2
$\begingroup$

Let $\Omega$ be a closed domain in $\mathbb{R}^N$, and $\lambda$ the corresponding Lebesgue measure. We define in $(L^\infty(\Omega), \Vert \cdot \Vert_\infty)$ the following operator :

\begin{array}{rccc} A_f : &L^\infty(\Omega)&\longrightarrow & L^\infty(\Omega) \\ &g & \longmapsto & f g \end{array}

where $f \in L^\infty(\Omega)$ is fixed.

This operator is well-defined, and is continuous for the $\Vert \cdot \Vert_\infty$ topology, with $||| A_f |||=\Vert f \Vert_\infty$.

I have the two following questions :

1) Can we define a trace for $A_f$? I know that in Hilbert space we can define the trace for the operators lying in the trace class, but here we face an operator in a non-relexive non-separable Banach space. So I have no idea of if it is a well-posed question.

2) If the trace of $A_f$ does have a sense, what is it? I feel that we should have $tr(A_f)=\int_\Omega f(x) \ dx$.

What do you think? This operator looks really simple, so if the trace can be defined in arbitrary Banach spaces for a class of nice operators, I have some hope that $A_f$ lives therein.

In the particular case of $\Omega$ being bounded (i.e. of finite measure), by using the inclusion $L^\infty(\Omega) \subset L^2(\Omega)$, we see that $A_f$ is just the restriction on $L^\infty(\Omega)$ of the continuous operator $g \mapsto \langle f,g \rangle$ induced by the usual scalar product of $L^2(\Omega)$. So maybe in that case we could pass through the trace theory in that Hilbert space, but I am not sure that it leads to the 'same' trace since the norm topologies of $L^\infty(\Omega)$ and $L^2(\Omega)$ doesn't coincide on $L^\infty(\Omega)$ (just look at the separability) ...

Thank you in advance !

$\endgroup$
10
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Suppose $f\equiv1$. Then $A_f$ is the identity over an infinite dimensional space. Its trace should be infinite. $\endgroup$ Commented May 12, 2015 at 13:06
  • $\begingroup$ Without extra conditions on $f$ I think this is fairly hopeless $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Commented May 12, 2015 at 13:07
  • $\begingroup$ math.tamu.edu/~johnson/TF3.4.pdf $\endgroup$ Commented May 12, 2015 at 13:42
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @LiviuNicolaescu Perhaps I have misunderstood, but how is that (very nice) paper relevant to the present discussion? The authors are looking at weak Hilbert spaces and $L^\infty$ is very far from being such a space: they are only looking at nuclear operators and Denis Serre's example points out that the multiplication operators considered by the OP need not even be compact $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Commented May 12, 2015 at 14:27
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Isn't multiplication by $f$ compact precisely if $f=0$ ? $\endgroup$ Commented May 12, 2015 at 14:32

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .