This paper extends operator similarity results on l^p spaces, proving a version of Voiculescu's absorption theorem, establishing group structure for certain Ext groups, and demonstrating homotopy invariance for separable Banach algebras.
Contribution
It introduces new similarity and homotopy invariance results for operators on l^p spaces, generalizing classical operator theory to Banach algebra contexts.
Findings
01
Proves a version of Voiculescu's absorption theorem for l^p operators.
02
Shows Ext groups are groups for certain Banach algebras.
03
Establishes homotopy invariance of Ext groups in specific Banach algebra settings.
Abstract
For 1<p<∞, we prove (i) a version of Voiculescu's absorption theorem for operators on lp, (ii) that Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is a group for certain Banach algebra A, and (iii) homotopy invariance of Ext∼,s(A,K(lp))−1 in A for separable Banach algebra A that is isomorphic to a subalgebra of B(lp).
Equations606
{(x1,x2,…):xn∈Xn, for n∈N, and n=1∑∞∥xn∥p<∞}
{(x1,x2,…):xn∈Xn, for n∈N, and n=1∑∞∥xn∥p<∞}
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsHolomorphic and Operator Theory · Mathematical Analysis and Transform Methods · Advanced Banach Space Theory
Full text
Similarity of operators on lp
March T. Boedihardjo
Department of Mathematics, University of California, Los Angeles, CA 90095-1555
For 1<p<∞, we prove (i) a version of Voiculescu’s absorption theorem for operators on lp, (ii) that Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is a group for certain Banach algebra A, and (iii) homotopy invariance of Ext∼,s(A,K(lp))−1 in A for separable Banach algebra A that is isomorphic to a subalgebra of B(lp).
Key words and phrases:
lp space, Similarity, Voiculescu’s theorem, Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theory
Over the past 80 years, certain classical results about operators on Hilbert spaces have been extended to operators on more general Banach spaces. Mean ergodic theorem for reflexive Banach spaces is established [23] (for p=2, see [32]); commutators on c0, lp and Lp, for 1≤p≤∞, are characterized [1], [2], [14], [15], [16] (for p=2, see [9]); quasitriagularity of operators on c0 and lp, for 1≤p<∞, is characterized [4] (for p=2, see [3]); West’s result [34] on Riesz operators on Hilbert spaces is generalized to c0 and lp, for 1≤p<∞ [13]. This list is by no means complete. In fact, there is a recent development of Lp-operator algebras since [29], [30], [31].
The purpose of this paper is to study the extent to which results concerning unitary equivalence, up to a small perturbation, of operators on Hilbert spaces hold for operators on lp for 1<p<∞. We obtain an lp version of Voiculescu’s absorption theorem [33]. We introduce a notion of Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) for Banach algebra A that is isomorphic to a subalgebra of B(lp), where K(lp) is the algebra of compact operators on lp. We show that Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is a group when A=C(M), for any compact metric space M that is homeomorphic to a subset of a Euclidean space, or when A is the algebra generated by the range of the left regular representation of a countable amenable group on lp. Hence, a lifting theorem for homomorphisms from A into B(lp)/K(lp) is obtained for these algebras A. We also prove homotopy invariance of Ext∼,s(A,K(lp))−1 for separable Banach algebra A that is isomorphic to a subalgebra of B(lp). The p=2 case of these results are proved in [11], [5], [20].
In the study of single operators, the following consequences are obtained for 1<p<∞: (1) the unilateral shift U on lp is approximately similar to the direct sum of the unilateral shift and the bilateral shift on lp; (2) the bilateral shift B on lp is approximately similar to the direct sum of circular shifts on finite dimensional lp spaces; (3) there exist u1,u2,…∈[0,1] such that U⊕(⊕k=1∞ukB) is similar to a compact perturbation of ⊕k=1∞ukB. (For p=2, this is a consequence of the Brown-Douglas-Fillmore theorem.)
Note that we have relaxed unitary equivalence to similarity. This is due to the lack of invertible isometries on lp: every invertible isometry on lp, for p∈[1,∞]\{2}, is the composition of a diagonal operator with entries on the unit circle and a permutation operator [22].
In the negative direction, we point that some basic results concerning unitary equivalence of operators on Hilbert spaces do not hold for some more general Banach spaces even if we relax unitary equivalence to similarity. The bilateral shift on l2 is unitarily equivalent to the sum of a diagonal operator on l2 and a compact operator. However, the bilateral shift on lp, for p∈[1,∞]\{2}, does not have functional calculus for functions in C(S1) [17] unlike unitary operators on Hilbert spaces. Here S1 is the unit circle on C. As a consequence, the bilateral shift on lp, for p∈(1,∞)\{2}, is not similar to the sum of a diagonal operator on lp and a compact operator (Corollary 7.17).
Normal operators on a separable complex Hilbert space that have the same essential spectrum are unitarily equivalent modulo compact operators [6]. When p∈(1,∞)\{2}, if μ1 and μ2 are purely nonatomic mutually singular measures on [0,1], the multiplication operators Mμ1∈B(Lp(μ1)) and Mμ2∈B(Lp(μ2)) defined by (Mμ1f)(z)=zf(z), for f∈Lp(μ1), and (Mμ2f)(z)=zf(z), for f∈Lp(μ2), are not similar modulo compact operators [7] even if μ1 and μ2 have the same support.
All trivial extensions of K(l2) by a separable C∗-algebra A are equivalent [33] (when A is commutative, this is proved in [11]). In this paper, we show that when p∈(1,∞)\{2}, there are bounded below homomorphisms ϕ1:C[0,1]→B(lp) and ϕ2:C[0,1]→B(lp) such that ϕ1(z) and ϕ2(z) are not similar modulo compact operators, where z∈C[0,1] is the identity function.
In Sections 2-6, we prove some preliminary results and introduce some new notions that are needed for Sections 7-10. In Section 7, we state and prove an lp version of Voiculescu’s absorption theorem (Theorem 7.4) and obtain various consequences. In Section 8, we define Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) and provide nontrivial examples of isomorphic extensions of K(lp) by some Banach algebras. In Section 9, we show that Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is a group for certain Banach algebra A (Theorems 9.5 and 9.7). In Section 10, we prove homotopy invariance of Ext∼,s(A,K(lp))−1 for separable Banach algebra A that is isomorphic to a subalgebra of B(lp) (Corollary 10.6).
Throughout this paper, unless stated otherwise, the scalar field is C and 1<p<∞. If X is a Banach space, B(X) denotes the algebra of operators on X and K(X) denotes the ideal of compact operators on X. The symmetric difference between two sets F1 and F2 is denoted by F1ΔF2.
If F is a set then lp(F)={x:F→C:∑i∈F∣x(i)∣p<∞} is the lp space on F. When F is an interval, lp(F) is understood as lp(F∩Z). For instance, lp([1,3]) is a 3-dimensional lp space. If F is the empty set, lp(F)={0}. The canonical basis for lp(F) is denoted by (ej)j∈F and (ej∗)j∈F are the coordinate functionals on lp(F), i.e., ej∗(ei)=1 if i=j and 0 if i=j. If M is a compact metric space, then C(M) is the algebra of scalar valued continuous functions on M.
If X1,X2,… are Banach spaces, then (⊕n=1∞Xn)lp is the Banach space
[TABLE]
with norm
[TABLE]
For each n∈N, let Tn be an operator on Xn. Assume that supn∈N∥Tn∥<∞. Then T1⊕T2⊕… is the operator on (⊕n∈NXn)lp defined by (T1⊕T2⊕…)(x1,x2,…)=(T1x1,T2x2,…).
If X1 and X2 are Banach spaces and T:X1→X2 is an operator, then ∥T∥e is the infimum of ∥T+K∥ over all compact operator K:X1→X2.
A map is a function where no continuity or algebraic property is assumed. Let A1 and A2 be Banach algebras. A homomorphismψ:A1→A2 is a bounded linear map such that ψ(ab)=ψ(a)ψ(b) for all a,b∈A1. The Banach algebras A1 and A2 are isomorphic if there exist a bijective homomorphism ψ:A1→A2 and C≥1 such that
[TABLE]
for all a∈A1.
Let X1 and X2 be Banach spaces. Let λ≥1. The spaces X1 and X2 are λ-isomorphic if there is an invertible operator S:X1→X2 such that ∥S∥∥S−1∥≤λ. The spaces X1 and X2 are isomorphic if they are λ-isomorphic for some λ≥1. Let Λ be a set. Let ψ1:Λ→B(X1) and ψ2:Λ→B(X2) be maps. The maps ψ1 and ψ2 are λ-similar if there is an invertible operator S:X1→X2 such that ∥S∥∥S−1∥≤λ and ψ2(α)=Sψ1(α)S−1 for all α∈Λ. The maps ψ1 and ψ2 are λ-approximately similar if there are invertible operators Sn:X1→X2, for n∈N, such that
(i)
supn∈N∥Sn∥∥Sn−1∥<∞;
2. (ii)
ψ2(α)−Snψ1(α)Sn−1 is compact for all n∈N and α∈Λ; and
3. (iii)
limn→∞∥ψ2(α)−Snψ1(α)Sn−1∥=0 for all α∈Λ.
(Hadwin [18] defines approximate similarity without condition (ii) but the author [7] shows that these two notions coincide for single operators.) The maps ψ1 and ψ2 are λ-similar modulo compact operators if there is an invertible operator S:X1→X2 such that ∥S∥∥S−1∥≤λ and ψ2(α)−Sψ1(α)S−1 is compact for all α∈Λ. The maps ψ1 and ψ2 are similar/approximately similar/similar modulo compact operators if they are λ-similar/λ-approximately similar/λ-similar modulo compact operators for some λ≥1.
For each n∈N, let Xn be a Banach space and let ψn:Λ→B(Xn) be a map. The direct sum⊕n=1∞ψn:Λ→B((⊕n=1∞Xn)lp) is defined by (⊕n=1∞ψn)(α)=⊕n=1∞ψn(α) for α∈Λ.
Except for Section 10, the symbol π always denotes the quotient map from B(X) onto B(X)/K(X) for some Banach space X. Except for Sections 8 and 10, by abuse of notation, we use the same π even for two different Banach spaces X1 and X2. Moreover, if T1∈B(X1) and T2∈B(X2) then we define π(T1)⊕π(T2)=π(T1⊕T2)∈B(X1⊕X2)/K(X1⊕X2). In Section 8, we use different notation for quotient maps onto the Calkin algebras of different Banach spaces. In Section 10, the symbol π denotes the quotient map from B(X1,X2) onto B(X1,X2)/K(X1,X2) for some Banach spaces X1,X2, where B(X1,X2) is the Banach space of operators from X1 to X2 and K(X1,X2) is the subspace of compact operators. Moreover, if T1∈B(X1,X2) and T2∈B(X2,X3) then we define π(T2)π(T1)=π(T2T1)∈B(X1,X3).
For a topological vector space Y, a countable infinite set Λ and elements xα∈Y, for α∈Λ, a series ∑α∈Λxαconverges unconditionally if the series ∑i=1∞xg(i) converges to the same element x∈Y for all bijection g:N→Λ.
If X is a Banach space then its dual space is denoted by X∗. If T∈B(X) then T∗∈B(X∗) is defined by (T∗x∗)(x)=x∗(Tx) for x∗∈X∗ and x∈X. The strong operator topology on B(X) is denoted by SOT and the weak operator topology is denoted by WOT.
For x∗∈X∗, we define a seminorm ∣∣x∗ on B(X) by
[TABLE]
for T∈B(X). It is easy to see that ∣T1T2∣x∗=∣T2∣T1∗x∗ and
[TABLE]
for all T1,T2∈B(X).
More terminologies and notation will be introduced at the beginning of some later sections.
[TABLE]
2. Estimates and partitions of unity
A diagonal operatorA on lp is an operator of the form
[TABLE]
for some w1,w2,…∈C, which are the diagonal entries of A. The support of A is the set supp(A)={i∈N:ai=0}.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let r∈N. Let (Dn)n∈N be a sequence of diagonal operators on lp of norms at most 1 such that every j∈N is contained in at most r of the sets suppD1,suppD2,…. Then
(i)
[TABLE]
for all bounded sequence (xn)n∈N in lp such that ∑i=1∞∥Dixi∥p is finite;
2. (ii)
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp;
3. (iii)
[TABLE]
for all T1,…,Tk∈B(lp) and k∈N; and
4. (iv)
[TABLE]
for all T1,…,Tk∈B(lp) and k∈N.
Proof.
We have
[TABLE]
For all j∈N and (xn)n∈N in lp, since ej∗(Dixi)=0 for at most r values of i,
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
This proves (i). Let x∈lp. For each j∈N, since ej∗(Dix)=0 for at most r values of i,
[TABLE]
Since each Di is a diagonal operator of norm at most 1, we have 1≤i≤nmax∣ej∗(Dix)∣≤∣ej∗(x)∣. Therefore,
[TABLE]
This proves (ii). For every x∈lp,
[TABLE]
This proves (iii). Let n∈N. Let Pn be the projection from lp onto lp([1,n]). By (iii),
[TABLE]
Taking n→∞, we obtain
[TABLE]
This proves (iv).
∎
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let r∈N. Let D1,…,Dk be diagonal operators on lp such that every j∈N is contained in at most r of suppD1,…,suppDk. Define operators V:lp→klp⊕…⊕lp and E:klp⊕…⊕lp→lp by
[TABLE]
for x∈lp and y1,…,yk∈lp. Then ∥V∥≤r1≤i≤kmax∥Di∥ and ∥E∥≤r1≤i≤kmax∥Di∥.
Proof.
By homogeneity, we may assume that D1,…,Dk have norm 1. By Lemma 2.1(ii), we have ∥V∥≤r. By Lemma 2.1(i), we have ∥E∥≤r.
∎
Lemma 2.3**.**
Let r∈N∪{0}. Let X1,X2,… be finite dimensional Banach spaces. For each k∈N, let Jk:Xk→(⊕n∈NXn)lp and Qk:(⊕n∈NXn)lp→Xk be the canonical embedding and projection, respectively. For i,j∈N, let Ti,j∈B(Xj,Xi). Assume that supi,j∈N∥Ti,j∥<∞ and Ti,j=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r. Then the sum ∑i,j∈NJiTi,jQj in B((⊕n∈NXn)lp) converges in SOT unconditionally and
[TABLE]
Proof.
For notational convenience, let Xk={0} for k<1 and let Ji=0 and Ti,j=0 for i<1. For s∈Z, finite subset Ω⊂N and x∈(⊕n∈NXn)lp,
[TABLE]
So ∑j∈NJj+sTj+s,jQj converges in SOT unconditionally for every s∈Z. Since Ti,j=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r, it follows that the series ∑i,j∈NJiTi,jQj=∑s=−rr∑j∈NJj+sTj+s,jQj converges in SOT unconditionally.
for all s∈Z and n∈N. Since Ti,j=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r,
[TABLE]
for all n∈N. Since X1,X2,… are finite dimensional, ∥T∥e=n→∞lim∥T(I−(Q1+…+Qn))∥ for every operator T on (⊕n=1∞Xn)lp. It follows that
[TABLE]
Also,
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let d∈N. Let M be a compact subset of Rd. Let ϵ>0. Then there exists an open cover (Ui)1≤i≤k of M such that each Ui has diameter at most ϵ and every v∈M is contained in at most 2d of the sets U1,…,Uk.
Proof.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that M is a subset of [0,1]d. Let n≥ϵ2d be a natural number. Note that the intervals (nj−1,nj+1), for j=0,…,n form an open cover of [0,1]. Every c∈[0,1] is contained in at most two of these intervals. For j1,…,jd∈{0,…,n}, let Uj1,…,jk=(nj1−1,nj1+1)×…×(njd−1,njd+1). Then the open sets Uj1,…,jd, for j1,…,jd∈{0,…,n}, form an open cover of [0,1]d. Each Uj1,…,jd has diameter at most ϵ with respect to the Euclidean metric. Fix (v1,…,vd)∈[0,1]d. For 1≤i≤d, the number vi is contained in at most two of the intervals (nj−1,nj+1), for j=0,…,n. So there are ji(1),ji(2)∈{0,…,n} (which may or may not be the same) such that if vi∈(nj−1,nj+1) then j must be ji(1) or ji(2). Thus, if (v1,…,vd)∈Uj1,…,jd then for each 1≤i≤d, the number ji must be ji(1) or ji(2). So (v1,…,vd) is contained in at most 2d of the sets Uj1,…,jd, for j1,…,jd∈{0,…,n}.
∎
Lemma 2.5**.**
Let d∈N. Let M be a nonempty compact subset of Rd. Let ϵ>0. Then there exist a partition of unity (fi)1≤i≤k on M and continuous functions gi:M→[0,1], for 1≤i≤k, such that
(1)
the diameter of the support of gi is at most ϵ for every i=1,…,k;
2. (2)
every v∈M is contained in at most 2d of the sets suppg1,…,suppgk; and
3. (3)
gi=1* on the support of fi for every i=1,…,k.*
Proof.
By Lemma 2.4, there exists an open cover (Ui)1≤i≤k of M such that each Ui has diameter at most ϵ and every v∈M is contained in at most 2d of the sets U1,…,Uk. Take (fi)1≤i≤k to be a partition of unity on M subordinate to (Ui)1≤i≤k. For each 1≤i≤k, let gi:M→[0,1] be a continuous function such that gi=1 on the support of fi and suppgi⊂Ui. Since each v∈M is contained in at most 2d of the sets U1,…,Uk, it is contained in at most 2d of suppg1,…,suppgk.
∎
3. Approximate identity
A sequence (An)n∈N of operators on lp is a refined diagonal approximate identity onlp if
(1)
each An is a diagonal operator on lp with diagonal entries in [0,1] and supp(An) is finite;
2. (2)
An→I in SOT, as n→∞; and
3. (3)
(I−An+1)An=0 for all n∈N.
It is easy to see that if (An)n∈N is a refined diagonal approximate identity, then suppA1⊂suppA2⊂… and (I−An)Am=0 for all m<n in N.
The following two lemmas are well known results but we include their proofs for convenience.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let X be a separable reflexive Banach space. Let (Kn)n∈N be a bounded sequence of compact operators on X converging to 0 in WOT. Then Kn→0 weakly in the sense of Banach space.
Proof.
Let BX(0,1) and BX∗(0,1) be the unit balls of X and X∗, respectively, equipped with the weak topologies. Consider the compact Hausdorff space M=BX(0,1)×BX∗(0,1) with the product topology. For each K∈K(X), define a continuous function fK:M→C by fK(x,x∗)=x∗(Kx), for (x,x∗)∈M. Since (Kn)n∈N is uniformly bounded and converges to 0 in WOT, (fKn)n∈N is uniformly bounded and converges to 0 pointwise. So by dominated convergence theorem, ∫fKndμ→0 for every finite measure μ on M. So fKn converges to 0 weakly in the space C(M) of continuous functions from M into C equipped with ∥∥∞.
Note that the map K↦fK defines an isometry from K(X) into C(M). Thus, by Hahn-Banach Theorem, it follows that Kn converges to 0 weakly.
∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let ψ:Λ→B(lp). Then for all finite subsets Ω1⊂Ω2⊂… of Λ and ϵ1,ϵ2,…>0, there exists a refined diagonal approximate identity (An)n∈N on lp such that ∥Anψ(α)−ψ(α)An∥≤ϵn for all α∈Ωn and n∈N.
Proof.
For each n∈N, let Pn be the projection from lp onto lp([1,n]). Then for each α∈Λ, we have Pnψ(α)−ψ(α)Pn→0 in SOT as n→∞. So by Lemma 3.1, for each α∈Λ, we have Pnψ(α)−ψ(α)Pn→0 weakly in the sense of Banach space as n→∞.
Choose finite rank diagonal operators A1,A2,… as follows: Take A1=0. Suppose that A1,…,Ai−1 have been chosen. Let j∈N be large enough so that j≥i and (I−Pj)Ai−1=0. From the previous paragraph, Pnψ(α)−ψ(α)Pn→0 weakly in the sense of Banach space, as n→∞, for every α∈Ωj. Thus, there exists Ai that is a convex combination of Pj,Pj+1,… such that ∥Aiψ(α)−ψ(α)Ai∥≤ϵi for every α∈Ωj.
Since j≥i, it follows that ∥Aiψ(α)−ψ(α)Ai∥≤ϵi for all α∈Ωi and i∈N. Since (I−Pj)Ai−1=0 and Ai is a convex combination of Pj,Pj+1,…, it is easy to see that (I−Ai)Ai−1=0 for all i≥2. Also, since j≥i and Ai is a convex combination of Pj,Pj+1,…, we have An→I in SOT as n→∞. Therefore, (An)n∈N is a refined diagonal approximate identity on lp.
∎
In the sequel, A−1=A0=0.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Suppose that (An)n∈N is a refined diagonal approximate identity on lp. Then
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp. Moreover, if (xn)n∈N is a sequence in lp such that n=1∑∞∥xn∥p<∞, then
[TABLE]
Proof.
For n∈N, since (I−An−1)An−2=(I−An)An−2=0, we have An−An−1=0 on lp(suppAn−2) and so supp(An−An−1)⊂suppAn\suppAn−2. Since suppA1⊂suppA2⊂…, it follows that every j∈N is contained in at most 2 of supp(An−An−1), for n∈N. By Lemma 2.1(ii) with r=2, we obtain (3.1).
Since (I−An+1)An−3=(I−An−2)An−3=0, we have An+1−An−2=0 on lp(suppAn−3) and so supp(An+1−An−2)⊂suppAn+1\suppAn−3. For each n∈N, let Dn be the projection from lp onto lp(supp(An+1−An−2)). By Lemma 2.1(i) with r=4, if xn is in the range of An+1−An−2 for n∈N, then
Suppose that (An)n∈N is a refined diagonal approximate identity on lp. For every n∈N,
[TABLE]
so
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for every n∈N,
[TABLE]
so
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
So combining Lemma 3.2 and Lemma 3.3, we obtain the following result.
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Suppose that X is a Banach space that is either finite dimensional or λ-isomorphic to lp. Let ψ:Λ→B(lp). Let Ω1⊂Ω2⊂… be finite subsets of Λ. Let ϵ1,ϵ2,…>0. Then there exist finite rank operators A1,A2,… on X such that
(i)
n∈Nsup∥An∥≤λ;
2. (ii)
An→I* in SOT as n→∞;*
3. (iii)
∥Anψ(α)−ψ(α)An∥≤ϵn* for all α∈Ωn and n∈N;*
4. (iv)
(An+1−An−2)(An−An−1)=An−An−1* for all n∈N;*
5. (v)
(n=1∑∞∥(An−An−1)x∥p)p1≤2λ∥x∥* for x∈X; and*
6. (vi)
if (xn)n∈N is a sequence in X such that n=1∑∞∥xn∥p<∞, then
[TABLE]
4. Functional calculus
Let B be a Banach algebra. A function h:[0,1]→B is B-simple if there are b1,…,bn∈B and f1,…,fn∈C[0,1] such that h(t)=∑i=1nbifi(t) for all t∈M.
Suppose that A is a diagonal operator on lp with entries a1,a2,… in [0,1]. For f∈C[0,1], let f(A) be the diagonal operator on lp with entries f(a1),f(a2),… and let f(π(A))=π(f(A))∈B(lp)/K(lp).
Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). We define h(π(A)), for every B-simple function h:[0,1]→B, as follows: if we write h(t)=∑i=1nbifi(t), where b1,…,bn∈B, we set
[TABLE]
For example, if h(t)=b0+b1t+b2t2 then h(π(A))=b0+b1π(A)+b2π(A2).
Next we can define h(π(A)) for all continuous function h:[0,1]→B. Indeed, we show that every continuous function from [0,1] to B can be approximated by B-simple functions on [0,1] for all unital Banach algebra B (Lemma 4.1). We also prove that
[TABLE]
for all B-simple function h on [0,1] (Corollary 4.3). We define h(π(A)) as follows: if (hn)n∈N is any sequence of B-simple functions on [0,1] such that sup0≤t≤1∥hn(t)−h(t)∥→0, as n→∞, then we set
[TABLE]
where the limit exists and does not depend of the choice of (hn)n∈N.
Let B be a Banach algebra. Let a∈B. A function h:[0,1]→B is a-continuous if there exists a continuous function h:[0,1]→B such that (h(t)−h(t))a=0, for all t∈[0,1], and h(0)=h(0).
Finally, if A is a diagonal operator on lp with entries in [0,1] and B is the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp), we define h(π(A)), for every π(A)-continuous function h:[0,1]→B, as follows:
[TABLE]
where h:[0,1]→B is any continuous function such that (h(t)−h(t))π(A)=0, for all t∈[0,1], and h(0)=h(0). By Lemma 4.4 below, the element h(π(A)) of B does not depend on the choice of h.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let B be a unital Banach algebra. Let h:[0,1]→B be a continuous function. Then there is a sequence (hn)n∈N of B-simple functions on [0,1] such that 0≤t≤1sup∥hn(t)−h(t)∥→0 as n→∞.
Proof.
Let ϵ>0. We need to find a B-simple function h1 on [0,1] such that sup0≤t≤1∥h1(t)−h(t)∥≤ϵ. There exists γ>0 such that
[TABLE]
for all t,s∈[0,1] such that ∣t−s∣≤γ. Let (Ui)1≤i≤k be an open cover of [0,1] such that each Ui has diameter at most γ. Let (fi)1≤i≤k be a partition of unity on [0,1] subordinate to (Ui)1≤i≤k. For each 1≤i≤k, pick ti∈Ui. Take
[TABLE]
for t∈[0,1]. For t∈[0,1], we have
[TABLE]
where the last inequality follows from the fact that ∑i=1kfi(t)=1. However, if fi(t)=0 then t∈Ui. Since Ui has diameter at most γ, this implies that ∣t−ti∣≤γ and so ∥h(ti)−h(t)∥≤ϵ. Therefore, ∥h1(t)−h(t)∥≤ϵ for all t∈[0,1].
∎
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with entries in [0,1]. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Let h be a B-simple function. Then for every ϵ>0, there exists γ>0 such that ∥(h(π(A))−h(t))π(f(A))∥≤ϵ for all t∈[0,1] and f∈C[0,1] with suppf⊂[t−γ,t+γ].
Proof.
We write h(t)=∑i=1nbifi(t), for t∈[0,1], where b1,…,bn∈B and f1,…,fn∈C[0,1]. Take γ>0 to be small enough so that ∣fi(s)−fi(t)∣≤∥b1∥+…+∥bn∥ϵ for all 1≤i≤n and s,t∈[0,1] such that ∣s−t∣≤γ. Then ∥(fi(A)−fi(t))f(A)∥≤∥b1∥+…+∥bn∥ϵ for all t∈[0,1] and f∈C[0,1] with suppf⊂[t−γ,t+γ]. Hence,
[TABLE]
∎
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with entries in [0,1]. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Let h be a B-simple function. Then
for all t∈[0,1] and f∈C[0,1] with suppf⊂[t−γ,t+γ]. Let (Ui)1≤i≤k be an open cover of [0,1] such that each Ui has diameter at most γ and every point on [0,1] is contained in at most 2 of U1,…,Uk. Let (fi)1≤i≤k be a partition of unity on [0,1] subordinate to (Ui)1≤i≤k. We have ∑i=1kfi(A)=I so
[TABLE]
Since h(π(A))∈B, the elements h(π(A)) and π(A) commute. Thus, h(π(A)) commutes with any polynomial of π(A) and so h(π(A)) commutes with π(fi(A)21). Therefore,
[TABLE]
Since every point on [0,1] is contained in at most 2 of U1,…,Uk, every j∈N is contained in at most 2 of suppf1(A)21,suppf2(A)21,…. By Lemma 2.1(iv),
[TABLE]
Since each Ui has diameter at most γ, we have Ui⊂[ti−γ,ti+γ] for some ti∈[0,1]. So suppfi⊂[ti−γ,ti+γ] for all 1≤i≤k. Thus, by (4.1),
[TABLE]
So by (4.2) and (4.3), we have ∥h(π(A))∥≤40≤t≤1sup∥h(t)∥.
∎
As explained at the beginning of this section, having proved Lemmas 4.1-4.3, we can define h(π(A))∈B for all diagonal operator A on lp with entries in [0,1] and continuous function h:[0,1]→B where B is the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Moreover,
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.4**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with entries in [0,1]. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). If h1:[0,1]→B and h2:[0,1]→B are continuous functions such that (h1(t)−h2(t))π(A)=0, for all t∈[0,1], and h1(0)=h2(0), then h1(π(A))=h2(π(A)).
Proof.
Let ϵ>0. Since h1(0)=h2(0), there exists γ>0 such that ∣h1(t)−h2(t)∣≤ϵ for all 0≤t≤γ. Let f:[0,1]→[0,1] be a continuous function such that f(0)=1 and f(t)=0 for all γ≤t≤1. Then ∥(h1−h2)f∥≤ϵ and so ∥(h1(π(A))−h2(π(A)))f(π(A))∥≤ϵ.
Since (h1(t)−h2(t))π(A)=0 and 1−f(0)=0, we have (h1(t)−h2(t))(1−f(π(A)))=0 by polynomial approximation. Hence, by (4.4), we have (h1(π(A))−h2(π(A)))(1−f(π(A)))=0. Therefore, ∥h1(π(A))−h2(π(A))∥=∥(h1(π(A))−h2(π(A)))f(π(A))∥≤ϵ. Choose ϵ>0 to be arbitrarily small. The result follows.
∎
As explained at the beginning of this section, having proved Lemma 4.4, we can define h(π(A))∈B for all diagonal operator A on lp with entries in [0,1] and π(A)-continuous function h:[0,1]→B where B is the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Recall that h is π(A)-continuous if there is a continuous function h:[0,1]→B such that (h(t)−h(t))π(A)=0, for all t∈[0,1], and h(0)=h(0). The following results say that this “functional calculus” preserves direct sum with 1.
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with entries in [0,1]. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Let h1:[0,1]→B(lp)/K(lp) and h2:[0,1]→B be continuous functions. Let B2 be the commutant of π(I)⊕π(A) in B(lp⊕lp)/K(lp⊕lp). Define h3:[0,1]→B2 by h3(t)=h1(t)⊕h2(t) for t∈[0,1]. Then h3(π(I)⊕π(A))=h1(1)⊕h2(π(A)).
Proof.
Let ϵ>0. There exist b1,…,bn∈B(lp)/K(lp), c1,…,ck∈B, f1,…,fn,g1,…,gk∈C[0,1] such that ∥h1(t)−∑i=1nbifi(t)∥≤ϵ and ∥h2(t)−∑j=1kcjgj(t)∥≤ϵ for all t∈[0,1]. Define h4:[0,1]→B2 by
[TABLE]
for t∈[0,1]. Then h4 is a B2-simple function and ∥h3(t)−h4(t)∥≤ϵ for all t∈[0,1]. So
The following result says that Lemma 4.5 still holds if h2 is only assumed to be π(A)-continuous.
Lemma 4.6**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with entries in [0,1]. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Suppose that h1:[0,1]→B(lp)/K(lp) is continuous and h2:[0,1]→B is π(A)-continuous. Let B2 be the commutant of π(I)⊕π(A) in B(lp⊕lp)/K(lp⊕lp). Define h3:[0,1]→B2 by h3(t)=h1(t)⊕h2(t) for t∈[0,1]. Then h3 is (π(I)⊕π(A))-continuous and h3(π(I)⊕π(A))=h1(1)⊕h2(π(A)).
Proof.
There is a continuous function h2:[0,1]→B such that (h2(t)−h2(t))π(A)=0, for all t∈[0,1], and h2(0)=h2(0). Then π(I)⊕π(A) and h1(t)⊕h2(t) commute for all t∈[0,1]. Define h3:[0,1]→B2 by h3(t)=h1(t)⊕h2(t) for t∈[0,1]. Then h3 is continuous, (h3(t)−h3(t))(π(I)⊕π(A))=0, for all t∈[0,1], and h3(0)=h3(0). Therefore, h3 is (π(I)⊕π(A))-continuous and h3(π(I)⊕π(A))=h3(π(I)⊕π(A)). But by Lemma 4.5, we have h3(π(I)⊕π(A))=h1(1)⊕h2(π(A)). Since h2(π(A))=h2(π(A)), the result follows.
∎
5. Unconditional direct sum
Let Y be a Banach space. Let k∈N. Define the Banach space
[TABLE]
with norm
[TABLE]
where δ=(δ1,…,δk) is a random vector uniformly distributed on {−1,1}k and E denotes expectation with respect to δ. For example,
[TABLE]
Let T1,…,Tk∈B(Y). Define an operator (T1⊕…⊕Tk)u∈B(Yu⊕k) by
[TABLE]
for (y1,…,yk)∈Yu⊕k. It is easy to see that ∥(T1⊕…⊕Tk)u∥≥1≤i≤kmax∥Ti∥. Equality does not necessarily hold. However, when T1,…,Tk are scalars, ∥(T1⊕…⊕Tk)u∥ is, up to a constant, bounded by max1≤i≤k∥Ti∥.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let Y be a Banach space. Let c1,…,ck∈C. Then the operator (c1I⊕…⊕ckI)u on Yu⊕k has norm at most 2max1≤i≤k∣ci∣.
Proof.
If c1,…,ck∈{1,−1} then for all y1,…,yk∈Y,
[TABLE]
So ∥(c1I⊕…⊕ckI)u∥=1.
The set {(c1,…,ck)∈Ck:∥(c1I⊕…⊕ckI)u∥≤1} is convex and contains {−1,1}k. So it contains [−1,1]k. Thus, ∥(c1I⊕…⊕ckI)u∥≤1 for all c1,…,ck∈[−1,1]. If c1,…,ck∈C and ∣ci∣≤1 for all 1≤i≤k then writing ci as the sum of its real and imaginary parts, we have ∥(c1I⊕…⊕ckI)u∥≤2.
∎
Let 1<p<∞. Then there exists λp≥1 such that (⊕n∈NHn)lp is λp-isomorphic to lp for all nonzero finite dimensional Hilbert spaces H1,H2,….
Lemma 5.8**.**
Let 1<p<∞. Then there exists λp≥1 such that (lp)u⊕k is λp-isomorphic to lp for every k∈N.
Proof.
For each n∈N, let en∗∈(lp)∗ be the nth coordinate functional, i.e., en∗(x1,x2,…)=xn for (x1,x2,…)∈lp and n∈N. For each n∈N, define Sn:(lp)u⊕k→l2([1,k]) by
So by Lemma 5.6, we have Cp21∥y∥≤∥Sy∥≤Cp2∥y∥ for all y∈(lp)u⊕k. It is easy to see that S is surjective. Therefore, (lp)u⊕k is Cp2-isomorphic to (l2([1,k])⊕l2([1,k])⊕…)lp. By Lemma 5.7, the result follows.
∎
6. Domination
Recall that ∣∣x∗ is defined at the end of Section 1 for a bounded linear functional x∗ on a Banach space X. Let Λ be a set. Let X and Y be Banach spaces. Let ψ:Λ→B(X) and ρ:Λ→B(Y) be maps. Let λ≥1. We write ψ≪λρ if there exist operators Vn:X→Y and En:Y→X, for n∈N, such that
(i)
∥Vn∥≤λ and ∥En∥≤1 for all n∈N;
2. (ii)
EnVn→I in SOT as n→∞;
3. (iii)
Vnψ(α)−ρ(α)Vn→0 in SOT, as n→∞, for all α∈Λ;
4. (iv)
∣Enρ(α)−ψ(α)En∣x∗→0, as n→∞, for all α∈Λ and x∗∈X∗; and
5. (v)
Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞.
We write ψ≪ρ if ψ≪λρ for some λ≥1. The motivation of this notion is the first lemma in [33] where it is shown that if A is a separable C∗-subalgebra of B(l2) with I∈A and ϕ:π(A)→B(l2) is a cyclic ∗-representation, then ϕ∘π≪id where id:A→B(l2) is the identity representation.
The following result says that condition (v) above can be strengthened.
Lemma 6.1**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let X be a Banach space. Let ψ:Λ→B(X) and ρ:Λ→B(lp) be such that ψ≪λρ. Then for all numbers m1∈N and ϵ>0, finite subset Ω⊂Λ and finite dimensional subspaces F⊂X and G⊂X∗, there exist m2>m1 and operators V:X→lp and E:lp→X such that
(i)
∥V∥≤λ* and ∥E∥≤1;*
2. (ii)
∥EVx−x∥≤ϵ∥x∥* for all x∈F;*
3. (iii)
∥Vψ(α)x−ρ(α)Vx∥≤ϵ∥x∥* for all α∈Ω and x∈F;*
4. (iv)
∣Eρ(α)−ψ(α)E∣x∗≤ϵ∥x∗∥* for all α∈Ω and x∗∈G; and*
5. (v)
Vx∈lp([m1+1,m2])* for all x∈X and Ey=0 for all y∈lp([1,m1]∪(m2,∞)).*
Proof.
Fix numbers m1∈N and ϵ>0, a finite subset Ω⊂Λ and a finite dimensional subspace F⊂X. By Lemma 3.2, there exists a finite rank diagonal operator A1 on lp with diagonal entries in [0,1] such that A1x=x for all x∈lp([1,m1]) and
[TABLE]
for all α∈Ω. Since A1 is a finite rank diagonal operator, there exists m1′>m1 such that A1x=0 for all x∈lp([m1′,∞)).
For each m∈N, let Pm be the projection from lp onto lp([1,m]). Since ψ≪λρ, there exist operators V0:X→lp and E0:lp→X such that
(a)
∥V0∥≤λ and ∥E0∥≤1;
2. (b)
∥E0V0x−x∥≤ϵ∥x∥ for all x∈F;
3. (c)
∥V0ψ(α)x−ρ(α)V0x∥≤ϵ∥x∥ for all α∈Ω and x∈F;
4. (d)
∣E0ρ(α)−ψ(α)E0∣x∗≤ϵ∥x∗∥ for all α∈Ω and x∈G; and
5. (e)
∥Pm1′V0x∥≤1+maxα∈Ω∥ρ(α)∥ϵ∥x∥ and ∥Pm1′V0ψ(α)x∥≤ϵ∥x∥ for all x∈F and α∈Ω.
Let N>m1′ be large enough so that
[TABLE]
for all x∈F and α∈Ω. By Lemma 3.2, there exists a finite rank diagonal operator A2 on lp with diagonal entries in [0,1] such that A2x=x for all x∈lp([1,N]) and
[TABLE]
for all α∈Ω. There exists m2>N such that A2x=0 for all x∈lp((m2,∞)).
Take V=(PN−Pm1′)V0 and E=E0(A2−A1). We have ∥V∥≤λ and ∥E∥≤1. Since m1<m1′<N<m2, the range of V is in lp([m1+1,m2]) and Ey=0 for all y∈lp([1,m1]∪(m2,∞)). So we obtain (i) and (v).
Since A1=0 on lp([m1′,∞)) and N>m1′, we have A1(PN−Pm1′)=0. Since A2=I on lp([1,N]) and N>m1′, we have
A2(PN−Pm1′)=PN−Pm1′. Therefore,
[TABLE]
Thus, for all x∈F, we have
[TABLE]
This proves (ii). For all α∈Ω and x∈F, we have
[TABLE]
This proves (iii). For all α∈Ω and x∗∈G, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, (iv) is proved.
∎
Lemma 6.2**.**
Let 0<ϵ<1. Suppose that T is an operator on a Banach space X and F is a finite dimensional subspace of X such that
[TABLE]
for all x∈F. Then there exists an invertible operator S on X such that ∥I−S−1∥≤1−ϵϵ and S−1Tx=x for all x∈F.
Proof.
Define an operator K:F→X by Kx=Tx−x for x∈F. By Auerbach’s lemma, we can extend K to an operator K∈B(X) so that
[TABLE]
Let S=I+K. Then S is an invertible operator on X such that ∥I−S−1∥≤1−ϵϵ and
[TABLE]
for all x∈F.
∎
The following result says that in Lemma 6.1, we can have equality in (ii) but with (i) being slightly weakened. This can be proved by replacing E in Lemma 6.1 by S−1E where S is obtained from Lemma 6.2 (for a different ϵ).
Lemma 6.3**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let X be a Banach space. Let ψ:Λ→B(X) and ρ:Λ→B(lp) be such that ψ≪λρ. Then for all numbers m1∈N and ϵ>0, finite subset Ω⊂Λ and finite dimensional subspaces F⊂X and G⊂X∗, there exist m2>m1 and operators V:X→lp and E:lp→X such that
(i)
∥V∥≤λ* and ∥E∥≤1+ϵ;*
2. (ii)
EVx=x* for all x∈F;*
3. (iii)
∥Vψ(α)x−ρ(α)Vx∥≤ϵ∥x∥* for all α∈Ω and x∈F;*
4. (iv)
∣Eρ(α)−ψ(α)E∣x∗≤ϵ* for all α∈Ω and x∗∈G; and*
5. (v)
Vx∈lp([m1+1,m2])* for all x∈X and Ey=0 for all y∈lp([1,m1]∪(m2,∞)).*
Lemma 6.4**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let X1,X2,… be Banach spaces. Let ρ:Λ→B(lp). For each i∈N, let ψi:Λ→B(Xi) be such that ψi≪λρ. Then ψ1⊕ψ2⊕…≪λρ.
Proof.
Fix numbers m1,j0∈N and ϵ>0 and a finite subset Ω⊂Λ. For each 1≤i≤j0, fix a finite dimensional subspace Fi⊂Xi. Consider the finite dimensional subspace
[TABLE]
of (X1⊕X2⊕…)lp and the finite dimensional subspace
[TABLE]
of the dual (X1∗⊕X2∗⊕…)lq of (X1⊕X2⊕…)lp, where p1+q1=1. It suffices to find V:(X1⊕X2⊕…)lp→lp and E:lp→(X1⊕X2⊕…)lp such that
(i)
∥V∥≤λ and ∥E∥≤1;
2. (ii)
∥EVx−x∥≤ϵ∥x∥ for all x∈(F1⊕…⊕Fj0)lp;
3. (iii)
∥V(ψ1(α)⊕ψ2(α)⊕…)x−ρ(α)Vx∥≤ϵ∥x∥ for all α∈Ω and x∈(F1⊕…⊕Fj0)lp;
4. (iv)
∣Eρ(α)−(ψ1(α)⊕ψ2(α)⊕…)E∣x∗≤ϵ∥x∗∥ for all α∈Ω and x∗∈(G1⊕…⊕Gj0)lq; and
5. (v)
Vx∈lp([m1,∞)) for all x∈(X1⊕X2⊕…)lp.
By using Lemma 6.1 recursively, we obtain integers m2<…<mj0+1 and operators Vi:Xi→lp and Ei:lp→Xi, for 1≤i≤j0, such that m2>m1 and for every 1≤i≤j0, we have
(a)
∥Vi∥≤λ and ∥Ei∥≤1;
2. (b)
∥EiVixi−xi∥≤j01ϵ∥xi∥ for all xi∈Fi;
3. (c)
∥Viψi(α)xi−ρ(α)Vixi∥≤j01ϵ∥xi∥ for all α∈Ω and xi∈Fi;
4. (d)
∣Eiρ(α)−ψi(α)Ei∣xi∗≤j01ϵ∥xi∗∥ for all α∈Ω and xi∗∈Gi; and
5. (e)
Vixi∈lp([mi+1,mi+1]) for all xi∈Xi and Eiy=0 for all y∈lp([1,mi]∪(mi+1,∞)).
Take
[TABLE]
for (x1,x2,…)∈(X1⊕X2⊕…)lp, and
[TABLE]
for y∈lp. For (x1,x2,…)∈(X1⊕X2⊕…)lp, since Vixi∈lp([mi+1,mi+1]) by (e),
[TABLE]
Thus, ∥V∥≤λ. For each m∈N, let Pm be the projection from lp onto lp([1,m]). Since Ei=Ei(Pmi+1−Pmi) by (e),
[TABLE]
So ∥E∥≤1. Hence we obtain (i).
Let x=(x1,…,xj0,0,0,…)∈(F1⊕…⊕Fj0)lp. Since Ei1Vi2=0 when i1=i2,
[TABLE]
So by (b),
[TABLE]
This proves (ii).
For x=(x1,…,xj0,0,0,…)∈(F1⊕…⊕Fj0)lp,
[TABLE]
so by (c),
[TABLE]
This proves (iii). For y∈lp,
[TABLE]
so by (d), for x∗=(x1∗,…,xj0∗,0,0,…)∈(G1⊕…⊕Gj0)lq,
[TABLE]
This proves (iv). By (e), we have Vixi∈lp([m1,∞)) for all x∈Xi and i∈N. So Vx∈lp([m1,∞)) for all x∈(X1⊕X2⊕…)lp. This proves (v).
∎
7. lp version of Voiculescu’s absorption theorem
Lemma 7.1**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let X be a Banach space that is either finite dimensional or λ-isomorphic to lp. Let ψ:Λ→B(X) and ρ:Λ→B(lp) be such that ψ≪λρ. Then for all ϵ>0 and finite subset Λ0⊂Λ, there exist operators L:X→lp and R:lp→X satisfying
(I)
∥L∥≤2λ2* and ∥R∥≤4λ(1+ϵ);*
2. (II)
Lψ(α)−ρ(α)L* is compact for all α∈Λ and has norm at most ϵ for all α∈Λ0;*
3. (III)
Rρ(α)−ψ(α)R* is compact for all α∈Λ and has norm at most ϵ for all α∈Λ0; and*
4. (IV)
RL=I.
Proof.
Fix ϵ>0 and finite subset Λ0⊂Λ. Let Ω−1⊂Ω0⊂Ω1⊂… be finite subsets of Λ such that ∪n=−1∞Ωn=Λ and Λ0⊂Ω−1.
By Lemma 3.4, there are finite rank operators A1,A2,… on X such that
(i)
n∈Nsup∥An∥≤λ;
2. (ii)
An→I in SOT, as n→∞;
3. (iii)
∥Anψ(α)−ψ(α)An∥≤2nϵ for all α∈Ωn and n≥−1;
4. (iv)
(An+1−An−2)(An−An−1)=An−An−1 for all n≥−1;
5. (v)
[TABLE]
6. (vi)
if (xn)n∈N is a sequence in X such that n=1∑∞∥xn∥p<∞, then
[TABLE]
By using Lemma 6.3 recursively, we obtain integers 1<m1<m2<… and operators Vn:X→lp and En:lp→X, for n∈N, such that for every n∈N, we have
(a)
∥Vn∥≤λ and ∥En∥≤1+ϵ;
2. (b)
EnVnx=x for all x in the range of An−An−1;
3. (c)
∥Vnψ(α)x−ρ(α)Vnx∥≤2nϵ∥x∥ for all α∈Ωn and x in the range of An−An−1;
4. (d)
∣Enρ(α)−ψ(α)En∣x∗≤2nϵ∥x∗∥ for all α∈Ωn and x∗ in the range of (An+1−An−2)∗; and
5. (e)
Vnx∈lp([mn+1,mn+1]) for all x∈X and Eny=0 for all y∈lp([1,mn]∪(mn+1,∞)).
Take
[TABLE]
for x∈X, and
[TABLE]
for y∈lp, where A0=A−1=0. For every x∈X,
[TABLE]
For each n∈N, let Pn be the projection from lp onto lp([1,n]). For every y∈lp,
[TABLE]
Thus (I) is proved.
For all α∈Ωn−1 and n∈N, we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Combining these two inequalities, we obtain
[TABLE]
for all α∈Ωn−1 and n∈N. For all α∈Λ and x∈X,
[TABLE]
Recall the properties of Ωn at the beginning of the proof. By (7.1),
[TABLE]
is finite for all α∈Λ and is at most 5λϵ for all α∈Λ0. Since
[TABLE]
has finite rank for every n∈N, it follows that Lψ(α)−ρ(α)L is compact for all α∈Λ and has norm at most 5λϵ for all α∈Λ0. Thus (II) is proved.
Let x∗∈X∗. Let n∈N. Let x1∗=(An+1−An−2)∗x∗. For all α∈Ωn−2,
is finite for all α∈Λ and has norm at most 7λ(1+ϵ)ϵ for all α∈Λ0. Since
[TABLE]
has finite rank for every n∈N, it follows that Rρ(α)−ψ(α)R is compact for all α∈Λ and has norm at most 7λ(1+ϵ)ϵ for all α∈Λ0. Thus (III) is proved.
By (e), we have En1Vn2=0 when n1=n2. So for every x∈X,
[TABLE]
Thus, (IV) is proved.
∎
Lemma 7.2**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let 1<p<∞. Let X be a Banach space that is either finite dimensional or λ-isomorphic to lp. Let ψ:Λ→B(X) and ρ:Λ→B(lp) be such that ψ≪λρ. Then for all ϵ>0 and finite subset Λ0⊂Λ, there exist a Banach space Y, an invertible operator S:X⊕Y→lp and a map ρ2:Λ→B(Y) such that
(i)
∥S∥≤2λ2+1* and ∥S−1∥≤(4λ+8λ3+1)(1+ϵ); and*
2. (ii)
ρ(α)−S(ψ(α)⊕ρ2(α))S−1* is compact for all α∈Λ and has norm at most ϵ for all α∈Λ0.*
Proof.
Let L:X→lp and R:lp→X be as in Lemma 7.1. Since RL=I, the operator LR is an idempotent on lp. Take Y to be the range of I−LR. Take S(x,y)=Lx+y for x∈X and y∈Y. It is easy to see that S−1z=(Rz,(I−LR)z) for z∈lp. Thus, by (I) in Lemma 7.1, we have ∥S∥≤2λ2+1 and ∥S−1∥≤(4λ+8λ3+1)(1+ϵ).
Take ρ2(α)y=(I−LR)ρ(α)y for y∈Y and α∈Λ. Then
[TABLE]
for all α∈Λ and z∈lp. Hence,
[TABLE]
for all α∈Λ. By (II) and (III) in Lemma 7.1, it follows that ρ(α)−S(ψ(α)⊕ρ2(α))S−1 is compact for all α∈Λ and has norm at most ϵ for all α∈Λ0.
∎
If P is an idempotent on lp then the range of P is either finite dimensional or isomorphic to lp.
If X is a Banach space and ψ:Λ→B(X) and ρ:Λ→B(lp) are maps such that ψ≪ρ, then there exist operators V:X→lp and E:lp→X such that ∥EV−I∥<1. Thus, EV∈B(X) is invertible and V(EV)−1E is an idempotent on lp. Moreover, V defines an invertible from X onto the range of this idempotent. Therefore, by Lemma 7.3, the space X is either finite dimensional or isomorphic to lp.
The following result is an lp version of Voiculescu’s absorption theorem where the notion of ≪λ is defined at the beginning of Section 6.
Theorem 7.4**.**
Let 1<p<∞. Let X1,X2,… be Banach spaces. Let Λ be a countable set. Let ρ:Λ→B(lp). Suppose that λ≥1 and for each i∈N, we have ψi:Λ→B(Xi) such that ψi≪λρ. Then ρ is approximately similar to ρ⊕ψ1⊕ψ2⊕….
Proof.
By Lemma 6.4, we have ψ1⊕ψ2⊕…≪ρ. So it suffices to show that ρ is approximately similar to ρ⊕ψ for all ψ:Λ→B(X) such that ψ≪ρ where X is any Banach space. As remarked above, ψ≪ρ automatically implies that X is either finite dimensional or isomorphic to lp.
By Lemma 6.4, if ψ≪ρ then ψ⊕ψ⊕…≪ρ. Let ϵ>0. Let Λ0 be a finite subset of Λ. By Lemma 7.2, there exist a Banach space Y and maps ρ2:Λ→B(Y) and κ:Λ→K(lp) such that ∥κ(α)∥≤ϵ, for all α∈Λ0, and ρ+κ is similar to (ψ⊕ψ⊕…)⊕ρ2, where (ρ+κ)(α)=ρ(α)+κ(α) for α∈Λ.
Note that (ψ⊕ψ⊕…)⊕ρ2 is similar to (ψ⊕ψ⊕…)⊕ρ2⊕ψ, which is similar to (ρ+κ)⊕ψ. Therefore, ρ+κ is similar to (ρ+κ)⊕ψ. So ρ is approximately similar to ρ⊕ψ.
∎
Let T1,T2∈B(lp). Let Λ be a singleton and define ψ1:Λ→B(lp) and ψ2:Λ→B(lp) by ψ1(α)=T1 and ψ2(α)=T2. We write T1≪T2 if ψ1≪ψ2. The operators T1,T2 are approximately similar if ψ1 and ψ2 are approximately similar. We can also define ≪ and the notion of approximate similarity for tuples of operators. The following result is the single operator version of Theorem 7.4.
Theorem 7.5**.**
Let T1 and T2 be operators on lp. If T1≪T2 then T2 is approximately similar to T2⊕T1⊕T1⊕….
Corollary 7.6**.**
Let U∈B(lp(N)) and B∈B(lp(Z)) be the unilateral and bilateral shifts, respectively, i.e.,
[TABLE]
for n∈N, and
[TABLE]
n∈Z. Then U is approximately similar to U⊕B⊕B⊕….
Proof.
Let P be the projection from lp(Z) onto lp(N). For n∈N, define operators Vn:lp(Z)→lp(N) and En:lp(N)→lp(Z) by
[TABLE]
for x∈lp(Z) and y∈lp(N). It is easy that (i) ∥Vn∥=∥En∥=1 for all n∈N, (ii) EnVn→I in SOT, as n→∞, (iii) VnB−UVn→0 in SOT, as n→∞, (iv) EnU=BEn for all n∈N and (v) Vn→0 in WOT, as n→∞. So B≪U. By Theorem 7.5, the result follows.
∎
Let X be a Banach space. Two operators T1,T2∈B(X) are norm approximately similar if there are invertible operators Sn:lp→lp, for n∈N, such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Corollary 7.7**.**
Let T1,T2∈B(lp). Suppose that T1 and T2 are norm approximately similar and that T1 is norm approximately similar to T1⊕T1⊕…. Then T1 and T2 are approximately similar.
Proof.
The operators T2 and T1⊕T1⊕… are norm approximately similar. So there are invertible operators Wn:lp→(lp⊕lp⊕…)lp such that n∈Nsup∥Wn∥ and n∈Nsup∥Wn−1∥ are finite and
[TABLE]
For each n∈N, let Jn:lp→(lp⊕lp⊕…)lp be the canonical embedding that maps lp onto the nth component of (lp⊕lp⊕…)lp and let Qn:(lp⊕lp⊕…)lp→lp be the canonical projection onto the nth component of (lp⊕lp⊕…)lp. Note that Jnx→0 weakly, as n→∞, for every x∈lp. So there are k1<k2<… such that Wn−1Jknx→0 weakly, as n→∞, for every x∈lp. For n∈N, define operators Vn:lp→lp and En:lp→lp by
[TABLE]
for x∈lp and y∈lp. It is easy to check that (i) supn∈N∥Vn∥ and supn∈N∥En∥ are finite, (ii) EnVn=I for all n∈N, (iii)
[TABLE]
as n→∞, (iv)
[TABLE]
as n→∞, and (v) Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞. Thus, T1≪T2. By Theorem 7.5, we have that T2 is approximately similar to T2⊕T1.
Since T1 and T2 are norm approximately similar and T1 is norm approximately similar to T1⊕T1⊕…, the operator T2 is norm approximately similar to T2⊕T2⊕…. Thus, interchanging the roles of T1 and T2 and applying the conclusion of the previous paragraph, we obtain that T1 is approximately similar to T1⊕T2. It follows that T1 and T2 are approximately similar.
∎
Lemma 7.8**.**
Let n∈N. For 0≤r≤n and k∈Z, let uk,r∈C. Assume that supk,r∣uk,r∣<∞. For each 0≤r≤n, let Dr be the diagonal operator on lp(Z) defined by Drek=ur,kek, for k∈Z. Let λ1,…,λn∈C. Then
[TABLE]
if and only if (λ0,…,λn) is in the closure of {(u0,k,…,un,k):k∈Z}.
Proof.
Let x=(xk)k∈Z∈lp(Z). We have
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
So the result follows.
∎
Corollary 7.9**.**
Let (uk)k∈Z and (vk)k∈Z be bounded two sided sequences in C. Let Du and Dv be their corresponding diagonal operators on lp(Z). Let B be the bilateral shift on lp(Z). Then the following statements are equivalent.
(1)
(Du,B)* is approximately similar to (Dv,B)*
2. (2)
The closures of {(uk,…,uk+n):k∈Z} and {(vk,…,vk+n):k∈Z} coincide for every n∈N.
Proof.
Suppose that (Du,B) is approximately similar to (Dv,B). Let n∈N. Then the (n+1)-tuples of operators
[TABLE]
are approximately similar. Note that
[TABLE]
for all 0≤r≤n and k∈Z. Observe that for λ0,…,λn∈C, the set of all (n+1)-tuples (D0,…,Dn) of diagonal operators on lp(Z) satisfying
[TABLE]
is invariant under approximate similarity. So using Lemma 7.8 with Dr=B−rDuB−r, for 0≤r≤n, and using Lemma 7.8 with Dr=B−rDvB−r, for 0≤r≤n, we obtain that for λ0,…,λn∈C, the tuple (λ0,…,λn) is in the closure of {(un,…,un+k):k∈Z} if and only if (λ0,…,λn) is in the closure of {(vk,…,vk+n):k∈Z}. This means that the closures of {(uk,…,uk+n):k∈Z} and {(vk,…,vk+n):k∈Z} coincide.
Conversely, suppose that the closures of {(uk,…,uk+n):k∈Z} and {(vk,…,vk+n):k∈Z} coincide for every n∈N. Let m∈N. Then (u−m,…,um) is in the closure of {(vk,…,vk+2m):k∈Z}. So there exists km∈Z such that
[TABLE]
Thus, ∣uj−vkm+j+m∣≤m1 for all −m≤j≤m. So there exist t1,t2,…∈Z such that ∣uj−vj+tm∣≤m1 for all −m≤j≤m and m∈N (take tm=km+m). So
[TABLE]
for all k∈Z.
Since t1,t2,…∈Z, passing to a subsequence, we have that either tm=t for all m∈N or ∣tm∣→∞ as m→∞. In the first case, uk=vk+t for k∈Z. We have Du=B−tDvBt and so (Du,B) and (Dv,B) are approximately similar. In the second case, for n∈N, consider operators Vn:lp(Z)→lp(Z) and En:lp(Z)→lp(Z) defined by Vn=Btn and En=B−tn. It is easy to check that (i) ∥Vn∥=∥En∥=1 for all n∈N, (ii) EnVn=I for all n∈N, (iii) VnB=BVn for all n∈N, (iv) EnB=BEn for all n∈N and (v) Vn→0 in WOT, as n→∞. This only gives that B≪B. But we want to show that (Du,B)≪(Dv,B). To obtain this, it suffices to show that VnDu−DvVn→0 in SOT and ∣EnDv−DuEn∣y∗→0, as n→∞, for every y∗∈lp(Z)∗.
For all k∈Z and n∈N, we have (VnDu−DvVn)ek=(uk−vk+tn)ek+tn so by (7.3), we have ∥(VnDu−DvVn)ek∥→0, as n→∞. Hence, VnDu−DvVn→0 in SOT, as n→∞.
Since
[TABLE]
and B−tnDvBtn−Du is a diagonal operator whose kth diagonal entry is vk+tn−uk, it follows that
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
for all numbers k∈Z and n∈N and y∈lp(Z). By (7.3), we deduce that ∣EnDvx−DuEn∣ek∗→0, as n→∞, and so ∣EnDv−DuEn∣y∗→0, as n→∞, for all y∗∈lp(Z)∗.
Therefore, (Du,B)≪(Dv,B). By Theorem 7.4, we have that (Dv,B) is approximately similar to (Dv⊕Du,B⊕B). Interchanging the roles of (un)n∈Z and (vn)n∈Z, we have that (Du,B) is approximately similar to (Du⊕Dv,B⊕B). But (Du⊕Dv,B⊕B) is similar to (Dv⊕Du,B⊕B). Therefore, (Du,B) is approximately similar to (Dv,B).
∎
The following result follows immediately from Corollary 7.9. The case p=2 was obtained in [25] (see also [24]).
Corollary 7.10**.**
Let (uk)k∈Z and (vk)k∈Z be bounded two sided sequences in C. Assume that the closures of {(uk,…,uk+n):k∈Z} and {(vk,…,vk+n):k∈Z} coincide for every n∈Z. Define operators Tu,Tv∈B(lp(Z)) by
[TABLE]
for k∈Z. Then Tu and Tv are approximately similar.
Remark**.**
If all un and vn are chosen independently from the same distribution μ on a compact subset of C, then the assumption of Corollary 7.10 is satisfied almost surely.
Corollary 7.11**.**
Let T∈B(lp). For each k∈N, let Pk be the projection from lp onto lp([1,k]). Consider the operator X on (⊕k=1∞lp([1,k]))lp,
[TABLE]
Then X is approximately similar to X⊕T⊕T⊕….
Proof.
For each n∈N, let Jn:lp([1,n])→(⊕k=1∞lp([1,k]))lp and Qn:(⊕k=1∞lp([1,k]))lp→lp([1,n]) be the canonical embedding and projection, respectively. Let Y=(⊕k=1∞lp([1,k]))lp. For n∈N, define operators Vn:lp→Y and En:Y→lp by
[TABLE]
for x∈lp and y∈Y. It is easy to see that
(i)
∥Vn∥=∥En∥=1 for all n∈N;
2. (ii)
EnVn=Pn→I in SOT, as n→∞;
3. (iii)
[TABLE]
for n∈N and x∈lp(Z), and so VnT−XVn→0 in SOT as n→∞;
4. (iv)
[TABLE]
and so ∣EnX−TEn∣y∗→0, as n→∞, for every y∗∈lp(Z)∗; and
5. (v)
Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞.
Therefore, T≪X. By Theorem 7.5, the result follows.
∎
Lemma 7.12**.**
Let G be a countable infinite group. Let H be an amenable subgroup of G. Consider the homomorphisms ψ:G→B(lp(G)) and ψH:G→B(lp(G/H)) defined by
[TABLE]
for s,g∈G. Then ψH≪1ψ.
Proof.
Case 1: H is infinite.
Since H is amenable, there is a Fønler sequence F1,F2,… for H. Let T be a collection of elements of G such that t1H=t2H, for all t1=t2 in T, and ∪t∈TtH=G (i.e., we pick a representative from each coset). For n∈N, define an operator Vn:lp(G/H)→lp(G) by
[TABLE]
for t∈T. Note that Vnet1H and Vnet2H have disjoint supports for all t1=t2 in T. So ∥Vn∥=1 for all n∈N.
For each finite subset F of G, let yF∗∈lp(G)∗,
[TABLE]
for x∈lp(G), and let PF be the projection from lp(G) onto lp(F). By Hölder’s inequality,
[TABLE]
for x∈lp(G). Also if F and F′ are finite subsets of G with ∣F∣=∣F′∣, then
for y∈lp(G). So ∥En∥≤1 for all n∈N. For every t∈T,
[TABLE]
So EnVn=I for all n∈N.
Fix s∈G. There exists a permutation σ on T such that stH=σ(t)H for all t∈T. Thus, there exists a map h:T→H such that st=σ(t)h(t) for all t∈T. Thus, for all t∈T,
for t∈T and y∈lp(G). Thus, ∣Enψ(s−1)−ψH(s−1)En∣etH∗→0, as n→∞, for every t∈T. Thus, ∣Enψ(s−1)−ψH(s−1)En∣y∗→0, as n→∞, for every y∗∈lp(G)∗. Finally, it is easy to see that Vn→0 in WOT, as n→∞. Therefore, ψH≪1ψ.
Case 2: H is finite.
Let s1,s2,… be distinct elements of G. For n∈N, define an operator Vn:lp(G/H)→lp(G) by
[TABLE]
for g∈G. For every finite subset F of G, let yF∗∈lp(G)∗,
[TABLE]
for x∈lp(G). For n∈N, define an operator En:lp(G)→lp(G/H) by
[TABLE]
for y∈lp(G). It is easy to check that (i) ∥Vn∥≤1 and ∥En∥≤1 for all n∈N, (ii) EnVn=I for all n∈N, (iii) VψH(s)=ψ(s)Vn for all n∈N, (iv) Enψ(s)=ψH(s)En for all n∈N and (v) Vn→0 in WOT, as n→∞. Therefore, ψH≪1ψ.
∎
Remark**.**
In Case 1, the fact that H is infinite implies that ∣Fn∣→∞ so that we have Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞. In Case 2, we put sn in the definition of Vn in (7.7) so that Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞.
Corollary 7.13**.**
Let G be a countable infinite group. Consider the homomorphism ψ:G→B(lp(G)) defined by ψ(s)eg=esg for s,g∈G. Let H1,H2,… be amenable subgroups of G such that ∩i=1∞∪n=i∞Hn is trivial. For k∈N, let G/Hk be the set of all left cosets of Hk in G and let ψk:G→B(lp(G/Hk)) be defined by ψk(s)egHk=esgHk for s,g∈G. Then ψ and ⊕k=1∞ψk are approximately similar.
Proof.
For each n∈N, let Jn:lp(G/Hn)→⊕k=1∞lp(G/Hk) and Qn:⊕k=1∞lp(G/Hk)→lp(G/Hn) be the canonical embedding and projection, respectively. Let Y=⊕k=1∞lp(G/Hk).
Since ∩i=1∞∪n=i∞Hn is trivial, there exist S1⊂S2⊂… in G such that ∪n=1∞Sn=G and g1Hn=g2Hn for all g1=g2 in Sn. For n∈N, define operators Vn:lp(G)→Y and En:Y→lp(G) by
[TABLE]
for g∈G and y∈Y.
(i)
We have ∥Vn∥=1, for all n∈N, and
[TABLE]
for n∈N and y∈Y. Thus, ∥En∥≤1 for all n∈N.
2. (ii)
Since EnVneg=eg for all g∈Sn, we have EnVn→I in SOT as n→∞.
3. (iii)
It is easy to see that Vnψ(s)eg=(⊕k=1∞ψk(s))Vneg for all group elements s∈G and g∈Sn∩s−1Sn and n∈N. Hence, Vnψ(s)−(⊕k=1∞ψk(s))Vn→0 in SOT, as n→∞, for all s∈G.
4. (iv)
For all group elements s∈G and g∈Sn∩sSn, point y∈Y and n∈N,
[TABLE]
So ∣En(⊕k=1∞ψk(s))−ψ(s)En∣eg∗→0, as n→∞, for all s,g∈G. Thus, ∣En(⊕k=1∞ψk(s))−ψ(s)En∣y∗→0, as n→∞, for all s,g∈G and y∗∈Y∗.
5. (v)
Clearly Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞.
Thus, ψ≪⊕k=1∞ψk. By Theorem 7.4, we have that ⊕k=1∞ψk is approximately similar to (⊕k=1∞ψk)⊕ψ. But by Lemma 7.12 and Theorem 7.4, we have that ψ is approximately similar to ψ⊕ψ1⊕ψ2⊕…. It follows that ⊕k=1∞ψk is approximately similar to ψ.
∎
Remark**.**
A consequence of Corollary 7.13 is that if G is a countable, residually finite, amenable group, then there exist finite rank idempotents P1,P2,… on lp(G) such that Pn→I in SOT and ∥Pnψ(g)−ψ(g)Pn∥→0, as n→∞, for every g∈G. An alternative way to prove this result is to use a technique of Orfanos [26]. Moreover, using this technique, we can have ∥Pn∥=1.
The following result follows from Corollary 7.13 by taking G=Z and Hn=nZ.
Corollary 7.14**.**
Let B be the bilateral shift on lp(Z). For each n∈N, let Bn be the circular shift on lp(Z/nZ), i.e., Bnej=ej+1 for j∈Z/nZ. Then B is approximately similar to B1⊕B2⊕….
Let p∈[1,∞]\{2}. Let B be the bilateral shift on lp(Z). Then there exist Laurent polynomials f1,f2,… such that sup∣v∣=1∣fn(v)∣=1, for all n∈N, and ∥fn(B)∥→∞ as n→∞.
Lemma 7.16**.**
Let U be the unilateral shift on lp(N). Let B be the bilateral shift on lp(Z). Let f be a Laurent polynomial. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
From the proof of Corollary 7.6, there exist isometries Vn:lp(Z)→lp(N), for n∈N, such that VnB−UVn→0 in SOT, as n→∞, and Vn→0 in WOT as n→∞. Let U−1 be the backward shift on lp(N). Then U−1U=I and so VnB−1−U−1Vn=U−1(UVn−VnB)B−1→0 in SOT as n→∞. Hence, for all a−m,…,am∈C,
[TABLE]
in SOT, as n→∞. Since Vn are isometries, for all x∈lp(Z) and K∈K(lp(Z)),
[TABLE]
where we used the fact that Vn→0 in WOT, as n→∞, in the last equality. So
[TABLE]
for every K∈K(lp(Z)). Thus, ∥f(B)∥≤∥f(π(U))∥ for every Laurent polynomial f.
Note that B is 1-similar to a rank one perturbation of U−1⊕U. So ∥f(π(U))∥≤∥f(π(B))∥. The inequality ∥f(π(B))∥≤∥f(B)∥ is trivial.
∎
Lemma 7.17**.**
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. The bilateral shift B on lp(Z) is not similar to a compact perturbation of a diagonal operator on lp.
Proof.
If B is similar to a compact perturbation of a diagonal operator on lp, then there exists C>0 such that ∥f(π(B))∥≤Csup∣v∣=1∣f(v)∣ for all Laurent polynomial f. By Lemma 7.16, we have ∥f(π(B))∥=∥f(B)∥. Thus, ∥f(B)∥≤Csup∣v∣=1∣f(v)∣. By Lemma 7.15, an absurdity follows.
∎
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. Let T be an invertible isometry on lp. Then T is the composition of a permutation operator and a diagonal operator with entries in the unit circle on C [22]. Since every permutation on N is a product of disjoint finitary cyclic permutations and “bilateral shift” permutations, T is 1-similar to the direct sum of weighted circular shifts (if any) and weighted bilateral shifts (if any), where the weights are in the unit circle. A weighted bilateral shift is an operator on lp(Z) of the form ej↦wjej+1, for j∈Z. A weighted circular shift is an operator on lp(Z/rZ) of the form ej↦wjej+1, for j∈Z/rZ, for some r∈N. Here the wj are called the weights.
Every weighted bilateral shift with weights in {v∈C:∣v∣=1} is 1-similar to the bilateral shift B (by using conjugations by certain diagonal operators). Every weighted circular shift with weights {v∈C:∣v∣=1} is 1-similar to vBn for some v∈C with ∣v∣=1 and n∈N, where Bn is the circular shift defined in Corollary 7.14. Thus every invertible isometry on lp is 1-similar to the direct sum of operators of the form B or vBn. For notational convenience, let B∞=B. We have
Lemma 7.18**.**
Let p∈[1,∞]\{2}. If T is an invertible isometry on lp, then there exist countable collections (ni)i∈C⊂N∪{∞} and (vi)i∈C⊂{v∈C:∣v∣=1} such that T is 1-similar to i∈C⨁viBni.
Lemma 7.19**.**
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. Let T0 be an invertible isometry on lp. Let B be the bilateral shift on lp(Z). Then B is approximately similar to B⊕T0.
Proof.
By Lemma 7.18, there exist countable collections (ni)i∈C⊂N∪{∞} and (vi)i∈C⊂{v∈C:∣v∣=1} such that T0 is 1-similar to i∈C⨁viBni. By Lemma 7.12, we have Bn≪1B, for all n∈N, and also B≪1B. So viBni≪1viB for all i∈C. But vB is 1-similar to B for every v∈C with ∣v∣=1. Thus, viBni≪1B. By Theorem 7.4, the result follows.
∎
Since the only invertible isometries on lp, for p=2, are compositions of permutation operators and diagonal operators, if T1,T2∈B(lp) are 1-similar and T1 is a diagonal operator, then T2 is also a diagonal operator. Here it is important that T1,T2 are 1-similar rather than just similar, e.g., every circular shift Bn is similar to a diagonal operator.
Lemma 7.20**.**
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. Let T be an invertible isometry on lp. Let B be the bilateral shift on lp(Z). If there exists r∈N such that Tr is a diagonal operator, then T is similar to a diagonal operator. If Tr is not a diagonal operator for any r∈N, then T is approximately similar to B.
Proof.
By Lemma 7.18, there exist countable collections (ni)i∈C⊂N∪{∞} and (vi)i∈C⊂{v∈C:∣v∣=1} such that T is 1-similar to i∈C⨁viBni. If there exists r∈N such that Tr is a diagonal operator, then supi∈Cni<∞. Since Bn is similar to a diagonal operator for every n∈N, it follows that T is similar to a diagonal operator.
Suppose that Tr is not a diagonal operator for any r∈N. Then supi∈Cni=∞. Thus, either (1) ni0=∞ for some i0∈C or (2) ni<∞ for all i∈C but supi∈Cni=∞.
In Case (1), T is 1-similar to B⊕(⨁i=i0viBni). Thus, taking T0=⨁i=i0viBniin Lemma 7.19, we have that B is approximately similar to B⊕T0, which is 1-similar to T.
In Case (2), there exists an infinite subset C0⊂C such that the ni, for i∈C0, are finite and distinct. So T is 1-similar to (⊕i∈C0viBni)⊕(⊕i∈C\C0viBni). Replacing C0 by a smaller subset, we may assume that v=limi∈C0vi exists, i.e., v=limi→∞vg(i) for any bijection g:N→C0.
From the proof of Corollary 7.13, we have B≪⊕i∈C0Bi. So vB≪⊕i∈C0vBi. Note that ⊕i∈C0vBi is a compact perturbation of ⊕i∈C0viBi. Thus, vB≪⊕i∈C0viBi. By Theorem 7.5, we have that ⊕i∈C0viBni is approximately similar (⊕i∈C0viBni)⊕vB. Therefore, T is approximately similar to T⊕vB, which is similar to T⊕B. So by Lemma 7.19, we have that T is approximately similar to B.
∎
Corollary 7.21**.**
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. Let T1 and T2 be invertible isometries on lp. Then T1 and T2 are approximately similar if and only if either
(1)
T1r* and T2r are not diagonal operators for any r∈N, or*
2. (2)
T1* and T2 have the same spectrum, dim ker(T1−λ)=dim ker(T2−λ) for all isolated point λ in the spectrum, and there exists r∈N such that T1r and T2r are diagonal operators.*
Proof.
Suppose that T1 and T2 are approximately similar. By Lemma 7.20, if there exists r∈N such that T1r is a diagonal operator, then T1 is similar to a diagonal operator. By Lemma 7.17, we have that T2 is not approximately similar to the bilateral shift B. By Lemma 7.20, there exists r∈N such that T2r is a diagonal operator. Thus, we have either (1) or (2). (In (2), if the r in T1r and the r in T2r are different, then we can replace them with their product.)
Conversely, if (1) is true then T1 and T2 are approximately similar (to B) by Lemma 7.20. If (2) is true then by Lemma 7.20, we have that T1 is similar to a diagonal operator D1 and T2 is similar to a diagonal operator D2. The operators D1 and D2 have the same spectrum and dim ker(D1−λI)=dim ker(D2−λI) for all isolated point λ in the spectrum. So D1 and D2 are approximately similar via conjugations by certain permutation operators. Thus the result follows.
∎
8. Examples of extensions of K(lp)
Let A be a separable unital Banach algebra. An isomorphic extension of K(lp) by A is a unital homomorphism ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) such that there exists C≥1 satisfying
[TABLE]
for all a∈A. Two isomorphic extensions ϕ1:A→B(lp)/K(lp) and ϕ2:A→B(lp)/K(lp) are (strongly) equivalent if there is an invertible operator S on lp such that ϕ2(a)=π(S)ϕ1(a)π(S)−1 for all a∈A. For each isomorphic extension ϕ of K(lp) by A, let [ϕ] be the equivalence class of isomorphic extensions of K(lp) by A containing ϕ.
If ϕ1:A→B(lp)/K(lp) and ϕ2:A→B(lp)/K(lp) are isomorphic extensions, define an isomorphic extension ϕ1⊕ϕ2:A→B(lp⊕lp)/K(lp⊕lp) by
[TABLE]
for a∈A, where we define π(T1)⊕π(T2)=π(T1⊕T2) for T1,T2∈B(lp). Thus, we can define an operation + on the set of all equivalence classes [ϕ] by [ϕ1]+[ϕ2]=[ϕ1⊕ϕ2]. The set of all equivalence classes of isomorphic extensions of K(lp) by A equipped with + forms a commutative semigroup EXT∼,s(A,K(lp)).
An isomorphic extension ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) is trivial if there is a unital homomorphism ρ:A→B(lp) such that ϕ=π∘ρ. The set of all equivalence classes [ϕ] for trivial isomorphic extensions ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) is a subsemigroup of EXT∼,s(A,K(lp)). The quotient of EXT∼,s(A,K(lp)) by this subsemigroup is denoted by Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)).
Example**.**
Let U and B be the unilateral and bilateral shifts on lp, respectively. Let A be the subalgebra of B(lp) generated by B and B−1. By Lemma 7.16, there is a unital homomorphism ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ(B)=π(U). Moreover, ∥ϕ(T)∥=∥T∥ for all T∈A. Thus, ϕ is an isomorphic extension. Since π(U) has nontrivial Fredholm index, ϕ is a nontrivial isomorphic extension. Thus, the semigroup Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is nontrivial.
In this section, we show that
for every separable closed unital subalgebra A of B(l2)/K(l2), there is an isomorphic extension ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ(a) and a have the same index for all invertible a∈A (Theorem 8.8);
2. 2.
as a consequence, for all nonempty compact subset M of C and numbers ni associated with each hole Oi of M, there is an isomorphic extension ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ(z−λ) has index ni for all λ∈Oi where z∈C(M) is the identity function (Corollary 8.10); and
3. 3.
if p=2, there are two trivial isomorphic extensions ϕ1:C[0,1]→B(lp)/K(lp) and ϕ2:C[0,1]→B(lp)/K(lp) that are not equivalent (Theorem 8.14).
Let X1,X2,… be Banach spaces. Let V be the vector space of all formal infinite matrix (Ti,j)i,j∈N such that
(1)
Ti,j is an operator from Xj into Xi for all i,j∈N,
2. (2)
supi,j∈N∥Ti,j∥<∞,
3. (3)
there exists r≥0 such that Ti,j=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r.
Let (Ti,j(1))i,j∈N,(Ti,j(2))i,j∈N∈V. Note that for all i,k∈N, the infinite summation ∑j∈NTi,j(1)Tj,k(2) contains only finitely many nonzero terms. Moreover, the infinite matrix (∑j∈NTi,j(1)Tj,k(2))i,k∈N is in V. So matrix multiplication is a well defined operation on V. Thus V becomes an algebra.
For each integer r≥0, let Vr be the set of all (Ti,j)i,j∈N in V such that Ti,j=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r. Note that V=∪r≥0Vr.
Lemma 8.1**.**
Let X1,X2,… be finite dimensional Banach spaces. Let X(p)=(⊕n∈NXn)lp. Let πp:B(X(p))→B(X(p))/K(X(p)) be the quotient map. For each k∈N, let Jk(p):Xk→(⊕n∈NXn)lp and Qk(p):(⊕n∈NXn)lp→Xk be the canonical embedding and projection, respectively. Then the map Φp:V→B(X(p)), defined by
[TABLE]
for (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈V, is a unital (algebra) homomorphism such that
(i)
for all integer r∈N and (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈Vr,
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
for every integer r∈N, the set Φp(Vr) consists of all operators T∈B(X(p)) such that Qi(p)TJj(p)=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r.
Proof.
That the sum ∑i,j∈NJi(p)Ti,jQj(p) converges in SOT unconditionally and that (i) is satisfied follow from Lemma 2.3. For (Ti,j(1))i,j∈N,(Ti,j(2))i,j∈N∈V and r,s∈N, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, Φp is a unital (algebra) homomorphism. Finally to prove (ii), note that if T∈Φp(Vr) then Qi(p)TJj(p)=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r. Conversely, if Qi(p)TJj(p)=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r, then setting Ti,j=Qi(p)TJj(p), for i,j∈N, we have T=ϕp[(Ti,j)i,j∈N]. Thus, the result follows.
∎
Let X1,X2,… be finite dimensional Banach spaces. Let X(2)=(⊕n∈NXn)l2. Let π2:B(X(2))→B(X(2))/K(X(2)) be the quotient map. For each k∈N, let Jk(2):Xk→(⊕n∈NXn)l2 and Qk(2):(⊕n∈NXn)l2→Xk be the canonical embedding and projection, respectively. Then the map Φ2:V→B(X(2)), defined by
[TABLE]
for (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈V, is a unital (algebra) homomorphism such that
(i)
for all integer r∈N and (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈Vr,
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
for every integer r∈N, the set Φ2(Vr) consists of all operators T∈B(X(2)) such that Qi(2)TJj(2)=0 for all ∣i−j∣>r.
Note that the algebra V depends only on X1,X2,… but not on p so the algebra V and the set Vr in Lemma 8.1 and Lemma 8.2 are the same.
Let B be a separable subalgebra of B(l2). Then there are 0=m1<m2<… such that T−∑k=1∞(Qk−1+Qk+Qk+1)TQk is compact for every T∈B, where Q0=0 and Qk is the canonical projection from l2 onto l2([mk+1,mk+1]).
Let 0=m1<m2<…. Note that in Lemma 8.2, if we take Xk=l2([mk+1,mk+1]) for k∈N, then X(2)=(⊕n∈Nl2([mn+1,mn+1]))l2=l2(N) and the projection Qk(2) coincides with the projection Qk in Lemma 8.3.
Lemma 8.4**.**
Let X(p)=(⊕n∈Nl2([mn+1,mn+1]))lp. Let U be the unilateral shift on l2. Let π2:B(l2)→B(l2)/K(l2) be the quotient map. Let A be a separable closed unital subalgebra of B(l2)/K(l2) containing π2(U). Then there exist 0=m1<m2<… and a unital homomorphism ϕ:A→B(X(p))/K(X(p)) such that
[TABLE]
for all a∈A, and ϕ(π2(U)) has Fredholm index −1.
Proof.
Let B=π2−1(A). By Lemma 8.3, there are 0=m1<m2<… such that T−∑k=1∞(Qk−1(2)+Qk(2)+Qk+1(2))TQk(2) is compact for every T∈B, where Qk(2) is the canonical projection from l2(N) onto l2([mk+1,mk+1]) and Q0(2)=0. In Lemma 8.1 and Lemma 8.2, take Xk=l2([mk+1,mk+1]) for k∈N. We have that the unital homomorphisms Φ2:V→B(X(2)) and Φp:V→B(X(p)), defined by
[TABLE]
for (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈V, satisfy
(i)
for all integer r∈N and (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈Vr,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
Φ2(V1) consists of all operators T∈B(X(2)) such that Qi(2)TJj(2)=0 for all ∣i−j∣>1.
So
[TABLE]
for all (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈Vr and integer r≥0. Thus, the map ϕ0:π2(Φ2(V))→B(X(p))/K(X(p)),
[TABLE]
for (Ti,j)i,j∈N∈V, is a well defined unital homomorphism that is bounded on π2(Φ2(Vr)) for each r≥0.
For every T∈B(l2),
[TABLE]
for all ∣i−j∣>1. So by (ii), the operator ∑k=1∞(Qk−1(2)+Qk(2)+Qk+1(2))TQk(2) is in Φ2(V1). Thus, from the beginning from this proof, every operator T∈B is the sum of a compact operator and an operator in Φ2(V1). Hence A⊂π2(Φ2(V1)).
Take ϕ to be the restriction of ϕ0 to A. By (8.2), we have 31∥a∥≤∥ϕ(a)∥≤3∥a∥ for all a∈A. Thus, (8.1) is proved. It remains to show that ϕ(π2(U))) has Fredholm index −1.
Let (es)s∈N be the canonical basis for X(2)=(⊕n∈Nl2([mn+1,mn+1]))l2=l2(N). Let (xs)s∈N be the canonical basis for X(p)=(⊕n∈Nl2([mn+1,mn+1]))lp, i.e., for each n∈N, we have that (xs)mn+1≤s≤mn+1 is the canonical basis for l2([mn+1,mn+1]). Since Ues=es+1 for every s∈N, we have that Qi(2)UJj(2)=0 for all ∣i−j∣>1. So by (ii), we have that U∈Φ2(V1). Thus there exists (Ti,j(0))i,j∈N∈V1 such that Φ2[(Ti,j(0))i,j∈N]=U. It is easy to see that if U(p)=Φp[(Ti,j(0))i,j∈N] then U(p)xs=xs+1 for every s∈N. Thus ϕ(π2(U))=ϕ0(π2(U))=πp(Φp[(Ti,j(0))i,j∈N])=πp(U(p)) has Fredholm index −1.
∎
Let X be a Banach space. For every k∈Z, the set of all invertible T∈B(X)/K(X) with Fredholm index k is open.
Lemma 8.7**.**
Let X(p)=(⊕n∈Nl2([mn+1,mn+1]))lp. Let A be a separable closed unital subalgebra of B(l2)/K(l2). Then there exist 0=m1<m2<… and a unital homomorphism ϕ:A→B(X(p))/K(X(p))such that
[TABLE]
for all a∈A, and ϕ(a) and a have the same Fredholm index for every a∈A that is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2).
Proof.
Let C be a countable dense subset of the set of all a∈A that is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2). Let U be the unilateral shift on l2. Let π2:B(l2)→B(l2)/K(l2) be the quotient map. By Lemma 8.5, for every a∈C, there is a path fa:[0,1]→B(l2)/K(l2) such that
(1)
fa(0)=a;
2. (2)
fa(1)=π2(U−ind a); and
3. (3)
fa(t) is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2) for all t∈[0,1],
where ind a is the Fredholm index of a. Since fa is continuous, {fa(t):t∈[0,1]} is separable.
Let A1 be the closed subalgebra of B(l2)/K(l2) generated by A, π2(U), π2(U)−1 and fa(t) for a∈C and t∈[0,1]. Note that A1 is separable. By Lemma 8.4, there exist 0=m1<m2<… and a unital homomorphism ϕ1 from A1 into B(X(p))/K(X(p)) such that (8.3) is satisfied and ϕ1(π2(U)) has Fredholm index −1.
Let a∈C. Then ϕ1∘fa is a path in the set of all invertible elements of B(X(p))/K(X(p)). By Lemma 8.6, the subset {t∈[0,1]:ind ϕ1(fa(t))=ind ϕ1(fa(0))} of [0,1] is closed and open in [0,1]. Thus ϕ1(fa(1)) and ϕ1(fa(0)) have the same Fredholm index. Since ϕ1(fa(0))=ϕ1(a) and
[TABLE]
it follows that ϕ1(a) and a have the same Fredholm index. Thus the Fredholm indices of ϕ1(a) and a coincide for all a∈C. Since C is dense in the set of all a∈A that is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2), the Fredholm indices of ϕ1(a) and a coincide for all a∈A that is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2). The result follows by taking ϕ to be the restriction of ϕ1 to A.
∎
Combining Lemmas 8.7 and 5.7, we obtain the following result.
Theorem 8.8**.**
Let A be a separable closed unital subalgebra of B(l2)/K(l2). Then there exist a unital homomorphism ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) and C≥1 such that
[TABLE]
for all a∈A, and ϕ(a) and a have the same Fredholm index for every a∈A that is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2).
Corollary 8.9**.**
Let A be a separable closed unital subalgebra of B(l2)/K(l2). Then there exists an isomorphic extension of K(lp) by A.
Corollary 8.10**.**
Let M be a nonemepty compact subset of C. Let O1,O2,… be the bounded connected components of C\M. For each i∈N, let ni∈Z. Let z∈C(M) be the identity function on M. Then there exists an isomorphic extension ϕ:C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ(z−λ) has Fredholm index ni for all λ∈Oi and i∈N.
Proof.
Brown, Douglas and Fillmore [10] showed that there exists an isomorphic extension ϕ1:C(M)→B(l2)/K(l2) such that ϕ1(z−λ) has Fredholm index ni for all λ∈Oi and i∈N. Let A be the range of ϕ1. By Theorem 8.8, there is an isomorphic extension ϕ2:A→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ2(a) and a have the same Fredholm index for every a∈A that is invertible in B(l2)/K(l2). The result follows by taking ϕ=ϕ2∘ϕ1.
∎
Corollary 8.11**.**
There exist a Fredholm operator T∈B(lp) and C≥1 such that the Fredholm index of T is −1 and
[TABLE]
for every Laurent polynomial f.
Proof.
By Corollary 8.10, there exists a unital homomorphism ϕ:C(S1)→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ(z) has Fredholm index −1. Note that
[TABLE]
for every Laurent polynomial f. The result follows by taking T∈B(lp) such that π(T)=ϕ(z).
∎
Remark**.**
An explicit operator satisfying the conclusion of Corollary 8.11 can be constructed as follows. Let 0=m1<m2<… be such that ms+1−ms→∞ as s→∞. Let (xs)s∈N be the canonical basis for X(p)=(⊕n∈Nl2([mn+1,mn+1]))lp. From the proof of Lemma 8.4, one can check that the operator T0 on X(p) defined by T0xs=xs+1, for s∈N, has Fredholm index −1 and
[TABLE]
for every Laurent polynomial f. Let S:X(p)→lp be an invertible operator which exists by Lemma 5.7. Then ST0S−1 satisfies the conclusion of Corollary 8.11.
Next we show that if p∈(1,∞)\{2} then there are two trivial isomorphic extensions of K(lp) by C[0,1] that are not equivalent.
Lemma 8.12**.**
Let T be a diagonal operator on l2([1,n]) with distinct diagonal entries u1,…,un. Let D be a diagonal operator on lp. Let β≥1. Let L:l2([1,n])→lp be an operator such that β1∥x∥≤∥Lx∥≤β∥x∥ for all x∈l2([1,n]). Let ϵ=mini=j∣ui−uj∣. Then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let (ei(2))1≤i≤n be the canonical basis for l2([1,n]). Let (ej(p))j∈N be the canonical basis for lp. Let v1,v2,… be the diagonal entries of D. We have Tei(2)=uiei(2), for all 1≤i≤n, and Dej(p)=vjej(p) for all j∈N. For each 1≤i≤n, let Ji={j∈N:∣vj−ui∣<2ϵ} (which could be empty). Note that J1,…,Jn are disjoint. For each 1≤i≤n, let Pi be the canonical projection from lp onto lp(Ji). For all 1≤i≤n and x=(x1,x2,…)∈(I−Pi)lp=lp(N\Ji),
[TABLE]
Hence ∥(D−uiI)(I−Pi)x∥≥2ϵ∥(I−Pi)x∥ for all 1≤i≤n and x∈lp. Thus,
[TABLE]
for all 1≤i≤n, where the first equality follows from the fact that D and Pi commute. So
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. For each n∈N, let Tn be the diagonal operator on l2([1,n]) with diagonal entries n1,…,nn. Let (nk)k∈N be a sequence in N such that every natural number appears in the sequence n1,n2,… infinitely many times. Let X=(⊕k∈Nl2([1,nk]))lp. Consider the operator T=⊕k∈NTnk on X. Let D be a diagonal operator on lp. Then there is no operator L:X→lp such that inf{∥Lx∥:∥x∥=1}>0 and DL−LT is compact.
Proof.
Suppose, for contradiction, that there is an operator L:X→lp such that inf{∥Lx∥:∥x∥=1}>0 and DL−LT is compact. Let β≥1 be such that β1∥x∥≤∥Lx∥≤β∥x∥ for all x∈X. For each i∈N, let Ji:l2([1,ni])→(⊕k∈Nl2([1,nk]))lp be the canonical embedding. We have β1∥x∥≤∥(LJi)x∥≤β∥x∥ for all x∈l2([1,ni]). Since DL−LT is compact, ∥D(LJi)−(LJi)Tni∥=∥(DL−LT)Ji∥→0 as i→∞.
for all i∈N. Since ∥D(LJi)−(LJi)Tni∥→0 as i→∞ and every natural number appears in n1,n2,… infinitely many times, it follows that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all n∈N. An absurdity follows since p=2.
∎
If T is an operator on a Banach space X0 and there is a constant C≥1 such that
[TABLE]
for every polynomial f, then we can define a unital homomorphism ρ:C[0,1]→B(X0) by setting ρ(z)=T where z∈C[0,1] is the identity function on [0,1].
Theorem 8.14**.**
Let p∈(1,∞)\{2}. There exist trivial isomorphic extensions ϕ1,ϕ2 of K(lp) by C[0,1] that are not equivalent. Moreover, [ϕ1]=[ϕ2]+[ϕ3] for every isomorphic extension ϕ3 of K(lp) by C[0,1].
Proof.
Let T and X be as in Lemma 8.13. Let D be a diagonal operator on lp whose entries are dense in [0,1]. Each of T and D has spectrum [0,1] and
[TABLE]
for every polynomial f. Let S:X→lp be an invertible operator which exists by Lemma 5.7. Define unital homomorphisms ρ1,ρ2 from C[0,1] into B(lp) by setting ρ1(z)=STS−1 and ρ2(z)=D. Take ϕ1=π∘ρ1 and ϕ2=π∘ρ2. By the conclusion of Lemma 8.13, we have that T⊕T0 is not similar to a compact perturbation of D for any operator T0 on any Banach space X0. So ρ1(z)⊕T0 is not similar to a compact perturbation of ρ2(z) for any operator T0 on any Banach space X0. By taking X0={0}, we have that ϕ1 and ϕ2 are not equivalent. By taking X0=lp and π(T0)=ϕ3(z), we have that [ϕ1]=[ϕ2]+[ϕ3].
∎
9. Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is a group for certain A
Let Λ be a set. Let X and Yn, for n∈N, be Banach spaces. Let ψ:Λ→B(X) and ηn:Λ→B(Yn), for n∈N, be maps. Let λ≥1. We write ψ≺λ(ηn)n∈N if there exist operators Vn:lp→Yn and En:Yn→lp, for n∈N, such that
(i)
∥Vn∥e≤λ for all n∈N;
2. (ii)
∥En∥e≤1 for all n∈N;
3. (iii)
limn→∞∥Vnψ(α)−ρ(α)Vn∥e=0 for every α∈Λ;
4. (iv)
limn→∞∥Enρ(α)−ψ(α)En∥e=0 for every α∈Λ; and
5. (v)
limn→∞∥EnVn−I∥e=0.
Note that in (i) and (ii), we can have ∥Vn∥≤λ and ∥En∥≤1 by replacing Vn by (1−n1)Vn(I−Pn) and En by (1−n1)(I−Pn)En for some finite rank operator Pn on lp.
Lemma 9.1**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let ψ:Λ→B(lp). For n∈N, let Yn be a Banach space and let ηn:Λ→B(Yn). Suppose that ψ≺λ(ηn)n∈N. Then there exist operators L:lp→(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp and R:(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp→lp such that
(I)
∥L∥≤2λ* and ∥R∥≤4;*
2. (II)
Lψ(α)−(⊕n=1∞ηn(α))L* is compact for all α∈Λ;*
3. (III)
R(⊕n=1∞ηn(α))−ψ(α)R* is compact for all α∈Λ; and*
4. (IV)
RL−I* is compact.*
Proof.
There exist operators Vn:lp→Yn and En:Yn→lp, for n∈N, such that ∥Vn∥≤λ and ∥En∥≤1, for all n∈N, and (iii)-(v) are satisfied. Let Ω1⊂Ω2⊂… be finite subsets of Λ such that ∪n=1∞Ωn=Λ. By Lemma 3.2, there is a refined diagonal approximate identity (An)n∈N on lp such that
[TABLE]
for all α∈Ωn and n∈N. Since An→0 in SOT, as n→∞, passing to a subsequence of (An)n∈N, we have
(a)
∥Vn∥≤λ;
2. (b)
∥En∥≤1;
3. (c)
∥(Vnψ(α)−ηn(α)Vn)(An−An−1)∥≤2n1 for every α∈Ωn;
4. (d)
∥(An+1−An−2)(Enηn(α)−ψ(α)En)∥≤2n1 for every α∈Ωn; and
5. (e)
∥(EnVn−I)(An−An−1)∥≤2n1,
for all n≥3. Since (An)n∈N is a refined diagonal approximate identity, by Lemma 3.3 and (9.1),
(1)
∥Anψ(α)−ψ(α)An∥≤2n1 for all α∈Ωn and n∈N;
2. (2)
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp; and
3. (3)
if (xn)n∈N is a sequence in lp such that n=1∑∞∥xn∥p<∞, then
[TABLE]
For each n∈N, let Jn:Yn→(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp and Qn:(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp→Yn be the canonical embedding and projection, respectively. Take
[TABLE]
for x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
for y∈(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp. For x∈lp,
[TABLE]
For y∈(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp,
[TABLE]
Thus, (I) is proved.
Let α∈Λ. Since Ω1⊂Ω2⊂… and ∪n=1∞Ωn=Λ, there exists n0≥2 such that α∈Ωn for all n≥n0. For n≥n0+1,
[TABLE]
By (c), we have ∥(Vnψ(α)−ηn(α)Vn)(An−An−1)∥≤2n1 for n≥n0. Therefore,
[TABLE]
for all n≥n0+1. Thus,
[TABLE]
for every α∈Λ. For x∈lp and α∈Λ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since Vn(An−An−1)ψ(α)−ηn(α)Vn(An−An−1) has finite rank for n≥3, by (9.2), Lψ(α)−(⊕n=1∞ηn(α))L is compact for all α∈Λ. So (II) is proved.
Let α∈Λ. There exists n0∈N such that α∈Ωn for all n≥n0. For n≥n0+2,
[TABLE]
By (d), we have ∥(An+1−An−2)(Enηn(α)−ψ(α)En)∥≤2n1 for all n≥n0. Therefore,
[TABLE]
for every α∈Λ. For y∈(Y1⊕Y2⊕…)lp and α∈Λ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Therefore, Rη(α)−ψ(α)R is compact for all α∈Λ. So (III) is proved.
For x∈lp,
[TABLE]
and since (An)n∈N is a refined diagonal approximate unit on lp,
[TABLE]
By (e), we have ∥(EnVn−I)(An−An−1)∥≤2n1 for n≥3. Therefore, RL−I is compact. So (IV) is proved.
∎
Lemma 9.2**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let ψ:Λ→B(lp) and η:Λ→B(lp). Let λ≥1. Suppose that there exist operators L,R∈B(lp) such that
(I)
∥L∥≤λ* and ∥R∥≤λ;*
2. (II)
Lψ(α)−η(α)L* is compact for all α∈Λ;*
3. (III)
Rη(α)−ψ(α)R* is compact for all α∈Λ; and*
4. (IV)
RL−I* is compact.*
Then there exist a Banach space Y, an invertible operator S:lp⊕Y→lp⊕lp and a map ζ:Λ→B(Y) such that
(i)
∥S∥≤λ+2* and ∥S−1∥≤2λ2+6λ+5; and*
2. (ii)
η(α)⊕η(α)−S(ψ(α)⊕ζ(α))S−1* is compact for all α∈Λ.*
Proof.
There exists m∈N such that ∥(RL−I)(I−P)∥≤21 where P is the projection from lp onto lp([1,m]). Define L1:lp→lp⊕lp and R1:lp⊕lp→lp by
[TABLE]
for x∈lp and y1,y2∈lp. We have
(a)
∥L1∥≤λ+1 and ∥R1∥≤λ+1;
2. (b)
L1ψ(α)−(η(α)⊕η(α))L1 is compact for all α∈Λ;
3. (c)
R1(η(α)⊕η(α))−ψ(α)R1 is compact for all α∈Λ; and
4. (d)
R1L1−I is compact and has norm at most 21.
Since ∥R1L1−I∥≤21, the operator R1L1 is invertible and ∥(R1L1)−1∥≤2. Define L2:lp→lp⊕lp and R2:lp⊕lp→lp by L2=L1 and R2=(R1L1)−1R1. Then
(1)
∥L2∥≤λ+1 and ∥R2∥≤2λ+2;
2. (2)
L2ψ(α)−(η(α)⊕η(α))L2 is compact for all α∈Λ;
3. (3)
R2(η(α)⊕η(α))−ψ(α)R2 is compact for all α∈Λ; and
4. (4)
R2L2=I.
The rest of this proof proceeds in the same way as the proof of Lemma 7.2. The operator L2R2 is an idempotent on lp⊕lp. Take Y to be the range of I−L2R2. Take S(x,y)=L2x+y for x∈lp and y∈Y. Then S−1z=(R2z,(I−L2R2)z) for z∈lp⊕lp. We have ∥S∥≤λ+2 and ∥S−1∥≤(2λ+2)+(λ+1)(2λ+2)+1. Take ζ(α)=(I−L2R2)(η(α)⊕η(α))∣Y for α∈Λ. It is easy to check that η(α)⊕η(α)−S(ψ(α)⊕ζ(α))S−1 is compact for all α∈Λ.
∎
Lemma 9.3**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. Let λ≥1. Let ψ:Λ→B(lp). For n∈N, let Yn be a Banach space and let ηn:Λ→B(Yn). Suppose that ψ≺λ(ηn)n∈N and (⊕n=1∞Yn)lp is λ-isomorphic to lp. Then there exist a Banach space Y and a map ζ:Λ→B(Y) such that ⊕n=1∞(ηn⊕ηn) is (2500λ4)-similar to ψ⊕ζ modulo compact operators.
Proof.
Let W:(⊕n=1∞Yn)lp→lp be an invertible operator such that ∥W∥≤1 and ∥W−1∥≤λ. Let L:lp→(⊕n=1∞Yn)lp and R:(⊕n=1∞Yn)lp→lp be obtained by applying Lemma 9.1. Then
(I)
∥WL∥≤2λ and ∥RW−1∥≤4λ;
2. (II)
WLψ(α)−(W(⊕n=1∞ηn(α))W−1)WL is compact for all α∈Λ;
3. (III)
RW−1(W(⊕n=1∞ηn(α))W−1)−ψ(α)RW−1 is compact for all α∈Λ; and
4. (IV)
(RW−1)(WL)−I is compact.
Taking η(α)=W(⊕n=1∞ηn(α))W−1, for α∈Λ, in Lemma 9.2, we have that there exist a Banach space Y and a map ζ:Λ→B(Y) such that η⊕η is (2500λ3)-similar to ψ⊕ζ modulo compact operators. But η⊕η is λ-similar to ⊕n=1∞(ηn⊕ηn). Thus, the result follows.
∎
Lemma 9.4**.**
Let d∈N. Let M be a nonempty compact subset of Rd. Let ψ:C(M)→B(lp) be a map such that π∘ψ:C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) is a unital homomorphism. Let Ω be a finite subset of C(M). Let M0 be a dense subset of M. Let ϵ>0. There exist k∈N, points w1,…,wk∈M0, operators V:lp→(lp)u⊕k and E:(lp)u⊕k→lp such that
(i)
∥V∥e≤∥π∘ψ∥* and ∥E∥e≤2d∥π∘ψ∥;*
2. (ii)
EV−I* is compact;*
3. (iii)
∥Vψ(h)−η(h)V∥e≤ϵ* for all h∈Ω; and*
4. (iv)
∥Eη(h)−ψ(h)E∥e≤ϵ* for all h∈Ω,*
where η(h)=(h(w1)I⊕…⊕h(wk)I)u for h∈C(M).
Proof.
Let γ>0 be such that
[TABLE]
for all v,w∈M with distance at most γ and h∈Ω. By Lemma 2.5, there exist a partition of unity (fi)1≤i≤k on M and continuous functions gi:M→[0,1], for 1≤i≤k, such that
(1)
the diameter of the support of gi is at most γ for every 1≤i≤k,
2. (2)
every v∈M is contained in at most 2d of suppg1,…,suppgk,
3. (3)
gi=1 on the support of fi for every 1≤i≤k.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that each fi is not a zero function. Thus, suppgi has nonempty interior. Since M0 is dense, there exists wi∈M0∩suppgi.
Take
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
for all (y1,…,yk)∈(lp)u⊕k.
Since (fi)1≤i≤k is a partition of unity on M, we have ∥∑i=1kδifi∥≤1 for all δ∈{−1,1}k. So
[TABLE]
for all δ∈{−1,1}k. So by Lemma 5.4, we have ∥V∥e≤∥π∘ψ∥.
By (2), we have ∥∑i=1kδigi∥≤2d for all δ∈{−1,1}k. Thus,
[TABLE]
for all δ∈{−1,1}k. So by Lemma 5.4, we have ∥E∥e≤2d∥π∘ψ∥. Thus, (i) is proved.
By (3), we have gifi=fi for all 1≤i≤k. Since EV=i=1∑kψ(gi)ψ(fi), it follows that
[TABLE]
Hence, (ii) is proved.
Since wi is in the support of gi, by (1) and (9.4), we have ∣h(v)−h(wi)∣≤2dϵ for all v in suppgi and h∈Ω. By (2), we have ∑i=1kgi≤2d and so
[TABLE]
Since 0≤fi≤gi, we also have
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
for all v∈M. So
[TABLE]
for all h∈Ω. Note that
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
for all y1,…,yk∈lp. By (9.5) and Lemma 5.4, we obtain (iii) and (iv).
∎
Modulo some technicalities, the following result follows by combining Lemmas 9.3 and 9.4.
Theorem 9.5**.**
Let d∈N. Let M be a nonempty compact subset of Rd. Then Ext∼,s(C(M),K(lp)) is a group.
Proof.
It suffices to show that for every isomorphic extension ϕ:C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp), there exists an isomorphic extension ϕ(−1):C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ⊕ϕ(−1):C(M)→B(lp⊕lp)/K(lp⊕lp) is a trivial isomorphic extension. Let ψ:C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) be any map such that π∘ψ=ϕ. Let Λ be a countable dense subset of C(M). By Lemmas 9.4 and 5.2, there exist k1,k2,…∈N and unital homomorphisms ηn:C(M)→B((lp)u⊕kn)/K((lp)u⊕kn), for n∈N, such that ψ∣Λ≺λ(ηn∣Λ)n∈N where λ=2d∥ϕ∥2. By Lemma 5.8, we have that (⊕n=1∞(lp)u⊕kn)lp is isomorphic to lp. By Lemma 9.3, there exist a Banach space Y and a map ζ:Λ→B(Y) such that ⊕n=1∞(ηn∣Λ⊕ηn∣Λ) is similar to (ψ∣Λ)⊕ζ modulo compact operators. Since ⊕n=1∞(ηn⊕ηn) is a unital homomorphism and Λ is dense in C(M), it follows that we can extend ζ to ζ:C(M)→B(Y) so that ⊕n=1∞(ηn⊕ηn) is similar to ψ⊕ζ modulo compact operators. In particular, π∘ζ is a unital homomorphism.
Let ζ0:C(M)→B(lp) be defined by sending h∈C(M) to the diagonal operator on lp with entries h(w1),h(w2),… where (wn)n∈N is a fixed sequence that is dense in M and each wn occurs infinitely many times. Then ⊕n=1∞(ηn⊕ηn)⊕ζ0 is similar to ψ⊕ζ⊕ζ0 modulo compact operators.
Note that ⊕n=1∞(ηn⊕ηn)⊕ζ0 is a unital homomorphism and so π∘(ψ⊕ζ⊕ζ0) is a trivial isomorphic extension. Since Y is isomorphic to the range of an idempotent on lp, by Lemma 7.3, the direct sum Y⊕lp is isomorphic to lp. Let S:Y⊕lp→lp be any invertible operator. Define ψ(−1):C(M)→B(lp) by ψ(−1)(h)=S(ζ(h)⊕ζ0(h))S−1 for h∈C(M). Then π∘ψ(−1):C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) is an isomorphic extension. Since π∘(ψ⊕ζ⊕ζ0) is a trivial isomorphic extension, (π∘ψ)⊕(π∘ψ(−1)) is a trivial isomorphic extension. The result follows.
∎
Lemma 9.6**.**
Let G be a countable amenable group. Let X=(⊕g∈Glp)lp. Define θ:G→B(X) by
[TABLE]
for s∈S and (yg)g∈G∈X. Let ψ:G→B(lp) be a map such that π∘ψ is a unital (group) homomorphism and sups∈G∥ψ(s)∥<∞. Let F0 be a finite subset of G. Let ϵ>0. Then there exist operators V,E∈B(lp) such that
(i)
∥V∥e≤sups∈G∥ψ(s)∥* and ∥E∥≤sups∈G∥ψ(s)∥;*
2. (ii)
EV−I* is compact;*
3. (iii)
∥Vψ(s)−θ(s)V∥e≤ϵ* for all s∈F0; and*
4. (iv)
∥Eθ(s)−ψ(s)E∥e≤ϵ* for all s∈F0.*
Proof.
For each s∈G, let Js:lp→X be the canonical embedding that maps lp onto component s of X=(⊕g∈Glp)lp and let Qs:X→lp be the canonical projection from X=(⊕g∈Glp)lp onto its component s. Since G is amenable, there is a nonempty finite subset F of G such that
[TABLE]
for all s0∈F0. Let p1+q1=1. Take
[TABLE]
for x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
for y∈X. We have
[TABLE]
for x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
where the first inequality follows from Hölder’s inequality. Thus, (i) is proved.
We have
[TABLE]
Since π∘ψ is a unital homomorphism, EV−I is compact. So (ii) is proved.
Modulo some technicalities, the following result follows by combining Lemmas 9.3 and 9.6.
Theorem 9.7**.**
Let G be a countable amenable group. Let ω:G→B(lp(G)) be the left regular representation, i.e., ω(s)eg=esg for s,g∈G, where (eg)g∈G is the canonical basis for lp(G). Let A be the subalgebra of B(lp(G)) generated by {ω(s):s∈G}. Then Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) is a group.
Proof.
It suffices to show that for every isomorphic extension ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp), there exists an isomorphic extension ϕ(−1):A→B(lp)/K(lp) such that ϕ⊕ϕ(−1):A→B(lp⊕lp)/K(lp⊕lp) is a trivial isomorphic extension. Let ψ:A→B(lp) be any map such that π∘ψ=ϕ and ∥ψ(a)∥≤∥ψ(a)∥e+1=∥ϕ(a)∥+1 for all a∈A. Then sups∈G∥ψ∘ω(s)∥≤∥ϕ∥+1<∞. By Lemma 9.6, we have ψ∘ω≺λ(θ)n∈N where λ=(∥ϕ∥+1)2.
By Lemma 9.3, there exist a Banach space Y and a map ζ:G→B(Y) such that ⊕n=1∞(θ⊕θ) is similar to (ψ∘ω)⊕ζ modulo compact operators. Note that θ is 1-similar to ω⊕ω⊕…. Thus, there is a unital isometric homomorphism η:A→B(lp) such that η(ω(s))=θ(s) for all s∈G. Therefore, ⊕n=1∞(η∘ω⊕η∘ω) is similar to (ψ∘ω)⊕ζ modulo compact operators. Since A is generated by {ω(s):s∈G} and η is a unital homomorphism, it follows that there is a map ζ:A→B(Y) such that ⊕n=1∞(η⊕η) is similar to ψ⊕ζ modulo compact operators. (In particular, π∘ζ is a unital homomorphism.) Thus, ⊕n=1∞(η⊕η) is similar to ψ⊕(ζ⊕η) modulo compact operators.
By Lemma 7.3, the direct sum Y⊕lp is isomorphic to lp. Let S:Y⊕lp→lp be any invertible operator. Define ψ(−1):A→B(lp) by ψ(−1)(a)=S(ζ(a)⊕η(a))S−1 for a∈A. Then π∘ψ(−1):A→B(lp)/K(lp) is an isomorphic extension. Therefore, (π∘ψ)⊕(π∘ψ(−1)) is a trivial isomorphic extension. The result follows.
∎
Corollary 9.8**.**
Suppose that either A=C(M), for some compact subset M of a Euclidean space, or A is the subalgebra of B(lp) generated by the range of the left regular representation of a countable amenable group G. Let ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) be a unital homomorphism. Then there exist L,R∈B(lp) and a unital homomorphism η:A→B(lp) such that ϕ(a)=π(Rη(a)L) and η(a)LR−LRη(a) is compact for all a∈A.
Proof.
For each a∈A, let ψ(a)∈B(lp) be such that π(ψ(a))=ϕ(a). By Theorems 9.5 and 9.7, there exist a unital homomorphism η:A→B(lp), a map ψ(−1):A→B(lp)/K(lp) and an invertible operator S:lp⊕lp→lp such that η(a)−S(ψ(a)⊕ψ(−1)(a))S−1 modulo compact operators. Let Q be the projection from lp⊕lp onto lp⊕0. Take L=S∣lp⊕0 and R=QS−1. Then ψ(a)−Rη(a)L and η(a)LR−LRη(a) are compact for all a∈A. So the result follows.
∎
10. Homotopy invariance of Ext∼,s(A,K(lp))−1
We write (lp)(∞)=(lp⊕lp⊕…)lp and for T∈B(lp), we write T(∞)=T⊕T⊕….
Lemma 10.1**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with diagonal entries in [0,1]. Let ϵ>0. Let k≥ϵ1 be an integer. Then there exist operators V:lp→k+1lp⊕…⊕lp and E:k+1lp⊕…⊕lp→lp such that
(i)
∥V∥≤2* and ∥E∥≤2;*
2. (ii)
EV=I;
3. (iii)
∥VA−(k0I⊕…⊕kkI)V∥≤ϵ* and VT−(T⊕…⊕T)V is compact;*
4. (iv)
∥E(k0I⊕…⊕kkI)−AE∥≤ϵ* and E(T⊕…⊕T)−TE is compact; and*
5. (v)
V=(I⊕f(A)⊕…⊕f(A))V* and E=E(I⊕f(A)⊕…⊕f(A)),*
for all T∈B(lp) such that TA−AT is compact and for all f∈C[0,1] such that f(t)=1 for all 5k2≤t≤1.
Proof.
For 1≤i≤k+1, let Ui=(ki−1.6,ki−0.4). Note that (Ui)1≤i≤k+1 is an open cover of [0,1]. Let (fi)1≤i≤k+1 be a partition of unity on [0,1] subordinate to (Ui)1≤i≤k+1. For each 1≤i≤k+1, let gi:[0,1]→[0,1] be a continuous function such that suppgi⊂Ui and gi=1 on suppfi.
Take
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
for all y1,…,yk+1∈lp.
Let a1,a2,… be the diagonal entries of A. Every t∈[0,1] is contained in at most 2 of the sets U1,…,Uk+1. Note that
[TABLE]
and suppfi(A)⊂suppgi(A) for all 1≤i≤k+1. Therefore, every j∈N is contained in at most 2 of the sets suppf1(A),…,suppfk+1(A) and every j∈N is contained in at most 2 of the sets suppg1(A),…,suppgk+1(A). By Lemma 2.2, we have ∥V∥≤2 and ∥E∥≤2. Thus, (i) is proved.
Since gifi=fi for all 1≤i≤k+1, we have EV=i=1∑k+1gi(A)fi(A)=i=1∑k+1fi(A)=I. Hence, (ii) is proved.
Since ∣t−ki−1∣≤k1≤ϵ for all t∈Ui and suppfi⊂suppgi⊂Ui,
[TABLE]
Note that
[TABLE]
for all x∈lp, and
[TABLE]
for all y1,…,yk+1∈lp. By (10.1) and Lemma 2.2, we obtain
[TABLE]
If T is an operator on lp such that TA−AT is compact, then Tfi(A)−fi(A)T and Tgi(A)−gi(A)T are compact for all 1≤i≤k+1. Thus, VT−(T⊕…⊕T)V and E(T⊕…⊕T)−TE are compact. So (iii) and (iv) are proved.
For 2≤i≤k+1, we have Ui⊂(k0.4,∞) and so
[TABLE]
Thus, fi(A)=f(A)fi(A) and gi(A)=gi(A)f(A) for all 2≤i≤k+1 and f∈C[0,1] such that f(t)=1 for all 5k2≤t≤1. So (v) is proved.
∎
Lemma 10.2**.**
Let A be a diagonal operator on lp with diagonal entries in [0,1]. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B(lp)/K(lp). Let Λ be a set. For α∈Λ, let hα:[0,1]→B be a π(A)-continuous function. For t∈[0,1], let ρt:Λ→B(lp). Let W1,W2∈B(lp) be such that W2W1=I and ∥W1∥=∥W2∥=1. Suppose that
(a)
(π(W1)hα(t)−π(ρt(α)W1))π(A)=0* and π(A)(π(W2ρt(α))−hα(t)π(W2))=0 for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ; and*
2. (b)
π(W1)hα(0)=π(ρ0(α)W1)* and π(W2ρ0(α))=hα(0)π(W2) for all α∈Λ.*
Let ξ:Λ→B(lp) be a map such that π∘ξ(α)=hα(π(A)) for α∈Λ. Then ξ≺4(⊕r=0kρkr)k∈N.
Proof.
By Lemma 10.1, there exist operators Vk:lp→k+1lp⊕…⊕lp and Ek:k+1lp⊕…⊕lp→lp, for k∈N, such that
(i)
∥Vk∥≤2 and ∥Ek∥≤2 for all k∈N;
2. (ii)
EkVk=I for all k∈N;
3. (iii)
limk→∞∥VkA−(k0I⊕…⊕kkI)Vk∥=0 and VkT−(T⊕…⊕T)Vk is compact for all k∈N;
4. (iv)
limk→∞∥Ek(k0I⊕…⊕kkI)−AEk∥=0 and Ek(T⊕…⊕T)−TEk is compact for all k∈N; and
5. (v)
Vk=(I⊕f(A)⊕…⊕f(A))Vk and Ek=Ek(I⊕f(A)⊕…⊕f(A)),
for all T∈B(lp) such that TA−AT is compact and for all f∈C[0,1] such that f(t)=1 for all 5k2≤t≤1. For each α∈Λ, since hα is π(A)-continuous, there exists a continuous function hα:[0,1]→B such that (hα(t)−hα(t))π(A)=0, for all t∈[0,1], and hα(0)=hα(0). Since hα can approximated by B-simple functions, by (iii) and (iv), we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all α∈Λ. For k∈N, fix fk∈C[0,1] such that fk(0)=0 and fk(t)=1 for all 5k2≤t≤1. Since fk(0)=0, by (a), we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ. Since (hα(t)−hα(t))π(A)=0 and fk(0)=0, we have
By definition, hα(π(A))=hα(π(A)). By (i), we have ∥(π(W1)⊕…⊕π(W1))π(Vk)∥≤2 and ∥π(Ek)(π(W1)⊕…⊕π(W1))∥≤2 for all k∈N. By (ii),
[TABLE]
for all k∈N. Therefore, ξ≺4(⊕r=0kρkr)k∈N.
∎
Lemma 10.3**.**
Let W1,W2∈B(lp) be such that W2W1=I and ∥W1∥=∥W2∥=1. Let Λ be a countable set. For t∈[0,1], let ψt:Λ→B(lp) and ρt:Λ→B(lp). Suppose that
(a)
t↦π∘ψt(α)* is a continuous function from [0,1] to B(lp)/K(lp) for every α∈Λ;*
2. (b)
W1ψt(α)−ρt(α)W1* and W2ρt(α)−ψt(α)W2 are compact for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ; and*
3. (c)
W1ψ0(α)=ρ0(α)W1* and W2ρ0(α)=ψ0(α)W2.*
Then there are rational numbers u1,u2,… such that ψ1⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk) is (25002⋅48)-similar to ⊕k∈Nρuk modulo compact operators.
Proof.
Since t↦π∘ψt(α) is continuous for all α∈Λ, the set {π(ψt(α)):t∈[0,1],α∈Λ} in B(lp)/K(lp) is separable. By Lemma 3.2, there are finite rank diagonal operators A1,A2,… on lp with diagonal entries in [0,1] such that
(i)
∥Anψt(α)−ψt(α)An∥→0, as n→∞, for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ; and
2. (ii)
supp(I−A1)⊃supp(I−A2)⊃ and ∩n=1∞supp(I−An)=∅.
Replacing the sequence A1,A2,… by A1,21A1+21A2,A2,32A2+31A3,31A2+32A3,A3,43A3+41A4,…, we may assume that ∥An−An+1∥→0 as n→∞.
Take A=(I−A1)⊕(I−A2)⊕…. By (i), we have that A(ψt(α)(∞))−(ψt(α)(∞))A is compact for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ. Let B be the commutant of π(A) in B((lp)(∞))/K((lp)(∞)). For α∈Λ, define hα:[0,1]→B by hα(t)=π(ψt(α)(∞)) for t∈[0,1]. We claim that hα is π(A)-continuous. For n∈N, let Pn be the projection from lp onto lp(supp(I−An)). Then Pn→0 in SOT as n→∞. Note that P=P1⊕P2⊕… is the projection from lp⊕lp⊕… onto lp(suppA). By (a), the map t↦π(ψt(α)(∞)P) from [0,1] to B(lp)/K(lp) is continuous for every α∈Λ. Thus,
[TABLE]
defines a continuous function from [0,1] to B((lp)(∞))/K((lp)(∞)). As explained above, π(A) commutes with π(ψt(α)(∞)) for all t∈[0,1]. Since P is the projection onto lp(suppA), we have AP=A=PA. So π(A) commutes with hα(t) and
[TABLE]
Also hα(0)=π(ψ0(α)(∞))=hα(0). Therefore, hα:[0,1]→B is a π(A)-continuous function.
Since I−An→0 in SOT, by (b), the operators
(W1(∞)ψt(α)(∞)−ρt(α)(∞)W1(∞))A and A(W2(∞)ρt(α)(∞)−ψt(α)(∞)W2(∞)) are compact. So
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By (c), we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Let ξ:Λ→B((lp)(∞)) be a map such that π∘ξ(α)=hα(π(A)) for α∈Λ. By Lemma 10.2, we have ξ≺4(⊕r=0kρkr)k∈N. By Lemma 9.3, there are rational numbers u1,u2,… in [0,1], a Banach space Y and a map ζ:Λ→B(Y) such that ⊕k∈Nρuk is (2500⋅44)-similar to ξ⊕ζ modulo compact operators.
Since ∥An−An+1∥→0 as n→∞, the operator A−I⊕A is compact so π(A)=π(I)⊕π(A) commute. Since hα(t)=π(ψt(α))⊕hα(t) for all t∈[0,1], by Lemma 4.6, we have hα(π(A))=hα(π(I)⊕π(A))=π(ψ1(α))⊕hα(π(A)). So ξ and ψ1⊕ξ coincide modulo compact operators. So ξ⊕ζ and ψ1⊕ξ⊕ζ coincide modulo compact operators. Therefore, from the conclusion of the previous paragraph, ⊕k∈Nρuk is (25002⋅48)-similar to ψ1⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk) modulo compact operators.
∎
Theorem 10.4**.**
Let Λ be a countable set. For t∈[0,1], let ψt:Λ→B(lp), ζt:Λ→B(lp) and ρt:Λ→B(lp⊕lp). Suppose that
(a)
t↦π∘ψt(α)* is a continuous function from [0,1] to B(lp)/K(lp) for every α∈Λ; and*
2. (b)
ρt(α)−(ψt(α)⊕ζt(α))* is compact for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ.*
Then there are rational numbers u1,u2,… such that ψ1⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk) is (25002⋅48)-similar to ψ0⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk) modulo compact operators.
Proof.
Define W∈B(lp⊕lp⊕lp⊕lp) by
[TABLE]
for x1,x2,x3,x4∈lp. For t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ, let κ0(α)=ρ0(α)−(ψ0(α)⊕ζ0(α))∈K(lp⊕lp),
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Define W1:lp⊕lp→lp⊕lp⊕lp⊕lp and W2:lp⊕lp⊕lp⊕lp→lp⊕lp by
[TABLE]
for x1,x2,x3,x4∈lp. Since ρt(α)−(ψt(α)⊕ζ0(α)⊕ψ0(α)⊕ζt(α)) is compact, by (b), we have that W1ψt(α)−ρt(α)W1 and W2ρt(α)−ψt(α)W2 are compact for all t∈[0,1] and α∈Λ. Also since ψ0(α)=ρ0(α)∈B(lp⊕lp), we have W1ψ0(α)=ρ0(α)W1 and W2ρ0(α)=ψ0(α)W2 for all α∈Λ. Note that t↦π∘ψt(α) is continuous for every α∈Λ. By Lemma 10.3, it follows that there are rational numbers u1,u2,… in [0,1] such that ψ1⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk) is (25002⋅48)-similar to ⊕k∈Nρuk modulo compact operators. Thus, ψ1⊕ζ0⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk)⊕(⊕k∈Nρ0) is (25002⋅48)-similar to (⊕k∈Nρuk)⊕(⊕k∈Nρ0) modulo compact operators. Since ψ0⊕ζ0 and ρ0 coincide modulo compact operators, it follows that ψ1⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk)⊕(⊕k∈Nρ0) is (25002⋅48)-similar to ψ0⊕(⊕k∈Nρuk)⊕(⊕k∈Nρ0) modulo compact operators.
∎
Corollary 10.5**.**
Let U and B be the unilateral and bilateral shifts on lp, respectively. Then there are rational numbers u1,u2,… in [0,1] such that U⊕(⊕k∈NukB) is similar to a compact perturbation of ⊕k∈NukB.
Proof.
Let U−1 be the backward shift on lp. Then U⊕U−1 is similar to a rank one perturbation of B. In Theorem 10.4, take Λ to be a singleton, take ψt(α)=tU, take ζt(α)=tU−1 and take ρt(α)=tB. The result follows.
∎
With the notation at the beginning of Section 8, for a unital Banach algebra A that is isomorphic to a subalgebra of lp, if ϕ:A→B(lp)/K(lp) is an isomorphic extension, we denote the image of [ϕ] in Ext∼,s(A,K(lp)) by [[ϕ]].
Let A1,A2 be unital Banach algebras that are isomorphic to subalgebras of B(lp). If τ:A1→A2 is a unital homomorphism, ϕ:A2→B(lp)/K(lp) is an isomorphic extension and θ:A1→B(lp)/K(lp) is a trivial isomorphic extension, then the map (ϕ∘τ)⊕θ:A1→B(lp)/K(lp), defined as a↦ϕ(τ(a))⊕θ(a), is an isomorphic extension. The map [[ϕ]]→[[(ϕ∘τ)⊕θ]] is a well defined homomorphism from the semigroup Ext∼,s(A2,K(lp)) into the semigroup Ext∼,s(A1,K(lp)). We denote this homomorphism by τ∗
Corollary 10.6**.**
Let A1,A2 be separable unital Banach algebra that is isomorphic to subalgebras of B(lp). Let ϕ:A2→B(lp)/K(lp) be an isomorphic extension such that [[ϕ]] is invertible in Ext∼,s(A2,K(lp)). For t∈[0,1], let τt:A1→A2 be a unital homomorphism. Suppose that t↦τt(a) is a continuous function from [0,1] to A2 for every a∈A1. Then (τ1)∗[[ϕ]]=(τ0)∗[[ϕ]].
Proof.
Let Λ be a countable dense subset of A1. For t∈[0,1], let ψt:Λ→B(lp) be any map such that π∘ψt(a)=ϕ∘τt(a) for all a∈Λ. Since [[ϕ]] is invertible in Ext∼,s(A2,K(lp)), there exist an isomorphic extension ϕ(−1):A2→B(lp)/K(lp) and a unital homomorphism ρ:A2→B(lp⊕lp)/K(lp⊕lp) such that ϕ(a)⊕ϕ(−1)(a)=π∘ρ(a) for a∈A2. By Theorem 10.4, there are rational numbers u1,u2,… in [0,1] such that ψ1⊕(⊕k∈Nρ∘τuk∣Λ) is similar to ψ0⊕(⊕k∈Nρ∘τuk∣Λ) modulo compact operators. Since Λ is dense in A1, it follows that (ϕ∘τ1)⊕(⊕k∈Nρ∘τuk) is similar to (ϕ∘τ0)⊕(⊕k∈Nρ∘τuk) modulo compact operators. Since ⊕k∈Nρ∘τuk is a unital homomorphism from A1 to B((lp)(∞)), we conclude that (τ1)∗[[ϕ]]=(τ0)∗[[ϕ]].
∎
Corollary 10.7**.**
Let M be a contractible subset of a Euclidean space. Let ϕ:C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) be an isomorphic extension. Then there is a trivial isomorphic extension θ:C(M)→B(lp)/K(lp) such that [θ]=[ϕ]+[θ].
Proof.
By Theorem 9.5, the semigroup Ext∼,s(C(M),K(lp)) is a group. Since M is contractible, by Corollary 10.6, this group is trivial. So the result follows.
∎
Acknowledgements: The author is grateful to William B. Johnson for useful discussions.
Bibliography34
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] C. Apostol, Commutators on l p superscript 𝑙 𝑝 l^{p} -spaces , Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl. 17 (1972), 1513-1534.
2[2] C. Apostol, Commutators on c 0 subscript 𝑐 0 c_{0} -spaces and on l ∞ subscript 𝑙 l_{\infty} -spaces , Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl. 18 (1973), 1025-1032.
3[3] C. Apostol, C. Foias and D. Voiculescu, Some results on non-quasitriangular operators IV , 18 (1973), 487-514.
4[4] C. Apostol and D. Voiculescu, Quasitriangularity in Banach space. II , Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl. 20 (1975), 171-179.
5[5] W. Arveson, Notes on extensions of C ∗ superscript 𝐶 C^{*} -algebras , Duke Math. J. 44 (1977), 329-355.
6[6] I. D. Berg, An extension of the Weyl-von Neumann theorem to normal operators , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 160 (1971), 365-371.
7[7] M. T. Boedihardjo, A coordinate free characterization of certain quasidiagonal operators Indiana Univ. Math. J. 64 (2015), 515-531.
8[8] M. T. Boedihardjo, Multiplication operators on L p superscript 𝐿 𝑝 L^{p} , Studia Math. 244 (2019), 309-319.