Suppose I have a sequence of normal operators $T_n$ on some Hilbert space (separable say) that converge in the weak operator topology to $T$ and also have the same essential spectrum and spectrum as we vary $n$. Is it true that




where $\sigma_{ess}$ denotes the essential spectrum (only one reasonable definition for normal operators)? (Is it even true that $T$ is normal?)

What happens in the case that all the $T_n$ are unitary equivalent?


It is known that the set of unitary operators is wot dense in the unit ball of $B(H)$ when $H$ is infinite-dimensional. So, any non-normal element of the unit ball is a limit of unitaries (i.e. normals).

Regarding an example: Let $T$ be any non-normal operator in the unit ball, with spectrum $\sigma(T)$ properly contained in $\mathbb D$, and $\sigma_{\rm ess}(T)\subsetneq\mathbb T$. Consider, on $B(H\oplus H)$, the operator $$ X=\begin{bmatrix} T&0\\ 0& V\end{bmatrix}, $$ where $V$ is a unitary with $\sigma(V)=\sigma_{\rm ess}(V)=\mathbb T$. Then $X$ is not normal, and $\sigma(X)=\sigma(T)\cup\mathbb T$. Now let $\{W_j\}$ be a net of unitaries such that $W_j\to T$ wot. Then $$ U_j=\begin{bmatrix}W_j&0\\0& V\end{bmatrix} $$ is a unitary, $U_j\to X$ wot, and $\sigma(U_j)=\sigma_{\rm ess}(U_j)=\mathbb T$, while both $\sigma(X)$ and $\sigma_{\rm ess}(X)$ are strictly larger than $\mathbb T$.

Finally, as $H$ is infinite-dimensional, there exists a unitary $H\oplus H\to H$, and so the above example can be cramped back into $B(H)$.

  • $\begingroup$ That's a nice example, but here the spectrum of $T_n$ varies as we vary $n$. I'm wondering about the case when the spectrum and essential spectrum stays fixed. $\endgroup$ – Mathmo Jan 18 '17 at 17:47
  • $\begingroup$ My bad, I missed that. I'll edit soon with the full answer. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Jan 18 '17 at 17:51
  • $\begingroup$ Consider the operators in matrix form - take the Hilbert space $l^2(\mathbb{N})$. Then matrix elements converge and hence $T$ must be normal. $\endgroup$ – Mathmo Jan 18 '17 at 17:57
  • $\begingroup$ @Mathmo: no. See the edit. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Jan 18 '17 at 18:03
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, nice! I see, my argument only works in the self-adjoint case. $\endgroup$ – Mathmo Jan 18 '17 at 18:08

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.