C*-algebras from actions of congruence monoids
on rings of algebraic integers
Chris Bruce
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
University of Victoria
Victoria, BC V8W 3R4
Canada
[email protected]
Abstract.
Let K be a number field with ring of integers R. Given a modulus m for K and a group Γ of residues modulo m, we consider the semi-direct product R⋊Rm,Γ obtained by restricting the multiplicative part of the full ax+b-semigroup over R to those algebraic integers whose residue modulo m lies in Γ, and we study the left regular C*-algebra of this semigroup. We give two presentations of this C*-algebra and realize it as a full corner in a crossed product C*-algebra. We also establish a faithfulness criterion for representations in terms of projections associated with ideal classes in a quotient of the ray class group modulo m, and we explicitly describe the primitive ideals using relations only involving the range projections of the generating isometries; this leads to an explicit description of the boundary quotient.
Our results generalize and strengthen those of Cuntz, Deninger, and Laca and of Echterhoff and Laca for the C*-algebra of the full ax+b-semigroup.
We conclude by showing that our construction is functorial in the appropriate sense; in particular, we prove that the left regular C*-algebra of R⋊Rm,Γ embeds canonically into the left regular C*-algebra of the full ax+b-semigroup. Our methods rely heavily on Li’s theory of semigroup C*-algebras.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 46L05; Secondary 11R04.
Research supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada through an Alexander Graham Bell CGS-D award.
This work was done as part of the author’s PhD project at the University of Victoria.
1. Introduction
1.1. Historical context
Cuntz pioneered the study of C*-algebras associated with ax+b-semigroups over the ring Z in [Cun]; his work was motivated by the construction of Bost and Connes in [Bo-Co].
Cuntz introduced a C*-algebra QN defined using generators and relations involving the additive group of Z and the multiplicative semigroup N×:=N∖{0}. The C*-algebra QN can be canonically (and faithfully) represented on ℓ2(Z), QN is simple and purely infinite, and admits a unique KMS state for a canonical time evolution, see [Cun]. Cuntz showed that QN can be realized as a full corner in the crossed product C*-algebra for the action of the ax+b-group Q⋊Q+∗ on the ring AQ,f of finite adeles over Q and then discussed its K-theory.
Another C*-algebra QZ was defined in [Cun] using an analogous presentation but with the larger multiplicative semigroup Z×:=Z∖{0} of all non-zero integers in place of N×.
Laca and Raeburn initiated the study of Toeplitz algebras in this context, see [La-Rae3]. They showed that the semigroup N⋊N× is quasi-lattice ordered, and they studied phase transitions for a canonical time evolution on its left regular C*-algebra Cλ∗(N⋊N×) (which they called the “Toeplitz algebra” of N⋊N×). They also exhibited Cuntz’s QN as the boundary quotient of Cλ∗(N⋊N×). In a subsequent paper, Laca and Neshveyev parameterized the Nica spectrum of N⋊N× in terms of an adelic space and computed the type of each equilibrium state at high temperature, see [La-Nesh].
Building on [Cun], Cuntz and Li introduced the so-called ring C*-algebras in [Cun-Li1] (see also [Li1]). In particular, given a ring of integers R in a number field K, Cuntz and Li defined a C*-algebra A[R] using generators and relations generalizing those used in [Cun] to define QZ, so that for the ring Z, their construction gave the C*-algebra QZ. They showed that A[R] also has a canonical (and faithful) representation on ℓ2(R), and proved that A[R] is simple and purely infinite. They gave a description of A[R] as a canonical full corner in the crossed product for the action of the ax+b-group K⋊K× on the ring AK,f of finite adeles over K, and used this description to make a connection with Bost-Connes type systems for arbitrary number fields as defined in [L-L-N].
The problem of computing the K-theory of A[R] was particularly difficult; it was solved in the case that K has only two roots of unity by Cuntz and Li in [Cun-Li2] using a duality theorem for global fields, and then in full generality by Li and Lück in [Li-Lü].
Cuntz, Deninger, and Laca defined Toeplitz algebras associated with rings of integers of arbitrary number fields in [C-D-L]. Given a number field K with ring of integers R, they defined a C*-algebra T[R] using generators and relations similar to those used to define A[R], but without certain “tightness” relations. They proved that T[R] is canonically isomorphic to the left regular C*-algebra Cλ∗(R⋊R×) of the ax+b-semigroup R⋊R× where the multiplicative semigroup R×:=R∖{0} acts on (the additive group of) R by multiplication.
In [C-D-L], the left regular C*-algebra of R⋊R× is denoted by T and is called the “Toeplitz algebra” of R⋊R×.
Cuntz, Deninger, and Laca studied phase transitions for a canonical time evolution on Cλ∗(R⋊R×), and they proved that the associated C*-dynamical system exhibits several interesting properties. They gave a description of Cλ∗(R⋊R×) as a full corner in a crossed product for an action of the ax+b-group K⋊K× on a certain adelic space, and proved that their construction was functorial for inclusions of rings of integers. They also showed that the ring C*-algebra A[R] of R appeared naturally as a quotient of Cλ∗(R⋊R×).
Since [C-D-L] appeared, the C*-algebras of ax+b-semigroups over rings of algebraic integers have been studied intensively. They inspired Neshveyev to prove a powerful general result on KMS states for groupoid C*-algebras, see [Nesh], where Neshveyev also gives an alternative approach to proving the phase transition theorem from [C-D-L].
These C*-algebras also provided a motivating class of examples for Li’s theory of semigroup C*-algebras developed in [Li1, Li2] (see also [C-E-L-Y, Chapter 5]).
In [Ech-La], Echterhoff and Laca developed general results on primitive ideal spaces of crossed products, then used these results to compute the primitive ideal space of Cλ∗(R⋊R×). Cuntz, Echterhoff, and Li proved a general formula for the K-theory of a large class of semigroup C*-algebras in [C-E-L1, C-E-L2] which, as a particular case, gives a formula for the K-theory of Cλ∗(R⋊R×). They also showed in [C-E-L1] that Cλ∗(R⋊R×) is purely infinite, has the ideal property, but does not have real rank zero.
Building on these works, Li gave an explicit description of the primitive ideals in Cλ∗(R⋊R×) in [Li4] and used K-theoretic invariants to show that one can recover the Dedekind zeta function of K from Cλ∗(R⋊R×), provided that one knows the number of roots of unity in K. Continuing his investigation, Li showed in [Li5] that one can recover both the Dedekind zeta function of K and the ideal class group Cl(K) of K from Cλ∗(R⋊R×) together with its canonical diagonal sub-C*-algebra. Li also studied the semigroup C*-algebras of ax+b-semigroups for more general classes of rings in [Li6], where he showed that some of the results on ideal structure, pure infiniteness, and K-theory can be generalized; in [Li7], he gives an alternative approach to pure infiniteness of these ax+b-semigroup C*-algebras using partial transformation groupoids.
Recently, Laca and Warren in [La-War] have used Neshveyev’s characterization of traces on crossed products from [Nesh, Section 2] to describe the low temperature KMS equilibrium states from the phase transition theorem in [C-D-L] in terms of ergodic invariant measures for groups of linear toral automorphisms. As a result, this revealed a connection with the generalized Furstenberg conjecture in ergodic theory.
1.2. Overview of the construction
In this paper, we generalize the construction from [C-D-L] by considering the C*-algebras of a larger class of semigroups. The construction of these semigroups depends not only on a number field K, but also on additional number-theoretic data that arise naturally in the study of the ray class fields of K, that is, in class field theory.
Namely, given a number field K with ring of integers R, a modulus m for K, and a group Γ of residues modulo m, the associated congruence monoid Rm,Γ is the multiplicative monoid of algebraic integers in R that reduce to an element of Γ modulo m. We form the semi-direct product R⋊Rm,Γ where Rm,Γ acts on R by multiplication, and investigate the left regular C*-algebra of this semigroup.
We formulate and prove the appropriate generalizations of several of the results mentioned above for the full ax+b-semigroup. In addition, we give a new faithfulness criterion for representations, see Section 6.
We now briefly explain our construction in the special case of the number field K=Q, see Section 3 for a detailed discussion of the general case. Let PQ denote the set of rational prime numbers, and let w be the unique embedding w:Q↪R. A modulus for Q is a function m:{w}⊔PQ→N such that m(w)∈{0,1} and m(p)=0 for all but finitely many primes p∈PQ. Denote by m the positive integer ∏p∈PQpm(p). The multiplicative group of residues modulo m is (Z/m)∗:={±1}×(Z/mZ)∗ where (Z/mZ)∗ is the multiplicative group of invertible elements in the ring Z/mZ. For a∈Z such that gcd(a,m)=1, the residue of a modulo m is
[TABLE]
where sign(a):=a/∣a∣. Dealing with moduli allows us to speak of congruence relations that can involve positivity conditions.
Let Γ⊆(Z/m)∗ be a subgroup, and let
[TABLE]
where Z×:=Z∖{0}.
Since Γ is a group, Zm,Γ is a unital semigroup under multiplication. Such semigroups are called congruence monoids, see [HK, Definition 5] and [G-HK].
Notice that Zm,Γ is a disjoint union of arithmetic progressions; for example, if Γ is the trivial group, then Zm,Γ=1+mN.
We form the semi-direct product semigroup Z⋊Zm,Γ with respect to the action of Zm,Γ on (the additive group of) Z given by multiplication. The left regular C*-algebra of Z⋊Zm,Γ is the sub-C*-algebra of B(ℓ2(Z⋊Zm,Γ)) generated by the isometries λ(b,a) for (b,a)∈Z⋊Zm,Γ defined via the left translation action of Z⋊Zm,Γ on itself.
In this article, we study C*-algebras of semigroups of this kind and their analogues for general number fields.
It is very natural to consider C*-algebras associated with semigroups of the form R⋊M where M is a subsemigroup of R×. For K=Q and R=Z, such C*-algebras have already been considered in two special cases: Larsen and Li in [Lar-Li] considered the 2-adic ring C-algebra* associated with the semigroup Z⋊[2⟩ where [2⟩:={1,2,22,23,...}, and Barlak, Omland, and Stammeier in [B-O-S] considered C*-algebras associated with semigroups of the form Z⋊M where M is a subsemigroup of N× generated by a non-empty family of relative prime numbers.
If we consider the special case where Γ={1}×(Z/mZ)∗, then Zm,Γ is the subsemigroup of N× generated by the prime numbers that do not divide m, so that our Z⋊Zm,Γ is a semigroup of the type considered in [B-O-S].
Some of the analysis in Sections 3, 4, and 5 can likely be generalized to other semigroups of the form R⋊M. However, results in later sections of this paper rely heavily on M being a congruence monoid, which shows that actions of congruence monoids give rise to particularly nice semigroups, and we thus focus on this case from the beginning to avoid unnecessary technical difficulties. The author plans to consider more general semigroups of the form R⋊M in a future work.
1.3. Outlook
We now briefly mention two works that build directly on the results of this paper.
The semigroup C*-algebras that we consider here carry canonical time evolutions coming from the norm map on K, and a computation of the KMS and ground states of the associated C*-dynamical systems is worked out in [Bru]. There, the finite group Im/i(Km,Γ), which appears first in Section 3 below, plays an important role. For instance, for each β>2, the simplex of KMSβ states for the canonical time evolution on Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) decomposes over Im/i(Km,Γ), whereas uniqueness for β in the critical interval [1,2] relies on classical properties of the L-functions associated with characters of Im/i(Km,Γ), see [Bru, Theorem 3.2].
Another natural problem is to determine whether the analyses from [Li-Lü, Li4, Li5] on K-theoretic invariants can be carried out for C*-algebras arising from actions of congruence monoids on rings of algebraic integers. This is investigated in [Bru-Li], where we show that the left regular semigroup C*-algebra Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) contains subtle number-theoretic information about K and about a certain class field (i.e., finite abelian extension) of K that is naturally associated with the data (m,Γ), see [Bru-Li, Theorem 5.5]. Even in the case of the full ax+b-semigroup over R, said theorem is novel since no connection with class field theory had been made previously. It is further shown in [Bru-Li, Section 3] that Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) is purely infinite in a very strong sense.
1.4. Organization of this paper
We begin in Section 2 with a brief discussion of notation and preliminaries for semigroup C*-algebras in Section 2.1 and for moduli of algebraic number fields in Section 2.2. In Section 3, we define R⋊Rm,Γ and take a first step towards understanding Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ); namely, we compute the semilattice of constructible right ideals of R⋊Rm,Γ and prove that this semilattice satisfies the independence condition from [Li2], see Proposition 3.4. This puts us in a setting where we can use general results from Li’s theory of semigroup C*-algebras from [Li2, Li3] (see also [Li6] and [C-E-L-Y, Chapter 5]).
We begin our study of the left regular C*-algebra Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) in Section 4 where we give two presentations for Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) in terms of explicit generators and relations, see Propositions 4.1 and 4.3. In Section 5, we realize Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) as a full corner in a crossed product and hence also as the C*-algebra of a groupoid, see Equation (3) and Proposition 5.4. Then, in Section 6, we follow the approach of [La-Rae1, Theorem 3.7] to establish a faithfulness criterion for representations of Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) in terms of spanning projections of the canonical diagonal sub-C*-algebra, see Theorem 6.1.
Section 7 contains an explicit description of the primitive ideal space of Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ), which generalizes [Ech-La, Theorem 3.6], see Theorem 7.1. However, in the proof of Theorem 7.1, we use a general result by Sims and Williams for groupoid C*-algebras, see [Sims-Wil, Lemma 4.6], rather than working with crossed product C*-algebras as in [Ech-La]. We also give an explicit presentation of the primitive ideals using relations that only involve the range projections of the generating isometries. This presentation is motivated by the description of the primitive ideals of Cλ∗(R⋊R×) given in [Li4, Section 3] and [Li5]. We then prove in Section 8 that the boundary quotient of Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) can be realized as a semigroup crossed product; this generalizes the semigroup crossed product description for the ring C*-algebra of R.
In Section 9, we show that the number-theoretic input for our construction carries a canonical partial order, and that our construction respects this order, that is, it is functorial in the appropriate sense, see Propositions 9.2 and 9.5.
Acknowledgments.
I am grateful to my PhD supervisor, Marcelo Laca, for providing lots of helpful comments and feedback on the content and style of this article.
I would also like to thank Xin Li and Mak Trifković for many helpful discussions and to thank the anonymous referee for several useful suggestions/comments and for mentioning the papers [Lar-Li] and [B-O-S].
2. Preliminaries
2.1. The left regular C*-algebra of a semigroup.
Let P be a unital subsemigroup of a countable group G, and let {δx:x∈P} be the canonical orthonormal basis for ℓ2(P). Each p∈P gives rise to an isometry λp in B(ℓ2(P)) such that λp(δx)=δpx for all x∈P. The left regular C-algebra of P* is Cλ∗(P):=C∗({λp:p∈P}). The canonical “diagonal” sub-C*-algebra of Cλ∗(P) is Dλ(P):=Cλ∗(P)∩ℓ∞(P), where we view ℓ∞(P) as sub-C*-algebra of B(ℓ2(P)) in the canonical way.
Since P embeds into a group, Dλ(P) coincides with the smallest unital sub-C*-algebra of ℓ∞(P) that is invariant under conjugation by the isometries λp for p∈P and the co-isometries λp∗ for p∈P; however, to see this we must introduce some ideas from [Li2].
For each subset X⊆P and p∈P, let
[TABLE]
Consider the smallest collection JP of subsets of P such that
∅ and P are in JP;
if X is in JP and p is in P, then pX and p−1(X) are in JP;
if X,Y∈JP, then X∩Y∈JP.
It is shown in [Li2, Section 3] that the first two conditions imply the third. Members of JP are called constructible right ideals of P, see [Li2, Section 2] and [Li3, Definition 2.1]. We refer the reader to [Li2] or [Li1, Section A.2] for a discussion of the motivation for considering constructible ideals and some of the history leading up to their conception.
Since P embeds in a group, the results of [Li2, Section 3] show that
[TABLE]
where EX∈B(ℓ2(P)) is the orthogonal projection onto the subspace ℓ2(X)⊆ℓ2(P). At this point, it is not difficult to see that Dλ(P) is indeed the smallest unital sub-C*-algebra D of ℓ∞(P) such that p∈P and d∈D implies λpdλp∗∈D and λp∗dλp∈D.
Following [Li2, Definition 2.26], we say that JP is independent or P satisfies the independence condition if ⋃i=1mXi=X for X,X1,...,Xm∈JP implies X=Xi for some 1≤i≤m. Semigroups satisfying the independence condition are particularly tractable; indeed, if P satisfies the independence condition, then the diagonal C*-algebra Dλ(P) enjoys a certain universal property, which we will discuss in Section 4. Much of Section 3 is devoted to establishing that the class of semigroups under consideration in this paper satisfy the independence condition.
2.2. Moduli and ray classes.
Let K be a number field with ring of integers R, and let R×:=R∖{0} denote the multiplicative semigroup of non-zero elements in R.
Let PK denote the set of all non-zero prime ideals of R, and let I denote the group of fractional ideals of K.
For a∈I, there is a unique factorization a=∏p∈PKpvp(a) where vp(a)∈Z, and vp(a)=0 for all but finitely many p; for x∈K×:=K∖{0}, we let vp(x):=vp(xR). Let i:K×→I be the group homomorphism i(x):=xR; the ideal class group of K is given by Cl(K):=I/i(K×).
If [K:Q] is the degree of K over Q, then there are exactly [K:Q] embeddings of K into the complex numbers; these come in two flavours: there are the real embeddings w:K↪R and the complex embeddings w:K↪C such that w(K)⊈R. We let VK,R be the (finite) set of real embeddings of K.
A modulus m for K is a function m:VK,R⊔PK→N such that
m∞:=m∣VK,R:VK,R→N takes values in {0,1};
m∣PK:PK→N is finitely supported, that is, m(p)=0 for all but finitely many p.
Let m0 be the ideal m0:=∏ppm(p) of R. It is conventional to write m as a formal product m=m∞m0. The set of moduli for K carries a canonical partial order; by definition, m≤n if and only if m∞(w)≤n∞(w) for all w∈VK,R and m(p)≤n(p) for all p∈PK; this is nothing more than the usually partial order on N-valued functions. Traditionally, one says that m divides n if m≤n and writes m∣n instead of m≤n. In particular, a prime p divides m if and only if m(p)>0, and a real embedding w divides m if and only if m∞(w)=1. Thus, we will write w∣m∞ to indicate that m∞ takes the value one at the real embedding w.
The multiplicative group of residues modulo m is
[TABLE]
If m∞ is trivial, that is, if m(w)=0 for all real embeddings w, then (R/m)∗=(R/m0)∗, and if m∣PK is trivial, so that m0=R, then (R/m)∗=∏w∣m∞{±1}. If m is trivial, then (R/m)∗ is simply the trivial group.
Note that it does not make sense to talk about additive classes modulo m. By the Chinese Remainder Theorem, (R/m0)∗≅∏p∣m0(R/pm(p))∗. Let
[TABLE]
be the multiplicative semigroup of non-zero algebraic integers that are coprime to the ideal m0. If a∈Rm, then a is invertible modulo m0, and we define its residue modulo m to be
[TABLE]
where sign(t):=t/∣t∣ for any non-zero real number t.
Lemma 2.1**.**
The map Rm→(R/m)∗ given by a↦[a]m is a surjective semigroup homomorphism.
Proof.
It is easy to see that [ab]m=[a]m[b]m for all a,b∈Rm. Let (ϵ,b+m0)∈(R/m)∗. By [Nar, Proposition 2.2(i)], the coset 1+m0 contains (infinitely many) elements of any given signature. Thus, we can find c∈1+m0 such that (sign(w(bc)))w∣m∞=ϵ. Since bc∈Rm, and bc+m0=b+m0, we have [bc]m=(ϵ,b+m0).
∎
Let Km:={a∈K×:vp(a)=0 for all p∣m0} be the (multiplicative) subgroup of K× consisting of non-zero elements of K whose corresponding principal fractional ideal is coprime to m0.
Lemma 2.2**.**
The group of (left) quotients Rm−1Rm:={a/b:a,b∈Rm} of Rm in K× coincides with Km. Therefore, the semigroup homomorphism Rm→(R/m)∗ given by a↦[a]m has a unique extension to a (surjective) group homomorphism Km→(R/m)∗, which we denote by x↦[x]m.
Proof.
Clearly, Rm−1Rm⊆Km. Let x∈Km. Then xR=a/b with a and b integral ideals coprime to m0, and a and b represent the same class k in Cl(K). Choose an integral ideal c in k−1 such that c is coprime to m0. Then there are a,b∈Rm such that ac=aR and bc=bR. Now, xR=a/b=ac/bc=aR/bR, so that x=au/b for some u∈R∗, which shows the reverse inclusion.
If x∈Km, then by Lemma 2.2, we can write x=a/b with a,b∈Rm, and [x]m is given by [x]m=[a]m[b]m−1. A standard argument shows that this gives a well-defined group homomorphism.
∎
Moduli play a central role in the ideal-theoretic formulation of class field theory, see [Mil, Chapter V].
Let Im denote the group of fractional ideals of K that are coprime to m0, and let i:Km→Im be the canonical homomorphism given by a↦aR. Let Km,1:={x∈Km:[x]m=1}, so that Km/Km,1≅(R/m)∗. The group Km,1 is called the ray modulo m, and the group Clm(K):=Im/i(Km,1) is the ray class group modulo m.
Let Rm,1:=R∩Km,1, let R∗ denote the group of units in R, and let Rm,1∗:=Rm,1∩R∗ be the group of invertible elements in Rm,1. A relationship between ray class groups and the usual ideal class group is demonstrated by the following standard result.
Proposition 2.3** ([Mil, Chapter V, Theorem 1.7]).**
For every modulus m, there is a five-term exact sequence
[TABLE]
Hence, Clm(K) is a finite group of order
[TABLE]
where h:=∣Cl(K)∣ is the class number of K, r0 denotes the number of real embeddings w of K for which m(w)=1, and N(p):=∣R/p∣ is the norm of p.
3. Semigroups defined by actions of congruence monoids
on rings of algebraic integers
Let K be a number field with ring of integers R, and fix a modulus m for K. For each subgroup Γ of (R/m)∗, let
[TABLE]
Clearly Rm,Γ is a subsemigroup of Rm containing the semigroup Rm,1=Rm,{1}. For Γ=(R/m)∗, we have Rm,Γ=Rm.
Remark 3.1*.*
Semigroups of the form Rm,Γ are called congruence monoids, see [HK, Definition 5] and [G-HK].
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let Km,Γ:={x∈Km:[x]m∈Γ}. Then Km,Γ=Rm,Γ−1Rm,Γ where Rm,Γ−1Rm,Γ is the group of (left) quotients of Rm,Γ in Km.
Proof.
Clearly, Rm,Γ−1Rm,Γ⊆Km,Γ. Let x∈Km,Γ. Using Lemma 2.2, we can write x=a/b with a,b∈Rm. Since [x]m=[a]m[b]m−1∈Γ, there exists γ∈Γ such that [a]m=[b]mγ. By Proposition 2.1, there exists c∈Rm such that [c]m=[a]m−1. Now, [ac]m=[a]m[c]m=[1]m is in Γ, and [bc]m=([a]mγ−1)[c]m=γ−1 is also in Γ, so we have that x=a/b=ac/bc is in Rm,Γ−1Rm,Γ.
∎
The semigroup Rm,Γ acts on (the additive group of) R by multiplication, and we form the semi-direct product R⋊Rm,Γ. Explicitly, R⋊Rm,Γ consists of pairs (b,a) with b∈R and a∈Rm,Γ, and the product of two such pairs is (b,a)(d,c):=(b+ad,ac). Our first observation about R⋊Rm,Γ is the following.
Proposition 3.3**.**
The semigroup R⋊Rm,Γ is left Ore with enveloping group (Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ where Rm−1R={ba∈K:a∈R,b∈Rm} denotes the localization of the ring R at Rm. That is, the set of left quotients (R⋊Rm,Γ)−1(R⋊Rm,Γ) taken inside K⋊K× coincides with the group (Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ.
Proof.
For (b,a),(d,c)∈R⋊Rm,Γ, we have
[TABLE]
Hence, (R⋊Rm,Γ)−1(R⋊Rm,Γ) lies in (Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ.
A direct calculation shows that (R⋊Rm,Γ)−1(R⋊Rm,Γ) is a group. Since (Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ=(Rm−1R⋊{1})({0}⋊Km,Γ), we will be done once we show that (R⋊Rm,Γ)−1(R⋊Rm,Γ) contains the subgroups Rm−1R⋊{1} and {0}⋊Km,Γ
By considering all products in (1) with b=d=0 and using Proposition 3.2, we see that {0}⋊Km,Γ is contained in (R⋊Rm)−1(R⋊Rm,Γ), and by considering all products in (1) with a=c, we see that (Rm,Γ−1R)⋊{1} is contained in (R⋊Rm,Γ)−1(R⋊Rm,Γ). It remains to show that Rm,Γ−1R coincides with Rm−1R. The inclusion Rm,Γ−1R⊆Rm−1R is easy to see. Now suppose that a∈R and b∈Rm. By Lemma 2.1, there is a c∈Rm such that [c]m=[b]m−1, that is, w(bc)>0 for all w∣m∞ and bc∈1+m0, so that bc∈Rm,1. Now a/b=ac/bc lies in Rm,Γ−1R, so Rm−1R⊆Rm,Γ−1R.
∎
We now turn to the problem of computing the semilattice JR⋊Rm,Γ of constructible right ideals in R⋊Rm,Γ. Recall that Im is, by definition, the group of fractional ideals of K that are coprime to m0. Let Im+ be the submonoid of Im consisting of (non-zero) integral ideals that are coprime to m0. For a∈Im, we set a×:=a∖{0}. When m=m0=R, we will write I instead of IR.
Our goal now is to prove the following result, which generalizes the computation of JR⋊R× from [Li2, Section 2.4].
Proposition 3.4**.**
The set (⨆a∈Im+R/a)⊔{∅} is a semilattice with respect to intersections. For each x∈R and a∈Im+, the set (x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ) is a constructible right ideal of R⋊Rm,Γ, and the map
[TABLE]
given by x+a↦(x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ) and ∅↦∅ is an isomorphism of semilattices. Moreover, JR⋊Rm,Γ is independent.
We need several preliminary results before we can prove Proposition 3.4. They are contained in the following propositions and lemmas, several of which will also be useful later.
Recall that an element x∈K× is totally positive if w(x)>0 for every real embedding w:K↪R. Note that if K has no real embeddings, then every element of K× is totally positive.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let p1,...,pk be distinct non-zero primes of R not dividing m0 and n1,...,nk be in N. There is an element x in Rm,1 such that x is totally positive and vpj(x)=nj for j=1,...,k.
Proof.
For each 1≤j≤k, let πpj∈pj∖pj2. By the Chinese Remainder Theorem, there exists y∈R such that
- (1)
y≡πpjnjmodpjnj+1;
2. (2)
y≡1modm0.
The first condition says that vpj(y)=nj for 1≤j≤k. Choose an integer T in m0p1n1+1⋯pknk+1 such that x:=y+T is totally positive. Since T∈m0pjnj+1=m0∩pjnj+1 for each 1≤j≤k, x still satisfies (1) and (2), so we are done.
∎
The following two lemmas are refinements of well-known results for the case of trivial m (in which case Γ must also be trivial), see [C-D-L, Lemma 4.15(a)] and [Li2, Section 2.4].
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let a∈Im+. For each a∈a∩Rm,1, there exists b∈a∩Rm,1 such that a=aR+bR.
Proof.
Write aR=aca for some ideal ca of R. Since a is relatively prime to m0, we have ca∈Im+. By Lemma 3.5, we can find b∈a∩Rm,1 such that vp(b)=vp(a) for every prime p dividing ca. Now write bR=acb for some ideal cb of R. Since vp(cb)=vp(b)−vp(a)=0 for all p dividing ca, we see that ca and cb are relatively prime, that is, R=ca+cb. Thus, a=aR=a(ca+cb)=aR+bR.
∎
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let a∈Im+. For each a∈Rm,1, there exists b∈Rm,1 such that a=baR∩R.
Proof.
Write aR=aca for some ideal ca of R. Since a∈ca, Lemma 3.6 implies that there is a b∈ca∩Rm,1 such that ca=aR+bR. Since abR=(aR+bR)(aR∩bR), we have a=aR(ca)−1=aR(aR+bR)−1=b−1(aR∩bR)=baR∩R.
∎
For any set X⊆R, we denote by X+ the subset of all totally positive elements in X, and by ⟨X⟩ the ideal of R generated by X.
Lemma 3.8**.**
Let a∈Im+. Then for each subgroup Γ⊆(R/m)∗, a is generated as an ideal by the set a∩Rm,Γ. Indeed, a is generated by the set (a∩(1+m0))+=a∩(1+m0)+.
Proof.
Since a and m0 are coprime, a∩m0=am0, and there exists x∈a and y∈m0 such that 1=x+y. Choose an integer T∈a∩m0 such that x0:=x+T is totally positive. Then 1=x0+y0 with x0∈a and y0:=y−T∈m0.
Now,
[TABLE]
Hence, a∩(1+m0)=x0+am0. Since x0∈(x0+am0)+, it follows that (am0)+ is contained in ⟨(x0+am0)+⟩.
If b is any non-zero ideal of R and x an element of b, then for sufficiently large k∈N×, x+kN(b) is totally positive. Since N(b)∈b+, and x=(x+kN(b))−kN(b), we see that any element of a non-zero ideal of R can be written as the difference of two totally positive elements each lying in the ideal. Using this fact, we see that (am0)+⊆⟨(x0+am0)+⟩ implies that ⟨(x0+am0)+⟩ contains am0.
Since a⊇⟨(x0+am0)+⟩, we will be done if we show that m0 and ⟨(x0+am0)+⟩ are coprime.
Since x0∈(x0+am0)+, it suffices to show that vp(x0)=0 for each p∣m0. Let p∣m0. Then we have 0=vp(1−x0+x0)≥min{vp(1−x0),vp(x0)}. Now, 1−x0=y0∈m0⊆p, which implies that vp(1−x0)>0. Hence, we must have vp(x0)=0.
∎
Proposition 3.9**.**
The set Im+⊔{∅} is a semilattice with respect to intersections. For each a∈Im+, the set a∩Rm,Γ is a constructible right ideal of the multiplicative semigroup Rm,Γ, and the map Im+⊔{∅}→JRm,Γ given by a↦a∩Rm,Γ and ∅↦∅ is an isomorphism of semilattices. Moreover, JRm,Γ is independent.
Proof.
It is clear that Im+⊔{∅} is a semilattice with respect to intersections. Now let a∈Im+. By Lemma 3.7, there exists a,b∈Rm,1 such that a=baR∩R, and so have a∩Rm,Γ=baR∩Rm,Γ. If x∈R such that bax∈Rm,Γ, then x lies in Rm,Γ; it follows that a∩Rm,Γ=baRm,Γ∩Rm,Γ, which clearly lies in JRm,Γ. This settles the second claim.
To show surjectivity, it suffices to show that J:={a∩Rm,Γ:a∈Im+}⊆JRm,Γ∪{∅} satisfies the characterizing properties of JRm,Γ (see Section 2.1). Clearly, ∅ and Rm,Γ lie in J. Let a∈Im+ and x∈Km,Γ. If xa=y∈Rm,Γ for some a∈a, then [a]m=[x]m−1[y]m∈Γ, so a∈Rm,Γ. Thus,
[TABLE]
lies in J, which proves that J satisfies the desired properties. Hence, JRm,Γ⊆J which shows that the map a↦a∩Rm,Γ is surjective.
Suppose now that a∩Rm,Γ=b∩Rm,Γ for a,b∈Im+. Then Lemma 3.8 implies that a=b, so this map is also injective.
It remains to show independence. Suppose that a,a1,...,ak∈Im+ are distinct ideals such that ai∩Rm,Γ⊆a∩Rm,Γ for i=1,...,k. We need to show that ⋃i=1kai∩Rm,Γ⊊a∩Rm,Γ. By Lemma 3.8, the inclusion ai∩Rm,Γ⊆a∩Rm,Γ implies that ai⊆a. Since ai=a, we even have ai⊊a for 1≤i≤k. Thus, there are positive integers N≤M, distinct non-zero primes p1,...,pN,pN+1,...,pM, and non-negative integers n1,...nN,ni,1,...,ni,M, for 1≤i≤k, with nj≤ni,j for all 1≤j≤N, 1≤i≤M, such that
[TABLE]
By Lemma 3.5, there exists x∈Rm,1 such that vpj(x)=nj for j=1,...,N and vpi(x)=0 for i=N+1,...,M. It follows that x∈a and x∈ai for i=1,...,k. Thus, x∈a∩Rm,1∖⋃i=1kai. Since Rm,1⊆Rm,Γ, it follows that x∈a∩Rm,Γ∖⋃i=1kai, so we are done.
∎
We are now ready to prove Proposition 3.4.
Proof of Proposition 3.4.
If x+a,y+b lie in ⨆a∈Im+R/a, then
[TABLE]
Thus, (⨆a∈Im+R/a)⊔{∅} is a semilattice with respect to intersections
Let a∈Im+. By Lemma 3.7, we can write a=baR∩R for some a,b∈Rm,1. As in the proof of Proposition 3.9, we have a∩Rm,Γ=baRm,Γ∩Rm,Γ. Thus,
[TABLE]
and for x∈R we have (x,0)(a×(a∩Rm,Γ))=(x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ). Hence, (x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ) is in JR⋊Rm,Γ for all x∈R and a∈Im+.
To show surjectivity, it suffices to show that J~:={(x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ):x∈R,a∈Im+}∪{∅} satisfies the characterizing properties of JR⋊Rm,Γ (see Section 2.1).
It is easy to see that J~ is closed under taking finite intersections. Let (x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ)∈J~ and (b,a)∈R⋊Rm,Γ.
Then
[TABLE]
lies in J~. Moreover, for any c∈Rm,Γ,
[TABLE]
Now, c−1(x+a)∩R=c−1((x+a)∩cR) is either empty or of the form c−1z+c−1a∩R for some z∈(x+a)∩cR, and c−1(a∩Rm,Γ)∩Rm,Γ=c−1a∩Rm,Γ. It follows that J satisfies the conditions in Section 2.1, which concludes the proof of surjectivity.
Injectivity follows as in the proof of Proposition 3.9, and independence of JR⋊Rm,Γ follow from independence of JRm,Γ.
∎
We conclude this section by giving several corollaries. The first simply says that Proposition 3.4 generalizes the computation of JR⋊R× from [Li2, Section 2.4].
Corollary 3.10** ([Li2, Section 2.4]).**
We have
[TABLE]
where a×:=a∖{0}. Moreover, JR⋊R× is independent.
Proof.
Apply Proposition 3.4 for the case of trivial m and Γ.
∎
As before, let i:Km→Im denote the map i(x)=xR. Then the group Im/i(Km,Γ) is a quotient of the finite group Clm(K), hence is finite; indeed, Im/i(Km,Γ)≅Clm(K)/Γˉ where Γˉ=i(Km,Γ)/i(Km,1). Recall that a semigroup is right LCM if all of its constructible right ideals are principal.
Corollary 3.11**.**
The semigroup R⋊Rm,Γ is right LCM if and only if the group Im/i(Km,Γ) is trivial.
Proof.
By Proposition 3.4, R⋊Rm,Γ is right LCM if and only if every integral ideal a∈Im+ is principal and generated by some a∈Rm,Γ. This is equivalent to Im/i(Km,Γ) being trivial.
∎
Let K=Q, so that R=Z. Let m∈N× be a positive natural number, and let m=m∞m0 where m∞ takes the value one at the only real embedding of Q and m0(p):=vp(m). Then a calculation shows that Im/i(Km,1)≅(Z/mZ)∗. Thus, Corollary 3.11 shows that, even in the case K=Q, the semigroup R⋊Rm,Γ is usually not right LCM.
We also have:
Corollary 3.12**.**
The map JR⋊Rm,Γ→JR⋊R× given by (x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ)↦(x+a)×a× and ∅↦∅ is an injective map of semilattices.
Proof.
The map (x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ)↦(x+a)×a× is well-defined by Proposition 3.9, and it is not difficult to see that it is a map of semilattices. Injectivity follows from Proposition 3.4.
∎
4. Presentations for Cλ∗(R⋊Rm,Γ).
Let K be a number field with ring of integers R. Also let m be a modulus for K, let S:={p∈PK:p∣m0} be the support of m0, and let Γ⊆(R/m)∗ be a subgroup. These will remain fixed throughout this section.
We begin with a short discussion of semigroup crossed products. Let P be a subsemigroup of a countable group G as in Section 2.1, and suppose that α is an action of P on a unital C*-algebra D by injective -endomorphisms. The triple (D,P,α) is called a semigroup dynamical system. A covariant representation of (D,P,α) in a unital C-algebra B is a pair (π,V) where π:D→B is a unital *-homomorphism, and V:P→Isom(B) is a semigroup homomorphism satisfying the covariance condition
[TABLE]
Here, Isom(B) denotes the semigroup of isometries in B.
Given a semigroup dynamical system (D,P,α), the semigroup crossed product D⋊αP, as defined in [La-Rae1, Definition 2.2], is the universal unital C*-algebra for covariant representations of (D,P,α); that is, D⋊αP is a unital C*-algebra, and there is a covariant representation (iD,v) of (D,P,α) in D⋊αP such that
D⋊αP=C∗({iD(d):d∈D}∪{vp:p∈P});
for any covariant representation (π,V) of (D,P,α) in a C*-algebra B, there exists a representation π×V:D⋊αP→B such that (π×V)∘iD=π and (π×V)∘v=V.
Following [Li2], we now show how to canonically associate a semigroup dynamical system with P. By definition, a semilattice is a commutative semigroup in which every element is an idempotent; the collection JP is a semilattice with semigroup operation given by intersection of subsets.
The C-algebra of JP, as defined in [Li-Nor, Section 2], is the universal C-algebra Cu∗(JP) generated by projections {eX:X∈JP} such that
[TABLE]
Note that Cu∗(JP) is unital with unit eP. Since the collection {eX:X∈JP} of generating projections is closed under multiplication, we have Cu∗(JP)=span({eX:X∈JP}). The universal property of Cu∗(JP) implies existence of a *-homomorphism Cu∗(JP)→Dλ(P) determined on the spanning projections by eX↦EX where EX∈B(ℓ2(P)) is, as in Section 2.1, the orthogonal projection from ℓ2(P) onto ℓ2(X)⊆ℓ2(P). By [Li2, Proposition 2.24], this map is an isomorphism if and only if P satisfies the independence condition.
The semigroup P acts on the semilattice JP by left multiplication, p:X↦pX, which gives rise to an action of P on the (commutative) C*-algebra Cu∗(JP) of the semilattice JP by injective -endomorphisms αp that are determined on the generating projections by αp(eX)=epX. Thus, we get the semigroup dynamical system (Cu∗(JP),P,α).
From the definition of Cu∗(JP) we see that the crossed product Cu∗(JP)⋊αP is the universal C-algebra generated by isometries {vp:p∈P} and projections {eX:X∈JP} such that
- (I)
vpvq=vpq and vpeXvp∗=epX for all p,q∈P and X∈JP;
2. (II)
e∅=0, eP=1, and eXeY=eX∩Y for all X,Y∈JP.
This is precisely the presentation for the (full) semigroup C-algebra C∗(P) of P* as given in [Li2, Definition 2.2], so C∗(P)=Cu∗(JP)⋊αP, see [Li2, Lemma 2.14].
Let λ:p↦λp∈Isom(Cλ∗(P)) be the left regular representation of P, and let η be the canonical *-homomorphism η:Cu∗(JP)→Dλ(P) such that η(eX)=EX. Then the pair (η,λ) is a covariant representation of (Cu∗(JP),P,α) in Cλ∗(P). The associated representation C∗(P)→Cλ∗(P) determined by vp↦λp and eX↦EX is called the left regular representation of C∗(P).
We now turn to the special case of Pm,Γ:=R⋊Rm,Γ. First, note that by Proposition 3.4, the semigroup Pm,Γ satisfies the independence condition, so [Li2, Proposition 2.24] asserts that the canonical *-homomorphism Cu∗(JPm,Γ)→Dλ(Pm,Γ) is an isomorphism.
Proposition 4.1**.**
The left regular representation C∗(Pm,Γ)→Cλ∗(Pm,Γ) is an isomorphism.
Proof.
By Proposition 3.3, Pm,Γ is left Ore with solvable, hence amenable, enveloping group (Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ, and Pm,Γ satisfies the independence condition by Proposition 3.4; hence, [Li2, Section 3.1] combined with [Li3, Theorem 6.1] implies our claim.
∎
From now on, we will use Proposition 4.1 to identify C∗(Pm,Γ)=Cu∗(JPm,Γ)⋊Pm,Γ with Cλ∗(Pm,Γ). We also have:
Proposition 4.2**.**
*The canonical inclusion of semilattices JPm,Γ→JR⋊R× from Corollary 3.12 gives rise to an injective -homomorphism Cu∗(JPm,Γ)→Cu∗(JR⋊R×) such that e(x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ)↦e(x+a)×a×. Moreover, this map is equivariant for the obvious Pm,Γ-actions.
Proof.
Existence of such a *-homomorphism follows immediately from the universal property of Cu∗(JPm,Γ). Equivariance is obvious, and injectivity follows Proposition 3.4 and [C-E-L-Y, Proposition 5.6.21].
∎
To avoid cumbersome notation, we will often identify Cu∗(JPm,Γ) with its image in Cu∗(JR⋊R×) under the canonical inclusion from Proposition 4.2. Thus, we will write e(x+a)×a× rather than e(x+a)×(a∩Rm,Γ) for a canonical spanning projection of Cu∗(JPm,Γ).
Our next result gives a presentation for C∗(Pm,Γ) that is, for the particular case of trivial m, entirely analogous to the presentation given in [C-D-L, Definition 2.1], see also [Li2, Section 2.4].
Proposition 4.3**.**
For x∈R, let ux:=v(x,1), for a∈Rm,Γ, let sa:=v(0,a), and for a∈Im+, let ea:=ea×(a∩Rm,Γ). Then:
- (Ta)
The ux are unitary and satisfy uxuy=ux+y, the sa are isometries and satisfy sasb=sab. Moreover, saux=uaxsa for all x,y∈R and a,b∈Rm,Γ.
2. (Tb)
The ea are projections and satisfy eaeb=ea∩b, eR=1.
3. (Tc)
We have saebsa∗=eab.
4. (Td)
For a∈Im+, {uxea=eauxeauxea=0 for x∈a, and for x∈a.
Moreover, C∗(Pm,Γ) is universal in the following sense: if B is a C-algebra containing elements Ux for x∈R, Sa for a∈Rm,Γ, and Ea for a∈Im+ satisfying the obvious “uppercase” analogues of (Ta)–(Td), then there is a unique -homomorphism C∗(Pm,Γ)→B such that ux↦Ux, sa↦Sa, and ea↦Ea.
Proof.
A calculation analogous to that given in [Li2, Section 2.4] shows that the relations (Ta)–(Td) are satisfied.
If {Ux:x∈R}, {Sa:a∈Rm,Γ}, and {Ea:a∈Im+} are elements in a C*-algebra B satisfying “uppercase” analogues of (Ta)–(Td), let V(x,a):=UxSa and Ex+a:=UxEaU−x for x∈R, a∈Rm,Γ, and a∈Im+. A calculation verifies that these elements satisfying the defining relations (I) and (II) for C∗(Pm,Γ), so the universal property of C∗(Pm,Γ) gives us a *-homomorphism C∗(Pm,Γ)→B such that v(x,a)↦V(x,a) and e(x+a)×a×↦Ex+a.
∎
5. Description as a full corner in a crossed product.
We will now describe C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) as a full corner in a crossed product, and thus also as a groupoid C*-algebra. Since R⋊Rm,Γ is left Ore by Proposition 3.3, this could be derived from [La, Theorem 2.1.1]. However, for the present setting, the results from [Li3, Section 4] give us a concrete realization of the “dilated system” which will be more convenient for our purposes.
5.1. The Toeplitz condition
Let P be a subsemigroup of a group G as in Section 2.1. Let λG denote the left regular representation of G on ℓ2(G), and for each subset Y⊆G, let EY∈B(ℓ2(G)) be the corresponding multiplication operator, that is, EY is the orthogonal projection onto ℓ2(Y)⊆ℓ2(G).
Let JP⊆G be the smallest collection of subsets of G that contains JP, is closed under left translation by elements in G, and is closed under finite intersections. Let DP⊆G:=span({EX:X∈JP⊆G}).
Then DP⊆G is a sub-C*-algebra of ℓ∞(G), and, as explained in [C-E-L1, Section 2.5], we can identify DP⊆G⋊rG with the sub-C*-algebra of B(ℓ2(G)) given by span({EYλgG:Y∈JP⊆G,g∈G})).
By [Li3, Lemma 3.8], the projection EP is full in DP⊆G⋊rG. We always have the containment Cλ∗(P)⊆EP(DP⊆G⋊rG)EP, where we view Cλ∗(P) as a sub-C*-algebra of B(ℓ2(G)). The reverse containment need not hold in general.
By [Li3, Definition 4.1], the inclusion P⊆G satisfies the left Toeplitz condition provided that for each g∈G, the compression EPλgGEP of λgG by EP is either zero or of the form EPλgGEP=λp1∗λq1⋯λpn∗λqn for some p1,q1,...,pn,qn∈P. If P⊆G satisfies the left Toeplitz condition, then [Li3, Lemmas 3.9] guarantees that Cλ∗(P)=EP(DP⊆G⋊rG)EP.
Now assume that P⊆G satisfies the left Toeplitz condition, and let ΩP⊆G:=Spec(DP⊆G). By [Li3, Lemma 4.2(i)], we have DP=EPDP⊆GEP, so there is a canonical inclusion ΩP⊆ΩP⊆G, and EP(DP⊆G⋊rG)EP≅1ΩP(C0(ΩP⊆G)⋊rG)1ΩP.
We also have
[TABLE]
where G⋉ΩP:={(g,w)∈G×ΩP:gw∈ΩP} is the reduction of the transformation groupoid G⋉ΩP⊆G by the compact open set ΩP. Our notation for the reduction groupoid is justified by the fact that the groupoid G⋉ΩP can be canonically identified with the transformation groupoid for a canonical partial action of G on ΩP, see [Li7, Section 2].
We now return to the case of R⋊Rm,Γ⊆(Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ. To avoid cumbersome notation, we let Pm,Γ:=R⋊Rm,Γ and Gm,Γ:=(Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ. Since Pm,Γ is left Ore by Proposition 3.3, the inclusion Pm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ satisfies the left Toeplitz condition by [Li3, Section 8.3].
From the discussion above, we have isomorphisms
[TABLE]
Our aim now is to describe the diagonal sub-C*-algebra DPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ≅C0(ΩPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ).
Proposition 5.1**.**
We have JPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ={(x+a)×a×:x∈K,a∈Im}∪{∅}.
Proof.
Since Pm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ is left Toeplitz, [Li3, Lemma 4.2] implies that JPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ={gX:g∈G,X∈JPm,Γ}. Hence, JPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ={(y+a)×a×:y∈Rm−1R,a∈Im}∪{∅}, so the inclusion “⊆” holds.
To prove the reverse inclusion, let a∈Im and y∈K. We need to find x∈Rm−1R such that x+a=y+a. By strong approximation ([Nar, Theorem 6.28]), there exists x∈K such that
vp(x−y)≥vp(a) for all p∣a;
vp(x)≥0 for all p∣m0.
That is, x+a=y+a and x is integral at every prime that divides m0.
Write xR=b/c where b and c are coprime integral ideals. Then, because vp(x)≥0 for all p∣m0, c is coprime to m0 and thus defines a class [c] in Im/i(Km); let d be an integral ideal in the inverse class [c]−1, so that cd=bR for some b∈Rm. The class of d in Cl(K) coincides with the inverse of the class of c in Cl(K), and b and c are in the same ideal class in Cl(K), so there exists a∈R such that bd=aR. Now we have
[TABLE]
so x=au/b for some u∈R∗ which shows that x∈Rm−1R. Since x+a=y+a, we are done.
∎
5.2. An adelic description of the spectrum of the diagonal
We will now describe C(ΩPm,Γ) and C0(ΩPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ) as functions on certain adelic spaces; this is motivated by [La-Nesh, Section 1] and [C-D-L, Section 5], also see [Li4, Section 2].
Each non-zero prime ideal p of R defines a normalized absolute value ∣⋅∣p on K×; explicitly, ∣x∣p:=N(p)−vp(x). We let Kp denote the corresponding completion of K and Rp={x∈Kp:∣x∣p≤1} the ring of integers in Kp. The ring of finite adeles over K is
[TABLE]
Equipped with the restricted product topology with respect to the compact open subsets Rp⊆Kp, Af is a locally compact ring. Let R^ denote the compact subring ∏pRp consisting of integral adeles. We can modify this definition to work with only the primes not dividing m. Let S:={p∈PK:p∣m0} be the support of m0, and put
[TABLE]
Also equip AS with the restricted product topology. Denote by R^S the compact subring ∏p∈SRp of AS, and let R^S∗:=∏p∈SRp∗ be the group of units in R^S. The compact group R^S∗ acts on AS by multiplication, and we will let aˉ denote the image of a∈AS under the quotient map AS→AS/R^S∗.
There is a diagonal embedding of additive groups K↪AS, so K acts on AS by translation. Moreover, the image of Km,Γ under this embedding is contained in the multiplicative group AS∗ of units in AS, so Km,Γ acts on AS by multiplication. This action descends to an action of Km,Γ on the quotient AS/R^S∗ given by kaˉ=ka. Hence, the locally compact space AS×AS/R^S∗ carries a canonical action of Gm,Γ given by (n,k)(b,aˉ)=(n+kb,kaˉ).
Remark 5.2*.*
The space R^S/R^S∗ can be canonically identified with ∏p∈/SpN∪{∞}, which may be thought of as the space of “super ideals coprime to m0”, and we can identify Im+ with its canonical image in R^S/R^S∗ via a↦∏ppvp(a). Similarly, AS/R^S∗ may be thought of as the space of “super fractional ideals coprime to m0”.
We define an equivalence relation on AS×AS/R^S∗ by (b,aˉ)∼(d,cˉ) if aˉ=cˉ and b−d∈aˉR^S. The action of Gm,Γ descends to a well-defined action on the locally compact quotient space
[TABLE]
This equivalence relation restricts to an equivalence relation on the compact subset R^S×R^S/R^S∗⊆AS×AS/R^S∗, and the quotient space
[TABLE]
is a compact subset of ΩKm.
Proposition 5.3**.**
There are Gm,Γ-equivariant isomorphisms DPm,Γ≅C(ΩRm) and DPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ≅C0(ΩKm) such that the following diagram commutes
[TABLE]
where the horizontal arrows are the canonical inclusions, and the vertical arrows are determined by
[TABLE]
Proof.
From Lemma 5.1, we have JPm,Γ⊆Gm,Γ={(x+a)×a×:x∈K,a∈Im}∪{∅}. When m is trivial, the result follows from the analysis in [Li4, Section 2], and the general case goes through almost verbatim.
∎
An immediate consequence, we have isomorphisms
[TABLE]
where Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm={(g,w)∈Gm,Γ×ΩRm:gw∈ΩRm} is the reduction groupoid of the transformation groupoid Gm,Γ⋉ΩKm with respect to the compact open set ΩRm.
Proposition 5.4**.**
There is an isomorphism
[TABLE]
that is determined on generators by ϑ(v(b,a))=1{(b,a)}×ΩRm for (b,a)∈Pm,Γ.
Proof.
Since Gm,Γ is amenable, there is a canonical isomorphism C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩPm,Γ)≅Cr∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩPm,Γ). Hence, the result follows from Proposition 4.1 combined with (3).
∎
6. Faithful representations of C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ).
6.1. A criterion for faithfulness
As before, we will use the notation Pm,Γ:=R⋊Rm,Γ and Gm,Γ:=(Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ. Also let S:={p:p∣m0} be the support of m0 and put PKm:=PK∖S.
Following the approach of [La-Rae1, Theorem 3.7], we next establish a faithfulness criterion for representations of C∗(Pm,Γ) in terms of spanning projections of the diagonal.
Theorem 6.1**.**
For each class k∈Im/i(Km,Γ), choose an integral ideal ak∈k. Suppose ψ is a representation of C∗(Pm,Γ) in a C-algebra B. Then ψ is injective if and only if for each k∈Im/i(Km,Γ), we have*
[TABLE]
for all y1,...,ym∈R and a1,...,am∈Im+ such that yi+ai⊊ak for 1≤i≤m.
We need a preliminary result.
Proposition 6.2**.**
A representation ψ of C∗(Pm,Γ) is faithful if and only if it is faithful on Cu∗(JPm,Γ).
Proof.
Since the isomorphism C∗(Pm,Γ)≅C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm) from Proposition 5.4 carries Cu∗(JPm,Γ) isomorphically onto C(ΩRm), it suffices to prove that a representation ψ of the C*-algebra C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm) is faithful if and only if it is faithful on C(ΩRm).
Since Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm is amenable, by [Exel, 4.4 Theorem], it suffices to show that Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm is essentially principal; in the terminology from [Exel], this means that we need to show that the interior of the isotropy bundle of Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm coincides with the unit space of G⋉ΩRm. For this, it suffices to show that the set of points in ΩRm with trivial isotropy is dense in ΩRm; this is a special case of the subsequent result.
∎
For each w∈ΩRm, let Gm,Γ.w:={gw:(g,w)∈ΩRm} be the orbit of w; its closure Gm,Γ.w is called the quasi-orbit of w. The following proposition is more than we need; its full strength will be used in Section 7 below.
Proposition 6.3** (cf. [Ech-La, Lemmas 3.1, 3.4 and Corollary 3.5]).**
For aˉ∈R^S/R^S∗, let Z(aˉ):={p∈PKm:aˉp=0}, and for each set A⊆PKm, let CA:={[b,aˉ]∈ΩRm:A⊆Z(aˉ)}. Then
- (1)
the quasi-orbit of a point [b,aˉ]∈ΩRm is equal to CZ(aˉ);
2. (2)
for any closed Gm,Γ-invariant subset C⊆ΩRm, the set of points in C with trivial isotropy is dense in C.
In particular, the set of points in ΩRm with trivial isotropy is dense in ΩRm.
Proof.
The proof of the first part is similar to the proof of [Ech-La, Lemma 3.1], but differs in a few places, so we include it here.
Clearly, we have [b,aˉ]∈CZ(aˉ). Since CZ(aˉ) is closed and Gm,Γ-invariant, it follows that the quasi-orbit of [b,aˉ] is contained in CZ(aˉ). Thus, we only need to show that CZ(aˉ) is contained in the quasi-orbit of [b,aˉ].
Let [d,cˉ]∈CZ(aˉ). Any open set containing [d,cˉ] contains the image under the quotient map π:R^S×R^S/R^S∗→ΩRm of an (open) set W1×W2 where W1⊆R^S is an open set of the form
[TABLE]
for some integral ideal a∈Im+, and W2⊆R^S/R^S∗ is an open set of the form
[TABLE]
for some finite set F⊆PKm and non-negative integers np for p∈F∩Z(cˉ). By Lemma 3.5, we can find b∈Rm,1 such that vp(b)=vp(aˉ) for p∈F∖Z(cˉ). Now use Lemma 3.5 again to choose a∈Rm,1 such that
vp(a)=vp(cˉ) for p∈F∖Z(cˉ);
vp(a)=np+vp(b) for p∈F∩Z(cˉ);
vp(a)=vp(b) for p∈Fc with vp(b)>0.
Let k:=a/b. Then k∈Km,1, kaˉ∈R^S/R^S∗, and kaˉ∈W2. By strong approximation ([Nar, Theorem 6.28]), K is dense in AS, so there exists y∈K such that y+kb∈W1. As in the proof of Lemma 5.1, we can find x∈Rm−1R such that x−y∈a. Then x+kb∈W1, so we have that (x,k)[b,aˉ]⊆π(W1×W2). Hence, CZ(aˉ) is contained in the quasi-orbit of [b,aˉ].
An argument analogous to that given in the proof of [Ech-La, Lemma 3.4] now shows that for any A⊆PKm, there exists [d,cˉ]∈CA such that the isotropy group of [d,cˉ] is trivial and Z(cˉ)=A. This implies part (2), so we are done.
∎
We are now ready for the proof of Theorem 6.1.
Proof of Theorem 6.1.
By Proposition 6.2, it suffices to prove that the restriction of ψ to Cu∗(JPm,Γ) is injective. For this, by [C-E-L-Y, Proposition 5.6.21], it is enough to show that
[TABLE]
for y,y1,...,ym∈R, a,a1,...,am∈Im+ such that yi+ai⊊y+a for 1≤i≤m. Here, ⋁i=1me(yi+ai)×a× is the smallest projection in Cu∗(JPm,Γ) that dominates each e(yi+ai)×a×, see [C-E-L-Y, Lemma 5.6.20.].
We will exploit the covariance condition, see (2). For each (b,a)∈Pm,Γ, let W(b,a):=ψ(v(b,a)), and observe that
[TABLE]
Since W(y,1) is a unitary, it follows that ψ(∏i=1m(e(y+a)×a×−e(yi+ai)×a×)) is non-zero if and only if ψ(∏i=1m(ea×a×−e(yi−y+ai)×a×)) is non-zero; hence, it is enough to show that (4) holds when y=0.
Let y1,...,ym∈R and a,a1,...,am∈Im+ be such that yi+ai⊊a for 1≤i≤m. If k∈Im/i(Km,Γ) is the class containing a, then there exists a,b∈Rm,Γ such that aa=bak. We have
[TABLE]
Now, yi+ai⊆a implies that ayi+aai⊆aa=bak. Hence, there exists y~i∈ak such that ayi=by~i. From this, we see that aai⊆b(ak−y~i) which implies that a~i:=baai is an integral ideal.
Since a,b∈Rm,Γ, we see also that a~i is coprime to m0, so that a~i lies in Im+. Since a(yi+ai)=b(y~i+a~i), we have
[TABLE]
Conjugating by an isometry defines an injective *-homomorphism, so
[TABLE]
Since ψ(∏i=1n(eak×ak×−e(y~i+a~i)×a~i×)) is non-zero by assumption, ψ(∏i=1n(ea×a×−e(yi+ai)×ai×)) must also be non-zero. Hence, ψ is injective on Cu∗(JPm,Γ) as desired.
∎
As an immediate consequence, we obtain the following reformulation.
Corollary 6.4**.**
Suppose that B is a C-algebra containing elements Ux for x∈R, Sa for a∈Rm,Γ, and Ea for a∈Im+ satisfying the “uppercase” analogues of (Ta)–(Td) from Proposition 4.3, and let ψ:C∗(Pm,Γ)→B be the unique -homomorphism such that ψ(ux)=Ux, ψ(sa)=Sa, and ψ(ea)=Ea.
Then ψ is an isomorphism onto the sub-C-algebra of B generated by {Uxx∈R},{Sa:a∈Rm,Γ}, and {Ea:a∈Im+} if and only if for each k∈Im/i(Km,Γ), we have*
[TABLE]
for all y1,...,ym∈R and a1,...,am∈Im+ such that yi+ai⊊ak for 1≤i≤m.
Thus, Theorem 6.1 may be viewed as a uniqueness result, analogous to a Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem.
6.2. Representations coming from ideal classes
Using the inclusion from Corollary 3.12, we will view JPm,Γ as a subsemilattice of JR⋊R×. The canonical action of Pm,Γ on JPm,Γ× given by (b,a)[(x+a)×a×]=(b+ax+aa)×(aa)× gives rise to an isometric representation V of Pm,Γ on the Hilbert space H:=ℓ2(JPm,Γ×); namely, V:Pm,Γ→Isom(H) is determined on the canonical orthonormal basis by V(b,a)δ(x+a)×a×=δ(b+ax+aa)×(aa)×.
Proposition 6.5**.**
For each class k∈Im/i(Km,Γ), the subspace Hk:=span({δ(z+b)×b×:b∈k})⊆H is invariant under V(b,a) for all (b,a)∈Pm,Γ.
Let V(b,a)k be the restriction of V(b,a) to Hk. For x∈R and a∈Im+, let Px+ak be the orthogonal projection from Hk onto the subspace span({δ(z+b)×b×:z+b⊆x+a}).
Then there is a representation ψk:C∗(Pm,Γ)→B(Hk) such that ψk(v(b,a))=V(b,a)k and ψk(e(x+a)×a×)=Px+ak. Moreover, ψk is faithful.
Proof.
It is easy to see that Hk is invariant. A calculation shows that the collections {V(b,a)k:(b,a)∈Pm,Γ} and {0}∪{Px+ak:x∈R,a∈Im+} satisfy the defining relations (I) and (II) for C∗(Pm,Γ), so existence of ψk follows from the defining universal property of C∗(Pm,Γ). For each k~∈Im/i(Km,Γ), let ak~∈k~ be an integral ideal. By Theorem 6.1, injectivity of ψk will follow if we show that for each k~, we have ∏i=1m(Pak~k−Pyi+aik)=0 for any y1,...,ym∈R and a1,...,am∈Im+ such that yi+ai⊊ak~. For this, it suffices to find b∈k such that b⊆ak~ and yi+ai⊆b. By [Mil, Theorem 7.2], the class kk~−1 contains infinitely many prime ideals, so we can choose a prime p∈kk~−1 such that y1,y2,...,ym∈p. Then b:=pak~∈k clearly satisfies b⊊ak~, and we also have yi+ai⊆b because b⊆p, and yi+ai⊆b would imply yi∈b.
∎
Remark 6.6*.*
In the case of trivial m, it is shown in [C-D-L, Section 4] that the direct sum ⊕k∈Cl(K)ψk is faithful.
7. The primitive ideal space
Given a C*-algebra B, let Prim(B) denote the primitive ideal space of B. If X⊆B is any subset, we let ⟨X⟩B denote the (closed, two-sided) ideal of B generated by X; by convention, ⟨∅⟩:={0}.
Continuing with the notation from the previous section, we let PKm:=PK∖S denote the collection of (non-zero) prime ideals of R that do not divide m0, let Pm,Γ=R⋊Rm,Γ, and let Gm,Γ=(Rm−1R)⋊Km,Γ.
Equip 2PKm with the power-cofinite topology. Recall that a base for the power-cofinite topology is given by the sets UF:={T∈2PKm:T∩F=∅} for F⊆2PKm finite. We may view both 2PKm and Prim(C∗(Pm,Γ)) as partially ordered sets with respect to the orders given by inclusion of subsets and inclusion of ideals, respectively. The following theorem is a strengthening and generalization of [Ech-La, Theorem 3.6]. Our explicit description is motivated by the explicit description of the primitive ideals of C∗(R⋊R×) given in [Li4, Li5].
Theorem 7.1**.**
For each p∈PKm, let fp denote the order of [p]∈Im/i(Km,Γ), so that pfp=tpR for some tp∈Rm,Γ.
For each subset A⊆PKm, let
[TABLE]
Then IA is a primitive ideal, and the map 2PKm→Prim(C∗(Pm,Γ)) given by A↦IA is an order-preserving homeomorphism.
Before we can prove Theorem 7.1, we need a preliminary result.
Each open Gm,Γ-invariant subset U⊆ΩRm gives rise to the ideal C∗(Gm,Γ⋉U)⊆C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm). In particular, for each point w∈ΩRm, the set ΩRm∖Gm,Γ.w is open and Gm,Γ-invariant where, as before, Gm,Γ.w:={gw:(g,w)∈ΩRm} is the orbit of w, and Gm,Γ.w is the closure of Gm,Γ.w, which is called the quasi-orbit of w. The quasi-orbit space is given by Q(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm):=ΩRm/∼ where w∼w′ if Gm,Γ.w=Gm,Γ.w′; this space was described in Proposition 6.3 above.
Lemma 7.2**.**
For each x∈ΩRm, the ideal C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖Gm,Γ.w)) is primitive, and the map ΩRm→Prim(C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)) given by w↦C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖Gm,Γ.w)) descends to a homeomorphism Q(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)≃Prim(C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)).
Moreover, if ϑ:C∗(Pm,Γ)≅C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm) is the isomorphism from Proposition 5.4, then ϑ(IA)=C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CA)) for every A⊆PKm.
Proof.
Each ideal C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖Gm,Γ.w)) is primitive by [Sims-Wil, Lemma 4.5].
The groupoid Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm is second countable, étale, and amenable. By Proposition 6.3(2), we may apply [Sims-Wil, Lemma 4.6] to conclude that the map ΩRm→Prim(C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)) given by w↦C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖Gm,Γ.w)) descends to a homeomorphism Q(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)≃Prim(C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)).
We now turn to the second claim. Let A⊆PKm. For each p∈A, we have that
[TABLE]
lies in C0(ΩRm∖CA). Hence, ϑ(IA)⊆C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CA)).
We know that ϑ(IA)=⋂JJ where J runs over all primitive ideals of C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm) that contain ϑ(IA), so to show that C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CA)) is contained in ϑ(IA), it suffices to show that any primitive ideal that contains ϑ(IA) must also contain C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CA)).
Suppose J∈Prim(C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm)) with ϑ(IA)⊆J. By part (1), J=C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CB)) for some B⊆PKm. Now, we have 1{[b,aˉ]:vp(aˉ)<fp}∈C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CB)) for all p∈A which implies that 1{[b,aˉ]:vp(aˉ)<fp} vanishes on CB for all p∈A; hence, A⊆B. Thus, C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CA))⊆J.
∎
We are now ready to prove Theorem 7.1.
Proof of Theorem 7.1.
By Proposition 6.3(1) and Lemma 7.2(1), the map A↦C∗(Gm,Γ⋉(ΩRm∖CA)) is a order-preserving bijection from 2PKm onto Prim(C∗(Gm,Γ⋉ΩRm). The proof that this map is a homeomorphism is analogous to the proof of [La-Rae2, Proposition 2.4]. Thus, Theorem 7.1 follows from Lemma 7.2(2).
∎
Corollary 7.3**.**
The ideal IPKm is the unique maximal ideal of C∗(Pm,Γ), and the map p↦I{p} defines a bijection from PKm onto the set of minimal primitive ideals of C∗(Pm,Γ).
Proof.
This follows from Theorem 7.1 since the bijection A↦IA is inclusion-preserving.
∎
8. The boundary quotient
By Corollary 7.3, the ideal IPKm is the unique maximal ideal of C∗(Pm,Γ). The C*-algebra C∗(Pm,Γ)/IPKm is the boundary quotient of C∗(Pm,Γ), as defined in [Li3, Section 7] (see also [Li7, Chapter 5.7]). We now give a description of C∗(Pm,Γ)/IPKm as a semigroup crossed product. This generalizes the well-known semigroup crossed product description of the ring C*-algebra of R.
Each (b,a)∈Pm,Γ gives rise to an injective continuous map R^S→R^S given by (b,a)x:=b+ax; let τ(b,a) be the corresponding -endomorphism of C(R^S). Then (C(R^S),Pm,Γ,τ) is a semigroup dynamical system, so we may form the crossed product C-algebra C(R^S)⋊τPm,Γ. For (b,a)∈Pm,Γ, let w(b,a) be the corresponding isometry in C(R^S)⋊τPm,Γ.
Proposition 8.1**.**
*There is a surjective -homomorphism π:C∗(Pm,Γ)→C(R^S)⋊τPm,Γ such that
[TABLE]
for all (b,a)∈Pm,Γ and (x+a)×a×∈JPm,Γ×, where a^ denotes the closed ideal of R^S generated by a. Moreover, kerπ=IPKm, so we get an isomorphism C∗(Pm,Γ)/IPKm≅C(R^S)⋊τPm,Γ.
Proof.
Consider the collection of projections {1x+a^:x∈R,a∈Im+} and the collection of isometries {w(b,a):(b,a)∈Pm,Γ}. A calculation verifies that these collections satisfy the defining relations (I) and (II) for C∗(Pm,Γ), so the universal property of C∗(Pm,Γ) gives us a *-homomorphism π:C∗(Pm,Γ)→C(R^S)⋊τPm,Γ such that
[TABLE]
for all (b,a)∈Pm,Γ and (x+a)×a×∈JPm,Γ×.
Since span{1x+a^:x∈R,a∈Im+} is dense in C(R^S), we see that
[TABLE]
generates C(R^S)⋊τPm,Γ as a C*-algebra, so π is surjective.
It remains to show that kerπ=IPKm. Since IPKm is a maximal ideal, it suffices to show that IPKm⊆kerπ. For every a∈Im+, the canonical embedding R↪R^S induces an isomorphism R/a≅R^S/a^, so R^S=⨆x∈R/a(x+a^). Hence,
[TABLE]
Since the projections 1−∑x∈R/tpRv(x,tp)v(x,tp)∗ for p∈PKm generate IPKm, we are done.
∎
9. Functoriality
As before, let K be a number field with ring of integers R. Recall that the number-theoretic data for our construction consists of a pair (m,Γ) where m a modulus for K and Γ a subgroup of (R/m)∗. The set of such pairs carries a canonical partial order, which we now describe.
Let m and n be moduli for K, and let Γ and Λ be subgroups of (R/m)∗ and (R/n)∗, respectively. Denote by prm:Rm→(R/m)∗ and prn:Rn→(R/n)∗ the canonical projection maps. Recall that m∣n if m0∣n0 and m∞≤n∞.
If m∣n, then we have a canonical inclusion of semigroups Rn⊆Rm, and a canonical surjective group homomorphism πn,m:(R/n)∗→(R/m)∗ such that the following diagram commutes:
[TABLE]
We define (m,Γ)≤(n,Λ) if and only if m∣n and πn,m(Λ)⊆Γ. We will show next that our construction respects this ordering, that is, it is functorial in the appropriate sense. First, we need a lemma.
Lemma 9.1**.**
Let m be a modulus for K, and suppose that w is a real embedding of K. Then w∣m∞ if and only if w(x)>0 for all x∈Rm,1.
Proof.
First, suppose that w(x)>0 for all x∈Rm,1, and assume that w∤m∞. By definition,
[TABLE]
and [Nar, Proposition 2.2(i)] asserts that the coset 1+m0 contains (infinitely many) elements of every signature. Hence, there exists a∈Rm,1 with v(a)>0 for every v∣m∞ and w(a)<0. This contradicts that w(x)>0 for all x∈Rm,1, so we must have w∣m∞. The other direction is obvious.
∎
Proposition 9.2**.**
Let m and n be moduli for K, and let Γ and Λ be subgroups of (R/m)∗ and (R/n)∗, respectively. Then
- (1)
Rn,Λ⊆Rm,Γ* if and only if (m,Γ)≤(n,Λ).*
2. (2)
*If the equivalent conditions from (1) are satisfied, so that there is a canonical inclusion of semigroups ι:R⋊Rn,Λ↪R⋊Rm,Γ, then there is an injective -homomorphism C∗(R⋊Rn,Λ)→C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) such that v(b,a)↦v(ι(b),ι(a)).
Proof.
(1): First, note that Rn,Λ⊆Rm,Γ implies that Rn,1⊆Rm,1. We will now show that m∞≤n∞. Suppose w is a real embedding of K such that m∞(w)=1. Since Rn,1⊆Rm,1, we must have w(x)>0 for all x∈Rn,1, so w∣n∞ by Lemma 9.1.
Next we show that m0∣n0. The inclusion Rn,1⊆Rm,1 implies that (1+n0)+⊆(1+m0)+, which in turn implies that (n0)+⊆(m0)+. Since ideals are generated by the totally positive elements that they contain (see the proof of Lemma 3.8), we have n0⊆m0.
Using commutativity of (5) and that Rn,Λ⊆Rm,Γ, we have
[TABLE]
as desired.
For the converse, suppose (m,Γ)≤(n,Λ), so that m∣n and πn,m(Λ)⊆Γ. Then prm−1(πn,m(Λ))⊆prm−1(Γ)=Rm,Γ, and commutativity of (5) implies prm(Rn,Λ)=πn,m(Λ),
so we have Rn,Λ⊆prm−1(πn,m(Λ))⊆Rm,Γ.
(2): Assume Rn,Λ⊆Rm,Γ. Then m∣n by part (1) which implies that In+⊆Im+ . The collections {e(x+a)×a×:x∈R,a∈In+}∪{0} and {v(ι(b),ι(a)):(b,a)∈R⋊Rn,Λ} of projections and isometries, respectively, in C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) satisfy the defining relations (I) and (II) for C∗(R⋊Rn,Λ), so the universal property of C∗(R⋊Rn,Λ) gives us a *-homomorphism ψ:C∗(R⋊Rn,Λ)→C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ) such that ψ(v(b,a))=v(ι(b),ι(a)) for all (b,a)∈R⋊Rn,Λ.
The projections {e(x+a)×a×:x∈R,a∈In+} are linearly independent in Cu∗(JR⋊Rm,Γ) by Proposition 3.4, so the hypotheses of Theorem 6.1 are satisfied; hence, ψ is injective.
∎
In particular, if we take m to be trivial, so that Γ must also be trivial, then we obtain the following result.
Corollary 9.3**.**
*For each modulus n and each subgroup Λ⊆(R/n)∗, there is an injective -homomorphism C∗(R⋊Rn,Λ)→C∗(R⋊R×) such that v(b,a)↦v(ι(b),ι(a)) where ι:R⋊Rn,Λ↪R⋊R× is the canonical inclusion.
We can also ask what happens as the number field varies. Let K and K′ be number fields with rings of integers R and R′, respectively.
Lemma 9.4**.**
Suppose that m is a modulus for K and that there is an inclusion of number fields i:K↪K′. Define a modulus m~ for K′ by m~∞(w′):=m∞(w′∘i) for each real embedding w′:K′↪R and m~0:=i(m0)R′ where i(m0)R′ is the ideal of R′ generated by i(m0).
For each modulus m′ of K′, we have i(Rm,1)⊆Rm′,1′ if and only if m′∣m~.
Proof.
Suppose that i(Rm,1)⊆Rm′,1′. Then for each w′∣m∞′, we see that w′∘i(x)>0 for every x∈Rm,1, so (w′∘i)∣m∞ by Lemma 9.1. That is, w′∣m∞′ implies w′∣m~∞, so we have m∞′∣m~∞.
The inclusion i(Rm,1)⊆Rm′,1′ also implies that (1+i(m0))+⊆(1+m0′)+ where (1+i(m0))+ and (1+m0′)+ denote the sets of totally positive elements in 1+i(m0) and 1+m0′, respectively. It follows that m~0=i(m0)R′ is contained in m0′, that is, m0′∣m~0. Thus, we have shown i(Rm,1)⊆Rm′,1′ implies m′∣m~.
For the converse, suppose that m′∣m~. Let a∈Rm,1, so that a∈1+m0 and w(a)>0 for every w∣m∞. We have 1+m~0⊆1+m0′, and if w′∣m∞′, then w′∣m~, so that (w′∘i)∣m∞. Hence, i(a)∈1+m0′, and if w′∣m∞′, then (w′∘i)(a)>0. That is, i(a)∈Rm′,1′. Hence, i(Rm,1)⊆Rm′,1′, as desired.
∎
In the setup from Lemma 9.4, suppose that m′∣m~. The inclusion i∣R:R↪R′ induces homomorphisms (R/m0)∗→(R′/m~0)∗ and ∏w∣m∞{±1}→∏(w′∘i)∣m∞{±1}. Combining these, gives us a homomorphism φ:(R/m)∗→(R′/m~)∗. These maps give rise to the following commutative diagram
[TABLE]
Proposition 9.5**.**
Let m and m′ be moduli for K and K′, respectively, and let Γ and Γ′ be subgroups of (R/m)∗ and (R′/m′)∗, respectively. Suppose that there is an inclusion of number fields i:K↪K′. Then, using the notation from the preceding discussion, we have the following:
- (1)
i(Rm,Γ)⊆Rm′,Γ′′* if and only if m′∣m~ and πm~,m′∘φ(Γ)⊆Γ′.*
2. (2)
*If the equivalent conditions in (1) are satisfied, so that there is an inclusion ι:K⋊K×↪K′⋊(K′)× that restricts to an inclusion R⋊Rm,Γ↪R′⋊Rm′,Γ′′,
then there is an injective -homomorphism C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ)↪C∗(R′⋊Rm′,Γ′′) such that v(b,a)↦v(ι(b),ι(a)) for all (b,a)∈R⋊Rm,Γ.
Proof.
(1): Suppose that i(Rm,Γ)⊆Rm′,Γ′′. Then i(Rm,1)⊆Rm′,1′, so Lemma 9.4 implies that m′∣m~. Let γ∈Γ, and write γ=[a]m for some a∈Rm,Γ. Using commutativity of (6), we have
[TABLE]
Since i(a) lies in Rm′,Γ′′ by assumption, we have [i(a)]m′∈Γ′. Hence, πm~,m′∘φ(Γ)⊆Γ′.
For the converse, suppose that m′∣m~ and πm~,m′∘φ(Γ)⊆Γ′. Let a∈Rm,Γ. We need to show that i(a) lies in Rm′,Γ′′, that is, we need to show that [i(a)]m′ lies in Γ′. By commutativity of (6), we have [i(a)]m′=πm~,m′∘φ([a]m). Since [a]m∈Γ and πm~,m′∘φ(Γ)⊆Γ′, we have πm~,m′∘φ([a]m)∈Γ′, as desired.
(2): By [C-D-L, Proposition 3.2 and Theorem 4.13], there is an injective *-homomorphism ψ:C∗(R⋊R×)→C∗(R′⋊(R′)×) such that ψ(v(b,a))=v(ι(b),ι(a)). Let θ and θ′ by the canonical injective *-homomorphisms θ:C∗(R⋊Rm,Γ)→C∗(R⋊R×) and θ′:C∗(R′⋊RΓ′′)→C∗(R′⋊(R′)×) from Proposition 9.2. There is a (unique) *-homomorphism ρ such that the following diagram commutes:
[TABLE]
Moreover, it is not difficult to see that ρ is injective and ρ(v(b,a))=v(ι(b),ι(a)).
∎