Morita equivalence for *-algebras - MathOverflow most recent 30 from http://mathoverflow.net 2013-05-25T06:28:47Z http://mathoverflow.net/feeds/question/117156 http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/2.5/rdf http://mathoverflow.net/questions/117156/morita-equivalence-for-algebras Morita equivalence for *-algebras Kevin Walker 2012-12-24T17:36:01Z 2012-12-24T18:47:08Z <p>This is a reference request. I'm looking for a definition of Morita equivalence of *-algebras, as described below. If anyone thinks that this is not the right way to define Morita equivalence of *-algebras, I'd be interested to hear that also.</p> <hr> <p>By a *-algebra, I mean an algebra equipped with an anti-involution *, $(ab)^* = b^*a^*$. (I'm mainly interested in finite-dimensional algebras.)</p> <p>Recall that a Morita equivalence of algebras $A$ and $B$ consists of (1) a pair of bimodules $_AM_B$ and $_BN_A$, and (2) bimodule isomorphisms $f:{}_A(M\otimes N)_A \to {}_AA_A$ and $g:{}_B(N\otimes M)_B \to {}_BB_B$ such that (3) $f$ and $g$ satisfy the zig-zag identities.</p> <p>If $A$ and $B$ are *-algebras, it seems to me that the definition of Morita equivalence should be modified (enhanced) as follows. </p> <p>First, note that the *-structure of $A$ allows us to convert between left and right $A$-modules, and similarly for $B$. In particular, to any $A$-$B$ bimodule $_AX_B$ there is associated a $B$-$A$ bimodule $_BX^*_A$. The first modification to the definition of Morita equivalence is to replace $_BN_A$ above with $_BM^*_A$.</p> <p>Next, note that both $_AA_A$ and $_A(M\otimes M^*)_A$ have involutions coming from the *-structure. The second (and final) modification to the definition is to require that the isomorphism $f:{}_A(M\otimes M^*)_A \to {}_AA_A$ intertwine with these two involutions, and similarly for $g:{}_B(M^*\otimes M)_B \to {}_BB_B$.</p> <hr> <p>Recall that an (ordinary) Morita equivalence gives an isomorphism between 0-th Hochschild homologies $HH_0(A) \cong HH_0(B)$. A *-structure on $A$ gives rise to an involution of $HH_0(A)$. The isomorphism $HH_0(A) \cong HH_0(B)$ coming from an ordinary Morita equivalence need not commute with the involutions on either side, but the above enhanced Morita equivalences do guarantee compatibility with the involutions on $HH_0$.</p> <hr> <p>So, repeating my initial question, where can i find the above definition in the literature?</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/117156/morita-equivalence-for-algebras/117159#117159 Answer by Branimir Ćaćić for Morita equivalence for *-algebras Branimir Ćaćić 2012-12-24T17:58:26Z 2012-12-24T18:11:08Z <p>Perhaps what you want is something along the lines of Rieffel's strong Morita equivalence of $C^\ast$-algebras (see, for instance, <a href="http://math.berkeley.edu/~alanw/242papers99/bursztyn" rel="nofollow">http://math.berkeley.edu/~alanw/242papers99/bursztyn</a>, and pretty much any introductory account of operator-algebraic noncommutative geometry), except forgetting all the functional-analytic nuances?</p> http://mathoverflow.net/questions/117156/morita-equivalence-for-algebras/117161#117161 Answer by Vahid Shirbisheh for Morita equivalence for *-algebras Vahid Shirbisheh 2012-12-24T18:35:16Z 2012-12-24T18:35:16Z <p>I suggest you look at the book "Morita Equivalence and Continuous-Trace C*-algebras" by I. Raeburn and D. P. Williams. They define much of the construction of a Morita equivalence for <em>-subalgebras of C</em>-algebras without assuming the completeness. You can also look at S. Echterhoff's notes arXiv:1006.4975, where the notion of linking algebra is used to construct Morita equivalence. I have a feeling you can use linking algebras for your purpose as well. Good Luck! </p>