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?

$\endgroup$
  • 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. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Feb 14 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? $\endgroup$ – Pierre Dubois Feb 14 at 22:43
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. $\ \ \ \ \ $ $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Feb 14 at 23:06
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I have fixed it $\endgroup$ – Pierre Dubois Feb 15 at 11:22
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 $\lambda_n = \frac{1}{\log(n+1)}$?

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

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.