Spectrum of Weighted Composition Operators. Part V. Spectrum and essential spectra of weighted rotation-like operators
Arkady Kitover, Mehmet Orhon

TL;DR
This paper introduces weighted rotation-like operators, explores their essential spectra, and provides detailed descriptions of these spectra for weighted rotation operators in Banach spaces of measurable and analytic functions.
Contribution
It defines a new class of weighted rotation-like operators and analyzes their essential spectra, offering comprehensive spectral descriptions in specific Banach spaces.
Findings
Characterization of essential spectra of weighted rotation-like operators
Complete descriptions of spectra for weighted rotation operators in certain Banach spaces
Development of a framework for spectral analysis of rotation-like operators
Abstract
We introduce the class of weighted "rotation-like" operators and study general properties of essential spectra of such operators. Then we use this approach to investigate and in some cases completely describe essential spectra of weighted rotation operators in Banach spaces of measurable and analytic functions.
Peer Reviews
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.
Spectrum of Weighted Composition Operators
Part V
Spectrum and essential spectra of weighted rotation-like operators.
Arkady Kitover
Community College of Philadelphia, 1700 Spring Garden St., Philadelphia, PA, USA
and
Mehmet Orhon
University of New Hampshire, Durham, NH, 03824
Abstract.
We introduce the class of weighted ”rotation-like” operators and study general properties of essential spectra of such operators. Then we use this approach to investigate and in some cases completely describe essential spectra of weighted rotation operators in Banach spaces of measurable and analytic functions.
Key words and phrases:
Weighted rotation-like operators, spectrum, Fredholm spectrum, essential spectra
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary 47B33; Secondary 47B48, 46B60
Dedicated to Eric Nordgren and to the memory of Herbert Kamowitz
1. Introduction
This paper is a continuation of the study of the spectrum and the essential spectra of weighted composition operators undertaken by the first named author in [23] - [26], see also [1].
To illustrate what the paper is about let us consider the following example. Let be a Banach ideal space ( see Definition 2.6 below) of Lebesgue measurable functions on the unit circle such that , and the norm on is rotation invariant. Consider a non-periodic rotation of the circle. Let be the corresponding composition operator on and where . Then it follows from the results in [23] - [25] that the spectrum of is a connected rotation-invariant subset of the complex plane, and the essential spectra of the operator coincide with its spectrum. Such a simple description of spectra is due to two circumstances:
(1) Non-periodic rotations are ergodic.
(2) The composition operator is an invertible isometry on .
But it is another property of , not used in [23] - [25], we are especially interested in here:
(3) where is the multiplication operator, , , and is not a root of unity.
Property (3) gives the rise to the definition of rotation-like operators introduced and studied below in Section 3.
The structure of the paper is as follows. In Section 2 we introduce the notations, recall the basic definitions, and state some known results needed in the sequel. In Section 3 we introduce the notion of a ”rotation-like” operator and prove some results about the spectrum and essential spectra of weighted ”rotation-like” operators. In sections 4, 5, and 6 we discuss the weighted rotations and/or weighted ”rotation-like” operators acting on Banach ideal spaces, spaces of analytic functions, and on uniform algebras, respectively, and prove some general results concerning the essential spectra of such operators. Finally, in Section 7 we apply the results from Sections 3 - 6, as well as from [23] - [26] to study the essential spectra of weighted ”rotation-like” operators in various Banach spaces of analytic functions.
It is worth noticing that while weighted rotations have some properties that greatly simplify the study of their spectra, there are many instances when our knowledge of these spectra remains, at best, incomplete. We highlighted the corresponding questions by putting them as open problems in the text of the paper.
2. Preliminaries
In the sequel we use the following standard notations
is the semigroup of all natural numbers.
is the ring of all integers.
is the field of all real numbers.
is the field of all complex numbers.
is the unit circle. We use the same notation for the unit circle considered as a subset of the complex plane and as the group of all complex numbers with modulus 1.
is the open unit disc.
is the closed unit disc.
For any we denote by , , and the open unit polydisc, the unit torus, and the open unit ball in , respectively.
All the linear spaces are considered over the field of complex numbers.
Let be an open subset of . We denote by the vector space of all functions analytic in with the topology of uniform convergence on compact subsets of .
The algebra of all bounded linear operators on a Banach space is denoted by .
Let A be a commutative unital Banach algebra. We denote by and by the space of maximal ideals and the Shilov boundary of , respectively.
Let be a set, be a bijection, and be a complex-valued function on . Then
, , is the iteration of ,
,
, , is the iteration of the inverse map ,
, , .
Recall that an operator is called semi-Fredholm if its range is closed in and either or codim .
The index of a semi-Fredholm operator is defined as
ind = - .
The subset of consisting of all semi-Fredholm operators is denoted by .
.
.
is the set of all Fredholm operators in .
is the set of all Weyl operators in .
Let be a bounded linear operator on a Banach space . As usual, we denote the spectrum of by and its spectral radius by .
We will consider the following subsets of .
.
.
Remark 2.1**.**
The notations and refer, of course, to the approximate point spectrum and the residual spectrum of , respectively. But, because the corresponding definitions vary in the literature, we prefer to avoid using this terminology.
Following [14] we consider the following spectra of .
is the semi-Fredholm spectrum of .
.
is the Fredholm spectrum of .
is the Weyl spectrum of .
there is a component of the set such that and the intersection of with the resolvent set of is not empty.
It is well known (see e.g. [14]) that the sets are nonempty closed subsets of and that , where all the inclusions can be proper. Nevertheless all the spectral radii are equal to the same number, , (see [14, Theorem I.4.10]) which is called the essential spectral radius of . It is also known (see [14]) that the spectra are invariant under compact perturbations, but in general is not.
We will need two results on semi-Fredholm operators. The first of them is the following well known lemma (see e.g. [36, Lemma 1] or [10, Theorems 4.2.1, 4.2.2, and 4.4.1])
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let and be a continuous map from into the Banach algebra such that , and . Then ind = ind .
The second result was proved in [34, Theorem 1]
Theorem 2.3**.**
Let be a Banach space and . Assume that and that the operator is semi-Fredholm. Then is a pole of the resolvent of .
Theorems 2.4 - 2.7 below are corollaries of more general results proved in [23] - [25].
Theorem 2.4**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space and be a homeomorphism of onto itself. Let and let
[TABLE]
Assume that
- (a)
The set of all -periodic points is of first category in . 2. (b)
There is no open nonempty subset of such that the sets are pairwise disjoint (where means the -th iteration of ).
Then is a rotation invariant subset of the complex plane. 3. (c)
If additionally cannot be represented as union of two disjoint nonempty clopen -invariant subsets then is connected.
Theorem 2.5**.**
Let be a unital uniform Banach algebra and be an automorphism of . Let and . Let be the homeomorphism of generated by . (Notice that ). The operator can be considered as a weighted composition operator on and on . Then
- (a)
, 2. (b)
.
Recall the following definition.
Definition 2.6**.**
A Banach space is called a Banach ideal space (see e.g. [20]) if there is a measure space such that is an order ideal in the vector lattice of all (classes of) -measurable functions on and the norm on is a lattice norm compatible with the order on , i.e. is a Banach space with norm such that .
Theorem 2.7**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space and be a finite regular Borel probability measure on . Let be a measure preserving homeomorphism of onto itself such that where is the set of all –periodic points in . Assume that
- (1)
* is a Banach ideal space of -measurable functions, and* 2. (2)
the ideal center is isomorphic to , and 3. (3)
the composition operator , , is bounded on and .
(In particular, conditions (1) - (3) above are satisfied if is an interpolation space (see e.g. [6]) between and .)
Let , and let be the weighted composition operator,
[TABLE]
Then and is a rotation invariant subset of the complex plane.
Moreover, if is ergodic then the set is connected.
The next theorem provides a formula for the spectral radius of some weighted composition operators (for the proof see [27]).
Theorem 2.8**.**
Let be a Banach space and be a closed unital commutative subalgebra of . Assume that for every
[TABLE]
where is the Gelfand transform of and is the norm of in .
Let be such that and . Let be the homeomorphism of generated by the automorphism of . Finally, let and . Then
[TABLE]
where is the set of all -invariant regular probability Borel measures on .
In the sequel we will often use the following definition.
Definition 2.9**.**
Let be a Banach space and . Let and . We define the operator as
[TABLE]
The next lemma follows from (3) by a direct computation.
Lemma 2.10**.**
[TABLE]
We will conclude this section with a simple but useful lemma (see [23, Lemma 3.6, p. 643])
Lemma 2.11**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space, be a homeomorphism of onto itself, and . Let be defined as
[TABLE]
Let , . Then if and only if there is a such that
[TABLE]
3. Weighted rotation-like operators and some properties of their spectra
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be a Banach space and be an invertible element of . We say that is a rotation-like operator if there is an , , and a such that and .
Remark 3.2**.**
Without the assumption that Definition 3.1 becomes meaningless: every invertible operator on would be ”rotation-like”.
Definition 3.3**.**
Let be a rotation-like operator on . Let
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
It is obvious that is a multiplicative unital semigroup in and that is a unital semigroup of . We denote the subgroup of generated by by , i.e.
[TABLE]
Definition 3.4**.**
Let be a rotation-like operator. Let be the commutant of in and let . We call the operator a weighted rotation-like operator.
Theorem 3.5**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator and . Let . Assume that the operator is invertible from the left.
Then, .
Moreover, if then .
Proof.
Let and let , , . Then . But
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Recalling that the operator is bounded from below we see that . Hence . Now, whether is a root of unity or not, the statement that becomes trivial, because in the latter case we have .
Assume now that . It is equivalent (see e.g. [6]) to the existence of a sequence such that , , and the sequence is singular, i.e. it does not contain a norm convergent subsequence. By the first part of the proof all we need is to prove that the sequence is also singular. If not, we can assume without loss of generality that . Let be a left inverse of . Then , a contradiction. ∎
Corollary 3.6**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator. Assume one of the following conditions.
- (1)
Every operator from has a left inverse and the group is of infinite order. 2. (2)
There is an such that has a left inverse and is not a root of unity.
Then the sets , , and are rotation invariant.
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator. Assume one of the following conditions.
- (1)
Every operator from is invertible and the group is of infinite order. 2. (2)
There is an such that is invertible and is not a root of unity.
Then the spectrum, , the essential spectra , as well as , are rotation invariant.
Proof.
The set is rotation invariant in virtue of Corollary 3.6 and the fact that if then .
Next, the relations and show that the sets and are rotation invariant.
To prove that is rotation invariant let , i.e. the operator is Fredholm but its index is not equal to [math]. Then , i.e. for every the operator is Fredholm. Because the set of Fredholm operators is open in and the index of a Fredholm operator is stable under small norm perturbations (see e.g. [22]) we see that .
Finally, we can conclude that the set is rotation invariant based on its definition and the fact that both and the resolvent set of are rotation invariant. ∎
The conditions of invertibility or one-sided invertibility we had to impose in the previous results, are quite heavy and it is desirable to weaken them. That leads to the following problem.
Problem 3.8**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator. Assume one of the following conditions.
- (1)
The group is of infinite order and for every and every we have (respectively, ). 2. (2)
For an such that is not a root of unity and for every we have (respectively, ).
Is it true that under these assumptions the statement of Theorem 3.5 (respectively, Corollary 3.7) remains correct?
We will now state and prove some partial results we obtained when trying to solve Problem 3.8.
Lemma 3.9**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator. Assume that and is not a root of unity. Assume also that there is a sequence of polynomials such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then the sets and are rotation invariant.
Proof.
Let . Without loss of generality we can assume that . Let , , and
[TABLE]
The proof of Theorem 3.5 shows that it is sufficient to prove that . Assume to the contrary that . Then and conditions (6) and (7) guarantee that , in contradiction with (8). ∎
Theorem 3.10**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator. Assume the following conditions.
- (a)
There is an such that is not a root of unity. 2. (b)
The weight belongs to the closure in the operator norm of the subalgebra generated by and the identical operator in . 3. (c)
For any we have . 4. (d)
.
Then the sets and are rotation invariant.
Proof.
I. Let us first consider the case when . If our statement follows from Lemma 3.9. Therefore, we can assume without loss of generality that . Let . Let , , and . We claim that if then . Indeed, if then the inclusion follows from the proof of Theorem 3.5. If, on the other hand, then , in contradiction with .
Thus, the problem is reduced to the following. Let and let be an isolated point in the set . Then we need to prove that .
Notice that the set is a clopen subset of . Let be the corresponding spectral projection and be the corresponding nontrivial spectral subspace of and (see e.g. [11, p. 575]).
Next notice that the space is -invariant. To prove it let . Then and, because we have
[TABLE]
A similar reasoning shows that
[TABLE]
and therefore .
Let us denote by and the restrictions of, respectively, and on . We need to prove that . If not, then there is an open interval such that the resolvent is analytic in . The formulas
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
show that for any and for any the vector function is analytic in . Because is not a root of unity, for any large sufficient the function is analytic in and therefore in contradiction with condition .
II. Consider the general case. Let , , and . If then ; therefore assume that . For any we can find a polynomial , , such that . Then , and therefore the sequence is bounded. Taking, if necessary, a subsequence of this sequence we can assume that , and therefore . The proof can now be finished as in part I. ∎
The proof of the following theorem is similar to that of Theorem 3.10 and therefore we omit it.
Theorem 3.11**.**
Let be a weighted rotation-like operator. Assume the following conditions.
- (a)
The group is of infinite order. 2. (b)
The operators from commute. 3. (c)
The weight is invertible in and belongs to the closure in the operator norm of the subalgebra generated by and the identical operator in . 4. (d)
For any we have . 5. (e)
.
Then the set is rotation invariant.
We can relax conditions of Theorem 3.10 but at the price of being able to prove only a considerably weaker result.
Theorem 3.12**.**
Assume that
- (A)
* is an invertible weighted rotation-like operator.* 2. (B)
For any and for any we have . 3. (C)
The group is of infinite order.
Then there is a real positive number such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
. First notice that for any we have . Therefore, we can assume without loss of generality that . Assume, contrary to our statement, that does not contain any circle centered at [math]. Let and . There are an and numbers such that , , and for any we have
[TABLE]
where .
Condition (C) of the theorem guarantees that there are an and an such that for any
[TABLE]
Fix an arbitrary . The vector valued function is analytic in the region } and guarantees that it can be analytically extended on some open neighborhood of . From easily follows that
[TABLE]
Combining (9) and (10) we see that the function is analytic in the region . Repeating this argument we come to the conclusion that the function is analytic in and therefore identically zero. Thus, , a contradiction. ∎
Next we will discuss some conditions of absence (or presence) of circular gaps in the spectrum of .
Theorem 3.13**.**
Let be a rotation-like operator such that .
Let be an invertible weight such that where is the double commutant of and let .
Assume that there is a circular gap in , i.e. there is a positive real number such that is the union of two nonempty sets, and , such that and . Let and be the corresponding spectral subspaces of and , - the corresponding spectral projections.
Then the projections , commute with and moreover, . 111We do not assume that is a commutative semigroup.
Proof.
First notice that because we have
[TABLE]
Next, , where . The conditions of the proposition together with equality (11) guarantee that the operators pairwise commute.
Therefore, if and , then it is immediate to see that
[TABLE]
From (12) and from the fact that and we obtain that , hence and .
Similarly, for any and any we have
[TABLE]
and therefore .
By considering the operator we obtain in the same way that and .
Hence, and therefore commutes with projections .
Next, let and . Then whence and . Similarly we obtain that . Therefore commutes with the spectral projections .
Finally, Let . Because the projections commute with they commute with . ∎
Corollary 3.14**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 3.13. Assume also that the either or does not contain any idempotent such that .
Then the set is connected.
If, additionally, the set is rotation invariant then it is either an annulus or a circle centered at [math].
We finish this section with the discussion of the following question: is it possible in some cases to extend the result of Theorem 2.8 without assuming condition (1) in the statement of this theorem? At the present we have only a very limited result related to this problem.
Theorem 3.15**.**
Let be a rotation-like operator such that and let be such that , where is not a root of unity. Assume that where is a polynomial and that is invertible in . Assume also that there are sequences and such that , is a primitive root of unity, and for any positive real number we have
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where is the Gelfand transform of considered as an element of the commutative Banach algebra which is the operator norm closure of the algebra generated by and , is the homeomorphism of the Shilov boundary generated by the automorphism , and is the set of all -invariant regular Borel probability measures on .
Proof.
Let be the degree of and let be its roots in . Then . Without loss of generality we can assume that . Next,
[TABLE]
If in the right part of (14) we substitute for the right part becomes
[TABLE]
Condition (13) together with the condition guarantee that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Because is invertible and is not a root of unity we see that does not intersect the circles centered at [math] with the radii . We have to consider three cases.
. . Then
[TABLE]
where for some constant , . Therefore,
[TABLE]
. . Then, similarly to case we get
[TABLE]
. Finally, if we assume that there is a natural , , such that , and , then
[TABLE]
The statement of the theorem follows from (16) - (20). ∎
Problem 3.16**.**
Will the statement of Theorem 3.15 remain true if we assume only that is not a root of unity and ?
4. Weighted rotation operators on Banach ideal spaces
In this subsection we will complement Theorem 2.7 by some results concerning the spectral radius of weighted composition operators on Banach ideal spaces. Then we will consider in more details the case of weighted rotation-like operators acting on Banach ideals of where is a compact abelian group and is the Haar measure.
In what follows we assume notations and conditions from the statement of Theorem 2.7.
We will also assume temporarily that the homeomorphism is uniquely ergodic, i.e. is the unique -invariant regular Borel probability measure on .
Let us agree (as it is customary) that if we will say that , or that is semicontinuous, et cetera, instead of stating more rigorously that , considered as a class of -a.e. coinciding -measurable functions on , has a representative that is continuous (respectively, semicontinuous, et cetera) on .
By Theorem 2.8
[TABLE]
where is the homeomorphism of the space of maximal ideals, , of the algebra induced by the isomorphism of (considered as a closed subalgebra of ), is the set of all -invariant regular Borel probability measures on , and is the Gelfand transform of .
It follows that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, applying again Theorem 2.8 we see that if then
[TABLE]
As the next example shows equality (21) becomes in general false if we assume only that .
Example 4.1**.**
Let be the normalised Lebesgue measure on . Let be defined as , where and is not a root of unity. Let be a nowhere dense closed subset of such that . Notice that for any we have . Let be the Gelfand compact of the algebra . For any let be the Gelfand transform of . Let be the support of the function in . Then is a clopen subset of and . Let be such that on and on . Let be the homeomorphism of onto itself generated by the isomorphism of . Notice that and therefore there exists a -invariant regular probability Borel measure on such that . On the other hand, if is the functional on such that then it is immediate that is a -invariant regular probability Borel measure on and that . Because is the only -invariant probability Borel measure on for any we have
[TABLE]
Nevertheless, the condition is not necessary for .
Theorem 4.2**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 2.7. Assume also that the map is uniquely ergodic. Let be an upper semicontinuous function on . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Being an upper semicontinuous function is the lower envelope of the set (see [7, p.146]), i.e.
[TABLE]
It follows that . Consider first the case when i.e. For any such that let . Then
[TABLE]
But the functional is order continuous on , hence
[TABLE]
Assume now that and for each consider and . Then by the previous part of the proof we have
[TABLE]
∎
Corollary 4.3**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 4.2. Then
- (1)
If is lower semicontinuous and invertible in then
[TABLE] 2. (2)
If is -Riemann integrable on 222The definition of Riemann integrable function on a compact topological space endowed with a Borel measure can be found in [8, p.130]. then
[TABLE] 3. (3)
If is -Riemann integrable on and invertible in then
[TABLE]
Proof.
is trivial because if is invertible and lower semicontinuous then is upper semicontinuous.
and follow from the fact that (see [8]) if is -Riemann integrable then -a.e. where (respectively, ) is an upper semicontinuous (respectively, lower semicontinuous) function. ∎
Recall that a topological group is called monothetic if there is such that the subgroup is dense in . Clearly, every monothetic group is abelian.
Corollary 4.4**.**
Let be a compact monothetic Hausdorff 333The condition that is Hausdorff is often included in the definition of topological group. topological group and let be such that . Let be the Haar measure on . Let and let .
Let be a Banach ideal in such that the ideal center , the composition operator is defined and bounded on , and . Finally let .
Then
- (1)
* is a rotation invariant connected subset of .* 2. (2)
If is upper semicontinuous then
[TABLE] 3. (3)
If is -Riemann integrable then
[TABLE]
We can prove a result similar to Theorem 4.2 but not involving the condition that is uniquely ergodic. Let be a compact Hausdorff space with a probability Borel measure . Let be a -preserving homeomorphism of onto itself and let be an upper semicontinuous function on . Because is a bounded Borel function on the following expression is well defined
[TABLE]
where is the set of all -invariant regular Borel probability measures on .
Remark 4.5**.**
We need to emphasize that in (22) is considered as an individual function, not as an element of . Indeed, changing values of on a Borel set such that may change the value of the expression in (22).
The proof of the next theorem goes along the same lines as that of Theorem 4.2 and we omit it.
Theorem 4.6**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 2.7. Assume additionally that coincides -a.e. with an upper semicontinuous function . Then
[TABLE]
Problem 4.7**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 2.7. Assume also that the map is uniquely ergodic and that . Is it true that coincides -a.e. with an upper semicontinuous function?
We finish this section with the following variant of Theorem 2.8 which we will need in the sequel.
Theorem 4.8**.**
Let be a compact abelian group, , and . Let and for any let . Let be the closed subgroup of generated by . Let be the Haar measure on Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Assume first that is invertible in . For any there is such that
[TABLE]
where . Notice that where . It is immediate to see that where convergence is in weak⋆ topology on . Let be a limit point of the sequence in . Then for any we have and follows.
If is not invertible in we will consider operators , and then apply the first part of the proof and Lebesgue’s Dominated Convergence Theorem.
∎
5. General properties of spectra of weighted rotation
operators on spaces of analytic functions
The goal of this section is to describe some general properties of spectra of weighted rotations operators in Banach spaces of analytic functions. These properties will be helpful later when we discuss some concrete Banach spaces of analytic functions.
Theorem 5.1**.**
Let be an open connected subset of and be a Banach space such that . Assume that . Let be an analytic automorphism of and , . Assume that the operators and are defined and bounded on . Finally, assume that there are a compact subset of such that , and a -invariant regular Borel probability measure on such that for any we have
[TABLE]
Then
- (1)
* is either empty or the singleton , where .* 2. (2)
. 3. (3)
If the set is connected and there are no isolated points of on the circle , then .
Proof.
(1) Let , , and . We can assume that . Indeed, otherwise . Then
[TABLE]
Because is -invariant, it follows from (23) and (24) that
[TABLE]
(2) Follows from (1) and the fact that .
(3) If is a closed interval , , then the statement follows from (1) and the fact that .
Otherwise and our statement follows from the fact that does not have isolated points and Theorem 2.3. ∎
Problem 5.2**.**
Is it possible to dispense with the condition that is connected in part (3) of the statement of Theorem 5.1?
There is one special but important case when the answer to Problem 5.2 is positive.
Theorem 5.3**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 5.1. Assume additionally that
(a) For every the dynamical system is minimal, i.e. for every the set is dense in .
(b) For any open nonempty subset of we have
[TABLE]
(c) The operator is a rotation-like operator and for any (see Definition 3.3), .
Then
- (1)
For any , . 2. (2)
.
Proof.
(1) It follows immediately from (23), (26), and Baire category theorem that there is such that for any we have . Let and , , be such that . Notice that . Indeed, otherwise for any we have , and it follows from the minimality of the system and from (23) that . Now, if and then for some we have and therefore .
(2) Assume to the contrary that there is a . Then . Let be such that , and let be such that , , . Then and
[TABLE]
We consider two possibilities.
(I) is a root of unity. Let , , and . Then it follows from (27) that . But then in virtue of minimality of the system and part (1) of the proof we have that , , a contradiction.
(II) is not a root of unity. It follows from (27) that . Then there is an open subinterval of such that . Let be a root of unity such that and . It remains to repeat the argument from part (I) above. ∎
We proceed with applying Theorems 5.1 and 5.3 to special situations when is the unit disc , a polydisc , or a unit ball .
Corollary 5.4**.**
Let be a Banach space of functions analytic in . Let be such that
[TABLE]
and , , be a function analytic in . Assume that the operator ,
[TABLE]
is defined and bounded on . Assume additionally that there are and such that . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Fix an and let and . It follows from (28) that for any the system is minimal. The measure on is defined in an obvious way: if is a Borel subset of then where is the Haar measure on . It is immediate to see that all the conditions of Theorem 5.3 are satisfied. ∎
Assume conditions of Corollary 5.4 and let . It follows from Theorem 5.3 that . Some additional information about the point spectrum of weighted rotation operators in spaces of analytic functions is contained in the next corollary.
Corollary 5.5**.**
Let be an open connected rotation invariant subset of . Assume also that and let be the largest positive number such that . Let and let , . Let be the weighted rotation operator in ,
[TABLE]
Let . Then
- (a)
* in ,* 2. (b)
.
Proof.
(a) By (25)
[TABLE]
for any . If then it follows from (29) and Jensen’s formula (see e.g. [2]) that cannot have zeros in . Let . Then where and , and therefore
[TABLE]
Combining (30), Jensen’s formula for , and (25) we come to a contradiction.
(b) Let and . If then it follows from (a) that . If, on the other hand, then for some , where . Hence,
[TABLE]
Therefore and . ∎
We can now prove a result similar to Corollary 5.5 for functions analytic in a domain in .
Corollary 5.6**.**
Let be an open connected subset of such that and for any and for any we have 444We do not call rotation invariant because usually this term is reserved for domains invariant under all linear unitary transformations of .
[TABLE]
Let , and let be the weighted rotation operator in ,
[TABLE]
Let . Then
- (a)
, 2. (b)
.
Proof.
We will prove the corollary by induction. For the statement follows from Corollary 5.5. Assume that our claim is true for . Let and . Consider . there are two possibilities.
(I). . Then it is immediate to see that our claim follows from the induction assumption.
(II). . In this case , and . It remains to notice that and apply the induction assumption. ∎
It is possible now to improve the result of Corollary 5.4.
Theorem 5.7**.**
Let be an open connected subset of such that and for any , we have
[TABLE]
Let us fix . Assume that there is such that is not a root of unity. Let , . Let be a Banach space of functions analytic in . Assume that the operator ,
[TABLE]
is defined and bounded on . Assume additionally that there is such that . Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let . Then . Let be such that . Then for any we have . Therefore and the set is uncountable in contradiction with Corollary 5.6 (b). ∎
Remark 5.8**.**
Assume conditions of Theorem 5.7. It follows that in order to obtain a complete description of essential spectra of it is sufficient to
- (1)
Describe . 2. (2)
Describe . 3. (3)
Find for any .
6. Uniform algebras. Polydisc and ball algebras
Definition 6.1**.**
Let be a compact Hausdorff space and be a homeomorphism of onto itself. A nonempty subset of is called -wandering if the sets are pairwise disjoint.
Theorem 6.2**.**
Let be a unital uniform algebra. Let be an automorphism of and be the corresponding homeomorphism of (and ) onto itself. Let and . Assume that
- (a)
The set of all -periodic points is of first category in . 2. (b)
There are no open -wandering subsets of .
Then
- (1)
* and .* 2. (2)
The sets are rotation invariant subsets of . 3. (3)
If is not the union of two nonempty clopen -invariant subsets then is a disk centered at [math]. 4. (4)
If, moreover, is not the union of two nonempty clopen -invariant subsets then there are three possibilities.
- (I).
If is invertible in then is an annulus or a circle centered at [math]. 2. (II).
If is not invertible in then is either a disk centered at [math] or the singleton . 3. (III).
If is invertible in but not invertible in then is an annulus or a circle centered at [math] and is the open disc where
[TABLE]
where the minimum is taken over the set of all -invariant regular Borel probability measures on .
Proof.
The only part of the statement of the theorem that requires a proof is that . The rest follows immediately from Theorems 2.4 and 2.5.
Part (A). We will prove that . Let .
Assume first that . Then the set . Conditions (a) and (b) combined guarantee that has no isolated points and therefore we can find open nonempty pairwise disjoint subsets , of such that on . Let , , and . Then . Notice that the sequence is singular. Indeed, otherwise there is a subsequence of such that . Then and . On the other hand, it follows from the construction of the sequence that , a contradiction.
Assume now that . Without loss of generality we can assume that . By Lemma 2.11 there is such that
[TABLE]
It follows from (a) and (31) that we can find nonempty open subsets of with properties.
The sets are pairwise disjoint.
For any and for any ,
[TABLE]
Let be such that and
[TABLE]
Let (see Definition 2.9). It follows from (32), (33), and Lemma 2.10 that , , and . Thus, .
Part (B). Now we will prove that . Let again . Notice that if are distinct points in then it follows easily from the definition of Shilov boundary that
[TABLE]
The case is rather obvious. Indeed, the conditions of the theorem guarantee that there are pairwise distinct points such that . Let . Then , , and . Thus, the sequence is singular.
If we again can assume without loss of generality that . Applying Lemma 2.11 to the operator we see that there is such that
[TABLE]
It follows from (34) and (a) that there are such that
All the points are pairwise distinct.
[TABLE]
Let and let . Then it follows from (35) and Lemma 2.10 that . It remains to notice that for any we have and therefore the sequence is singular. ∎
Remark 6.3**.**
Condition (b) in Theorem 6.2 is satisfied, in particular, if there is a -invariant regular Borel probability measure on such that for any nonempty open subset of we have .
Example 6.4**.**
Let and be the Banach algebra of all functions analytic in the polydisc and continuous on . It is well known (see e.g. [3] or [19]) that the space of maximal ideals of the algebra can be identified with and its Shilov boundary with .
Recall that a Möbius transformation of onto itself is called elliptic if it has a fixed point in . If is an elliptic Möbius transformation then there is another Möbius transformation such that is a rotation of .
Let be a permutation of the set , be elliptic Möbius transformations on such that for at least one the map is not periodic. Let , let be defined as
[TABLE]
Finally, let .
Then by Theorems 2.4, 2.5, and 6.2 the sets and are rotation invariant connected subsets of .
Moreover, if is invertible in but not invertible in then
(a) If then and .
(b) If then .
Indeed, let . Then .
If then has a finite number of zeros in and therefore .
If and , then because cannot have isolated zeros in .
If and has no zeros in then it must have a zero, in . Let and let . Then and, because index is stable under small norm perturbations, .
Consider the following special case. Let be a non-periodic rotation of , i.e. for any
[TABLE]
where , and for at least one , is not a root of unity. Let , be the composition operator, , and .
Let be the closed subgroup of generated by and be the Haar measure on . For any let . Then
- (1)
. 2. (2)
By Theorem 4.8
[TABLE] 3. (3)
In particular, if the condition (28) is satisfied then
[TABLE]
where is the Haar measure on .
Example 6.5**.**
Let and be the Banach algebra of all functions analytic in the unit ball of and continuous in . Then ([3], [19]) and - the topological boundary of in . Let be a linear unitary transformation of such that for any , . Let and
[TABLE]
Then
- (1)
If is an invertible element of then and is either an annulus or a circle centered at [math]. 2. (2)
If is not invertible in then is a disc centered at [math]. 3. (3)
If is invertible in but not invertible in then is a disc centered at [math], is an annulus or a circle centered at [math], is an open disc centered at [math] and .
Example 6.6**.**
Let be a rotation invariant compact subset of . Let . We consider the Banach algebra of all functions continuous on and analytic in . It is known that the space of maximal ideals of is (see [19, Theorem 2.6.6, p. 88]) and that the Shilov boundary of is - the topological boundary of in (It follows from [19, Example 3.3.5 (2), p. 161]). Let . Assume that is not a root of unity. Let and let
[TABLE]
Then it follows from Theorem 6.2 that
(1) .
(2) The sets are rotation invariant.
(3) .
Remark 6.7**.**
Assume conditions of Example 6.6. It follows from the fact that is rotation invariant and the celebrated Vitushkin’s theorem (see e.g. [16, Theorem 8.2]) that , where is the closure in of the algebra of all rational functions with poles in . We are grateful to Professor O. Eroshkin for the corresponding information.
Problem 6.8**.**
Assume conditions of Example 6.6. Describe . Equivalently, assume that ; find necessary and/or sufficient conditions for .
We do not know the answer to Problem 6.8 even in the following situation. Let be the annulus , where . Let be not a root of unity and let
[TABLE]
Then and . Let . What is ?
Example 6.9**.**
Here we consider the Banach algebra of all functions analytic and bounded in the unit disc .
Corollary 6.10**.**
Let be a weighted rotation operator
[TABLE]
where and is not a root of unity. Then
- (1)
If then is either an annulus or a circle centered at [math]. 2. (2)
If is not invertible in , where for almost all is the radial limit of (see **[17]**), then is a disc centered at [math]. 3. (3)
If but is invertible in then is an annulus or a circle centered at [math], while is a disk. 4. (4)
Assume conditions of case (3) above. Then if and only if where is a finite Blaschke product and is the outer function in the canonical factorization of (**[17]**). Otherwise . 5. (5)
If is Riemann integrable then
[TABLE]
Proof.
(1) - (3) follow from Theorem 6.2 and the well known fact that the Shilov boundary of can be identified with the space of maximal ideals of the algebra (see e.g. [17, p. 174]).
(4) In virtue of (3) the index of the operator is constant in the open disc and coincides with . Consider the canonical factorization ([17, p. 67]) where is a Blaschke product, - a singular inner function, and - an outer function. If either is an infinite Blaschke product or the factor is nontrivial then it is immediate to see that . Otherwise is equal to the number of zeros of taking into consideration their multiplicities.
(5) follows from Corollary 4.3. ∎
Remark 6.11**.**
Statement (5) of Corollary 6.10 is not valid for an arbitrary . Indeed, et be the function constructed in Example 4.1. Then (see e.g. [17, p. 53]) there is an invertible such that the boundary values of on coincide a.e. with , and therefore is an annulus.
Problem 6.12**.**
Is an analogue of Corollary 6.10 true for weighted rotation operators on or for ?
7. Spectra of weighted rotation-like operators on Banach spaces of analytic
functions
7.1. Hardy - Banach spaces
In this subsection we will extensively use the fact that the Hardy space, where is a ”rich” closed subspace of . Namely, if is a nonnegative function from such that then there is a such that (see [17, p. 53]). It leads to the folowing definition.
Definition 7.1**.**
( [24, Definition 19]) Let be a Dedekind complete Banach lattice and be a closed subspace of . We say that is almost localized in if for any band in and for any there is a such that and where is the band projection on .
Theorem 7.2**.**
Let be a Hausdorff compact space, be a homeomorphism of onto itself, and be a -invariant regular Borel probability measure on such that for any nonempty open subset of we have . Let be a Banach ideal in such that , the composition operator is defined and bounded on , and moreover, . Assume also that where is the set of all -periodic points in .
Let be almost localized closed subspace of such that . Let be such that , and let . Then
(1) is a rotation invariant subset of .
Assume additionally that for any nonzero we have
[TABLE]
Then
(2) and .
Proof.
(1) The proof of Theorem 20 in [24] shows that and moreover that if the we can construct a sequence such that , , and in , which obviously implies that the sequence is singular and therefore .
The condition guarantees that the set , and therefore , is rotation invariant.
The equality follows from Theorem 4.5 in [25].
(2). Assume that . We have to consider two possibilities.
(a) - the topological boundary of in . Then, applying Lemma 2.2 and Theorem 2.3, we come to a contradiction.
(b) . Recalling that is rotation invariant and that the set is open in we see that the set contains an interval , . On the other hand if then must be an eigenvalue of . Indeed, otherwise we would have , a contradiction. Let be such that . Then
[TABLE]
Condition (36) guarantees that all the integrals in (37) converge, and because is a -invariant measure we have
[TABLE]
a contradiction. ∎
Problem 7.3**.**
Does statement (2) of Theorem 7.2 remain true without assuming condition (36)?
Example 7.4**.**
Let be the normalized Lebesgue measure on . Let be a Banach ideal space such that . Assume that is not a root of unity. Let . Assume that the operator , , is bounded on and that . Notice that this condition is automatically satisfied if is an interpolation space between and .
Let us identify the Hardy space with a closed subspace of and let . Then is a closed subspace of and consists of all functions from with boundary values in . Notice that operator acts on and . Let and let .
We claim that all the conditions of Theorem 7.2 are satisfied. Let be a band in . Than there is a measurable subset of such that and . Let . Fix . Let . There is (see [17, p.53]) such that coincide a.e. on with . It follows that is almost localized in .
Condition (36) is satisfied for any nonzero function from (see e.g. [17, p.51]).
As a result we obtain the following corollary which in virtue of Corollary 6.10 provides a complete description of essential spectra of on .
Corollary 7.5**.**
Let the operator and the Banach space be as described above. Then
[TABLE]
Remark 7.6**.**
If in Example 7.4 we assume that is an interpolation space between and then the results stated in that example can be extended to operators of the form where is an elliptic non-periodic automorphism of .
Example 7.7**.**
Let and be the normalized Lebesgue measure on . Let be a Banach ideal space in such that and the norm on is order continuous. Notice that the last condition implies that is an interpolation space. Let , be a non-periodic rotation of , and . Let .
We claim that the conditions of Theorem 7.2 are satisfied and, respectively, its conclusions remain valid for operator .
To see that is almost localized in let be a band in . Then where . Let be such that . Fix . Because the norm in is order continuous there is an open subset of such that , , and . Consider the function . Function is lower semicontinuous on and therefore (see [30, Theorem 3.5.3]) there is such that the boundary values of coincide a.e. on with .
Condition (36) follows from Theorem 3.3.5 in [30].
Under the conditions of this example we can also improve statement (2) of Theorem 7.2 by claiming that . The reasoning is the same as in Example 6.4
Note that if is an interpolation space then instead of non-periodic rotations of we can consider more general transformations considered in Example 6.4.
Example 7.8**.**
Instead of polydisc considered in the previous example we can consider Banach-Hardy spaces with order continuous norm on and weighted composition operators of the form
[TABLE]
where and is a non-periodic unitary transformation of . In this case the condition that is almost localized in follows from [32, Theorem 12.5] and condition (36) from [31, Theorem 5.6.4].
Problem 7.9**.**
Is it possible in Examples 7.7 and/or 7.8 to weaken the condition that the norm on is order continuous? Of course, of particular interest is the case of weighted rotation operators on and .
Example 7.10**.**
Let be an annulus in centered at [math]. The Hardy spaces were considered by Kas’yanyuk in [21] and by Sarason in [33]. Following [33] we consider the annulus
[TABLE]
Let . Then
[TABLE]
As usual, means the algebra of all bounded analytic functions in .
It is proved in [33] that , can be identified with a closed subspace of . Moreover, it follows from Theorem 9 in [33] that the space is almost localized in and that condition (36) is satisfied.
Let and be a non-periodic rotation of . Let us fix and let
[TABLE]
It follows from Theorems 7.2 and 3.13 that is a rotation invariant connected subset of . Moreover, we can add the following details.
(1) . Therefore is either a connected rotation invariant subset of or the union of two rotation invariant disjoint connected subsets.
(2) The set if it is nonempty, is the union of at most two open disjoint rotation invariant components: - an open disc centered at [math] and - an open annulus. If then the following conditions are equivalent
(a) ,
(b) there are constants such that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, if , we do not know under what are necessary and/or sufficient conditions for (cf. Problem 6.8).
7.2. Bergman spaces
Recall that the Bergman space , , consists of all functions analytic in and such that
[TABLE]
Endowed with the norm
[TABLE]
is a Banach space (see e.g. [13]). Let be not a root of unity and let . Clearly the operator
[TABLE]
is defined and bounded on . Vice versa, every multiplier of belongs to (see [13, Theorem 12, p. 59]).
Proposition 7.11**.**
The operator is invertible from the left and therefore by Theorems 3.5 and 5.7 the sets and are rotation invariant.
Proof.
The proof follows from the definition of norm in and the fact that is a nondecreasing function of on (see [12, Theorem 1.5, p. 9]). ∎
Proposition 7.12**.**
The spectrum is a circle, annulus, or disc centered at [math].
Proof.
First notice that by Theorem 2.8 we have
[TABLE]
By Proposition 7.11 it remains to prove that is connected. If not, then there is a positive such that where and . Let and be the corresponding spectral projections. Let and for any let . By Theorem 3.13 commutes with and therefore . Because is dense in we get that is the operator of pointwise multiplication by and therefore . But then is a nonzero idempotent in and hence , a contradiction. ∎
Propositions 7.11 and 7.12 give some information about the essential spectra of weighted rotations on Bergman spaces but fall short of providing a complete description of these spectra.
Problem 7.13**.**
Let , be not a root of unity, and
[TABLE]
Describe essential spectra of .
The theorem below provides a partial solution of Problem 7.13 under the additional assumption that the weight belongs to the disc-algebra .
Theorem 7.14**.**
Let and let be the canonical factorization of . Then
- (1)
If is invertible in then . 2. (2)
If is invertible in but not invertible in then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
. 3. (3)
If is not invertible in then .
Proof.
(1) Follows immediately from Theorem 2.8.
(2) By Proposition 7.12 and Theorem 2.8 . Let . We claim that . Indeed, let us fix , . It follows easily from Theorem 2.8 and the fact that is invertible in and continuous on that there are an and an such that
[TABLE]
Let , . Then it follows from (38) and the fact that is a nondecreasing function of on that
[TABLE]
It remains to prove that for we have . Using the stability of the index we see that it is sufficient to prove that . Notice that where is a finite Blaschke product and is invertible in . Therefore it is sufficient to notice that , as follows from [5, Proposition 1].
(3) By Theorem 5.7 it is sufficient to prove that . Let . Then by Theorem 2.4 . Without loss of generality we can assume that . By Lemma 2.11 there is a such that
[TABLE]
where . Let and let . Then (see [13, proof of Lemma 5, p.130])
[TABLE]
where is an arbitrary open neighborhood of in . For any let be an open neighborhood of in such that the sets , are pairwise disjoint.
Let us fix and let
[TABLE]
where .
Then it follows from (40) and (3) that
[TABLE]
From (41) and (4) follows that
[TABLE]
Because is arbitrary large and in virtue of (39) it follows from (42) that . ∎
For an open subset of and for the Bergman space is defined as
[TABLE]
where is the volume in . It is well known and easy to prove that endowed with the norm
[TABLE]
is a Banach space.
Analogues of Theorem 7.14 can be proved for weighted rotation operators in spaces and , . We will state the corresponding results and outline the changes that have to be made in the proof of Theorem 7.14.
Theorem 7.15**.**
Let , , and let be defined as
[TABLE]
where is a non-periodic rotation of . Then
(1) If is invertible in then is either a circle or an annulus centered at [math]. In particular, if condition (28) is satisfied then
[TABLE]
(2) If is invertible in but not invertible in then is a circle or an annulus, where and .
(3) If is not invertible in then .
Proof.
It is sufficient to prove that . The inverse inclusion and the rest of the statements of the theorem then would follow from Theorems2.4. Let
[TABLE]
Let be such that inequalities (39) hold. Because -periodic points are nowhere dense in we can for any find an open subset of such that the sets are pairwise disjoint and
[TABLE]
Let and let
[TABLE]
and let
[TABLE]
It follows from the computation in [13, Proof of Lemma 5, p.130] that for any
[TABLE]
Therefore uniformly on where is an arbitrary open neighborhood of in , and we can proceed as in the proof of part (3) of Theorem 7.14. ∎
Theorem 7.16**.**
Let be a unitary transformation of such that , let and let be defined as
[TABLE]
Then
(1) If is invertible in then is either a circle or an annulus centered at [math].
(2) If is invertible in but not invertible in then is a circle or an annulus, where , and .
(3) If is not invertible in then .
Sketch of the proof. Let . Let be such that inequalities (39) hold. For simplicity we assume that is not -periodic (if it is -periodic, we will apply the same procedure as in the proof of Theorem 7.15). Without loss of generality we can assume that . Let
[TABLE]
Fix and take an open neighborhood of in such that the sets are pairwise disjoint. There is an such that on . Let us fix an and notice that
[TABLE]
Applying integration by parts times to the last integral in (45) we can see that
[TABLE]
where the constant , does not depend on . Taking an such that and considering we obtain from (46) that uniformly on . The remaining part of the proof repeats verbatim the corresponding part of the proof of Theorem 7.14.
7.3. The Bloch space
The Bloch space consists of all functions analytic in and such that
[TABLE]
Endowed with the norm
[TABLE]
is a Banach space. The little Bloch space is the closure of polynomials in . It is well known (see [13]) that
[TABLE]
Let be the Banach space of all multipliers of . It was proved in [9, Theorem 1] that
[TABLE]
It follows from (47) and Theorem 2.8 that if , and
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
where is the homeomorphism of generated by the rotation of by and is the set of all -invariant regular probability Borel measures on . In particular, it is not difficult to see that if then
[TABLE]
Remark 7.17**.**
The second dual can be canonically identified with (see [13]). The operator can be restricted on and . Therefore , , and .
Theorem 7.18**.**
Let
[TABLE]
where is not a root of unity and .
Then the sets , and therefore are rotation invariant. Moreover the set is connected.
Proof.
The connectedness of follows from the description of and Theorem 3.13. Let us prove that is rotation invariant.
(I) Assume first that . Let , , and . Then and, considering if necessary , we can assume that . Let the points be such that . We need to consider two possibilities.
(a). Then by Montel’s theorem there is a subsequence that converges uniformly on compact subsets of to a nonzero function analytic in . It is immediate that and . Let . Then and
(b) . Let . If we can prove that
[TABLE]
then like in proof of Theorem 3.5 we will obtain that . To prove (49) notice that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
(II) We turn to the case when . Let , , and . If we can proceed as in part (I) of the proof. If, on the other hand, then like in part (Ia) we see that there is a nonzero such that , and we are done. ∎
We have the following analogue of Theorem 7.14
Theorem 7.19**.**
Let be not a root of unity, , and be the weighted rotation operator on ,
[TABLE]
Then
- (1)
If is invertible in then . 2. (2)
If is invertible in but not invertible in then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
. 3. (3)
If is not invertible in then .
Proof.
W will first prove the inclusion
[TABLE]
Let . We assume without loss of generality that . Let be such that inequalities (39) hold. Because is rotation invariant we can assume that . Fix and let be an open neighborhood of in such that inequalities (43) hold. Let
[TABLE]
Simple calculations show that
[TABLE]
Let . It follows from (51) that
[TABLE]
and we can proceed as in the proof of Theorem 7.14. ∎
Remark 7.20**.**
(1) It follows from [4, Theorem 4.1] that if then is invertible in if and only if it is invertible in .
(2) Analogues of Theorem 7.19 can be proved for weighted rotation operators on Bloch spaces in polydisc and in the unit ball of .
Problem 7.21**.**
Describe completely for an arbitrary weight . In particular, is it true that where is the operator on defined by the same formula as ?
7.4. The Dirichlet space
The Dirichlet space is the space of all functions analytic in and such that
[TABLE]
Endowed with norm (52) is a Hilbert space. A complete description of multipliers of is not trivial and involves Carleson measures. The interested reader is referred to [35] or [15].
We will consider as a member of the scale of spaces , where is the space of all functions analytic in and such that
[TABLE]
It follows easily from (53) that the norm on the Banach algebra satisfies (1). The proofs of the next two results are analogous to those of Theorem 7.18 and Theorem and we omit them.
Theorem 7.22**.**
Let and
[TABLE]
where is not a root of unity and .
Then the sets and are rotation invariant. Moreover, the set is connected.
Theorem 7.23**.**
Let . Let be not a root of unity, , and be the weighted rotation operator on ,
[TABLE]
Then
- (1)
If is invertible in then . 2. (2)
If is invertible in but not invertible in then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
. 3. (3)
If is not invertible in then .
7.5. Some spaces of analytic functions smooth in
Let and let be a Banach ideal space, . We will assume that the norm on is rotation invariant. For we denote by the derivative of of order . It is also convenient to put . In this subsection we consider the following Banach spaces of functions analytic in .
[TABLE]
Endowed with the norm
[TABLE]
is a Banach algebra.
[TABLE]
The norm on is defined as
[TABLE]
Theorem 7.24**.**
Let be not a root of unity and let . Let
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then,
[TABLE]
Theorem 7.25**.**
Let be not a root of unity and let . Let
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then the operators and are bounded in and , respectively and
[TABLE]
Remark 7.26**.**
In virtue of Example 6.4 and Corollary 7.5 Theorems 7.24 and 7.25 provide a complete description of essential spectra of in and , respectively.
The proofs of Theorems 7.24 and 7.25 are very similar and therefore we provide only (a little bit more complicated of two) proof of Theorem 7.25.
Proof of Theorem 7.25. Let be the closed subspace of defined as
[TABLE]
Clearly and . The map is a linear isometry of onto and it is immediate to see that
[TABLE]
It follows from (56) that
[TABLE]
where is a compact operator. It follows from (57) and from that . Because by Corollary 7.5 the sets , are rotation invariant we see that . Next notice that the operator , , is an isometry on and therefore by Theorem 3.5 the set is rotation invariant. Hence, .
It remains to notice that . Indeed, if then is an isolated eigenvalue of . Let be a corresponding eigenvector. Then and we have .
7.6. The space
In this last subsection we consider the Banach algebra of all functions analytic in with absolutely convergent Taylor series. In what follows is not a root of unity, , and
[TABLE]
The next proposition follows in a trivial way from Theorem 3.5, Corollary 3.14, and Theorem 5.3.
Proposition 7.27**.**
Let be defined by (58). Then
- (1)
. 2. (2)
* is a rotation invariant connected subset of .* 3. (3)
The sets and are rotation invariant.
We can get more information about spectra of at the price of imposing an additional condition on the weight . Consider the space ,
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
is the modulus of continuity of . It is easy to see that endowed with the norm
[TABLE]
is a Banach space. Moreover, and
[TABLE]
By the well known theorem of Bernstein (see e.g. [18, p.13]) where is the space of all functions on with absolutely convergent Fourier series.
Theorem 7.28**.**
Let . Then . In particular,
if is invertible in then
[TABLE]
otherwise
[TABLE]
Proof.
From the inclusions follows that
[TABLE]
It remains to notice that in virtue of (59) and Theorem 2.8 we have . ∎
Problem 7.29**.**
(a) Assume conditions of Theorem 7.28 and assume that is not invertible in . Is it true that ?
(b) Does the formula remain true for an arbitrary ?
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Abramovich Yu.A., Arenson E.L., and Kitover A.K., Banach C ( K ) 𝐶 𝐾 C(K) -modules and operators preserving disjointness, In: Pitman Research Notes in Mathematical Series, vol. 277. Longman Scientific and Tecnical (1992).
- 2[2] Ahlfors, L.V., Complex analysis. An introduction to the theory of analytic functions of one complex variable, International Series in pure and applied Mathematics (3rd ed.), Düsseldorf: Mc Graw–Hill (1979).
- 3[3] Alexander H. and Wermer J., Several complex variables and Banach algebras, third edition, Springer (1998).
- 4[4] Allen R.F. and Colonna F., Isometries and spectra of multiplication operators on the Bloch space, Bull. Aust. Math. Soc.79(2009), 147–160.
- 5[5] Axler S. and Bourdon P., Finite codimensional invariant subspaces of Bergman spaces, Transactions of the AMS, 306, n.2 (1988).
- 6[6] Bennet C. and Sharpley R., Interpolation of operators, Academic Press Inc. (1988).
- 7[7] Bourbaki N., General topology, Part 2, Addison - Wesley (1966).
- 8[8] Bourbaki N., Integration I, Springer (2004).
