On ∗-class A contractions
© Gao and Li; licensee Springer. 2013
Received: 11 January 2013
Accepted: 25 April 2013
Published: 13 May 2013
A Hilbert space operator T belongs to ∗-class A if . The famous Fuglede-Putnam theorem is as follows: the operator equation implies when A and B are normal operators. In this paper, firstly we prove that if T is a contraction of ∗-class A operators, then either T has a nontrivial invariant subspace or T is a proper contraction and the nonnegative operator is a strongly stable contraction; secondly, we show that if X is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator, A and are ∗-class A operators such that , then .
Keywords∗-class A operators contraction operators the Fuglede-Putnam theorem
Let ℋ be a complex Hilbert space and let ℂ be the set of complex numbers. Let denote the -algebra of all bounded linear operators acting on ℋ. For operators , we shall write kerT and ranT for the null space and the range of T, respectively. Also, let denote the spectrum of T.
Recall that is called p-hyponormal for if ; when , T is called hyponormal. And T is called paranormal if for all [2, 3]. And T is called normaloid if for all (equivalently, , the spectral radius of T). In order to discuss the relations between paranormal and p-hyponormal and log-hyponormal operators (T is invertible and ), Furuta et al.  introduced a very interesting class of operators: class A defined by , where which is called the absolute value of T; and they showed that the class A is a subclass of paranormal and contains p-hyponormal and log-hyponormal operators. Recently Duggal et al.  introduced ∗-class A operators (i.e., ) and ∗-paranormal operators (i.e., for all ); and they proved that a ∗-class A operator is a generalization of hyponormal operator and ∗-class A operators form a subclass of the class of ∗-paranormal operators.
A contraction is an operator T such that . A contraction T is said to be a proper contraction if for every nonzero . A strict contraction is an operator T such that . A strict contraction is a proper contraction, but a proper contraction is not necessary a strict contraction, although the concepts of strict and proper contractions coincide for compact operators. A contraction T is of class if when for every (i.e., T is a strongly stable contraction) and it is said to be of class if for every nonzero . Classes and are defined by considering instead of T, and we define the class for by . An isometry is a contraction for which for every .
In this paper, firstly we prove that if T is a contraction of ∗-class A operators, then either T has a nontrivial invariant subspace or T is a proper contraction and the nonnegative operator is a strongly stable contraction; secondly, we show that if X is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator, A and are ∗-class A operators such that , then .
2 On ∗-class A contractions
Theorem 2.1 If T is a contraction of ∗-class A operators, then the nonnegative operator is a contraction whose power sequence converges strongly to a projection P, and .
for every . So that . □
T is a proper contraction;
the nonnegative operator is a strongly stable contraction (so that ).
Let T be a contraction of ∗-class A operators. By Theorem 2.1 we have D is a contraction, converges strongly to a projection P, and . So, . Suppose T has no nontrivial invariant subspace. Since kerP is a nonzero invariant subspace for T whenever and , it follows that . Hence and so converges strongly to 0, that is, is a strongly stable contraction. D is self-adjoint, so that . □
Since a self-adjoint operator T is a proper contraction if and only if T is a -contraction, we have the following corollary by Theorem 2.2.
Corollary 2.3 Let T be a contraction of ∗-class A operators. If T has no nontrivial invariant subspace, then both T and the nonnegative operator are proper contractions.
3 The Fuglede-Putnam theorem for ∗-class A operators
Theorem 3.1 Let A and B be normal operators and X be an operator such that , then .
The Fuglede-Putnam theorem was first proved in the case by Fuglede  and then a proof in the general case was given by Putnam . Berberian  proved that the Fuglede theorem was actually equivalent to that of Putnam by a nice operator matrix derivation trick. Rosenblum  gave an elegant and simple proof of the Fuglede-Putnam theorem by using Liouville’s theorem. There were various generalizations of the Fuglede-Putnam theorem to nonnormal operators; we only cite [11–14]. For example, Radjabalipour  showed that the Fuglede-Putnam theorem holds for hyponormal operators; Uchiyama and Tanahashi  showed that the Fuglede-Putnam theorem holds for p-hyponormal and log-hyponormal operators. If let be Hilbert-Schmidt class, Mecheri and Uchiyama  showed that normality in the Fuglede-Putnam theorem can be replaced by A and class A operators. In this paper, we show that if X is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator, A and are ∗-class A operators such that , then .
Let denote the tensor product on the product space for non-zero . In , Duggal et al. give a necessary and sufficient condition for to be a ∗-class A operator.
Lemma 3.2 (see )
Let be non-zero operators. Then belongs to ∗-class A operators if and only if A and B belong to ∗-class A operators.
Theorem 3.3 Let . Then is a ∗-class A operator on if and only if A and belong to ∗-class A operators.
Proof The unitary operator by a map induces the ∗-isomorphism by a map . Then we can obtain ; see details . This completes the proof by Lemma 3.2. □
Lemma 3.4 (see )
Let be a ∗-class A operator. If and for some , then .
Now we are ready to extend the Fuglede-Putnam theorem to ∗-class A operators.
Theorem 3.5 Let A and be ∗-class A operators. If for , then .
Proof Let Γ be defined on by . Since A and are ∗-class A operators, we have that Γ is a ∗-class A operator on by Theorem 3.3. Moreover, we have because of . Hence X is an eigenvector of Γ. By Lemma 3.4 we have , that is, . The proof is complete. □
This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (11071188); the Natural Science Foundation of the Department of Education, Henan Province (2011A110009), Project of Science and Technology Department of Henan province (122300410375) and Key Scientific and Technological Project of Henan Province (122102210132).
- Aluthge A: On p -hyponormal operators for . Integral Equ. Oper. Theory 1990, 13: 307–315. 10.1007/BF01199886MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Furuta T: On the class of paranormal operators. Proc. Jpn. Acad. 1967, 43: 594–598. 10.3792/pja/1195521514MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Furuta T: Invitation to Linear Operators. Taylor & Francis, London; 2001.View ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Furuta T, Ito M, Yamazaki T: A subclass of paranormal operators including class of log-hyponormal and several classes. Sci. Math. 1998, 1(3):389–403.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- Duggal BP, Jeon IH, Kim IH: On ∗-paranormal contractions and properties for ∗-class A operators. Linear Algebra Appl. 2012, 436: 954–962. 10.1016/j.laa.2011.06.002MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Kubrusly CS, Levan N: Proper contractions and invariant subspace. Int. J. Math. Math. Sci. 2001, 28: 223–230. 10.1155/S0161171201006287MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Fuglede B: A commutativity theorem for normal operators. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1950, 36: 35–40. 10.1073/pnas.36.1.35MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Putnam CR: On normal operators in Hilbert space. Am. J. Math. 1951, 73: 357–362. 10.2307/2372180MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Berberian SK: Note on a theorem of Fuglede and Putnam. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1959, 10: 175–182. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1959-0107826-9MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Rosenblum M: On a theorem of Fuglede and Putnam. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 1958, 33: 376–377.MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Berberian SK: Extensions of a theorem of Fuglede-Putnam. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1978, 71: 113–114. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1978-0487554-2MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Furuta T: On relaxation of normality in the of Fuglede-Putnam theorem. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1979, 77: 324–328. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1979-0545590-2MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Radjabalipour M: An extension of Fuglede-Putnam theorem for hyponormal operators. Math. Z. 1987, 194: 117–120. 10.1007/BF01168010MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Uchiyama A, Tanahashi K: Fuglede-Putnam’s theorem for p -hyponormal or log-hyponormal operators. Glasg. Math. J. 2002, 44: 397–410. 10.1017/S0017089502030057MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Mecheri S, Uchiyama A: An extension of the Fuglede-Putnam’s theorem to class A operators. Math. Inequal. Appl. 2010, 13(1):57–61.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
- Brown A, Pearcy C: Spectra of tensor products of operators. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1966, 17: 162–166. 10.1090/S0002-9939-1966-0188786-5MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
- Mecheri S: Isolated points of spectrum of k -quasi-∗-class A operators. Stud. Math. 2012, 208: 87–96. 10.4064/sm208-1-6MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.