Applications of Arithmetic Geometric Mean Inequality
Vol.07No.02(2017), Article ID:77048,8 pages
10.4236/alamt.2017.72004
Wasim Audeh
Department of Mathematics, University of Petra, Amman, Jordan
Copyright © 2017 by author and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY 4.0).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
Received: March 26, 2017; Accepted: June 18, 2017; Published: June 21, 2017
ABSTRACT
The well-known arithmetic-geometric mean inequality for singular values, due to Bhatia and Kittaneh, is one of the most important singular value inequalities for compact operators. The purpose of this study is to give new singular value inequalities for compact operators and prove that these inequalities are equivalent to arithmetic-geometric mean inequality, the way by which several future studies could be done.
Keywords:
Compact Operator, Inequality, Positive Operator, Singular Value
1. Fundamental Principles
Let indicate the set of all bounded linear operators on a complex separable Hilbert space H, and let
indicate the two-sided ideal of compact operators in
. If
, the singular values of T, denoted by
are the eigenvalues of the positive operator
ordered as
and repeated according to multiplicity. It is well known that
for
. It follows by Weyl’s monotonicity principle (see, e.g., [1] , p. 63 or [2] , p. 26) that if
are positive and
, then
for
. Moreover, for
if and only if
for
. Here, we use the direct sum notation
for the block-diagonal operator
defined on
. The sin- gular values of
and
are the same, and they consist of those of
S together with those of T.
Bhatia and Kittaneh have proved in [3] that if such that
is self-adjoint,
, and
, then
(1.1)
for.
Audeh and Kittaneh in [4] prove inequality which is equivalent to inequality (1.1):
If such that
, then
(1.2)
for.
The well-known arithmetic-geometric mean inequality for singular values, due to Bhatia and Kittaneh [5] , says that if, then
(1.3)
for. On the other hand, Zhan has proved in [6] that if
are positive, then
(1.4)
for. Moreover, Tao has proved in [7] that if
such
that, then
(1.5)
for.
Audeh and Kittaneh have proved in [4] that:
If such that
is self-adjoint,
, and
, then
(1.6)
for.
It has been pointed out in [4] that the four inequalities (1.3)-(1.6) are equi- valent.
Moreover, Tao in [7] uses inequality (1.3) to prove that if and
are positive operators in
,
. Then
(1.7)
for.
2. Introduction
In this study, we will present several new inequalities, and prove that they are equivalent to arithmetic-geometric mean inequality.
The following are the proved inequalities in this study:
Let and
be operators in
where
,
and
arbitrary operators. Then
(2.1)
for.
Let and
be arbitrary operators in
. Then we have
(2.2)
for.
Let be operators in
. Then
(2.3)
for.
If and
are operators in
. Then
(2.4)
for.
Let be positive operators in
Then
(2.5)
for.
3. Main Results
Our first singular value inequality needs the following lemma.
Lemma 1: Let be a positive operator in
,
be an arbitrary operator in
. Then we have
(3.1)
Now we will prove the first Theorem which is equivalent to arithmetic- geometric mean inequality.
Theorem 3.1 Let and
be operators in
where
,
and
arbitrary operators. Then
for.
Proof. Let (because
by assumption), and let
. Then we have
From (1.5) we have
for.
Now we will prove that Theorem (3.1) is equivalent to arithmetic-geometric mean inequality.
Theorem 3.2 The following statements are equivalent:
1) Let, then
for.
2) Let and
be operators in
where
,
and
arbitrary operators. Then
for.
Proof. 1) ® 2) Let
Now apply arithmetic-geometric mean inequality to get
for. But
The above steps implies that
for
.
2) ® 1) The matrix can be factorized as
, but it is well known that
for
. So
for, from (2) we have
(3.2)
for. Now let
in Inequality (3.2) we get
(3.3)
for, which is the arithmetic-geometric mean inequality.
The following lemma which was proved by Bhatia [1] is essential to prove the next theorem.
Lemma 2 Let be arbitrary operator in
. Then
(3.4)
Now we will prove the following theorem which is more general than Theo- rem (3.1) and equivalent to arithmetic-geometric mean inequality.
Theorem 3.3 Let and
be arbitrary operators in
. Then we have
for.
Proof. Applying Lemma (2) gives for an arbitrary ope- rator
. Let
by using Inequality (3.1) we have
Hence using Inequality (1.5) gives
.
Remark 1 Theorem (3.3) is generalization of Theorem (3.1) because here X is arbitrary operator but there A should be positive operator.
Remark 2 Inequality (2.2) is equivalent to arithmetic-geometric mean inequality. We can prove this equivalent by similar steps used to prove Theorem (3.2).
The following theorem is a generalization of Theorem (3.1) and Theorem (3.3).
Theorem 3.4 Let and
be arbitrary operators in
. Then we have
for.
Proof. Let Then
Hence
use Inequality (1.5) to get the required result.
Remark 3 Replace B, D by 0 in Inequality (2.4) will gives Inequality (2.1).
Remark 4 Replace A, C by 0 in Inequality (2.4) will also gives Inequality (2.1).
Now we will use Inequality (1.3) to prove the following theorem, then we will show that they are equivalent.
Theorem 3.5 Let be operators in
. Then
for.
Proof. Let Then
and
Now use Inequality (1.3) we get
for.
Now we will prove that Inequality (2.3) is equivalent to Inequality (1.3).
Theorem 3.6 The following statements are equivalent:
1) Let. Then
for.
2) Let be operators in
. Then
for.
Proof. 1) ® 2) It is the proof of Theorem (3.5).
2) ® 1) By replacing and
in Inequality (2.3), we
get From this we reach to
which implies that
for
.
In the rest of this paper, we will prove new inequality which is equivalent to Inequality (1.7).
Theorem 3.7 Let be positive operators in
, n is an even integer,
. Then
(3.5)
for.
Proof. Let Then we have
and Now apply
Inequality (1.7) we get the result.
We will prove that Inequality (1.7) is equivalent to Inequality (3.5).
Theorem 3.8 The following statements are equivalent:
1) Let and
be positive operators in
,
. Then
for.
2) Let be positive operators in
, n is even integer,
. Then
for.
Proof. 1) ® 2) This implication follows from the proof of Theorem 3.7.
2) ® 1) Let in Inequality (3.5) to get
for. But
and
for
.
If and only if, this gives
for, replace
by
,
by
in this inequality we will get
for.
4. Conclusion
Since this study has been completed, we can conclude that several singular value inequalities for compact operators are equivalent to arithmetic-geometric mean inequality, which in turns have many crucial applications in operator theory, and from this point we advise interested authors to join these results with results in other studies to make connection between several branches in operator theory.
Acknowledgements
The author is grateful to the University of Petra for its Support. The Author is grateful to the referee for his comments and suggestions.
Cite this paper
Audeh, W. (2017) Applications of Arithmetic Geometric Mean Inequality. Advances in Linear Algebra & Matrix Theory, 7, 29-36. https://doi.org/10.4236/alamt.2017.72004
References
- 1. Bhatia, R. (1997) Matrix Analysis, GTM169. Springer-Verlag, New York.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0653-8 - 2. Gohberg, I.C. and Krein, M.G. (1969) Introduction to the Theory of Linear Nonselfadjoint Operators. American Mathematical Society, Providence.
- 3. Bhatia, R. and Kittaneh, F. (2008) The Matrix Arithmetic-Geometric Mean Inequality Revisited. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 428, 2177-2191.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2007.11.030 - 4. Audeh, W. and Kittaneh, F. (2012) Singular Value Inequalities for Compact Operators. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 437, 2516-2522.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2012.06.032 - 5. Bhatia, R. and Kittaneh, F. (1990) On the Singular Values of a Product of Operators. SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, 11, 272-277.
https://doi.org/10.1137/0611018 - 6. Zhan, X. (2000) Singular Values of Differences of Positive Semidefinite Matrices. SIAM Journal on Matrix Analysis and Applications, 22, 819-823.
https://doi.org/10.1137/S0895479800369840 - 7. Tao, Y. (2006) More Results on Singular Value Inequalities of Matrices. Linear Algebra and Its Applications, 416, 724-729.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.laa.2005.12.017
上一篇:Jordan Γ*-Derivation on 下一篇:Two Nonzero Component Lemma an
最新文章NEWS
- On Characterization of Poised Nodes for a Space of Bivariate Functions
- Least-Squares Solutions of Generalized Sylvester Equation with Xi Satisfies Different Linear Constra
- Matrices and Division by Zero z/0 = 0
- Jordan Γ*-Derivation on Semiprime Γ-Ring M with Involution
- Two Nonzero Component Lemma and Matrix Trigonometry
- Using Row Reduced Echelon Form in Balancing Chemical Equations
- Tight Monomials with t-Value ≤ 9 for Quantum Group of Type D4
- Minimum Covering Randić Energy of a Graph
推荐期刊Tui Jian
- Chinese Journal of Integrative Medicine
- Journal of Genetics and Genomics
- Journal of Bionic Engineering
- Chinese Journal of Structural Chemistry
- Pedosphere
- Nuclear Science and Techniques
- 《传媒》
- 《哈尔滨师范大学自然科学学报》
热点文章HOT
- Using Row Reduced Echelon Form in Balancing Chemical Equations
- Minimum Covering Randić Energy of a Graph
- A Note on the Inclusion Sets for Tensors
- A General Hermitian Nonnegative-Definite Solution to the Matrix Equation AXB = C
- Jordan Γ*-Derivation on Semiprime Γ-Ring M with Involution
- Matrices and Division by Zero z/0 = 0
- On Characterization of Poised Nodes for a Space of Bivariate Functions
- Two Nonzero Component Lemma and Matrix Trigonometry