In the setting of non-type \ty{II_1} representations, we propose a definition of deformed Fredholm module \big[D_\ct|D_\ct|^{-1}\,,\,{\bf\cdot}\,\big]_\ct for a modular spectral triple \ct, where D_\ct is the deformed Dirac operator. D_\ct is assumed to be invertible for the sake of simplicity, and its domain is an "essential" operator system \ce_\ct. According to such a definition, we obtain \big[D_\ct|D_\ct|^{-1}\,,\,{\bf\cdot}\,\big]_\ct=|D_\ct|^{-1}d_\ct(\,{\bf\cdot}\,)+d_\ct(\,{\bf\cdot}\,)|D_\ct|^{-1}, where d_\ct is the deformed derivation associated to D_\ct. Since the "quantum differential" 1/|D_\ct| appears in a symmetric position, such a definition of Fredholm module differs from the usual one even in the undeformed case, that is in the tracial case. Therefore, it seems to be more suitable for the investigation of noncommutative manifolds in which the nontrivial modular structure might play a crucial role. We show that all models in [FS] of non-type \ty{II_1} representations of noncommutative 2-tori indeed provide modular spectral triples, and in addition deformed Fredholm modules according to the definition proposed in the present paper. Since the detailed knowledge of the spectrum of the Dirac operator plays a fundamental role in spectral geometry, we provide a characterisation of eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the deformed Dirac operator D_\ct in terms of the periodic solutions of a particular class of eigenvalue Hill equations.
For the states \omega_\mu, we have
(i) \omega_\mu\in{\mathcal S}({\mathbb A}_{2\alpha}) is faithful if and only if \mathop{\rm supp}(\mu)={\mathbb T} (cf. [FS], Proposition 4.1);
(ii) if for n\in{\mathbb Z}, \mu\circ R_{2\alpha}^{n}\preceq\mu (and thus \mu\circ R_{2\alpha}^{n}\sim\mu), then the support of \omega_\mu in the bidual is central: s(\omega_\mu)\in Z({\mathbb A}_{2\alpha}^{**}) (cf. [FS], Proposition 4.2).
A spectral triple considered in the present paper, named as modular spectral triple according to the terminology in [CM], is a triplet {\mathcal T}:=(\omega,{\mathcal L},{\mathcal E}), where with a slight abuse of notation we write {\mathcal E}\equiv{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}, made of a modular state \omega\in{\mathcal S}({\mathfrak A}), an operator {\mathcal L}:{\mathcal A}\subset{\mathfrak A}\to{\mathfrak A} defined on a unital dense *-algebra {\mathcal A}\subset{\mathfrak A}, and finally an operator system {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T} acting on {\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega), satisfying the following properties.
First we put {\mathcal L}^\star:=-*{\mathcal L}\,* and, for a\in {\mathfrak A}, we denote by a_\omega\in {\mathcal H}_\omega the natural embedding of a in {\mathcal H}_\omega, i.e. a_\omega=\pi_\omega(a)\xi_\omega.
(i) With {\mathcal H}_\omega\supset {\mathcal A}_\omega\ni a_\omega\mapsto L_\omega^\#a_\omega:=({\mathcal L}^\#a)_\omega\subset{\mathcal H}_\omega, where {\mathcal L}^\# and L_\omega^\# stand for {\mathcal L},{\mathcal L}^\star and L_\omega,L^\star_\omega, respectively, the deformed Dirac operator
acting on its own domain {\mathcal D}_{D^{(o)}_{\mathcal T}}\subset{\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega uniquely defines a self-adjoint operator with compact resolvent: D^{(o)}_{\mathcal T} is densely defined essentially self-adjoint with closure D_{\mathcal T}, and \big((1+D_{\mathcal T})^2\big)^{-1/2} is compact.
(ii) There exists a dense *-subalgebra {\mathcal B}\subset{\mathfrak A}, and a set {\bf P}=(P_\iota)_{\iota\in{\mathcal I}}\subset{\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega) of (increasing) self-adjoint projections with \sup_\iota P_\iota=:P\leq I_{{\mathcal H}_\omega}, such that
and for each A\in{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}, the deformed commutator
uniquely defines a bounded operator, denoted by d_{\mathcal T}(A): \overline{{\mathcal D}_{d^{(o)}_{\mathcal T}(A)}}={\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega and
(a) The usual case of undeformed spectral triples associated to tracial states leads to {\mathcal I} being the singleton \{\iota_o\} with P_{\iota_o}=I_{{\mathcal H}_\omega}. The same situation emerges when \omega is an “inner" deformation of a trace considered in [CM].
(b) The main case described in [CS] corresponds to \Delta_\omega=I_{{\mathcal H}_\omega} occurring when \omega is a trace, and {\mathcal I} being a singleton with corresponding projection P< I_{{\mathcal H}_\omega}. In order not to loose any information possibly encoded into the spectral triple, it is natural to consider a set of projections such that \sup_\iota P_\iota=I_{{\mathcal H}_\omega}. In such a situation, we say that {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T} is essential.
(c) We may decide not to include in {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T} the irrelevant subspace {\mathbb C} P, where P=\sup_{\iota\in {\mathcal I}} P_\iota. In such a situation, {\mathcal E} would be
(d) The models in [FS], Sections 8 and 9, provide modular spectral triples {\mathcal T}=(\omega,{\mathcal L},{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}) associated to a nontrivial modular structure, see Sections ? and ? below. Therefore, we indeed have nontrivial examples of spectral triples satisfying all properties listed in Definition 3.1.
The completion \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} w.r.t. the norm (?) of {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}, can be viewed as a, non necessarily closed, operator system in {\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega), and d_{\mathcal T} uniquely extends to the whole \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}, providing again bounded operators.
We start by noticing that, since [\!] A^* [\!]_{\mathcal T}=[\!] A [\!]_{\mathcal T}, \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} is equipped with a *-operation in a natural way, and thus \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} is an (abstract at this stage) operator system as well.
Let \widetilde{A}\in\overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}, and choose a sequence (A_n)_n\subset {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T} converging to \widetilde{A} in the topology generated by [\!]\,\,\, [\!]_{\mathcal T}. It is a Cauchy sequence w.r.t. the norm (?), and therefore both sequences (A_n)_n\subset{\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega) and \big(d_{\mathcal T}(A_n)\big)_n\subset{\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega) are Cauchy sequences w.r.t. the norms of {\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega) and {\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega), respectively.
Let A and B the limits in {\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega) and {\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega) of the sequences (A_n)_n and \big(d_{\mathcal T}(A_n)\big)_n, respectively, and define j(\widetilde{A}):=A. It is straightforward to verify that such a map is well defined, and realises a homeomorphism between \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} and j\big(\overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}\big)\subset{\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega). In addition, after putting d_{\mathcal T}(\widetilde{A}):=B, we obtain the required extension of d_{\mathcal T} to the whole \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} by bounded operators.
By identifying \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} with its image j\big(\overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}\big)\subset{\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega), we can suppose that \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}, as well as the operators \{d(A)\mid A\in\overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}\}, are directly acting on the Hilbert space {\mathcal H}_\omega and {\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega, respectively. In particular, \overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}} can be considered as a concrete operator system.
The operator D_\omega with domain {\mathcal D}_{D_\omega} is self-adjoint. In addition, it has compact resolvent if and only if
and if
It is matter of routine to check that D_\omega is self-adjoint in {\mathcal D}_{D_\omega}, see [FS], Proposition 7.1. Here, we report the details of the proof of Theorem 7.3 in [FS] concerning compactness.
By disregarding the kernel of the Dirac operator, we can suppose that it is invertible. Therefore, D_\omega has compact resolvent if and only if D^{-1}_\omega is compact. Then it is enough to consider
which is invertible with inverse
We now note that, by the form of the operators D_{\omega,n} given in (?), the D^{-1}_{\omega,n} are compact operators.
Suppose now that (4.1) holds true, D^{-1}_\# is manifestly compact being norm limit of the sequence of compact operators \big(\bigoplus_{0<|n|\leq N}D^{-1}_{\omega,n}\big)_N. Conversely, suppose (4.1) were not true. Then there would exist a sequence (\xi_k)_{k\in{\mathbb N}}\subset{\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega of unit vectors such that for k,l\in{\mathbb N} k\neq l,
Therefore, the sequence \big((D_\#)^{-1}\xi_k\big)_{k\in{\mathbb N}} is not relatively compact.
Finally, by [FS], Lemma 7.2, \big\|D^{-1}_{\omega,n}\big\|\leq\frac{\gamma_\mathpzc{f}(n)}{|n|}, n\neq0. Thus, if (4.1) is satisfied, then \big\|D^{-1}_{\omega,n}\big\|=o(1) and the second half follows by the first one.
By (?), any A\in{\mathcal E}_{{\mathcal T}_\mathpzc{f}} is an entire element w.r.t. the adjoint action {\rm ad}_{\Delta_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}}}^{\imath t} on {\mathcal B}\big({\mathcal H}_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}}\big) of the one-parameter group generated by the modular operator, see the proof of Theorem 5.4 below.
The triple {\mathcal T}_\mathpzc{f}=\big(\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}},{\mathcal L},{\mathcal E}_{{\mathcal T}_\mathpzc{f}}\big) is a modular spectral triple, provided (4.1) is satisfied.
With \omega=\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}, we start by noticing that the deformed Dirac operator D_\omega given in (?) has compact resolvent if and only if (4.1) is satisfied. We notice that a sufficient condition for having compact resolvent is \gamma_\mathpzc{f}(n)=o(n). Then, we have to verify (ii) in Definition 3.1.
Indeed, we have only to check that \Delta_\omega^{-1}[L,P_N\pi_\omega({\mathbb A}_{2\alpha}^{oo})P_N] provides bounded operators on the common dense domain \pi_\omega({\mathcal A})\xi_\omega for {\mathcal A} given in (?), the other part concerning the anti-diagonal term in (?) being similar.
Since P_N\pi_\omega({\mathcal A})\xi_\omega\subset \pi_\omega({\mathcal A})\xi_\omega and, on such a dense domain P_N commutes with L and \Delta_\omega, we have
and thus the assertion follows by [FS], Theorem 8.1. We report those computations for the convenience of the reader.
Indeed, for the linear generator a=x \lambda^l, where x:=W(\widehat{F}(m)\delta_{n,0}) and \lambda^l:=W(\delta_{m,0}\, \delta_{n,l}) the l-step shift on the direct sum \bigoplus_{\mathbb Z} L^2({\mathbb T},\mathpzc{m}), we have
We note that \pi_\omega(x) is diagonal with \pi_\omega(x)_n=M_{F\circ \mathpzc{f}^{n}}. Then, setting A=\pi_\omega(x), [L,A] is diagonal as well, providing
By using (?) and (?), we get
and thus
On the other hand, by (8.3) in [FS], we have
where \gamma_\mathpzc{f}(n) is the growth sequence of the diffeomorphism \mathpzc{f}.
Collecting together, on the domain \pi_\omega({\mathcal A})\xi_\omega we get
For all models considered in the present paper, in order to obtain the estimate (?), in the Definition 3.1 of the modular spectral triple we should use the modular operator \Delta_{\omega'_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}}=\Delta^{-1}_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}} of the state \omega'_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}=\langle\,{\bf\cdot}\,\xi_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}},\xi_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}}\rangle\lceil_{\pi_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}}({\mathbb A}_{2\alpha})'} on the commutant \pi_{\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}}({\mathbb A}_{2\alpha})'. The meaning of such a fact is still unclear.
The modular spectral triple {\mathcal T} in Definition 3.1 is called a deformed Fredholm module if in addition, for any A\in {\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}, the deformed commutator [F_{\mathcal T},A]^{(o)}_{\mathcal T} in (?) uniquely defines a compact operator denoted by [F_{\mathcal T},A]_{\mathcal T}: \overline{{\mathcal D}_{[F_{\mathcal T},A]^{(o)}_{\mathcal T}}}={\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega,
and \overline{[F_{\mathcal T},A]^{(o)}_{\mathcal T}}=:[F_{\mathcal T},A]_{\mathcal T}\in{\mathcal K}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega).
Suppose that the modular spectral triple {\mathcal T} considered in Definition 3.1, in addition to \rm{(iii)} in (?), also satisfies the following conditions:
(iv) \underline{A}{\mathcal R}_{\Gamma_{\mathcal T}^{-1}}\subset {\mathcal D}_{\Gamma_{\mathcal T}}, A\in{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T};
(v) for \iota\in {\mathcal I}, P_{\iota}\bigoplus P_{\iota} strongly commutes with \Gamma_{\mathcal T}, i.e. \Gamma_{\mathcal T}\big(P_{\iota}\bigoplus P_{\iota}\big)\supset\big(P_{\iota}\bigoplus P_{\iota}\big)\Gamma_{\mathcal T}, and \big(P_{\iota}\bigoplus P_{\iota}\big){\mathcal R}_{\Lambda_{\mathcal T}\Gamma_{\mathcal T}^{-1}}\subset{\mathcal D}_{\Gamma_{\mathcal T}^{-1}};
(vi) \overline{\Gamma_{\mathcal T} \underline{A}\Gamma^{-1}_{\mathcal T}}{\mathcal D}_{D_{\mathcal T}}\subset{\mathcal D}_{D_{\mathcal T}}, A\in{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}.
Then, for {\mathcal T},
and thus it provides a deformed Fredholm module.
By using (iii), (vi) and the polar decomposition (?) of F_{\mathcal T}, from (?) we get on the dense domain {\mathcal D}_{D_{\mathcal T}},
We now check that D_{\mathcal T}\,\overline{\Gamma_{\mathcal T} \underline{A} \Gamma_{\mathcal T}^{-1}}- \overline{\Gamma_{\mathcal T}^{-1} \underline{A} \Gamma_{\mathcal T}}\,D_{\mathcal T}\supset d^{(o)}_{\mathcal T}(A). Indeed, by recalling (?) and using (?) from Definition 3.1, by (iv) and (v) we have
Therefore, we find from (Proof),
We now suppose that \xi\in {\mathcal D}_{d^{(o)}_{\mathcal T}(A)}. Firstly, \xi\in {\mathcal D}_{\Gamma_{\mathcal T} \underline{A} \Gamma_{\mathcal T}^{-1}},
and
Secondly, \xi\in {\mathcal D}_{D_{\mathcal T}^{(o)}},
and
By (ii) in Definition 3.1 and the previous computations, \overline{|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1} d_{\mathcal T}^{(o)}(A)}\subset |D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1} d_{\mathcal T}(A) and |D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1}d_{\mathcal T}^{(o)}(A) is bounded. Thus \overline{|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1} d_{\mathcal T}^{(o)}(A)}=|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1} d_{\mathcal T}(A). At the same time, we also get \overline{d_{\mathcal T}^{(o)}(A)|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1}}= d_{\mathcal T}(A)|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1}.
Collecting together the last computations and (?),
and thus [F_{\mathcal T},A]_{\mathcal T}=|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1} d_{\mathcal T}(A)+d_{\mathcal T}(A)|D_{\mathcal T}|^{-1} because the r.h.s. is bounded. Since the r.h.s. is also compact, [F_{\mathcal T},A]_{\mathcal T} provides a compact operator for each A\in{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}.
The deformed commutator [F_{\mathcal T},A]_{\mathcal T} is also meaningful for A\in\overline{{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}}, providing compact operators acting on {\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega as well, again obtaining
With \|\,\,\,\|=\|\,\,\,\|_{{\mathcal B}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega)}, we consider \widetilde{A}\in{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T}, together with a sequence (A_n)_n\subset{\mathcal E}_{\mathcal T} converging to \widetilde{A} in the norm [\!]\,\,\,[\!]_{\mathcal T}. Since
the sequence \big([F_{\mathcal T},A_n]_{\mathcal T}\big)_n\subset{\mathcal K}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega) is a Cauchy sequence which converges to a compact operator as {\mathcal K}({\mathcal H}_\omega\bigoplus{\mathcal H}_\omega) is complete. Since such a limit does not depend on the sequence converging to \widetilde{A} in the norm [\!] \,\,\,[\!]_{\mathcal T}, it uniquely defines a compact operator which we still call [F_{\mathcal T},\widetilde{A}]_{\mathcal T}.
The spectral triples {\mathcal E}_{{\mathcal T}_\mathpzc{f}} given in Theorem 4.3 are indeed deformed Fredholm modules.
To simplify, we put \omega:=\omega_{\mu_\mathpzc{f}}, and note that (iv) and (v) in Definition 5.1 are easily achieved by (?) and (?).
We now argue that, by (?) and (?),
Since \big\|\Gamma_\omega\big(P_N\bigoplus P_N\big)\big\|=\max_{n\leq N}\gamma_\mathpzc{f}(n), by (Proof) we have for A\in{\mathcal E}_{{\mathcal T}_\mathpzc{f}}
Therefore, \underline{A} is an entire element for the group {\rm ad}_{\Gamma_\omega^{\imath t}}, and thus (iii) in (?) is satisfied.
Concerning (vi), we reason as in the proof of Theorem 4.3. Indeed, for the linear generator a=x\lambda^l, with x=W(\widehat{F}(m)\delta_{n,0}) and \lambda^l=W(\delta_{m,0}\delta_{n,l}) as above, we first note that P_N commutes with \pi_\omega(x). Therefore, we reduce the matter when A is either P_N\pi_\omega(x) or P_N\pi_\omega(\lambda)^lP_N.
By (?), and taking into account that the \delta_n and F are C^1-function on {\mathbb T}, we easily get (vi) for such a situation. For the case A=P_N\pi_\omega(\lambda)^lP_N, we also obtain the assertion after applying again (?). Indeed, if \xi_k\in H^1({\mathbb T})\bigoplus H^1({\mathbb T}) and
since the \delta_n are smooth, \pi_\omega(\lambda)^l\xi=\bigoplus_{n\in{\mathbb Z}}\delta_{n,k-l}\xi_k is in the domain of D_\omega as well.
The real number \lambda is an eigenvector of the deformed Dirac operator (?) if and only if there exists n\in{\mathbb Z} such that the homogeneous Hill equation
admits a periodic C^2 (and therefore necessarily C^\infty) nontrivial solution.
Taking into account (?), \lambda is an eigenvalue of D_\omega if, for some n, there exist non vanishing periodic functions f,g on the unit circle, necessarily smooth, satisfying
By replacing g from the 2nd equation in the 1st of (Proof), and defining h:=\delta_n^{-1}f, we obtain
By passing to H(\theta):=h(e^{\imath\theta}) and d_n(\theta)=\delta_n(e^{\imath\theta}), it becomes
which leads to the homogeneous Hill equation (8.1).
Suppose now that (8.1) admits a non zero smooth periodic solution for some \lambda\neq0 and n\in{\mathbb Z}, the case \lambda=0 being trivially satisfied.
By putting H(\theta)d_n(\theta)=f(z) with z=e^{\imath\theta}, and
an easy calculation shows that the vector-valued function
provides an eigenvector corresponding to the eigenvalue \lambda.
Indeed, for \lambda\neq0 and n\in{\mathbb Z}, (Proof) reads \delta_n^{-1}L_ng=\lambda f and L_n^\star(\delta_n^{-1} f)=\lambda g, where L_n and L_n^\star are the differential operators given in (?).
We first note that (?) is nothing else than the first condition above. Concerning the second, by using the Hill equation we get
Summarising,
and this concludes the proof.
The text on this page is from arXiv:2206.14762v2 by Fabio Ciolli and Francesco Fidaleo, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.
The record of each item is in analysis/objects/2206/2206.14762.jsonl.