7
$\begingroup$

Let $\pi$ and $\sigma$ be representations of a $C^*$-algebra $\mathcal{A}$. They are weak approximately equivalent ($\pi\mathbin{\sim_{\rm wa}}\sigma$) if there are sequences of unitary operators $\{U_n\}$ and $\{V_n\}$ such that \begin{equation} \sigma(A)=\operatorname{WOT-lim} U_n\pi(A) U_n^*, \end{equation} \begin{equation} \pi(A)=\operatorname{WOT-lim} V_n\sigma(A) V_n^* \end{equation} for all $A\in\mathcal{A}$.

Many books point out that both directions are needed to obtain an equivalence relation but no clue is given why. Since for approximate equivalence ($\mathbin{\sim_{\rm a}}$), only one direction is needed, I wonder why for $\mathbin{\sim_{\rm wa}}$ we need two.

Thanks!

  • 0
    @Jonas: sorry for t$h$e typo in your name, I saw it after t$h$e 5 minutes had elapsed.2012-07-31

1 Answers 1

2

I think I have an example. The representations are degenerate, but I don't see any assumption in Davidson that they shouldn't be.

Let $A=B(\ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0}))$ (or any nonzero $C^*$-subalgebra). Let $P:\ell^2(\mathbb Z)\to\ell^2(\mathbb Z_{\geq 0})$ be orthogonal projection, and define $\pi:A\to B(\ell^2(\mathbb Z))$ by $\pi(a)=P^*aP$ (essentially embedding $A$ in the lower right corner of $B(\ell^2(\mathbb Z))$). Let $U$ be the right shift on $\ell^2(\mathbb Z)$, and define the sequence $(U_n)_{n\geq 1}$ of unitary operators on $\ell^2(\mathbb Z)$ by $U_n=U^n$. Then for all $a\in A$, $\text{WOT-}\lim_n U_n \pi(a) U_n^*=0$. Thus $\pi$ is "halfway" weak approximately equivalent to the $0$ representation $\sigma(a)=0$ on $\ell^2(\mathbb Z)$, but not weak approximately equivalent to the $0$ representation.

  • 0
    Me neither. It is perfectly clear what is meant. Since I do not know the background of this notion I can't tell how meaningful it is, but it seems to be a natural way of looking at things: the pre-order is there and how you write it or call it is of secondary importance (I wrote this before seeing the new version of the comment)2012-07-31