Mrthdrb

I'm currently preparing for an exam in functional analysis, and I have a question about the extension of the spectral theorem for bounded self adjoint operators to bounded normal operators.

Starting point is the spectral theorem for bounded self adjoint operators:
Let $T$ be a bounded self adjoint operator in an Hilbert space $X$, then there exists a unique spectral measure $E : Sigma_mathbbR rightarrow B(X)$, which has compact support in $mathbbR$ (Here $Sigma_mathbbR$ is the Borel-$sigma$-algebra on $mathbbR$ and $B(X)$ is the set of all bounded and linear operators in $X$) and $T = intlimits_mathbbRlambda dE_lambda$.
Moreover the mapping $f rightarrow f(T) := intlimits_mathbbR f(lambda) dE_lambda$, for bounded and measurable functions $f$, satisfies the conditions of the (unique) measurable functional calculus.

If a normal operator $T in B(X)$ is given, one can define the Operators:
$S_1 := frac12 left( T+T^ast right)$ and $S_2 := frac12i left( T-T^ast right)$.
Then we get that $T = S_1 + i S_2$ and that $S_1$ and $S_2$ are self adjoint.
Then by the spectral theorem for self adjoint operators there exist two spectral measures $E^1$ and $E^2$. Since $T$ is normal, $S_1$ and $S_2$ commute, and therefore the spectral measures $E^1$ and $E^2$.

Then there exists a unique spectral measure $E : Sigma_mathbbR^2 rightarrow B(X)$ such that for all $A, B in Sigma_mathbbR$ we have that $E(A times B) = E^1(A)E^2(B)$. (See: Schmüdgen - Thm. 4.10)

By identifying $mathbbR^2$ with $mathbbC$ one gets a unique specral measure $E : Sigma_mathbbC rightarrow B(X)$ and is able to define integrals with respect to this spectral measure in the natural way: First for step functions and then for bounded measurable functions by approximation.

Now I have to show that $E$ has the same properties as the spectral measure for self adjoint operators, i.e.:
$T = intlimits_mathbbC z dE_z$ and the mapping $f rightarrow f(T) := intlimits_mathbbC f(z) dE_z$, for bounded and measurable functions $f$, satisfies the conditions of the (unique) measurable functional calculus.

My question now is: is there any other way to show that, beside re-do the proof of the spectral theorem for self adjoint operators? It's not that much work, once one has the proof of the self adjoint case. I'm just curious if there's an more elegant way ...

Thanks in advance, GordonFreeman

The proof of the spectral theorem for normal operators doesn't rely on the proof of the spectral theorem for self-adjoint operators, instead the proofs are basically identical.

How do you construct the spectral measure in the self-adjoint case? One way to do it is to look at the $C^*$-algebra generated by the self-adjoint operator $T$ on the Hilbert space $X$, let's call it $C^*(T)$. Since $C^*(T)$ is commutative, by Gelfand theory it is isomorphic to the algebra of continuous functions on the spectrum of $T$, $C(sigma(T))$. Given $x,yin H$, the map $C^*(T)tomathbb C$ given by $Smapsto langle Sx,yrangle$ is a bounded linear functional, hence defines a Borel measure $mu_x,y$ on $mathbb R$, supported in $sigma(T)$. Using these measures, we can extend the isomorphism $C(sigma(T))to C^*(T)$ to a homomorphism of $B(mathbb R)to mathcal B(X)$ from the algebra bounded Borel functions on $mathbb R$ to bounded operators on $X$. The spectral measure is just the restriction of this homomorphism to characteristic functions of Borel sets.

If now $T$ is normal, $C^*(T)$ is still commutative, and (again by Gelfand theory) is isomorphic to $C(sigma(T))$, where now $sigma(T)subsetmathbb C$. Given $x,yin X$, the measure $mu_x,y$ is now a Borel measure on $mathbb C$ supported in $sigma(T)$, and in this way we obtain a homomorphism $B(mathbb C)tomathcal B(X)$ from the algebra of bounded Borel functions on $mathbb C$ to $mathcal B(X)$, and obtain the spectral measure.

The rest of the proof of the spectral theorem should be the same.

EDIT

Hopefully this will help translate my response to language you are familiar with.

Firstly, yes, $C^*(T)$ is as you have defined it.

Secondly, basically the only difference between the two cases is that if $T$ is normal, we define the map $Phi_0$ from polynomials in two variables $p=p(z,overline z)$ to $B(X)$ by $sum_ija_ijz^ioverline z^jmapsto sum_ija_ijT^i(T^*)^j$ and extend this by Stone-Weierstrass to a map $Phi:C(sigma(T))to B(X)$. We need to consider bivariate polynomials in the normal case because if the set $Xsubsetmathbb C$ is not a subset of $mathbb R$, polynomials in one variable are not closed under conjugation, hence the Stone-Weierstrass theorem cannot be applied.

Thirdly, there are plenty of books out there that prove the spectral theorem for normal operators, leaving the case for self-adjoint operators as a corollary, but most of the one's I'm familiar with develop some basic $C^*$-algebra theory to make the proofs more transparent. See for instance Conway's or Rudin's functional analysis books, or Murphy's $C^*$-algebras and operator theory.

@Aweygan: Thanks for the quick reply! HL3 has to wait, since I lately have some troubles concerning math :)

Sadly in my lecture we didn't really touched the topics of $C^ast$-algebras or Gelfand-theory and only proved the spectral theorem for self adjoint operators. We started out by defining a map $ Phi_0 : P(sigma(T)) rightarrow B(X)$ by $p(T) := sumlimits_i = 0^n a_i T^i$ and then extended this map to a map $ Phi : C(sigma(T)) rightarrow B(X)$ by density of the polynomials $P(sigma(T))$ in $C(sigma(T))$ due to the Stone-Weierstrass theorem. Then we did the rest of the construction the same way you described it by obtaining a complex measure by Riesz-represenation theorem.

I'm assuming that the space $C^ast(T)$ you are talking about is the set $left f in C(sigma(T)) right$ right?

So by setting $Phi_0$ the same way we did for self adjoint operators, we would again get a compelx measure by the Riesz-represenation theorem. So it's basically the same proof for normal operators?

I'm just aking this question, because every book (Werner, Schmüdgen) which proves the spectral theorem by using the functional calculus (not stieltjes integrals) just proves it for self adjoint operators and for normal ones "it's left for the reader" ...
I'm guessing the autors of the mentioned books, don't want to do the whole proof again and are using the method I described in the first post.