Ideal submodules versus ternary ideals versus linking ideals

DOI10.1007/S10468-020-10025-7MaRDI QIDQ2118265zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Publication date 22 March 2022

Published in Algebras and Representation Theory (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1804.05233

Ternary compositions (17A40) (C^*)-modules (46L08) Homological methods in functional analysis (exact sequences, right inverses, lifting, etc.) (46M18) Linear operators in (C^*)- or von Neumann algebras (47C15)

Abstract: We show that ideal submodules and closed ternary ideals in Hilbert modules are the same. We use this insight as a little peg on which to hang a little note about interrelations with other notions regarding Hilbert modules. In Section 3, we show that the ternary ideals (and equivalent notions) merit fully, in terms of homomorphisms and quotients, to be called ideals of (not necessarily full) Hilbert modules. The properties to be checked are intrinsically formulated for the modules (without any reference to the algebra over which they are modules) in terms of their ternary structure. The proofs, instead, are motivated from a third equivalent notion, linking ideals (Section 2), and a Theorem (Section 3) that all extends nicely to (reduced) linking algebras. As an application, in Section 4, we introduce ternary extensions of Hilbert modules and prove most of the basic properties (some new even for the known notion of extensions of Hilbert modules), by reducing their proof to the well-known analogue theorems about extensions of

C^{*}

-algebras. Finally, in Section 5, we propose several open problems that our method naturally suggests.

Recommendations

Cites work

Cited in

(8)

This page was built for publication: Ideal submodules versus ternary ideals versus linking ideals

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2118265)