Timeline for Idempotent homomorphisms of von Neumann algebras
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jun 23, 2012 at 0:59 | history | edited | Yulia Kuznetsova | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
corrected formulation according to comments
|
| Jun 23, 2012 at 0:57 | comment | added | Yulia Kuznetsova | Matthew, mohanravi, I should have written "morphism", so normal and involutive. Then indeed the image is weakly closed since it is the kernel of $F-Id$. | |
| Jun 23, 2012 at 0:48 | vote | accept | Yulia Kuznetsova | ||
| Jun 22, 2012 at 20:31 | comment | added | Matthew Daws | So can I ask a naive question: is it correct that $F$ is just an algebra homomorphism (not assumed normal, or a $*$-map, etc.?) | |
| Jun 22, 2012 at 20:23 | history | edited | Yulia Kuznetsova | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
I do not claim anymore that these two questions are equivalent.; added 73 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2012 at 20:22 | comment | added | Yulia Kuznetsova | I had a doubt about that when asking. Indeed, these might be wo different questions. Just in my case I know that the image is weakly closed. | |
| Jun 22, 2012 at 18:35 | answer | added | Dmitri Pavlov | timeline score: 4 | |
| Jun 22, 2012 at 17:36 | comment | added | mohanravi | Naive question perhaps - Why are the two questions equivalent? I don't see why the range of an unital idempotent is weakly closed. | |
| Jun 22, 2012 at 15:34 | history | edited | Yulia Kuznetsova | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
deleted 4 characters in body
|
| Jun 22, 2012 at 15:33 | history | undeleted | Yulia Kuznetsova | ||
| Jun 22, 2012 at 15:28 | history | deleted | Yulia Kuznetsova | ||
| Jun 22, 2012 at 15:27 | history | asked | Yulia Kuznetsova | CC BY-SA 3.0 |