EIGENVALUES FOR A CLASS OF 2D AND 3D PAULI OPERATORS
DIOMBASAMBOU
Abstract. In this work, we investigate the discrete spectrum generated by complex matrix- valued perturbations for a class of 2D and 3D Pauli operators with nonconstant magnetic fields. We establish a simple criterion for the potentials to produce discrete spectrum near the low ground energy of the operators. Moreover, in case of creation of nonreal eigenvalues, this criterion specifies also their location.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 35P20; Secondary: 81Q12, 35J10.
Keywords. Pauli operators, complex potentials, discrete spectrum, asymptotic expansions.
1. Introduction
1.1. Description of the models. We consider in this articlen-dimensional Pauli operators Pn(b, V), n= 2, 3, defined as follows. Denote by X⊥ := (x, y) the usual variables on R2 and byX := (X⊥, Xk) those onR3. Forx=X⊥∈R2 orx=X ∈R3, let
(1.1) B(x) =
(b(x) for n= 2, 0,0, b(x) for n= 3,
be a magnetic field such that b(x) = b(x, y) is an admissible magnetic field. Namely, there exists a constant b0 >0 satisfying
(1.2) b(x, y) =b0+eb(x, y),
whereeb is such that the Poisson equation ∆ϕe =eb admits a solution ϕe ∈ C2(R2) satisfying sup(x,y)∈
R2|Dαϕ(x, y)|e <∞,α∈Z2+,|α| ≤2. By definingϕ0(x, y) := 14b0(x2+y2) onR2 and (1.3) ϕ(x, y) :=ϕ0(x, y) +ϕ(x, y),e
we obtain a magnetic potential An : Rn −→ Rn generating the magnetic field B = curlAn by setting
(1.4) An(x) =
(An(x, y) = −∂yϕ(x, y), ∂xϕ(x, y) for n= 2, An(x, y, Xk) = −∂yϕ(x, y), ∂xϕ(x, y),0 for n= 3.
Remark 1.1.
The author is partially supported by the Chilean ProgramNúcleo Milenio de Física Matemática RC120002.
The author gratefully acknowledges the many helpful suggestions of V. Bruneau during the preparation of the paper. The author should like to thank R. Novák for bringing to his attention the reference [24].
1
arXiv:1506.05756v4 [math.SP] 7 Dec 2016
(i) The class of admissible magnetic fields described above is essentially the one intro- duced in [28, 29]. We refer to these papers for more details and examples of admissible magnetic fields.
(ii) In (1.1),b stands for the intensity of the magnetic field.
(iii) The caseeb= 0 corresponds to the constant magnetic field of strength b0>0.
(iv) In the three-dimensional casen = 3, the magnetic field is of constant direction and points in theXk-direction.
Let V(x) = V`k(x) 2`,k=1 be a 2×2 complex matrix-valued potential. Then, the Pauli operators Pn(b, V) acting onL2(Rn) :=L2(Rn,C2),n= 2, 3, are defined by
(1.5) Pn(b, V) :=
(−i∇ −An)2−b 0
0 (−i∇ −An)2+b
+V, initially on C0∞(Rn,C2), and then closed in L2(Rn).
For V = 0, we have the following result from [28, Propositions 1.1 and 1.2] about the spectrum σ P2(b,0)of the operator P2(b,0):
Proposition 1.1. Letbbe an admissible magnetic field withb0 >0. Then,0 = infσ P2(b,0) is an isolated eigenvalue of infinite multiplicity. More precisely, we have
(1.6) dim Ker (−i∇ −A2)2−b=∞, dim Ker (−i∇ −A2)2+b= 0, and
(1.7) (0, ζ)⊂R\σ P2(b,0),
where
(1.8) ζ := 2b0e−2 oscϕe, osc ˜ϕ:= sup
(x,y)∈R2
ϕ(x, y)e − inf
(x,y)∈R2ϕ(x, y).e In particular, by [29, Corollary 2.2], we have
(1.9) σ P3(b,0)=σac P3(b,0)= [0,∞).
Throughout this paper, our minimal assumptions on the potentials V are the following:
Assumption (A1): Forn= 2, we assume that
(1.10) 06≡V`k, |V`k(x, y)| ≤F(x, y), 1≤`, k≤2, where F ∈ Lq2 ∩L∞ R2,R∗+for some 2≤q <∞.
Assumption (C1): Forn= 3, we assume that
∗ 06≡V`k, |V`k(x, y, Xk)| ≤G⊥(x, y)G(Xk), 1≤`, k≤2,
∗ G⊥∈ Lq2 ∩L∞ R2,R∗+for some 2≤q <∞,
∗0< G(Xk)≤Const.hXki−m, m >3,wherehyi:= (1 +|y|2)12 fory∈Rd. (1.11)
Examples:
(i) In Assumptions (A1) and (C1), bothF and G⊥ can be thought of the function R2 3 (x, y)7→ h(x, y)i−m⊥ withm⊥ >0.
(ii) In Assumption (C1), nonreal-valued potentialsV withV`k(x, y, Xk) =O h(x, y, Xk)i−α, 1≤`, k≤2,α >3, can be considered since obviously this implies that
V`k(x, y, Xk) =O h(x, y)i−m⊥hXki−m, m∈(3, α), m⊥=α−m >0.
1.2. State of the article. Since we will deal with non-self-adjoint operators, for convenience, we introduce some conventional definitions and notations. LetSbe a closed operator acting on a separable Hilbert space. An isolated pointµofσ(S) lies inσdisc(S), the discrete spectrum ofS, if it’s algebraic multiplicity
(1.12) mult(µ) := rank
1 2iπ
Z
C(S−z)−1dz
is finite, C being a small positively oriented circle centred at µ and containing µ as the only point of σ(S). Note that the geometric multiplicity of µ, defined by dim Ker (S−µ), satisfies the inequality dim Ker (S−µ)≤mult(µ), equality happening ifS is self-adjoint. We define the essential spectrumσess(S) ofS as the set of pointsµ∈Csuch thatS−µis not a Fredholm operator. Under Assumptions (A1) and (C1), we prove thatV is relatively compact with respect to Pn(b,0), n = 2, 3. Therefore, due to the Weyl criterion on the invariance of the essential spectrum, we have σess Pn(b, V) = σess Pn(b,0), n = 2, 3. However, the potentialV may generate (complex) discrete spectrum whose only accumulation points are σess Pn(b, V), see [19, Theorem 2.1, p. 373]. The distribution of the discrete spectrum near the essential spectrum for the quantum Hamiltonians has been extensively studied by various authors. However, most of the known results treat the case of self-adjoint electric potentials, see for instance [23, Chap. 11-12], [27, 39, 40, 32, 28, 3, 29, 4] and the references given there.
But, recently and during the past years, there has been an increasing interest in the spectral theory of non-self-adjoint differential operators, in particular for the quantum Hamiltonians, see for instance [15, 8, 5, 11, 25, 12, 17, 22, 42, 33, 13, 9, 16]. For a detailed bibliography on the theory, we refer for instance to [42, 9]. Another results on spectral properties for non-self- adjoint operators can be found in Sjöstrand paper [38] and the references given there. Results concerning non-self-adjoint Pauli operators are much more sparse, see for instance [24], where the authors investigated the 1D Pauli equation with complex boundary conditions.
The aim of the present paper is to describe simple methods of obtaining complex eigenvalues asymptotics near the low ground energy 0 of the 2D Pauli operatorP2(b, V), and to show how we can construct complex matrix-valued potentialsV generating nonreal eigenvalues near the low ground energy 0 of the 3D Pauli operatorP3(b, V). Our work is closely related to [35, 34], where the author treats the case of the Schrödinger and Dirac operators with constant and nonconstant magnetic fields. Both in these papers and in the present one, the proofs of the results are inspired by previous works (on characteristic values and resonances) for self- adjoint perturbations (see [3, 4]). More precisely, here, in the 2D case, the spectral gap (0, ζ) inσ P2(b,0) allows to reduce the study of σdisc P2(b, V) near 0, to that of the zeros of a holomorphic function ina punctured neighbourhood of 0 (see Lemma 3.1 and Proposition 3.1).
Hence, by this way, we can apply the general approach developed in [4] to solve our problem.
On the contrary, in the 3D case, sinceσ P3(b,0)is absolutely continuous, this reduction holds inhalf-disks not containing0 (see Lemma 6.3 and Proposition 6.2). In that case, [4]’s approach does not work and we have to use the one developed in [3] to solve our problem. The methods of this article also combine functional analysis, complex analysis, functional determinant and spectral properties of Toeplitz operators which appear when making spectral reduction near
the low ground energy 0. The main difficulties come from the matrix-valuedness and the non-selfajointness of V. Moreover, in the three-dimensional case, unlike the study of the resonances, V is not supposed to be exponentially decreasing with respect to the direction of the magnetic field. Thus, the operator-valued function z 7−→ TV(z) defined in Lemma 6.3 is not analytic near the real axis and some limiting absorption principle have to be used (see Proposition 6.2). In contrast with the Laplace operator, in [42], Wang investigated the case of −∆ +V in L2 Rn, n ≥ 2, V being a dissipative potential, i.e. V(x) = V1(x)−iV2(x) whereV1 andV2 are two measurable functions satisfyingV2(x)≥0, andV2(x)>0 on an open non empty set. He proved that 0 is not an accumulation point of the complex eigenvalues if the potential decays more rapidly than |x|−2. It is still unknown, for more general complex potentials without sign restriction on the imaginary part, whether 0 can be an accumulation point of complex eigenvalues or not. In the present work, we show that in the presence of a magnetic field, the situation is totally different. Even a compactly supported perturbation can produce clusters of eigenvalues near the low ground energy 0 of the operatorsPn(b, V),n= 2, 3. More precisely, in the case n = 3, for some sufficiently small and sufficiently decreasing potential of the form
• ηW, with W a positive Hermitian matrix,
• η∈C∗,Arg(η)∈ ±(π2, π),
we prove that 0 is an accumulation point of a sequence of eigenvalues which are concentrated along the semi-axisei(2Arg(η)∓π)[0,+∞) (see Theorem 2.4). On the contrary, when
• Arg(η)∈ ±(0,π2),
this phenomenon disappears (see Corollary 2.1). In the case n = 2, the situation is rather different in the sense we prove that 0 is an accumulation point of a sequence of eigenvalues which are concentrated along the semi-axis±eiArg(η)[0,+∞), for some sufficiently decreasing potential of the form
• ηW, with ±W a positive Hermitian matrix,
• η∈C∗,
(see Theorem 2.2). The case of the Laplace operator is also studied in a recent preprint by Bögli [2], where nonreal potentials decaying at infinity generating infinitely many nonreal eigenvalues accumulating at each point of the essential spectrum [0,+∞) are constructed.
Upper bounds on the number of the complex eigenvalues in small annulus near the low ground energy 0 of the operatorsPn(b, V), n= 2, 3, are also established here (see Theorems 2.1 and 2.3 respectively).
1.3. Organisation of the paper. The paper is organized as follows. Our main results are stated in Section 2. Section 3 is devoted to the study of the discrete spectrum near the low ground energy for the two-dimensional Pauli operator. The corresponding main results are proved in Sections 4 and 5. Section 6 is devoted to the study of the discrete spectrum near the low ground energy with respect to the three-dimensional Pauli operator, the corresponding main results being proved in Sections 7 and 8. Section 9 is a brief appendix on basic properties of Schatten-von Neumann class ideals, Section 10 a brief appendix on the theory of the index of a finite meromorphic operator-valued function, and Section 11 a brief appendix on the notion of characteristic values of operator-valued functions.
Notations. For a 2×2 matrixM :C2→C2,|M|denotes the multiplication operator by the matrix√
M∗M(x) =:|M|`k(x) , 1≤`, k≤2,x∈Rn,n= 2,3. We will denoteBh(Rn) the set of 2×2 Hermitian matrices on Rn,n= 2, 3. The spectral projection of L2(R2) onto the (infinite-dimensional) kernel ofP2−:= (−i∂x−a1)2+(−i∂y−a2)2−b, will be denotedp:=p(b).
Here,aj,j = 1, 2, are the components of the magnetic potentialA2, so that P2− is the first component of the operatorP2(b,0). The operatorP2+ := (−i∂x−a1)2+ (−i∂y−a2)2+bwill denote his second component.
2. Statement of the main results
This section is devoted to the formulation of our main results. The eigenvalues will be counted according to their algebraic multiplicity defined above. As preparation, we first recall some well-known results on Toeplitz operators. We know from [29, Lemma 2.3] that if U ∈ Lq(R2), q ≥ 1, then the Toeplitz operator pU p belongs to the Schatten-von Neumann class Sq L2(R2) (see Section 9 for the definition of the Schatten classes Sq). In particular, pU p is a compact operator. Moreover, when it is self-adjoint and positive, the following asymptotics about the quantity Tr1(r,∞)(pU p),r&0, are well-known:
(H1) If 0≤U ∈C1 R2verifies U(x, y) =u0k(x,y)k(x,y) k(x, y)k−m(1 +o(1),k(x, y)k → ∞, m >0 constant, where u0 is a non-negative continuous function on S1 not vanishing identically, |∇U(x, y)| ≤ C1h(x, y)i−m−1 with some constant C1 > 0, and if there exists an integrated density of states for the operatorP2− (see [29] definition (3.11)), then by [29, Lemma 3.3],
(2.1) Tr1(r,∞) pU p=Cmr−2/m 1 +o(1), r&0, whereCm := 4πb0 R
S1dt u0(t)2/m.
(H2) If 0 ≤U ∈L∞ R2 verifies lnU(x, y) =−µk(x, y)k2β 1 +o(1), k(x, y)k → ∞, with some constantsβ >0 and µ >0, then by [29, Lemma 3.4],
(2.2) Tr1(r,∞) pU p=ϕβ(r) 1 +o(1), r&0, where for 0< r <e−1, we set
ϕβ(r) :=
1
2b0µ−1/β|lnr|1/β if 0< β <1,
1
ln(1+2µ/b0)|lnr| ifβ = 1,
β
β−1 ln|lnr|−1|lnr| if 1< β <∞.
(H3) If 0 ≤ U ∈ L∞ R2 has a compact support and if there exists a constant C > 0 verifyingC ≤U on an open non-empty subset of R2, then by [29, Lemma 3.5], (2.3) Tr1(r,∞) pU p=ϕ∞(r) 1 +o(1), r&0,
whereϕ∞(r) := ln|lnr|−1|lnr|, 0< r <e−1.
2.1. Results for the case 2D. Let V satisfy Assumption (A1). In that case, we have
|V|`k(x, y) = O F(x, y) for any 1 ≤ `, k ≤ 2 and any (x, y) ∈ R2. Then, [29, Lemma 2.3] implies that the Toeplitz operator p|V|11p belongs to the Schatten-von Neumann class
Sq
2 L2(R2),q ≥2. In particular, p|V|11p is a self-adjoint positive compact operator. For ζ defined by (1.8), fix 0< ≤ζ and introduce the punctured disk of 0
(2.4) D(0, )∗:=µ∈C: 0<|µ|< .
Our first main result gives an upper bound on the number of complex eigenvalues near the low ground energy 0 of the operatorP2(b,0), in small annulus.
Theorem 2.1(Local upper bound). Assume that Assumption (A1) holds with ζ >kVk 1.
Then, there exists 0< r0 < ζ such that for any r >0 with r < r0< 32r,
(2.5) #nµ∈σdisc P2(b, V):r <|µ|<2ro≤CTr1(r,∞) p|V|11p|lnr|+O(1),
for some constantC >0. In particular, if|V|11is compactly supported, thenTr1(r,∞) p|V|11p satisfies the asymptotic (2.3) as r&0.
In order to get asymptotic results, we put some restrictions on the potentialV. Assumption (A2): We assume that
(2.6) V =ηW withη ∈C∗, andW(x, y) =
W`k(x, y) 2
`,k=1∈Bh(R2), (x, y)∈R2.
Denote J := sign(W) the matrix sign of W satisfying W =J|W|. Let P⊥ and Q⊥ be the orthogonal projections inL2 R2 defined by
(2.7) P⊥:=
p 0 0 0
, Q⊥:= I−P⊥=
I−p 0
0 I
. Forµ∈D(0, ) :=D(0, )∗∪ {0}, we introduce the operator
(2.8) A⊥(µ) :=J|W|12p 1 0
0 0
|W|12 −µJ|W|12 P2(b,0)−µ−1
Q⊥|W|12.
Note that A⊥(·) is holomorphic on D(0, ). Introduce Π the orthogonal projection onto KerA⊥(0) together with the following condition:
(2.9)
(I−ηA0⊥(0)Π is an invertible operator for W of definite sign±W(x, y)≥0, (x, y)∈R2. Remark 2.1.
(i) There is no loss of generality in saying W is of definite signJ =±.
(ii) Actually,A0⊥(0)Π is compact so that condition (2.9) is generically satisfied. Namely, it is fulfilled wheneverη ∈R\ {e−1n , n∈N}, where (en)n denotes the nonzero eigenvalue sequence of the operator A0⊥(0)Π.
(iii) Condition (2.9) is also fulfilled for small potentialsV. Namely, for potentialsV =εηW withεa real number small enough.
Ifr0,δ, are two positive fixed constants, andr >0 tending to zero, we define the sector (2.10) Γδ(r, r0) :=x+iy∈C:r < x < r0,−δx < y < δx .
Theorem 2.2 (Localization, asymptotic behaviours). Let V satisfy Assumptions (A1) and (A2), with η∈C∗ and W of definite sign J =±. Assume that (2.9) holds. Then, there exits r0 >0 such that near zero:
(i) Localization: The discrete eigenvalues µ of P2(b, ηW) with0<|µ|< r0 satisfy
(2.11) µ∈ ±ηΓδ(r, r0),
for anyδ >0.
(ii) Asymptotic: There exists a sequence (r`)` of positive numbers tending to zero such that
(2.12) #nσdisc P2(b, ηW):r`<|µ|< r0
o= Tr1(r`,∞) p|W|11p 1 +o(1), as `−→ ∞.
(iii) Asymptotic: If |W|11 satisfies the hypotheses (H1), (H2) and (H3) above, then, (2.13) #nσdisc P2(b, ηW):r <|µ|< r0
o= Tr1(r,∞) p|W|11p 1 +o(1), as r&0.
<(µ)
=(µ)
r
y= tan Arg(η)x
r0
θ θ
×××××
×××××
×××××
××
×
××
V =ηW η ∈C∗, W ≥0
Figure 2.1. A graphic illustration of the localization of the nonreal eigenvalues near zero: For r0 small enough, the nonreal eigenvalues µ of P2(b, ηW) are localized near the semi-axis µ = η]0,+∞) in small angular sectors.
Corollaries and Remarks.
(i) According to (2.1), (2.2) and (2.3), the asymptotics obtained in Theorem 2.2 essen- tially coincide with those obtained in [28], where the case of the self-adjoint Pauli operatorP2(b, V) with more general assumptions on V is considered. Novelty in this paper is that we consider complex matrix-valued potentialsV.
(ii) Theorem 2.2 is still true if we replace the assumptionJ =±by sign(W)
1 0 0 0
=
±1 0
0 0
.
This condition is for instance fulfilled by potentialsW ∈Bh(R2,C2) of the form W =
±W11 0 0 W22
, W11>0.
(iii) The existence of nonreal eigenvalues and their accumulation near 0 are ensured by assertion (ii) and (iii) of Theorem 2.2.
(iv) Another way of stating assertion (i) of Theorem 2.2 is as follows: near the low ground energy of P2(b,0), the discrete eigenvalues µ of P2(b, ηW) are concentrated around the semi-axis ±η]0,+∞), respectively for J =±.
(v) For η = 1, we recover the standard self-adjoint electric potentials V of definite sign, and (2.11) becomes µ ∈ ±]0,+∞). This just amounts to saying that the discrete eigenvalues are localized on the right and the left of 0.
(vi) Ifη=i, we can write (2.11) as±=(µ)≥0 with|<(µ)|=o(|µ|), see (5.1). This means that the discrete eigenvalues are concentrated in a vicinity of the semi-axis±i]0,+∞).
2.2. Results for the case 3D. LetV satisfy Assumption (C1) andV11be the multiplication operator by the function (also noted)V11:R2−→Rdefined by
(2.14) V11(x, y) := 1
2 Z
R
dXk|V|11(x, y, Xk).
Then, as in the case 2D, the Toeplitz operatorpV11psatisfiespV11p∈ Sq L2(R3)so that it is a self-adjoint positive compact operator. In the sequel,
(2.15) C±:=z∈C:±=(z)>0
denotes respectively the upper and lower half-plane. For 0≤%1 < %2 ≤ζ, we introduce the ring
(2.16) D(%1, %2) :=z∈C:%1 <|z|< %2 , and the half-rings
(2.17) D±(%1, %2) :=D(%1, %2)∩C±. For ν >0 constant, we define the domains
(2.18) Dν±(%1, %2) :=D±(%1, %2)∩z∈C:|=(z)|> ν .
Our first main result gives upper bounds on the number of complex eigenvalues near the low ground energy 0 of the operator P3(b,0), in small half-rings.
Theorem 2.3 (Local upper bounds). Assume that Assumption (C1) holds withζ >kVk 1.
Then, there exists 0 < r0 < √
ζ such that for any r > 0 with r < r0 < q52r, and any 0< ν <2r2,
(2.19) #nz∈σdisc P3(b, V)∩Dν±(r2,4r2)o≤CTr1(r,∞) pV11p|lnr|+O(1), for some constantC >0. In particular, if V11 is compactly supported, then Tr1(r,∞) pV11p satisfies the asymptotic (2.3) as r&0.
In what follows below, two kinds of assumption on V are needed in additional.
Assumption (C2): We assume that
(2.20) V =ηW withη ∈C\R, andW(X) =
W`k(X) 2`,k=1∈Bh(R3), X ∈R3. Remark 2.2.
(i) In (2.20), when W is of definite sign (i.e. ±W ≥ 0), since the change of the sign consists to replaceArg(η) byArg(η) +π, then it is sufficient to consider onlyW ≥0.
(ii) For ±sin Arg(η) > 0 and W ≥ 0, the discrete eigenvalues z of the operator P3(b, ηW) satisfy ±=(z)≥0.
With respect to Assumption (C2) above, we introduce W11, the multiplication operator by the function (also noted) W11:R2 −→R, defined as in (2.14) with|V|11 replaced by|W|11. Hence, we introduce the following exponential decay assumption:
Assumption (C3): We assume that the functionW11 satisfies (2.21) 0<W11(x, y)≤e−Ch(x,y)i2, C >0.
For α∈R andθ >0, we introduce the sector
(2.22) E±(α, θ) :=D(0, ζ)\ei(2α∓π)ei(−2θ,2θ)(0, ζ),
where we have just excluded around the semi-axis z = ei(2α∓π)(0, ζ), an angular sector of amplitude 4θ. Hence, we can formulate our second main result in this part as follows:
Theorem 2.4 (Sector free of complex eigenvalues, lower bounds). Suppose that V satisfies Assumption (C1), and Assumption (C2) with W ≥0,±Arg(η)∈(0, π). Then, for any θ >0 small enough, there exists ε0 >0 such that:
(i) For any 0< ε≤ε0, the operator P3(b, εV) has no discrete eigenvalues in the sector (2.23) D±(r2, r20)∩E±(Arg(η), θ), 0≤r < r0 <pζ.
(ii) If furthermore W11 satisfies Assumption (C3), then for any 0 < ε≤ ε0, there is an accumulation of nonreal eigenvalues of P3(b, εV) near zero, in a sector around the semi-axis ei(2Arg(η)∓π)(0,+∞), for
(2.24) Arg(η)∈ ±
π 2, π
.
More precisely, there exists a decreasing sequence of positive numbers (r`)`, r` & 0, satisfying
# (
z∈σdisc P3(b, εV)∩D±(ε2r2`+1, ε2r`2)∩ei(2Arg(η)∓π)
ei(−2θ,2θ)(0, ζ) )
≥Tr1(r
`+1,r`) pW11p. (2.25)
A graphic illustration of Theorem 2.4 is given in Figure 2.2.
Remark 2.3.
(i) Theorem 2.4 and [3, Theorem 2] are quite similar in there structure, although in [3], is considered the 3D Schrödinger operator with constant magnetic field and self-adjoint potentials decaying exponentially in the direction of the magnetic field, to study the resonances near the Landau levels.
(ii) If we setδ:= tan(θ), then the proof of Theorem 2.4 see (8.7) and (8.16)shows that for 0< r0 <√
ζ, the parameter ε0 >0 above depends onθ as follows:
(2.26) ε0 <Cp1 +δ−2−1min 1, C1(δ, ν)−1e−Γq C1(δ,ν)+1 dqe!
,
0 r2 r02
eiArg(η)R+
π−Arg(η)
<(z)
=(z)
y= tan 2Arg(η)−π
x
2θ 2θ
D+(r2, r20)∩E+(Arg(η), θ)
××××
××
××
××
×××××
××
×
××
V =ηW
Arg(η)∈(π2, π), W ≥0
Figure 2.2. A graphic illustration of the localization of the non- real eigenvalues near the low ground energy 0: Forθsmall enough and 0< ε≤ε0,P3(b, εV) has no complex eigenvalues inD+(r2, r02)∩E+(Arg(η), θ) (see (i) of Theorem 2.4). They are localized around the semi-axis z = ei(2Arg(η)−π)]0,+∞) (see (ii) of Theorem 2.4).
for some uniform constants C, ν positive, where C1(δ, ν) is the constant defined by (8.17), Γq by (9.3), and dqe by (9.2).
An immediate consequence of assertion (i) of Theorem 2.4 together with (ii) of Remark 2.2 is the following:
Corollary 2.1 (Non cluster of complex eigenvalues). Let the assumptions of Theorem 2.4 be fulfilled. Then, for any η satisfying Arg(η) ∈ ± 0,π2, there is no accumulation of discrete eigenvalues of P3(b, εV) near zero, for0< ε≤ε0.
Actually, we expect this to be a general phenomenon in the following sense:
Conjecture 2.1. Let V = ηW satisfy Assumption (C1), with η ∈ C\Reikπ2, k ∈ Z, and W ∈ Bh(R3) of definite sign. Then, there is no accumulation of complex eigenvalues of P3(b, V) near zero if and only if <(V)>0.
Remark 2.4. To make our results in perspective, let us mention that more general situations such as: more general magnetic field in the 3D case (not supported only in theXkaxis), and/or to consider perturbations of the magnetic field itself, are open problems.
3. Discrete eigenvalues for the 2D problem
Throughout Sections 3-5, D(0, )∗ stands for the punctured disk given by (2.4). Here and in the rest of the paper,ζ is the constant defined by (1.8).
3.1. Preliminary results. Let P⊥and Q⊥:=I−P⊥be the orthogonal projections defined by (2.7). Forµ /∈σ P2(b,0), on account of (1.5) with n= 2 and Proposition 1.1, we clearly have
(3.1) P2(b,0)−µ−1P⊥=−p
µ−1 0
0 0
.
Therefore, for any µlying in the resolvent set of P2(b,0), we have (3.2) P2(b,0)−µ−1 =−p
µ−1 0
0 0
+ P2(b,0)−µ−1Q⊥. We begin with a general result on the first term of the r.h.s. of (3.2).
Lemma 3.1. Let U ∈Lq(R2) with q∈[2,+∞). Then, the operator-valued function D(0, )∗ 3µ7−→U P2(b,0)−µ−1P⊥
is holomorphic with values in Sq L2(R2). Furthermore,
(3.3)
U P2(b,0)−µ−1P⊥
q Sq
≤ b0e2osc ˜ϕ
2πµq kUkqLq. Proof. The holomorphicity onD(0, )∗ is evident. Let us show (3.3).
Thanks to (3.1), we have
(3.4) U P2(b,0)−µ−1P⊥=−U p
µ−1 0
0 0
.
As in [29, Proof of Lemma 2.4], it can proved that U p∈ Sq L2(R2)with
(3.5) kU pkqS
q ≤ b0
2πe2osc ˜ϕkUkqLq.
Then, bound (3.3) follows by combining (3.4) and (3.5).
The next result concerns the second term of the r.h.s. of (3.2).
Lemma 3.2. Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.1, the operator-valued function C\[ζ,+∞)3µ7−→U P2(b,0)−µ−1Q⊥
is holomorphic with values in Sq L2(R2). Moreover, (3.6) U P2(b,0)−µ−1Q⊥q
Sq ≤CkUkqLq 1 + |µ+ 1|
dist µ,[ζ,+∞)
!q
, where C=C(q) is a constant depending onq.
Proof. Forµlying in the resolvent set of P2(b,0), (1.5) implies that we have (3.7) (P2(b,0)−µ)−1Q⊥=(P2−−µ)−1(I−p) 0
0 (P2+−µ)−1
= (P2−−µ)−1(I−p)⊕(P2+−µ)−1. Then, C\[ζ,+∞) 3 µ 7−→ (P2−−µ)−1(I −p)⊕(P2+−µ)−1 is well defined and analytic sinceC\[ζ,+∞) is included in the resolvent set ofP2− defined on (I−p)Dom(P2−) andP2+
defined onDom(P2+). Thus, µ7−→U P2(b,0)−µ−1Q⊥ is holomorphic on C\[ζ,+∞).
Now, let us prove estimate (3.6). In what follows below, constants are generic. Namely changing from a relation to another. First, let us show that (3.6) holds ifq is even.
Identity (3.7) implies that we have (3.8) U(P2(b,0)−µ)−1Q⊥q
Sq
≤U P2−−µ−1(I −p)q
Sq
+
UP2+−µ−1
q Sq
.
Let us focus on the first term of the r.h.s. of (3.8). We have (3.9) U(P2−−µ)−1(I−p)q
Sq
≤U(P2−+ 1)−1q
Sq
(P2−+ 1)(P2−−µ)−1(I−p)q. By the Spectral mapping theorem, we have
(3.10) (P2−+ 1)(P2−−µ)−1(I −p)q≤supqs∈[ζ,+∞)
s+ 1 s−µ .
Using the resolvent equation, the boundedness of the magnetic field b, and applying the diamagnetic inequality see [1, Theorem 2.3] and [37, Theorem 2.13] which is only valid whenq is even, we get
U P2−+ 1−1q
Sq ≤I+ (P2−+ 1)−1bqU (−i∇ −A)2+ 1−1q
Sq
≤CU(−∆ + 1)−1q
Sq
. (3.11)
By the standard criterion [37, Theorem 4.1], we have (3.12) U(−∆ + 1|)−1q
Sq ≤CkUkqLq
| · |2+ 1
−1
q Lq
. Combining (3.9), (3.10), (3.11) and (3.12), we obtain
U P2−−µ−1(I−p)q
Sq
≤CkUkqLqsupqs∈[ζ,+∞)
s+ 1 s−µ
≤CkUkqLq 1 + |µ+ 1|
dist µ,[ζ,+∞)
!q
. (3.13)
Arguing similarly, it can be proved that we have (3.14) U P2+−µ−1q
Sq
≤CkUkqLq 1 + |µ+ 1|
dist µ,[ζ,+∞)
!q
. Hence, forq even, (3.6) holds by putting together (3.8), (3.13) and (3.14).
To prove that (3.6) holds for any q ≥2, we use interpolation method. If q verifies q >2, then clearly there exists even integers q0 < q1 satisfying q ∈ (q0, q1) and q0 ≥ 2. Consider γ∈(0,1) such that 1q = 1−γq
0 +qγ
1 and introduce the operator
Lqi R23U 7−→T U P2(b,0)−µ−1Q⊥∈ Sqi, i= 0,1.
DenoteCi =C(qi) the constant appearing in (3.6) fori= 0, 1, and define C(µ, qi) :=C
1 qi
i 1 + |µ+ 1|
dist µ,[ζ,+∞)
! .
By (3.6),kTk ≤C(µ, qi) fori= 0, 1. Using the Riesz-Thorin Theorem see for instance [14, Sub. 5 of Chap. 6], [31], [41], [26, Chap. 2], we interpolate between q0 andq1 to obtain the extensionT :Lq(R2)−→ Sq, with
kTk ≤C(µ, q0)1−γC(γ, q1)γ ≤C(q)1q 1 + |µ+ 1|
dist µ,[ζ,+∞)
! .
Then, in particular, we have for any U ∈Lq(R2)
kT(U)kSq ≤C(q)1q 1 + |µ+ 1|
dist µ,[ζ,+∞)
!
kUkLq,
or equivalently bound (3.6), and the lemma follows.
Now, observe that Assumption (A1) given by (1.10), implies that there exists a bounded operatorM such that|V|12 =MF12 withF satisfying (1.10). Consequently, since the radius of D(0, )∗ satisfies 0 < < ζ and V is bounded, then by combining identities (3.1) and (3.2) with Lemmas 3.1 and 3.2, we obtain the following:
Lemma 3.3. The operator-valued function
D(0, )∗ 3µ7−→ TV,⊥(µ) := ˜J|V|12 P2(b,0)−µ−1|V|12
is holomorphic with values in Sq L2(R2), where J˜ is defined by the polar decomposition V = ˜J|V|of V.
3.2. Reduction of the problem. We reduce the study of the discrete eigenvalues ofP2(b, V) near zero, to that of the zeros of a holomorphic function in a punctured neighbourhood of zero.
In what follows below, the regularized determinant detdqe(•) is defined in Appendix A 1.
Similarly to Lemma 3.3, it can be shown that V P2(b,0)− ·−1 is holomorphic in D(0, )∗ with values inSq L2(R2). Then, detdqeI +V P2(b,0)−µ is well defined by (9.2). It is well known, see for instance [37, Chap. 9], that
(3.15) µ∈σdisc P2(b, V)⇔fq(µ) := detdqeI+V P2(b,0)−µ−1= 0.
SinceV P2(b,0)− ·−1is holomorphic inD(0, )∗, then so is the functionfq by Propertyd)of Appendix A 1. Moreover, the algebraic multiplicity ofµ as a discrete eigenvalue of P2(b, V) is equal to its order as a zero offq.
In the next proposition, the quantity IndC(•) appearing in the r.h.s. of (3.16) is defined in Appendix A 2.
Proposition 3.1. Let TV,⊥(µ) be the operator defined in Lemma 3.3. Then, the following assertions are equivalent:
(i) µ∈D(0, )∗ is a discrete eigenvalue of P2(b, V), (ii) detdqe I+TV,⊥(µ)= 0,
(iii) −1 is an eigenvalue of TV,⊥(µ).
Moreover,
(3.16) mult(µ) =IndC I+TV,⊥(·),
where C is a small contour positively oriented, containing µ as the unique discrete eigenvalue of P2(b, V).
Proof. The equivalence between assertions (i) and (ii) follows obviously from (3.15) and the equality
detdqeI+V P2(b,0)−µ= detdqeI+ ˜J|V|12 P2(b,0)−µ−1|V|12, thanks to Property b)of Appendix A 1.
The equivalence between assertions (ii) and (iii) follows from Property c)of Appendix A 1.
We prove now (3.16). To this end, we consider the functionfq defined by (3.15). According to the comment just after (3.15), we have
(3.17) mult(µ) =indCfq,
where the r.h.s. of (3.17) is the index defined by (10.2) of the holomorphic function fq with respect to the contour C. We thus get (3.16) easily from the equality
indCfq=IndCI+TV,⊥(·),
see for instance [4, (2.6)] for more details.
3.3. Decomposition of the weighted resolvent. Our goal in this section is to split the weighted resolventTV,⊥(µ) := ˜J|V|12 P2(b,0)−µ−1|V|12 into two parts which are respectively meromorphic and holomorphic in a neighbourhood of zero. The potential V is assumed to satisfy Assumption (A1).
The next proposition is a direct consequence of identities (3.1), (3.2) and Lemma 3.3.
Proposition 3.2. For µ∈D(0, )∗, we have
(3.18) TV,⊥(µ) =−J˜
µ|V|12 p 0
0 0
|V|12 +A⊥(µ),
where the operator A⊥(µ) := ˜J|V|12 P2(b,0)−µ−1Q⊥|V|12 ∈ Sq L2(R2) is holomorphic in the open disk D(0, ) :=D(0, )∗∪ {0}.
Remark 3.1.
(i) Thanks to Lemma 3.1,|V|12 p 0
0 0
|V|12 is a compact operator. Then, for any r >0, we have
(3.19) Tr1(r,∞)
|V|12 p 0
0 0
|V|12
= Tr1(r,∞)
p 0 0 0
|V| p 0
0 0
= Tr1(r,∞)(p|V|11p), where we recall that the |V|`k, 1≤`, k≤2, are the coefficients of the matrix|V|.
(ii) If V satisfies Assumption (A2) given by (2.6), then Proposition 3.2 holds with ˜J replaced byJ η,J :=sign(W), and|V|11 replaced by|W|11 in (3.19).
4. Proof of Theorem 2.1: Upper bound The proof will be divided into two steps.
