arXiv:1611.06082v1 [math.AC] 18 Nov 2016

ON THE CONVEXITY OF NUMERICAL RANGE OVER
CERTAIN FIELDS
E. BALLICO
Abstract. Let L be a degree 2 Galois extension of the field K and M an n×n
matrix with coefficients in L. Let h , i : Ln × Ln −→ L be the sesquilinear
form associated to the involution σ : L −→ L fixing K. This sesquilinear form
defines the numerical range Num(M ) of any n × n matrix over L. In this paper
we study the convexity of Num(M ) (under certain assumptions on K and/or
M ). Many of the results are for ordered fields.

1. Introduction
For any field F let Mn,n (F ) denote the set of all n × n matrices with coefficients
in F . Fix fields K ⊂ L such that L is a degree 2 Galois extension of K and
call σ the generator of the Galois group of the extension
K ⊂ L. For any u =
Pn
(u1 , . . . , un ), v = (v1 , . . . , vn ) ∈ Ln set hu, vi :=
i=1 σ(ui )vi . The map h , i :
Ln × Ln −→ L is sesquilinear (linear in the second variable and σ-linear in the
first one) and hu, vi = σ(hv, ui) for all u, v ∈ Ln . For any M ∈ Mn,n (L) and
u ∈ L set νM (u) := hu, M ui. We obtain a map νM : Ln −→ L, call the numerical
map of M . When K = R and L = C (and so σ is the complex conjugation
and h , i is the usual Hermitian product) the image of the restriction of νM to
Cn (1) := {z ∈ Ln | hz, zi = 1} is called the numerical range of M ([5], [9]);
it is always a convex subset of C ([5], [9]) and the main aim of this paper is to
explore the convexity for other (L, K, σ), sometimes with strong restrictions on the
matrix M . Under mild assumptions on L and K we have M = M † if and only if
Num(M ) ⊆ K (Proposition 3), but this is not always true (Example 1). Fix an
integer k > 0 and M1 , . . . , Mk ∈ Mn,n (L). Let νM1 ,...,Mk : Ln −→ Lk be the map
defined by the formula νM1 ,...,Mk (u) = (hu, M1 ui, . . . , hu, Mu i); we call it the joint
numerical map of M1 , . . . , Mk . When L = C the image of the map νM1 ,...,Mk |Cn (1)
is called the joint numerical range of the matrices M1 , . . . , Mk ([8]). In [2] we
introduced the following subsets of K. Let ∆ ⊆ L be the set of all ha, ai, a ∈ L.
Since σ(ha, ai) = ha, ai for any a ∈ L, we have ∆ ⊆ K. Note that 0 ∈ ∆, that
∆ \ {0} is a multiplicative group and that ∆ is the image of the norm map L −→ K.
Since ha, ai = a2 for all a ∈ K, ∆ contains all squares of elements of K. For each
n ≥ 1 let ∆n ⊆ K be the sum on n elements of ∆. The set ∆n is the set of all
hu, ui for some u ∈ Ln . We have ∆n + ∆m = ∆n+m for all n > 0, m > 0 and it is
easy to check that ∆n \ {0} is a multiplicative group ([2, Lemma 2]).
Take a, b ∈ L such that a 6= b. The ∆-convex hull of {a, b} is the set of all
ta + (1 − t)b with t ∈ ∆ ∩ (1 − ∆). At least if char(K) = 0, ∆ ∩ (1 − ∆) is infinite
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 15A33; 15A60; 12D99; 12F10; 12J15.
Key words and phrases. numerical range; sesquilinear form; real closed field; euclidean field.
The author was partially supported by MIUR and GNSAGA of INdAM (Italy).
1

2

E. BALLICO

([2, Lemma 8]). A set S ⊆ L is said to be ∆-convex if for all a, b ∈ S with a 6= b, S
contains the ∆-convex hull of {a, b}. For any S ⊆ L the ∆-convex hull of S is the
intersection of all ∆-convex subsets of L containing S, i.e. the smallest ∆-convex
subsets of L containing S. If we take ∆n ∩ (1 − ∆n ) instead of ∆ ∩ (1 − ∆) we get
the notion of ∆n -convexity.
We met the following obstacles to get the convexity of Num(M ) and to study
the numerical range, the joint numerical range, the numerical map and the joint
numerical map.
(1) L may be not algebraically closed and hence there are matrices M ∈
Mn,n (L), n ≥ 2, with eigenvalues not contained in L;
(2) there are u ∈ Ln , n ≥ 2, with u 6= 0 and hu, ui = 0;
(3) there are u ∈ Ln such that hu, ui 6= 0, but there is no t ∈ L with htu, tui = 1;
(4) ∆n may strictly contain ∆.
The obstacles (3) and (4) are equivalent (Remark 1). It is very restrictive to
assume that L is algebraically closed, but the only case in which we get ∆-convexity
of all numerical ranges (Theorem 2) requires that K is a real closed field and so L
is algebraically closed ([3, Theorem 1.2.2]). When L is not algebraically closed we
may at least get informations for some matrices, e.g. the ones with all eigenvalues
contained in L, plus some other conditions are satisfied. We discussed (2), (3) and
(4) in [2]. Here we describe another case in which ∆n = ∆ for all n and hu, ui = 0
for some u ∈ Ln if and only if u = 0 (Proposition 1). We say that h , i is definite
up to n if hu, ui 6= 0 for all u ∈ Ln \ {0}.
When L and K are finite fields, say K = Fq , L = Fq2 and σ the Frobenius map
t 7→ tq , we have ∆ = K and so ∆n = ∆ for all n > 0, so the third condition is
always satisfied, but the only non-empty ∆-convex subsets of L are the singletons,
L and the affine K-lines of L seen as a 2-dimensional K vector space; there are
plenty of examples ([4]) of matrices M with ♯(Num(M )) ∈
/ {1, q, q 2 } and hence with
numerical range not ∆-convex. The obstacle (2) may be overcome in all cases in
which we have some definite positive conditions (e.g. if K is a subfield of R and
L = K(i) with σ the complex conjugation). We axiomatize the non-existence of
obstacle (2) in the following way. We say that h , i is definite of to n if hu, ui =
6 0
for all u ∈ Ln with u 6= 0. In the set-up of (2) and (3) even if M has an eigenvalue
c ∈ L we may have c ∈
/ Num(M ) (e.g. see Example 2; there are many examples
over finite fields ([4]).
The classical text-book proof of the Toeplitz-Hausdorff theorem on the convexity
of Num(M ) uses a reduction to the case in which the numerical range is either a
segment or a region bounded by an ellipse with one or two foci ([5, §1.1]). We
axiomatize this case in the following way.
Definition 1. A ∆n -ellipse with a unique focus at 0 is a subset S ⊆ L such
that there are δ1 ∈ ∆n \ {0} and δ2 ∈ ∆n \ {0} with S = {σ(x)y | (x, y) ∈
L2 , δ1 xσ(x) + δ2 yσ(y) = 1}. In this case we say that S is a ∆n -ellipse with a unique
focus with parameters (δ1 , δ2 ). A ∆n -ellipse with two foci is a subset S ⊆ L such
that there are δ1 , δ2 ∈ ∆n \ {0} and d1 , d2 ∈ L∗ with S = {d1 yσ(x) + d2 yσ(y) |
(x, y) ∈ L2 , δ1 xσ(x) + δ2 yσ(y) = 1}; (δ1 , δ2 , d1 , d2 ) are the parameters of the ellipse
with 2 foci. A ∆n -ellipse is set S ⊆ L such that there are a, b ∈ L with b 6= 0
and (S − a)/b is a ∆n -ellipse with one or two foci. We define in the same way the
∆-ellipses.

NUMERICAL RANGE

3

When K is a finite field, a ∆-ellipse is not ∆-convex. When n = 2 we find some
cases in which Num(M ) is an ellipse with one or two foci (Propositions 4, 5). We
show some cases in which for any a, b ∈ Num(M ) the set Num(M ) contains either
the ∆-convex hull of {a, b} or a ∆-ellipse with 2 foci containing {a, b} (Propositions
4, 5 and 2). Easy examples show that Num(M ) may not contain the spectrum of
M (not even the eigenvalues of M contained in L), but it obviously contains an
eigenvalue a ∈ L if there is u ∈ Ln with hu, ui ∈ ∆ \ {0} and M u = au. Example 2
shows that it is not sufficient to assume hu, ui ∈ ∆2 \ {0}.
We may generalize this observation to two eigenvalues in the following way.
Theorem 1. Assume that h , i is definite up to n and take M ∈ Mn,n (L). Fix
eigenvalues a, b ∈ L of M with a 6= b and assume the existence u, v ∈ Ln such that
hu, ui ∈ ∆ \ {0}, hv, vi ∈ ∆ \ {0}, M u = au and M v = bv.
(a) If hu, vi = 0, then Num(M ) ⊇ {ta + (1 − t)b}t∈∆∩(1−∆).
(b) If hu, vi =
6 0, then there is S ⊆ Num(M ) such that a ∈ S, b ∈ S and S is
a ∆n -ellipse.
Example 2 shows that we cannot use ∆2 instead of ∆; in Example 2 we get
a ∆2 -ellipse S ⊆ Num(M ), but a ∈
/ S and b 6= S, because a ∈
/ Num(M ) and
b∈
/ Num(M ).
In section 4 we consider the case in which K as an ordering ([3, Ch. 1]). We
prove the following results.
Proposition 1. Take K with an ordering < such that each positive element of K
is a square. Take L := K(i) with σ induced by the map i 7→ −i. Take M ∈ Mn,n (L)
such that M = M † . Then Num(M ) is ∆-convex.
Proposition 2. Take K with an ordering < such that each positive element of K is
a square. Take L := K(i) with σ induced by the map i 7→ −i. Take M ∈ Mn×n (K)
and a, b ∈ Num(M ) with a 6= b. Then there is S ⊆ Num(M ) such that a ∈ S, b ∈ S
and S is either the ∆-convex hull of a and b or an ellipse with two foci containing
{a, b}.
Theorem 2. Assume that K is a real closed field and that L = K(i) with σ the
complex conjugation. For any M ∈ Mn,n (L) the set Num(M ) is a closed and
bounded ∆-convex subset of L.
As an immediate corollary of Theorem 2 we get the following result.
Corollary 1. Assume that K is a real closed field and that L = K(i) with σ the
complex conjugation. Fix M, N ∈ Mn,n (L) such that M † = M and N † = N . Then
the joint numerical range Num(M, N ) ⊂ L2 is ∆-convex. If K is real closed, then
Num(M, N ) is a closed, bounded and ∆-convex subset of K 2
2. Preliminaries
For any n > 0 let In×n denote the identity n × n matrix (over any field). For any
field F set F ∗ := F \ {0}. Note that ∆2 = ∆ if and only if ∆n = ∆ for all n > 1.
Remark 1. Take d ∈ ∆ \ {0} and u ∈ Ln such that hu, ui = d. Since ∆ \ {0} is a
multiplicative group, there is t ∈ L with tσ(t) = 1/d. Note that htu, tui = 1. Fix
a ∈ ∆n \ {0}. By assumption there is v ∈ Ln such that hv, vi = 0. Assume the
existence of k ∈ L such that hkv, kvi = 1. We get a = 1/c with c := kσ(k) ∈ ∆\{0}.
Since ∆ \ {0} is a multiplicative group, we get a ∈ ∆.

4

E. BALLICO

Remark 2. For any M ∈ Mn,n (L) and any u, v ∈ Ln we have hu, M vi = hM † u, vi =
σ(hv, M † ui). Thus Num(M ) ⊆ K if M † = M .
We fix an element β ∈ L \ K with the following property.
First assume char(K) 6= 2. We take as β one of the roots of a polynomial
t2 − α, with α ∈ K, α not a square in K and L ∼
= K[t]/(t2 − α); note that
σ(β) = −β in this case. We have L = K + Kβ as a K-vector space and we see
Ln = K n + βK n as a 2n-dimensional K-vector space. For any z = x + yβ ∈ L,
set ℜz := x and ℑz = y. We have x = (z + σ(z))/2 and y = (z − σ(z))/2β. The
K-linear maps ℜ : L −→ K and ℑ : L −→ K depends on the choice of β. Take any
M ∈ Mn,n (L) and set M+ := (M + M † )/2 and M− := (M − M † )/2β. We obvious
†
†
have M = M+ βM− and M+
= M+ . Since σ(1/2β) = −1/(2β) we have M−
= M− .
Remark 2 gives Num(M+ ) ⊆ K and Num(M− ) ⊆ K. For any u ∈ Ln we have
hu, M ui = hu, M+ ui + βhu, M− ui. Hence the maps ℜ and ℑ induces surjections
Num(M ) −→ Num(M+ ) and Num(M ) −→ Num(M− ).
Now assume char(K) = 2. There is ε ∈ K such that the polynomial t2 + t + ε
is irreducible in K, while L ∼
= K[t]/(t2 + t + ε). We take as β one of the roots
in L of t2 + t + ε. Note that β + 1 is a root of t2 + t + ε. Thus σ(β) = β + 1.
We see L = K + Kβ as a 2-dimensional K-vector space and hence Ln as a 2ndimensional K-vector space and Mn,n (L) as a 2n2 -dimensional K-vector space.
If z = x + yβ ∈ L with x, y ∈ K, then set ℜz := x and ℑz := y. We have
σ(z) = x + y + yβ and hence y = z + σ(z) and x = z − βz − βσ(z) = σ(β)z + βσ(z).
The maps ℜ : L −→ K and ℑ : L −→ K are K-linear. For any M ∈ Mn,n (L)
set M+ := (β + 1)M + βM † and M− = M + M † . Obviously M− is Hermitian.
Since 2β = 0, we have M = M+ + βM− . Since σ(β + 1) = β and σ(β) = β + 1,
M+ is Hermitian. Thus the map z 7→ ℜz (resp. z 7→ ℑz) induces surjections
Num(M ) −→ Num(M+ ) ⊆ K (resp. Num(M ) −→ Num(M− ) ⊆ K).
Lemma 1. Assume that h , i is definite up to n. Take linearly independent
w1 , . . . , wm ∈ Ln , m ≤ n. Then there are f1 , . . . , fn ∈ Ln such that hfi , fi i 6= 0 for
all i, hfi , fj i = 0 for all i 6= j and f1 , . . . , fm span the linear subspace spanned by
w1 , . . . , wm . If ∆ = ∆n , then we may find f1 , . . . , fn with the additional condition
that hfi , fi i = 1.
Proof. We use induction on m. Call W the linear span of w1 , . . . , wm−1 ; if m−1 > 0
we take f1 , . . . , fm−1 mutually orthogonal and spanning W . Set W ⊥ = {u ∈ Ln |
hu, vi = 0 for all v ∈ W }. Since W is non-degenerate, we have dim W ⊥ = n− m+ 1.
Since h , i is definite positive up to n, we have W ∩ W ⊥ = {0}, i.e. Ln = W ⊕ W ⊥
(orthogonal decomposition. Write fm = u + v with u ∈ W and w ∈ W ⊥ . Since
w1 , . . . , wm are linearly independent, we have v 6= 0. Take fm = v. If m = n,
then we stop. Now assume m < n. Let V be the linear span of w1 , . . . , wm . Set
V ⊥ = {u ∈ Ln | hu, vi = 0 for all v ∈ V }. We again have Ln = V ⊕ V ⊥ and we take
as fm+1 any non-zero element of V ⊥ . If m+1 < n we continue using the orthogonal
of the linear span of f1 , . . . , fm+1 . Now assume ∆ = ∆n . We assumed exactly
the conditions for which the usual Gram-Schmidt orthonormal
process works; for
Pm−1
instance if f1 , . . . , fm−1 are orthonormal, we have v = wm − 1 hwm , fi i; since
∆ = ∆n and ∆n \ {0} is a multiplicative group there is t ∈ L such that tσ(t) =
1/hw, wi and we take fm := tv.

Lemma 2. Assume ∆2 = ∆. Take e, f ∈ L such that e 6= f and take a, b in the
∆-convex hull S of e, f . Then S contains the ∆-convex hull of a, b.

NUMERICAL RANGE

5

Proof. Take t1 , t2 , t ∈ (∆∩(1−∆) such that a = t1 e+(1−t1 )f , b = t2 e+(1−t2 )f . We
have ta+(1−t)b = [tt1 +(1−t)t2 ]e+[(1−t)t1 +t(1−t2 )]f . Since ∆ is multiplicative
and ∆2 = ∆, we have [tt1 + (1 − t)t2 ] ∈ ∆ and [(1 − t)t1 + t(1 − t2 )] ∈ ∆. Hence
[(1 − t)t1 + t(1 − t2 )] ∈ (∆ ∩ (1 − ∆).

If we need algebraic extensions of L (e.g. because some of the eigenvalues of the
matrix M are not in L) the following set-up may be useful. Let K be a perfect field
(e.g. assume char(K) = 0). Fix an algebraic closure L of L with a fixed inclusion
j : L ֒→ L. The map j ◦ σ : L :−→ L extends to a field isomorphism σ ′ : L −→ L
with σ ′ (x) = x for all x ∈ K ([7, Theorem V.2.8]). We fix one such σ ′ . For instance,
if K ⊆ R, L = K(i) and σ is the complex conjugate, we may just take as σ ′ the
complex conjugate ; if K = Fq and L = Fq2 with σ the Frobenius map t 7→ tq
we may take as σ ′ : Fq2 −→ Fq2 the map t 7→ tq . As seen in the last example σ ′2
may not be the identity (in this example Fq2 is exactly the fixed point set of σ ′2
and σ ′ has not finite order). We fix one σ ′ and use it to define the K-bilinear map
P
n
n
h , iσ′ : L × L −→ L by the formula h(u1 , . . . , un ), (v1 , . . . , vn )i = ni=1 σ ′ (ui )vi .
n
We say that h , iσ′ is definite up to n if hu, uiσ′ 6= 0 for all u ∈ L \ {0}. This
is always the case if K ⊂ R, L = K(i) and σ and σ ′ are induced by the complex
conjugation.
3. General results
Lemma 3. Assume that either char(K) = 0 or char(K) 6= 2 and there is (w, δ)
such that δ ∈ (∆ ∩ (1 − ∆) \ {0, 1}, w ∈ L \ K, wσ(w) = δ and both δ and 1 − δ are
squares in K. Take M ∈ Mn,n (L) such that M = M † and ♯(Num(M )) = 1. Then
M = cIn×n for some c ∈ K.
Proof. If M is Hermitian, then Num(M ) ⊆ K by Remark 2. Assume Num(M ) =
{c} for some c. If char(K) = 0, then apply [2, Proposition 1]. Hence we may
assume the existence of (w, δ). Since c ∈ K, M − cIn×n is Hermitian. Thus
taking M − cIn×n instead of M we reduce to the case c = 0. Write M = (mij ),
i, j = 1, . . . , n. Since mii = hei , M ei i, all the diagonal elements of M are zeroes.
Assume the existence of 1 ≤ i < j ≤ n with mij 6= 0. We have mji = σ(mij ).
Take u = xei + yej with xσ(x) + yσ(y) = 1. Since mii = mjj = 0, we have 0 =
hu, M ui = mij σ(x)y + σ(mij )xσ(y) = 0. Hence e + σ(e) = 0, where e := mij σ(x)y.
Since char(K) 6= 2, there is α ∈ K such that e = αβ. Take x, y ∈ K with x2 = δ
and y 2 = 1 − δ. Since δ ∈
/ {0, 1}, we have xy 6= 0. Since e ∈ Kβ, we get mij = kβ
for some k ∈ K ∗ . Thus σ(x)y ∈ K for all (x, y) ∈ L2 with xσ(x) + yσ(y) = 1.
Taking x = w and y ∈ K with y 2 = 1 − δ we get a contradiction.

Proposition 3. Assume that either char(K) = 0 or char(K) 6= 2 and there is
(w, δ) such that δ ∈ (∆ ∩ (1 − ∆) \ {0, 1}, w ∈ L \ K, wσ(w) = δ and both δ
and 1 − δ are squares in K. A matrix M ∈ Mn,n (L) is Hermitian if and only if
Num(M ) ⊆ K.
Proof. If M is Hermitian, then Num(M ) ⊆ K by Remark 2. For an arbitrary
M ∈ Mn,n (L) write M = M+ + βM− . M is Hermitian if and only if M− = 0In×n .
Since the map ℑ : Num(M ) −→ ℑ(M− ) is surjective, Num(M ) ⊆ K if and only if
Num(M− ) = {0}. Apply Lemma 3.


6

E. BALLICO

Example 1. Take K = F2 , L = F4 and as σ the Frobenius map t −→ t2 . If
u = (x, y) ∈ L2 we have hu, ui = 1 if and only if x3 + y 3 = 1, i.e. (since z 3 = 1
if z ∈ F∗4 ) if and only if (x, y) ∈ {(0, 1), (1, 0)}. Hence for each M ∈ M2,2 (F4 ) the
numerical range Num(M ) is the set of all diagonal elements of M . Hence there are
16 matrices M ∈ M2,2 (F4 ) with Num(M ) = {0} and 4 of them are Hermitian. This
is the only example we know (and the only one for finite fields).
Proof of Theorem 1: Taking a multiple of u and v instead of u and v and applying
Remark 1 we reduce to the case hu, ui = hv, vi = 1. Since a 6= b, u and v are
1
(M − aIn×n ) instead of M we reduce to the case
linearly independent. Taking b−a
a = 0 and b = 1. Thus u 6= 0, M u = 0 and M v = v.
(a) First assume assume hu, vi = 0 and hence hv, ui = 0. Fix δ ∈ ∆ ∩ (1 − ∆)
and write δ = yσ(y) and 1 − δ = xσ(x) for some x, y ∈ L. Take m = xu + yv.
We have hm, mi = 1, because xσ(x) + yσ(y) = 1. We have M m = yv and hence
hm, M mi = σ(y)y = δ.
(b) Now assume d := hu, vi =
6 0. Set w := v − hv, uiu. Since u, w and u, v
have the same linear span, we have w 6= 0. Since h , i is non-degenerate up to n,
we have c := hw, wi ∈ ∆n \ {0}. We have hw, ui = 0. Take m = xu + yw. We have
hm, mi = 1 if and only if σ(x)x + cyσ(y) = 1. We have M m = yv = yw + ydu and
hence hm, M mi = d2 σ(x)y + cσ(y)y. The latter set is a ∆n -ellipse with 2 foci. 
Example 2. Assume that h , i is definite up to 2, but ∆2 6= ∆ and fix δ ∈ ∆2 \ ∆.
We may take K = Q, L = Q(i) and σ the complex conjugate ([2, Example 2]). Note
that δ 6= 0. Fix u ∈ L2 such that hu, ui = δ. Since h , i is non-degenerate, there is
m ∈ L2 such that hm, ui = 0 and m 6= 0. Let M ∈ M2,2 (L) be the only matrix with
M u = 0 and M m = m. Hence 0 and 1 are the eigenvalues of M . Set δ1 := hm, mi.
We claim that 0 ∈
/ Num(M ). Take v = xm + yu. Since M v = xm and m, u are
orthogonal, we have hv, M vi = 0 if and only if x = 0. We have hv, vi = σ(x)xδ 6= 1
(Remark 1). Now we check that 1 ∈
/ Num(M ). We have hv, vi = 1 if and only if
δ1 xσ(x) + δyσ(1) = 1. We have hv, M vi = 1 if and only if δ1 xσ(x) = 1, i.e. if and
only if y = 0. Hence 1 ∈ Num(M ) if and only if there is x ∈ L with δ1 xσ(x) = 1,
i.e. if and only if hf1 , f1 i = 1, where f1 = xm. Write f1 = g1 e1 + g2 e2 and set
f2 := g2 e1 + g1 e1 . We get hf2 , f2 i = 1 and hf2 , f1 i = 0. Hence there is t ∈ L∗ with
u = tf2 . We get δ = tσ(t) ∈ δ, a contradiction. This situation is satisfied if we take
2
K = Q, L = Q(i), σ and σ ′ the complex conjugate. Note that in this case σ ′ is
the identity and h , iσ′ is definite for all n. Hence we do not see a reasonable way
of weaking the assumptions in Theorem 1.
Lemma 4. Fix an integer n ≥ 2 and assume that h , iσ′ is definite up to n and
take M ∈ Mn,n (L) such that M † = M . Let c ∈ L be any eigenvalue of M . Then
σ ′ (c) = c.
n

Proof. Take u ∈ L , u 6= 0, such that M u = cu. We have chu, ui = hu, M ui =
hM u, ui = σ ′ (c)hu, ui.

Lemma 5. Fix an integer n ≥ 2 and assume that h , iσ′ is definite up to n and
take M ∈ Mn,n (L) such that M † = M . Take eigenvalues c, d ∈ L of M such that
c 6= d and any u, v ∈ L such that M u = cu and M v = dv. Then hu, viσ′ = 0.
Proof. We have dhu, viσ′ = hu, M viσ′ = hM u, viσ′ = σ ′ (c)hu, viσ′ . Lemma 4 gives
σ ′ (c) = c 6= d.


NUMERICAL RANGE

7

Remark 3. Take A ∈ Mn,n (L), B ∈ Mm,m (L) and set M := A⊕B ∈ Mn+m,n+m (L).
Num(M ) is the ∆-convex hull of Num(A) and Num(B) ([2, Lemma 7].
Lemma 6. Take n = 2 and fix b ∈ L∗ . Take


0 b
M=
0 1
Then Num(M ) is the ellipse with foci at {0, 1} and parameters (δ1 , δ2 , d1 , d2 ) =
(1, 1, b, 1).
Proof. Take u = xe1 + ye2 . We have hu, ui = 1 if and only if xσ(x) + yσ(y) = 1
and hu, M ui = bxσ(y) + yσ(y).

Lemma 7. Take n = 2 and the matrix
M=


0
0


1
0

Then Num(M ) is the ellipse with one focus at 0 and δ1 = δ2 = 1.
Proof. Take u = xe1 + ye2 . We have hu, ui = 1 if and only if xσ(x) + yσ(y) = 1
and hu, M ui = σ(x)y.

Proposition 4. Assume that h , i is definite up to 2 and take M ∈ M2,2 (L) with
two different eigenvalues, both in L. Assume either ∆2 = ∆ or that M has at least
one eigenvector u with hu, ui ∈ ∆. Then Num(M ) is an ellipse with two foci or the
∆-convex hull of its eigenvalues.
Proof. If ∆2 = ∆, then hw, wi ∈ ∆ \ {0} for any w ∈ L2 \ {0}, because h , i is
definite up to 2. Call c1 and c2 the two eigenvalues of M with c1 with eigenvalue
u with hu, ui ∈ ∆ \ {0}. Take t ∈ L∗ such that tσ(t) = 1/hu, ui and set f1 := tu.
Write u = a1 e1 + a2 e2 with ai ∈ L and set f2 := a2 e1 − a1 e2 . We have hfi , fj i = 0
1
(M − c1 I2×2 ) instead of
for all i 6= j. We have hf2 , f2 i = hf1 , f1 i = 1. Taking c2 −c
1
M we reduce to the case c1 = 0 and c2 = 1. Since f1 and f2 is an orthonormal basis,
we may use it instead of e1 and e2 to compute Num(M ). If f2 is an eigenvector
of M , then it has eigenvalue 1 and hence M is unitarily equivalent to 0I1×1 ⊕ I1×1
and hence Num(M ) = ∆ ∩ (1 − ∆) (the ∆-convex hull of 0 and 1).

Proposition 5. Assume either char(L) 6= 2 or that L is perfect. Assume that h , i
is definite up to 2 and take M ∈ M2,2 (L) with a unique eigenvalue, c. Then c ∈ L.
Assume also that either ∆2 = ∆ or that M has an eigenvector u with hu, ui ∈ ∆.
Then either M = cI2×2 and Num(M ) = {c} or Num(M ) is an ellipse with one
focus.
Proof. The characteristic polynomial of M has degree 2 and c is its only root over
L. We have c ∈ L, because in the case char(L) = 2 we assumed that L is perfect.
Taking M − cI2×2 instead of M we reduce to the case c = 0. By assumption M has
an eigenvector u with hu, ui ∈ ∆ \ {0}. Take t ∈ L∗ such that tσ(t) = 1/hu, ui and
set f1 := tu. Write u = a1 e1 + a2 e2 with ai ∈ L and set f2 := a2 e1 − a1 e2 . We have
hfi , fj i = 0 for all i 6= j. We have hf2 , f2 i = hf1 , f1 i = 1. Write M = (aij ), i = 1, 2,
in the orthonormal basis f1 and f2 . We have a11 = a21 = 0. Since 0 is the only
eigenvalue of M , we have a22 = 0. If f2 is an eigenvector of M , then M = 0I2×2 .
Hence we may assume that a12 6= 0. Apply Lemma 7 to (1/a12 )M .


8

E. BALLICO

4. Ordered fields
Let (K, <) be any ordered field. Fix a real closure R ⊇ K ([3, Theorem 1.3.2])
and call again < the ordering of R extending the ordering < of K. Set K0 := K.
For each i ≥ 1 let Ki ⊆ R be the field obtained adding to Ki−1 all the squareroots of the positive (with respect to the ordering < of R) elements of Ki−1 . Set
e := ∪Ki≥1 . K
e is the smallest subfield of R such that K ⊆ K
e and all positive
K
e are square ([6, Proposition 16.4]; ordered fields with this property
elements of K
e = K(i)
e
are called euclidean in [6, Proposition 16.2]. Set L
and use the complex
conjugation σ ′ to get a positive definite sesquilinear form up to any n. Since each
e σ) has ∆ = K
e ≥0 ⊇ ∆n and so ∆ = ∆n for all n.
square is contained in ∆, (L,

Proof of Proposition 1: If z = x + yi ∈ L with x, y ∈ K, then hz, zi = x2 +
y 2 ≥ 0 with equality if and only if x = y = 0. Hence h , i is definite up to
any m > 0. Since ∆ contains all squares, we have ∆m = ∆ for all m ≥ 2. If
Num(M ) = {c} for some c ∈ K, then M = cIn×n by [2, Proposition 1]. Now
assume the existence of a, b ∈ Num(M ) such that a 6= b and take u, v ∈ Ln such
that hu, ui = hv, vi = 1, hu, M ui = a and hv, M vi = b. By Lemma 1 we may
assume that u = e1 and v = e2 . Set N := M|(Le1 +Le2 ) . We have a, b ∈ Num(N )
and Num(N ) ⊆ Num(M ). Write N = (aij ), i, j = 1, 2. We have a11 = a ∈ K,
a22 = b ∈ K, a21 = hv, M ui = hM v, ui = σ(hu, M vi) = σ(a12 ). Hence N † = N .
Write a12 = x + yi with x, y ∈ K. Let f (t) be the characteristic polinomial of N .
22
I2×2 instead of N we reduce to the case a11 = −a22 , i.e. N has
Taking N − a11 +a
2
trace 0, i.e. f (t) = t2 − a211 − a12 σ(a12 ) = t2 − a211 − x2 − y 2 . Since sums of squares
of elements of K are squares by our assumption on K, we have f (t) = t2 − d2 for
some d ∈ K. Hence all the eigenvalues of N are contained in K. If d 6= 0, then
N has two different eigenvalues, d and −d, and Lemma 5 gives that N is unitarily
equivalent to (−d)I1×1 ⊕ dI1×1 . In this case we apply Remark 3. If d = 0, then
a11 = x = y = 0 and so N = 0I2×2 . Thus Num(N ) = {0}, contradicting the
assumption a 6= b.

Proposition 6. Take K with an ordering < such that each positive element of K is
a square. Take L := K(i) with σ induced by the map i 7→ −i. Take M ∈ M2,2 (K).
Then Num(M ) is either a point, or a ∆-segment or a ∆-ellipse with one or 2 foci.
22
I2×2 instead of M we
Proof. Write M = (mij ), i, j = 1, 2. Using M − m11 +m
2
reduce to the case m11 + m12 = 0. Hence the characteristic polynomial f (t) of M
is of the form f (t) = t2 + d for some d ∈ K. If d ≤ 0 (resp. d > 0), then it has 2
roots in K (resp. L), because every positive element of K has a square root in K.
If d 6= 0, then we apply Proposition 4. If d = 0, then either M = 0I2×2 or we apply
Proposition 5.


Proof of Proposition 2: Let R be a real closure of (K, <). Since (K, <) is euclidean,
we have ∆ = ∆m for every m > 0 and h , iσ′ is definite up to any m > 0. Take
u, v ∈ Ln such that hu, ui = hv, vi = 1, a = hu, M ui and b = hv, M vi. Since a 6= b,
u and v are not proportional. Let W be the linear span u and v. By Lemma 1 we
may assume n = 2 with the matrix N := M|W . If N has a unique eigenvalue, c,
then we apply Proposition 5. If N has two different eigenvalues, both of them in L,
we use Proposition 5. Now assume that N has two eigenvalues ci ∈ R(i), i = 1, 2,
none of them in L. Since the characteristic polynomial of N has coefficients in K,

NUMERICAL RANGE

9

these eigenvalues generate a degree 2 Galois extension K1 of K, i.e. there are a
non-square m ∈ K such that K1 (g) with g 2 = e. Since (K, <) is euclidean, e < 0
and −e = f 2 for some f ∈ K. Thus K1 = K(i) = L, a contradiction.

If K is real closed, then Proposition 2 is trivial, because in that case Num(M )
is a semi-algebraically connect bounded and closed semi-algebraic subset of K (see
Example 4), i.e. a closed interval ([3, Proposition 2.1.7]).
Remark 4. Take as K a real closed ordered field ([3, §1.2]) and take L = K(i)
′
with σ the complex conjugation. Thus L is algebraically closed, σ ′ = σ and σ 2
is the identity. Therefore for every n > 0 h , i and h , iσ′ are definite up to n.
Since K≥0 is the set of all squares of elements of K, we have ∆n ⊆ K≥0 = ∆ and
so ∆n = ∆ for all n. The set S 2n−1 := {u ∈ Ln | hu, ui = 1} is a closed and
bounded subset of Ln = K 2n for the euclidean topology and the map u 7→ hu, M ui
is real algebraic. Thus Num(M ) is a closed and bounded semi-algebraic subset of L
([3, Proposition 2.5.7]). Since the sphere S 2n−1 is semi-algebraically connected in
the sense of [3, Definition 2.4.2], Num(M ) is semi-algebraically connected. By [3,
Proposition 2.5.13] Num(M ) is semi-algebraically path connected. Take a, b ∈ L
with a 6= b. The ∆-convex hull A ⊆ L is the segment {ta+(1−t)a}t∈K,0≤t≤1. Hence
∆-convexity is preserved by any K-affine map. Since L is algebraically closed, to
prove that Num(M ) is convex, it is sufficient to prove that ellipse with one or two
foci are ∆-convex, but we prefer to follow the convexity proof given in [9]. To show
that ellipses with one foci are disks of L = K 2 (resp. an ellipse with two foci plus its
interior in the sense of the euclidean topology) we may use the following remarks.
First of all we reduce to the case δ1 = δ2 = 1. Under this assumption they are
the numerical range of the matrix M appearing in Lemma 7 (resp. Lemma 6). On
L \ {0} the function |z| is semi-algebraic and so ℜ(z/|z|) and ℑ(z/|z|). We use this
functions instead of the functions cos and sin to show that {|z| ≤ 1/2} = Num(M )
in the case of Lemma 7 following the proof in [5, Example 1, page 1]. To adapt
the proof of [5, Example 2, pages 2,3 and Lemma 1.1] to get the ∆-convexity in
the set-up of Lemma 6 we need to make sense of some trigonometric expression
like sin and cos; if K 6= R we cannot use the real exponential function to get the
trigonometric function ([1]). With our substitute of the functions cos and sin, the
first one is even and the second one is odd. For any fixed z ∈ S 1 := {|z| = 1} there
are a, b ∈ S 1 with a2 = z and b3 = z. Instead of cos(u + v) (resp. sin(u + v)) we
may use cos(u) cos(v) − sin(u) sin(v) (resp. sin(u) cos(v) + cos(u) sin(v)).
Theorem 2 easily follows from the following result ([9, Lemma 2]; the proof in
[9, page 4] works with minimal modifications).
Proposition 7. Assume that K is a real closed field and that L = K(i) with σ the
complex conjugation. Fix M ∈ Mn,n (L) such that M † = M and any t ∈ L. Then
−1
−1
either νM
(t) = ∅ or νM
(t) is semi-algebraically arc-connected.
−1
Proof. If t ∈
/ K, then νM
(t) = ∅ by Lemma 4 and hence we may assume t ∈ K. If
t ∈ K, then M − tIn×n is Hermitian. Since Num(M − tIn×n ) = Num(M )− t, taking
M − tIn×n instead of M we reduce to the case t = 0. Since U M U † is Hermitian
and Num(U M U † ) = Num(M ) for every unitary U , we reduce to the case in which
M is diagonal, say M = (mij ) with mii ∈ K and mij = 0 for all i 6= j. Take
−1
a = (a1 , . . . , an ) ∈ νM
(0). For all (z1 , . . . , zn ) ∈ Ln with σ(zi )zi = 1 for all i we
−1
have (z1 a1 , . . . , zn an ) ∈ νM
(0), because M is a diagonal matrix. Since the circle

10

E. BALLICO

S 1 = {σ(z)z = 1} ⊂ L is semi-algebraically arc-connected, it is sufficient to prove
−1
that if a = (a1 , . . . , an ), b = (b1 , . . . , bn ) ∈ νM
(0) with ai , bi ∈ K for all i, then a
−1
and b are connected by a semi-algebraic arc contained in νM
(0). As in [9, page 4]
it is sufficient to use the semi-algebraic arc u(t)
=
(u
(t),
.
.
.
un (t)) from the unit
1
q

−1
interval [0, 1] into νM
(0) ∩ K n with uj (t) =

(1 − t)a2j + tb2j .



Proof of Theorem 2: ([9, page 4]) Fix a, b ∈ Num(M ) such that a 6= b. Taking
1
b−a (M − aIn×n ) instead of M we reduce to the case a = 0 and b = 1. Since ∆
is the set of all non-negative elements of K, it is sufficient to prove that Num(M )
contains the closed interval [0, 1] ⊂ K. Take u, v ∈ Ln such that hu, ui = hu, ui =
1, hu, M ui = 0 and hv, M vi = 1. Since {0, 1} ∈ K, we have hu, M+ ui = 0,
hu, M− ui = 0, hv, M+ vi = 1 and hv, M− − vi = 0. Since M− is Hermitian, and
−1
−1
(0) with m(0) = u
(0), there is a semi-algebraic arc m : [0, 1] −→ νM
{u, v} ⊂ νM
−
−
and m(1) = v (Proposition 7). We have hm(t), M m(t)i = hm(t), M+ m(t)i, because
hm(t), M− m(t)i = 0 for all t ∈ [0, 1]. Since M+ is Hermitian, hm(t), M+ m(t)i ∈ K
for all K. The set Z of all hm(t), M+ m(t)i, t ∈ [0, 1], is a semi-algebraic arc
contained in K and hence it is an interval ([3, Proposition 2.1.7]). Since {0, 1} ⊂
Z ⊆ Num(M ), then [0, 1] ⊆ Num(M ).

Proof of Corollary 1: Identify L2 with K 2 + iK 2 sending any z = (z1 , z2 ) ∈ L2 to
(ℜz1 , ℜz2 , ℑz1 , ℑz2 ) and then identify any (a1 , a2 ) ∈ K 2 with a1 + ia2 ∈ L. Take
A := M + iN ∈ Mn,n (L). Since M and N are Hermitian, we have A+ = M , A− =
N , Num(M ) ⊂ K, Num(N ) ⊂ K and c ∈ Num(A) if and only if ℜc ∈ Num(M )
and ℑc ∈ Num(N ). Apply Theorem 2 to A.

References
[1] N. Alling, On exponentially closed fields, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 13 (1962), no. 5, 706–711.
[2] E. Ballico, On the numerical range of square matrices with coefficients in a degree 2 Galois
extension, arXiv: 1611.01915.
[3] J. Bochnak, M. Coste and M.-F. Roy, Real Algebraic Geometry, Springer, Berlin, 1998.
[4] J. I. Coons, J. Jenkins, D. Knowles, R. A. Luke and P. X. Rault, Numerical ranges over finite
fields, Linear Algebra Appl. 501 (2016), 37–47.
[5] K. E. Gustafson and D. K. M. Rao, Numerical Range. The Field of Values of Linear Operators
and Matrices, Springer, New York, 1997.
[6] R. Hartshorne, Geometry: Euclid and beyond, Undergraduate Texts in Mathematics,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000.
[7] S. Lange, Algebra, Springer, Berlin, 2002.
[8] C.-K. Li and Y.-T. Poon, Convexity of the joint numerical range, SIAM J. Matrix Anal.
Appl. 21 (1999), no. 2, 668–678.
[9] P.J. Psarrakos and M.J. Tsatsomeros, Numerical range: (in) a matrix nutshell, Notes, National Technical University, Athens, Greece, 2004.
Dept. of Mathematics, University of Trento, 38123 Povo (TN), Italy
E-mail address: ballico@science.unitn.it

