Verapoulous Algebra $C(K) mathbin{hatotimes} C(L)$ is a subalgebra of $C(Ktimes L)$?
$begingroup$
Let $K$ and $L$ be compact spaces. Consider the Banach algebra $V(K,L)=C(K)mathbin{hatotimes} C(L)$ , which is the completion of the $C(K)otimes C(L)$ with respect to the projective tensor norm. It is known that $V(K,L)$ is a subalgebra of $C(Ktimes L)$ , not isometrically. I am trying to establish this result . Heres what I have figured out.
Due to the universal property of tensor product , there is an algebra homomorphism $theta : C(K)otimes C(L)to C(Ktimes L)$ such that $$theta(sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i)(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(y)$$
I want to show that this map is injective. Once this is done then we can extend it to its completion.
functional-analysis tensor-products operator-algebras c-star-algebras banach-algebras
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $K$ and $L$ be compact spaces. Consider the Banach algebra $V(K,L)=C(K)mathbin{hatotimes} C(L)$ , which is the completion of the $C(K)otimes C(L)$ with respect to the projective tensor norm. It is known that $V(K,L)$ is a subalgebra of $C(Ktimes L)$ , not isometrically. I am trying to establish this result . Heres what I have figured out.
Due to the universal property of tensor product , there is an algebra homomorphism $theta : C(K)otimes C(L)to C(Ktimes L)$ such that $$theta(sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i)(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(y)$$
I want to show that this map is injective. Once this is done then we can extend it to its completion.
functional-analysis tensor-products operator-algebras c-star-algebras banach-algebras
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
But be careful: The extension of an injective uniformly continuous map to the completion needn't be injective! Consider a Banach space $(X,|cdot|)$ and a strictly finer norm $||cdot||$ on it (e.g., $|x|+|f(x)|$ for a discontinuous linear functional). Then the identity from $(X,||cdot||)$ to $(X,|cdot|)$ is continuous and injective but its extension to the completion is not injective (because otherwise its inverse would be continuous by the closed graph theorem).
$endgroup$
– Jochen
Jan 15 at 13:47
$begingroup$
@jochen Thanks for reminding , I was actually thinking the same .
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 16 at 13:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $K$ and $L$ be compact spaces. Consider the Banach algebra $V(K,L)=C(K)mathbin{hatotimes} C(L)$ , which is the completion of the $C(K)otimes C(L)$ with respect to the projective tensor norm. It is known that $V(K,L)$ is a subalgebra of $C(Ktimes L)$ , not isometrically. I am trying to establish this result . Heres what I have figured out.
Due to the universal property of tensor product , there is an algebra homomorphism $theta : C(K)otimes C(L)to C(Ktimes L)$ such that $$theta(sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i)(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(y)$$
I want to show that this map is injective. Once this is done then we can extend it to its completion.
functional-analysis tensor-products operator-algebras c-star-algebras banach-algebras
$endgroup$
Let $K$ and $L$ be compact spaces. Consider the Banach algebra $V(K,L)=C(K)mathbin{hatotimes} C(L)$ , which is the completion of the $C(K)otimes C(L)$ with respect to the projective tensor norm. It is known that $V(K,L)$ is a subalgebra of $C(Ktimes L)$ , not isometrically. I am trying to establish this result . Heres what I have figured out.
Due to the universal property of tensor product , there is an algebra homomorphism $theta : C(K)otimes C(L)to C(Ktimes L)$ such that $$theta(sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i)(x,y)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(y)$$
I want to show that this map is injective. Once this is done then we can extend it to its completion.
functional-analysis tensor-products operator-algebras c-star-algebras banach-algebras
functional-analysis tensor-products operator-algebras c-star-algebras banach-algebras
edited Jan 14 at 10:39


Andreas Caranti
56.6k34395
56.6k34395
asked Jan 14 at 10:30


Lav KumarLav Kumar
219112
219112
$begingroup$
But be careful: The extension of an injective uniformly continuous map to the completion needn't be injective! Consider a Banach space $(X,|cdot|)$ and a strictly finer norm $||cdot||$ on it (e.g., $|x|+|f(x)|$ for a discontinuous linear functional). Then the identity from $(X,||cdot||)$ to $(X,|cdot|)$ is continuous and injective but its extension to the completion is not injective (because otherwise its inverse would be continuous by the closed graph theorem).
$endgroup$
– Jochen
Jan 15 at 13:47
$begingroup$
@jochen Thanks for reminding , I was actually thinking the same .
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 16 at 13:55
add a comment |
$begingroup$
But be careful: The extension of an injective uniformly continuous map to the completion needn't be injective! Consider a Banach space $(X,|cdot|)$ and a strictly finer norm $||cdot||$ on it (e.g., $|x|+|f(x)|$ for a discontinuous linear functional). Then the identity from $(X,||cdot||)$ to $(X,|cdot|)$ is continuous and injective but its extension to the completion is not injective (because otherwise its inverse would be continuous by the closed graph theorem).
$endgroup$
– Jochen
Jan 15 at 13:47
$begingroup$
@jochen Thanks for reminding , I was actually thinking the same .
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 16 at 13:55
$begingroup$
But be careful: The extension of an injective uniformly continuous map to the completion needn't be injective! Consider a Banach space $(X,|cdot|)$ and a strictly finer norm $||cdot||$ on it (e.g., $|x|+|f(x)|$ for a discontinuous linear functional). Then the identity from $(X,||cdot||)$ to $(X,|cdot|)$ is continuous and injective but its extension to the completion is not injective (because otherwise its inverse would be continuous by the closed graph theorem).
$endgroup$
– Jochen
Jan 15 at 13:47
$begingroup$
But be careful: The extension of an injective uniformly continuous map to the completion needn't be injective! Consider a Banach space $(X,|cdot|)$ and a strictly finer norm $||cdot||$ on it (e.g., $|x|+|f(x)|$ for a discontinuous linear functional). Then the identity from $(X,||cdot||)$ to $(X,|cdot|)$ is continuous and injective but its extension to the completion is not injective (because otherwise its inverse would be continuous by the closed graph theorem).
$endgroup$
– Jochen
Jan 15 at 13:47
$begingroup$
@jochen Thanks for reminding , I was actually thinking the same .
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 16 at 13:55
$begingroup$
@jochen Thanks for reminding , I was actually thinking the same .
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 16 at 13:55
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Suppose $hin C(K)otimes C(L)$ and $theta(h)=0$. Write $h=sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i$, where the $g_i$ are linearly independent. But then this implies that for all $xin K$,
$$0=theta(h)(x,cdot)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(cdot),$$
whence $f_i=0$ for all $i$, and thus $h=0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
1
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
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%2f3073079%2fverapoulous-algebra-ck-mathbin-hat-otimes-cl-is-a-subalgebra-of-ck-ti%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
$begingroup$
Suppose $hin C(K)otimes C(L)$ and $theta(h)=0$. Write $h=sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i$, where the $g_i$ are linearly independent. But then this implies that for all $xin K$,
$$0=theta(h)(x,cdot)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(cdot),$$
whence $f_i=0$ for all $i$, and thus $h=0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
1
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose $hin C(K)otimes C(L)$ and $theta(h)=0$. Write $h=sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i$, where the $g_i$ are linearly independent. But then this implies that for all $xin K$,
$$0=theta(h)(x,cdot)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(cdot),$$
whence $f_i=0$ for all $i$, and thus $h=0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
1
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Suppose $hin C(K)otimes C(L)$ and $theta(h)=0$. Write $h=sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i$, where the $g_i$ are linearly independent. But then this implies that for all $xin K$,
$$0=theta(h)(x,cdot)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(cdot),$$
whence $f_i=0$ for all $i$, and thus $h=0$.
$endgroup$
Suppose $hin C(K)otimes C(L)$ and $theta(h)=0$. Write $h=sum_{i=1}^nf_iotimes g_i$, where the $g_i$ are linearly independent. But then this implies that for all $xin K$,
$$0=theta(h)(x,cdot)=sum_{i=1}^nf_i(x)g_i(cdot),$$
whence $f_i=0$ for all $i$, and thus $h=0$.
answered Jan 14 at 14:52


AweyganAweygan
14.2k21441
14.2k21441
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
1
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
1
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
$begingroup$
Thank you so much.
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 16:59
1
1
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
You're welcome. Glad to help!
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:00
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
Is the choice of representation of h with g's linearly independent comes from smallest representation of h as sums of elementary tensors ?
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 14 at 17:02
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
$begingroup$
I wouldn't think so, but possibly. You might be able to do it with the $f_i$ linearly independent and obtain a representation with less elementary tensors.
$endgroup$
– Aweygan
Jan 14 at 17:09
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.
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%2f3073079%2fverapoulous-algebra-ck-mathbin-hat-otimes-cl-is-a-subalgebra-of-ck-ti%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
$begingroup$
But be careful: The extension of an injective uniformly continuous map to the completion needn't be injective! Consider a Banach space $(X,|cdot|)$ and a strictly finer norm $||cdot||$ on it (e.g., $|x|+|f(x)|$ for a discontinuous linear functional). Then the identity from $(X,||cdot||)$ to $(X,|cdot|)$ is continuous and injective but its extension to the completion is not injective (because otherwise its inverse would be continuous by the closed graph theorem).
$endgroup$
– Jochen
Jan 15 at 13:47
$begingroup$
@jochen Thanks for reminding , I was actually thinking the same .
$endgroup$
– Lav Kumar
Jan 16 at 13:55