2
$\begingroup$

I am learning the noncommutative Hölder inequality. It is based on operator theory. I have two problems when I try to understand the proof of noncommutative Hölder inequality.

Let $M$ be a von Neumann algebra of $B(\mathbb{H})$. $\forall x \in B(\mathbb{H})$, we have its polar decomposition $x=u|x|$, where $u$ is a partial isometry, we define the right support of $x$ is $r(x)=u^*u=P_{{(\ker x)}^{\perp}}$ and the left support of $x$ is $l(x)=uu^*=P_{\overline{im x}}$. If $x$ is self-adjoint then $l(x)=r(x)$, we denote it $s(x)=l(x)=r(x)$.

Then we define the trace on $M$. If the mapping $\tau : M_+ \rightarrow [0,\infty]$ satisfying: (a) $$\forall x, y\in M_+, \forall \lambda \in \mathbb{R}_+, \tau (x+\lambda y)= \tau(x)+ \lambda\tau(y).$$(b)$$\forall \in M, \tau(x^*x)=\tau(xx^*).$$

HERE are the problems i have:

Firstly If $x\in M_+$, Using spectral decomposition, We may find a sequence $\{x_n\}$ satisfying the following: $0\le x_n\le x$, each $x_n$ is a linear combination of mutually orthogonal spectral projections of $x$ and $\|x_n-x\|\rightarrow 0$.

I want to ask Why $x_n^p\le x^p, 1\le p\le \infty$?

Secondly, if $e$ and $f$ are orthogonal projections, Why $\tau(ef)$ is reasonable?

My attempt: For the first problem: I want to let $x^p-x_n^p=(x-x_n)(x^{p-1}+...+x_n^{p-1})$, but i do not sure it is reasonable?

For the second problem: I know the $\tau$ can be extended when it is finite, but i can not deduce some results. $e$ and $f$ may be not commutative, so $ef$ may be not a positive element.

Any idea will be appreciated!

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

(1) In general, it is not true that $x\leq y$ implies $x^p\leq y^p$ for positive operators $x,y$ and $p>1$. Here, however, $x_n=f(x)$ for a bounded Borel function $f$ with $0\leq f\leq \mathrm{id}$, and $x_n^p\leq x^p$ follows from the fact that spectral calculus is a $\ast$-homorphism, hence order preserving.

(2) If $e$ and $f$ are orthogonal, then $ef=0$. But I guess you just mean that $e$ and $f$ are projections. In general, $ef$ is not positive in that case, but it is customary to write $\tau(xy)$ for $\tau(x^{1/2}yx^{1/2})=\tau(y^{1/2}xy^{1/2})$ for positive $x,y$. So $\tau(ef)=\tau(efe)=\tau(fef)$ by definition.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much! For (2), here $e$ and $f$ are orthogonal prejections, i.e.$(e^*=e=e^2)$. but they are may be not mutual orthogonal, i.e.$ef=0$. And why $\tau(xy)=\tau(x^{1/2}yx^{1/2})$? I mean why $\tau(xy)=\tau(yx)$ for positive $x,y$ ? $\endgroup$
    – John
    Commented May 7, 2021 at 4:54
  • $\begingroup$ The equality $\tau(xy)=\tau(y^{1/2}xy^{1/2})$ is simply a definition. But it is consistent in the sense that if $xy\geq 0$, it coincides with the original definition. The equality $\tau(x^{1/2}y x^{1/2})=\tau(y^{1/2}xy^{1/2}$ follows from the trace identity (b). $\endgroup$
    – MaoWao
    Commented May 7, 2021 at 4:57
  • $\begingroup$ In your answer (2), $x,y$ is $\tau$-finite? I know for $\tau$-finite element or combination of $\tau$-finite elements, $\tau$ can be extended on $M$ or $S(M)=\overline{span}(S_+(M))$, where $S_+(M)=\{x\in M_+: \tau(s(x)) <\infty \}$ $\endgroup$
    – John
    Commented May 7, 2021 at 5:06
  • $\begingroup$ Then we have $\tau(xy)=\tau(yx) $ for $x,y \in S(M)$ $\endgroup$
    – John
    Commented May 7, 2021 at 5:09
  • $\begingroup$ The definition from (2) can be used for arbitrary positive $x,y$, but it is also consistent with the extension to $\tau$-finite elements. $\endgroup$
    – MaoWao
    Commented May 7, 2021 at 5:10

You must log in to answer this question.

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