The Shilov boundary for a q-analog of the holomorphic functions on the unit ball of 2×2 symmetric matrices
Jimmy Johansson
and
Lyudmila Turowska
Department of Mathematical Sciences,
Chalmers University of Technology and the University of Gothenburg,
Gothenburg SE-412 96, Sweden
[email protected]
[email protected]
Abstract.
We describe the Shilov boundary for a q-analog of the algebra of holomorphic functions on the unit ball in the space of symmetric 2×2 matrices.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 17B37; Secondary 20G42, 46L07
1. Introduction
In the middle of the 1990s, L. Vaksman initiated a program to develop a q-analog of the theory of holomorphic functions on bounded symmetric domains (see [vaksman-book] and references therein).
Among the numerous results which have emanated under this program we shall in this paper be interested in a noncommutative analog of the maximum modulus principle, a notion whose foundation is comprised of a noncommutative generalization of the Shilov boundary in the setting of operator algebras, which was developed by W. Arveson in [arveson1, arveson2].
In [vaksman-boundary], Vaksman proved a q-analog of the maximum modulus principle for the unit polydisk in Cn, and more recently D. Proskurin and L. Turowska obtained, in [pro-tur], an analogous result for the unit ball in the space of 2×2 matrices. In this paper we show that similar methods can be used to compute the Shilov boundary ideal for a q-analog of the algebra of holomorphic functions on the unit ball in the space of symmetric 2×2 matrices.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we collect some basic material from the theory of quantum groups that we will need in this paper. In Section 3 we introduce the algebra of polynomials on quantum complex symmetric 2×2 matrices and discuss its universal enveloping C∗-algebra C(D2sym)q, a q-analog of the continuous functions on the unit ball D2sym={Z∈Mat2sym:Z∗Z≤I}. We prove, in particular, that the Fock representation is a faithful irreducible representation of C(D2sym)q. In Section 4 we describe the Shilov boundary ideal for the closed subalgebra A(D2sym)q, a q-analog of the algebra of functions holomorphic on the open unit ball of Mat2sym and continuous on its closure. The key tool, like in [vaksman-boundary] and [pro-tur], is a unitary dilation of a contractive operator on a Hilbert space. Finally, in Section 5, we show that our result agrees with the definition of a ∗-algebra referred to as the algebra of regular functions on the Shilov boundary, whose definition was proposed in [bershtein-2].
In this paper all algebras are assumed to be associative unital algebras over C and q∈(0,1).
2. Preliminaries
In this section we review and fix our notation for the notions from the theory of quantum groups that we shall employ in this paper.
The algebra C[SL2]q is defined by the generators tij, i,j=1,2, and the relations
[TABLE]
We define C[SU2]q=(C[SL2]q,∗), where the involution ∗ is determined by t11∗=t22 and t12∗=−qt21.
Here and throughout this paper we denote by {ek:k∈Z≥0} the standard orthonormal basis for the Hilbert space ℓ2(Z≥0), and we let S, Cn, D∈B(ℓ2(Z≥0)) denote the operators defined by
[TABLE]
It is well known that C[SU2]q admits the irreducible representations πφ, φ∈[0,2π), acting on ℓ2(Z≥0), which are determined by
[TABLE]
C[SU2]q can also be equipped with a Hopf ∗-algebra structure (see e.g. [klimyk_schmudgen]).
In particular, the comultiplication is given by
[TABLE]
We denote by Uqsl2 the Hopf algebra generated by E,F,K,K−1 satisfying the relations
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
The comultiplication Δ, the antipode S, and the the counit ε are defined by
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
We let Uqsu2 denote the Hopf ∗-algebra (Uqsl2,∗), where the involution is given by
[TABLE]
We recall that C[SL2]q is the finite dual of Uqsl2. As linear functionals the elements of C[SL2]q are determined by
[TABLE]
and all other evaluations on the generators are zero.
We shall also need the ∗-algebra Pol(C)q2, a q-analog of the ∗-algebra of polynomials on C, which is defined by the generator z and the relation z∗z=q4zz∗+1−q4.
We have the following list of irreducible representations of Pol(C)q2, up to unitary equivalence (see [pusz-woronowicz]):
- (i)
the Fock representation ρF acting on ℓ2(Z≥0): ρF(z)=C4S;
2. (ii)
one-dimensional representations ρφ, φ∈[0,2π): ρφ(z)=eiφ.
3. A q-analog of the algebra of continuous and holomorphic functions on the unit ball
The algebra C[Mat2sym]q is defined by the generators z11, z21, z22 satisfying the relations
[TABLE]
The algebra admits a natural gradation given by degzij=1.
The ∗-algebra Pol(Mat2sym)q, a q-analog of the ∗-algebra of polynomials on the space of symmetric complex 2×2 matrices, is defined by the generators z11, z21, z22 satisfying the relations (4)
and
[TABLE]
Remark 3.1*.*
For the sake of symmetry and for brevity in formulas (see e.g. Lemma 3.3), one may include z12 as an additional generator together with the relation z12=qz21.
We have that C[Mat2sym]q is a Uqsl2-module algebra, where the Uqsl2-action is given as follows ([bershtein-2]):
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Recall that the action of Uqsl2 on other elements of C[Mat2sym]q can be obtained from the property that
[TABLE]
for ξ∈Uqsl2, f,g∈C[Mat2sym]q and Δ(ξ)=∑iξi(1)⊗ξi(2) (in the Sweedler notation).
Since the involutions in Uqsu2 and Pol(Mat2sym)q are compatible in the sense that
[TABLE]
the action of Uqsl2 on C[Mat2sym]q can be extended to an action of Uqsu2 on Pol(Mat2sym)q. Explicitly, the Uqsu2-action is given by (6)–(8) together with
[TABLE]
The irreducible representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q, which we present in the following theorem, were classified in [bershtein-1].
Theorem 3.2**.**
The irreducible representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q up to unitary equivalence are given by
- (i)
the Fock representation acting on ℓ2(Z≥0)⊗3:
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
representations τφ, φ∈[0,2π), acting on ℓ2(Z≥0)⊗2:
[TABLE]
3. (iii)
representations ωφ, φ∈[0,2π), acting on ℓ2(Z≥0):
[TABLE]
4. (iv)
representations νφ, φ∈[0,2π), acting on ℓ2(Z≥0):
[TABLE]
5. (v)
one-dimensional representations θφ1,φ2, φ1,φ2∈[0,2π):
[TABLE]
From the above list it readily follows that Pol(Mat2sym)q is ∗-bounded, i.e., for each x∈Pol(Mat2sym)q there exists a constant Cx such that ∥π(x)∥≤Cx for all representations π of Pol(Mat2sym)q. We let C(D2sym)q denote the universal enveloping C∗-algebra of Pol(Mat2sym)q and A(D2sym)q the closed (non-involutive) subalgebra generated by z11, z21, and z22. We recall that the universal enveloping C∗-algebra can be defined as a pair (C(D2sym)q,ρ), where ρ:Pol(Mat2sym)q→C(D2sym)q is a ∗-homomorphism with the property that for each representation π of Pol(Mat2sym)q there is a unique representation φ of C(D2sym)q such that π=φ∘ρ. It is useful to note that the irreducible representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q are in one-to-one correspondence with the irreducible representations of C(D2sym)q. We say that C(D2sym)q (resp. A(D2sym)q) is a q-analog of the C∗-algebra of continuous functions (resp. subalgebra of holomorphic functions) on the closed unit ball of symmetric complex 2×2 matrices D2sym={Z∈Mat2sym:Z∗Z≤I}.
We will now consider an alternative way of constructing representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q which was presented in [bershtein-1]. Imperative to this construction is the following ∗-homomorphism, whose existence was indicated in [bershtein-1] without proof, of a coaction corresponding to the action of the unitary group U2 of 2×2 matrices
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.3**.**
There is a ∗-homomorphism
[TABLE]
given by
[TABLE]
Proof.
We begin by establishing that the restriction of D to C[Mat2sym]q,
[TABLE]
is a homomorphism. Using the fact that C[SL2]q⊂(Uqsl2)∗ as linear functionals given by (3), we claim that the map (9) recovers the Uqsl2-action on C[Mat2sym]q, i.e.,
[TABLE]
Consequently D respects the relations (4),
showing that the map (9) is a well-defined homomorphism.
It is straightforward to verify that the claim holds when x and ξ are generators of C[Mat2sym]q and Uqsl2 respectively. In order to show that D(zij)(ξ)=ξzij for all ξ∈Uqsl2, it would be enough to see that whenever D(zij)(ξk)=ξkzij for ξk∈Uqsl2, k=1,2, we have D(zij)(ξ1ξ2)=ξ1ξ2zij. Using the fact that the comultiplication is a homomorphism, we have the following computation:
[TABLE]
It remains to show that extending D to C[Mat2sym]q naturally by linearity and by letting D(fg)=D(f)D(g), f, g∈C[Mat2sym]q, we obtain D(fg)(ξ)=ξ(fg) for all ξ∈Uqsl2 and f, g∈C[Mat2sym]q. Let
[TABLE]
denote the comultiplication of an element ξ∈Uqsl2. For f,g generators of C[Mat2sym]q we have
[TABLE]
The general case is proved by induction on the degree of f and g.
Since Pol(Mat2sym)q is a Uqsu2-module algebra and the involutions in Uqsu2 and C[SU2]q are compatible, it follows that (9) can be extended to a ∗-homomorphism on Pol(Mat2sym)q.
∎
From relations (4)–(5) it follows that the family of maps
[TABLE]
φ∈[0,2π), defined on the generators of Pol(Mat2sym)q by
[TABLE]
is a ∗-homomorphism.
Let ρF and ρφ, φ∈[0,2π), be the irreducible representations of Pol(C)q2 given in Section 2. Defining
[TABLE]
we obtain two families of representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q:
[TABLE]
here π0 is the irreducible representation of C[SU2]q given by (2). Evaluated on the generators, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Lemma 3.4**.**
The representation (Fφ⊗π0)∘D, φ∈[0,2π), is unitarily equivalent to τφ.
Proof.
It is straightforward to verify that Ω=e0⊗e0 is cyclic for all representations τφ and (Fφ⊗π0)∘D, φ∈[0,2π), and
[TABLE]
Therefore both τφ and (Fφ⊗π0)∘D are coherent representations of the Wick algebra corresponding to Pol(Mat2sym)q with equal coherent state. (We refer to [wick] for the definition and properties of coherent representations of ∗-algebras allowing Wick ordering.) Since a coherent representation of a Wick algebra is unique up to unitary equivalence by [wick]*Proposition 1.3.3, this proves the lemma.
∎
Theorem 3.5**.**
The Fock representation πF of C(D2sym)q is faithful, and consequently C(D2sym)q is ∗-isomorphic to C∗(πF(Pol(Mat2sym)q)).
Proof.
Let C∗(S) be the C∗-algebra generated by the isometry S.
Recall that for φ∈[0,2π), there exists a ∗-homomorphism Θφ:C∗(S)→C defined by Θφ(S)=eiφ, see e.g. [davidson].
The operators in (1) satisfy
[TABLE]
and hence Cn,D∈C∗(S). Moreover, we have Θφ(Cn)=1 and Θφ(D)=0.
We note that C∗(πF(Pol(Mat2sym)q))⊂C∗(S)⊗3 and similarly for the other representations. By letting Θφ act on the last factor in the tensor products, we get the induced ∗-homomorphisms
[TABLE]
Since C∗(τφ(Pol(Mat2sym)q)) is ∗-isomorphic to C∗((Fφ⊗π0)∘D(Pol(Mat2sym)q)) by Lemma 3.4, by letting Θ0 act on the last factor in the tensor product for (Fφ⊗π0)∘D, we get an induced ∗-homomorphism
[TABLE]
Finally, by letting Θφ1 act on νφ2, φ1,φ2∈[0,2π), we get an induced ∗-homomorphism
[TABLE]
As a ∗-homomorphism between C∗-algebras is contractive we get that for all x∈Pol(Mat2sym)q and all irreducible representations π of Pol(Mat2sym)q, ∥π(x)∥≤∥πF(x)∥. By the definition of C(D2sym)q, it follows that the ∗-homomorphism
[TABLE]
is an isomorphism.
∎
4. The Shilov boundary
The notion of a noncommutative analog of the maximum modulus principle goes back to the foundational paper [arveson1] by W. Arveson. Recall that the Shilov boundary of a compact Hausdorff space X relative to a uniform algebra A in C(X) is the smallest closed subset S⊂X such that every function in A attains its maximum modulus on S. The prototypical example of this is of course the maximum modulus principle encountered in the theory of holomorphic functions. For the disk algebra A(D)⊂C(D), consisting of functions that are continuous on the closed unit disk D and holomorphic on its interior, it is well known that every function in A(D) attains its maximum modulus on the unit circle T.
When passing to the noncommutative setting, a notion that arises is that of completely contractive and completely isometric maps. Let E be a subspace of a C∗-algebra B, and let Mn(E) be the space of n×n-matrices with entries in E and norm induced by the one on Mn(B). Then any linear map T from E to another C∗-algebra C induces a linear map T(n):Mn(E)→Mn(C) by letting
[TABLE]
The linear map T is called a contraction (resp. an isometry) if ∥T∥≤1 (resp. ∥T(a)∥=∥a∥ for any a∈E).
It is called a complete contraction (resp. a complete isometry) if T(n) is a contraction (resp. an isometry) for all n∈N.
Clearly a ∗-homomorphism between C∗-algebras is completely contractive.
The following noncommutative generalization of the Shilov boundary was given by Arveson in [arveson1].
Definition 4.1**.**
Let A be a subspace of a C∗-algebra B such that A contains the identity of B and generates B as a C∗-algebra. A closed ideal J in B is called a boundary ideal for A if the canonical quotient map jq:B→B/J is a complete isometry when restricted to A. A boundary ideal is called the Shilov boundary for A if it contains every other boundary ideal.
It is clear from the definition that if the Shilov boundary exists, then it is unique, and it was shown by M. Hamana in [hamana] that the Shilov boundary exists for any A satisfying the conditions of the above definition. It is not difficult to see that this definition is equivalent to the definition of the Shilov boundary given above in the commutative case, i.e., when B=C(X).
Example 4.2*.*
The ideal J={f∈C(D):f∣T=0} is the Shilov boundary for A(D).
Example 4.3*.*
In [pro-tur], the authors considered a q-analog C(D2)q (resp. A(D2)q) of the C∗-algebra of continuous functions (resp. subalgebra of holomorphic functions) on the closed unit ball of complex 2×2 matrices D2={Z∈Mat2:Z∗Z≤I}. The former was defined as the universal enveloping C∗-algebra of Pol(Mat2)q, a q-analog of the ∗-algebra of polynomials on D2. It was proven that the ideal in C(D2)q generated by
[TABLE]
is the Shilov boundary for A(D2)q.
Let J be the ∗-ideal of Pol(Mat2sym)q generated by
[TABLE]
and let J be the closed ideal generated by the image of J in C(D2sym)q. We shall refer to the quotient C(S(D2sym))q=C(D2sym)q/J as a q-analog of the C∗-algebra of continuous functions on the Shilov boundary of D2sym. The canonical quotient map jq:C(D2sym)q→C(S(D2sym))q is a q-analog of the restriction map that sends a continuous function on D2sym to its restriction to the Shilov boundary S(D2sym)={Z∈Mat2sym:Z∗Z=I}. The aim of this section is to prove that J is the Shilov boundary for A(D2sym)q.
From the above discussion of representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q, we have the following result on which representations annihilate J, whose proof is a straightforward verification.
Lemma 4.4**.**
The representations ωφ and θφ1,φ2, φ,φ1,φ2∈[0,2π), are the only, up to unitary equivalence, irreducible representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q that annihilate J. Moreover, any representation (χφ1,φ2⊗π0)∘D, φ1,φ2∈[0,2π), annihilates J.
Theorem 4.5**.**
The ideal J is a boundary ideal for A(D2sym)q.
Proof.
By Lemma 4.4, any representation (χφ1,φ2⊗π0)∘D, φ1,φ2∈[0,2π), annihilates J. Thus we have a family of ∗-homomorphisms
[TABLE]
given by b+J↦(χφ1,φ2⊗π0)∘D(b), and consequently
[TABLE]
for all (bij)∈Mn(C(D2sym)q). Since the quotient map jq:C(D2sym)q→C(S(D2sym))q is a ∗-homomorphism, jq and consequently jq∣A(D2sym)q is a complete contraction. It is therefore sufficient to prove that
[TABLE]
for all (aij)∈Mn(A(D2sym)q).
We note that the operator C4S is a contraction on H=ℓ2(Z≥0). By Sz.-Nagy’s dilation theorem (see e.g. [paulsen]*Theorem 1.1), there exists a unitary operator U on a Hilbert space K containing H as a subspace such that (C4S)n=PHUn∣H for all n≥0. Consider the map Ψ into B(H⊗2⊗K) defined on the generators of Pol(Mat2sym)q by
[TABLE]
It is readily verified that this map extends uniquely to a representation of Pol(Mat2sym)q on H⊗2⊗K. By the spectral theorem, Ψ can be written as a direct integral representation of the field of representations {τφ:φ∈[0,2π)}, i.e.,
[TABLE]
For ξ∈H⊗2⊗K, we have
[TABLE]
Thus ∥Ψ(b)∥≤supφ∈[0,2π)∥τφ(b)∥
for all b∈C(D2sym)q, and since Ψ induces a representation on Mn(C(D2sym)q), similar arguments show that
[TABLE]
for all (bij)∈Mn(C(D2sym)q). Since πF(a)=(I⊗I⊗PH)Ψ(a)∣H⊗3, we get
[TABLE]
for all (aij)∈Mn(A(D2sym)q).
Our next step is to show that, for all φ∈[0,2π),
[TABLE]
for all (aij)∈Mn(A(D2sym)q). Similar to the previous step, we consider the map Ψφ into B(K⊗H) defined on the generators of Pol(Mat2sym)q by
[TABLE]
It is readily verified that Ψφ extends to a representation of C(D2sym)q on K⊗H. By (10) and the spectral theorem, Ψφ can be written as a direct integral representation of the field of representations {(χφ1,φ⊗π0)∘D:φ1∈[0,2π)}, i.e.,
[TABLE]
For ξ∈K⊗H, we have
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
for all b∈C(D2sym)q. Since Ψφ induces a representation on Mn(C(D2sym)q), similar arguments show that
[TABLE]
for all (bij)∈Mn(C(D2sym)q). Since
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all a∈A(D2sym)q, we have
[TABLE]
By a similar argument, we have
[TABLE]
for all (aij)∈Mn(A(D2sym)q). By combining the inequalities (11) and (12), we get the desired statement.
∎
Lemma 4.6**.**
If π is a representation of Pol(Mat2sym)q that annihilates J, then
[TABLE]
for all x∈Pol(Mat2sym)q.
Proof.
As θφ1,φ2 and ωφ, φ,φ1,φ2∈[0,2π) are the only irreducible representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q that annihilate J
it is sufficient to prove that
[TABLE]
for all x∈Pol(Mat2sym)q and φ1,φ2∈[0,2π).
Recall that C∗(ωφ(Pol(Mat2sym)q)) is a subalgebra of C∗(S) and if Θφ2:C∗(S)→C is the ∗-homomorphism given by Θφ2(S)=eiφ2, then
it is readily verified that Θφ2 induces a ∗-homomorphism
[TABLE]
where each generator ω(φ1+φ2+π)/2(zij) is mapped to θφ1,φ2(zij). Thus
[TABLE]
for all x∈Pol(Mat2sym)q and φ1,φ2∈[0,2π), which proves the lemma.
∎
Theorem 4.7**.**
The ideal J contains all other boundary ideals.
Proof.
Let I be a boundary ideal such that I⊃J, and let iq and jq,
[TABLE]
be the canonical quotient maps. If
[TABLE]
is nonempty, then I⊂∩φ∈Kkerωφ, and hence I=J if
[TABLE]
We claim that it is sufficient to prove that K is dense in [0,2π]. Indeed, suppose that x lies in kerωφ for all φ∈K. If Kˉ=[0,2π], it follows by Lemma 4.6 that jq(x)=0, i.e., x∈J.
Since iq and jq are isometries when restricted to A(D2sym)q, we have
[TABLE]
for any θ∈[0,2π). Since ωφ and θφ1,φ2,φ,φ1,φ2∈[0,2π), are the only, up to unitary equivalence, irreducible representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q that annihilate J, Lemma 4.6 gives
[TABLE]
If π is an irreducible representation of C(D2sym)q/I which does not vanish on z21+I, then π∘iq is an irreducible representation of C(D2sym)q which does not vanish on z21. Since π∘iq(J)=0, π∘iq is unitary equivalent to ωφ for some φ∈K. Thus
[TABLE]
where π ranges over the irreducible representations of C(D2sym)q/I and XK={eiφ:φ∈K}⊂T. From (13) and (14) we conclude that
[TABLE]
for any θ∈[0,2π), and hence XK must be dense in T, which proves the theorem.
∎
5. Regular functions on the Shilov boundary
In [bershtein-2], a ∗-algebra C[S(Dnsym)]q referred to as the algebra of regular functions on the Shilov boundary on the quantum unit ball in the space of symmetric complex n×n matrices was defined as the localization of C[Matnsym]q with respect to the Ore system (detqsymz)Z≥0, where detqsymz is a q-analog of the determinant of the symmetric matrix z=(zij) corresponding to the generators of C[Matnsym]q (see [bershtein-2] for definitions of C[Matnsym]q and detqsymz). In this section we show that for our particular case, n=2, this agrees with our previous result.
In our case of C[S(D2sym)]q the quantum determinant takes the form
[TABLE]
and the involution is given by
[TABLE]
Theorem 5.1**.**
The map k:zij+J↦zij∈C[S(D2sym)]q, i,j=1,2, can be extended to a ∗-isomorphism of the ∗-subalgebra of C(S(D2sym))q generated by zij+J, i,j=1,2, onto C[S(D2sym)]q.
Proof.
It is straightforward to verify that an extension of k to polynomials in zij+J, i,j=1,2, is well-defined. We construct an inverse to k as follows. Since π((detqsymz)∗detqsymz)=q−2 for all representations of Pol(Mat2sym)q that annihilate J, it follows that (detqsymz)∗detqsymz=detqsymz(detqsymz)∗=q−2 in C(S(D2sym))q. Moreover, each zij∗ in C(S(D2sym))q has the same expression in terms of the generators and (detqsymz)−1 as in C[S(D2sym)]q. Since C[S(D2sym)]q is generated by zij, i,j=1,2, and (detqsymz)−1, we have a ∗-homomorphism k′:C[S(D2sym)]q→C(S(D2sym))q given by zij↦zij+J and (detqsymz)−1↦q2(detqsymz)∗+J. It is easily verified that k and k′ are mutually inverse to each other.
∎
Acknowledgments
The authors are grateful to Olga Bershtein for discussions during the preparation of this paper.
References