Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $R$ be the hyperfinite $II_1$ factor and let $X$ be any $R$-$R$-bimodule.

Question: Is $X$ completely reducible (i.e. a direct integral of irreducible $R$-$R$-bimodules)?

Example: If $(N \subset M)$ is an irreducible, finite depth and finite index (hyperfinite $II_1$) subfactor, then $_NL^{2}(M)_N$ is completely reducible.

share|improve this question
1  
You will need direct intgerals. –  Marc Palm Nov 25 '13 at 10:22
2  
Your example $_NL^2M_N$ has finite statistical dimension and is therefore completely reducible. –  André Henriques Nov 25 '13 at 16:46
1  
It's certainly well known. I don't know the original reference, but it appears as Lemma 4.10 of my paper arxiv.org/pdf/1110.5671v1.pdf –  André Henriques Nov 25 '13 at 19:29
1  
Yes, this is proven in my paper. The relevant definitions and propositions are: Definition 5.1, Definition 5.10, Warning 5.11, Lemma 5.16, Proposition 7.5, and Corollary 7.14. –  André Henriques Nov 25 '13 at 20:39
1  
$_NL^2M_N = _NL^2M\boxtimes_M L^2M_N$. –  André Henriques Nov 25 '13 at 22:29

1 Answer 1

up vote 3 down vote accepted

Let $_RM_R:={}_R(L^2R\otimes_{\mathbb C} L^2R)_R$, where the first $R$ acts on the first $L^2R$ and the second $R$ acts on the second $L^2R$. Its algebra of $R$-$R$-bimodule endomorphisms is $R^{\mathrm{op}}\,\bar\otimes\, R$.

Using (misleading!) intuition from the representation theory of separable $C^*$-algebras, one might guess that every MASA in $R^{\mathrm{op}}\bar\otimes R$ gives rise to a direct integral decomposition of $_RM_R$ into irreducible $R$-$R$-bimodules. But that is not true. There is no way of writing $_RM_R$ as a direct integral of irreducible bimodules.

Indeed, suppose that ${}_R(M_x)_R$, $x\in X$, are irreducible bimodules, and that $\int^\oplus_{x\in X} {}_R(M_x)_R dx$ is an $R$-$R$-bimodule that is isomorphic to $_RM_R$. Then for every $M_x$, the left and right actions of $R$ induce an action of $R\,\bar\otimes\, R^{\mathrm{op}}$ on $M_x$. But $R\,\bar\otimes\, R^{\mathrm{op}}$ is type $II$ and does not admit irreducible representations. Contradiction.

My argument above is not valid. Nevertheless, I still maintain that there is no way of writing $_RM_R$ as a direct integral of irreducible bimodules.


Here is where my intuition comes from:

Let $R_1$ and $R_2$ be two factors such that one type II (or III) while the other is of type I.
Let $_{R_1}M_{R_2}:={}_{R_1}(L^2{R_1}\otimes_{\mathbb C} L^2{R_2})_{R_2}$, where the first $R_1$ acts on the first $L^2R_1$ and the second $R_2$ acts on the second $L^2R_2$. Its algebra of bimodule endomorphisms is $R_1^{\mathrm{op}}\,\bar\otimes\, R_2$.

Using (misleading!) intuition from the representation theory of separable $C^*$-algebras, one might guess that every MASA in $R_1^{\mathrm{op}}\bar\otimes R_2$ gives rise to a direct integral decomposition of $_{R_1}M_{R_2}$ into irreducible $R_1$-$R_2$-bimodules. But that is not true. There is no way of writing $M$ as a direct integral of irreducible bimodules as... there are no irreducible $R_1$-$R_2$-bimodules!

share|improve this answer
    
Andre, I trust you about $_RM_R$, but if your argument is not valid, how do you know that $_RM_R$ is not completely reducible? Is it intuition or do you read this result somewhere ? –  Sébastien Palcoux Nov 25 '13 at 21:41
    
@André: I think you're correct. If you look at the coarse correspondence as an $M=R\otimes R^{op}$ module, then sub $M$-modules correspond to projections in the commutant $M'\cong R\otimes R$, which is type II$_1$. Irreducible sub $M$-modules should correspond to minimal projections, of which there are none. Or am I missing something here? –  Dave Penneys Nov 25 '13 at 22:28
    
@Dave: That's not how things work. The "summands" in a direct integral decomposition are not sub(bi)modules. –  André Henriques Nov 25 '13 at 22:32
    
@AndréHenriques: can you complete your answer? Anyway I will accept it thanks to this meta-post: Acceptation of partial answers –  Sébastien Palcoux Sep 4 at 12:17

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.