A Hölder type inequality and an interpolation theorem in Euclidean Jordan algebras

Abstract: In a Euclidean Jordan algebra V of rank n which carries the trace inner product, to each element x we associate the eigenvalue vector whose components are the eigenvalues of x written in the decreasing order. For any number p between (and including) one and infinity, we define the spectral p-norm of x to be the p-norm of the corresponding eigenvalue vector in the Euclidean n-space. In this paper, we show that for any two elements x and y, the one-norm of the Jordan product xoy is less than or equal to the product of p-norm of x and q-norm of y, where q is the conjugate of p. For a linear transformation on V, we state and prove an interpolation theorem relative to these spectral norms. In addition, we compute/estimate the norms of Lyapunov transformations, quadratic representations, and positive transformations on V.

\section{Introduction}
The classical H\"{o}lder and Minkowski inequalities, when stated
 in the setting of
$\mathcal{R}^n$, say that for two real vectors $x=(x_1,x_2,\ldots, x_n)$ and $y=(y_1,y_2,\ldots, y_n)$
and for any $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$ (that is, $p^{-1}+q^{-1}=1$),
$$\Big |\sum_{1}^{n}x_iy_i\Big |\leq \sum_{1}^{n}|x_iy_i|\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_q\quad\mbox{and}\quad ||x+y||_p\leq ||x||_p+||y||_p,$$
where $||x||_p$ denotes the $p$-norm of $x$, etc.
Viewing $\mathcal{R}^n$ as a Euclidean Jordan algebra with Jordan product
$x\circ y:=(x_1y_1,x_2y_2,\ldots, x_ny_n)$, inner product $\langle x,y\rangle=\sum_{1}^{n}x_iy_i$, and components of $x$ as eigenvalues of $x$, we may restate the above inequalities as
$$|\langle x,y\rangle| \leq ||\lambda(x\circ y)||_1\leq ||\lambda(x)||_p\,||\lambda(y)||_q\quad\mbox{and}\quad ||\lambda(x+y)||_p\leq ||\lambda(x)||_p+||\lambda(y)||_p,$$
where $\lambda(x)$ denotes the vector of eigenvalues (here, entries) of $x$ written in the decreasing order, etc.
Motivated by the appearance of inequalities of the above type
in various matrix theory settings (especially for real symmetric or complex Hermitian matrices) and in the optimization literature over symmetric cones, we raise the issue of proving such
inequalities over general Euclidean Jordan algebras. To elaborate,
let $({\cal V},\circ,\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle)$ be a Euclidean Jordan algebra of rank $n$
\cite{faraut-koranyi}, \cite{gowda-sznajder-tao}. We assume that ${\cal V}$ carries the trace inner product, that is,
$\langle x,y\rangle:=tr(x\circ y).$
For each $x\in {\cal V}$, we associate the eigenvalue vector
$\lambda(x)$ in $\mathcal{R}^n$ whose entries are the eigenvalues of $x$ written in the decreasing order.
For $p\in [1,\infty]$, we define  the {\it spectral $p$-norm} on ${\cal V}$ by
$$||x||_{p}:=||\lambda(x)||_p,$$
where the right-hand side denotes the $p$-norm of the vector $\lambda(x)$ in $\mathcal{R}^n$.
Using majorization ideas, a generalization of Thompson's triangle inequality, and case-by-case analysis
(of five types of simple Euclidean Jordan algebras), Tao et al., \cite{tao et al} have shown that
$||\cdot||_p$ is a norm on ${\cal V}$ thereby  establishing the Minkowski inequality in the setting of
Euclidean Jordan algebras.
For a comprehensive proof based on majorization and Schur-convexity theorem, see \cite{jeong-gowda}.
Regarding the H\"{o}lder inequality, Tao et al. \cite{tao et al}
have also shown that the inequality $|\langle x,y\rangle |\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_q$ holds for all $x$ and $y$ when ${\cal V}$ is a
simple Euclidean Jordan algebra. For $p=2$, the inequality $||x\circ y||_1\leq ||x||_2\,||y||_2$ was proved
 in \cite{wang et al} and \cite{meng et al}.
Going beyond these special cases, in this paper we  establish the inequalities
 $$|\langle x,y\rangle|\leq ||x\circ y||_1\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_q$$
 over  general Euclidean Jordan algebras. Our related contributions include  an interpolation theorem for linear transformations on ${\cal V}$ relative to the spectral norms and computation/estimation of
norms of Lyapunov transformations, quadratic representations, and positive transformations.

\vspace{11pt}

In  the first part of our paper, we establish the following  H\"{o}lder type inequality.
To explain,  we introduce a notation and a definition. Given  any Jordan frame
$\{e_1,e_2,\ldots, e_n\}$ in ${\cal V}$, we consider the {\it ordered Jordan frame}
${\cal E}:=\left (e_1,e_2,\ldots, e_n\right )$ and write, for any $x\in {\cal V}$,
$$\lambda(x)*\,{\cal E}:=\sum_{1}^{n}\lambda_i(x)e_i.$$
We say that two elements $x$ and $y$ in ${\cal V}$ {\it strongly operator commute} if there is an ordered Jordan frame ${\cal E}$
such that $x=\lambda(x)*{\cal E}$ and $y=\lambda(y)*{\cal E}.$

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{theorem}(A H\"{o}lder type inequality in Euclidean Jordan algebras) \label{main theorem}
{\it Let $x,y\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$. Then,
\begin{equation}\label{main inequality}
||x\circ y||_1\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_q.
\end{equation}
Moreover, equality holds in {\rm (\ref{main inequality})} if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(a)$] $x$ and $y\circ \varepsilon$ strongly operator commute and
\item [$(b)$]
$\langle \lambda(x),\lambda(y\circ \varepsilon)\rangle=||\lambda(x)||_p\,||\lambda(y)||_q$ holds in $\mathcal{R}^n$,
\end{itemize}
where $x\circ y$ has the spectral decomposition $x\circ y=(z_1e_1+z_2e_2+\cdots+z_ke_k)-(z_{k+1}e_{k+1}+\cdots+z_ne_n)$ for some $k$, $0\leq k\leq n$ and
$z_i\geq 0$ for all $i$,
and $\varepsilon:=(e_1+e_2+\cdots+e_k)-(e_{k+1}+\cdots+e_n).$
}
\end{theorem}

Our proof of the above result is based on the following generalization of the
Fan-Theobald trace inequality of matrix theory (which is  related to von Neumann's trace inequality). The
inequality (\ref{vn inequality}) given below extends
the so-called rearrangement inequality of Hardy, Littlewood, and P\'{o}lya when ${\cal V}=\mathcal{R}^n$ \cite{marshall-olkin} and the
Fan-Theobald trace
 inequality \cite{fan}, \cite{theobald} when ${\cal V}=\mathcal{S}^n$ or $\mathcal{H}^n$ (the algebras of $n\times n$ real/complex Hermitian matrices). For simple Euclidean Jordan algebras, this result has been observed in \cite{lim et al}, \cite{gowda-tao-cauchy}.
Based on this simple algebra result, the rearrangement inequality, and the fact that any Euclidean Jordan algebra is a
product of simple algebras, one can prove the general result. For a different and comprehensive proof, see \cite{baes}.

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{theorem}(A generalized  Fan-Theobald trace inequality)
\label{generalized ft inequality}
{\it Let  $x,y\in {\cal V}$. Then,
\begin{equation}\label{vn inequality}
\langle x, y\rangle\leq  \langle \lambda(x),\lambda(y)\rangle.
\end{equation}
Moreover, equality holds in {\rm (\ref{vn inequality})} if and only if
$x$ and $y$ strongly operator commute.
}
\end{theorem}

In the second part of the paper, we compute/estimate the (spectral) norms of
the Lyapunov transformation $L_a$ defined by $L_a(x):=a\circ x$, the quadratic representation $P_a$ defined by
$P_a:=2L_a^2-L_{a^2}$, and a positive (linear) transformation defined by the condition $x\geq 0\Rightarrow P(x)\geq 0$.\\
\\
In the final part of the paper, we describe an interpolation theorem for a linear transformation on ${\cal V}$
relative to the spectral norms. Based on the $K$-method of real interpolation theory \cite{lunardi}, we show that
$$
||T||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||T||_{r\rightarrow r}^{1-\theta}\,\,||T||_{s\rightarrow s}^{\theta},
$$
where $T:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$ is a linear transformation with $||T||_{p\rightarrow p}$ denoting the the norm of $T$ relative to the spectral $p$-norm and real numbers $r,s,p\in [1,\infty]$ are related by $\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1-\theta}{r}+\frac{\theta}{s}$ for some $\theta\in [0,1]$.

\section{Preliminaries}
The symbol $\mathcal{R}^n$ denotes the usual Euclidean $n$-space in which we regard elements as either row vectors or column vectors depending on the context.
Throughout this paper, $({\cal V}, \circ,\langle\cdot,\cdot\rangle)$ denotes a Euclidean Jordan algebra of rank
$n$ and unit element $e$ \cite{faraut-koranyi}, \cite{gowda-sznajder-tao},
 with $x\circ y$ denoting the Jordan product and $\langle x,y\rangle$
denoting the inner product of $x$ and $y$ in ${\cal V}$. We specifically note that
\begin{equation}\label{jordan property}
\langle x\circ y,z\rangle=\langle x,y\circ z\rangle\quad \mbox{for all}\,\,x,y,z\in {\cal V}.
\end{equation}
For convenience, we use the same inner product notation in $\mathcal{R}^n$ (which carries the usual inner product) and in ${\cal V}$.

 It is known that any Euclidean Jordan algebra is a direct product/sum
of simple Euclidean Jordan algebras and every simple Euclidean Jordan algebra is isomorphic one of five algebras,
three of which are the algebras of $n\times n$ real/complex/quaternion Hermitian matrices. The other two are: the algebra of $3\times 3$ octonion Hermitian matrices and the Jordan spin algebra.
We let $\mathcal{S}^n$ ($\mathcal{H}^n$) denote the algebra of all $n \times n$ real symmetric (respectively, complex Hermitian) matrices.

According to the {\it spectral decomposition
theorem} \cite{faraut-koranyi}, any element $x\in {\cal V}$ has a decomposition
$$x=x_1e_1+x_2e_2+\cdots+x_ne_n,$$
where the real numbers $x_1,x_2,\ldots, x_n$ are (called) the eigenvalues of $x$ and
$\{e_1,e_2,\ldots, e_n\}$ is a Jordan frame in ${\cal V}$. (An element may have spectral decompositions coming from different Jordan frames, but the eigenvalues remain the same.) Then, $\lambda(x)$-- called the {\it eigenvalue vector} of $x$-- is the vector of eigenvalues of $x$ written in the decreasing order. The {\it trace  and spectral $p$-norm} of $x$ are defined by
$$tr(x):=x_1+x_2+\cdots+x_n\quad\mbox{and}\quad ||x||_p:=||\lambda(x)||_p,$$
where $||\lambda(x)||_p$ denotes the usual $p$-norm of the  vector $\lambda(x)$ in $\mathcal{R}^n$. (Note that $||x||_p$ is the $p$-norm of any vector in $\mathcal{R}^n$ formed by
$x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n$.)

We use the notation $x\geq 0$ ($x\leq 0$, $x>0$) when all the eigenvalues of $x$ are nonnegative (respectively, nonpositive, positive). Also, $x\geq y$ (or $y\leq x$) means that $x-y\geq 0$.
When $x\geq 0$ and has the spectral decomposition $x=\sum x_ie_i$, we define $\sqrt{x}:=\sum \sqrt{x_i}e_i$.

\vspace{11pt}

An element $c$ in ${\cal V}$ is an idempotent if $c^2=c$. Corresponding to such an element, the {\it Peirce decomposition of ${\cal V}$} is the orthogonal direct sum (\cite{faraut-koranyi}, page 62 and Proposition IV.1.1)
$${\cal V}={\cal V}(c,1)\oplus{\cal V}(c,\frac{1}{2})\oplus {\cal V}(c,0),$$
where ${\cal V}(c,\gamma):=\{x\in {\cal V}:x\circ c=\gamma\,x\}$ and $\gamma\in \{0,\frac{1}{2},1\}.$
Here ${\cal V}(c,1)$ and ${\cal V}(c,0)$ are subalgebras of ${\cal V}$ and ${\cal V}(c,1)\circ {\cal V}(c,0)=\{0\}$.
There is another related Peirce decomposition of ${\cal V}$: Corresponding to a Jordan frame $\{e_1,e_2,\ldots, e_n\}$, let
${\cal V}_{ii}:={\cal V}(c_i,1)=\mathcal{R}\,e_i$ and for $i\neq j$, ${\cal V}_{ij}:={\cal V}(c_i,\frac{1}{2})\cap {\cal V}(c_j,\frac{1}{2})$. Then
${\cal V}$ is the orthogonal direct sum of subspaces ${\cal V}_{ij}$ (\cite{faraut-koranyi}, Theorem IV.2.1).
Hence any element $x\in {\cal V}$ has a Peirce decomposition: $x=\sum_{i\leq j}x_{ij}$, where $x_{ij}\in {\cal V}_{ij}$.

\vspace{11pt}

Now, starting from the given inner product in ${\cal V}$, one can define the trace inner product $\langle x,y\rangle_{tr}:= tr(x\circ y)$ on ${\cal V}$ which is also  compatible with the given Jordan product (\cite{faraut-koranyi}, Prop. II.4.3 and Prop. III.1.5).  Various  concepts/results/decompositions  remain  the  same  when  the  given  inner  product  is
replaced by the trace inner product; in particular, for an element in ${\cal V}$, the spectral decomposition,
eigenvalues, and trace remain the same.
Under this trace inner product, the norm of any primitive element (such as an element in a Jordan frame)
is one and so every Jordan frame becomes an orthonormal set.
{\it From now on, throughout this paper, we assume that the inner product is the\\ trace inner product, that is,
$\langle x,y\rangle=tr(x\circ y).$}

\vspace{11pt}

Given a spectral decomposition $a=\sum a_ie_i$,
we write
\begin{center}
$|a|:=\sum |a_i|e_i\quad \mbox{and}\quad ||a||_1=\sum|a_i|=tr(|a|).$
\end{center}
With this notation, we observe that
\begin{equation}\label{ip and one-norm}
|\langle x,y\rangle|=|tr(x\circ y)|\leq tr(|x\circ y|)=||x\circ y||_1.
\end{equation}

\vspace{11pt}

Recall that two elements $x$ and $y$ in ${\cal V}$ {\it strongly operator commute} if there is an ordered Jordan frame ${\cal E}$
such that $x=\lambda(x)*{\cal E}$ and $y=\lambda(y)*{\cal E}.$
The terms `simultaneous order diagonalization' and `similar joint decomposition' have also
been used in the literature \cite{lim et al}, \cite{baes}.
Note that this notion is stronger than the usual operator commutativity where it is required that
$x$ and $y$ have their spectral decompositions with respect to a common Jordan frame
(or equivalently, the linear operators $L_x$ and $L_y$ commute, where $L_x(z):=x\circ z$, etc.)
For example, in $R^2$, the vectors $x=(1,0)$ and $y=(0,1)$ operator commute, but not strongly.

\vspace{11pt}

Given two (column) vectors $p$ and $q$ in $\mathcal{R}^n$, we say that $p$ is majorized by $q$ and write $p\prec q$ if $p=Aq$ for some doubly stochastic matrix $A\in \mathcal{R}^{n\times n}$ \cite{marshall-olkin}. (So, $A$ is a nonnegative matrix with every
row and column sum one. By a well-known result of Birkhoff, a doubly stochastic matrix is a convex combination of permutation matrices, see \cite{bhatia-book}.)
For  $x,y\in {\cal V}$, we say that
$x$ is {\it majorized} by $y$ and write $x\prec y$ if $\lambda(x)\prec \lambda(y)$ in $\mathcal{R}^n$.
If $f:\mathcal{R}^n\rightarrow \mathcal{R}$ is a convex function and $F:=f\circ \lambda$, then (by the classical Schur-convexity theorem \cite{marshall-olkin}), we have:
\begin{equation}\label{schur convexity}
x\prec y\Rightarrow F(x)\leq F(y).
\end{equation}
See \cite{jeong-gowda} for applications of this in Euclidean Jordan algebras.

\vspace{11pt}

Throughout this paper, for a real number $\alpha$, we let $sgn\,\alpha$ denote $1$, $0$, or $-1$ according as
whether $\alpha$ is positive, zero, or negative.

\section{Proof of Theorem \ref{main theorem}}

Toward establishing $(\ref{main inequality})$, we first prove a weaker inequality given below.
It is a consequence of
 Theorem \ref{generalized ft inequality}.

\begin{proposition} \label{prop lp inequality}
{\it
Let  $x,y\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$.
Then,
\begin{equation} \label{lp inequality}
|\langle x,y\rangle |\leq ||x||_{p}\,||y||_{q}.
\end{equation}
Equality holds in {\rm (\ref{lp inequality})} if and only if, with $\eta:=sgn\,\langle x,y\rangle$,
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(i)$] $\eta\, x$ and $y$ strongly operator commute and
\item [$(ii)$]
$\big \langle \lambda(\eta\,x),\lambda(y)\big \rangle=||\lambda(\eta\,x)||_p\,||\lambda(y)||_q$ holds in $\mathcal{R}^n$.
\end{itemize}
}
\end{proposition}

\vspace{11pt}

\noindent The inequality (\ref{lp inequality}) for a simple algebra is noted in \cite{tao et al}, Theorem 4.2.
A partial result for the equality in a simple algebra is stated in \cite{tao et al}, Corollary 4.2, where it is assumed that
$x,y\geq 0$.

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, let $\langle x,y\rangle\neq 0$. Since $\eta:=sgn\,\langle x,y\rangle$ (which is $1$ or $-1$), from  Theorem
\ref {generalized ft inequality} and the (classical) H\"{o}lder's inequality in $\mathcal{R}^n$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{inequality chain}
|\langle x, y\rangle|=\langle \eta\,x,y\rangle\leq  \langle \lambda(\eta\,x),\lambda(y)\rangle\leq ||\lambda(\eta\,x)||_p\,||\lambda(y)||_q=||x||_p\,||y||_q,
\end{equation}
where we note that
$||\lambda(\eta\,x)||_p=||x||_p.$ This proves the inequality (\ref{lp inequality}).
Suppose $|\langle x,y\rangle |= ||x||_{p}\,||y||_{q}.$ Then, from (\ref{inequality chain}), $\langle \eta\,x,y\rangle=  \langle \lambda(\eta\,x),\lambda(y)\rangle$. It follows from Theorem \ref{generalized ft inequality}
 that $\eta\,x$ and $y$ strongly operator commute. Also, from  (\ref{inequality chain}), we get the equality  stated in $(ii)$. \\
Now suppose conditions $(i)$ and $(ii)$ hold. Then, by an application of Theorem \ref{generalized ft inequality}
and $(ii)$ we see that
the inequalities in (\ref{inequality chain}) turn into equalities.
\end{proof}

\vspace{11pt}

We now come to the proof of Theorem \ref{main theorem}. For the case of ${\cal V}=\mathcal{S}^n$ (or $\mathcal{H}^n$), the inequality
(\ref{main inequality}) can be proved using known singular values inequalities: For an $n\times n$
real/complex matrix $A$, let $\sigma(A):=(\sigma_1(A),\sigma_2(A),\ldots,\sigma_n(A))$ denote the
vector of singular values of $A$ (= the eigenvalues of $\sqrt{A^*A}$) written in the decreasing order.
Then, for any two matrices $A$ and $B$, we have the inequalities
 $\sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i} (AB)\leq \langle \sigma(A),\sigma(B)\rangle$ and  $\sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i} (A+B)\leq \sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i}(A)+\sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i} (B)$ (see \cite{horn-johnson}, Theorem 3.3.14 and Corollary 3.4.3). Using these, for any $X,Y\in \mathcal{S}^n$ or $\mathcal{H}^n$, we see that
$$||X\circ Y||_1:=\sum_{1}^{n}|\lambda_{i}(X\circ Y)|=\sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i}(X\circ Y)=
\sum_{1}^{n}\frac{1}{2}\sigma_{i}(XY+YX)$$
$$\leq
\frac{1}{2}\Big (\sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i}(XY)+\sum_{1}^{n}\sigma_{i}(YX)\Big )\leq \Big \langle \sigma(X),\sigma(Y)\Big \rangle\leq ||\sigma(X)||_p\,||\sigma(Y)||_q=||\lambda(X)||_p\,||\lambda(Y)||_q.$$
The proof given below, based on majorization techniques, is comprehensive and avoids looking at particular cases of simple algebras.

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{proof}
We fix $x,y\in {\cal V}$.
If  $x\circ y\geq 0$ or $x\circ y\leq 0$, then,
$$||x\circ y||_1=\operatorname{tr}(|x\circ y|)=|\operatorname{tr}(x\circ y)|=|\langle x,y\rangle|\leq ||x||_{p}\,||y||_{p}$$
 by Proposition \ref{prop lp inequality}. Moving away from these two cases, consider the spectral decomposition of $x\circ y$ which can be written in the following form: For some  natural number $k$, $1\leq k<n$,
$$x\circ y=(z_1e_1+z_2e_2+\cdots+z_ke_k)-(z_{k+1}e_{k+1}+\cdots+z_ne_n),$$
 where $z_i\geq 0$ for all $i$.
Now, let $\varepsilon:=(e_1+e_2+\cdots+e_k)-(e_{k+1}+\cdots+e_n).$ Then, $\varepsilon^2=e$ and
$|x\circ y|=(x\circ y)\circ \varepsilon$. We now claim that
\begin{equation}\label{claim}
||y\circ \varepsilon||_{q}\leq ||y||_{q}.
\end{equation}
To see this, let $c=e_1+e_2+\cdots +e_k$. By the Peirce decomposition theorem \cite{faraut-koranyi},
${\cal V}$ is the orthogonal direct sum of
${\cal V}(c,1)$, ${\cal V}(c,\frac{1}{2})$, and ${\cal V}(c,0)$. Hence, we can write $y=u+v+w$, where $u\in {\cal V}(c,1)$,
$v\in {\cal V}(c,\frac{1}{2})$, and  $w\in {\cal V}(c,0)$. Since $\varepsilon=2c-e$,  an
easy computation shows that
$$y\circ \varepsilon=u-w.$$
As ${\cal V}(c,1)\circ {\cal V}(c,0)=\{0\}$, by  working with the spectral decompositions of $u$ in ${\cal V}(c,1)$ (which is a Euclidean Jordan algebra of rank $k$) and $w$ in ${\cal V}(c,0)$ (which is a Euclidean Jordan algebra of rank $n-k$), we see that the
eigenvalues of $u-w$
comprise of eigenvalues of $u$ and  $-w$; hence, $\lambda(u-w)$ is just a permutation of the vector formed by $\lambda(u)$ (which can be viewed as a vector in
$\mathcal{R}^k$) and $-\lambda(w)$ (which can be viewed as a vector in $\mathcal{R}^{n-k}$).
A similar statement holds for $u+w$. Hence,
$$||u-w||_q=||\lambda(u-w)||_q= ||\left [ \begin{array}{r} \lambda(u)\\-\lambda(w)\end{array}\right ]||_q=||\left [ \begin{array}{r} \lambda(u)\\\lambda(w)\end{array}\right ]||_q =||\lambda(u+w)||_q=||u+w||_q.$$
Now, it it is known (see \cite{gowda positive map}, page 52) that $$u+w\prec y.$$ With  $f(\zeta):=||\zeta||_q$ for $\zeta\in \mathcal{R}^n$ and
$F(a):=f(\lambda(a))=||a||_q$ for $a\in {\cal V}$, (\ref{schur convexity}) implies
$$||u+w||_q\leq ||y||_q.$$ It follows that
$$||y\circ \varepsilon||_{q}=||u-w||_q=||u+w||_q\leq ||y||_q,$$
proving  (\ref{claim}).
\\Now,
\begin{equation}
||x\circ y||_1=\operatorname{tr}(|x\circ y|)=\langle |x\circ y|,e\rangle =\langle (x\circ y)\circ \varepsilon,e\rangle=\langle x,y\circ \varepsilon\rangle,
\end{equation}
where the last equality is due to (\ref{jordan property}). So, by (\ref{vn inequality})  and (\ref{claim}),
\begin{equation}\label{norm equals inner product}
||x\circ y||_1=\langle x,y\circ \varepsilon\rangle\leq \langle \lambda(x),\lambda(y\circ \varepsilon)\rangle
\leq ||x||_{p}\,||y\circ\varepsilon||_{q}\leq ||x||_{p}\,||y||_{q}.
\end{equation}
This completes the proof of the inequality in the theorem. Now we justify the equality statement.\\
Suppose that $||x\circ y||_1= ||x||_p\,||y||_q.$ From (\ref{norm equals inner product})
we have $\langle x,y\circ\varepsilon\rangle =\langle \lambda(x),\lambda(y\circ\varepsilon)\rangle$. From Theorem \ref{generalized ft inequality}, we get
Item $(a)$.
Item $(b)$ follows from (\ref{norm equals inner product}).
Conversely, suppose conditions $(a)$ and $(b)$ hold. Then, from Theorem \ref{generalized ft inequality} and (\ref{norm equals inner product}),
$||x\circ y||_1=\langle x,y\circ \varepsilon\rangle=||x||_p\,||y||_q.$
\end{proof}

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{theorem}\label{some p,q norm inequalities}
{\it
Let $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$. Then the following statements hold in ${\cal V}$:
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(i)$] $|\langle x,y\rangle |\leq ||x\circ y||_1\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_q$.
\item [$(ii)$]
$\sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x,y\rangle|}{||y||_q}=
\sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{||x\circ y||_1}{||y||_q}=||x||_p.$
\item [(iii)] $||x\circ y||_p\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_\infty.$
\end{itemize}
}
\end{theorem}

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{proof} $(i)$ follows from (\ref{main inequality}) and (\ref{ip and one-norm}).
An immediate consequence of  $(i)$ is:
\begin{equation} \label{temp inequalities}
\sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x,y\rangle|}{||y||_q}\leq
\sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{||x\circ y||_1}{||y||_q}\leq ||x||_p.
\end{equation}
We now prove the reverse inequalities. Consider the spectral decomposition \\$x=\sum x_ie_i=\sum sgn (x_i)|x_i|e_i$.
First, suppose $p=\infty$.
Then, for  $1\leq i\leq n$,
$$|x_i|=|\langle x,e_i\rangle |=\frac{|\langle x,e_i\rangle |}{||e_i||_1}\leq \sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x,y\rangle|}{||y||_1},$$ hence $||x||_\infty\leq \sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x,y\rangle|}{||y||_1}$. By (\ref{temp inequalities}), the reverse inequality also holds. Thus, $(ii)$ holds when $p=\infty$.\\
Now, let $u:=\sum sgn (x_i)|x_i|^{\frac{p}{q}}e_i$ when $1<p<\infty$ and
$u:=\sum sgn (x_i)\,e_i$ when $p=1$. We easily verify that
$|\langle x,u\rangle|=||x\circ u||_1=||x||_p\,||u||_q.$ Thus, the inequalities in (\ref{temp inequalities}) turn into equalities, proving $(ii)$ for $1\leq p<\infty$.
\\
Now,
$$||x\circ y||_p=\sup_{z\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x\circ y,z\rangle|}{||z||_q}=\sup_{z\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x\circ z,y\rangle|}{||z||_q}\leq \sup_{z\neq 0}\frac{||x\circ z||_1\,||y||_\infty}{||z||_q}\leq ||x||_p\,||y||_\infty,$$
where the first equality comes from $(ii)$, the first inequality comes from an application of (\ref{lp inequality}), and the second inequality comes from $(ii)$.
This proves $(iii)$.
\end{proof}

\vspace{11pt}

\noindent{\bf Remark 1.} The above result shows that the spectral norms $||\cdot||_p$ and $||\cdot||_q$ on ${\cal V}$ are dual to each other.  We also have the following inequalities:
$$||x\circ y||_1\leq ||x||_1\,||y||_\infty\quad \mbox{and}\quad
||x\circ y||_\infty\leq ||x||_\infty\,||y||_\infty.$$
The first inequality has been observed in \cite{tao-yuan} in a simple algebra setting based on a case-by-case analysis.

\vspace{11pt}

\section{Pointwise inequalities for positive transformations}
Given $a\in {\cal V}$, we define the corresponding {\it Lyapunov transformation} $L_a$ and
{\it quadratic representation} $P_a$ on ${\cal V}$ by
$$L_a(x):=a\circ x\quad\mbox{and}\quad P_a(x)=2a\circ (a\circ x)-a^2\circ x\quad (x\in {\cal V}).$$
Now, expressed in terms of $L_a$, Theorem \ref{main theorem} says that
$$||L_a(x)||_1\leq ||x||_p\,||a||_q$$ for all $a,x\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$.
In this section, we consider such inequalities for quadratic representations and more generally for the so-called positive
transformations. Recall that a linear transformation $P:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$ is said to be a {\it positive transformation} \cite{gowda positive map}
if
$$x\geq 0\Rightarrow P(x)\geq 0.$$ Writing $P^*$ for the adjoint/transpose
 of a linear transformation $P$, we note that if $P$ is positive, then $P^*$ is also positive as $\langle P^*(z),y\rangle =\langle z,P(y)\rangle \geq 0$ for all $y,z\geq 0$.

\vspace{11pt}

Here are some examples of positive transformations:
\begin{itemize}
\item [$\bullet$] Any nonnegative matrix on the algebra $\mathcal{R}^n$.
\item [$\bullet$] Any quadratic representation $P_a$ on ${\cal V}$ \cite{faraut-koranyi}.
\item [$\bullet$] For any $A\in \mathcal{R}^{n\times n}$, the transformation $P$ defined on $\mathcal{S}^n$  by $P(X):=AXA^T$.
\item [$\bullet$] $P=L^{-1}$ on ${\cal V}$, where $L:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$ is linear, positive stable (which means that all eigenvalues of $L$ have positive real parts) and satisfies the $Z$-property \cite{gowda-tao-z}:
$$x\geq 0,y\geq 0,\,\langle x,y\rangle =0\Rightarrow \langle L(x),y\rangle \leq 0.$$ Specifically,
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(i)$] On the algebra $\mathcal{R}^n$, $P=A^{-1}$, where $A$ is a positive stable $Z$-matrix (meaning that its off-diagonal entries are nonpositive);
\item [$(ii)$] On the algebra $\mathcal{H}^n$,
$P=L_{A}^{-1}$, where $A$ is a complex $n\times n$  positive stable matrix and  $L_A(X):=AX+XA^*$.
The transformation $L_A$ (also called a Lyapunov transformation) appears in dynamical systems.
\end{itemize}
\item [$\bullet$] $P$ is a {\it doubly stochastic transformation} on ${\cal V}$ \cite{gowda positive map}. This means that $P$ is positive\\ and $P(e)=e=P^*(e)$. Being a generalization of a doubly stochastic matrix, such a  transformation has the following property (\cite{gowda positive map}, Theorem 6):
$$x=P(y)\Rightarrow x\prec y.$$
\item [$\bullet$] {\it `Schur product'} induced transformation $P$ defined  as follows (\cite{gowda-tao-sznajder}, Proposition 2.2): Fix a positive semidefinite matrix $A=[a_{ij}]\in \mathcal{S}^n$ and a Jordan frame
 $\{e_1,e_2,\ldots, e_n\}$ in ${\cal V}$. Corresponding to this Jordan frame, we write the Peirce decomposition (\cite{faraut-koranyi}, Theorem IV.2.1) of any $x\in {\cal V}$:
$x=\sum_{i\leq j}x_{ij}$. Then,
$$P(x):=A\bullet x=\sum_{i\leq j}a_{ij}x_{ij}.$$
It is known (\cite{gowda positive map}, Example 8) that if such an $A$ has all ones on its diagonal, then $P$ is doubly stochastic.
\end{itemize}

\vspace{11pt}

The following result gives pointwise estimates for positive transformations.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem for positive transformations}
{\it
Let $P$ be a positive transformation on ${\cal V}$. For any $x\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$, we have
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(a)$]
$||P(x)||_1  \leq ||x||_p\,||P^*(e)||_q.$ In particular, $||P(x)||_1  \leq ||x||_1\,||P^*(e)||_\infty.$
\item [$(b)$] $||P(x)||_p\leq ||x||_\infty\,||P(e)||_p.$ In particular, $||P(x)||_\infty\leq ||x||_\infty\,||P(e)||_\infty.$
\end{itemize}
}
\end{theorem}

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{proof}
$(a)$ We start with the observation that when $u\leq v$ and $-u\leq v$ in ${\cal V}$, we have $||u||_1\leq ||v||_1$. This is easy to see:
Writing the spectral decomposition $u=\sum u_ie_i$, we have $u_i=\langle u,e_i\rangle \leq \langle v,e_i\rangle$ and
similarly, $-u_i\leq \langle v,e_i\rangle$; thus, $|u_i|\leq \langle v, e_i\rangle$ for all $i$ and so,
$$||u||_1=tr(|u|)\leq \sum \langle v,e_i\rangle =\langle v,e\rangle =tr(v)=||v||_1$$ as $v\geq 0$. Now, for any $x\in {\cal V}$, $x\leq |x|$ and $-x\leq |x|$; hence using the positivity of $P$,
$P(x)\leq P(|x|)$ and $-P(x)\leq P(|x|)$ and so
$$||P(x)||_1\leq ||P(|x|)||_1=\Big \langle P(|x|),e\Big\rangle=\Big\langle |x|,P^*(e)\Big\rangle\leq \Big\langle \lambda(|x|),\lambda(P^*(e))\Big\rangle
\leq ||x||_p\,||P^*(e)||_q,$$
where the second inequality comes from (\ref{vn inequality}) and the last inequality is just the classical H\"{o}lder's inequality.
\\$(b)$ Since $P$ is a positive transformation, $P^*$ is also positive.
Hence, by applying $(a)$ to $P^*$ and $y$, we get $||P^*(y)||_1\leq ||y||_q\,||P(e)||_p.$ Now,
by an application of (\ref{lp inequality}), we get
$$||P(x)||_p=\sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{|\langle P(x),y\rangle|}{||y||_q}=\sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{|\langle x, P^*(y)\rangle|}{||y||_q}\leq \sup_{y\neq 0}\frac{||x||_\infty\,||P^*(y)||_1}{||y||_q}\leq ||x||_\infty\,||P(e)||_p.$$
\end{proof}

\vspace{11pt}

Here are some illustrations of the above theorem.

\begin{itemize}
\item [$\bullet$] Let $A\in \mathcal{R}^{n \times n}$ and consider the positive transformation $P$ on $\mathcal{S}^n$ defined by $P(X):=AXA^T$. Then, for any $X\in \mathcal{S}^n$, $P^*(X):=A^TXA$. So, with $e=I$ (the identity matrix), we have the inequalities
$$||AXA^T||_1\leq ||X||_p\,||A^TA||_q\quad\mbox{and}\quad ||AXA^T||_p\leq ||X||_\infty\,||AA^T||_p.$$
\item [$\bullet$] Let $A=[a_{ij}]\in \mathcal{S}^n$ be positive semidefinite. Then, considering the `Schur product' positive transformation $X\mapsto A\bullet X$, we have, for any $X\in \mathcal{S}^n$,
$$\rho(A\bullet X)=||A\bullet X||_\infty\leq ||X||_\infty\,||A\bullet I||_\infty =||X||_\infty\,(\max_{1\leq i\leq n}|a_{ii}|)=\rho(X)\,\rho(\operatorname{diag}(A)),$$
where $\rho(X)$ denotes the spectral radius of $X$ and $\operatorname{diag}(A):=A\bullet I$ with $I$ denoting the identity matrix.
We remark that eigenvalue and spectral radius inequalities for the Schur/Hadamard product have been well-studied in the matrix theory literature.
\end{itemize}

\vspace{11pt}

We now specialize the above result to $P_a$. It is well-known
that $P_a$ is self-adjoint and positive. Moreover, $P_a(e)=a^2$.
Hence,  we have the following:
For any $a,x\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$,
$$
||P_a(x)||_1\leq  ||x||_p\,||a^2||_q\quad \mbox{and}\quad ||P_a(x)||_p\leq ||x||_\infty\,||a^2||_p.
$$

As we see below, some finer inequalities can be obtained.

\begin{theorem}\label{majorization between quadratic and Lyapunov}
{\it
For  any $a,x\in {\cal V}$,
\begin{equation}\label{majorization between pa and la}
P_a(x)\prec a^2\circ x.
\end{equation}
Hence, for any  $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$,
\begin{equation} \label{inequality for pa}
||P_a(x)||_1\leq  ||a^2\circ x||_1\leq ||x||_p\,||a^2||_q\quad \mbox{and}\quad ||P_a(x)||_p\leq ||a^2\circ x||_p\leq ||x||_\infty\,||a^2||_p.
\end{equation}
}
\end{theorem}

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{proof}
The inequalities in (\ref{inequality for pa}) follow from (\ref{majorization between pa and la})
 by an application of
(\ref{schur convexity}) (with
$f$ denoting the usual $p$-norm on $\mathcal{R}^n$) and Theorem \ref{some p,q norm inequalities}.
We now prove (\ref{majorization between pa and la}). Since $P_a(x)\prec a^2\circ x$ means that
$\lambda(P_a(x))\prec \lambda(a^2\circ x)$, by continuity of the eigenvalue map $\lambda$ and the compactness of the set of all $n\times n$ doubly stochastic matrices, it is enough to prove (\ref{majorization between pa and la}) when $a$ is invertible (that is, all eigenvalues of $a$ are nonzero). {\it So, assume that $a$ is invertible.}
Then, we have the formula (see \cite{schmieta-alizadeh}, Lemma 8, Item 3)
$$P_{a,a^{-1}}P_a=L_{a^2},$$
where $P_{a,a^{-1}}:=L_aL_{a^{-1}}+L_{a^{-1}}L_a-L_{a\,\circ\, a^{-1}}.$
By  Lemma \ref{lemma in appendix} in the Appendix, the linear transformation $P_{a,a^{-1}}$  is invertible and
its inverse, $(P_{a,a^{-1}})^{-1}$, is doubly stochastic. Now, writing
$$P_a(x)=(P_{a,a^{-1}})^{-1}(a^2\circ x)$$
and invoking Theorem 6 in \cite{gowda positive map}, we see that  $P_a(x)\prec a^2\circ x.$

\end{proof}

We now mention some consequences of the majorization inequality (\ref{majorization between pa and la}).
\begin{itemize}
\item [(1)] Writing $\lambda_{\max}(u)$ and $\lambda_{\min}(u)$ for the maximum and minimum of eigenvalues of $u$, we have
$$\lambda_{\max}(P_a(x))\leq \lambda_{\max}(a^2\circ x)\quad \mbox{and}\quad \lambda_{\min}(P_a(x))\geq \lambda_{\min}(a^2\circ x).$$
\item [(2)] When $a\geq 0$, we have $P_{\sqrt{a}}(x)\prec a\circ x.$ Such a majorization inequality was proved
in \cite{meng et al} on a case-by-case basis under the assumptions that ${\cal V}$ is simple, $a>0$, $x>0$, and $a\circ x>0$.
\item [(3)] When $a\geq 0$, for any real number $\mu$, $P_{\sqrt{a}}(x)-\mu e\prec a\circ x-\mu e.$ It follows from (\ref{schur convexity}) that for any $p\in [1,\infty]$,
$$||P_{\sqrt{a}}(x)-\mu e||_p\leq ||a\circ x-\mu e||_p.$$
Such inequalities, for $p\in \{2,\infty\}$, appear in interior point methods, see e.g., \cite{schmieta-alizadeh}, Lemma 30.
\end{itemize}

\section{Norms of  Lyapunov transformations, quadratic representations, and positive transformations}
In a recent paper \cite{gowda positive map}, it was shown that for a positive transformation $P$ on a Euclidean Jordan algebra,
the infinity norm of $P$ is attained at the unit element. This result applies  to the quadratic transformation $P_a$ and the inverse of a positive stable $Z$-transformation \cite{gowda-tao-z} on a Euclidean Jordan algebra. In this section, we consider calculating the norms of the Lyapunov transformation $L_a$,
the quadratic representation $P_a$, and positive transformations relative to spectral norms. We remark that questions related to the norm of the Lyapunov
transformation $L_A$ on $\mathcal{S}^n$ (defined by $L_A(X):=AX+XA^T$ for $A\in \mathcal{R}^{n\times n}$) arise in connection with stability of dynamical systems, see
 \cite{feng et al} and citations therein.

\vspace{11pt}

Given a linear transformation $T:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$, and $r,s\in [1,\infty]$, we define the norm of the operator
$T:\,({\cal V},||\cdot||_r)\rightarrow ({\cal V},||\cdot||_s)$ by
$$||T||_{r\rightarrow s}:=\sup_{x\neq 0}\frac{||T(x)||_{s}}{||x||_r}.$$
By the duality of norms (see Theorem \ref{some p,q norm inequalities}), we immediately see that
$$||T||_{r\rightarrow s}=||T^*||_{s^\prime\rightarrow r^\prime},$$
where $T^*$ denotes the adjoint/transpose of $T$ and $r^\prime$ ($s^\prime$) denotes the conjugate of $r$ (respectively, of $s$).
\vspace{11pt}

Now consider the spectral decomposition
$a=\sum a_ie_i$. Then,
$$L_a(e_i)=a_ie_i\quad\mbox{and}\quad P_a(e_i)=a_i^2e_i$$
for all $i$. For any $r,s\in [1,\infty]$, $||e_i||_r=||e_i||_s=1$ and so,
$|a_i|=||a_ie_i||_s=||a\circ e_i||_s\leq ||L_a||_{r\rightarrow s}\,||e_i||_r=||L_a||_{r\rightarrow s}$. Taking the maximum over $i$, we see that
\begin{equation}\label{lower bound for norm of la}
||a||_\infty\leq ||L_a||_{r\rightarrow s}\quad (r,s\in [1,\infty]).
\end{equation}
Similarly,
\begin{equation}\label{lower bound for norm of pa}
||a^2||_\infty=||a||_\infty^2\leq ||P_a||_{r\rightarrow s}\quad (r,s\in [1,\infty]).
\end{equation}

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{theorem}\label{la norms}
{\it
For any $a\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$, the following statements hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(i)$] $||L_a||_{\infty\rightarrow q}=||L_a||_{p\rightarrow 1}=||a||_q.$
\item [$(ii)$] $||L_a||_{1\rightarrow q}=||L_a||_{p\rightarrow \infty}=||a||_\infty.$
\item [$(iii)$] $||L_a||_{p\rightarrow p}=||a||_\infty.$
\end{itemize}
}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
$(i)$ As $L_a$ is self-adjoint, the first equality comes from the
 duality of norms. The second equality is  immediate from Item $(ii)$ in
 Theorem \ref{some p,q norm inequalities}.
\\
$(ii)$ The first equality is due to the duality of norms. Now for the second equality. We have, from  Remark 1,
 $||a\circ x||_\infty \leq ||a||_\infty\,||x||_\infty$. As  $||x||_\infty\leq ||x||_p$,
we see that  $||a\circ x||_\infty \leq ||a||_\infty\,||x||_p$
and so, $||L_a||_{p\rightarrow \infty}\leq ||a||_\infty.$
On the other hand,
$||a||_\infty\leq ||L_a||_{p\rightarrow \infty}$ from (\ref{lower bound for norm of la}). This proves the equality
$||L_a||_{p\rightarrow \infty}=||a||_\infty.$
\\
$(iii)$ From Theorem \ref{some p,q norm inequalities}$(iii)$,
$||a\circ x||_p\leq ||x||_p\,||a||_\infty.$
From this, we get $||L_a||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||a||_\infty.$
On the other hand,
$||a||_\infty\leq ||L_a||_{p\rightarrow p}$ from (\ref{lower bound for norm of la}). Thus,
$||a||_\infty= ||L_a||_{p\rightarrow p}$.
\end{proof}

\vspace{11pt}
\begin{theorem}
{\it
Let $P$ be a positive transformation on ${\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$. Then,
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(i)$] $||P||_{\infty\rightarrow p}= ||P(e)||_p$ and $||P||_{p\rightarrow 1}= ||P^*(e)||_q$.
\item [$(ii)$] $||P||_{p\rightarrow \infty}\leq ||P(e)||_{\infty}$ and $||P||_{1\rightarrow p}\leq ||P^*(e)||_{\infty}$.
\end{itemize}
}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
$(i)$ From Theorem  \ref{theorem for positive transformations}(b), $||P(x)||_p\leq ||x||_\infty\,||P(e)||_p$ with equality when $x=e$. Hence $||P||_{\infty\rightarrow p}=\sup_{x\neq 0}\frac{||P(x)||_p}{||x||_\infty}= ||P(e)||_p$.
The dual version of this gives the second statement in $(i)$.\\
$(ii)$
 From Theorem  \ref{theorem for positive transformations}(b), we have $||P(x)||_\infty\leq ||x||_\infty\,||P(e)||_\infty\leq ||x||_p\,||P(e)||_\infty.$ This gives
$||P||_{p\rightarrow \infty}\leq ||P(e)||_{\infty}$. The second statement is the dual version of this.\\
\end{proof}

\noindent{\bf Remark 2.} The above result shows that for a positive transformation on ${\cal V}$,
$||P||_{1\rightarrow 1}\leq ||P^*(e)||_\infty$ and $||P||_{\infty \rightarrow \infty}\leq ||P(e)||_\infty$.
Using Theorem \ref{interpolation theorem} (see the next section), for any $p\in [1,\infty]$ we have
$$||P||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||P^*(e)||_\infty^{\frac{1}{p}}\,||P(e)||_\infty^{1-\frac{1}{p}}$$
and when $P$ is self-adjoint, $||P||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||P(e)||_\infty.$
To see a special case, suppose $L:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$ is linear, positive stable, and satisfies the $Z$-property (see Section 3 for definitions). Then,
$$||L^{-1}||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||(L^*)^{-1}(e)||_\infty^{\frac{1}{p}}\,||L^{-1}(e)||_\infty^{1-\frac{1}{p}}.$$
In particular, by taking  ${\cal V}=\mathcal{H}^n$ and $L=L_A$ with $A$ positive stable (see Section 3), we can estimate $||L_A^{-1}||_{p\rightarrow p}.$ See \cite{bhatia} for a discussion of this type of  an estimate on the space of all $n\times n$
complex matrices.

\vspace{11pt}

For quadratic representations, we can compute the norms precisely.

\begin{theorem}
For any $a\in {\cal V}$ and $p\in [1,\infty]$ with conjugate $q$, the following statements hold:
\begin{itemize}
\item [$(i)$] $||P_a||_{p\rightarrow 1}=||P_a||_{\infty\rightarrow q}= ||a^2||_q.$
\item [$(ii)$] $||P_a||_{1\rightarrow p}=||P_a||_{q\rightarrow \infty}=||a||_\infty^2.$
\item [$(iii)$] $||P_a||_{p\rightarrow p}=||a||_\infty^2.$
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
$(i)$ Since $P_a$ is self-adjoint and $P_a(e)=a^2$, this comes from the
previous theorem, Item $(i)$.
\\
$(ii)$ From Item $(ii)$ in the previous theorem, $||P_a||_{1\rightarrow p}=||P_a||_{q\rightarrow \infty}\leq ||a||_\infty^2.$ The reverse inequality follows from (\ref{lower bound for norm of pa}).
\\
As a consequence of Item $(ii)$,
$||P_a||_{1\rightarrow 1}=||a||_\infty^2=||P_a||_{\infty\rightarrow \infty}$. By invoking Theorem \ref{interpolation theorem} (see the next section),  we see that  $||P_a||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||a||_\infty^2$. Since the reverse inequality also holds, see  (\ref{lower bound for norm of pa}), we have
$||P_a||_{p\rightarrow p}= ||a||_\infty^2.$
\end{proof}

\section{An interpolation theorem}
In this section, we prove the following  interpolation theorem for a linear transformation on ${\cal V}$  with respect to the spectral norms.

\begin{theorem}\label{interpolation theorem}
{\it
Suppose $1\leq r,s,p\leq \infty$,  $0\leq \theta\leq 1$, and
\begin{equation}\label{r,s,p}
\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1-\theta}{r}+\frac{\theta}{s}.
\end{equation}
Then, for  any linear transformation $T:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{interpolation inequality}
||T||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||T||_{r\rightarrow r}^{1-\theta}\,\,||T||_{s\rightarrow s}^{\theta}.
\end{equation}
In particular,
$$||T||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||T||_{1\rightarrow 1}^{\frac{1}{p}}\,\,||T||_{\infty\rightarrow \infty}^{1-\frac{1}{p}}.
$$
}
\end{theorem}

There are numerous interpolation theorems in analysis, two classical
 ones being the Riesz-Thorin and Marcinkiewicz
interpolation theorems.  The interpolation theorems are usually proved using either the real or the complex methods.
We present a proof of the above theorem using the $K$-method of real interpolation theory \cite{lunardi}.
While the above result deals with the norm of $T$ relative to the same spectral norm (such as $||T||_{p\rightarrow p}$),
 we  anticipate a broader result similar to the Riesz-Thorin theorem that deals with the norm of $T$ relative to two spectral norms (such as $||T||_{p_0\rightarrow p_1}$).
We note that a Riesz-Thorin type result is available for linear transformations
 on the space of complex $n\times n$ matrices with respect to Schatten $p$-norms, see the interpolation theorem of Calder\'{o}n-Lions (\cite{reed-simon}, Theorem IX.20). A key idea in our proof is the use of a majorization result that connects a
$K$-functional defined on ${\cal V}$ to a $K$-functional on an $L_p$-space.
\\

Before presenting the proof, we describe some background material.
Corresponding to our Euclidean Jordan algebra ${\cal V}$ of rank $n$, we let $\Omega:=\{1,2,\ldots, n\}$
and  $\mu$ denote the  measure on (the power set of) $\Omega$ with $\mu(\{k\})=1$ for all $k\in \Omega$. Let  $L_{p}(\Omega)$ (abbreviated as $L_p$) denote the corresponding Lebesgue measure space (consisting, for our consideration,
 only of real valued functions).
We regard any element $f$ in $L_{p}(\Omega)$ either as an $n$-tuple or as a real valued function on $\Omega$. We let $||f||_p$ denote the usual $p$-norm of $f$.
{\it We assume the notation/conditions of Theorem \ref{interpolation theorem}.}
We will use the following abbreviations:
$$V_r:=(V,||\cdot||_r),\,\,V_s:=(V,||\cdot||_s),\,\,M_r:=||T||_{r\rightarrow r},\,\,\mbox{and}\,\,M_s:=||T||_{s\rightarrow s}.$$
For any real number  $t>0$, $x\in {\cal V}$, and $f:\Omega\rightarrow \mathcal{R}$, we consider all possible decompositions $x=a+b$  with $a,b\in {\cal V}$ and $f=g+h$ with $g,h:\Omega\rightarrow \mathcal{R}$, and define the $K$-functionals:
$$K(t,x,V_r,V_s):=\inf\Big \{||a||_r+t\,||b||_s:x=a+b\Big \},$$
and
$$K(t,f,L_r,L_s):=\inf\Big \{||g||_r+t\,||h||_s:f=g+h\Big \}.$$

We describe/recall some preliminary results.

\begin{proposition} (\cite{lunardi}, Definition 1.2 and Example 1.27)\label{equality in lp}
{\it
Suppose $1\leq r, s,p\leq \infty$, $r< s$,  $0< \theta< 1$, and
$$\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1-\theta}{r}+\frac{\theta}{s}.
$$
Then, for any $f:\Omega\rightarrow \mathcal{R}$,
$$||f||_p=\Big [\int_{0}^{\infty} \Big ( t^{-\theta}K(t,f,L_r,L_s)\Big )^p\frac{dt}{t}\Big ]^{\frac{1}{p}}.$$
}
\end{proposition}

\vspace{11pt}

The following can be regarded as a majorization result. In a simple Euclidean Jordan algebra, it is known that $\lambda(a+b)\prec \lambda(a)+\lambda(b)$ \cite{gowda-tao-cauchy} so that $\lambda(a+b)=A(\lambda(a)+\lambda(b))$ for some doubly stochastic matrix $A$. For a general Euclidean Jordan algebra, we have the following.

\begin{proposition} (\cite{jeong-gowda}, Proposition 8) \label{majorization}
{\it Given $a,b\in {\cal V}$, there exist doubly stochastic matrices $A$ and $B$ in $\mathcal{R}^{n\times n}$ such that
$$\lambda(a+b)=A\lambda(a)+B\lambda(b).$$
}
\end{proposition}

\vspace{11pt}

Based on the above majorization result, we connect the two $K$-functionals defined earlier.

\begin{lemma}\label{equality of two Ks}
{\it For any $t>0$ and $x\in {\cal V}$, we have
$$K(t,x,V_r,V_s)=K(t,\lambda(x), L_r,L_s).$$
}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We fix $x\in {\cal V}$ and consider the decomposition $x=a+b$. By Proposition \ref{majorization},
$$\lambda(x)=A\lambda(a)+B\lambda(b),$$
where $A$ and $B$ are doubly stochastic matrices in $\mathcal{R}^{n\times n}$.
Let $g:=A\lambda(a)$ and $h:=B\lambda(b)$ so that
$$\lambda(x)=g+h.$$
As $A$ and $B$ are convex combinations of permutation matrices (by Birkhoff's Theorem \cite{bhatia-book}), we see that $||g||_r\leq ||\lambda(a)||_r=||a||_r$ and $||h||_s\leq ||\lambda(b)||_s=||b||_s.$ Hence, for any $t>0$,
$$K(t,\lambda(x),L_r,L_s)\leq ||g||_r+t\,||h||_s\leq ||a||_r+t\,||b||_s.$$
As this holds for any decomposition $x=a+b$, taking the infimum,
$$K(t,\lambda(x), L_r,L_s)\leq K(t,x,V_r,V_s).$$
Now for the reverse inequality. Consider any decomposition $\lambda(x)=g+h$ where $g,h:\Omega\rightarrow \mathcal{R}.$ Corresponding to the spectral decomposition $x=\sum \lambda_i(x)e_i$, we define
$$a:=\sum g(i)e_i\quad\mbox{and}\quad b:=\sum h(i)e_i.$$
Then, $x=a+b$ in ${\cal V}$. So,
$$K(t,x,V_r,V_s)\leq ||a||_r +t\,||b||_s=||g||_r+t\,||h||_s.$$
Taking the infimum, we get
$$K(t,x,V_r,V_s)\leq K(t,\lambda(x), L_r,L_s).$$
This completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{lemma} \label{inequality of Ks}
{\it
Let $T:{\cal V}\rightarrow {\cal V}$ be linear and nonzero. Then,
$$K(t,T(x),V_r,V_s)\leq M_r\,K\Big (\frac{M_s}{M_r}t,x,V_r,V_s\Big ).$$
}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof} Fix $x\in {\cal V}$ with decomposition $x=a+b$. Then, $T(x)=T(a)+T(b)$ and so,
$$K(t,T(x),V_r,V_s)\leq ||T(a)||_r+t\,||T(b)||_s\leq M_r||a||_r+t\,M_s||b||_s\leq M_r\Big [||a||_r+t\frac{M_s}{M_r}||b||_s\Big ].$$
Taking the infimum over all decompositions $x=a+b$, we get the stated inequality.
\end{proof}

We now come to the proof of Theorem \ref{interpolation theorem}.

\vspace{11pt}

\begin{proof} As (\ref{interpolation inequality}) holds when $T=0$ or $r=s$ or when $\theta\in \{0,1\}$, we assume that
 $T\neq 0$, $r\neq s$, and $0<\theta<1$. We first assume that $r<s$ (so that conditions of Proposition \ref{equality in lp} are met).\\
We fix $x\in {\cal V}$ and let $y:=T(x)$. Then,
$||y||_p=||\lambda(y)||_p$ and
$$\begin{array}{rcl}
||\lambda(y)||_p^p & = & \int_{0}^{\infty} \Big [t^{-\theta}K(t,\lambda(y),L_r,L_s)\Big ]^p\frac{dt}{t}\\
          &=& \int_{0}^{\infty} \Big [ t^{-\theta}K(t,y,V_r,V_s)\Big ]^p\frac{dt}{t}\\
          &\leq & \int_{0}^{\infty} \Big [ t^{-\theta}M_r\,K\Big(\frac{M_s}{M_r}t,x,V_r,V_s\Big )\Big ]^{p}\frac{dt}{t}\\
          &=& \int_{0}^{\infty}\Big [ \Big (\frac{M_r}{M_s}t\Big )^{-\theta}M_r K(t,x,V_r,V_s)\Big ]^p
\frac{dt}{t}\\
&=& \Big (\frac{M_r}{M_s}\Big )^{-\theta\,p}M_r^{p}\int_{0}^\infty \Big [t^{-\theta}K(t,x,V_r,V_s)\Big ]^p\frac{dt}{t}\\
&=& M_r^{p(1-\theta)}M_s^{p\theta}\,||x||_p^{p},
\end{array}
$$
where the first equality is due to Proposition \ref{equality in lp},  the second equality is due to Lemma
\ref{equality of two Ks}, the first inequality is due to Lemma \ref{inequality of Ks}, and the third equality is due to a change of variable.
Also, the last equality is seen by applying Lemma \ref{equality of two Ks} and  Proposition \ref{equality in lp}.
Hence,
$$||T(x)||_p\leq M_r^{1-\theta}M_s^{\theta}\,||x||_p.$$
This implies that
$$||T||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||T||_{r\rightarrow r}^{1-\theta}\,||T||_{s\rightarrow s}^{\theta}.$$
Note that we proved this inequality  under the assumption that $r<s$. When $s<r$, we let $\phi:=1-\theta$ and observe that $\frac{1}{p}=\frac{1-\phi}{s}+\frac{\phi}{r}$. Then, by what has been proved,
$$||T||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||T||_{s\rightarrow s}^{1-\phi}\,||T||_{r\rightarrow r}^{\phi}=||T||_{r\rightarrow r}^{1-\theta}\,||T||_{s\rightarrow s}^{\theta}.$$
We thus have (\ref{interpolation inequality}) in all cases. In particular, by putting
$r=1$ and $s=\infty$ we  get
$$||T||_{p\rightarrow p}\leq ||T||_{1\rightarrow 1}^{\frac{1}{p}}\,||T||_{\infty\rightarrow \infty}^{1-\frac{1}{p}}.$$
\end{proof}
\section{Appendix}

For $a,b\in {\cal V}$, we define (see \cite{schmieta-alizadeh}, page 4 or \cite{faraut-koranyi}, page 32)
$$P_{a,b}:=L_aL_b+L_bL_a-L_{a\,\circ\, b}.$$

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma in appendix}
Suppose $a\in {\cal V}$ is invertible. Then, the linear transformation $P_{a,a^{-1}}$ is invertible and
$(P_{a,a^{-1}})^{-1}$
is doubly stochastic.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We consider the spectral decomposition $a=\sum a_ie_i$, where the eigenvalues $a_i$ are nonzero and $\{e_1,e_2,\ldots, e_n\}$ is a Jordan frame. With respect to this Jordan frame, we consider the Peirce decomposition of any element $u\in {\cal V}$ (\cite{faraut-koranyi}, Theorem IV.2.1) in the form $u=\sum_{i\leq j}u_{ij}.$ Then, from \cite{gowda-tao-sznajder} (page 720),
$$L_a(u)=\sum_{i\leq j}\frac{a_i+a_j}{2}\,u_{ij}\quad\mbox{and}\quad L_{a^{-1}}(u)=\sum_{i\leq j}\frac{a_i^{-1}+a_j^{-1}}{2}\,u_{ij}.$$
Since $a\circ a^{-1}=e$, an  easy computation shows that
$$P_{a,a^{-1}}(u)=\sum_{i\leq j} \frac{a_i^2+a_j^2}{2a_{i}a_{j}}\,u_{ij}.$$
As $P_{a,a^{-1}}(u)=0\Rightarrow u=0$, the linear transformation $P_{a,a^{-1}}$ is invertible and
$$(P_{a,a^{-1}})^{-1}(u)=\sum_{i\leq j} \frac{2a_{i}a_{j}}{a_i^2+a_j^2}\,u_{ij}.$$
Now consider the real symmetric matrix $A=[a_{ij}]$, where $a_{ij}=\frac{2a_{i}a_{j}}{a_i^2+a_j^2}$.
By considering the functions $\phi_i(t)$ in $L_2([0,\infty))$, $i=1,2,\ldots, n$, defined by
$$\phi_i(t)=\sqrt{2}\,a_i\,e^{-a_i^2\,t},$$
we see that the inner product (computed in $L_2([0,\infty))$)
$$\langle \phi_i,\phi_j\rangle=\int_{0}^{\infty}2a_ia_je^{-(a_i^2+a_j^2)t}\,dt=a_{ij}.$$
Hence, $A$ is the Gram matrix corresponding to the set $\{\phi_1,\phi_2,\ldots,\phi_n\}$ in  $L_2([0,\infty))$. It follows that $A$ is positive semidefinite. Now, using the definition of `Schur product' induced transformation (see Section 4)
$$(P_{a,a^{-1}})^{-1}(u)= A\bullet u\,\,(u\in {\cal V}).$$
As $A$ is positive semidefinite and has ones on the diagonal, from Example 8 in \cite{gowda positive map} we see
that the transformation $u\rightarrow A\bullet u$ is doubly stochastic. This proves that $(P_{a,a^{-1}})^{-1}$
is doubly stochastic.
\end{proof}


Radially Symmetric Solutions To The Graphic Willmore Surface Equation

Abstract: We show that a smooth radially symmetric solution $u$ to the graphic Willmore surface equation is either a constant or the defining function of a half sphere in ${\mathbb R}^3$. In particular, radially symmetric entire Willmore graphs in ${\mathbb R}^3$ must be flat. When $u$ is a smooth radial solution over a punctured disk $D(\rho)\backslash\{0\}$ and is in $C^1(D(\rho))$, we show that there exist a constant $\lambda$ and a function $\beta$ in $C^0(D(\rho))$ such that $u''(r) =\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r+\beta(r)$; moreover, the graph of $u$ is contained in a graphical region of an inverted catenoid which is uniquely determined by $\lambda$ and $\beta(0)$. It is also shown that a radial solution on the punctured disk extends to a $C^1$ function on the disk when the mean curvature is square integrable.

\section{Introduction}

A Willmore surface in ${\mathbb R}^3$ is a smoothly immersed surface that satisfies the equation
\begin{equation}\label{Willmore}
\Delta_g H + \frac{1}{2} H^3-2H^2K=0
\end{equation}
where $H = \kappa_1+\kappa_2$ and $K=\kappa_1\kappa_2$ are the mean curvature and the Gauss curvature of the surface respectively and $\Delta_g$ is the Laplace-Beltrami operator in the metric $g$ on the surface, which is induced from the Euclidean metric in ${\mathbb R}^3$ via the immersion.

For a smooth graph $(x,y,u(x,y))$ in ${\mathbb R}^3$, the area element is $v=\sqrt{1+|Du|^2}$ and $H= \mbox{div}\left(\frac{D u}{v}\right)$, where $D$ is the Euclidean gradient operator on functions in the $xy$-plane. Fro graphs, as shown in \cite{D-D},  the Willmore surface equation \eqref{Willmore} can be written in an elegant form:
\begin{equation}\label{Willmore equation}
\mbox{div}\left(\frac{1}{v}\left(\left(I-\frac{D u\otimes D u}{v^2}\right)D(vH)-\frac{1}{2}H^2D u\right)\right)=0.
\end{equation}

Inspired by the classical theorem of Bernstein for the minimal surface equation, one asks when an entire Willmore graph is a plane. An entire smooth solution to \eqref{Willmore equation} is shown to be affine if $H$ is square integrable \cite{C-L}, \cite{L-S}; the approach taken in \cite{C-L} is geometric in nature, rather than dealing with the fourth order partial differential equation directly. It has remained an interesting open question on the radially symmetric case: is an entire radial solution to \eqref{Willmore equation} constant? In this paper, we answer this question affirmatively.

 \begin{thm}\label{main theorem}
Let $u(r)$ be a smooth solution to \eqref{Willmore equation} defined on a disk $D(\rho)$ in the $xy$-plane centered at the origin with radius
$\rho$, where $r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$. Suppose that $u(0)=c$ and the mean curvature of of the graph $(x,y,u(r))$ at $(0,0,c)$ is $2a$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item  if $a=0$, then $u\equiv c$;
\item if $a\neq 0$,  the graph is contained in a half sphere centered at $(0,0,c)$ of radius $\frac{1}{|a|}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
Consequently, a global radially symmetric solution to \eqref{Willmore equation} must be constant.

The main observation in this paper can be summarized as follows. The fourth order equation \eqref{Willmore equation} reduces to a third order equation due to its divergence free structure; the latter further reduces, in the radially symmetric case, to an ordinary differential equation of second order for $u'$ since the zeroth order term $u$ itself is absent from the equation \eqref{Willmore equation}. The singularity at $r=0$ in the second order equation is surprisingly mild. Even more, the difference of any two solutions to the second order equation satisfies an equation which admits a contraction property that leads to uniqueness of solutions to an initial value problem. The desired rigidity then follows. In section \ref{smooth} we will prove Theorem \ref{main theorem}.

\vspace{.1cm}

In section \ref{singular}, we will extend the techniques developed in section \ref{smooth} to study radially symmetric solutions with a point singularity at the origin. Our main focus is to classify the radially symmetric solutions to the Willmore surface
equation on a punctured disk $D(\rho)\backslash\{0\}$, which is in $C^1(D(\rho))$. Such a solution $u$ will be shown to have the following decomposition property:
$$u''(r)=\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r+\beta(r),\,\,\,\, \mbox{where }\beta\in C^0[0,\rho);$$
which is equivalent to the mean curvature decomposes as:
$$H(r)=\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r+\gamma(r),\,\,\,\, \mbox{where }\gamma\in C^0[0,\rho).$$
Further, we will prove that such a surface is contained in the image of an inversion in ${\mathbb R}^3$ of a catenoid, where the inversion and the catenoid are uniquely determined by the information at the origin: $\lambda$ and $\beta(0)$ (or equivalently $\gamma(0)$). We now describe the corresponding catenoid and  inversion.

A catenoid $\mathcal{C}_c$ may be defined by the parametrization
$$
{\mathcal F}_c(t,\theta)=(|c| \cosh t\cos\theta,|c|\cosh t\sin\theta,ct),
$$
where $c\neq 0$ (here we allow $c<0$).  The inversion of this catenoid under the mapping
$$
I_a(x,y,z)=\frac{(x,y,z-a)}{|(x,y,z-a)|^2}
$$
 is a closed surface with $0\in{\mathbb R}^3$ as its only nonsmooth point, in particular, away from finitely many circles that are perpendicular to the $z$-axis, the inverted catenoid can be written as several graphs over the $xy$-plane, among them, we will identify which one contains the graph of $u$ (translated by the constant vector $(0,0,u(0))$).
Let
$$
h(t)=\frac{|c|\cosh t}{c^2\cosh^2t+(ct-a)^2}
$$
be the distance of $I_a({\mathcal F}_c(t,\theta))$ to the $z$-axis. Direct computations shows that $h$ has only finitely many critical points and denote them by $t_1<\cdots<t_m$. Then the inversion of $
\mathcal{C}_c\backslash (\bigcup_i{\mathcal F}_c(\{t_i\}\times S^1))$
consists of the following $m+1$ graphs
$$
I_a\left({\mathcal F}_c((-\infty,t_1)\times S^1)\right),\,\,\,\, I_a\left({\mathcal F}_c((t_1,t_2)\times S^1\right),\cdots,
I_a\left({\mathcal F}_c((t_m,+\infty)\times S^1\right)
$$
where the first one and the last one are graphs over a punctured disk and the rest are graphs over an annulus. Let
$$
t_{c,a}=t_m,\,\,\,\, R_{c,a}=h(t_{c,a}),\,\,\,\, \Sigma_{c,a}=I_a\left({\mathcal F}_c((t_m,+\infty)\times S^1)\right).
$$
The disk $D(R_{c,a})$ in the $xy$-plane is the largest domain
over which $\Sigma_{c,a}$ can be defined (see Section \ref{inverted catenoid} for more details).

\begin{thm}\label{main2}
Let $u(r)$ be a smooth solution to \eqref{Willmore equation} defined on a disk $D(\rho)\backslash\{0\}$ in the $xy$-plane centered at the origin with radius $\rho$. Suppose  $u\in C^{1}(D(\rho))$. Then
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] there exist a constant $\lambda$ and a function $\beta\in C^0([0,\rho))$ such that
$$
u''(r) = \frac{\lambda}{2}\log r +\beta(r),\,\,\,\,r>0;
$$
\item[(2)] the graph of $u$ is contained in $(0,0,u(0))+\Sigma_{c,a}$ where
$$
c=-\frac{\lambda}{4} \,\,\,\, {and} \,\,\,\,
a= \frac{\lambda}{4}\log\frac{|\lambda|}{8}+\frac{3\lambda}{8}-\frac{\beta(0)}{2}
$$
and $\rho$ is no larger than $R_{c,a}$ and $u\in C^{1,\alpha}(D(\rho))$ for any $0<\alpha<1$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}

The regularity assumption $u\in C^1(D(\rho))$ in Theorem \ref{main2} will be  shown  to hold when the mean curvature $H$ is square integrable over $D(\rho)$.
\begin{cor}\label{main3}
Let $u(r)$ be a smooth solution to \eqref{Willmore equation} defined on a punctured disk $D(\rho)\backslash\{0\}$ in the $xy$-plane. Suppose that the Willmore energy $\int_{
D(\rho)}|H|^2d\mu$ is finite. Then $u$ can be extended at $0$ as a $C^{1,\alpha}$ function on $D(\rho)$ and (1) and (2) in Theorem \ref{main2} hold.
\end{cor}

For rigidity of Willmore surfaces in $\mathbb{R}^3$ that are not necessarily graphs, Bryant showed \cite{Bryant}, among other things, that an embedded closed Willmore surface of genus zero must be a round sphere; Rigoli \cite{R}  showed that for a complete
Willmore immersion $f:\Sigma\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^3$,  if there
exists a vector $a\in \mathbb{R}^3$ such that $\langle n+Hf, a\rangle\equiv 0$, then $f(\Sigma)$ must be a plane.

\section{Smooth Radially symmetric solutions}\label{smooth}
Let $f$ be a smooth radially symmetric function defined on the disk
$D(\rho)$ in ${\mathbb R}^2$ centered at the origin with radius $\rho\in (0,\infty]$. The divergence of the smooth radial vector field $X=f(r)\frac{\partial}{\partial r}$, where $r=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}$ for $(x,y)\in{\mathbb R}^2$, is given by
\begin{equation}\label{radial vector}
\mbox{div} X=\frac{(rf)'}{r}=f'+\frac{f}{r}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, $f'(0)$ must be 0. In fact, if we set $\tilde f(x,y)=f(r)$, then $\tilde f(x,y)=\tilde f(-x,-y)$. It follows that both $\tilde f_x$ and $\tilde f_y$ vanish at the origin; hence $$f'(0)=\tilde f_x(0,0)\cos\theta+\tilde f_y(0,0)\sin\theta=0. $$

\vspace{0.2cm}

Now consider the graph defined by a smooth radially symmetric function $u(r)$ on $D(\rho)$. Letting $w=u'$, we have
$$
v=\sqrt{1+w^2}\ \ \ \mbox{and} \ \ \ v'=\frac{ww'}{v}.
$$
Note that
$$
w(0)=u'(0)=0.
$$
We calculate the mean curvature of the graph as follows
\begin{eqnarray}\label{H}
H&=& \mbox{div} \left(\frac{w}{v}\frac{\partial}{\partial r} \right) \\
&=&\left( \frac{w}{v} \right)'+\frac{w}{rv} \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{w'}{v}-\frac{w^2w'}{v^3}+\frac{w}{rv} \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{w'}{v^3}+\frac{w}{rv}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Two consequences are immediate. First, at the origin, we have
\begin{equation}\label{H(0)}
H(0)=w'(0)+\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}\frac{w}{rv}=2w'(0).
\end{equation}
Second, we have
\begin{equation}\label{(vH)'}
(vH)'=\frac{w''}{v^2}-\frac{2w(w')^2}{v^4}+\frac{w'}{r}-\frac{w}{r^2}.
\end{equation}

To simplify the divergence free radial vector field in the Willmore surface equation \eqref{Willmore equation}, we first compute

\begin{eqnarray}\label{vH}
\left(I-\frac{D u\otimes D u}{v^2}\right)D(vH)&=&\left(\left(1-\frac{u_x^2}{v^2}\right)(vH)_x-\frac{u_xu_y}{v^2}\left(vH\right)_y\right)
\frac{\partial}{\partial x} \\
&&+\left(-\frac{u_xu_y}{v^2}(vH)_x+\left(1-\frac{u_y^2}{v^2}\right)(vH)_y\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\nonumber \\
&=&\left(\frac{1+u_y^2}{v^2}(vH)_x-\frac{u_xu_y}{v^2}(vH)_y\right)
\frac{\partial}{\partial x}  \nonumber \\
&&+\left(-\frac{u_xu_y}{v^2}(vH)_x+\frac{1+u_x^2}{v^2}(vH)_y\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial y}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Next, we convert the partial derivatives in $x,y$ of the radially symmetric  functions $u,vH$ into the derivatives in $r$:
\begin{equation}\label{r-derivatives}
u_x=u_r\frac{x}{r},\,\,\,\, u_y=u_r\frac{y}{r},\,\,\,\,  (vH)_x=(vH)_r\frac{x}{r},\,\,\,\, (vH)_y=(vH)_r\frac{y}{r}.
\end{equation}
It follows by substituting \eqref{r-derivatives} into \eqref{vH} that

\begin{eqnarray}\label{vH in r}
\hspace{.75cm}\left(I-\frac{D u\otimes D u}{v^2}\right)D(vH)&=&\frac{1}{v^2}\left(\left({1+u_r^2\frac{y^2}{r^2}}\right)(vH)_r\frac{x}{r}-{u_r^2}(vH)_r\frac{xy^2}{r^3}\right)
\frac{\partial}{\partial x} \\
&&+\frac{1}{v^2}\left(-{u_r^2}(vH)_r\frac{x^2y}{r^3}
+\left(1+u_r^2\frac{x^2}{r^2}\right)(vH)_r\frac{y}{r}\right)\frac{\partial}{\partial y}
 \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{1}{v^2}(vH)_r\left(\frac{x}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial x}+\frac{y}{r}\frac{\partial}{\partial y}\right) \nonumber \\
&=&\frac{1}{v^2}(vH)_r\frac{\partial}{\partial r}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}

Define a radially symmetric function by
\begin{equation}\label{def f}
f=\left<\frac{1}{v}\left(\left(I-\frac{D u\otimes D u}{v^2}\right)D(vH)-\frac{1}{2}H^2D u\right),\frac{\partial}{\partial r}\right>.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{H}, \eqref{(vH)'} and \eqref{vH in r}, we find
\begin{eqnarray}\label{f}
f&=&\frac{1}{v}\left(\frac{1}{v^2}(vH)_r-\frac{1}{2}H^2 w\right)\\
&=&\frac{1}{v}\left(\frac{1}{v^2}\left(\frac{w''}{v^2}-\frac{2w(w')^2}{v^4}+\frac{w'}{r}-\frac{w}{r^2}\right)\right)-\frac{1}{2v}H^2 w \nonumber\\
&=&\frac{w''}{v^5}-\frac{2w(w')^2}{v^7}+\frac{1}{v^3}\left(\frac{w'}{r}-\frac{w}{r^2}\right)
-\frac{w}{2v}\left(\frac{(w')^2}{v^6}+\frac{w^2(w')^2}{r^2v^2}+2\frac{w'w}{rv^4}\right) \nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{v^5}\left(w''+\left(-2\frac{w}{v^2}-\frac{w}{2v^2}\right)(w')^2
+\left(v^2-w^2\right)\frac{w'}{r}-v^2\frac{w}{r^2}-v^2\frac{w^3}{2r^2}\right) \nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{v^5}\left(w''-\frac{5w}{2\left(1+w^2\right)}(w')^2+\frac{w'}{r}-\left(1+w^2\right)\frac{w}{r^2}-\left(1+w^2\right)\frac{w^3}{2r^2}\right) \nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{v^5}\left(w''+\left(\frac{w}{r}\right)'-\frac{5w}{2\left(1+w^2\right)}(w')^2-\frac{w^3}{2r^2}\left(3+w^2\right)\right).\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}

\begin{lem}\label{lemma 1}
Let $u$ be a smooth radially symmetric function that solves the Willmore surface equation \eqref{Willmore equation} on a disk $D(\rho)$ in the $xy$-plane centred at the origin.  Then $f=0$.
\end{lem}

\proof Using the function defined in \eqref{def f}, the Willmore surface equation \eqref{Willmore equation} reads
\begin{equation}\label{radial W equation}
\mbox{div} \left(  f \frac{\partial}{\partial r}  \right) = 0.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{radial vector}, the above equation reduces to
$$
(rf)'=0.
$$
Then
\begin{equation}\label{f equation}
f=\frac{C}{r}
\end{equation}
for some constant $C$. Furthermore, for any $0<r_0<\rho$, integrating the Willmore equation \eqref{radial W equation} and using Stokes' theorem
$$
0=\int_{D(r_0)}\mbox{div}\left( f\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\right)=\int_{\partial D(r_0)}f=2\pi  \,C.$$
Thus, $C=0$. $\hfill\Box$\\

Then, Lemma \ref{lemma 1} and \eqref{f} yield

\begin{lem}\label{lemma 2}
$F=(x,y,u(r))$ is Willmore if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{equation.w}
w''+\left(\frac{w}{r}\right)'-\varphi(\omega)=0,
\end{equation}
where
$$\varphi(\omega)=\frac{5w}{2(1+w^2)}(w')^2+\frac{w^3}{2r^2}(3+w^2).$$
\end{lem}

For \eqref{equation.w}, we now establish a uniqueness result for an initial value problem.
\begin{lem}\label{uniqueness}
There exists $\epsilon>0$ such that the equation \eqref{equation.w} has at most one solution on $[0,\epsilon]$ with
initial data $w(0)=0$, and $w'(0)=a$.
\end{lem}

\proof Let $w_1$ and $w_2$ be solutions to \eqref{equation.w} on $[0,r_0]$ for some $r_0>0$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{equation.w1-w2}
(w_1-w_2)''+(\frac{w_1-w_2}{r})'=\varphi(w_1)-\varphi(w_2).
\end{equation}
We have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{varphi(w1)-varphi(w2)}
\varphi(w_1)-\varphi(w_2)&=&\frac{5w_1}{2\left(1+w_1^2\right)}(w_1')^2+\frac{w_1^3}{2r^2}\left(3+w_1^2\right)
-\frac{5w_2}{2\left(1+w_2^2\right)}(w_2')^2-\frac{w_2^3}{2r^2}\left(3+w_2^2\right) \nonumber\\
&=&\left(\frac{5w_1}{2(1+w_1^2)}-\frac{5w_2}{2\left(1+w_2^2\right)}\right)(w_1')^2
+\frac{5w_2(w_1'+w_2')}{2(1+w_2^2)}\left(w_1'-w_2'\right)\nonumber \\
&&+3\,\frac{w_1^3-w_2^3}{2r^2}+\frac{w_1^5-w_2^5}{2r^2}.
\end{eqnarray}

To estimate the three terms on the right hand side of the above identity, we first observe
$$
\left|\frac{w_1}{(1+w_1^2)}-\frac{w_2}{(1+w_2^2)}\right| =
\left|\frac{(1-w_1w_2)(w_1-w_2)}{(1+w_1^2)(1+w_2^2)}\right|\leq |w_1-w_2|.
$$
Next, let
\begin{equation}\label{lambda}
\Lambda=\|w_1\|_{C^1([0,r_0])}+\|w_2\|_{C^1([0,r_0])}.
\end{equation}
Since $w_i(0)=0$, for $r\leq r_0$, it holds
$$
|w_i(r)| = \left| \int^r_0 w'(s)ds\right| \leq r \|w_i\|_{C^1([0,r_0])}.
$$
There exists some positive constant $C(\Lambda)$ which depends only on $\Lambda$ such that:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left|\frac{w_i}{r}\right|&\leq& C(\Lambda),\,\,\,\, i=1,2;\\
\left|\frac{w_1^3-w_2^3}{r^2}\right| &=& \frac{|w_1^2+w_1w_2+w_2^2|}{r^2}|w_1-w_2| \leq C(\Lambda)|w_1-w_2|, \\
\left|\frac{w_1^5-w_2^5}{r^2}\right| &\leq& C(\Lambda)r^2|w_1-w_2|.
\end{eqnarray*}
Then
\begin{equation}\label{diff}
|\varphi(w_1)-\varphi(w_2)|\leq C(r|w_1'-w_2'|+|w_1-w_2|),\,\,\,\, r\in [0,r_0],
\end{equation}
where $C$ depends only on $\Lambda$ and $r_0$.

Let $\phi=w_1-w_2$. We have $\phi(0)=\phi'(0)=0$, hence $\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}
\frac{\phi}{r}=0$; therefore by \eqref{equation.w1-w2},
$$
\phi'(r)+\frac{\phi(r)}{r}=\int_0^r(\varphi(w_1(t))-\varphi(w_2(t)))dt.
$$
Then
$$
(r\phi(r))'=r\int_0^r(\varphi(w_1(t))-\varphi(w_2(t)))dt.
$$
By \eqref{diff},
\begin{eqnarray}\label{contraction}
|(r\phi(r))'|&\leq& Cr\int_0^r(|\phi(t)|+|t\phi'(t)|)dt \\
&=&Cr\int_0^r(|\phi(t)|+\left|(t\phi(t))'-\phi(t)\right|)dt \nonumber\\
&\leq&2Cr\int_0^r(|\phi(t)|+|(t\phi(t))'|)dt \nonumber\\
&=& 2Cr\int_0^r\left(\left|\frac{1}{t}\int_0^t(s\phi(s))'ds\right|+|(t\phi(t))'|\right)dt \nonumber\\
&\leq& 4Cr^2\|(t\phi)'\|_{C^0([0,r])}, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $r\in(0,r_0]$.

Given $r_1\in(0,r_0)\cap (0,\frac{1}{2\sqrt{2C}})$, if $(r\phi)'$ is not identically $0$ on $[0,r_1]$, then we can find $r_2\in (0,r_1]$, such that
$$
0<|(r\phi)'(r_2)|=\|(r\phi)'\|_{C^0([0,r_2])}.
$$
Thus, \eqref{contraction} yields
$$
0<|(r\phi)'(r_2)|\leq 4Cr_2^2|(r\phi)'(r_2)|<\frac{1}{2}|(r\phi)'(r_2)|,
$$
which is impossible. Therefore, $(r\phi)'=0$ on $[0,r_1]$. It follows that $r\phi$ is a constant which must be 0 since $\phi(0)=0$. We conclude that $\phi=0$ on $[0,r_1]$. Then $w_1=w_2$ on $[0,\epsilon]$ for $\epsilon =\min\{r_0, \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}C}\}$.
$\hfill\Box$\\

\noindent {\it Proof of Theorem \ref{main theorem}}: We divide the proof into two cases.

1) When $a=0$,  it is clear that $0$ is solution to \eqref{equation.w}. Since $w=u'$ is also a solution to \eqref{equation.w}, by Lemma \ref{uniqueness}, $w=0$ on $[0,\epsilon]$ for some $\epsilon>0$. Over the interval $[\epsilon,+\infty)$, \eqref{equation.w}
 is a second order ordinary differential equation with smooth coefficients, by the standard uniqueness theorem in ODE,  $w=0$ on $[\epsilon,+\infty)$ hence on $[0,+\infty)$. Then $u$ is a constant.

2)  Let  $a\neq 0$. It is well-known that the half sphere $F=(x,y,-\mbox{sign}(a)\sqrt{\frac{1}{a^2}-r^2})$ is a
 Willmore surface, i.e. $\left(-\mbox{sign}(a)\sqrt{\frac{1}{a^2}-r^2}\right)'$ satisfies the equation \eqref{equation.w}.  Moreover,
$$\left(-\mbox{sign}(a)\sqrt{\frac{1}{a^2}-r^2}\right)''_{r=0}=a.$$
Similar to  case 1), from Lemma \ref{uniqueness}
$$
w(r)= -\left(\mbox{sign}(a)\sqrt{\frac{1}{a^2}-r^2}\right)'
$$
on $[0,\frac{1}{|a|})$, which is the maximum interval on which $w$ is defined.  Then
$$
u=-\mbox{sign}(a)\sqrt{\frac{1}{a^2}-r^2}+c
$$
where $c$ is a constant and $r\in[0,\frac{1}{|a|})$. $\hfill\Box$\\

For an entire radial solution to \eqref{Willmore equation}, the second case in Theorem \ref{main theorem} cannot occur. Therefore, we have
\begin{cor}
A smooth radially symmetric Willmore graph $F=(x,y,u(r))$
must be a plane that is parallel to the $xy$-plane.
\end{cor}

\section{Radially symmetric solutions with a point singularity}\label{singular}

In this section, we study radially symmetric Willmore surface which has a
singularity at $(0,0,0)$.

\subsection{Regularity and uniqueness of solutions}
Examining the proof of Lemma \ref{lemma 2}, due to the singularity at 0, we can only conclude from \eqref{f equation} that
$f=\frac{\lambda}{r}$ for some $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$, while $\lambda =0$ when $u$ is smooth at $0$. Therefore, the equation for $w = u'$ takes a different form when singularity presents. We have

\begin{lem}\label{lemma}\label{singular Willmore equation}
Let $u\in C^\infty(D(\rho)\backslash\{0\})$ be a  radially symmetric function that solves the Willmore surface equation \eqref{Willmore equation} on $D(\rho)\backslash\{0\}$ in the $xy$-plane centred at the origin.  Then $f(r)=\frac{\lambda}{r}$ for some $\lambda\in\mathbb{R}$ where $f$ is defined in \eqref{f}, i.e. $F=(x,y,u(r))$ is Willmore if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{equation.w.with singularity}
w''+\left(\frac{w}{r}\right)'=\varphi(\omega)+\frac{\lambda}{r}v^5,
\end{equation}
where
$$\varphi(\omega)=\frac{5w}{2(1+w^2)}(w')^2+\frac{w^3}{2r^2}(3+w^2).$$
\end{lem}

We now establish a uniqueness result for an initial value problem of \eqref{equation.w.with singularity}.
\begin{lem}\label{uniqueness2}
There exists $\epsilon>0$ such that the equation \eqref{equation.w.with singularity} has at most one solution on $(0,\epsilon]$ with the
initial data
\begin{equation}\label{initial}
\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}w(r)=0,\,\,\,\, \lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}\left(w'(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r\right)=b.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}

\proof Let $w_1$ and $w_2$ be solutions to \eqref{equation.w.with singularity} on $(0,r_0]$ for some $0<r_0<1$ with \eqref{initial} satisfied. Let $\phi=w_1-w_2$. It follows that
$$
\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}\phi'(r)=\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}\phi(r)=0
$$
and $\phi$ can be extended to a function in $C^1([0,r_0])$ with
$\phi(0)=0$ and $\phi'(0)=0$.
Hence $\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}
\frac{\phi}{r}=0$, and by integration
$$
\phi'(r)+\frac{\phi(r)}{r}=\int_0^r\left(
\varphi(w_1(t))-\varphi(w_2(t))+\lambda\frac{v_1^5(t)-v_2^5(t)}{t}\right)dt.
$$
Then
$$
(r\phi(r))'=r\int_0^r\left(\varphi(w_1(t))-\varphi(w_2(t))+\lambda\frac{(1+w_1^2)^\frac{5}{2}-(1+w_2^2)^\frac{5}{2}}{t}\right)dt.
$$
From \eqref{initial}, we  may find $\Lambda_1=\Lambda_1(r_0,b,\lambda)$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{lambda1}
|w_1'(r)|+|w'_2(r)|<\Lambda_1 \log \frac{1}{r}.
\end{equation}
and
$$
\frac{|w_i(r)|}{r}\leq\frac{1}{r}\int_0^r|w_i'| \leq\Lambda_1 \log \frac{1}{r},\,\,\,\, i=1,2.$$
Moreover,
$$
\left|\frac{(1+w_1^2(r))^\frac{5}{2}-
(1+w_2^2(r))^\frac{5}{2}}{r}\right|\leq \frac{C}{r}|w_1^2-w_2^2|
\leq C|\phi|\log\frac{1}{r}.
$$
Applying \eqref{varphi(w1)-varphi(w2)}, similar to the proof of \eqref{diff} by using \eqref{lambda1} instead of \eqref{lambda}, we have
$$
\left|\varphi(w_1(r))-\varphi(w_2(r))+\lambda\frac{(1+w_1^2(r))^\frac{5}{2}-
(1+w_2^2(r))^\frac{5}{2}}{r}\right|\leq C(|\phi(r)|+r|\phi'|)\log^2\frac{1}{r}.
$$
Then using the arguments in \eqref{contraction}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{contraction1}
|(r\phi(r))'|&\leq& Cr\int_0^r(|\phi(t)|+|t\phi'(t)|)\log^2\frac{1}{t}dt \\
&\leq& 4Cr\left(r\log^2r-2r\log r+2r\right)\|(t\phi)'\|_{C^0([0,r])}\, \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $r\in(0,r_0]$.

Given $r_1\in (0,r_0)$, such that
$$
4Cr_1\left(r_1\log^2r_1-2r_1\log r_1+2r_1\right)\leq\frac{1}{2}.
$$
If $(r\phi)'$ is not identically $0$ on $[0,r_1]$, then we can find $r_2\in (0,r_1]$, such that
$$
0<|(r\phi)'(r_2)|=\|(r\phi)'\|_{C^0([0,r_2])}.
$$
Thus, \eqref{contraction1} yields
$$
0<|(r\phi)'(r_2)|\leq\frac{1}{2}|(r\phi)'(r_2)|,
$$
which is impossible. Therefore, $(r\phi)'=0$ on $[0,r_1]$, which implies that  $w_1=w_2$ on $[0,\epsilon]$ for $\epsilon =\min\{r_0, r_1\}$.
$\hfill\Box$\\

\begin{lem}\label{regularity}
Let  $w\in C^2((0,a_0])$ be a solution to \eqref{equation.w.with singularity} on $(0,a_0]$. If $\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}w(r)=0$,
then $w(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}r\log r\in C^1([0,a_0])$, and consequently $\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}\left(w'(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r\right)$ exists.
\end{lem}

\proof
We assume $|w|<\epsilon_1<1$ on $(0,a], a\leq a_0, a<1$.
First of all, we prove
\begin{equation}\label{energy}
\int_r^a\left((w')^2+\frac{w^2}{2t^2}\right)<C\left(\frac{w^2}{2r}+|w|\log\frac{1}{r}+\int_r^a\frac{|w|}{t}dt+1\right),\,\,\,\, r\in(0,a),
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a positive constant depends only on $a$,  $w'(a)$, $\lambda$ and the upper bound of $w$ in $[0,a]$. For simplicity, we will use $C$ to denote some uniform constant in the rest of the proof.

Multiplying  both sides of \eqref{equation.w.with singularity} by $w$ and then integrating from $r$ to $a$, since $w\varphi\geq 0$, we have
$$
\int_r^{a}\left(w''w+\left(\frac{w}{t}\right)'w\right)\geq \int_r^a\frac{\lambda}{t}v^5w\geq -C\int_r^a\frac{|w|}{t}dt.
$$
Then integrating by parts implies
$$
-w'(r)w(r)-\frac{w^2(r)}{r}-\int_r^a\frac{(w^2)'}{2t}-\int_r^a(w')^2
\geq -C\left(1+\int_r^a\frac{|w|}{t}dt\right),
$$
then applying integration by parts again and absorbing the terms evaluated at $a$ into $C$,  we have
$$
-w'(r)w(r)-\frac{w^2(r)}{r}+\frac{w^2(r)}{2r}-\int_r^a\frac{w^2}{2t^2}-\int_r^a(w')^2
\geq -C\left(1+\int_r^a\frac{|w|}{t}dt\right).
$$
Rearranging terms, we arrive at
\begin{equation}\label{energy2}
\int_r^a\left((w')^2+\frac{w^2}{2t^2}\right)dt\leq C\left(1+\int_r^a\frac{|w|}{t}dt\right)-w(r)\frac{(rw(r))'}{r}+\frac{w^2(r)}{2r}.
\end{equation}
To estimate $(rw(r))'$, integrating \eqref{equation.w.with singularity} again,
\begin{equation}\label{(rw)'}
\frac{(rw(r))'}{r}=-\int_r^a\left(\frac{5w(w')^2}{2(1+w^2)}+
\frac{3w^3+w^5}{2t^2}+\lambda\frac{v^5-1}{t}\right)dt
+\lambda \log\frac{r}{a}+w'(a)+\frac{w(a)}{a}.
\end{equation}
Then, absorbing the terms evaluated at $a$ into a uniform constant $C$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{(rw)'2}
\left|\frac{(rw(r))'}{r}\right|\leq
\epsilon_1 \int_r^a\left((w')^2+\frac{w^2}{2t^2}\right)+C\log\frac{1}{r}.
\end{equation}

Putting \eqref{(rw)'2} into \eqref{energy2} and recalling $|w|<\epsilon_1$, we get
$$
\int_r^a\left((w')^2+\frac{w^2}{2t^2}\right)\leq C\left(1+\int_r^a\frac{|w|}{t}dt\right)+\epsilon_1^2\int_r^a\left((w')^2+\frac{w^2}{2t^2}\right)+C|w|\log\frac{1}{r}+\frac{w^2(r)}{2r}
$$
and in turn we conclude the proof of \eqref{energy}.

Secondly, we prove
\begin{equation}\label{w}
|w(r)|<Cr\log \frac{1}{r}.
\end{equation}
By \eqref{energy} and \eqref{(rw)'2},
$$|rw'+w|\leq C\left(w^2+r\log\frac{1}{r}\right).$$
Fix an $\epsilon_2\in (0,1)$ and choose $a'$ such that $|w|<{\epsilon_2}/{C}$ on
$(0,a')$. It is well-known that
$$
\big|\,|rw|'\,\big|\leq |(rw)'|.
$$
Therefore
$$
\left|(r|w|)'\right|\leq \epsilon_2|w|+Cr\log\frac{1}{r},\,\,\,\, r\in(0,a').
$$
Then
$$r|w|'+(1-\epsilon_2)|w|\leq Cr\log\frac{1}{r}.$$
Thus
$$
\left(r^{1-\epsilon_2}|w|\right)'\leq Cr^{1-\epsilon_2}\log\frac{1}{r},
$$
then
$$
r^{1-\epsilon_2}|w(r)|\leq C\int_0^rt^{1-\epsilon_2}\log\frac{1}{t}dt\leq \frac{C}{2-\epsilon_2}
\left(r^{2-\epsilon_2}\log\frac{1}{r}+r^{2-\epsilon_2}\right)
$$
and \eqref{w} is established by dividing $r^{1-\epsilon_2}$.

Now we can finish the proof.
Putting \eqref{w} into \eqref{energy}, we are led to
$$
\int_0^a\left((w')^2+\frac{w^2}{2t^2}\right)dt<+\infty,
$$
then
\begin{equation}\label{finite}
\int_0^a\left|\frac{5w}{2(1+w^2)}(w')^2+\frac{3w^3+w^5}{2t^2}+\lambda\frac{v^5-1}{t}
\right|dt<+\infty.
\end{equation}
For convenience, set
$$
\psi(r)=-\int_r^a\left(\frac{5w}{2(1+w^2)}(w')^2+\frac{3w^3+w^5}{2t^2}+\lambda\frac{v^5-1}{t}\right)dt,
$$
which is continuous in $[0,a]$ by \eqref{finite}. By \eqref{(rw)'},
$$
w(r)=\frac{1}{r}\int_0^rt\psi(t)dt+\frac{\lambda}{2}r\log r+Br,
$$
where
$$
B=\frac{1}{2}\left(-\lambda\log a+w'(a)+\frac{w(a)}{a}\right)-\frac{\lambda}{4}.
$$
Thus,
$$
\lim_{r\to 0^+}\left(w(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r\right)'=B+\frac{\psi(0)}{2}.
$$
It is easy to check that the function $w(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}r\log r$ is differentiable at 0 with derivative $B+\frac{\psi(0)}{2}$. Therefore, $w(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}r\log r\in C^1([0,a_0])$.
$\hfill\Box$\\

\subsection{Inverted catenoids}\label{inverted catenoid}
A catenoid $\mathcal{C}_c$ is defined by
$${\mathcal F}_c(t,\theta)=(|c| \cosh t\cos\theta,|c|\cosh t\sin\theta,ct),$$
where $c\neq 0$.
The inversion of $\mathcal{C}_c$ under the map $I_a:{\mathbb R}^3\to{\mathbb R}^3$ defined in the introduction is given by
$$
(x,y,z)=\left(\frac{|c| \cosh t\cos\theta}{R^2},\frac{|c|\cosh t\sin\theta}{R^2},
\frac{ct-a}{R^2}\right),
$$
where
$$
R^2=c^2\cosh^2t+(ct-a)^2.
$$
Let
$$
h(t)=\frac{|c|\cosh t}{R^2},\,\,\,\, \bar{h} (t)=\frac{ct-a}{R^2}.
$$
Then $I_a(\mathcal{C}_c)$ is the surface of revolution generated by rotating the curve
$$
\sigma(t)=(h(t),0,\bar{h}(t))
$$
about the $z$-axis.
Since $h(+\infty)=h(-\infty)=0$, $h$ has at least 1 critical point. Direct calculation shows that $h$ has only finitely many (in fact, at most three) critical points. A tangent vector of $\sigma$ is given by $\sigma'(t)=(h'(t),0,\bar h'(t))$, so $t$ is a critical point of $h$ if and only if the tangent line of $\sigma(t)$ is parallel to the $z$-axis. Let $t_1<\cdots<t_m$ be the critical points of $h$ and set $t_0=-\infty$, $t_{m+1}=+\infty$, then
$I_a({\mathcal F}_c((t_i,t_{i+1})\times S^1))$ is a graph over
$D(h(t_{i+1}))\backslash D(h(t_i))$, which cannot be extended as a smooth graph over a larger domain, where $i=0, \cdots, m$.

\begin{lem}\label{catenoid}
Given $\lambda,b\in \mathbb{R}$, there exists a unique pair of numbers $c$ and $a$, such that
$\Sigma_{c,a}$ is the graph of a function $U(r)$ with
$$
\lim_{r\rightarrow 0^+}\left(U''(r)-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r\right)=b.
$$
Moreover, $U'$ satisfies the equation \eqref{equation.w.with singularity}.
\end{lem}

\proof

After changing parametrization, a catenoid can be written as
$$
(\rho\cos\theta,\rho\sin\theta,u(\rho)), \,\,\,\, \mbox{where}\,\,\,\,  u(\rho)=c \operatorname{arccosh}
\frac{\rho}{|c|}.$$
In this parametriation, $R=\sqrt{\rho^2+(u(\rho)-a)^2}$.
Suppose $\Sigma_{c,a}$ is the graph of $U(r)$. We have
$$
r=\frac{\rho}{R^2},\,\,\,\, \mbox{ and }\,\,\,\, U(r)=\frac{u(\rho)-a}{R^2}=\frac{r}{\rho}(u(\rho)-a),\,\,\,\,
r\in (0,R_{c,a}).
$$
We now calculate the expansion of $U$ at $r=0$. It is clear
\begin{equation}\label{rho}
\frac{1}{\rho}=r\left(1+\frac{(u(\rho)-a)^2}{\rho^2}\right)
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{U}
U(r)&=&r^2(u(\rho)-a)\left(1+\frac{(u(\rho)-a)^2}{\rho^2}\right)\\
     &=&r^2u(\rho)-ar^2+\frac{r^2}{\rho^2}O(u^3(\rho)), \,\,\,\, \mbox{ as }\rho\rightarrow+\infty.\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
By the definition of $\Sigma_{c,a}$,  $\frac{u(\rho)}{c}\rightarrow+\infty$ as $\rho\rightarrow+\infty$,
then by taking log of
$$
e^{\frac{u(\rho)}{c}}\frac{1+e^{-2\frac{u(\rho)}{c}}}{2}=\cosh \frac{u(\rho)}{\rho}=\frac{\rho}{|c|},
$$
we are led to
\begin{eqnarray*}
u(\rho)&=&c\log\rho+c\log 2-c\log|c|-c\log\left(1+e^{-2\frac{u(\rho)}{c}}\right)\\
&=&c\log\rho+c\log 2-c\log|c|+o(1), \,\,\,\, \mbox{as $\rho\to +\infty$.}
\end{eqnarray*}
Using \eqref{rho}, we get
\begin{eqnarray*}
u(\rho)&=&-c\log r+c\log 2-c\log|c|-\log\left(1+\frac{(u(\rho)-a)^2}{\rho^2}\right)+o(1)\\
&=&-c\log r+c\log 2-c\log|c|+o(1),\,\,\,\,\mbox{as $\rho\to +\infty$}.
\end{eqnarray*}
By \eqref{U},
$$
U(r)=-cr^2\log r+(c\log 2-c\log|c|-a)r^2+o(r^2),\,\,\,\,\mbox{ as $r\to 0$.}
$$
It follows that $U(r)+cr^2\log r$ is in $C^2([0,\rho))$ and
$$
\lim_{r\to 0^+}\left(U''(r)+2c\log r\right)= 2(c\log 2-c\log|c|-a)-3c.
$$
Set
$$
c=-\frac{\lambda}{4},\,\,\,\, a=\frac{\lambda}{4}\log\frac{|\lambda|}{8}+\frac{3\lambda}{8}
-\frac{b}{2}.
$$
Then the uniquely determined $\Sigma_{c,a}$ is the graph of $U$.
$\hfill\Box$\\

\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{main2} and Corollary \ref{main3}} Note that a smooth radially symmetric function $f$ defined on $D(\rho)\backslash\{0\}$ can be extended at 0 as a function in $C^1(D(\rho))$ if and only if $\lim_{r\to 0^+}f'(r)=0$.

\vspace{.2cm}

\noindent {\it Proof of Theorem \ref{main2}}. Since $u\in C^1(D(\rho))$, $\lim_{r\to 0^+}w(r)=0$.
By Lemma \ref{regularity}, we can write
$$
w(r)'-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r = \beta(r)
$$
for some function $\beta\in C^0([0,\rho))$. So
$$
\lim_{r\rightarrow 0}(w'-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r)=\beta(0).
$$
By Lemma \ref{catenoid}, there exist $c$ and $a$, such that $\Sigma_{c,a}$ is the graph
of a function $U(r)$ with
$$
\lim_{r\rightarrow 0}(U''-\frac{\lambda}{2}\log r)=\beta(0)
$$
and $U'$ satisfies \eqref{equation.w.with singularity}. Then by Lemma \ref{uniqueness2},
$U'=w$ in $[0,\epsilon]$ for some $\epsilon$. Note that the coefficients in \eqref{equation.w.with singularity}
are smooth on $[\epsilon,\rho)$. The standard uniqueness theorem in ODE theory asserts $U'=w$ on $[\epsilon, \rho)$ and consequently $U'=w$ on $[0,\rho)$.
$\hfill\Box$\\

\noindent{\it Proof of Corollary \ref{main3}.}  By a direct calculation, the first and the second fundamental forms of $F$ are
$$g=\left(\begin{array}{ll}
                1+w^2&0\\
                0&r^2\end{array}\right),\,\,\,\,
A=\left(\begin{array}{ll}
                \frac{w'}{v}&0\\
                0&\frac{rw}{v}\end{array}\right)$$
respectively.  Then
\begin{equation}\label{A}
|A|^2=\left(\frac{1}{v^2}\frac{w'}{v}\right)^2+\left(\frac{1}{r^2}\frac{rw}{v}\right)^2=
\left(\frac{w'}{v^3}\right)^2+\left(\frac{w}{rv}\right)^2
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{D(\rho)\backslash D(\epsilon)}(|A|^2-|H|^2)d\mu
&=&-2\int_{D(\rho)\backslash D(\epsilon)}\frac{w'}{v^3}\frac{w}{rv}d\mu\\
&=&-4\pi\int_\epsilon^{\rho}\frac{ww'}{v^3}\\
&=&4\pi\int_\epsilon^\rho\left(\frac{1}{v}\right)'dr\\
&=&4\pi\left(\frac{1}{v(\rho)}-\frac{1}{v(\epsilon)}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{A finite}
\int_{D(\rho)}|A|^2<+\infty.
\end{equation}

We now prove $\lim_{r\to 0^+}w(r)=0$. Assume there is a sequence
$r_k\rightarrow 0$, such that $w(r_k)\rightarrow c\neq 0$, where $c$ may be $\infty$. Define
$$
u_k(r)=\frac{u_k(r_kr)-u_k(r_k)}{r_k},\,\,\,\, w_k(r)=u_k'(r),\,\,\,\, F_k=(x,y,u_k),\,\,\,\, \Sigma_k=
F_k\left(D\left(\frac{\rho}{r_k}\right)\backslash \{(0)\}\right).
$$
Obviously, $w_k(1)=w(r_k)\rightarrow c$ as $k\to\infty$.
We may assume that the unit normal vector $n_k(p)$ of $\Sigma_k$ at $p=(1,0,0)$  converges to a unit vector $\alpha$ which is not orthogonal to the $xy$-plane,
i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{not 0}
\alpha\cdot (1,0,0)\neq 0.
\end{equation}
This is because the angle between the tangent plane $T_{p}\Sigma_k$ and the $xy$-plane
is uniformly bounded away from 0 when $c\not=0$.
Thus, we may assume that $\Sigma_k$ is the graph of some function $\tilde{u}_k(y,z)$ near $p$ over the $yz$-plane.  For convenience, we set $\tilde{F}_k=(\tilde{u}_k(y,z),y,z)$ and
$e=\frac{\partial\tilde{F}_k}{\partial y}$. Since $\Sigma_k$ is radially symmetric, the unit circle
$\{(\cos\theta,\sin\theta,0):\theta\in[0,2\pi)\}$ is in each $\Sigma_k$. Then
$\tilde{u}_k(y,0)=\sqrt{1-y^2}$ and
$|e(p)|=1$. For the second fundamental form $A_k$ of $\Sigma_k$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{A_k}
A_k(e(p),e(p))=\frac{\partial^2\tilde{F}_{k}}{\partial y^2}(p)\cdot n_k(p)=
(-1,0,0)\cdot n_k(p).
\end{equation}
However, for any $\delta>0$, we have by \eqref{A finite}
$$
\lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\int_{D(\delta)}|A_k|^2d\mu_k=
\lim_{k\rightarrow+\infty}\int_{D(r_k\delta)}|A|^2d\mu=0.
$$
Applying the curvature estimates in Theorem 2.10 in \cite{K-S1},
$$|A_k|(p)\leq C\|A_k\|_{L^2(B^3_1(p))}\leq C\|A_k\|_{L^2(D(2))}\rightarrow 0,$$
where $B^3_1(p)=\{q\in\mathbb{R}^3:|q-p|<1\}$. By \eqref{A_k}, we get
$(1,0,0)\cdot\alpha=0$. This contradicts \eqref{not 0}. Therefore, we have $\lim_{r\to 0^+}w(r)=0$, in turn, $u\in C^1(D(\rho))$. Now the desired results follow from Theorem \ref{main2}.
$\hfill\Box$\\