Each result cited is universally quantified over the data in its own statement, and is applied here to the data named in the statement of the lemma. Throughout, S = span ( e ) S=\operatorname{span}(e) S = span ( e ) denotes the span of the tuple e e e , a linear subspace of H H H containing every e i e_{i} e i by claim 1 of The Span of a Finite Family is the Smallest Subspace Containing It , and S ⊥ S^{\perp} S ⊥ its orthogonal complement . By Orthogonality, Orthogonal Complement and Orthonormal Families in a Real Inner Product Space §orthonormal the tuple e e e satisfies ⟨ e i , e j ⟩ = 0 \langle e_{i},e_{j}\rangle=0 ⟨ e i , e j ⟩ = 0 for i ≠ j i\ne j i = j and ∣ e i ∣ = 1 |e_{i}|=1 ∣ e i ∣ = 1 for every i i i .
The map P P P of the statement is the map of Projection onto the Span of an Orthonormal Tuple, and Coordinates on a Finite-Dimensional Subspace determined by e e e , so that claims 1 to 6 of that lemma are available: P P P is linear, P x ∈ S Px\in S P x ∈ S for every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H , P x = x Px=x P x = x for every x ∈ S x\in S x ∈ S , x − P x ∈ S ⊥ x-Px\in S^{\perp} x − P x ∈ S ⊥ for every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H , ∣ P x ∣ ≤ ∣ x ∣ |Px|\le|x| ∣ P x ∣ ≤ ∣ x ∣ and ∣ x ∣ 2 = ∣ P x ∣ 2 + ∣ x − P x ∣ 2 |x|^{2}=|Px|^{2}+|x-Px|^{2} ∣ x ∣ 2 = ∣ P x ∣ 2 + ∣ x − P x ∣ 2 ; and the map κ : S → R m \kappa:S\to\mathbb{R}^{m} κ : S → R m with κ ( y ) = ( ⟨ y , e 1 ⟩ , … , ⟨ y , e m ⟩ ) \kappa(y)=(\langle y,e_{1}\rangle,\dots,\langle y,e_{m}\rangle) κ ( y ) = (⟨ y , e 1 ⟩ , … , ⟨ y , e m ⟩) is a linear bijection with inverse the map sending ζ \zeta ζ to ∑ i = 1 m ζ i e i \sum_{i=1}^{m}\zeta_{i}e_{i} ∑ i = 1 m ζ i e i , and satisfies ⟨ y , y ′ ⟩ = κ ( y ) ⋅ κ ( y ′ ) \langle y,y'\rangle=\kappa(y)\cdot\kappa(y') ⟨ y , y ′ ⟩ = κ ( y ) ⋅ κ ( y ′ ) and ∣ y ∣ = ∥ κ ( y ) ∥ |y|=\lVert\kappa(y)\rVert ∣ y ∣ = ∥ κ ( y )∥ for all y , y ′ ∈ S y,y'\in S y , y ′ ∈ S .
Claim 1 (clause 1).
The map Λ \Lambda Λ is linear and Λ = κ ∘ P \Lambda=\kappa\circ P Λ = κ ∘ P . For each i i i the map x ↦ ⟨ x , e i ⟩ x\mapsto\langle x,e_{i}\rangle x ↦ ⟨ x , e i ⟩ is additive and homogeneous by claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space together with the symmetry of the inner product (condition (a) of Real Inner Product Space §inner-product ), and the vector operations of R m \mathbb{R}^{m} R m are coordinatewise by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §numbers ; hence Λ \Lambda Λ is linear. For x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H and each i i i we have e i ∈ S e_{i}\in S e i ∈ S and x − P x ∈ S ⊥ x-Px\in S^{\perp} x − P x ∈ S ⊥ , so ⟨ x − P x , e i ⟩ = 0 \langle x-Px,e_{i}\rangle=0 ⟨ x − P x , e i ⟩ = 0 by Orthogonality, Orthogonal Complement and Orthonormal Families in a Real Inner Product Space §complement and therefore ⟨ P x , e i ⟩ = ⟨ x , e i ⟩ \langle Px,e_{i}\rangle=\langle x,e_{i}\rangle ⟨ P x , e i ⟩ = ⟨ x , e i ⟩ by claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space . Since P x ∈ S Px\in S P x ∈ S , this says exactly Λ x = κ ( P x ) \Lambda x=\kappa(Px) Λ x = κ ( P x ) ; in particular Λ y = κ ( y ) \Lambda y=\kappa(y) Λ y = κ ( y ) for y ∈ S y\in S y ∈ S .
The identities involving Λ ♯ \Lambda^{\sharp} Λ ♯ . For ζ ∈ R m \zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} ζ ∈ R m the vector Λ ♯ ζ = ∑ i = 1 m ζ i e i \Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\zeta_{i}e_{i} Λ ♯ ζ = ∑ i = 1 m ζ i e i lies in S S S by Span of a Finite Family of Vectors , and κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) = ζ \kappa(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta)=\zeta κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) = ζ because Λ ♯ \Lambda^{\sharp} Λ ♯ is the inverse of κ \kappa κ . Consequently
Λ Λ ♯ ζ = κ ( P Λ ♯ ζ ) = κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) = ζ , \Lambda\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta=\kappa\bigl(P\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta\bigr)=\kappa\bigl(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta\bigr)=\zeta, Λ Λ ♯ ζ = κ ( P Λ ♯ ζ ) = κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) = ζ ,
using P y = y Py=y P y = y for y ∈ S y\in S y ∈ S ; and ∣ Λ ♯ ζ ∣ = ∥ κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) ∥ = ∥ ζ ∥ |\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta|=\lVert\kappa(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta)\rVert=\lVert\zeta\rVert ∣ Λ ♯ ζ ∣ = ∥ κ ( Λ ♯ ζ )∥ = ∥ ζ ∥ . Also Λ P x = κ ( P P x ) = κ ( P x ) = Λ x \Lambda Px=\kappa(PPx)=\kappa(Px)=\Lambda x Λ P x = κ ( PP x ) = κ ( P x ) = Λ x , again since P x ∈ S Px\in S P x ∈ S . And ∥ Λ x ∥ = ∥ κ ( P x ) ∥ = ∣ P x ∣ ≤ ∣ x ∣ \lVert\Lambda x\rVert=\lVert\kappa(Px)\rVert=|Px|\le|x| ∥ Λ x ∥ = ∥ κ ( P x )∥ = ∣ P x ∣ ≤ ∣ x ∣ . Finally, for x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H and ζ ∈ R m \zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} ζ ∈ R m , both Λ ♯ ζ \Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta Λ ♯ ζ and P x Px P x lie in S S S , so
ζ ⋅ Λ x = κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) ⋅ κ ( P x ) = ⟨ Λ ♯ ζ , P x ⟩ = ⟨ Λ ♯ ζ , x ⟩ , \zeta\cdot\Lambda x=\kappa\bigl(\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta\bigr)\cdot\kappa(Px)=\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta,\,Px\bigr\rangle=\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta,\,x\bigr\rangle, ζ ⋅ Λ x = κ ( Λ ♯ ζ ) ⋅ κ ( P x ) = ⟨ Λ ♯ ζ , P x ⟩ = ⟨ Λ ♯ ζ , x ⟩ ,
the last equality because ⟨ Λ ♯ ζ , x − P x ⟩ = 0 \langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta,x-Px\rangle=0 ⟨ Λ ♯ ζ , x − P x ⟩ = 0 (as x − P x ∈ S ⊥ x-Px\in S^{\perp} x − P x ∈ S ⊥ ) and claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space . Note also that P = Λ ♯ Λ P=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda P = Λ ♯ Λ , since Λ ♯ Λ x = ∑ i = 1 m ⟨ x , e i ⟩ e i = P x \Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda x=\sum_{i=1}^{m}\langle x,e_{i}\rangle e_{i}=Px Λ ♯ Λ x = ∑ i = 1 m ⟨ x , e i ⟩ e i = P x .
The map Λ ♯ \Lambda^{\sharp} Λ ♯ is linear. Let ζ , ζ ′ ∈ R m \zeta,\zeta'\in\mathbb{R}^{m} ζ , ζ ′ ∈ R m and a ∈ R a\in\mathbb{R} a ∈ R , and put y = Λ ♯ ( ζ + ζ ′ ) − Λ ♯ ζ − Λ ♯ ζ ′ y=\Lambda^{\sharp}(\zeta+\zeta')-\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta-\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta' y = Λ ♯ ( ζ + ζ ′ ) − Λ ♯ ζ − Λ ♯ ζ ′ . For every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H , the identity just proved and claim 2 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n give
⟨ y , x ⟩ = ( ζ + ζ ′ ) ⋅ Λ x − ζ ⋅ Λ x − ζ ′ ⋅ Λ x = 0 , \langle y,x\rangle=(\zeta+\zeta')\cdot\Lambda x-\zeta\cdot\Lambda x-\zeta'\cdot\Lambda x=0 , ⟨ y , x ⟩ = ( ζ + ζ ′ ) ⋅ Λ x − ζ ⋅ Λ x − ζ ′ ⋅ Λ x = 0 ,
using claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space on the left. Taking x = y x=y x = y gives ⟨ y , y ⟩ = 0 \langle y,y\rangle=0 ⟨ y , y ⟩ = 0 , so y = 0 H y=0_{H} y = 0 H by the definiteness of the inner product (condition (d) of Real Inner Product Space §inner-product ). The same argument with claim 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n gives Λ ♯ ( a ζ ) = a Λ ♯ ζ \Lambda^{\sharp}(a\zeta)=a\,\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta Λ ♯ ( a ζ ) = a Λ ♯ ζ . Taking a = 0 a=0 a = 0 shows that Λ ♯ \Lambda^{\sharp} Λ ♯ sends the origin of R m \mathbb{R}^{m} R m to 0 H 0_{H} 0 H , by claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Vector Space .
The last assertion. If Λ x = Λ x ′ \Lambda x=\Lambda x' Λ x = Λ x ′ then P x = Λ ♯ Λ x = Λ ♯ Λ x ′ = P x ′ Px=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda x=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda x'=Px' P x = Λ ♯ Λ x = Λ ♯ Λ x ′ = P x ′ ; conversely if P x = P x ′ Px=Px' P x = P x ′ then Λ x = Λ P x = Λ P x ′ = Λ x ′ \Lambda x=\Lambda Px=\Lambda Px'=\Lambda x' Λ x = Λ P x = Λ P x ′ = Λ x ′ . This proves Claim 1.
Claim 2 (clause 2). Let M , M ′ ∈ S ( m ) M,M'\in\mathcal{S}(m) M , M ′ ∈ S ( m ) , let a ∈ R a\in\mathbb{R} a ∈ R and let z , w , z ′ ∈ H z,w,z'\in H z , w , z ′ ∈ H .
M Λ M^{\Lambda} M Λ is a bounded symmetric bilinear form. Since M ∈ S ( m ) M\in\mathcal{S}(m) M ∈ S ( m ) we have M ⊤ = M M^{\top}=M M ⊤ = M by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §symmetric , so claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Transpose of a Real Matrix and claim 1 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n give
Λ z ⋅ ( M Λ w ) = ( M ⊤ Λ z ) ⋅ Λ w = ( M Λ z ) ⋅ Λ w = Λ w ⋅ ( M Λ z ) , \Lambda z\cdot(M\,\Lambda w)=\bigl(M^{\top}\Lambda z\bigr)\cdot\Lambda w=\bigl(M\,\Lambda z\bigr)\cdot\Lambda w=\Lambda w\cdot(M\,\Lambda z), Λ z ⋅ ( M Λ w ) = ( M ⊤ Λ z ) ⋅ Λ w = ( M Λ z ) ⋅ Λ w = Λ w ⋅ ( M Λ z ) ,
which is the symmetry M Λ ( z , w ) = M Λ ( w , z ) M^{\Lambda}(z,w)=M^{\Lambda}(w,z) M Λ ( z , w ) = M Λ ( w , z ) . Additivity and homogeneity in the first argument follow from the linearity of Λ \Lambda Λ (Claim 1) and claims 2 and 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n . By Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product , claim 3 of Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix and claim 5 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field , together with ∥ Λ z ∥ ≤ ∣ z ∣ \lVert\Lambda z\rVert\le|z| ∥ Λ z ∥ ≤ ∣ z ∣ and ∥ Λ w ∥ ≤ ∣ w ∣ \lVert\Lambda w\rVert\le|w| ∥ Λ w ∥ ≤ ∣ w ∣ from Claim 1,
∣ M Λ ( z , w ) ∣ ≤ ∥ Λ z ∥ ∥ M Λ w ∥ ≤ ∥ M ∥ ∥ Λ z ∥ ∥ Λ w ∥ ≤ ∥ M ∥ ∣ z ∣ ∣ w ∣ . \bigl|M^{\Lambda}(z,w)\bigr|\le\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\,\lVert M\,\Lambda w\rVert\le\lVert M\rVert\,\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\,\lVert\Lambda w\rVert\le\lVert M\rVert\,|z|\,|w| . M Λ ( z , w ) ≤ ∥ Λ z ∥ ∥ M Λ w ∥ ≤ ∥ M ∥ ∥ Λ z ∥ ∥ Λ w ∥ ≤ ∥ M ∥ ∣ z ∣ ∣ w ∣.
Hence M Λ ∈ S y m ( H ) M^{\Lambda}\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) M Λ ∈ Sym ( H ) by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §form , and ∥ M Λ ∥ ≤ ∥ M ∥ \lVert M^{\Lambda}\rVert\le\lVert M\rVert ∥ M Λ ∥ ≤ ∥ M ∥ by the second part of claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity , the number ∥ M ∥ \lVert M\rVert ∥ M ∥ being nonnegative by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §norm .
The remaining identities. That M Λ ( z , w ) = M Λ ( P z , P w ) M^{\Lambda}(z,w)=M^{\Lambda}(Pz,Pw) M Λ ( z , w ) = M Λ ( P z , Pw ) is immediate from Λ P z = Λ z \Lambda Pz=\Lambda z Λ P z = Λ z and Λ P w = Λ w \Lambda Pw=\Lambda w Λ Pw = Λ w (Claim 1). For T M Λ T_{M^{\Lambda}} T M Λ : by Claim 1, for every w ∈ H w\in H w ∈ H ,
⟨ Λ ♯ ( M Λ z ) , w ⟩ = ( M Λ z ) ⋅ Λ w = Λ z ⋅ ( M Λ w ) = M Λ ( z , w ) = ⟨ T M Λ z , w ⟩ , \bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}\bigl(M\,\Lambda z\bigr),\,w\bigr\rangle=\bigl(M\,\Lambda z\bigr)\cdot\Lambda w=\Lambda z\cdot\bigl(M\,\Lambda w\bigr)=M^{\Lambda}(z,w)=\bigl\langle T_{M^{\Lambda}}z,\,w\bigr\rangle, ⟨ Λ ♯ ( M Λ z ) , w ⟩ = ( M Λ z ) ⋅ Λ w = Λ z ⋅ ( M Λ w ) = M Λ ( z , w ) = ⟨ T M Λ z , w ⟩ ,
the middle equality by the symmetry established above and claim 1 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , and the last by claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space . Subtracting and using definiteness as in Claim 1 gives T M Λ z = Λ ♯ ( M Λ z ) T_{M^{\Lambda}}z=\Lambda^{\sharp}(M\,\Lambda z) T M Λ z = Λ ♯ ( M Λ z ) .
For the linearity in the matrix: the i i i th coordinate of ( M + M ′ ) η (M+M')\eta ( M + M ′ ) η is ∑ j = 1 m ( M i j + M i j ′ ) η j \sum_{j=1}^{m}(M_{ij}+M'_{ij})\eta_{j} ∑ j = 1 m ( M ij + M ij ′ ) η j , which equals ∑ j M i j η j + ∑ j M i j ′ η j \sum_{j}M_{ij}\eta_{j}+\sum_{j}M'_{ij}\eta_{j} ∑ j M ij η j + ∑ j M ij ′ η j by claim 2 of Properties of Finite Sums , so ( M + M ′ ) η = M η + M ′ η (M+M')\eta=M\eta+M'\eta ( M + M ′ ) η = M η + M ′ η ; likewise ( a M ) η = a ( M η ) (aM)\eta=a(M\eta) ( a M ) η = a ( M η ) by claim 3 of that lemma. With claim 5 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n this gives ( M + M ′ ) Λ = M Λ + ( M ′ ) Λ (M+M')^{\Lambda}=M^{\Lambda}+(M')^{\Lambda} ( M + M ′ ) Λ = M Λ + ( M ′ ) Λ and ( a M ) Λ = a M Λ (aM)^{\Lambda}=a\,M^{\Lambda} ( a M ) Λ = a M Λ , the operations on forms being those of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity .
Finally, suppose M ⪯ M ′ M\preceq M' M ⪯ M ′ , that is ζ ⋅ ( M ζ ) ≤ ζ ⋅ ( M ′ ζ ) \zeta\cdot(M\zeta)\le\zeta\cdot(M'\zeta) ζ ⋅ ( Mζ ) ≤ ζ ⋅ ( M ′ ζ ) for every ζ ∈ R m \zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} ζ ∈ R m by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §ordering . Taking ζ = Λ z \zeta=\Lambda z ζ = Λ z gives M Λ ( z , z ) ≤ ( M ′ ) Λ ( z , z ) M^{\Lambda}(z,z)\le(M')^{\Lambda}(z,z) M Λ ( z , z ) ≤ ( M ′ ) Λ ( z , z ) for every z ∈ H z\in H z ∈ H , that is M Λ ⪯ ( M ′ ) Λ M^{\Lambda}\preceq(M')^{\Lambda} M Λ ⪯ ( M ′ ) Λ by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §order . This proves Claim 2.
Claim 3 (clause 3). Bilinearity and symmetry of Π \Pi Π follow from the linearity of Λ \Lambda Λ (Claim 1) and claims 1, 2, 4 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , and ∣ Π ( z , w ) ∣ = ∣ Λ z ⋅ Λ w ∣ ≤ ∥ Λ z ∥ ∥ Λ w ∥ ≤ ∣ z ∣ ∣ w ∣ |\Pi(z,w)|=|\Lambda z\cdot\Lambda w|\le\lVert\Lambda z\rVert\lVert\Lambda w\rVert\le|z||w| ∣Π ( z , w ) ∣ = ∣Λ z ⋅ Λ w ∣ ≤ ∥ Λ z ∥ ∥ Λ w ∥ ≤ ∣ z ∣∣ w ∣ by Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product and Claim 1; so Π ∈ S y m ( H ) \Pi\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) Π ∈ Sym ( H ) with ∥ Π ∥ ≤ 1 \lVert\Pi\rVert\le1 ∥ Π ∥ ≤ 1 , by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §form and claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity . The identity form I I I lies in S y m ( H ) \mathrm{Sym}(H) Sym ( H ) by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity , so N = I − Π ∈ S y m ( H ) N=I-\Pi\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) N = I − Π ∈ Sym ( H ) by claim 1 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity .
Since P z , P w ∈ S Pz,Pw\in S P z , Pw ∈ S , Claim 1 gives Π ( z , w ) = Λ z ⋅ Λ w = κ ( P z ) ⋅ κ ( P w ) = ⟨ P z , P w ⟩ \Pi(z,w)=\Lambda z\cdot\Lambda w=\kappa(Pz)\cdot\kappa(Pw)=\langle Pz,Pw\rangle Π ( z , w ) = Λ z ⋅ Λ w = κ ( P z ) ⋅ κ ( Pw ) = ⟨ P z , Pw ⟩ ; and ⟨ P z , w ⟩ = ⟨ P z , P w ⟩ \langle Pz,w\rangle=\langle Pz,Pw\rangle ⟨ P z , w ⟩ = ⟨ P z , Pw ⟩ because ⟨ P z , w − P w ⟩ = 0 \langle Pz,w-Pw\rangle=0 ⟨ P z , w − Pw ⟩ = 0 , as P z ∈ S Pz\in S P z ∈ S and w − P w ∈ S ⊥ w-Pw\in S^{\perp} w − Pw ∈ S ⊥ . Taking w = z w=z w = z gives Π ( z , z ) = ∣ P z ∣ 2 = ∥ Λ z ∥ 2 \Pi(z,z)=|Pz|^{2}=\lVert\Lambda z\rVert^{2} Π ( z , z ) = ∣ P z ∣ 2 = ∥ Λ z ∥ 2 , the last equality by Claim 1. For N N N : by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity and claim 1 of Elementary Identities in a Real Inner Product Space ,
⟨ z − P z , w − P w ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , w ⟩ − ⟨ z , P w ⟩ + ⟨ P z , P w ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , P w ⟩ = N ( z , w ) , \langle z-Pz,\,w-Pw\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,w\rangle-\langle z,Pw\rangle+\langle Pz,Pw\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,Pw\rangle=N(z,w), ⟨ z − P z , w − Pw ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , w ⟩ − ⟨ z , Pw ⟩ + ⟨ P z , Pw ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , Pw ⟩ = N ( z , w ) ,
where ⟨ z , P w ⟩ = ⟨ P w , z ⟩ = ⟨ P w , P z ⟩ = ⟨ P z , P w ⟩ \langle z,Pw\rangle=\langle Pw,z\rangle=\langle Pw,Pz\rangle=\langle Pz,Pw\rangle ⟨ z , Pw ⟩ = ⟨ Pw , z ⟩ = ⟨ Pw , P z ⟩ = ⟨ P z , Pw ⟩ by the previous paragraph and symmetry of the inner product; and ⟨ z − P z , w ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , w ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , P w ⟩ = N ( z , w ) \langle z-Pz,w\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,w\rangle=\langle z,w\rangle-\langle Pz,Pw\rangle=N(z,w) ⟨ z − P z , w ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , w ⟩ = ⟨ z , w ⟩ − ⟨ P z , Pw ⟩ = N ( z , w ) likewise. Taking w = z w=z w = z gives N ( z , z ) = ∣ z − P z ∣ 2 N(z,z)=|z-Pz|^{2} N ( z , z ) = ∣ z − P z ∣ 2 , and claim 2 of Projection onto the Span of an Orthonormal Tuple, and Coordinates on a Finite-Dimensional Subspace gives ∣ z ∣ 2 = ∣ P z ∣ 2 + ∣ z − P z ∣ 2 = Π ( z , z ) + N ( z , z ) |z|^{2}=|Pz|^{2}+|z-Pz|^{2}=\Pi(z,z)+N(z,z) ∣ z ∣ 2 = ∣ P z ∣ 2 + ∣ z − P z ∣ 2 = Π ( z , z ) + N ( z , z ) .
That T Π z = P z T_{\Pi}z=Pz T Π z = P z follows from Π ( z , w ) = ⟨ P z , w ⟩ \Pi(z,w)=\langle Pz,w\rangle Π ( z , w ) = ⟨ P z , w ⟩ for all w w w and claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space , with definiteness as before. The quadratic forms Π ( z , z ) = ∣ P z ∣ 2 \Pi(z,z)=|Pz|^{2} Π ( z , z ) = ∣ P z ∣ 2 and N ( z , z ) = ∣ z − P z ∣ 2 N(z,z)=|z-Pz|^{2} N ( z , z ) = ∣ z − P z ∣ 2 are nonnegative and each is at most ∣ z ∣ 2 = I ( z , z ) |z|^{2}=I(z,z) ∣ z ∣ 2 = I ( z , z ) , by the displayed decomposition and Real Inner Product Space §norm ; so 0 S y m ⪯ Π ⪯ I 0_{\mathrm{Sym}}\preceq\Pi\preceq I 0 Sym ⪯ Π ⪯ I and 0 S y m ⪯ N ⪯ I 0_{\mathrm{Sym}}\preceq N\preceq I 0 Sym ⪯ N ⪯ I by Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §order , and ∥ N ∥ ≤ 1 \lVert N\rVert\le1 ∥ N ∥ ≤ 1 by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity . This proves Claim 3.
Claim 4 (clause 4). Write x 1 = Λ ♯ ζ 1 x_{1}=\Lambda^{\sharp}\zeta_{1} x 1 = Λ ♯ ζ 1 , so that Λ x 1 = ζ 1 \Lambda x_{1}=\zeta_{1} Λ x 1 = ζ 1 by Claim 1, and hence Λ x − ζ 1 = Λ ( x − x 1 ) \Lambda x-\zeta_{1}=\Lambda(x-x_{1}) Λ x − ζ 1 = Λ ( x − x 1 ) for every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H , by the linearity of Λ \Lambda Λ . Consequently, by the definitions of M Λ M^{\Lambda} M Λ and Π \Pi Π and by Claim 1,
T ( x ) = c + ⟨ Λ ♯ q , x − x 1 ⟩ + 1 2 M Λ ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) + η Π ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) = c + ⟨ Λ ♯ q , x − x 1 ⟩ + 1 2 b ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) , T(x)=c+\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q,\,x-x_{1}\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}\,M^{\Lambda}(x-x_{1},x-x_{1})+\eta\,\Pi(x-x_{1},x-x_{1})
=c+\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q,\,x-x_{1}\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}\,b(x-x_{1},x-x_{1}), T ( x ) = c + ⟨ Λ ♯ q , x − x 1 ⟩ + 2 1 M Λ ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) + η Π ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) = c + ⟨ Λ ♯ q , x − x 1 ⟩ + 2 1 b ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) ,
where b = M Λ + 2 η Π b=M^{\Lambda}+2\eta\,\Pi b = M Λ + 2 η Π , using η Π ( ⋅ , ⋅ ) = 1 2 ( 2 η Π ) ( ⋅ , ⋅ ) \eta\,\Pi(\cdot,\cdot)=\tfrac{1}{2}(2\eta\,\Pi)(\cdot,\cdot) η Π ( ⋅ , ⋅ ) = 2 1 ( 2 η Π ) ( ⋅ , ⋅ ) and Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms on a Real Inner Product Space: Norm, Order, Identity Form and Restriction §identity . Expanding by bilinearity and symmetry of b b b and by claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space ,
1 2 b ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) = 1 2 b ( x , x ) − b ( x , x 1 ) + 1 2 b ( x 1 , x 1 ) = 1 2 b ( x , x ) − ⟨ T b x 1 , x ⟩ + 1 2 b ( x 1 , x 1 ) , \tfrac{1}{2}b(x-x_{1},x-x_{1})=\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x)-b(x,x_{1})+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x_{1},x_{1})=\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x)-\bigl\langle T_{b}x_{1},x\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x_{1},x_{1}), 2 1 b ( x − x 1 , x − x 1 ) = 2 1 b ( x , x ) − b ( x , x 1 ) + 2 1 b ( x 1 , x 1 ) = 2 1 b ( x , x ) − ⟨ T b x 1 , x ⟩ + 2 1 b ( x 1 , x 1 ) ,
so that
T ( x ) = ⟨ Λ ♯ q − T b x 1 , x ⟩ + c 0 + 1 2 b ( x , x ) , c 0 = c − ⟨ Λ ♯ q , x 1 ⟩ + 1 2 b ( x 1 , x 1 ) . T(x)=\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q-T_{b}x_{1},\,x\bigr\rangle+c_{0}+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x,x),
\qquad
c_{0}=c-\bigl\langle\Lambda^{\sharp}q,x_{1}\bigr\rangle+\tfrac{1}{2}b(x_{1},x_{1}). T ( x ) = ⟨ Λ ♯ q − T b x 1 , x ⟩ + c 0 + 2 1 b ( x , x ) , c 0 = c − ⟨ Λ ♯ q , x 1 ⟩ + 2 1 b ( x 1 , x 1 ) .
By claims 1 and 2 of Affine and Quadratic Functions on a Real Hilbert Space are of Class C 2 C^2 C 2 the two summands (the affine one, and x ↦ 1 2 b ( x , x ) x\mapsto\tfrac12 b(x,x) x ↦ 2 1 b ( x , x ) ) belong to C 2 ( H ) C^{2}(H) C 2 ( H ) , with gradients Λ ♯ q − T b x 1 \Lambda^{\sharp}q-T_{b}x_{1} Λ ♯ q − T b x 1 and T b x T_{b}x T b x and Hessians 0 S y m 0_{\mathrm{Sym}} 0 Sym and b b b ; so by claim 2 of Constants, Sums, Scalar Multiples and Differences of Differentiable Functions on an Open Subset of a Real Inner Product Space , T ∈ C 2 ( H ) T\in C^{2}(H) T ∈ C 2 ( H ) with
D T ( x ) = Λ ♯ q − T b x 1 + T b x = Λ ♯ q + T b ( x − x 1 ) , D 2 T ( x ) = b , DT(x)=\Lambda^{\sharp}q-T_{b}x_{1}+T_{b}x=\Lambda^{\sharp}q+T_{b}(x-x_{1}),
\qquad
D^{2}T(x)=b , D T ( x ) = Λ ♯ q − T b x 1 + T b x = Λ ♯ q + T b ( x − x 1 ) , D 2 T ( x ) = b ,
the middle step by the linearity of T b T_{b} T b (claim 1 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space ).
By Claims 2 and 3 and claim 4 of The Bounded Symmetric Operator Represented by a Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Form on a Real Hilbert Space , T b z = Λ ♯ ( M Λ z ) + 2 η P z = Λ ♯ ( M Λ z + 2 η Λ z ) T_{b}z=\Lambda^{\sharp}(M\,\Lambda z)+2\eta\,Pz=\Lambda^{\sharp}\bigl(M\,\Lambda z+2\eta\,\Lambda z\bigr) T b z = Λ ♯ ( M Λ z ) + 2 η P z = Λ ♯ ( M Λ z + 2 η Λ z ) for z ∈ H z\in H z ∈ H , using P z = Λ ♯ Λ z Pz=\Lambda^{\sharp}\Lambda z P z = Λ ♯ Λ z and the linearity of Λ ♯ \Lambda^{\sharp} Λ ♯ . Taking z = x − x 1 z=x-x_{1} z = x − x 1 , so that Λ z = Λ x − ζ 1 \Lambda z=\Lambda x-\zeta_{1} Λ z = Λ x − ζ 1 , and using ∣ Λ ♯ ξ ∣ = ∥ ξ ∥ |\Lambda^{\sharp}\xi|=\lVert\xi\rVert ∣ Λ ♯ ξ ∣ = ∥ ξ ∥ , the triangle inequality in R m \mathbb{R}^{m} R m and claim 3 of Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix ,
∣ D T ( x ) − Λ ♯ q ∣ = ∥ M ( Λ x − ζ 1 ) + 2 η ( Λ x − ζ 1 ) ∥ ≤ ( ∥ M ∥ + 2 ∣ η ∣ ) ∥ Λ x − ζ 1 ∥ . \bigl|DT(x)-\Lambda^{\sharp}q\bigr|=\bigl\lVert M(\Lambda x-\zeta_{1})+2\eta(\Lambda x-\zeta_{1})\bigr\rVert\le\bigl(\lVert M\rVert+2|\eta|\bigr)\lVert\Lambda x-\zeta_{1}\rVert . D T ( x ) − Λ ♯ q = M ( Λ x − ζ 1 ) + 2 η ( Λ x − ζ 1 ) ≤ ( ∥ M ∥ + 2∣ η ∣ ) ∥ Λ x − ζ 1 ∥ .
In particular D T ( x ) = Λ ♯ q DT(x)=\Lambda^{\sharp}q D T ( x ) = Λ ♯ q when Λ x = ζ 1 \Lambda x=\zeta_{1} Λ x = ζ 1 . That T ( x ) = T ( x ′ ) T(x)=T(x') T ( x ) = T ( x ′ ) whenever Λ x = Λ x ′ \Lambda x=\Lambda x' Λ x = Λ x ′ is immediate from T = T 0 ∘ Λ T=T_{0}\circ\Lambda T = T 0 ∘ Λ . Finally, by Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality for the Euclidean Dot Product , claim 3 of Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix and claim 5 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field ,
∣ T 0 ( ζ ) − T 0 ( ζ 1 ) ∣ ≤ ∣ q ⋅ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ∣ + 1 2 ∣ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ⋅ ( M ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ) ∣ + ∣ η ∣ ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ q ∥ ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ + ( 1 2 ∥ M ∥ + ∣ η ∣ ) ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 . \bigl|T_{0}(\zeta)-T_{0}(\zeta_{1})\bigr|
\le\bigl|q\cdot(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr|+\tfrac{1}{2}\bigl|(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\cdot\bigl(M(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr)\bigr|+|\eta|\,\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}
\le\lVert q\rVert\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert+\bigl(\tfrac{1}{2}\lVert M\rVert+|\eta|\bigr)\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}. T 0 ( ζ ) − T 0 ( ζ 1 ) ≤ q ⋅ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) + 2 1 ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ⋅ ( M ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ) + ∣ η ∣ ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ q ∥ ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ + ( 2 1 ∥ M ∥ + ∣ η ∣ ) ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 .
This proves Claim 4.
Claim 5 (clause 5). That T 0 ( ζ 1 ) = c = χ ( ζ 1 ) T_{0}(\zeta_{1})=c=\chi(\zeta_{1}) T 0 ( ζ 1 ) = c = χ ( ζ 1 ) is immediate, since ζ 1 − ζ 1 \zeta_{1}-\zeta_{1} ζ 1 − ζ 1 is the origin of R m \mathbb{R}^{m} R m and the remaining three terms vanish there, by claim 1 of Linearity, Compatibility with the Matrix Product, and a Norm Bound for the Matrix-Vector Product and Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n .
Being of class C 2 C^{2} C 2 on Ω \Omega Ω , the function χ \chi χ is, by claim 2 of Basic Properties of Twice Differentiability at a Point , twice differentiable at ζ 1 \zeta_{1} ζ 1 with first-order coefficient D χ ( ζ 1 ) = q D\chi(\zeta_{1})=q Dχ ( ζ 1 ) = q and Hessian D 2 χ ( ζ 1 ) = M D^{2}\chi(\zeta_{1})=M D 2 χ ( ζ 1 ) = M . Suppose first 0 < η 0<\eta 0 < η . Applying Twice Differentiability at a Point §twice-differentiable with η \eta η in the role of the accuracy, there is a positive ρ ∈ R \rho\in\mathbb{R} ρ ∈ R such that every h ∈ R m h\in\mathbb{R}^{m} h ∈ R m with ∥ h ∥ < ρ \lVert h\rVert<\rho ∥ h ∥ < ρ satisfies ζ 1 + h ∈ Ω \zeta_{1}+h\in\Omega ζ 1 + h ∈ Ω and
∣ χ ( ζ 1 + h ) − χ ( ζ 1 ) − q ⋅ h − 1 2 h ⋅ ( M h ) ∣ ≤ η ∥ h ∥ 2 . \Bigl|\chi(\zeta_{1}+h)-\chi(\zeta_{1})-q\cdot h-\tfrac{1}{2}\,h\cdot(Mh)\Bigr|\le\eta\,\lVert h\rVert^{2}. χ ( ζ 1 + h ) − χ ( ζ 1 ) − q ⋅ h − 2 1 h ⋅ ( M h ) ≤ η ∥ h ∥ 2 .
Let ζ ∈ R m \zeta\in\mathbb{R}^{m} ζ ∈ R m satisfy ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ < ρ \lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert<\rho ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ < ρ and put h = ζ − ζ 1 h=\zeta-\zeta_{1} h = ζ − ζ 1 , so that ζ 1 + h = ζ \zeta_{1}+h=\zeta ζ 1 + h = ζ . Then ζ ∈ Ω \zeta\in\Omega ζ ∈ Ω and, by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field ,
χ ( ζ ) ≤ χ ( ζ 1 ) + q ⋅ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) + 1 2 ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ⋅ ( M ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ) + η ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 = T 0 ( ζ ) . \chi(\zeta)\le\chi(\zeta_{1})+q\cdot(\zeta-\zeta_{1})+\tfrac{1}{2}(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\cdot\bigl(M(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr)+\eta\,\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}=T_{0}(\zeta). χ ( ζ ) ≤ χ ( ζ 1 ) + q ⋅ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) + 2 1 ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ⋅ ( M ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ) + η ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 = T 0 ( ζ ) .
Suppose next η < 0 \eta<0 η < 0 , so that − η -\eta − η is positive by claim 4 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field . Applying Twice Differentiability at a Point §twice-differentiable with − η -\eta − η in the role of the accuracy gives a positive ρ \rho ρ such that every ζ \zeta ζ with ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ < ρ \lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert<\rho ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ < ρ lies in Ω \Omega Ω and satisfies
T 0 ( ζ ) = χ ( ζ 1 ) + q ⋅ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) + 1 2 ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ⋅ ( M ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ) − ( − η ) ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 ≤ χ ( ζ ) , T_{0}(\zeta)=\chi(\zeta_{1})+q\cdot(\zeta-\zeta_{1})+\tfrac{1}{2}(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\cdot\bigl(M(\zeta-\zeta_{1})\bigr)-(-\eta)\lVert\zeta-\zeta_{1}\rVert^{2}\le\chi(\zeta), T 0 ( ζ ) = χ ( ζ 1 ) + q ⋅ ( ζ − ζ 1 ) + 2 1 ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ⋅ ( M ( ζ − ζ 1 ) ) − ( − η ) ∥ ζ − ζ 1 ∥ 2 ≤ χ ( ζ ) ,
again by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field . This proves Claim 5.
Claim 6 (clause 6). By Euclidean Distance is a Metric on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n the map d E d_{E} d E is a metric on R m \mathbb{R}^{m} R m with d E ( ξ , ξ ′ ) = ∥ ξ − ξ ′ ∥ d_{E}(\xi,\xi')=\lVert\xi-\xi'\rVert d E ( ξ , ξ ′ ) = ∥ ξ − ξ ′ ∥ , so the triangle inequality gives, first,
∥ ζ ′ − ω ′ ∥ = d E ( ζ ′ , ω ′ ) ≤ d E ( ζ ′ , ζ ) + d E ( ζ , ω ) + d E ( ω , ω ′ ) = ∥ ζ − ω ∥ + ∥ ζ − ζ ′ ∥ + ∥ ω − ω ′ ∥ , \lVert\zeta'-\omega'\rVert=d_{E}(\zeta',\omega')\le d_{E}(\zeta',\zeta)+d_{E}(\zeta,\omega)+d_{E}(\omega,\omega')=\lVert\zeta-\omega\rVert+\lVert\zeta-\zeta'\rVert+\lVert\omega-\omega'\rVert, ∥ ζ ′ − ω ′ ∥ = d E ( ζ ′ , ω ′ ) ≤ d E ( ζ ′ , ζ ) + d E ( ζ , ω ) + d E ( ω , ω ′ ) = ∥ ζ − ω ∥ + ∥ ζ − ζ ′ ∥ + ∥ ω − ω ′ ∥ ,
using the symmetry of a metric; this is the first assertion. Exchanging the roles of the two pairs gives also ∥ ζ − ω ∥ ≤ ∥ ζ ′ − ω ′ ∥ + ∥ ζ − ζ ′ ∥ + ∥ ω − ω ′ ∥ \lVert\zeta-\omega\rVert\le\lVert\zeta'-\omega'\rVert+\lVert\zeta-\zeta'\rVert+\lVert\omega-\omega'\rVert ∥ ζ − ω ∥ ≤ ∥ ζ ′ − ω ′ ∥ + ∥ ζ − ζ ′ ∥ + ∥ ω − ω ′ ∥ , so, writing s = ∥ ζ − ω ∥ s=\lVert\zeta-\omega\rVert s = ∥ ζ − ω ∥ , t = ∥ ζ ′ − ω ′ ∥ t=\lVert\zeta'-\omega'\rVert t = ∥ ζ ′ − ω ′ ∥ and c = ∥ ζ − ζ ′ ∥ + ∥ ω − ω ′ ∥ c=\lVert\zeta-\zeta'\rVert+\lVert\omega-\omega'\rVert c = ∥ ζ − ζ ′ ∥ + ∥ ω − ω ′ ∥ , we have − c ≤ s − t ≤ c -c\le s-t\le c − c ≤ s − t ≤ c and hence ∣ s − t ∣ ≤ c |s-t|\le c ∣ s − t ∣ ≤ c by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field . Since s 2 − t 2 = ( s − t ) ( s + t ) s^{2}-t^{2}=(s-t)(s+t) s 2 − t 2 = ( s − t ) ( s + t ) and 0 ≤ s + t 0\le s+t 0 ≤ s + t , claim 4 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field and claim 5 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field give
∣ s 2 − t 2 ∣ = ∣ s − t ∣ ( s + t ) ≤ c ( s + t ) , \bigl|s^{2}-t^{2}\bigr|=|s-t|\,(s+t)\le c\,(s+t), s 2 − t 2 = ∣ s − t ∣ ( s + t ) ≤ c ( s + t ) ,
which is the second assertion. This proves Claim 6 and completes the proof of the lemma.