1
$\begingroup$

For a compact operator $A$ on a Hilbert space, it is said that $A$ is trace-class if for some (and hence any) orthonormal basis $\{e_n\}_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$, the series $$s_k = \sum_{n=1}^\infty\big\langle |A|e_n,e_n \big\rangle$$ is convergent.

If $A$ is diagonalizable, then it is very easy to see that, for large enough $t \in \mathbb{N}$, the operator $A^t$ is trace class.
Is this necessarily true for a non-diagonalizable compact operator?

$\endgroup$
4
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Your definition of trace-class is wrong. You need $|A|$ there, as stated it is easy to construct both compact and non-compact, not trace-class, operators satisfying your definition. $\endgroup$ Feb 14, 2019 at 18:20
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin: Thanks for pointing out the error. Do you mean it should satisfy $s_k == \sum_{n=1}^k \left<|A|(e_n),e_n \right> $ is a convergent sequence? $\endgroup$ Feb 14, 2019 at 22:43
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. $\ \ \ \ \ $ $\endgroup$ Feb 14, 2019 at 23:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have fixed it $\endgroup$ Feb 15, 2019 at 11:22

1 Answer 1

4
$\begingroup$

Why do you think that $A^t$ is trace class for sufficiently large $t$ if $A$ is diagonalizable? What if the eigenvalues are $\lambda_n = \frac{1}{\log(n+1)}$?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, of course! If the eigenvaluesgo slowly ebough to $0$, then no power raising can help it to converge! $\endgroup$ Feb 14, 2019 at 17:04

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .