1
$\begingroup$

It is known that if $D$ is a continuous derivation on a commutative Banach algebra $\mathcal{A}$, then for any nonzero character $\theta$ on $\mathcal{A}$ we have $D(\mathcal{A})⊆ker\theta $.

Please help me with these questions or give some references. How this can be restated in the case of a non-commutative Banach algebra?

Does there exist a similar result for a non-commutative Banach algebra?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ You should first clarify whether you are assuming that the derivation is continuous. For continuous derivations the Singer-Wermer theorem has an elegant and (relatively) easy proof, accessible to anyone with a good first course in Banach algebras. For not-necessarily continuous derivations on commutative Banach algebras, the corresponding statement is still true, but the proof is much much much much harder. $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Jan 28 '16 at 0:19
  • $\begingroup$ @YemonChoi : You are right. Sorry it was a typo. I am assuming the derivation $D$ is continuous. I corrected it. $\endgroup$ – Fermat Jan 28 '16 at 4:52
3
$\begingroup$

I shall assume that in your question, you are asking about continuous derivations on a Banach algebra $A$. Results for everywhere-defined-but-not-continuous derivations were studied intensively 30-40 years ago but my understanding is that the remaining open problems are thought to be inaccessible.

So, let $A$ be a Banach algebra and let $D:A\to A$ be a continuous derivation. Without loss of generality, we can assume that $A$ is unital — if not, then we simply adjoin an identity element and extend $D$ by making it $0$ on the adjoined identity.

We then have the following old result of A. M. Sinclair (Proc. AMS 20 (1969), 166–170):

Let $P$ be a primitive ideal of $A$. Then $D(P)\subseteq P$.

(This can also be found as Proposition 2.7.22(ii) of Dales's behemoth Banach Algebras and Automatic Continuity, but the original paper of Sinclair is reasonably self-contained and easy to follow.)

If $A$ is commutative, then primitive ideals are the same thing as maximal ideals, and so Sinclair's theorem implies that $D(M)\subseteq M$ for every maximal ideal $M$. But since $A={\mathbb C}1_A+M$ and $D(1_A)=0$, we get $D(A)\subseteq M$ for all maximal ideals $M$, which is to say $D(A)\subseteq {\rm rad}(A)$ — and that is the result which you quoted in your question.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you very much @YemonChoi for your detailed answer. $\endgroup$ – Fermat Jan 28 '16 at 4:57

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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