Let $(T_1,T_2)$ be a pair of commuting operators acting on $\mathcal{H}$. $(\lambda_1,\lambda_2)\in \sigma_T(T_1,T_2)$ if and only if the Koszul-Complex of $(T_1-\lambda_1,T_2-\lambda_2)$ is not exact. This is equivalent that at least one of the following properties fails:

  • $(a)$ The equation system $$(T_1-\lambda_1)\begin{pmatrix} x_1 \\ x_2 \end{pmatrix}=0\;\; \wedge \;\; (T_2-\lambda_2)\begin{pmatrix} x_1 \\ x_2 \end{pmatrix}=0$$ has the unique solution $(x_1,x_2)=(0,0)$.

  • $(b)$ The only solutions for the equation $$(T_1-\lambda_1)\begin{pmatrix} x_1 \\ x_2 \end{pmatrix}+(T_2-\lambda_2)\begin{pmatrix} y_1 \\ y_2 \end{pmatrix}=0$$ are of the form $$\begin{pmatrix} x_1 \\ x_2 \end{pmatrix}=-(T_2-\lambda_2)\begin{pmatrix} s_1 \\ s_2 \end{pmatrix}\;\;\text{and}\;\;\begin{pmatrix} y_1 \\ y_2 \end{pmatrix}=(T_1-\lambda_1)\begin{pmatrix} s_1 \\ s_2 \end{pmatrix},$$ for some $(s_1,s_2)\in \mathbb{C}^2$.

  • $(c)$ The equation $$(T_1-\lambda_1)\begin{pmatrix} x_1 \\ x_2 \end{pmatrix}+(T_2-\lambda_2)\begin{pmatrix} y_1 \\ y_2 \end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix} b_1 \\ b_2 \end{pmatrix},$$ has a solution for every $(b_1,b_2)\in \mathbb{C}^2$.

I want to prove that $$\sigma_T(T_1,T_2)\subset\sigma(T_1)\times\sigma(T_2)$$

For more informations about the Taylor spectrum see:

J. L. Taylor, A joint spectrum for several commuting operators, J. Functional Anal. 6(1970), 172-191.

we have

enter image description here

enter image description here


You seem to be assuming that $\mathcal H=\mathbb C^2$. There is no need for that.

Take $(\lambda,\mu)$ such that at least $\lambda\not\in\sigma(T_1)$ or $\mu\not\in\sigma(T_2)$. Suppose first that $\lambda\not\in\sigma(T_1)$ (the other case is similar). So $T_1-\lambda I$ is invertible. For typing simplicity, from now on I will write $T_1$ instead of $T_1-\lambda I$, and $T_2$ instead of $T_2-\mu I$.

As $T_1$ is invertible, $\ker T_1=\{0\}$, so $$\tag1 \ker T_1\cap \ker T_2=\{0\}. $$ For the second condition, if $T_1x+T_2y=0$, then $x=-T_1^{-1}T_2y=T_2T_1^{-1}y$. Let $z=T_1^{-1}y$. Then $$\tag2 x=-T_2z,\ \ \ y=T_1z, $$ so the second condition is satisfied.

Finally, since $T_1$ is onto, the sum of the images of $T_1$ and $T_2$ is $\mathcal H$. Together with $(1)$ and $(2)$, this shows that if $(\lambda,\mu)\not\in\sigma(T_1)\times\sigma(T_2)$, then $(\lambda,\mu)\not\in\sigma_T(T_1,T_2)$. Thus $$ \sigma_T(T_1,T_2)\subset\sigma(T_1)\times \sigma(T_2). $$

  • $\begingroup$ If $\mathcal H$ is not $\mathbb{C}^2$ the inclusion is not in general true? Also I don't see where exactely you use the fact that $\mathcal H =\mathbb{C}^2$? Thank you for your help. $\endgroup$ – Student Dec 4 '18 at 18:49
  • $\begingroup$ In the paper of Taylor $X$ is a Banach space. $\endgroup$ – Student Dec 4 '18 at 18:53
  • $\begingroup$ Did you read my answer? In your question, you used $\mathcal H=\mathbb C^2$; in my answer, I'm saying that such a thing is not necessary. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Dec 4 '18 at 18:53
  • $\begingroup$ Now I understand. Yes in my question I use $\mathbb{C}^2$ in order to understand with an example. $\endgroup$ – Student Dec 4 '18 at 18:58
  • $\begingroup$ I don't really know what $\sigma_T(\mathbf T)$ is. I would still expect the same argument to work, though. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Dec 4 '18 at 20:44

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.