Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I was trying to prove Remark 3.7 in this article, but failed. Here some necessary definitions.

Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a unital $C^*$-algebra such that there exist $S_1,S_2\in\mathcal{A}$ with property $S_1^*S_1=S_2^*S_2=1_{\mathcal{A}}$, $S_1^*S_2=S_2^*S_1=0$ (i.e. isometries with pairwise orthogonal images)

Let $Y$ be contractive (i.e. for all $a\in\mathcal{A}$, $y\in Y$ we have $\Vert a\cdot y\Vert\leq\Vert a\Vert\Vert y\Vert$) normed (i.e. normed space) unital (i.e. for all $y\in Y$ we have $1_\mathcal{A}y=y$) left module over $\mathcal{A}$.

Such a normed module is called semi-Ruan if for all $y_1, y_2\in Y$ the following holds $$ \Vert S_1\cdot y_1+S_2\cdot y_2\Vert^2\leq\Vert y_1\Vert^2+\Vert y_2\Vert^2 $$

My question. Let $Y^*$ be dual module of semi-Ruan module $Y$ (i.e. dual space with the structure of right unital contractive normed module with outer multiplication defined by $(f\cdot a)(y)=f(a\cdot y)$ ), then the following inequality holds $$ \Vert f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*\Vert^2\geq\Vert f_1\Vert^2+\Vert f_2\Vert^2 $$ My attempt. Note that $\Vert y_1\Vert\leq 1$,$\Vert y_2\Vert\leq 1$ implies $\Vert S_1\cdot y_1+S_2\cdot y_2\Vert\leq\sqrt{2}$, so $$ \Vert f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*\Vert^2=\sup\{|(f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*)(y)|^2:\Vert y\Vert\leq 1\}\geq $$ $$ \sup\left\{\left|(f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*)\left(S_1\cdot\frac{y_1}{\sqrt{2}}+S_2\cdot\frac{y_2}{\sqrt{2}}\right)\right|^2:\Vert y_1\Vert\leq 1,\Vert y_2\Vert\leq 1\right\}= $$ $$ 0.5 \sup\left\{|f_1(y_1)+f_2(y_2)|^2:\Vert y_1\Vert\leq 1,\Vert y_2\Vert\leq 1\right\}= $$ $$ 0.5 \sup\left\{|f_1(y_1)|^2+|f_2(y_2)|^2+2\operatorname{Re}(f_1(y_1)\overline{f_2(y_2)}):\Vert y_1\Vert\leq 1,\Vert y_2\Vert\leq 1\right\}=??? $$

share|cite|improve this question
Are you also assuming that $S_1$ and $S_2$ are isometries? If so, you should probably add that to the question. – user16299 Feb 6 '12 at 22:33
Oh, my mistake, I didn't read carefully enough. My apologies. – user16299 Feb 6 '12 at 22:47
Hint: Your final supremum is equal to $0.5( \|f_1\| + \|f_2\|)^2$. Actually, it's easiest to see this from the line before. This isn't what you want, but suppose instead you had taken the supremum over all $y_1,y_2$ with $\|y_1\|^2 + \|y_2\|^2\leq 1$... – Matthew Daws Feb 7 '12 at 7:54
So you propose the following $$\Vert f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*\Vert^2=$$$$\sup\{|(f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*)(y)|^2:\Vert y\Vert\leq 1\}\geq$$ $$\sup\left\{\left|(f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*)\left(S_1\cdot y_1+S_2\cdot y_2\right)\right|^2:\Vert y_1\Vert^2+\Vert y_2\Vert^2\leq 1\right\}=$$$$\sup\left\{|f_1(y_1)+f_2(y_2)|^2:\Vert y_1\Vert^2+\Vert y_2\Vert^2\leq 1\right\}$$ But, why the last supremum equals to $\Vert f_1\Vert^2+\Vert f_2\Vert^2$? This supremum is taken over dependent variables. – Norbert Feb 7 '12 at 9:55
@MatthewDaws I was thinking about your hint but haven't come to any conclusions. Do you know a complete solution, or that hint was just an idea that you think may be helpful? – Norbert Feb 8 '12 at 18:48
up vote 2 down vote accepted

This is maybe a comment, but it became too long. We seem to agree that $$ \|f_1\cdot S_1^*+f_2\cdot S_2^*\|^2 \geq \sup\big\{ |f_1(y_1)+f_2(y_2)|^2 : \|y_1\|^2+\|y_2\|^2\leq 1 \big\}. $$ Now, if $a_1,a_2\geq 0$ are such that $a_1^2+a_2^2\leq 1$ then for each $\epsilon>0$, we can pick $z_k$ with $|f_k(z_k)| = f_k(z_k) > \|f_k\|-\epsilon$, and with $\|z_k\|=1$. So setting $y_k = a_kz_k$, we see that $$ \sup\big\{ |f_1(y_1)+f_2(y_2)|^2 : \|y_1\|^2+\|y_2\|^2\leq 1 \big\} \geq \sup\big\{ (a_1\|f_1\|+a_2\|f_2\|)^2 : a_1^2+a_2^2\leq 1 \big\}. $$ But this supremum involves only scalars, and it's standard (I guess via Cauchy-Schwarz-- think about the proof that $(\ell^2)^*=\ell^2$) that this equals $$ \|f_1\|^2+\|f_2\|^2. $$ Conversely, $|f_1(y_1)+f_2(y_2)|^2 \leq ( \|f_1\|\|y_1\| + \|f_2\|\|y_2\| )^2 \leq (\|f_1\|^2+\|f_2\|^2)(\|y_1\|^2+\|y_2\|^2)$ by Cauchy-Schwarz. So actually $$ \sup\big\{ |f_1(y_1)+f_2(y_2)|^2 : \|y_1\|^2+\|y_2\|^2\leq 1 \big\} = \|f_1\|^2+\|f_2\|^2. $$ And we're done!

share|cite|improve this answer
Ah, the old proof that the p-norm is a sup over pairing with things in the ball of the q-norm. (Flashbacks to a certain AJW course, perhaps?) – user16299 Feb 8 '12 at 22:23
@Norbert, erm, yes, I guess. But the result is true for more than two summands, which would be less clear from your proof. Actually, all I was proving I guess is that the dual of the vector-valued space $\ell^2(F)$ is $\ell^2(F^*)$ for the obvious dual pairing... – Matthew Daws Feb 9 '12 at 7:27

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.