Gmail Calendar Documents Reader Web more »
Recently Visited Groups | Help | Sign in
Google Groups Home
-- Hopelessly stuck on normed algebra proof, please help!
There are currently too many topics in this group that display first. To make this topic appear first, remove this option from another topic.
There was an error processing your request. Please try again.
flag
  1 message - Collapse all  -  Translate all to Translated (View all originals)
The group you are posting to is a Usenet group. Messages posted to this group will make your email address visible to anyone on the Internet.
Your reply message has not been sent.
Your post was successful
 
From:
To:
Cc:
Followup To:
Add Cc | Add Followup-to | Edit Subject
Subject:
Validation:
For verification purposes please type the characters you see in the picture below or the numbers you hear by clicking the accessibility icon. Listen and type the numbers you hear
 
Rotwang  
View profile  
 More options Mar 8 2008, 3:38 pm
Newsgroups: sci.math
From: Rotwang <sg...@hotmail.co.uk>
Date: Sat, 8 Mar 2008 11:38:09 -0800 (PST)
Local: Sat, Mar 8 2008 3:38 pm
Subject: -- Hopelessly stuck on normed algebra proof, please help!
Hi all

I've just started reading a book on C*-algebras and within a few pages
I've already encountered a number of "it is easy to show that"
statements which I can't figure out how to prove. Here are a few of
them, any solutions or hints would be welcome.

Firstly suppose that U is a C*-algebra without identity. We define a
new C*-algebra U_1 as follows: let the elements of U_1 be pairs (a, A)
with a a complex number and A in U. Addition and involution are
defined in the obvious way, and multiplication is defined by (a, A)(b,
B) = (ab, aB + bA + AB). A norm on U_1 is defined as follows:

||(a, A)|| = sup {||aC + AC|| | C in U, ||C|| = 1}.

My first problem is, how does one show that this norm satisfies the
product inequality, i.e.

||(a, A)(b, B)|| <= ||(a, A)|| ||(b, B)||?

Secondly, how does one show that this norm makes U_1 complete? I
assume that this is proved by first proving that if ((an, An)) is a
Cauchy sequence then the sequences (an) and (An) are Cauchy, but I
don't know how to show that this is the case - it seems likely that |
an| and ||An|| are bounded by some function of ||(an,An)|| but my
attempts to show this have drawn a blank.

Now suppose that U is a C*-subalgebra of a C*-algebra V and that V has
an identity 1. The book states that U_1 is identifiable as the
smallest C*-subalgebra of V containing U and 1, by which I assume it
means that the map

(a,A) |--> a1 + A

is an isomorphism between U_1 and the aforementioned smallest
subalgebra. I am stuck on how to show that this map preserves the
norm; it is easy to see that ||(a,A)|| <= ||a1 + A|| but I don't know
how to show the other inequality.

Finally, the book defines a simple C*-algebra U as one whose only
closed two-sided ideals are the trivial ideals {0} and U. It then
states that "if U has an identity this amounts to saying that U has no
two-sided ideals at all, closed  or not". I have no idea why this is
the case, can anyone explain it?


    Forward  
You must Sign in before you can post messages.
To post a message you must first join this group.
Please update your nickname on the subscription settings page before posting.
You do not have the permission required to post.
End of messages
« Back to Discussions « Newer topic     Older topic »

Create a group - Google Groups - Google Home - Terms of Service - Privacy Policy
©2010 Google