Polar Decomposition
[8/100%]If is a bounded linear transformation from a Hilbert space to a Hilbert space , then there exists a partial isometry (from to ) and there exists a positive operator (on ) such that . The transformations and can be found so that , and this additional condition uniquely determines them.
The representation of as the product of the unique and satisfying the stated conditions is called the polar decomposition of , or, more accurately, the right-handed polar decomposition of . The corresponding left-handed theory () follows by a systematic exploitation of adjoints.
Every bounded linear transformation is the product of a maximal partial isometry and a positive operator.
What are the extreme points of the closed unit ball in the space of operators on a Hilbert space?
The closed unit ball in the space of operators is convex. For every interesting convex set, it is of interest to determine the extreme points.
An operator with polar decomposition is quasinormal if and only if .
An operator is called quasinormal if commutes with . Every normal operator is quasinormal, but the converse is false: if is an isometry, then and therefore commutes with , but if is not unitary, then is not normal (a concrete example is the unilateral shift).
Is it true for every operator that
What if is used in place of ? What if they are both used, one in each factor?
If is a positive operator, then defines an inner product (not necessarily strictly positive); it follows that satisfies the Schwarz-like inequality
(To feel comfortable about this relation it helps to recall that the positiveness of implies .) If is not positive, then the inner-product expression still defines something (sesquilinear, yes, positive and symmetric, probably not), but since the equation is not available, it is not clear what, if any, Schwarz-like inequality prevails. A possible guess is to replace on the right (majorant) side by . (Reason: if is a complex number, then .) Objection: why ? Why not ?
Which weighted shifts are quasinormal?
The set of all operators that have either a left or a right inverse is dense, but the set of all operators that have both a left and a right inverse (i.e., the set of all invertible operators) is not. What about the set of left-invertible operators?
The set of all invertible operators is connected.