Skip to main content
11 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Nov 13, 2021 at 13:24 vote accept Andromeda
Oct 31, 2021 at 20:18 comment added Jamie Gabe Ah, yes, this exercise in Paulsen's book is the correct generalisation of the n=2 case I mentioned above (the estimate I got applied the n=2 case over and over again to get a (quite bad) upper bound). This is much better!
Oct 31, 2021 at 19:45 comment added Andromeda @JamieGabe Thanks for your comment. Please check out my answer. We can replace the factor $2^{n-1}$ by $n$.
Oct 31, 2021 at 17:37 comment added Jamie Gabe Ah, I misread the the problem! Whoops! For the implication you want, you can use that $(a_{i,j})_{i,j=1}^n \leq 2^{n-1} \mathrm{diag}(a_1,\dots, a_n)$. The $2^{n-1}$ is definitely not optimal, but it works. To show the inequality, use the $n=2$ case over and over again (which is quite easy to prove) by considering matrices which "look like" $2\times 2$-matrices embedded in $n\times n$-matrices with a $n^2-4$ entries being zero.
Oct 31, 2021 at 16:15 comment added Andromeda @JamieGabe This does not help. From your hint, we get $\|\sum_i a_{ii}\| \le n\|(a_{i,j})\|$ and we need the inequality in the other direction.
Oct 31, 2021 at 14:37 history edited LSpice CC BY-SA 4.0
`\lVert\rVert`
Oct 31, 2021 at 12:15 answer added Andromeda timeline score: 3
Oct 31, 2021 at 11:45 comment added Jamie Gabe The map $M_n(A) \to A$ given by $(a_{i,j}) \mapsto \sum a_{i,i}$ is completely positive with norm $n$.
Oct 31, 2021 at 10:30 comment added Andromeda @DiegoMartínez $C$ can depend on $n$. What did you have in mind?
Oct 31, 2021 at 10:28 comment added Diego Martinez If you don't care if $C$ depends on $n$, then yes. If you do care, then not.
Oct 31, 2021 at 9:50 history asked Andromeda CC BY-SA 4.0