Annals of Mathematics

On Rings of Operators. III Author(s): J. v. Neumann Reviewed work(s): Source: The Annals of Mathematics, Second Series, Vol. 41, No. 1 (Jan., 1940), pp. 94-161 Published by: Annals of Mathematics Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1968823 . Accessed: 03/12/2011 09:30
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Annals of Mathematics is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Annals of Mathematics.

http://www.jstor.org

ANNALS OF MATHEMATICS Vol. 41, No. 1, January, 1940

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS.
BY J. V.
NEUMANN

III

(Received June 14, 1939)

INTRODUCTION

1. In two earlier papers ((1), (2)), F. J. Murray and the author investigated certain operator rings, called factors. (Cf. (1), p. 138, Definition 3.1.2. For an introduction into the theory of operator rings cf. (5) particularly pp. 372-376, 388-398.) The motives which led to those investigations are described in (1), pp. 116-123. The main principle of classification for factors, which was found in (1), is based on the ranges of their relative dimension functions. (Cf. ibid., p. 165, Definition 8.2.1; p. 168, Theorem VII; and p. 172, Theorem VIII.) Thus all factors were found to belong to classes called (I.) (n = 1, 2, ..), (I.), (III), It was shown that factors in each one of these classes actually do (IIJ), (IIIJ). exist-with the exception of (III.), which had to be left undecided. (Cf. (1), p. 208, Theorem XII.) The main result of this paper is that factors of class (III.) also exist. (Cf. Theorem IX, and Examples (a), (Il) in ?4.4.) Thus the above classification of factors is fullyjustified. 2. This result is obtained by the simultaneous use of two devices: The notions of norm and normedness,which form the subject of Chapter I; and the process AtEIE2. which is the analogue of the process of taking the diagonal part of a finitematrix, and is discussed in Chapter II. Both notions have an interest of their own, and we think that they deserve to be studied for their own sake. In this paper their analysis is restrictedto the amount which is necessary for our immediate purposes, although we permitted ourselves a certain leeway in some cases where a little more generality than absolutely necessary seemed to make things clearer and easier. But we propose to discuss both of them independently and more fully at some other occasion. Chapter III gives some explicit constructions of factors, generalizing those of (1), pp. 192-204. And then, with the help of the above-mentioned tools of Chapters I, II, it is shown in Chapter IV, to which classes the factors of Chapter III belong. At this stage examples of factors of class (III.) are also obtained. 3. The main questions concerningfactors were stated in (1) as Problems 1-11. Of these, Problems 1, 2, 5, and parts of 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 were answered in (1); Problem 11 was answered in (2). Our present result will settle the remainder of Problems 3, 4. Important parts of 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 remain unsettled. Especially 94

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

95

the following question is still open, and it is in our opinionof a quite decisive character:Are all factorsof class (JJ1) to isomorphic each other? (Part of 6.) We thinkthat the answer to this question will greatlyaffect the applicability of the theoryto factors, especiallyto quantum mechanics. F. J. Murray and the author believe that the answeris negative,and that further invariants-probably of an algebraical and group theoreticalnature exist. Certain partial resultshave been obtained, and they will be discussed elsewhere. But the main question (cf. above) is still unanswered. 4. The work (7) of the author also led to factors. The parts of the ringC" in the variousincomplete directproducts jJn=1,2,--. (,)(nJ) 0 ')(n,2)) ((7), p. 71, Lemma 7.3.1) were found to be in certain cases factorsof classes (I.), (II,), and (IL,). (Cf. ibid., pp. 71-77, in particularLemmas 7.4.1, 7.5.1.) It is not to difficult show that the above-mentioned parts are always (that is, in every factors. 0 (,)(n,i) ')(n,2)) 1I&n=1,2,-.. Applicationof our presentresults,namely of our Theorem IX, shows that thesefactorsare of class (III.) in certaincases. More precisely:It was shownin (7), p. 71, Lemma 7.3.1, that the part ofeCl 0 ')(n,2)) dependedessentially in (thatis, up to isomorphisms) 0n=1,2,--- (,)(n,) only upon a certainsequence al, a2, ... of constants > 0, < 1. It was also shownibid., pp. 71-77, that its class was (I.) fora, = a2 = . . . = 1, (II,) for al = a2 =0, and stated that it was (II.) for =3= = * 0, 2 a4 = * = 1. Now we can show this: The class is (III.), if forsome 5 > 0 we have forinfinitely many n = 1, 2, ...** X an < 1 -5. The factorsobtained by the above processhave various instructive aspects, and will be discussed (togetherwith the above-statedresults) elsewhere. in The surmises stated at the end of (7) have to be modified accordancewith the resultsstated above. 5. For an accountofmodernoperatortheory general, readeris referred in the to (3) or (4). For the other topics touched, a general orientationmay be with the methodsand resultsof these obtained from(5), (1). A familiarity papers will be assumed. Our notationsare the same as in the papers enumerated above, fora detailed cf. description (1), pp. 126-127. A detailedtable of contents and a bibliography follow. CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION

1. Statementof the main result .................................. ... A 2. Norm,normedness, IE1E21. 3. The Problems1-11 of (1) ............ .........................

..

94 94 94

96

J. V. NEUMANN

4. Relation with (7) ............................................ 5. Literatureand notations ............................... CONTENTS......................................................... BIBLIOGRAPHY.....................................................

95 95

95
96

I. TRACEIN ANARBITRARY CHAPTER THE RELATIVE FACTOR .97 1.1. Generalities. 97 ............................................... 1.2. Definition and properties of Ten (A). (A of finite rank)TheoremI ..97 and of 1.3. Definition properties [[A]]. (A offinite rank)-Theorem II. 101 1.4. Fundamental sequences, normed A's, [[A]] for normed A'sTheoremIII .105 of 1.5. Properties normedA's, of [[A]] fornormedA's. ProjectionsTheorems IV-V .112 1.6. Meaningofnormedness norm each class (In)-(III1). and in 115
CHAPTER II. MAXIMUM ABELIAN
RINGS AND THE OPERATION

and 2.1. Construction properties AI of E'IE21 .-Theorem VI. of beingofclass (III.) .122 2.2. Criterion OTR
CONSTRUCTION OF THE RINGS .124

A'

IE21

118

118

CHAPTER III.

3.1. Generalities 124 ................................................ = The "differentiation-theorem"-Theorem 3.2. S, F, A, 11S=SI8,j. VII .124 measurable.. 131 3.3. Relationofa groupS to S, Ft. Beingfree, ergodic,
3.4. 3.5. Constructions

Ad, S

tr.

. in
js......................................

134 135

in 3.6. Constructions O 'R, R.'. 3.7. First discussionof OR, OTh'-TheoremVIII .145
CHAPTER

139 .
149

4.1. Generalities. ............................................... 4.2. g measurable: Cases (I), (II) .150 4.3. g non-measurable: Case (III)-Theorem IX .153 4.4. Examples of Case (III). Not coupled factors.158 BIBLIOGRAPHY

IV.

DETERMINATION

OF THE CLASSES

OF

'Do, 1t..

149

(1) F. J. MURRAY AND J. V. NEUMANN: "On rings of operators,"Annals of vol. Mathematics, 37 (1936), pp. 116-229. II," Transac(2) F. J. MURRAY AND J. V. NEUMANN: "On ringsof operators, tionsAmer.Math. Soc., vol. 41 (1937), pp. 208-248. in (3) M. H. STONE: Linear transformations Hilbertspace, Amer. Math. Soc. Colloquium Publications, vol. XV (1932). Hermitescher Funktional(4) J. V. NEUMANN: "AllgemeineEigenwerttheorie Math. Annalen,vol. 102 (1929), pp. 49-131. operatoren,"

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

97

Math. Annalen, (5) J. V. NEUMANN: "Zur Algebrader Funktionaloperatoren," vol. 102 (1929), pp. 370-427. Annals (6) J. v. NEUMANN: "t~ber Funktionen von Funktionaloperatoren," of Math., vol. 32 (1931), pp. 191-226. direct products," Compositio Mathematica, (7) J. V. NEUMANN: "On infinite vol. 6 (1938), pp. 1-77. (0) F. HAUSDORFF: Mengenlehre. (IJJrd Edition.) W. de Gruyter, Berlin (1935).
CHAPTER I. THE RELATIVE TRACE IN AN ARBITRARY FACTOR

1.1. Let D be a Hilbert space, and 'DR a factorin A. The notationof the in traceTqr(A) was definedforall HermiteanA e O1R (1), pp. 212-213, relative in 15.1.1,and forall A E OR withoutrestriction (2), p. 218, Definition Definition classes: (In) (n = 1, 2, * * ), belongsto one of thefinite 2.2.1, providedthat ODR is to but (when ODR (III). We shall now extend this definition all factorsODR not all A e OR. We shall see, in particular,that when 'DR is purely infinite) covers A = 0 only. Hence the i.e. infinite, of class (III,), our definition are factors'ORforwhichwe really achieve something, those in the notpurely we classes: (I.), (II.c). (For (I.) in particular, get the usual notionof infinite cf. the trace and the E. Schmidtclass of operatorsin ODR the discussion(B) in we ?1.6 below. Nevertheless, shall use this extended notion of the relative class,withthe purposeofshowing tracein thispaper fora factorORofunknown that ODR just of class (IIIJ).) is in dimension function, factor,D(9) its relative 1.2. Let OR be an arbitrary TheoremVII.) 8.2.1, and p. 168, any normalization. ((1), p. 165, Definition and is X ODR. For any A e ORlthe closed, linear set [Range A] can be formed, 4.2.1. If a proofof the statein is defined (1), p. 141, Definition (This notion mentis wanted,cf. (1), pp. 151-152,Lemmas 6.1.1, 6.2.1.) a A DEFINITION 1.2.1. For every e M we define "rank" as follows:
Rank (A) = D([Range A]).

thatif OR = @ = theringofall boundedoperators (The readerwilleasilyverify in Sb-which is of class (I.) and if D(9J) is chosenin the standardnormalizain tion- (1), p. 173, Lemma 8.6.1 -then thisis the matrix-rank its usual sense.) or numerical values. TogetherwithD(9)), Rank (A) can assumefinite infinite rank. is When the former the case, we say that A has finite properties: following LEMMA 1.2.1. Rank (A) has the (i) Rank (A) > 0 it is = 0 if and onlyif A = 0. (ii) Rank (A) = Rank (A*). a number # 0. complex (iii) Rank (aA) = Rank (A) forevery (iv) Rank (A + B) < Rank (A) + Rank (B). (v) Rank (AB) ? Rank (A), Rank (B). (vi) Rank (E) = D(E) foreveryprojectionE e DR.

98

J. V. NEUMANN

PROOF: Ad (i): Rank (A) = D([Range A]) is clearly _ 0, and = 0 if and only if [Range A] = (0), i.e. Range A = (0), whichmeans A = 0. Ad (ii): Coincides with (1), p. 152, Lemma 6.2.1. Ad (iii): Since A is linear,alreadyRange (aA) = Range (A) if a # 0. Ad (iv): Clearly Range (A + B) C [Range A, Range B], hence [Range (A + B)] C [[RangeA], [Range B]], whence(1), p. 210, Lemma 14.2.3, gives the desiredresult. Ad (v): Clearly Range (AB) C Range A, hence [Range (AB)] C [Range A], thiswith(ii), we obtain: and so Rank (AB) < Rank (A). Combining Rank (AB) = Rank ((AB)*) = Rank (B*A*) ? Rank (B*) = Rank (B). the This completes proof. then Range E = 9N, Ad (vi): If E is the projectionof the closed linearset 9W, hence [Range E] = 9W. properties: following of LEMMA 1.2.2. The finiteness rank has the rank. (i) 0 has finite rank. rankif and onlyif A * has a finite (ii) A has a finite (iii) A has a finiterank if and onlyif aA has a finiterank,a beingany fixed number5 0. complex A for rank,if thesame is true both and B. (iv) A + B has a finite A for rank,if thesame is true either or B. (v) AB has a finite in rankif and onlyif it is finite thesenseof (1), p. 155, Defini(vi) E has a finite e tion 7.1.1, E beinganyfixedprojection DR. PROOF: These (i)-(vi) are immediate consequences of the corresponding (i)-(vi) in Lemma 1.2.1.Throughoutwhat followswe will make use of the resultsof these Lemmas to 1.2.1, 1.2.2, withoutreferring them explicitly. E DEFINITION 1.2.2. A closed,linearset 9) q it9-or its projection e Si ((1), p. 141, Lemma 4.2.1)-"contains" an A e S1tif [Range A],
EA

[Range A*] C P.
= AE = A.

LEMMA1.2.3. E containsA if and only if PROOF: [Range A] C 9N is equivalent to Range A C 9I, that is, to Af e 9) forevery e I, that is to EAf = Af. In otherwords:To EA = A. f Similarly [Range A *] C 9 means EA* = A *, that is (applying * to both

in LEMMA1.2.4. A (e i) is offiniterank, if and only if it is contained a 9) (7 Sit). finite hence [Range A] is finite, PROOF: Sufficiency: [Range A] C 91, 9) is finite,
that is, Rank (A) = D([Range A]) is a finite number.

sides) AE = A. Hence both together amount to EA = AE = A.

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

99

NTecessity: A has finiterank, helnceA* has also finiterank, so [Range A], [Range A*] are finite, and withthem9T = [[Range A], [Range A*]] ((1), p. 160, Lemma 7.3.5). This 9 meets all requirements.-Given a finite9Y? Olt)-and its projection E (EOlt)-then those A e OR (, which are containedin 9) are by Lemma 1.2.3 preciselythe elementswhich the correspondence >? X(w) (discussedin (1), pp. 186-187,Definition X 11.3.1, Lemmas 11.3.2-11.3.4) maps on the factorOlt(n)in 9) (instead of ! So we see: If A runsover all elements 9Rt of whichare containedin 9)?,thenA(p runs of over all elements 91t(p). The factor (w) necessarily belongs to one of the finiteclasses: (I.) (n = 1, 2, ... ), (II1) ((1), p. 188, Lemma 11.3.7, or p. 189, Lemma 11.4.3). Hence there exists a unique relative trace in 9,1l(p) defined for all A p e 6R(a) of of TOR(p)(A(p)). (For the definition Tl'9t(p)(Ap) cf. the beginning ?1.1, above.) We now define: and DEFINITION1.2.3. If A e O91t of finiterank, thendefine every for finite, whichcontainsA (such 9) existby Lemma 1.2.4) closed,linearset 9? l O91t

Ty)R(p)(A) = D(Z) Tu)tp) (A (p)). of (This TqR(p)(A) depends also on the normalization D(9)), but we do not need to indicatethisexplicitly.) and not 1.2.3 dependson A only, LEMMA 1.2.5. The TqR(p)(A) of Definition on 9) (as longas A, 9) are relatedas described there). ODR PROOF: In otherwords: If 9), 9 are both finite, closed linearsets,both -q and both containing then we claim that A, (1) TqR(a)(A) =Tg(%)(A)* Considerfirst the case where C . Considerthe operatorsAu e OR(X). Form the operatorAn,%in 9, whichis reducedby 9 and whichcoincideswith . 9. We claim that Awlp eOR(%) Indeed: Ace in 9) and with 0 in 9xOR(p) implies A = A(w) for an A eDR. As E = Pp eOR, we have Ape (EAE)(TI) = A(w), EA E eOR, so we may replace A by EAE, which coincides with 0 in t - 9). That is: We may assume that A itselfcoincideswith 0 in S& - 9). Hence Awls = A(%)EOR(91). Observefurther: (i)* I(w) = E(w) is theunitin 9)?,hence Y)R(p). And I(D)I% = E(%) . for
(ii)*

(iii)* (An + Bn)1% = An,% + Bull. then (iv)* If A is definite, Awls is also definite. = A* (v)* (A*)1w
(vi)* (ApBu)1% = Ap1%BpJ%

(a-Au),% = a-An,.

Now put foreveryAn

DR(an)
=

(2)

t(Au)

D (SR) T D(9I)?)

(% (A m . |)

100

J. V. NEUMANN

Comparing(2) and (i)*-(vi)* with (i)-(vi) in "Property III" in (2), pp. 218-219, we see immediately that t(Ao) fulfills (ii)-(vi), including(iv)', mentionedthere(for9)R() ,91 in place ofA, @D). (vi)' is also fulfilled, sinceit is a consequence (vi). (Put U-'A, U forA, B.) Let us finally of check (i). Considering(2) and (i)*, it becomes 1 (3)
-

D(9) TM)(E(%)), D(91)

that is

TSR(%)(E,?)) = D(%))

Now we knowfrom"PropertyIII," (*), in (2), pp. 218-219, together with (1), p. 219 (end of the first paragraph),that we have foreveryidempotent F = Pp, 3 C 91, TS(91)(F(1)) = D'(F(%)) = Y(f, whereD'(S) is the relativedimensionfunctionof R() in its standard normalization-that is, with D'(w) = 1. By (1), p. 188, Lemma 11.3.7, D(w) is also a relativedimension of function t(R), but in orderto makeits normalization the standardone, we must divide it by D(w). So D'(W) = D(3/D(W), and consequently TSRj(v)(F(g)) = D(fl/D(W). Now puttingw = 91, F = E gives (3). Thus (i) is also established. all We have thus shown that t(Au) fulfills conditions(i)-(vi)' in "Property III" in (2), pp. 218-219. Hence by "PropertyIV" in (2), p. 219, we have thisin (2): TOR (Am) = t(A ). Or, if we substitute (p) (4) D(9))TS(v)(Au) = D(9)TS(%)(AvI4),

A. Since it is containedin 9), so EA = AE = A Considernow our original we it by Lemma 1.2.3, therefore coincideswith 0 in & - 91. Therefore have forAm = A(w) also Awls = A(%. By this substitution, however,(4) become D(9)-T1(), (A(u))
=

D(9)TR(,) (Ag()(),

which,by Definition 1.2.3,is precisely (1). This completesthe proofforthe case where9 C 91. 9 Considernextthe case whereW1I, are arbitrary. Then form$ = [9S, 9]. Alongwith9)1,9 this $ will also be D and it will also be finite((1), p. 160, On, Lemma 7.3.5). We have 9J, 91 C $3,and $ containsA since 9), 9 do. So we have (1) for9)1,$ and for9, $ (in place of 9)1,9), and hencefor9)1,91too. is Thus theproof completed. Lemma1.2.5 we can dropthe9) fromthe DEFINITION 1.2.4. Considering A write (A) of Definition 1.2.3. We shall therefore for every e SR offinite TM rank (in thesenseofDefinition 1.2.3): TMR(A) = TI'(a)(A).

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

101

We obtain now with ease: III" (ii)-(vi) in "Property I. T'f)R(A) has the properties THEOREM pp. 218-219). That is: number. (ii) ToR(aA) = aToR(A), a a complex (iii) TqR(A + B) = TqR(A) + TqR(B). (iv) TDR(A) _ 0 if A is definite. and (iv)' TDR(A) > 0 if A is definite 5 0.

in (2),

(v) TgR(A*) = TR(A). are rank,and both e 911. A (vi) TqR(AB) = TiR(BA) if either or B has a finite (vi)' T9R(U-'A U) = TqR(A) if U (e 'R) is unitary. We havealso: projection. (vii) TOT{(E) = D(E) if E (e 'DR) is a finite Lemma 1.2.2.) (Throughout(i)-(vii) remember Ad (ii), (iv), (iv)', (v): They followimmediatelyfromthe correPROOF: spondingstatementsin "PropertyIII" in (2), pp. 218-219. We must only observe for (ii), (v), that 91 contains aA, A* along with A. And for (iv)', that if 9Z containsA, then A(w) = 0 impliesA = 0. rank: In orderto deduce them Ad (iii) and (vi), whenA, B have both finite of statements "PropertyIII," as above, we onlyneed a the from corresponding and contain finite %1 9'D be finite XN 'DRwhichcontainsboth A, B. Let 9M, Then v = [SI, %] meetsall requirements. (For the finiteA, B respectively. ness by (1), p. 160, Lemma 7.3.5.) in Ad (vi): Since (vi) is symmetric A, B, we may assume that A has a finite rank. So has BA, choose a finitev1 q 'DR which contains both A, BA (cf. above). So we have for E = Pp by Lemma 1.2.3, AE = A, EBA = BA. Consequently AB = AE.B = A-EB, BA = EBA
.

= EB.A.

rankalong withE. So our rank,and EB has also a finite Now A has a finite previousresultgives T6,(A EB) = TqR(EB -A), and consequentlyTqR(AB) TR(BA). rankalongwithA. Ad (vi)': Put U'1A, U forA, B in (vi). U'1A has a finite Ad (vii): Put E = Pf, WI is finitealong with E, it is tqOlt,and obviously hence for 911(p). So we obtain containsE. E(p) = I(w) is the unit in 91Y, (i) fromDefinition1.2.3, considering in "PropertyIII," as above: TqR(E) = D() )T9R(()(E(w)) = D(9)

1.3. Our new relative trace TqR(A) was onlydefinedfor the A E 'DR with a to finite rank. We nowwishto extendits definition a widerdomainofoperators A e 9O, with the help of a suitable limitingprocess.

102

J. V. NEUMANN

We firstintroducea normin the space of all A E t1l, finiterank, to be of denotedby [[A]],whichis analogousto the notionof (2), p. 241, Definition 4.3.1, and Lemma 4.3.2 (especiallythe latter). DEFINITION 1.3.1. If A E Onhas a finite we the rank,then define "norm"ofA, a number [[A]] > 0, by
[[A]] = (T9R(A*A))' = (T(AA*)).

(RememberTheoremI, (iv), (vi). A*A, AA* are obviouslydefinite.) THEOREM II. [[A]] has the characteristic properties a normin a linear of space. That is: (i) Always[[A]] _ 0, and = 0 if and onlyif A = 0. (ii) [[aA]] = I a I [[A]] for everycomplex a. (iii) [[A + B]] < [[A]] + [[B]]. [[A]] also possessesthe following further properties:
(iv)

(v) B iIl[[A]], where rank. (v <A] onlyA needbe offinite rank. (vi) l T9i1(AB) l < [[A]].[[B]], where B mustbothbe offinite A, E (vii) [[E]]= (D(E)) , where is a finite projection. in PROOF: We prove these statements a somewhatchanged order: Ad (i): Immediately TheoremI, (iv), (iv)' ifwe recallthat A*A = 0 implies by A = 0.' Ad (ii): Immediately TheoremI, (ii). by Ad (iv): Immediately the form Definition of 1.3.1. by Ad (vii): Immediately TheoremI, (vii), since E*E = E' = E. by A *A is definite,2 Ad (v), first inequality: Put I A III = a, then a21 hence B*(a2I - A*A)B is definite.3 Now
-

[[A*]] = [[A]]. IIIA 111 [[B]],where onlyB needbe offinite rank, [[AB]]

B*(a2I

A*A)B = a2B*B

B*A*AB = a2B*B - (AB)*(AB),

is too. Therefore and so thisexpression definite TheoremI, (iv), gives,together with (ii), (iii), eod.: 0 < T(PI(a2B*B - (AB)*(AB))
=

R~f(B*B) TOR((AB)*(AB))

= a2[[B]]2 -

[[AB]]2,

[[AB]]

a[[B]]

II A III[[B]].
II B* III [[A*]] =
41

Ad (v), second inequality: Combinethe above resultwith (iv):

< [[AB]] = [[(AB)*]] = [[B*A *]] ?
I 11 Af 112 =
2

!lB III.[[A]]
1If 112 -11

((a2l

3B*CB
4

(Af, Af) = (A*Af,f) = 0,11 Af 11 = 0, henceA = 0. = Af) = a2(f,f) -(Af, -(A*Af,f) A*A)f,f) = a2(f,f) is always definitealong with C: (B*CBf, f) = (CBf, Bf) _ 0.

a2

Af

!12 >

(.

B* 11! III = III B II, cf. (5), p. 384, footnote 36.

ON

RINGS

OF

OPERATORS,

III

103

(iv), we mightas well prove Ad (vi): Considering (5)

I TqjR(A*B) I <

[[A]] [[B]].

of In what followswe shall make use continuously TheoremI, (ii), (iii), (v), and of (ii) above:

0 ? [[A - B]]2 = T -t((A-B)*(A

- B))
-

= Tqj(A*A + B*B

A*B-

B*A) jt(A*B) -Tqjt(B*A)

-Tt(A*B)

= Tqjj (A*A) + Tc01t(B*B) -T = [[A]]2 + [[B]]2- Tcijt(A*B)

= [[A]]2 + [[B]]2- 29 T~qj(A*B), 1 Replace A, B by aA, - B, wherea > 0; then this becomes a
TT()1t(A*B)

< T1'qNf(A*B) '[[A]]2 + 4[[Bfl2.

< a

The greatest lowerbound of the rightside forall a > 0 is [[A]].[[B]], hence Now replace B by e"aB, a real, then this becomes T(e'c'TqR(A*B)) < [[A]] [[B]]. The maximumof the leftside forall real a is I Tcpjt(A*B)1, hence (5) results. Ad (iii): Use TheoremI, (iii), and (iv), (vi) above: [[A + B]]2 = T6)R((A + B)*(A + B)) = T61jt(A*A+ B*B + A*B + B*A) = T)pjt(A*A) + T')fl(B*B) + T6)jt(A*B) + TQJR(B*A) < [[A]]2+ [[B]]2+ 2[[A]] [[B]] = ([[A]] + [[B]])2, [[A + B]] < [[A]] + [[B]]. we what follows shall make use of the resultsof thcseTheoremsI Throughout to and II withoutreferring themexplicitly. TheoremII, (i)-(iii), give us also withoutany further the rightto use [[A]] as a normand [[A - B]] as a distance, comment. numericalevaluations for the In III III and [[A]] we have two different A A. It is therefore to evaluate each one in termsof the other. size of desirable This is only feasibleto a verylimitedextent,and is expressedby the Lemmas is 1.3.1, 1.3.2, which follow. (Cf., however,B.3 in (B) ini ?1.6, when 'ORJ{ in class (I.).)

[[B]]2. - [[All + 2 ~~2a2

104

J. V. NEUMANN

1.2.2), and D(E) = D(93Q)= D([Range A]) = Rank (A), (cf. E e 9OT Definition (D(E))' = (Rank (A))'. Every Af belongsto 9)1so EAf = Af,that is [[E]] EA = A. Hence A [[A]] = [[EA]] _ [[E]]-III
LEMMA

l. LEMMA 1.3.1. [[A]] _ (Rank (A))' |||A I|I Then A e DR implies X7 PROOF: Put 9) = [Range A], E = Po. IDR,

II=

(Rank

(A))'.*II A jj.

with existsan E e 9OT 1.3.2. If [[A]] < be with6, e > 0, thenthere Ii < d. A(I-E) D(E) < e2, so that 11 PROOF: A*A is Hermiteanand bounded,so it has a spectralform (6) (A*Af,g)
=

Xd(E(X)f, g.

spectraltheoremforbounded oper(This is an applicationof the well-known 42, ators,cf.e.g. (5), pp. 389-390,footnote and p. 418, or (1), p. 212, Definition 15.1.1. The Stieltjes integralconverges,cf. eod.) E (X), - 00 < X < + 00 of is a resolution unity (cf. eod.). Put f = g in (6), since (A*Af, f) = Af Af) = 11 1122 (E(X)f, f) = IIE(X)f112,we then obtain (Af, (7)

Af 112=

at

Xd(IIE(X)f112).

For Xo< 0 put f = E(Xo)g. Then the rightside in (7) becomes

= JLXOX E(X)g12) d(lj

<

xfd(I

IE(X)g

112) =

X 11 E(o)g 12.
0, SO IJE(xo)g

The left side of (7) is _ 0, hence Xo < 0 gives I E(Xo)g I E(X\o)g= 0. That is:

112 <

(8)

X< 0

implies E(X)

0.

Now (7), (8) give forf = E(52)g:

II AE(62)g 112 =

fXd(2

52

E(X)g 112)_

62

J d(j1 E(X)g 112)

rz2

62

IIE(62)g 1<62< 5jg

112,

IAE(62)g l<

jgfI,

that is
(9) IIIAE(52)

III <5.

On the otherhand we have by (7), (8)

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS, - a

III

105
E(6))f 12
E(X)f 12)

({ A*A - 6(I -E(62)) }f,f)

(A*Af,f)

11(I12)

f Xd(j IE(X)f
Xd(I E(X)f

-_2fd(jI

>.f =

112) -622

d(I IE(X)f 112)

0.

J
2

00

(X

j2)d(I IE(X)f 112) _

So A*A -

62(I

-E(62))
-

is definite, hence
62T (ITjV E(62))
=

[[A]]2

? Tc'JR(A*A)

62D(I

E(62)).

But [[A]]2 ? (10)

62C22consequently

D(I
=

E(6))

_ 62

So (9), (10) state that E

E(62)

meets all our requirements.

1.4. DEFINITION 1.4.1. A sequence operators 2A22 ... is called"regular" A1 of the if it possesses following properties: (i) All A. e O. ranks. (But their ranksneednotbe bounded.) (ii) All Anhavefinite (iii) The numbers A1 11,III 111, *. . are bounded. A2 I 1.4.2. A regular DEFINITION A1 sequence 2A2, .** is "fundamental" if
m n -boo

lim [[Am- A]] = 0. and

B1, B2 , ...

DEFINITION 1.4.3. Two regularsequences A1, A2, ... "equivalent"if

are

n--,c

lim [[An- Bn]] = O.

In all our considerations which will follow,we about operator-convergence This is the definition (5), pp. 381-382): shall use strong convergence. (cf.
DEFINITION

1.4.4.

A sequence A 1, A2,

. .

is "strongly convergent" to the

limit A, in symbols

lim str An = A) -boo

n

if these conditions are fulfilled: (i) The numbers II A1 1 KA2 111,... (ii) For everyf e &
m, n -

are bounded.

lim

1Anf-Af

1=O

106

J. v. NEUMANN

of We shall use onlythe mostobvious properties strongconvergence. (Cf. (5), pp. 382-384. In Definition1.4.4 above, (i) is a consequence of (ii)-cf. (5), 35 but we do not need thisfact.) p. 382, footnote We proceed now to establish connectionsbetween fundamentalsequences on and equivalenceon one hand, and strongconvergence the other. LEMMA 1.4.1. Let Al, A2, with be a regularsequence
n -400

lim [[An]]= 0.
* i(in
0o0)

Then it possessesa subsequence , Ai2, Ai

n -en

with

lim strAi,,= 0. For everym = 1, 2, ... thereexistsan no = no(m),such that n _ no implies[[An]] < 1/4m. Choose ii < i2 < ... within > no(m). Then we have
PROOF:

[[Ai]] Apply Lemma 1.3.2 with a =

(11)
e

<

= 1/2m,then an Em e O)Robtains,with
D(Em) <?m
Wr = P

(12)
Put Em = = Pn9Jm 91m

Aim(I- Em) III <

[9m,) Tn+l,

*...],

Fm

Then we have also

Fm 6 OR, and (1), p. 168, Lemma 8.3.2 gives

D(91.) < E
00

00

n=m <

D(TWn)y
00

D(Fm) (13)

n=m
D(Fm)

n-m

1 n

3.4m-1

<

=3.4m-1

Also, by construction of the 91m 97m D 91m+1 Fm _ Fm+l that is

(14)

T1

T2 D

F, >! F2

_>

* P911.912.

Hence by (4), p. 77, Theorem 19, we have lim strm-oo = F Fm and by (1), p. 169, Lemma 8.3.4,
DW911%2..

1= lim D(9%,),
m-.o0

D1(F) = lim D (Fj).

m-o0e

This is = 0 by (13), so F = 0, that is (15) lim str Fm = 0.

n-00

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III
-

107 -JRm

A (12) states 11itm(I Em)fII _ I (16)

" mf hence forf e I1,

|| Aijf 1j < 2mIlf l.

X By construction of 91m9J'mC %.m hence S& - 9m D 4- m, and so (16) , S) - 1m. Assume finallyfE ID - SM, m > p. Then (14) holds for all f e , gives 9M,D Sm so Z,, C & - XZm,and so (16) holds again. - SMX then (16) holds forall m > p. That is: Then So iff e

(17)

m--+x

lim 11 Aif =0.

(15), we see that the domain As (17) holds in every - % and considering M, dense set in S.5 of validityof (17) is an everywhere But the domain of validityof (17) is a closed set, because the Al, A2, all 1.4.1. Hence it comprises A. continuous (iii) in Definition by are uniformly . 1.4.4 is established for the sequence Ail, Ai2 Thus (ii) in Definition followsfrom(iii) in Definition1.4.1. (i) eod. sequence. ThenlimstromAn * beafundamental Let Al , A2, LEMMA 1.4.2. exists. PROOF: Since (i) in Definition1.4.4 followsfrom (iii) in Definition1.4.1, we must only prove the validity of (ii) in Definition1.4.4 for a suitable A. That is: For everyf e & the existenceof a g E ii (whichthenis to be Af) with the this is certainly case if - 0. And since & is complete, lim~ boo1 A nf-g
(18)
,n,n --,c

lim 1I Anf-Anf

0 II =

Thereforeassume the opposite: That (18) is not true for a suitablef E So we have anfo e I and a 6 > 0, such that
(19)

A 11 fO -A

f jdo

I> 3

for n

1, 2,

*,

where inin

-X

OC

From the fact that A1, A2, X * * is a fundamentalsequence, we conclude . is a regular sequence with immediatelythat Ail - Aj2 , Ai2 - A i2 we [[Ain-A inA] = 0. Therefore may apply Lemma 1.4.1 to A i- A j,3 linO ). This sequence possesses a subseAi2 - A i2, . .. (in place of Al, A2,X.. ... ), with lim strom (Aikn -A ik.) (kn -* quence Aikl - Aikl Aik,2 - A ,
k2

= 0.

Thus in particular limnn-oo

II

(Aikn

Aikn)fO II

0, that is

(20)

lim

Aiknfo -

Aknfo

= 0

be a fundamental sequencewithlim strom LEMMA 1.4.3. Let Al, A2, ... ct) with An = 0. Then it possesses a subsequence Ai,, Ai2, ... (in
n -*

each other,and this completesthe proof. (19) and (20) contradict

lim [[Ain]f= 0.
-

6 Consider an aribtraryf e limp.. II Fpf I = 0 by (15).

't.

Then fp = (I

Fp)f e

- S9p, and limp--. II f -

II

108

J. V. NEUMANN

is a fundamental PROOF: Since A1, A2, sequence, we have limm,n-* an n0 = no(p) [[Am- A.]] = 0. Hence thereexistsforeveryp = 1, 2, such that m, n > n0imply [[Am - AJ]] 1/4'. Choose i1 < i2 < ... with ip no(p). Then we have
.

[[Ai - Ai,,+]] < =4v ApplyLemma 1.3.2 with5 = (21) (22)

E

= 1/2', thenan E,, ER obtains,with D(Ev) < 4p,

(As,- Aj)(I-

E)

I < -1.

Let us now proceed as in the proofof Lemma 1.4.1. Put E,, = Pop, 91,p = [, p+l,I ...], Fp = P%,,. Then we have again Fme t, and as there
*000

(F()
D(Fp <

) (E(,) < _D
(Q
-<
T

4 = 3 .4q-1

(23)

1 D(Fv) < -3.42-1912

of By the construction the 1p, 1, D %1,,?,so 91 D (24) I2C

and

C 2 C

. -91p

Then we have foreveryp _ q also f e Considernow an f e .-1q. by (24), hence (I - Ep)f = f. So (22) gives forsuch an f -1 A fAip+jf
112P

1lf I.I

r - 1.

If r > s 2 q, thenthe above inequalitymay be applied to p = s, s + 1,..*, Addinggives

As*f- Aif || =
()

|2Az Ap-As
r_1
-

f|
r-1

Af

Aivf - A 21
11 <-

I< IL
.1

(25)

Ii Aiwj-Air+lf

2'- lf

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

109

1imr r Now lim strnx A, = 0 implies lim,_,. IIAJf II= 0, and a fortiori Airf I = 0. So ifs > q is fixed, and we let r -+00 withr > s then(25) gives: A

(26) This is true foreveryf E tutingthis into (26) gives:

||Ai

IIAiJfI 2<L1 C
-91q

jjf
-

ifs > q.

that is foreveryf = (I
1

Fq)g. SubstiII.

-F j11 11<--Fq)g

That is: (27)

I Ais(I

Fq)

< flj

Having obtained (27), we can now proceedto a generalevaluationof the An. Since the numbersIII 1 1 A2 1, ... are bounded,by (iii) in Definition A1 11I 1.4.1, thereexists a fixednumbera with (28) Hence (23), (28) give: ? [[AisFq]] IIAi. I (29)
* [[Fq]]

IllAnlII

forn=1,2,---.

= I|| Ai. *I (D(Fq))'

a_______

(3.4`-1)I

[[Ai8Fq]] <

Considernow any finite projectionG E 'R.

Then (27), (29) yield:

I + [[GAiJ ' [[GAi8FJII [[GAiJ(I?

Fq)]I

11G

+ 11 [[AiJFaFq]] A iA.,(I- F) 111[[GI]

)a 1 + (D(G))' * 8(D (G))' a (G))' + (D28-1 4-1)J

< 1*

(3.4q-1)i

(30)

[[GAlll < ( (3.

Put q = [Range Aiq], Gq = Pk8 . Again ?$q j DR, G e OR. And always = A qfe Eq, GAitQf Aiqf,that is GgAij = Ai,. So (I - Gq)Aiq = 0, and consequently (I - Gq)(Ai. - Aiq) = (I - Gq)JA

110

J. V. NEUMANN
i2,

of construction theil. Hence, by usingour original [[(IGq)Ajis] = [[(I

-

Gq)(Ais-

Ai q)]]

?
(31) [[(I -Gq)Aij]]

GI Gq Ih-[[A i-

AI] ?1-=

4q

4q~

<

ifs ? q.
=

that Now combine(30) withG = G. and (31), remembering D(G9) Rank (Aiq). So we obtain: (32) [[Aj + 1 +q a (3.4q-1) + ~ (Rank (AX)) 281
=

D(3)

if s > q q_
1
<- 3.q-1).!

an Let finally e > 0 be given. Choose a q and then an

sO =
SO(e,

q(e)

so that - 4q +

-2 2

q) so, that so > q and

(Rank(Aiq)

- 2

Then (32)

for givesimmediately all s ? sothat [[Aij] < e. In otherwords:

s3 --00

= lim [[AiJ]] 0.

Thus the proof is cotlIpleted.-1.4.1, 1.4.3 could have been Beforewe go on, we observethis: Both Lemnmata by thesequence Ai, by easilystrengthened replacingthe subsequenceA as itself. But theysuffice theystand forour immediatepurposes, Al, A2, formsimand our ultimate results (Theorem III) yield those strengthened mediately. lim str A A, III. (i) For every sequwnewc A2, fundaturital THEOREM AI , to exists,and belongs ORh. theequation and B1, B2, sequences (ii) For twofundamental Al, A2, lim strAn
n -too
--

fin strBn
n -boo

arc holdsif and onlyif thetwosequences equivalent. lime SO[[AJ] (numerical!) exists, fundamental sequence Al, A2, (iii) For every itself!). and it depends on lim stro0 A-,only (and not on thesequence Al , A2, in PROOF: We provethesestatements a somewhatchangedorder: An: IdenticalwithLemma 1.4.2. Ad (i): Existence limstrnSO of OeRi, and en being a ring, Ad (i): lim strnS.O Ec-TO:Clear, since Al, A2, . An topology. is closedin thestrong be two equivalent Let Al, A2, ... and B1,B2, Ad (ii): Sufficiency: is also a fundamental fundamentalsequences. Then Al, B1, A2, B2, Cn By (i) above lim strn.-0 exists. Hence sequence; denoteit by Cl, C2, -* e Bn lim strn_ SOC2n1 -lim strn., Con, that is lin strn., A", = lim strm00 ... .

ON RING(SOF 0P'U1ArTO1S, III

i11

of Ad (iii): Existence limn, [[An]]: Since Al , A2, is a fundamental sequence, - An]] = 0. Now I [[Am]] - [[An]]I we have limmn_ [[Am [[Am- An]],6 hence limmQno([[Am]]- [[An]]) = 0. Therefore the (numerical) limit lim" [[An]] exists. Ad (ii): Necessity:We may replaceAI, A2, and B1, B2 X** by Al -B1, A2- B2 and 0, 0, . That is: We may assume,thatB1 = B2 = ** = 0? So Al, A,2, and we assume that lim strn S An = 0. Then is fundamental, Lemma 1.4.3 excludes that lim,-,O [[An]] should exist and at the same time be $0. But we provedjust now that partof (iii) whichstatesthat limns does exist. Hence limnO [[An]]= 0. In otherwords: Al , A2 X and0, 0,.* are equivalent. Ad (iii): lim strn_.0 determineslimn-, [[An]]: We have two fundamental An sequences Al, A2,X * -and B1, B2, - with lim strn SO An = lim strod Bn, and we want to prove that lim O [[An]] = limn, [[BnI]. We provedjust now and B1 B2 , - * are at the necessityof the criterion (ii), hence A1 , A2, of , any rate equivalent. That is: limbe, [[A - Bn]] 0. But I [[An]]- [[Ba]] I < [[A,, - Bn]](cf.6 above), hence limnr ([[An]] - [[Ba]]) = 0. Consequently [[An]] limn_O: = limn.o [[B.]]. We can now define: DEFINITION 1.4.5. The fact that A1, A2, -is a fundamentalsequence and that strn, An = A, willbedenoted limn by
N . ! .
[[An]]

(A1, A2,

A.

A DEFINITION 1.4.6. We shall say thatan operator is "normed" a sequence if - A exists. By (iii) in Theorem III, limn-, Al, A2, .. with (A1, A2, ...) suchsequence, and it dependson A only(noton thesequence for every [[An]] exists
Al, A2, *** itself!). We shall definethe "norm" of A, the number [[A]], as this limit: [[A]] = limn,. [[Af]]. REMARKS: (i) Every A of finite rank is normed, since we then have

(A, A, * *) - A. This makes clear also that in this case-i.e., whenthe old [[A]]is also defined-the new [[A]]coincideswiththe old one. (ii) By (i) in TheoremIII everynormed is E 0911. A (iii) By (i), (ii) in TheoremIII the relation (Al)
A2

A **)

establishes a one-to-one correspondencebetween all equivalence-classes of -on one hand, and all mutuallyequivalent fundamental sequences Al, A2, normedA on the other.Throughoutwhat followswe shall make use of the resultsof Theorem III. Definitions 1.4.5, 1.4.6, and of the above Remarks,withoutreferring them to explicitly.
6Always I [[A]J - [[B]] I < [[A - B]]. Proof: [[A]] = [[B +(A - B)]] < [[B]] + [[A -B II, [A]] - [VB <-I IA -B II. Interchanging B gives [[B] - [[A]] ? [IA - B] . A, Hence (t[tAI - [L[BI) < [[A - B]], that is I [A]] - [B]] I ? [[A - B].

112

J. V. NEUMANN

) aA ) A implies (aA1, aA2, 1.5. LEMMA 1.5.1. (i) (A1, A2, ~ a. complex forevery ) ) Bimply (A? + B,, A2? B2, (ii) (Al, A2, * -) PA, (B1, B2, A +B ) MA implies(A1B,A2B, ) AB and (BA1, BA2, * ) (iii) (AI, A2, B BA forevery e OR. A A is equivalent (A*,A', *). .. to (iv) (Al, A2, ..) because alongwithA1, A2, is fundamental PROOF: Ad (i): aA1, aA2, - An]]. And lim strom An = A [[aAm- aAn]] = [[a(Am - An)]] = I a [[Am implieslim strn,. aAn = aA. and along with Al, A2, is fundamental Ad (ii): Al + B1, A2 + B2, + (Bmbecause [[(Am + Bm) - (An + B.)]] = [[(Am -A.) B1, B2, - Bn Bn)]] < [[Am - An]]+ [[Bm- Bn]]. And lim strn,0 An = A, lim strn in, = B implylim strn---. + B.) = A + B. (An Ad (iii): A1B, A2B, ... and BA1, BA2, - are fundamental along with Al,
*.. ...

A2,

because

[[AmB - AnB]]
[[BAm
-

-A, [[(Am - An)B]] < III B II -[[Am

-

BAn]] = [[B(Am

? An)]] <

I B III[[Am

An]].

And lim strom An = A implieslim str.o AnB = AB, lim strom BAn = BA. implication. Now to it Ad (iv): Since ** is identity, suffices provethe forward because [[A* - A]] = Al', A2,X... is fundamental along with Al, A2, * we know that we have lim str,0 A,, = A.'
limn0

[[(Am

An An)*]] = [[Am - An]]. Hence a B with lim strn Ad = B exists, and

-

Hence we have for everyf e i

0. So for allf, g e
t

Replacing f, g in the firstrelationby g, f and application of - gives limn_, lim and consequently stro A* = A*. This completesthe proof.A of properties the class ofthenormed It is noweasy to provethefundamental and of theirnorm [[A]]. of properties a norm A) IV. [[A]] (fornormed has thecharacteristic THEOREM in a linearspace. Thatis: (i) Always [[A]] > 0, and = Oif and only if A = 0. a. complex A, alongwith and [[aA]] = i a [[A]]forevery (ii) aA is normed A, alongwith B and [[A + B]] < [[A]] + [[B]]. (iii) A + B is normed are statements true: Thefollowing further and if (iv) A* is normed and onlyif A is normed, [[A*]] = [[A]]. e (butboth 'DR),and A if (v) AB is normed either orB is normed
< III A IIIj-[[B]] if B is normed, [[ IB] B I-II[[A]]if A is normed. (A*f, g) = (A*f, g). Hence (A*f, g) = (Bf, g) for all f, g
E

(Anf,g) = (Af, g), limb

11 A4

Af 11 =

0, lim

A*nf- Bf II= = (Bf, g). (A*f, g)

r I

limn 0*,

Sg. Thus A*

B,

= (lim strn..-An)* is not a generally valid equation in the sense that 7r Mstr.,.(A*) the existence of either side implies that one of the other side also, (Cf. (5), p. 382.)

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

1113

) is a regularsequence A is normed, and then .,A (A1, A2 (vi) If Al, A2, to is equivalent limn--, [[A - A]] = 0. )) PROOF: Ad (i): Choose an (Al, A2 , A. Then [[A]]= limn-. [[An]]. Since all [[An]] t 0, so [[A]] ? 0. And [[A]] = 0 means limn_.O [[An]]-= 0 that But as (Al, A2 *I ) - A, is, theequivalence of Al, A2, . * andO, 0O... ) (0, 0, *) -) - 0, thereforethis means A = 0. Ad (ii), (iii), (iv), (v): Immediatelyby (ii), (iii), (iv), (iii) in Theorem III, A respectively. (In the secondpart of (v) interchange and B.) ) X) Assume (Al, A2, Ad (vi): Sufficiency: -)- A. Clearly (-An, -An, X - -An Xhence (ii) in Lemmal1.5.1. (Al-A.,XA2 . -A-An by -A,, -)

must be Therefore limm [[Am - And] = [[A - An]]. Now Al, A2, ... 0, Since limm.-o[[Am-An]] exists,we fundamental, so limm,nO [[Am-AnA]] =O. have a fortiorilim,. (lim. [[Am - An]]) = 0, limn,. [[A - An]] = 0,that is limn_-[[A, - A]] = 0. = Necessity:Assume limn_-[[An - A]] = 0. By (iii) above, [[Am -A]] [[(Am - A) - (An - A)]] ? [[Am - A]] + [[An - A]]. Hence the above assumption implies limnn_,o[[Am - An]] = 0. So Al, A2, being regular, is even fundamental. Therefore a normed A' with (Al, A2 X ) *-*A' exists. Hence by our above result limbo [[An - A'l]] = 0. Now again by (iii) above
[[A - A']] = limn-,. [[An-

foreby (i) above, A - A' = 0,A = A'. Hence (A1, A2, -**) - A. )o ) LEMMA 1.5.2. If (Al, A2, ) A, (B1, B2, B, then limbo ') and it dependson A, B only(noton thesequences A2, A1, Tu(AnB n) exists,

A']]

[[(An - A') - (An - A)]] ? [[An - A']] + [[An = limber [[An -A]] = 0, thisproves [[A -A']]

0. There-

A]].

As

and B1, B2,

...

iTTi(A nB) and lime DO T6X(AnB) separately. And since the latter obtains from the formerby replacing A and the An by iA and the iAn , so we need to consider limn-. S TY) (A nB*) only. Now
([[An + Bn]]2 =
=
-

to PROOF: It suffices prove thisforlimed

themselves!).

[[A ]]2 -[[B,]]2)

+ Bn)(A,, + Bn)*) + Tgt(BnA*)) = TT6
_ -

21(T'jR[[A,,
2

TV

(AnA*)

TV(BnB*))

(T)R(AnB*)

=-2

(OrC(A2'B*) + T9R(BnA*)) T T",j(AB*)

=2([[An

(33)

+ B ,j12

[[An]]2 _ [[Bn]]2).

- A,(B1, B2, .**) We have (A1, A2, B, hence by (iii) in Lemma 1.5.1, - A + B. So lim,,o [[An]] = [[A]], lim,, also (A1 + B1, A2 + B2, ...) = [[B]], lim..w [[An+ Bn]] = [[A + B]]. Consequently (33) gives [[Bn]]

n --oo

lim TTR(AnB*)

"([[A + B]]2 -

[[A]]2 _ [[B]]2).

114

J. V. NEUMANN

This completesthe proof. DEFINITION 1.5.1. Let A, B be normed. By Lemma1.5.2 lin1,O T6p(AnB*) A exists any two for sequences. , A2, * and B1, B2, with(Al, A2, * -*) A, on A1, A2, * (B1, B2,*I ) B, and it depends A, B only(noton thesequences and B1, B2, * themselves!).We shall define "inner product"of A, B, the the number ?A, B,>> as thislimit: <<A, B>> = limn---. T6R(AnB*).Throughoutwhat followswe shall make use of the resultsof Theorem IV to and Definition1.5.1, withoutreferring them explicitly. THEOREM V. (i) <<A, B>? is linear in A, conjugate-linear B, and of in in Hermiteansymmetry A, B. That is
' ' . .

<<aA, B>> = a<<A, B>>, <<A + A", B?> = <<A, B>? + <<A, B>> <<A, aB>? = a<<A, B>?, <<A, B' + B">? = <<A, B'>? + <<A, B?>>, <<A, B? (ii) (iii) <<A, A> <<AD, B> <<DA, B>> = <<?B A>>.
= = =

[[A]]2. <<A, BD*>?, <<A, D*B>>,

and D e AD. A, where B are normed PROOF: All these statementsare immediate by Definition1.5.1, and the of properties Ti1(X) for X of finiterank. (Remember,in particular,that = Tjj(YX) ifeither or Y has a finite X rank, and both are e TiR(XY) We are now in a positionto prove: E LEMMA 1.5.3. A projection is normed and onlyif it is finite. if If thenit is of finite PROOF: Sufficiency: E is finite, rank,hence it is normed. Necessity:Assume that E is normed. We want to prove that it is finite, that is: If F e 'DR is a projection < E, with F - E ( *.. 'DR) ((1), p. 151, Definition 6.1.1), then F = E ((1), p. 155, Definition 7.1.1). So we assume that F has the above properties of (excepting courseF = E). for F E( ... OR) means F = U*U, E = UUU* a partially isometric U e((1), p. 151, Definition6.1.1), that is a U with UU*U = U, U*UU* = U*
'

both normed, along withE.

((1), p. 142, Lemma 4.3.2).

F < E means FE = F.

Then U =

UU*U

= EU and F =

U*U are

ON

RINGS

OF

OPERATORS,

III

115

Now we obtain,withthe help of (i)-(iii) in TheoremV: K<E, F?2 = K<E, F*F>> <<FE, F>> = <<F, <<F, E>> [[E
F>>
=

[[F]]2,

<<E, F>> = [[F]]2= [[F]]2, = [[E]]2

F]]2

<<E

F, E -F>> F>> -<<F E?

-

= <<E, E>> + <<F, F>> -<<E, (34) Also: [[E]]2 = <<E, E>>
=

[[F]]2,

[[E

F]]2

_ [[E]]2 _ [[F]]2.

<<UU*, UU*>>
U*U>>

=
=

<<UU*U, U>>
<<U U*U, U>>

=
=

<<U, U>>,
<<U U>>,

[[F]]2= <<F F>> = <<U*U, (35)

[[E]12= [[F]]2.

Combining(34), (35) gives [[E - F]]2 = 0, [[E - F]] = 0, and consequently E = F. Thus the proofis completed.the by the Afterthis we could determine normedA completely investigating of of of spectralform A*A and the projections its resolution unityE(X), -c < X < + cc. We shall not do thishere,however, because forour further purposes (especiallyforLemma 2.2.1) Lemma 1.5.3 is sufficient. 1.6. We want to say a fewwordsabout the meaningof our above notionsof normedness and normin factorsO)Rof various classes. The contentsof this of section, however, are not needed for the understanding our subsequent deductions. is ) or (I1i): UR is in this case of a finite (A) 6"?)t of class (Jn)(n = 1, 2, class, hence every 9W O. is finite, rank. Tlit(A) is everyA E ' has finite definedforall A E UR and coincideswith the relativetrace TUK(A). (We can chooseST = & in Definitions 1.2.3, 1.2.4, and D(T)) in the standardnormalization.) Hence everyA is normed,and [[A]], <<A, B>> mean the same thingas in (2), p. 241, Definition 4.3.1, and Lemma 4.3.2. of (B) OU is ofclass (I): We mightas well take OR as the ring?s3 all bounded in operators St. (Cf. (1), p. 173, Lemma 8.6.1.) Let s(p, Se2, ** be a complete, everyA e OR = U@by its matrix: normalized, orthogonal in '5 and represent set A {aii}, i, 1, 2, j = ...

ai, = (A~pi Ip,)

116

J. V. NEUMANN

thenit is the commonnotionof in Choose D(9YV) the standardnormalizations; dimension. (Cf. loc. cit. above.) Hence Rank (A) has its usual meaningtoo. We show now: and B.1. (i) If Rank (A) is finite,then aii is absolutelyconvergent, 1 aii TSB(A) = and (ii) If Rank (A) is finite,then EZ',jo I aij 12 is absolutelyconvergent, thenRank (A) = D ([Range A]) = k = Ad (i): If Rank (A) is finite, , 4fkare a nor'k] 0 1, 2, .., hence [Range A] - [sI', ,'I, where 4s,.. malized orthogonalset. Put El = P[,p, I = 1, * , k, then P[RangeAl = + Ek, so A = PIRange A]A = E1A + *; + EkA. Each EA has at E1 + to most rank 1 so it suffices prove (i) whenthe rankis at most 1. In this case clearlyA =aij, aii = ai~j. If all ai = 0 or all As = 0, then all aii = 0 true. Hence we may assume that some is in whichcase our statement trivially ai $ 0 and some As $ 0. As every D.0 as; I2 and every fX=1 I ai; I2 must this be finite,8 implies that both Et.1 I ai 2 and Zi= hi are finite. So we have:
PROOF:
.

[[A]]2 = f, j-1 I ai,

j2.

to

co

0 <

1 aiI3 is absolutely con= place that E12 aThis proves in the first inequality). Now put B = {bi C = {ci}, vergent(by Schwarz'swell-known where
b
bll= O

Iai I 12,

l12 1 <

+0.

ai for j=1!

otherwise

'

ciij=

for i=

otherwise

Then BC = A, CB =

{dii, where

dii{

= 0

e i-

ai ii

for i,j otherwise

rank(= 1). of So CB = (17==1aiji)E, , whereE1 = P[,1] . B, C are clearly finite D(E1) = 1, hence Tgp(E1) = 1): Now we bave (remember
TFL(A)
=

~1Tg(BC) = Tgi(CB)

(E

ai,)

TD1(E1)

=2aE3i.

Thus the proofis completed. Ad (ii): Immediatelyby (i), since A*A Sk akiaki , hence {git}, git = = 9ii = Ek=l I aki 2 I aki 2 gii Ek,i=i 2 B.2. A is normed if and only if EXy~l I ai, 2 is finite. Again [[A]]2 =
i2O=l

Sm1j

DO I aii

2. 12.
12
= a.

I aij

resultsfor

EI._ asi

I aii 12 is finite. The same Awpi12, so , I (Awij, pj) 12= f1 . A* l7a in place of A =ai i 12 by considering

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

117
Then

1, hence EIAEn is normed,and [[EAAEJ]]_ [[A]]. Now EnAEn has even finite rank,along with En, and A - {ais} impliesERAE{aI~7n}, where

PROOF: Necessity: Assume that A is normed.

E E,

I=

Put E. = P(,.*,sj.

a(n)

f=

%I=

aoi

for

otherwise

, j=

1,

n..,n

Hence by (ii) in B.1:

[[EA
E2
=

i,j-1

an)

2 =

id-I1

la

12,

This proves for and consequently ESi-l i aij 12< [[A]]2 every n = 1, 2, the finiteness Esi-= I as; 12. of and Sufficiency, valueof[(A]]2 Assumethat E!ij aI 2is finite. Form E. = Each An has finiterank, and IIIA as above, put An = ERAE E. IIIEAE, I < IIIA II1. Hence the sequence Al, A2, . . is regular. It is ' - a^) also fundamental: m > n thenAm, If , and {a
(

{-~ =aii 0 -2

for ij 1,..., otherwise

00

but not i j =1,

and consequently(using (ii) in B.1)

[[Am
=nc42 i,j-1

]])2 -A m
ij=l

n1

i~j=1

=Iai

12

=I i,j=1

aii 12

So form ->n

[[Am -An]]2

I 12 Mai

~~~n
ij=1

I lai

12

of and so the finiteness Whirl I aii I2 implieslimmn--.. [[Am- An]] = 0. -im str >00 Finally lim strn-<oo = I, hence lim strn-..An = EnAEn = A. En Thus we have,

(Al YA2^
X

A.

A Therefore is normed,and (using (ii) in B.1)

[[A]]2 = ihn [[An]]2= lim EI
n >ea n--*a ^,jl

a~n) 12

n -o i~jl

lim

~~~n ~ 2 E Iai i1 ~

oo
=

I aii 12.

Thus the proofis completed.B.2 shows that in this case the class of all normedA coincideswiththe wellknownclass ofE. Schmidt. thatin thiscase thecondition We finally observe limm,n_,, - An]]= 0 [[Am of Definition1.4.2 (which implies the existence of limn_-O [[An]] hence the 1.4.1. boundednessof the sequence [[Al]],[[A2]],*.. ) implies (iii) in Definition So in the presentcase (In) condition(iii) in Definition1.4.1 is superfluouswhichis not true in the case (II), as will be seen in C.1 below.

118

J. V. NEUMANN

Indeed we have: A B.3 I11 I _ [[A]] if A is normed. ? _ [[A]] IIf II for everyfES . We may obviously PROOF: That is: I Af orthogonal normalized assume IIf I = 1, and thenwe can choosethe complete, 1 so that spl= f. So we want to prove II Alpl ? [[A]] that is, set spl, 02, IlAsp 112 ? [[A]]2. This, however,is obvious.9 is (C) 911T' of class (II): In this case our notions are genuinelynew. We our onlywishto observethat the oppositeofB.3 is true,whichjustifies formula1.4.1, 1.4.2. (Cf. the above discussionbeforeB.3.) Indeed tion of Definitions we have: great. can be arbitrarily rank I A III/[[A]] C.1. Evenforan A offinite E PROOF: Given any C > 0, choosea projection E 'a withD(E) > 0, < 1/C2. E = 1, [[E]] = (D(E))* ? 1/C, hence of finiterank. Then E is finite, > C. and consequently11 E fI/[[E]] (D) OR is of class (III): If A is of finiterank, then [Range A] is finite, is hence (since ORy of class (III.)!) [Range A] = 0, A = 0. Hence forevery necessarily sequence Al, A2, for regular,and a fortiori everyfundamental = A2 = ... = 0. Thus the onlynormed is A = 0. A A, all In this case, therefore, the notionswe have definedare vacuous.In spite of this,just thesenotionswill help us to prove that the examplesof in factorswhich we shall construct ??4.3-4.4, belong in certaincases to class (Cf. in particular?4.3, Theorem IX.) The procedurewill be essen(III.). tially the reverse of (C) above: We shall succeed in showingthat in those E 0, the proofbeingmainlybased 9V? projection mustbe factors everyfinite of on the properties the notion of normedness. From this we then conclude must be of class (III.). Any directattemptto prove such a that such an O1lt to alternative (III) the case (II.) is the thingwill show that of all possibilities very appropriatethat our notions of hardest one to exclude. It is therefore new. and normare in this case genuinely normedness We also want to point out, that Theorems IV, V show, that the normed form a (possibly) incompleteHilbert space. This space is operatorsin OR11 cases: (I.): Obvious. (I<<,):Clear by (B) actually completein the following above. (III): Clear, since it contains 0 only, cf. (D) above. In the cases (II1), (II) it is not complete,but can be completed to a space Q(9)R), by adjoiningto 9O certain(but not all) unboundedoperators7 911. This process C.1 was carriedout in detail for (III) in (2), pp. 236-242. In this connection into this subject. above is significant. We will not go here any further
.

CHAPTER II.

MAXIMUM ABELIAN RINGS AND THE OPERATIONS A IlIE

21

2.1. DEFINITION we define I l

E A 2.1.1. For any boundedoperator and any projection A E = EAE + (I

-

E)A(I

E).
12

Api

112 =

12

8, by footnote [[A]], = E'.

al I aii

by B. 2.

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

119

Consequently A
-

AIE = (I-

E)AE + EA(I

E).

LEMMA 2.1.1. (i) If A, E e OR thenAlE e )1. rank. rank,thenA IE is also offinite (ii) If A, E e OR and A is offinite are obvious. PROOF: Both statements withE. LEMMA 2.1.2. A E commutes PROOF: Results by an obvious computation. and if (ir, witheach other, X LEMMA 2.1.3. If E1, , En commute , n), then is a permutation (1, of
AlE

, in,,)

IEn =

1 A I Erl1 I...

, rn,,)is to PROOF: It is obviouslysufficient considerthe case where (iri 1). , nsay of just a transposition two neighbors, of m, m + 1 (m = 1,.. BIEmllEm put B = AIR, E,,i, and apply Then we must prove BIEmIEm+ lEm+21 .En to the result. Writing A, E, F forB, Em, Emil we see: We have to show Al EI = AIFIE
-

resultsby an obvious computation. if E, F commute. This, however, ... witheach other, thenA E1 I I En comCOROLLARY. If El, , E,, commute mutes withall of them.
.

n) PROOF: Consider an i - 1, ..., n. Let (lri, TO, be a permutation of (1, ... , n) with in = i. Then AIEl' .JEn - A IET,1 ... Ernby Lemma 2.1.3, and this commutes with En = Es by Lemma 2.1.2. I A"E" ,,En _I < II A LEMMA 2.1.4. From this PROOF: We shall prove IIIAIElI. En-IEm l < fAJE1... fEl. the desired result obtains by putting m = 1, . , n. Write in the above Em. Then we obtain II A E IIl _II A < inequality A, E for AlE,! .Em1i In other words: We want to prove

(36)
Now clearly

1(A'Ef, g) I < IIIA IIIIfII

((I -E)A(I
=

Ig I .

(AlEf, g) = (EAEf, g) +

E)f, g) (AEf, Eg) + (A(I

-

E)f, (I

E)g).

Hence (37)

1(A'Ef, g) I < IllA

(11 Ef

11 || Eg 11 +

11(I

E)f 11 11(I

E)g II).

By Schwarz's well-known inequality

jj EfI1

Eg 11 + 11(I

E)f 11 1I (I

E)g
-

II
E)f 112)(11 Eg 112+ 11(I
-

<

[(Il Ef

2 --+ 11(I

E)g

112)]'

120 But

J. V. NEUMANN

fl 12 + Ef
similarly

11(I -

E)f

112 =

(Ef, Ef) + ((I = (Eff)

E)f, (I + ((I
_
-

E)f) = (ff) =

E)ff)

11ft11

Eg Therefore

112+

fl (I-E)g
-

|g2 Ilf I11 g 11.

Ef Eg I + 11 f 1111

11 -E)f (I

(I1111

E)g ?l

And this carries(37) over into (36), and thereby completesthe proof. LEMMA 2.1.5. Assume thatA, E1, E2, * * O A RThA,of finiterank, the E1, witheach other. Then E2. ... commute
[[AEl..1 l -Em
AIE1il*

IEnh]2 =

[[Ail

...

m]] -

[[A 1I'En]]2

if m < n, m, n = 1, 2, rankby Lemma 2.1.1, (ii), so all quantities PROOF: All Al El2 **..*are of finite whichoccurin the above equation are defined. We want to prove (38) forX = Now
[[X +

[[X + y]]2 = [[X]]2 + [[y]]2

A11...IEn

Y
+

= AIEll

Em -

AIEll..

y]]2 =

<<X

Y, X =

Y>> <<X, X>> + <<Y. Y>> + <<X, Y>> + <<Y. X>>

[[X]]2 + [[Y]]2 + 2(<<X,

Y>>,

hence (38) is certainly consequenceof a (39) <<X, Y>> = 0. And since

n-I

We shall prove (39) forthe above X, Y.

AIE1I
{Em _

AIE1I

I.B

E (A IElII...EP p=m

1B A+

so we may prove (39) for X = Al1l I{n Y A-El1'-..Ep _ A-El'-..|Ep|Ep+ < n. withp < n, p + 1 Let (Xi, * , wrn)be a permutationof (1, * , n) with 7r. = p + 1. . n = AI Erl I.Iern-lee} AIEril .IEwrnlILEp+l Then Lemma 2.1.3 gives Al 1I Write B C, E for AIEr"I...IEwn-l, AlEl' 1IEP, EP+l, then we see: We need to prove (39) for X = BIE, Y = C - CIE only. By Definition2.1.1, BIE = = EBE + (I - E)B(I - E), C -Cl (IE)CE + EC(I - E). Hence we need to prove (39) only forthe following combinations X, Y: of

(40) (Y=

fiX = EBE (I - E)CE

or (I- E)B(I -E) or EC(I - E).

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

121

Now we have forthe various alternatives (40) of (41) fEither FX =X, FY = 0 for F = E XF =X, YF = 0 for F = F for or I-E, or I-E.

Owingto (41) we now have: Either <<X, Y>> = <<FX, Y>> = <<X, FY>> = 0, or <<X, Y>> = <<XF, Y>> = <<X, YF>> = 0. Hence (39) holdsin any case. Thus the proofis completed. beas in Lemma2.1.5. Put An= AE". En LEMMA2.1.6. Let A, E1, E2, for n = 1, 2, *. . Then Al, A2, - is a fundamental sequence. PROOF: Al, A2, - is a regularsequence: We must verifythe conditions (i)-(iii) in Definition 1.4.1. Ad (i): Obvious. Ad (ii): Immediateby repeatedapplicationof Lemma 2.1.1, (ii). Ad (iii): Immediateby Lemma 2.1.4. further condithe sequence: We must verify Al, A2, * is a fundamental tion of Definition1.4.2, that is (42)
mn-oo

lim [[Am - An]]2 = 0.

> Now Lemma 2.1.5 gives [[Am]]2 [[A .]]2form < n,

[[A1]]2 >

[[A2]]2 2

...

> 0.

Therefore [[An]]2exists. Hence limn_-., (43) But (44)

n]]2 [[Am- A ]]2 = I [[Am]]2- [[A I.
m,n-+00

_ lim i [[Am]]2 [[An]]2

.=

in Indeed: By symmetry m, n we need onlyto prove (44) form _ n, and then it followsfromLemma 2.1.5. Now (43), (44) give together(42). 2.1.2. Let A, El, E2, * be as in Lemma 2.1.5. Then there DEFINITION Lemma2.1.6 a uniqueA, so that existsby
(Al, A2, ***)
-

A,

where An = AIElll.

We shallwrite
A = AIE1IE21.
THEOREM
(i)
AIEl1E21I".

VI.

Let A, El, E2,X** be as in Lemma 2.1.5. Then we have:

.

is normed.

(ii)

AIB1I B21 - -

commutes withE1, E2,

122

J. V. NEUMANN

2.1.2. PROOF: Ad (i): Obvious by Definition En commutes For n > i A n = A IEIII . Ad (ii): Considera fixedi = 1, 2, = lim str,._oAn by with Ei by the Corollaryto Lemma 2.1.3. But A'ElIE2l commutesalso with Es. Definition 2.1.2, hence AIElIE21 to respect OR,cf. (1), p. 155, (with = E projection e 2 is either 0 or infinite ifevery 7.1.1).Definition infinite loc. cit. above) of finite (cf. terms: finite, Observe that the following rank (Definition1.2.1) normed(Definition1.4.6) are always to be understood however,is definedin Definition with respect to 'OR. Being purely infinite, 2.2.1 above forany ring2 c OR. But it has, of course,for V = OR the old being purely infinite((1), p. 172, Theorem VIII): That ORl meaning of ODR belongsto class (IIIJ). We prove now: if is infinite, and onlyif theonlynormed LEMMA2.2.1. A ring V C Oft purely = 0. A eisA Assume that the only normedA E 2 is A = 0. Apply PROOF: Sufficiency: this to projectionsE e V'. They must be = 0 or infinite. Hence ?, is purely infinite. A infinite. Considera normed e '. Then Necessity:Assumethat A'is purely A*A is also normedand also e 2 along with A. We now proceed as in the proofof Lemma 1.3.2, and obtain the spectral the of form A*A, in particular equations (6)
(7)

2.2.

DEFINITION

2.2.1.

A ring S C OR1 will be said to be "purely infinite"

(A*Af,g)

f
00 00

Xd(E(X)f, g),
12),

11 Af

112 =

fXd(lIl E(X)f

(8)

X < 0 implies E(X) = 0

of whereE(X), - c < X < + a, is a resolution unity. (Cf. loc. cit. above.) Considernow a Xo > 0. Form the bounded function
a(X) iX-?X

for X?>Xo = 0 otherwise by a(A*A) whichis characterized

We can formthe operatorB

(45)

(Bf, g)

=La(X)
00

00

d(E(X)fl g)

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

123

((6), pp. 202-205), and whichbelongsto , along withA*A ((6), ). 213, Theorem is 6--only the easy, suifficiency of thistheorem nieeded). Now B.A*A = par-t fl(A*A), where
A(X) = Xa(X) =otherwise

e) ((6), pp. 205-206, property on p. 205); hence (B .A*Af, g) = ((6), pp. 202-205), and so B A*A = I
I

3 ,(X) d(E(X)f, g)

((I -E(Xo))f,

g)

E(Xo).

B, A*A belong both to If and A*A is normed; hence B.A*A = I - E(Xo) belongsalso to !' and is also normed. So we have shown: (46)
A = 0.

X > 0 implies E(X)

=

I.
=

(8), (46) and (7) give togetherI Af 112

0, Af

0 for all f e So. Hence

This completesthe proof. an of LEMMA 2.2.2. Consider AbelianringdT C OR. Thereexistsa sequence part (Cf. (5), 401, lower projections E2, * * * e(Uwith (X = iR(E1,E2, ..). El, witheach other. of thepage.) Since LT is Abelian,theseE1, E2,I .. commute A rank (Definition A 2.1.2). ? We conSo we can form IEl I E21 ... forevery offinite siderCfand E1, E2, - * as given. We make thefollowing assumptions: infinite. Cf'(C (R) is purely (i) The ring R.X F(e finite projection OR) (ii) For every F }EIE21 | Es|=
PROOF:

implies F - 0.

ThenORis ofclass (IIIO). Let F(E OR) be a finiteprojection. Then we can formFIE1IE2*. .. is normed((i) in TheoremVI), and so in particulare OR. FurtherF EIIE21 more F El IE2 ... commuteswith El, E2, *- ((ii) in Theorem VI), hence with all of C = tR(E1, E2, * ) and so it is ECf'. Thus FIE1lE21 -OR ICT'.. Now F ElIE21... is normedand OR (C' is purelyinfinite (i), hence Lemma 2.2.1 by to - 0. And (ii) permits us therefore conclude that F = 0. gives F' ElE21 In otherwords: A projectionF e OR is either = 0 or infinite. Hence OR is of class (III.).The above Lemma 2.2.2 is the device by which we are going to establish
. ..

10We

could show thatAIlE1!21... dependsonlyon A and Cf(and not on the sequence

itself). We omit the proof, because this fact is immaterial for our further

El,

E2, ... purposes.

124

J. V. NEUMANN

that some of our examples 6X are of class (IIJo). proposeto go into it in this connection.
CHAPTER

shall apply it to rings (f which are -= It Lt, so-called maximum Abelian rings in OR1s. The general theory of such rings is of some interest, but we do not
III.
CONSTRUCTION OF THE RINGS

(Cf. Lemma 4.3.5.) We

'DR,'DR'

3.1. This chapterwill be devoted to the construction and investigation a of familyof examples of factors'DR in appropriateHilbert spaces A5. Some of these'D will be shownto be of class (JIII). More precisely:We shall succeed in determining class of each 911 of this family,and we shall see that all the classes (In)-(IIIo) occuramongthem. The examples which we shall considerare a generalization those of (1), of pp. 192-209, whichbelongedto the classes (In)-(IIc) We desire,however, to treat the intervening notion of (generalized) Lebesgue measure in a slightly different this part of our way than was done loc. cit. above. Furthermore, discussionwill have to be made on a broaderbasis than was necessarythere. For these reasonswe begin with a discussionof the properties (generalized) of in Lebesgue measure and integration an arbitrary space S. 3.2. DEFINITION 3.2.1. Let S be a fixed set. A system of subsets S will r of be calleda "Borel-system" it has the if following properties: (i) 0 (theempty e r. set) (ii) M eF impliesS - M e r. r (iii) M1I M2, -... r implym.
LEMMA

+ M2 +

3.2.1. For a Borel system in S we havefurther: r

(i)

(ii) M,Ne r imply M - N e r. (iii) M1, M2 ... erimply M1-M2-.

PROOF:

se r.

e r.

We prove these statementsin a somewhatchanged order:

S-

Ad (i): By (i), (ii) in Definition 3.2.1, since S = Ad (iii): By (ii), (iii) in Definition3.2.1, since
MIM2 - -=S-((S-M

0.
M2) +
-

) + (S

) N
=

Ad (ii): By (ii) Definition 3.2.1 and (iii) above, since M

M. (S

N).

DEFINITION 3.2.2. Let A be an arbitrary system subsets S. Then there of of existsa minimum Borel-system zD A in S," whichwill be denoted r(A). r by

11 The intersection of all Borel-systems r

in S.

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

125

DEFINITION 3.2.3. A Borel-system in S will be called "separable,"if there r A existsa system of subsets S withthefollowing of properties:

(i) r = r(A). x (ii) If x, y e S and if e M is equivalent y e M for all M e A, thenx = y. to or (iii) A is finite enumerably infinite.We can now defineour notion of (generalized)Lebesgue measure. (To be called r-measure, below.) cf. DEFINITION 3.2.4. Let a separableBorel-system be givenin S. A function r ,u(M) will be called a "r-measure"if it possessesthefollowing properties: (i) ,Z(M) is defined all M e r and onlythose. for > (ii) Thevaluesof/.(M) arerealnumbers 0 < + 00. (iii) Thereexistsa sequenceT('), T(2)* e r withT(') + suchthatall ,4(T(t)) < + so. (iv) If M1, M2,
A(Ml

T(2) +

S..

8,

e r and i $ j impliesMaiM
+ M2 + * X )-= A(Ml)

= 0 then
+ *

+ A(M2)

We shall always considermeasureswith /h(S) $ 0. DEFINITION 3.2.5. A complex valuedfunction f(x), defined all x e S, will for be called "r-measurable," thesets if (x; 9Rf(x)> a), (x; 3f(x) > a) are e r forevery real a.It is not necessaryto develop the properties the class of all r-measurable of in functions detail since they are the same and obtainedin preciselythe same manneras those of the class of all Lebesgue-measurable functions one real of variable. (Cf. any standardexpositionof that subject. For a systematic discussionofsuchfunction classesas ours,cf.e.g. (0), pp. 232-247. Our r-measurable function's are to be characterized the terminology cit. as follows: f(x) in loc. of Tf(x), Caf(x)are both functions class (r, *) or, whichis equivalent in this case, of class (r, r).) It may suffice observethat the following in to functions particularare r-measurable: (i) The characteristic function OM(x
{-0

oth sM of any M e r. erw

(ii) af(x),f(x) along withf(x), a being any complexconstant. (iii) f(x) + g(x),f(x)g(x), Max (f(x), g(x)), Min (f(x), g(x)) alongwithf(x),g(x). (iv) f(x) = limn-, fn(x) (if this limit exists for all x e S) along with fi(x),
f2(x), *
e

For the r-measurable functions f(x) we now define the notionof r, ju-integrability(with respectto the r-measure,!) and the numericalvalue of the r, ,Uintegral (47)
f

f(x) dox

(M e

r)

126

J. V. NEUMANN

of in the usual way. (Cf. any standardexp)osition Lebesgue-integration.The observationsof (1), p. 194, top of that page, apply to the presentsituation.) details. Let us mention There is again no need to enumeratethe well-known as this, however:For a general,complexvalued, f(x) we restrict, usual, (47) over M that is, where f(x) is even F, y-summable to the case where If(x) I dx to f(x) is restricted real however, where existsand is finite. In such situations, for we and _ 0 functions, shall consider(47) as meaningful all F-measurable in permitting thiscase the value + o also forthe integral. This f(x), expressly too convention agreeswiththe generalusage. Throughoutthe rest of this section,as well as in ??3.3-3.7 whichfollow,we assume that S, F y are given, and also that r is a separable Borel-system. v, may vary. whichwill be considered, Other 1'-measures Pt,v" and groupsAi, Hilbert space over S. We construct next a functional DEFINITION 3.2.6. Let !9s = tsar,, be the setof all (complex) valued F-measurablefunctions f(x) (x e S) witha finite iff(x)

i f(x) 12do x.

Consider g as identical f,

0. g(x), except an x-setof .-measure Define for

(fY,q)

= (,fS,g) r;. = ff(x) g(x) d x.

A, the 3.2.2. The space ?~sfulfills postulates B, C, E of (4), pp. 64-66. LEMMA (f, for and whichdefines g),s of (This includestheexistence finiteness theintegral Euclidean or a Hilbertspace. f, g e !)s.) Thus I~s is a finite-dimensional of PROOF: Existence and finiteness

f(x) g(x) dx: Literally as in (4),

p. 109. Ad A, B, E: Literallyas in (4), pp. 109, 111. in Ad C: Same as in (4), pp. 109-111, exceptthat the systemof neighborhoods whichoccursthere(Q is a metricspace whichplays the role of our S), is to be sets in S (all e r): T(t)T, i, j = 1, 2, ..., wherethe replacedby the following 2 T(l) 2)7 .. are the sets from(iii) in Definition3.2.4, and the T1 , T2, number applicationsofthe operations of are all sets whichobtainby any (finite) infinite basis or M - N M + N, M . N to the elementsof a finite enumerably A of F in the sense of Definitions 3.2.2, 3.2.3.It may be well to recall at this stage the examples a) and b) of (1), p. 193. given thereserve both for (iii) in Definition 3.2.4, and (The sets T(l), T, = F(A). F turnsout to be in A, F by A = (T(1), T ..2 - ), to construct the examplea) the systemof all sub-setsof S and in the exampleb) the system of all relativeBorel sets in S in the usual topologicalsense.) The example a), with a finiteset S = (xl, ... , x,) shows in particularthat i;s may actually Euclidean space. be a finite-dimensional of We conclude this section by proving the. "differentiation-theorem" (TheoremVII below). It would be possible to carryout Lebesgue-Nikodym

ON Ri1NGS OF OPEl{ATrORS,

III

127

most of what we want also withoutthis theorem, but such a procedurewould necessitatequalifications and restrictions the hypotheses the lemmas and in of whichfollow. theorems LEMMA 3.2.3. Considertwo F-measures v in S. Then we have: y, (i) If 4(M) = 0 implies v(M) = 0 thenthereexists a r-measurable function K(X) > 0, suchthat forall r-measurable (complex) functions and all setsM e f(x)

fM(x)

d, x =

If(X)K(X)

dx.

(This is meantto includethatif either side is defined and finite, thenbothare.) (ii) The K(X) of (i) is unique,up to x-setsof 4-measure 0. This is eventhecase to if (i) is restricted f(x) -1, M e F. (iii) The equivalence ,4(M) = 0 to v(M) = 0 is equivalent havingalways of to K(X) > 0 in (i), except for an x-setof 4-measure 0.
. Let T for 4: T") T and then forv: T ( T be the i, j = 1, 2, ** *, arranged as a sequence. They will then do for the ' ' F'-measure defined by

PROOF: Ad (i): Consider the T('), T(),

of (iii) in Definition 3.2.4 first

(48)

p(M) = ,(M) + V(M)

(M e r)

in the sense of (iii) in Definition3.2.4. The same is true for T('), T(2). if we define TW = T - (T?1 + + T 'l), i = 1, 2, . And these have the further property that i $ j impliesTo) T() = 0. Let us form
(49) L(f)

=
o00

fAx) dx
Since
=

for any f c As,rp.

(Observe: v in the integral, but p in Isr p!) If(x) 12dx _ and

1 dx

lf(x) 12dx

f If(x)
(l'(o))

dx = IIf 112

are both finite,the integralin (49) is (by Schwarz's well-known inequality) existing and finite, and even
I Li(f) I
=

Lf(x)

dx _

[L
C|

f(x)

12

d,x vl

12

x]

(0
(50)

I [(TL()))
i Li(-")

(C
(Ci =

| [ f| rp
[V(T"o))1*).

I < CiX||If I|sIS, p

128

J. V. NEUMANN

in Li(f) is by (49) a conjugatelinearfunctional As,r, and by (50) a continuous one. Hence a lemma of F. Riesz applies to it (cf. e.g. (4), p. 94, footnote 52): There existsa Kit E Br , such that Li(f) (K , f) that is
fT()

f(x) d, = ff(X) Ki(x) dx = ff(x)

K, (X)

dK + J ) ff

K,(X)

dx.

Considernow a r-measurable f(x) > 0 whichis = 0 forx 4 Too) and bounded in S. Then f e Isxr,, (because p(T(o))is finite!),and the above equation may be written

(51)

f,, f(X)(1 -

K,(x))

dx =

f(X) K'(x) dzx.

Since it does not matterin (51), what f(x) does forx 4 T(o we can drop the requirement f(x) = 0 forx 4 T(o). of Taking the real part of both sides of (51) replaces (sincef(x) is real) Ki(X) by RK'(X). Hence we can assume that K'(X) is real. Now put f(x) {O (
_

{=

forx e M otherwise The

=

firstwith M = M' = T(o) (x; K'(X) < 0), and then with M = T(). (x; K'(X) > 1). In both cases f(x) meets the requirements (51). of leftside of (51) becomes > 0 and _ 0 respectively, so we obtain and

Ki(X)

d x > 0,

x KW(X) do

? 0.

< 0 forall x e M' and K'(X) > 0 for all x e M"'; hence necessarily This also impliesv(M') = v(M') = 0. Hence we can in change K'(x) arbitrarily M' + M' withoutaffecting validity of (51). the = 0 forx e M + Mti. So we have We redefine K4(X)
,u(M'),= u(M") = 0.
K'(X)

But

(52)

0 _

K'(X)

<

(X

e T~o)

So the integrands both sides of (51) are ? 0. Therefore f(x) is merely on if r-measurable and > 0, we can put
fn (x)

{-

= f(x) forf(x) ? n 0 otherwise

replacef(x) by fn(x)in (51), and apply limnO: Then (51) forthe original f(x) results. In otherwords: (51) holds forall r-measurable f(x) > 0. (Of course thenboth sides of (51) may be infinite.) Now put Ki(x)
-K5(X)

Then (52) gives

Ki~(x)
>

(53)

(X

1()

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

129

f(x) in (51) by We can replace

-Ki(X)

f(X)

; then (51) becomes:

(54)

Lf

dv x) x

f(x)

Ki(X)

dx,
Ki(X)

f(x) _ 0. Now defineK(X) again for all F-measurable Then (53) gives i = 1, 2, . (55) And adding (54) over all i = 1, 2, (56) f(x) dV x
=
K (X)

forx ET")
(X ES).

gives ff(x) K(x) d x.

(complex)f(x). Apply (56) to if(x) I (which Considernow any F-measurable is _ 0): It shows that if either of If(x) I dox,

f(x) K(x)dx is finite,

ff(x)K(x)dcx thenbothare. That is (f(x) is complex!): If eitherof ff(x)dvx,

and finite, then both are. Combiningthis with the validityof (56) is defined for F-measurable f(x) ? 0 shows: (56) holds for all r-measurable (complex) and finite, f(x), thisbeingmeant to include,that ifeitherside of (56) is defined thenboth are. f= f(x) for x e M~1 ,M Er. Then (56) becomes (in the f'(x) Now define ~= 0 otherwise same sense as above) (57)
fAf(x) dvx =

ff(x)

K(X)

dox.

And (55), (57) completethe proofof (i). of Ad (ii): Assumethat K'(X), K"(X) both meet the requirements (i), withthe of (iii) in Definition 3.2.4 for made in (ii). ConsiderT('), T(2). restriction 1 f(x) and put M/,n = T(t). (X; K (X) < K"(X) < n). Considerthe function
',

and M = M$,n. Then we have v(M',i) = Since v(M$,,,) ' But

K"(X)

K'(X)

d,x

=
-

K'(X)

d,x.
=

we v(T(")) is finite, can infer > 0 forx e

<
,

' Put M'= n hence we have (M n)=O. in thenthisgives y(M') = 0. By symmetry = 0. And for we have similarly M" = (x; K'(X) > K'(X)) K'(X), K"(X) II(M") so forM = M' + M" = (x; K'(X) id K'(X)) again ,i(M) = 0. That is: K'(X) 0 except foran x-setof u-mneasure (namely: M). K"(X), Ad (iii): Sufficiency:Assume K(x) > 0, except for an x-set of 4-measure 0.
K'(X)

(K"(X)

K'(X))dgX

0.

Zin=

Mz

(X;

K'(X)

K "(X)),

v(M) = 0 implies

K(x)dcx = 0, and since K(X) > 0 forxe M (exceptforan

130

J. Ir. NEUMANN

x-set of /-measure0), so ,i(M) = 0. Hence p(M) = 0 and v(M) = 0 are equivalent. Necessity:Assumethatp(M) = 0 is equivalentto (4M)= 0. Put f(x) _OaM( {-= 1 for xE ill f(X) OMW = 0 otherwise M
=

(x;

K(X)

=0 ).

Then we obtain v(M) =

K(x)d,,x 0, henceM(M) = 0

(by the above assumption). So we have K(X) > 0, except for an x-set of ,umeasure 0 (namely: AI). 0!) of the 3.2.7. We denote unique (up to r-sets u-rneasure /\(x) DEFINITION of (i), (ii) in Lemma3.2.3 bydp (x).
THEOREM

VII.

in r-measure S. Let j1 be a fixed d,

Thentherelation

K(X) >_ 0 functions all between F-measurable correspondence a establishes one-to-one v, 0!) of (up tox-sets j,-measure on onehand,and all r-measures forwhich i(M) = 0 is relation impliesv(M) = 0, on theother. The inverse

v(M'1)
PROOF:.

K(X)

dx.

and uniquenessof this Given v(M), as describedabove, the existence 3.2.7. So was already stated in (i), (ii) in Lemma 3.2.3 and in Definition the we mustonlyconsider ease whereK(X), as describedabove, is given. .. of (iii) in Definition 3.2.4, and let T( T, Consider the ~ ~T, arrangedas a sequence. They will be the T(t). (x; K(X) < n), i, n = 1, 2, by defined thendo forthe F-measure
K(X)

(58)

v(M) =

K(X)

dox

(AI eP)

3.2.4. It is also clear by (58) that ,4(M) = 0 in the sense of (iii) in Definition d impliesv(M) = 0. Hence we can form (x). Put f(x) 1, thenwehave v(M) fd(x)d dm Hence by (ii) in Lemma3.2.3 d, (x)

dx=

f|

(x)ddgx. So (58) gives (ME r).

x=
-K(X),

fM(xxd~x

0. exceptforan x-setofM-measure

the with(58), completes proof. This, together

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

131

COROLLARY. (i)

W (x)

1.

d, (x) dp (x) _ dP (x) if pu(M) = 0 implies v(M) = 0, and v(M) = 0 implies d... dy d., p(M) = 0.

(ii)

PROOF:

of (i), (ii) are both immediateon the basis of the characterization the

d, (x) in (i), (ii) in Lemma 3.2.3. 3.3. Let S, rF,u be as in the precedingsection. We now describea certain betweenS and a group9. relationship properties: following DEFINITION 3.3.1. 9 is an S-groupif it has the aco, (i) 9 is a "group,"thatis, a "composition" an "inverse"aol and a "uinit"1 in properties: aredefined 9 withthese (a)-y = a(g3y), aa-1 = a-1a = 1 al = la a. "commutative.") but (So 9 is "associative," notnecessarily mappingofS on itself: one-to-one a (ii) Everya e 9 defines certain
x -xa (x,xa ES).

is 9, Thesemappings"represent" that
(xa)( = x(a3) (x E S, a, 3 e9).

infinite. (iii) 9 is finiteor enumerably x and that x >i xa1 is the One sees immediately(by (ii) above) that xl mappingto x >? Xa. inverse shall,as usual, denoteby Ma theset (xa; x E M) (M, Ma C S). Wre a DEFINITION 3.3.2. An S-group9 is an "S, r-group"if for every e 9 M E I' in the by Ma e r. Henceif piis a r-measure S, then ia,defined implies Ala(M) i(Ma)
is also a r-measure in S. DEFINITION 3.3.3. An S r-group 9 is an "S, r, /i-group" (tz a r-measure in S), iffor everya e 9 ,A(M) = 0 implies 1.(Ma) = 0. LEMMA 3.3.1. Let 9 be an S, F, i-group. Then we have: = 0 (that is: 1u(Ma) = 0) are equivalent. Hence we (i) 4(M) = 0 and ic(M)

can formden(x).
(ii) Each one of the following formulae holds, except for x-sets of si-measure 0: d, (x) > 0, d,' (x)
da

o (x)-1,

d,, (xa) dn (x)

dp

_
da

(x).

132

J. V. NEUMANN

of 0, up characterized, toan x-set 4-measure bythisproperty (iii) (ta (x) is uniquely

f(xa) do (x) d,,x =

ff(x) do .

in M function, e r, everything thesame senseas in (i) (f(x) is any F-measurable in Lemma 3.2.3). in PROOF: We prove these statements a somewhatchangedorder. Ad (i): pu(M) = 0 implies pu(Ma) = 0, and Ap(Ma) = 0 implies pu(Ma. as-) = 0,
p(M) = 0.

formula:Immediateby (i) above and (iii) in Lemma 3.2.3. Ad (ii), first up 3.2.7, do-(x) is characterized, to an x-setof to Ad (iii): According Definition

Hence p(M) = 0 is equivalent to p(Ma)

= 0, that is to A,,(M) = 0.

p-measure by 0, (59) ff(x) d.= fx)x(x)d,

M (f(x) L'-measurable, E r). So (59) becomes

(60) f|
Ma

Now obviously

f(x)dx

f(xa-')dox.

f(xa')

d,,x=

f f(x)

di,

(x) dx.

of Replacement M, f(x) by Mcai',f(xa) in (60) givesthedesiredformula. TheoremVII. after Coincideswith(i) in theCorollary Ad (ii), secondformula:
Ad (iii), third formula: Two applications of (iii) above show, that d-# (xa)

do

L` (x)
do

the of satisfies characterization do (x) by (iii) above. If a

DEFINITION
e

if W is DEFINITION 3.3.5. An S, r, pA-group "ergodic" it has thisproperty: a the of for If M e r is suchthat every e CP difference thesetsM, Ma (i.e. theset ,1(M) = 0 or (t - M) = 0. 0, (M + Ma) - (M . Ma)) has pl-measure theneither this in Cf. the comment (1), p. 195, bottomof the page, concerning notionof ergodicity. Vi following if LEMMA 3.3.2. An S, r, pu-group is ergodic and onlyif it has the a suchthat every e 9 f(xa) f(x) (except for function If f(x) is a F-measurable 0). for except an x-set pi-measure for of x-sets 0), f(x) a (constant!, ofp-measure then functions If PROOF: Sufficiency: f(x) runsonlyover characteristic
f(x) OM() property:

0. xa of for q is = 1 then = x holdsonly an x-set p-measure

3.3.4. An S.,F,-group 9 is "free"ifit has thisproperty:

0 otherwise

thenthis coincideswithDefinition 3.3.5.

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

133

Necessity:Since we may consider ?f(x), lf(x) insteadoff(x) we may amsulm(e

fAx) thatf(x) is real. And sincewe may consider1 +f(x)

instead off(x), we may

even assume that (61) -1 <f(x) < 1. used ill For any real a the set Ma = (x; f(x) < a) has clearlythe property 3.3.5; henceeither,4(M.) = 0 or ( - Ma) = 0. Let 2 be the set Definition b MaC Mb, of all a withA(Ma) = 0. By (61)-1 e , 14 ,andasfor a say so in this case b e ; impliesa e Z. Hence z possessesa least upper boulnd,
ao and ao
e

X, ao + - 2 forn = 1, 2,...
=

0, Mao+iin) have /h-measure and so has theirsum, the set (x f(x) $ ao). 0.That is: f(x) ao, exceptforan x-setof M-measure

and Hencethesets (x;f(x) < ao) = E'--1 Mao-1/n (x; f(x) > ao)

to ergodic,S, I, a-groupcorresponds what was Our presentnotionof a free, 12.1.5,but there (forS, s) in (1), page 195, Definition called an ergodicm-group that; the stronger requirement ,4(M) = js(Ma) replacedour presentrequirement 4(M) = 0 imply4(Ma) = 0. definition: the This situationmotivates following existsa 1'9 DEFINITION3.3.6. An S, F, u-group is "measurable"if therc properties: the neasurevwith following to (i) tt(M) = 0 is equivalent v(M) = 0. (ii) Alwaysv(M) = v(Ma). of We concludethissectionby provingtwo properties the above notions. 3.3.6, arc v of LEMMA 3.3.3. The properties theF-measure givenin Definition of to following properties its K(X) =d equivalent the 0: of for alwaysexcept x-sets Mi-measure
(i) K(X) > 0.

Theorem VII!), (x) (remember

(ii)

(K(x) K(Xa)

d, (x)

dT

PROOF: (i) is equivalent to (i) in Definition3.3.6: Coincides with (iii) in Lemma 3.2.3. 3.3.6: (ii) is equivalentto (ii) in Definition
(x)
K-(X)

henceclearlykv (x)(x) ill

K(xa). So (ii) in the Corollaryto TheoremVII gives (by evaluating two ways): (62)
K(X)

(X)

K(xa) Lda(.

134

J.

V.

NEUMANN

Now (ii) in Definition 3.3.6 means v = va, that is, by (i) in the Corollaryto 'Tlheorem VII `(x)
d
=

1. Hence (62) becomes the desired equation

K (X)

v LEMMA 3.3.4. Let li be antergodicS, r, ,-group. Then thc I'-measurc of I)cfinition 3.3.6 is uniquely determined, toa constant a up factor > 0. 1'IOOF: Let v', v" be twosuchI'-measures. Formtheir K(X)
=

*10

d" (x),

K(x)

Put f(x) All this, of course, holds with the exceptionof x-sets of ,u-measure Now Lemma 3.3.2 gives 0. same sense) witha constanta. Hence v'(M) = f(.r) a, K'(X) aK"(X) (ill the a (IV"(M), and clearly > 0.
K (X)/K'(Xa') K (X)/K"(x)

dZ

(.r), iin accordance with Lemma 3.3.3. Then (ii) in Lemma 3.3.3 gives and replacea by a-1, then we have: f(x) = f(xa).
=

K'(X)/K

(xa

),

K (X)/K

(X)

K'(xa1)/K"(xa').

3.4. DFIsrrioN 3.4.1. (i) Let 1' be theset ofall (complex-valued) functions thatSj is finiteor enumerI f(a) 12. (Remember f(a) (a E .ts)witha finite
LaE

ablyinfinite!) Define (f, g)

(ii) Let
$'
-

a f C,

2 f(a)g(a).

be theset of all (complex-valued) Rf(x, (x E S, a) functions a E VJ) a in are which r-measurable x forevery e ci and witha finite
:

Ea

K) Tf(x, a) I dyx. for YX(x,a) except an x-setof g-measure

Oforevery E (L. Define a

Consider ',Xas identical 'F(x, a) if ',

= ({f-,x))a s

sry ~~~~a f

J a) X(x, a) d, x. {f(x,
J

the LEMMA 3.4.1. (i) The spaces Do, D3 fulfill postulates B, C, E of (4), A, and pp. 64-66. (This includestheexistence finiteness thesums and integrals of dimensional Euclideanor which (f, define g)3, (f, XM)d.) Thus 'D, D arefinite Ililbertspaces. set (ii) Usingthecomplete, normalized, orthogonal ofall functions
soao (a)=

=1

0 otherwise |'

for

a=ao

ON RIN(,S

OF OPERATORS,

III

135

in $S and setting thecorrespondence up

tf(x, a)
(al, (7X2. *** II

< "f(X, &?),

k-f(Xj,2),

> a, Is

.-titerationrn so that theabovc a( 72 rUns ove of VJ,

1S i

2.4.1 'vith itso'norphic S ? s in thesensc of (1), p. 135, Definitiorn and Lernnma 2.4.1. we! the notation In whatfollows uset inoresymmetric

.f(x,,a)
PaROOF:

-'<

<f(x,

a);

a e

>.

in We prove these statement's a solnewhatchlanlgedorder. of S?3: 1ut f(&n) = an eutitner( , 2, Ad (i): Character In = 1, 2, - I 1, then our definitions ation of t3!),and f(a) coincide with the of originaldefinition a finitedimensional uc(lideanor a Hilbert space ((1), of ). 69, lowerlpart the page). Ad (ii): Immediate, by comparingour )efilnition 3.4.1 with (1), p. 135, 2.4.1 and Lemma 2.4.1. Definition what we showedabout vSW Ad (i): Characterof y Considering above, an(l from(ii) above, since 't is isomorphic to about 's in Lemma 3.2.2, thisfollows We are now in a positionto begin a systematic investigation of certain operand S8. atorsin 8s what follows, i will be a fixedS, F, ,u-group. We assume 3.5. Throughout now on throughout but not that it is from ??3.5-3.7,that cj is freeand ergodic, measurable. in We beginby constructions t, . LEMMA 3.5.1. Definethe operators: (i)
ip(x).

UgAf(X)

[!:a

Fdjgal

(x)] f(xa) foranya e6.

(ii) L,,(.)f(x) _ p(x)f(x) for any (complex-valued)F-measurable,boundedfunction These operatorsare bounded, Ua is evenunitary. PROOF: Ua is bounded and unitary: By (iii) in Lemma 3.3.1

fI Uaf(X)
Hence

12 dx

f f(xa)
p(x)

12da (x)d.x

I f(x) 12dx.

So fe !gsimplies Uafe .Ss

and IIUaf II = I f IIs. L,(2) is bounded: We have I Vo(x)I < C for all x c S and a suitable C > 0.

f L,,(x)f(x)

|dx

fI

2 I f(x) I2dx

< C2

If(x)

j d.x.

So f c '~s implies Lz,(,)f e ps I and

11Lp,()f

IIs <

II f I1I.

136
LEMMA 3.5.2.
(ii) (iii) Ua-1 Ucg =
=

J. V. NEUMANN

(i) U1 = 1.
= Ua.

U1 UUjo.

PROOF: We prove these statementsin a somewhatchanged order: Ad (i), (iii): Immediateby (ii) in Lemma 3.3.1. so And since U. is unitary, U =' U Ad (ii): (i), (iii) above give Ua-i = Ui'. LEMMA 3.5.3. Let 2 be thesetof all operators L,(.) from(ii) in Lemma3.5.1. Then2 is a ring, and ? = t'. ?' is necessarily ringit suffices proveS -2'. As LS(x)L,(z)= to a PROOF: As also with every L*(2). As L*(x) = L6x, so Lr,(x) yso Lp(,^4(x, L,,(,) commutes witheveryL+(2). Thus L,,(,)e 2', thatis, 2 C 2'. So we mustonly commutes prove S' C 2. an Consider therefore A e 2'. Then A commuteswith every L,(2,, that is ALV(C)f = L,,(c)Af. That is (63) A (sp(x)f(x)) (p(x)Af(x).

The assumptions are: so(x), f(x) r-measurable, ,o(x) bounded,

f(x)

I2d#x

finite. (63), as well as all subsequent relationsin this proof,holds with the 0. exceptionof an x-setof A-measure 3.2.4; we can replace themby Considerthe T(') T(2) ... of (iii) in Definition that i 5 j impliesT(i), T()
T ()
...

where T(i) = T(
-

0.

Define

(T(1) + *

+ T(t-)), and then we have also

Then (64)

ei(x)

OT(t)(X) 0

forXe = O otherwise0

and so we can put f(x) c-(x) ei(x) 2dx = i.(T(')) is finite, A(sp(x)e,(x)) (Ae,(x))jp(x).

in (63).

We obtain: As ei(x) is bounded, we can also put So(x) - ei(x) in (64), and so we obtain A (e,(x)) (Aei(x))ei(x) that is:
(65) Aei(x) 0 for z 4 T(i)
.

Now define p(x) = Aei(x) forx e T('), i = 1, 2, * .

Then (65) means

(66) (67) (68)

Ae;(x)_=p(x)ej(x), A(jp(x)ej(x)) _p(x)(p(x)ej(x).

,

and consequently(64) becomes:

Summing (67) over i = 1, *

n, and writingf(x) for 50(X) E' p(x)f(x),

+ T

ei(x), we obtain

Af(x)

iff(x) is bounded and = 0 for x 4 T(1) + *

for any n = 1, 2, ...

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

1.37

lp(x) i > C + 1, x e T(') +

A is bounded; so I Af 11s

C.1I IlI fora f

l(X) {_

suitable C > 0. Put M, = (x; We may use + T(n)) n = 1, 2,

1 for xe M 0 therwise

f(x) _
in (68).
A

Then we have:
= ~112

I AO1n(x)

12dAx

I p(x)

12d, x

f
I2dx

(C

1)2dyx

(C

1)2

(M,)

11OM,, So II AOm. IIs

|MA(x)

bi~~~~~~~n

cx di

= CII Om.IIsgives u(Mn) = 0. ConsequentlyforM = E (x; I p(x) I > C + 1) also A(M) = 0. Hence we have (withtheusual exception)

(69)

p(x) I _ C + 1.

So p(x) is bounded,and we may form L,(,) . And (68) becomes: (70) Af(x) Lp(z)f(x) Indense set in bs. forall f(x) of (68). But thesef(x) forman everywhere deed, if any f e S~s is given,then define
e

( \f{=f(x)
= O

otherwise

for If(x)I

<

n, x e T

+ *.+

Tn

Then all fn(x), n = 1, 2, * , satisfy the requirements stated after (68), and IA - f 118 = 0 clearly IiMn-.1 As A, L.(,) are both bounded, this means that (70) extends by continuity to all f e 1~s. Hence A = L,(x e S. So we have established 2' C ? too, thus completing the proof. a LEMMA 3.5.4. L,p(.)= Li(,)Ua holdsif and onlyif either = 1, w(x)-_(x)

0), of for (except an x-set si-measure or a $ 1, j(x) --(x) 0). of,i-measure Obvious. PROOF: Sufficiency: Ua. That is Necessity: Assume L,0(,) = L#(x)
(71) p(xPfAX) -+(z) Wdy()

0_ (except an x-set for

f(xat),

whenever

f(X) 12 d,,x is finite, (71), as well as all subsequent relations in this

0. proof,holds with the exception of an x-set of M-measure

138 Considerthe ""),

f(X)

J. V.

NEUMANN

(2),.

of (iii) in Definition 3.2.4. We may put

+T(n)(X)

OTM('+.

f=
=

0 otherwise

for

XET

in (71), since m(T(') +

+ T(n))

is finite.
[

Then (71) implies

(72)

w(A) --(x)

W(x)]

A Ad suinning overn =1, 2, thosex forwhich xa e 7T" + * + x, for gives (72) forall x. (72) settlesthe case a = 1, owingto (ii) in Lemma 3.3.1. Assumetherefore $ 1. Substituting a #(x)from(72) into ( 71) gives cp(x)f(x) -(x)f(xa), thatis

('73)

fi

(x) 12 f(x)

f(xa) 12 d.x

0.
=

by (iii) eod. We may put

f(x)
f()

Now consider the systema of Definition 3.2.3.

We have A A'i.M

(Ml

1112, *2)

VT(%),i(x\

~~~~=

= 0

for xeT

otherwise

i, j = 1, 2,

since jA(T7 .Mj) -A(T'(i))

I= = f

is finite. Now clearly

*.1j1

j\X -gxa

O if neitheror both x, xa E T()

1 otherwise

and the latter x-set is

Kii
=

A ((7T(i') M)

(T('i

Mj)a')

((7(i)

MA)) (T(')

-.)

Hence (73) becomes (74)

f l(x)I2d',x = 0.
x Consequently e K. So we see

je

Considernow K = Fi Kij. If x = xa, then never x e Kij, and hence $ xa thenwe knowfrom(ii) in Definition not x e K. If x 3.2.3 that forsomle
1, 2, . The one e M, is also one, but not the other of x, xa is e Mj. forsome i = 1, 2, ... , hence one, but not the other of x, xa is e 7'" . Mi. TGi K = (x; x $ xa).

This meansx e Ki,.

(75)

and as a $ 1, so we have ly Definition Since .3 is free, 3.3.4, x $ xa, exceptfor 0. an x-setof ;A-mneasure That is
(76) ,A(S
-

K) = 0.

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

139 0, and so,

Summingover i, j = 1, 2, by (76) (77)

fi(x)

converts(74) into That is so(X)

fI$(x) I2dyx=

'2dx = 0.

0.

So we have fora * 1 by (72), (77), Sp(x) -i(x) 0, and the proofis completed. LEMMA 3.5.5. Let ?? be as in Lemma 3.5.3, and let 6t( be theset of all U,, a e 9. Then t' 611'= (aI) (a any complexnumber). , so aIe E. '6t', PROOF: alI belongs obviously to 611',and as aI = La. to prove 2. 1t' c (aI). 611'D (aI). So we need only 2.t so A Assume therefore E !t' ql, Then A E 611' foreverya E W UaA = AUa, A E 8A = UaAUA' - A. Also L-() I, UaAU'f = Lo(,a) , hence Lp(xa) s(x), except for an x-set of By Lemma 3.5.4 this means (p(xa) L,,(,,) 0. Since t3 is ergodic,this impliesby Lemma 3.3.2 that <0(x) = a ,u-measure La = al. Thus 0. (constant!) exceptforan x-set of g-measure Hence A the proof. t' .6l c (aI), completing
=

in 3.6. We now pass to constructions tS,. LEMMA 3.6.1. Define theoperators

(i)
(ii)

a) Uot( (x)a f(x, )

Viao

f(X, a)

f(xao ,aao) d ? LdA ~ 1F(x, a)J ao

forany ao E

(iii) W'f(x,a) a) (iv) Lx(I)<f(x,

[dd

(x)] 'T(xa', a').

for any bounded and F-measurable

for a) (V) M<,(I)<F(X,_ sp(sxa')Lf(x, <p(x) whichis defined all x e S. ax)

sp(x),F(x,a)

W are evenunitary. are These operators bounded,UaTo V, PROOF: UaCoVaO, W are bounded and unitary: By (iii) in Lemma 3.3.1

a eG

f
s
|

r;'f(X,

a)

12d

aefo)I2 =
E

f f(xao, 12 (x) aao) dA?

| j'f(x,aa)
2dysx
12 -

d.x

e af (8

Z s a) 2d x, a e( JIF(x;

and

IiWTf(x,a) I2d x = Z
=

fI (ra-'. a-1)
?|I
Sr

d
l-dpX

(x) d,,x

1 fS(srcQ.1)
et 8

? Z
f

| -f1#(Xa) 12d a.
S

140 And obviously

J. V. NEUMANN

af

f
S I
_

7ao2F0(x s)I2daIx

E
aea

I f(X7a-1a)I'dpx =f(x,
and
1Uao|=

I
|ao

a) 12dx.
t
=

So
_

Je tP

W e implies Uco {# V. F0f7 fE ,

are bounded: We have j so(x) I < C forall x e S and a suitable C > 0. Hence
L,,(2), M,,()

ated

a) L|4y(c)ff(x,l2dx =

aeg

fI(x)

12(

a) 192dx
< C2
Y(a)

Ce 12dyx,

t et

and

IM"(,)(X, EI a eW 8a

a)

12dx =

e3

f o(xa')

12

a) Y(x, I2d.x
?C-

fi(xa)12dpx. ? C

i, 1 So 5YetO implies.L,,(c)f, MRWyFe 'f, and I x MJcIFIF, LEMMA3.6.2. (i) U1 = I. (i)' V1 = I. = (ii) Ua l = UTao Uao (ii)' Va 1 = 7ao = fa0 UaoUgo = V (iii) VVTao = Va00o (iii) aoo .
(iv)
(V)

11 I119.

W =

W-=
=

W*
V9aO

(vi) WL,,(X)W =l(v) in PROOF: We prove these statements a somewhatchanged order: W2. One verifies immediately: Ad (iv): We determine
W2I(X, a) Ld;
=

WULaOW

(x) d-- (xa-1) di

a). {F(x,
)

By (ii) in Lemma3.3.1 (witha-', (x)

ca) 1, s W2Y(, a s0

a in place of a, ,) 7
that is: W2 = HenceWT
I.

(x)

(x

Y(x,a),

-= W?. = Ad (v): Owing to (iv) we may as well prove WVVGOW

-' and sinceT is unitary, so

(x) dWd0
)

U a.

Now

WVaOWJ(X,

a)

(xa)]

9(xao , aao).

By (iii) in Lemma 3.3.1

(with a-1, aao in place of a,

ON RINGS

OF OPEtUATORS,
a

III

141

d (x)

d cl

(Xa ')

d"'o so TWVaW(x, (x),

dm

a)

_[a

(x)]

$(xao, aao)

Ua0T(XI a),

that is: WVaoW = Ua0. Ad (vi): Owingto (iv) we may as well prove WL,(z) = MR0(I)W. This, however, is obviously true, since WLP(.)J(x, a), MR,(I)WiF(x, are both a) Ad (i)', (iii)': Obvious. Ad (ii)': (i)', (iii)' above give Vf-l
V-1-=V~*

V-.

And since Vas is unitary,so

Ad (i)-(iii): Considering (iv), (v) above, theyresultfrom(i)'-(iii)' above, respectively. and N thesetofall Vao LEMMA 3.6.3. Let g be thesetof all Uao and all L), A and all M,,W. (Cf. Lemma 3.6.1.) Formfor each boundedoperator in S! 2.4.2: A - <Aa,,g>, a, A et from (1), p. 136, Definition the decomposition in !09 A whereevery ag -isa boundedoperator As. (Cf. the decomposition = we there, replacethe indices ts = 0 !from Lemma 3.4.1. As described s set orthogonal normalized, 1, 2, ... by indices a, 3 E9, as alreadythecomplete, in thisway.) Then we have: ao e N,cf. loc. cit. above, tSNhas beenindexed (Pao, bounded of function x for Here x,(x) mustbe a (complexvalued) F-measurable, every e A. y A a We do notdetermine whichsystems (i) for x,(x), y e (W, bounded satisfying or is (ii) actuallyexist. This, however, true: 4' fromall A 5 by (i), and thoseobtained (iii) The systems x,(x), y e 9, obtained fromall A -g' by (ii), are identical. (iv) An A, e 5' and an A2 e g,' whichhave the same x,(x), 7 e ', by (i) or (ii) automorphism 2? WY If respectively, obtainfrom each otherby the involutory of 19. of Rememberthe definition the Aa,, ((1), p. 136, Definition2.4.2, = < Aa' f(); A ft>; using our present notations): A <f(x)epa'(a); a E a by a, ( so that now x e S and 3 e 9 are the variables, that is (ifwe replace a', Then the definitions Ua,, of and a e $3is a parameter):Af(x)(pa((3) = Aa,(x).
PROOF:
-

(i) A e5' if and only if Aag = LXajg-1(xv). (ii) A e g' if and onlyif Aa,0 = Lxa-1i()UV-Ia.

Lso(p), W give: If A
(78)

<Aa,,,,>, a, ( eH, then WA W

LIW)A
'

UlAUao

,ao <UCJ2Aaa- 1l

Uao>,

a, (3 E t3,

(79) (80) (81)

<Ulal,-0>

a c-b e A a, (3 e a, (3 e h.

ALf(z)

~ <AaJ3L<p(z)>,

<Lo(x)Aag>,

142

J. V. NEUMANN

We now proceed to prove the statements(i)-(iv) in a somewhat changed order: _ Ad (i): A e g' means that A commuteswith all L.(), L*(-) Ua0, C . Uy -L = Ula- I it suffices consider Lp(x),UP(X). That is = L the to Since ,, (82) (83) Lv(j)A = jLv(x)
U-lAUao
=

A.
',

(82) means owing to (80), (81), that all Aa,, O A ao 1e A. SO

(84) cua,(X)

that is, by Lemma 3.5.3,

Aas

Lw.,a(x) y

of bounded function x. a (complex-valued)F-measurable, (83) means, owingto (78), that = Aa,# UalAaao1,ga61Ua0 that is

(85)

= it (84) into (85) transforms into Lwa,,(x) Lwaai,ra5j(xa-1) Substituting

(86)

Wcao(x) -

0. exceptforan x-setof .t-measure If we put ao = 3,and writex,(x) forw7,j(x),then (86) specializesto

(87)
Wajt(X)

-0W-1),

0. exceptforan x-setof ,u-measure Again (87) obviouslyimplies(86). So A e 5' is equivalent to (84), (87), that is, to
(88) Aca,g=
LXa-01 tx0B)

This completesthe proofof (i). of Em Willis an automorphism St, since Ad (ii), (iv): Since W is unitary, is W = W-, W2 = I (by (iv) in Lemma 3.6.2), this automorphism involutory. into the operator WAW. carries an operator A in This automorphism it carries Uao, L4(x) into VTa MS,(X)(by (iv)-(vi) in Lemma 3.6.2), and Hence so 5 into g. Hence it carriesg' into g'. So the general A2 Eg' obtains by forming = WA1W' for the general A2 WA1W. Now A1E '. Or (by (iv) in Lemma 3.6.2) equivalentlyby forming (88) gives the Aai of the generalA1 e 5', hence (79) permitsus to findthe Aar, of the generalA2 g'. We obtain in thisway forthe latterAaO
(89) Aax = Us'Lx,-&1(xft)Ua.

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

143

But since Use = U0U# 1a

(90)

Lxa-l,(x#)Up =

, UgLxa.--fi(x)(89) can also be written

Aa,0 = Lx,-1 #(x)U--l a

This completesthe proofof (ii). of fi W'J claimed by (iv). And we have also establishedall properties J Ad (iii): Immediate by (iv). We have also seen (in the proofof (ii), (iv) above), that 1F iWf REMARK: carries S into g. And since it is involutory(cf. (iv) above), it also carries g into g. 3.6.1. (i) We denote the set of all systems x7(x), 'y e X, which DEFINITION
occur in (i) or in (ii) in Lemma 3.6.3 (both are the same, cf. (iii) eod.) by Xo . (ii) We denote the relation between an A e 5' or an A e g' and a systemx,(x), in ,ye 9, from Xo, as describedin (i) or in (ii) in Lemma 3.6.3, respectively, both cases by A
LEMMA

{xy(x);7'l}.

J' = 5'. A(S) .k(1) J 5 automorphism Hi W7Fof St interchanges the involutory PROOF: Since and I (cf. (iv) in Lemma 3.6.3 and the remarkafterthis lemma), and conseto g', quentlyalso 9k(5), g' and A?(gS), it suffices prove Rk(5)= g'. for immediately, A = Uao Proofof AR(S) C g': One verifies 3.6.4.
-

that

Aa,`

a U0 otherwise

X and

for A

Lp() that

for A =0 Lp,(x) a = Aabo= 0 otherwise wher x7() w

=1

So we have A a,# = LX,-(x)UOla

=

fory = ao-oX7x otherwise

-0

(p(x) fory = 1

otherwise'

respectively. So A e g' by (ii) in Lemma 3.6.3. We have thus proved A C J'. Since g' is a ring,this impliesAR(g) C g'. Proof of 9I(4) D g': Consider any A e g', B e g', then we have by Lemma
3.6.3, Aag

then (1), pp. 136-137, (iv) in Lemma 2.4.3, gives:

Ca,0 =
E

Lxa#-0l(x1-) I Bag

= Lwal_0j(x)U0g1a. =

Put C

AR, D

BA,

A.(,gBa,7

LxY0#l(x-1)LWa-lY(x)

Uy-a

EI
EI
-Y 6 9

LXyft-1(X#O1)Wa-ly(X)

Ue-Y1a

LXay-.

1(x0-

1).O-.I(x)

U7

144

J. v. NEUMANN

(we replace(d summatiotn the index y by ay71), aind

D

a,

1
'Y fe,

=E B-y,; AM" =

E
en

]JCO Ip1(l)Ug-,_ybx.,_(xzy-,)

=
=

I l(x) Lxa

(z3- i) Uv3 I lI .Y

E
'Y e 't

LXal(xi-1)a?

(z)

UO-i1-

X .,_1~

1 (:2rXg- (z) Ue )

(we replaced the summationindex y by #3y). Remembering that the orderof summation does not matter in the above E d (cf. loc. cit. above), we see from
= the above equation that Cr Ad D,,,,ofor all a, ,3 e Wi. That is: C = D, or in As I e g (I = U'), so
LR(.)

otherwords: A B = BA. Since 5' is a ring,and A E 5' arbitrary, this means that B E 5". And as B E J' was arbitrary, we have g' C g". so A' c A(S). The proofis therebycompleted.
= .4" by (5), p. 397, Theorem 7. Hence we have

LEMMA 3.6.5. Put O)R = ,R(4) = a'. Then Ot' = @R((cf) - $1',and OR 9R' are factors (in the sense of (1), p. 138, Definition 3.1.2). PROOF: Clearly'DR' = R2(#)' = g', thisand Lemma 3.6.4 proveall our equa-

A e A -ORt'impliesA = a4.

tions. It remains for us to prove that p1, AR' are factors,that is that Consideran A E OR.O'. 3.6.3 gives that
(91)

Then A E '
Acat, =

g' and A E OR' = g', henceLemma

Lxa-l(x-1)

and
(92) A a, = Lwe_ l(z)Up
1a

simultaneously. Comparing(91), (92), and using Lemma 3.5.4 gives: For Wla 5$ 1, that is a 5$ 3: x,,#-t(xF'1) = wa-i#(x) 0, except for an x-set of M-measure That is: In this case (91) givesAaf = 0. 0. For 13-a = 1, thatis a = j3: xi(x0-3) =w(x), exceptforan x-setof M-measure 0. Comparingherein,3 = 1 with the general 3 E9 gives x,(x#-3)=-xl(x), withthe same exceptions. Since P is ergodic, thisgives, by Lemma 3.3.2 (with xi(), -1 in place of f(x), a): Xi(x) a, except for an x-set of r-measure0. Hence (91) gives A,,,, = La = aL. So we see:
A ,O= aI for a = al= otherwise 0

that is: A = aL. Thus the proofis completed.

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

145

3.7. We derivenow the basic rulesof algebraical computation the factors in O1)R,, 0'.. LEMMA 3.7.1. Bothin R11 in .OnR' the and following rules of comtputation hold: e e e I If A {ti.(x); fy.} (all ofthem O, {xY(x); ye E, B {It(x); fy(JI, or all of theme OR'!), thenwe have: (i) If C = aA, then71.y(x) axy(x). (ii) If C = A*, then-qy(x) xy-i(xr ) (iii) If C = A + B, then-q,(x) xy(x) + tz(x). (iv) If C = AB, then th(x) 3 ae The converges X,((X)ya-1(Xa1). "en mesure" theprecise (cf. at description thisnotion theend oftheproof),irreof spective theorder whichthea e 9 are gonethrough. in of PROOF: Considering(iv) in Lemma 3.6.3, it suffices considerthe case to whereA, B, C e ODR. We prove the statements (i)--(iv) forthis case in a somewhat changedorder: Ad (i), (iii): Immediateby (i), (iii) in (1), pp. 136-137, Lemma 2.4.3. Ad (ii): This follows from(ii), loc. cit. above, by the following consideration:
Eag

is t,( X-)(SY e Ad (iv): Apply (iv), loc. cit. above. We have C,#
Eys = Ay,#Bcty

Cad = Ln,,_i(z#-I) Ca,

= A;.a =

LX#._l(xa-1)

?71-1(x1-1) =

Xpa-i(xa-1),

that

Cam =
in

= have tta91(@fl)t Ly7zl(yB-x1)a-,l(Zy-1). in place of y, a this becomes:

the sense of strongconvergence, of irrespective the orderof the y e W. So we

Putting ,3=1

Eze

LX^ -l(x4-)LLaYl(z1-l)

?^ye

Lxyp- (xp- l) tar-I(x-i)

and writing a, -y

(93)

L,.,(X) =

Lxa(z)t.alr(xa-I)

in the sense of strongconvergence, of irrespective the orderof the a et. and form Considernow an M e r witha finite ,p(M),
EM(x)

{
n

0=

= 1 forx eM
a2, a**

otherwise'

Then OME Cs

, and so (93) implies: If al , lim L7y(,) - E GM

is an enumeration X, then of
2

a Lxb-i(x)t

a 7')OM

=0.

That is lim
n boo

] f8(X)Om (X)
.Si=l n -oo

- E2

xai(x

Oz'x 1)OM(x) dx )
2

0,

(94)

lim

x(x) () ~

(xat1) = 0 a()t-y 1 djx

146

J.

v.

NEUMANN

So we have forevery e > 0 and M e 1' with a finite ,A(M),owingto (94): (95)
lim
A ((x;71(x)
-

Xa (x)tta'(x&a')

> e)

That is: j X= xai(x)tzas1(x&a7') converges "en mesure" to q(x). As a&, was an arbitrary enumeration I this proves (iv). (Of course,if $ of * sum E the are considerations unnecessary, finite the convergence is finite, being simplyequal to q,(x).)We sum up the resultsobtainedso far. in Borel-system S (DefiniLet S be a fixedset,r a separable THEOREM VIII. 3.2.4) and 9 an S, F, u-group in tions3.2.1, 3.2.3), A,a r-measure S (Definition infinite), or finite enumerably 3.3.1-3.3.3; hence9 is, in particular, (Definitions 3.3.4, 3.3.5). Form the unitary(finite whichis free and ergodic(Definitions 3.2.6, 3.4.1). Euclidean or Hilbert)spaces 1ds, 1Dq,1Dq (Definitions dimensional
a2,

UT In St formtheoperators 2,VY , W. 4 ,MI ROW(Lemma 3.6.1). Let g be . Thenwe have: thesetof all Ua0 L,(x) and g thesetof all V,, , ,,,
r

A,(g) = (' is a ring,its ' is OR' = %(,IJ)='.

1Y>? WTY an involutory is 5, of S automorphism SAt whichinterchanges Ak(g),5', A g', 'a1 and g, Jk(g), OR'. OR, 'DR' are factors. The generalelement e 'DR or { x,(x); 'ye ' } (Definition A A e OR' has a representation 3.6.1), forwhichthe are rules of algebraicalcomputation known(Lemma 3.7.1). a of PROOF: This is merely restatement the essentialresultsofvariousDefiniin tions and Lemmas in ??3.2-3.7. Besides those mentioned the text,cf. also (i), Lemmas 3.6.4, 3.6.5, (iv) in Lemma 3.6.3, and finally (ii) in Lemma 3.6.3.The resultsand notionsenumeratedin Theorem VIII will be made use of to what follows,withoutbeing referred explicitly. throughout We concludethis sectionby two lemmata on certainspecial operatorsin OR and 6n)k'. (All -relationsin both of them are to be understoodto hold with 0 the exceptionof x-setsof Au-measureonly.) 3.7.2. AssumeA em or 9)R',A LEMMA % Ix,(x); -ye }. Then we have: if (i) A is Hermitean and onlyif x,(x)- X-l(X-Y-') forall -ye A. This implies thatxi(x) is real. then (ii) If A is definite, xl(x) > 0. A and (iii) If A is definite xi(x) 0, then = 0. 'f W{F O1, 'Dt' (cf. in particular of the isomorphism PROOF: Considering to (iv) in Lemma 3.6.3), it suffices considerthe case A e 91t'. A Hermiteanmeans Ad (i): A - {x_(x); - e }, A* txi-(xFy-'); - e}. A = A*, that is x,(x) -x,-(x-y'). For ey = 1 this becomes xi(x) - Xl(x), so Xi(x) must be real.

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

147

Ad (ii): Consideran f e

ts

and define f(x) fora = 1 0 otherwise1 0

7Fx)~= 9(xy ca) Then ef

and as A is definite, easilythat (A0, f)O > O. Now one verifies

=

(AR,i
(96) If M
e

fxi(x) \f(x) I2dox. So we see:

fxi(x)

If(x) 12d,x

> 0 forevery f e ts.

P, /(M) finite, can put we

1 for eM x f~x) O~x) {-O= otherwise ' A~)-Xz)

thenf e
(97)
'8,}

and (96) becomes

Xi(x) dyx ? 0.

* * of (iii) in DefiniNow xi(x) is real by (i) above. Considerthe T"), tion 3.2.4, and put M = (x; xl(x) < 0) . T(t). Then 4(M) ? 4(T(t)), hence it is finite, (97) holds. And as xi(x) < 0 forall x E M, so 4(M) = 0. Thus so xi(x) > 0 forall x E T(') (exceptionsas above!). Summingover i = 1, 2, gives xl(x) > 0, unrestrictedly. Define Ad (iii): Consideran ao e W3, $ 1, and two f, g e 's. ao

a) >F(x,

r=f(X)
'

fora 1 = g(x) fora =ao = 0 otherwise > O. Now one verifies easily,con-

Then fe Sl and, as A is definite, (AfSJ sidering x0(x)-e that (98) (At ~i

dx xao(x)f(x)g(x) +

xa-

(Xao )g(x)f(x)d,(x).

Now by (i), xao(X) =- xO-1(xa-1), so the second term in (98) is the complex one. Hence (98) becomes conjugate of the first (99) (ASF,iF)t
=

29

Xa(X)f(x)g(x) dox.

By (99), (AM,Jtt > 0 states that (100)

dyx> Xao(X)f(X)9(i)

0.

148

J. V. NEUMANN

we If M e I', A(M) finite, can put

Xf)= 1 forx E M
=

0 otherwise

q(x)

{:

-sgn xi(x) forx e M12

otherwise

thelnf, E s and (100) becomes g

(101)

I X(x)

d;,x ? 0.

0 for all x E M (exceptionsas above!). Now with the 'Al', Thus xa.(x) . . 3.2.4 we may put M = T(t) and sum over i = 17(2) of (iii) in Definition 1, 2, *.; this gives xa0(x) --0 unrestrictedly. 0 fora $ 1. For a = 1 it holdsby assumption. Thus So we have xa(x)

A = O.-

only,but the automorphism whichfollowwill be made for91O The statements in SO (cf.in particular(iv) in Lemma 3.6.3) extendsthemimmediately 'ff? WS to DIV'too. thesetofall Lp(x)by S. DEFINITION 3.7.1. (i) We denote {_ M 7 Om,(x) (ii) For every Fr put E(M) = LxM(z) where
LEMMA

oMtherwis

3.7.3. (i) 2 is an Abelianringc 'OR,we have

' is clearly a ring, 2 .) = 6X A': Since OR PROOF: Ad (i): It sufficesto prove it proves that Si is also a ring,and implies2 c Olt,and also 2 C A', that is,

withtheE(M). in (ii) The projections 2 coincide

mutes with every Lp(x), and L4(x) = L, u 2 c OR '.

that 2 is Abelian. eE Proofof S C OR-It': LTV(X) 5 c 9k(S)

'DR,so 2 C OR. EveryLp(x)comhence it is E2', so i' C 2'. Hence

A'. Since A E OR, so A Ak': Consideran A E 'DR. Proofof 2 D OR {x,(x); witheveryL,(x). Now L,,(x){<p(x)b; -y E S3. Since A E A', so A commutes 'ye}, where
= 1 forty = 1 = 0 otherwise| jaI
for
for
a 54 0

12For any complex a sgn a a sgn a = I al.

[=a

__0

So always

sgn a

?1

and

for a=O

ON RI.NGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

149 y e }.
E

So

L,()

{P(x)x,(x);

y E q},

AL<(z)

{p(x_ ')x,(a);

That is

(102) Put

f(X)xW( -(XT))x

(X).

(P(X)-

OMW

O (X)

-= 1 for x EM
=

0 otherwise

for an M (103)

F, then (102) becomes XY(x) 0 for x EM, X'yJ 4OM, or

x'-y' EM, x OM.

Now let M run over all elements of the finite or enumerably infinitesystem A in Definition 3.2.3; owing to (ii) eod. (103) becomes, if we sum over all M EA: (104) x7(x) 0 if x'zea - x that is, if x x'y. Now if y X 1, then since 9 is free, this means that (104) holds without any furtherqualifications. So x,(x) --xi(x)67 (a, as (see above), and thereforeA E Ad. above), and hence A = LX1(X)

. Thus we have shown that m)R?' c V?,and thereby completed the proof. E ? is a projection, means this: A = Lp(x) and A =A* Ad (ii): That an A x), o(x)-= A = A= But A* = L(,(x) , AZ = L (X)2 so it means (p(x) That is: sp(x) -0, 1. But these sp(x) are precisely the
o(x)-=
M(x)

{=1

for xe

MI
for all M
E

for all M

F, and so the A are the LomCx) = E(M)

P.

CHAPTER

IV.

DETERMINATION

OF THE CLASSES

OF

9R1, n)R'
or not. (Cf.

4.1. The essential distinction which has to be made when determining the
classes of 91, Y)R'/ is whether the 8, F, it-group
r3

is measurable

Definition 3.3.6.) Consider firstthe case when .) is measurable. This means that a F-measure v as described in Definition 3.3.6 exists, or, equivalently, that a function K(x) as described in Lemnma 3.3.3 exists. In this case it is possible to replace At by v altogether: } is an S, F, v-group as well as an S, F, Au-group, and its being free and ergodic depends only on the become s and Si sets of measure 0-which are the same for Atand for v.

and (K(X))'{f(X, a) a) A r ^ and S's, Ir,v if we replacef(x) and iF(x, by (K(x))!f(x) respectively. That is: This replacement compensates for the changes brought
about by substituting v for Atin to and St.
Vaeo I WI LA(x)

And finally (ii) in Lemma 3.3.3

shows that this replacement has also the right effectin the definitions of Uao
I A2x .

150

J. V. NEUMANN

In otherwords: If 9 is measurableat all, then we may even assume that ju 3.3.6. That is: for required v,especially(ii) in Definition has itself theproperties (105) 4(M) = 4(Ma) = -A(M),

di(x) 1.

essentially or' coincide that fora measurable(Cour oR, This means,however, withthose of (1), pp. 192-204, and so the exhaustivediscussiongiven loc. cit. disposesof our OR, OR' also in this case. Indeed, it is forthe sake of the not measurable9, to be discussedin ??4.3-4.4 below, that this work was underto taken. (They correspond case (III.,,), cf. TheoremIX.) discuss the measurable9 for We shall nevertheless, the sake of completeness, by replacingAu v. We shall, however, about also, and that withoutbothering keep this discussionas shortas possible, and not enter into questions which expressionsfor could also be answered now: Find criteriafor normedness, TOR(A), [[A]],<<A, B?, etc. this sectionthat 9 is measurable,and make use 4.2. We assume throughout 3.3.6 and Lemma 3.3.3. unique) v, K(X) of Definition of the (essentially ??4.2-4.4, will be stated and provedforOR only: All our results,throughout (iv) He The automorphism WF of Aft(cf.in particular in Lemma 3.6.6) extends to themimmediately OR' too. {x (x); -Ye 9} thenwe haveforA DEFINITION 4.2.1. If A e OR is definite, formtheintegral (by (ii) in Lemma3.7.2) xi(x) _ 0. Hence we can certainly

dX. Xi(X)K(X)

thisvalue or valueis _ 0, butit may befinite infinite. We denote Its numerical by T0(A). LEMMA 4.2.1. We havefor A, B, C e OR, A, B definite: (i) 0 <-T (A) _ + 00 . (ii) T7(A) > OifA s 0. (iii) T0(A + B) = TV(A) + T(B). and {xy(x); or e 9}. C*C,CC*are bothe OA and definite, (iv) C

1 (C*0)

TO(00*)

X | J (X) I2

K(X)

dx.

9 are > 0 it is clearwhatit means.) in (Since all terms this , PROOF: Ad (i): Immediateby (ii) in Lemma 3.7.2. Ad (ii): Immediateby (ii), (iii) in Lemma 3.7.2 Adl(iii): Obvious

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

151

Ad (iv): 0*0, CI* e E6talong withC 'e )R,their definiteness obvious. We have is oye i}, C* y e }, hence CC* py(x); y E } with {xI(x); Ixe--(xe-y'); p7(x) = x xa(x)xay-i(x"-V). Hence fory- 1

(106)

pW(x)

a e

i xa(X) 12.

"en mesure"in the sense of (iv) in Lemma3.7.1. But in These a . converge the Ea e of (106) all termsare _ 0, henceit converges numerically finite (to or infinite values). Hence both limits agree, and (106) holds in the sense of numerical convergence. Now To(CC*) = (107)

pl(X)K(x) dox, hence (106) gives:

X
ei

To(CC*)

=
(1

I Ixa(X)

I2

K(X)dx. Then (107) becomes,if we

We replaceC by C*, that is xa(x) by Xa-l(xa-'). indexatby a-: also replacethe summation (108) TO(C*C) =
a

ft

f I

Xa(Xa)

I2

K(x)dx.

Now by (iii) in Lemma 3.3.1 and (ii) in Lemma 3.3.3 we have always
K(x) dx =

f(xa)

f(X) K(X)

dox,hence the rightsides of (107) and (108) are equal.

Therefore they combineto (109) TO(C*C) = TO(CC*) = E

a
fe

xa(x) I2K(x) d,
p

which completesour proof. e LEMMA 4.2.2. (i) If E runs overall projections OR, thenT0(E) is always dimension in and defined, it is a relative function thesenseof (1), p. 165,Definition relative dimension 8.2.1. We nowassigntothe normalization: function DON(E) this DR(E) = T0(E).

(ii) We have theE(M) of (ii) in Definition for 3.7.1., M e F: D9 (.E(M))

K(X)dx

(M).

(iii) Thereexistsan M e P withv(M) 7 0, oo.

152

J. V. NEUMANN

PROOF: We provethesestatements a somewhatchangedorder: in Ad (ii): We have E(M) =LoM(x) where

M\xJ X=

-=1 forxe 0 otherwise

= LoM(x)

Now thismeans (cf. also the proofof (i) in Lemma 3.7.3) E(M) e {OM(x)6; My }, where = 1 fory = 1 = 0 otherwise| So by Definition 4.2.1. (110) To(E(M)) Om OM(x>)(x)d}x

c(x) d}x = V (M).

= As soon as we shall have proven (i) and therebyestablishedDqj(E(M)) To(E(M)), (110) willgo overinto the formula want to prove. we 3.2.4. If all v(T(t)) = Ad (iii): Considerthe V'), V') ... of (iii) in Definition 0, then summationover all i = 1, 2, ... would give v(S) = 0, hence equivalentlyAu(S)= 0, whichis not the case. Hence thereexistsan i = 1, 2, * with the v(T(t)) 5 0. Since we have also v(T(t)) # a, thiscompletes proof. for every projection Ad (i): Since every projection is definite,therefore E e O1RTo(E) is defined (Definition 4.2.1) and > 0, < + X ((i) in Lemma 4.2.1). And To(E) # 0, oo does occur: Put E = E(M) foran M from(iii) above, and use the alreadyestablished part of (ii) above, (110): T0(E(M)) = v(M) 5$ 0, o. Thereforethe characterof T0(E) as a relative dimensionfunctioncan be to establishedby (1), p. 170, Lemma 8.3.5: It suffices show that T0(E) fulfills 8.2.1. the conditions (ii), (iii) in (1), p. 165, Definition Proof of (ii) eod.: We must show that E - F(... OR) implies T0(E) = T0(F). By (1), p. 151, Definition6.1.1, and p. 141, Lemma 4.3.1, it implies E = U*U, F = UU*. Hence To(E) = To(F) by (iv) in Lemma 4.2.1. Proofof(iii) eod.: We mustshow T0(E + F) = T7(E) + T0(P) fororthogonal E, F. Now thisis immediateby (iii) in Lemma 4.2.1. This completesthe proof. to COROLLARY: 'DR belongs theclasses (I) or (II). (( is assumedto be measurable!) withDOR(E) PROOF: (ii), (iii) above together show that a projectionE e O1R s 0, x exists. So OR is not of class (III).A precisedetermination theclass to whichO1R when9 is measurable, of belongs, could now be carriedout. Owing to the above Corollarythe possibilities are But since this discussion these: (In) (n = 1, 2, - .), (I.), (II,), (II.). would coincidein all details withthat one of (1), pp. 204-208,we omitit. The reader is referred that work, and especially to the complete enumeration the to of resultsin (1), p. 208, Theorem XII. (The role of ,uthereis played by our v.) thatall thecases enumerated That theorem showsin particular above do actually arise whenS, i, ,uare chosensuitably.

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

153

4.3. Later in this sectionwe shall make the assumptionthat C3is not measurable. use what the class of OR is, we shall nevertheless itsrelative Withoutknowing dimensionfunctionDgj(E). (Cf. (1), p. 165, Definition8.2.1, and p. 168, TheoremVII-it does not matternow in whichnormalization.) We shall see in ultimately, Lemma 4.3.5, that the class is (III.), and hence the range of us consistsof0, X only-but thisneed not concern now. Dq(E) the We beginby investigating Ds0pj(E(M)), M e r (cf. (ii) in Definition 3.7.1). r and i # j impliesMiMi = 9, then LEMMA 4.3.1. (i) If M1, M2, ** Dq(E(M1
+ M2 +
*.A))-

D6Oy(E(Ml))

DM(E(M2))

(ii) If M er, thenfor all

a e9

D%,(E(M))

= D91(E(Ma)).

3.7.1 that from(ii) in Definition PROOF: Ad (i): One concludesimmediately closed,linearset 9Y(M): of E(M) is the projection the following (111) E(M) = P9(M), a) W(M) = (F; 1F(x, = 0 if x 4 M).

on Now it is clear that underthe above assumptions M1, M2, *** U (M1 + = [9N (M1), 9(M2), *** are mutually M2 + * .) (M1), I9N(M2), ***],and the 9N + M2 + ...)) = orthogonal. Hence (1), p. 168, Lemma8.3.2. givesD((E(M1 + DJX-9(E(M2)) + *** as desired. D'lt(E(Ml)) and 4 0 9k(,) = $RT, it is and C Ad (ii): Ua (cf. (i) in Lemma 3.6.1) is unitary clear from(111) that Ua maps 9)I(M) on 9W(Ma). Hence UQXE(M) is partially So M(M) isometric and has the initialset 9)(M) and the finalset 9)(Ma). = DqX(E(Ma)) by (1), p. 151,Definition 91(Ma) (. .. O9) and henceDq(E(M)) 8.2.1. 6.1.1., and p. 165, (ii) in Definition are onlythetwo alternatives: following LEMMA 4.3.2. There (a) For no M e r is DEyL(E(M)) $ 0, o. all * -S, suchthat M1, M2, ** F, M1 + M2 + (b) Thereexistsa sequence X ?, o DqR(B(Mi)) K exists PROOF: Definea subsystem of r as follows: M e K ifand onlyifthere = M, suchthatall Djrc(E(Mi)) a sequenceM1 M2 *. * F with M1 + M2 +
#0,
Oo.

Observe: M()(2)
...

(112)

eK

imply

MW') MM2) + +

K.
,

Indeed: Form the sequence M"), M(t), ... forM(t) (i = 1, 2, * as thenM3i), i, j = 1,2, ** , written a simplesequence M1, M2, M( ) + M(2) + ... . Next: (113) M
e

cf.above), * willdo for

implies Ma

forevery a

E i.

154

J. V. NEUMANN

Indeed: If Ml, M2, ** do for M, then Mia, M2a, ** will do for Ma considering in Lemma 4.3.1. And finally: (ii) (114) If M EK, M C M', 1u(M' -M) = 0, then M' eK. Indeed: Form the sequence Ml, M2, ***for M, then replace M1 by M1 + (M' - M) and leave M2, M3, *** unchanged: This sequence will do forM'. 3.2.4 forjU. Define: Considernow the T"' T 21 ... of (iii) in Definition (115) ai
=

T"'); M e K). Least upperbound of (,M(M. we can choose an Mi,j with Mi,i e K,
,

For i, j = 1, 2, (116)

Iu(Mi,j.T"')) > ai

as a simplesequence M() M Writethe M ,j, i, j = 1, 2, ... by (112) By; l Mi,j = M(1) +M2) + ***e K, thatis
00

Then

(117) We have ,(M.T(i))

ij-1

2 Mj,pEK.
.

_ A(Mij .T()) _ a,-i

Since thisholdsforall j = 1, 2,

and 1A T(")) does not depend on j, so it implies/u(MT()) _ a, . By (Mi (115), (117) also ,u(MT-')) < a , so (118) 4(M.T()) = aj.

M-T'' Now consideran M eK with M D M. Then we have MeT~') D with (115), (118), and both sets are CTT"),so theiru are finite. This, together gives: ((M -M)* T(') = that is: (119) over i = 1, 2, * Summing (120) If M eK ,((M -M)T"i)
=

-T(i)

(i)
=

ju(M. T(')

u1(M T(i)) _ a,

a, = 0,

0.
= 0.

and restating hypothesis, obtain: our we then ,u(M-M)

and M D M,

(117), (113) give foreverya e Ma eK. Hence by (112) M + Ma eK (put = the * = Ma). So M = M + Ma fulfills hypotheses M()= M, M2 = M(3)* of (120), and therefore (121) + UA((M Ma)
-

M) = 0.

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

155 +

Replacing a by a-' in (121) gives ,(M Ma-') - M)a) = 0, that is

(122) /((M + Ma)

+ Ma-1)
-

M) = 0, hence eu(((M

Ma)

= 0.

Summing(121), (122) gives:

(123) p((M + Ma) - (M.Ma))
e

= 0.

Since (123) holdsforall a

(124a)

we X, and since P is ergodic, must eitherhave g(M) = 0

y (S -M)
e

or
(124b)
=

$ 0, co. Then we see, r with DqR(E(M)) by replacing the M1, M2, .. of M by M, M1, M2 ..* , that M + M e K. of the M + M fulfills hypotheses (120), hence u((M + M) - M) = 0. This ,(M + M) = 0, henceuv(M)= 0. Now (ii) in Definiand (124a) give together our tion 3.7.1 shows E(M) = 0 and so D6pJE(M)) = 0, whichcontradicts assumption. $ 0, co, whichis thealternative (a). So we have neverDR(E(M)) CASE (124b): (117), (124b), and (114) give togetherS E K, which is the alternative(b). q then is measurable. (b) LEMMA 4.3.3. If thealternative ofLemma4.3.2 holds,
CASE (124a): Considerany M PROOF: For every M
e

r define

v(M) = D(R(E(M)). the conditions(i)-(iv) of Definition This v is a F-measure,because it fulfills 3.2.4. Indeed: Ad (i), (ii): Obvious.
Ad (iii): Immediate by (b) in Lemma 4.3.2, if we put Ml , M2,
T (2), ...

for T('),

Ad (iv): Coincides with (i) in Lemma 4.3.1. the of We now prove the measurability P by showingthat this v also fulfills 3.3.6. Indeed: conditions(i), (ii) of Definition Ad (i): v(M) = 0 meansD J(RE(M)) = 0, that is E(M) = 0, thatis,by (ii) in Definition 3.7.1, LOM(x) = 0. But this is clearly equivalent to 4 (M) = 0. Ad (ii): Coincideswith (ii) in Lemma 4.3.1. This completesthe proof.of 2.1.2). We next derive a property the operationA IElIE2 (cf. Definition is LEMMA 4.3.4. Since L C Y.R an Abelianring(by(i) in Lemma3.7.3), so every ... A E1, and is commutative hence every e q1T for of sequence projections E2, * *
offiniterank A 1911lE21
...

PutA

Ix,(x);,y E },

can beformedand is c.OR(by Definition2.1.2). { X(X);Ye . . AIEIE2

156 Then

J. V. NEUMANN

All x-relations this proofare to be understoodto hold with the in 0 exceptionof x-setsof p-measure only. We define
PROOF:

X1(X)--X1 (x), exceptfor an x-set of p-measure 0.

(125)

AIEll

... lEn =

{xe .(x);y

forn = 1, 2, .

and proceedin severalsuccessivesteps: ProofofxI(x) =X"' (x): We have (126)

AIE1 =

E1AE1+ (I

E1)A(I

-E).

Now E1 e T, so by (ii) in Lemma 3.7.3, E1 = E(M1) for an M1 E r. RI = LM,(x)I

That is,

O(m
This means,as we know,E1

=1 {=

forx eM1 0 otherwise

O M1(x) ;-yc (}, 6, 6 = 1 for-y=1 = O otherwise

This and A A

E ,x (x); -y I give,owingto (126):

I[ OM,(X)OM,(X)y'

) +

(1 -

Om,(x)) (1 - OM,(x-y )]xe(x); -yE }.

Hence by (125): (127)

xe' (x) =[OMJ(X)OM,(x7y) + (1 - OMJ(x))(1
-

OM1(xy-'))]X(x) .

Put -y= 1 in (127); then,since Om(x)= 0, 1, it goes over into X(1)(x) Xi(x). Proof of X(n)(X) ): We proved Xi(x) (for n = 1, 2, X(n+l)(x) X(1)W. Replace A, E1 by A E1I (x) I En+l, thenthisbecomes (x) Combiningthe two above resultsgives: (128)
Proof of XI(x)= Xi(X)

x? (x)

I(x) F, ^21 A,'and-hence

x* (x): We have (by Definition 2.1.2)

limstr
nz- oc

A'Ell

.IEn

That is: For every Y S'c- lim, oo forall , e3C (129) lim ((A
n-oo

V ll1fl5 jXC)t - (AI ElE2I

f 9JC))

O.

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

157

Choose anyf,g e As, and define .f(x,a)

f=0 fora = 1 fAx)otherwise'

= = g x) for a = 1 otherwise -= 0

r(a SC(x, a)
then X, X e aid, and
(A (EI...

EnT 5JC)q = ffl)(n)f(x)g(z)

don,

(A
(AJElIE21...Y

xi (x)f(x)g(x) A, :C~t dot., =s 5JC)g fx(x)f(x)g (x) dx.

Hence (129) becomes

lim

f n~o(x(8) f

-xl

(x))f(x)g(x)

d, x

0,

or, considering(128),
(130)

(xi(x) - X(x))f(x)g(x)d,,x = 0.

If M e F, ,u(M) finite, can put we

j~x){=

AX =1

0 otherwise I
0 *(x)) for x MI ~~otherwise

for xeMl

{fsgn

(x(x)-

(cf. footnote"),thenf, g e As, and (130) becomes (131)

dx = 0. (x)- xl(x) J
-

Thus xi(x) x1(x) forall x e M (exceptionsas above!). Now with the I"() = ... of (iii) in Definition 3.2.4 we mayput M = T(), and sum overi = 1, 2, 7i(2)y this gives xl(x) =x (x) unrestrictedly. Thus theproof completed.is We are nowin thepositionto take the decisivestep. LEMMA 4.3.5. If .3 is notmeasurable, O)R then is ofclass (11100). PROOF: Assumethat 9 is not measurable. We shall show that SWy of class is Lemma 2.2.2. For the(dmentioned (11100) applying by there shall choosethe we ? of (i) in Definition 3.7.1. So we must onlyprove the hypotheses Lemma of 2.2.2 for(d = 2. JT an Abelian ringCMR: By (i) in Lemma 3.7.3. is

158

J. V. NE UMANN

Ad (i): The ring R-P'(c'DR) is purelyinfinite:By Lemmata 4.3.2, 4.3.3, since 9 is not measurable, alternative(a) of Lemma 4.3.2 holds. But this the means, considering in Lemma 3.7.3 and Definition (ii) 2.2.1, that 2 is purely infinite. Now by (i) in Lemma 3.7.3, ? = OR 1.', hencewe have shownthat )11 is A2' purelyinfinite. Ad (ii): For every finiteprojection F(OR) FIE1Rh21 = 0 implies F - 0: {X {X (x); 'y e Od}, FlJElIE1 . Assume F as described. Put F *(X); -YE }. = 0 impliesxl (x) Then F'E1E2 0. (All x-relations to be understood are to hold with the exceptionof x-sets of p-measure0 only.) By Lemma 4.3.4, is Xi(x) xl (x), henceXI(x) 0. Now P beinga projection, definite. Hence 0 implies, (iii) in Lemma 3.7.2, that F = 0. xi(x) by Thus the proofis completed.We may sum up our resultsas follows: THEOREM IX. Let S, F, ,u be as in Theorem VIII, and formUS, g and R, ORt' described as there. Thenwe have: to If g is measurable Definition (cf. 3.3.6), then factors 9k' belong theclasses the OR, or (II). The precisedetermination theirclasses is givenin (1), p. 204, (I) of Lemma13.1.1,and p. 206,Lemma 13.2.1. (Cf. theend ofour ?4.2.) If 9 is not then factors)T,'R' belong theclass (III) (that (IIIJ )). measurable, the to is, of to PROOF: It suffices consider'DR only: The automorphism 'for WMf t S (cf.TheoremVIII) extendsour resultsfrom )Rto SR'. a to Our statements the concerning measurable i resultfrom Corollary Lemma a 4.2.2, and the discussion whichfollows, the end of ?4.2. Those concerning at non-measurablei resultfrom Lemma 4.3.5. 4.4. Examplesof S, F, A,and q, as requiredby TheoremsVIII, IX forany one of the classes (I)-(II)--that is, of free, and measurablegroups3-were ergodic, givenin (1), pp. 206-208, Lemma 13.2.1, and the specific examples (a) - (-y). and So thereis onlyone morethingleftforus to do: To give examplesof S, r, Au theclass (III)-that is: offree, g as required TheoremsVIII, IX for by ergodic, and non-measurable goups9. A certainclass of exampleswas mentionedin the Introduction, but we ?4, shallnotinvestigate here. Our examples it willbe based on thefollowing lemma: LEMMA4.4.1. Let S, F, Atand g be as described Theorem in VIII. Denotethe = setof those EX,forwhich a alwaysMu(M) A(Ma), bygo. go is a subgroup AJ of withAfor v. (Cf. and a freeS, F, u-group alongwithq. It is also measurable, Definitions 3.3.3, 3.3.4, and 3.3.6.) Now we assume: (i) go is ergodic. (Cf. Definition 3.3.5.) Then 9 is not measurable. PROOF: The statements about go whichprecede (i), (ii) are obvious on the basis of the definitions referred to.
(ii) g0 5 3.

ON RINGS OF OPERATORS, III

159

the of Assume now (i), (ii), and, per absurdum, measurability C. Consider the v of Definition 3.3.6 for A. This v will also do for to. So A, v both do for qo. Now 0ois ergodicby (i), hence Lemma 3.3.4 applies forto in place of X, and gives g(M) = av(M) fora constantfactora > 0. Since we have forevery a E C v(M) = v(Ma) by the definition v, so thisgives M(M) = M(Ma), that is of a E C0 . Hence 0o = Ci,whichcontradicts (ii). This completesthe proof.examples. We can nowgivespecific F EXAMPLE (a). Let S be the set of all real numbers, the systemof all Borel sets in S (in the usual sense), and ,uthe commonLebesgue measure (forBorel of one-to-one mappings S on itself: sets). Considerthefollowing
(132) a,(p, a): X Z? px + a,

p > 0, p, a-rational.

infinite group. Let C be thisgroup an These ai(p, a-)form obviouslyenumerably and that 9 is an S, F, u-group, also that it is free. One verifies immediately = pM(M) for a = al(p, a-), hence the set CWo all a E q with of Clearly M(Ma)
M(Ma) = M(M) consists of all c = a,, (p, a-) with p = 1. So 9o # A. and ergodicby (1), p. 206, Lemma 13.2.1, and p. Co is also an S, F, A-group, Hence 9 is a fortiori ergodic. 208, example (().

So S, F, > and C fulfill requirements TheoremsVIII, IX, and to fulfills of the the conditions Lemma 4.4.1. Hence 9 is not measurable. of Observethat in this case M(S) = oo. EXAMPLE (f): Let S be the set of all complexnumbersz withI z = 1, F the systemof all Borel sets in S (in the usual sense). Let ,ube the common Lebesgue measure to be applied after S has been mapped by the mapping z = e2rip on the set S. of all real numbersso 0, < 1 whichcan be (and in what willbe) looked at as the set of all real numbers(mod 1). follows Considerthe following one-to-one mappingsof S on itself:
(133) These
,.13
a2(O, z z) Z:

?z

+ U

01

Ju1l <

1.

a2(0, u) form an obviously continuous group. Denote this group by Consider the following elements of C3: The a = a2(O, u) with 0 = e2tP, p 0, and that one with 0 = 1, u = 2. They form an enumerably rational, u infiniteset, and consequently they generate an enumerably infinitesubgroup of

c.

Let q be this subgroup. In combining two a = a2(0, u) of (133), their 0 simply multiply. Hence the 0 of all a = a2(0, U) e 3 are the products of the 0 of those a = a2(0, U) with which we started, that is: the 0 = e2rip p rational. Therefore we have: (134)
a = a2(O, 0) E 0 if and only if 0 = e2TiP,p rational.

One verifiesimmediately that g3is an S, r, g-group, and also that it is free.

13

( plays a well-known and important role in the theory of conformal mappings.

160

J. V. NEUMANN

thati(Ma) = 8(M). Since a = a2(G, u) Let us nowdetermine a e Weomeans to, theirlengths, hence,that it be a maps arcs on arcs,thisrequiresthatit conserve rotationor a reflection. That is:
a: z O Oz,
or z TO-,

1=

1.

and the firstone means u = 0 fora = (133) excludesthe second alternative, So go is characterized u = 0, and consequentlyby (134). So by a2(0, u). W $ go , sincea = a2(l, a) is e9 but not eg0. Now map S by z = e2 i, on the V-setS, (cf. above). Then the mappingsof (in 9o go over fromz >? e2Tt"z (134)) into V, (p + p, p rational. This proves that go is ergodic(in S1, and hencealso in S), by (1), p. 206, Lemma 13.2.1,and ergodic. p. 208, example (f3). Hence 9 is a fortiori all of So S, r, la and 9 fulfill requirements TheoremsVIII, IX, and 9o fulfills of theconditions Lemma4.4.1. Hence 9 is notmeasurable. Observethatin thiscase ,u(S) = 1. Besides establishingthe existenceof factors'OR of class (III), the above all 9RT, typesof factorizations examplescan also be used to determine existing 912. To this end we need the lemmawhichfollows. 9, LEMMA 4.4.2. Consider theS, F, A, 9o and 9T, 9/' ofLemma4.4.1. Every e A e 9R' is A {= I(x); -y 9) ; consider those which for oy x,(x)- 0 whenever 4 90. their by91. Thenwe have: Denote set (i) 9.is a ring. all numbers). (ii) 91'. 9.' = (aI) (a runsover complex 91 factors. (Cf. (1), p. 138, (iii) 9tR, is a factorization, 9T, 91 are notcoupled but Definition 3.1.3.) 91 to ,u(S) is finite (iv) The class of thefactor is (III) or (II,,) according whether or not. PROOF: Ad (i), (ii): Literally the same as the proof of (1), pp. 208-209, Lemma 13.4.1. of Ad (iii): Literally same as theproof (1), p. 209, Lemma 13.4.2. the A {X7(x); YE 9)I (but Ad (iv): For A e 91.,A definite, have also A e 9R,, we xY(x) 0 forly4 go!), and we defineagain To(A) = considerations Lemmas 4.2.1., 4.2.2, apply literally 91 (because fora e $3o of in (M) = u(Ma), and forall othera e 9 we have xa(x) 0). Hence D91(E) = ju E after Lemma To(E) forall projections e 91. Hence we see, as in theCorollary 4.2.2, that A91 belongsto the classes (I) or (II). If 91 wereofclass (I), thenA91' factor (1), p. 184,Lemma by wouldbe a normal 91. by 11.2.2,and hence9OT, wouldbe a coupledfactorization (1), p. 183,Lemma 11.1.2. This contradicts (iii) above, hence91 is of class (II). Now D6,j(I) = To(I) =

xl(x) dcx. Then the

1 djx = AL(S), hence91.is of class (III) or (II.),

according whether to or IA(S)is finite not.-

ON RINGS

OF OPERATORS,

III

161

Thus Lemma 4.4.2 shows, if we avail ourselves of the above Examples (a), (p), that non-coupled factorizations of the classes (II), (III.) and (II1), (III) exist. This shows that no analogue of (1), p. 182, Theorem X (which holds for coupled factorizations) holds for non-coupled factorizations. Indeed, the only restriction on non-coupled factorizations is that no factor can be of class (I) (by (1), pp. 183-184, Lemmas 11.1.2, 11.2.2, cf. the above proof of (iv) in Lemma 4.4.2). We could also show the existence of non-coupled factorization of class (III), (III), but we shall not discuss this now.
INSTITUTE FOR ADVANCED STUDY.