Each result cited is universally quantified over the data in its own statement. Norm bounds for sums, scalar multiples and composites, and β₯Iβ₯opββ€1, are those of Bounded Linear Maps between Complex Inner Product Spaces: the Least Bound, Operations, the Underlying Real Structure, Adjoints, Completeness and the Quadratic-Form Bound Β§operations; that β₯Tβ₯opβ is a bound for T is Bounded Linear Maps between Complex Inner Product Spaces: the Least Bound, Operations, the Underlying Real Structure, Adjoints, Completeness and the Quadratic-Form Bound Β§least-bound.
Claim 2 (Powers). We prove, by induction on k (the inductive set being the set of kβN for which both inequalities hold), that β₯Xkβ₯opββ€ck and β₯XkβYkβ₯opββ€kckβ1β₯XβYβ₯opβ. For k=1, X1=XI=X and Y1=Y, so both hold. If they hold for k, then β₯Xk+1β₯opβ=β₯XXkβ₯opββ€cβ
ck, and, since composition distributes over sums,
Xk+1βYk+1=X(XkβYk)+(XβY)Yk
(with β₯Ykβ₯opββ€ck by the first inequality applied to Y), so β₯Xk+1βYk+1β₯opββ€cβ
kckβ1β₯XβYβ₯opβ+β₯XβYβ₯opβck=(k+1)ckβ₯XβYβ₯opβ.
Claim 1 (Neumann series). Put b=β₯Bβ₯opβ<1. By Claim 2 with X=B and c=b, β₯Bkβ₯opββ€bk for kβN, and β₯B0β₯opββ€1. For n<nβ² in N, Snβ²β(B)βSnβ(B)=βk=n+1nβ²βBk, hence
β₯Snβ²β(B)βSnβ(B)β₯opββ€k=n+1βnβ²βbk=1βbbn+1βbnβ²+1ββ€1βbbn+1β,
the equality because (1βb)βk=n+1nβ²βbk=bn+1βbnβ²+1 (the sum telescopes). Since bnβ0 by Series of Nonnegative Real Numbers, Comparison, and the Geometric Series Β§geometric, the sequence (Snβ(B)) satisfies the Cauchy hypothesis of Bounded Linear Maps between Complex Inner Product Spaces: the Least Bound, Operations, the Underlying Real Structure, Adjoints, Completeness and the Quadratic-Form Bound Β§complete, which gives TβL(H) with Snβ(B)βT in operator norm. Letting nβ²ββ in the displayed bound (the norm of the difference with T is at most the norm of the difference with Snβ²β(B) plus β₯Snβ²β(B)βTβ₯opβ, which tends to 0) gives β₯TβSnβ(B)β₯opββ€bn+1/(1βb) for every n, by Order Properties of Limits of Real Sequences.
Distributivity gives (IβB)Snβ(B)=Snβ(B)(IβB)=IβBn+1 (the sums telescope). Hence
β₯(IβB)TβIβ₯opββ€β₯(IβB)(TβSnβ(B))β₯opβ+β₯Bn+1β₯opββ€(1+b)1βbbn+1β+bn+1
for every n, and the right side tends to 0; a nonnegative real number bounded by every term of a sequence tending to 0 is 0 (Order Properties of Limits of Real Sequences). So β₯(IβB)TβIβ₯opβ=0, i.e. (IβB)T=I because the operator norm is a bound; likewise T(IβB)=I. Thus IβB is a bijection of H onto H with inverse TβL(H). Finally, telescoping as above, βk=1nβbk=1βbbβbn+1ββ€1βbbβ, so β₯Snβ(B)β₯opββ€1+1βbbβ=1βb1β, so β₯Tβ₯opββ€1βb1β+1βbbn+1β for every n, and β₯Tβ₯opββ€1βb1β by Order Properties of Limits of Real Sequences.
Claim 3 (Inverses in double commutants). If ST=TS, then Tβ1S=Tβ1STTβ1=Tβ1TSTβ1=STβ1. If S=Sβ²β² and TβS, every SβSβ² commutes with T by The Commutant of a Set of Bounded Operators on a Complex Hilbert Space Β§commutant, hence with Tβ1; so Tβ1β(Sβ²)β²=Sβ²β²=S.
Claim 4 (Invertibility of AβiyI). For vβH, expanding the inner product (linear in the second and conjugate-linear in the first argument),
β₯(AβiyI)vβ₯2=β₯Avβ₯2+y2β₯vβ₯2βiyβ¨Av,vβ©+iyβ¨v,Avβ©,
and β¨v,Avβ©=β¨Av,vβ© because A is self-adjoint; so the identity holds. In particular β₯(AβiyI)vβ₯β₯β£yβ£β₯vβ₯ for every v, so AβiyI is injective, and whenever AβiyI is onto its inverse G satisfies β₯Gwβ₯β€β£yβ£β1β₯wβ₯ for every w; G is linear as the inverse of a linear bijection, so GβL(H) with β₯Gβ₯opββ€β£yβ£β1 by Bounded Linear Maps between Complex Inner Product Spaces: the Least Bound, Operations, the Underlying Real Structure, Adjoints, Completeness and the Quadratic-Form Bound Β§least-bound. The same holds with y replaced by any real y0βξ =0.
It remains to prove surjectivity. Let c=β₯Aβ₯opβ, t=1+(c+1)/β£yβ£ and y0β=ty; then β£y0ββ£=β£yβ£+c+1>c and β£yβy0ββ£=c+1<β£y0ββ£. First, with B0β=βiy0β1βA we have β₯B0ββ₯opβ=c/β£y0ββ£<1 and βiy0β(IβB0β)=Aβiy0βI; by Claim 1, IβB0β is a bijection of H, hence so is Aβiy0βI, and by the previous paragraph its inverse G0β lies in L(H) with β₯G0ββ₯opββ€β£y0ββ£β1. Second, with B1β=i(yβy0β)G0β we have β₯B1ββ₯opββ€β£yβy0ββ£/β£y0ββ£<1 and
(Aβiy0βI)(IβB1β)=Aβiy0βIβi(yβy0β)I=AβiyI.
By Claim 1, IβB1β is a bijection of H, so AβiyI is the composite of two bijections of H and is onto. The first paragraph now gives (AβiyI)β1βL(H) and β₯(AβiyI)β1β₯opββ€β£yβ£β1.