FOURIER ALGEBRAS AND AMENABILITY

November, 2009
 BONAFIDE CERTIFICATE

I certify that this dissertation entitled "Fourier algebras and amenability",

submitted in partial fulllment of the requirements for the degree of Master of
Philosophy in Mathematics to the Pondicherry University, Puducherry, is a
bonade record of the work carried out by Mr. Kunda Chowdaiah, under
my supervision and guidance during 2008-2009.

I further certify that this material has not been submitted for any other
degree by any person to the best of my knowledge.

I arm also that all the sources from which material borrowed are ade-
quately referred to.

Place : (Dr. V. MURUGANANDAM)

Date : SUPERVISOR
 DECLARATION

I here by declare that the work presented in this dissertation original and
has been the supervision and guidance of Dr. V. Muruganandam, Reader,
Department of Mathematics, Pondicherry University, Puducherry. I further
state that this work has not formed the basis for the award of any other degree
of this university or any other university.

Place :

Date : (Kunda Chowdaiah)

 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I have no adequate words to express my indebted sense of sincere

gratitude to my guide, Dr. V. Muruganandam , Reader, Department of

Mathematics, Pondicherry University, Puducherry, for his excellent guidance,

inspiring comments, suggestions and motivation that he has given to me

throughout the preparation of this dissertation.

I would like to thank Dr. A. M. S. Ramasamy , Professor and Dean,

Department of Mathematics, Pondicherry University, Puducherry, for giving

support and encouragement for the completion of this thesis.

Further, I would like to specially thank Dr. V. Indumathi , Professor

and Head, Department of Mathematics, Pondicherry University, Puducherry,

for her encouragement through out the course.

I am also thankful to the teaching and non-teaching sta of my depart-

ment for their support and encouragement to me.

I gratefully acknowledge my parents and my friends who gave to me

co-operation and advice to nish this project work.

I take this opportunity to express my sincere thanks to my all classmates

and my all well wishing friends for their in getting this dissertation successful.

Place :

Date : Kunda Chowdaiah

Contents

Introduction iv
1 Generalities 1
2 Representation theory of groups 10
2.1 General theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
2.2 Representations of group algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
2.3 Peter-Weyl theory of compact groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.3.1 Irreducible representations are nite dimensional . . . . 18
2.3.2 Schur's theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.3.3 Peter-Weyl theory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
2.3.4 Representation theory of SU (2) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3 Fourier algebras 33
3.1 Fourier-Stieltjes algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33
3.2 Fourier algebra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

4 Fourier algebras and amenable groups 41

4.1 Denitions and examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
4.2 Reiter's property . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
4.3 Leptin's Theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

5 Amenable Banach algebras 56

5.1 Basic properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
5.2 Amenability of group algebras
(for amenable groups) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
5.3 Non-amenability of Fourier algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72

List of symbols 77
Bibliography 79

iv
Introduction

As the title suggests the main objective of this dissertation is to understand

the intimate relation that exists between the Fourier algebras of locally

compact groups and the concept called amenability.

Fourier algebras are commutative function algebras that are dened on

locally compact groups which are not necessarily abelian. In fact it consists

of matrix coecients associated to the left regular representation of the group

and turns out to be the classical Fourier algebra when the group is abelian.

Amenability, on the other hand is the most useful and widely studied

concept on locally compact groups. Amenability was introduced and studied

by the legendary mathematician John von Neumann for groups and later by

Johnson for Banach algebras. Briey put, this dissertation expounds theory

of amenable groups studied by Hulancki, Eymard and nally characterizes

the amenable groups by their Fourier algebras. Moreover, it elaborates the

theory of amenable Banach algebras and show that these Fourier algebras

over non-abelian groups are far from being amenable Banach algebras.

In what follows, we shall briey mention the contents of the disserta-

tion. Chapter 1 is devoted to the preliminaries which would form basics

to follow the latter chapters. The Chapter 2, studies representation theory

of groups. It has three sections. Section 2.1 is devoted to basic properties

of representations of groups. In section 2.2, we bring out the relationship

that exists between unitary representations of a group and non-degenerate

?-representations of its group algebra L1 (G). In section 2.3 we study the no-

tion of Peter-Weyl theory of compact groups. Main results in this section are

the irreducible representations, Schur's theory, Peter-Weyl theory. Moreover,

we parameterize the irreducible representations of SU (2).

v
 Chapter 3 is one of the main chapters of this dissertation. In this chapter

we associate a C? algebra for every locally compact group in such a way that

unitary representation of G lifts into a non-degenerate ?-representation of

? ?
this C -algebra so that the full force of the C -algebra theory can be used to

understand the groups. It has two sections. In Section 3.1, we construct the

enveloping C ? -algebra and reduced C ? -algebra of a group. Using C ? -algebra

theory, we show that the dual of enveloping C ? -algebra is the Banach space

of of all matrix coecients corresponding to all unitary representations of G.

The studies we carry out here, give rise to two Banach algebras, called Fourier

Stieltjes algebra and Fourier algebra, which we study in end of Section 3.1

and Section 3.2 respectively.

The aim of chapter 4 is to understand amenability vis-a-vis the Fourier

algebras we dened in the previous chapter. It contains many important

results due to Godement, Hulanicki, Leptin. It contains three sections.

In section 4.1 collects important properties of amenable groups, discusses

examples, counter-examples of amenable groups. In Section 4.2 we study the

relation between amenability and Reiter's Pp -property. Finally we show that

a group G is amenable if and only if its reduced C ? -algebra and enveloping

?
C -algebra are equivalent. In Section 4.3 we proving the most important

result due to Leptin, which states that G is amenable if and only if the Fourier
algebra has a bounded approximate identity.

The investigation we carry out in this dissertation will not be complete

if we do not discuss one important property that the group algebra of an

amenable group has. In fact it serves as a motivation for the study of

amenable Banach algebras initiated by Johnson. It has three sections.

In section 5.1 we dene amenable Banach algebras and characterization of

amenable Banach algebras in terms of virtual diagonals. In section 5.2 we

prove the most celebrated Johnson's theorem which says that a group is

amenable if and only if its group algebra is amenable. Section 5.3 we study

amenability among Banach algebras and show that the Fourier algebras of

non-amenable are far from being amenable.

vi
Chapter 1
Generalities

As the title suggests, we write down the denition and basic results which we

may need in the sequel. This chapter contains prerequisites that would help

to follow the remaining chapters. Also, we x the notations and conventions

which we may adhere to in the future. The main section of this chapter

discusses the elementary concepts regarding the general theory of locally

compact groups.

Denition 1.0.1. A topological space is G is said to be a topological group

if it is a group and the map (x, y) → xy−1 is continuous from G × G into G.
A topological group is said to be locally compact (compact, connected, etc..)
group if its topological space is compact (compact, connected, etc..).

Note :- Any topological group under consideration is always assumed to

be locally compact Hausdor, second countable.

Let us give some important classes of locally compact Hausdor groups.

(i) Rn is a locally compact group.

(ii) For every xed n ≥ 1,Tn is a compact group.

(iii) For every xed n, let GL(n, R) be the group consisting of n×n invertible
matrices with real entries. Then GL(n, R) is a locally compact group
n2
as it is an open subset of R .

1
(iv) SL(n, R) = {x ∈ GL(n, R) : det(x) = 1} and O(n) be the group

of orthogonal matrices are also locally compact groups as they form

closed subset of GL(n, R).

 
n a b o
(v) S= x= : a > 0, b ∈ R .
0 1

(vi) Let F2 denote the free group generated by a,b with ab 6= ba.It is a

nonabelian discrete group.Arbitary element of this group is of the form

am bn ck .... where m,n,k belong to Z.

Denition 1.0.2 (Strong operator topology). If X is a Banach space,

then the strong operator topology (SOT) on BL(X) is the topology which is
generated by the sub basic open sets at T given by {S(T, x, )}x∈X, >0 where
n o
S(T, x, ) = A ∈ BL(X) : k(T − A)xk <  .

A net {Tα } in BL(X) converges to T with respect to strong operator topology

if lim Tα x = T x, for all x ∈ X.
α

Theorem 1.0.3. Let (xα )α∈ I is a net in a normed space that converges
weakly to some x, then some sequence of convex combinations of members of
{xα : α ∈ I} converges to x with respect to the norm topology.

Denition 1.0.4. Let G be a locally compact space. A Borel measure µ is

said to be regular if
1. µ(K) < ∞, for every compact set K.
2. For every Borel set E , µ(E) = inf{ µ(U ) : U is open and E ⊆ U }.
3. If E is any Borel set and µ(E) < ∞,
then µ(E) = sup µ(K) : K is compact, K ⊆ E .


Let G be a locally compact Hausdor group. If M (G) denotes the space

of complex Borel measures on G, then it forms a Banach Space. In what

follows, we briey show that the underlying group structure gives rise to

2
two additional structures on M (G), with respect to which M (G) forms an

involutive Banach algebra. If µ, ν M (G), then dene

are in
Z Z Z
φ(x) d(µ ∗ ν)(x) = φ(xy) dµ(x) dν(y).

µ∗ν is called the convolution of the measures. For every µ and ν, µ ∗ ν

belongs to M (G) and kµ ∗ νk ≤ kµk kνk . Recall that if x belongs to G, then
δx denotes the Dirac measure at x. If x, y are in G, then
Z Z Z Z
φ d(δx ∗ δy ) = φ(uv) dδx (u) dδy (v) = φ(xy) = φ dδxy .

Therefore, δx ∗ δy = δxy . See that δe is the multiplicative identity of M (G).

?
The involution µ → µ on M (G) is dened by
Z Z
φ dµ = φ(x−1 ) dµ(x).
?

It is easy to see that δe is the identity for M (G). In what follows we exhibit

one more involutive Banach algebra over G. A Borel measure m on G is

said to be left invariant if m(xE) = m(E) for every Borel set E, and for all
x in G.

Theorem 1.0.5. Let G be a locally compact Hausdor group. There exists

a non-zero, positive, left invariant regular Borel measure on G. Moreover, it
is unique up to a positive constant.
Such a measure is called Haar measure and the corresponding integral

is called Haar integral. The proof in its full generality, can be seen in the

books by A. Weil[16], Loomis[10]. For any subset E of a discrete group, if

m(E) is dened to be the number of elements in E, then it is a Haar measure

called counting measure. The Lebesgue measure is the Haar measure for the
1
R 2π
group Rn , as it is translation invariant. For the Torus T,
2π 0
f (eıx )dx is
the Haar integral. For the computation of Haar measure for other classical

matrix groups, we refer to Hewitt and Ross [6]. Let Lp (G), 1 ≤ p < ∞ denote
as usual, the Banach space consisting of all measurable functions f such that
R p
G
|f (x)| dx is nite. Recall that by Radon-Nikodym theorem we can view
1
L (G) as a closed subspace of M (G) consisting of all measures which are

3
absolutely continuous with respect to Haar measure. For every f, g ∈ L1 (G),
since
Z Z Z Z Z
φ(x)d(f ∗g)(x) dx = φ(xy)f (x)g(y) dx dy = φ(x)f (y)g(y −1 x) dydx
G G G G G

we dene convolution
Z
f ∗ g(x) = f (y)g(y −1 x) dy. (1.0.1)

Similarly, the involution of M (G), restricted to L1 (G), is given by

f ? (x) dx = f (x−1 ) d(x−1 ).

That is,

f ? (x) = ∆(x−1 )f (x−1 ). (1.0.2)

Summarizing we observe that with the above convolution product and the

involution, L1 (G) forms an involutive Banach algebra. Moreover it is a two-

sided ideal in M (G) and closed under involution. In fact

Z
µ ∗ g(x) = g(y −1 x) dµ(y).
G
Z
f ∗ µ(x) = ∆(y −1 )f (xy −1 ) dµ(y).
G

One can easily see that if G is commutative then L1 (G) is a commutative

Banach ?-algebra. With a little more eorts, one can prove the converse
1
also. That is, if L (G) is commutative with the convolution product then

the underlying group is commutative. Let us also remark that if G is discrete

then δe is the identity for L1 (G). We recall that the converse also holds. In
1
fact if L (G) has identity then G is discrete. But nevertheless it has bounded

approximate identity. We briey construct one such as follows.Let {Vα }α∈ I

be a neighbourhood system consisting of compact neighbourhoods at e. Set

χVα
fα = , µ(Vα ) is a measure on Vα . (1.0.3)
µ(Vα )

4
Then {fα }α∈I is a bounded approximate identity for L1 (G). Let us end our

discussion about group algebra by recalling some important properties of

group algebras of commutative groups. In the rest of this section we recall

the results from abelian harmonic analysis which we might require in the

future. We assume that G is commutative. If A = L1 (G) we show how

∆(A) is identied with the group consisting of characters. Let T denote the

Torus, group consisting of all complex numbers with modulus 1. A continuous

group homomorphism from G into T, is called a character. The set of all

characters of G is denoted by G
b. It can be seen that G
b is forms a locally

compact abelian group under pointwise multiplication and compact - open

topology and is called as dual group of G.

Theorem 1.0.6. The map χ to τχ from Gb in to ∆(L1 (G)) given by

Z
τχ (f ) = f (x)χ(x)dx ∀f ∈ L1 (G), (1.0.4)
G

denes a homeomorphism from Gb into ∆(L1 (G)), with Gelfand topology.

Denition 1.0.7. For every f ∈ L1 (G) the Fourier transform of f is dened
to be a function on Gb given by
Z
fˆ(γ) = f (x)hx, γi dx. (1.0.5)

Proposition 1.0.8. The Fourier transform is a injective homomorphism

from L1 (G) to C0 (G)
b and its range is dense in C0 (G)
b .

That is to say in the language of Gelfand theory,

Theorem 1.0.9. (Fourier Inversion formula) Let G be a locally compact

abelian group. Then there exists a Haar measure dγ on Gb satisfying the
following. If f ∈ L1 (G) and fb ∈ L1 (G)
b , then
Z
f (x) = fb(γ)γ(x) dγ a. e (1.0.6)

G
b

5
Theorem 1.0.10. (Plancherel theorem) Let G be a locally compact abelian
group. If f ∈ L1 (G) ∩ L2 (G) then
kf kL2 (G) = kfˆkL2 (G)
b .

The Fourier transform extends to a unitary operator from L2 (G) onto L2 (G).
b

For the proofs and more details we refer to Loomis[10] and the recent

book Folland [4]

Denition 1.0.11. Let A be a Banach space over C. If A is an algebra over

C in which the multiplication satisfying

kxyk ≤ kxkkyk, ∀ x, y ∈ A

then A is called a Banach algebra.

Denition 1.0.12. Let A be a Banach algebra. A net {υα } of elements of
A is called approximate identity of A if

lim kυα x − xk = 0 = lim kxυα − xk = 0, ∀ x ∈ A.

α α

If {υα } is bounded, then {υα } is called a bounded approximate identity.

Notation Let A be a commutative Banach algebra. Then the set of all

non-zero complex homomorphism from A to C is denoted by ∆(A). Let us

recall that if φ belongs to ∆(A), then it is bounded and in fact kφk ≤ 1.

Equipped with weak ?-topology ∆(A) forms a locally compact space called

Gelfand space. Moreover, ∆(A) is compact if and only if A has identity.

Suppose that A is a commutative Banach algebra. Then the map x → x̂

given by x̂(φ) = φ(x) is called Gelfand transform. For every x ∈ A, x̂ is a
continuous function which vanish at innity. Moreover the Gelfand transform

is an algebra homomorphism from A into C0 (∆(A)). Let A be a commutative

Banach algebra . We say that A is semisimple, if the Gelfand transform is

one-to-one. A is called Tauberian if {x : support of x̂ is compact} is dense

in A. A commutative Banach algebra A is called regular if for every closed

subset K in ∆(A) and for all τ ∈

/ K, there exists x∈A such that x̂|K = 0
and x̂(τ ) = 1.

6
Theorem 1.0.13. If G is commutative then the group algebra L1 (G) is
semisimple and Tauberian. Moreover, it is regular.
Denition 1.0.14. If Banach algebra A admits a map: x → x? ∈ A with
the following properties,
1. (x? )? = x
2. (x + y)? = x? + y?
3. (αx)? = ᾱx?
4. (xy)? = y? x?
5. kx? k = kxk
for every x, y ∈ A and α ∈ C, then A is called an involutive Banach algebra
or Banach ?-algebra and the map x → x? , is called the involution of A.
Denition 1.0.15. Let A, B be two involutive Banach algebras. Then a
homomorphism φ : A → B is said to be a ?-homomorphism if φ(x? ) = φ(x)? .
Denition 1.0.16. An element x in an involutive Banach algebra is said
to be self-adjoint if x = x? . A self-adjoint element x is said to be positive if
x = y ? y for some y in A. We say that x ≥ y is x − y is positive. Similarly,
A linear functional φ on A is called positive if it takes positive elements to
positive reals.
Denote the set of all positive elements of A by A+ . In what follows, we

shall recall the convolution algebras dened over locally compact groups.

Denition 1.0.17. An involutive Banach algebra A is said to be C ? -algebra

if the involution of A satises the additional condition

kx? xk = kxk2 , x ∈ A.

7
Remarks
1. Let X be a compact Hausdor space. The space C(X) of continuous

complex valued functions on X is a unital Banach algebra with the

uniform norm. The map f → f¯ is an involution that makes C(X) into

?
a C -algebra. Similarly if X is a locally compact noncompact Haus-

dor space then C0 (X) consists of continuous functions which vanish

?
at innity forms a C -algebra without identity. In fact the following

theorem implies that the preceding examples are indeed the prototype.

2. Let H be a Hilbert space. Then the unital Banach algebra BL(H) is

?
a C algebra with the operator norm and the involution given by the
1
map T → T? is a examples of commutative C ? -algebras.

Theorem 1.0.18 (Gelfand Naimark theorem). Let A be a commutative

unital C ? -algebra . Then the Gelfand transform is an isometric ?-isomorphism
from A onto C(∆(A)). Moreover if A does not have identity then the Gelfand
transform is an isometric ?-isomorphism from A onto C0 (∆(A)).
Theorem 1.0.19. Let A be a involutive Banach algebra and B be a C ? -
algebra. If φ : A → B is a ?-homomorphism then

kφ(x)k ≤ kxk

for every x ∈ A.
Theorem 1.0.20. Let A, B be two C ? -algebras. If φ is a ?-isomorphism of
A into B , then
kφ(x)k ≥ kxk

for every x ∈ A.
Corollary 1.0.21. A ?-isomorphism of a C ? -algebra into another C ? -algebra
is an isometry.
1T ∗ is a adjoint of T

8
Theorem 1.0.22. If A is a C ? -algebra then there exists a approximate iden-
tity {υi } satisfying the following conditions
1. 0 ≤ υi ≤ υj if i ≤ j
2. kυi k ≤ 1 ∀ i.
Denition 1.0.23. Let A be a C ∗ -algebra and φ a linear functional on A.
We say that φ is a positive linear functional on A if φ is such that φ(x) ≥ 0
for every x ≥ 0, i.e. for every positive element x ∈ A.
Let φ be a positive linear functional on A. Then

• φ(x∗ ) = φ(x) for every x ∈ A.

• |φ(x∗ y)|2 ≤ φ(x∗ x)φ(y ∗ y) for every x, y ∈ A. This is an analog of the

Cauchy-Schwartz inequality

Let φ be a linear functional on a C ∗ -algebra A with identity element e. Then

• φ is positive if and only if φ is bounded and kφk = φ(e).

Theorem 1.0.24. Let A be a C ? -algebra. Let φ be a positive linear form.

Then there exists a unique (up to unitary equivalence) cyclic ?-representation
(π, H, ξ) with the cyclic vector ξ, satisfying

φ(x) = hπ(x)(ξ), ξi ∀ x ∈ A.

The references for this section are the books by Takesakai[15] and Peder-

son [11].

9
Chapter 2
Representation theory of groups

The main theme of this chapter is representation theory of groups and Peter-

Weyl theory of compact groups. It has three sections. Section 2.1 is devoted

to basic properties of representations of groups. In section 2.2, we bring out

the relationship that exists between unitary representations of a group and

non-degenerate ?-representations of its group algebra L1 (G). In section 2.3

we study the notion of Peter-Weyl theory of compact groups. Main results in

this section are the characterization irreducible representations of compact

groups, Schur's theory, Peter-Weyl theory of compact groups. Moreover, we

parameterize the irreducible representations of SU (2). The primary refer-

ences for this chapter are Sugiura [14] and G.Folland [4].

2.1 General theory

Denition 2.1.1. Let G be a locally compact group. Then (π, H) is said to
be representation of G if
1. the map (g, v) → π(g)v from G × H to H is continuous.
2. π : G → GL(H) is a group homomorphism.

10
Denition 2.1.2. Let G be a topological group. A unitary representation
of G is a pair (π, H) where H is a Hilbert space and π : G → U (H) is a
homomorphism such that the mapping of G × H → H that sends (g, v) to
π(g)v is continuous. Here U (H) denotes the set of unitary operators of H.
The group G is said to act unitarily on H or sometimes, G is said to act by
unitary representation on H.
Examples
1. Let Sn be the symmetric group on n symbols {1, 2, ..., n}. We may

Sn as a topological group with discrete topology. Dene π :

consider

Sn → GL(Cn ) by setting π(σ)x = (xσ(1) , ..., xσ(n) ) for x = (x1 , ..., xn ) ∈

Cn . Then (π, Cn ).

2. Let G = C, theadditive group of complex numbers, H = C2 . Dene

1 z
π(z) = , ∀ z ∈ C. Note that π(z) ∈ GL(2, C). Then (π, C2 )
0 1
is a non-unitary representation of G.

3. Let G be a locally compact group and H = L2 (G). Dene

(λ(g)f )(x) = f (g −1 x), for all g ∈ G, f ∈ H.

Then g → λ(g) is a unitary representation of G. This representation is

said to be left regular representation. Similarly, if we dene

(ρ(g)f )(x) = f (xg), for all g ∈ G, f ∈ H.

Then the representation g → ρ(g) is said to be right regular represen-

tation.

Denition 2.1.3. A representation (π, Hπ ) is said to be uniformly bounded

if there exists a constant C > 0 such that sup kπ(g)k ≤ C. Here kπ(g)k
g∈ G
denotes the operator norm of π(g).
A unitary representation is uniformly bounded, since kπ(g)vk = kvk, ∀ g.
One can also observe that any continuous representation of a compact group

is uniformly bounded.

If (π, Hπ ) is nite dimensional then the dimension of Hπ is called the

dimension of the representation π, and dimension of π is denoted by dπ .

11
Denition 2.1.4. Let (π1 , H1 ) and (π2 , H2 ) be two representations of G. A
bounded linear map T : H1 → H2 is called a G-map or intertwines with π1
and π2 if
T ◦ π1 (g) = π2 (g) ◦ T, for all g ∈ G.

We denote the algebra of all G-maps by HomG (H1 , H2 ).

Denition 2.1.5. 1. Two representations (π1 , H1 ) and (π2 , H2 ) are said
to be equivalent if there exists a G-map T such that T is one-to-one,
onto and T −1 is continuous.
2. Two unitary representations (π1 , H1 ) and (π2 , H2 ) of a group G is said
to be unitarily equivalent if there exists a G-map T : H1 → H2 which
is unitary. That is, hT u, T vi = hu, vi, for all u, v ∈ H1 .
Denition 2.1.6. Suppose (π, H) is a representation of G on the Hilbert
space H. Let H? be the dual of H. Let hπ? (g)u, vi = hu, π(g−1 vi , for all
u ∈ H? , v ∈ H, g ∈ G. Then (π ? , H? ) is a representation of G. This
representation is called the contragredient of (π, H).
Denition 2.1.7. Let (π, H) be a representation of G. If V is a closed sub-
space of H such that π(g)V ⊆ V, for all g ∈ G. Then V is said to be π-
invariant. or G- stable.
Note that V = {0} and V =H are trivial invariant subspaces.

Denition 2.1.8. A representation (π, H) is said to be an irreducible

representation of G if H does not have any non-trivial closed π-invariant
subspace.
Examples
1. Any one dimensional representation of any group G is irreducible.

2. Let G and H be as in example (2). Then (π, H) is not a irreducible

representation of G, since {(x, y) ∈ C2 : y = 0} is a proper invariant

subspace.

12
Notation Let G
b be the set of equivalence classes of irreducible

unitary representation of G and let G

e be the set of equivalence classes of

unitary representation of G.

Lemma 2.1.9. If (π, H) is a unitary representation of G and if V ⊆ H is a

π - invariant subspace then V ⊥ = {u ∈ H : (u, v) = 0, for all v ∈ V } is an
invariant subspace.
Proof. We claim that π(g)V ⊥ ⊆ V ⊥ . Let w ∈ V ⊥. If v belongs to V, then

we shall show that hπ(g)(w), vi = 0. Since (π, H) is a unitary representation,

? −1
π(g) = π(g ). Therefore,

hπ(g)(w), vi = hw, π(g)? vi = hw, π(g −1 )vi = 0.

Hence V⊥ is an invariant subspace.

Denition 2.1.10. Let (π, H) be any representation of a topological group

G. A non-zero vector v ∈ H is said to be cyclic if the linear span of {π(g)v :
g ∈ G} is a dense subspace of H. We say that (π, H) is a representation with
a cyclic vector v.
Remark:- If (π, H) is irreducible, then any non-zero v ∈ H is a cyclic vector.
Proposition 2.1.11. Two unitary representations (π1 , H1 ) and (π2 , H2 ) are
equivalent if and only if they are unitarily equivalent.
Proof. Only converse needs the proof. Suppose (π1 , H1 ) and (π2 , H2 ) are

equivalent. Then there exists a G- map T : H 1 → H2 such that T is one-to-

−1
one, onto and T is continuous. Let h, i and( , ) be the inner products
for H1 and H2 , respectively. Now consider P = T ? T : H1 → H1 . We then
have hT T u, ui = hT u, T ui = kT uk2 ≥ 0,
?
since T is one-to-one. Thus P
is a positive operator on H1 with respect to h , i. P has square root, say S.
Moreover, any operator A commutes with P if and only if A commutes with S.

13
 (Bu, Bv) = (T S −1 u, T S −1 v)
= hS −1 u, T ∗ T S −1 vi
= hS −1 u, S 2 S −1 vi
= hS −1 u, Svi
= hS ∗ S −1 u, vi
= hu, vi.

Thus, B : (H1 , h , i) → (H2 , ( , )) is a unitary operator.

−1
Since T is a G-map, B ◦ π1 (g) = T S ◦ (π1 (g)) = T π1 (g)S −1 = π2 (g) ◦ T S −1 .
Therefore, B ◦ π1 (g) = π2 (g) ◦ B. Hence (π1 , H1 ) and (π2 , H2 ) are unitarily

equivalent.

2.2 Representations of group algebra

Denition 2.2.1. Let A be an involutive Banach algebra and let H be a
Hilbert space. A ?-representation of A is a ?-homomorphism π of A into the
C ? -algebra BL(H).

Denition 2.2.2. A ?-representation ρ of L1 (G) is said to be nondegenerate

if ξ 6= 0 then there exists an element f in L1 (G) such that ρ(f )(ξ) 6= 0.
Remark 2.2.3. A representation (π, H) of L1 (G) is non-degenerate if and
only if the following holds. For every v in H if hπ(f )u, vi = 0 for all u in H
and for all f in L1 (G) then v = 0.
For every unitary representation of the group G we want to associate a non-
1
degenerate ?-representation of L (G) in a unique way.

Lemma 2.2.4. Suppose that {fα } is a bounded approximate identity in

L1 (G). If ρ(fα ) → I in strong operator topology, then ρ is non-degenerate.

Proof. Suppose ρ(fα ) → I in strong operator topology. Then for every ξ in

H, ρ(fα )ξ → ξ. Let η in H be such that hρ(fα )ξ, ηi = 0, for all ξ ∈ H. Then

hξ, ηi = 0, for all ξ ∈ H. That is, hη, ηi = 0. Which implies that η = 0. By

Remark 2.2.3, ρ is non-degenerate.

14
Lemma 2.2.5. If (π, H) is a (uniformly bounded) unitary representation of
G, then to each µ in M (G) if we dene π̃(µ) by
Z
hπ̃(µ)u, vi = hπ̃(g)u, vidµ(g), for all u, v ∈ H.
G

then π̃(µ) ∈ BL(H).

Proof. Since (π, H) is uniformly bounded, there exists M > 0 such that

kπ(g)k ≤ M, ∀ g. Therefore,

Z 
 
|hπ̃(µ)u, vi| =  hπ(g)u, vi dµ(g)

ZG
≤ |hπ(g)u, vi| d |µ| g
G
≤ M kukkvkkµk.

we get π̃(µ) ∈ BL(H).

Theorem 2.2.6. If π ∈ G̃ then there exists ?-representation π̃ on M (G)

such that π̃|L1 (G) is non-degenerate.
Proof. Dene π̃ : M (G) → BL(H) by

Z
hπ̃(µ)ξ, ηi = hπ(x)ξ, ηi dµ(x).
G

Then π̃ is a ?-representation. For,

Z
hπ̃(µ ∗ ν)ξ, ηi = hπ(x)ξ, ηi d(µ ∗ ν)(x)
G
Z Z
= hπ(xy)ξ, ηi dµ(x) dν(y)
G G
Z Z
= hπ(x)π(y)ξ, ηi dµ(x) dν(y)
G G

15
 Z
hπ̃(µ ∗ ν)ξ, ηi = hπ̃(µ)π(y)ξ, ηi dν(y)
G
Z
= hπ(y)ξ, π̃(µ)? ηi dν(y)
G
= hπ̃(ν)ξ, π̃(µ)? ηi
= hπ̃(µ)π̃(ν)ξ, ηi.

We deduce that π̃(µ ∗ ν) = π̃(µ)π̃(ν).

Also
Z
?
hπ̃(µ )ξ, ηi = hπ(x)ξ, ηi d(µ? )(x)
G
Z
= hπ(x−1 )ξ, ηi dµ(x)
G
Z
= hπ(x)η, ξi dµ(x)
G

= hπ̃(µ)η, ξi
= hπ̃(µ)? ξ, ηi.

Therefore π̃(µ? ) = π̃(µ)? . Let fα be as in (1.0.3). Then {fα }α∈ I is a bounded

1
approximate identity for L (G). We claim that π̃|L1 (G) is non-degenerate.

Fix ξ ∈ H. Since π is representation, x → π(x)ξ is continuous at e. That is,

given >0 there exists Vα0 such that, x ∈ Vα0 ⇒ kπ(x)ξ − ξk < .
For every α > α0 ,
Z
kπ̃(fα )ξ − ξk = fα (x)π(x)ξ dx − ξ

G
Z
= fα (x)(π(x)ξ − ξ) dx

Vα
Z
≤ |fα (x)| kπ(x)ξ − ξk dx
Vα
Z
< . |fα (x)| dx.
Vα
= .

16
Therefore, lim π̃(fα )ξ = ξ. Hence π̃(fα ) → I in strong operator topology. By
α
Lemma 2.2.4, π̃|L1 (G) is non-degenerate.

Theorem 2.2.7. Suppose that ρ : L1 (G) → BL(H) is a ?-representation

and is non-degenerate. Then there exists a unique continuous unitary repre-
sentation π : G → BL(H) such that π̃ = ρ.
Proof. Set K = [ρ(L1 (G)(H)]. By hypothesis, K is dense in H. Dene

π(x)(ρ(f )ξ) = ρ(δx ∗ f )(ξ).

We claim that π(x) is bounded on K. We know that δx ∗fα ∗f → δx ∗f, for all
1
f ∈ L (G), x ∈ G. So that lim ρ(δx ∗fα ∗f )ξ = ρ(δx ∗f )ξ. By Theorem 1.0.19,
α
we have kρ(δx ∗ fα )k ≤ 1. Therefore,

kπ(x)(ρ(f )ξ)k = kρ(δx ∗ f )(ξ)k

= k lim ρ(δx ∗ fα ∗ f )(ξ)k
α
≤ lim kρ(δx ∗ fα )kkρ(f )(ξ)k
α
≤ kρ(f )(ξ)k.

Therefore π(x) is bounded on K. Hence π(x) gets extended as an operator

on H. We claim that π(xy) = π(x) ◦ π(y).

π(xy)(ρ(f )(ξ)) = lim ρ(δxy ∗ fα ∗ f )(ξ)

α
= lim ρ(δx ∗ δy ∗ fα ∗ f )(ξ)
α
= lim π(x)ρ(δy ∗ fα ∗ f )(ξ)
α
= π(x) ◦ π(y)ρ(f )(ξ).

Therefore π(xy) = π(x) ◦ π(y). We claim that π is unitary.

By Theorem 1.0.19, we have

kξk = kπ(x−1 )π(x)(ξ)k ≤ kπ(x)ξk ≤ kξk.

We deduce that kπ(x)ξk = kξk. Hence π is unitary. Now,

ρ(f )(ρ(g)ξ) = ρ(f ∗ g)(ξ)

17
Since ρ is a bounded linear map on L1 (G), it commutes with integration.
1
Therefore for every g ∈ L (G),
Z
ρ(f )(ρ(g)ξ) = f (y)ρ(δy ∗ g)(ξ)dy.
G
Z
= f (y)π(y)(ρ(g)ξ)dy.
G
= π̃(f )(ρ(g)ξ).

We deduce that ρ = π̃. Finally, suppose π1 is another unitary representation

of G such that πe1 (f ) = ρ(f ) = π̃(f ), f ∈ L1 (G). Now,
Z Z
f (x)hπ(x)u, vidx = hπ̃(f )u, vi = hπe1 (f )u, vi = f (x)hπ1 (x)u, vidx.
G G

Therefore hπ1 (x)u, vi = hπ(x)u, vi, for all x ∈ G, u, v ∈ H.

Hence π1 (x) = π(x), for all x ∈ G, proving the theorem.

2.3 Peter-Weyl theory of compact groups

2.3.1 Irreducible representations are nite dimensional
Lemma 2.3.1. (Schur's lemma) Suppose that (π, H) is a nite dimensional
unitary representation of G then π is irreducible if and only if the set of all
intertwining operators is CI.
Theorem 2.3.2. Let (π, H) be a continuous unitary representation of a
locally compact group G then π is irreducible if and only if the set of all
intertwining operators is CI.
Corollary 2.3.3. Let G be an abelian topological group. Then any irreducible
unitary representation of G is one dimensional.
Theorem 2.3.4. If G is compact then every irreducible representation is
nite dimensional.
Proof. Let η1 , η2 be the xed vectors in H
Let us dene a map Bη1 ,η2 on H×H as follows. Bη1 ,η2 : H × H → C .

18
 R
Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 ) = hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 i hπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg
G

Clearly Bη1 ,η2 : H × H −→ C is sesquilinear and ,

Z
|Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 )| ≤ |hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 i| |hπ(g)ξ2 , η2 i|dg
G Z
≤ ||ξ1 || ||ξ2 || ||η1 || ||η2 || ||π(g)|| ||π(g)||dg.
G

Bη1 ,η2 is sesquilinear and, bounded . Then By Riesz representation theorem,

there exists a linear map say Tη1 ,η2 from H1 into H2 and

Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 ) = hTη1 ,η2 (ξ1 ), ξ2 i.

Now we shall prove that Tη1 ,η2 is an intertwining map.

For all x∈G and for every ξ1 ∈ H1 , ξ2 ∈ H2 ,

hπ(x)Tη1 ,η2 ξ1 , ξ2 i = hTη1 ,η2 (ξ1 ), π(x−1 )ξ2 i = Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , π(x−1 )ξ2 )
Z
= hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(g)π(x−1 )ξ2 , η2 idg
ZG
= hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(gx−1 )ξ2 , η2 )idg
ZG

= hπ(gx)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg

ZG

= hπ(g)π(x)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg

G
= Bη1 ,η2 (π(x)ξ1 , ξ2 )
= hTη1 ,η2 (π(x)ξ1 ), ξ2 i
= h(Tη1 ,η2 ◦ π(x))ξ1 , ξ2 i.

So, Tη1 ,η2 is an intertwining operator. By Schur's lemma, we know that the

set of all intertwining operators is CI.

So there exist λη1 ,η2 ∈ C such that Tη1 ,η2 = λη1 ,η2 I i.e.,

hTη1 ,η2 ξ1 , ξ2 i = hλη1 ,η2 ξ1 , ξ2 i = λη1 ,η2 hξ1 , ξ2 i

Similarly by inter changing the η1 , η2 with ξ1 , ξ2 we can get a linear operator

Tξ1 ,ξ2 on H and

hTξ1 ,ξ2 η1 , η2 i = hλξ1 ,ξ2 η1 , η2 i = λξ1 ,ξ2 hη1 , η2 i

19
But

hTξ1 ,ξ2 η1 , η2 i = Bξ1 ,ξ2 (η1 , η2 )

Z
= hπ(g)η1 , ξ1 i hπ(g)η2 , ξ2 idg
ZG

hπ(g −1 )ξ1 , η1 i π(g −1 )ξ2 , η2 dg


=
ZG
= hπ(g −1 )ξ1 , η1 i hπ(g −1 )ξ2 , η2 idg
ZG

= hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 i hπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg

G
= Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 ) = hTη1 ,η2 ξ1 , ξ2 i
= λη1 ,η2 hξ1 , ξ2 i

Therefore

λξ1 ,ξ2 hη1 , η2 i = λη1 ,η2 hξ1 , ξ2 i (2.3.1)

Let ξ1 = ξ2 = ξ where ξ is unit vector in H

If λξ1 ,ξ2 = λ then by 2.3.1

Z
hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 i hπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg = λ hξ1 , ξ2 i hη1 , η2 i
G

If H is not a nite dimensional space Then for every n there exist a set

{ei : 1 ≤ i ≤ n}. Let us apply the above formula for a set of orthonormal

vectors.

n
! n Z
X X
λ hξ, ξi hej , ej i = hπ(x)ξ, ej i hπ(x)ξ, ej i dx (2.3.2)
j=1 j=1
n
Z X
= hπ(x)ξ, ej i hπ(x)ξ, ej i dx (2.3.3)
j=1

n
Z X
nλ ≤ | hπ(x)ξ, ej i |2 dx
j=1

20
by Parseval's inequality. So,
Z
nλ ≤ kπ(x)ξk2 dx = 1

1
Hence, for every n, |λ| ≤n
which forces that λ = 0.
R
But then, if λ=0 then, | hπ(x)ξ1 , η1 i |2 dx = 0 for every ξ1 , η1 and x∈G
i.e., hπ(e)ξ, ξi = 0. But, hξ, ξi =
6 0. So, λ is nonzero which is a contradiction.
So, our supposition that H is not nite dimensional is wrong. Hence, every

irreducible representation of a compact group is nite dimensional.

2.3.2 Schur's theory

Theorem 2.3.5. Let G be a compact group and (π, H) be a non unitary
representation of G on H with the inner product h , i. Then, there exists an
inner product h , iu on H such that h , i is equivalent to h , iu and (π, H) is
a unitary representation on H with the inner product h , iu .
Theorem 2.3.6. (Schur's orthogonality relations) Let (π, H1 ) and (ρ, H2 )
are irreducible unitary representations of compact group G on Hi respectively.
1. If π is not equivalent to σ then, hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihσ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg = 0
R

2. If π is equivalent to σ
Then, Z
1
hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg = hξ1 , ξ2 ihη1 , η2 i
dπ
where ξi , ηi i=1,2 are xed vectors in Hi i=1,2 respectively.
Proof. Let η1 , η2 be the xed vectors in H1 , H2 respectively. Let us dene a

map Bη1 ,η2 on H1 × H2 as follows

Z
Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 ) = hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihρ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg (2.3.4)
G

Clearly, Bη1 ,η2 : H1 × H2 → C is sesquilinear and,

Z
|Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 )| ≤ |hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 i| |hρ(g)ξ2 , η2 i|dg
G Z
≤ ||ξ1 || ||ξ2 || ||η1 || ||η2 || ||π(g)|| ||ρ(g)||dg.
G

21
We know that all representations of a compact group are uniformly bounded

i.e., for any representation π then ∃ C >0 such that ||π(g)|| ≤ C ∀ g ∈ G.

So, there exists M1 , M2 > 0 such that ∀g ∈ G, ||π(g)|| ≤ M1 , ||ρ(g)|| ≤ M2 .
So, by the above, |Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 )| ≤ M1 M2 ||ξ1 || ||ξ2 || ||η1 || ||η2 ||.
Therefore Bη1 ,η2 is sesquilinear and bounded, By Riesz representation

theorem, then there exists a linear map say Tη1 ,η2 from H1 into H2 and

Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 ) = hTη1 ,η2 (ξ1 ), ξ2 i.

Now we shall prove that Tη1 ,η2 is an intertwining map.

For all x∈G and for every ξ1 ∈ H1 , ξ2 ∈ H2 ,

hρ(x)Tη1 ,η2 ξ1 , ξ2 i = hTη1 ,η2 (ξ1 ), ρ(x−1 )ξ2 i = Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ρ(x−1 )ξ2 )
Z
= hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihρ(g)ρ(x−1 )ξ2 , η2 idg
ZG
= hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihρ(gx−1 )ξ2 , η2 )idg
ZG
= hπ(gx)ξ1 , η1 ihρ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg
ZG

= hπ(g)π(x)ξ1 , η1 ihρ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg

G
= Bη1 ,η2 (π(x)ξ1 , ξ2 )
= hTη1 ,η2 (π(x)ξ1 ), ξ2 i
= h(Tη1 ,η2 ◦ π(x))ξ1 , ξ2 i.
So, Tη1 ,η2 is an intertwining operator.

Let (π, H1 ) and (ρ, H2 ) be two nite dimensional irreducible representations

of G on Hi , i=1,2 respectively. Then, the set of all intertwining operators

from H1 into H2 6= {0} ⇔ if π is equivalent to ρ.

Since π is not equivalent to ρ, Tη1 ,η2 ≡ 0. ∀ξ1 ∈ H1 , ξ2 ∈ H2 ,

Z
hTη1 ,η2 ξ1 , ξ2 i = Bη1 ,η2 (ξ1 , ξ2 ) = hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihρ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg = 0.
G
Suppose (π, Hi ) and (ρ, H2 ) are equivalent to (π, H). Let dπ = deg π. Then,

Z
1
∀ ξ1 , ξ2 , η1 , η2 ∈ H, hπ(x)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(x)ξ2 , η2 i dx = hξ1 , ξ2 ihη1 , η2 i.
dπ

22
Let {ei : 1 ≤ i ≤ dπ } be an orthonormal basis and e0 be the identity element.

Proceeding as we did in the proof of theorem 2.3.4 we get the equation (2.3.2)

as,

n
Z X Z
2 1
dπ λ = |π(x)e0 , ej | dx = ||π(x)e0 ||2 dx = 1 i.e., λ=
G j=1 G dπ

1
R
Hence, hπ(g)ξ1 , η1 ihπ(g)ξ2 , η2 idg = hξ , ξ ihη1 , η2 i where
dπ 1 2
ξi , ηi i=1,2

are xed vectors in H.

Denition 2.3.7. Let (π, H) be any nite dimensional representation of

G.Then the function g −→ trace of π(g) is called the character of π and is
denoted by χπ . i.e., χπ : G → C , χπ (g) =Trace of (π(g)) for every g ∈ G.
Denition 2.3.8. Let G be a locally compact group. A function f : G → C
is said to be a class function, if f depends only on the conjugacy classes
i.e., for every x, y ∈ G, f (yxy−1 ) = f (x).
Proposition 2.3.9. Let (π, H) and (σ, V) be any nite dimensional repre-
sentations of a group G Then
(i) If (π, H) is equivalent to (σ, V) then χπ = χσ .
(ii) χπ is a class function.
(iii) χπ⊕σ = χπ + χσ .
(iv) χπ (e) = dim(π)
Theorem 2.3.10. Let G be a compact group, suppose (π, H) and (σ, V) be
any two irreducible unitary representations . Then,

0 if (π, H) and (σ, V) are not equivalent

(
hχπ , χρ iL2 (G) =
1 if (π, H) and (σ, V) are equivalent

Proof. Observe that χπ (g) = hπ(g)ei , ei i where {ei }i is orthonormal basis,

P
i
proof follows from Schur's orthogonality relations.

23
2.3.3 Peter-Weyl theory
Denition 2.3.11. Let G be the compact group and (π, H) be a repre-
sentation of G. For every u, v in H the function ψu,vπ
(x) = hπ(x)u, vi is a
continuous function and is called matrix coecients of representation (π, H).
Note:Some times we will denote ψu,v
π
by πu,v .

Let (π, H) be a unitary representation of G on a nite dimensional Hilbert

space H. We chose the orthonormal basis {e1 , e2 , · · · en } of H. With respect

to this basis each π(g) is represented by unitary matrix:

π
π(g) = (ψi,j (g))1≤i,j≤n .

Recall that
X
π
π(g)ei = ψi,j (g)ej
So that
π
hπ(g)ei , ej i = ψi,j (g)
This shows that the function

π
g −→ hπ(g)ei , ej i = ψi,j (g)

is a continuous function on G. Note that if π is unitary

−1
π
ψi,j (g) = hπ(g)ei , ej i = hei , π(g −1 )ej i π
= hπ(g )ej , ei i = ψj,i (g −1 ).

Notation: Let B(G) denote the set of all matrix coecients of represen-

tation to all nite dimensional continuous unitary representations.

Proposition 2.3.12. B(G) is an algebra contained in C(G) which is closed

under conjugation. Also B(G) contains constant functions.
Proof. Suppose that φ ∈ B(G). Then,
π
φ = ψu,v where u, v ∈ H, π is nite

dimensional representation.

π
λφ(x) = λψu,v (x)
= λhπ(x)u, vi
= hπ(x)λu, vi
π
= ψλu,v (x)

24
So, for every φ ∈ B(G), λφ ∈ B(G).
Let φ1 = ψuπ1 ,v1 , φ2 = ψuρ2 ,v2 are any two arbitrary elements of B(G)

Claim:- φ1 + φ2 = ψ(u
π⊕ρ
1 ,u2 ),(v1 ,v2 )
. For,

π⊕ρ
ψ(u1 ,u2 ),(v1 ,v2 )
(x) = hπ ⊕ ρ(x)(u1 , u2 ), (v1 , v2 )i
= h(π(x)u1 , ρ(x)u2 ), (v1 , v2 )i
= hπ(x)u1 , v1 i + hρ(x)u2 , v2 i
= φ1 + φ2 .

Claim:- If γ(x) = ψ(u

(π⊗ρ)
1 ⊗u2 ),(v1 ⊗v2 )
(x) then, γ(x) = φ1 (x)φ2 (x)

γ(x) = hπ ⊗ ρ(x)(u1 ⊗ u2 ), (v1 ⊗ v2 )i = hπ(x) ⊗ ρ(x)(u1 ⊗ u2 ), (v1 ⊗ v2 )i

= hπ(x)u1 , v1 i ⊗ hρ(x)u2 , v2 i
= φ1 (x)φ2 (x).

π π (x) = hπ(x)u, vi = ψ π 1
Let φ(x) = ψu,v (x). Then, φ(x) = ψu,v v,u (x)
e
.

So, φ ∈ B(G) i.e., B(G) is closed under conjugation.

Let π denote the trivial representation given by π(x) = IH where IH denotes

the identity operator on H. Let u ∈ Hπ be such that hu, ui = 1

π
i.e., ψu,u (x) = hπ(x)u, ui = hu, ui = 1. So, 1 ∈ B(G).
Hence the theorem is proved.

Theorem 2.3.13. B(G) is dense in C(G).

Proof. We prove this theorem, using Gelfand Raikov theorem which is given

below.

Theorem 2.3.14. (Gelfand Raikov's theorem) Let G be a locally compact

group. Then, G has suciently many irreducible representations to separate
points of G. i.e., for every x, y ∈ G, x 6= y then there exists an irreducible
representation π of G such that π(x) 6= π(y) .
We use Stone Weierstrass theorem to show that B(G) is dense in C(G).
Towards that, we rst verify that B(G) separates points of G.
1π
e(x) = π(x−1 )

25
 Let x, y ∈ G and x 6= y . Now we claim that there exists φ ∈ B(G),
φ(x) 6= φ(y). By Gelfand Raikov's theorem there exists an irreducible repre-

sentation π on G such that π(x) 6= π(y) i.e., there exists at least one element
say u∈H such that π(x)u 6= π(y)u. So, there exists at least one element
π π
say v ∈H such that hπ(x)u, vi =
6 hπ(y)u, vi i.e., ψu,v 6 ψu,v
(x) = (y). Hence
the claim.

We know that B(G) is a subalgebra of C(G) closed under complex

conjugation. By Stone Weierstrass Theorem B(G) is dense in C(G).

Theorem 2.3.15. Let (π, Hπ ) be a irreducible representation of G. Let

{e1 , e2 , . . . , edπ } be an orthonormal basis for Hπ with dim(Hπ ) = dπ . Then
√
set { dπ ψi,j π b is an orthonormal basis for L2 (G).
: 1 ≤ i, j ≤ dπ :∈ G}

Theorem 2.3.16. Any f ∈ L2 (G) can be written as

X X X Z
π

 π
f (y) = dπ f, ψi,j ψi,j (y) = dπ f (x)χπ (xy −1 )dx
b 1≤i,j≤dπ
π∈G G

where the convergence of the series is with respect to the L2 norm.

√
Proof. By Peter-Weyl theorem, the functions
π
{ dπ ψi,j : 1 ≤ i, j ≤ dπ :∈ G}
b
form an orthonormal basis of L2 (G). Thus,

dπ
X X
π

 π
f= dπ f, ψi,j ψi,j (2.3.5)
b i,j=1
π∈G

Now it is enough to show that

π
 π
f ∗ χπ = f, ψi,j ψi,j
i,j

Now
Z
f ∗ χπ (x) = f (xy −1 )χπ (y)dy
Z
= f (y −1 )χπ (y, x)dy
Z X
= f (y −1 ) ψiiπ (y, x)dy
i

26
 Z X
f ∗ χπ (x) = f (y −1 ) π
ψi,k π
(y)ψk,i (x)dy
i,k
X Z
= π
ψk,i (x) f (y −1 )ψi,k
π
(y)dy
i,k
X Z
= π
ψk,i (x) π
f (y)ψi,k (y −1 )dy
i,k
X Z
π π
= ψk,i (x) f (y)ψi,k (y)dy
i,k
X

π
 π
= f, ψi,j ψi,j .
i,j

Denition 2.3.17. For any f ∈ L2 (g), π ∈ Gb,let fb be dened on Gb

Z
fb(π) = f (x−1 )π(x)dx

Then fb is known as the (operator valued) Fourier transform of f . Note that

fb(π) is a intertwining operator on Hπ .

If H is nite dimensional vector(complex valued) space , and A is a

intertwining operator on H, then the Hilbert Schmidt norm kAkH.S dened

2 ∗
of A is dened kAkH.S = tr(AA ).

Proposition 2.3.18. Any f ∈ L2 (G) has the Fourier exaction

X
f (g) = dλ tr(fb(λ)λ(g))
λ∈G
b

In particular,
1. f (e) = (Fourier inversion formula)
P
dλ tr(fb(λ)
λ∈G
b

2. kf k = dλ kfb(λ)k2H.S (Fourier Parseval Relation)

P
λ∈G
b

27
Proof. Now we prove 1

X
tr(fb(λ)λ(g)) = (fb(λ)λ(g))i,i
i
XD E
= fb(λ)λ(g)ei , ei
i
XZ
= f (x−1 ) hλ(x)λ(g)ei , ei i dx
i
XZ
= f (x−1 )ψi,i
λ
(xg)dx
i
XZ X
= f (x−1 ) λ
ψi,j λ
(x)ψj,i (g)dx
i j
X Z
= λ
ψj,i (g) λ
f (x)ψi,j (x−1 )dx
i,j
X Z
λ λ
= ψj,i (g) f (x)ψj,i (x)dx
i,j
X
λ λ


= ψj,i (g) f, ψj,i
i,j

This is follows from theorem 2.3.16

2) Let γ = f ∗ f∗ where f ∗ = f (x−1 )

Now we apply 1) to γ we get the 2).

2.3.4 Representation theory of SU (2)

Let G be the special unitary group of order 2

SU (2) = {g ∈ U (2) : detg = 1}

n α β
 o
2 2
= : |α| + |β| = 1; α, β ∈ C
−β −α

SU (2) is obviously homomorphic to the unit sphere in C2 = R4 and hence

compact. G Has a natural representation on V = C2 viz., the identity
representation g −→ g ∈ GL(V ). Thus
    
α β z1 αz1 + βz2
g.x = = ∈ C2
−β −α z2 βz1 − αz2

28
For all n≥0 , let Hn be the set of homogeneous polynomials of degree n in

two variables z1 , z2 . i.e.

( n
)
X
Hn = φ(z1 , z2 ) = αk z1k z2n−k : αk ∈ C
k=0

Clearly Hn is (n + 1) dimensional vector space spanned by ϕr where ϕr =

n n−r
z1 z2 , 0 ≤ r ≤ n. We dene a inner prodoct h, i on Hn by

hϕk , ϕr i = 0 if k 6= r

and

hϕk , ϕk i = k!(n − k)!

n n−r n n−r
P P
Then for f, g ∈ Hn , f (z) = r αr z1 z2 and g(z) = r βr z1 z2 ,
P
hf, gi = r!(n − r)!αr βr .

For each n ≥ 0, let Hn be a Hilbert space dened above If g ∈ SU (2), dened

a linear map πn (g) on Hn by

πn (g)f (z) = f (g −1 z), f ∈ Hn

It is easy to see that the map g → πn (g) from SU (2) to GL(Hn ) is represen-

tation of SU (2)

Remark 2.3.19. Let

  iθ  
e 0
T = t(θ) = : θ ∈ [−π, π]
0 e−iθ

T is clearly Homomorphic to S 1 .

1. Every element of SU (2) is conjugate to an element of T and that t(θ)

is conjugate to t(−θ), θ ∈ [−π, π]
2. Let f ∈ Hn then πn (t(θ))f = ei(n−2k)θ f for all θ ∈ [−π, π] if and only
if f = cϕk for some constant c.
Theorem 2.3.20. For each n ≥ 0 the representation (πn , Hn ) of SU (2) is
an irreducible representation .

29
Proof. By Schur's lemma ,it is sucient to show that if A : Hn −→ Hn is

linear such that A ◦ πn (g) = πn (g) ◦ A for all g∈G then A = λI for some

λ∈C  iθ 
n e 0 o
Consider the subgroup T = t(θ) = : 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π . Then
0 e−iθ
πn (t(θ))ϕr = ei(n−2r)θ ϕr , for all θ and 0 ≤ r ≤ n Thus one dimensional
subspace Cϕr , is invariant under πn (T ) for any r.

Thus each ϕr is a common eigenvalue for all πn (t(θ) with eigenvalue for
i(n−2r)θ
all πn (t(θ)) with eigenvalue e . Since Hn = ⊕Cϕr , Hn is the direct sum
of simultaneous eigen subspaces of πn (T ) In particular πn (t(θ))ψ = ei(n−2r)θ ψ
for some ψ ∈ Hn i ψ is a scalar multiple of ϕr . We now show that each Cϕr
is invariant under A.

πn (t(θ))Aϕr = A ◦ πn (t(θ))ϕr = Aei(n−2r)θ ϕr = ei(n−2r)θ Aϕr

Thus Aϕr is a eigen vector of πn (t(θ)) with eigen value ei(n−2r)θ . Therefore

Aϕr = λr ϕr for some λr ∈ C.

To conclude the proof of the clime we must show that all λr 's are equal.

To this end consider the subgroup K:

 
n cosθ −sinθ o
K = SO(2) = k(θ) = ; 0 ≤ θ ≤ 2π ⊂ SU (2)
sinθ cosθ
We consider the action of the subgroup on eigen space {Cϕr }

πn (k(θ))ϕn (z) = (z1 cosθ + z2 sinθ)n

X n 
= cosr θsinn−r θϕr (2.3.6)
r
πn (k(θ)) ◦ Aϕn (z) = πn (k(θ))λn ϕn
= λn πn (k(θ))ϕn
X n 
= cosr θsinn−r θϕr (2.3.7)
r
X n 
A ◦ πn (k(θ))ϕn = A cosr θsinn−r θϕr
r
X  n 
= λr cosr θsinn−r θϕr (2.3.8)
r

30
From 2.3.6 and 2.3.7 and the fact that πn (k(θ)) ◦ A = A ◦ πn (k(θ)) for all

θ,we conclude that λn = λr for 0 ≤ r ≤ n. Hence we have proved (πn .Hn ) is

an irreducible representation of G.

Remarks
1. Let f be a continuous function on SU (2) such that f (hgh−1 ) = f (g)
∀ h, g ∈ SU (2) (Recall that such functions are called class function).

Then Z Z π
2
f (g)dg = f (h(θ)) sin2 θdθ
SU (2) π 0

2. Let n ≥ 0 χπn the character of the representation (πn .Hn ) then

and
sin(n + 1)θ
χπn (h(θ)) = , where θ 6= 0, π, −π; and χπn (h(0)) = n + 1,
sin
n
θ
χπn (h(π)) = (−1) (n + 1) = χπn (h(−π)).

Theorem 2.3.21. Let (π, H) be an irreducible representation on SU (2).Then

π is equivalent to (πn , Hn ) for some n.

Proof. Let χπ denote the characteristic function of representation (π, H).We

1
consider χπ as a function on S ≈T and write χπ (h(θ)) = χθ . If (π, H) is not

equivalent to any (πn , Hn ), By Schur's orthogonality relations hχπ , χπn i = 0

for all n ≥ 0. Since χπ is a class function ,
Z π
2
kχπ k22 = |χπ (θ)|2 sin2 θdθ.
π 0

Let ψ(θ) = χπ (θ) sin θ; then ψ is an odd function on [−π, π]. Hence ψ(0)
b = 0,
and for n≥1
Z π
1
ψ(n)
b = ψ(θ)e−inθ dθ
2π −π
−i π
Z
= ψ(θ) sin nθdθ
π 0
−i π
Z
= χπ (θ) sin θ sin nθdθ
π 0
−i π
Z
= χπ (θ)χπn−1 (θ) sin2 θ
π 0
i
= − hχπ , χn−1 i
2
31
 i
Similarly ψ(−n)
b = hχπ , χn−1 i . Hence by the Plancherel theorem for L2 (S 1 ),
2
we get
1X

kχπ k22 = 2kψ(n)k 2

| χπ , χπn−1 |2 = 0,

b =
2
by our assumption. Hence χπ = o, which contradicts the hypothesis that π

is an irreducible representation.

Note:- Every irreducible representation on SU (2) is equivalent to (πn , Hn )

for some n.

32
Chapter 3
Fourier algebras

This chapter constitutes the main chapter of this dissertation. In this chapter

we associate a C? algebra for every locally compact group in such a way that

unitary representation of G lifts into a non-degenerate ?-representation of

this C ? -algebra so that the full force of the C ? -algebra theory can be used to
understand the groups. It has two sections. In Section 3.1, we construct the

enveloping C ? -algebra and reduced C ? -algebra of a group. Using C ? -algebra

theory, we show that the dual of enveloping C ? -algebra is the Banach space

of of all matrix coecients corresponding to all unitary representations of G.

The studies we carry out here, give rise to two Banach algebras, called Fourier

Stieltjes algebra and Fourier algebra, which we study in end of Section 3.1

and Section 3.2 respectively.

3.1 Fourier-Stieltjes algebra

Proposition 3.1.1. If k . k0 is dened on L1 (G) by

kf k0 = sup {kπ(f )k : π is any non-degenerate ?-representation} (3.1.1)

then it denes a norm on L1 (G). Moreover, the completion of L1 (G) with

respect to this norm is a C ? -algebra.
Proof. Clearly,

kλf + gk0 ≤ |λ| kf k0 + kgk0

33
Suppose that kf k0 = 0. Then λ(f ) = 0 where λ : L1 (G) −→ BL(L2 (G))
is the left regular representation. As λ is a faithful representation, we have

f = 0. Therefore k . k0 is indeed a norm and kf ∗ f k0 ≤ kf k.kgk, for every

1 ? ? 2
f ∈ L (G). Also kπ(f ∗ f )k = kπ(f ) .π(f )k = kπ(f )k . Then

sup kπ(f ? ∗ f )k = sup xkπ(f )k2

= (sup kπ(f )k)2 .

Therefore,
2
kf ? ∗ f k0 = (kf k0 )

That is k . k0 is a C ? -norm. Therefore, the completion of (L1 (G), k . k0 ) is a

?
C -algebra

Denition 3.1.2. The C ? -algebra obtained above is called full C ? -algebra of

G and is denoted by C ? (G).

From the preceding proof we observe that instead of taking all unitary rep-

resentations in the equation (3.1.1), if we take the left regular representation

alone, we get another C ? -algebra which is called reduced C ? -algebra of G.

Denition 3.1.3. The closure of ?-subalgebra λ(L1 (G)) in BL(L2 (G)) is a
C ? -algebra and is called reduced C ? -algebra of G.

We denote this C ? -algebra by Cλ? (G).

Proposition 3.1.4. Suppose that the group G is abelian. Then the full C ? -
algebra of G is identied with C0 (G).
b

Proof. If (π, H) is a unitary irreducible representation of G then by Schur's

lemma it is given by one-dimensional representation. That is, there exists

a character χπ such that π(x)ξ = χπ (x), for every x ∈ G. π going to χπ

identies G
b with the dual group. Recall that in this case G
b is a locally
compact abelian group and is called dual group with the Gelfand topology.

34
 Now
Z
π(f ) = f (x)π(x) dx.
G
Z
= f (x)χπ (x) dx.
G
Z
= f (x)χπ (x−1 ) dx.
G

= fb(χ̌π ), where χ̌π = χπ (x−1 ).

Therefore,

kf k0 = sup kπ(f )k = sup kfb(χ̌π )k = kf k∞ , since χ̌ ∈ G.

b
π∈ G
b χ∈ G
b

Since C ? (G) (L1 (G), k . k0 ) and ∆(L1 (G)) = G,

is the completion of b we have
C ? (G) is the completion of {fb ∈ C0 (G)
b : k . k∞ − norm}. Since L1 (G) is
Tauberian, (refer Theorem 1.0.13), {f : fb ∈ Cc (G)}b is dense in L1 (G).
Therefore C ? (G) = C0 (G).
b

Proposition 3.1.5. If ρ is any ?-representation of L1 (G), then ρ gets ex-

tension to a ?-representation of C ? (G).
Proof. We know that L1 (G) is dense in C ? (G) For every f ∈ L1 (G),

kρ(f )k ≤ sup kπ(f )k : π is any representation

kρ(f )k ≤ kf k0

So, ρ denes a bounded ?-homomorphism from (L1 (G), k.k0 ) into BL(Hρ ).
Thus ρ gets extended to C ? (G).

Remarks :-
1. If ρ is any non-degenerate representation of L1 (G) then it is irreducible
?
if and only if the extension of ρ to C (G) is irreducible.

2. If ρ1 and ρ2 are two non-degenerate representations of L1 (G) then they

are equivalent if and only if their extensions to C ? (G) are equivalent.

35
 3. We observe that there is a bijective correspondence between the unitary

representations of G and non-degenerate ?-representations of C ? (G)

such that irreducible ones go into irreducible ones. Moreover this iden-

tication respects equivalence relation among the representations.

Theorem 3.1.6. Let A denotenthe C ? -algebra obtained

o by completing L1 (G)
with k · k00 where kf k00 = sup kπ(f )k : π ∈ Gb . Then C ? (G) and A are
isometrically ?-isomorphic.
Proof. Dene ψ : (L1 (G), k . k0 ) → (A, k . k00 ) . Then kψ(f )k ≤ kf k0 . So
?
ψ extended into a ?-homomorphism from C (G) into A. ψ
We claim that

is injective. Suppose ψ(f ) = 0, ∀ f ∈ C ? (G). Then π(f ) = 0, ∀ π ∈ G.

b
By Gelfand Raikov Theorem, f = 0. Therefore ψ is injective. By Corol-

lary 1.0.21, we have

kψ(f )k = kf k, ∀ f ∈ C ? (G).

Therefore, ψ(C ? (G)) is closed in A. Thus ψ(C ? (G)) = A.

Hence A is C ? -completion of (L1 (G), k . k00 ).

Remark 3.1.7. The Banach space dual [C ? (G)]? of C ? (G) is given by

{πξ,η : ξ, η ∈ Hπ , π is a unitary representation of G} . (3.1.2)

Moreover the weak ?-topology on [C ? (G)]? is equivalent to the topology of

uniform convergence on compacta.For the proof and other details we refer to
Dixmier [1]
Denition 3.1.8. The Banach space dual [C ? (G)]? of the C ? -algebra of G
is called Fourier-Stieltjes algebra of G and is denoted by B(G).
Let us see from the following theorem that it is in fact a Banach algebra.

Theorem 3.1.9. B(G) forms a Banach algebra with unity under point wise
product.
Proof. As it is the dual space of C ? (G) it forms a Banach space. We show
1 2
that it forms a Banach algebra. Let φ = πξ,ξ 0 and ψ = πη,η 0 be two functions

36
in B(G) as given in (3.1.2). Let ρ denote the unitary representation given by
the tensor product
1
π ⊗π . 2
Then if ζ =ξ⊗η and ζ 0 = ξ 0 ⊗ η0 then we have

ρζ,ζ 0 (x) = hρ(x)(ζ)ζ 0 i = hπ 1 (x)(ξ), ξ 0 ihπ 2 (x)(η), η 0 i = φ(x)ψ(x)

Therefore, by (3.1.2) again, the product φ·ψ belongs to B(G).

The proof that kφ · ψk ≤ kφk · kψk for every φ and ψ belonging to B(G)
is a deep result involving the theory of operator algebras. We refer to the

paper by Eymard [3] for the proof. Hence it forms a Banach algebra.

Moreover, if (ρ, Hρ ) denotes the trivial representation then for any unit vector
ξ in Hρ , we have φ(x) = ρξ,ξ (x) = hξ, ξi = 1 and so 1 belongs to B(G) and

is the identity for B(G).

Remarks
1. Without resorting into C? -algebras, on can compute the norm of an

element in B(G) by the following result due to Eymard.

If φ belongs to B(G) then

kφk = inf{kξkkηk : φ = πξ,η }, (3.1.3)

where the inrmum is taken over all πξ,η such that φ = πξ,η .
For the proof we refer to Eymard [3].

2. Since the matrix coecients are continuous we see that B(G) is con-

tained in Cb (G). Moreover the inclusion map is continuous because,

kφk∞ ≤ kφkB(G) by (3.1.3).

3. Suppose that G is abelian. Then by Proposition 3.1.4, the full C ?-

algebra of G is identied with C0 (G),
b where G
b is the dual group of

G. Therefore, b ? So, by Riesz Representation

B(G) = [C0 (G)] theorem,

we observe that B(G) = M (G)

b where M (G)b consists of all bounded

regular Borel measures on G.

b

37
But then by inverse Fourier-Stieltjes transform we have the following identi-

cation.

B(G) = {φ = µ̂ : for some µ ∈ M (G)},

b with kφkB(G) = kµk ,

where the inverse Fourier-Stieltjes transform is given by

Z
µ̂(γ) = γ(x)dµ(x).
G
b

But then this is precisely Fourier Stieltjes algebra on G. Refer the classical

book by Rudin [12] for more details on harmonic analysis over abelian groups.

3.2 Fourier algebra

Having dened Fourier-Stieltjes algebra let us now dene Fourier algebra.

Before doing so, let us recall how it is being dened for the case of abelian

groups.

Recall that the when the group is abelian, the Fourier algebraA(G) is de-
ˇ 1 b ˇ
ned to be the space {f : f ∈ L (G)} where the f denote the inverse Fourier

transform of f and fˇ
1 b
A(G)
= kf kL1 (G)
b . As L (G) is closed ideal of M (G)
b
consisting of all measures which are absolutely continuous with respect to

the Haar measure, we infer that A(G) is a closed two sided ideal of B(G).
But this denition cannot be carried over to non-abelian groups as there is

neither a dual group nor an inverse Fourier transform.

But we have one more characterization of A(G) when the group is abelian.

Theorem 3.2.1. If G is abelian, then A(G) is contained in B(G) ∩ Cc (G.)

Moreover, A(G) is the closure of B(G) ∩ Cc (G).
It is one of the classical results of abelian harmonic analysis, whose proof can

be found in Rudin [12]. Taking a cue from this theorem we dene Fourier

algebras of locally compact groups which are not necessarily abelian.

Denition 3.2.2. Let G be locally compact group. The closure of the ideal
B(G) ∩ Cc (G) in B(G) is called the Fourier algebra and is denoted by A(G).

38
Observe that A(G) is a closed two sided ideal in B(G). Moreover, if G is

abelian we get back the classical Fourier algebra.

Theorem 3.2.3. Let G be abelian. If u ∈ A(G), then u = f ∗ g̃, for some

f, g ∈ L2 (G), where g̃(y) = g(y −1 ).

It is one of the important results of Eymard [3] that the preceding result is

true for non-abelian groups also. But since it involves deep theory of operator

algebras we do not give the proof but merely record the statement.

Theorem 3.2.4. (Eymard)Let G be a locally compact group. Then

A(G) = λf,g : f, g ∈ L2 (G) ,



where λf,g is the matrix coecient associated to the left regular representation
λ of G.

We observe that if f, g belong to Cc (G) then f ∗g̃ belongs to Cc (G). Moreover,

since,
Z
−1
f ∗ g̃(x ) = f (x−1 y)g̃(y −1 ) dy.
G
Z
= f (x−1 y)g(y) dy.
G
Z
= λ(x)f (y)g(y) dy.
G
= hλx f, giL2 (G)
= λf, g .

we see that λf, g belongs to B(G) ∩ Cc (G) and so by denition of A(G), it

belongs to A(G).

39
In what follows we list out some of the important properties of A(G) which

we might need in the sequel.

1. A(G) has identity if and only if A(G) = B(G) since A(G) is a two sided
ideal in B(G). Equivalently, A(G) = B(G) if and only if G is compact.

2. A(G) is a commutative regular, semi simple Tauberian Banach algebra.

3. The canonical embedding of G in ∆(A(G)) namely, x into τx given by

τx (φ) = φ(x) is a bijective homeomorphism.

For the proofs of all these results we refer to Eymard [3].

40
Chapter 4
Fourier algebras and amenable
groups

The aim of this chapter is to understand amenability vis-a-vis Fourier

algebras we dened in the previous chapter. It contains many important

results due to Godement, Hulanicki, Leptin. It contains three sections.

Section 4.1 collects important properties of amenable groups, provide several

examples, counter-examples of amenable groups. In Section 4.2 we study the

relation between amenability and Reiter's Pp -property. Finally we show that

a group G is amenable if and only if its reduced C ? -algebra and envelop-

?
ing C -algebra are equivalent. In Section 4.3 we will be proving the most

important result due to Leptin, which states that G is amenable if and only

if the Fourier algebra has a bounded approximate identity.

4.1 Denitions and examples

Denition 4.1.1. Let E be any subspace of L∞ (G) which contains all
constant functions. Then m : E → C is said to be a mean on E if m is
a state and kmk = m(1).
Example 4.1.2. If {g1 , g2 , . . . , gn } is any nite set in G and {λ1 , λ2 , . . . , λn },
n n
such that λi > 0 satisfying λi = 1, we dene m by hf, mi = λi f (gi ).
P P
i=1 i=1
Then m is a mean.

41
Denition 4.1.3. Let E be a subspace of L∞ (G) containing the constant
functions. A mean on E is said to be left invariant mean if m( g f ) = m(f ),
for all g ∈ G, f ∈ E.
Example 4.1.4. Let λ denote normalized left Haar measure on G, and dene
Z
hf, mi = f (g) dλ(g), f ∈ L∞ (G) ⊆ L1 (G).
G

Then m is a left invariant mean on L∞ (G).

Notation S(G) = f ∈ L1 (G) : f ≥ 0, f (g)dg = 1 .
n R o

Denition 4.1.5. A mean m on E is said to be topologically left invariant

mean if m(f ∗ φ) = m(φ), for all f ∈ S(G), φ ∈ E.
Denition 4.1.6. A locally compact group G is amenable if there is a left
invariant mean on L∞ (G).
Theorem 4.1.7. Let G be a locally compact group. Then the following are
equivalent,
1. Cu (G) has a left invariant mean.
2. G is amenable.
3. Cru (G) has a left invariant mean.
4. Clu (G) has a left invariant mean.
5. Cb (G) has a left invariant mean.
For the proof we refer to Runde [13], Greenleaf [5].

Corollary 4.1.8. Let Gd denote G with discrete topology. Then if Gd is

amenable then G is amenable.
Proof. Suppose Gd is amenable. Then l∞ (G) has left invariant mean, say m.
Observe that Cb (G) ⊆ l∞ (G). Then m|Cb (G) is left invariant mean on Cb (G).
Therefore G is amenable.

42
Lemma 4.1.9. Let H be a locally compact group, and let φ : G → H be a
continuous, open homomorphism with φ(G) is dense in H. If G is amenable
then H is amenable.
Corollary 4.1.10. Let G be amenable, and let N be a closed normal subgroup
of G. Then G/N is amenable.
Theorem 4.1.11. Let H be a closed subgroup of G. If G is amenable, then
H is also amenable.

Theorem 4.1.12. Let N be a closed normal subgroup such that both N and
G/N are amenable. Then G is amenable.

For the proofs and other details we refer to Runde [13].

Theorem 4.1.13. (Von Neumann) F2 is not amenable.

Proof. Suppose F2 is amenable. Then there is a left invariant mean, say

m, on F2 . Consider w(a) = {x ∈ F2 : x begins with a }. Similarly we take

w(b), w(a−1 ), w(b−1 ), w(e) = {e}. Then Clearly,

F2 = w(e) ∪ w(a) ∪ w(b) ∪ w(a−1 ) ∪ w(b−1 ).

Note that w(a), w(b), w(a−1 ), w(b−1 ), w(e) = {e} are disjoint.

Let χA be a characteristic function of a set A.

χF2 = χw(e) + χw(a) + χw(b) + χw(a−1 ) + χw(b−1 ) . (4.1.1)

If / w(a−1 ),
x∈ then ax ∈ w(a). Therefore,

a.(F2 \ w(a−1 )) ⊆ w(a). (4.1.2)

Now,

1 = m(χF2 )
= m(χw(e) ) + m(χw(a) ) + m(χw(b) ) + m(χw(a−1 ) ) + m(χw(b−1 ) ) by (4.1.1)
≥ m(χw(a) ) + m(χw(b) ) + m(χw(a−1 ) ) + m(χw(b−1 ) ).

43
Therefore, by (4.1.2), we have

1 ≥ m(a.χF2 \w(a−1 ) ) + m(χw(a−1 ) ) + m(b.χF2 \w(b−1 ) ) + m(χw(b−1 ) )

≥ m(χF2 \w(a−1 ) ) + m(χw(a−1 ) ) + m(χF2 \w(b−1 ) ) + m(χw(b−1 ) ).

Since m is left invariant, we have

1 ≥ m(χF2 \w(a−1 ) + χw(a−1 ) ) + m(χF2 \w(b−1 ) + χw(b−1 ) ).

= m(χF2 ) + m(χF2 )
= 1+1
= 2, a contradiction.

This proves that F2 is not amenable. Hence the theorem.

Corollary 4.1.14. If G is any locally compact group containing F2 as a

closed subgroup, then G is not amenable.
Proof. By Theorem 4.1.11, if G is amenable then its closed subgroup F2 also

has to be amenable. We proved in Theorem 4.1.13 that F2 is not amenable.

Therefore G is not amenable.

Weak containment
Let A be a C ? -algebra. Let as usual, Ae denote the class of all non-degenerate
?-representations of A.

Denition 4.1.15. Suppose that G is locally compact group. Let Σ ⊆ A. e We

say that π is weakly contained in Σ if ker(π) ⊇ ker(ρ) and it is denoted
T
ρ∈Σ
by π  Σ.
Denition 4.1.16. A function φ : G → C is said to be positive denite if
n
for all c1 , c2 , ..., cn ∈ C and x1 , x2 , ..., xn ∈ G, we have
X
ci c̄j φ(x−1
j xi ) ≥ 0.
i,j=1

Notation Let P (G) be the set of all continuous positive denite functions
on G.

44
Denition 4.1.17. Let A be a C ? -algebra. Any positive linear functional φ
is said to be a state if kφk = 1.
For the denition of weak containment among the representations of C ?-
algebra and for the proof of the three theorems that follow, we refer to the

book Dixmier [1].

Remark 4.1.18. If Σ ⊆ A,
e and if I = T ker(π), then it is an ideal. If
π∈Σ
e ξ ∈ Hπ , then πξ,ξ is a positive linear functional in A. For every
π ∈ A,
ξ, η ∈ Hπ , πξ,η ∈ A? and kπξ,η k ≤ kξk.kηk.

Theorem 4.1.19. Suppose A is a C ? -algebra. Let Σ ⊆ A, e Then the

e π ∈ A.
following are equivalent
1. π  Σ.
n o
2. kπ(x)k ≤ sup kρ(x)k : ρ ∈ Ge .
3. For every ξ ∈ Hπ , there exists a net {φα } consisting of the matrix coef-
cients belonging the representations in Σ such that {φα } converges to
πξ, ξ in the weak ?-topology. In fact Every positive form πξ, ξ associated
to π is weak ?-limit of linear sum of positive linear form associated to Σ.
4. Every state πξ,ξ associated to π is weak ?-limit of linear sum of positive
linear form associated to Σ.
For Proof we refer Theorem 3.4.4 of Dixmier [1]. For more details regarding

the weak containment among the representations of C ? -algebra we refer to

Section 3.4 of Dixmier [1].

Theorem 4.1.20. If π is irreducible, then the following are equivalent:

(i) π  Σ.
(ii) For at least one limit vector ξ ∈ Hπ , πξ,ξ is weak ?-limit of sum of the
linear forms associated to Σ.

45
As we explained earlier, there exists a bijective correspondence between uni-

tary representations of G and non-degenerate ?-representations of the C ?-

algebra namely C ? (G). In what follows, we want to understand the above

relation viz weak containment as representations of the group.

Denition 4.1.21. Let be G is a locally compact group. Let Σ ⊆ G, e π ∈

e We say that π is said to be weakly contained in Σ if the corresponding
G.
?-representation π of C ? (G) is weakly contained in corresponding Σ.

Remark 4.1.22. If we take Σ = {λ} then we observe by the preceding

discussion and Theorem 3.1.6, that C ? (G) and Cλ? (G) are isometrically iso-
morphic if and only if every irreducible unitary representation of G is weakly
contained in λ.
The following theorem is useful in understanding the weak containment

among the representations of G.

Theorem 4.1.23. Let P1 (G) = {ψ ∈ P (G) : kψk = ψ(1) = 1} On P (G) the

weak ?-topology and the topology of uniformly convergence on compact sets
are equivalent.
For proof and other details we refer to Dixmier [Theorem 13.5.2 [1]].

Theorem 4.1.24. Let G be a locally compact group. Then the following are
equivalent:
1. π  Σ.
2. Every positive denite function ψ associated to π is limit of sum of
positive denite functions associated to Σ with respect to the topology
of uniformly convergence on compact sets. If π is further assumed to
be irreducible, then the above if equivalent to the following.
3. If πξ,ξ for some ξ in H, is the limit of sum of positive denite functions
associated to Σ with respect to the topology of uniformly convergence
on compact sets.
Proof. The proof follows by Theorem 4.1.19, Theorem 4.1.20 and Theo-

rem 4.1.23.

46
Tensor products
Denition 4.1.25. (Algebraic tensor products) Let M and N be any two
vector space over F. Then there exists a pair (S, g) consisting of a vector space
S over F and a bilinear map g : M × N → S with the following properties,
given any vector space P over F and any bilinear map f : M × N → P, there
exists a unique linear mapping f 0 : S → P such that f = f 0 ◦ g.
Let H1 and H2 be two Hilbert spaces. Let H0 be the algebraic tensor

product of H1 and H2 . A general element ξ of H0 is of the form

n
X
ξ= ξ1,i ⊗ ξ2,i , ξ1,i ∈ H1 , ξ2,i ∈ H2 , 1 ≤ i ≤ n.
i=1

Now we dene a sesquilinear form ( , ) on H0 by

n
X m
X
(ξ, η) = (ξ1,i , η1,j ) (ξ2,i , η2,j ) (4.1.3)
i=1 j=1

Pn Pn
Where ξ= i=1 ξ1,i ⊗ ξ2,i ∈ H0 and η = i=1 η1,i ⊗ η2,i ∈ H0 .

Lemma 4.1.26. The sesquilinear form dened by (4.1.3) is an inner product

in H0 .
Denition 4.1.27. The completion H of H0 is called the tensor product of
H1 and H2 , and denoted by H1 ⊗ H2

Proposition 4.1.28. Let {uα }, {vβ } be orthonormal bases for H1 , H2 respec-

tively. Then {uα ⊗ vβ } is an orthonormal basis for H1 ⊗ H2 .
Denition 4.1.29. (Cross-norm) Suppose that E1 and E2 are two complex
Banach spaces. If a norm k . kβ on E1 ⊗ E2 satises

kx1 ⊗ x2 kβ = kx1 kkx2 k, x1 ∈ E1 , x2 ∈ E2 ,

then this norm is called a cross-norm of E1 ⊗ E2 .

Note that the completion of E1 ⊗ E2 under a cross-norm k . kβ is denoted
by E1 ⊗β E2

47
Denition 4.1.30. (Injective cross-norm) For each x =
Pn
i=1 x1,i ⊗ x2,i ∈
E1 ⊗ E2 , we dene
( n  )
X 
kxkλ = sup  f (x1,i )g(x2,i ) : f ∈ E1? , kf k ≤ 1; g ∈ E2? , kgk ≤ 1
 
 
i=1

Then the norm k . kλ is called injective cross-norm and the completion

ˇ 2 is called the injective tensor product.
E1 ⊗E

Denition 4.1.31. For each x ∈ E1 ⊗ E2 , we dene

( n  )
X  n
X
kxkπ = inf  kx1,i kkx2,i k : x = x1,i ⊗ x2,i
 
 
i=1 i=1

Then the norm k . kπ is called projective cross-norm and the completion

b 2 is called the projective tensor product.
E1 ⊗E

We can easily see that kxkλ 6= 0 for any non-zero x ∈ E1 ⊗ E2

and kxkπ 6= 0 for any non-zero x ∈ E1 ⊗ E2

Proposition 4.1.32. The map φ : E1 ⊗ E2 → BL(E1? , E2 ) is an isometry

with respect to the injective cross-norm k . kλ in E1 ⊗ E2 . Hence φ is
extended to an isometry of E1 ⊗Eˇ 2 into BL(E1? , E2 ).

4.2 Reiter's property

Theorem 4.2.1. Let G be a locally compact group. Then the following are
equivalent:
(i) G is amenable.
(ii) There exists a net {gi } in S(G) such that {h ∗ gi − gi } → 0 in the weak
?-topology of (L∞ (G))? , ∀ h ∈ S(G).

(iii) There exists a net {gi } in S(G) such that, lim

i
kh ∗ gi − gi k1 = 0, ∀ h ∈
S(G).

(iv) For given  > 0, for every compact set K, there exists g ∈ S(G) such
that kλ(x)g − gk1 < , ∀ x ∈ K.

48
Remark 4.2.2. Condition (iv) of the preceding theorem is called P1 -property.
Denition 4.2.3. We say that a locally compact group G is said to have the
property Pp , 1 ≤ p < ∞ if the following holds.
Forgiven  > 0, for every compact set K, there exists g ∈ Lp (G) such that g
is non-negative and kgkp = 1 satisfying kλ(x)g − gkp < , ∀ x ∈ K.
Theorem 4.2.4. G is amenable if and only if there is a net {fi } in the
unit sphere of L2 (G) such that {fi ∗ fei } converges to 1 uniformly on compact
subsets of G.
Theorem 4.2.5. Let G be a locally compact group. Then G has property P1
if and only if G has the property Pp , ∀ p such that 1 ≤ p < ∞.
For proofs we refer to Runde [13].

Theorem 4.2.6. Let G be a locally compact group. Then G has property P2

if and only if there exists {fi } ⊆ Cc (G) such that kfi k2 = 1 and fi ∗ f˜i → 1
uniformly on compact subsets of G.
Proof. Let K be a compact subset of G and let  > 0 be given. Choose

f ∈ Cc (G) be such that kf k2 = 1 and |(f ∗ f˜)(x) − 1| < 2 , ∀ x ∈ K. Then

by equation
Z Z
f ∗ f˜(x) = f (y)f˜(y −1 x) dy = f (y)f (x−1 y) dy
G G

We have (f ∗ f˜)(e) = 1. Furthermore,

λ(x)f − f 2 = λ(x)f − f, λ(x)f − f


2


 

= λ(x)f, λ(x)f + f, f − 2Re λ(x)f, f
= 2 − 2Re f ∗ f˜(x)

= 2Re 1 − (f ∗ f˜)(x)

≤ 21 − (f ∗ f˜)(x)
 

< .

49
If we take g = |f | then,

Z
λ(x)g − g 2 = g(x y) − g(y)2 dy
 −1 
2
G
Z
 |f (x−1 y)| − |f (y)| 2 dy
 
=
G
Z
f (x−1 y) − f (y)2 dy
 
≤
G
2
= λ(x)f − f 2
< .

Therefore G has the property P2 . Conversely, suppose G has the property

P2 . Then for given  > 0, for any compact set K, there exists f ∈ L2 (G)
such that kλ(x)f − f k2 < 2 , f ≥ 0 and kf k2 = 1, ∀ x ∈ K. Since Cc (G) is
2
dense in L (G), given >0 there exists g ∈ Cc (G) with kgk2 = 1 such that

kg − f k < 4 . Therefore, for any x ∈ K, we have

|g ∗ g̃(x) − 1| ≤ |g ∗ g̃(x) − f ∗ f˜(x)| + |f ∗ f˜(x) − 1|

= g ∗ (g̃ − f˜)(x) + (g − f ) ∗ f˜(x)| + |f ∗ f˜(x) − 1|.


Therefore ,

|g ∗ g̃(x) − 1| ≤ kg − f k kgk + kf k + kλ(x)f − f k
 
< .2 + = .
4 2
We deduce that there exists {g} in Cc (G) with kgk2 = 1 such that g ∗ g̃ → 1
uniformly on compact subsets of G. Hence the theorem.

Let G be a locally compact group. Then G is amenable if and only if

there exists {fi } ⊆ Cc (G) such that kfi k2 = 1 and fi ∗ f˜i → 1 uniformly

on compact subsets of G. Let us recall an all time important theorem in the

representation theory of groups, namely, Godement's theorem.

50
Theorem 4.2.7. (Godement) Let φ be any square-integrable continuous
positive denite function on G. Then there exists a square-integrable function
ψ such that φ = ψ ∗ ψ.e

Refer Dixmier [1, Theorem 13.8.6] for a proof and more details.

Theorem 4.2.8. (Hulanicki) Let G be a locally compact group. Then the

following are equivalent.
1. G is amenable.
2. Every irreducible unitary representation of G is weakly contained in λ.
3. The trivial representation G is weakly contained in λ.
Proof. We shall rst show that (1) and (2) are equivalent. Suppose G is

amenable. Then there exists {fi } in Cc (G) such that kfi k = 1 and fi ∗ f˜i → 1
in topology of uniform convergence on compact sets. That is, if φi = fi ∗ f˜i

then φi → 1 in topology of uniform convergence on compact sets. Hence

1  λ, by (3) of Theorem 4.1.24.

Conversely, suppose that if 1  λ. Then by Theorem 4.1.24 and by

Theorem 4.2.4 we observe that G is amenable. Now we shall show that (2)

and (3) are equivalent. Of course one has to show only that (3) implies (2).

Let the trivial representation is weakly contained in λ. By the above para-

graph G is amenable. Therefore by the preceding remark, there exists a net

of positive denite functions {ψi } in Cc (G), {ψi } → 1 in topology

such that

of uniformly convergence on compact sets. Let π ∈G

b and φ = πξ,ξ . Then
{φψi } → φ and φψi belongs to Cc (G). By Godement's theorem, there exists

gi ∈ L2 (G) such that φψi = gi ∗ g̃. Thus gi ∗ g˜i → φ in topology of uniform

convergence on compact sets. Hence by Theorem 4.1.24, again we have that

π is weakly contained in λ.

The preceding theorem is due to Hulanicki [7]. There is an important

corollary of the above theorem.

Corollary 4.2.9. A group G is amenable if and only if C ? (G) ∼

= Cλ? (G).

Proof. The proof follows by the preceding theorem and Remark 4.1.22.

51
4.3 Leptin's Theorem
Lemma 4.3.1. If {uα } is a bounded approximate identity in A(G). Then
{uα } → 1 uniformly on compact sets.

Proof. Recall that for every φ = πξ,ξ in B(G),

|φ(x)| = |hπ(x)ξ, ηi| ≤ kξk kηk.

Therefore

|φ(x)| ≤ kφk implies kφk∞ ≤ kφk.

Let K be a compact set. Since A(G) is regular, there exists φ ∈ A(G) such

that φ|K = 1. For every x ∈ K,

|uα (x) − 1| = |(uα .φ(x))(x) − φ(x)| ≤ kuα .φ − φkA(G) .

Hence {uα } → 1 uniformly on compact sets.

Theorem 4.3.2 (Leptin). Let G be a locally compact group. If G is

amenable if and only if A(G) has a bounded approximate identity.

Proof. Let G be amenable. Then there exists {fi } ⊆ Cc (G) such that

kfi k2 = 1 and fi ∗ f˜i → 1 uniformly on compact subsets of G. Denote ψi

by fi ∗ f˜i . We claim that ψi is a bounded approximate identity in A(G). Since

Cc (G) ∩ P (G) spans a dense subsets of A(G) and kψi kA(G) ≤ kfi k2 kf˜i k2 = 1,
it is sucient to show that lim kψi φ − φkA(G) = 0, ∀ φ ∈ Cc (G) ∩ P (G). Let
i
φ ∈ Cc (G) ∩ P (G). Take χi = ψi φ. Then χi ∈ P (G). For f ∈ Cc (G), we let

ρ(f ) denote the bounded operator on L2 (G) given by convolution

ρ(f )g = g ∗ f, f ∈ L2 (G).

By Godement's theorem, ρ(χi ), ρ(φ) are positive and there exists

hi , h ∈ L2 (G) such that

χi = hi ∗ h̃i , φ = h ∗ h̃

52
and

ρ(χi )1/2 (f ) = f ∗ hi , ρ(φ)1/2 (f ) = f ∗ h, ∀ f ∈ Cc (G).

We shall show that lim khi − hk2 = 0. Let S = supp(φ). Then supp(χi ) ⊆ S.
i
Since ψi → 1 uniformly on S, we have

lim kχi − φk∞ = 0. (4.3.1)

i

For any f ∈ Cc (G), let fy (x) = f (xy −1 ), x ∈ G. Then clearly,

kfy k2 = ∆(y)1/2 kf k2 . Therefore for any f ∈ Cc (G), we have

ρ(χi ) − ρ(φ) = f ∗ (χi − φ)
2
Z
χi (y) − φ(y) ∆(y)−1 fy dy


=

2
G
Z !
χi (y) − φ(y) ∆(y)−1/2 dy
 
≤ kf k2
G
Z !
∆(y)−1/2 dy

≤ χi − φ kf k2 .
∞
S

Therefore, by (4.3.1), we have lim ρ(χi ) − ρ(φ) = 0 and the number
i √
c = sup kρ(χi )k is nite. By approximating the function t with

polynomials uniformly on the interval [0, c] we see that

lim ρ(χi )1/2 − ρ(φ)1/2 = 0.
i

Thus for every f ∈ Cc (G),

lim f ∗ (hi − h) 2 = lim ρ(χi )1/2 − ρ(φ)1/2 (f ) 2 = 0.
i i

Since f ? (x) = ∆(x)−1 f (x−1 ), x ∈ G, we have

limhhi − h, f ∗ gi = lim f ? ∗ (hi − h), g = 0, ∀ f, g ∈ Cc (G).


i i

53
Moreover,
Z Z
2 2
hi =
2
| hi (x)| dx = hi (x)hi (x)dx
G G
Z
= hi (x)h̃i (x−1 )dx = (hi ∗ h̃i )(e).
G

Since Cc (G) ∗ Cc (G) is dense in L2 (G) and sup khi k22 = sup χi (e) < ∞, we

have

limhhi , f i = hh, f i, f ∈ L2 (G).

i

Also lim khi k2 = lim χi (e) = φ(e) = khk2 . Therefore,

i i

lim khi − hk22 = 2khk22 − 2 lim Rehhi , hi = 0.

i i

Now,

ψi φ − φ = kχi − φkA(G)
A(G)

= hi ∗ h̃i − h ∗ h̃ A(G)

= hi ∗ (h̃i − h̃) + (hi − h) ∗ h̃kA(G)

≤ khi k2 khi − hk2 + khi − hk2 khk2

 
= khi − hk2 khi k2 + khk2 .

Therefore, lim ψi φ−φ A(G) = 0. Similarly we can get lim φψi −φ A(G) = 0.
i i
Hence ψi is a bounded approximate identity in A(G) as claimed.

Conversely, suppose that {uα } is a bounded approximate identity. We claim

that A(G) is weak ?-dense in B(G). Let φ ∈ B(G). Consider {φ.uα } is a

bounded net in B(G). Any bounded set in B(G) is weak ?-compact. By

Lemma 4.3.1, uα → 1 uniformly on compact sets. Therefore φ.uα → φ. By

Theorem 4.1.23, φ.uα → φ in weak ?-topology. SinceA(G) is dense in B(G),

uα ∈ A(G). Therefore A(G) is weak ?-dense in B(G). Consider

A(G)+ = {φ ∈ A(G) : φ is positive denite}.

54
We show that A(G)+ is weak ?-dense in B(G)+ = P (G). Since A(G)+ is

a convex set, there exists T ∈ C ? (G) such that hT, ui = 0, ∀ u ∈ A(G)+ .

As A(G) is weak ?-dense in B(G), T = 0. Since (Cc (G) ∩ A(G))+ is dense

in A(G)+ , (Cc (G) ∩ A(G))+ is weak ?-dense in B(G)+ . As 1 ∈ B(G), there

exists φi ∈ Cc (G) ∩ A(G) and bounded such that φi → 1 in weak ?-topology.

Therefore φi → 1 in topology of uniform convergence on compact sets. By

Godement's theorem, there exists {fi } in L2 (G) such that φi = fi ∗ f˜i . Hence
G is amenable. This completes the proof of the Theorem 4.3.2.

The preceding theorem is due to Leptin [9]. But the proof given here is

adopted from what is given in Pederson [11].

55
Chapter 5
Amenable Banach algebras

This chapter studies the notion of amenable Banach algebras introduced by

Johnson. It has three sections. In section 5.1 we dene amenable Banach

algebras and give a characterization of amenable Banach algebras in terms

of virtual diagonals. In section 5.2 we prove the most celebrated Johnson's

theorem which says that a group is amenable if and only if its group algebra

is amenable. Section 5.3 we investigate the amenability of Fourier algebras of

noncompact groups. Unlike abelian case, Fourier algebras are non-amenable

even in the simplest case of non-abelian groups. We give a characterization

of compact groups to have its Fourier algebra to be amenable. Using this

characterization we show that the Fourier algebra of such a simple group like

SU (2) is not amenable.

5.1 Basic properties

Denition 5.1.1. Let A be a Banach algebra. A Banach space X which is
also a left A-module is called a left Banach A- module if there is K > 0 such
that ka.xk ≤ Kkakkxk, (∀ a ∈ A, x ∈ X).
Similarly we dene right Banach A-module, Banach A -bimodule.
Denition 5.1.2. Let A be a Banach algebra. A Banach
A-bimodule X is said to be non-degenerate( or essential) if the linear hull of
{a.x.b : a, b ∈ A, x ∈ X} is dense in X.

56
 We need the following important theorem in the sequel.

Theorem 5.1.3. (Cohen's factorization theorem) Suppose that A is a

Banach algebra with bounded approximate identity and X is a non-degenerate
A-bimodule. Then for all y ∈ X, there exists
a, b ∈ A, x ∈ X such that
y =a·x·b

Denition 5.1.4. Let A be a Banach algebra, and let X be a Banach A-

bimodule. A bounded linear map D : A → X is called a derivation if

D(ab) = a.D(b) + D(a).b, (a, b ∈ A)

Denition 5.1.5 (Inner derivation). Let x ∈ X. We dene

adx : A → X by a → a.x − x.a

It is easily seen that adx is a derivation. Derivations of this form are called
inner derivations.
Notation Let Z 1 (A, X) be the set of all derivations from A into X and let
1
B (A, X) be the set of all inner derivations from A into X. Then clearly

B 1 (A, X) is a subspace of Z 1 (A, X) and Z 1 (A, X) is a closed subspace of

L(A, X).

Denition 5.1.6. Let A be a Banach algebra, and let X be a Banach A-

bimodule. Then 1
Z (A, X)
H1 (A, X) = ,
B 1 (A, X)
is the rst Hochschild co-homology group of A with coecients in X . Then
H1 (A, X) is called a co-homology space.

Remarks

(i) Let A be a Banach algebra. Then if X is a left Banach A-module, then

?
X becomes a right Banach A-module through

hx, φ.ai = ha.x, φi, (a ∈ A, x ∈ X, φ ∈ X ? )

57
(ii) If X is a right Banach A-module, then X? becomes a left Banach A-
module through

hx, a.φi = hx.a, φi, (a ∈ A, x ∈ E, φ ∈ X ? )

(iii) If X is a Banach A-bimodule, then X? equipped with the left and

right module actions of A from (i) and (ii), respectively, is a Banach

A-bimodule.

Proposition 5.1.7. Let A be a Banach algebra with a bounded right approx-

imate identity, and let X be a Banach A -bimodule such that A.X = {0}.
Then H1 (A, X ? ) = {0}.
Proof. Since ha, f.xi = hx.a, f i = h0, f i = 0, x ∈ A, a ∈ X, f ∈ X ? .
Therefore X ? .A = {0}. Let D ∈ Z 1 (A, X ? ) and let a, b ∈ A. Then D(ab) =
?
D(a).b + a.D(b). Since X .A = {0}, we have D(a).b = 0. Therefore, D(ab) =
a.D(b).
Let (eα )α be a bounded right approximate identity for A, and let φ ∈ X? be

a weak ?-limit point of (Deα )α . Without loss of generality, we may suppose

?
that φ = w -limDeα .
α
Then

D(a) = limD(aeα ) = lima.D(eα ) = a.limD(eα ) = a.φ.

α α α
1 ?
Therefore D(a) = a.φ. Hence D ∈ B (A, X ). By denition of H1 (A, X ? ),
we have H1 (A, X ? ) = {0}, establishing the proposition completely.

Denition 5.1.8. Let A be a unital Banach algebra. Then a Banach

A-bimodule X is called unital if

eA .x = x.eA = x, (x ∈ X).

Denition 5.1.9. Let A be a Banach algebra. A Banach A-bimodule X is

called pseudo unital if
X = {a.x.b : a, b ∈ A, x ∈ X}.

Remark If A has a bounded approximate identity and if X is non-degenerate,

then X is pseudo unital.

58
Proof. By using Cohen's factorization Theorem 5.1.3, we see that X is

pseudo unital.

Proposition 5.1.10. Let A be a Banach algebra with a bounded approximate

identity. Then H1 (A, X ? ) = {0} for each Banach A-bimodule X if and only
if H1 (A, X ? ) = {0} for each pseudo- unital Banach A-bimodule X.
Proof. Since every pseudo-unital Banach A-bimodule X is Banach A-bimodule,
1 ?
we have H (A, X ) = {0} for each pseudo-unital Banach A-bimodule X.
Conversely, assume that H1 (A, X ? ) = {0} for each pseudo-unital Banach

A-bimodule X. Let X be any Banach A-bimodule.

1 ?
We claim that H (A, X ) = {0} for each Banach A-bimodule X. Let X0 =
{a.x.b : a, b ∈ A, x ∈ X}. Then X0 is a non-degenerate Banach A-
submodule. By Cohen's Factorization Theorem 5.1.3, X0 is a pseudo unital
1
and closed. By hypothesis, H (A, X0? ) = 0. Let D ∈ Z 1 (A, X ? ), and let

π : X ? → X0? be a restriction map. Then

hx, π(a.f )i = hx, a.f i

= ha.x, f i, x ∈ X0
= ha.x, π(f )i
= hx, a.π(f )i.

Therefore π(a.f ) = a.π(f ). Hence π is A-module homomorphism. Then

1
π◦D ∈ Z (A, X0? ). Since H 1
(A, X0? ) = {0}, there exists a φ0 ∈ X0? such
?
that π ◦ D = adφ0 . By Hahn Banach theorem, let φ ∈ X be such that
φ|X0 = φ0 . If D̃ = D − adφ , then D̃ ∈ Z 1 (A, X0⊥ ). Also A. (X/X0 ) = 0.
For, a.(x + X0 ) = ax + X0 = X0 , since ax ∈ X0 . By Proposition 5.1.7, we

have
1
H (A, (X/X0 ) ) = 0. ?
That is, H 1
(A, X0⊥ ) = 0, since (X/X0 )? = X0⊥ .
Then there exists a ψ ∈ X0⊥ such that D̃ = adψ . That is, D = adφ +
adψ = adφ+ψ . Hence H1 (A, X ? ) = 0, for any Banach A-bimodule, proving
the proposition.

Denition 5.1.11. A Banach algebra A is called amenable if H1 (A, X ? ) =

{0}, for every Banach A-bimodule X.

We will give examples of Amenable Banach algebras in next section.

59
Proposition 5.1.12. Let A be an amenable Banach algebra. Then A has a
bounded approximate identity.
Proof. Let E be the Banach A- bimodule whose underlying space is A. We

dene a.x and x.a as follows

a.x = ax and x.a = 0, a ∈ A, x ∈ E.

Note that

1. hx? , a · x?? i = hx? · a , x?? i and hx , x? · ai = ha · x , x? i =

6 0.

2. hx? , x?? · ai = ha · x? , x?? i and hx , a · x? i = hx · a , x? i = 0.

Let i : A → E ?? be the canonical embedding of A. Then i ∈ Z 1 (A, E ?? ).
For,

a.i(b) + i(a).b = a.i(b), by (2).

= ab
= i(ab)

Since E is Banach A-bimodule, we have E? is also Banach A-bimodule.

1 ?? 1 ??
As A is amenable, we have Z (A, E ) = B (A, E ). Then there exists

φ ∈ E ?? such that i = adφ . That is, i(a) = a.φ − φ.a = a.φ, by (2).
Now for every f ∈ E ?, we have

hf, i(a)i = hf, a.φi = hφ.f, ai = hφ, f.ai

i.e., hf, ai = hf.a, φi, for all a ∈ A.

Let {eα }α∈I be a bounded net in A such that X = w? - lim eα . Then

α

w- lim ha.eα , f i = ha, f i

α

Therefore, a = w- lim aeα .

α
By Theorem 1.0.3, we have a = lim a.eα . Therefore, {eα } is a bounded right
α
approximate identity for A. Similarly, we can obtain a bounded left approx-

imate identity {fβ }β∈I for A. Dene ẽα,β = eα + fβ − eα fβ . Then, for a ∈ A,

we have

kaẽα,β − ak ≤ ka.eα − ak + ka.fβ − aeα fβ k

≤ kaeα − ak + ka − aeα kkfβ k

60
Since lim kaeα − ak = 0, we have lim kaẽα,β − ak = 0. Similarly, we get
α α
a = lim ẽα,β .a, for all a ∈ A.
α,β

Virtual diagonal
Let A be a Banach algebra. Then A⊗A
b is a Banach A -bimodule through

a.(b ⊗ c) = ab ⊗ c and (b ⊗ c).a = b ⊗ ca, (a, b, c, ∈ A).

Now we dene diagonal operator ∆A : A⊗

bA → A by ∆A (a ⊗ b) = ab.
Since ∆A (a.(b ⊗ c)) = ∆A (ab ⊗ c) = abc = a.∆A (b ⊗ c), we have ∆A is a

A-left module homomorphism. Similarly, we get ∆A is a A- right module

homomorphism. Thus ∆A is a A- bimodule homomorphism. Then ∆??

A is a
?? ??
bimodule homomorphism from (A⊗A)
b to A .

Denition 5.1.13. Let A be a Banach algebra. Then M ∈ (A⊗A) b ?? is

called a virtual diagonal for A if a.M = M.a and a.∆??
A M = a, a ∈ A.

Denition 5.1.14. Let A be a Banach algebra. Then a bounded net {mα }α∈I
in (A⊗A)
b is called an approximate diagonal for A if

a.mα − mα .a → 0 and a.∆A mα → a, (a ∈ A).

Example 5.1.15. Let A = Mn . Let {ej,k : j, k = 1, ..., n} be the set of

n
canonical matrix units of A, and let m = n1
P
ej,k ⊗ ek,j .
j,k=1

n
1 X
T hen ∆m = ∆(ej,k ⊗ ek,j )
n j,k=1
n
1 X
= ej,k .ek,j
n j,k=1
n
1X
= n.ej,j
n j=1
n
X
= ej,j
j=1

61
 n
Therefore, a.∆m = a.
P
ej,j = a.
j=1
Let l, m ∈ {1, 2, ..., n}. We then have
n
1 X
el,m .m = el,m ej,k ⊗ ek,j
n j,k=1
n
1X
= el,j ⊗ ej,m
n j=1
n
1 X
= ej,k ⊗ ek,j el,m
n j,k=1
= m.el.m .

Therefore, a.m = m.a. Which implies that a.m − m.a = 0, a ∈ A. Hence m

is an approximate diagonal.
Theorem 5.1.16. Let A be a Banach algebra. Then the following are
equivalent.
1. A is amenable.
2. A has a virtual diagonal.
3. A has an approximate diagonal.
Proof. Suppose A is amenable. Then By Proposition 5.1.12, A has a
??
bounded approximate identity, say {eα }α∈I . Let X ∈ (A ⊗γ A) be a weak

?-limit point of (eα ⊗ eα ). We claim that adX (A) ∈ ker(∆?? ).

Now,

∆?? (a.X − X.a) = ∆?? (a.X) − ∆?? (X.a)

= w? - lim ∆(a.(eα ⊗ eα )) − (w? - lim ∆((eα ⊗ eα ).a))
α α
= w? - lim ∆(a.eα ⊗ eα ) − (w? - lim ∆(eα ⊗ eα .a))
α α
? 2 ? 2
= w - lim (a.eα ) − (w - lim (eα .a))
α α
= 0

Hence adX (A) ∈ ker(∆?? ). Since ∆?? is a Banach bimodule homomorphism,

we have ker(∆?? ) is a Banach bimodule homomorphism. By Cohen's factor-

ization theorem, ∆ is onto and by open mapping theorem, ∆ is open. We

62
know that ker(∆?? ) ∼
= (ker ∆)?? . So that ker(∆?? ) is a dual Banach A- bimod-
ule. Since A is amenable, there exists a N ∈ ker(∆?? ) such that adX = adN .
Take M = X − N. Then we claim that M is virtual diagonal. We have,

a.M − M.a = a.(X − N ) − (X − N ).a

= adX−N (a) = adX (a) − adN (a)
= 0.

Therefore, a.M=M.a. Also

a.∆?? M = a.∆?? (X − N )
= a. (∆?? (X) − ∆?? (N ))
= a.∆?? (X), since N ∈ ker(∆?? )
= w? - lim ∆(a.(eα ⊗ eα ))
α
= w - lim a.e2α
?
α
= a.

Therefore a.∆?? M = a, a ∈ A.
Hence (1) ⇒ (2). Suppose M is a virtual diagonal for A. Let {mα }α∈I be a

b such that M = w? - lim mα . Then

bounded net in A⊗A
α

a.M − M.a = a.(w? - lim mα ) − (w? - lim mα ).a

α α
= w- lim(a.mα − mα .a)
α

and

a = a.∆?? M
= a.∆?? (w? - lim mα )
α
= a.w? - lim ∆mα
α
= w- lim a.∆mα .
α

By Theorem 1.0.3, a.mα − mα .a → 0 and a.∆mα → a. Hence {mα }α∈I is an

approximate diagonal for A. Hence (2) ⇒ (3). Let {mα }α∈I be an approx-

imate diagonal for A. Then {∆mα }α∈I is a bounded approximate identity

63
for A. Let X be a Banach A-bimodule. We claim that H1 (A, X ? ) = {0}.
By Proposition 5.1.10, without loss of generality, we may assume that X is
∞
1
P (α) (α)
pseudo-unital. Let D ∈ Z (A, X), and let mα = an ⊗ bn be such that
n=1
∞
α) (α)
b → X ? by
P
kan kkbn k < ∞. Then we dene D̃ : A⊗A
n=1

m
! m
X X
D̃ an ⊗ b n = an D(bn ).
n=1 n=1

Then D̃ is linear and bounded.

For,
!
m
X m
X
D̃ an ⊗ b n ≤ kan kkDkkbn k, since D is bounded.


n=1 n=1
m
X
= kDk kan kkbn k
n=1

Taking the inmum, we have

!
m
X Xm
D̃ an ⊗ bn ≤ kDk an ⊗ b n .


n=1 n=1 γ

Therefore, D̃extends to bounded linear map on A ⊗γ A.

∞
(α) (α)
w? - lim
P
Let φ= an .D(bn ). Then for a ∈ A and x ∈ X, we have
α n=1
* ∞
+
X
hx, a.φi = lim x, a.a(α) (α)
n .D(bn )
α
n=1

But,

lim D̃(a.mα ) = lim D̃(mα .a), in X? .

α α
∞
! ∞
! !
X X
lim D̃ a. a(α)
n ⊗ bn
(α)
= lim D̃ an(α) ⊗ b(α)
n .a
α α
n=1 n=1
∞
! ∞
!
X X
lim D̃ a.a(α) (α)
n ⊗ bn = lim D̃ a(α) (α)
n ⊗ bn .a
α α
n=1 n=1
X∞ ∞
X
lim a.a(α) α
n D(bn ) = lim a(α) (α)
n .D(bn .a).
α α
n=1 n=1

64
Thus,

* ∞
+
X
hx, a.φi = lim x, a(α) (α)
n .D(bn .a)
α
n=1
* ∞
+
X
= lim x, a(α) (α)
n bn .D(a) + a(α) (α)
n .D(bn ).a
α
n=1
* ∞
+ * ∞
+
X X
= lim x, a(α) (α)
n bn .D(a) + lim x, a(α) (α)
n .D(bn ).a
α α
n=1 n=1
* ∞
+ * ∞
+
X X
= lim x. a(α) (α)
n bn , D(a) + lim x, a(α) (α)
n .D(bn ).a
α α
n=1 n=1
= limhx.∆mα , D(a)i + hx, φ.ai
α
= hx, D(a)i + hx, φ.ai
= hx, D(a) + φ.ai.

We have a.φ = D(a)+φ.a ⇒ D(a) = a.φ−φ.a ⇒ D(a) = adφ (a). Therefore

D ∈ B (A, X ? ).
1
Thus H1 (A, X ? ) = {0}. Hence A is amenable.

5.2 Amenability of group algebras

(for amenable groups)
Proposition 5.2.1. Let A be a Banach algebra with a bounded approximate
identity, and let B be a Banach algebra such that A ⊆ B, A is a two sided
closed ideal. Suppose that X -pseudeo unital Banach A-bimodule. Then
1. X is a Banach B-bimodule
2. If D ∈ Z 1 (A, X ? ) then there is a D̃ ∈ Z 1 (B, X ? ) such that D can be
extended to D̃ from B into X ? .
3. D̃ is continuous with respect to the strict operator topology on B and
the weak ?-topology on X ? .
Proof. Let x ∈ X, and let a ∈ A, y ∈ X be such that x = a.y. For b ∈ B,

65
we dene b.x = ba.y. Then b.x is well dened. For, if x = a.y = a0 .y 0 , then

ba.y = lim (beα .a).y

α
= lim (b.eα )(a.y)
α
= lim (b.eα )a0 .y 0
α
= lim (beα .a0 ).y 0
α
= ba0 .y 0 .

We can easily observe that X is a left Banach B - module. Similarly, we dene

a right Banach B -module structure on X, so that, X becomes a Banach B-

right module. Thus X is a Banach B- bimodule, completing the rst part of

the theorem.

Let D ∈ Z 1 (A, X ? ), and let

D̃ : B → X ? , b → w? - lim (D(beα ) − b.D(eα )).

α

We claim that D̃ is well dened. It is enough to prove that the above limit

does exist. Let x ∈ X, and let a∈A and y∈X be such that x = y.a. Then

hx, D(beα ) − b.Deα i = hy.a, D(beα ) − b.D(eα )i

= hy, a.(D(beα ) − b.D(eα ))i
= hy, a.D(beα ) − ab.D(eα )i
= hy, D(abeα ) − D(a).beα − D(ab.eα ) + D(ab).eα i
= hy, D(ab).eα i − hy, D(a).beα i
= hy, D(ab).eα i − hbeα .y, D(a)i

We therefore have, lim hx, D(beα ) − b.Deα i = hy, D(ab)i−hb.y, D(a)i , b ∈ B.

α
Thus D̃ is well dened as claimed. If a ∈ A, then

D̃(a) = w? - lim (D(a.eα ) − a.D(eα ))

α
= w? - lim (D(a).eα + a.D(eα ) − a.D(eα ))
α
?
= w - lim (D(a).eα ).
α

66
Therefore, for every x ∈ X, we have

hx, D̃(a)i = w? - lim hx, D(a).eα i

α
?
= w - lim heα .x, D(a)i
α
= hx, D(a)i.
Thus D̃(a) = D(a), for all a ∈ A. Therefore, D̃|A = D. We claim that D̃ is

a derivation. Let b, c ∈ B. Then

hx, D̃(bc)i
= w? - limhx, D(bc.eα ) − bc.D(eα )i
α
?
= w - lim (hx, D(bc.eα )i − hx, bc.D(eα )i)
α
= w? - lim (hx, b.D(c.eα ) + D(b).ceα i − hx.b, c.D(eα )i)
α
= w? - lim (hx.b, D(c.eα ) − c.D(eα )i + hx, D(b).ceα i) (5.2.1)
α

But,

w? - limhx, D(b).ceα i = w? - limhceα .x, D(b)i

α α
= w? - limheα c.x, D(b)i
α
?
= w - limhc.x, D(b).eα i
α
= w? - limhc.x, D(b.eα ) − b.D(eα )i
α

Therefore equation (5.2.1) becomes,

hx, D̃(bc)i = w? - lim (hx.b, D(c.eα ) − c.D(eα )i + hc.x, D(b.eα ) − b.D(eα )i)
α

= hx.b, D̃(c)i + hc.x, D̃(b)i

= hx, b.D̃(c)i + hx, D̃(b).ci.
Therefore, D̃(bc) = D̃(b).c + b.D̃(c). Hence D̃ is a derivation as claimed. The

second part of the theorem is completed. We claim that D̃ is continuous with

respect to strict operator topology and weak ?-topology. That is, we have to

prove that D̃(bα ) → D̃(b) if bα → b in strict operator topology.

Let x = a.y, we then have

(D̃b).a = w? - lim (D(beα ).a − b(D(eα ).a))

α
?
= w - lim (D(beα .a) − beα .D(a) − b.D(eα a) + beα .D(a))
α
= D(ba) − b.D(a).

67
Also

hx, D̃(bα )i = hy, D̃(bα ).ai

= hy, D(bα a) − bα .D(a)i
= hy, D(bα a)i − hy.bα , D(a)i.


Since lim y.bα = y.b, we have lim hy, D(bα a)i − hy.bα , D(a)i = hy, D(ba)i −
α α
hy.b, D(a)i. Therefore,

limhx, D̃(bα )i = hy, D(ba) − b.D(a)i

α

= hy, D̃(b).ai
= ha.y, D̃(b)i.
= hx, D̃(b)i.

Therefore D̃(bα ) → D̃(b) if bα → b. Hence D̃ is continuous with respect to

the strict operator topology on B and the weak ?-topology on X ?.

Theorem 5.2.2. (Day's xed point theorem) Let G be a locally compact

group. Then the following are equivalent
1. G is amenable.
2. Let K be a compact, convex subset of a locally convex vector space E. If
G acts anely on K (i.e., g(tx + (1 − t)y) = t(g.x) + (1 − t)(g.y), g ∈
G, x, y ∈ K, t ∈ [0, 1]) such that the map (g, x) → g.x from G×K → K
is separately continuous, then there is x ∈ K such that g.x = x for all
g ∈ G.

68
Theorem 5.2.3. (Johnson's theorem) Let G be a locally compact group.
Then G is amenable if and only if H1 (L1 (G), X ? ) = {0}, for each Banach
L1 (G)-bimodule X .
Proof. Suppose G is amenable. Let X be a Banach L1 (G)-bimodule. By the
proposition 5.1.10, without loss of generality, we may assume that X is a

pseudo unital.

Let D ∈ Z 1 (L1 (G), X ? ), and let D̃ ∈ Z 1 (M (G), X ? ) be the extension of D.

Let K denote weak ?-closed convex hull of {D̃(δx ).δx−1 : x ∈ G} in X ? .
Then K in weak ?-compact and convex. Dene an action of G on X? by

x.η = δx .η.δx−1 + D̃(δx ).δx−1 , for all x ∈ G, for all η ∈ X ?.

Now

(x.y)η = δx .(δy .η.δy−1 ).δx−1 + D̃(δx .δy )δy−1 δx−1

= δx .(δy .η.δy−1 ).δx−1 + [D̃(δx ).δy + δx D̃(δy )].δy−1 δx−1
= δx [δy .η.δy−1 + D̃(δy )δy−1 ]δx−1 + D̃(δx ).δx−1
= δx [y.η]δx−1 + D̃(δx ).δx−1
= x.[y.η]
Therefore, this is a group action. Finally, Fix η ∈ X ?. We know that if
1
xα → x in G, then xα f →x f in L (G). Therefore, δxα ∗ f → δx ∗ f. i.e.,
δxα → δx in strong operator topology. i.e., D̃(δxα ) → D̃(δx ) in weak ?-
topology in X ? , since D̃ is continuous. Moreover, for a xed x in G, η → x.η is
continuous and ηα → η in weak ?-topology. Therefore, δx .ηα .δx−1 → δx .η.δx−1
in weak ?-topology as ηα → η in weak ?-topology.
We then have,

D̃(δxα ).δx−1 + δx .ηα .δx−1 → D̃(δx ).δx−1 + δx .η.δx−1

i.e., x.ηα → x.η in weak ?-topology. By Day's xed point theorem, there

exist a y in K such that x.y = y, for all x ∈ G. Therefore, x.η = η, for all x∈
G, η ∈ K. That is, δx .η.δx−1 + D̃(δx ).δx−1 = η, which implies that

D̃(δx ) = η.δx − δx .η.δx−1 .δx

= η.δx − δx .η
= ad(−η) (δx ).

69
Therefore D̃(µ) = ad(−η) (µ), for all µ ∈ M (G) and D̃(f ) = ad(−η) (f ), for all
1 1 1 ? 1 1 ?
f ∈ L (G). Hence D ∈ B (L (G), X ). We therefore get, H (L (G), X ) = 0,
for each L1 (G)-bimodule X.
Conversely, dene an L1 (G)- bimodule action on L∞ (G) by
 
Z
f.φ = f ∗ φ and φ.f =  f (x)dmG (x) φ, ( f ∈ L1 (G), φ ∈ L∞ (G)).
G

Then L∞ (G) is a Banach L1 (G)-bimodule. Since constant function 1 in

∞ ∞ ∞
L (G), Y = C.1in L (G). Then
consider
 Y is a subspace of L (G).
R
For, f.1(x) = f ∗ 1(x) = f (x)dmG (x) .1 ∈ Y.
 G 
R
Moreover, 1.f = f (x)dmG (x) .1 ∈ Y.
G
Let X = L∞ (G)/Y. Then X is a Banach L1 (G)-bimodule. Therefore, X? is
∞ ?
a Banach bimodule. Let n ∈ L (G) such that h1, ni = 1.
Dene D : L1 (G) → L∞ (G)? by D(f ) = f.n − n.f Then

D(f )(1) = h1, D(f )i

= h1, f.n − n.f i
= h1, f.ni − h1, n.f i
= h1.f, ni − hf.1, ni
*Z  +
=  f (x)dmG (x) .1 − f ∗ 1, n .
G
R
Since f ∗1 = f (x)dmG (x), we have D(f )(1) = 0. Hence D(f )/Y =
G
0, for allf ∈ L1 (G). We have D(L1 (G)) ∈ X ? . That is, D denes a mapping
from L1 (G) to X ? . Since H1 (L1 (G), X ? ) = {0}, there exists a τ̃ in X ? such
that D = adτ̃ . Let m̃ = n − τ̃ . Then m̃ ∈ L∞ (G)? and h1, m̃i = h1, n − τ̃ i =
h1, ni − h1, τ̃ i = 1, since τ̃ (1) = 0. We claim that hf ∗ φ, m̃i = hφ, m̃i, for all
∞
f ∈ S(G), φ ∈ L (G). Now

hf ∗ φ, m̃i = hf.φ, m̃i

= hφ, m̃.f i
= hφ, f.m̃i.

70
Since f.n − n.f = f.τ̃ − τ̃ .f ⇒ f.(n − τ̃ ) = (n − τ̃ ).f, we have

hf ∗ φ, m̃i = hφ.f, m̃i

Z
= f (x)dmG (x)hφ, m̃i
G
= hφ, m̃i, since f ∈ S(G).

Since L∞ (G) is commutative C ? -algebra, by Gelfand Naimark theorem, we

see that L∞ (G) ∼

= C(K), K is a compact T2 -space. Since m̃ ∈ L∞ (G)? ,
we have m̃ ∈ C(K)? . By Riesz representation theorem, m̃ is a measure of
L∞ (G).
Then for every f ∈ L∞ (G) and f ≥ 0, we have hf, |m̃|i ≥ 0. That is,
|m̃|
|m̃| is a positive linear functional. Take m= . Then h1, mi = 1 and
h1, |m̃|i
m is a positive linear functional. Therefore, m is a state. Since m̃ is a left
invariant mean, we have m is a left invariant mean. Hence G is amenable,

proving the Johnson's theorem.

Proposition 5.2.4. If {dπ : π ∈ G}

b is bounded then A(G×G) = A(G)⊗A(G).
b

Theorem 5.2.5. If G is compact group with {dπ : π ∈ G}

b bounded, then
A(G) is amenable.

For proof and other details we refer to Johnson [8] and Runde [13].

71
5.3 Non-amenability of Fourier algebras
Denition 5.3.1. If G is compact and π is irreducible, π̃ is a ?-homomorphism
into M, so that T r(π̃(f )) is well-dened for f ∈ L(G) where T r is the canon-
ical trace on Mdπ . Note that, if π1 and π2 have the same equivalence class
in G, then T r(π̃1 (f )) = T r(π̃2 (f )) for f ∈ L(G) In the sequel,we denote the
nuclear norm on Mn by k . kN .
Proposition 5.3.2. Let G be a compactgroup.Then:
1. An element f ∈ L(G) has a representative in A(G) if and only if
X
dπ kπ̃(f )kN < ∞ ;
π∈Ĝ

in this case, we have

X
kπ(f )kA(G) = (dπ )kπ̃(f )kN
π∈Ĝ

2. If φ : Ge −→ n∈N Mn is a function such that φ(π) ∈ Mdπ for each

S

π ∈ G̃ and
X
(dπ )kφ(π)kN < ∞ ,
π∈Ĝ

then there is f ∈ A(G) such that π̃(f ) = φ(π) for all π ∈ G.

e

3. If f ∈ A(G) , then X
f (eG ) = dπ T re
π (f ).
π∈G
e

For proof we refer to Hewitt and Ross [[6]Ÿ34] it is similar.

Remark 5.3.3. Let G be a compact group,and suppose that mG (G) = 1.Then

L2 (G) and A(G) are Banach algebras with respect to convolution.

Denition 5.3.4. Let G be a compact group.Then Aγ (G) denotes the range

of the map
γ : A(G)⊗A(G)
b → A(G), f ⊗ g → f ∗ g
equipped with the quotient norm k . kγ induced by γ. There is an analogue of
Proposition 5.3.2 for A(G).

72
Proposition 5.3.5. Let G be a compact group.
(i) An element f ∈ L1 (G) has a representative in Aγ (G) if and only if
X
d2π kπ̃(f )kN < ∞
π∈Ĝ

in this case, we have

X
kπ(f )kA(G) = d2π kπ̃(f )kN
π∈Ĝ

(ii) If φ : Ge → Mn is a function such that φ(π) ∈ Mdπ for each π ∈ G̃

S
n∈N
and X
(dπ )kφ(π)kN < ∞ ,
π∈Ĝ

then there is f ∈ Aγ (G) such that π̃(f ) = φ(π) for all π ∈ G.

e

Proof. First observe that,for each π∈G e, the operator γ drops to a metric

surjection b d π → Md π
γπ : Mdπ ⊗M , where Mdπ is equipped with k . kN . The

result then follows from Proposition 5.3.2.

We now establish,for a compact group G , a link between the amenability of

A(G) and the existence of certain nets in Aγ (G).

Remark 5.3.6. Let G be a compact group such that A(G) is amenable.

Dene ∆∗ : C(G) −→ C(G × G) by letting

(∆∗ f )(g, h) := f (gh−1 ) (g, h ∈ G)

∆∗ maps Aγ (G) into A(G)⊗A(G)

b and that ∆∗ |Aγ (G) is an isometric right
inverse of γ̌.
Lemma 5.3.7. Let G be a compact group such that A(G) is amenable. Then
there is a bounded net (fα )α in Aγ (G) such that
(i) kfα f kγ → 0 for each f ∈ Aγ (G) with f (eG ) = 0;
(ii) fα (eG ) −→ 1;
(iii) fα ∈ Z(L1 (G)).

73
Proof. Let (mα )α be an approximate diagonal for A(G). Dene

γ̌ : A(G)⊗A(G)
b → A(G), f ⊗ g → γ(f ⊗ ǧ)

It is easy to see that γ̌ is a continuous map onto Aγ (G). Let fα := γ̌(mα ),

(fα )α is bounded in Aγ(G)
so that the net

Let f ∈ A(G)⊗A(G)
b belong to ker ∆A(G) . Then it follows easily that

mα • f −→ 0. Dene ∆∗ : C(G) −→ C(G × G) by

(∆∗ f )(g, h) := f (gh−1 ) (g, h ∈ G)

It is not hard to see that (∆∗ (γ̌(mα )))α is also an approximate diagonal

for A(G), so that ∆∗ (γ̌(mα )) • f → 0 holds. Let f ∈ Aγ (G) be such that

f (eG ) = 0. By above remark 5.3.6, it follows that ∆∗ f ∈ A(G)⊗A(G)

b , and

f (eG ) = 0 implies that ∆∗ f ∈ ker ∆A(G) . We then have:

∆∗ (fα f ) = (∆∗ fα ) • (∆∗ f ) =M∗ (γ̌(mα )) • ∆∗ f → 0.

Since again by above remark 5.3.6, ∆∗ : Aγ (G) → A(G)⊗A(G)

b is an isometry,

it follows that kfα f kγ → 0.

SinceA(G) is unital , ∆A(G) mα → eA(G) . Viewing each mα as a function

on G × G we thus obtain:
Z
fα (eG ) = γ̌(mα )(eG ) = mα (g, g)dmG (g) → 1.
G

This proves (ii).

For (iii), replace the net (fα )α be the net (f 0 α )α dene through
Z
fα0 := fα (ghg −1 )dmG (g) (h ∈ G),
G

where mG (G) = 1.It is not hard to check that,if (fα )α satises (i) and (ii),

so does (f 0 α )α , and from the denition it is immediate that (fα )α lies in

Z(L1 (G)).

We can now show that A(G) is not amenable for certain compact groups G.

Theorem 5.3.8. Let G be an innite compact group such that, for each
n ∈ N, the set {π ∈ G
b : dπ = n} is nite. Then A(G) is not amenable.

74
Proof. Assume that A(G) is amenable, and let(fα )α be a net in Aγ (G) as

specied in Lemma 5.3.7. Let C ≥ 0 be such that supα kfα kγ ≤ C . By

Proposition 5.3.5(i), we have

X
d2π ke
π (fα )kN ≤ C.
π∈G
b

Since k . kγ ≥ k . k∞ , Lemma 5.3.7(i) implies that fα → 0 uniformly on

compact subsets of e of L1 (G),

G \ {eG }. From denition of ?-representation π
it is then follows e(fα ) → 0 for all π ∈ G
that π b (here we need the fact that G
is innite, so that mG (eG ) = 0). Fix N ∈ N. Then we have:
X X X
dπ ke
π (fα )kN = dπ ke
π (fα )kN + dπ ke
π (fα )kN
π∈G
b π∈Gb π∈Gb
dπ <N dπ ≥N
X 1 X 2
≤ dπ ke
π (fα )kN + dπ ke
π (fα )kN
N
π∈Gb π∈Gb
dπ <N dπ ≥N
X C
≤ dπ ke
π (fα )kN + .
N
π∈Gb
dπ <N

C 
Let  > 0, and choose N ∈N so large that
N
≤ 2
. We obtain:

X X 
dπ ke
π (fα )kN ≤ dπ ke
π (fα )kN + . (5.3.1)
2
π∈G
b π∈Gb
dπ <N

The hypothesis on G implies that the second sum in equation 5.3.1 is nite,

so that
X 
dπ ke
π (fα )kN < .
2
π∈Gb
dπ <N

for large α; it follows that

X
dπ ke
π (fα )kN < 
π∈G
b

for large α. Hence, we have

X
dπ ke
π (fα )kN −→ 0 . (5.3.2)

π∈G
b

75
By Lemma 5.3.7(iii), the net(fα )α belongs to Z(L1 (G)). Consequently, for

each π∈G
b, the net (π(fα ))α lies in Z(Mdπ ) = CEdπ ,
so that ke
π (fα )kN = |T re
π (fα )|. It follows that

 
 
X 
|fα (eG )| =  dπ T re
π (fα ) , by Proposition 5.3.2(iii),
π∈Gb 
X
= dπ |T re
π (fα )|
π∈G
b
X
= dπ |e
π (fα )|N
π∈G
b
→ 0 by 5.3.2

But this contradicts Lemma 5.3.7(ii)

Example 5.3.9. The special unitary group SU (2) and we know that every
irreducible representation on SU (2) is equivalent to (πn , Hn ) for some n
(refer theorem 2.3.21), so it satises the hypothesis of Theorem 5.3.8. Hence,
A(SU (2)) is not amenable.

Example 5.3.10. The special orthogonal group SO(3) satises the hypothe-
sis of Theorem 5.3.8. Hence, A(SO(3)) is not amenable.

76
 List of symbols
adx : inner derivation implemented by x
At : transpose matrix of A
A(G) : Fourier algebra of G
B(G) : Fourier-Stieltjes algebra of G
B 1 (A, X) : set of all inner derivations from A into X .
C : complex numbers
C(Ω) : continuous functions on Ω
Cb (Ω) : bounded continuous functions on Ω
C0 (Ω) : continuous functions on Ωvanishing at innity
Cc (Ω) : continuous functions onΩ with compact support
C n ([0, 1]) : n-times continuous dierentiable functions on [0, 1]
C ∗ (G) : group C ∗ -algebra of G
Clu (G) : left uniformly continuous functions on G
Cru (G) : right uniformly continuous functions onG
Cu (G) : uniformly continuous functions on G
dπ : dimension of representation π
eG : identity of the group G
Fn : free group with n-generators
G
b : equivalence classes of irreducible unitary representation of G
G
e : equivalence classes of unitary representation of G.
Gd : G equipped with discrete topology
GL(n, C) : general linear group over C
GL(n, R) : general linear group over R
H1 (A, X) : rst Hochschild cohomology group
La : multiplication with a from left
L1 (G) : group algebra of G
Lp (G) : p-integrable functions on G
L∞ (G) : essential bounded functions on G
mG : (left) Haar measure on G
M (G) : space of complex Borel measures on G
Mm,n (E) : m × n matrices with entries in E
Mn (E) := Mn,n (E)
Mm,n := Mm,n (C)
Mn := Mn,n

77
N : positive integers(excluding zero)
N0 : positive integers with zero
O(n) : orthogonal matrices of order n
P (G) : continuous positive denite functions on G
P1 (G) : positive functions of L1 -norm one
Q : rational numbers
R : real numbers
SO(n) : special orthogonal matrices of order n
SU (n) : special unitary matrices of order n
T∗ : adjoint of T
U (n) : unitary group of order n
Z 1 (A, X) : set of all derivations from A into X
∆ : modular function on group
∆A : diagonal operator
∆(A) : non-zero complex homomorphism from A to C
λp : left regular representations of G on Lp (G)
λp : representations of M (G) induced by λp
ρp : right regular representations of G on Lp (G)
ρp : representations of M (G) induced by ρp
δx : Dirac measure at x
π
ψu,v (x) := hπ(x)u, vi
πu,v : matrix coecient function of π
k . kH.S : Hilbert Schmidt norm i.e., kAk2H.S = tr(AA∗ )
k . kλ : injective cross norm
k . kπ : projective cross norm
k . kβ : cross norm
⊗ : algebraic tensor product
ˇ
⊗ : injective tensor product
⊗
b : projective tensor product

78
Bibliography

[1] J. Dixmier, C? -algebras, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam,

1977.

[2] N. Dunford and J. Schwartz, Linear operators, part I: General theory,

Interscience, New York - London, 1958.

[3] P. Eymard, L'algèbre de Fourier d'un groupe localement compact, Bull.

Soc. Math. France. 92 (1964), 181236.

[4] G. Folland, A course in abstarct harmonic analysis, CRC Press, 1994.

[5] F.P. Greenleaf, Invariant means on topological groups and their appilica-
tions ,Van Nostrand Mathematical Studies, 16, Van Nostrand, Princeton,
New York, 1969.

[6] E. Hewitt and K.A. Ross, Abstract harmonic analysis, I, Springer-Verlag,

Berlin-Heidelberg -New York, 1963.

Means and Følner's conditions on locally compact groups,

[7] A. Hulanicki,

Studia. Math. 27 (1966), 87104.

[8] B.E. Johnson, Non-amenability of the Fourier algebra of a compact

groups, J. London Math. Soc. (2)50 (1994), 361374.
[9] H. Leptin,Sur l'algèbre de Fourier d'un groupe localement compact, C.R.
Acad. Sci. Paris. Sér.A 266 (1968), 11801182.

[10] L.H. Loomis, An introduction to abstract harmonic analysis, Van Nos-

trand, New York, 1953.

79
[11] Gert K. Pederson, C? -algebras and their automorphism groups, London
Math. Society Monographs, no. 14, Academic Press, London-New york,

1979.

[12] W. Rudin, Fourier analysis on groups, Interscience, New York - London,

1962.

[13] V. Runde, Lectures on amenability, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol.

1774, Springer, Berlin, Heidelber, New York, 2002.

[14] M. Sugiura, Unitary representations and harmonic analysis, An intro-

duction, North-Holland , 1990.

[15] M. Takesakai, Theory of operator algebras I, Springer, New York, 1979.

[16] A. Weil, L'intègration dans les groupes topologiques et ses applications,
Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1938.

[17] K. Yosida, Functional analysis, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1974.

80