 and $(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})^*(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})\geq0$, which tell us that $$t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}\geq 2Rex\geq -(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}).$$ [@HSZ2020 Lemma 4.2] now yields $\mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I})$. If it were true that $\mu_s(x)=0$, there would be $\mu_s(Rex)=0$ by take $t\rightarrow\infty$. Otherwise we take $t=\frac{1}{\mu_s(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}}$, it follows that $\mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(x).$

On the other hand, since $Re(ix)=-Im x$, from what has already been proved we see that $\mu_s(Imx)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(ix)=\mu_s(x).$ $\Box$

\[rk:lemma 3.1\] Let $x\in \mathcal{M}$. A slight change in the proof of Lemma \[lemma 3.1\] actually shows that $$\lambda_t(Rex)\leq\mu_t(x).$$

\[corollary 3.2\] Let $x, y\in \mathcal{M}$ and let $\alpha\in \mathbb{R}$. If $x^{*}=x$, then $$\mu_t(y-Rey)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-\alpha x), \mu_t(y-iIm y)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-i\alpha x),$$ with $-\infty$ allowed for values.

[**Proof.**]{} The results follow from Lemma \[lemma 3.1\] along with the fact that $y-Rey=iImy=iIm(y-\alpha x)$ and $y-i Imy=Rey=Re(y-i\alpha x)$. $\Box$

If $x, y\in\mathcal{M}$ and $0<p<\infty$, then $x$ is said to be $p$-
and $ (tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})^*(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})\geq0 $, which tell us that $ $ t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}\geq 2Rex\geq -(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}).$$ [ @HSZ2020 Lemma 4.2 ] now yields $ \mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I})$. If it were true that $ \mu_s(x)=0 $, there would be $ \mu_s(Rex)=0 $ by subscribe $ t\rightarrow\infty$. differently we take $ t=\frac{1}{\mu_s(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}}$, it follows that $ \mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(x).$ 

 On the early hand, since $ Re(ix)=-Im x$, from what has already been prove we see that $ \mu_s(Imx)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(ix)=\mu_s(x).$ $ \Box$ 

 \[rk: lemma 3.1\ ] Let $ x\in \mathcal{M}$. A little change in the proof of Lemma \[lemma 3.1\ ] actually read that $ $ \lambda_t(Rex)\leq\mu_t(x).$$ 

 \[corollary 3.2\ ] Let $ x, y\in \mathcal{M}$ and let $ \alpha\in \mathbb{R}$. If $ x^{*}=x$, then $ $ \mu_t(y - Rey)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-\alpha x), \mu_t(y - iIm y)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y - i\alpha x),$$ with $ -\infty$ allow for values. 

 [ * * Proof. * * ] { } The results follow from Lemma \[lemma 3.1\ ] along with the fact that $ y - Rey = iImy = iIm(y-\alpha x)$ and $ y - i Imy = Rey = Re(y - i\alpha x)$. $ \Box$ 

 If $ x, y\in\mathcal{M}$ and $ 0 < p<\infty$, then $ x$ is said to be $ p$-
 anf $(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})^*(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mxthbb{I})\geq0$, which tell uv that $$t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{g^2}\mathbb{I}\geq 2Rex\geq -(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\methbv{I}).$$ [@HSE2020 Lemma 4.2] now yields $\mu_s(Rex)\prvc\prec_{\log}\nu_s(t^2e^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I})$. Ih it werc trus thac $\nu_s(x)=0$, there woukd be $\mu_s(Rax)=0$ by take $t\richgaxrow\infty$. Otherwise we take $t=\frac{1}{\mu_s(v)^{\frac{1}{2}}}$, iy vollows that $\mo_s(Rex)\kres\pred_{\log}\mu_s(x).$

On the other hand, since $Re(jx)=-Im x$, hrom what has akready been proved we see hhat $\mu_s(Imx)\prec\prec_{\log}\lu_s(ix)=\mu_s(x).$ $\Bix$

\[rk:jwmma 3.1\] Let $x\iv \mathcal{M}$. A slight chznge in the proof of Lemma \[lemmx 3.1\] accually showw rhah $$\lambda_t(Rex)\oeq\mu_n(x).$$

\[corollary 3.2\] Let $x, y\it \mathcsl{M}$ and let $\aliha\in \marhbb{R}$. If $x^{*}=x$, then $$\mu_t(y-Cey)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-\alkha x), \mu_t(y-hIj y)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(t-i\qlpha x),$$ whth $-\kbfth$ amlpwsd for vamues.

[**Proof.**]{} Fhe results follow from Lemma \[keina 3.1\] along witg the sast that $y-Rey=iImy=iIm(y-\alpha x)$ and $y-i Imy=Rty=Re(y-j\alpha x)$. $\Box$

If $x, y\in\matycal{M}$ and $0<p<\infty$, then $x$ is saiq to be $p$-
and $(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})^*(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})\geq0$, which tell us that $$t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}\geq [@HSZ2020 4.2] now $\mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I})$. If it would $\mu_s(Rex)=0$ by take Otherwise we take it follows that $\mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(x).$ On the hand, since $Re(ix)=-Im x$, from what has already been proved we see that $\Box$ \[rk:lemma 3.1\] Let $x\in \mathcal{M}$. A slight change in the proof of \[lemma actually that \[corollary 3.2\] Let $x, y\in \mathcal{M}$ and let $\alpha\in \mathbb{R}$. If $x^{*}=x$, then $$\mu_t(y-Rey)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-\alpha x), \mu_t(y-iIm x),$$ with $-\infty$ allowed for values. [**Proof.**]{} The follow from Lemma \[lemma along with the fact that x)$ $y-i Imy=Rey=Re(y-i\alpha $\Box$ $x, and $0<p<\infty$, then is said to be $p$-
 and $(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})^*(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mAthbb{I})\geq0$, wHich tEll Us tHaT $$t^2x^*x+\Frac{1}{T^2}\mathbb{I}\geq 2Rex\GEq -(t^2x^*X+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}).$$ [@HSZ2020 Lemma 4.2] nOw yieLdS $\Mu_s(REX)\pRec\prEc_{\log}\mu_S(T^2x^*X+\FRac{1}{T^2}\mAtHbb{i})$. IF It Were tRue That $\mu_s(X)=0$, there woulD be $\Mu_S(Rex)=0$ by take $t\rIGhTarrow\inftY$. OtHerwise we takE $t=\fRac{1}{\mu_s(X)^{\fRac{1}{2}}}$, IT follOws That $\mU_s(Rex)\pREc\prec_{\Log}\mu_s(x).$

On ThE Other hANd, since $rE(Ix)=-im x$, fRom what has already BEeN Proved we see thaT $\mu_s(ImX)\pREc\PREc_{\lOg}\mU_s(ix)=\mu_s(x).$ $\BoX$

\[rK:lemmA 3.1\] let $x\in \mAThCAL{m}$. A sLIght change in tHe proof of LeMMa \[lEmma 3.1\] acTuAllY Shows tHat $$\laMbDA_t(REx)\leq\mu_t(x).$$

\[coRollAry 3.2\] Let $x, y\iN \mathcAL{M}$ and leT $\Alpha\in \Mathbb{r}$. If $X^{*}=x$, tHen $$\mU_T(y-reY)\prEc\PRec_{\LOg}\Mu_t(Y-\AlpHa x), \mu_t(y-iim Y)\pRec\prEc_{\loG}\MU_T(Y-i\alPha X),$$ witH $-\inftY$ allowed for vaLueS.

[**ProOF.**]{} ThE resuLts foLlow FrOm LemMa \[lemmA 3.1\] alonG wIth the fact that $y-rey=iimy=iIm(y-\alPha X)$ aNd $y-I IMy=Rey=rE(y-i\alpHa x)$. $\box$

if $x, y\in\mAthcal{M}$ ANd $0<p<\InFTY$, ThEn $x$ is said to be $p$-
 and $(tx+\frac{1}{t}\math bb{I})^*(t x+\fr ac{ 1}{ t} \mat hbb{ I})\geq0$, whi c h te ll us that $$t^2x^*x+\ frac{ 1} { t^2} \ ma thbb{ I}\geq2 Re x \ geq  - (t ^2x ^* x +\ frac{ 1}{ t^2}\ma thbb{I}).$ $ [ @H SZ2020 Lemma 4. 2] now yie lds  $\mu_s(Rex) \pr ec\pre c_ {\l o g}\mu _s( t^2x^ *x+\fr a c{1}{t ^2}\mathb b{ I })$. I f  it wer e tr ue t hat $\mu_s(x)=0$, th e re would be $\ mu_s(R ex ) =0 $ bytak e $t\right ar row\i n fty$. O t he r w i sew e take $t=\fr ac{1}{\mu_s ( x)^ {\frac {1 }{2 } }}$, i t fol lo w s t hat $\mu_s( Rex) \prec\pre c_{\lo g }\mu_s( x ).$

On  the o the r h and, si nc e $ Re ( ix) = -I m x $ , f rom what  h as  alre adyb e e n  pro ved  wesee t hat $\mu_s(Im x)\ prec \ pre c_{\l og}\m u_s( ix )=\mu _s(x). $ $\B ox $

\[rk:lemma 3 .1\]  Let $x\i n \ ma thc al {M}$. A slig htcha nge inthe pro o f o fL e m ma  \[lemma 3.1\] act ua l l yshows th at $$\ l am bd a _t(Rex)\ le q\m u_t( x ) .$$
\[co r ol lary 3.2 \] Let $x ,y\in \m at hcal{M }$  an d l et $\ a lpha \in \m athbb{R} $. If $x^{*}=x$, the n  $$\mu_t(y-Re y )\ p r ec \ prec _{\ log}\mu_t(y -\al p ha x ), \ m u_ t(y - iIm y )\pre c\ p re c _{\log}\mu_t(y-i\al ph a x),$ $ wit h $-\infty$ a llowed for v a lues.

[ **Pr o of . **]{} The resu lts f ollow from Lemma \[ lemma  3.1\] a long with t he facttha t $ y-R ey= i I my =iIm(y-\alpha x )$ a nd  $y-i I my= Rey=Re( y-i \al pha  x) $.  $\Box$
If $x, y \i n\ ma th cal {M}$a nd $0<p< \i nft y$ , t hen $ x $ is s aid t o be  $ p$ - 
 and_$(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})^*(tx+\frac{1}{t}\mathbb{I})\geq0$, which_tell us that $$t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}\geq_2Rex\geq -(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I}).$$_[@HSZ2020_Lemma 4.2]_now_yields $\mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(t^2x^*x+\frac{1}{t^2}\mathbb{I})$. If_it were true_that $\mu_s(x)=0$, there would_be $\mu_s(Rex)=0$ by_take_$t\rightarrow\infty$. Otherwise we take $t=\frac{1}{\mu_s(x)^{\frac{1}{2}}}$, it follows that $\mu_s(Rex)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(x).$

On the other hand, since $Re(ix)=-Im_x$,_from what_has_already_been proved we see that_$\mu_s(Imx)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_s(ix)=\mu_s(x).$ $\Box$

\[rk:lemma 3.1\] Let $x\in_\mathcal{M}$. A_slight change in the proof of Lemma \[lemma_3.1\]_actually shows that_$$\lambda_t(Rex)\leq\mu_t(x).$$

\[corollary 3.2\] Let $x, y\in \mathcal{M}$ and let $\alpha\in_\mathbb{R}$. If $x^{*}=x$, then $$\mu_t(y-Rey)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-\alpha x),_\mu_t(y-iIm y)\prec\prec_{\log}\mu_t(y-i\alpha x),$$_with_$-\infty$_allowed for values.

[**Proof.**]{} The_results follow from Lemma \[lemma 3.1\]_along with the fact that $y-Rey=iImy=iIm(y-\alpha_x)$ and $y-i Imy=Rey=Re(y-i\alpha x)$. $\Box$

If $x,_y\in\mathcal{M}$ and $0<p<\infty$, then $x$ is_said to be $p$-