Approximate normal operator using linear combination of orthogonal projections
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
For every bounded normal operator $N in mathcal{B(H)}$, and every $epsilon>0$, there is a set ${P_n}$ of pairwise commuting orthogonal projections with sum $I$(identity operator) and corresponding set ${lambda_n}$ in $mathbb{C}$ s.t $||N-sum_{n}lambda_nP_n|| < epsilon$.
I was thinking using functional calculus for normal operator to prove it, but I am still unclear how to start it. Furthermore, there is another similar problem: for a bounded normal operator T such that $0leq Tleq I$, find a sequence of pairwise commuting projections s.t $T=sum_n frac{1}{2^n}P_n$, there is hint for this problem: Let $P_1=chi_{(1/2,1]}, P_2=chi_{(1/4,1/2]cup(3/4,1]}, dots$. I am not sure how to solve those two problems and their connections.
Any help will be appreciated.
functional-analysis operator-theory
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
For every bounded normal operator $N in mathcal{B(H)}$, and every $epsilon>0$, there is a set ${P_n}$ of pairwise commuting orthogonal projections with sum $I$(identity operator) and corresponding set ${lambda_n}$ in $mathbb{C}$ s.t $||N-sum_{n}lambda_nP_n|| < epsilon$.
I was thinking using functional calculus for normal operator to prove it, but I am still unclear how to start it. Furthermore, there is another similar problem: for a bounded normal operator T such that $0leq Tleq I$, find a sequence of pairwise commuting projections s.t $T=sum_n frac{1}{2^n}P_n$, there is hint for this problem: Let $P_1=chi_{(1/2,1]}, P_2=chi_{(1/4,1/2]cup(3/4,1]}, dots$. I am not sure how to solve those two problems and their connections.
Any help will be appreciated.
functional-analysis operator-theory
What is the functional calculus for you? For instance, if you already know that the smallest weak operator topology closed *-algebra containing $N$ is isometrically *-isomorphic to $L^infty$ of some measure space, then the two exercises boil down to approximating the identity function on the spectrum of $N$ by simple function.
– Bartosz Malman
Dec 5 at 18:31
@BartoszMalman I meant the continuous functional calculus for normal operator. Is it just by continuous functional calculus, then we just need to approximate the identity functions?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:44
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
up vote
1
down vote
favorite
For every bounded normal operator $N in mathcal{B(H)}$, and every $epsilon>0$, there is a set ${P_n}$ of pairwise commuting orthogonal projections with sum $I$(identity operator) and corresponding set ${lambda_n}$ in $mathbb{C}$ s.t $||N-sum_{n}lambda_nP_n|| < epsilon$.
I was thinking using functional calculus for normal operator to prove it, but I am still unclear how to start it. Furthermore, there is another similar problem: for a bounded normal operator T such that $0leq Tleq I$, find a sequence of pairwise commuting projections s.t $T=sum_n frac{1}{2^n}P_n$, there is hint for this problem: Let $P_1=chi_{(1/2,1]}, P_2=chi_{(1/4,1/2]cup(3/4,1]}, dots$. I am not sure how to solve those two problems and their connections.
Any help will be appreciated.
functional-analysis operator-theory
For every bounded normal operator $N in mathcal{B(H)}$, and every $epsilon>0$, there is a set ${P_n}$ of pairwise commuting orthogonal projections with sum $I$(identity operator) and corresponding set ${lambda_n}$ in $mathbb{C}$ s.t $||N-sum_{n}lambda_nP_n|| < epsilon$.
I was thinking using functional calculus for normal operator to prove it, but I am still unclear how to start it. Furthermore, there is another similar problem: for a bounded normal operator T such that $0leq Tleq I$, find a sequence of pairwise commuting projections s.t $T=sum_n frac{1}{2^n}P_n$, there is hint for this problem: Let $P_1=chi_{(1/2,1]}, P_2=chi_{(1/4,1/2]cup(3/4,1]}, dots$. I am not sure how to solve those two problems and their connections.
Any help will be appreciated.
functional-analysis operator-theory
functional-analysis operator-theory
asked Dec 5 at 17:53
apple
467
467
What is the functional calculus for you? For instance, if you already know that the smallest weak operator topology closed *-algebra containing $N$ is isometrically *-isomorphic to $L^infty$ of some measure space, then the two exercises boil down to approximating the identity function on the spectrum of $N$ by simple function.
– Bartosz Malman
Dec 5 at 18:31
@BartoszMalman I meant the continuous functional calculus for normal operator. Is it just by continuous functional calculus, then we just need to approximate the identity functions?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:44
add a comment |
What is the functional calculus for you? For instance, if you already know that the smallest weak operator topology closed *-algebra containing $N$ is isometrically *-isomorphic to $L^infty$ of some measure space, then the two exercises boil down to approximating the identity function on the spectrum of $N$ by simple function.
– Bartosz Malman
Dec 5 at 18:31
@BartoszMalman I meant the continuous functional calculus for normal operator. Is it just by continuous functional calculus, then we just need to approximate the identity functions?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:44
What is the functional calculus for you? For instance, if you already know that the smallest weak operator topology closed *-algebra containing $N$ is isometrically *-isomorphic to $L^infty$ of some measure space, then the two exercises boil down to approximating the identity function on the spectrum of $N$ by simple function.
– Bartosz Malman
Dec 5 at 18:31
What is the functional calculus for you? For instance, if you already know that the smallest weak operator topology closed *-algebra containing $N$ is isometrically *-isomorphic to $L^infty$ of some measure space, then the two exercises boil down to approximating the identity function on the spectrum of $N$ by simple function.
– Bartosz Malman
Dec 5 at 18:31
@BartoszMalman I meant the continuous functional calculus for normal operator. Is it just by continuous functional calculus, then we just need to approximate the identity functions?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:44
@BartoszMalman I meant the continuous functional calculus for normal operator. Is it just by continuous functional calculus, then we just need to approximate the identity functions?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:44
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Using compactness of $sigma(N)$, find a partition $sigma(N)=bigcup_{n=1}^k K_n$ with each $K_n$ measurable and contained in a ball of radius $varepsilon$. Now let $P_n=1_{K_n}(N)$, and $lambda_nin K_n$. Then
begin{align}
|N-sum_nlambda_nP_n|&=left|sum_n (NP_n-lambda_nP_n)right|
=max_n|NP_n-lambda_nP_n| \
&=max_nleft|int_{K_n}(lambda-lambda_n),dE(lambda) right|
leqmax_nvarepsilon|P_n|=varepsilon.
end{align}
For the second part, you use the identity
$$
t=sum_{n=1}^infty 2^{-n},1_{R_n}(t),=sum_{n=1}^n2^{-n},1_{{tgeq 1-2^{-n}}}(t).
$$
where $R_n={t: tgeqsum_{k=1}^n2^{-k}}$.
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3027411%2fapproximate-normal-operator-using-linear-combination-of-orthogonal-projections%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Using compactness of $sigma(N)$, find a partition $sigma(N)=bigcup_{n=1}^k K_n$ with each $K_n$ measurable and contained in a ball of radius $varepsilon$. Now let $P_n=1_{K_n}(N)$, and $lambda_nin K_n$. Then
begin{align}
|N-sum_nlambda_nP_n|&=left|sum_n (NP_n-lambda_nP_n)right|
=max_n|NP_n-lambda_nP_n| \
&=max_nleft|int_{K_n}(lambda-lambda_n),dE(lambda) right|
leqmax_nvarepsilon|P_n|=varepsilon.
end{align}
For the second part, you use the identity
$$
t=sum_{n=1}^infty 2^{-n},1_{R_n}(t),=sum_{n=1}^n2^{-n},1_{{tgeq 1-2^{-n}}}(t).
$$
where $R_n={t: tgeqsum_{k=1}^n2^{-k}}$.
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Using compactness of $sigma(N)$, find a partition $sigma(N)=bigcup_{n=1}^k K_n$ with each $K_n$ measurable and contained in a ball of radius $varepsilon$. Now let $P_n=1_{K_n}(N)$, and $lambda_nin K_n$. Then
begin{align}
|N-sum_nlambda_nP_n|&=left|sum_n (NP_n-lambda_nP_n)right|
=max_n|NP_n-lambda_nP_n| \
&=max_nleft|int_{K_n}(lambda-lambda_n),dE(lambda) right|
leqmax_nvarepsilon|P_n|=varepsilon.
end{align}
For the second part, you use the identity
$$
t=sum_{n=1}^infty 2^{-n},1_{R_n}(t),=sum_{n=1}^n2^{-n},1_{{tgeq 1-2^{-n}}}(t).
$$
where $R_n={t: tgeqsum_{k=1}^n2^{-k}}$.
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
Using compactness of $sigma(N)$, find a partition $sigma(N)=bigcup_{n=1}^k K_n$ with each $K_n$ measurable and contained in a ball of radius $varepsilon$. Now let $P_n=1_{K_n}(N)$, and $lambda_nin K_n$. Then
begin{align}
|N-sum_nlambda_nP_n|&=left|sum_n (NP_n-lambda_nP_n)right|
=max_n|NP_n-lambda_nP_n| \
&=max_nleft|int_{K_n}(lambda-lambda_n),dE(lambda) right|
leqmax_nvarepsilon|P_n|=varepsilon.
end{align}
For the second part, you use the identity
$$
t=sum_{n=1}^infty 2^{-n},1_{R_n}(t),=sum_{n=1}^n2^{-n},1_{{tgeq 1-2^{-n}}}(t).
$$
where $R_n={t: tgeqsum_{k=1}^n2^{-k}}$.
Using compactness of $sigma(N)$, find a partition $sigma(N)=bigcup_{n=1}^k K_n$ with each $K_n$ measurable and contained in a ball of radius $varepsilon$. Now let $P_n=1_{K_n}(N)$, and $lambda_nin K_n$. Then
begin{align}
|N-sum_nlambda_nP_n|&=left|sum_n (NP_n-lambda_nP_n)right|
=max_n|NP_n-lambda_nP_n| \
&=max_nleft|int_{K_n}(lambda-lambda_n),dE(lambda) right|
leqmax_nvarepsilon|P_n|=varepsilon.
end{align}
For the second part, you use the identity
$$
t=sum_{n=1}^infty 2^{-n},1_{R_n}(t),=sum_{n=1}^n2^{-n},1_{{tgeq 1-2^{-n}}}(t).
$$
where $R_n={t: tgeqsum_{k=1}^n2^{-k}}$.
answered Dec 5 at 19:14
Martin Argerami
123k1176174
123k1176174
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
add a comment |
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
are you implicitly using the spectral theorem or continuous functional calculus for normal operators?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:45
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
Implicitly? I would say fairly explicitly.
– Martin Argerami
Dec 5 at 20:38
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3027411%2fapproximate-normal-operator-using-linear-combination-of-orthogonal-projections%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
What is the functional calculus for you? For instance, if you already know that the smallest weak operator topology closed *-algebra containing $N$ is isometrically *-isomorphic to $L^infty$ of some measure space, then the two exercises boil down to approximating the identity function on the spectrum of $N$ by simple function.
– Bartosz Malman
Dec 5 at 18:31
@BartoszMalman I meant the continuous functional calculus for normal operator. Is it just by continuous functional calculus, then we just need to approximate the identity functions?
– apple
Dec 5 at 19:44