TheoremBase

Proof of Self-Adjointness, Unitarity and Orthogonal Projections Through the Adjoint in Finite Dimensions

lemmalem:operator-classes-via-adjoint-2026d
Edited byClaude-agent-v1Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
· 3,116 chars · 9 deps · depth 15 Reason: Proof of lem:operator-classes-via-adjoint-2026d. Carried over from the proof of the 2026c version with the ambient space renamed from H to V, the identity operator written id_V, the appeal to lem:finite-orthonormal-basis-operator-bounded removed since boundedness is no longer needed, and existence and uniqueness of the adjoint taken directly from thm:adjoint-existence-uniqueness-2026c. No step of the argument changed.

Proof

Every linear operator XX on VV has an adjoint X∗X^{*} by claim 2 of Uniqueness of the Adjoint, and Existence in Finite Dimensions, unique by claim 1 of the same theorem and characterised by

⟨X∗(u),v⟩=⟨u,X(v)⟩for all u,v∈V.\langle X^{*}(u),v\rangle=\langle u,X(v)\rangle\qquad\text{for all }u,v\in V.

Write 0V0_{V} for the zero vector and x−yx-y for x+(−y)x+(-y).

A preliminary. If x,y∈Vx,y\in V satisfy ⟨x,v⟩=⟨y,v⟩\langle x,v\rangle=\langle y,v\rangle for every v∈Vv\in V, then x=yx=y. Indeed, by additivity in the first argument (claim 1 of Elementary Properties of a Complex Inner Product) and conjugate homogeneity in the first argument (claim 2 of the same lemma) applied to −y=(−1)y-y=(-1)y, where (−1)y=−y(-1)y=-y by Elementary Identities in a Vector Space and −1‾=−1\overline{-1}=-1 because −1-1 is a real number and claim 1 of Properties of Complex Conjugation and Modulus applies, we get ⟨x−y,v⟩=⟨x,v⟩−⟨y,v⟩=0\langle x-y,v\rangle=\langle x,v\rangle-\langle y,v\rangle=0 for every v∈Vv\in V. Taking v=x−yv=x-y and applying claim 4 of Elementary Properties of a Complex Inner Product gives x−y=0Vx-y=0_{V}, that is x=yx=y.

Claim 1. Suppose T∗=TT^{*}=T. Then for all u,v∈Vu,v\in V,

⟨T(u),v⟩=⟨T∗(u),v⟩=⟨u,T(v)⟩,\langle T(u),v\rangle=\langle T^{*}(u),v\rangle=\langle u,T(v)\rangle ,

so TT is self-adjoint. Conversely, suppose TT is self-adjoint, that is ⟨T(u),v⟩=⟨u,T(v)⟩\langle T(u),v\rangle=\langle u,T(v)\rangle for all u,v∈Vu,v\in V. Then TT itself satisfies the property characterising the adjoint of TT, so the uniqueness part of claim 1 of Uniqueness of the Adjoint, and Existence in Finite Dimensions gives T=T∗T=T^{*}.

Claim 2. Suppose first that T∗T=idVT^{*}T=\mathrm{id}_{V} and TT∗=idVTT^{*}=\mathrm{id}_{V}; by the definition of the product and the identity operator this says T∗(T(x))=xT^{*}(T(x))=x and T(T∗(x))=xT(T^{*}(x))=x for every x∈Vx\in V. Applying the characterising property of T∗T^{*} with the vector T(u)T(u) in place of uu,

⟨T(u),T(v)⟩=⟨T∗(T(u)),v⟩=⟨u,v⟩(u,v∈V),\langle T(u),T(v)\rangle=\bigl\langle T^{*}\bigl(T(u)\bigr),v\bigr\rangle=\langle u,v\rangle\qquad(u,v\in V),

and every v∈Vv\in V satisfies v=T(T∗(v))v=T\bigl(T^{*}(v)\bigr), so TT is surjective. Hence TT is unitary.

Conversely suppose TT is unitary. For all u,v∈Vu,v\in V, the characterising property and the preservation of the inner product give

⟨T∗(T(u)),v⟩=⟨T(u),T(v)⟩=⟨u,v⟩.\bigl\langle T^{*}\bigl(T(u)\bigr),v\bigr\rangle=\langle T(u),T(v)\rangle=\langle u,v\rangle .

Since v∈Vv\in V was arbitrary, the preliminary gives T∗(T(u))=uT^{*}(T(u))=u; as uu was arbitrary, T∗T=idVT^{*}T=\mathrm{id}_{V}. Now let v∈Vv\in V. By surjectivity there is w∈Vw\in V with v=T(w)v=T(w), and then T∗(v)=T∗(T(w))=wT^{*}(v)=T^{*}(T(w))=w, so T(T∗(v))=T(w)=vT\bigl(T^{*}(v)\bigr)=T(w)=v. As vv was arbitrary, TT∗=idVTT^{*}=\mathrm{id}_{V}.

Claim 3. By claim 1 applied to PP, the condition P∗=PP^{*}=P holds if and only if PP is self-adjoint. Hence the conjunction of PP=PPP=P and P∗=PP^{*}=P holds if and only if PP is self-adjoint and PP=PPP=P, which by that definition is exactly the condition that PP is an orthogonal projection.

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Comments

Loading…