7A Self-Adjoint and Normal Operators


Topics

  • Adjoints
  • Self-Adjoint Operators
  • Normal Operators



Adjoints



Remark: Motivating the Adjoint


Recall that the dual map, T′:W′⟶V′T': W' \longrightarrow V' takes vectors in W′W' back to vectors in V′V'. If VV and WW are finite dimensional, the adjoint map T∗:W⟶VT^*: W \longrightarrow V is just the extension of the dual map T′T' from WW to VV. Recall also that the Riesz Representation Theorem told us that the map sending v∈Vv \in V to ϕv∈V′\phi_v \in V', where ϕv(u)=⟨u,v⟩∀u∈V\phi_v(u) = \langle u, v \rangle \forall u \in V, is an invertible map between VV and V′V' when VV is a finite dimensional vector space. We will call this invertible map ιV:V⟶V′\iota_V: V \longrightarrow V' the dual correspondence. This allows us to define the adjoint as the composition:

T∗=ιW−1∘T′∘ιV. T^* = \iota_W^{-1} \circ T' \circ \iota_V.

The composition is easy to follow and unpack through the first two maps, but because we don't have an explicit definition for the third map, ιW−1\iota_W^{-1}, we rather refer to its invertibility to state that there exists a unique element v∈Vv \in V that corresponds to it. This correspondence will end up being exactly what we need to motivate what the dual map is.

Follow each step with the diagram below. Step 0: Start with a w∈Ww \in W. Step 1: ιW\iota_W takes ww to ψW\psi_W, where ψW(u)=⟨u,w⟩\psi_W(u) = \langle u, w \rangle for every u∈W.u \in W. Step 2: T′T' takes ψw\psi_w to T′(ψw)T'(\psi_w), which is ψw∘T\psi_w \circ T by the definition of the dual map. What does T′(ψw)T'(\psi_w) do to each u∈Vu \in V? It does the same thing as ψw\psi_w, except it precomposes with TT first: (T′(ψw))(u)=(ψw∘T)(u)=ψw(T(u))=⟨T(u),w⟩\left( T'(\psi_w) \right) (u) = (\psi_w \circ T)(u) = \psi_w(T(u)) = \langle T(u), w \rangle for every u∈V.u \in V. Step 3: ιV−1\iota_V^{-1} takes T′(ψw)T'(\psi_w) to a unique vector v∈V.v \in V.

Analysis: T∗(w)T^*(w) is the unique vector v∈Vv \in V with the property that

φv=T′(ψw)\varphi_v = T'(\psi_w)

⇒φv=ψw∘T\Rightarrow \varphi_v = \psi_w \circ T

⇒⟨u,v⟩=⟨T(u),w⟩  ∀u∈V.\Rightarrow \langle u, v \rangle = \langle T(u), w \rangle \ \ \forall u \in V.

Conclusion: T∗(w)T^*(w) is the unique vector in VV such that

⟨u,T∗(w)⟩=⟨T(u),w⟩  ∀u∈V. \langle u, T^*(w) \rangle = \langle T(u), w \rangle \ \ \forall u \in V.
Picture of the Setup

Definition: Adjoint, T∗T^*


Suppose T∈L(V,W)T \in \mathscr{L}(V,W). The adjoint of TT is the unique function T∗:W⟶VT^*: W \longrightarrow V such that

⟨T(v),w⟩=⟨v,T∗(w)⟩  ∀v∈V,w∈W.\langle T(v), w \rangle = \langle v, T^*(w) \rangle \ \ \forall v \in V, w \in W.

Note that T∗T^* can also be expressed as the unique vector v∈Vv \in V such that φv=ψw∘T\varphi_v = \psi_w \circ T. It may perhaps be easier to think of the adjoint map this way, but it is often more useful to use the original definition.

Lemma: Adjoint of a Linear Map is a Linear Map

Suppose T∈L(V,W)T \in \mathscr{L}(V,W). Then T∗∈L(W,V)T^* \in \mathscr{L}(W,V).


Proof:

An intuitive way to prove this would be to observe that T∗T^* is the composition of three functions that preserve vector addition, and it is also the composition of three maps that, though they do not all preserve scaling, two of them conjugate scalars and these two conjugations cancel each other out. On the other hand, we can use the inner product property to prove this. Let v∈Vv \in V and w,w1,w2∈Ww, w_1, w_2 \in W and λ∈F\lambda \in \mathbb{F}. Then

⟨v,T∗(w1+w2)⟩=⟨T(v),w1+w2⟩=⟨T(v),w1⟩+⟨T(v),w2⟩ \langle v, T^*(w_1 + w_2) \rangle = \langle T(v), w_1 + w_2 \rangle = \langle T(v), w_1 \rangle + \langle T(v), w_2 \rangle

=⟨v,T∗(w1)⟩+⟨v,T∗(w2)⟩=⟨v,T∗(w1)+T∗(w2)⟩. = \langle v, T^*(w_1) \rangle + \langle v, T^*(w_2) \rangle = \langle v, T^*(w_1) + T^*(w_2) \rangle.

and

⟨v,T∗(λw)⟩=⟨T(v),λw⟩=λ‾⟨T(v),w⟩=λ‾⟨v,T∗(w)⟩=⟨v,λT∗(w)⟩.\langle v, T^*(\lambda w) \rangle = \langle T(v), \lambda w \rangle = \overline{\lambda} \langle T(v), w \rangle = \overline{\lambda} \langle v, T^*(w) \rangle = \langle v, \lambda T^*(w) \rangle.

Lemma: Properties of the Adjoint

Suppose T∈L(V,W)T \in \mathscr{L}(V,W). Then a) (S+T)∗=S∗+T∗. (S+T)^* = S^* + T^*. b) (λT)∗=λ‾T∗ (\lambda T)^* = \overline{\lambda} T^* for all λ∈F.\lambda \in \mathbb{F}. c) (T∗)∗=T. (T^*)^* = T. d) (ST)∗=T∗S∗. (ST)^* = T^* S^*. e) I∗=I, I^* = I, where II is the identity on V.V. f) If TT is invertible, then T∗T^* is invertible and (T∗)−1=(T−1)∗. (T^*)^{-1} = (T^{-1})^*.


Proof:

a) For any s∈L(V,W),s \in \mathscr{L}(V,W),

⟨v,(S+T)∗(w)⟩=⟨(S+T)(v),w⟩=⟨S(v),w⟩+⟨T(v),w⟩ \langle v, (S+T)^*(w) \rangle = \langle (S+T)(v), w \rangle = \langle S(v), w \rangle + \langle T(v), w \rangle

=⟨v,S∗(w)⟩+⟨v,T∗(w)⟩=⟨v,(S∗+T∗)(w)⟩. = \langle v, S^*(w) \rangle + \langle v, T^*(w) \rangle = \langle v, (S^* + T^*)(w) \rangle.

b) For any λ∈F\lambda \in \mathbb{F},

⟨v,(λT)∗(w)⟩=⟨(λT)(v),w⟩=λ⟨T(v),w⟩ \langle v, (\lambda T)^*(w) \rangle = \langle (\lambda T)(v), w \rangle = \lambda \langle T(v), w \rangle

=λ⟨v,T∗(w)⟩=⟨v,λ‾T(w)⟩. = \lambda \langle v, T^*(w) \rangle = \langle v, \overline{\lambda}T(w) \rangle.

c) Using the definition of the adjoint, (T∗)∗(T^*)^* sends each vector in v∈Vv \in V to the unique vector w∈Ww \in W such that ⟨T∗(w),v⟩=⟨w,(T∗)∗(v)⟩. \langle T^*(w), v \rangle = \langle w, (T^*)^*(v) \rangle. Using this fact, we observe the following:

⟨T∗(w),v⟩=⟨v,T∗(w)⟩‾=⟨T(v),w⟩‾=⟨w,T(v)⟩. \langle T^*(w), v \rangle = \overline{\langle v, T^*(w) \rangle} = \overline{\langle T(v), w \rangle} = \langle w, T(v) \rangle.

⟨T∗(w),v⟩=⟨w,T(v)⟩ \langle T^*(w), v \rangle = \langle w, T(v) \rangle shows that T(v)=(T∗)∗(v). T(v) = (T^*)^*(v). d) This follows from the fact that (TS)′=S′∘T′. (TS)' = S' \circ T'. Alternatively, using inner products we have:

⟨ST(v),w⟩=⟨T(v),S∗(w)⟩=⟨v,T∗S∗(w)⟩ \langle ST(v), w \rangle = \langle T(v), S^*(w) \rangle = \langle v, T^* S^*(w) \rangle

for every v∈Vv \in V, w∈W.w \in W. e) This follows from the fact that the dual of the identity is the identity (becuse precomposing with the identity does not change your functional). Alternatively, we have the following using inner products:

⟨v,I∗(w)⟩=⟨I(v),w⟩=⟨v,w⟩ \langle v, I^*(w) \rangle = \langle I(v), w \rangle = \langle v, w \rangle

for every v∈Vv \in V, w∈W.w \in W. f) This also follows from the inverse of the dual being the dual of the inverse for invertible linear maps. This can be shown with inner products, but we would only be using the following equalities, which prove this result (and similarl equalities prove that the dual of the inverse is the inverse of the dual.)

T∗(T−1)∗=(T−1T)∗=(IV)∗=IV T^* (T^{-1})^* = (T^{-1} T)^* = (I_V)^* = I_V

and

(T−1)∗T∗=(TT−1)∗=(IW)∗=IW. (T^{-1})^* T^* = (T T^{-1})^* = (I_W)^* = I_W.

Lemma: Kernel and Range of T∗T^*

Suppose T∈L(V,W)T \in \mathscr{L}(V,W). Then a) ker⁡(T∗)=T(V)⊥. \ker(T^*) = T(V)^\perp. b) T∗(W)=ker⁡(T)⊥. T^*(W) = \ker(T)^\perp. c) ker⁡(T)=T∗(W)⊥. \ker(T) = T^*(W)^\perp. d) T(V)=ker⁡(T∗)⊥. T(V) = \ker(T^*)^\perp.


Proof:

We begin by proving part c): ker⁡(T∗)=T(V)⊥ \ker(T^*) = T(V)^\perp because for any v∈Vv \in V,

T(v)=0  ⟺  ⟨T(v),w⟩=0  ∀w∈W. T(v) = 0 \iff \langle T(v), w \rangle = 0 \ \ \forall w \in W.

Now, b) is the orthogonal complement of both sides of c), and the remaining two statements are b) and c) with the switching of TT and T∗T^*.

Definition: Conjugate Transpose


The conjugate transpose of an m×nm \times n matrix AA is the n×mn \times m matrix A∗A^* that changes rows and columns (transpose) and conjugates each entry. Stated in matrix notation,

Ai,j∗=A‾j,i. A^*_{i,j} = \overline{A}_{j,i}.

Proposition: Matrix of T∗T^* is the Conjugate Transpose

For any linear map T∈L(V,W)T \in \mathscr{L}(V,W) and orthonormal bases for VV and WW, the corresponding matrix for T∗T^* with respect to these bases is the conjugate transpose of the matrix of TT with respect to these bases. Said with symbols, if β\beta and γ\gamma are orthonormal bases for VV and WW respectively, then

M(T∗,γ,β)=M(T,β,γ)∗. \mathcal{M}(T^*, \gamma, \beta) = M(T, \beta, \gamma)^*.

Proof:

Let A=M(T,β,γ)A = M(T, \beta, \gamma), B=M(T∗,γ,β)B = \mathcal{M}(T^*, \gamma, \beta), β=(e1,…,en)\beta = (e_1, \ldots, e_n), and γ=(f1,…,fm)\gamma = (f_1, \ldots, f_m). To find the jjth column of BB, we put fjf_j into T∗T^* and find its coordinates in terms of β\beta. Because we're working with orthonormal bases, The iith coordinate of this column vector can be found by projection: ⟨T∗(fj),ei⟩.\langle T^*(f_j), e_i \rangle. Thus, ⟨T∗(fj),ei⟩\langle T^*(f_j), e_i \rangle is the iith entry of the jjth column of BB. Now observe what we get from using conjugate symmetry on this inner product:

⟨T∗(fj),ei⟩=⟨ei,T∗(fj)⟩‾=⟨T(ei),fj⟩‾. \langle T^*(f_j), e_i \rangle = \overline{\langle e_i, T^*(f_j) \rangle} = \overline{\langle T(e_i), f_j \rangle}.

By the same reasoning, this is the conjugate of the jjth coordinate of the iith column of AA. Therefore AA and BB are conjugate transposes of each other.



Self-Adjoint Operators



Definition: Self-adjoint


An operator T∈L(V)T \in \mathscr{L}(V) is self-adjoint if T=T∗T = T^*.

Results for F=C\mathbb{F} = \mathbb{C}:

Theorem: Self-adjoint operators have real eigenvalues

Every eigenvalue of a self-adjoint operator is a real number.


Proof:

To prove this, we will show that conjugating an eigenvalue does not change it. Let T∈L(V)T \in \mathscr{L}(V) be self-adjoint and let v∈Vv \in V be an eigenvector with eigenvalue λ\lambda. Then

λ∥v∥2=⟨λv,v⟩=⟨T(v),v⟩=⟨v,T(v)⟩ \lambda \Vert v \Vert^2 = \langle \lambda v, v \rangle = \langle T(v), v \rangle = \langle v, T(v) \rangle

=⟨v,λv⟩=λ‾⟨v,v⟩=λ‾∥v∥2 = \langle v, \lambda v \rangle = \overline{\lambda} \langle v, v \rangle = \overline{\lambda} \Vert v \Vert^2

Because ∥v∥≠0\Vert v \Vert \neq 0, λ=λ‾\lambda = \overline{\lambda}.

Proposition: T(v)T(v) is orthogonal to vv for every v∈Vv \in V if and only if T=0T=0 (provided F=C\mathbb{F} = \mathbb{C}).

Suppose VV is a complex inner product space and T∈L(V).T \in \mathscr{L}(V). Then ⟨T(v),v⟩=0\langle T(v), v \rangle = 0 for every v∈Vv \in V if and only if T=0T = 0.


Proof:

This proof uses a generalization of the polarization identity for inner products, and it will first be proved as a claim. Claim: For any u,w∈Vu, w \in V and any T∈L(V)T \in \mathscr{L}(V),

⟨T(u),w⟩=∑ζ4=1ζ⟨T(u+ζw),u+ζw⟩4 \langle T(u), w \rangle = \sum_{\zeta^4 = 1} \frac{\zeta \langle T(u+\zeta w), u+\zeta w \rangle}{4}

Proof of claim: Take 4 times the sum and expand each of the inner products using conjugate linearity. You will see that the first terms (T(u)T(u) with uu) cancel for values of ζ\zeta that are negatives of each other, the second terms (T(u)T(u) with ww) remain to equal 4 times the left hand side of the equation, the third terms (T(w)T(w) with uu) cancel for values of ζ\zeta by (1↔i)(1 \leftrightarrow i) and (−1↔−i)(-1 \leftrightarrow -i), and the fourth terms (T(w)T(w) with ww) cancel similarly to the first terms, for avlues of ζ\zeta that are negatives of each other. There is a version with every term showing and color-coordinated cancellation in my notes, but the unabridged statement of this claim doesn't even fit in a regular computer browser, let alone the expanded versions. With the claim proved, we proceed: On the one hand, if TT is the zero map then ⟨T(v),v⟩=⟨0,v⟩=0\langle T(v), v \rangle = \langle 0, v \rangle = 0 for all v∈Vv \in V. On the other hand, if ⟨T(v),v⟩=0\langle T(v), v \rangle = 0 for every v∈Vv \in V, then for any u,w∈Vu, w \in V we have

⟨T(u),w⟩=∑ζ4=1ζ⟨T(u+ζw),u+ζw⟩4=∑ζ4=1 0 4=0. \langle T(u), w \rangle = \sum_{\zeta^4 = 1} \frac{\zeta \langle T(u+\zeta w), u+\zeta w \rangle}{4} = \sum_{\zeta^4 = 1} \frac{ \ 0 \ }{4} = 0.

Proposition: TT is self-adjoint   ⟺  \iff ⟨T(v),v⟩∈R ∀v∈V\langle T(v), v \rangle \in \mathbb{R} \ \forall v \in V (provided F=C.\mathbb{F} = \mathbb{C}.

Let VV be a complex inner product space and T∈L(V).T \in \mathscr{L}(V). Then TT is self-adjoint if and only if ⟨T(v),v⟩∈R \langle T(v), v \rangle \in \mathbb{R} for every v∈V.v \in V.


Proof:

⇒\Rightarrow: This direction comes from conjugate symmetry. If TT is self-adjoint then for any v∈Vv \in V,

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

⇐\Leftarrow: Suppose that for every v∈Vv \in V, ⟨T(v),v⟩=⟨T(v),v⟩‾\langle T(v), v \rangle = \overline{\langle T(v), v \rangle}. Then ⟨T(v),v⟩=⟨v,T(v)⟩=⟨T∗(v),v⟩\langle T(v), v \rangle = \langle v, T(v) \rangle = \langle T^*(v), v \rangle, and hence ⟨(T−T∗)(v),v⟩=0\langle (T - T^*)(v), v \rangle = 0 for every v∈V.v \in V. Because we are working over F=C\mathbb{F}=\mathbb{C}, this means (T−T∗)(T-T^*) is the zero operator, and therefore T=T∗T = T^*.

Result for F=R\mathbb{F} = \mathbb{R}:

Lemma: For any self-adjoint operator TT, ⟨T(v),v⟩=0 ∀v∈V⇒T=0.\langle T(v), v \rangle = 0 \ \forall v \in V \Rightarrow T = 0.

Suppose TT is a self-adjoint operator on VV with the property that ⟨T(v),v⟩=0\langle T(v), v \rangle = 0 for every v∈Vv \in V. Then T=0.T = 0.


Proof:

Similarly to the complex case, we first prove a generalization of the real polarization identity. Claim: For every u,w∈Vu, w \in V and any self-adjoint T∈L(V),T \in \mathscr{L}(V),

⟨T(u),w⟩=∑ζ2=1ζ⟨T(u+ζw),u+ζw⟩4.\langle T(u), w \rangle = \sum_{\zeta^2 = 1} \frac{\zeta \langle T(u + \zeta w), u + \zeta w \rangle}{4}.

Proof: There is room to write out the expansion in the real case.

∑ζ2=1ζ⟨T(u+ζw),u+ζw⟩=⟨T(u+w),u+w⟩−⟨T(u−w),u−w⟩ \sum_{\zeta^2 = 1} \zeta \langle T(u + \zeta w), u + \zeta w \rangle = \langle T(u+w), u+w \rangle - \langle T(u-w), u-w \rangle

=(1−1)⟨T(u),u⟩+(1−(−1))⟨T(u),w⟩+(1−(−1))⟨T(w),u⟩+(1−1)⟨T(w),w⟩ = (1-1)\langle T(u), u \rangle + (1-(-1))\langle T(u), w \rangle + (1-(-1))\langle T(w), u \rangle + (1-1)\langle T(w),w \rangle

=2⟨T(u),w⟩+2⟨w,T(u)⟩=4⟨T(u),w⟩. = 2 \langle T(u), w \rangle + 2 \langle w, T(u) \rangle = 4 \langle T(u), w \rangle.

With the claim proven, we can proceed. Let u,w∈Vu, w \in V and let T∈L(V)T \in \mathscr{L}(V) be self-adjoint. Then similarly to the corresponding proof, we have

⟨T(u),w⟩=⟨T(u+w),u+w⟩+⟨T(u−w),u−w⟩4=0+04=0. \langle T(u), w \rangle = \frac{\langle T(u+w), u+w \rangle + \langle T(u-w), u-w \rangle}{4} = \frac{0 + 0}{4} = 0.

Because T(u)T(u) is orthogonal to every w∈Vw \in V, T(u)=0T(u)=0.



Normal Operators



Definition: Normal


An operator on an inner product space is normal if it commutes with its adjoint. Using symbols, T∈L(V)T \in \mathscr{L}(V) is normal if and only if

T∗T=TT∗. T^* T = T T^*.

Note: This means that every self-adjoint operator is normal.

Theorem: TT is normal if and only if T(v)T(v) and T∗(v)T^*(v) have the same norm

Let T∈L(V)T \in \mathscr{L}(V). TT is normal if and only if

∥T(v)∥=∥T∗(v)∥\Vert T(v) \Vert = \Vert T^*(v) \Vert

for every v∈V.v \in V.


Proof:

Note first that TT being normal is equivalent to the difference (T∗T−TT∗)(T^*T - TT^*) operator being the zero operator. This difference is called the commutator and it is often compared to a trivial element to test whether or not two things commute. We also note that T∗TT^*T and TT∗TT^* are both self-adjoint, so the commutator (T∗T−TT∗)(T^*T - TT^*) is also self-adjoint, which we will need for the first implication in the case where F=R\mathbb{F}=\mathbb{R}. We are now ready to begin.

(T∗T−TT∗)=0 (T^*T - TT^*) = 0

  ⟺  ⟨(T∗T−TT∗)(v),v⟩=0 ∀v∈V \iff \langle (T^*T - TT^*)(v), v \rangle = 0 \ \forall v \in V

  ⟺  ⟨T∗T(v),v⟩=⟨TT∗(v),v⟩ ∀v∈V \iff \langle T^*T(v), v \rangle = \langle TT^*(v), v \rangle \ \forall v \in V

  ⟺  ⟨T(v),T(v)⟩=⟨T∗(v),T∗(v)⟩ ∀v∈V \iff \langle T(v), T(v) \rangle = \langle T^*(v), T^*(v) \rangle \ \forall v \in V

  ⟺  ∥T(v)∥=∥T∗(v)∥ ∀v∈V. \iff \Vert T(v) \Vert = \Vert T^*(v) \Vert \ \forall v \in V.

Lemma: Range, kernel, and eigenvectors of a normal operator

Let TT be a normal operator on an inner product space VV. Then a) ker⁡(T)=ker⁡(T∗)\ker(T) = \ker(T^*) b) T(V)=T∗(V)T(V) = T^*(V) c) V=ker⁡(T)⊕T(V)V = \ker(T) \oplus T(V) d) T−λIT-\lambda I is normal for every λ∈F\lambda \in \mathbb{F}. e) If v∈Vv \in V and λ∈F\lambda \in \mathbb{F}, then T(v)=λv  ⟺  T∗(v)=λ‾v.T(v) = \lambda v \iff T^*(v) = \overline{\lambda} v.


Proof:

a) T(v)=0T(v)=0 if and only if T∗(v)=0T^*(v)=0 because ∥T(v)∥=∥T∗(v)∥.\Vert T(v) \Vert = \Vert T^*(v) \Vert. b) Because their kernels are the same, their ranges must be the same, as range is the orthogonal complement of the kernel. c) This follows from the orthogonal complement decomposition into a direct sum. d) Because TT and T∗T^* commute, all of the terms in {T,T∗,λI,λ‾I}\{ T, T^*, \lambda I, \overline{\lambda} I \} commute with each other. Therefore (T−λI)(T-\lambda I) and (T∗−λ‾I)(T^* - \overline{\lambda} I) commute. e) Very similarly to part a), (T−λI)(v)=0  ⟺  (T∗−λ‾I)(v)=0(T - \lambda I)(v) = 0 \iff (T^* - \overline{\lambda} I)(v) = 0 because

∥(T−λI)(v)∥=∥(T∗−λ‾I)(v)∥.\Vert (T - \lambda I)(v) \Vert = \Vert (T^* - \overline{\lambda} I)(v) \Vert.

Lemma: Orthogonal eigenvectors of normal operators

Let TT be a normal operator on VV. Then eigenvectors of TT with distinct eigenvalues are orthogonal.


Proof:

Let v1,v2v_1, v_2 be eigenvectors of TT with distinct eigenvalues λ1,λ2\lambda_1, \lambda_2. Then

(λ1−λ2)⟨v1,v2⟩=λ1⟨v1,v2⟩−λ2⟨v1,v2⟩ (\lambda_1 - \lambda_2)\langle v_1, v_2 \rangle = \lambda_1 \langle v_1, v_2 \rangle - \lambda_2 \langle v_1, v_2 \rangle

=⟨λ1v1,v2⟩−⟨v1,λ‾2v2⟩ = \langle \lambda_1 v_1, v_2 \rangle - \langle v_1, \overline{\lambda}_2 v_2 \rangle

=⟨T(v1),v2⟩−⟨v1,T∗(v2)⟩ = \langle T(v_1), v_2 \rangle - \langle v_1, T^*(v_2) \rangle

=⟨T(v1),v2⟩−⟨T(v1),v2⟩ = \langle T(v_1), v_2 \rangle - \langle T(v_1), v_2 \rangle

=0. = 0.

Because (λ1−λ2)≠0(\lambda_1 - \lambda_2) \neq 0, ⟨v1,v2⟩=0\langle v_1, v_2 \rangle = 0.

Result for F=C\mathbb{F} = \mathbb{C}:

Lemma: TT is normal if and only if the real and imaginary parts of TT commute.

Suppose TT is an operator on a complex inner product space VV. Then TT is normal if and only if there exist commuting self-adjoint operators AA and BB such that T=A+BiT = A + Bi.


Proof:

⇒\Rightarrow: Suppose TT is normal. Set A=T+T∗2A = \frac{T + T^*}{2} and B=T−T∗2i.B = \frac{T - T^*}{2i}. Then both operators are self-adjoint, and AB−BAAB - BA simplifies to T∗T−TT∗2i=02i.\frac{T^*T - TT^*}{2i} = \frac{0}{2i}. In summary, TT and T∗T^* commuting made the difference T∗T−TT∗T^*T - TT^* zero, which in turn made the difference AB−BAAB - BA zero, so AA and BB commute. ⇐\Leftarrow: Suppose T=A+iBT = A + iB for commuting self-adjoint operators AA and BB. Then T∗=(A+iB)∗=A∗−iB∗=A−iB.T^* = (A + iB)^* = A^* - iB^* = A - iB. Using a similar process to the other direction, we have A=T+T∗2A = \frac{T+T^*}{2} and B=T−T∗2iB = \frac{T - T^*}{2i}. Subsequently, T∗T−TT∗=AB−BA2=02=0.T^*T - TT^* = \frac{AB - BA}{2} = \frac{0}{2} = 0. Therefore TT is normal.