p m ( z, z z ) = z 2 p m+1 ( z, z ), (3.5) Then (3.4) and (3.5) give x i, x j x i, z p m+1 ( z, z ) z, x j ). Remark 3.3. In the preceding theorem we tacitly assumed that the underlying C -algebra has the unit element e. Note that the same statement holds true for modules over non-unital algebras. This is seen by the same computation as in the preceding proof performed in the minimal unitization A. Observe that, although the unit element e à appears in the expressions p m(a), inequality (3.3) involves only elements from the original C -algebra A. In the following remark we give some interesting properties of sequences defined in Theorem 3.2. Remark 3.4. It is obvious that p m ( z, z ) p m 1 ( z, z )... p 0 ( z, z ) 0, for every z X such that f m ( z, z ) 0. Therefore, xi, z p m ( z, z ) z, x j ) x i, z p m 1 ( z, z ) z, x j )... 0, for all x 1,...,x n X, so we really have a non-decreasing (finite of infinite) sequence of matrices in (3.3).
6 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN Let us now discuss the finiteness of the sequence ( f m (a) ). We first observe that it does not have to be finite. For example, let a be a self-adjoint and nonpositive element in A such that f m (a) 0 for some m N. Then all elements f k (a) (k N) are self-adjoint, so σ(f k (a)) R, where σ(c) denotes the spectrum of the element c A. From λ σ(f m 1 (a)) f m 1 (a) λ λ 2 σ(f m (a)) f m 1 (a) λ λ 2 0 λ 0, f m 1 (a) it follows that f m 1 (a) is a self-adjoint element with positive spectrum, therefore it is positive. Inductively, we get that a must be positive, which contradicts our assumption. Therefore, if a is self-adjoint and non-positive, then f m (a) 0 for all m N. However, we apply the functions f m only to positive elements. It turns out that for a positive element a of a C -algebra A the number m N such that f m (a) = 0 exists if and only if the spectrum of a has finitely many elements. (In particular, if A = M n (C) for some n N, this will be fulfilled for every positive a.) Indeed, suppose that for a positive a A there is m N such that f m (a) = 0. Let λ σ(a). Then f m (λ) σ(f m (a)) = {0}, so f m (λ) = 0 for all λ σ(a). Since f m is a polynomial (and f m 0), it follows that σ(a) is a finite set. Conversely, suppose that a A is a non-zero positive element such that σ(a) is finite. From a σ(a) it follows that 0 = f 1 ( a ) σ(f 1 (a)). If f 1 (a) 0 then f 1 (a) 0 and f 2 (0) = f 2 ( f 1 (a) ) = 0. Since σ(f 2 (a)) = f 2 (σ(a)), we conclude that card σ(f 2 (a)) < card σ(f 1 (a)). As 0 σ(f k (a)) for all k N, we get that there is m N such that σ(f m (a)) = {0}, which, together with f m (a) 0, yields f m (a) = 0. Moreover, suppose that f m (a) = 0 and f m 1 (a) 0. Then f m 1 (a) f m 1 (a) = f m 1 (a) 2 1, and b m 1 := f f m 1 (a) m 1(a) satisfies b m 1 = b 2 m 1. If, in addition, a is self-adjoint then b m 1 is self-adjoint as well, and therefore an orthogonal projection. 4. Applications In this section we discuss some consequences and application of Theorem 3.2. 4.1. Ostrowski inequality. Let us consider the special case where X is a semiinner product space (H, ( )). Then A = C and for λ C we have f 0 (λ) = λ
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 7 and f 1 (λ) = λ λ λ 2. Hence for all ξ X we have f 0 ((ξ ξ)) = (ξ ξ), f 1 ((ξ ξ)) = (ξ ξ) (ξ ξ) ((ξ ξ)) 2 = 0 and therefore f m ((ξ ξ)) = 0 for m 2. Thus, we only have p 0 ((ξ ξ)) and p 0 ((ξ ξ)) = 1 ξ 2, which gives only one iteration in (3.3): for every n N and ξ 1,...,ξ n H it holds (ξi ξ j ) 1 ξ 2 (ξi ξ)(ξ ξ j ), (ξ H \ {0}). As a consequence we get an Ostrowski type inequality. Indeed, if n = 2 and ξ 1, ξ 2 H \ {0}, then for all ξ H \ {0} such that (ξ 1 ξ) = 0 we get ξ 1 2 (ξ 1 ξ 2 ) 1 0 0, (ξ 2 ξ 1 ) ξ 2 2 ξ 2 0 (ξ ξ 2 ) 2 i.e. ξ1 2 (ξ 1 ξ 2 ) (ξ 2 ξ 1 ) ξ 2 2 1 ξ 2 (ξ ξ 2 ) 2 From here we get ( ξ 1 2 ξ 2 2 1 ) ξ (ξ ξ 2) 2 2 i.e., 0. (ξ 1 ξ 2 )(ξ 2 ξ 1 ) 0, (ξ, ξ 2 ) 2 ξ 2 ξ 1 2( ξ 1 2 ξ 2 2 (ξ 1, ξ 2 ) 2 ), which is known as the Ostrowski inequality (e.g. see 16). The following Ostrowski type inequality in pre-hilbert C -modules is proved in 1: if A is a C -algebra and X is a pre-hilbert A -module, then for x, y, z X, x 0, z 0, such that x, z = 0 it holds z, y 2 z 2 x 2( x 2 y 2 x, y 2 ). In a matrix form this can be written as x 2 e x, y y, x y, y 1 y, z z, y z,z 0. (4.1) However, if we apply (3.3) to such x, y, z, we get an inequality which is stronger than (4.1).
8 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN Theorem 4.1. Let A be a C -algebra and (X,, ) be a semi-inner product A -module. Let x, y, z X be such that x, z = 0 and x, x 0. Then x, x x, y 0 y, x y, y y, z p m ( z, z ) z, y for all m N such that f m ( z, z )) 0. 4.2. Covariance variance inequality. The next application of Theorem 3.2 is the covariance variance inequality in semi-inner product C -modules. Let us begin with a definition and some known examples. Definition 4.2. Let A be a C -algebra, (X,, ) be a semi-inner product A - module and x, y, z X. The covariance cov z (x, y) between x and y with respect to z is defined to be the element x, y z of A. The element cov z (x, x) is said to be the variance of x with respect to z and denoted by var z (x). Example 4.3. Given a Hilbert space H, vectors x, y H and operators S, T B(H ), covariance and variance of operators was defined in 10 as cov x,y (S, T) = y 2 (Sx Tx) (Sx y)(y Tx). Observe that cov x,y (S, T) = (Sx Tx) y. In the case where x = 1 and y = x we get the notion of covariance of two operators T and S introduced in 6 as cov x (S, T) = (Sx Tx) (Sx x)(x Tx). As it is announced in 6, J.I. Fujii was the first who introduced the covariance and variance of Hilbert space operators in his seminar talk; see also 15. Furthermore, Enomoto 5 showed the near relation of the operator covariance variance inequality with the Heisenberg uncertainty principle and pointed out that it is exactly the generalized Schrödinger inequality. Another remarkable note is that for a unit vector x H, the determinant of the positive semidefinite Gram matrix (Sx Sx) (Sx T x) (Sx x) (Tx Sx) (Tx Tx) (Tx x) (x Sx) (x T x) (x x) is the difference var x (S)var x (T) cov x (S, T) 2 and is nonnegative; see 7. Example 4.4. Recall that if (Ω, µ) is a probability measure space, then Ef = Ω fdµ is the expectation of the random variable f L2 (Ω, µ). Then the covariance between f and g is defined to be cov(f, g) = E(fg) Ef Eg and variance of
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 9 f is cov(f, f). We can obtain this by considering L 2 (Ω, µ) as a Hilbert C-module via the usual inner product f, g = Ω fg. Let A be a C -algebra and X be a semi-inner product A -module. Then for elements x, y, z X it holds cov z (x, y) cov z (x, y) var z (y) var z (x). (4.2) This (Cauchy-Schwarz) inequality for cov z (, ) is known as the covariance variance inequality. As we have mentioned in the introductory section, the inequality (4.2) can be represented as var z (x) cov z (x, y) cov z (x, y) var z (y) e It follows from Theorem 3.2 that var z (x) cov z (x, y) cov z (x, y) var z (y) 0. (4.3) 0, which improves (4.3). Actually, we have the following statement. Theorem 4.5 (Generalized Covariance-Variance Inequality). Let A be a C - algebra and X be a semi-inner product A -module. Let x 1,, x n, z X. Then the matrix cov z (x i, x j ) M n (A ) is positive. Assume that A is a C -algebra acting on a Hilbert space and B is one of its C -subalgebras. Let Φ : A B be a positive linear mapping which is a left multiplier, i.e. Φ(ab) = Φ(a)b (a A, b B). Then we can define a semi-inner product on the semi-inner product A -module X by x, y Φ = Φ( x, y ). If we fix a unit vector x X and a positive left multiplier mapping Φ and take operators A and B in B(X ), then we could define the covariance of A, B and variance of A by cov(a, B) = Φ( Ax, Bx ) Φ( Ax, x )Φ( x, Bx ) and var(a) = cov(a, A), respectively; see 5. Observe that, if we regard X as a semi-inner product A -module with respect to, Φ, we have cov(a, B) = cov x (Ax, Bx). Therefore, var(a) cov(a, B) cov(a, B) var(b) = var x (Ax) cov x (Ax, Bx) cov x (Ax, Bx) var x (Bx) 0.
10 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN Our idea is essentially related to the work of Umegaki 18, in which he considered a pair (A, ϕ) of a von Neumann algebra A and a (normal) state ϕ of A as a frame for a noncommutative probability theory and generalizes the main work of 6, where the proofs of several known inequalities for Hilbert space operators are unified. Modifying the approach of 6, Lemma 1 we get Proposition 4.6. Let B be a C -subalgebra of a unital C -algebra A and Φ : A B be a positive left multiplier mapping and let x be a vector in a Hilbert A - module X with x = e, where e is the unit of A. Let A 1, A 2 B(X ) be operators satisfying m i A i M i (i = 1, 2) for some scalars 0 m i M i (i = 1, 2). Then cov(a 1, A 2 ) 1 4 (M 1 m 1 )(M 2 m 2 ). Proof. (M C)(C m) ( ) M m 2 2 for any self-adjoint operator C in the C - algebra B(X ), due to (C M+m ) 2 0. Hence 2 var(a 1 ) = Φ( A 2 1 x, x ) Φ( A 1x, x ) 2 = ( M 1 e Φ( A 1 x, x ) )( Φ( A 1 x, x ) m 1 e ) Φ( (M 1 A 1 )(A 1 m 1 )x, x ) + ( M 1 Φ( A 1 x, x ) )( Φ( A 1 x, x ) m 1 ) ( by (M1 A 1 )(A 1 m 1 ) 0 ) 1 4 (M 1 m 1 ) 2 ( by the selfadjointness of Φ( A1 x, x ) The covariance variance inequality yields 6). cov(a 1, A 2 ) 2 var(a 1 ) var(a 2 ) 1 16 (M 1 m 1 ) 2 (M 2 m 2 ) 2. The next corollary gives us a generalization of Kantorovich inequality (see also Corollary 4.7. Let B be a unital C -subalgebra of a unital C -algebra A and Φ : A B be a unital positive left multiplier mapping and let x be a vector in a Hilbert A -module X with x = e, where e is the unit of A. Let A B(X ) be an operator satisfying m A M for some scalars 0 < m M. Then Φ( Ax, x )Φ( A 1 x, x ) (M + m)2 4Mm. (4.4) Proof. Set A 1 = A, A 2 = A 1, m 1 = m, M 1 = M, m 2 = M 1, M 2 = m 1 in Proposition 4.6 to get Φ(e) Φ( Ax, x )Φ( A 1 x, x ) (M m)2 4Mm,
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 11 wherefrom which turns into Φ( Ax, x )Φ( A 1 x, x ) 1 + Φ( Ax, x )Φ( A 1 x, x ) (M m)2 4Mm, (M + m)2 4Mm. Remark 4.8. If Ax, x = e, then we can replace x by A 1/2 x in (4.4) to get Φ( A 2 x, x ) (M+m)2 for any state Φ of A. Hence 4Mm A2 x, x (M+m)2 = 4Mm (M+m) 2 Ax, 4Mm x 2, which is a variant of Kantorovich inequality in the setting of Hilbert space operators. Remark 4.9. If (a 1,, a n ) is a positive n-tuple of positive real numbers with 0 < m a i M (1 i n), we can put A = B = X = C, A = diag(a i ) and x = 1 n (1,, 1)t in Corollary 4.7. Then 0 < m A M and (4.4) gives rise to the classical Kantorovich inequality n i=1 a i can deduce the Schweitzer inequality b a f b a 1 f n i=1 a 1 i (M + m)2 4Mm, where f, 1/f L 1 a, b with 0 < m f M; see 3. (M+m)2. Similarly one 4Mm By choosing some special X we obtain, from Theorem 4.5, some known results (see 2, 9, 12). In our first corollary X is a C -algebra regarded as a Hilbert C -module over itself. Corollary 4.10. Let B be a C -subalgebra of a C -algebra A and Φ : A B be a positive left multiplier. Then for all a 1,, a n, c A. Φ(c c) Φ(a ia j ) Φ(a ic)φ(c a j ) (4.5) Remark 4.11. If Φ : A B is a conditional expectation, then Φ is a completely positive left multiplier; cf. 17, IV, 3. Hence inequality (4.5) holds and so we get an extension of 2, Theorem 1 for conditional expectations. In the second corollary X is the space X = B(H, K ) of all bounded linear operators between Hilbert spaces regarded as a Hilbert C -module over A = B(H ) via A, B = A B.
12 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN Corollary 4.12. Let B be a C -subalgebra of B(H ) and Φ : B(H ) B a positive left multiplier. Then Φ(C C) Φ(A ia j ) Φ(A ic)φ(c A j ). is valid for all A 1,, A n, C B(H, K ). Let A be a unital C -algebra with the unit e. Another example of a positive left multiplier is a positive linear functional, in particular a vector state ϕ(a) = au, u corresponding to a unit vector u H on which A acts. We can provide the following related corollary as well. Corollary 4.13. Let X be a Hilbert A -module and A B(X ) be a positive map. Then for all x 1,, x n, z X A 1 2 z 2 Ax i, x j Ax i, z z, Ax j 0. Proof. This follows from Theorem 3.2 for m = 0 if we replace x 1,, x n, z by A 1 2x 1,, A 1 2x n, A 1 2z. 4.3. Kantorovich inequality. Finally, we provide a generalization of Kantorovich inequality in the context of Hilbert C -modules which can be viewed as an extension of Corollary 4.7. Recall that for positive invertible elements a, b A, we can use the following characterization of operator mean due to Ando as follows { } a b = max x A : x = x a x, 0, x b where a b = a2(a 1 1 2ba 1 2) 1 2a 1 2. This is easily deduced from a = (a b)b 1 (a b) and a x the fact that a xb 1 x if and only if 0, where x A. x b Theorem 4.14. Let A be a unital C -algebra, X be a Hilbert A -module and A B(X ) such that m A M for some scalars 0 < m M. Then for every x X for which x, x is invertible and every unital positive linear mapping Φ : A A it holds Φ( x, x ) Φ( Ax, x ) Φ( A 1 x, x ) M + m 2 Φ( x, x ). (4.6) mm Proof. First note that due to invertibility of x, x we have, for a := mm A 1 x, x and b =: Ax, x, a m x, x and b m x, x, so a and b are positive and invertible. Since Φ is positive and unital, Φ(a) and Φ(b) are also positive and invertible.
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 13 Observe now that M A and 1 m A 1 are positive commuting elements of the C -algebra B(X ). This implies that (M A)( 1 m A)( 1 m A 1 ) 0, wherefrom we get mma 1 + A (m + M). Then for every x X and therefore mm A 1 x, x + Ax, x (m + M) x, x mmφ( A 1 x, x ) + Φ( Ax, x ) (m + M)Φ( x, x ). Since t 1+t 2 for all t 0, we get (Φ(a) 1 2 Φ(b)Φ(a) 1 1 1 1 2 ) 2 (e + Φ(a) 2 Φ(b)Φ(a) 1 2 ) 2 and then Φ(a) 1 2(Φ(a) 1 2Φ(b)Φ(a) 1 2) 2Φ(a) 1 1 2 1 (Φ(a) + Φ(b)). By definition, the 2 left hand side of the previous inequality is Φ(a) Φ(b), so we get mmφ( A 1 x, x ) Φ( Ax, x ) 1 2 (mmφ( A 1 x, x ) + Φ( Ax, x )) m + M Φ( x, x ), 2 which gives the Kantorovich inequality (the second inequality of (4.6)). Applying Theorem 3.2 for n = 2, x 1 = A 1 2x, x 2 = A 1 2x and an arbitrary z such that z 0 we get Ax, x x, x x, x A 1 x, x 0. Now from 4, Corollary 4.4 (ii) it follows that Φ( Ax, x ) Φ( x, x ) Φ( x, x ) Φ( A 1 x, x ) 0, so Φ( x, x ) Φ( Ax, x ) Φ( A 1 x, x ). References 1 Lj. Arambašić, R. Rajić, Ostrowski s inequality in pre-hilbert C -modules, Math. Ineq. Appl. 12 (2009), no. 1, 217-226. 2 R. Bhatia and C. Davis, More operator versions of the Schwarz inequality, Comm. Math. Phys. 215 (2000), no. 2, 239 244. 3 P.S. Bullen, A dictionary of inequalities, Pitman Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics, 97. Longman, Harlow, 1998. 4 M.-D., Choi, Some assorted inequalities for positive linear maps on C -algebras, J Operator Theory 4 (1980), 271 285. (1980).
14 LJ. ARAMBAŠIĆ, D. BAKIĆ, M.S. MOSLEHIAN 5 M. Enomoto, Commutative relations and related topics, Surikaisekikenkyusho Kokyuroku, Kyoto University, 1039 (1998), 135 140. 6 M. Fujii, T. Furuta, R. Nakamoto, and S.-E. Takahasi, Operator inequalities and covariance in noncommutative probability, Math. Japon. 46 (1997), no. 2, 317 320. 7 M. Fujii, S. Izumino, R. Nakamoto, and Y. Seo, Operator inequalities related to Cauchy Schwarz and Hölder McCarthy inequalities, Nihonkai Math. J. 8 (1997), no. 2, 117 122. 8 E.C. Lance, Hilbert C -Modules, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Series 210, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1995. 9 E.H. Lieb and M.B. Ruskai, Some operator inequalities of the Schwarz type Advances in Math. 12 (1974), 269 273. 10 C.S. Lin,On variance and covariance for bounded linear operators Acta Math. Sin. (Engl. Ser.) 17 (2001), 657 668. 11 V.M. Manuilov and E.V. Troitsky, Hilbert C -Modules, Translations of Mathematical Monographs, 226. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2005. 12 R. Mathias, A note on: More operator versions of the Schwarz inequality Comm. Math. Phys. 215 (2000), no. 2, 239 244; by R. Bhatia and C. Davis, Positivity 8 (2004), no. 1, 85 87. 13 V.I. Paulsen, Completely bounded maps and dilations, Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics Series, 146., New York, 1986. 14 I. Raeburn and D.P. Williams, Morita Equivalence and Continuous-Trace C -Algebras, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs. 60. Providence, RI: American Mathematical Society (AMS), 1998. 15 Y. Seo, Variance in noncommutative probability, Math. Japon. 46 (1997), no. 3, 439 444. 16 H. Šikić, T. Šikić, A note on Ostrowski s inequality, Math. Ineq. Appl. 4(2) (2001), 297 299. 17 M. Takesaki, Theory of Operator Algebras. I, Reprint of the first (1979) edition. Encyclopaedia of Mathematical Sciences. 124. Operator Algebras and Non-commutative Geometry, 5. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2002. 18 H. Umegaki, Conditional expectation in an operator algebra, Tôhoku Math. J. (2) 6, (1954). 177 181. 19 N.E. Wegge-Olsen, K-theory and C -algebras - a friendly approach, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1993. 1 Department of Mathematics, University of Zagreb, Bijenička cesta 30, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. E-mail address: arambas@math.hr 2 Department of Mathematics, University of Zagreb, Bijenička cesta 30, 10000 Zagreb, Croatia. E-mail address: bakic@math.hr
GRAM MATRIX IN C -MODULES 15 3 Department of Pure Mathematics, Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, P. O. Box 1159, Mashhad 91775, Iran; Center of Excellence in Analysis on Algebraic Structures (CEAAS), Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Iran. E-mail address: moslehian@ferdowsi.um.ac.ir and moslehian@ams.org