Moore-Penrose Inverses of Operators in Hilbert C -Modules

Similar documents
Bulletin of the. Iranian Mathematical Society

Moore-Penrose Inverse of Product Operators in Hilbert C -Modules

of a Two-Operator Product 1

EXPLICIT SOLUTION TO MODULAR OPERATOR EQUATION T XS SX T = A

EXPLICIT SOLUTION TO MODULAR OPERATOR EQUATION T XS SX T = A

Some results on the reverse order law in rings with involution

arxiv: v2 [math.fa] 2 Aug 2012

Dragan S. Djordjević. 1. Introduction

On EP elements, normal elements and partial isometries in rings with involution

Research Article On the Idempotent Solutions of a Kind of Operator Equations

Direct Product of BF-Algebras

Weyl s Theorem and Property (Saw)

On a Certain Representation in the Pairs of Normed Spaces

Group Inverse for a Class of. Centrosymmetric Matrix

THE POLAR DECOMPOSITION FOR ADJOINTABLE OPERATORS ON HILBERT C -MODULES AND CENTERED OPERATORS

Solving Homogeneous Systems with Sub-matrices

On the Moore-Penrose Inverse in C -algebras

On Symmetric Bi-Multipliers of Lattice Implication Algebras

Double Total Domination on Generalized Petersen Graphs 1

Research Article Partial Isometries and EP Elements in Banach Algebras

Mappings of the Direct Product of B-algebras

Left R-prime (R, S)-submodules

A Note on Operators in Hilbert C*-Modules

Research Article k-kernel Symmetric Matrices

Join Reductions and Join Saturation Reductions of Abstract Knowledge Bases 1

When is the Ring of 2x2 Matrices over a Ring Galois?

The Generalized Viscosity Implicit Rules of Asymptotically Nonexpansive Mappings in Hilbert Spaces

Finite Groups with ss-embedded Subgroups

Expressions and Perturbations for the Moore Penrose Inverse of Bounded Linear Operators in Hilbert Spaces

Dragan S. Djordjević. 1. Introduction and preliminaries

Order-theoretical Characterizations of Countably Approximating Posets 1

A Class of Z4C-Groups

Buzano Inequality in Inner Product C -modules via the Operator Geometric Mean

Operators with Compatible Ranges

Moore-Penrose Inverse and Operator Inequalities

arxiv: v1 [math.ra] 28 Jan 2016

Moore-Penrose-invertible normal and Hermitian elements in rings

The Residual Spectrum and the Continuous Spectrum of Upper Triangular Operator Matrices

The Moore-Penrose inverse of differences and products of projectors in a ring with involution

Remarks on Fuglede-Putnam Theorem for Normal Operators Modulo the Hilbert-Schmidt Class

Some Range-Kernel Orthogonality Results for Generalized Derivation

A Generalization of p-rings

International Journal of Algebra, Vol. 7, 2013, no. 3, HIKARI Ltd, On KUS-Algebras. and Areej T.

Some Reviews on Ranks of Upper Triangular Block Matrices over a Skew Field

On the Moore-Penrose and the Drazin inverse of two projections on Hilbert space

Research Article Bessel and Grüss Type Inequalities in Inner Product Modules over Banach -Algebras

A New Characterization of A 11

Research Article Minor Prime Factorization for n-d Polynomial Matrices over Arbitrary Coefficient Field

Parallel Properties of Poles of. Positive Functions and those of. Discrete Reactance Functions

arxiv: v1 [math.ra] 21 Jul 2013

Double Total Domination in Circulant Graphs 1

Morphisms Between the Groups of Semi Magic Squares and Real Numbers

EP elements in rings

STRUCTURAL AND SPECTRAL PROPERTIES OF k-quasi- -PARANORMAL OPERATORS. Fei Zuo and Hongliang Zuo

Surjective Maps Preserving Local Spectral Radius

On Generalized Derivations and Commutativity. of Prime Rings with Involution

Normality of adjointable module maps

Available online at J. Math. Comput. Sci. 4 (2014), No. 1, 1-9 ISSN:

Strong Convergence of the Mann Iteration for Demicontractive Mappings

Convex Sets Strict Separation in Hilbert Spaces

Research Article Constrained Solutions of a System of Matrix Equations

Introducing Preorder to Hilbert C -Modules

Regular Generalized Star b-continuous Functions in a Bigeneralized Topological Space

DOUGLAS RANGE FACTORIZATION THEOREM FOR REGULAR OPERATORS ON HILBERT C -MODULES

CORACH PORTA RECHT INEQUALITY FOR CLOSED RANGE OPERATORS

arxiv: v2 [math.oa] 21 Nov 2010

Re-nnd solutions of the matrix equation AXB = C

Equivalent Multivariate Stochastic Processes

A Generalization of Generalized Triangular Fuzzy Sets

On the Computation of the Adjoint Ideal of Curves with Ordinary Singularities

Complete and Fuzzy Complete d s -Filter

EXPLICIT SOLUTION OF THE OPERATOR EQUATION A X + X A = B

Restrained Independent 2-Domination in the Join and Corona of Graphs

Hermitian Weighted Composition Operators on the Fock-type Space F 2 α(c N )

On Annihilator Small Intersection Graph

Rainbow Connection Number of the Thorn Graph

On Permutation Polynomials over Local Finite Commutative Rings

On Sum and Restriction of Hypo-EP Operators

On a Type of Para-Kenmotsu Manifold

On the Power of Standard Polynomial to M a,b (E)

Dragan S. Djordjević. 1. Motivation

A Note on Linearly Independence over the Symmetrized Max-Plus Algebra

Prime Hyperideal in Multiplicative Ternary Hyperrings

Explicit Expressions for Free Components of. Sums of the Same Powers

Contra θ-c-continuous Functions

The Rainbow Connection of Windmill and Corona Graph

Generalized Derivation on TM Algebras

Cross Connection of Boolean Lattice

The Split Hierarchical Monotone Variational Inclusions Problems and Fixed Point Problems for Nonexpansive Semigroup

Toric Deformation of the Hankel Variety

On a Boundary-Value Problem for Third Order Operator-Differential Equations on a Finite Interval

Research Article r-costar Pair of Contravariant Functors

Moore Penrose inverses and commuting elements of C -algebras

arxiv: v1 [math.ra] 25 Jul 2013

Research Article A Note on Property gb and Perturbations

Application of Block Matrix Theory to Obtain the Inverse Transform of the Vector-Valued DFT

Induced Cycle Decomposition of Graphs

Complete Ideal and n-ideal of B-algebra

Block-Transitive 4 (v, k, 4) Designs and Suzuki Groups

Nonsingularity and group invertibility of linear combinations of two k-potent matrices

Transcription:

International Journal of Mathematical Analysis Vol. 11, 2017, no. 8, 389-396 HIKARI Ltd, www.m-hikari.com https//doi.org/10.12988/ijma.2017.7342 Moore-Penrose Inverses of Operators in Hilbert C -Modules Fugen Gao College of Mathematics and Information Science Henan Normal University, Henan, China Guoqing Hong College of Mathematics and Information Science Henan Normal University, Henan, China Copyright c 2017 Fugen Gao and Guoqing Hong. This article is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. Abstract For two given bounded adjointable operators T and S between Hilbert C*-modules, it is well known that an operator Moore-Penrose inverse exists iff the operator has closed range. In this paper, we give some formulas for the Moore-Penrose inverses of products T S. Mathematics Subject Classification 47A05, 46L08, 15A09 Keywords Hilbert C*-module, bounded adjointable operator, Moore- Penrose inverse, product operators 1 Introduction and preliminaries Throughout the paper, we assume that E, F, G are Hilbert A-modules, where A is a C*-algebra. For an operator T, let R(T be the range of T and K(T be the kernel of T. The notation [T, S] denotes the commutator T S ST of T and S. We abbreviate Moore-Penrose inverse to MP-inverse.

390 Fugen Gao and Guoqing Hong For two given invertible operator T, S in Hilbert C*-modules, the equality (T S 1 = S 1 T 1 is called the reverse order law. If T and S are invertible operator then the reverse order law effective but this case does not validate for the MP-inverse in general. The problem first studied by Greville [5] and then reconsidered by Bouldin [1] and Izumino [6]. A number of researchers discussed the problem such that reverse order law holds from different angles [2, 3, 4, 8, 15]. We also refer to another interesting Sharifi and Bonakdar [15] of this type. In this paper we continue and supplement this research by using the space decompositions and operator matrix representations in C*-modules. We specialize the investigations to the MP-inverses of T S and give some formulas for the MP-inverses of T S. The notion of C*-module has been presented by Kaplansky [7] and Paschke [13]. A Hilbert C*-module E is right A-module with an inner product, E E A satisfying (1 x, αy + βz = α x, y + β x, z, (2 x, ya = x, y a, (3 y, x = x, y, (4 x, x 0 and x, x = 0 iff x = 0, for all x, y, z E, a A, α, β C and such that E is complete corresponding to x = x, x. Hilbert C*-module can be regard as a generalization of the Hilbert space. In spite of this promotion is natural, some basic properties of Hilbert spaces are not applicable in Hilbert C*-modules. Therefore, when studying a certain problem in C*-modules, it is useful to find conditions to gain the results homologous to those for Hilbert spaces. The elements of L(E, F is said to be bounded adjointable operators, if there is an operator T F E satisfying T (x, y = x, T (y for each x E and y F. The operator T is selfadjoint if T = T and T L(E, F is MP invertible if there is X L(F, E such that T XT = T, XT X = X, (T X = T X, (XT = XT. There is at most one element X satisfying the above formula, if T L(E, F is MP-invertible, then the unique X is called MP inverse of T. In symbols this is denoted by T. Xu and Sheng [16] show that an operator permits a MP-inverses iff the operator has closed range. Moreover, Sharifi [14] show that T S has closed range iff the kernel of T is orthogonally complemented with the range of S, iff the kernel of S is orthogonally complemented with the range of T. If a Hilbert A-submodule W of a Hilbert A-module E and its orthogonal complement W yield E = W W, then W is orthogonal complemented. We associate the matrix representation of an operator T L(E, F with respect

Moore-Penrose inverses of operators 391 to some natural decompositions of C*-modules. If E = K K, F = H H then operator T has the following matrix form T1 T T = 2 T 3 T 4 where T 1 L(K, H, T 2 L(K, H, T 3 L(K, H, T 4 L(K, H. 2 Main results First, we need following three auxiliary results. Lemma 2.1. [9] Let T L(E, F and R(T be closed. Then T has the following matrix form T1 0 R(T T = R(T K(T K(T, where T 1 is invertible. Moreover T T 1 1 0 = R(T K(T R(T. K(T Lemma 2.2. [15] Let E 1, E 2 be closed submodules of E and F 1, F 2 be closed submodules of F such that E = E 1 E 2 and F = F 1 F 2. If T L(E, F has closed range, then T has the following matrix form (i T = T1 T 2 [ E1 E 2 ] R(T K(T. Moreover T = T 1 D 1 0 T2 D 1, 0 where D = T 1 T1 + T 2 T2 L(R(T is positive and invertible. (ii T1 0 R(T T = F1. T 2 0 K(T F 2 Moreover T = [ D 1 T 1 D 1 T 2 ],

392 Fugen Gao and Guoqing Hong where D = T 1 T 1 + T 2 T 2 L(R(T is positive and invertible. Lemma 2.3. Let N L(E, F have a closed range, and let M L(F be selfadjoint and invertible. Then R(MN = R(N iff [M, NN ] = 0. Proof. Suppose N have a closed range, M be selfadjoint and invertible. We consider the orthogonal direct sums E = R(N + K(N and F = R(N + K(N. Then the operators N and M have the corresponding matrix forms as follows N = N1 0 where N 1 is invertible, and M1 M M = 2 M 3 M 4 R(N R(N K(N K(N, R(N R(N K(N K(N, where M 3 = M2. It follows that M1 N MN = 1 0 R(N R(N M 3 N 1 0 K(N K(N. M1 0 Hence, R(MN = R(N implies M 3 = 0 and M 2 = 0, so M =. 0 M 4 Since M is selfadjoint and invertible, we [ obtain ] that M 1 and M 4 are also N selfadjoint and invertible. Since N 1 1 0 =, we obtain that MNN = NN M holds. Conversely, if M is invertible and MNN = NN M, then R(MN = R(MNN = R(NN M = R(NN = R(N. In the following, we give some formulas about (T S. Theorem 2.4. Suppose S L(E, F, T L(F, G, TS have closed ranges. Then (T S = (T T S T iff R(T T T S = R(T S. Proof. By Lemma (2.1, the operator S and its MP-inverse S have the following matrix forms S1 0 R(S S = R(S K(S K(S, S S 1 1 0 R(S R(S = K(S. K(S From Lemma 2.2 it follows that the T and its MP-inverse T have the following matrix forms

Moore-Penrose inverses of operators 393 T = T1 T 2 R(S R(T K(S K(T, T = T 1 D 1 0 T2 D 1, 0 where D = T 1 T1 + T 2 T2 L(R(T is positive and invertible. Then we have the following products T1 S T S = 1 0, (T S (T1 S = 1 0 S, S T 1 1 T1 = D 1 0. Notice that R((T T S = R(S T T = S R(T T = S R(T = R((T S is closed, so R(T T S is closed. First, we find the equivalent conditions for our statements. (1. Let us denote C = T T S. Using [[11], Corollary 2.4] we find C as follows [ C = (C C C = ] (S 1 T1 D 1 T 1 S 1 S1T 1 D 1 T 1 (S1T 1 D 1 T 1 S 1 S1T 1 D 1 T 2. Now, we can see that (T S = (T T S T is equivalent with (T 1 S 1 = (S1T 1 D 1 T 1 S 1 S1T 1 D 1 = (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2. (2. It is obvious that T T DT1 S T S = 1 0, so R(T T T S = R(T S holds iff R(DT 1 S 1 = R(T 1 S 1. (1 (2 From the third Moore-Penrose equation for (T 1 S 1 = (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2, we see that T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2 is selfadjoint. So we have the following equivalents Now, T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2 is selfadjoint D 1 2 T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 is selfadjoint [D, D 1 2 T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 ] = 0 D 1 2 T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 = D 1 2 T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D DT 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 = T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D. R(DT 1 S 1 = R(DT 1 S 1 (T 1 S 1 = R(T 1 S 1 (T 1 S 1 D = R(T 1 S 1. (2 (1 If R(DT 1 S 1 = R(T 1 S 1, then we apply Lemma 2.3 to obtain [D, T 1 S 1 (T 1 S 1 ]=0.

394 Fugen Gao and Guoqing Hong Now, from the previous argument it follows that T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2 is selfadjoint. Noticed that (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2 T 1 S 1 is the orthogonal projection onto R((T 1 S 1 D 1 2 = R((T 1 S 1, so T 1 S 1 (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2 T 1 S 1 = T 1 S 1. Finally, it is not difficult to examine that (T 1 S 1 = (D 1 2 T 1 S 1 D 1 2 holds. Similarly to Theorem 2.4 we have Theorem 2.5. Suppose S L(E, F, T L(F, G, TS have closed ranges. Then (T S = S (T SS iff R(S S(T S = R((T S. Proof. According to Theorem 2.4, we have the following equivalences (S T = (T (S T T R(T T T S = R(T S Now,take T = S and S = T, (T S = S (T S S R(S S S T = R(S T. Theorem 2.6. Suppose S L(E, F, T L(F, G, TS have closed ranges. Then S = (T S T iff R(T T S = R(S. Proof. We keep the matrix forms of T and S as in previous theorems. (1 We can obatin that S = (T S T iff I = (T 1 S 1 T 1 S 1 and (T 1 S 1 T 2 = 0. Hence, S = (T S T is equivalent to the following two conditions T 1 is injective with closed range and (T 1 S 1 T 2 = 0. (2 R(T T S = R(S iff R(T 1 T 1 S 1 = R(S 1 and T 2 T 1 S 1 = 0. Hence, R(T T S = R(S is equivalent to the following two conditions T 1 is injective with closed range and T 1 T 2 = 0. To prove the equivalence (1 (2, we have the following (T 1 S 1 T 2 = 0 R(T 2 K((T 1 S 1 = K((T 1 S 1 (T 1 S 1 T 2 = 0 T 1 T 2 = 0. We also prove the following result. Theorem 2.7. Suppose S L(E, F, T L(F, G, TS have closed ranges. Then T = S(T S iff R(SS T = R(T. Proof. From the Theorem 2.6 it follows that S = T (S T iff R(T T S = R(S. Now replace, T and S by S and T, to obtain theorem holds.

Moore-Penrose inverses of operators 395 Remark 2.8. The conditions R(T T S = R(S and R(SS T = R(T taken in Theorem 2.6 and Theorem 2.7 imply the reverse order law (T S = S T holds, since S T = (T S T S(T S = (T S. Acknowledgements. The research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11301155, (11271112, IRTSTHN (14IRT- STHN023 and the Natural Science Foundation of the Department of Education, Henan Province (16A110003. References [1] R. H. Bouldin, The Pseudo-Inverse of a Product, SIAM Journal on Applied Mathematics, 24 (1973, 489-495. https//doi.org/10.1137/0124051 [2] D. S. Cvetković-Ilić and R. Harte, Reverse order laws in C -algebras, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 434 (2011, 1388-1394. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2010.11.022 [3] C. Deng, Reverse order law for the group inverses, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 382 (2011, 663-671. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2011.04.085 [4] D. S. Djordjević and N. C. Dinćić, Reverse order law for the Moore- Penrose inverse, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, 361 (2010, 252-261. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2009.08.056 [5] T. N. E. Greville, Note on the Generalized Inverse of a Matrix Product, SIAM Review, 8 (1966, 518-521. https//doi.org/10.1137/1008107 [6] S. Izumino, The product of operators with closed range and an extension of the reverse order law, Tohoku Mathematical Journal, 34 (1982, 43-52. https//doi.org/10.2748/tmj/1178229307 [7] I. Kaplansky, Modules over operator algebras, American Journal of Mathematics, 75 (1953, 839-858. https//doi.org/10.2307/2372552 [8] J. J. Koliha, D. Djordjević and D. Cvetković, Moore-Penrose inverse in rings with involution, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 426 (2007, 371-381. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2007.05.012 [9] M. M. Karizaki, M. Hassani, M. Amyari and M. Khosravi, Operator matrix of Moore-Penrose inverse operators on Hilbert C -modules, Colloquium Mathematicum, 140 (2015, 171-182. https//doi.org/10.4064/cm140-2-2

396 Fugen Gao and Guoqing Hong [10] E. C. Lance, Hilbert C -Modules A Toolkit for Operator Algebraists, London Mathematical Society Lecture Note, Cambridge University Press, 1995. https//doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511526206 [11] M. S. Moslehian, K. Sharifi, M. Forough and M. Chakoshi, Moore-Penrose inverses of Gram operator on Hilbert C -modules, Studia Mathematica, 210 (2012, 189-196. https//doi.org/10.4064/sm210-2-6 [12] G. J. Murphy, C -Algebras and Operator Theory, Academic Press, Boston, 1990. https//doi.org/10.1016/c2009-0-22289-6 [13] W. L. Paschke, Inner Product Modules Over B -Algebras, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, 182 (1973, 443-468. https//doi.org/10.2307/1996542 [14] K. Sharifi, The product of operators with closed range in Hilbert C -modules, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 435 (2011, 1122-1130. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2011.02.025 [15] K. Sharifi and B. A. Bonakdar, The reverse order law for Moore-Penrose inverses of operators on Hilbert C -modules, Bulletin of the Iranian Mathematical Society, 42 (2016, 53-60. [16] Q. Xu and L. Sheng, Positive semi-definite matrices of adjointable operators on Hilbert C -modules, Linear Algebra and its Applications, 428 (2008, 992-1000. https//doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2007.08.035 Received March 21, 2017; Published April 15, 2017