The intrinsic metric on the unit sphere of a normed space

Abstract: Let $S$ denote the unit sphere of a real normed space. We show that the intrinsic metric on $S$ is strongly equivalent to the induced metric on $S$. Specifically, for all $x,y\in S$, \[ \|x-y\|\leq d(x,y)\leq\sqrt{2}\pi\|x-y\|, \] where $d$ denotes the intrinsic metric on $S$.

\section*{Correction}
The authors would like to thank the anonymous referee who pointed out the result
\cite[Theorem~3.5]{Schaffer} to them. This result solves the problem posed in this manuscript
and far predates it, (it actually proves Conjecture~\ref{conj} stated below).

The authors take some solace in the following:
That the result is true, with optimal constant $2$, as conjectured.
That their initial \emph{this-really-should-exist-somewhere-in-the-literature} gut feeling was actually correct.
And finally, that this result is now much easier to find by googling for the obvious ``intrinsic metric unit sphere''.

\section{Introduction}

Consider the following problem which arose in other questions under
investigation by the first author:
\begin{question*}
For the unit sphere of a real normed space, is the induced metric
strongly equivalent to the sphere's intrinsic metric?
\end{question*}
This paper will answer this question in the affirmative.

More precisely: For a unit sphere $S$ of a real normed space, the
length of a path $\rho:[0,1]\to S$ (assumed to be continuous), is
given by
\[
L(\rho):=\sup\set{\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(t_{j})-\rho(t_{j+1})}}{\begin{array}{c}
n\in\mathbb{N},\\
0=t_{0}<\ldots<t_{n}=1
\end{array}},
\]
and the intrinsic metric on $S$ is defined by taking the infimum
of the above quantity over all paths between two points. I.e., for
$x,y\in S$, we define the \emph{intrinsic metric on $S$} by
\[
d(x,y):=\inf\set{L(\rho)}{\begin{array}{c}
\rho:[0,1]\to S\ \mbox{continuous},\\
\rho(0)=x,\ \rho(1)=y
\end{array}}.
\]
The above question is then rephrased as: For the unit sphere $S$
in a normed space, do there exist constants $A,B>0$ such that, for
all $x,y\in S$,
\[
A\norm{x-y}\leq d(x,y)\leq B\norm{x-y}?
\]
To the authors' knowledge, the answer to this question does not appear
in the literature\footnote{False! See the correction above!},
a fact that is perhaps more surprising than the
positive solution to the problem which will be presented in this paper.

The problem can essentially be reduced to one in two dimensions and
apart from relying on John Ellipsoids---a fundamental structure from
local theory---the result follows from entirely elementary (albeit
somewhat technical) arguments.

We will now describe the structure of the paper.

After introducing the needed notation, definitions and preliminary
results in Section~\ref{sec:Preliminaries}, in Section~\ref{sec:R2-results}
our goal will be to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:main-result2}:

\setcounter{thm}{5}
\setcounter{section}{3}

\begin{thm}
For any norm $\norm{\cdot}$ on a real vector space $V$, let $d$
denote the intrinsic metric on the unit sphere $S$ of $V$. For all
$x,y\in S$,
\[
\norm{x-y}\leq d(x,y)\leq\sqrt{2}\pi\norm{x-y}.
\]

\end{thm}
\setcounter{thm}{0}
\setcounter{section}{1}

A crucial ingredient is that of the John Ellipsoid: The largest ellipsoid
(Euclidean ball of largest volume) that can be contained inside a
unit ball of a finite dimensional normed space.
\def\johncite{\customizepaperstyle{lms}{(}John's Theorem \cite[Theorem 12.1.4]{AlbiacKalton}\customizepaperstyle{lms}{)}}%
\begin{thm}[\johncite]
\label{thm:John's-Theorem}
Let $W$ be any normed space of dimension $n>1$. With $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$
denoting the Euclidean norm on $\mathbb{R}^{n}$, there exists a norm one
isomorphism $T:(\mathbb{R}^{n},\norm{\cdot}_{E})\to W$ with inverse $T^{-1}:W\to(\mathbb{R}^{n},\norm{\cdot}_{E})$
whose norm is at most $\sqrt{n}$.
\end{thm}
Specifically, all two-dimensional subspaces of a normed space has
a Banach-Mazur distance of at most $\sqrt{2}$ from two-dimensional
Euclidean space. Of course, the intrinsic metric on a normed space
$V$'s unit sphere is bounded above by the ``planar'' intrinsic
metric: where all paths in the defining infimum are taken to live
in any two-dimensional subspace of $V$. This allows us to reduce
the question to $\mathbb{R}^{2}$, where $S$ lies between a Euclidian unit
sphere $\sphere E$ and $\sqrt{2}\sphere E$.

In this setting, the crucial ingredients are Lemmas~\ref{lem:estimate_segment}
and~\ref{lem:norm_decreasing}, which allows us to conclude the local
bi\hyp{}Lipschitzness of the map $\sigma:S\to\sphere E$ defined
by $\sigma(x):=x/\norm x_{E}$ where both $S$ and $\sphere E$ are
endowed with the Euclidean induced metric. Since the Euclidean induced--
and intrinsic metrics on $\sphere E$ are easily calculated and related
(Lemma~\ref{lem:bound-eclidean-arclength-by-shortcut}), our main
results, Theorems~\ref{thm:main-result1} and~\ref{thm:main-result2},
then easily follow.

\medskip

We note that the constant $\sqrt{2}\pi$ obtained in our main result
(Theorem~\ref{thm:main-result2}) is likely not optimal. In two dimensions,
the $\norm{\cdot}_{\infty}$-norm provides a worst case for the John
Ellipsoid. Let $S_{\infty}$ be the unit sphere of this norm, with
intrinsic metric $d_{\infty}$, then for $x,y\in S_{\infty}$, it
is easily seen that $\norm{x-y}_{\infty}\leq d_{\infty}(x,y)\leq2\norm{x-y}_{\infty}$.
This prompts the following conjecture:
\begin{conjecture}\label{conj}\footnote{This conjecture is proven true in \cite[Theorem~3.5]{Schaffer}.}
For any norm $\norm{\cdot}$ on a real vector space $V$, let $d$
denote the intrinsic metric on the unit sphere $S$ of $V$. For all
$x,y\in S$,
\[
\norm{x-y}\leq d(x,y)\leq2\norm{x-y}.
\]

\end{conjecture}

\section{Definitions, notation and preliminary results\label{sec:Preliminaries}}

This section will explicitly define all notation used in this paper.
Since we will translate between many different metrics on many different
sets, we will take extreme care to make our notation as explicit as
possible.

Let $V$ be a real vector space. Let $A$ be an arbitrary index symbol
and $\norm{\cdot}_{A}$ any norm on $V$. We will denote unit sphere,
closed unit ball and open unit ball with respect to $\norm{\cdot}_{A}$
respectively by $\sphere A$, $\closedball A$ and $\openball A.$

For any subset $M\subseteq V$, we define the \emph{induced metric}
$d_{A}:M\to\mathbb{R}_{\geq0}$ on $M$ by $d_{A}(x,y):=\norm{x-y}_{A}$ for
$v,w\in M$.

We define the \emph{$A$-$M$-path-space} by
\[
\mathcal{P}_{A}(M):=\set{\rho}{\rho:[0,1]\to M,\ \norm{\cdot}_{A}-\mbox{continuous}},
\]
and the \emph{planar $A$-$M$-path-space} by
\[
\planarpathspace AM:=\set{\rho\in\pathspace AM}{\dim\parenth{\textup{span}\parenth{\textup{Im}\rho}}=2}.
\]
We define the \emph{$A$-path-length operator} $L_{A}:\mathcal{P}_{A}(V)\to\mathbb{R}_{\geq0}\cup\{\infty\}$
by
\[
\lengthoperator A(\rho):=\sup\set{\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(t_{j})-\rho(t_{j+1})}_{A}}{\begin{array}{c}
n\in\mathbb{N},\\
0=t_{0}<\ldots<t_{n}=1
\end{array}}\quad(\rho\in\mathcal{P}_{A}(V)).
\]
We define the \emph{(extended) $A$-$M$-intrinsic metric }$\pathmetric AM:M\to\mathbb{R}_{\geq0}\cup\{\infty\}$,
by
\[
\pathmetric AM(v,w):=\inf\set{\lengthoperator A(\rho)}{\begin{array}{c}
\rho\in\pathspace AM,\ \rho(0)=v,\ \rho(1)=w\end{array}}\quad(v,w\in M)
\]
and the \emph{(extended) $A$-$M$-planar-intrinsic metric }$\planarpathmetric AM:M\to\mathbb{R}_{\geq0}\cup\{\infty\}$
by
\[
\planarpathmetric AM(v,w):=\inf\set{\lengthoperator A(\rho)}{\begin{array}{c}
\rho\in\planarpathspace AM,\ \rho(0)=v,\ \rho(1)=w\end{array}}\quad(v,w\in M).
\]

We introduce the following abbreviated notation that will aid in readability
of the paper: For (extended) metrics $d$ and $d'$ on some set $D$,
subset $M\subseteq D$, and constant $K>0$, by
\[
\mbox{``}d\leq Kd'\quad\mbox{on}\quad M\mbox{''}
\]
we will mean $d(a,b)\leq Kd'(a,b)$ for all $a,b\in M$.

For any real normed space $(V,\norm{\cdot}_{A})$ and subset $M\subseteq V$,
since $\planarpathspace AM\subseteq\pathspace AM\subseteq\pathspace AV$,
the chain of inequalities
\[
d_{A}=\pathmetric AV\leq\pathmetric AM\leq\planarpathmetric AM\leq\infty\quad\mbox{on}\quad M
\]
is easy to verify.

An elementary calculation establishes the following lemma:
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:bound-eclidean-arclength-by-shortcut}With $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$
denoting the Euclidean norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$,
\[
d_{E}\leq\pathmetric E{\sphere E}\leq\frac{\pi}{2}d_{E}\quad\mbox{on}\quad\sphere E.
\]

\end{lem}
If $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ is endowed with the euclidean norm $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$
arising from an inner product $\duality{\cdot}{\cdot}$, for elements
$x,y\in\mathbb{R}^{2}$ the \emph{ray from $x$ through $y$ }is denoted by
$\ray xy$ and defined by $\ray xy:=\set{(1-t)x+ty}{t\geq0}$. For a point
$x$ and points $y,z\in\mathbb{R}^{2}$ distinct from $x$, when referring to the
size of the angle between $\ray xy$ and $\ray xz$ we will mean the
quantity
\[
\arccos\parenth{\frac{\duality{y-x}{z-x}}{\norm{y-x}_{E}\norm{z-x}_{E}}}\in[0,\pi].
\]
For points $v,w,x,y\in\mathbb{R}^{2}$, we will say \emph{the ray
$\ray xy$ lies between the rays $\ray xv$ and $\ray xw$ } if $v,w$ and $x$
are in general position and $\ray xy\cap\set{(1-t)v+tw}{t\in[0,1]}\neq\emptyset$, or,
$\ray xy =\ray xv = \ray xw$.

\section{The intrinsic metric on unit spheres in $\protect\mathbb{R}^{2}$\label{sec:R2-results}}

In this section we will prove our main results. Although somewhat
technical, our results follow mostly from elementary trigonometry and Euclidian
plane geometry.

Let $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ denote the Euclidean norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and
let $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ satisfying $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\subseteq K\closedball E$
for some $K\geq1$. A large part of our attention will be devoted
to proving that the map $\sigma:\sphere X\to\sphere E$ defined by
$\sigma(x):=x/\norm x_{E}$ is locally bi\hyp{}Lipschitz when both
$\sphere X$ and $\sphere E$ are both endowed with the Euclidean
induced metrics. Once this has been achieved through Lemmas~\ref{lem:estimate_segment}
and~\ref{lem:norm_decreasing}, a straightforward calculation will
prove our main results Theorems~\ref{thm:main-result1} and~\ref{thm:main-result2}.

\medskip

Let $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ denote the Euclidean norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and
let $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any other norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ satisfying
$\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X$. We will first relate points
on $\sphere X$ to lines tangent to $\sphere E$. Specifically, for
any point $x\in\sphere X$ that is not in $\sphere E$, the two lines
through $x$ that are tangent to $\sphere E$ are such that points
in $\sphere X$ ``close to'' $x$ are ``wedged between'' the tangent
lines. Also, if $x\in\sphere X\cap\sphere E$, then the whole of $\sphere X$
lies on the same side of the line $\set{y\in\mathbb{R}^{2}}{\duality xy=1}.$

Let $x\in\mathbb{R}^{2}\setminus\openball E$, and let $\tau(x)\in\sphere E$
be a point on a tangent line to $\sphere X$ through $x$. Then the
angle between $r_{0,x}$ and $r_{0,\tau(x)}$ equals $\arccos(\norm x_{E}^{-1})$.
Let $x^{\perp}\in\sphere X\cap\{x\}^{\perp}$ be such that $\duality{\tau(x)}{x^{\bot}}\geq0$.
If we now define
\[
a(x):=\cos\left(\arccos\left(\frac{1}{\norm x_{E}}\right)\right)\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}=\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}^{2}}
\]
and
\[
b(x):=\sin\left(\arccos\left(\frac{1}{\norm x_{E}}\right)\right)x^{\perp}=\sqrt{1-\frac{1}{\norm x_{E}^{2}}}x^{\perp},
\]
then $\tau(x)=a(x)+b(x)$.
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:tangent-lines} Let $\duality{\cdot}{\cdot}$ be an inner
product and $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ be the associated Euclidean norm on
$\mathbb{R}^{2}$. Let $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any other norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$
such that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X$. For all $x\in\sphere X$,
\begin{enumerate}
\item For all $t\in\mathbb{R}$, $\duality{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}{\tau(x)}=1.$
\item For all $t\in[0,1]$, $\norm{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}_{X}\leq1$.
\item For all $t>1$, $\norm{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}_{X}\geq1$.
\item If $x\in\sphere X\cap\sphere E$ and $y\in\sphere X$, then $\duality xy\leq1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We prove (1). Let $x\in\sphere X$. For all $t\in\mathbb{R}$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\duality{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}{\tau(x)} & = & t\duality x{\tau(x)}+(1-t)\duality{\tau(x)}{\tau(x)}\\
 & = & t\frac{\duality xx}{\norm x_{E}^{2}}+(1-t)\\
 & = & t+(1-t)\\
 & = & 1.
\end{eqnarray*}

We prove (2). Let $x\in\sphere X$. Since $\tau(x)\in\sphere E\subseteq\closedball X$,
and $\closedball X$ is convex, the result follows.

We prove (3). Let $x\in\sphere X$. Since $\norm x_{X}=1$, if $\tau(x)=x$,
then, $\norminline{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}_{X}=1$, and the result is trivial.
We therefore assume $\tau(x)\neq x$. Since $\tau(x)\in\sphere E$,
so that$\norm{\tau(x)}_{X}\leq1$, by the reverse triangle inequality
and intermediate value theorem there exists some $t_{0}\leq0$ such
that $1=\norminline{t_{0}x+(1-t_{0})\tau(x)}_{X}=\norminline{1x+(1-1)\tau(x)}_{X}$
(here we used $\tau(x)\neq x$). Since the map $t\mapsto\norminline{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}_{X}$
is convex, we cannot have that $\norminline{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}_{X}<1$
for any $t>1$, as this would contradict $1=\norminline{t_{0}x+(1-t_{0})\tau(x)}_{X}=\norminline{1x+(1-1)\tau(x)}_{X}$.
We conclude that $\norminline{tx+(1-t)\tau(x)}_{X}\geq1$ for all
$t>1$.

We prove (4). Let $x\in\sphere X\cap\sphere E$ and $y\in\sphere X$,
but suppose $\duality xy>1$.

If $y$ and $x$ are linearly dependent, then $\norm y_{X}>1$, contradicting
$y\in\sphere X$, and we therefore may assume that $y$ and $x$ are
linearly independent.

Let $L$ denote the line through $x$ and $y$, parameterized by the
affine map $\eta(t):=(1-t)y+tx$ for $t\in\mathbb{R}$. The line $L$ is not
tangent to $\sphere E$ (else we would have $\duality xy=1$). Therefore
$L$ intersects $\sphere E$ in two distinct points, one being $x$;
let $t_{0}\in\mathbb{R}$ be such that $\eta(t_{0})\in\sphere E\cap L$ is
the other. We must have $t_{0}>1$, since $1<\duality x{\eta(t)}$
for $t\in[0,1)$. Since $\eta$ is an affine map and $(\mathbb{R}^{2},\norm{\cdot}_{E})$
is a strictly convex space,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{\eta\parenth{\frac{1+t_{0}}{2}}}_{X} & = & \norm{\frac{\eta(t_{0})+\eta(1)}{2}}_{X}\\
 & \leq & \norm{\frac{\eta(t_{0})+\eta(1)}{2}}_{E}\\
 & < & 1.
\end{eqnarray*}

Let $\lambda:=2(1+t_{0})^{-1}\in(0,1)$, so that $\lambda\parenth{\frac{1+t_{0}}{2}}+(1-\lambda)0=1$.
Then, again since $\eta$ is affine,
\begin{eqnarray*}
1 & = & \norm x_{X}\\
 & = & \norm{\eta(1)}_{X}\\
 & = & \norm{\eta\parenth{\lambda\parenth{\frac{1+t_{0}}{2}}+(1-\lambda)0}}_{X}\\
 & = & \norm{\lambda\eta\parenth{\frac{1+t_{0}}{2}}+(1-\lambda)\eta(0)}_{X}\\
 & \leq & \lambda\norm{\eta\parenth{\frac{1+t_{0}}{2}}}_{X}+(1-\lambda)\norm{\eta(0)}_{X}\\
 & = & \lambda\norm{\eta\parenth{\frac{1+t_{0}}{2}}}_{X}+(1-\lambda)\norm y_{X}\\
 & < & \lambda\cdot1+(1-\lambda)\cdot1\\
 & = & 1,
\end{eqnarray*}
which is absurd. We conclude that $\duality xy\leq1$ for all $x\in\sphere X\cap\sphere E$
and all ${y\in\sphere X}$.
\end{proof}
Next, we show that for points $x,y\in\sphere X$ that are ``sufficiently
close'', the size of the angle formed by the rays $\ray 0x$ and $\ray 0y$
bounds the size of the acute angle formed by the ray $\ray xy$ and
the perpendicular line to $\ray 0x$ through $x$.

\begin{lem}
\label{cor:angles} Let $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ denote the Euclidean norm
on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ such
that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X$. Let $x,y\in\sphere X$
and let $x^{\bot}\in\sphere E\cap\{x\}^{\bot}$ be such that $\duality{x^{\bot}}y\geq0$
and define $v:=x+x^{\bot}$. If $K\geq1$ and $x,y\in\sphere X$ are
such that $\norm x_{E}\leq K$ and the size of the angle between the
rays $\ray 0x$ and $\ray 0y$ is at most $\arccos(K^{-1})$, then
$\alpha$, the size of the angle between the rays $\ray xv$ and $\ray xy$,
is also at most $\arccos(K^{-1})$.\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As a visual aid, the reader is referred to Figure~\ref{figure:angles}.

\customizepaperstyle{lms}{%
	\begin{figure}[t]
		\centering
		\input{diagram_anglebound3}\caption{}
		\label{figure:angles}
	\end{figure}%
}
\customizepaperstyle{ams}{%
	\begin{figure}[H]
		\centering
		\input{diagram_anglebound3}\caption{}
		\label{figure:angles}
	\end{figure}%
}

Let $\beta:=\arccos(K^{-1})$ and $u\in\sphere E$ be such that $\duality{x^{\bot}}u>0$
and that the size of the angle formed by the rays $\ray 0x$ and $\ray 0u$
equals $\beta$ (i.e., $\duality xu=\norm x_{E}\cos\beta$). Let $\tau_{1}(x),\tau_{2}(x)\in\sphere E$
be the point(s) on the lines through $x$ that are tangent to $\sphere E$,
such that $\duality{x^{\bot}}{\tau_{1}(x)}\geq0$. Let
\[
w:=\begin{cases}
v & x=\tau_{1}(x)=\tau_{2}(x)\\
2x-\tau_{2}(x) & \mbox{otherwise,}
\end{cases}
\]
so that $w\in\ray{\tau_{2}(x)}x$ is distinct from $x$, and is such
that $\ray xw\subseteq\ray{\tau_{2}(x)}x$. Let $P_{u}$ denote the
orthogonal projection onto the span of $u$. Then size of the angle
formed between the rays $\ray x{P_{u}x}$ and $\ray xv$ is exactly
$\beta$. Since $\norm x_{E}\leq K$, the point $P_{u}x$ lies on
the line segment $\set{tu}{t\in(0,1]}$ (if $\norm x_{E}=K$, then
$P_{u}x=u=\tau_{1}(x)$), and therefore the size of angle between
rays $\ray xu$ and $\ray xv$ is at most $\beta$. Since $\ray x{\tau_{1}(x)}$
is between the rays $\ray xu$ and $\ray xv$, and since $\ray xv$
bisects the angle formed by the rays $\ray x{\tau_{1}(x)}$ and $\ray xw$,
the size of the angle formed by $r_{x,v}$ and $\ray xw$ is also
at most $\beta$.
Finally, by Lemma~\ref{lem:tangent-lines} (2),(3) and (4) and the fact that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X$, the ray $\ray xy$
lies either between the rays $\ray xu$ and $\ray xv$ or the rays
$\ray xv$ and $\ray xw$ (The point $y$ can only lie in the shaded
area in Figure~\ref{figure:angles}).
We conclude that $\alpha$,
the size of the angle between rays $\ray xv$ and $\ray xy$, is at
most $\beta=\arccos(K^{-1})$.\end{proof}
\begin{lem}
\label{lem:estimate_segment} Let $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ denote the Euclidean
norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$
such that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\subseteq K\closedball E$
for some $K\geq1$. If $x,y\in\sphere X$ is such that $\theta$,
the size of angle between the rays $r_{0,x}$ and $r_{0,y}$, is at
most $\arccos(K^{-1})$, then
\[
\norm{x-y}_{E}\leq K^{2}\norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}_{E}.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As a visual aid, the reader is referred to Figure~\ref{figure:norm-bounf-figure}.

\customizepaperstyle{ams}{%
	\begin{figure}[H]
	\centering
	\input{diagram_normbound}\caption{}
	\label{figure:norm-bounf-figure}
	\end{figure}%
}
\customizepaperstyle{lms}{%
	\begin{figure}[b]
	\centering
	\input{diagram_normbound}\caption{}
	\label{figure:norm-bounf-figure}
	\end{figure}%
}

Let $x^{\bot}\in\sphere E\cap\{x\}^{\bot}$ be such that $\duality{x^{\bot}}y>0$
and define $v:=x+x^{\bot}.$ Let $P_{x}$ and $P_{y}$ be the orthogonal
projections onto the span of $x$ and $y$ respectively. Define $u:=P_{y}(x/\norm x_{E})$,
and $\lambda:=\norm{P_{x}y}_{E}^{-1}$ so that $P_{x}(\lambda y)=x/\norm x_{E}$.
Let $\alpha$ denote the size of the angle formed by the rays $\ray xy$
and $\ray xv$. We note that then size of the angle formed between
the rays $\ray{x/\norm x_{E}}{\lambda y}$ and $\ray{x/\norm x_{E}}u$
also equals~$\theta$. Elementary trigonometry will establish
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{x-y}_{E} & = & \frac{1}{\cos\alpha}\norm{y-P_{x}y}_{E}\\
 & = & \frac{1}{\lambda\cos\alpha}\norm{\lambda y-P_{x}(\lambda y)}_{E}\\
 & = & \frac{1}{\lambda\cos\alpha}\norm{\lambda y-\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}}_{E}\\
 & = & \frac{1}{\lambda\cos\alpha\cos\theta}\norm{u-\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}}_{E}.
\end{eqnarray*}

Now we note that $\norm{u-\frac{x}{\norm x}}_{E}\leq\norm{\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}-\frac{x}{\norm x}}_{E}$,
since $u$ the is the closest point (with respect to $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$)
in the span of $y$ to the point $x/\norm x_{E}$. Also, by Lemma~\ref{cor:angles}
we have $\alpha\leq\arccos(K^{-1})$, so that $\cos\alpha\geq K^{-1}$.
Furthermore $\lambda^{-1}=\norm{P_{x}y}_{E}=\norm y_{E}\cos\theta\leq K\cos\theta$.
Finally we conclude\belowdisplayskip=-12pt
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{x-y}_{E} & = & \frac{1}{\lambda\cos\alpha\cos\theta}\norm{u-\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}}_{E}\\
 & \leq & \frac{K\cos\theta}{\cos\alpha\cos\theta}\norm{\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}-\frac{x}{\norm x}}_{E}\\
 & = & K^{2}\norm{\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}-\frac{x}{\norm x}}_{E}.
\end{eqnarray*}\qedhere
\end{proof}

\begin{lem}
\label{lem:norm_decreasing} Let $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ denote the Euclidean
norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$
such that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X$. If $x,y\in\sphere X$,
then
\[
\norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}_{E}\leq\norm{x-y}_{E}.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As a visual aid we refer the reader to Figure~\ref{figure:euclidean-norm-bound-figure}.

\customizepaperstyle{ams}{%
	\begin{figure}[H]
	\centering
	\input{diagram_lastlemma}\caption{}
	\label{figure:euclidean-norm-bound-figure}
	\end{figure}
}
\customizepaperstyle{lms}{%
	\begin{figure}[H]
	\centering
	\input{diagram_lastlemma}\caption{}
	\label{figure:euclidean-norm-bound-figure}
	\end{figure}
}

Let $x,y\in\sphere X$. By exchanging the roles of $x$ and $y$ if
necessary, we may assume $\norm y_{E}\geq\norm x_{E}\geq1$. Let $P_{y}$
be the orthogonal projection onto the span of $y$ and let $u:=P_{y}\parenth{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}}$.
Then $\norm u_{E}\leq1$ and $\norm{y/\norm x_{E}}_{E}\geq1=\norm{y/\norm y_{E}}_{E}$.
Then, by the Pythagorean theorem,\belowdisplayskip=-12pt
\begin{eqnarray*}
\norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}_{E}^{2} & = & \norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-u}_{E}^{2}+\norm{u-\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}_{E}^{2}\\
 & \leq & \norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-u}_{E}^{2}+\norm{u-\frac{y}{\norm x_{E}}}_{E}^{2}\\
 & = & \norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-\frac{y}{\norm x_{E}}}_{E}^{2}\\
 & = & \frac{1}{\norm x_{E}^{2}}\norm{x-y}_{E}^{2}\\
 & \leq & \norm{x-y}_{E}^{2}.
\end{eqnarray*}\qedhere
\end{proof}
In essence, the previous two Lemmas together establish that the local
bi\hyp{}Lipschitzness of the map $\sigma:\sphere X\to\sphere E$
defined by $\sigma(x):=x/\norm x_{E}$ when $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\subseteq K\closedball E$.

We will now use the previous results to prove one of our main results
which relates the intrinsic metric on $\sphere X$ to the induced
metric on $\sphere X$ when $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\subseteq K\closedball E$
for some $K\geq1$.
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:main-result1} Let $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ denote the Euclidean
norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ be any norm on $\mathbb{R}^{2}$
such that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\subseteq K\closedball E$
for some $K\geq1$. Then
\[
d_{X}\leq\pathmetric X{\sphere X}\leq K^{3}\frac{\pi}{2}d_{X}\quad\mbox{on}\quad\sphere X.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We have already noted in Section~\ref{sec:Preliminaries} that $d_{X}\leq\pathmetric X{\sphere X}$
on $\sphere X$.

Let $x,y\in\sphere X$ be arbitrary. Let $c:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}^{2}$ be the map
defined by $c(\theta):=(\cos(\theta),\sin(\theta))$ for $\theta\in\mathbb{R}$.
Let $\theta_{x},\theta_{y}\in\mathbb{R}$ be such that $c(\theta_{x})/\norm{c(\theta_{x})}_{X}=x$
and $c(\theta_{y})/\norm{c(\theta_{y})}_{X}=y$. By switching the
roles of $x$ and $y$, if necessary, we may assume that $0\leq\theta_{y}-\theta_{x}\leq\pi$.
Consider the path $\rho:[\theta_{x},\theta_{y}]\to\sphere X$ defined
by $\rho(\theta):=c(\theta)/\norm{c(\theta)}_{X}$ for $\theta\in[\theta_{x},\theta_{y}]$.

Let $\varepsilon>0$ be arbitrary and $\theta_{x}=\theta_{0}<\theta_{1}<\ldots<\theta_{n}=\theta_{y}$
be a partition of $[\theta_{x},\theta_{y}]$ such that
\[
\sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(\theta_{j})-\rho(\theta_{j+1})}_{X}\geq\lengthoperator X(\rho)-\varepsilon.
\]
We may assume that $0<\theta_{j+1}-\theta_{j}\leq\arccos K^{-1}$,
since the triangle inequality ensures that every refinement of $\curly{\theta_{j}}_{j=1}^{n}$
still satisfies the above inequality.

We note that $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\subseteq K\closedball E$
implies $\norm w_{X}\leq\norm w_{E}\leq K\norm w_{X}$ for all $w\in\mathbb{R}^{2}$.
Then, by Lemmas~\ref{lem:estimate_segment},~ \ref{lem:bound-eclidean-arclength-by-shortcut}~and~\ref{lem:norm_decreasing},
we obtain
\customizepaperstyle{ams}{%
	\begin{eqnarray*}
	 &  & \negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace\negthickspace \pathmetric X{\sphere X}(x,y)\\
	 & \leq & \lengthoperator X(\rho)\\
	 & \leq & \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(\theta_{j})-\rho(\theta_{j+1})}_{X}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(\theta_{j})-\rho(\theta_{j+1})}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}K^{2}\norm{c(\theta_{j})-c(\theta_{j+1})}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & K^{2}\sup\set{\sum_{j=0}^{m-1}\norm{c(\phi_{j})-c(\phi_{j+1})}_{E}}{
	 			\begin{array}{c}
		 			m\in\mathbb{N} \\
		 			\theta_{x}=\phi_{0}<\ldots<\phi_{m}=\theta_{y}
	 			\end{array}
	 		}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & K^{2}\pathmetric E{\sphere E}\parenth{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}},\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & K^{2}\frac{\pi}{2}\norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & K^{2}\frac{\pi}{2}\norm{x-y}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
	 & \leq & K^{3}\frac{\pi}{2}\norm{x-y}_{X}+\varepsilon.
	\end{eqnarray*}%
}
\customizepaperstyle{lms}{
	\begin{eqnarray*}
			 \pathmetric X{\sphere X}(x,y) & \leq & \lengthoperator X(\rho)\\
					 & \leq & \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(\theta_{j})-\rho(\theta_{j+1})}_{X}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}\norm{\rho(\theta_{j})-\rho(\theta_{j+1})}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & \sum_{j=0}^{n-1}K^{2}\norm{c(\theta_{j})-c(\theta_{j+1})}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & K^{2}\sup\set{\sum_{j=0}^{m-1}\norm{c(\phi_{j})-c(\phi_{j+1})}_{E}}{
					 		\begin{array}{c}
					 			m\in\mathbb{N} \\
				 				\theta_{x}=\phi_{0}<\ldots<\phi_{m}=\theta_{y}
				 			\end{array}
					 		}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & K^{2}\pathmetric E{\sphere E}\parenth{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}},\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & K^{2}\frac{\pi}{2}\norm{\frac{x}{\norm x_{E}}-\frac{y}{\norm y_{E}}}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & K^{2}\frac{\pi}{2}\norm{x-y}_{E}+\varepsilon\\
					 & \leq & K^{3}\frac{\pi}{2}\norm{x-y}_{X}+\varepsilon.
	\end{eqnarray*}%
}
Since $\varepsilon>0$ was chosen arbitrarily, the result follows.
\end{proof}
Our final result now follows through an easy application of the previous
result and John's Theorem (Theorem~\ref{thm:John's-Theorem}):
\begin{thm}
\label{thm:main-result2} For any norm $\norm{\cdot}_{X}$ on a real
vector space $V$,
\[
d_{X}\leq\pathmetric X{\sphere X}\leq\sqrt{2}\pi\,d_{X}\quad\mbox{on}\quad\sphere X.
\]
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We have already noted in Section~\ref{sec:Preliminaries} that $d_{X}\leq\pathmetric X{\sphere X}\leq\planarpathmetric X{\sphere X}$
on $\sphere X$. Let $x,y\in\sphere X$ be arbitrary and let $W\subseteq V$
be any two-dimensional subspace containing $x$ and $y$, noting that
then $\planarpathmetric X{\sphere X}(x,y)\leq\pathmetric X{\sphere X\cap W}(x,y).$
By John's Theorem (Theorem~\ref{thm:John's-Theorem}), there exists
a Euclidean norm $\norm{\cdot}_{E}$ on $W$ such that $\norm w_{X}\leq\norm w_{E}\leq\sqrt{2}\norm w_{X}$
for all $w\in W$, i.e., $\closedball E\subseteq\closedball X\cap W\subseteq\sqrt{2}\closedball E$.
Then, by Theorem~\ref{thm:main-result1}, we may conclude that $d_{X}\leq\pathmetric X{\sphere X}\leq\sqrt{2}\pi\,d_{X}$
on $\sphere X$.
\end{proof}

Functional Analysis (math.FA); Metric Geometry (math.MG)


Construction of frame relative to n-Hilbert space

Abstract: In this paper, our aim is to introduce the concept of a frame in n-Hilbert space and describe some of their properties. We further discuss tight frame relative to n-Hilbert space. At the end, we study the relationship between frame and bounded linear operator in n-Hilbert space.

\section{Introduction}

\smallskip\hspace{.6 cm} In the study of vector spaces, one of the most fundamental concept is that of a basis.\;A basis provides us with an expansion of all vectors in terms of its elements.\;In infinite-dimensional Hilbert space, we are forced to work with infinite series and so depending on  the work on infinite series, different concepts of basis has been established which may contain infinitely many elements namely, Schauder basis, orthonormal basis etc.\;In fact, in a separable Hilbert space every element can be expressed as a infinite linear combination of an orthonormal basis.\;The condition linearly independentness is not being assumed to define such Schauder basis or orthonormal basis but Schauder basis or orthonormal basis automatically becomes linearly independent.\;A frame is also spanning set of a Hilbert space but it is a redundant or linearly dependent system for a Hilbert space.\;So, frame can be considered as a generalization of orthonormal basis.\;In fact, frames play important role in theoretical research of wavelet analysis, signal denoising, feature extraction, robust signal processing etc.\;In 1946, D. Gabor \cite{Gabor} first initiated a technique for rebuilding signals using a family of elementary signals.\;In 1952, Duffin and Schaeffer abstracted Gabor's method to define frame for Hilbert space in their fundamental paper \cite{Duffin}.\;Later on, frame theory was popularized by Daubechies, Grossman, Meyer \cite{Daubechies}.\;The concept of \,$2$-inner product space was first introduced by Diminnie, Gahler and White \cite{Diminnie} in 1970's.\;In 1989, A.\,Misiak \cite{Misiak} developed the generalization of a \,$2$-inner product space for \,$n \,\geq\, 2$.

In this paper, our focus is to study and characterize various properties of frame and tight frame relative to \,$n$-Hilbert space.\;Finally, we shall established that an image of a frame under a bounded linear operator will be a frame if and only if the operator is invertible and give a characterization of frame in terms of its pre-frame operator in \,$n$-Hilbert space.

Throughout this paper,\;$H$\; will denote separable Hilbert space with inner product \,$\left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot\,\right>$\, and \,$l^{\,2}(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\; denote the space of square summable scalar-valued sequences with index set of natural numbers \,$\mathbb{N}$.

\section{Preliminaries}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Christensen}\label{th1}
Let \,$H_{\,1},\, H_{\,2}$\; be two Hilbert spaces and \;$U \,:\, H_{\,1} \,\to\, H_{\,2}$\; be a bounded linear operator with closed range \;$\mathcal{R}_{\,U}$.\;Then there exists a bounded linear operator \,$U^{\dagger} \,:\, H_{\,2} \,\to\, H_{\,1}$\, such that \,$U\,U^{\dagger}\,x \,=\, x\; \;\forall\; x \,\in\, \mathcal{R}_{\,U}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{note}
The operator \,$U^{\dagger}$\, defined in Theorem (\ref{th1}), is called the pseudo-inverse of \,$U$.
\end{note}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Kreyzig}\label{th1.051}
The set \,$\mathcal{S}\,(\,H\,)$\; of all self-adjoint operators on \,$H$\; is a partially ordered set with respect to the partial order \,$\leq$\, which is defined as for \,$T,\,S \,\in\, \mathcal{S}\,(\,H\,)$
\[T \,\leq\, S \,\Leftrightarrow\, \left<\,T\,f \,,\, f\,\right> \,\leq\, \left<\,S\,f \,,\, f\,\right>\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, H.\]
\end{theorem}

\begin{definition}\cite{Kreyzig}
A self-adjoint operator \,$U \,:\, H \,\to\, H$\, is called positive if \,$\left<\,U\,x \,,\,  x\,\right> \,\geq\, 0$\, for all \,$x \,\in\, H$.\;In notation, we can write \,$U \,\geq\, 0$.\;A self-adjoint operator \,$V \,:\, H \,\to\, H$\, is called a square root of \,$U$\, if \,$V^{\,2} \,=\, U$.\;If, in addition \,$V \,\geq\, 0$, then \,$V$\, is called positive square root of \,$U$\, and is denoted by \,$V \,=\, U^{\,\dfrac{1}{2}}$.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Kreyzig}\label{th1.05}
The positive square root \,$V \,:\, H \,\to\, H$\, of an arbitrary positive self-adjoint operator \,$U \,:\, H \,\to\, H$\, exists and is unique.\;Further, the operator \,$V$\, commutes with every bounded linear operator on \,$H$\, which commutes with \,$U$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{definition}\cite{Christensen}
A sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty} \,\subseteq\, H$\, is said to be a frame for \,$H$\, if there exist positive constants \,$A,\, B$\, such that
\[ A\; \|\,f\,\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \;\sum\limits_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}\;  \left|\ \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \, \right >\,\right|^{\,2} \,\leq\, B \;\|\,f\,\|^{\,2}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, H.\]
The constants \,$A$\, and \,$B$\, are called frame bounds.\,If the collection \;$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}$\; satisfies
\[\sum\limits_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}\;  \left|\,\left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \, \right >\,\right|^{\,2} \,\leq\, B \;\|\,f\,\|^{\,2}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, H \]
then it is called a Bessel sequence with bound \,$B$.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Christensen}\label{th1.1}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}$\; be a sequence in \,$H$\; and \,$B \,>\, 0$\; be given.\;Then \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}$\, is a Bessel sequence with Bessel bound \,$B$\, if and only if the operator defined by \;$ T \,:\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,) \,\to\, H,\; T\,\{\,c_{i}\,\} \,=\, \sum\limits_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty} \;c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}$\;
is bounded and \;$\|\,T\,\| \,\leq\, \sqrt{B}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{definition}\cite{Christensen}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}$\; be a frame for \,$H$.\;Then the bounded linear operator \,$ T \,:\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,) \,\to\, H$, defined by \,$T\,\{\,c_{i}\,\} \,=\, \sum\limits_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty} \;c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}$, is called  pre-frame operator and its adjoint operator \,$T\,^{\,\ast} \,:\, H \,\to\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$, given by \;$T^{\,\ast}\,f \,=\, \left \{\, \left <\,f \,,\, f_{i} \,\right >\,\right \}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}$\; is called the analysis operator.\;The operator \,$S \,:\, H \,\to\, H$\; defined by \,$S\,f \,=\, T\,T^{\,\ast}\,f \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\; \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \, \right >\,f_{\,i}$\; is called the frame operator.
\end{definition}

The frame operator \,$S$\; is bounded, positive, self-adjoint and invertible \cite{Christensen}.

\begin{definition}\cite{Mashadi}
A \,$n$-norm on a linear space \,$X$\, (\,over the field \,$\mathbb{K}$\, of real or complex numbers\,) is a function
\[\left(\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right) \,\longmapsto\, \left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|,\; x_{\,1},\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X\]from \,$X^{\,n}$\, to the set \,$\mathbb{R}$\, of all real numbers such that for every \,$x_{\,1},\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X$\, and \,$\alpha \,\in\, \mathbb{K}$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(I)]\;\; $\left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 0$\; if and only if \,$x_{\,1},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}$\; are linearly dependent,
\item[(II)]\;\;\; $\left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|$\; is invariant under permutations of \,$x_{\,1},\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}$,
\item[(III)]\;\;\; $\left\|\,\alpha\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, |\,\alpha\,|\, \left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|$,
\item[(IV)]\;\; $\left\|\,x \,+\, y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,\leq\, \left\|\,x \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,+\,  \left\|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|$.
\end{itemize}
A linear space \,$X$, together with a n-norm \,$\left\|\,\cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot \,\right\|$, is called a linear n-normed space.
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}\cite{Misiak}
Let \,$n \,\in\, \mathbb{N}$\; and \,$X$\, be a linear space of dimension greater than or equal to \,$n$\; over the field \,$\mathbb{K}$, where \,$\mathbb{K}$\, is the real or complex numbers field.\;A n-inner product on \,$X$\, is a map
\[\left(\,x \,,\, y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right) \,\longmapsto\, \left<\,x \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right>,\; x,\, y,\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X\]from \,$X^{n \,+\, 1}$\, to the set \,$\mathbb{K}$\, such that for every \,$x,\, y,\, x_{\,1},\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X$\, and \,$\alpha \,\in\, \mathbb{K}$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(I)]\;\; $\left<\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,1} \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \;\geq\;  0$\; and \;$\left<\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,1} \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \;=\;  0$\; if and only if \;$x_{\,1},\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}$\; are linearly dependent,
\item[(II)]\;\; $\left<\,x \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \;=\; \left<\,x \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,i_{\,2}} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,i_{\,n}} \,\right> $\; for every permutations \\$\left(\, i_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, i_{\,n} \,\right)$\; of \;$\left(\, 2 \,,\, \cdots \,,\, n \,\right)$,
\item[(III)]\;\; $\left<\,x \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \;=\; \overline{\left<\,y \,,\, x \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> }$,
\item[(IV)]\;\; $\left<\,\alpha\,x \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \;=\; \alpha \,\left<\,x \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> $,
\item[(V)]\;\; $\left<\,x \,+\, y \,,\, z \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \;=\; \left<\,x \,,\, z \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right> \,+\,  \left<\,y \,,\, z \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right>$.
\end{itemize}
A linear space \,$X$\, together with n-inner product \,$\left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot\,\right>$\, is called n-inner product space.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Gunawan}
For \,$n$-inner product space \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot\,\right>\,\right)$,
\[\left|\,\left<\,x \,,\, y \,|\, x_{\,2} \,,\,  \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right| \,\leq\, \left\|\,x \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|\, \left\|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|\]
hold for all \,$x,\, y,\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X$, is called Cauchy-Schwarz inequality.
\end{theorem}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Misiak}
For every n-inner product space \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \;|\; \cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot\,\right> \,\right)$,
\[\left \|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, \sqrt{\left <\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,1} \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\,  \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right>}\] defines a n-norm for which
\[ \left <\,x,\, y \,|\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}\,\right> \,=\,\dfrac{\,1}{\,4}\, \left(\,\|\,x \,+\, y,\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2} \,-\, \|\,x \,-\, y,\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2}\,\right),\;\&\]
\[\|\,x \,+\, y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2} \,+\, \|\,x \,-\, y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2}\]
\[ \,=\, 2\, \left(\,\|\,x \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2} \,+\, \|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2} \,\right)\]
hold for all \;$x,\, y,\, x_{\,1},\, x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{definition}\cite{Mashadi}
Let \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left\|\,\cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot \,\right\|\,\right)$\; be a linear n-normed space.\;A sequence \,$\{\,x_{\,k}\,\}$\; in \,$X$\, is said to converge to some \,$x \,\in\, X$\; if
\[\lim\limits_{k \to \infty}\,\left\|\,x_{\,k} \,-\, x \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n} \,\right\| \,=\, 0\]
for every \,$ x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X$\, and it is called a Cauchy sequence if
\[\lim\limits_{l \,,\, k \,\to\, \infty}\,\left \|\,x_{l} \,-\, x_{\,k} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 0\]
for every \,$ x_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n} \,\in\, X$.\;The space \,$X$\, is said to be complete if every Cauchy sequence in this space is convergent in \,$X$.\;A n-inner product space is called n-Hilbert space if it is complete with respect to its induce norm.\;2-Hilbert space \cite{Kim} is a particular case of n-Hilbert space for \,$n \,=\, 2$.
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}\cite{Sadeghi}
Let \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot\, \right > \,\right)$\; be a 2-Hilbert space and \,$\xi \,\in\, X $.\,A sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1} \,\subseteq\, X$\, is said to be a 2-frame associated to \,$\xi$\, if there exist positive constants \,$A,\, B$\, such that
\[A\; \left\|\,f \,,\, \xi\,\right\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \sum\limits_{i \,=\, 1}^{\infty}\, \left|\,\left <\,f \,,\,  f_{\,i} \,|\, \xi\, \right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,\leq\, B\, \left\|\,f \,,\, \xi\,\right\|^{\,2}\;\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X.\]
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Sadeghi}
Let \,$L_{\,\xi}$\; denote the \,$1$-dimensional linear subspace of \,$X$\, generated by a fixed \;$\xi \,\in\, X$.\;Let \;$M_{\,\xi}$\, be the algebraic complement of \,$L_{\,\xi}$.\;Define \,$\left <\,x \,,\, y\, \right >_{\,\xi} \,=\, \left <\,x \,,\, y \,|\, \xi\, \right >$\, on \,$X$.\;This semi-inner product induces an inner product on the quotient space \,$X \,/\, L_{\,\xi}$\, which is given by
\[ \left <\,x \,+\, L_{\,\xi} \,,\, y \,+\, L_{\,\xi}\, \right >_{\,\xi} \,=\, \left <\,x \,,\, y\,\right >_{\,\xi} \,=\, \left <\,x \,,\, y \,|\, \xi\, \right >\; \;\forall \;\; x,\, y \,\in\, X.\]
By identifying \,$ X \,/\, L_{\,\xi}$\, with \,$M_{\,\xi}$\, in an obvious way, we obtain an inner product on \,$M_{\,\xi}$.\;Define \,$\left \|\,x\, \right \|_{\,\xi} \,=\, \sqrt{\, \left <\,x \,,\, x\, \right >_{\,\xi}} \;\;\; \left(\,x \,\in\, M_{\,\xi}\,\right)$.\;Then \,$\left(\,M_{\,\xi} \,,\, \|\,\cdot\,\|_{\,\xi}\,\right)$\, is a norm space.\;Let \,$X_{\,\xi}$\, be the completion of the inner product space \,$M_{\,\xi}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{theorem}\cite{Sadeghi}\label{th1.2}
Let \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot\, \right > \,\right)$\; be a 2-Hilbert space and \,$\xi \,\in\, X$.\;Then a sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$\; in \,$X$\; is a 2-frame associated to \,$\xi$\, with bounds \,$A \;\;\&\;\; B$\; if and only if it is a frame for the Hilbert space \,$X_{\,\xi}$\; with bounds \,$A \;\;\&\;\; B$.
\end{theorem}

\section{Frame and it's properties in $n$-Hilbert space}

\smallskip\hspace{.6 cm} In this section, we introduce the notion of frame relative to \,$n$-Hilbert space and discussed several properties of them in \,$n$-Hilbert space.

\begin{theorem}
Let \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot\,\right> \,\right)$\, be a n-inner product space and \,$x_{\,1},\, \cdots,\, x_{\,n}$\, are elements in \,$X$.\;Then
\[\left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|\,=\, \sup\,\left\{\,\left|\,\left<\,x_{\,1} \,,\, y \,|\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right| \,:\, y \,\in\, X,\, \left\|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}.\]
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Now,
\[\left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, \left<\,x_{\,1} \,,\, \dfrac{x_{\,1}}{\left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|} \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right>\]
\[\hspace{2cm}\leq\, \sup\,\left\{\,\left|\,\left<\,x_{\,1} \,,\, y \;|\; x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right| \;:\; y \,\in\, X\; \;\text{and}\;\; \left\|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\]
\[\hspace{3cm}\left[\;\text{where}\;\; y \,=\, \dfrac{x_{\,1}}{\left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|}\,\right]\]
\[\hspace{2cm}\leq\; \sup\,\left\{\,\left \|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|\,\left\|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \;:\;  \left\|\,y \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\]
\[\hspace{3cm}[\;\text{by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality}\;]\]
\[ =\; \left\|\,x_{\,1} \,,\, x_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, x_{\,n}\,\right\|.\hspace{5.8cm} \]
\end{proof}

Let \,$L_{F}$\, denote the linear subspace of \,$X$\, spanned by the non-empty finite set \,$F \,=\, \left\{\,\,a_{\,2} \,,\, a_{\,3} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\}$, where \,$a_{\,2},\, a_{\,3},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}$\, are fixed elements in \,$X$.\;Then the quotient space \,$ X \,/\, L_{F}$\, is a normed linear space with respect to the norm,
\[\left\|\,x \,+\, L_{F}\,\right\|_{F} \,=\, \left\|\,x \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\,  \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|\; \;\text{for every}\; x \,\in\, X.\]
Let \,$M_{F}$\, be the algebraic complement of \,$L_{F}$, then \,$X \,=\, L_{F} \,\oplus\, M_{F}$.\;Define
\[\left<\,x \,,\, y\,\right>_{F} \,=\, \left<\,x \,,\, y \;|\; a_{\,2} \,,\,  \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\; \;\text{on}\; \;X.\]
Then \,$\left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot\,\right>_{F}$\, is a semi-inner product on \,$X$\, and this semi-inner product induces an inner product on the quotient space \,$X \,/\, L_{F}$\; which is given by
\[\left<\,x \,+\, L_{F} \,,\, y \,+\, L_{F}\,\right>_{F} \,=\, \left<\,x \,,\, y\,\right>_{F} \,=\, \left<\,x \,,\, y \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\,  \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\;\; \;\forall \;\; x,\, y \,\in\, X.\]
By identifying \,$ X \,/\, L_{F}$\; with \,$M_{F}$\; in an obvious way, we obtain an inner product on \,$M_{F}$.\;Now, for every \,$x \,\in\, M_{F}$, we define \,$\|\,x\,\|_{F} \;=\; \sqrt{\left<\,x \,,\, x \,\right>_{F}}$\, and it can be easily verify that \,$\left(\,M_{F} \,,\, \|\,\cdot\,\|_{F}\,\right)$\; is a norm space.\;Let \,$X_{F}$\; be the completion of the inner product space \,$M_{F}$.\\

For the remaining part of this paper, \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot\,\right> \,\right)$\; is consider to be a \,$n$-Hilbert space.\;$I_{F}$\, will denote the identity operator on \,$X_{F}$\, and \,$\mathcal{B}\,(\,X_{F}\,)$\, denote the space of all bounded linear operator on \,$X_{F}$.

\begin{definition}\label{def0.1}
Let \,$X$\, be a n-Hilbert space.\;A sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$\, in \,$X$\, is said to be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, if there exist constant \,$0 \,<\, A \,\leq\, B \,<\, \infty$\, such that
\[ A \, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,\leq\, B\, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\]
for all \,$f \,\in\, X$.\;The infimum of all such \,$B$\, is called the optimal upper frame bound and supremum of all such \,$A$\, is called the optimal lower frame bound.\;A sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$\, satisfies the inequality
\[\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,\leq\, B\; \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X\] is called a Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, in \,$X$\, with bound \,$B$.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\label{th2}
Let \,$\left(\,X \,,\, \left<\,\cdot \,,\, \cdot \,|\, \cdot \,,\, \cdots \,,\, \cdot\,\right> \,\right)$\; be a n-Hilbert space.\,Then \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1} \,\subseteq\, X$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; with bounds \,$A \;\;\&\;\; B$\; if and only if it is a frame for the Hilbert space \,$X_{F}$\; with bounds \,$A \;\;\&\;\; B$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
This theorem is an extension  of the Theorem (\ref{th1.2}) and proof of this theorem directly follows from that of the Theorem (\ref{th1.2}).
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}\label{th2.1}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$\; be a Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; in \,$X$\, with bound \,$B$.\;Then the operator given by
\[T_{F} \,:\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,) \,\to\, X_{F},\; T_{F}\,\left(\,\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}\,\right) \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\;c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}\] is well-defined and bounded.\;Furthermore, the adjoint operator of \,$T_{F}$\; is given by
\[T_{F}^{\,\ast} \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,),\; T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,(\,f\,) \;=\; \left\{\,\left<\,f \;,\; f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n} \,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}.\]
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let \,$\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \,\in\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$.\;Then
\[\left\|\,\sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, 1}\,c_{\,i} \, f_{\,i} \,-\, \sum\limits^{k}_{i \,=\, 1}\,c_{i}\, f_{\,i}\,\right\|_{F}^{\,2} \,=\, \left\|\,\sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, k+1}\,c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}\, \;,\; a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\hspace{3cm}\]
\[=\; \sup\,\left\{\,\left|\,\left<\,\sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, k+1}\,c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}\, \;,\; y \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,:\, y \,\in\, X,\, \left\|\,y \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\]
\[=\; \sup\,\left\{\,\left |\,\sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, k+1}\,c_{\,i}\,\left<\,f_{\,i}\, \;,\; y \;|\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right |^{\,2} \;:\; y \;\in\; X,\; \left \|\,y \;,\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\]
\[\leq\, \sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, k+1}\,\left|\,c_{\,i}\,\right|^{\,2}\, \sup\,\left\{\,\sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, k+1}\,\left |\,\left<\,f_{\,i}\, \,,\, y \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,:\, y \,\in\, X,\, \left\|\,y \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\]
\[\hspace{6cm}[\;\text{using Cauchy-Schwarz iequality}\;]\]
\[\leq\;  B\; \sum\limits^{l}_{i \,=\, k+1}\,|\,c_{\,i}\,|^{\,2}\;  [\;\; \text{since}\; \left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}\; \;\text{is a Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$}\;\;].\hspace{1.7cm}\]
This implies that \,$\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}$\; is convergent in \,$X_{F}$\; if \,$\{\,c_{\,i}\,\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1} \;\in\; l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$.\;Using the continuity of \,$n$-norm function, we get
\[\left\|\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}\,\right\|_{F}^{\,2} \,\leq\, B\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,|\,c_{\,i}\,|^{\,2} \,\Rightarrow\, \left\|\,T_{F}\,\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}\,\right\|_{F} \,\leq\, \sqrt{B}\, \left\|\,\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}\,\right\|_{l^{\,2}}.\]The above calculation shows that \,$T_{F}$\; is well-defined and bounded.\;To find the expression for \,$T^{\,\ast}_{F}$, let \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$\, and \,$\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \,\in\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$.\;Then
\[\left<\,f \,,\, T_{F}\,\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right> \,=\, \left<\,f \,,\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\hspace{1cm}\]
\[\hspace{4.7cm} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\overline{\,c_{\,i}}\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>.\]The convergence of the series \,$\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\overline{\,c_{\,i}}\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>$\, for all \,$\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \,\in\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\, implies that \,$\left\{\,\left<\,f \;,\; f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n} \,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \,\in\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$, (\,see  page 145 of \cite{Heuser}\,).
\[\text{Therefore,}\hspace{.1cm}\left<\,f \,,\, T_{F}\,\left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}\,\right>_{F} \,=\, \left<\;\left\{\;\left<\,f \;,\; f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n} \,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \;,\; \left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}\;\right>_{l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)}\]and hence \,$T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,(\,f\,) \;=\; \left\{\,\left<\,f \;,\; f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n} \,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}$.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
The operator \,$T_{F}$, defined in Theorem (\ref{th2.1}), is called pre-frame operator and the adjoint operator of \,$T_{F}$\; is called analysis operator for \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$.
\end{remark}

\begin{definition}\label{def1}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$\; be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; for \,$X$. Then the operator \,$S_{F} \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, X_{F}$\, defined by
\[S_{F}\,(\,f\,) \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\,f_{\,i}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X_{F}\]
is called the frame operator for \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$.\;It can be easily verify that
\begin{equation}\label{eq1.1}
\left<\,S_{F}\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right> \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X_{F}.
\end{equation}
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\label{th2.2}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}$\; be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; for \,$X$\, with bounds \;$A \;\&\; B$.\;Then the corresponding frame operator \,$S_{F}$\; is bounded, invertible, self-adjoint and positive.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
For each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[\left\|\,S_{F}\,f \,\right\|_{F}^{\,2} \;=\; \left\|\,S_{F}\,f \;,\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n}\,\,\right\|^{\,2}\]
\[=\, \sup\,\left\{\,\left|\,\left<\,S_{F}\,f \,,\, g \;|\; a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,:\, \left\|\,g \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\hspace{3.5cm}\]
\[=\, \sup\,\left\{\,\left|\,\left<\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\,f_{\,i} \;,\; g \;|\; a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,:\,  \left\|\,g \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1\,\right\}\]
\[\leq\, \sup\,\left\{\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\, \left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\,\right|^{\,2}\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\; \left|\,\left<\,g \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2} \,:\, \left \|\,g \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\| \,=\, 1 \,\right\}\]
\[\hspace{6cm}[\;\text{using Cauchy-Schwarz iequality}\;]\]
\[\leq\; B\; \left \|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\;  B\; \;[\;\text{since}\; \left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\,\infty}_{\,i \,=\, 1}\; \;\text{is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$}\;\;]\hspace{4cm}\]
\[ =\, B^{\,2}\; \left \|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\;=\; B^{\,2}\; \|\,f\,\|^{\,2}_{F}.\hspace{6.9cm}\]
This shows that \,$S_{F}$\; is bounded.\;Since \,$S_{F} \,=\, T_{F}\,T^{\,\ast}_{F}$, it is easy to verify that \,$S_{F}$\, is self-adjoint.\;By (\ref{eq1.1}), frame inequality of definition (\ref{def0.1}), can be written as
\[A\,\left<\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right> \,\leq\, \left<\,S_{F}\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right> \,\leq\, B\,\left<\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\]
and therefore according to Theorem (\ref{th1.051}), we can write \,$A\,I_{F} \,\leq\, S_{F} \,\leq\, B\,I_{F}$.\;Thus, \,$S_{F}$\; is positive and consequently it is invertible.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}\label{rmr1}
In Theorem (\ref{th2.2}), it is proved that \,$A\,I_{F} \,\leq\, S_{F} \,\leq\, B\,I_{F}$.\;Since \,$S^{\,-1}_{F}$\; commutes with both \,$S_{F}$\; and \,$I_{F}$, multiplying in the inequality, \,$ A\,I_{F} \,\leq\, S_{F} \,\leq\, B\,I_{F}$\, by \,$S^{\,-1}_{F}$, we get \,$B^{\,-1}\,I_{F} \,\leq\, S^{\,-1}_{F} \,\leq\, A^{\,-1}\,I_{F}$.
\end{remark}

\begin{theorem}\label{th2.3}
Let \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}^{\infty}_{i \,=1\, }$\; be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; for \,$X$\, with frame bounds \,$A,\, B$\, and \,$S_{F}$\; be the corresponding frame operator.\;Then \,$\left \{\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i}\,\right \}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is also a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, with bounds \,$B^{\,-1},\, A^{\,-1}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
By Theorem (\ref{th2.2}), \,$S^{\,-1}_{F} \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, X_{F}$\, is self-adjoint.\;Now, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[ \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\,1}\,\left |\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left|\,\left <\,\left (\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\,\right )^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2} \]
\[\;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\,\left <\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\; f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right|^{\,2}\]
\[ \,\leq\, B\; \left \|\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\, f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\right\|^{\,2}\hspace{1.2cm}\]
\[\hspace{3.5cm} [\;\text{since}\; \,\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}^{\infty}_{i \,=1\, } \;\; \text{is a frame associated to}\;\left(\,a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)\;]\]
\[\leq\, B\, \left \|\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\,\right \|^{\,2}\, \left \|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\right \|^{\,2}.\]
This shows that \,$\left\{\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i}\,\right \}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$. Also, for any \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[ \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\right >\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\, f_{\,i} \,=\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,\,\left(\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\, f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,f_{\,i}\,\right) \]
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
\hspace{6.5cm} \;=\; S^{\,-1}_{F}\; \left(\,S_{F}\; \left(\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f\,\right) \,\right) \;=\; S^{\,-1}_{F}\;\,f.
\end{equation}
This shows that \,$S^{\,-1}_{F}$\; is the frame operator for \,$\left\{\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}$.\;Now, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, using the inequality \,$B^{\,-1}\,I_{F} \,\leq\, S^{\,-1}_{F} \,\leq\, A^{\,-1}\,I_{F}$, we get
\[B^{\,-1}\,\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \left <\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f \,,\, f \;|\;  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right > \,\leq\, A^{\,-1}\,\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\|^{\,2}.\]Now, using (\ref{eq2}),
\,$\left <\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f \,,\, f \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >$
\[\,=\, \left <\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i} \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\;\right >\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i} \;,\; f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\, \right >\]
\[\;=\;\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i} \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\;\right >\; \left <\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i} \,,\, f \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\hspace{.2cm}\]
\[\;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\; \left|\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i} \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right|^{\,2}.\hspace{3.8cm}\]
Therefore for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[ B^{\,-1}\,\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\, f_{\,i} \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right|^{\,2} \,\leq\, A^{\,-1}\,\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\|^{\,2}.\]
Hence, by Theorem (\ref{th2}), \,$\left\{\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; for \,$X$\, with bounds \,$B^{\,-1},\, A^{\,-1}$.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
From the Theorem (\ref{th2.3}), we can conclude that if \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, with optimal frame bounds \,$A,\, B$, then \,$B^{\,-1},\, A^{\,-1}$\; are also optimal frame bounds for \,$\left\{\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}$.\;The frame \,$\left\{\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}$\; is called the canonical dual frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, of \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$.
\end{remark}

\begin{theorem}\label{eq2.4}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=1\, }$\; be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, and \,$S_{F}$\, be the corresponding frame operator.\;Then for every \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[ f \;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \;,\; S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i} \;|\;  a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n}\;\right >\;f_{\,i}, \;\text{and}\]
\[ f \;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \;,\; f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n}\;\right >\;S^{\,-1}_{F}\;f_{\,i},\]
provided both the series converges unconditionally for all \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$.\;Then
\[f \,=\, S_{F}\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f \,=\, S_{F}\, \left(\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\right >\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i}\,\right)\; [\;\text{using (\ref{eq2})}\;]\]
\[\hspace{.1cm} \;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\right >\,S_{F}\,\left(\,S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i}\,\right)\]
\[\;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\right >\,f_{\,i}.\hspace{1.5cm}\]
Since \,$\left \{\,\left <\,f \,,\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\right >\,\right \}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1} \,\in\, l^{\,2} (\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\; and \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$, the above series converges unconditionally.\;On the other hand,
\[f \,=\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\, S_{F}\, f \,=\, S^{\,-1}_{F}\, \left(\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\,\right >\,f_{\,i}\,\right)\hspace{1cm}\]
\[\hspace{3cm}\;=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\;S^{\,-1}_{F} f_{\,i}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X_{F}.\]
\end{proof}

\begin{definition}\label{def2}
A sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=1\, }$\, in \,$X$\, is said to be a tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2} ,\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, with bound \,$A$\, if for all \,$f \,\in\, X$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq2.5}
\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,|^{\,2} \,=\, A\,\left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}.
\end{equation}
If \,$A \,=\, 1$\, then it is called normalized tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$. From (\ref{eq2.5}), we have
\[ \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\, f \,,\,  \dfrac{1}{\,\sqrt{A}}\;f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right |^{\,2} \,=\, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}.\]
Therefore, if \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, with bound \,$A$\; then family \,$\left\{\,\dfrac{1}{\,\sqrt{A}}\;f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a normalized tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\,. According to Theorem (\ref{th2}), \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, with bound \,$A$\; if and only if it is a tight frame for \,$X_{F}$\, with bound \,$A$.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\, be a tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, with frame bound \,$A$.\;Then for every \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[ f \;=\; \dfrac{1}{A}\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\, \right >\,f_{\,i}.\]
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Since \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\, is a tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, with bound \,$A$,
\[\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,|^{\,2} \,=\, A\,\left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X_{F}.\]
Let \,$S_{F}$\, be the corresponding frame operator for \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$, then by (\ref{eq1.1}),
\[\left <\,S_{F}\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right > \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{k \,=\, 1}\,\left|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right> \,\right|^{\,2}\hspace{3cm}\]
\[ \hspace{4cm}\,=\, A\, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2} \,=\, \left <\,A\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\]
\[ \Rightarrow\, \left <\,\left(\,S_{F} \,-\, A\, I_{F}\,\right) f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right > \,=\, 0\; \;\;\forall\; f \,\in\, X_{F}\; \Rightarrow\, S_{F} \,=\, A\, I_{F}.\hspace{1cm}\] Therefore, for \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we get
\[ A\,f \,=\, S_{F}\,(\,f\,) \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\; \left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\,f_{\,i}\]
\[\Rightarrow\, f \,=\, \dfrac{1}{A}\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\,f_{\,i}.\]
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}
Let \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, and \,$S_{F}$\, be the corresponding frame operator.\;Then \,$\left \{\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i}\,\right \}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a normalized tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; and furthermore, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[ f \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \;,\; S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\;f_{\,i} \;|\;  a_{\,2} \;,\; \cdots \;,\; a_{\,n}\;\right >\;S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\;f_{\,i}.\]
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
By Theorem (\ref{th1.05}), a unique positive square root \,$S^{\,-\, \dfrac{1}{2}}_{F}$\, of \,$S_{F}^{\,-1}$\; exists, which is self-adjoint and commutes with \,$S_{F}$.\;Therefore, each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$\, can be written as
\[ f \;=\; S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\; S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\; \left(\,S_{F}\;f\,\right) \;=\; S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\; S_{F}\;\left(\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\;f \,\right)\]
\[\hspace{1cm}=\; S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\; \left(\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f \;,\; f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\;\right >\,f_{\,i}\,\right)\]
\[=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\;f_{\,i}\]
\[=\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i}.\]
Now, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\|^{\,2} \,=\, \left<\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\]
\[=\, \left<\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i} \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\]
\[=\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left <\,f \,,\, S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i} \;|\; a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\left<\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i} \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right> \]
\[ \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\,\left <\,f \,,\, S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right|^{\,2}.\hspace{4.1cm}\]
Hence, \,$\left \{\,S_{F}^{\,-\,\dfrac{1}{2}}\,f_{\,i}\,\right \}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\, is a normalized tight frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$.
\end{proof}

\section{Frame and operator relative to $n$-Hilbert space}

\smallskip\hspace{.6 cm}In this section, we establish an image of frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, under a bounded linear operator becomes a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, if and only if the bounded linear operator have to be invertible.\;In general, a Bessel sequence does not a frame in \,$n$-Hilbert space.\;We give some sufficient condition for Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, becomes frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, in \,$n$-Hilbert space.

\begin{theorem}\label{th3}
Let \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; for \,$X$\, with bounds \,$A,\, B$\, and \,$S_{F}$\; be the corresponding frame operator and \,$U \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, X_{F}$\; be a bounded linear operator.\;Then \,$\left\{\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\, is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\; if and only if \,$U$\; is invertible on \,$X_{F}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Suppose \,$U \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, X_{F}$\; is invertible.\;Then for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[\left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2} \,=\, \left\|\,(\,U^{\,-\, 1}\,)^{\,\ast}\,U^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\hspace{1cm}\]
\begin{equation}\label{eq3}
\hspace{2.8cm}\leq\, \left\|\,U^{\,-\, 1}\,\right \|^{\,2}\,\left\|\,U^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right \|^{\,2}.
\end{equation}
Since \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}^{\infty}_{i \,=1\, }\; \text{is a frame associated to}\;\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left |\,\left <\,f \,,\, U\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\,\left <\,U^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}\hspace{3cm}\]
\[\hspace{1.4cm}\geq\, A\, \left\|\,U^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right \|^{\,2}\]
\[\hspace{4.5cm}\,\geq\, A\, \left\|\,U^{\,-\, 1}\,\right \|^{\,-\, 2}\, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\; \;[\;\text{by (\ref{eq3})}\;].\]
On the other hand,
\[\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left |\,\left <\,f \,,\, U\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\,\left <\,U^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}\]
\[\hspace{5cm}\,\leq\, B\, \left\|\,U\,\right \|^{\,2}\, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}. \]
Hence, \,$\{\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$.\\

Conversely, suppose \,$\{\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$.\;Now, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left <\,f,\, U\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,U\,f_{\,i} \,=\, U\,\left(\,\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left <\,U^{\,\ast}\,f,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right) \,=\, U\,S_{F}\, U^{\,\ast}\,f.\]
This implies that \,$U\,S_{F}\, U^{\,\ast}$\; is the corresponding frame operator for \,$\{\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$.\;By Theorem (\ref{th2.2}), \,$U\,S_{F}\, U^{\,\ast}$\; is invertible and hence \,$U \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, X_{F}$\; is invertible.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}
Let \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\, be a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, and \,$U \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, X_{F}$\, be a bounded linear operator.\;Then \,$\left\{\, f_{\,i} \,+\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\, is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, if and only if \,$I \,+\, U$\, is invertible on \,$X_{F}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
For each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we can write
\[ \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\,\left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,+\, U\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right|^{\,2} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left|\,\left <\,\left(\,I \,+\, U\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}.\]
Thus, \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i} \,+\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\, is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, if and only if \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$.\;By Theorem (\ref{th3}), \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i} \,+\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, if and only if \,$I \,+\, U$\; is invertible on \,$X_{F}$.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark}
Furthermore, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[\sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,+\, U\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\, \left(\,f_{\,i} \,+\, U\, f_{\,i}\,\right)\hspace{2.5cm}\]
\[\hspace{.6cm}\,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left <\,f \,,\, (\,I \,+\, U\,)\,f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\, (\,I \,+\, U \,)\,f_{\,i}\]
\[\hspace{.8cm}\,=\, (\,I \,+\, U\,)\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\, \left<\,(\,I \,+\, U\,)^{\,\ast}\, f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,f_{\,i}\]
\[=\, (\,I \,+\, U\,)\,S_{F}\,(\,I \,+\, U \,)^{\,\ast}\,f. \hspace{3cm}\]
This implies that \,$(\,I \,+\, U\,)\,S_{F}\,(\,I \,+\, U \,)^{\,\ast}$\, is the corresponding frame operator for the frame \,$\left\{\, f_{\,i} \,+\, U\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$.
\end{remark}

\begin{theorem}
Let \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\, and \,$\{\,g_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; be two Bessel sequences associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, with pre frame operators \,$T_{F}$, \,$T_{F}^{\,\prime}$, respectively.\;Then for \,$L_{\,1},\, L_{\,2} \,\in\, \mathcal{B}\,\left(\,X_{F}\,\right)$, the sequence \,$\left\{\,L_{\,1}\,f_{\,i}\, \,+\, L_{\,2}\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\; if and only if \,$\left[\;T_{F}^{\,\ast}\, L_{\,1}^{\,\ast} \,+\, \left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\, L_{\,2}^{\,\ast}\, \right]$\; is an invertible on \,$X_{F}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Since \,$T_{F},\, T_{F}^{\,\prime}$\, are pre frame operators for \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty} \;\text{and}\; \{\,g_{\,i}\,\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$,
\[T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,(\,f\,) \,=\, \left\{\,\left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i}\, \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}, \;\text{and}\]
\[\hspace{1cm}\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,(\,f\,) \,=\, \left\{\,\left <\,f \,,\, g_{\,i}\, \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}\; \;\forall\; f \,\in\, X_{F}.\]
By Theorem (\ref{th3}), \,$\left\{\,L_{\,1}\,f_{\,i}\, \,+\, L_{\,2}\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\, is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\; if and only if its analysis operator \,$T \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\; defined by
\[T\,(\,f\,) \,=\, \left \{\,\left <\,f \,,\, L_{\,1}\,f_{\,i}\, \,+\, L_{\,2}\,g_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right \}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}\]\; is invertible on \,$X_{F}$.\;Now, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$,
\[T\,(\,f\,) \,=\, \left \{\,\left <\,f \,,\, L_{\,1}\,f_{\,i}\, \,+\, L_{\,2}\,g_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right \}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}\hspace{3cm}\]
\[\hspace{1.3cm}\,=\, \left\{\,\left <\,f \,,\, L_{\,1}\,f_{\,i}\, \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right> \,+\, \left <\,f \,,\, L_{\,2}\,g_{\,i}\, \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\right \}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}\]
\[\hspace{2.2cm} \,=\, \left\{\,\left <\,L_{\,1}^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty} \,+\,  \left\{\,\left <\,L_{\,2}^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, g_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty} \]
\[\hspace{1cm}\,=\, \left[\,T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,L_{\,1}^{\,\ast} \,+\, \left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,L_{\,2}^{\,\ast}\,\;\right]\,f.\hspace{5.2cm}\]
Therefore, \,$\left\{\,L_{\,1}\,f_{\,i}\, \,+\, L_{\,2}\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\,1}^{\infty}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\; if and only if \,$\left[\,T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,L_{\,1}^{\,\ast} \,+\, \left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,L_{\,2}^{\,\ast}\,\;\right]$\; is an invertible on \,$X_{F}$.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}
A sequence \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; in \,$X$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; if and only if \,$T_{F} \,:\, \left\{\,c_{i}\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty} \,\to\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,c_{\,i}\,f_{\,i}$\; is well-defined mapping of \,$l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\, onto \,$X_{F}$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
First we suppose that \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$. Then by Theorem (\ref{th2.1}), \,$T_{F}$\; is well-defined bounded linear operator from \,$l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\; onto \,$X_{F}$.\;Also by Theorem (\ref{th2.2}), the frame operator \,$S_{F} \,=\, T_{F}\, T^{\,\ast}_{F}$\; is surjective and hence \,$T_{F}$\; is surjective.\\

\text{Conversely}, suppose that \,$T_{F}$\; is well-defined mapping of \,$l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\; onto \,$X_{F}$.\;By Theorem (\ref{th1.1}), \,$T_{F}$\; is bounded and that \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a Bessel sequence associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$.\;So, \,$T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,f \,=\, \left\{\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n} \,\right>\,\right\}_{i \,=\, 1}^{\,\infty}$.\;Since \,$T_{F}$\, is surjective, by Theorem (\ref{th1}), there exists an operator \,$T^{\,\dagger}_{F} \,:\, X_{F} \,\to\, l^{\,2}\,(\,\mathbb{N}\,)$\; such that \,$T_{F}\; T^{\,\dagger}_{F} \,=\, I_{F}$.\;This implies that \,$\left(\,T^{\,\dagger}_{F}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,T^{\,\ast}_{F} \,=\, I_{F}$.\;Then for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we get
\[\left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \left\|\,\left(\,T^{\,\dagger}_{F}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,\right\|^{\,2}\; \left\|\,T^{\,\ast}_{F}\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2}\]
\[\hspace{3.8cm} \leq\, \left\|\, T^{\,\dagger}_{F}\,\right\|^{\,2}\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,|^{\,2}\]
\[\Rightarrow\, \dfrac{1}{\left\|\, T^{\,\dagger}_{F}\,\right\|^{\,2}}\, \left\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right\|^{\,2} \,\leq\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,|\,\left<\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,|^{\,2}.\]
Therefore \,$\{\,f_{\,i}\,\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\; \cdots,\; a_{\,n}\,\right)$.
\end{proof}

\begin{theorem}
Let \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; and \,$\left\{\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; be two Bessel sequences associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, for \,$X$\, with bounds \,$C\; \;\text{and}\; \;D$, respectively.\;Suppose that \,$T_{F}$\; and \,$T_{F}^{\,\prime}$\; be their pre frame operators such that \,$T_{F}\,\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast} \,=\, I_{F}$.\;Then \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; and \,$\left\{\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; are frames associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; for \,$X$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Since \,$T_{F}$\, and \,$T_{F}^{\,\prime}$\, are pre frame operators for \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\, and \,$\left\{\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$, respectively, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[\left\|\,T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,f\,\right\|_{F}^{\,2} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}, \;\text{and}\]
\[\left\|\,\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,f\,\right\|_{F}^{\,2} \,=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\,f \,,\, g_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}.\] Now, for each \,$f \,\in\, X_{F}$, we have
\[\|\,f \,,\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\|^{\,4} \,=\, \left[\,\left<\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right]^{\,2}\hspace{3cm}\]
\[\hspace{2.2cm}\,=\, \left[\,\left<\,T_{F}\,\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right]^{\,2}\; \;[\;\because\; T_{F}\,\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast} \,=\, I_{F}\;]\]
\[\,=\, \left[\,\left<\,\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,f \,,\, T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,f \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right>\,\right]^{\,2}\hspace{2cm}\]
\[\hspace{1.8cm} \,\leq\, \left\|\,T_{F}^{\,\ast}\,f\,\right\|_{F}^{\,2}\; \left\|\,\left(\,T_{F}^{\,\prime}\,\right)^{\,\ast}\,f\,\right\|_{F}^{\,2}\; \;[\;\text{by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality}\;]\]
\[\hspace{2cm}=\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}\; \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\,f \,,\, g_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}\]
\[\leq\, \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}\; D\; \|\,f \,,\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2}\]
\[\Rightarrow\; \dfrac{1}{D}\; \|\,f \,,\,  a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\|^{\,2} \;\leq\;  \sum\limits^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}\,\left |\, \left <\,f \,,\, f_{\,i} \,|\, a_{\,2} \,,\, \cdots \,,\, a_{\,n}\,\right >\,\right |^{\,2}.\]Hence, \,$\left\{\,f_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a frame associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\, in \,$X$.\;Similarly, it can be shown that \,$\left\{\,g_{\,i}\,\right\}^{\infty}_{i \,=\, 1}$\; is a frames associated to \,$\left(\,a_{\,2},\, \cdots,\, a_{\,n}\,\right)$\; with the lower bound \,$\dfrac{1}{C}$.
\end{proof}