Open MathsAll courses
Positive maps and finite-dimensional approximation · Prerequisite proofs · Sources and terms

Tensor completion, injectivity and state domination

Written by GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI), Ultra. Course exposition: CC0-1.0 to the extent of rights held. Earlier programme and human-source notices retain their own terms.

A completed tensor has two descriptions here: a Cauchy sequence for the projective norm π\pi, and a Cauchy sequence for the symmetric norm σ\sigma. Because σ≤π\sigma\le\pi, the algebraic identity gives a map from the first completion to the second. The random lift construction supplies a projective preimage of every self-adjoint target vector, with cost at most (81/16)∥v∥σ+ε(81/16)\|v\|_\sigma+\varepsilon. Different choices of ε\varepsilon could still give different preimages. Their difference lies in the kernel of the completion map.

We prove that this kernel is zero. A normalized functional detects a kernel vector through its real part; the bilinear exponential test makes that real part symmetric-norm continuous. Finite cosine averages and an exact binomial variation bound then turn two numerical-reality conditions into a norm bound tending to zero. A second proof supplies the full Gaussian heat estimate. Once the lift is unique, its approximate costs become an exact norm comparison. That comparison makes every bounded real bilinear form eligible for the compact affine argument, which chooses one pair of states for all inputs.

Write

q(x)=x∗x+xx∗2.q(x)=\frac{x^*x+xx^*}{2}.

The two algebraic tensor norms are

∥u∥π=inf⁡u=∑jxj⊗yj∑j∥xj∥∥yj∥,∥u∥σ=inf⁡u=∑jxj⊗yj∥∑jq(xj)∥1/2∥∑jq(yj)∥1/2.\|u\|_\pi=\inf_{u=\sum_jx_j\otimes y_j}\sum_j\|x_j\|\|y_j\|, \qquad \|u\|_\sigma=\inf_{u=\sum_jx_j\otimes y_j} \Big\|\sum_jq(x_j)\Big\|^{1/2}\Big\|\sum_jq(y_j)\Big\|^{1/2}.

Both infima use finite decompositions. The real projective norm uses self-adjoint factors and real scalars. A bounded form acts on these completions when its value on an algebraic tensor is bounded by the corresponding norm; its dual norm is the least such bound.

Section 8.1 proves real and complex functional extension. Section 8.2 constructs the completion maps and the projective algebra. Section 8.3 constructs the states, using the scalar spectrum, continuous calculus and order proved in ITP F01–F13. The scalar foundations and continuous norm integrals are in Elementary calculus for infinite products. Section 9 proves compactness and convergent subnets for arbitrary dual balls. None of these constructions assumes separability. A unital algebra in the state assertions has a nonzero identity of norm one; the injectivity assertion also includes zero and nonunital algebras.

Can a tensor disappear in the completion?

Theorem 3.1. For any C*-algebras A,BA,B, the canonical map

I:A⊗^πB⟶A⊗^σB(7)I:A\widehat\otimes_\pi B\longrightarrow A\widehat\otimes_\sigma B \tag{7}

is injective.

The algebraic identity is contractive and therefore extends to II on Cauchy representatives. Injectivity asks whether σ\sigma-convergence to zero can hide a nonzero projective limit.

Proof. If either factor is zero, both tensor spaces are zero. First take nonzero unital A,BA,B, and put C=A⊗^πBC=A\widehat\otimes_\pi B. Section 8.2 proves its completeness, submultiplicative norm, isometric involution and norm-one identity 1⊗11\otimes1. Multiplication and involution also extend to the σ\sigma-completion by the preceding lesson's product estimate. The algebraic identities consequently pass to the completions: I(uv)=I(u)I(v)I(uv)=I(u)I(v) and I(u∗)=I(u)∗I(u^*)=I(u)^*. Thus K=ker⁡IK=\ker I is closed, is invariant under involution, and is an ideal.

Norm-preserving extension at the identity supplies SC\mathcal S_C. For F∈SCF\in\mathcal S_C, put G=(F+F∗)/2G=(F+F^*)/2, where F∗(u)=F(u∗)‾F^*(u)=\overline{F(u^*)}. Adjoint isometry gives ∥G∥≤1\|G\|\le1, while G(1)=1G(1)=1 gives the reverse inequality. The bilinear form VG(x,y)=G(x⊗y)V_G(x,y)=G(x\otimes y) therefore has norm one and value one at (1,1)(1,1): its norm is at most ∥G∥\|G\|, and its value on that pair is one. It is self-adjoint. Lemma 1.1 and (3) below bound its value on every tensor decomposition by its σ\sigma-cost. It extends continuously to the σ\sigma-completion. The extension composed with II agrees with GG on the algebraic tensors and hence on CC. Consequently GG vanishes on KK. If v=v∗∈Kv=v^*\in K, this says Re⁡F(v)=0\operatorname{Re}F(v)=0 for every normalized FF. Consequently h=ivh=iv is numerical-real. Since v2∈Kv^2\in K is self-adjoint, ih2=−iv2ih^2=-iv^2 is also numerical-real. Lemma 2.1 gives v=0v=0. For general u∈Ku\in K, apply this to u+u∗u+u^* and i(u−u∗)i(u-u^*); both are self-adjoint elements of KK. Thus u=0u=0.

For nonunital algebras, use forced C*-unitizations A~,B~\widetilde A,\widetilde B. ITP F02 constructs these unitizations with isometric copies of the original algebras and a contractive scalar quotient. Thus ∥PA(a+λ1)∥=∥a∥≤∥a+λ1∥+∣λ∣≤2∥a+λ1∥\|P_A(a+\lambda1)\|=\|a\|\le\|a+\lambda1\|+|\lambda|\le2\|a+\lambda1\|; the same holds for PBP_B. On each finite decomposition, PA⊗PBP_A\otimes P_B has projective bound at most 44, so Section 8.2 extends it to a bounded left inverse of the projective inclusion. That inclusion is therefore injective. The algebraic inclusion is σ\sigma-contractive, since all square-sum norms are preserved. The commuting square of the two canonical maps shows that an element in the kernel of (7) maps to the kernel for the unitizations. The unital result and projective injectivity of the inclusion make it zero. □\square

Normalized functionals control the kernel

Suppose initially that A,BA,B are unital and V:A×B→CV:A\times B\to\mathbb C is bilinear, with ∥V∥=V(1,1)=1\|V\|=V(1,1)=1. Each marginal has norm at most one and value one at the identity, so its norm is exactly one. Section 8.3's positivity criterion therefore makes φ(x)=V(x,1)\varphi(x)=V(x,1) and ψ(y)=V(1,y)\psi(y)=V(1,y) states. For self-adjoint aa, the exponential series and adjoint give (eita)∗=e−ita(e^{ita})^*=e^{-ita} and e−itaeita=1e^{-ita}e^{ita}=1. The C*-identity yields ∥eita∥=1\|e^{ita}\|=1, which permits the following bilinear test.

Lemma 1.1. For self-adjoint a,ba,b,

∣Re⁡V(a,b)∣≤φ(a2)1/2ψ(b2)1/2.(1)|\operatorname{Re}V(a,b)|\le\varphi(a^2)^{1/2}\psi(b^2)^{1/2}. \tag{1}

Proof. Expand the two exponential series through order two and apply VV. If M=∥a∥+∥b∥M=\|a\|+\|b\| and ∣t∣≤1|t|\le1, the terms of total degree at least three have absolute sum at most eMM3∣t∣3/6e^M M^3|t|^3/6; this follows from n!≥6(n−3)!n!\ge6(n-3)!. The marginal values on a,ba,b are real, so the first-order term has zero real part. Thus

Re⁡V(eita,eitb)=1−t2[12φ(a2)+12ψ(b2)+Re⁡V(a,b)]+O(∣t∣3).(2)\operatorname{Re}V(e^{ita},e^{itb}) =1-t^2\big[\tfrac12\varphi(a^2)+\tfrac12\psi(b^2) +\operatorname{Re}V(a,b)\big]+O(|t|^3). \tag{2}

The left side is at most 11, so the bracket is nonnegative. Replace aa by −a-a to get ∣Re⁡V(a,b)∣≤[φ(a2)+ψ(b2)]/2|\operatorname{Re}V(a,b)|\le[\varphi(a^2)+\psi(b^2)]/2. Replace a,ba,b by ta,t−1bt a,t^{-1}b and minimize over t>0t>0. If either quadratic value is zero, take the corresponding limit; otherwise the minimizing bound is their geometric mean. □\square

Write V∗(x,y)=V(x∗,y∗)‾V^*(x,y)=\overline{V(x^*,y^*)}. If also V=V∗V=V^*, its values on self-adjoint pairs are real. For arbitrary x=a+ic,y=b+idx=a+ic,y=b+id, rotate xx by a scalar phase so that V(x,y)V(x,y) is real. Then

∣V(x,y)∣=∣V(a,b)−V(c,d)∣≤φ(a2+c2)1/2ψ(b2+d2)1/2=φ(q(x))1/2ψ(q(y))1/2.(3)|V(x,y)|=|V(a,b)-V(c,d)| \le\varphi(a^2+c^2)^{1/2}\psi(b^2+d^2)^{1/2} =\varphi(q(x))^{1/2}\psi(q(y))^{1/2}. \tag{3}

The phase does not change q(x)q(x). Summing (3) and applying scalar Cauchy–Schwarz proves that this normalized self-adjoint functional on A⊗^πBA\widehat\otimes_\pi B is σ\sigma-continuous, with dual norm at most 11.

Two tests for an invisible element

For a unital complex Banach algebra CC, assume ∥1∥=1\|1\|=1. Its normalized functionals are

SC={F∈C∗:∥F∥=F(1)=1}.\mathcal S_C=\{F\in C^*: \|F\|=F(1)=1\}.

They need not be positive on any involution. Call hh numerical-real if every F∈SCF\in\mathcal S_C takes a real value at hh.

Lemma 2.1. If hh and ih2ih^2 are numerical-real, then h=0h=0.

Proof by finite cosine averages.

The directional norm derivative and Euler argument proved below have the following consequence: if kk is numerical-real, then eiske^{isk} and e−iske^{-isk} are inverse contractions for every real ss. Multiplication by either is an isometry. These two preliminary arguments use only norming functionals on span⁡C{1,k}\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb C}\{1,k\}, scalar series and completeness; neither uses the Gaussian argument. We apply them first to k=hk=h.

Define

Cs=eish+e−ish2,Ss=eish−e−ish2i. C_s=\frac{e^{ish}+e^{-ish}}2,\qquad S_s=\frac{e^{ish}-e^{-ish}}{2i}.

Both have norm at most one. Products of the exponentials add their parameters, by the absolutely convergent Cauchy product. For m≥0m\ge0, put

pj=4−m(2mj)(0≤j≤2m),p−1=p2m+1=0. p_j=4^{-m}\binom{2m}{j}\quad(0\le j\le2m), \qquad p_{-1}=p_{2m+1}=0.

The binomial expansion, followed by multiplication by SsS_s, gives the exact finite identity

SsCs 2m=12i∑j=02m+1(pj−1−pj)e is(2j−2m−1)h.(BK1) S_s C_s^{\,2m} =\frac1{2i}\sum_{j=0}^{2m+1} (p_{j-1}-p_j)e^{\,is(2j-2m-1)h}. \tag{BK1}

Indeed the positive exponential in SsS_s shifts the index by one, while its negative exponential leaves the index fixed. Every exponential on the right has norm one.

The sequence pjp_j increases up to pmp_m and decreases thereafter. This follows directly from pj+1/pj=(2m−j)/(j+1)p_{j+1}/p_j=(2m-j)/(j+1). Including its zero endpoints, its total variation is therefore 2pm2p_m. Taking norms in (BK1) proves

∥SsCs 2m∥≤cm,cm=4−m(2mm).(BK2) \|S_s C_s^{\,2m}\|\le c_m,\qquad c_m=4^{-m}\binom{2m}{m}. \tag{BK2}

Here the variation is a finite sum of scalar absolute differences, not a measure-theoretic assertion.

There is an elementary bound sufficient for the limit:

cm≤1m+1(m≥0).(BK3) c_m\le\frac1{\sqrt{m+1}}\qquad(m\ge0). \tag{BK3}

For m=0m=0 equality holds. Factorials give cm+1/cm=(2m+1)/(2m+2)c_{m+1}/c_m=(2m+1)/(2m+2). The induction step follows upon squaring from the exact identity

4(m+1)3−(2m+1)2(m+2)=3m+2≥0. 4(m+1)^3-(2m+1)^2(m+2)=3m+2\ge0.

Thus (BK3) uses no asymptotic formula or Gaussian integral.

Fix t>0t>0, and for m≥1m\ge1 set sm=t/ms_m=\sqrt{t/m} and H=∥h∥H=\|h\|. Absolute scalar series give

∥Csm−(1−th2/(2m))∥≤t2H4etH24m2. \|C_{s_m}-(1-t h^2/(2m))\| \le\frac{t^2H^4 e^{\sqrt t H}}{24m^2}.

To justify the bound, the constant and quadratic terms of the cosine series are the two displayed terms, while its remaining terms are bounded by the exponential-series tail of degree at least four. For r≥0r\ge0, that tail is at most r4er/24r^4e^r/24, since n!≥24(n−4)!n!\ge24(n-4)! for n≥4n\ge4.

Let X=CsmX=C_{s_m} and Y=1−th2/(2m)Y=1-t h^2/(2m). The finite power-telescoping identity bounds their 2m2m-th powers by

∥X2m−Y2m∥≤2m∥X−Y∥max⁡(∥X∥,∥Y∥)2m−1≤t2H4etH+tH212m⟶0.(BK4)\begin{aligned} \|X^{2m}-Y^{2m}\| &\le 2m\|X-Y\| \max(\|X\|,\|Y\|)^{2m-1}\\ &\le\frac{t^2H^4 e^{\sqrt t H+tH^2}}{12m} \longrightarrow0 . \end{aligned} \tag{BK4}

We used ∥X∥≤1\|X\|\le1, ∥Y∥≤1+tH2/(2m)\|Y\|\le1+tH^2/(2m), and 1+r≤er1+r\le e^r. The telescoping identity and this norm estimate are valid without a commutation assumption. The Euler formula already proved for Banach-algebra series gives Y2m→e−th2Y^{2m}\to e^{-t h^2}. Also,

∥Ssm/sm−h∥≤sm2H3esmH/6⟶0, \|S_{s_m}/s_m-h\| \le s_m^2H^3e^{s_mH}/6\longrightarrow0,

by the same exponential-tail estimate starting at degree three. Consequently

(Ssm/sm)Csm 2m⟶he−th2 (S_{s_m}/s_m)C_{s_m}^{\,2m} \longrightarrow h e^{-t h^2}

in norm. Dividing (BK2) by sms_m and using (BK3) now gives

∥he−th2∥≤lim sup⁡mmtm+1=1t.(BK5) \|h e^{-t h^2}\| \le\limsup_m\frac{\sqrt m}{\sqrt t\sqrt{m+1}} =\frac1{\sqrt t}. \tag{BK5}

Finally apply the isometric exponential argument to k=ih2k=ih^2, which is numerical-real by the second hypothesis. The two real parameters t,−tt,-t give inverse contractions e−th2e^{-t h^2} and eth2e^{t h^2}. Hence

∥h∥=∥he−th2∥≤1/t(t>0). \|h\|=\|h e^{-t h^2}\|\le1/\sqrt t\qquad(t>0).

Letting tt increase without bound proves h=0h=0. This proof uses only finite averages and norm limits. The Gaussian proof below also gives the more precise intermediate estimate 1/πt1/\sqrt{\pi t}, which is used in the exercises. □\square

Second proof, by Gaussian averaging. We build the norm derivative, the isometric exponential group and the integral estimate in turn. The norm derivative only needs restrictions to span⁡C{1,a}\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb C}\{1,a\}. Section 8 proves the functional extension used in that step.

Directional norm derivative using only two-dimensional compactness

Let CC be a unital complex Banach algebra with ∥1∥=1\|1\|=1, and define

SC={F∈C∗:∥F∥=F(1)=1}.\mathcal S_C=\{F\in C^*: \|F\|=F(1)=1\}.

The norming-functional assertion at 11 makes this set nonempty. For a∈Ca\in C, set

Ds=∥1+sa∥−1s,s>0.D_s=\frac{\|1+s a\|-1}{s},\qquad s>0.

The map s↦∥1+sa∥s\mapsto\|1+s a\| is convex, so Ds≤DtD_s\le D_t for 0<s<t0<s<t. Also ∣Ds∣≤∥a∥|D_s|\le\|a\|. Thus D=lim⁡s↓0DsD=\lim_{s\downarrow0}D_s exists and is finite. Evaluating a member of SC\mathcal S_C gives

Ds≥Re⁡F(a),soD≥sup⁡F∈SCRe⁡F(a).(B1)D_s\ge\operatorname{Re}F(a), \quad\hbox{so}\quad D\ge\sup_{F\in\mathcal S_C}\operatorname{Re}F(a). \tag{B1}

Choose sj↓0s_j\downarrow0, small enough that 1+sja≠01+s_j a\ne0, and a norm-one Fj∈C∗F_j\in C^* with Fj(1+sja)=∥1+sja∥F_j(1+s_j a)=\|1+s_j a\|. This is the norming consequence proved in Section 8.1. Restrict these functionals to E=span⁡C{1,a}E=\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb C}\{1,a\}. Their values at a fixed basis of EE are bounded, because ∣Fj(x)∣≤∥x∥|F_j(x)|\le\|x\|. A subsequence converges coordinatewise: repeatedly bisect a bounded interval containing each of their finitely many real and imaginary coordinates, retain a subinterval containing infinitely many indices, and then take a diagonal increasing subsequence. The nested lengths tend to zero, so real completeness gives convergence in every coordinate. This is the only compactness argument needed.

The limiting functional f:E→Cf:E\to\mathbb C is linear and satisfies ∣f(x)∣≤∥x∥|f(x)|\le\|x\| for every fixed x∈Ex\in E. Moreover,

Fj(1)=∥1+sja∥−sjFj(a)⟶1,F_j(1)=\|1+s_j a\|-s_j F_j(a)\longrightarrow1,

so f(1)=1f(1)=1. Apply Section 8.1 to extend ff to F∈C∗F\in C^* with norm at most one; its value at 11 forces its norm to be exactly one. Hence F∈SCF\in\mathcal S_C. Finally,

Dsj=Re⁡Fj(1)−1sj+Re⁡Fj(a)≤Re⁡Fj(a).D_{s_j} =\frac{\operatorname{Re}F_j(1)-1}{s_j} +\operatorname{Re}F_j(a) \le\operatorname{Re}F_j(a).

Passing along the coordinate-convergent subsequence gives D≤Re⁡F(a)D\le\operatorname{Re}F(a). Together with (B1), this proves

lim⁡s↓0∥1+sa∥−1s=sup⁡F∈SCRe⁡F(a).(4)\lim_{s\downarrow0}\frac{\|1+s a\|-1}{s} =\sup_{F\in\mathcal S_C}\operatorname{Re}F(a). \tag{4}

This proof applies even when CC is nonseparable. It uses finite-dimensional scalar subsequence compactness and Hahn-Banach, without the weak-* compactness of the full dual ball.

Numerical reality gives an isometric exponential group

Call k∈Ck\in C numerical-real if F(k)∈RF(k)\in\mathbb R for all F∈SCF\in\mathcal S_C. Formula (4), applied to a=±ika=\pm ik, gives

∥1+s(±ik)∥=1+o(s),s↓0.(C1)\|1+s(\pm ik)\|=1+o(s),\qquad s\downarrow0. \tag{C1}

The exponential ea=∑m≥0am/m!e^a=\sum_{m\ge0}a^m/m! converges in norm, since ∥am∥≤∥a∥m\|a^m\|\le\|a\|^m and the scalar exponential series converges. Also

(1+a/n)n⟶ea.(C2)(1+a/n)^n\longrightarrow e^a. \tag{C2}

To see this directly, the coefficient of ama^m, for m≤nm\le n, is (nm)/nm\binom nm/n^m, which tends to 1/m!1/m! and is at most 1/m!1/m!. The norm of the tail above any fixed m0m_0, uniformly in nn, is bounded by ∑m>m0∥a∥m/m!\sum_{m>m_0}\|a\|^m/m!, which tends to zero. The finite initial segment converges coefficientwise.

Fix t∈Rt\in\mathbb R. With a=itka=itk, (C1) and submultiplicativity give

∥eitk∥≤lim sup⁡n∥1+itk/n∥n=1.\|e^{itk}\| \le\limsup_n\|1+itk/n\|^n=1.

For the last bound, fix ε>0\varepsilon>0. Formula (C1) gives ∥1+itk/n∥≤1+ε∣t∣/n\|1+itk/n\|\le1+\varepsilon|t|/n for all sufficiently large nn, using the appropriate sign when t≠0t\ne0. The scalar exponential series gives 1+r≤er1+r\le e^r for r≥0r\ge0, and hence

∥1+itk/n∥n≤(1+ε∣t∣/n)n≤eε∣t∣.\|1+itk/n\|^n\le(1+\varepsilon|t|/n)^n\le e^{\varepsilon|t|}.

Take the limit in (C2) and then let ε↓0\varepsilon\downarrow0. For t=0t=0 the norm is already one. For any F∈SCF\in\mathcal S_C, reality of F(k)F(k) gives ∥1+itk/n∥≥∣1+itF(k)/n∣≥1\|1+itk/n\|\ge|1+itF(k)/n|\ge1. Thus the Euler norms are also bounded below by one, proving their limit is exactly one. Absolute convergence of the exponential series permits their Cauchy product; the binomial identity then gives eitke−itk=1e^{itk}e^{-itk}=1. Both factors are contractions and ∥1∥=1\|1\|=1, so both have norm one. For every x∈Cx\in C,

∥x∥=∥e−itk(eitkx)∥≤∥eitkx∥≤∥x∥,\|x\|=\|e^{-itk}(e^{itk}x)\|\le\|e^{itk}x\|\le\|x\|,

and therefore left multiplication by eitke^{itk} is an isometry. The analogous right assertion follows by the same calculation.

The scalar Gaussian facts and the vector integral

The scalar improper integral I=∫Re−u2 duI=\int_{\mathbb R}e^{-u^2}\,du exists: outside [−1,1][-1,1], e−u2≤e−∣u∣e^{-u^2}\le e^{-|u|}. Its normalization can be checked using only compact Riemann integrals. If IR=∫−RRe−u2 duI_R=\int_{-R}^R e^{-u^2}\,du, the double Riemann integral over the square equals IR2I_R^2, by rectangular product sums. That square contains the disk of radius RR and lies inside the disk of radius 2R\sqrt2 R. For a continuous radial function on a disk, upper and lower sums on concentric annuli, whose areas are π(rj2−rj−12)\pi(r_j^2-r_{j-1}^2), give the radial integral ∫0R2πrf(r) dr\int_0^R2\pi r f(r)\,dr. Uniform continuity makes the difference of the two sums tend to zero. Applying this to f(r)=e−r2f(r)=e^{-r^2} gives

π(1−e−R2)≤IR2≤π(1−e−2R2).\pi(1-e^{-R^2})\le I_R^2\le\pi(1-e^{-2R^2}).

Hence I2=πI^2=\pi, and positivity gives I=πI=\sqrt\pi. Scalar substitution now shows that for t>0t>0,

gt(s)=(4πt)−1/2e−s2/(4t)satisfies∫Rgt(s) ds=1.(D1)g_t(s)=(4\pi t)^{-1/2}e^{-s^2/(4t)} \quad\hbox{satisfies}\quad \int_{\mathbb R}g_t(s)\,ds=1. \tag{D1}

Section 8.4 constructs the disk and annulus areas from rectangular sums, and identifies the same π\pi in the scalar quarter-phase example of Exercise 6. For the vector integral, let v:[a,b]→Ev:[a,b]\to E be norm continuous in a real or complex Banach space. Scalar compactness makes it uniformly continuous. If ω(δ)=sup⁡∣s−r∣≤δ∥v(s)−v(r)∥\omega(\delta)=\sup_{|s-r|\le\delta}\|v(s)-v(r)\|, comparison of two tagged sums through their common refinement gives

∥SP(v)−SQ(v)∥≤(b−a)[ω(mesh⁡P)+ω(mesh⁡Q)].\|S_P(v)-S_Q(v)\|\le(b-a)[\omega(\operatorname{mesh}P)+\omega(\operatorname{mesh}Q)].

Dyadic sums are Cauchy and have a limit by completeness. The same estimate proves that every choice of tags converges to that limit as its mesh tends to zero. The scalar norm function is continuous, and the triangle inequality applied to each tagged sum yields

∥∫abv(s) ds∥≤∫ab∥v(s)∥ ds.(D2)\left\|\int_a^b v(s)\,ds\right\|\le\int_a^b\|v(s)\|\,ds. \tag{D2}

If a continuous scalar integrable envelope b(s)≥∥v(s)∥b(s)\ge\|v(s)\| has vanishing tails on R\mathbb R, (D2) makes the integrals over [−R,R][-R,R] Cauchy as R→∞R\to\infty. Their limit is the improper norm integral, and (D2) holds on the line. Bounded linear maps, including multiplication by a fixed algebra element, commute with these integrals by passage from Riemann sums. The continuous fundamental theorem proved in R04 applies to any real or complex Banach space: the integral primitive has derivative vv, and subtracting it from a function with continuous derivative leaves a constant function. With the bilinear product estimate in R07, this gives

∫abu′(s)v(s) ds=[u(s)v(s)]ab−∫abu(s)v′(s) ds\int_a^b u'(s)v(s)\,ds=[u(s)v(s)]_a^b-\int_a^b u(s)v'(s)\,ds

for scalar uu and Banach-valued vv with continuous derivatives. Thus integration by parts is a norm identity. Only continuous functions with the specified integrable envelopes enter the full-line argument.

The heat identity, with all exchanges justified

Let h∈Ch\in C. The series for eishe^{ish} converges uniformly on every compact ss-interval, so it may be integrated there termwise. For the full-line integral, its absolute series has scalar envelope

gt(s)∑m≥0∣s∣m∥h∥mm!=gt(s)e∣s∣∥h∥.g_t(s)\sum_{m\ge0}\frac{|s|^m\|h\|^m}{m!} =g_t(s)e^{|s|\|h\|}.

This is integrable, since with A=∥h∥A=\|h\|,

−s2/(4t)+A∣s∣≤−s2/(8t)+2tA2.-s^2/(4t)+A|s|\le -s^2/(8t)+2t A^2.

Fix a large compact interval; uniform convergence gives termwise integration there. Outside the interval, the same integrable envelope controls every partial sum and the full sum. Its tail tends to zero. These two observations justify interchange of the series and the improper norm integral, without appealing to an unproved general Bochner dominated-convergence theorem.

Odd Gaussian moments vanish by symmetry. Integration by parts for the even moments uses gt′=−sgt/(2t)g_t'=-s g_t/(2t); polynomial times gtg_t tends to zero at both endpoints. Indeed eu≥uN/N!e^u\ge u^N/N! for u≥0u\ge0; choosing 2N2N larger than a given polynomial degree shows that ∣s∣me−s2/(8t)→0|s|^m e^{-s^2/(8t)}\to0. Keeping the other factor e−s2/(8t)e^{-s^2/(8t)} bounds each polynomial Gaussian tail by an integrable Gaussian, and eventually by a constant times e−∣s∣e^{-|s|}. For m≥1m\ge1,

∫s2mgt(s) ds=2t(2m−1)∫s2m−2gt(s) ds=(2m)!m!tm.(E1)\int s^{2m}g_t(s)\,ds =2t(2m-1)\int s^{2m-2}g_t(s)\,ds =\frac{(2m)!}{m!}t^m. \tag{E1}

The last equality follows inductively from (D1). Consequently,

∫Rgt(s)eish ds=∑m≥0(−1)mh2m(2m)!(2m)!m!tm=e−th2.(5)\int_{\mathbb R}g_t(s)e^{ish}\,ds =\sum_{m\ge0}\frac{(-1)^m h^{2m}}{(2m)!} \frac{(2m)!}{m!}t^m =e^{-t h^2}. \tag{5}

Derivative estimate and the kernel conclusion

Now assume hh and ih2ih^2 are numerical-real. The isometric exponential argument gives ∥eish∥=1\|e^{ish}\|=1. Uniform differentiation of the exponential series on compact intervals gives (eish)′=iheish(e^{ish})'=ih e^{ish}. Integration by parts on [−R,R][-R,R], and then passage to the limit, gives

∫Rgt′(s)eish ds=−ih∫Rgt(s)eish ds.\int_{\mathbb R}g_t'(s)e^{ish}\,ds =-ih\int_{\mathbb R}g_t(s)e^{ish}\,ds.

The endpoint terms vanish because gt(±R)→0g_t(\pm R)\to0 and ∥e±iRh∥=1\|e^{\pm iRh}\|=1; both integrals have scalar integrable envelopes. Thus (5) yields

he−th2=i∫Rgt′(s)eish ds,∥he−th2∥≤∫R∣gt′(s)∣ ds.(6)h e^{-t h^2}=i\int_{\mathbb R}g_t'(s)e^{ish}\,ds, \qquad \|h e^{-t h^2}\|\le\int_{\mathbb R}|g_t'(s)|\,ds. \tag{6}

The Gaussian is even and decreasing on the positive half-line, so scalar integration gives

∫R∣gt′∣=2gt(0)=1πt.(F2)\int_{\mathbb R}|g_t'|=2g_t(0)=\frac1{\sqrt{\pi t}}. \tag{F2}

Numerical reality of ih2ih^2 and the isometric exponential argument make both eth2e^{t h^2} and e−th2e^{-t h^2} contractions: these are eir(ih2)e^{ir(ih^2)} for the two real values r=−t,tr=-t,t. Hence right multiplication by e−th2e^{-t h^2} is an isometry. Equations (6) and (F2) give

∥h∥=∥he−th2∥≤1πt(t>0).\|h\|=\|h e^{-t h^2}\|\le\frac1{\sqrt{\pi t}} \qquad(t>0).

Letting t→∞t\to\infty gives h=0h=0, as required. The first hypothesis bounds the Gaussian integrand; the second allows the inverse damping operator without increasing the norm. These operations give ∥h∥≤1/πt\|h\|\le1/\sqrt{\pi t} for every t>0t>0, and therefore prove the lemma. □\square

From small lifts to the real tensor bound

The kernel theorem makes a small preimage unique. Before transferring its cost, we identify the real completion inside the complex one. The real projective space embeds in the complex projective space. To see this without assuming a tensor-inclusion theorem, expand any complex decomposition of a self-adjoint tensor as in (6) of the preceding lesson. It costs at most twice the original projective cost, since ∥Re⁡x∥2+∥Im⁡x∥2≤2∥x∥2\|\operatorname{Re}x\|^2+\|\operatorname{Im}x\|^2\le2\|x\|^2. Thus

∥u∥π≤∥u∥πR≤2∥u∥π(8)\|u\|_\pi\le\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}\le2\|u\|_\pi \tag{8}

on the algebraic real tensor space, and the inclusion of its completion is injective. Its image is the self-adjoint part of the complex completion: symmetrized algebraic approximants are Cauchy by (8).

Theorem 4.1. On the completed real self-adjoint tensor space,

∥u∥σ≤∥u∥πR≤8116∥u∥σ.(9)\|u\|_\sigma\le\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}} \le\frac{81}{16}\|u\|_\sigma. \tag{9}

Every bounded real bilinear form WW on Asa×BsaA_{\rm sa}\times B_{\rm sa} therefore has σ\sigma-dual norm at most (81/16)∥W∥(81/16)\|W\|.

Proof. Let vv be in the completed real σ\sigma-space. For every ε>0\varepsilon>0, the preceding random-lift lesson supplies a real projective vector uεu_\varepsilon with

I(uε)=v,∥uε∥πR≤(81/16)∥v∥σ+ε.I(u_\varepsilon)=v,\qquad \|u_\varepsilon\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}\le(81/16)\|v\|_\sigma+\varepsilon.

Theorem 3.1 above and (8) show that the real canonical map is injective. All these uεu_\varepsilon are therefore one vector uu. Taking the infimum of its bounds gives ∥u∥πR≤(81/16)∥v∥σ\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}\le(81/16)\|v\|_\sigma. The reverse inequality follows from the contractive canonical map. This identifies the two completed real spaces and proves (9). Evaluation of a bounded real bilinear form on projective decompositions gives ∣W(u)∣≤∥W∥∥u∥πR|W(u)|\le\|W\|\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}; (9) gives the dual norm bound and extension to the completion. □\square

One pair of states for all tests

A finite list of affine inequalities can be encoded by a subset of Euclidean space. Let QQ be a nonempty compact convex set and let F1,…,FmF_1,\ldots,F_m be continuous real affine functions. Their joint image K⊂RmK\subset\mathbb R^m is compact and convex. Write y+y_+ for the coordinatewise positive part and y−=(−y)+y_-=(-y)_+. If KK misses the positive orthant, the continuous function ∥y−∥2\|y_-\|^2 has a strictly positive minimum at y0∈Ky_0\in K. Put z0=(y0)+z_0=(y_0)_+ and w=z0−y0=(y0)−w=z_0-y_0=(y_0)_-. For every y∈Ky\in K, z0z_0 is a possible orthant point, so

∥y0−z0∥2≤∥y0+t(y−y0)−z0∥2,0≤t≤1.\|y_0-z_0\|^2\le\|y_0+t(y-y_0)-z_0\|^2,\qquad 0\le t\le1.

The right derivative at zero gives (y0−z0)⋅(y−y0)≥0(y_0-z_0)\cdot(y-y_0)\ge0. Hence

w≥0,w≠0,w⋅y≤w⋅y0=−∥w∥2<0(y∈K).(S1)w\ge0,\quad w\ne0,\qquad w\cdot y\le w\cdot y_0=-\|w\|^2<0\quad(y\in K). \tag{S1}

The nonnegative coefficients wjw_j therefore give a strictly negative maximum of ∑jwjFj\sum_jw_jF_j. If every finite nonnegative combination of functions in a family F\mathcal F has nonnegative maximum, this contradiction proves that each finite list of its closed nonnegative sets has a common point. Compactness of QQ gives one point satisfying the entire family. The finite-dimensional minimum uses scalar compactness; the last step uses arbitrary compactness, without a countability or metrizability assumption.

An exact two-dimensional instance of the orthant separation calculation.

Here K={(−2+t,1−2t):0≤t≤1}K=\{(-2+t,1-2t):0\le t\le1\}. Its nearest point to the positive orthant is y0=(−6/5,−3/5)y_0=(-6/5,-3/5), with z0=(0,0)z_0=(0,0) and w=(6/5,3/5)w=(6/5,3/5). The line w⋅y=−9/5w\cdot y=-9/5 contains the entire segment, while w⋅z≥0w\cdot z\ge0 on the orthant. These are the signs and strict gap in (S1). The picture illustrates one finite test family; it does not represent an infinite-dimensional state space.

Section 8.3 constructs states norming every positive element, including the zero element, on a nonzero unital algebra. It also proves that the state space is a closed subset of the weak-* compact dual ball from Section 9. The product S(A)×S(B)S(A)\times S(B) is compact by the same disk-product construction with the coordinates of both algebras together. The two states norming a finite test's two square sums may depend on that test. The orthant argument will replace those separate choices by one pair that passes every test.

Lemma 5.1. For a real σ\sigma-continuous bilinear form WW on self-adjoint pairs in unital A,BA,B, there are states φ,ψ\varphi,\psi with

∣W(a,b)∣≤cφ(a2)1/2ψ(b2)1/2,c=∥W∥σ∗.(10)|W(a,b)|\le c\varphi(a^2)^{1/2}\psi(b^2)^{1/2}, \qquad c=\|W\|_{\sigma^*}. \tag{10}

Proof. If c=0c=0, the form is zero and any pair of states works. Suppose c>0c>0. On Q=S(A)×S(B)Q=S(A)\times S(B), test every self-adjoint pair with

Fa,b(φ,ψ)=c2[φ(a2)+ψ(b2)]−W(a,b).(11)F_{a,b}(\varphi,\psi)=\tfrac c2[\varphi(a^2)+\psi(b^2)]-W(a,b). \tag{11}

For a finite sum ∑jλjFaj,bj\sum_j\lambda_jF_{a_j,b_j}, λj≥0\lambda_j\ge0, replace aj,bja_j,b_j by λjaj,λjbj\sqrt{\lambda_j}a_j,\sqrt{\lambda_j}b_j. Set SA=∥∑jaj2∥S_A=\|\sum_j a_j^2\|, SB=∥∑jbj2∥S_B=\|\sum_j b_j^2\|, and choose states separately norming these two positive sums. The definition of the σ\sigma-dual norm gives ∑jW(aj,bj)≤cSASB\sum_jW(a_j,b_j)\le c\sqrt{S_A S_B}. The combined test at those states has value at least c(SA+SB)/2−cSASB≥0c(S_A+S_B)/2-c\sqrt{S_A S_B}\ge0.

The finite-orthant minimum and compactness argument therefore give one pair (φ,ψ)(\varphi,\psi) passing every test. Testing (a,b)(a,b) and (−a,b)(-a,b) gives

∣W(a,b)∣≤c2[φ(a2)+ψ(b2)].|W(a,b)|\le\tfrac c2[\varphi(a^2)+\psi(b^2)].

Apply this to (ta,t−1b)(ta,t^{-1}b). If both quadratic values are positive, take t4=ψ(b2)/φ(a2)t^4=\psi(b^2)/\varphi(a^2). If either value is zero, send tt to the corresponding endpoint. This proves (10), with the same states for all pairs. □\square

The complex form and its two common states

Theorem 6.1. For unital C*-algebras and any bounded complex bilinear form VV, there are states φ,ψ\varphi,\psi such that

∣V(x,y)∣≤8116∥V∥φ(x∗x+xx∗)1/2ψ(y∗y+yy∗)1/2.(12)|V(x,y)|\le\frac{81}{16}\|V\| \varphi(x^*x+xx^*)^{1/2}\psi(y^*y+yy^*)^{1/2}. \tag{12}

Proof. Put V1=(V+V∗)/2V_1=(V+V^*)/2, V2=(V−V∗)/(2i)V_2=(V-V^*)/(2i). Each is self-adjoint and has norm at most ∥V∥\|V\|. Its real restriction is σ\sigma-continuous by Theorem 4.1. Lemma 5.1 gives states φi,ψi\varphi_i,\psi_i with constant K∥V∥K\|V\|, where K=81/16K=81/16. Expanding x=a+ic,y=b+idx=a+ic,y=b+id and taking real parts gives the same two-term estimate as (3). Rotating xx then gives

∣Vi(x,y)∣≤K∥V∥φi(q(x))1/2ψi(q(y))1/2.|V_i(x,y)|\le K\|V\|\varphi_i(q(x))^{1/2}\psi_i(q(y))^{1/2}.

Sum the bounds for V1,V2V_1,V_2, apply Cauchy–Schwarz to this two-term sum, and set φ=(φ1+φ2)/2\varphi=(\varphi_1+\varphi_2)/2, ψ=(ψ1+ψ2)/2\psi=(\psi_1+\psi_2)/2. The result is 2K∥V∥φ(q(x))ψ(q(y))2K\|V\|\sqrt{\varphi(q(x))\psi(q(y))}, which equals the right side of (12). □\square

This finite universal constant is the input to the sharp inequality. Its existence, rather than its preliminary numerical size, is what the improvement argument needs.

7. Exercises with complete solutions

The first three checks build the functional that tests a kernel vector. Exercises 4–6 examine the compactness and Gaussian estimates that make the test decisive. Exercises 7–8 transfer a completed lift's cost. Exercises 9–10 turn those norm estimates into common-state bounds.

Exercise 1. Let VV be the normalized bilinear form used in Lemma 1.1, with marginal states φ,ψ\varphi,\psi, and let a,ba,b be self-adjoint. Test VV on (eita,eitb)(e^{ita},e^{itb}). Determine the sign of the second-order bracket in (2), and determine what changes when the first input is replaced by its negative.

Solution. Put M=∥a∥+∥b∥M=\|a\|+\|b\|. Multiplying the two norm-convergent exponential series through VV gives

V(eita,eitb)=1+it[φ(a)+ψ(b)]−t2[φ(a2)+ψ(b2)2+V(a,b)]+R(t).V(e^{ita},e^{itb})= 1+it[\varphi(a)+\psi(b)] -t^2\left[\frac{\varphi(a^2)+\psi(b^2)}2+V(a,b)\right]+R(t).

For ∣t∣≤1|t|\le1, group the absolute terms by their total degree nn. The binomial identity bounds them by ∣t∣nMn/n!|t|^nM^n/n!. Since n!≥6(n−3)!n!\ge6(n-3)! for n≥3n\ge3,

∣R(t)∣≤M3eM6∣t∣3.|R(t)|\le \frac{M^3e^M}{6}|t|^3.

The first-order coefficient is real before multiplication by ii, because the marginals are states. For B=[φ(a2)+ψ(b2)]/2+Re⁡V(a,b)B=[\varphi(a^2)+\psi(b^2)]/2+\operatorname{Re}V(a,b) we therefore have Re⁡V(eita,eitb)=1−t2B+Re⁡R(t)\operatorname{Re}V(e^{ita},e^{itb})=1-t^2B+\operatorname{Re}R(t). Both exponentials have norm one, so their bilinear value has real part at most one. Subtract one and divide by t2>0t^2>0:

−B+Re⁡R(t)t2≤0.-B+\frac{\operatorname{Re}R(t)}{t^2}\le0.

The last quotient tends to zero, proving B≥0B\ge0. Thus Re⁡V(a,b)≥−[φ(a2)+ψ(b2)]/2\operatorname{Re}V(a,b)\ge-[\varphi(a^2)+\psi(b^2)]/2. For (−a,b)(-a,b), the square terms remain the same and the cross term changes sign. The resulting bracket inequality gives the opposite bound, and hence the absolute-value estimate that reciprocal scaling will sharpen.

Exercise 2. The bilinear test gives an additive quadratic bound, while the desired state bound is multiplicative. For α,β≥0\alpha,\beta\ge0, compute the infimum over t>0t>0 of

H(t)=t2α+t−2β2.H(t)=\frac{t^2\alpha+t^{-2}\beta}{2}.

Specify its minimizer when both values are positive and handle every case αβ=0\alpha\beta=0, including whether the infimum is attained.

Solution. The identity

2[H(t)−αβ]=(tα−t−1β)22[H(t)-\sqrt{\alpha\beta}] =(t\sqrt{\alpha}-t^{-1}\sqrt{\beta})^2

proves H(t)≥αβH(t)\ge\sqrt{\alpha\beta} for all t>0t>0. When α,β>0\alpha,\beta>0, equality occurs precisely at t4=β/αt^4=\beta/\alpha, so the positive minimizer is t=(β/α)1/4t=(\beta/\alpha)^{1/4} and the minimum is αβ\sqrt{\alpha\beta}.

When α=0<β\alpha=0<\beta, H(t)=β/(2t2)>0H(t)=\beta/(2t^2)>0 at each finite positive tt, but it tends to zero as t→∞t\to\infty. When β=0<α\beta=0<\alpha, H(t)=αt2/2>0H(t)=\alpha t^2/2>0, tending to zero as t↓0t\downarrow0. Both infima are zero and neither is attained. If α=β=0\alpha=\beta=0, every value of HH is zero. Applying these cases to α=φ(a2)\alpha=\varphi(a^2), β=ψ(b2)\beta=\psi(b^2) proves that a zero quadratic value forces the tested bilinear value to vanish; no division by a zero value is needed.

Exercise 3. A kernel vector is tested by the self-adjoint part of a normalized functional. Let CC be an involutive complex Banach algebra whose involution is isometric and whose identity has norm one. If F∈SCF\in\mathcal S_C, verify that

G=(F+F∗)/2,F∗(x)=F(x∗)‾,G=(F+F^*)/2,\qquad F^*(x)=\overline{F(x^*)},

is normalized and self-adjoint.

Solution. The adjoint is complex linear, since

F∗(λx+μy)=λˉF(x∗)+μˉF(y∗)‾=λF∗(x)+μF∗(y).F^*(\lambda x+\mu y) =\overline{\bar\lambda F(x^*)+\bar\mu F(y^*)} =\lambda F^*(x)+\mu F^*(y).

The involution carries the unit ball onto itself. Substituting z=x∗z=x^* in the functional norm supremum therefore gives ∥F∗∥=sup⁡∥z∥≤1∣F(z)∣=∥F∥=1\|F^*\|=\sup_{\|z\|\le1}|F(z)|=\|F\|=1. The triangle inequality gives ∥G∥≤1\|G\|\le1. Since 1∗=11^*=1 and F(1)=1F(1)=1,

G(1)=12[1+1‾]=1.G(1)=\tfrac12[1+\overline1]=1.

Evaluation at the norm-one identity gives 1=∣G(1)∣≤∥G∥1=|G(1)|\le\|G\|, proving equality. Finally (F∗)∗=F(F^*)^*=F, and conjugate linearity of the functional adjoint on scalar coefficients gives G∗=GG^*=G. This is normalization in the Banach-algebra sense; positivity requires the additional C*-order criterion in Section 8.3.

Exercise 4. The directional formula (4) must hold for an arbitrary, possibly nonseparable, unital Banach algebra CC. For a∈Ca\in C, put q(s)=(∥1+sa∥−1)/sq(s)=(\|1+sa\|-1)/s. Explain how compactness of the entire dual unit ball supplies the limiting normalized functional, and how its subnet preserves the scalar limsup. Also identify why a convergent functional subsequence cannot be assumed.

Solution. Section 9 uses one disk of radius ∥x∥\|x\| for every x∈Cx\in C. In their product, impose all equations f(x+λy)=f(x)+λf(y)f(x+\lambda y)=f(x)+\lambda f(y). Each equation is closed in the coordinate topology. Their intersection consists exactly of linear functionals of norm at most one, so it is the weak-* dual ball. The ultrafilter proof of product compactness works for the full index set CC; it imposes no countability condition.

The triangle inequality gives ∣q(s)∣≤∥a∥|q(s)|\le\|a\|, so its scalar limsup LL is finite. Choose a strictly decreasing sequence sn↓0s_n\downarrow0 with q(sn)→Lq(s_n)\to L, by taking sns_n below the previous half-step and below a threshold on which q<L+1/nq<L+1/n, while ensuring q(sn)>L−1/nq(s_n)>L-1/n. For all sufficiently large nn, 1+sna≠01+s_na\ne0. Section 8.1 supplies ∥Fn∥=1\|F_n\|=1 with Fn(1+sna)=∥1+sna∥F_n(1+s_na)=\|1+s_na\|.

Compactness gives a cluster point FF in the full dual ball. More explicitly, intersect the closures of all tails of (Fn)(F_n). They have the finite intersection property, so that intersection is nonempty. Direct the triples (n,U,m)(n,U,m) with m≥nm\ge n and Fm∈UF_m\in U, where UU is a neighborhood of FF, by increasing both indices and decreasing the neighborhood. The cluster property gives a common upper triple for any two. The selected index mm is order preserving and eventually exceeds every integer. The selected functionals therefore form a subnet converging weak-* to FF, as constructed for general nets in Section 9.5. Along it sm→0s_m\to0 and q(sm)→Lq(s_m)\to L.

The norming equality gives

∣Fn(1)−1∣≤∣∥1+sna∥−1∣+sn∣Fn(a)∣≤2sn∥a∥.|F_n(1)-1| \le|\|1+s_na\|-1|+s_n|F_n(a)| \le2s_n\|a\|.

Thus F(1)=1F(1)=1. Its dual-ball bound and ∥1∥=1\|1\|=1 then give ∥F∥=1\|F\|=1. Taking real parts of the same norming equality, and using Re⁡Fn(1)≤1\operatorname{Re}F_n(1)\le1, gives

q(sn)≤Re⁡Fn(a).q(s_n)\le\operatorname{Re}F_n(a).

On the chosen subnet this implies L≤Re⁡F(a)≤sup⁡G∈SCRe⁡G(a)L\le\operatorname{Re}F(a)\le\sup_{G\in\mathcal S_C}\operatorname{Re}G(a). For each normalized GG, evaluating 1+sa1+sa gives q(s)≥Re⁡G(a)q(s)\ge\operatorname{Re}G(a); hence the liminf is at least that same supremum. The two bounds prove the limit in (4).

Arbitrary compactness supplies subnets, and does not assert sequential compactness of this dual ball. The main proof can instead restrict the functionals to the at most two-dimensional span of 1,a1,a, take a convergent coordinate subsequence there, and extend that restricted limit by Hahn–Banach. Neither route assumes separability of CC.

Exercise 5. In the heat estimate (6), the scalar envelope is the absolute derivative of the normalized kernel gt(s)=(4πt)−1/2e−s2/(4t)g_t(s)=(4\pi t)^{-1/2}e^{-s^2/(4t)}, t>0t>0. Compute ∫R∣gt′(s)∣ ds\int_{\mathbb R}|g_t'(s)|\,ds exactly. Check the value both by substitution and by the variation on the two half-lines.

Solution. Differentiation gives gt′(s)=−sgt(s)/(2t)g_t'(s)=-s g_t(s)/(2t). Because gtg_t is even, its absolute derivative is even, and hence

∫R∣gt′∣=1t(4πt)−1/2∫0∞se−s2/(4t) ds.\int_{\mathbb R}|g_t'| =\frac1t(4\pi t)^{-1/2} \int_0^\infty s e^{-s^2/(4t)}\,ds.

For the last integral set v=s2/(4t)v=s^2/(4t), so s ds=2t dvs\,ds=2t\,dv. The scalar integral of e−ve^{-v} on [0,∞)[0,\infty) is one, by its antiderivative and its vanishing endpoint. Thus the last integral is 2t2t, and

∫R∣gt′∣=2(4πt)−1/2=1πt.\int_{\mathbb R}|g_t'| =2(4\pi t)^{-1/2}=\frac1{\sqrt{\pi t}}.

On [0,∞)[0,\infty), gtg_t decreases from gt(0)g_t(0) to zero, so its variation is gt(0)g_t(0). On the negative half-line it increases from zero to gt(0)g_t(0). Adding these variations gives 2gt(0)2g_t(0), the same value. This is valid for every positive tt, and is the precise constant bounding the norm integral in (6).

Exercise 6. Trace the two hypotheses of Lemma 2.1 through the heat estimate. Explain why numerical reality of hh and of ih2ih^2 are both needed to conclude h=0h=0, rather than merely decay of he−th2he^{-th^2}. Test the distinction on the nonzero self-adjoint matrix diag⁡(1,0)\operatorname{diag}(1,0) and on the scalar multiple e−iπ/41e^{-i\pi/4}1.

Solution. If hh is numerical-real, (4) and the Euler construction show that eishe^{ish} and e−ishe^{-ish} are inverse contractions for real ss. Therefore their norms are one, and (6) gives

∥he−th2∥≤∫R∣gt′(s)∣ ds=1πt.\|he^{-th^2}\| \le\int_{\mathbb R}|g_t'(s)|\,ds=\frac1{\sqrt{\pi t}}.

This controls the damped vector.

The second hypothesis applies the same exponential construction to k=ih2k=ih^2:

eitk=e−th2,e−itk=eth2.e^{itk}=e^{-th^2},\qquad e^{-itk}=e^{th^2}.

Both have norm at most one and are inverses. Consequently

∥h∥=∥(he−th2)eth2∥≤∥he−th2∥≤∥h∥.\|h\|=\|(he^{-th^2})e^{th^2}\| \le\|he^{-th^2}\|\le\|h\|.

The heat bound is therefore a bound on ∥h∥\|h\| for every t>0t>0. Sending tt to infinity gives zero.

For the matrix projection h=diag⁡(1,0)h=\operatorname{diag}(1,0), normalized functionals are states by Section 8.3, so hh is numerical-real. Direct exponentiation gives

he−th2=diag⁡(e−t,0),∥he−th2∥=e−t,∥h∥=1,∥eth2∥=et.he^{-th^2}=\operatorname{diag}(e^{-t},0),\qquad \|he^{-th^2}\|=e^{-t},\quad \|h\|=1,\quad \|e^{th^2}\|=e^t.

Evaluation at the first diagonal entry is a normalized functional and takes ih2ih^2 to ii, so the second hypothesis fails. Decay of the damped element alone cannot yield h=0h=0. Conversely, for h=e−iπ/41=(1−i)1/2h=e^{-i\pi/4}1=(1-i)1/\sqrt2, squaring its scalar coefficient gives h2=−i1h^2=-i1, so ih2=1ih^2=1, which is numerical-real, while every normalized functional takes hh to the nonreal scalar e−iπ/4e^{-i\pi/4}. Thus the second condition alone does not supply the first.

Exercise 7. To place a real projective lift inside the complex completion, let u=u∗u=u^* be an algebraic tensor and start with an arbitrary complex decomposition u=∑jxj⊗yju=\sum_jx_j\otimes y_j. Construct a real decomposition and prove

∥u∥π≤∥u∥πR≤2∥u∥π.\|u\|_\pi\le\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}\le2\|u\|_\pi.

Explain how its upper factor 22 controls the inclusion of the completed real space.

Solution. Write xj=aj+icjx_j=a_j+ic_j, yj=bj+idjy_j=b_j+id_j with self-adjoint parts. Average the decomposition of uu with its adjoint:

u=u+u∗2=∑j(aj⊗bj−cj⊗dj).u=\frac{u+u^*}{2} =\sum_j(a_j\otimes b_j-c_j\otimes d_j).

This is a real decomposition, with cost at most ∑j(∥aj∥∥bj∥+∥cj∥∥dj∥)\sum_j(\|a_j\|\|b_j\|+\|c_j\|\|d_j\|). For each jj, scalar Cauchy–Schwarz bounds its summand by

(∥aj∥2+∥cj∥2)1/2(∥bj∥2+∥dj∥2)1/2.(\|a_j\|^2+\|c_j\|^2)^{1/2} (\|b_j\|^2+\|d_j\|^2)^{1/2}.

Adjoint isometry in aj=(xj+xj∗)/2a_j=(x_j+x_j^*)/2, cj=(xj−xj∗)/(2i)c_j=(x_j-x_j^*)/(2i) gives ∥aj∥,∥cj∥≤∥xj∥\|a_j\|,\|c_j\|\le\|x_j\|, and likewise ∥bj∥,∥dj∥≤∥yj∥\|b_j\|,\|d_j\|\le\|y_j\|. The product is at most 2∥xj∥∥yj∥2\|x_j\|\|y_j\|. Taking the infimum over the original complex decompositions proves the upper bound. Every real decomposition is also an allowed complex decomposition, proving the lower bound.

The inequalities apply to differences of real tensors. A Cauchy sequence for the real norm is therefore Cauchy for the complex norm, and if its complex limit is zero the upper inequality forces its real limit to be zero. This proves injectivity of the inclusion of completions. For a self-adjoint complex projective limit, symmetrize finite approximants. They converge to it in the complex norm, and the upper inequality makes the symmetrized sequence Cauchy in the real norm. Thus its image is exactly the self-adjoint part of the complex completion, as used in (8).

Exercise 8. Let vv be any vector of the completed real σ\sigma-space. Suppose that for every ε>0\varepsilon>0 the random lift construction supplies uεu_\varepsilon with

I(uε)=v,∥uε∥πR≤(81/16)∥v∥σ+ε.I(u_\varepsilon)=v,\qquad \|u_\varepsilon\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}\le(81/16)\|v\|_\sigma+\varepsilon.

Use injectivity to obtain an exact norm bound, including v=0v=0. Explain whether a convergent family of different lifts or an attaining algebraic decomposition is needed.

Solution. For any two positive tolerances, I(uε−uδ)=0I(u_\varepsilon-u_\delta)=0. Injectivity, using the real inclusion from Exercise 7, gives uε=uδu_\varepsilon=u_\delta. Thus every supplied lift is one fixed vector uu. Put K=81/16K=81/16. If d=∥u∥πR−K∥v∥σd=\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}-K\|v\|_\sigma were positive, the lift bound with ε=d/2\varepsilon=d/2 would say d≤d/2d\le d/2, a contradiction. Hence

∥u∥πR≤K∥v∥σ.\|u\|_{\pi_{\mathbb R}}\le K\|v\|_\sigma.

When v=0v=0, injectivity also gives u=0u=0, and the same bound is exact.

The approximate statements concern the costs of preimages. Uniqueness identifies their vectors before any limit argument, so no compactness of a projective ball and no convergence of distinct lifts enter. The projective norm remains an infimum of decomposition costs; the bound does not assert that one finite decomposition realizes that infimum.

Exercise 9. Let QQ be a nonempty compact convex set and F1,…,FmF_1,\ldots,F_m continuous real affine tests, with joint image K⊂RmK\subset\mathbb R^m. When KK misses the positive orthant, explain why the separating combination uses nonnegative coefficients and has strictly negative maximum on KK. Relate the orientation to positive coordinate rays and to the fact that the orthant contains zero.

Solution. The image KK is nonempty, compact and convex. The continuous distance-squared function ∥y−∥2\|y_-\|^2 attains a positive minimum at some y0y_0: a zero minimum would put y0y_0 in the orthant. Set z0=(y0)+z_0=(y_0)_+, w=z0−y0=(y0)−w=z_0-y_0=(y_0)_-. Then w≥0w\ge0, w≠0w\ne0, and disjoint positive and negative coordinates give w⋅y0=−∥w∥2w\cdot y_0=-\|w\|^2.

For y∈Ky\in K and 0<t≤10<t\le1, y0+t(y−y0)∈Ky_0+t(y-y_0)\in K. Its distance to the orthant is at most its distance to z0z_0, while minimality bounds that distance below by the one at y0y_0. Expanding the squared norm gives

0≤−2t w⋅(y−y0)+t2∥y−y0∥2.0\le-2t\,w\cdot(y-y_0)+t^2\|y-y_0\|^2.

Divide by tt and let t↓0t\downarrow0. We obtain

w⋅y≤w⋅y0=−∥w∥2<0.w\cdot y\le w\cdot y_0=-\|w\|^2<0.

Thus ∑jwjFj\sum_jw_jF_j has strictly negative maximum on QQ, and every coefficient wjw_j is nonnegative. This is exactly the kind of combination permitted in the finite-test hypothesis.

The orientation can also be read from any strict separator that bounds its values below on the orthant and above on KK. A negative jj-th coefficient would send its value on the ray rejre_j, r→∞r\to\infty, to −∞-\infty, violating that lower bound. Therefore every coefficient is nonnegative. Because zero belongs to the orthant, its infimum under such a functional is zero. Strict separation consequently puts the compact-set maximum below zero. Applying this contradiction to every finite test list yields the finite intersection property for the closed sets {F≥0}\{F\ge0\}. Compactness of QQ supplies one point satisfying the whole, possibly uncountable, family.

Exercise 10. Let V=V1+iV2V=V_1+iV_2, where V1,V2V_1,V_2 are the self-adjoint parts in Theorem 6.1, and put K=81/16K=81/16. Each part has the bound

∣Vi(x,y)∣≤K∥V∥φi(q(x))ψi(q(y)).|V_i(x,y)|\le K\|V\| \sqrt{\varphi_i(q(x))\psi_i(q(y))}.

Compute the bound for VV using the mean states. Check that converting q(x)q(x) and q(y)q(y) to the two sums in (12) does not introduce another factor of two.

Solution. The triangle inequality first gives a sum of two nonnegative scalar bounds. Apply scalar Cauchy–Schwarz to that sum:

∣V(x,y)∣≤K∥V∥∑i=12φi(q(x))ψi(q(y))≤K∥V∥(φ1+φ2)(q(x))(ψ1+ψ2)(q(y)).\begin{aligned} |V(x,y)| &\le K\|V\|\sum_{i=1}^2 \sqrt{\varphi_i(q(x))}\sqrt{\psi_i(q(y))}\\ &\le K\|V\| \sqrt{(\varphi_1+\varphi_2)(q(x))} \sqrt{(\psi_1+\psi_2)(q(y))}. \end{aligned}

Both sums are twice the mean states φ=(φ1+φ2)/2\varphi=(\varphi_1+\varphi_2)/2 and ψ=(ψ1+ψ2)/2\psi=(\psi_1+\psi_2)/2. The two square roots therefore multiply their factors 2\sqrt2 into 22, giving 2K∥V∥φ(q(x))ψ(q(y))2K\|V\|\sqrt{\varphi(q(x))\psi(q(y))}. By the definition of qq,

φ(q(x))ψ(q(y))=12φ(x∗x+xx∗)ψ(y∗y+yy∗).\sqrt{\varphi(q(x))\psi(q(y))} =\tfrac12 \sqrt{\varphi(x^*x+xx^*)\psi(y^*y+yy^*)}.

That factor 1/21/2 cancels the 22 from the means. The coefficient in (12) is exactly K=81/16K=81/16. Convexity makes the means states, and the original two pairs worked for all inputs; hence the mean pair also works for every x,yx,y, including inputs whose quadratic values vanish.

8. Norm-preserving functional extension

We use extension in three places: to norm a vector in the projective algebra, to extend a limit on span⁡C{1,a}\operatorname{span}_{\mathbb C}\{1,a\}, and to extend a spectral evaluation to a state. The construction below works on arbitrary subspaces of arbitrary normed spaces, whether or not they are closed or complete.

8.1. The precise norming-functional input

For the general real extension principle, let p:E→Rp:E\to\mathbb R be finite-valued and sublinear: p(x+y)≤p(x)+p(y)p(x+y)\le p(x)+p(y) and p(tx)=tp(x)p(tx)=tp(x) for t≥0t\ge0. Let g:D→Rg:D\to\mathbb R be real linear with g≤pg\le p. At z∉Dz\notin D, prescribe g1(z)=cg_1(z)=c between

sup⁡y∈D[g(y)−p(y−z)]andinf⁡w∈D[p(w+z)−g(w)].\sup_{y\in D}[g(y)-p(y-z)] \quad\text{and}\quad \inf_{w\in D}[p(w+z)-g(w)].

Each lower candidate is at most each upper candidate, since g(y)+g(w)≤p(y+w)≤p(y−z)+p(w+z)g(y)+g(w)\le p(y+w)\le p(y-z)+p(w+z). The choices y=0y=0 and w=0w=0 give finite bounds, so scalar completeness supplies cc. For t>0t>0, the upper inequality at y/ty/t gives g(y)+tc≤p(y+tz)g(y)+tc\le p(y+tz). For t=−b<0t=-b<0, the lower inequality at y/by/b gives g(y)−bc≤p(y−bz)g(y)-bc\le p(y-bz). Thus g1(y+tz)=g(y)+tcg_1(y+tz)=g(y)+tc is dominated everywhere on its enlarged domain. A chain's union is a linear dominated extension, because any finite list of vectors belongs to one domain in the chain. The original extension bounds the empty chain. Zorn supplies a maximal extension, and the one-vector construction shows that its domain is all of EE.

For a complex seminorm pp, satisfying p(λx)=∣λ∣p(x)p(\lambda x)=|\lambda|p(x), a complex linear ff with ∣f∣≤p|f|\le p has the same extension property. Extend its real part by the real principle and set F(x)=U(x)−iU(ix)F(x)=U(x)-iU(ix). Complex linearity and agreement on the original domain follow from U(ix)=−Im⁡f(x)U(ix)=-\operatorname{Im}f(x) there. Rotating xx to make F(x)F(x) real nonnegative gives ∣F(x)∣≤p(x)|F(x)|\le p(x). In particular this applies to p(x)=L∥x∥p(x)=L\|x\|. The norm-bounded construction, including its two signs and zero bound, is detailed next.

Let EE be a real normed vector space, let D⊂ED\subset E be a linear subspace, let f:D→Rf:D\to\mathbb R be linear, and let L≥0L\ge0 satisfy ∣f(y)∣≤L∥y∥|f(y)|\le L\|y\| on DD. If L=0L=0, the zero functional is an extension. Otherwise divide ff by LL, so that L=1L=1. For z∉Dz\notin D, a real number cc can be chosen between

sup⁡y∈D{f(y)−∥y−z∥}andinf⁡y∈D{∥y+z∥−f(y)}.(A1)\sup_{y\in D}\{f(y)-\|y-z\|\} \quad\hbox{and}\quad \inf_{y\in D}\{\|y+z\|-f(y)\}. \tag{A1}

Indeed for y,w∈Dy,w\in D,

f(y)+f(w)=f(y+w)≤∥y+w∥≤∥y−z∥+∥w+z∥.f(y)+f(w)=f(y+w)\le\|y+w\| \le\|y-z\|+\|w+z\|.

Every member of the set in the supremum is therefore at most every member of the set in the infimum. Taking y=w=0y=w=0 in the comparison also supplies finite upper and lower bounds. Real completeness supplies cc. Define

f1(y+az)=f(y)+ac,a∈R.f_1(y+a z)=f(y)+a c,\qquad a\in\mathbb R.

The representation is unique because z∉Dz\notin D, so f1f_1 is linear. If a>0a>0, the upper inequality in (A1), applied to y/ay/a, gives f1(y+az)≤∥y+az∥f_1(y+a z)\le\|y+a z\|. If a<0a<0, put b=−a>0b=-a>0 and apply the lower inequality in (A1) to y/by/b; it gives f(y)−bc≤∥y−bz∥f(y)-b c\le\|y-b z\|. The case a=0a=0 is the old bound. Applying the same upper bound to the negative vector gives ∣f1(x)∣≤∥x∥|f_1(x)|\le\|x\|. Thus extension by one real dimension preserves the bound.

Partially order all such extensions by extension of both domain and functional. In a chain, the union of the domains is a vector subspace: any two vectors lie together in one of the comparable domains. The union functional is unambiguous and linear for the same reason, extends ff, and obeys the same bound at each vector. Thus every chain has an upper bound. Zorn's lemma gives a maximal extension; if its domain were not EE, the one-dimensional construction would enlarge it. The domain is therefore EE. Rescaling gives the assertion for any LL.

For a complex normed space EE, let D⊂ED\subset E be a complex linear subspace and let f:D→Cf:D\to\mathbb C be complex linear with ∣f(y)∣≤L∥y∥|f(y)|\le L\|y\|, L≥0L\ge0. Apply the real assertion to u=Re⁡fu=\operatorname{Re}f on the underlying real space and obtain a real-linear UU with ∣U(x)∣≤L∥x∥|U(x)|\le L\|x\|. Set

F(x)=U(x)−iU(ix).(A2)F(x)=U(x)-iU(ix). \tag{A2}

Then F(ix)=iF(x)F(ix)=iF(x), so FF is complex linear. On the original complex subspace, u(ix)=−Im⁡f(x)u(ix)=-\operatorname{Im}f(x), hence F=fF=f. If F(x)≠0F(x)\ne0, choose ∣λ∣=1|\lambda|=1 with λF(x)=∣F(x)∣\lambda F(x)=|F(x)|. It follows that

∣F(x)∣=Re⁡F(λx)=U(λx)≤L∥λx∥=L∥x∥.|F(x)|=\operatorname{Re}F(\lambda x)=U(\lambda x) \le L\|\lambda x\|=L\|x\|.

For F(x)=0F(x)=0 the inequality is immediate. This proves exactly the complex Hahn-Banach input used below. In particular, for x≠0x\ne0, extend the functional αx↦α∥x∥\alpha x\mapsto\alpha\|x\| on Cx\mathbb Cx. The extension has norm one and takes the real positive value ∥x∥\|x\| at xx.

8.2. Completion and the projective algebra

For a real or complex normed space EE, use equivalence classes of Cauchy sequences, identifying (xn)(x_n) and (yn)(y_n) when ∥xn−yn∥→0\|x_n-y_n\|\to0. The reverse triangle inequality makes ∥[(xn)]∥=lim⁡n∥xn∥\|[(x_n)]\|=\lim_n\|x_n\| well-defined. If this limit is zero, the sequence is equivalent to zero; the triangle inequality and homogeneity pass to classes. Constant sequences embed EE isometrically. A class represented by (xn)(x_n) lies within arbitrarily small distance of the constant class of a sufficiently late xNx_N, proving density.

If classes znz_n are Cauchy, choose xn∈Ex_n\in E within 2−n2^{-n} of znz_n. Then ∥xn−xm∥≤2−n+∥zn−zm∥+2−m\|x_n-x_m\|\le2^{-n}+\|z_n-z_m\|+2^{-m}, so (xn)(x_n) is Cauchy. Its class is the limit of znz_n. This proves completeness, also for the zero space. A bounded linear T:E→FT:E\to F into a Banach space extends by T[(xn)]=lim⁡nTxnT[(x_n)]=\lim_n Tx_n; its bound, independence of representative and uniqueness follow from this formula and density.

For a bilinear product of bound DD, Cauchy sequences are bounded and

∥xnyn−xmym∥≤D[∥xn∥∥yn−ym∥+∥xn−xm∥∥ym∥].\|x_ny_n-x_my_m\| \le D[\|x_n\|\|y_n-y_m\|+\|x_n-x_m\|\|y_m\|].

The products therefore define classes independent of representatives, with the same bound. An isometric involution extends by applying it to each term. Every algebra identity follows on the dense subspace and passes to limits by these bounds.

For π\pi, the elementary upper bound is ∥x⊗y∥π≤∥x∥∥y∥\|x\otimes y\|_\pi\le\|x\|\|y\|. If both factors are nonzero, Section 8.1 gives unit-norm functionals f,gf,g with f(x)=∥x∥f(x)=\|x\|, g(y)=∥y∥g(y)=\|y\|. Every finite decomposition satisfies

∣(f⊗g)(u)∣≤∑j∥xj∥∥yj∥.|(f\otimes g)(u)|\le\sum_j\|x_j\|\|y_j\|.

This proves equality for an elementary tensor. More generally, a nonzero finite tensor is detected by a pair of coordinate functionals on its finite factor spans. Those functionals are bounded: on a fixed finite basis the norm has a positive minimum on the Euclidean unit sphere, by scalar compactness. Extend them to the full factors by Section 8.1. Their tensor evaluation gives a positive lower bound for ∥u∥π\|u\|_\pi. Concatenating decompositions and scaling one leg give the norm's triangle inequality and homogeneity. The same construction over the real field gives πR\pi_{\mathbb R}.

For two finite decompositions, tensor multiplication obeys

∑i,j∥xizj∥∥yiwj∥≤(∑i∥xi∥∥yi∥)(∑j∥zj∥∥wj∥).\sum_{i,j}\|x_i z_j\|\|y_i w_j\| \le\Big(\sum_i\|x_i\|\|y_i\|\Big) \Big(\sum_j\|z_j\|\|w_j\|\Big).

Taking arbitrarily close costs proves ∥uv∥π≤∥u∥π∥v∥π\|uv\|_\pi\le\|u\|_\pi\|v\|_\pi. Adjoint isometry on the factors and reversal of the decompositions give ∥u∗∥π=∥u∥π\|u^*\|_\pi=\|u\|_\pi. Thus the completion is an involutive Banach algebra. For nonzero unital factors, the elementary tensor equality gives ∥1⊗1∥π=1\|1\otimes1\|_\pi=1; it is the identity first on finite tensors and then on their completion.

The preceding lesson proves σ≤π\sigma\le\pi, adjoint isometry and ∥uv∥σ≤4∥u∥σ∥v∥σ\|uv\|_\sigma\le4\|u\|_\sigma\|v\|_\sigma. The completion construction therefore extends its product and involution. It also extends the algebraic identity to a contraction II. Approximate two projective vectors by finite tensors; the two product estimates show that II preserves multiplication. The involution passes to limits in the same way. No injectivity of II is presupposed in constructing it.

8.3. Positive functionals and norming states

Let AA be a nonzero unital C*-algebra. The scalar calculus and order facts in ITP F02–F08 give real self-adjoint spectra, positive square roots, x∗x≥0x^*x\ge0, and 0≤p≤∥p∥10\le p\le\|p\|1 for positive pp. These statements concern every algebra, rather than a particular representation.

If f∈A∗f\in A^* has ∥f∥=f(1)=1\|f\|=f(1)=1, then for h=h∗h=h^* and real tt,

∣1+itf(h)∣2≤∥1+ith∥2=∥1+t2h2∥≤1+t2∥h∥2.|1+itf(h)|^2\le\|1+ith\|^2 =\|1+t^2h^2\|\le1+t^2\|h\|^2.

Writing f(h)=u+ivf(h)=u+iv, the inequality reads −2tv+t2∣f(h)∣2≤t2∥h∥2-2tv+t^2|f(h)|^2\le t^2\|h\|^2. The two signs of tt, followed by t→0t\to0, force v=0v=0. For 0≤h≤10\le h\le1, scalar calculus gives ∥1−h∥≤1\|1-h\|\le1, and hence ∣1−f(h)∣≤1|1-f(h)|\le1. Since f(h)f(h) is real, it is nonnegative. Dividing any nonzero positive element by its norm proves positivity on the entire cone; zero is automatic.

Conversely, a positive complex linear functional φ\varphi with φ(1)=1\varphi(1)=1 is bounded of norm one. Positivity makes its values on self-adjoint elements real, using their positive and negative parts, and gives φ(x∗)=φ(x)‾\varphi(x^*)=\overline{\varphi(x)}. Expanding φ((x−λy)∗(x−λy))≥0\varphi((x-\lambda y)^*(x-\lambda y))\ge0 and minimizing over λ\lambda proves

∣φ(y∗x)∣2≤φ(x∗x)φ(y∗y).|\varphi(y^*x)|^2\le\varphi(x^*x)\varphi(y^*y).

If φ(y∗y)=0\varphi(y^*y)=0, varying the phase and size of λ\lambda instead forces the cross term to be zero, proving that case too. Taking y=1y=1 and using x∗x≤∥x∥21x^*x\le\|x\|^21 yields ∣φ(x)∣≤∥x∥|\varphi(x)|\le\|x\|. Its value at the identity makes the norm exactly one.

Extend λ1↦λ\lambda1\mapsto\lambda by Section 8.1. The extension has norm one and is positive by the criterion, so states exist. For p≥0p\ge0, p≠0p\ne0, its scalar spectrum contains ∥p∥\|p\|. The isometric calculus C(σ(p))→C∗(1,p)C(\sigma(p))\to C^*(1,p) from ITP F06 makes evaluation at ∥p∥\|p\| a norm-one functional with value one at the unit and value ∥p∥\|p\| at pp. Extend it to AA; the criterion gives a state φ\varphi with φ(p)=∥p∥\varphi(p)=\|p\|. If p=0p=0, any of the states just constructed norms it.

The closed dual ball is weak-* compact by Section 9. Inside it impose f(1)=1f(1)=1 and, for every p≥0p\ge0, the closed coordinate condition f(p)∈[0,∞)f(p)\in[0,\infty). Their intersection is exactly the state space, hence compact. It is convex by the two defining conditions. For two algebras, put both sets of coordinates into a single disk product and impose both sets of closed linearity and state conditions. This proves compactness of S(A)×S(B)S(A)\times S(B) without a countable coordinate restriction.

8.4. Disk area and the quarter phase

The Gaussian normalization uses the disk area πR2\pi R^2. We can obtain it within scalar Riemann integration. For R>0R>0, put fR(x)=R2−x2f_R(x)=\sqrt{R^2-x^2} on [−R,R][-R,R]; scalar square-root continuity makes fRf_R uniformly continuous. In each narrow vertical strip, inscribed and circumscribed rectangles for the region between the graphs fRf_R and −fR-f_R differ in total area by at most the strip's width times twice the oscillation of fRf_R there. The sum of these differences is at most 4RωfR(δ)4R\omega_{f_R}(\delta) for strip mesh at most δ\delta, and tends to zero. Thus the disk has area

∫−RR2R2−x2 dx.\int_{-R}^{R}2\sqrt{R^2-x^2}\,dx.

Define π=∫−1121−x2 dx>0\pi=\int_{-1}^{1}2\sqrt{1-x^2}\,dx>0. The substitution x=Rux=Ru, justified on tagged sums, makes the displayed area πR2\pi R^2; the radius-zero disk has area zero.

The same rectangular construction permits continuous weights on a disk. On a square grid of side δ≤1\delta\le1, the cells meeting either boundary graph have total area at most

4(R+1)ωfR(δ)+8(R+1)δ,4(R+1)\omega_{f_R}(\delta)+8(R+1)\delta,

which tends to zero: in each column, cells meeting one graph have total height at most its oscillation plus 2δ2\delta, and there are at most 2R/δ+22R/\delta+2 columns. Away from these boundary cells, upper and lower sums for a continuous weight differ by at most the bounding-box area times its modulus of continuity at 2δ\sqrt2\delta. On the boundary cells their difference is bounded by twice a bound for the weight times the displayed area. Consequently the weighted sums converge. Subtracting two disk indicators gives annulus area π(r22−r12)\pi(r_2^2-r_1^2); disjoint finite sums and order inequalities pass from rectangular sums to their limits.

For a continuous radial weight w(∣z∣)w(|z|) on a disk of radius RR, partition [0,R][0,R] into radial intervals. Its integral on each annulus is between the minimum and maximum of ww there times that annulus's area. The difference of the two resulting sums is at most πR2ωw(δ)\pi R^2\omega_w(\delta). Because rj2−rj−12=2rj∗Δrjr_j^2-r_{j-1}^2=2r_j^*\Delta r_j with rj∗=(rj+rj−1)/2r_j^*=(r_j+r_{j-1})/2, their common limit is

∫0R2πr w(r) dr.\int_0^R2\pi r\,w(r)\,dr.

This proves the radial calculation used for IR2I_R^2, through finite area comparisons and continuous compact integrals.

It also identifies the quarter phase without an additional trigonometric assertion. Let

I=∫011−u2 du=π/4,T(y)=∫0y(1−u2)−1/2 du(0≤y<1).I=\int_0^1\sqrt{1-u^2}\,du=\pi/4,\qquad T(y)=\int_0^y(1-u^2)^{-1/2}\,du\quad(0\le y<1).

The integrand is at most (1−u)−1/2(1-u)^{-1/2}, whose integral from RR to 11 is 21−R2\sqrt{1-R}. Hence T(y)T(y) increases to a finite positive QQ. On [0,R][0,R], differentiation of the square root and integration by parts give

2∫0R1−u2 du=R1−R2+∫0R(1−u2)−1/2 du.2\int_0^R\sqrt{1-u^2}\,du =R\sqrt{1-R^2}+\int_0^R(1-u^2)^{-1/2}\,du.

Letting R↑1R\uparrow1 gives Q=2I=π/2Q=2I=\pi/2. The square-root derivative here follows directly by rationalizing its difference quotient; the integrands on every such compact interval have continuous derivatives.

For 0≤t<Q0\le t<Q, the continuous strictly increasing function TT has a unique inverse value y(t)∈[0,1)y(t)\in[0,1), by the intermediate-value property. Its inverse is continuous: the images of two sufficiently close points on either side of y(t)y(t) bracket tt, so nearby inputs have inverse values between those points. Dividing the identity T(y(t+h))−T(y(t))=hT(y(t+h))-T(y(t))=h by y(t+h)−y(t)y(t+h)-y(t) therefore proves y′(t)=1−y(t)2y'(t)=\sqrt{1-y(t)^2} in the interior. Put x(t)=1−y(t)2x(t)=\sqrt{1-y(t)^2}. Then x′=−yx'=-y, y′=xy'=x, so z=x+iyz=x+iy satisfies z′=izz'=iz, z(0)=1z(0)=1. The scalar exponential series satisfies the same equation, and (z(t)e−it)′=0(z(t)e^{-it})'=0; the continuous fundamental theorem makes this product constant. Thus z(t)=eitz(t)=e^{it}. As t↑Qt\uparrow Q, y(t)↑1y(t)\uparrow1: a smaller limit would have T(y)<QT(y)<Q, contradicting the inverse identity and continuity. Therefore eiQ=ie^{iQ}=i.

At t=Q/2t=Q/2, both coordinates of eite^{it} are positive and its square is ii. Writing them as x,yx,y gives x2−y2=0x^2-y^2=0, 2xy=12xy=1, hence x=y=1/2x=y=1/\sqrt2. Conjugation of the exponential series now proves

e−iπ/4=1−i2,i(e−iπ/4)2=1.e^{-i\pi/4}=\frac{1-i}{\sqrt2},\qquad i(e^{-i\pi/4})^2=1.

This is the scalar identity used in the second counterexample of Exercise 6.

9. Weak-star compactness for arbitrary normed spaces

This supplies compactness of the state spaces and the alternative Banach–Alaoglu argument in Exercise 4. The closed unit dual ball is compact in the weak-star topology for every real or complex normed space; separability and completeness of the original space are unnecessary. The foundation boundary is ZFC, including Zorn’s lemma, scalar completeness and topology, and the definitions of a norm, a product topology and a weak-star topology. The needed arbitrary product step is proved here.

9.1. Proper filters and maximal extensions

A proper filter on a nonempty set SS is a family of subsets containing SS, excluding the empty set, closed under finite intersections and upward inclusion. A family with the finite intersection property generates a proper filter by taking all supersets of its finite intersections. Order proper filters extending a fixed proper filter by inclusion. For a nonempty chain of proper filters extending the fixed filter, their union again contains the fixed filter and excludes the empty set. Any finite list of members of the union lies in a single filter of the chain: choose a filter containing each member and use the total ordering by inclusion to take the largest of the finitely many selected filters. Their intersection therefore belongs to the union and is nonempty. Upward closure also passes to the union. The fixed filter itself is an upper bound for the empty chain. Thus every chain has an upper bound in the ordered family, and Zorn's lemma gives a maximal proper extension. The maximal extension is denoted U\mathcal U.

For any A⊂SA\subset S, either A∈UA\in\mathcal U or S∖A∈US\setminus A\in\mathcal U. Indeed, if adjoining AA produced a proper filter, maximality would put AA in U\mathcal U. Otherwise some F∈UF\in\mathcal U has F∩A=∅F\cap A=\varnothing, so F⊂S∖AF\subset S\setminus A, and upward inclusion puts the complement in U\mathcal U. Such a maximal filter is an ultrafilter. If finitely many subsets cover a member of U\mathcal U, one of them is in U\mathcal U: otherwise all their complements would be in it, contradicting the nonempty-intersection requirement.

9.2. Every ultrafilter on a closed scalar disk converges

Let Dr={z∈C:∣z∣≤r}D_r=\{z\in\mathbb C:|z|\le r\}, where r≥0r\ge0, and let U\mathcal U be an ultrafilter on DrD_r. For r=0r=0, the disk is a singleton. For r>0r>0, begin with the closed square [−r,r]2[-r,r]^2 and divide both coordinate intervals into halves. Its four closed subsquares cover the disk, so the preceding finite-cover argument selects a subsquare Q1Q_1 for which Dr∩Q1∈UD_r\cap Q_1\in\mathcal U. Continue within that square. This gives nested closed squares QnQ_n, with Dr∩Qn∈UD_r\cap Q_n\in\mathcal U, and diameters tending to zero.

Write either coordinate interval of QnQ_n as [an,bn][a_n,b_n]. The left endpoints increase, the right endpoints decrease, and bn−an→0b_n-a_n\to0. By real completeness, c=sup⁡nanc=\sup_n a_n exists. Nestedness gives an≤c≤bna_n\le c\le b_n for every nn; the vanishing lengths make cc the only point in every interval. Applying this to both coordinates gives a unique point zz in every square. The proper-filter condition makes every Dr∩QnD_r\cap Q_n nonempty. Choose wnw_n there; then ∣wn−z∣≤diam⁡(Qn)→0|w_n-z|\le\operatorname{diam}(Q_n)\to0, so the reverse triangle inequality gives ∣z∣≤r|z|\le r. Every disk neighborhood of zz contains Dr∩QnD_r\cap Q_n for all sufficiently large nn, hence belongs to the ultrafilter. This proves convergence. In the real case there is only one coordinate interval.

9.3. Arbitrary products of these disks are compact

Let P=∏i∈IDriP=\prod_{i\in I}D_{r_i}, with its product topology; the point whose every coordinate is zero shows P≠∅P\ne\varnothing. If U\mathcal U is an ultrafilter on PP, its image under a coordinate projection is an ultrafilter on the corresponding disk: a subset belongs to that image filter precisely when its inverse image belongs to U\mathcal U. The filter and complement rules pass through inverse images. Each image ultrafilter converges to a coordinate ziz_i. These coordinates define z∈Pz\in P.

A basic neighborhood of zz restricts only finitely many coordinates. Each inverse image of a restricted-coordinate neighborhood belongs to U\mathcal U; their finite intersection does as well. Every neighborhood contains such a basic neighborhood, so U\mathcal U converges to zz.

Now suppose an open cover of PP had no finite subcover. The complements of its members would have the finite intersection property. Extend their generated proper filter to an ultrafilter and let it converge to zz. A cover member containing zz is a neighborhood and therefore belongs to the ultrafilter. Its complement belongs to it by construction, a contradiction. Thus every open cover has a finite subcover. This proves the precise arbitrary-product compactness needed here.

9.4. The dual ball is a closed subspace of the product

Let XX be a complex normed space and set

PX=∏x∈X{z∈C:∣z∣≤∥x∥}.P_X=\prod_{x\in X}\{z\in\mathbb C:|z|\le\|x\|\}.

An element b∈PXb\in P_X is a scalar-valued function on XX with ∣b(x)∣≤∥x∥|b(x)|\le\|x\|. For each x,y∈Xx,y\in X and λ∈C\lambda\in\mathbb C, the function

b⟼b(x+λy)−b(x)−λb(y)b\longmapsto b(x+\lambda y)-b(x)-\lambda b(y)

is continuous, since coordinate evaluations and finite scalar linear combinations are continuous. Its zero set is closed. Intersect all these zero sets. The intersection consists exactly of complex-linear functions satisfying the displayed bound: taking x=y=0x=y=0 first gives b(0)=0b(0)=0, and the equations then give additivity and homogeneity. Such a function is continuous, because ∣b(x)−b(y)∣≤∥x−y∥|b(x)-b(y)|\le\|x-y\|, and has functional norm at most one. Conversely every functional of norm at most one belongs to this intersection.

Thus the closed unit ball of X∗X^* is a closed subset of the compact space PXP_X. A closed subset of a compact space is compact: extend any relative open cover to an ambient open cover by adding its open complement, take a finite subcover, then discard the complement. The restricted product topology is exactly the weak-star topology, because both are the topology generated by the evaluations f↦f(x)f\mapsto f(x). This proves the required compactness. For real XX, use real intervals and real coefficients.

9.5. A convergent subnet of an arbitrary compact net

Let (xa)a∈A(x_a)_{a\in A} be a net in a compact space KK, where AA is directed and nonempty. For each aa, let Ta={xb:b≥a}T_a=\{x_b:b\ge a\}. The closed sets Ta‾\overline{T_a} have the finite intersection property: an index dominating a finite list of indices has its entire nonempty tail in all those tails. Their total intersection is nonempty, since otherwise their open complements would cover KK, and a finite subcover would contradict the finite intersection property. Fix pp in that intersection. For every neighborhood UU of pp and every a∈Aa\in A, there is b≥ab\ge a with xb∈Ux_b\in U.

To obtain an actual subnet, form the directed set

B={(a,U,b):a,b∈A, U is a neighborhood of p, b≥a, xb∈U}.B=\{(a,U,b):a,b\in A,\ U\text{ is a neighborhood of }p, \ b\ge a,\ x_b\in U\}.

Order it by

(a,U,b)⪯(a′,U′,b′)⟺a≤a′,U′⊆U,b≤b′.(a,U,b)\preceq(a',U',b') \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad a\le a',\quad U'\subseteq U,\quad b\le b'.

For two triples choose cc dominating their two tail indices and their two selected indices. The cluster property supplies b≥cb\ge c with xb∈U∩U′x_b\in U\cap U'; the triple (c,U∩U′,b)(c,U\cap U',b) dominates both. The map ϕ:B→A\phi:B\to A, ϕ(a,U,b)=b\phi(a,U,b)=b, is order preserving. For any a0∈Aa_0\in A, the triple (a0,K,a0)(a_0,K,a_0) belongs to BB, and every later triple has ϕ≥a0\phi\ge a_0. Thus ϕ\phi is cofinal in the eventual sense required for a subnet. Finally, given a neighborhood VV of pp, choose a triple whose neighborhood is VV. Every later triple has neighborhood contained in VV, so its selected term lies in VV. Hence (xϕ(d))d∈B(x_{\phi(d)})_{d\in B} is a convergent subnet. This applies to the weak-star compact dual ball without separability or metrizability.

9.6. The directional limit using a dual-ball subnet

For the application in formula (4), set

q(s)=∥1+sa∥−1s,s>0.q(s)=\frac{\|1+sa\|-1}{s},\qquad s>0.

The triangle inequality and its reverse give ∣q(s)∣≤∥a∥|q(s)|\le\|a\|. Thus the finite real number L=lim sup⁡s↓0q(s)L=\limsup_{s\downarrow0}q(s) exists by scalar completeness. Choose strictly decreasing sn↓0s_n\downarrow0 such that q(sn)→Lq(s_n)\to L. Explicitly, for each nn choose δn>0\delta_n>0 with sup⁡0<s<δnq(s)<L+1/n\sup_{0<s<\delta_n}q(s)<L+1/n, and then choose sn<min⁡{δn,1/n,sn−1/2}s_n<\min\{\delta_n,1/n,s_{n-1}/2\} with q(sn)>L−1/nq(s_n)>L-1/n, omitting the final constraint for n=1n=1. Such a choice exists because the supremum on every interval (0,δ)(0,\delta) is at least LL.

After discarding finitely many terms, 1+sna≠01+s_na\ne0. Use the norming-functional input already proved in Section 8.1 to choose Fn∈C∗F_n\in C^* with ∥Fn∥=1\|F_n\|=1 and Fn(1+sna)=∥1+sna∥F_n(1+s_na)=\|1+s_na\|. The dual-ball result and the preceding construction give a weak-star convergent subnet, with limit FF. For all nn,

∣Fn(1)−1∣≤∣∥1+sna∥−1∣+sn∣Fn(a)∣≤2sn∥a∥.|F_n(1)-1|\le |\|1+s_na\|-1|+s_n|F_n(a)| \le2s_n\|a\|.

Consequently F(1)=1F(1)=1. The limit is still in the unit dual ball, so ∥F∥≤1\|F\|\le1; since ∥1∥=1\|1\|=1, its value at 11 also gives ∥F∥≥1\|F\|\ge1. Thus FF is normalized. Further,

q(sn)≤Re⁡Fn(a),q(s_n)\le\operatorname{Re}F_n(a),

because Re⁡Fn(1)≤1\operatorname{Re}F_n(1)\le1. Passage along the convergent subnet gives

L≤Re⁡F(a)≤M:=sup⁡G∈SCRe⁡G(a).L\le\operatorname{Re}F(a) \le M:=\sup_{G\in\mathcal S_C}\operatorname{Re}G(a).

For every normalized GG, evaluating 1+sa1+sa gives q(s)≥Re⁡G(a)q(s)\ge\operatorname{Re}G(a), hence lim inf⁡s↓0q(s)≥M\liminf_{s\downarrow0}q(s)\ge M. Therefore

M≤lim inf⁡q≤lim sup⁡q=L≤M,M\le\liminf q\le\limsup q=L\le M,

which proves the limit in (4) and the precise limsup assertion in Exercise 4. Compactness was used to take a subnet of the bounded functional sequence; no convergent functional subsequence was asserted.

The limiting functional argument and the two-dimensional restriction argument prove the same directional formula. Section 8.3 combines this arbitrary dual-ball compactness with the closed positivity conditions needed for the common-state selection.

References

Gilles Pisier, Grothendieck's Theorem, past and present, expanded UNCUT author version, 21 August 2013, Appendix 23, Lemma 23.1 and Proposition 23.2, printed pp.78–80 (PDF pp.80–82): compact affine separation, common-state selection and reciprocal rescaling. The corresponding appendix is in arXiv:1101.4195v3, printed pp.73–75 (PDF pp.75–77). Section 9 of the UNCUT version, printed pp.29–31 (PDF pp.31–33), treats the real truncation method of the preceding lesson.

The numerical-reality test has two complete proofs here. The finite cosine proof uses binomial coefficients, finite total variation, the directional norm derivative and norm-convergent exponential series. The Gaussian proof includes its scalar normalization, all improper norm integrals and its sharper intermediate constant. The common-state argument uses a finite orthant minimum and arbitrary compactness; it does not assume a Radon-measure or bipolar representation theorem.

Jacob Shapiro, Functional Analysis, Princeton University MAT520 Lecture Notes, last typeset 10 December 2025, Theorems 4.4–4.5, printed/PDF pp.36–37: norm-preserving functional extension. Theorem 5.18, printed/PDF pp.44–45: weak-* compactness of the dual ball.

ITP F01–F13 prove completion, forced unitization, scalar spectrum, continuous calculus and order. Elementary calculus for infinite products proves their scalar and continuous norm-integral foundations. Real dominated functional extension and convex gauge separation are also given in CAR 19.1 and CAR 19.4.