arXiv:1604.00293v1 [math.SP] 1 Apr 2016 rsmerco eaieycmatprubtos rmr specific more or Schr¨odinger operators. perturbations, of compact re perturbations usually relatively pertu results, or for general symmetric even few However, a or only [12]. are qua [6], there [13], periodic operators adjoint operator e.g. as Moreover, see such crystals, applications [20]. photonic modern f [4], or in as [19], featuring well e.g. been as have info see gaps gaps gaps, universal spectral spectral for in in eigenvalues co need timates on and non the and for analysis spectrum emphasized problems non-real numerical have spectral for on operators papers importance ferential Recent great problems. of non-linear is operators ear htee lo o etrain ihrltv bound s relative with perturbations perturbations structured for on allow results mos even bands Our at that strongly, and more close. gaps or, gaps spectral open spectral remain the gaps of spectral many lengths many infinitely infinitely relativ the of the case on the of conditions for terms establish e.g. additio in perturbation; of formulated the effects are of the results constants and All spectrum, perturbation. discrete the essential the of of behaviour parts the isolated spectrum, non-real corresponding the boun and of gaps relatively estimates spectral merely of stability are the that concern results perturbations under spectrum the a,rsletetmt,esnilsetu,Drcoperat Dirac spectrum, essential estimate, resolvent gap, nltclifrainaottesetaadrslet fnon-s of resolvents and spectra the about information Analytical nti ae erqienihro hs odtosadsuyteb the study and conditions these of neither require we paper this In 1991 Date e od n phrases. and words Key pi ,2016. 4, April : ahmtc ujc Classification. Subject Mathematics epc oteuprubdoeao;i h atrcs,w c we case, latter the bound relative in with operator; perturbations unperturbed the addi to exhibiting respect perturbations Gohberg/Kre˘ın. F and by gaps and spectral Kato essential by extend, results results perturbation These sical I estimates. spec many resolvent operators. infinitely corresponding or self-adjoint one for of theorems stability spectrum establish the on perturbations ldproi ytm,adtocanlHmloin ihd with Hamiltonians two-channel ope and Dirac systems, massless periodic and pled massive applications, several by ted Abstract. O-YMTI ETRAIN OF PERTURBATIONS NON-SYMMETRIC ENCAD UNNADCRSIN TRETTER CHRISTIANE AND CUENIN JEAN-CLAUDE eivsiaeteeeto o-ymti eaieybound relatively non-symmetric of effect the investigate We EFAJITOPERATORS SELF-ADJOINT pcrm etrainter,nnslajitoperator non-selfadjoint theory, perturbation Spectrum, 1. Introduction ≥ 71;4A5 81Q12. 47A55, 47A10; .Tegnrlt forrslsi illustra- is results our of generality The 1. 1 r eidcsse,Hamiltonian. system, periodic or, ≥ inlsrcuewith structure tional 1. rlgp ln with along gaps tral n mrv,clas- improve, and aos point-cou- rators, nee lo for allow even an atclr we particular, n rhr estudy we urther, issipation. pcrlgp n of and gaps spectral eovn estimates, resolvent titdt bounded to stricted e ob h first the be to eem pcrlgp,we gaps, spectral a tutrsof structures nal mto nthe on rmation btoso self- of rbations slajitdif- -selfadjoint rrsletes- resolvent or e.Ormain Our ded. ihspectral with s ntl many finitely t boundedness e eut ..for e.g. results l-don lin- elf-adjoint nuigthat ensuring tmgraphs ntum rresponding hvorof ehaviour ed spectral , 2 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER
The outline of the paper is as follows. In Section 2 we study the effect of a relatively bounded perturbation A on the spectrum σ(T ) of a self-adjoint opera- tor T . We show that, if A has T -bound δA < 1, then the non-real part of σ(T +A) lies between two hyperbolas and we establish a “gap condition” ensuring that a spectral gap (α ,β ) R of T gives rise to a stable spectral free strip of T + A. T T ⊂ This means that there exists a non-empty subinterval (αT +A,βT +A) (αT ,βT ) such that ⊂
σ(T + sA) z C : α < Rez<β = ∅ for all s [0, 1]; (1.1) ∩{ ∈ T +A T +A} ∈ an analogous result is proved for essential spectral gaps. Moreover, we derive a resolvent estimate for T +A in this spectral free strip. The shape of the hyperbolas, the gap condition, the bounds αT +A, βT +A, and the resolvent estimate are all formulated in terms of the relative boundedness constants of A with respect to T and the endpoints αT , βT of the unperturbed spectral gap. Similar spectral estimates for form-bounded perturbations were proved in [27]; however, for non-symmetric perturbations there is no general relation between relative boundedness and relative form-boundedness. We also mention that our results extend, and improve, classical perturbation results by Kato and by Goh- berg/Krein, see [17, Theorems V.4.10/11], [16, Lemma V.10.1]. In Section 3 we study the stability of infinitely many spectral gaps (αn,βn) of T which tend to . We derive conditions on αn, βn ensuring that T + A has infinitely many stable∞ spectral free strips or that, more strongly, at most finitely many spectral gaps of T close under the perturbation A. A necessary condition for the latter is that the spectral gap lengths l = β α diverge if A has T - n n − n bound δA = 0 and that they diverge exponentially if δA > 0. These results also apply if two spectral gaps are separated by a single spectral point, e.g. if T has compact resolvent. In Section 4 we focus on perturbations that exhibit different additional struc- tures with respect to the unperturbed operator T , e.g. if T commutes with a self- adjoint involution τ, then A is supposed to anti-commute with τ, or vice versa. Using operator matrix techniques, we are able to tighten the spectral estimates derived in Section 2 and, at the same time, weaken the gap condition to such an extent that we can even allow for perturbations A with T -bound δA 1. For the special case of symmetric perturbations, we complement (1.1)≥ by show- ing that if e.g. αT +A = αT +δT +A, then σ(T +A) αT δT +A, αT +δT +A = ∅ and that if T has eigenvalues of total multiplicity∩m <− in an essential spec-6 tral gap (α ,β ), then T + A has eigenvalues of total algebraic∞ multiplicity m T T ≤ in (αT +A,βT +A). Further, we prove monotonicity results for spectral gaps and essential spectral gaps for a semi-bounded perturbation A. Finally, in Section 5 we apply our results to Dirac operators, massless in R2 and massive with Coulomb-like potentials in R3, to point-coupled periodic systems on manifolds, and to two-channel scattering systems with dissipation. The following notation will be used throughout the paper. For a closed linear operator T on a Hilbert space with domain (T ), we denote the kernel and range by Ker T and Ran T , respectively,H and theD spectrum and resolvent set by σ(T ) and ρ(T ), respectively. Moreover, T is called Fredholm if Ker T is finite NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 3 dimensional and Ran T is finite co-dimensional; the essential spectrum of T is ∗ defined as σess(T ) := λ C : T λ is not Fredholm . If T = T is self-adjoint and J R is an interval,{ E∈ (J) denotes− the corresponding} spectral projection. ⊂ T 2. Perturbation of spectra and spectral gaps In this section we study non-symmetric relatively bounded perturbations of self-adjoint operators and their effect on the spectrum. In particular, we estimate the non-real spectrum and the change of spectral gaps under such perturbations. All spectral enclosures are supplied with corresponding resolvent estimates. If T and A are linear operators in a Banach or Hilbert space, then A is called T -bounded if (T ) (A) and there exist a′, b′ 0 such that D ⊂ D ≥ Ax a′ x + b′ T x , x (T ). (2.1) k k≤ k k k k ∈ D ′ ′ The infimum δA of all b 0 such that there is an a 0 with (2.1) or, equivalently, the infimum δ of all b ≥0 such that there is an a ≥ 0 with A ≥ ≥ Ax 2 a2 x 2 + b2 T x 2, x (T ), (2.2) k k ≤ k k k k ∈ D is called T -bound of A (see [17, Section IV.1.1]). Note that (2.2) implies (2.1) with a′ = a, b′ = b, while (2.1) implies (2.2) with a2 = a′2(1+1/ε), b2 = b′2(1 + ε) for arbitrary ε> 0. Classical perturbation theorems of Kato for spectra of self-adjoint operators T either assume that the perturbation A is bounded or that T is semi-bounded and A is symmetric (see e.g. [17, Theorems V.4.10/11]). A much less known theorem of Gohberg and Krein assumes that A is relatively compact (see [16, Lemma V.10.1]). The following new result requires neither of these conditions. Theorem 2.1. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space and let A be T -bounded with T -bound < 1 and with a, b 0, b< 1, as in (2.2).H ≥ i) Then the spectrum of T + A lies between two hyperbolas, more precisely, a2 + b2 Rez 2 σ(T + A) z C : Imz 2 > | | = ∅. (2.3) ∩ ∈ | | 1 b2 − ii) If T has a spectral gap (αT ,βT ) R, i.e. σ(T ) (αT ,βT ) = ∅ with αT , β σ(T ), and if ⊂ ∩ T ∈ a2 + b2α2 + a2 + b2β2 <β α , (2.4) T T T − T then T + A hasq a stable spectralq free strip (α ,β ) + iR C, i.e. T +A T +A ⊂ σ(T + sA) z C : α < Rez<β = ∅, s [0, 1], (2.5) ∩{ ∈ T +A T +A} ∈ with
α := α + a2 + b2α2 , β := β a2 + b2β2 ; (2.6) T +A T T T +A T − T if A is symmetric,q then q ∅ ∅ σ(T +A) K a2+b2α2 (αT )= , σ(T +A) K a2+b2β2 (βT )= . (2.7) ∩ √ T 6 ∩ √ T 6 4 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER
iii) If T has an essential spectral gap (αT ,βT ) R, i.e. σess(T ) (αT ,βT )= ∅ with α , β σ (T ), and (2.4) holds, then⊂ the strip ∩ T T ∈ ess σ(T + A) z C : α < Rez<β (2.8) ∩{ ∈ T +A T +A} consists of at most countably many isolated eigenvalues of finite algebraic multiplicity which may accumulate at most at the points αT +A, βT +A. Resolvent estimates accompanying the spectral enclosures in Theorem 2.1 i) and ii) may be found in Proposition 2.8 below. Proof of Theorem 2.1. i) Since T is self-adjoint, we have the resolvent estimates (see [17, V.(3.16), (3.17)]) 1 1 (T z)−1 = , k − k dist(z, σ(T )) ≤ Imz | | z C R. (2.9) t z ∈ \ T (T z)−1 = sup | | | | , k − k t z ≤ Imz t∈σ(T ) | − | | | Therefore, for z C belonging to the second set in (2.3), ∈ a2 + b2 z 2 A(T z)−1 2 a2 (T z)−1 2 + b2 T (T z)−1 2 | | < 1. (2.10) k − k ≤ k − k k − k ≤ Imz 2 | | Now (2.3) follows from the stability result for bounded invertibility (see [17, The- orem IV.3.17]). ii) Let z = µ + iν with µ (α ,β ) ρ(T ) and ν R. Then z ρ(T ), ∈ T T ⊂ ∈ ∈ t µ (T µ)(T (µ + iν))−1 sup | − | 1, (2.11) 2 2 k − − k≤ t∈σ(T ) t µ + ν ≤ | − | and hence p A(T z)−1 A(T µ)−1 (T µ)(T (µ + iν))−1 A(T µ)−1 . (2.12) k − k≤k − kk − − k≤k − k For x (T ), we have T x = T x and hence, by (2.2), ∈ D k k k | | k 2 Ax 2 a2 x 2 + b2 T x 2 = (a2 + b2 T 2)x, x = a2 + b2 T 2 x . k k ≤ k k k | | k | | | | This yields that, for all s [0, 1], p ∈ sA(T µ)−1 A(T µ)−1 a2 +b2 T 2 (T µ)−1 k − k≤k − k ≤ | | − √a2 +b2t2 (2.13) = supp . t µ t∈σ(T ) | − | 2 2 2 2 2 2 If Rez =µ αT + a +b αT ,βT a +b βT , then an elementary computation shows that∈ − p p √a2 + b2t2 a2 +b2α2 a2 +b2β2 sup = max b, T , T < 1. (2.14) t µ µ α β µ t∈σ(T ) | − | ( p − T p T − ) Now (2.5) follows from [17, Theorem IV.3.17]. For the case that A is symmetric, we first prove that if λ σ(T ), then ∈ −1 σ(T +A) (λ δA,λ, λ+δA,λ) = ∅, δA,λ := lim sup ν A(T λ iν) . (2.15) ∩ − 6 ν∈R\{0} | |k − − k ν→0 NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 5
If λ σ(T + A), there is nothing to prove, so we suppose that λ σ(T + A). Since∈T is self-adjoint, there exists a singular sequence for T and 6∈λ, i.e. a se- quence (un)n∈N (T ), un = 1, with (T λ)un 0, n (see e.g. [28, Satz 8.24 b)]). For⊂ D every νk kR 0 we havek −λ + iν k →ρ(T ) and→ ∞ ∈ \{ } ∈ T + A λ = I + (iν + A) (T λ iν)−1 (T λ iν) , − − − − − which implies that (T + A λ)u 1+ (iν + A)(T λ iν)−1 ( (T λ)u + ν ). (2.16) k − nk≤ k − − k k − nk | | Similarly as above, we obtain that a2 +b2t2 A(T λ iν)−1 a2 +b2 T 2(T λ iν)−1 = sup =:s(ν)< , k − − k≤k | | − − k (t λ)2 +ν2 ∞ t∈σ(T )s − p (2.17) since the function over which the supremum is taken is continuous on all of R as ν = 0 and tends to b for t . Now we choose n N such that 6 → ±∞ ε ∈ ν (T λ)u < | | . k − nε k 2+ s(ν) Using this in (2.16) and u = 1, we conclude that k nε k (T + A λ)u (2 + s(ν)) (T λ)u + 2+ A(T λ iν)−1 ν k − nε k≤ k − nε k k − − k | | 3 ν + ν A(T λ iν)−1 u ≤ | | | |k − − k k nε k and hence 1 (T + A λ)−1 . k − k≥ 3 ν + ν A(T λ iν)−1 | | | |k − − k Taking the limes inferior over all ν R 0 with ν 0 on both sides, we find ∈ \{ } → −1 1 1 (T + A λ) lim inf −1 = . k − k≥ ν∈R\{0} 3 ν + ν A(T λ iν) δA,λ ν→0 | | | |k − − k Since A has T -bound < 1, T + A is self-adjoint by the Kato-Rellich theorem (see e.g. [17, Theorem V.4.3]) and thus 1 1 = (T + A λ)−1 . dist(λ, σ(T + A)) k − k≥ δA,λ This proves (2.15). Now we are ready to prove claim (2.7). One can show that for the supremum s(ν) in (2.17) the point t(ν) where it is attained tends to λ for ν 0 and thus → 2 2 2 −1 a +b t(ν) 2 2 2 δA,λ = lim sup ν A(T λ iν) lim sup ν 2 2 = a +b λ . ν∈R\{0} | |k − − k≤ ν∈R\{0} | |s(t(ν) λ) +ν ν→0 ν→0 − p This, together with (2.15) applied to the points α , β σ(T ), yields (2.7). T T ∈ iii) Let (ε ) N, (δ ) N [0, ), be sequences with ε 0, δ 0, n , n n∈ n n∈ ⊂ ∞ n → n → → ∞ αT+εn, βT δn σ(T ) and so that the spectral projection Pn :=ET ((αT+εn,βT δn)) has finite rank;− ∈ note that we can choose e.g. ε = 0, n N, if α is no accumulation− n ∈ T 6 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER
⊥ point of eigenvalues of T . If we set 1 :=Ran Pn, 2 := 1 = Ker Pn, and denote by T are the restrictions of T to H, then dim H< Hand i Hi H1 ∞ T = diag(T ,T ), (T ) = ( (T ) ) ( (T ) )= (T ) (T ), 1 2 D D ∩ H1 ⊕ D ∩ H2 D 1 ⊕ D 2 in = . Since (T ) (A), we can also decompose H H1 ⊕ H2 D ⊂ D T1 + A11 A12 T + A = , (T + A)= (T1) (T2), A21 T2 + A22 D D ⊕ D in = where A = P A , etc. If we write H H1 ⊕ H2 11 n |D(T )∩H1 T 0 A A T + A = + , = 1 , = 11 12 , T A T 0 T2 + A22 A A21 0 then is degenerate since dim < . It is not difficult to check that (2.2) implies A H1 ∞ A x 2 a2 x 2 + b2 T x 2, x (T ), i,j =1, 2, (2.18) k ij k ≤ k k k j k ∈ D j and, for η sufficiently large, | | A (T iη)−1 A (T + A iη)−1 k 12 2 − k < . k 12 2 22 − k≤ 1 A (T iη)−1 ∞ −k 22 2 − k Thus is -bounded and −1 is degenerate, hence compact. Since the essential spectrumA isT stable under relativelyAT compact perturbations (see e.g. [11, Theorem IX.2.1]), we have σ (T + A)= σ ( + )= σ ( )= σ (T + A ) σ(T + A ). ess ess T A ess T ess 2 22 ⊂ 2 22 By construction, σess(T1)= ∅ and σ(T2) (αT +εn,βT δn)= ∅ with αT +εn, β δ σ(T ). Applying ii) to T and A ∩ and letting n− , we conclude that T − n ∈ 2 2 22 → ∞ σess(T + A) (αT +A,βT +A) + iR = ∅. By i) the strip (αT+A,βT +A) + iR C contains points∩ of ρ(T ) and hence iii) follows e.g. from [15, Theorem XVII.2.1].⊂ Remark 2.2. There is an analogue of Theorem 2.1 in terms of the constants a′, b′ ′ ′ ′ ′ 2 2 2 2 2 2 in (2.1) with a + b αT , a + b βT in place of a +b αT , a +b βT everywhere; in particular, (2.4)| becomes| | | p p (a′ + b′ α ) + (a′ + b′ β ) <β α . (2.19) | T | | T | T − T 2 ′2 2 ′2 1 In fact, since (2.1) implies (2.2) with a = a (1 + ε), b = b (1 + ε ) for arbitrary ε>0, we can use Theorem 2.1 with each such pair of constants and observe that e.g.
′2 ′2 1 2 ′ ′ βT min a (1 + ε)+b 1+ βT = βT (a + b βT ), − ε>0 r ε − | | ′ b |βT | where the minimum is attained at ε = a′ . Note that the corresponding condi- tion (2.19) with the constants a, b from (2.2), which may also be used as a′, b′ in (2.1), is only sufficient but not necessary for (2.4).
Remark 2.3. Theorem 2.1 iii) remains valid if we replace σess(T ) by any of the sets σe,i(T ), i = 1, 2, 3, 4, defined in [11, Section IX.1] which are all stable under relatively compact perturbations. NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 7
The spectral inclusion established in Theorem 2.1 is illustrated in Figure 2.1 for the typical case a = 0, b = 0. Note that the asymptotes of the hyperbolas in Theorem 2.1 i) are given6 by Im6 z = arcsin b Rez ; if A is bounded, i.e. a = A , b = 0, the hyperbolas degenerate| | into± the lines| Im| z = A , in agreementk withk the classical perturbation result (comp. [17, Section| V.4.3]).| k k
αT βT
Figure 2.1. Spectral inclusion in Theorem 2.1 (a=0, b=0). 6 6 Theorem 2.1 extends, and improves, two classical perturbation results, firstly, the well-known stability theorem of T. Kato for symmetric perturbations of semi- bounded selfadjoint operators (see [17, Theorem V.4.11]) and, secondly, the less known perturbation result of M.G. Kre˘ınand I.C. Gohberg on relatively compact perturbations of self-adjoint operators (see [16, Lemma V.10.1]). The first of the following two corollaries shows that Theorem 2.1 ii) generalizes Kato’s stability result [17, Theorem V.4.11] to non-symmetric A and improves Kato’s lower bound for the spectrum of T + A even for symmetric A.
Corollary 2.4. If T in Theorem 2.1 ii) is bounded below with lower bound βT , then T + A is m-accretive with 2 2 2 βT a +b βT , for a, b as in (2.2), Re σ(T + A) βT +A = − (2.20) ≥ β (a′ + b′β ), for a′, b′ as in (2.1). ( T − p T Proof. The claim follows from Theorem 2.1 and its proof, applied with αT tending to , and Remark 2.2. −∞ Remark 2.5. Corollary 2.4 generalizes Kato’s semiboundedness stability result [17, Theorem V.4.11] to non-symmetric perturbations. Moreover, if A is symmetric it improved Kato’s lower bound a′ σ(T + A) β max ,a′ + b′ β , ≥ T − 1 b′ | T | ′ n a− ′ ′ o ′ ′ which is worse than the bound in (2.20) if ′ >a +b β , i.e. a +b β > β . 1−b | T | | T | | T | The next corollary shows that Theorem 2.1 i) does not only yield Gohberg and Kre˘ın’s result [16, Lemma V.10.1] as a special case where the perturbation A is T -compact, but it generalizes their result to T -bounded A with T -bound 0. Note that if A is T -compact, then A has T -bound 0 since H is reflexive and T is self-adjoint, thus closed (see [11, Corollary III.7.7]). Corollary 2.6. If A in Theorem 2.1 i) has T -bound 0, then for every ε> 0 there exists an rε > 0 such that σ(T + A) K(0, r ) Σ ( Σ ) ⊂ ε ∪ ε ∪ − ε 8 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER where K(0, r ) := z C : z r is the closed ball of radius r centred at 0 and ε { ∈ | |≤ ε} ε Σ := z C 0 : arg z ε ε { ∈ \{ } | |≤ } is the sector of opening angle 2ε lying symmetrically around the positive real axis. Proof. Let ε> 0 be arbitrary. Since A has T -bound 0, there exist a , b 0 with ε ε ≥ bε so small that 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 bε ε Ax aε x + bε T x , x (T ), and 2 < . k k ≤ k k k k ∈ D 1 bε 2 2 − 2 2 aε 2 Now let z σ(T + A). If Rez r0 := 2 2 , then Theorem 2.1 i) shows that ∈ | | ≥ 1−bε ε Imz 2 a2 1 b2 | | ε + ε <ε2 Rez 2 ≤ 1 b2 r2 1 b2 | | − ε 0 − ε and hence z Σ ( Σ ); if Rez 2 r2, then Theorem 2.1 i) shows that ∈ ε ∪ − ε | | ≤ 0 a2 + b2r2 z 2 r2 + Imz 2 r2 + ε ε 0 =: r2 | | ≤ 0 | | ≤ 0 1 b2 ε − ε and hence z K(0, r ). Since r r , the claim follows. ∈ ε ε ≥ 0 Remark 2.7. If T is self-adjoint and A is p-subordinate to T with 0 p < 1, i.e. (T ) (A) and there exists c 0 such that ≤ D ⊂ D ≥ Ax c x 1−p T x p, x (T ), k k≤ k k k k ∈ D then A is T -bounded with T -bound 0. Hence Corollary 2.6 implies the spectral enclosure in [26, Lemma 3.5], which was proved there for the more general case that T is bisectorial with angle θ [0,π/2) and radius r 0, see [26, Definition 2.7]. ∈ ≥ Proposition 2.8. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space and let A be T -bounded with T -bound < 1 and with a, b 0, b< 1, as in (2.2).H 2 2 2 ≥ 2 a +b |Rez| i) For z C such that Imz > 2 , we have ∈ | | 1−b 1 (T + A z)−1 . k − k≤ Imz a2 + b2 z 2 | |− | | ii) For z C such that α
Theorem 2.1 allows us to strengthen another classical result of Kato who showed 1 ′ ′ that if T is self-adjoint, A is T -bounded with T -bound < 2 and constants a , b as in (2.1), λ is an isolated eigenvalue of T with multiplicity m< , and ∞ d a′ + b′( λ + d) < , d := dist(λ, σ(T ) λ ), (2.24) | | 2 \{ } then the open ball B(λ, d/2) contains exactly m eigenvalues of T +A, counted with algebraic multiplicity, and no other points of σ(T + A) (see [17, Section V.4.3]). Here we can allow for perturbations with relative bound < 1 (see Remark 2.13 below) and for non-symmetric spectral gaps around the isolated eigenvalue. Theorem 2.12. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space , let A be T-bounded with T -bound < 1 and with a,b 0, b < 1, as in (2.2). SupposeH that λ σ(T ) is an isolated eigenvalue of T of multiplicity≥ m< , and set ∈ ∞ α := max ν σ(T ): ν < λ , β := min ν σ(T ): ν > λ . { ∈ } { ∈ } If a2 +b2α2 + a2 +b2λ2 < λ α and a2 +b2λ2 + a2 +b2β2 <β λ, (2.25) − − thenp the verticalp strip p p λ a2 +b2λ2, λ + a2 +b2λ2 + iR − contains exactly m isolated p eigenvalues of Tp+A, counted with algebraic multiplicity.
Proof. By Theorem 2.1 i) there exists η0 > 0 such that z C : Imz > η ρ(T + A). (2.26) { ∈ | | 0}⊂ Moreover, Theorem 2.1 ii) implies that
z C : α + a2 +b2α2 < Rez < λ a2 +b2λ2 ρ(T + A), ∈ | | − ⊂ n o (2.27) z C : λ + pa2 +b2λ2 < Rez <β pa2 +b2β2 ρ(T + A). ∈ | | − ⊂ n o Hence we can choosep a closed rectangular Jordanp curve Γ= 4 Γ ρ(T+A) whose i=1 i ⊂ vertical parts Γ1, Γ3 pass through the two strips in (2.27) and whose horizontal S parts Γ2, Γ4 lie in the two sets z C : Imz > η0 and z C : Imz < η0 , respectively. { ∈ } { ∈ − } Using the estimates (2.13), (2.14) in the proof of Theorem 2.1 in Γ1, Γ3 and the estimate (2.10) in the proof of Theorem 2.1 in Γ2, Γ4, one can show that the family of Riesz projections 1 P (χ) := (T + χA λ)−1dλ −2πi − ZΓ depends continuously on χ [0, 1]. Hence we have dim Ran P (1) = dim Ran P (0) = dim E( λ )= m. This together∈ with (2.26) yields the claim. { } 1 Remark 2.13. i) Theorem 2.12 allows for b< 1, and not only for b< 2 as in [17, Section V.4.3]; this can be seen e.g. letting λ = 0, a = 0 in (2.25) and (2.24), re- spectively. NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 11
ii) Theorem 2.12 can easily be generalized to a finite number of eigenvalues separated from the rest of the spectrum.
3. Infinitely many spectral gaps In this section we apply the stability result for a single spectral gap to study the behaviour of infinitely many spectral gaps. We establish criteria on the gap lengths ensuring that, under the perturbation, infinitely many spectral gaps are retained or, more strongly, at most a finite number of (finite) spectral gaps closes. Theorem 3.1. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space with infinitely H many spectral gaps, i.e. σ(T ) (αn,βn)= ∅ with αn, βn σ(T ), such that αn < β α , n N, α , n ∩ , and let A be T-bounded∈ with T-bound δ <1. n≤ n+1 ∈ n→∞ →∞ A i) If the unperturbed spectral gaps (αn,βn) satisfy β 1+ δ lim sup n > A ( 1), (3.1) n→∞ α 1 δ ≥ n − A then T + A has infinitely many stable spectral free strips; if even β 1+ δ lim inf n > A ( 1), (3.2) n→∞ α 1 δ ≥ n − A then at most finitely many spectral gaps of T close under perturbation by A. ii) If a , b 0, b <1, are so that (2.2) holds with a , b in place of a, b and n n ≥ n n n a2 + b2 α2 + a2 + b2 β2 lim inf n n n n n n < 1, (3.3) n→∞ β α p n − pn then T + A still has infinitely many stable spectral free strips; if even a2 + b2 α2 + a2 + b2 β2 lim sup n n n n n n < 1, (3.4) n→∞ β α p n − pn then at most finitely many spectral gaps of T close under perturbation by A. Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that α > 0, n N. n ∈ i) Suppose that (3.1) holds. Then there exists s subsequence (n ) N N such k k∈ ⊂ βnk βn 1+δA that α lim supn→∞ α =: γs ( 1−δ , ]. By assumption (3.1) and the nk → n ∈ A ∞ definition of the T -bound δ , we can choose a 0 and b δ , γs−1 (δ , 1) A ≥ ∈ A γs+1 ⊂ A such that (2.2) holds. Then 2 2 2 β a 2 a 2 nk 2 +b + 2 +b 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 αn αn αn a +b αnk + a +b βnk k k k γs +1 lim = lim β r = b < 1. k→∞ βn αn k→∞ q nk γs 1 p k p k α 1 − nk − −
By Theorem 2.1 ii), there exists k0 N so that T+A has infinitely many stable spect- ∈ R ral free strips (αT+A,nk ,βT+A,nk ) + i with (αT+A,nk ,βT+A,nk ) (αnk ,βnk ), k k0. Now suppose that (3.2) holds and choose ε> 0 such that ⊂ ≥
βn 1+ δA(1 + ε) 1+ δA 1+ ε γi := lim inf > > and δA,ε := δA < 1. n→∞ α 1 δ (1 + ε) 1 δ 1+ ε n − A − A 2 12 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER
βn 1+δA(1+ε) Then there exists n0 N such that > , n n0. Let a, b 0, b (δA,δA,ε), ∈ αn 1−δA(1+ε) ≥ ≥ ∈ be such that (2.2) holds. Since αn , there exists N0 N, N0 n0, such that 2 2 a 2 ε βn→ ∞ ∈ ≥ 2 1, we obtain that, for n N0, αn 4 αn 2 β2 ≥ a 2 a 2 n βn 2 2 2 2 2 2 α2 +b + α2 +b α2 +1 a +b αn + a +b βn n n n ε αn = β
By Theorem 2.1 ii), T + A has stable spectral free strips (αT +A,n,βT +A,n) + iR with (αT +A,n,βT +A,n) (αn,βn), n N0. ii) The claims in ii)⊂ are immediate≥ from Theorem 2.1 since we may allow the relative boundedness constants an, bn to be chosen differently for each spectral gap (αn,βn). Note that in Theorem 3.1 two spectral gaps may be separated by a single spectral point if αn = βn+1. In particular, Theorem 3.1 applies if the operator T has compact resolvent. While in Theorem 3.1 the assumptions in i) are easier to check, the conditions in ii) obtained using different relative boundedness constants in each spectral gap are weaker. In the next proposition we analyze the implications of the latter on the growth of the lengths of the spectral gaps; we restrict ourselves to (3.4). Proposition 3.2. Under the assumptions of Theorem 3.1, let l := β α > 0, n n − n n N, be the length of the n-th spectral gap of T , and let δA [0, 1) be the T -bound of∈A. Then ∈ (l ) N diverges exponentially if δ > 0, (3.4) requires that n n∈ A ((ln)n∈N diverges if δA =0 and A is unbounded. Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that α >0, n N. n ∈ If δA > 0, then bn δA, n N. Together with βn αn+1, n N, we find that (3.4) implies ≥ ∈ ≤ ∈ 2 2 2 2 2 2 an +bnαn + an +bnβn βn +αn 1 > lim sup lim sup bn n→∞ β α ≥ n→∞ β α p n − pn n − n αn δA lim sup 1+2 . ≥ n→∞ αn+1 αn − It follows that α δ 1+ δ lim inf n+1 2 A +1= A > 1 n→∞ α ≥ 1 δ 1 δ n − A − A and thus (α ) N diverges exponentially. Because l = β α (γ 1) α and n n∈ n n − n ≥ i − n γi > 1 for almost all n N, so does (ln)n∈N. If δ = 0, we first show∈ that a , n . Otherwise, A n → ∞ → ∞ 2 2 2 Ax lim sup an x , x (T ); k k ≤ n→∞ k k ∈ D NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 13 since (T ) is dense, this would imply that A is bounded, a contradiction to D ⊂ H the assumption. From (3.4) it now follows that (ln)n∈N diverges since a2 +b2 α2 + a2 +b2 β2 2a 1 > lim sup n n n n n n lim sup n . n→∞ β α ≥ n→∞ l p n − pn n The last inequality suggests that in Proposition 3.2 ii), it may be sufficient that the divergence of (ln)n∈N is of the same order as the divergence of (an)n∈N when bn 0, n , e.g. power-like rather than exponential, possibly modulated by logarithms→ → [3, ∞ 2, 7]. This is confirmed by Example 3.4 below which is used in Section 5.2 for a physical application. In fact, in applications often the growth rate of the spectral gaps and spectral bands is known rather than that of their end-points. Here the following alternative formulas are useful to check the conditions of Theorem 3.1; again we restrict ourselves to (3.2) and (3.4).
l =β α ln+1 n n − n
αn βn αn+1 βn+1 w =α β w n n+1 − n n+1 Figure 3.1. Unperturbed spectral gaps and spectral bands of T .
Remark 3.3. Let ln := βn αn > 0, wn := αn+1 βn 0 be the length of the n-th − − ≥ n−1 spectral gap and spectral band, respectively, of T , n N. Since (l + w )= ∈ j=1 j j α α , n N, condition (3.2) in Theorem 3.1 i) can be written as n − 1 ∈ P ln 1+ δA 1 + lim inf n−1 > ( 1), n→∞ (l + w ) 1 δA ≥ j=1 j j − and a sufficient condition for (3.4)P in Theorem 3.1 ii) is 2 n−1 κs := lim sup bn + an + bn (lj + wj ) < 1. (3.5) n→∞ l n j=1 X Below, for sequences (xn)n∈N, (yn)n∈N R, we use the notation xn . yn if there exists a constant C > 0 and N N such⊂ that x C y , n N; analogously, ∈ | n| ≤ | n| ≥ we define xn & yn and we write xn ≈ yn if xn . yn and xn & yn. Example 3.4. Assume that the assumptions of Theorem 3.1 hold and that A has T -bound 0. If there exist p , q > 0, p , q R such that 1 1 2 2 ∈ p1 p2 q1 q2 ln ≈ n (log n) , wn . n (log n) , (3.6) p1 p2 −1 p1−q1−1 p2−q2 an . n (log n) , bn . min n ,n (log n) , (3.7) then there exists ε0 > 0 such that T +εA, 0 ε ε0, has infinitely many stable spectral free strips, more precisely, at most finitely≤ ≤ many (finite) spectral gaps of T do not give rise to stable spectral free strips of T + εA. 14 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER
Proof. By assumption (3.6) and some elementary estimates, we have n−1 n−1 p1+1 p2 q1+1 q2 lj . n (log n) , wj . n (log n) . (3.8) j=1 j=1 X X By (3.8) and assumption (3.7), we see that κs defined in (3.5) satisfies
an 1 q1−p1+1 q2−p2 κs . 2 lim sup + bn + n + n (log n) < . (3.9) np1 (log n)p2 2 ∞ n→∞ Hence ε0 > 0 can be chosen so small that the corresponding bound εγ for the operator εA is < 1 and thus (3.4) holds for all 0 ε ε0. Now Theorem 3.1 ii) yields the claims. ≤ ≤
4. Symmetric and structured perturbations If the perturbation has some additional properties, we are able to tighten the stability results for spectral gaps derived in the previous sections. Here we distin- guish two cases, first, we briefly consider symmetric perturbations A and, secondly, we consider non-symmetric perturbations that exhibit a certain structure with re- spect to the spectral gap (αT ,βT ) of T . In the latter case, we may even allow for perturbations with T -bound 1. In the sequel, we denote the≥ numerical range of A by W (A) := (Ax, x): x (A), x =1 . { ∈ D k k } Theorem 4.1. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space and let H (αT ,βT ) R be such that (αT ,βT ) contains m eigenvalues of T , counted with multiplicity.⊂ Let A be a T-bounded symmetric operator with T -bound < 1 such that (2.2) holds with a,b 0, b< 1, and ≥ i) if (2.4) holds, i.e. a2 + b2α2 + a2 + b2β2 <β α , set T T T − T (α ,β ) :=p α + a2 p+ b2α2 ,β a2 + b2β2 ; T +A T +A T T T − T q q ii) if A is bounded above and sup W (A)+ a2 + b2β2 <β α , set T T − T (α ,β ) := α + sup W (A)p,β a2 + b2β2 ; T +A T +A T T − T q iii) if A is bounded below and a2 + b2α2 inf W (A) <β α , set T − T − T 2 2 2 (αT +A,βT +A) := αTp+ a + b αT ,βT + inf W (A) ; q iv) if A is bounded and supW (A) inf W (A) <β α , set − T − T (αT +A,βT +A) := αT + sup W (A),βT + inf W (A) .
Then, in each case, (αT +A,βT + A) contains at most m isolated eigenvalues of T + A, counted with algebraic multiplicity. In particular, if (αT ,βT ) contains no eigenvalues of T , then (αT +A,βT +A) contains no eigenvalues of T + A.
Proof. Denote by ET the spectral family of the self-adjoint operator T , set P := E (( , α ]), P := E ([β , )), P := E ((α ,β )), 1 T −∞ T 2 T T ∞ 3 T T T NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 15 and i := Pi , i = 1, 2, 3. Then = 1 2 3 with dim 3 = m < by the assumptionH H on T . Let T := PHT Hbe⊕ the H part⊕ H of T in andH set ∞ ii i |Hi Hi A := P AP , (A ) := P (T ), i,j =1, 2, 3. ij i j |Hj D ij j D Then the operators T , i =1, 2, are semi-bounded, T α and T β. Since A ii 11 ≤ 22 ≥ is symmetric and T -bounded, the operators Aii are symmetric and Tii-bounded, i = 1, 2; in particular, (2.2) holds for the pairs Tii, Aii, i = 1, 2 with the same constants a,b 0, b< 1. Hence, by Corollary 2.4, for all x P (T ), y P (T ), ≥ ∈ 1D ∈ 2D 2 2 2 2 ((T + A)x, x) = ((T11 + A11)x, x) αT + a + b αT x , ≤ k k (4.1) q ((T + A)y,y) = ((T + A )y,y) β a2 + b2β2 y 2. 22 22 ≥ T − T k k Now we are precisely in the position of [28, Satz 8.28]q from which the claim in case i) follows. In cases ii), iii), and iv) we replace the first, the second, or both, respectively estimates in (4.1) by corresponding estimates in terms of the numerical range of A, e.g. for x P (T ), ∈ 1D ((T + A )x, x) α + sup W (A) x 2. 11 11 ≤ T k k In the previous theorem, the operator matrix representation of T + A with respect to the “almost spectral gap” (αT ,βT ) was used as a tool in the proof. In the following results, we assume that the perturbation A is either “off-diagonal” or “diagonal” with respect to the spectral gap (αT ,βT ). Theorem 4.2. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space with spectral family E and spectral gap (α ,β ) such that 0 (α ,β ), andH denote by T , T T T ∈ T T 11 T22 the restrictions of T to 1 := ET (( , αT ]) and 2 := ET ([βT , )) , respectively. Let A be T -boundedH and off-diagonal−∞ withH respectH to the decomposition∞ H = , i.e. H H1 ⊕ H2 T11 0 0 A12 T = , A= in (T )= (T11) (T22) (A), 0 T22 A21 0 D D ⊕ D ⊂ D with (T11)= ET (( , αT ]) (T ), (T22)= ET ([βT , )]) (T ) in = 1 2. If theD constants a ,−∞a , b ,Db D0, in ∞ D H H ⊕H 12 21 12 21 ≥ A x 2 a2 x 2 + b2 T x 2, x (T ), k 21 k ≤ 21k k 21k 11 k ∈ D 11 A y 2 a2 y 2 + b2 T y 2, y (T ), k 12 k ≤ 12k k 12k 22 k ∈ D 22 satisfy β α 2 b b < 1, (a2 + b2 β2 )(a2 + b2 α2 ) < T − T (4.2) 12 21 12 12 T 21 21 T 2 q and we set β α β α 2 δ := T − T T − T (a2 + b2 β2 )(a2 + b2 α2 ), T +A 2 − 2 − 12 12 T 21 21 T r q then σ(T + A) z C : α + δ < Rez<β δ = ∅. ∩ ∈ T T +A T − T +A 16 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER
Proof. The proof relies on the Frobenius-Schur factorization (see e.g. [24, (2.2.11)]), −1 I 0 T11 λ 0 I (T11 λ) A12 T + A λ = −1 − − − A21(T11 λ) I 0 S2(λ) 0 I − valid on (T ) = (T11) (T22); here S2(λ), λ ρ(T11), is the second Schur complementD of theD operator⊕ D matrix T + A, given by∈ S (λ) := T λ A (T λ)−1A , (S (λ)) = (T ). 2 22 − − 21 11 − 12 D 2 D 22 It is easy to see that (see e.g. [24,Corollary 2.3.5]), for λ (α ,β ) ρ(T ) ρ(T ), ∈ T T ⊂ 11 ∩ 22 λ ρ(T +A) 0 ρ(S (λ)) 1 ρ A (T λ)−1A (T λ)−1 . (4.3) ∈ ⇐⇒ ∈ 2 ⇐⇒ ∈ 21 11 − 12 22 − Using (2.12), T11 αT , T22 βT , and 0 ρ (T )= ρ(T11) ρ(T22) by assumption, we obtain that, for≤λ C with≥ α < Reλ<β∈ , ∩ ∈ T T A (T λ)−1 A (T Reλ)−1 A T −1 T (T Reλ)−1 k 21 11 − k≤k 21 11 − k≤k 21 11 kk 11 11 − k a2 +b2 α2 Reλ 2 a2 + b2 α2 21 21 T 1+ | | = 21 21 T , (4.4) ≤ p αT Reλ αT pReλ αT and, analogously, | | − − a2 + b2 β2 A (T λ)−1 12 12 T . (4.5) k 12 22 − k≤ β Reλ p T − Thus A (T λ)−1A (T λ)−1 < 1, and hence λ ρ(T + A) by (4.3), if k 21 11 − 12 22 − k ∈ (Reλ α )(β Reλ) > (a2 + b2 β2 )(a2 + b2 α2 ), − T T − 12 12 T 21 21 T which is equivalent to α + δ < Reqλ<β δ . T T +A T − T +A Remark 4.3. If we do not assume that 0 (αT ,βT ), the formulation of Theorem 4.2 has to be modified. Then four cases have∈ to be distinguished since, instead of the estimates (4.4), (4.5), we now have to use a2 + b2 α2 A (T λ)−1 A (T Reλ)−1 max b , 21 21 T , Reλ>α , k 21 11 − k≤k 21 11 − k≤ 21 Reλ α T ( p − T ) a2 + b2 β2 A (T λ)−1 A (T Reλ)−1 max b , 12 12 T , Reλ<β , k 12 22 − k≤k 12 22 − k≤ 12 β Reλ T ( p T − ) and the maximum may be either of the two expressions depending on the position of λ. In all cases, (4.2) is a necessary condition. To obtain a sufficient condition, the second assumption in (4.2) has to be modified for the four different cases; we omit the tedious details. Remark 4.4. Theorem 4.2 extends [1, Theorem 5.4] where A was assumed to be bounded; in this case, b12 = b21 = 0 so that the formula for δT +A simplifies and coincides with the corresponding formula therein due to [1, (5.9)].
In the next theorem the unperturbed operator T is bounded below and diagonal with respect to some decomposition of the Hilbert space , while the perturbation A is off-diagonal; in the second theorem, T has a spectralH gap symmetric to 0 and is off-diagonal, while A is diagonal. We mention that such operators T are also NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 17 called abstract Dirac operators [23, Section 5.1]; in the first case T is called even or bosonic, in the second case odd or fermionic. Theorem 4.5. Let T be a non-negative self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space and let A be T -bounded. Suppose that τ is a self-adjoint involution in with TH τ = τT and Aτ = τA, i.e. H − T11 0 0 A12 T = , A = in = + −, 0 T22 A21 0 H H ⊕ H 1 where H± :=Ran P±, P± := 2 (I τ). Let βT,i :=min σ(Tii), i =1, 2, and a12, a21, b , b 0 with ± 12 21 ≥ 2 2 2 2 2 A21x a x + b T11x , x (T11)= P+ (T ), k k ≤ 21k k 21k k ∈ D D (4.6) A y 2 a2 y 2 + b2 T y 2, y (T )= P (T ). k 12 k ≤ 12k k 12k 22 k ∈ D 22 −D If b12b21 < 1, then ⊕ Re σ(T + A) min βT,1,βT,2 δT+A where ≥ { }− 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 a12+b12βT,2 a21+b21βT,1 ⊕ 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 δT+A:= a12+b12βT,2 a21+b21βT,1 tan arctan rq q . r 2 max βT,1,βT,2 min βT,1,βT,2 q q { }− { } Proof. If 0 ρ(T ), then the proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 4.2. Now, instead of (4.4),∈ (4.5), we have to use the two inequalities
2 2 2 2 2 2 a21 + b21βT,1 a12 + b12βT,2 A (T λ)−1 , A (T λ)−1 (4.7) k 21 11 − k≤ qβ Reλ k 12 22 − k≤ qβ Reλ T,1 − T,2 − −1 −1 for λ< min βT,1,βT,2 . Hence λ ρ(T +A) if A21(T11 λ) A12(T22 λ) < 1 which holds{ if } ∈ k − − k 2 βT,1 + βT,2 βT,1 βT,2 2 2 2 2 2 2 λ< − + a12+b12βT,2 a21+b21βT,1; (4.8) 2 − r 2 elementary identities for solutions of quadratic q equations (comp.q [18, Lemma 1.1]) show that the right hand side above is equal to min β ,β δ⊕ . { T,1 T,2}− T+A If 0 / ρ(T ), we consider Tε := T + ε I, ε > 0, instead of T . By what we just ∈ ⊕ ⊕ proved, Re σ(T + A) min β ,β + ε δ where δ is obtained from ε ≥ { T,1 T,2} − T+A,ε T+A,ε δ⊕ by replacing β by β + ε and a by a + ε. Since δ⊕ δ⊕ , ε 0, T+A T,i T,i ij ij T+A,ε → T+A → the claim follows by a limiting argument. Remark 4.6. Theorem 4.5 generalizes, and gives a different proof of, [18, Lemma 1.1] by V. Kostrykin, K.A. Makarov, and A.K. Motovilov for bounded T and A, as well as of [25, Theorem 5.6] for unbounded T and bounded A. Theorem 4.7. Let T be a self-adjoint operator in a Hilbert space with sym- metric spectral gap ( β ,β ) R with β > 0, i.e. σ(T ) ( β ,βH) = ∅ and − T T ⊂ T ∩ − T T βT σ(T ), and let A be T -bounded. Suppose that τ is a self-adjoint involution in ∈ with T τ = τT and Aτ = τA, i.e. H − 0 T12 A11 0 T = ∗ , A = in = + −, T 0 0 A22 H H ⊕ H 12 18 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER where H :=Ran P , P := 1 (I τ). Let a , a , b , b 0 be such that ± ± ± 2 ± 11 22 11 22 ≥ 2 2 2 2 ∗ 2 ∗ A11x a x + b T x , x (T )= P+ (T ), k k ≤ 11k k 11k 12 k ∈ D 12 D (4.9) A y 2 a2 y 2 + b2 T y 2, y (T )= P (T ). k 22 k ≤ 22k k 22k 12 k ∈ D 12 −D If 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 b11b22 < 1 and a11 + b11βT a22 + b22βT <βT , (4.10) then T +A has a stable spectral freeq strip ( β⊕q,β⊕ )+iR C, more precisely, − T+A T+A ⊂ σ(T + sA) z C : Rez <β⊕ = ∅, s [0, 1], (4.11) ∩ ∈ | | T +A ∈ with β⊕ (0,β ] given by T +A ∈ T 2 a2 +b2 β2 a2 +b2 β2 a2 +b2 β2 + a2 + b2 β2 β⊕ := β2 + 11 11 T 22 22 T 11 11 T 22 22 T . T +A v T − u p 2 p ! − p 2p u t Proof. The assumptions on T imply that 0 ρ(T ∗ ) and T −∗ = 1 . Hence we ∈ 12 k 12 k βT can use the factorization (see [24, (2.2.16)]) −∗ −∗ I (A λ)T 0 Q2(λ) IT (A λ) T + A λ = 11 − 12 12 22 − − 0 I T ∗ 0 0 I 12 valid on (T ); here Q2(λ) is the so-called second quadratic complement of the operatorD matrix T + A (see [25, Definition 2.2.20]) given by Q (λ):=T (A λ)T −∗(A λ), (Q (λ)) := (T ), 2 12 − 11 − 12 22 − D 2 D 12 for λ C. By [25, Corollary 2.3.8], we have ∈ λ ρ(T +A) 0 ρ(Q (λ)) 1 ρ (A λ)T −∗(A λ)T −1 . (4.12) ∈ ⇐⇒ ∈ 2 ⇐⇒ ∈ 11 − 12 22 − 12 By (4.9), we can estimate (A λ)T −∗(A λ)T −1 ( A T −∗ + λ T −∗ )( A T −1 + λ T −1 ) k 11 − 12 22 − 12 k≤ k 11 12 k | |k 12 k k 22 12 k | |k 12 k a2 +b2 β2 λ a2 +b2 β2 λ 11 11 T + | | 22 22 T + | | . ≤ p βT βT ! p βT βT ! If λ < β⊕ , then this upper bound is < 1 and hence λ ρ(T + A) by (4.12). | | T +A ∈ Note that β⊕ β and that β⊕ > 0 due to assumption (4.10). T +A ≤ T T +A Remark 4.8. Theorem 4.5 refines and extends Corollary 2.4, and hence Kato’s semiboundedness stability result [17, Theorem V.4.11], while Theorem 4.7 refines and extends Corollary 2.11, i.e. Theorem 2.1 for a symmetric spectral gap. In fact, since different relative boundedness constants may be chosen for A11, A22 in (4.6) and (4.9), respectively, we only have to impose conditions on the products in (4.10) and not on the factors; e.g. we can allow for perturbations with relative bound > 1 if the product of the column-wise relative bounds is < 1. If we choose a11 =a22 =:a, ⊕ 2 2 2 b11 =b22 =:b, and in Theorem 4.5 βT,1 = βT,2 =: βT , then δT+A = a + b βT and ⊕ 2 2 2 βT+A = βT +A = βT a + b βT ; so in this case Theorem 4.5 andp Theorem 4.7 coincide with Corollary− 2.4 and Corollary 2.11, respectively. p NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 19
5. Applications In this final section we illustrate our results by several applications, including massless and massive Dirac operators with complex potentials, point-coupled pe- riodic systems on manifolds with infinitely many spectral gaps, and two channel scattering Hamiltonians with dissipation. 5.1. Massless and massive Dirac operators. The massive Dirac operator is the prototype of a non-semi-bounded self-adjoint operator with spectral gap. Re- cently, the massless Dirac operator in two dimensions has gained particular interest since it appears as an effective Hamiltonian near the so-called Dirac cones in single layer graphene, see [14]. Using natural units (i.e. ~ = c = 1), the Dirac operator H0 of a free relativistic particle of mass m 0 in dimension d = 2 or d = 3 is the self-adjoint operator given by ≥ 2 2,1 R2 C2 i j=1 σj ∂j , (H0)= W ( , ), d =2, H0 = − D (5.1) i P3 α ∂ + m β, (H )= W 2,1(R3, C4), d =3, − j=1 j j D 0 in L2(R2, C2) andP L2(R3, C4), respectively. Here σ , σ , σ M(2, C) and α , α , 1 2 3 ∈ 1 2 α3, β M(2, C) are the Pauli and Dirac matrices, respectively. It is well-known that H∈ has purely absolutely continuous spectrum σ(H ) = ( , m] [m, ), 0 0 −∞ − ∪ ∞ see e.g. [23]; in particular, H0 has a spectral gap if and only if m> 0. Massless Dirac operator in R2. Assume that V : R2 M(2, C) is a measurable matrix-valued function with → V Lp(R2,M(2, C)) for some p> 2. ∈ Using H¨older and Hausdorff-Young inequality (see e.g. the proof of [29, Satz 17.7]), one obtains the family of inequalities Vf 2 a (t)2 f 2 + b (t)2 H f 2, t> 0, (5.2) k k ≤ p k k p k 0 k of the form (2.2) with 1/p −2 − 2 p 2π a (t) := C t p , b (t) := C t p , C := V (2π)−2/p . p p p p p k kp p 2 − Since bp is a strictly monotonically increasing function, we can solve for t and re-parametrise ap; the family of inequalities (5.2) can then be written as p 2 2 2 2 2 2 p−2 − p−2 Vf a (b ) f + b H f , a (b ) := Cp bp , b > 0. (5.3) k k ≤ p p k k pk 0 k p p p Theorem 2.1 i) yields that a (b )2 + b2 Rez 2 C 2 p p p| | σ(H0 + V ) z : Imz 2 . ⊂ ( ∈ | | ≤ 1 bp ) 0 Figure 5.1. Curves bounding the spectrum of the massless Dirac operator in R2 for p = 5 (outer curve) and p = 7 (inner curve). Massive Dirac operator with Coulomb-like potential in 3 dimensions. Assume that V : R3 M(4, C) is a measurable (possibly non-hermitian) matrix- valued function such→ that 2 2 2 −2 3 V (x) C C + C x for almost all x R , k kM(4, ) ≤ 1 2 | | ∈ 4 where C denotes the operator norm of the matrix V (x) in C equipped k·kM(4, ) with the Euclidean scalar product, and C1, C2 0. Theorem 2.11 and Hardy’s 2 2 2 ≥ inequality imply that, if C1 +4C2 m ii) The problem of decoupling the corresponding electronic and positronic spec- tral subspaces, i.e. of finding a generalized Foldy-Wouthuysen transformation for Dirac operators in Rd with unbounded potentials, was studied in [8]. iii) For d = 1, the Birman-Schwinger principle together with the explicit form of the resolvent kernel of H0 were used to prove more refined estimates for the eigenvalues of Dirac operators with non-hermitian potentials in [9]. 5.2. Point-coupled periodic systems on manifolds. The spectrum of Schr¨o- dinger operators in Rd with periodic potentials typically exhibits a band-gap struc- ture. Generically, the number of gaps is infinite for d = 1 and finite for d> 1; this so-called Bethe-Sommerfeld conjecture was proved for a general class of smooth potentials for d =2, 3, see e.g. [21, 22]. However, in the case of singular potentials, the number of gaps may be infinite also for d>1. Moreover, while the band to gap ratio generally tends to at high energies, the situation is reversed for free quantum motion on periodic manifolds,∞ as shown in [7]. The manifolds consist of two-dimensional spheres, connected either by points where two spheres touch (case 1) or by line segments (case 2). The Hilbert space of the system is an infinite number of copies of L2(X, C) where X is the two-sphere S2 (case 1) or S2 with a line segment [0, d) attached (case 2). On this Hilbert space we consider the operator S = ( ∆ ) in := L2(X, C), − X H m∈Z m∈Z where M M b 2 2 ∆X := ∆S2 in L (S , C) (case 1), − 2 d 2 2 2 ∆ := ( ∆S2 ) in L (S , C) L ([0, d), C) (case 2), X − ⊕ −dx2 ⊕ 2 and ∆S2 is the Laplace-Beltrami operator on S . With domain of ∆X chosen as the set− of functions in W 2,2(X, C) that vanish at two distinct points on S2 (case 1) or at one point of S2 and at d (case 2), S is a symmetric operator with infinite deficiency indices. If a self-adjoint extension S of S is selectedb by means of local boundary condi- tions reflecting the necklace geometry of the system, see [7, Section 3] for details, then the gap and band lengths ln band wn of the spectrum of S satisfy 2 2 −ǫ ln ≈ n , wn ≈ n (log n) (case 1), (5.4) 2 2−ǫ ln ≈ n , wn ≈ n (case 2), (5.5) for some ǫ (0, 1). Consider∈ a perturbation V = V with potentials V : X C such that, m∈Z m m → in both cases, supp V S2 and m ⊂ L c := sup Vm Lp(S2) < for some p (2, ). (5.6) m∈Z k k ∞ ∈ ∞ We can estimate the relative boundedness constants of Vm with respect to ∆S2 in (2.2) using the following interpolation inequality. The latter was established− in [5] in the more general context of compact Riemannian manifolds with uniformly 22 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER positive Ricci curvature; we state the inequality as presented e.g. in [10]. If µ denotes the normalized surface measure on S2, then, for all q (2, ), ∈ ∞ 2/q q q 2 2 2 1 2 u dµ − S2 u dµ + u dµ, u H (S , dµ). (5.7) S2 | | ≤ 2 S2 |∇ | S2 | | ∈ Z Z Z It easily follows from (5.7) that, for m Z, n N, and u ( ∆S2 ), ∈ ∈ ∈ D − 2 2 2 Vmu L2(S2) Vm Lp(S2) u 2p k k ≤k k k kL p−2 (S2) 2 −2/p 1 2 2 c (4π) S2 u 2 S2 + u 2 S2 ≤ p 2k∇ kL ( ) k kL ( ) − 2 2 −2/p 1 2 n 2 c (4π) ∆S2 u 2 S2 + 1+ u 2 S2 . ≤ (p 2)n2 k kL ( ) p 2 k kL ( ) − − Hence, the relative boundedness constants of V with respect to S in (2.2) satisfy 2 −2 an ≈ n , bn ≈ n . Thus we are in the situation of Example 3.4 which shows that, if the potential satisfies (5.6), then there exists ε0 > 0 such that S +εV , 0 ε ε0, has infinitely many stable spectral free strips; more precisely, at most≤ finitely≤ many (finite) spectral gaps of S do not give rise to stable spectral free strips of S + εV . 5.3. Two-channel scattering with dissipation. The Hamiltonian of a non- relativistic two-channel potential scattering model in Rd is given by (in the centre of mass frame) ∆+ x2 V H V H = 12 =: C 12 − V ∆ V H 21 − 21 S in the Hilbert space L2(Rd, C) L2(Rd, C) where all masses, as well as the Planck ⊕ 2 constant ~, have been set to unity. We assume that the Hamiltonian HC = ∆+x in the confined channel, governing the relative motion between two permanently− confined particles (e.g. a quark and an antiquark), is a harmonic oscillator, while HS = ∆ in the scattering channel is the free Laplacian. − 2 d Then both HC and HS are self-adjoint in L (R ) and bounded below. The spectrum of HC is discrete, σ(HC )= 2n + d : n N0 , while the spectrum of HS is absolutely continuous, σ(H ) = [0,{ ), and hence∈ } S ∞ βH,1 = min σ(HC )= d, βH,2 = min σ(HS )=0. (5.8) The communication between the two channels is mediated by the off-diagonal potentials V12, V21; if V21 = V12, which corresponds to a scattering process with dis- sipation, then the two-channel6 Hamiltonian H is not self-adjoint. We assume that V Lp(Rd) for some p>d/2, p 2, 12 ∈ ≥ and that there are p , p , p 0, such that, with the usual multi-index notation, 0 1,α 2,α ≥ V (x) p + p xα + p xα. (5.9) | 21 |≤ 0 1,α 2,α |αX|=1 |αX|=2 NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 23 In terms of the creation and annihilation operators ∂ ∗ ∂ Aj = + xj , Aj = + xj , j =1, . . . , d, ∂xj − ∂xj the harmonic oscillator HC and the monomials xj can be written as d 1 H = A∗A + d, x = A + A∗ . (5.10) C j j j 2 j j j=1 X Then, for f (H ), ∈ D C d d H f 2 = A A f 2 +2d A f 2 + d2 f 2, k C k k j k k k j k k k j=1 j,kX=1 X # ∗ and hence, if Aj is either Aj or Aj , 1 1 A#A#f 2 H f 2, A#f 2 H f 2, f 2 H f 2. k j k k ≤k C k k j k ≤ 2dk C k k k ≤ d2 k C k This, together with (5.9) and (5.10) implies that 2p2 1 V f 2 b2 H f 2, b2 := 0 + p2 +2 p2 . (5.11) k 21 k ≤ 21k C k 21 d2 d 1,α 2,α |αX|=1 |αX|=2 On the other hand, in analogy to (5.2), (5.3), for f (H ), ∈ D S 2p d 2 2 2 2 2 2p−d − 2p−d V f a (b ) f +b H f , a (b ):=Cp b , b >0, k 12 k ≤ 12,p 12,p k k 12,pk S k 12,p 12,p 12,p 12,p with 2πd/2 C := V (2π)−d/p B(d/2,p d/2), (5.12) p k 12kp Γ(d/2) − where B, Γ denote the Beta- and Gamma-function. Together with (5.8), Theo- rem 4.5 yields that 1 2b da (b ) Re σ(H) inf b da (b ) tan arctan 21 12,p 12,p . −1 21 12,p 12,p ≥ − 12 2 d 0 Acknowledgements. The first author gratefully acknowledges the support of Schweiz- erischer Nationalfonds, SNF, through the postdoc stipends PBBEP2 136596 and P300P2 147746; the second author thanks for the support of SNF, within grant no. 200020 146477. 24 JEAN-CLAUDE CUENIN AND CHRISTIANE TRETTER References [1] S. Albeverio, A. K. Motovilov, and C. Tretter. Bounds on the spectrum and reducing sub- spaces of a J-self-adjoint operator. Indiana Univ. Math. J., 59(5):1737–1776, 2010. [2] J. Asch, P. Duclos, and P. Exner. Stability of driven systems with growing gaps, quantum rings, and Wannier ladders. J. Statist. Phys., 92(5-6):1053–1070, 1998. [3] J. E. Avron, P. Exner, and Y. Last. Periodic Schr¨odinger operators with large gaps and Wannier-Stark ladders. Phys. Rev. Lett., 72(6):896–899, Feb 1994. [4] J. Behrndt, F. Philipp, and C. Trunk. Bounds on the non-real spectrum of differential operators with indefinite weights. Math. Ann., 357(1):185–213, 2013. [5] M.-F. Bidaut-V´eron and L. V´eron. Nonlinear elliptic equations on compact Riemannian manifolds and asymptotics of Emden equations. Invent. Math., 106(3):489–539, 1991. [6] B. M. Brown, V. Hoang, M. Plum, and I. Wood. Spectrum created by line defects in periodic structures. Math. Nachr., 287(17-18):1972–1985, 2014. [7] J. Br¨uning, P. Exner, and V. A. Geyler. Large gaps in point-coupled periodic systems of manifolds. J. Phys. A, 36(17):4875–4890, 2003. [8] J.-C. Cuenin. Block-diagonalization of operators with gaps, with applications to Dirac op- erators. Rev. Math. Phys., 24(8):1250021, 31, 2012. [9] J.-C. Cuenin, A. Laptev, and C. Tretter. Eigenvalue estimates for non-selfadjoint Dirac operators on the real line. Ann. Henri Poincar´e, 15(4):707–736, 2014. [10] J. Dolbeault, M. J. Esteban, M. Kowalczyk, and M. Loss. Sharp Interpolation Inequalities on the Sphere: New Methods and Consequences. Chin. Ann. Math. Ser. B, 34(1):99–112, 2013. [11] D. E. Edmunds and W. D. Evans. Spectral theory and differential operators. Oxford Mathe- matical Monographs. The Clarendon Press Oxford University Press, New York, 1987. Oxford Science Publications. [12] C. Engstr¨om, H. Langer, and C. Tretter. Non-linear eigenvalue problems and applications to photonic crystals, 2015. Submitted, arXiv:1507.06381 [math-ph]. [13] P. Exner and O. Turek. Spectrum of a dilated honeycomb network. Integral Equations Operator Theory, 81(4):535–557, 2015. [14] A. K. Geim and K. S. Novoselov. The rise of graphene. Nature Materials, 6:183–191, 2007. [15] I. Gohberg, S. Goldberg, and M. A. Kaashoek. Classes of linear operators. Vol. I, volume 49 of Operator Theory: Advances and Applications. Birkh¨auser Verlag, Basel, 1990. [16] I. C. Gohberg and M. G. Kre˘ın. Introduction to the theory of linear nonselfadjoint operators. Translated from the Russian by A. Feinstein. Translations of Mathematical Monographs, Vol. 18. American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1969. [17] T. Kato. Perturbation theory for linear operators. Die Grundlehren der mathematischen Wissenschaften, Band 132. Springer-Verlag New York, Inc., New York, 1966. [18] V. Kostrykin, K. A. Makarov, and A. K. Motovilov. Perturbation of spectra and spectral subspaces. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 359(1):77–89 (electronic), 2007. [19] M. Marletta. Neumann-Dirichlet maps and analysis of spectral pollution for non-self-adjoint elliptic PDEs with real essential spectrum. IMA J. Numer. Anal., 30(4):917–939, 2010. [20] E. Prodan, S. R. Garcia, and M. Putinar. Norm estimates of complex symmetric operators applied to quantum systems. J. Phys. A, 39(2):389–400, 2006. [21] M. M. Skriganov. The Bethe-Sommerfeld conjecture. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 244(3):533– 534, 1979. [22] M. M. Skriganov. Proof of the Bethe-Sommerfeld conjecture in dimension 2. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 248(1):39–42, 1979. [23] B. Thaller. The Dirac equation. Texts and Monographs in Physics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1992. [24] C. Tretter. Spectral theory of block operator matrices and applications. Imperial College Press, London, 2008. [25] C. Tretter. Spectral inclusion for unbounded block operator matrices. J. Funct. Anal., 256(11):3806–3829, 2009. [26] C. Tretter and C. Wyss. Dichotomous Hamiltonians with unbounded entries and solutions of Riccati equations. J. Evol. Equ., 14(1):121–153, 2014. NON-SYMMETRIC PERTURBATIONS OF SELF-ADJOINT OPERATORS 25 [27] K. Veseli´c. Spectral perturbation bounds for selfadjoint operators. I. Oper. Matrices, 2(3):307–339, 2008. [28] J. Weidmann. Lineare Operatoren in Hilbertr¨aumen. Teil 1. Mathematische Leitf¨aden. [Mathematical Textbooks]. B. G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 2000. Grundlagen. [Foundations]. [29] J. Weidmann. Lineare Operatoren in Hilbertr¨aumen. Teil II. Mathematische Leitf¨aden. [Mathematical Textbooks]. B. G. Teubner, Stuttgart, 2003. Anwendungen. [Applications]. Mathematisches Institut, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universitat¨ Munchen,¨ Theresienstr. 39, 80333 Munchen,¨ Germany E-mail address: [email protected] Mathematisches Institut, Universitat¨ Bern, Sidlerstr. 5, 3012 Bern, Switzerland E-mail address: [email protected]