Let $\mathcal{H}$ be a separable Hilbert space with orthonormal base $\{e_i\}\;\;i\in \mathbb{N}$.

Definition: We say a subvector space $W\subset B(\mathcal{H})$ is a Fredholm subspace if there is a constant $M$ such that $Ind(T)\leq M$ for all operators $T \in W$ which are Fredholm. In the other words $W$ is a Fredholm subspace if the Index is a bounded function on $$Fred(W):=\{T\in W \mid\; \text{T is a Fredholm operator\}}$$ According to this definition $W$ is NOT counted as a Fredholm subspace if $W$ contains no Fredholm operator, at all.

Example: Put $\mathcal{H}=\ell^{2}$. $S_1$ is the shift operator on $\ell^{2}.$

We define $W=\{P(S_1)\mid P\;\; \text{is a polynomial of degree at most n\}}$. Then $W$ is a $n+1$ dimensional Fredholm subspace of $B(\ell^2)$. See this post

In this question we would like to ask "Is the space of Fredholm subspaces an open set?"

We try to give a meaning to the latter statement via Grassmanian in $B(\mathcal{H}):$

We define an inner product on $B(\mathcal{H})$ with $<A,B>=\sum \frac{1}{n^2}<Ae_n,Be_n>$. This obviously enable us to define the Grassmanian $G(n, B(\mathcal{H})),$ the space of all $n$ dimensional subvector space of $B(\mathcal{H})$ with a natural topology as follows:

Let $S$ be the unit sphere of $B(\mathcal{H})$ with respect to the norm arising from the above inner product. So $S$ has a natural topology. We define a unique topology on $G(n, B(\mathcal{H}))$ such that the following map be a quotient map $$Span:\{(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n) \in \overbrace{S\times S\times \ldots\times S}^{n-times}\mid <x_i,x_j>=0\}\to G(n, B(\mathcal{H}))$$

This map sends $(x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n)$ to the $n$ dimensional subspace $W$ generated by $x_1,x_2,\ldots,x_n.$

So our question is the following:

Is the space of all Fredhom subspaces of $G(n,B(\mathcal{H})$ an open set? What about if we replace $S$ by unit sphere of $B(\ell^{2})$ with its operator norm and its natural topology?

  • $\begingroup$ No vector subspace of $B(H)$ can consist only of Fredholm operators since $0$ is not a Fredholm operator. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 17:38
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @LiviuNicolaescu I think there is a misunderestanding. Can I ask you to read the definition again?Thank you. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 17:40
  • $\begingroup$ I permute two words to remove the misunderstanding. $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 17:42
  • $\begingroup$ @LiviuNicolaescu Now is the definition, clear? $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 24, 2015 at 17:45

1 Answer 1


The statement is false for $n= 2$, as I'll show, with respect to both distances you are considering on $G(n,B(H))$ (this easily implies that it is also false for any $n>2$; on the other hand for $n=1$ the statement is true according to your definition of Fredholm subspace, as it reduces to the fact that Fredholm operators are an open subset of $B(H)$. )

Let $S$ be the injective shift operator on $\ell^2$. Recall that for any $\lambda\in \mathbb{C}$ the operator $S-\lambda$ is injective and Fredholm of index $-1$ if $|\lambda|<1$, it is not Fredholm if $|\lambda|=1$, and it is invertible if $|\lambda|>1$. It will be of use a countable direct sum of operators $\lambda_j S$; to do it more nicely, we can realize it on a suitable Hilbert decomposition of $\ell^2$ into countably many infinite dimensional subspaces.

So let $\alpha:=(\alpha_k)_{k\ge1}$ be a bounded sequence of complex numbers. Consider the bounded operator $L^\alpha$ on $H:=\ell^2(\mathbb{Z}_+)$ defined on the standard orthonormal bases $(e_k)_{k\ge1}$ by $$L^\alpha e_k = \alpha_k e_{2k}\ .$$ Assume further that the sequence $\alpha$ satisfies $\alpha_{2k}=\alpha_k$ for all $k\ge 1$. Then $H$ splits in a Hilbert sum of a countable family of $L^\alpha$-invariant subspaces, $H=\bigoplus_{j\in\mathbb{N}} H_j $, with $H_j:=\operatorname {Span}(e_{(2j+1)2^n}: n\ge0)$. Moreover, for any $j\ge0$ the operator $L^\alpha_{\ |H_j}$ on $H_j$ is unitary equivalent to $\alpha_{2j+1}S$ on $\ell^2$. Thus for any $\lambda\in\mathbb{C}$ the operator $L^\alpha-\lambda I$ is unitary equivalent to the direct sum $\bigoplus_{j\in\mathbb{N}} \big(\alpha_{2j+1}S-\lambda\big)$. The $j$-th component $\alpha_{2j+1}S-\lambda$ is either non-Fredholm, or injective Fredholm of index $-1$, or invertible according whether $|\lambda|=|\alpha_{2j+1}|$, $|\lambda|<|\alpha_{2j+1}|$, respectively $|\lambda|>|\alpha_{2j+1}|$, in which case $\big\|\big(\alpha_{2j+1}S-\lambda\big)^{-1}\big\|\le\frac{1}{|\lambda|-|\alpha_{2j+1}|} .$

Therefore the operator $L^\alpha-\lambda I$ is Fredholm of index $$\mathrm{ind}(L^\alpha-\lambda I)=-\mathrm{card} \{j\ge0\ : |\alpha_{2j+1}| > |\lambda| \}\ , $$

provided $|\alpha_{2j+1}|$ is bounded away from $|\lambda| $ and $|\alpha_{2j+1}|<|\lambda| $ for all but finitely many $j$, say $m$: indeed, in this case $L^\alpha-\lambda I$ is the direct sum of a bounded family of invertible operators whose inverses have bounded norms, plus $m$ Fredholm operators of index $-1$, thus the direct sum of an invertible operator and a Fredholm operator of index $-m$.

As a consequence, the $2$-dimensional subspace $V^\alpha$ generated by the operator $L^\alpha$ and the identity $I$ is a Fredholm subspace according to your definition, if e.g. the sequence $|\alpha_{2j+1}|$ is eventually constant, and it is not, if e.g. it is strictly decreasing. Indeed, in the former case the index of Fredholm operators in $V^\alpha$ can only assume finitely many values, while in the latter case $V^\alpha$ possesses Fredholm operators of any negative index. On the other hand, for bounded sequences $\alpha$ and $\beta$ one has $\|L^\alpha-L^\beta\|\le |\alpha-\beta|_\infty$ for the operator norm, so that $V^\alpha$ depends continuously from $\alpha $ (and a fortiori, if you adopt the inner product norm deduced from $\langle\ ,\ \rangle$, which is weaker). Since an eventually constant sequence is arbitrarily close to strictly decreasing sequences in the $\ell_\infty$ norm, we conclude that Fredholm subspaces of $G(2,B(H))$ are not an open subset.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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