Arxiv:1711.05845V4 [Math.OA]

arXiv:1711.05845v4 [math.OA] 24 Apr 2020 n20 kmn n evrwr bet rdc,wt h extr the with produce, to able were as Weaver known and Akemann 2004 In ,nneaal C nonseparable I, rbe a rvdas o eti rp C recently graph More certain for 4]). also Theorem proved was [Ros53, problem and 7.3] Theorem [Kap51, Is equivalence. unitary to e er ae,i Ni1,h se hte hsproperty this whether asked he [Nai51], in later, years equivale few unitary to A up representation irreducible unique a snnepy(e rpsto . n h aarp fe co after paragraph the countere and and 3.3 traces proposition no (see non-empty with is counterexamples of Akem simplex both tracial by there the that given on information counterexamples immediate f any the any provide going of on Before construction limitation problem. of original Naimark’s kind th to some on counterexamples suggest ac focus of group to we regarding seemed observation paper initially general this which following In the by above. led mentioned pr those Naimark’s than to other counterexamples that properties algebraic amr’ problem. Naimark’s smrhs.Tefloigqeto skonas known is question following The isomorphism. o nw hte oiiease oNiakspolmi c is problem Naimark’s to answer positive a whether known not rbe a oiiease o h lse ftp n sep and I type of classes the for answer positive a has problem n14,i Ni8,Niakosre htteagbao com of algebra the that observed Naimark [Nai48], in 1948, In hrfr,a Therefore, h eea oiaino u nur st netgt furt investigate to is inquiry our of motivation general The nteyasimdaeyatrNiakpsdhsqeto,i question, his posed Naimark after immediately years the In RC PCSO ONEEAPE ONAIMARK’S TO COUNTEREXAMPLES OF SPACES TRACE hc r h xrm onso h tt space state the of points extreme the are which a apn o nt-iesoa ipee)ta h acti the that simplexes) finite-dimensional for happens (as otoefie on,i.e. point, fixed one most utb osprbe n n20 kmn n evrue the used from Weaver independent and axiom Akemann 2004 theoretic in set spac and (a Hilbert i nonseparable, some It be on equivalence. unitary must operators to compact up of representation irreducible algebra the to phic Abstract. n uhcounterexample such any hwta h rc pc facutrxml oNiakspr Naimark’s als can to and counterexample simplex, a Choquet of metrizable Akemann- any space the to trace adapt homeomorphic we the particular, that In show diamond. assuming here ♦ ntleapeo uhagba se[W4) ermr th remark We [AW04]). (see algebras such of example unital a , oneeapet amr’ problem Naimark’s to counterexample ∗ oneeapet amr’ rbe saC a is problem Naimark’s to counterexample A agbawt nqeeuvlnecaso reuil rep irreducible of class equivalence unique a with -algebra Let A A = ∼ A eaC a be A h ntr group unitary the , K a tms n rc.W ieasrn eaieanswer negative strong a give We trace. one most at has ( .Introduction 1. H NRAVACCARO ANDREA o oeHletspace Hilbert some for ) ∗ agbawt nyoeirdcberpeetto up representation irreducible one only with -algebra PROBLEM ZFC 1 ∗ agba se[ST17]). (see -algebras ogv h rtcutrxmls For counterexamples. first the give to ) U S ( A ( A amr’ problem Naimark’s cstastvl ntepr states, pure the on transitively acts ) .I scnevbeta hsimplies this that conceivable is It ). ol aet easml,non-type simple, a be to have would elkonta uhalgebras such that well-known s c teiett representation). identity (the nce ∗ nof on agbata sntisomor- not is that -algebra be a o ant satisfy, cannot) (or can oblem in ncmatcne sets, convex compact on tions hs lers xetmaybe except algebras, these enonseparable. be o olr 3.4). rollary H h ieo rca simplexes tracial of size the ,ytsilhsol one only has still yet e, evrcntuto to construction Weaver rhr ermr htthe that remark we urther, ape hs rc space trace whose xamples n n evrde not does Weaver and ann e h tutrladC and structural the her be a eaffinely be can oblem characterizes ? U oiiease othe to answer positive a , nitn with onsistent atoperators pact ( A td ftaespaces, trace of study e rbeC arable imn principle diamond a hw htthe that shown was t on ) e-hoei axiom set-theoretic a . S ( A ∗ a at has ) agba (see -algebras resentations. K ti sstill is it at ZFC ( K H ( pto up ) H . has ) ∗ - 2 ANDREA VACCARO

Let K be a compact convex set and G a group of affine homeomorphisms of K and consider the action Θ : G K K × → (g,x) g(x) 7→ Assume moreover that the action is transitive when restricted to the set of extreme points. It is conceivable that the set of the points in K fixed by the action has size no bigger than one (as happens if K is a finite-dimensional simplex)1. This relates to our context as follows. In a unital counterexample to Naimark’s problem A there is a unique irreducible representation modulo unitary equivalence. This implies, by [Mur90, Theorem 5.1.4] and an application of Kadison transitivity theorem ([Mur90, Theorem 5.2.2]), that the action of the unitary group on the state space of A Θ : (A) S(A) S(A) A U × → (u, ϕ) ϕ Ad(u) 7→ ◦ is transitive on the pure states of A, namely the extreme points of S(A). Moreover, since the traces are fixed by this action, according to the previous observation it may seem plausible that a counterexample to Naimark’s problem could have at most one trace. This is not the case for general affine actions Θ, in fact there is no strict bound on the number of fixed points even for a separable K. For instance, let A be a separable simple unital C∗-algebra and let AInn(A) be the group of asymptotically inner automorphisms of A, i.e, the group of all α Aut(A) such that there exists a continuous path (u ) (A) ∈ t t∈[0,∞) ⊆ U such that α(a) = limt→∞ Ad(ut)(a) for all a A. Then, by the Kishimoto-Ozawa-Sakai theorem on the transitivity of the action of automorphisms∈ on the pure state space of a separable simple unital C∗-algebra in [KOS03], the action Ξ : AInn(A) S(A) S(A) A × → (α, ϕ) ϕ α 7→ ◦ is transitive on the extreme points of S(A). On the other hand, since traces are fixed by inner automorphisms, by continuity they are also fixed by the elements of AInn(A). Since every metrizable Choquet simplex occurs as the trace space of some separable simple unital ∗ C -algebra (see [Bla80]), we infer that the set of fixed points in ΞA can be considerably large. The same is true for the unitary action ΘA on the state space of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem, as is shown in the main result of this paper. Theorem 1. Assume . Then the following holds: ♦ (1) For every metrizable Choquet simplex X there is a counterexample to Naimark’s problem whose trace space is affinely homeomorphic to X. (2) There is a counterexample to Naimark’s problem whose trace space is nonseparable. In fact, we obtain the following stronger result.

Theorem 2. Assume . For every metrizable Choquet simplex X and 1 n 0 there is a C∗-algebra A such♦ that ≤ ≤ℵ

(1) A is simple, unital, nuclear and of density character 1, (2) A is not isomorphic to its opposite algebra, ℵ (3) A has exactly n equivalence classes of pure states, (4) all automorphisms of A are inner, (5) either of the following conditions can be obtained:

1 In this case, if there are at least two points fixed by Θ, we can find a point y = Pk≤n λkxk such that g(y)= y for all g ∈ G, and λi 6= λj for some i 6= j, where {x1,...,xn} are affinely independent extremal points of K. However, for any g ∈ G such that g(xi)= xj , we get g(y) 6= y. TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 3

(a) T (A) is affinely homeomorphic to X. (b) T (A) is nonseparable. In [Gli61] Glimm shows that every separable C∗-algebra which is not type I has un- countably many inequivalent irreducible representations. We remark how theorem 2 (in particular its third clause) pushes even further the consistency of the failure of Glimm’s dichotomy in the nonseparable setting, already obtained in [AW04] and [FH17] (see also section 8.2 of [Far14]). The starting point for the proof of theorem 2 is the techniques developed in [AW04] and [FH17], which both rely on an application of the Kishimoto-Ozawa-Sakai theorem in [KOS03]. As we shall see in the next section, the main effort to prove theorem 2 will be to refine the results in [KOS03] in order to have a better control on the trace space of the crossed product obtained from the automorphism provided by the Kishimoto-Ozawa-Sakai theorem (see theorem A in section 3). We remark that a key tool in the proofs of the main technical lemmas of the paper (lemmas 4.1 and 4.2) are the so-called complemented partitions of unity recently defined in [CET+19]. We shall recall their definition in the next section. The paper is organized as follows. We fix some definitions and notations in section 2. In section 3 we show how the study of the trace space of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem is reduced to a refinement the Kishimoto-Ozawa-Sakai theorem. In section 4 we prove two main lemmas which will be necessary in section 5, where our variant of the Kishimoto-Ozawa-Sakai theorem is proved. Finally section 6 is devoted to conclusions and final observations. We remark that no additional set-theoretic axiom is needed in sections 4 and 5.

2. Preliminaries

First we ﬁx some notations and deﬁnitions.

∗ ∗ 2.1. C -algebras If A is aC -algebra, Asa is the set of its self-adjoint elements, A+ the set of its positive elements and A1 the set of its norm one elements. If A is unital, (A) is the set of all unitaries in A. Denote by S(A) the state space, by P (A) the pureU state space, by T (A) the trace space, and by ∂T (A) the set of extremal traces of A, all endowed with the weak* topology. Through this paper by trace of a given C∗-algebra A, we always mean a tracial state of A, namely a norm-one, positive, linear functional τ of A such that τ(ab)= τ(ba) for all a, b A. We denote by the symbol the unitary equivalence between ∈ ∼ states. Given any ϕ S(A), (πϕ,Hϕ,ξϕ) is the GNS representation associated to ϕ. If ∈ ∗ τ T (A), for A a simple C -algebra, we denote by 2,τ the ℓ2-norm induced by τ on A (the∈ subscript τ will be suppressed when there is nok risk k of confusion). Given two vectors ξ and η in a normed vector space, ξ η means ξ η < ǫ. For functions ϕ and ψ on ≈ǫ k − k a normed vector space, given a ﬁnite subset G of the vector space and δ > 0, ϕ G,δ ψ means ϕ(ξ) ψ(ξ) < δ for all ξ G. Denote by Aut(A) the set of all automorphisms≈ of A. Givenk a unital− Ck∗-algebra A and∈ u (A), the inner automorphism induced by u on A is Ad(u) and it sends a to uau∗. An∈U automorphism α is outer if it is not induced by a unitary, and we denote by Out(A) the set of all outer automorphisms. An automorphism α Aut(A) is asymptotically inner if there exists a continuous path of unitaries (u ) ∈ t t∈[0,∞) in A such that α(a) = limt→∞ Ad(ut)(a) for all a A. Given α Aut(A) and τ T (A), the trace τ is α-invariant if τ(α(a)) = τ(a) for all ∈a A. Suppose∈ A is simple and∈ unital, let α Aut(A), τ T (A) and suppose furthermore∈ that τ is α-invariant. Then α can ∈ ∈ ′′ be canonically extended to an automorphism of πτ (A) , (see [B´ed93, Section 2]). The ′′ automorphism α is τ-weakly inner (τ-strongly outer) if its canonical extension to πτ (A) is inner (outer). 4 ANDREA VACCARO

2.2. Set theory 1 is the smallest uncountable cardinal, the well-ordered set of all countable ordinals.ℵ A club in is an unbounded subset C such that for every ℵ1 ⊆ ℵ1 increasing sequence βn n∈N C the supremum supn∈N βn belongs to C. A subset of is stationary if it meets{ } every⊆ club. An increasing transfinite{ } -sequence of C∗-algebras ℵ1 ℵ1 Aβ β<ℵ1 is continuous if Aγ = β<γAβ for every limit ordinal γ < 1. { The} following is Jensen’s original∪ formulation of . ℵ ♦ The diamond principle ( ). There exists an -sequence of sets A such that ♦ ℵ1 { β}β<ℵ1 (1) Aβ β for every β < 1, (2) for every⊆ A the setℵ β < : A β = A is stationary. ⊆ℵ1 { ℵ1 ∩ β} The principle is known to be true in the Gödel constructible universe ([Jec03, Theorem 13.21]) and it implies♦ the continuum hypothesis, thus it is independent from the Zermelo- Fraenkel axiomatization of set theory plus the Axiom of Choice (ZFC). 2.3. Tracial Ultrapowers and Complemented Partitions of Unity Given a C∗- algebra A, for every = T T (A) we define the seminorm ∅ 6 ⊆ ∗ 1/2 a 2,T = sup τ(a a) , k k τ∈T which is always a norm in case A is simple. We denote 2,T (A) by 2,u. For a free ultrafilter on N, the ultrapower of A is k·k k·k U AU = ℓ∞(A)/cU , where cU = ~a ℓ∞(A) : lim an = 0 . { ∈ n→Uk k } The uniform tracial ultrapower of A is U A = AU /JA, where JA is the trace-kernel ideal:

JA = ~a AU : lim an 2,u = 0 . { ∈ n→Uk k } U We freely identify elements of ℓ∞(A) with their classes in AU or in A . The sets of all U elements in AU and in A which commute with all elements in (the canonical copy of) A are respectively denoted by A A′ and AU A′. U ∩ ∩ Any sequence of traces (τn)n∈N on A induces a trace τ on AU

τ(~a) = lim τn(an). n→U

The set of all such limit traces on AU is TU (A). With this notation we have that J = ~a A : ~a = 0 . A { ∈ U k k2,TU (A) } We introduce now the notion of complemented partitions of unity of a C∗-algebra, origi- nally defined in [CET+19, Definition G - Definition 3.1] (see also [CE19, Definition 1.13]). Definition 2.1 (Complemented Partitions of Unity). Let A be a separable C∗-algebra such that T (A) is non-empty and compact. We say that A has complemented partitions of unity (abbreviated CPoU ) if for every F ⋐ A, every ǫ > 0, every a1, . . . ak A+ and every scalar δ > 0 such that ∈ sup min τ(ak) < δ, τ∈T (A) i≤k there exist elements e ,...,e A1 such that 1 k ∈ + (1) [e , b] <ǫ for all b F i k, k i k ∈ ≤ (2) Pi≤k ei = 1, (3) e2 e <ǫ, k i − ik2,u TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 5

(4) eiej 2,u <ǫ, (5) τk(a ek) < δτ(e )+ ǫ for all i k and τ T (A). i i i ≤ ∈ ∗ U ′ Remark 2.2. Let A be a simple C -algebra such that M2(C) embeds into A A . It follows U ′ ∩ that Mn(C) embeds into A A for every n N. This can be shown as follows. Let B be U ′ ∩ ∈ a copy of M2(C) in A A . By standard arguments it can be shown that there is a copy ∩ ′ U of M2(C) also in (A B) A . This can be done using model theory via the countable saturation of AU or,∪ by more∩ standard means, using Kirchberg’s ǫ-test, [Kir06, Lemma A.1]. Iterating this operation countably many times, it is possible to define an embedding U ′ ϕ of the CAR algebra M2∞ into A A . Let τ be the unique trace of M2∞ . Since the unit ball of AU A′ is -complete∩ ([CET+19, Lemma 1.6]) and the embedding ϕ ∩ k·k2,TU (A) is ( )-contractive (by uniqueness of the trace on M ∞ ), by Kaplansky’s k·k2,τ − k·k2,TU (A) 2 density theorem ϕ extends by continuity to an embedding of the hyperfinite II1 factor U ′ R into A A . Since Mn(C) embeds into for every n N, it follows that it also embeds into AU ∩ A′. R ∈ ∩ ∗ The matrix algebra M2(C) is the universal C -algebra generated by two unitaries u, v such that uv = vu ([Far10, Lemma 1.3]). We have therefore the following proposition. − Proposition 2.3. Let A be a separable, simple, unital C∗-algebra. The following are equivalent U ′ (1) M2(C) embeds into A A , (2) for all finite F ⋐ A and∩ǫ> 0 there are u, v A such that (a) max u , v 1, ∈ {k k∗k k} ≤ ∗ ∗ ∗ (b) max uu 1 2,u, vv 1 2,u, u u 1 2,u, v v 1 2,u, uv + vu 2,u <ǫ, (c) max{k [u,− b]k ,k [v, b−] k <ǫk . − k k − k k k } b∈F {k k2,u k k2,u} Let S A be a set of generators of A. The equivalence above holds also if clause 2 is checked for⊆ all F ⋐ S, rather than F ⋐ A. Combining remark 2.2 with [CET+19, Lemma 3.6] and [CET+19, Lemma 3.7] we obtain the following theorem. Theorem 2.4. Let A be a nuclear, separable, unital C∗-algebra such that AU A′ contains a copy of M (C), for some free ultradilter . Then A has CPoU. ∩ 2 U We remark that it is not known whether the nuclearity assumption is required to prove the previous result.

3. The trace space of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem

Akemann-Weaver’s proof in [AW04] is the starting point of our analysis. Their results ∗ were reﬁned in [FH17] to produce, given 1 n 0, a non-type I C -algebra A not isomorphic to its opposite, with exactly n equivalence≤ ≤ ℵ classes of irreducible representations, and with no outer automorphisms. For the reader’s convenience we quickly recall the construction here. All omitted details can be found in [FH17], where a continuous model-theoretic equivalent version of , more suitable for working with C∗-algebras, is introduced. ♦ The algebra A is obtained as an inductive limit of an increasing continuous 1-sequence of separable simple unital C∗-algebras ℵ

A0 A1 Aβ A = [ Aβ ⊆ ⊆···⊆ ⊆···⊆ β<ℵ1 where each inclusion is unital. The crucial part of the construction is the successor step, where the following improvement of the main result of [KOS03] is used. 6 ANDREA VACCARO

Theorem 3.1 ([AW04]). Let A be a separable simple unital C∗-algebra, and let ϕ N { h}h∈ and ψ N be two sequences of pure states of A such that the ϕ ’s are mutually inequiv- { h}h∈ h alent, and similarly the ψh’s. Then there is an asympotically inner automorphism α such that ϕ ψ α for all h N. h ∼ h ◦ ∈ Theorem 3.1 is applied in the proof of the following lemma. Lemma 3.2 ([FH17, Lemma 2.3]). Let A be a separable simple unital C∗-algebra. Suppose and are disjoint countable sets of inequivalent pure states of A and let E be an equivalenceX Y relation on . Then there exists a separable simple unital C∗-algebra B such that Y (1) B unitally contains A, (2) every ψ has multiple extensions to B, (3) every ϕ ∈X extends uniquely to a pure state ϕ˜ of B, (4) given ϕ ∈Y, ϕ , then ϕ Eϕ if and only if ϕ˜ ϕ˜ . 0 1 ∈Y 0 1 0 ∼ 1 The algebra B is A⋊α Z, where α Aut(A) is provided by theorem 3.1 for two sequences of inequivalent pure states which depend∈ on , and E. Back to the construction in X Y [FH17], given Aβ, Aβ+1 = Aβ ⋊α Z is obtained by an application of lemma 3.2, where , and E are chosen according to . X WeY warm up proving the following♦ simple fact. ∗ Proposition 3.3. Let Aβ β<ℵ1 be an increasing continuous 1-sequence of unital C - algebras such that A { = }A ⋊ G for all β < , G beingℵ a discrete group. Let β+1 β α,r β ℵ1 β A be the inductive limit of the sequence. Suppose furthermore that every τ T (Aβ) is 2 ∈ αg-invariant for all g Gβ. Then for each β < 1 there is an embedding eβ of T (Aβ) into T (A). ∈ ℵ Proof. Let B be any unital tracial C∗-algebra, τ T (B), and α a homomorphism of a ∈ discrete group G (whose identity is e) into Aut(B) such that τ is αg-invariant for all g G. Consider the reduced crossed product B ⋊ G and denote by u , for g G, the unitaries∈ α,r g ∈ corresponding to the elements of the group. The map deﬁned on any ﬁnite sum Pg∈G agug as ′ τ (X agug)= τ(ae) g∈G extends uniquely to a trace of B ⋊ G. In fact, τ ′ is Ad(u)-invariant for all u (B) α,r ∈ U since τ is a trace, and it is Ad(ug)-invariant for all g G since τ is αg-invariant, hence τ ′(wa)= τ ′(aw) for all a B ⋊ G and w = w . . . w∈, where w (B) u : g G ∈ α,r 1 k j ∈U ∪ { g ∈ } for all j k. The linear span of the set of products of elements in (B) ug : g G is dense in≤B ⋊ G, therefore τ ′(ab)= τ ′(ba) for all a, b B ⋊ G.U Thus,∪ the{ embedding∈ } α,r ∈ α,r eβ can be constructed by induction iterating the extension above at successor steps, and taking the unique extension of previous steps at limit stages. In the Akemann-Weaver construction (and in the one from [FH17] we previously re- called) there is no restriction, when starting the induction, on the choice of the C∗-algebra A0, as long as A0 is separable simple and unital. Since every metrizable Choquet simplex occurs as the trace space of some separable simple unital C∗-algebra (see [Bla80]), and since all traces are invariant for asymptotically inner automorphisms (as they are pointwise limits of inner automorphisms), proposition 3.3 can be applied to the construction we sketched before to have the following.

Corollary 3.4. Assume . For every metrizable Choquet simplex X and 1 n 0, there is a non-type I C∗-algebra♦ A not isomorphic to its opposite, with exactly n equivalence≤ ≤ ℵ

2A continuous map which is a homeomorphism with the image. TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 7 classes of irreducible representations, and with no outer automorphisms, such that T (A) contains a homeomorphic copy of X. Proposition 3.3 implies that the -sequence ℵ1 r1,0 r2,1 r +1 T (A ) T (A ) ...T (A ) β ,β T (A) 0 ←−− 1 ←−− β ←−−−−· · · ← is a projective system whose bonding maps (the restrictions) are surjective. Proposition 3.3 also entails that each restriction has a continuous section. Theorem 2 answers affirmatively the questions whether it is possible to perform the constructions in [AW04] and [FH17] so that the 1-sequence above ‘stabilizes’, or so that it is forced to be ‘strictly increasing’. Dependingℵ on which of the final two clauses of theorem 2 one wants to obtain, two different strengthenings of lemma 3.2 are needed. Clause 5a follows if, when applying lemma 3.2 to A = Aβ (hence B = Aβ ⋊α Z), we require in addition that the restriction map r : T (A ⋊ Z) T (A ) is a homeomorphism for all β < . This would in β+1,β β α → β ℵ1 fact entail that T (A) is affinely homeomorphic to T (A0). On the other hand, in order to get clause 5b, it is sufficient to require rβ+1,β to be not injective for all β < 1, as shown in proposition 3.6. ℵ Since α is asymptotically inner, the restriction map rβ+1,β : T (Aβ ⋊α Z) T (Aβ) is a homeomorphism if and only if all the powers of α are τ-weakly outer for all→ τ ∂T (A) (see [Tho95, Theorem 4.3]). ∈ Thus, all we need to show is the following variant of theorem 3.1.

Theorem A. Let A be a separable simple unital C∗-algebra, and let ϕ N and ψ N { h}h∈ { h}h∈ be two sequences of pure states of A such that the ϕh’s are mutually inequivalent, and similarly the ψh’s. (1) If A is nuclear and there exists a copy of M (C) inside AU A′ for some free 2 ∩ ultrafilter , then there is an asymptotically inner automorphism α such that ϕh ψ α forU all h N, and such that αl is τ-strongly outer for all τ ∂T (A) and all∼ h ◦ ∈ ∈ l N. Moreover, α can be chosen so that B := A ⋊α Z is such that M2(C) embeds into∈ BU B′. (2) Given a∩ countable T ∂T (A), there is an asymptotically inner automorphism α such that ϕ ψ α ⊆for all h N and such that α is τ-weakly inner for all τ T . h ∼ h ◦ ∈ ∈ Let’s assume theorem A for the rest of this section. Lemma 3.5. Let A be a separable simple unital C∗-algebra. Suppose and are disjoint countable sets of inequivalent pure states of A and let E be an equivalenceX relationY on . Then there exists a separable simple unital C∗-algebra B such that Y (1) B unitally contains A, (2) every ψ has multiple extensions to B, (3) every ϕ ∈X extends uniquely to a pure state ϕ˜ of B, ∈Y (4) given ϕ0, ϕ1 , then ϕ0Eϕ1 if and only if ϕ˜0 ϕ˜1, (5) either of the∈Y following conditions can be obtained:∼ U ′ (a) if A is nuclear and there exists a copy of M2(C) inside A A for some free ∩ U ′ ultrafilter , then B is nuclear, there exists a copy of M2(C) inside B B for some freeU ultrafilter , and the restriction map r : T (B) T (A) ∩is a homeomorphism, U → (b) the restriction map r : T (B) T (A) is not injective. → Proof. This lemma can be proved as lemma 2.3 of [FH17] by substituting all the instances of theorem 3.1 with theorem A. Once lemma 3.5 is proved, theorem 2 in the introduction follows from the proof of lemma 2.8 and theorem 1.2 in [FH17], by substituting all instances of lemma 2.3 of [FH17] with 8 ANDREA VACCARO our lemma 3.5. Point 2 of the last clause of theorem 2 is a consequence of the following fact.

Proposition 3.6. Let Aβ β<ℵ1 be an increasing continuous 1-sequence as in proposition 3.3 and let A be{ the} inductive limit of the -sequence.ℵ Suppose that the set ℵ1 β < 1 : rβ+1,β : T (Aβ+1) T (Aβ) is not injective is unbounded in 1. Then T (A) is {nonseparable.ℵ → } ℵ

Proof. Suppose T (A) is separable and let τ N be a countable dense subset of T (A). { n}n∈ Claim 3.6.1. The set B = β < 1 : n s.t. τn ↾ Aβ has multiple extensions to A is unbounded in . { ℵ ∃ } ℵ1 Proof. Suppose the claim is false and let γ < be an upper bound for B. Then each ℵ1 τn ↾ Aγ has a unique extension to Aγ+1, which, as we already know from the proof of proposition 3.3, is deﬁned through the conditional expectation. If γ is big enough there is a trace σ T (A ), a A , and g G such that σ(au ) =0. If ǫ> 0 is small enough, ∈ γ+1 ∈ γ ∈ β g 6 then τn ↾ Aγ+1 τ T (Aγ+1) : τ(aug) σ(aug) <ǫ is empty. This is a contradiction since{ τ ↾ A }∩{is dense∈ in T (A | ). − | } { n γ+1} γ+1

The claim entails that there is an 1-sequence of traces (modulo taking a cofinal sub- sequence of the algebras A ) τ ℵ such that β { β}β<ℵ1 (1) τ T (A ) for all β < , β ∈ β ℵ1 (2) τγ ↾ Aβ = τβ for all γ > β, (3) the trace τ admits two different extensions to T (A ) for every β < . β β+1 ℵ1 This allows to build a discrete set of size 1 in T (A) as follows, which is a contradiction. For any β < consider τ ′ T (A ℵ) different from τ and extending τ , and ℵ1 β+1 ∈ β+1 β+1 β pick two open sets in T (Aβ+1) dividing them. Their preimage via the restriction map r : T (A) T (A ) are two open disjoint subsets of T (A) such that only one of them β+1 → β+1 contains all the extensions of τβ+1. Hence, any 1-sequence of extensions in T (A) of the elements in τ ′ has the required property. ℵ { β}β<ℵ1 The next two sections are devoted to the proof of theorem A.

4. Paths of unitaries

The aim of this section is to prove lemmas 4.1 and 4.2, two variants of lemma 2.2 of [KOS03] (for simple C∗-algebras), which are needed for theorem A. The reader can safely assume these lemmas as blackboxes and go directly to section 5, to see how they are used in the main proofs, before going through this section.

∗ Lemma 4.1. Let A be a separable, simple, unital C -algebra, (ϕh)h≤m some inequivalent pure states and τ ,...,τ ∂T (A). For every F ⋐ A and ǫ> 0, there exist G ⋐ A and { 1 n}⊆ δ > 0 such that, if (ψh)h≤m are pure states which satisfy ψh G,δ ϕh for all 1 h m, ′ ≈ ≤ ≤ then for every ﬁnite K A and every ǫ > 0 there is a path of unitaries (ut)t∈[0,1] such that ⊂

(1) u0 = 1, (2) ϕ Ad(u ) ′ ψ for all 1 h m, h ◦ 1 ≈K,ǫ h ≤ ≤ (3) b Ad(ut)(b) <ǫ for all b F , (4)k (a)− u 1 k <ǫ for all k ∈ n,3 k t − k2,k ≤ (b) If moreover A is nuclear and M (C) embeds into AU A′, then u 1 <ǫ. 2 ∩ k t − k2,u 3 We suppress the notation and denote k k2,τk by k k2,k. TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 9

Lemma 4.2. Let A be an infinite-dimensional separable, nuclear, simple, unital, C∗- algebra such that M (C) embeds into AU A′ and let (ϕ ) be inequivalent pure states. 2 ∩ h h≤m For every F ⋐ A and ǫ > 0, there exist G ⋐ A and δ > 0 such that, if (ψh)h≤m are inequivalent pure states which satisfy ψh G,δ ϕh for all 1 h m, then for every σ (A), k N 0 , K ⋐ A and every ǫ′≈> 0 there is a path≤ of unitaries≤ (u ) and ∈U ∈ \ { } t t∈[0,1] an a A1 such that, for every τ T (A) ∈ ∈ (1) u0 = 1, (2) ϕh Ad(u1) K,ǫ′ ψh for all 1 h m, (3) b ◦ Ad(u )(≈b) <ǫ for all b ≤F , ≤ k − t k ∈ (4) Ad(σ)(a) Ad(u∗k)(a) > 1/4. k − 1 k2,τ The proof of lemma 4.1 mirrors the one of proposition 2.2 in [KOS03], with the addition that the unitary u1 is close to the identity with respect of the ℓ2-norm induced by some traces. In a certain sense, the construction in lemma 4.2 achieves the opposite. In fact, in this second case, we need a path of unitaries as in proposition 2.2 of [KOS03] so that u1 (or one of its powers) is far from the scalars with respect of the ℓ2-norm induced by a trace. 4.1. Proof of lemma 4.1 We briefly introduce some notation for the following propo- ∗ sition. Given a state ϕ on a C -algebra A, we let Lϕ be the following closed left ideal L := a A : ϕ(a∗a) = 0 = a A : π (a)ξ = 0 ϕ { ∈ } { ∈ ϕ ϕ } We recall that for any state ϕ the intersection L L∗ is a hereditary subalgebra of A. ϕ ∩ ϕ Proposition 4.3. Let A be an infinite-dimensional, simple, unital C∗-algebra, τ T (A) ∈ and ϕ1,...,ϕm some pure states of A. Then M = a A : π (a)ξ = π (a∗)ξ = 0 j m { ∈ ϕj ϕj ϕj ϕj ∀ ≤ } ′′ is a hereditary subalgebra of A and πτ [M] is strongly dense in πτ [A] . ∗ Proof. Since M = j≤mLϕj Lϕj , the strong closure of πτ (M) is a hereditary subalgebra ′′ ∩ ∩ ′′ ′′ of πτ (A) , therefore it is of the form pπτ (A) p for some projection p πτ (A) . Suppose p is not the identity and let η H be a unit vector orthogonal to the∈ range of p. Consider ∈ τ the state ψ(a) = πτ (a)η, η . By uniqueness of the GNS representation, (πψ,Hψ,ξψ) is h i ′′ unitarily equivalent to (πτ , πτ (A)η, η). Since πτ (A) is a type II1 von Neumann algebra, ′′ the same is true for πψ(A) (see proposition 5.3.5 of [Dix77]). Consider a j≤mLϕj . Then a∗a M and this implies ∈ ∩ ∈ π (a)p⊥ 2 = p⊥π (a∗a)p⊥ = 0 k τ k k τ k hence π (a)η = 0, which means π (a)ξ = 0, which in turn entails L L . Con- τ ψ ψ ψ ⊇∩j≤m ϕj sider the state ϕ = 1 ϕ , which is such that L = L . By the correspondence Pj≤m m j ϕ ∩j≤m ϕj between closed left ideals and weak*-closed faces of S(A) (see theorem 3.10.7 of [Ped79]4) we infer that ψ is contained in the smallest weak*-closed face of S(A) which contains ϕ, which is in fact the set θ S(A) : θ(L ) = 0 { ∈ ϕ } On the other hand, the smallest face of S(A) containing the state ϕ is F = θ S(A) : λ> 0 θ λϕ ϕ { ∈ ∃ ≤ } By the Radon-Nikodym theorem (theorem 5.1.2 in [Mur90]), for every state θ contained in Fϕ, the GNS representation (πθ,Hθ) is (unitarily equivalent to) a subrepresentation of (πϕ,Hϕ). Since the latter representation is type I (it is in fact the subrepresentation of a direct sum of irreducible representations), we get to a contradiction if we can prove that

4Here we can consider faces of S(A) instead of Q(A) since A is unital. 10 ANDREA VACCARO

Fϕ is weakly*-closed, since this would imply that (πψ,Hψ) is type I. By Radon-Nikodym theorem the map Θ : π (A)′ A∗ ϕ ϕ → v π ( )vξ ,ξ 7→ h ϕ ϕ ϕi ′ is a linear map such that Θϕ(πϕ(A) ) S(A) = Fϕ. Let π denote i≤mπϕi . We prove ′ ∩ ′ ⊕ that π(A) is finite-dimensional, which entails that also πϕ(A) is finite-dimensional, since ′ ′ ′ πϕ(A) = qπ(A) q for some projection q π(A) . This follows from the contents of Chapter ∈ ′ 5 of [Dix77]. More specifically, if ϕ1,...,ϕn are equivalent pure states, given π = i≤nπϕi , ′ ′ ⊕ then π (A) is a type In-factor by proposition 5.4.7 of [Dix77], thus it is finite dimensional. By theorem 3.8.11 [Ped79], the commutant π(A)′ is therefore the direct sum of a finite number of finite-dimensional type I factors. Corollary 4.4. Let A be an infinite-dimensional, simple, unital C∗-algebra and τ T (A). ∈ Let (πi,Hi) i≤n be inequivalent irreducible representations, Fi Hi finite sets and Ti (H{) projections.} For every ǫ> 0 there is b A such that ⊂ ∈ B i ∈ + (1) b < 9, k k (2) πi(b) ↾Fi ǫ Ti ↾Fi for all i n, (3) (a) b ≈ <ǫ; ≤ k k2,τ (b) If moreover A is nuclear and M (C) embeds into AU A′, then b <ǫ. 2 ∩ k k2,u Proof. By the Glimm-Kadison transitivity theorem (see [GK60, Corollary 7]) there is b′ A whose norm is smaller than 3/2 such that, for all i n ∈ sa ≤ ′ πi(b ) ↾Fi∪Ti[Fi]= Ti ↾Fi∪Ti[Fi] . Define for each i n the set ≤ L = a A : π (a)ξ = 0 ξ F T [F ] . i { ∈ i ∀ ∈ i ∪ i i } Let L be the intersection of all Li’s. For every τ T (A), by proposition 4.3 the set πτ [L] ′′ ∈ ′ is strongly dense in πτ [A] . There is thus a self-adjoint aτ L such that b aτ 2,τ < ǫ/6. ′ ′ ∈′ k − k For every τ T (A) define bτ := b aτ . Notice that πi(bτ ) ↾Fi∪Ti[Fi]= Ti ↾Fi∪Ti[Fi] for all ∈ ′ − i n, and that bτ 2,τ < ǫ, so the lemma for item 3a has been proved. From now on, ≤ k k U ′ we assume that A is nuclear and that M2(C) embeds into A A , and thus that A has ∩ ′ CPoU, by theorem 2.4. By Kaplansky’s density theorem we can assume that bτ < 3 for every τ T (A). Let b be the square of b′ . We have that, for every τ T (A)k k ∈ τ τ ∈ i. bτ A+, ii. b ∈ < 9, k τ k iii. bτ 2,τ < ǫ/2, iv. kπ (bk ) ↾ = T ↾ for all i n (this is the case since all T ’s are projections). i τ Fi i Fi ≤ i By compactness of T (A) there exists a finite set b A of elements whose norm is { j}j≤k ⊂ + smaller than 9 such that supτ∈T (A) minj≤k bj 2,τ < ǫ/2 and πi(bj) ↾Fi = Ti ↾Fi for every j k and i n. Since A has CPoU, fork everyk γ > 0 we can find some contractions e ,...,e≤ A≤ such that 1 k ∈ + (1) Pj≤k ej = 1, (2) for every τ T (A) and all j, h k (a) [e , b ∈] < γ, ≤ k j h k (b) ej eh 2,τ < γ, k 2 k (c) ej ej 2,τ < γ, k −2 k 2 (d) τ(ej bj ) < (ǫ /4)τ(ej )+ γ. 1/2 1/2 Let b := Pj≤k ej bjej for γ > 0 small enough (γ also depends on k) so that i. b < 9, k k TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 11

ii. π (b) ↾ π (e )π (b ) ↾ = π (e )T ↾ = T ↾ for all i n, i Fi ≈ǫ Pj≤k i j i j Fi Pj≤k i j i Fi i Fi ≤ iii. for every τ T (A) ∈ 2 2 2 2 b 2,τ = τ( X ejbjbheh) f(γ) τ(X ejbj ) <ǫ /4 X(τ(ej )+ γ) <ǫ . k k ≈ j,h≤k j≤k j≤k The following proposition is implicitly used in [KOS03, Theorem 3.1]. We give here a full proof of it. Proposition 4.5. For every ǫ > 0 and M N there is δ > 0 such that the following holds. Suppose ξ is a norm one vector in an∈ inﬁnite-dimensional Hilbert space H, and ∗ ∗ that bj j≤M B(H) are such that Pj bjbj 1 and Pj bjbj ξ = ξ. Let moreover η H { } ⊆ ≤ ∗ ∈ be a unit vector orthogonal to the linear span of bjbkξ : j, k M such that, for all j, k M { ≤ } ≤ b∗ ξ, b∗ξ b∗η, b∗η < δ |h k j i − h k j i| Then there is a projection q B(H) such that ∈ ∗ ∗ X bjqbj (η + ξ) ǫ 0 and X bjqbj (η ξ) ǫ η ξ ≈ − ≈ − j≤M j≤M Proof. By lemma 3.3 of [FKK01], for every ǫ′ > 0 and M ′ N there is a δ′ > 0 such that ∈ if (ξ1,...,ξM ′ ) and (η1,...,ηM ′ ) are two sequences of vectors in a Hilbert space H such that ξ 2 1, η 2 1, and Pik ik ≤ Pik ik ≤ ξ ,ξ η , η < δ′ i, j M ′ |h i ji − h i ji| ∀ ≤ then there is a unitary U B(H) such that ∈ Uξ η <ǫ′ j M ′ k j − jk ∀ ≤ ′ Moreover, if H is inﬁnite dimensional and ξi, ηj = 0 for all i, j M , then U can be chosen to be self-adjoint. Let δ > 0 be smallerh thani ǫ/M and than≤ the δ′ given by lemma ′ ′ 3.3 of [FKK01] for M = M and ǫ = ǫ/M. Fix ξ, η and bj for j M as in the statement ∗ ≤ ∗ of the current proposition. Since the linear spans of bj ξ : j M and bj η : j M are orthogonal, there is a self-adjoint unitary w on H such{ that,≤ for every} j{ M ≤ } ≤ wb∗ξ b∗η < ǫ/2M k j − j k wb∗η b∗ξ < ǫ/2M k j − j k This entails, since b 1 for all j M, b wb∗ξ b b∗η < ǫ/2M, therefore k jk≤ ≤ k j j − j j k ∗ ∗ X bjwbj ξ X bjbj η < ǫ/2 k − k j≤M j≤M Similarly we have ∗ ∗ X bjwbj η X bjbj ξ < ǫ/2 k − k j≤M j≤M Moreover b b∗ξ = ξ and δ < ǫ/M imply b b∗η η. Thus, if q is the projection Pj j j Pj j j ≈ǫ (1 w)/2, it follows that − ∗ ∗ X bjqbj (η + ξ) ǫ 0 and X bjqbj (η ξ) ǫ η ξ ≈ − ≈ − j≤M j≤M Proposition 4.6. For every ǫ> 0 and N > 0 there exists δ > 0 such that for every self- adjoint element a of norm smaller than N on a Hilbert space H, every r [ N,N], and all unit vectors ξ H, we have the following. If rξ aξ then exp(iπr)ξ ∈ −exp(iπa)ξ. ∈ ≈δ ≈ǫ 12 ANDREA VACCARO

Proof. Fix ǫ,N > 0 and let p(x) be a polynomial such that (p(x) exp(iπx)) < ǫ/3 k − ↾[−N,N]k∞ It is straightforward to find δ > 0 (depending only on ǫ, N and p(x)) such that aξ δ rξ implies p(r)ξ p(a)ξ. Thus we have ≈ ≈ǫ/3 exp(iπr)ξ p(r)ξ p(a)ξ exp(iπa)ξ ≈ǫ/3 ≈ǫ/3 ≈ǫ/3 Proof of lemma 4.1. It is sufficient to show the following claim. ∗ Claim 4.6.1. Let A be a separable simple unital C -algebra, (ϕh)h≤m some inequivalent pure states and τ ,...,τ ∂T (A). For every finite F ⋐ A and ǫ > 0, there exist a { 1 n} ⊆ finite G ⋐ A and δ > 0 such that the following holds. Suppose (ψh)h≤m are pure states such that ψ ϕ , and that moreover ψ ϕ for all 1 h m. Then there exists a h ∼ h h ≈G,δ h ≤ ≤ path of unitaries (ut)t∈[0,1] in A satisfying the following (1) u0 = 1, (2) ϕ Ad(u )= ψ for all 1 h m, h ◦ 1 h ≤ ≤ (3) b Ad(ut)(b) <ǫ for all b F , (4)k (a)− u 1 k <ǫ for all k ∈ n; k t − k2,k ≤ (b) If moreover A is nuclear and M (C) embeds into AU A′, then u 1 <ǫ. 2 ∩ k t − k2,u Given m N and ~ϕ P (A)m, the set ∈ ∈ ~ϕ Ad(u) : u (A) { ◦ ∈U } is weak* dense in P (A)m (see [FKK01, Lemma 2.3]). Hence, the statement of lemma 4.1 follows from the claim (see [KOS03, Lemma 2.2] for details). We start by showing the existence of a path of unitaries satisfying items 1-4a of the claim. By an application of the Glimm-Kadison transitivity theorem, there exists ǫ′′ > 0 such that if (θh)h≤m are inequivalent pure states and (χh)h≤m are pure states such that θ χ <ǫ′′, then there is a path of unitaries (v ) which satisfies the following k h − hk t t∈[0,1] θh Ad(v1)= χh for all 1 h m, • v ◦ 1 < ǫ/8 for all t [0≤, 1].≤ • k t − k ∈ In fact for every h m, if θ χ is small enough, θ and χ are two vector states on ≤ k h − hk h h Hθh induced by two vectors ξθh and ζχh which can be chosen to be very close (depending on θ χ ). Hence there is u (B(H )) which sends ξ to ζ and is very close to k h − hk h ∈U θh θh χh the identity of B(Hθh ), which in turn implies that uh = exp(iah) for some ah B(Hθh )sa whose norm is close to zero. Given the representation π = π on H = ∈ H , Lh≤m θh Lh≤m θh by Glimm-Kadison transitivity theorem there is b B(H) which behaves like a on ξ ∈ sa h θh for every h m, and whose norm is close zero. The required path is (vt)t∈[0,1], where ≤ ′′ vt = exp(itb). Fix such ǫ . Let ǫ′ > 0 be smaller than the δ provided by proposition 4.6 for N = 22n and ′′ min ǫ /2, ǫ/4 . Let (πh,Hh,ξh) be the GNS representations associated to ϕh, let (π,H) be the{ direct sum} of them, and let p B(H) be the projection onto the span of the cyclic ∈ vectors ξh for h m. The representation π has an approximate diagonal since it is the direct sum of some≤ inequivalent irreducible representations (see section 4 of [KOS03]), thus there is a positive integer M and some bj A for j M such that ∗ ∈ ≤ Pj bjbj 1, • ≤ ∗ p(1 Pj π(bjbj )) = 0, • − ∗ ∗ ǫ 1 sup b bjcb bjcb b < 2n for all b F . • c∈A,kck≤1k Pj j − P j k 4 eπ2 22n ∈ Fix δ = δ′/2, δ′ being the value given by proposition 4.5 for M and ǫ′. Fix moreover G = b b∗ : j, k M { j k ≤ } TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 13

Suppose ψh ϕh and ψh G,δ ϕh for all h m. For every h m pick wh (A) such that ϕ ∼Ad(w )= ψ ≈, and let η denote≤ the vector w ξ . By≤ Glimm’s lemma∈ U (see h ◦ h h h h h lemma 1.4.11 in [BO08]) there are, for every h m, ζh Hh unit vectors orthogonal to π(b b∗)ξ ,π(b b∗)η : j, k M such that, if θ ≤= ω π∈ , we have θ ψ for every { j k h j k h ≤ } h ζh ◦ h h ≈G,δ h h m. As a consequence θ ′ ϕ for all h m, which implies, for j, k M ≤ h ≈G,δ h ≤ ≤ π(b )∗ξ ,π(b )∗ξ π(b )∗ζ ,π(b )∗ζ < δ′ |h k h j hi − h k h j hi| From an application of proposition 4.5 for ξ = ξh, η = ζh and bj = πh(bj), we obtain ∗ a projection qh B(Hh) such that vh = exp(iπ Pj bjqhbj ) satisfies ζh ǫ′′/2 vhξh. By ∈ 1 ≈ Glimm-Kadison transitivity theorem there is a Asa which agrees with qh on Sh = span π(b∗)ξ ,π(b∗)ζ ,π(q )π(b∗)ξ ,π(q )π(b∗)ζ :∈j M for every h m. For each { j h j h h j h h j h ≤ } ≤ k n corollary 4.4 (item 3a) provides one a A such that a ǫ′2/(94nM), which ≤ k ∈ sa k kk2,k ≤ moreover agrees with qh on Sh for all h m. We can assume moreover that each ak has ≤ 2 ∗ norm smaller than 9. Define a to be the sum Pj bja1 . . . ana an . . . a1bj . This is a positive 2n element whose norm is smaller than 2 . Define ut for t [0, 1] to be exp(itπa). Thus, ∈ ′′ combining proposition 4.6 with the previous construction, we get π(u1)ξh ζh < ǫ /2 for all h m. This implies ϕ θ <ǫ′′. Moreover for all b F kwe have − k ≤ k h − hk ∈ [u , b] eπkak [a, b] ǫ/4 k t k≤ k k≤ Finally, leta ˜ be a / a . Then for each k n we can show that k k k kk ≤ 2 4n 2 ∗ τk(a ) 9 X τk(bja˜1 . . . aña añ . . . a˜1bj )= ≤ j≤M

4n 2 ∗ = 9 X τk(ãk . . . aña añ . . . a˜1bj bja˜1 . . . a˜k−1) ≤ j≤M

4n 2 2 1/2 ∗ 2 1/2 9 X [τk((ãk . . . aña añ . . . a˜k) ] [τk((ãk−1 . . . a˜1bj bja˜1 . . . a˜k−1) ] ≤ ≤ j≤M

4n 2 1/2 4n 2 1/2 ′2 9 X τk(ãk . . . aña añ . . . a˜k) 9 X τk(ãk) ǫ ≤ ≤ ≤ j≤M j≤M ′ Therefore a 2,k ǫ , thus ut 1 2,k ǫ/4. Perform the same construction between (θ ) andk (kψ )≤ to findk a path− ofk unitaries≤ (v ) such that ψ Ad(v ) θ <ǫ′′ h h≤m h h≤m t t∈[0,1] k h ◦ 1 − hk for all h m, [vt, b] ǫ/4 for all t [0, 1] and b F and finally such that vt 1 2,k ǫ/4 for all≤ t k[0, 1]k≤ and k n. The∈ argument sketched∈ at the beginningk of− thek proof≤ ∈ ≤ ′ ′ ′ allows to find two paths of untaires (ut)t∈[0,1], (vt)t∈[0,1] such that ϕh Ad(u1u1)= θh and ′ ′ ◦′ ψh Ad(v1v1) = θh for all h m, and such that ut 1 < ǫ/8, vt 1 < ǫ/8 for all ◦ ′ ′∗ ∗ ≤ k − k k − k t [0, 1]. Then (ututvt vt )t∈[0,1] is the desired path. ∈In order to build a path of unitaries satisfying item 4b of the claim, the first part of the proof is analogous to what we just did. Instead of using item 3a corollary 4.4 to find ak Asa, by item 3b of the same lemma, for every τ T (A), there is a A+ ∈ ′ 2 ∈ ∈ with norm smaller than 9 such that a 2,τ < (ǫ ) /9M which moreover agrees with qh on ∗ ∗ k k ∗ S = span π(b )ξ ,π(b )ζ , : j M well enough so that π(exp (iπ b ab ))ξ ′′ ζ h { j h j h ≤ } Pj j j h ≈ǫ /2 h for every h m. Let a be b ab∗ and, for t [0, 1], u = exp (itπa). This implies ≤ Pj j j ∈ t ϕ Ad(u ) θ <ǫ′′. For all b F we have k h ◦ 1 − hk ∈ [u , b] eπkak [a, b] ǫ/4. k t k≤ k k≤ Notice that a is positive with norm smaller than 9. This implies that, for τ T (A), ∈ 2 ∗ ∗ a 2,τ 9τ(a) = 9 X τ(bjabj ) = 9 X τ(abj bj) k k ≤ ≤ j≤M j≤M 14 ANDREA VACCARO

∗ 9 X a 2,τ bj bj 2,τ 9M a 2,τ ≤ k k k k ≤ k k j≤M Since a ǫ′, it follows that u 1 ǫ/4 for every τ T (A). Perform the same k k2,τ ≤ k t − k2,τ ≤ ∈ construction between (θh)h≤m and (ψh)h≤m to find a path of unitaries (vt)t∈[0,1] such that ψ Ad(v ) θ <ǫ′′ for all h m, [v , b] ǫ/4 for all t [0, 1] and b F and finally k h ◦ 1 − hk ≤ k t k≤ ∈ ∈ such that vt 1 2,τ ǫ/4 for all t [0, 1] and τ T (A). The argument sketched at the k − k ≤ ∈ ∈ ′ ′ beginning of the proof allows to find two paths of untaires (ut)t∈[0,1], (vt)t∈[0,1] such that ′ ′ ′ ϕh Ad(u1u1)= θh and ψh Ad(v1v1)= θh for all h m, and such that ut 1 < ǫ/8, ′ ◦ ◦ ′ ′∗ ∗ ≤ k − k vt 1 < ǫ/8 for all t [0, 1]. Then (ututvt vt )t∈[0,1] is the desired path. k − k ∈

4.2. Proof of lemma 4.2 Proof of lemma 4.2. We start with the following claim. Claim 4.6.2. For every F ′ ⋐ A, γ > 0 and k′ N 0 there is a A1 and a path of ∈ \ { } ∈ unitaries (wt)t∈[0,1] such that a. w0 = 1 ′ b. [b, a] < γ and maxt∈[0,1] [wt, b] < γ for all b F , k k ′ k k ∈ c. Ad(w∗k )(a) a > 3/4 for all τ T (A). k 1 − k2,τ ∈ Proof. Let a′ M (C) be unitary whose trace is zero. Considering the isomorphism ∈ 2 M ∞ = Z M (C), let a M ∞ the element corresponding to the tensor 2 ∼ Nn∈ 2 ∈ 2 . . . 1 1 a′ 1 1 . . . ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ⊗ ′ where a appears in the coordinate corresponding to zero. Let β Aut( Z M (C)) ∈ Nn∈ 2 be the automorphism sending the n-th copy of M2(C) to the n + 1-th copy. A direct computation shows that, for l Z 0 ∈ \ { } l β (a) a 2,τ = √2, k − k M2∞ where 2,τ is the ℓ2-norm induced by τM ∞ , the unique trace of M2∞ . Since all k·k M2∞ 2 automorphisms in the CAR algebra are asymptotically inner with a path starting from the identity (see [Bla98, Exercise 7.7.5]), there exists a path of unitaries (wt)t∈[0,1] in M2∞ such that w0 = 1 and ∗k′ Ad(w )(a) a 2,τ > 1. k 1 − k M2∞ Moreover, since M ∞ is UHF, we can assume that there is a self-adjont d M ∞ such 2 ∈ 2 that wt = exp (itd) for all t [0, 1]. By hypothesis and remark 2.2 there exists a copy U ′ ∈ of M2∞ into A A , hence we can identify d and a with elements (dn)n∈N and (an)n∈N of AU A′. Let ∩w = exp(itd ) and, without loss of generality, assume that a = 1 ∩ t,n n k nk for all n N. Since [0, 1] is compact there exists X such that [an, b] < γ and max ∈[w , b] < γ for all n X and all b F ′. We∈ Uclaim that therek is nk X such t∈[0,1]k t,n k ∈ ∈ ∈ that, for all τ T (A) ∈ ′ Ad(w∗k )(a ) a > 3/4. k 1,n n − nk2,τ Suppose this is not the case, then for every n X we can find aτ ñ for which the inequality ∈ U above is false. Let ~τ = (τn)n∈N be a trace on A such that τn =τ ñ for all n X. On the one hand we have that ∈ ′ Ad(w∗k )(a) a 3/4. k 1 − k2,~τ ≤ U ∞ On the other, since all traces of A restrict to τM2∞ on M2 , we have that ∗k′ ∗k′ Ad(w )(a) a 2,~τ = Ad(w )(a) a 2,τ > 3/4, k 1 − k k 1 − k M2∞ which is a contradiction. TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 15

Given F ⋐ A and ǫ > 0, let G ⋐ A and δ > 0 be given by lemma 4.1. Let (ψh)h≤m be inequivalent pure states such that ψh G,δ ϕh for all 1 h m, and ﬁx σ (A), N ′ ≈ ≤ ≤ ∈ U k 0 , K ⋐ A and ǫ > 0. By lemma 4.1 there exists a path of unitaries (vt)t∈[0,1] such∈ that\ { }

i. v0 = 1, ii. ϕh Ad(v1) K,ǫ′ ψh for all 1 h m, iii. b ◦ Ad(v )(≈b) <ǫ for all b ≤F . ≤ k − t k ∈ Apply claim 4.6.2 to F K σ, v , k and γ > 0 small enough to ﬁnd a A1 and a path ∪ ∪ { 1} ∈ of unitaries (wt)t∈[0,1] such that iv. w0 = 1, v. ϕ Ad(v w ) ′ ψ for all 1 h m, h ◦ 1 1 ≈K,ǫ h ≤ ≤ vi. b Ad(vtwt)(b) <ǫ for all b F , vii. kAd(− σ)(a) Ad((kv w )∗k)(a) ∈ a Ad(w∗k)(a) f(γ) > 1/2 for all τ T (A). k − 1 1 k2,τ ≥ k − 1 k2,τ − ∈

5. A variant of Kishimoto-Ozawa-Sakai theorem In this section we prove theorem A. We split the proof in two parts, the ﬁrst for clause 1, the second for clause 2.

Proof of theorem A - part 1. Fix a dense ai i∈N in A and a dense σj j∈N in (A). The construction proceeds by induction on the{ couples} (j, k) N N. These{ } two indicesU keep track of the fact that we want to build an automorphism∈α such× that for every τ T (A) k ′′ ∈ the k-th power of its extension ατ to πτ [A] is far away from all Ad(σj) in the ℓ2-norm induced by τ. Let be any well-ordering of the couples N N, and assume that the first elements of such ordering are (1, 1) (2, 1). We shall present× in detail step 1 and 2 of the construction, then the generic n-th≺ step. U ′ Step 1: a1) By assumption, there is a copy of M2(C) in A A for some free ≤1 ∩ ultrafilter . Let c1, d1 A be two elements given by clause 2 of proposition U ∈ −6 2.3 for the finite set a1 and ǫ1 = 2 . Apply lemma 4.2 to ϕ1 for F1 = {−6 } a1, c1, d1 and ǫ1 = 2 to find a G1 ⋐ A and δ1 > 0 which satisfy the thesis of{ the lemma.} ˜ ˜ b1) Fix ψ1 ψ1 such that ψ1 G1,δ1 ϕ1. ∼ ˜ ≈ ′ ′ ′ a2) Apply lemma 4.1 to ψ1 for F1 = F1, ǫ1 to find a G1 ⋐ A and δ1 > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma (specifically satisfying item 4b). b2) Fix σ = σ , k = 1, K = G′ F ′ and ǫ′ = min δ′ , 1/2 , and let (v ) be 1 1 ∪ 1 { 1 } 1,t t∈[0,1] a path of unitaries in A and b A1 given by the application of lemma 4.2 1,1 ∈ in part a1 such that (we will denote v1,1 simply by v1): (i) v1,0 = 1, (ii) ϕ Ad(v ) ′ ψ˜ , 1 ◦ 1 ≈K,ǫ 1 (iii) b Ad(v1,t)(b) <ǫ1 for all b F1, k − k ∗ ∈ (iv) Ad(σ1)(b1,1) Ad(v1 )(b1,1) 2,τ > 1/4 for all τ T (A). k −≤1 k ∈ Step 2: a1) Let c2, d2 A be two elements given by clause 2 of proposition 2.3 ′ ∈ ∗ −7 for the set F1 v1 and ǫ2 = 2 . Apply lemma 4.2 to ϕ1 Ad(v1) for F = F ′ a ,∪ c , { d ,}Ad(v∗)(a ) : i 2 b , v∗ , and ǫ = 2◦−7 to find a 2 1 ∪ { i i i 1 i ≤ } ∪ { 1,1 1} 2 G2 ⋐ A and δ2 > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma. ′ b1) Fix K = G2 F2 and ǫ = min δ2, 1/4 , and let (w1,t)t∈[0,1] be a path of unitaries in A ∪given by the application{ of lemma} 4.1 in part a2 of the previous step such that (we will denote w1,1 simply by w1): (i) w1,0 = 1, (ii) ϕ Ad(v ) ′ ψ˜ Ad(w ), 1 ◦ 1 ≈K,ǫ 1 ◦ 1 16 ANDREA VACCARO

(iii) b Ad(w )(b) <ǫ for all b F ′, k − 1,t k 1 ∈ 1 (iv) w1 1 2,τ <ǫ1 for all τ T (A). Let u kbe− equalk to w v∗. We have,∈ for τ T (A), 1 1 1 ∈ (2.b1.iv) Ad(σ )(b ) Ad(u )(b ) Ad(σ )(b ) Ad(v∗)(b ) 2−5 k 1 1,1 − 1 1,1 k2,τ ≥ k 1 1,1 − 1 1,1 k2,τ − (1.b2.iv) > 1/8. Moreover, we have, for x c , d 1 ∈ { 1 1} (1.b2.iii) (2.b1.iii) Ad(u )(x ) x Ad(w )(x ) x + ǫ 2ǫ . k 1 1 − 1k2,τ ≤ k 1 1 − 1k2,τ 1 ≤ 1 Conclude by fixing ψ˜2 ψ2 such that ϕ2 Ad(v1) K,ǫ′ ψ˜2 Ad(w1). ˜∼ ˜ ◦ ≈ ′ ◦ ∗ a2) Apply lemma 4.1 to (ψ1 Ad(w1), ψ2 Ad(w1)) for F2 = F2 Ad(w1)(ai) : ′ ◦ ′ ◦ ∪ { i 2 , ǫ2 to find a G2 ⋐ A and δ2 > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma (with≤ } item 4b). b2) Fix σ = v σ , k = 1, K = G′ F ′, ǫ′ = min δ′ , 1/4 , and let (v ) be a 1 2 2 ∪ 2 { 2 } 2,t t∈[0,1] path of unitaries in A and b A1 given by the application of lemma 4.2 in 2,1 ∈ part a1 such that (we will denote v2,1 simply by v2) (i) v2,0 = 1, (ii) ϕ Ad(v v ) ′ ψ˜ Ad(w ) for h 2, h ◦ 1 2 ≈K,ǫ h ◦ 1 ≤ (iii) b Ad(v2,t)(b) <ǫ2 for all b F2, (iv) kAd(− v σ )(b )k Ad(v∗)(b ) ∈ > 1/4 for all τ T (A). k 1 2 2,1 − 2 2,1 k2,τ ∈ Assume (j′, k′) is the n-th element of the ordering induced on N N by . We define L = max k : (j, k) (j′, k′) . × ≺ { } ≤1 Step n: a1) Let cn, dn A be two elements given by clause 2 of proposition 2.3 ′ ∈ ∗ −(5+n) 2 for the set Fn−1 un−2vn−1 and ǫn = 2 /(4L(L + 1) ). Apply lemma 4.2 to (ϕ Ad(v∪.{ . . v )) } for F = F ′ a , c , d , Ad(v∗ . . . v∗)(a ) : h ◦ 1 n−1 h≤n n n−1 ∪{ i i i n−1 1 i i n b : (j, k) (j′, k′) u v∗ and ǫ = 2−(5+n)/(4L(L + 1)2) ≤ } ∪ { j,k ≺ } ∪ { n−2 n−1} n to find a Gn ⋐ A and δn > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma. ′ −n b1) Fix K = Gn Fn and ǫ = min δn, 2 , and let (wn−1,t)t∈[0,1] be a path of unitaries in A∪given by the application{ of} lemma 4.1 in part a2 of the previous step such that (we will denote wn−1,1 simply by wn−1): (i) wn−1,0 = 1, ˜ (ii) ϕh Ad(v1 . . . vn−1) K,ǫ′ ψh Ad(w1 . . . wn−1) for h n 1, (iii) b ◦ Ad(w )(b) <ǫ≈ for◦ all b F ′ , ≤ − k − n−1 k n−1 ∈ n−1 (iv) wn−1 1 2,τ <ǫn−1 for all τ T (A). k − k ∗ ≤ ′ ′ Let un−1 be equal to un−2wn−1vn−1. For every (j, k) (j , k ) and τ T (A) we have, assuming that (j, k) corresponds to the N-th≺ element of the∈ well- ordering : ≺ ∗ bj,k,uN−2vN−1∈FN+1,(N–N+1.b1.iv) Ad(σ )(b ) Ad(uk )(b ) k j j,k − n−1 j,k k2,τ ≥ ∗ uN−2vN−1∈FN Ad(σ )(b ) Ad((u v∗ v∗ )k)(b ) 2−4 ≥ k j j,k − N−2 N−1 N j,k k2,τ − ≥ (N.b2.iv) Ad((u∗ v )kσ )(b ) Ad(v∗k)(b ) 2−3 > 1/8. ≥ k N−2 N−1 j j,k − N j,k k2,τ − We also have, for i

˜ ′ ∗ a2) Apply lemma 4.1 to (ψh Ad(w1 . . . wn−1))h≤n for Fn = Fn Ad(wn−1 . . . ∗ ◦ ′ ′ ∪ { w1)(ai) : i n , ǫn to find a Gn ⋐ A and δn > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma≤ (with} item 4b). ∗ k′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′ −n b2) Fix σ = (u v ) σ ′ , k = k , K = G F , ǫ = min δ , 2 , and let n−2 n−1 j n ∪ n { n } (vn,t)t∈[0,1] be a path of unitaries in A given by the application of lemma 4.2 in part a1 such that (we will denote vn,1 simply by vn): (i) vn,0 = 1, (ii) ϕ Ad(v . . . v ) ′ ψ˜ Ad(w . . . w ) for h n, h ◦ 1 n ≈K,ǫ h ◦ 1 n−1 ≤ (iii) b Ad(vn,t)(b) <ǫn for all b Fn. k − ∗ kk′ ∈ ∗k′ (iv) Ad((u v ) σ ′ )(b ′ ′ ) Ad(v )(b ′ ′ ) > 1/4 for all τ T (A). k n−2 n−1 j k ,j − n k ,j k2,τ ∈ The proof that Φ and Ψ, defined respectively as the pointwise limits of Ad(v ) N and { n }n∈ Ad(wn) n∈N, are two automorphisms of A such that ϕh Φ ψh Ψ for all h N is as in {theorem} 2.1 of [KOS03]. Suppose now that α =Ψ Φ−1,◦ and∼ that◦ αk is a τ-weakly∈ inner automorphism for some k N and τ T (A). There◦ exists σ such that, for all a A1 ∈ ∈ j ∈ Ad(σ )(a) αk(a) 1/16. k j − k2,τ ≤ Let N N be corresponding to the step (j, k) in the induction. Let n N be bigger than ∈ k k ∈ N and such that Ad(un)(bj,k) α (bj,k) 2,τ < 1/16. Hence by construction it follows that k − k Ad(σ )(b ) Ad(uk )(b ) > 1/8, k j j,k − n j,k k2,τ which is a contradiction. Let B = A ⋊α Z and let uα B be the unitary which with A generates B and such that u au∗ = α(a) for all a A.∈ TheC∗-algebra B is generated by α α ∈ a N u , therefore, in order to check that B′ BU contains a copy of M (C), it is { i}i∈ ∪ { α} ∩ 2 enough to prove clause 2 of proposition 2.3 for finite subsets of a N u . Let ǫ> 0 { i}i∈ ∪ { α} and F ⋐ a N u containing u . Let n N be big enough so that F u F { i}i∈ ∪ { α} α ∈ \ { α} ⊆ n and ǫn−4 <ǫ. We have that (1) max cn , dn 1, (2) max{kc ck∗ k 1k} ≤, d d∗ 1 , c∗ c 1 , d∗ d 1 , c d + d c < {k n n − k2,u k n n − k k n n − k2,u k n n − k2,u k n n n nk2,u} ǫn−4 <ǫ, (3) max [c , b] , [d , b] <ǫ <ǫ. b∈F \{uα}{k n k2,u k n k2,u} n−4 Moreover, by part b1 of each step m n of the construction, we infer that, for every m n and x c , d ≥ ≥ n ∈ { n n} Ad(u )(x ) x <ǫ < ǫ. k m n − nk2,u n−4 Therefore, we conclude that ∗ uαxnu xn 2,τ = α(xn) xn 2,τ = lim Ad(um)(xn) xn 2,τ < ǫ. k α − k k − k m→∞k − k

Proof of theorem A - part 2. Fix a dense ai i∈N in A. { } −1 Step 1.: a1) Apply lemma 4.1 to ϕ1 for F1 = a1 , ǫ1 = 2 , τ1 , to find a finite G A and δ > 0 which satisfy the thesis{ of} the lemma{ (with} item 4a). 1 ⊂ 1 b1) Fix ψ˜1 ψ1 such that ψ˜1 G,δ ϕ1. ∼ ˜ ≈ ′ ′ a2) Apply lemma 4.1 to ψ1 for F1 = F1, ǫ1, τ1 , to find a finite G1 A and ′ { } ⊂ δ1 > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma (with item 4a). b2) Fix K = G′ F ′ and ǫ′ = min δ′ , 1/2 , and let (v ) be a path of 1 ∪ 1 { 1 } 1,t t∈[0,1] unitaries in A given by the application of lemma 4.1 in part a1 such that (we will denote v1,1 simply by v1): – v1,0 = 1, – ϕ1 Ad(v1) K,ǫ′ ψ˜1, – b ◦ Ad(v )(≈b) <ǫ for all b F , k − 1,t k 1 ∈ 1 18 ANDREA VACCARO

– v1 1 2,1 <ǫ1. Step n.: a1)k Apply− k lemma 4.1 to (ϕ Ad(v . . . v )) for F = F ′ a , h ◦ 1 n−1 h≤n n n−1 ∪ { i Ad(v∗ . . . v∗)(a ) : i n , ǫ = 2−n, τ ,...,τ to find a finite G A n−1 1 i ≤ } n { 1 n} n ⊂ and δn > 0 which satisfy the thesis of the lemma (with item 4a). ′ −n b1) Fix K = Gn Fn and ǫ = min δn, 2 , and let (wn−1,t)t∈[0,1] be a path of unitaries in A∪given by the application{ of} lemma 4.1 in part a2 of the previous step such that (we will denote wn−1,1 simply by wn−1): – wn−1,0 = 1, ˜ – ϕh Ad(v1 . . . vn−1) K,ǫ′ ψh Ad(w1 . . . wn−1) for h n 1, – b ◦ Ad(w )(b) <ǫ≈ for◦ all b F ′ , ≤ − k − n−1 k n−1 ∈ n−1 – wn−1 1 2,k <ǫn−1 for all k n 1. k − k ˜ ≤ − ′ ∗ a2) Apply lemma 4.1 to (ψh Ad(w1 . . . wn−1))h≤n for Fn = Fn Ad(wn−1 . . . ∗ ◦ ′ ∪ {′ w1)(ai) : i n , ǫn, τ1,...,τn to find a finite Gn A and δn > 0 which satisfy the thesis≤ } of the{ lemma (with} item 4a). ⊂ b2) Fix K = G′ F ′ and ǫ′ = min δ′ , 2−n , and let (v ) be a path of n ∪ n { n } n,t t∈[0,1] unitaries in A given by the application of lemma 4.1 in part a1 such that (we will denote vn,1 simply by vn): – vn,0 = 1, – ϕ Ad(v . . . v ) ′ ψ˜ Ad(w . . . w ) for h n, h ◦ 1 n ≈K,ǫ h ◦ 1 n−1 ≤ – b Ad(vn,t)(b) <ǫn for all b Fn, – kv − 1 <ǫ kfor all k n. ∈ k n − k2,k n ≤ The proof that the maps Φ and Ψ, defined respectively as the pointwise limits of Ad(v ) N { n }n∈ and Ad(wn) n∈N, are two automorphisms of A such that ϕh Φ ψh Ψ for all h N { } ∗ ◦ ∼ ◦ ∈ is as in theorem 2.1 in [KOS03]. If we let ut = wtvt , then the path of unitaries (ut)t∈[0,∞) is such that α(a) = limt→∞ Ad(ut)(a) for all a A is the required automorphism. By construction, for each n N and all k n we have∈ that ∈ ≤ u u = u u∗ 1 = w v∗ 1 < 2−(n−1) k n+1 − nk2,k k n+1 n − k2,k k n+1 n+1 − k2,k Thus, given any τ τ N, the sequence π (u ) N is strongly convergent on B(H ) ∈ { k}k∈ { τ n }n∈ τ (recall that the strong convergence of π (u ) N is equivalent to the convergence of { τ n }n∈ un n∈N in the ℓ2-norm induced by τ). Let v be its strong limit. Then Ad(v) extends α, {in fact} for every a, x, y A and ǫ> 0, for n N big enough the following holds ∈ ∈ vπ (a)v∗x,y = π (a)v∗x, v∗y π (au∗ )x,π (u∗ )y = h τ iτ h τ iτ ≈ǫ h τ n τ n iτ = π (u au∗ )x,y π (α(a))x,y h τ n n iτ ≈ǫ h τ iτ ′′ The argument extends by density to all x,y Hτ and all a πτ (A) . ∈ ∈

6. Conclusions and final remarks

Going back to the main motivation of our inquiry, namely understanding what counterexamples to Naimark’s problem look like and how they could be characterized, we are still not able to say anything more that such algebras have to be nonseparable, simple and non-type I. The results we proved actually show that the tracial simplex of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem has no speciﬁc property, at least when it is separable. On the other hand, theorem 1 provides a wide variety of counterexamples, and it high- lights the versatility of the techniques in [KOS03] and [AW04]. It would be interesting to know how further this versatility can be pushed, to see for instance if it is possible to obtain any (nonseparable) Choquet simplex as the trace space of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem, or if there is any K-theoretic or model theoretic obstruction to being a counterexample to Naimark’s problem. TRACE SPACES OF COUNTEREXAMPLES TO NAIMARK’S PROBLEM 19

Another interesting topic (already mentioned in the introduction of [FH17]) is the existence of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem with an outer automorphism. This problem is related to the following theorem. Theorem 6.1 ([Kis81, Theorem 2.1]). Let A be a separable simple C∗-algebra and α Out(A). Then there exist two inequivalent pure states ϕ, ψ P (A) such that ϕ = ψ α ∈ ∈ ◦ This result is linked in turn to the following question on inner automorphisms which, to our knowledge, is open. Question 6.2. Let A be a unital C∗-algebra and let α be an automorphism of A. Suppose that, whenever A is embedded in a C∗-algebra B, α extends to an automorphism of B. Is α inner? The analogous question has a positive answer for the category of groups (see [Sch87]), and an application of theorem 6.1 shows that this is also the case for separable simple unital C∗-algebras. In fact, let A be a separable simple unital C∗-algebra and α Out(A). Suppose ϕ, ψ P (A) are two inequivalent pure states such that ϕ = ψ α.∈ Since A is simple, the∈ GNS representation associated to ϕ provides a map π : ◦A B(H ) ϕ → ϕ which is an embedding of A into B(Hϕ). Identify A with πϕ(A) and suppose α can be extended to an automorphism of B(H ), which means that there is u (B(H )) ϕ ∈ U ϕ such that Ad(u) ↾A= α. The pure state ψ is thus equal to the vector state induced by uξϕ, therefore an application of the Kadison transitivity theorem entails that ϕ and ψ are unitarily equivalent, which is a contradiction. A generalization of theorem 6.1 to nonseparable C∗-algebras would settle the question also in the nonseparable simple case. However, a counterexample to Naimark’s problem with an outer automorphism would witness the impossibility of such generalization. Acknowledgements. I am grateful to Ilijas Farah for having introduced me to this problem, and for the countless suggestions he gave me during the early stages of this work and on the first drafts of this paper. I wish to thank George Elliott for sharing with me interesting remarks and comments on Naimark’s problem, and Georgios Katsimpas for his useful feedback on the earlier drafts of this paper. I further thank Alessandro Vignati for raising the question on the tracial simplexes of counterexamples to Naimark’s problem in the first place. I am grateful to the anonymous referee for their useful suggestions and remarks on the paper, and in particular on the abstract. I wish to thank Gábor Szabó for pointing out the mistake in the original version of the paper. Finally, I wish to thank Christopher Schafhauser who, along with Gábor, made crucial suggestions in the process of fixing it.

References

[AW04] C. Akemann and N. Weaver, Consistency of a counterexample to Naimark’s problem, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 101 (2004), no. 20, 7522–7525. MR 2057719 [Béd93] E. Bédos, On the uniqueness of the trace on some simple C∗-algebras, J. Operator Theory 30 (1993), no. 1, 149–160. MR 1302613 [Bla80] B. Blackadar, Traces on simple AF C∗-algebras, J. Funct. Anal. 38 (1980), no. 2, 156–168. MR 587906 [Bla98] , K-theory for operator algebras, second ed., Mathematical Sciences Research Institute Publications, vol. 5, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998. MR 1656031 [BO08] N. P. Brown and N. Ozawa, C∗-algebras and finite-dimensional approximations, Graduate Stud- ies in Mathematics, vol. 88, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2008. MR 2391387 [CE19] J. Castillejos and S. Evington, Nuclear dimension of simple stably projectionless c*-algebras, arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.11441 (2019). [CET+19] J. Castillejos, S. Evington, A. Tikuisis, S. White, and W. Winter, Nuclear dimension of simple C∗-algebras, arXiv preprint arXiv:1901.05853 (2019). 20 ANDREA VACCARO

[Dix77] J. Dixmier, C∗-algebras, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam-New York-Oxford, 1977, Translated from the French by Francis Jellett, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 15. MR 0458185 [Far10] I. Farah, Graphs and CCR algebras, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 59 (2010), no. 3, 1041–1056. MR 2779071 [Far14] , Logic and operator algebras, Proceedings of the Seoul ICM, volume II (Sun Young Jang et al., eds.), 2014, pp. 15–39. [FH17] I. Farah and I. Hirshberg, Simple nuclear C∗-algebras not isomorphic to their opposites, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 114 (2017), no. 24, 6244–6249. MR 3667529 [FKK01] H. Futamura, N. Kataoka, and A. Kishimoto, Homogeneity of the pure state space for separable C∗-algebras, Internat. J. Math. 12 (2001), no. 7, 813–845. MR 1850673 [GK60] J. Glimm and R. V. Kadison, Unitary operators in C∗-algebras, Paciﬁc J. Math. 10 (1960), 547–556. MR 0115104 [Gli61] J. Glimm, Type I C∗-algebras, Ann. of Math. (2) 73 (1961), 572–612. MR 0124756 [Jec03] T. Jech, Set theory, Springer Monographs in Mathematics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2003, The third millennium edition, revised and expanded. MR 1940513 [Kap51] I. Kaplansky, The structure of certain operator algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 70 (1951), 219–255. MR 0042066 [Kir06] E. Kirchberg, Central sequences in C∗-algebras and strongly purely inﬁnite algebras, Operator Algebras: The Abel Symposium 2004, Abel Symp., vol. 1, Springer, Berlin, 2006, pp. 175–231. MR 2265050 [Kis81] A. Kishimoto, Outer automorphisms and reduced crossed products of simple C∗-algebras, Comm. Math. Phys. 81 (1981), no. 3, 429–435. MR 634163 [KOS03] A. Kishimoto, N. Ozawa, and S. Sakai, Homogeneity of the pure state space of a separable C∗-algebra, Canad. Math. Bull. 46 (2003), no. 3, 365–372. MR 1994863 [Mur90] G. J. Murphy, C∗-algebras and operator theory, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1990. MR 1074574 [Nai48] M. A. Naimark, Rings with involutions, Uspehi Matem. Nauk (N.S.) 3 (1948), no. 5(27), 52–145. MR 0027448 [Nai51] , On a problem of the theory of rings with involution, Uspehi Matem. Nauk (N.S.) 6 (1951), no. 6(46), 160–164. MR 0046574 [Ped79] G. K. Pedersen, C∗-algebras and their automorphism groups, London Mathematical Society Monographs, vol. 14, Academic Press, Inc. [Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, Publishers], London- New York, 1979. MR 548006 [Ros53] A. Rosenberg, The number of irreducible representations of simple rings with no minimal ideals, Amer. J. Math. 75 (1953), 523–530. MR 0057477 [Sch87] P. E. Schupp, A characterization of inner automorphisms, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 101 (1987), no. 2, 226–228. MR 902532 [ST17] N. Suri and M. Tomforde, Naimark’s problem for graph C*-algebras, arXiv preprint arXiv:1708.04368 (2017). [Tho95] K. Thomsen, Traces, unitary characters and crossed products by Z, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 31 (1995), no. 6, 1011–1029. MR 1382564