There is a quotation in a book about C*-algebra.

A positive linear functional $f$ on an operator system $E$ is completely positive map. Indeed, for $\xi=(\xi_{1}, \xi_{2},\ldots,\xi_{n})\in l_{n}^{2}$ (here, $l_{n}^{2}$ denotes $n$-dimensional Hilbert space) and $a=[a_{i, j}] \geq 0$ in $M_{n}(E)$, we have

$$\langle f_{n}(a)\xi, \xi\rangle=f(\Sigma_{i,j=1}^{n}\bar{\xi_{i}}\xi_{j}a_{i,j})=f((\bar{\xi_{1}},\ldots,\bar{\xi_{n}}) \left(\begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} & \cdots &a_{1n}\\ \vdots & & \vdots\\ a_{n1}& \cdots &a_{nn} \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right) ) \geq 0$$

I do not know why this $f((\bar{\xi_{1}},\ldots,\bar{\xi_{n}}) \left(\begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} & \cdots &a_{1n}\\ \vdots & & \vdots\\ a_{n1}& \cdots &a_{nn} \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right) ) \geq 0$ holds? Could someone explain it to me ? Thanks.

  • $\begingroup$ I changed $< f_{n}(a)\xi, \xi >$ to $\langle f_{n}(a)\xi, \xi\rangle$. That is standard usage. $\endgroup$ – Michael Hardy Mar 11 '14 at 16:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Michael Hardy Ok thanks~ $\endgroup$ – Yan kai Mar 11 '14 at 16:32

(here I'm addressing in part Tom's answer, and a mistake in the question). The vector $\xi$ is not in $l^2_n$; this makes no sense, as we need the operator system $E$ to act on each coordinate. Rather, $\xi\in \oplus_{j=1}^nH$, where $H$ is the Hilbert space such that $E\subset B(H)$. So the (bad) notation in the proof quoted in the question actually means $$ \bar\xi\,\xi a=\langle a\xi,\xi\rangle, $$and $$ (\bar{\xi_{1}},...,\bar{\xi_{n}}) \left(\begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} & ... &a_{1n}\\ \vdots & & \vdots\\ a_{n1}& ... &a_{nn} \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right)=\left\langle \left(\begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} & ... &a_{1n}\\ \vdots & & \vdots\\ a_{n1}& ... &a_{nn} \end{array}\right) \,\left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right), \left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right) \right\rangle $$ Now the positivity of $A$ makes the inner product non-negative.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin Argerami:But, I suppose, in you equation above, $(\xi_{1},\ldots,\xi_{n}) \left(\begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} & \cdots &a_{1n}\\ \vdots & & \vdots\\ a_{n1}& \cdots &a_{nn} \end{array}\right)\left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right) $ is an element in operator system $E$ $\endgroup$ – Yan kai Mar 12 '14 at 1:45
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin Argerami And $\langle \left(\begin{array}{ccc} a_{11} & \cdots &a_{1n}\\ \vdots & & \vdots\\ a_{n1}& \cdots &a_{nn} \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right), \left(\begin{array}{ccc} \xi_{1} \\ \vdots \\ \xi_{n} \end{array}\right) \rangle$ is a complex number, So what does your equal sign mean? $\endgroup$ – Yan kai Mar 12 '14 at 1:49
  • $\begingroup$ No, the point is that the left-hand-side is (really bad) notation for the right-hand-side. $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Mar 12 '14 at 2:20
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin Argerami I am sorry, I can not understand what is "(really bad) notation"? $\endgroup$ – Yan kai Mar 12 '14 at 2:26
  • $\begingroup$ Because $\xi_j$ is vector in a Hilbert space. So there's no obvious meaning for $\bar \xi_j$ nor $\bar\xi_j\,\xi_j$ $\endgroup$ – Martin Argerami Mar 12 '14 at 3:12

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.