Operator Theory On Hilbert Spaces
Operator Theory On Hilbert Spaces
Operator Theory On Hilbert Spaces
In this section we take a closer look at linear continuous maps between Hilbert
spaces. These are often called bounded operators, and the branch of Functional
Analysis that studies these objects is called “Operator Theory.” The standard
notations in Operator Theory are as follows.
Notations. If H1 and H2 are Hilbert spaces, the Banach space
L(H1 , H2 ) = {T : H1 → H2 : T linear continuous }
will be denoted by B(H1 , H2 ). In the case of one Hilbert space H, the space
L(H, H) is simply denoted by B(H).
Given T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ) and S ∈ B(H2 , H3 ), their composition S◦T ∈ B(H1 , H3 )
will be simply denoted by ST .
We know that B(H) is a unital Banach algebra. This Banach algebra will
be our main tool used for investigating bounded operators. The general theme of
this section is to study the interplay between the operator theoretic properties of
a bounded linear operator, say T : H → H, and the algebraic properties of T as
an element of the Banach algebra B(H). Some of the various concepts associated
with bounded linear operators are actually defined using this Banach algebra. For
example, for T ∈ B(H), we denote its spectrum in B(H) by SpecH (T ), that is,
SpecH (T ) = {λ ∈ C : T − λI : H → H not invertible},
and we define its spectral radius
radH (T ) = max |λ| : λ ∈ SpecH (T ) .
We start with an important technical result, for which we need the following.
Lemma 7.1. Let X and Y be normed vector spaces. Equip X×Y with the product
topology. For a sesquilinear map φ : X × Y → C, the following are equivalent:
(i) φ is continuous;
(ii) φ iscontinuous at (0, 0);
(iii) sup |φ(x, y)| : (x, y) ∈ X × Y, kxk, kyk ≤ 1 < ∞;
which is impossible.
(iii) ⇒ (iv). Assume φ has property (iii), and denote the number
sup |φ(x, y)| : (x, y) ∈ X × Y, kxk, kyk ≤ 1
is a vector space, when equipped with pointwise addition and scalar multiplication.
Prove that the map
S(X, Y) 3 φ 7−→ kφk ∈ [0, ∞)
defines a norm.
With this terminology, we have the following technical result.
Theorem 7.1. Let H1 and H2 be Hilbert spaces, and let φ : H1 × H2 → C be
a sesquilinear map. The following are equivalent (equip H1 × H2 with the product
topology):
(i) φ is continuous;
(ii) there exists T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ), such that
φ(ξ1 , ξ2 ) = (T ξ1 |ξ2 )H2 , ∀ (ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ H1 × H2 ,
where ( . | . )H2 denotes the inner product on H2 .
302 CHAPTER II: ELEMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
+ η = ξ˜ + η̃.
so by the uniqueness part in Riesz’ Theorem we get the equality ξ]
Likewise, if ξ ∈ H1 , and λ ∈ C, we have
˜ H = λ̄(ξ|ζ)
(λξ|ζ) ˜ H = λ̄φ(ξ, ζ) = φ(λξ, ζ) = φλξ (ζ), ∀ ζ ∈ H2 ,
2 2
T : H1 3 ξ 7−→ ξ˜ ∈ H2 ,
with
φ(ξ, ζ) = (T ξ|ζ)H2 , ∀ (ξ, ζ) ∈ H1 × H2 .
Using (4) we also have
kT ξkH2 ≤ kφk · kξkH1 , ∀ x ∈∈ H1 ,
so T is indeed continuous, and it has norm kT k ≤ kφk. The uniqueness of T is
obvious.
(ii) ⇒ (i). Assume φ has property (ii), and let us prove that φ is continuous.
This is pretty clear, because if we take T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ) as in (ii), then using the
Cauchy-Bunyakovski-Schwartz inequality we have
|φ(ξ1 , ξ2 )| = |(T ξ1 |ξ2 )H2 | ≤ kT ξ1 k · kξ2 k ≤ kT k · kξ1 k · kξ2 k, ∀ (ξ1 , ξ2 ) ∈ H1 × H2 ,
so we can apply Lemma 7.1. Notice that this also proves the inequality kφk ≤ kT k.
Since by the proof of the implication (i) ⇒ (ii) we already know that kT k ≤ kφk,
it follows that in fact we have equality kT k = kφk.
So if for example all Tn ’s are self-adjoint, then this proves that (T ξ|ξ) ∈ R, ∀ ξ, ∈ H,
so T is selfadjoint. Likewise, if all Tn ’s are positive, then (T ξ|ξ) ≥ 0, ∀ ξ ∈ H, so T
is positive.
E. Given Hilbert spaces H1 and H2 , and an operator T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ), it follows
that the operators T ? T ∈ B(H1 ) and T T ? ∈ B(H2 ) are positive. This is quite
obvious, since
(T ? T ξ|ξ) = (T ξ|T ξ) = kT ξk2 ≥ 0, ∀ ξ ∈ H1 ,
(T T ? η|η) = (T ? η|T ? η) = kT ? ηk2 ≥ 0, ∀ η ∈ H2 .
F. The space B(H)sa is a real linear subspace of B(H).
G. The space B(H)+ is a convex cone in B(H)sa , in the sense that
• if S, T ∈ B(H)+ , then S + T ∈ B(H)+ ;
• if S ∈ B(H)+ and α ∈ [0, ∞), then αS ∈ B(H)+ .
H. Using G, one can define a order relation on the real vector space B(H)sa by
S ≥ T ⇐⇒ S − T ∈ B(H)+ .
This is equivalent to the inequality
(Sξ|ξ) ≥ (T ξ|ξ), ∀ ξ ∈ H.
The transitivity and reflexivity properties are clear. For the antisymmetry, one
must show that if T ≥ S and S ≥ T , then S = T . This is however clear, because
the difference X = S − T is self-adjoint, and satisfies
(11) (Xζ|ζ) = 0, ∀ ζ ∈ H.
Using polarization (see Section 3), we have
3
1 X −k
X(ξ + ik η)ξ + ik η ,
(Xξ|η) = i
4
k=0
Exercise 2 ♦ . Prove that for an operator T ∈ B(H) the following are equivalent:
• T is normal;
• kT ξk = kT ? ξk, ∀ ξ ∈ H.
Exercise 3*. For a self-adjoint operator, Theorem 7.1 has a slightly improved
version. Prove that if T ∈ B(H) be self-adjoint, then one has the equality
kT k = sup |(T ξ|ξ)| : ξ ∈ H, kξk ≤ 1 .
Hints: Denote the right hand side of the above equality by M . Use the Cauchy-Bunyakovski-
Schwartz inequality, to get the inequality kT k ≤ M . To prove the inequality kT k ≤ M , show first
that
(∗) |(T ζ|ζ) ≤ M kζk2 , ∀ ζ ∈ H.
Use Theorem 7.1 which gives
kT k = sup |(T ξ|η)| : ξ, η ∈ H, kξk, kηk ≤ 1 .
This reduces the problem to proving that, whenever kξk, kηk ≤ 1, one has the inequality
|(T ξ|η)| ≤ M.
Prove this inequality, under the extra assumption that (T ξ|η) ∈ R, using (∗), polarization, and
the Parallelogram Law.
Exercise 4. A. Prove that, if T ∈ B(H) is self-adjoint, then one has the in-
equalities −kT kI ≤ T ≤ kT kI.
B. Prove that, if S, T ∈ B(H) are such that S ≥ T ≥ 0, then kSk ≥ kT k.
Example 7.2. Let H be a Hilbert space, and let X ⊂ H be a closed linear
subspace. Then the orthogonal projection PX : H → H is a positive bounded
operator. Indeed, if one starts with some ξ ∈ H, using the fact that ξ − PX ξ ∈ X⊥ ,
it follows that (ξ − PX ξ) ⊥ PX ξ, so we have
0 = (PX ξ|ξ − PX ξ) = (P ξ|ξ) − (PX ξ|PX ξ),
which proves that
(PX ξ|ξ) = (PX ξ|PX ξ) = kPX ξk2 ≥ 0, ∀ ξ ∈ H.
It turns out that orthogonal projections can be completely characterized alge-
braically. More explicitly one has the following.
Proposition 7.3. Let H be a Hilbert space. For a bounded operator Q ∈ B(H),
the following are equivalent:
(i) there exists a closed subspace X ⊂ H, such that Q = PX - the orthogonal
projection onto X;
(ii) Q = Q? = Q2 .
Proof. The implication (i) ⇒ (ii) is trivial.
(ii) ⇒ (i). Assume Q = Q? = Q2 , and let us prove that Q is the orthogonal
projection onto some closed subspace X ⊂ H. We define X = Ran Q. First of all,
we must show that X is closed. This is pretty obvious, since the equality Q2 = Q
gives the equality X = Ker(I − Q). To prove that Q = PX , we must prove two
things:
(a) Qξ = ξ, ∀ ξ ∈ X;
(b) Qξ = 0, , ∀ ξ ∈ X⊥ .
§7. Operator Theory on Hilbert spaces 307
The first property is clear, since X = Ker(I − Q), To prove the second property, we
use Proposition 7.2 to get
X⊥ = (Ran Q)⊥ = Ker Q? = Ker Q.
Convention. An operator Q ∈ B(H) with Q2 = Q = Q? will be simply called
a projection.
The above example illustrates the basic idea that spatial (i.e. operator theo-
retic) properties of bounded operators can often be translated into algebraic prop-
erties, stated in terms of the involutive Banach algebra B(H). The types normal
and self-adjoint are already described in algebraic terms. Besides these, there are
other types of operators whose spatial properties can be characterized algebraically
(see Proposition 7.4 below), and these are introduced below.
Definitions. Let H1 and H2 be Hilbert spaces.
A. An operator T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ) is called an isometry, if kT ξk = kξk, ∀ ξ ∈ H1 .
B. An operator T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ) is said to be a coisometry, if its adjoint T ? ∈
B(H2 , H1 ) is an isometry.
C. An operator U ∈ B(H1 , H2 ) is called a unitary, if U is a bijective isometry.
The algebraic characterizations for these types of operators are as follows.
Proposition 7.4. Let H1 and H2 be Hilbert spaces.
A. For an operator T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ), the following are equivalent:
(i) T is an isometry;
(ii) T ? T = IH1 .
B. For an operator T ∈ B(H1 , H2 ), the following are equivalent:
(i) T is a coisometry;
(ii) T T ? = IH2 .
C. For an operator U ∈ B(H1 , H2 ), the following are equivalent:
(i) U is unitary;
(ii) U ? U = IH1 and U U ? = IH2 .
Proof. A. (i) ⇒ (ii). Using polarization, applied to the sesquilinear form
φ : H1 × H1 3 (ξ, η) 7−→ (T ? T ξ|η) ∈ C,
it follows that, for every ξ, η ∈ H, one has the equalities
3 3
1 X −k 1 X −k ?
i φ(ξ + ik , ξ + ik η) = T T (ξ + ik η) ξ + ik η =
φ(ξ, η) = i
4 4
k=0 k=0
3 3
1 X 1X
i−k T (ξ + ik η) T (ξ + ik η) = i−k kT (ξ + ik η)k2 .
=
4 4
k=0 k=0
Using the fact that T is an isometry, and polarization again (for the inner product),
the above computation continues with
3 3
1 X −k 1 X −k
φ(ξ, η) = i kT (ξ + ik η)k2 = i kξ + ik ηk2 =
4 4
k=0 k=0
3
1X
i−k ξ + ik η ξ + ik η = (ξ|η).
=
4
k=0
308 CHAPTER II: ELEMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
Remark 7.3. With the notations above, the condition that T is invertible is
also equivalent to the condition
(iii) both operators T ? T ∈ B(H1 ) and T T ? ∈ B(H2 ) are invertible.
Indeed, if T is invertible, then so is T ? , so the products T ? T and T T ? are also
invertible. Conversely, if both T ? T and T T ? are invertible, and if we put X =
(T ? T )−1 and Y = (T T ? )−1 , then we have the equalities
(XT ? )T = IH1 and T (T ? Y ) = IH2 ,
so T is both left and right invertible.
Proposition 7.5. Let H be a Hilbert space.
(i) Every self-adjoint operator T ∈ B(H) has real spectrum, i.e. one has the
inclusion SpecH (T ) ⊂ R.
(ii) Every positive operator T ∈ B(H) has non-negative spectrum, i.e. one
has the inclusion SpecH (T ) ⊂ [0, ∞).
Proof. (i). Let T ∈ B(H) be self-adjoint. We wish to prove that for every
complex number λ ∈ CrR, the operator X = λI −T is invertible. Write λ = a+ib,
with a, b ∈ R with b 6= 0. We are going to apply Lemma 7.2, so we need to consider
the operators X ? X and XX ? . It turns out that
X ? X = XX ? = |λ|2 I − 2(Re λ)T + T 2 ,
so all we need is the existence of a constant α > 0, such that X ? X ≥ αI. But this
is clear, since
X ? X = (a2 + b2 )I − 2aT + T 2 = b2 I + (aI − T )2 ,
and the positivity of (aI −T )2 = (aI −T )? (aI −T ) (see Remark 7.2.E) immediately
gives X ? X ≥ b2 I.
(ii). By part (i) we only need to prove that, for every number a ∈ (−∞, 0), the
operator X = aI − T is invertible. As before, we have
X ? X = XX ? = a2 I − 2aT + T 2 ,
and then the positivity of −2aT and of T 2 = T ? T (see Remark 7.2.F), forces
X ? X ≥ a2 I. Since a 6= 0, by Lemma 7.2, it follows that X is indeed invertible.
The above result can be nicely complemented with the one below.
Proposition 7.6 (Spectral Radius Formula for self-adjoint operators). Let H
be a Hilbert space. For every self-adjoint operator T ∈ B(H), one has the equality
radH (T ) = kT k.
Proof. It T = 0, there is nothing to prove, so without any loss of generality
we can assume that kT k = 1. Since radH (T ) ≤ kT k = 1 (see Section 5), all we have
to prove is the fact that SpecH (T ) contains one of the numbers ±1. Equivalently,
310 CHAPTER II: ELEMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
Remarks 7.4. A. The types normal and self-adjoint make sense for elements
in a C? -algebra.
B. The type projection also makes sense for an element in a C? -algebra. Pro-
jections are defined as those elements satisying condition (ii) from Proposition 7.3.
C. The types (co)isometry and unitary make sense for elements in a unital C? -
algebra. For these types one uses conditions A.(ii), B.(ii), C.(ii) from Proposition
7.4 as definitions.
D. The characterization of invertible elements given in Remark 7.3 is valid if
B(H) is replaced with an arbitrary unital C? -algebra. More explicitly, if A is a
unital C? -algebra, then for an element a ∈ A, the conditions
• a is invertible in A,
• both a? a and aa? are invertible in A,
are equivalent. The proof is identical to the one given in Remark 7.3. (In fact this
is true even when A is only a unital ?-algebra.)
The following result analyzes the Gelfand correspondence discussed in Section
5, in an important particular case.
Theorem 7.2. Let H be a Hilbert space, and let T ∈ B(H) be a normal
operator. Consider the closed subalgebra T = alg({I, T, T ? }).
A. T is a commutative C? -subalgebra of B(H).
B. One has the equality SpecT (T ) = SpecH (T ).
C. Every character of T is involutive, i.e. one has the equality
Char(T) = Char? (T).
D. The Gelfand correspondence ΓT : T → C Char(T) is an isometric ?-
isomorphism.
E. The map FT : Char(T) 3 γ 7−→ γ(T ) ∈ C establishes a homeomorphism
∼
FT : Char(T) −
→ SpecT (T ).
Proof. A. We begin with an explicit description of the algebra
T0 = alg({I, T, T ? }),
which by construction is dense in T. For this puprose we introduce the following
notation. If P (s, t) is a polynomial in two variables, say
N
X
P (s, t) = αmn sm tn ,
m,n=0
It is obvious that Π is linear, and satisfies Π(1) = I, where 1 denotes the con-
PN m n
stant polynomial 1. Remark that, if P (s, t) = m,n=0 αmn s t and Q(s, t) =
PK k `
k,`=0 βk` βk` s t , are polynomials in two variables, then using the fact that T
commutes with T ? (i.e. T T ? = T ? T ), we get
N
X K
X
P (T ? , T )Q(T ? , T ) = αmn βk` (T ? )m T n (T ? )k T ` =
m,n=0 k,`=0
N
X K
X
= αmn βk` (T ? )m+k T n+` ,
m,n=0 k,`=0
and define
A0 = P (T ? , T )[Q(T ? , T )]−1 : P ∈ C[s, t], Q ∈ M .
We now proceed with the proof of the fact that the “old” C? -algebra T has
properties B-E. As mentioned before this will be done by comparing it with A. We
know that T is a C? -subalgebra of A.
Claim 6: One has the equality ΓA (T) = C Char(A) .
Denote for simplicity the compact space Char(A) by K, and the space ΓA (T) by
A. On the one hand, since ΓA is an isometric ?-homomorphism, it follows that A
is a C? -subalgebra of C(K). On the other hand, it is clear that A contains the
constant function 1 = ΓA (I). Finally, A separates the points of K, which means
that whenever γ1 , γ2 ∈ K are such that γ1 6= γ2 , then there exists f ∈ A with
f (γ1 ) 6= f (γ2 ). This is however clear, because if we take GT = ΓA (T ) ∈ A, then
by Claim 4, we know that we must have GT (γ1 ) 6= GT (γ2 ). We now use the
Stone-Weierstrass Theorem (see Section 6) to conclude that A = C(K).
Using Claim 6 we now see that the equality ΓA (T) = C Char(A) forces on the
the one hand the equality ΓA (A) = C Char(A) . In particular, by Claim 5, we see
that ΓA : A → C Char(A) is an isometric ?-isomorphism. On the other hand the
injectivity of ΓA , combined with the equality ΓA (T) = ΓA (A) forces T = A. Now
we are done, since A has properties B-E.
Proof. Put T = alg({I, T, T ? }). On the one hand, by Theorem 7.2, we know
that SpecH (T ) = SpecT (T ). In particular we also have the equality
radH (T ) = radT (T ).
On the other hand, from the properties of the Gelfand transform (see Section 5),
it follows that radT (T ) = kΓT (T )k. Now we are done, because ΓT is isometric, so
we have kΓT (T )k = kT k.
Since T1 and T2 are self-adjoint, they are normal. In particular, if one considers
the C? -algebras Tk = alg({I, Tk , Tk? }), k = 1, 2, then by Theorem 7.2 we have the
equalities
(27) SpecTk (Tk ) = SpecH (Tk ), k = 1, 2.
Notice that, since we have the inclusions Tk ⊂ A ⊂ B(H), again by the results in
Section 5, we have the inclusions
SpecTk (Tk ) ⊃ SpecA (Tk ) ⊃ SpecH (Tk ), k = 1, 2,
and then the equalities (27) will force the equalities
SpecA (Tk ) = SpecH (Tk ), k = 1, 2.
Using these equalities, combined with (26), we now have
0 ∈ SpecH (T1 ) ∪ SpecA (T2 ),
that is, one of the operators T1 = (λI − X)? (λI − X) or T2 = (λI − X)(λI − X)?
is non-invertible in B(H). By Remark 7.3 this forces the operator λI − X to be
non-invertible in B(H), so λ indeed belongs to SpecH (X).
The following result is a generalization of Theorem 7.2.D.
Theorem 7.3 (Gelfand-Naimark). Let H be a Hilbert space, and let A ⊂ B(H)
be a commutative C? -subalgebra, which is non-trivial, in the sense that it contains
at least one operator X 6= 0.
(i) The character space Char(A) is non-empty;
(ii) The Gelfand correspondence ΓA : A → C0 Char(A) is an isometric ?-
isomorphism.
Proof. We start with the following
Particular Case: Assume A contains the identity operator I.
As in the proof of Theorem 7.2, one key step in the proof is contained in the
following.
Claim 1: Every character of A is involutive, i.e. one has the equality
(28) Char(A) = Char? (A).
To prove this fact we use Proposition 5.4, which states that the equality (28) is
equivalent to the fact that every self-adjoint element X ∈ A has real spectrum, i.e.
SpecA (X) ⊂ R. But this is clear, because by Corollary 7.3 we have the equality
SpecA (X) = SpecH (X), and everything follows from Propoistion 7.5.(i).
Claim 2: The space A = Ran ΓA is dense in C Char(A) .
We already know that,
since ΓA is a unital algebra homomorphism, A is a subalge-
bra of C Char(A) , which contains
the unit 1. By Claim 1, we know that in fact A
is a ?-subalgebra of C Char(A) , so using the Stone-Weierstrass Theorem, we only
need to show that A separates the points of Char(A). But this is obvious, for if one
starts with two characters γ1 6= γ2 , then there exists X ∈ A with γ1 (X) 6= γ2 (X),
so if we put f = X̂ = ΓA (X) ∈ A, we have
f (γ1 ) = γ1 (X) 6= γ2 (X) = f (γ2 ).
Using Claims 1 and 2, we see now that the proof will be finished once we
show that ΓA is isometric. (Among other things this will force A to be closed in
318 CHAPTER II: ELEMENTS OF FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS
C Char(A) , so by Claim 2, this will force the equality C Char(A) = A.) But
this is obvious, since by Corollary 7.3 we have
kΓA (X)k = radA (X) = radH (X), ∀ X ∈ A
and every X ∈ A is normal, so by Corollary 7.2 the above equalities yield
kΓA (X)k = kXk, ∀ X ∈ A.
Having proven the Theorem in the above particular case, we now proceed with
the general case. By excluding the particular case, we assume here that A does not
contain the indentity operator I. Consider then the space
D = A + CI = {X + λI : X ∈ A, λ ∈ C}.
Since A ⊂ B(H) is a closed linear subspace, it follows (see Proposition 2.1) that D
is also closed. In fact, D is also a ?-subalgebra, so we get the fact that D is a C? -
subalgebra of B(H). Since D contains I, by the above particular case it follows that
its Gelfand correspondence ΓD : D → C Char(D) is an isometric ?-isomorphism.
Notice that, since I 6∈ A, the correspondence
Θ : Ã 3 (X, λ) 7−→ X + λI ∈ D
is a ?-isomorphism. On the one hand, this ?-isomorphism gives rise to a homeo-
morphism Char(D) ' Char(Ã). On the other hand, we also know (see Section 5)
that Char(Ã) is identified with Char(A) ∪ {0} (this space regarded as a subset in
(A∗ )1 ), so we now have a homeomorphism
φ : Char(A) ∪ {0} → Char(D).
Explicitly, the map φ is given as follows. One starts with some γ ∈ Char(A) ∪ {0}
(so either γ : A → C is a character, or the zero map), and one defines the character
φ(γ) = γ̃ : D → C by
γ̃(X + αI) = γ(X) + α, ∀ X ∈ A, α ∈ C.
Furthermore, if we denote the compact space Char(A) ∪ {0} simply by T , the
homeomorphism φ : T → Char(D) gives rise to an isometric ?-isomorphism
Φ : C Char(D) 3 f 7−→ f ◦ φ ∈ C(T ).
Note now that the composition
(29) Θ = Φ ◦ ΓD : D → C(T )
is an isometric ?-isomorphism. Since A is non-trivial, we have dim D ≥ 2, which
among other things forces dim C(T ) ≥ 2. In particular the space T = Char(A)∪{0}
cannot be a singleton, so Char(A) is indeed non-empty.
Claim 3: If we identify C0 Char(A) = f ∈ C(T ) : f (0) = 0 , as a closed
sub-algebra of C(T ), then we have the equality
ΓA = ΘA : A → C0 Char(A) .
Indeed, if we start with some element X ∈ A, and we take f = ΓD ∈ C Char(D) ,
then the function h = Θ(X) = f ◦ φ ∈ C0 Char(A) ⊂ C(T ) is defined by
h(γ) = (f ◦ φ)(γ) = f (γ̃) = γ̃(X) = γ(X), ∀ γ ∈ Char(A),
i.e. h = ΓA (X).
Since Θ is an isometric ?-isomorphism, by Claim 3, it follows that ΓA is an
isometric ?-homomorphism. To finish the proof, all we need to prove now is the
§7. Operator Theory on Hilbert spaces 319
fact that ΓA is surjective. Start with some f ∈ C0 Char(A) . When we view f as
an element in C(T ), using the isomorphism (29), there exists some element Z ∈ D
with Θ(Z) = f . Of course, when we write Z = X + αI, with X ∈ A and α ∈ C, by
Claim 3 we have
f = Θ(X) + αΘ(I) = ΓA (X) + α1,
where 1 ∈ C(T ) is the constant function 1. Since both f and ΓA (X) belong to
C0 Char(A) , i.e. f (0) = 0 = [ΓA (X)](0), the above equality forces α = 0, so we
actually get f = ΓA (X), and we are done.
ΦT = Γ−1
T ◦ ΘT : C SpecH (T ) → T.
Next we prove that ΦT is the unique map with properties (i)-(vi). Start with
an arbitrary map Φ : C(K) → B(H) with properties (i)-(vi). Consider the space
A = f ∈ C(K) : Φ(f ) = ΦT (f ) .
On the one hand, since both Φ and ΦT are continuous (by Corollary 7.1), it follows
that A is a closed in C(K), in the norm topology. On the other hand, since both Φ
and ΦT satisfy (i)-(vi) it follows that in fact A is a C? -subalgebra of C(K), which
contains the constant function 1. By (vi) it follows that A also contains ι : K ,→ C,
so in particular A separates the points of K. By the Stone-Weierstrass Theorem it
follows that A = C(K), so we indeed have Φ = ΦT .
B. Properties (i) and (ii) are obvious, since by construction ΦT : C(K) → T
is an isometric ?-isomorphism. The first equality in (iii) is clear, by Corollary 7.2.
The second equality is a consequence of the fact that, since ΦT is an isomorphism,
one has the equality
SpecT ΦT (f ) = SpecC(K) (f ), ∀ f ∈ C(K).
Then the desired equality follows from the well known equality
SpecC(K) (f ) = Ran f, ∀ f ∈ C(K).
is dense in C SpecH (T ) . So if one starts with an arbitrary continuous function
f : SpecH (T ) → C, then there exists a sequence (Pn )∞ n=1 ⊂ C[s, t], such that
limn→∞ kfPn − f k = 0, i.e.
lim max{|Pn (λ̄, λ) − f (λ)| : λ ∈ SpecH (T )} = 0.
n→∞
where ι : SpecH (T ) ,→ C is the inclusion map. Consequently one has the equality
alg({T, T ? }) = f (T ) : f ∈ C0 SpecH (T ) r {0} .
which can be regarded as a non-unital version of (32)
The continuous functional calculus is functorial in the following sense.
Proposition 7.8. Let T ∈ B(H) be a normal operator, and let f ∈ C SpecH (T ) .
It is trivial that Ψ has all properties (i)-(vi) from Theorem 7.4.A, so one has the
equality Ψ = ΦX , where ΦX is the continuous functional calculus correspondence
for X.
Comment. The results of Proposition 7.5.(i) and Proposition 7.6 are true if
B(H) is replaced with a unital C? -algebra.
The following technical result is extremely useful.
Lemma 7.3. Let H be a Hilbert space, and let (Tλ )λ∈Λ ⊂ B(H) be a net with
the following properties:
• Tλ is positive, for each λ ∈ Λ;
• for any λ, µ ∈ Λ with λ µ, the operator Tλ − Tµ is positive;
• supλ∈Λ kTλ k < ∞.
Then the net (Tλ )λ∈Λ also has the following properties.
(i) the net (kTλ k)λ∈Λ ⊂ [0, ∞) is increasing, in the sense that, whenever
λ µ, one has kTλ k kTµ k.
(ii) For every ξ ∈ H, the net (Tλ ξ)λ∈Λ ⊂ H is convergent.
(iii) The map T : H → H defined by
T ξ = lim Tλ ξ, ∀ ξ ∈ H,
λ∈Λ
the inclusion Ran W ⊂ Ran W . On the other hand, we also know that, since for
every vector ξ ∈ H1 we have
⊥ ⊥
ξ − P1 ξ ∈ X⊥
1 = (Ker V ) = Ker V = Ker V,
we have
V ξ = V (ξ − P1 ξ) + V P1 ξ = V P1 ξ = W P1 ξ, ∀ ξ ∈ H1 ,
so in particular we have Ran V ⊂ Ran W . This gives the equality
(33) Ran W = Ran V.
Finally, we know that W is an isometry. In particular, it follows that Ran W is
closed, and then the equality (33) gives
Ran W = Ran W = Ran V = (Ker V ? )⊥ = X2 .
This proves that, when regarded as an operator W : X1 → X2 , W is unitary.