7
$\begingroup$

Edit: According to the valuable comment of Yemon Choi I revise the question by replacing "faithful" with "irreducible".

We say that a $C^*$ algebra $A$ satisfies the invariant subspace property if there exist an irreducible representation $\phi: A \to B(H)$, for some Hilbert space $H$, such that $\forall a \in A,\; \phi(a)$ has a nontrivial closed invariant subspace of $H$.

What is an example of a simple $C^*$ algebra with this property not isomorphic to the matrix algebra or the algebra of compact operators?

In particular, does $C^*_{red}(F_2)$ satisfy this property?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The union of an increasing sequence of finite dimensional matrix algebras? $\endgroup$ – user6976 Mar 31 '18 at 1:17
  • $\begingroup$ So every simple AF algebra works? $\endgroup$ – Ali Taghavi Mar 31 '18 at 1:26
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I do not know, I am not a specialist in $C^*$ algebras. I just guessed. $\endgroup$ – user6976 Mar 31 '18 at 1:28
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I think youh need to adjust the question, because as it is stated, can't you just do the following? Take any faithful representation $\theta: A\to B(H)$ and then just take $\phi : A\to B(H\oplus H)$, $\phi(a) = {\rm diag}( \theta(a), \theta(a))$. $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Mar 31 '18 at 2:38
  • $\begingroup$ @YemonChoi Thank you. I replaced "faithful" by "Irreducible". $\endgroup$ – Ali Taghavi Mar 31 '18 at 7:26
2
$\begingroup$

Any unital C*-algebra has this property. This follows from these two facts:

Fix $a\in A$.

(1) If $a-\lambda\cdot 1$ is not left invertible then there is an irreducible representation $\pi$ such that $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of $\pi(a)$.

(2) The set of $\lambda$ such that $a-\lambda \cdot 1$ is not left invertible contains the boundary of the spectrum of $a$. In particular, this set is nonempty.

Proof of (1): Assume first that $a$ is not left invertible, so that $\overline{Aa}$ is a proper left ideal in $A$. Choose a maximal left ideal $L$ containing $\overline{Aa}$. Then there exists a pure state $\phi$ such that $$ L=\{x\in A:\phi(x^*x)=0\}. $$ See Theorem 2.9.5 in Dixmier's "C*-algebras". Now do the GNS construction with this state. We get that $\pi_{\phi}(a)\xi_\phi=0$ (because $a\cdot 1\in L$). So $\pi_\phi(a)$ has kernel. Now, in general, if $a-\lambda\cdot 1$ is not left invertible then we apply the same argument to $a-\lambda \cdot 1$.

Notice that, conversely, if $\lambda$ in the spectrum of $a$ can be realized as an eigenvalue in some representation, then $a-\lambda \cdot 1$ cannot be left invertible.

Proof of (2): (This is well known.) Suppose that $a$ is left invertible and in the closure of the set of invertible elements. Say $ba=1$ and $c_n\to a$, with $c_n$ invertible. Then $bc_n\to 1$. So $bc_n$ is invertible for large $n$. Since $c_n$ is invertible, we get that $b$ is invertible, whence $a$ is invertible.

Somewhat digressing into the question of realizing the full spectrum as eigenvalues:

(1) If $A$ is finite (i.e., the unit is a finite projection) then left invertible implies invertible so the full spectrum can be realized as eigenvalues. (Pointed out by Yemon in the comments.)

(2) If $a$ is normal, then again left invertible implies invertible, so the same works. This case is a theorem in Pedersen's book "C*-algebras and their automorhism groups".

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I just realized hat if $a-\lambda$ is left invertible then $\lambda$ can't possibly be realized as an eigenvalue in some representation. So realizing the "left spectrum" as eigenvalues is best possible. $\endgroup$ – Leonel Robert Apr 26 '18 at 21:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In your last paragraph, you just need $A$ to be (Dedekind) finite, right? $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Apr 26 '18 at 23:39
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Oh yes, finite is what's needed. I'll update the answer with this and a couple more remarks when I get the chance. $\endgroup$ – Leonel Robert Apr 26 '18 at 23:55
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AliTaghavi: I've expanded it. $\endgroup$ – Leonel Robert Apr 27 '18 at 14:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ As far as I understand, this constructs a particular irreducible representation for every fixed element $a\in A$; however, the OP asks for one irreducible representation which would work for all elements simultaneously. Am I missing an obvious trick to achieve that, given the construction? $\endgroup$ – Vadim Alekseev Dec 28 '19 at 8:52

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.