[Math.FA] 4 Apr 1997 Abstract
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The “maximal” tensor product of operator spaces by Timur Oikhberg Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843, U. S. A. and Gilles Pisier* Texas A&M University and Universit´eParis 6 Abstract. In analogy with the maximal tensor product of C∗-algebras, we define the “maximal” tensor product E E of two operator spaces E and E and we show that 1 ⊗µ 2 1 2 it can be identified completely isometrically with the sum of the two Haagerup tensor products: E E + E E . Let E be an n-dimensional operator space. As an 1 ⊗h 2 2 ⊗h 1 application, we show that the equality E∗ E = E∗ E holds isometrically iff E = R ⊗µ ⊗min n or E = Cn (the row or column n-dimensional Hilbert spaces). Moreover, we show that if an operator space E is such that, for any operator space F , we have F E = F E ⊗min ⊗µ isomorphically, then E is completely isomorphic to either a row or a column Hilbert space. arXiv:math/9704208v1 [math.FA] 4 Apr 1997 1991 AMS Classification Numbers: 47 D 15, 47 D 25, 46 M 05. * Partially supported by the N.S.F. 1 In C∗-algebra theory, the minimal and maximal tensor products (denoted by A A 1⊗min 2 and A A ) of two C∗-algebras A ,A , play an important rˆole, in connection with 1 ⊗max 2 1 2 “nuclearity” (a C∗-algebra A is nuclear if A A = A A for any A ). See [T] 1 1 ⊗min 2 1 ⊗max 2 2 and [Pa1] for more information and references on this. In the recently developed theory of operator spaces [ER1-6, Ru1-2, BP1, B1-3], some specific new versions of the injective and projective tensor products (going back to Grothendieck for Banach spaces) have been introduced. The “injective” tensor product of two operator spaces E1,E2 coincides with the minimal (or spatial) tensor product and is denoted by E E . 1 ⊗min 2 Another tensor product of paramount importance for operator spaces is the Haagerup tensor product, denoted by E E (cf. [CS1-2, PaS, BS]). 1 ⊗h 2 Assume given two completely isometric embeddings E A , E A . Then E E 1 ⊂ 1 2 ⊂ 2 1 ⊗min 2 (resp. E E ) can be identified with the closure of the algebraic tensor product E E in 1⊗h 2 1⊗ 2 A A (resp. in the “full” free product C∗-algebra A A , see [CES]). (The “projective” 1⊗min 2 1∗ 2 case apparently cannot be described in this fashion and will not be considered here.) It is therefore tempting to study the norm induced on E E by A A . When A = B(H ) 1⊗ 2 1⊗max 2 i i (i = 1, 2) the resulting tensor product is studied in [JP] and denoted by E E . See 1 ⊗M 2 also [Ki] for other tensor products. In the present paper, we follow a different route: we work in the category of (a priori nonself-adjoint) unital operator algebras, and we use the maximal tensor product in the latter category (already considered in [PaP]), which extends the C∗-case. The resulting tensor product, denoted by E E is the subject of this paper. A brief 1 ⊗µ 2 description of it is as follows: we first introduce the canonical embedding of any operator space E into an associated “universal” unital operator algebra, denoted by OA(E), then we can define the tensor product E E as the closure of E E in OA(E ) OA(E ). 1 ⊗µ 2 1 ⊗ 2 1 ⊗max 2 Our main result is Theorem 1 which shows that E E coincides with a certain 1 ⊗µ 2 “symmetrization” of the Haagerup tensor product. We apply this (see Corollary 10 and Theorem 16) to find which spaces E have the property that E E = E E for 1 1 ⊗µ 2 1 ⊗min 2 all operator spaces E2. We refer the reader to the book [Pa1] for the precise definitions of all the undefined 2 terminology related to operator spaces and complete boundedness, and to [KaR, T] for operator algebras in general. We recall only that an “operator space” is a closed subspace E B(H) of the C∗-algebra of all bounded operators on a Hilbert space H. We will use ⊂ freely the notion of a completely bounded (in short c.b.) map u: E E between two 1 → 2 operator spaces, as defined e.g. in [Pa1]. We denote by u the corresponding norm and k kcb by cb(E1,E2) the Banach space of all c.b. maps from E1 to E2. We will denote by A′ the commutant of a subset A B(H). ⊂ Let E ,...,E be a family of operator spaces. Let σ : E B(H) be complete 1 n i i → contractions (i =1, 2,...,n). We denote by σ ... σ : E E B(H) the linear 1 · · n 1 ⊗···⊗ n → map taking x x to the operator σ (x )σ (x ) ...σ (x ). 1 ⊗···⊗ n 1 1 2 2 n n We define the norm on E E as follows: k kµ 1 ⊗···⊗ n x E E x = sup σ ... σ (x) ∀ ∈ 1 ⊗···⊗ n k kµ k 1 · · n kB(H) where the supremum runs over all possible H and all n-tuples (σi) of complete contractions as above, with the restriction that we assume that for any i = j, the range of σ commutes 6 i with the range of σ . We will denote by (E E E ) the completion of E E j 1 ⊗ 2 ···⊗ n µ 1 ⊗···⊗ n for this norm. In the particular case n = 2, we denote this simply by E E , so we have 1 ⊗µ 2 for any x = x1 x2 E E i ⊗ i ∈ 1 ⊗ 2 P x = sup σ (x1)σ (x2) k kµ {k 1 i 2 i kB(H)} X where the supremum runs over all possible pairs (σ1,σ2) of complete contractions (into some common B(H)) with commuting ranges, i.e. such that σ1(x1)σ2(x2) = σ2(x2)σ1(x1) for all x E , x E . 1 ∈ 1 2 ∈ 2 The space (E E ) can obviously be equipped with an operator space structure 1 ⊗···⊗ n µ associated to the embedding J: (E E ) B(H ) B( H ) 1 ⊗···⊗ n µ → σ ⊂ σ σ σ M M where the direct sum runs over all n-tuples σ = (σ ,...,σ ) with σ : E B(H ) such 1 n i i → σ that σ 1 and the σ ’s have commuting ranges. k ikcb ≤ i 3 We note in passing that if we defineσ ˆ : E B(H ) B( H ) byσ ˆ (x) = i i → σ σ ⊂ σ σ i σσi(x), then we have J(x)=ˆσ1...σˆn and the mapsLσ ˆi have commutingL ranges. ⊕ Thus we can now unambiguously refer to (E E ) , and in particular to E E 1⊗···⊗ n µ 1⊗µ 2 as operator spaces. We will give more background on operator spaces and c.b. maps below. For the moment, we merely define a “complete metric surjection”: by this we mean a surjective mapping Q: E E between two operator spaces, which induces a complete isometry 1 → 2 from E1/ ker(Q) onto E2. To state our main result, we also need the notion of ℓ1-direct sum of two operator spaces E ,E : this is an operator space denoted by E E . The norm on the latter 1 2 1 ⊕1 2 space is as in the usual ℓ1-direct sum, i.e. we have (e , e ) = e + e k 1 2 kE1⊕1E2 k 1kE1 k 2kE2 but the operator space structure is such that for any pair u : E B(H), u : E B(H) 1 1 → 2 2 → of complete contractions, the mapping (e , e ) u (e ) + u (e ) is a complete contraction 1 2 → 1 1 2 2 from E E to B(H). 1 ⊕1 2 The simplest way to realize this operator space E E as a subspace of B( ) for 1 ⊕1 2 H some is to consider the collection I of all pairs p =(u ,u ) as above with H = H (say) H 1 2 p and to define the embedding J: E E B H 1 ⊕1 2 → p Mp∈I defined by J(e1, e2) = [u1(e1) + u2(e2)]. Then, we may as well define the operator (u1,u2)∈I space structure of E LE as the one induced by the isometric embedding J. In other 1 ⊕1 2 words, E E can be viewed as the “maximal” direct sum for operator spaces, in 1 ⊕1 2 accordance with the general theme of this paper. We will denote by E E the linear tensor product of two vector spaces and by 1 ⊗ 2 v tv the transposition map, i.e. for any v = x y in E E , we set tv = y x . → i ⊗ i 1 ⊗ 2 i ⊗ i The identity map on a space E will be denotedP by IdE. P We will denote by E E the Haagerup tensor product of two operator spaces for which 1 ⊗h 2 we refer to [CS1-2, PaS]. 4 Convention: We reserve the term “morphism” for a unital completely contractive homo- morphism u: A B between two unital operator algebras. → Our main result is the following one. Theorem 1. Let E1, E2 be two operator spaces. Consider the mapping Q: (E E ) (E E ) E E 1 ⊗h 2 ⊕1 2 ⊗h 1 → 1 ⊗µ 2 defined on the direct sum of the linear tensor products by Q(u v) = u + tv.