arxiv: v1 [math.fa] 22 Sep 2021

arXiv:2109.10846v1 [math.FA] 22 Sep 2021

wandering subspace property

Shailesh Trivedi

Abstract. We extend and study the notion of bounded point evalua- tion introduced by Williams for a cyclic operator to the class of operators with the wandering subspace property. We characterize the set bpe(T ) of all bounded point evaluations for an operator T with the wandering subspace property in terms of the invertibility of certain projections.

This result generalizes the earlier established characterization of bpe(T ) for a finitely cyclic operator T . Further, if T is a left-invertible operator with the wandering subspace property, then we determine the bpe(T ) and the set abpe(T ) of all analytic bounded point evaluations for T . We also give an example of left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace property for whichD 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
$ abpe(T ) $ bpe(T ), where r(T^′)is the spectral radius of the Cauchy dual T^′ of T .

1. Introduction

The primary motivation for the present work comes from Shimorin’s an- alytic model for a left-invertible analytic operator [12], which facilitates us to model a left-invertible analytic operator T as the operator of multiplica- tion by the co-ordinate function on the Hilbert space H of ker T^∗-valued holomorphic functions defined on D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
, where r(T^′) is the spectral radius of the Cauchy dual T^′ of T . This analytic model gives that the open disc D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
is contained in the set of all bounded point evaluations on H . On the other hand, the example [3, Example 2] shows that the disc D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
is not optimum and may be properly contained in the set of all bounded point evaluations on H in general. Therefore, it comes very naturally to inquire about the set of all bounded point evaluations on H . For this, we adapt the abstract approach of Williams [15] who, motivated by the work of Trent [13], introduced and studied the notion of bounded point evaluation for a cyclic operator. His idea was extended by Miller-Miller- Neumann [10] for rationally cyclic operators which was further generalized by the trio Guendafi-Mbekhta-Zerouali [6] for finitely multicyclic operators.

Later, Mbekhta-Ourchane-Zerouali [9] extended and studied the notion of

2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 47B02; Secondary 47A65, 47B37.

Key words and phrases. bounded point evaluation, wandering subspace property, weighted shift.

The work of the author is supported through the Inspire Faculty Fellowship DST/INSPIRE/04/2018/000338.

1

bounded point evaluation for rationally multicyclic operators. A contribu- tion in the study of bounded point evaluations for a cyclic operator was also made by Bourhim-Chidume-Zerouali [2].

In this paper, we extend and study the notion of bounded point evalua- tion for an operator with the wandering subspace property. Besides, study- ing the general properties of the set bpe(T ) of all bounded point evalua- tions for an operator T with the wandering subspace property, we also de- scribe bpe(T ) in terms of the invertibility of the restriction of specific pro- jections (see Theorem 2.4). In addition, we give the complete description of bpe(T ) for a left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace prop- erty. This comprises a major part of Section 2. In the third section, we study the notion of analytic bounded point evaluation and characterize the set abpe(T ) of all analytic bounded point evaluations for a left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace property. This, in particular, re- covers the Shimorin’s analytic model for a left-invertible operator with the wandering subspace property. We wind up this paper with an example of a left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace property for which D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
$ abpe(T ) $ bpe(T ).

We set below the notations to be used in the posterior sections. The set of non-negative integers, the field of real numbers and the field of complex numbers are denoted by N, R and C respectively. The complex conjugate of a complex number w is denoted by w, and for a non-empty subset F of C, the complex conjugate of F is given by F := {w : w ∈ F }. The interior of F is denoted by int F . An open disc in the complex plane centred at w with radius r > 0 is denoted by D(w, r) whereas the closed disc centred at w with radius r > 0 is denoted by D(w, r). For a polynomial p, deg p denotes the degree of p. Let H be a complex separable Hilbert space. By a subspace of H we do not mean a closed subspace of H. If M is a subspace of H, then its closure is denoted by cl M. Further, if M is a subspace of H, then by dim M we mean the Hilbert space dimension of M. The orthogonal complement of a subspace M is denoted by M^⊥. If M is a closed subspace of H, then P_M stands for the orthogonal projection of H onto M. For a subset S of H, the linear span and the closed linear span of S are denoted by span{x : x ∈ S} and W{x : x ∈ S} respectively. Let B(H) denote the algebra of bounded linear operators on H. For T ∈ B(H), the kernel, range and adjoint of T are denoted by ker T , ran T and T^∗ respectively.

The spectrum and the point spectrum of T ∈ B(H) are respectively denoted by σ(T ) and σp(T ) whereas r(T ) stands for the spectral radius of T . If T ∈ B(H) is left-invertible, then T^∗T is invertible. In this case, the Cauchy dual T^′ of T is defined as T^′ := T (T^∗T)⁻¹. Further, we say that T ∈ B(H) is analytic if T

n∈NTⁿ(H) = {0}.

2. Bounded point evaluation: General properties

Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H. A closed subspace M of H is said to be a cyclic subspace for T if

_

n∈N

Tⁿ(M) = H.

If dim M is finite, then T is said to be finitely cyclic. We say that T has the wandering subspace property if ker T^∗ is a cyclic subspace for T . A rich supply of examples of operators with the wandering subspace property is provided by the class of operator-valued unilateral shift [7, Theorem 4.5].

Let T ∈ B(H) have the wandering subspace property. Then for a ker T^∗- valued polynomial p(z) =Pk

n=0x_nzⁿ, x_n∈ ker T^∗, we set p(T ) :=

k

X

n=0

Tⁿxn.

If P(C, ker T^∗) denotes the vector space of all ker T^∗-valued polynomials, then {p(T ) : p ∈ P(C, ker T^∗)} is a dense subspace of H. Thus, we have the following definition.

Definition2.1. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex sepa- rable Hilbert space H. Suppose that T has the wandering subspace property.

A point w ∈ C is said to be a bounded point evaluation for T if there exists a positive constant c such that

kp(w)k 6 c kp(T )k for all p ∈ P(C, ker T^∗).

The set of all bounded point evaluations for T is denoted by bpe(T ).

The notation bpe(T ) was used for the set of all bounded point evaluations for a finitely cyclic operator (with respect to some cyclic subspace) [6]. It can be easily seen that if T is finitely cyclic with the wandering subspace property, then bpe(T ) given by the preceding definition coincides with the bpe(T ) defined in [6].

Let w ∈ bpe(T ). Then the map Ew: {p(T ) : p ∈ P(C, ker T^∗)} → ker T^∗ defined by

Ew(p(T )) = p(w), p∈ P(C, ker T^∗),

is well-defined, linear, surjective and continuous. Also, it is easy to see that E_w|_{ker T}^∗ = I_{ker T}^∗. Since {p(T ) : p ∈ P(C, ker T^∗)} is a dense subspace of H, Ew can be extended continuously on H. We denote the continuous extension of E_w on H by E_w itself. The following proposition studies the general properties of Ew.

Proposition 2.2. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex sep- arable Hilbert space H. Suppose that T has the wandering subspace property.

Then the following statements hold:

(i) 0 ∈ bpe(T ) ⊆ σp(T^∗).

(ii) If w ∈ bpe(T ), then E_w^∗(ker T^∗) = ker(T^∗− w). Moreover, E_w^∗ : ker T^∗ → ker(T^∗− w) is invertible.

(iii) ker Ew = cl ran(T − w) for each w ∈ bpe(T ).

(iv) For each w ∈ bpe(T ), E_wE_w^∗ is invertible on ker T^∗. Moreover, E₀E₀^∗ = I_{ker T}^∗.

(v) If w ∈ bpe(T ), then E_wTⁿx= wⁿE_wx for all x∈ H and n ∈N.

Proof. The proof of (i) goes exactly along the lines of the proofs of [14, Proposition 2.4(i),(ii)] with minor modifications. To see (ii), let w ∈ bpe(T ).

For p ∈ P(C, ker T^∗) and x ∈ ker T^∗, we have

hT^∗E_w^∗x, p(T )i = hE_w^∗x, T p(T )i = hx, E_w(T p(T ))i = hx, wp(w)i

= hwx, p(w)i = hwE_w^∗x, p(T )i.

Since {p(T ) : P(C, ker T^∗)} is a dense subspace of H, it follows that T^∗E_w^∗x= wE_w^∗x. Thus E_w^∗(ker T^∗) ⊆ ker(T^∗− w). Note that E_w^∗ : ker T^∗ → ker(T^∗− w) is expansive. Indeed, for each x ∈ ker T^∗, we have

kxk² = hx, E_wxi = hE_w^∗x, xi 6 kE_w^∗xkkxk.

Thus E_w^∗ is injective and has closed range. Suppose that there exists h ∈ ker(T^∗− w) such that hE_w^∗x, hi = 0 for all x ∈ ker T^∗. This, in turn, implies that hx, Ewhi = 0 for all x ∈ ker T^∗, and hence, Ewh = 0. Also, for any p(z) =Pk

n=0x_nzⁿ∈ P(C, ker T^∗), we get D

h,

k

X

n=0

Tⁿx_nE

=

k

X

n=0

hT^∗nh, x_ni =

k

X

n=0

hwⁿh, x_ni = hh, p(w)i. (2.1) Let {p_n}_n>1be a sequence of polynomials in P(C, ker T^∗) such that p_n(T ) → h as n → ∞. Then

khk² = lim

n→∞hh, p_n(T )i^(2.1)= lim

n→∞hh, p_n(w)i = hh, E_whi = 0.

Thus E_w^∗(ker T^∗) = ker(T^∗− w) and hence (ii) stands verified.

For (iii), observe that for each w ∈ bpe(T ), we have ker Ew = ran E_w^{∗⊥ (ii)}= ker(T^∗− w)^⊥= cl ran (T − w).

To see (iv), let w ∈ bpe(T ). Note that E_w|_ker(T∗−w) : ker(T^∗− w) → ker T^∗ is an invertible operator by virtue of (iii). Further, it follows from (ii) that E_w^∗ : ker T^∗ → ker(T^∗− w) is invertible. Thus EwE_w^∗ is invertible on ker T^∗. For the moreover part, let x ∈ ker T^∗ and p(z) = Pk

n=0xnzⁿ ∈ P(C, ker T^∗). Then we get

hE₀^∗x, p(T )i = hx, E0p(T )i = hx, p(0)i = hx, p(T )i.

Since {p(T ) : p ∈ P(C, ker T^∗)} is a dense subspace of H, it follows that E^∗₀x = x for all x ∈ ker T^∗. This gives that E₀E₀^∗x = x for all x ∈ ker T^∗, and hence, establishes (iv).

The conclusion of (v) was derived in the proof of [14, Proposition 2.2].

Here we provide a different proof. Suppose that w ∈ bpe(T ). Then E_w : H → ker T^∗ is continuous. Let x ∈ H. Then for each n ∈N and y ∈ ker T^∗, we have

hE_wTⁿx, yi = hx, T^∗nE_w^∗yi = hx, wⁿE_w^∗yi = hwⁿE_wx, yi,

where in the second equality, we used (ii). Thus, we must have EwTⁿx = wⁿE_wx for each n ∈N. This completes the proof.  A bounded linear operator T on a complex separable Hilbert space H is said to be circular if for each real number θ there exists a unitary Uθ on H such that U_θT = e^iθT U_θ. Circular operators were introduced and studied in [1]. Later, Gellar [5] characterized all the circular operators and proved that an operator is circular if and only if it is an operator-valued shift [5,

Proposition 1]. The following proposition shows that if T is circular, then bpe(T ) has circular symmetry.

Proposition 2.3. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex sep- arable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. If T is circular, then the set bpe(T ) of all bounded point evaluations for T has circular sym- metry.

Proof. Suppose that T is circular. Let θ be an arbitrary but fixed real number. We first show that

bpe(T ) = bpe(e^iθT). (2.2)

The proof of (2.2) follows by imitating the arguments of the proof of [14, Proposition 2.3] but we include the details for the sake of completeness. To this end, let U_θbe the unitary on H such that U_θT = e^iθT U_θ. Since ker T^∗ = ker(e^iθT)^∗, we must have Uθ(ker T^∗) = ker T^∗. Now suppose that w ∈ bpe(T ). Let p(z) =Pk

n=0xnzⁿ∈ P(C, ker T^∗). Then p(z) =Pk

n=0U_θynzⁿ, y_n∈ ker T^∗. Thus, we have

kp(w)k =

k

X

n=0

U_θy_nwⁿ =

k

X

n=0

y_nwⁿ 6c

k

X

n=0

Tⁿy_n

= c

k

X

n=0

U_θTⁿy_n =c

k

X

n=0

e^inθTⁿU_θy_n =c

k

X

n=0

e^inθTⁿx_n

= ckp(e^iθT)k.

This shows that w ∈ bpe(e^iθT), and hence, bpe(T ) ⊆ bpe(e^iθT). The other way inclusion can be obtained similarly. This completes the verification of (2.2).

Further, suppose that w ∈ bpe(T ). Let p(z) =Pk

n=0x_nzⁿ∈ P(C, ker T^∗).

Then p(e^iθw) = Pk

n=0e^inθwⁿx_n = ˜p(w), where ˜p(z) = Pk

n=0y_nzⁿ with yn= e^inθxn. Thus, we get

kp(e^iθw)k = k˜p(w)k 6 c

k

X

n=0

Tⁿy_n =c

k

X

n=0

e^inθTⁿx_n

=ckp(e^iθT)k.

This shows that e^iθw ∈ bpe(e^iθT) ^(2.2)= bpe(T ), and hence, completes the

proof. 

We are now ready to give a complete description of bpe(T ). The following theorem extends [6, Theorem 4].

Theorem2.4. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Let {x_n : 1 6 n 6 dim ker T^∗} be an orthonormal basis of ker T^∗. For w∈C, let Pw denote the orthogonal projection of H onto ker(T^∗− w). Then the following statements are equivalent:

(i) A complex number w is a bounded point evaluation for T . (ii) Pw|_{ker T}^∗ : ker T^∗ → ker(T^∗− w) is invertible.

(iii) There exists a sequence of vectors {y_n : 1 6 n 6 dim ker T^∗} in ker(T^∗− w) such that hxi, yji = δij (the Kronecker delta) for all i, j= 1, . . . , dim ker T^∗.

Proof. We first establish the equivalence of (i) and (ii). To this end, let w ∈ bpe(T ). Then it can be easily shown that

H = _

n∈N

(T − w)ⁿ(ker T^∗).

Applying Pw on both sides of the above identity, we get that ker(T^∗− w) = P_w(ker T^∗). Thus, P_w|_{ker T}∗ is onto. To see that P_w|_{ker T}∗ is one-one, assume that Pwx= 0 for some x ∈ ker T^∗. Then x ∈ cl ran(T − w). Let {yn}n>1 be a sequence in H such that (T − w)yn → x as n → ∞. This, together with Proposition 2.2(v), gives that

0 = Ew(T − w)yn→ Ewx= x as n → ∞.

Thus x = 0.

Conversely, suppose that Pw|_{ker T}^∗ : ker T^∗ → ker(T^∗− w) is invertible for some w ∈ C. Let p(z) = Pk

n=0x_nzⁿ ∈ P(C, ker T^∗). Then for all y ∈ ker(T^∗− w), we have

hp(T ), yi =DX^k

n=0

Tⁿxn, y E

=

k

X

n=0

hTⁿxn, yi =

k

X

n=0

hwⁿxn, yi = hp(w), yi.

The above equality gives that kPwp(T )k = kPwp(w)k. Since Pw|_{ker T}^∗ is invertible, we get that

kp(w)k = k(Pw|_{ker T}^∗)⁻¹P_wp(w)k 6 k(Pw|_{ker T}^∗)⁻¹kkPwp(T )k 6 k(Pw|_{ker T}^∗)⁻¹kkPwkkp(T )k.

Hence, w ∈ bpe(T ).

To see the equivalence of (ii) and (iii), suppose that Pw|_{ker T}^∗ : ker T^∗ → ker(T^∗− w) is invertible for some w ∈C. Let {hⁿ : 1 6 n 6 dim ker T^∗} be an orthonormal basis of ker(T^∗− w). Let (aij)16i,j6dim ker T^∗ be the matrix representation of (Pw|_{ker T}^∗)⁻¹ with respect to the bases {hn : 1 6 n 6 dim ker T^∗} and {xn : 1 6 n 6 dim ker T^∗} of ker(T^∗ − w) and ker T^∗ respectively. Set

y_j :=

dim ker T^∗

X

k=1

a_kjh_k, j= 1, . . . , dim ker T^∗.

Then it can be easily verified that y_j ∈ ker(T^∗− w) and hx_i, y_ji = δ_ij for all i, j = 1, . . . , dim ker T^∗.

Conversely, assume that (iii) holds. It was already seen in the beginning of the proof that Pw(ker T^∗) = ker(T^∗ − w). Thus it only remains to show that Pw|_{ker T}^∗ is one-one. To this end, let Pwx = 0 for some x ∈ ker T^∗. Then for all j = 1, . . . , dim ker T^∗, we get

0 = hPwx, yji = hx, yji =D^{dim ker T}

∗

X

i=1

hx, xiixi, yj

E

= hx, xji.

Hence x = 0. This completes the proof. 

We characterize below bpe(T ) for a left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace property (cf. [7, Proposition 5.1]).

Theorem 2.5. Let T be a left-invertible operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H and let T^′ denote the Cauchy dual of T . Suppose that T has the wandering subspace property. For each w∈C and n ∈ N, set

Mn:=

n

_

k=0

T^k(ker T^∗) and Sn(w) :=

n

X

k=0

w^kT^′k. Then w ∈ bpe(T ) if and only if sup

n∈NkPMnS_n(w)|kerT^∗k < ∞. Moreover, if w∈ bpe(T ), then kE_w^∗k = sup

n∈N

kP_MnS_n(w)|kerT^∗k.

Proof. Suppose that w ∈ bpe(T ). Then E_w : H → ker T^∗is continuous.

Let n ∈ N. Then for each ker T^∗-valued polynomial p with degree up to n and for each x ∈ ker T^∗, we get

hS_n(w)x, p(T )i = hx, p(w)i = hE_w^∗x, p(T )i. (2.3) Let y ∈ Mn. Then there exists a sequence of ker T^∗-valued polynomials p_m with degree up to n such that p_m(T ) → y as m → ∞. Thus for each x∈ ker T^∗, we get

hSn(w)x, yi = lim

m→∞hSn(w)x, pm(T )i^(2.3)= lim

m→∞hE_w^∗x, p_m(T )i = hE_w^∗x, yi.

This gives that P_Mn(S_n(w)x − E_w^∗x) = 0 for all n ∈ N. Consequently, we obtain

kP_MnSn(w)xk 6 kE_w^∗xk for all n ∈N and for all x ∈ ker T^∗. (2.4) Application of the uniform boundedness principle in the above inequality yields the desired conclusion.

Conversely, suppose that w ∈C is such that supn∈NkP_MnS_n(w)|_kerT^∗k <

∞. Let p be any ker T^∗-valued polynomial. Then for any n > deg p, we have

kp(w)k = sup

x∈ker T^∗,kxk=1

|hx, p(w)i| = sup

x∈ker T^∗,kxk=1

|hSn(w)x, p(T )i|

6 kP_MnS_n(w)|kerT^∗kkp(T )k 6 sup

n∈N

kP_MnS_n(w)|kerT^∗k

kp(T )k.

Thus w ∈ bpe(T ).

For the moreover part, assume that w ∈ bpe(T ). Then (2.4) implies that sup

n∈N

kP_MnSn(w)|_kerT^∗k 6 kE_w^∗k. To see the reverse inequality, let y ∈ H with kyk = 1. Then there exists a sequence {p_n(T )}_n∈N with kp_n(T )k = 1 for all n ∈ N such that pn(T ) → y as n → ∞. For all x ∈ ker T^∗ with kxk = 1, we get

|hE_w^∗x, yi| = lim

n→∞|hE_w^∗x, pn(T )i|^(2.3)= lim

n→∞|hS_{deg pn}(w)x, pn(T )i|

6 lim

n→∞kP_{Mdeg pn}S_{deg pn}(w)xk 6 sup

n∈N

kP_MnS_n(w)|_kerT^∗k.

As a consequence, we get kE_w^∗k 6 sup_n∈NkPMnS_n(w)|kerT^∗k. This com-

pletes the proof. 

Some consequences of the preceding theorem are in order but first a definition. For T ∈ B(H) and x ∈ H, we set r_T(x) := lim sup

n→∞

kTⁿxkⁿ¹. In the literature, rT(x) is known as local spectral radius of T at x [8]. Clearly, r_T(x) 6 r(T ).

Corollary 2.6. Let T be a left-invertible operator on a complex sepa- rable Hilbert space H and let T^′ denote the Cauchy dual of T . Suppose that T has the wandering subspace property. Then the following statements hold:

(i) The open discD 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
is contained in the bpe(T ).

(ii) If the power series P

n∈NwⁿT^′nx converges weakly for all x ∈ ker T^∗, then bpe(T ) contains D(0, r), where r = inf

x∈ker T^∗

1 r_T′(x). Proof. Observe that if w ∈D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
, then (I − wT^′) is invertible and (I − wT^′)⁻¹ =P

n∈NwⁿT^′n. Now the proof of (i) is immediate from the preceding theorem.

For (ii), let w ∈C be such that the power seriesP

n∈NwⁿT^′nxconverges weakly for all x ∈ ker T^∗. Then the sequence of partial sums S_n(w)x :=

Pn

k=0w^kT^′kx is a weakly convergent sequence, and hence bounded. By the uniform boundedness principle, we obtain that sup_n∈NkSn(w)|kerT^∗k < ∞.

Thus by Theorem 2.5, w ∈ bpe(T ). Further, let x ∈ ker T^∗ and y ∈ H. The radius of convergence Ry of the power series P

n∈NwⁿhT^′nx, yi is given by 1

Ry

= lim sup

n→∞ |hT^′nx, yi|ⁿ¹ 6lim sup

n→∞ (kT^′nxkkyk)¹ⁿ = rT^′(x).

If we set r := inf_{x∈ker T}^∗_r ¹

T ′(x), then it follows thatD(0, r) ⊆ bpe(T ). This

completes the proof. 

The subspace M :=W

w∈bpe(T )E_w^∗(ker T^∗) plays a central role in studying the function theoretic behaviour of T . In fact, if M = H, then it turns out that T can be modelled as Mz on a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of ker T^∗-valued functions defined on bpe(T ) (see Theorem 3.3). The following proposition studies the general properties of M and also gives a dichotomy that M is either whole H or M skips an infinite dimensional subspace if T is injective and analytic.

Proposition 2.7. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex sep- arable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Let M :=

W

w∈bpe(T )E_w^∗(ker T^∗). Then the following statements hold:

(i) M^⊥ is T -invariant.

(ii) If T is injective and analytic, then either M = H or M^⊥is infinite dimensional.

(iii) If T is circular, then T |_M⊥ is circular.

(iv) If T is analytic, then T |_M⊥ is analytic.

(v) P_M⊥(ker T^∗) ⊆ ker(T |_M⊥)^∗. Proof. Observe that M^⊥ =T

w∈bpe(T )ker Ew. Let x ∈ M^⊥. Then by Proposition 2.2(v), we have E_wT x = wE_wx = 0 for all w ∈ bpe(T ). Thus T x∈ M^⊥. This proves (i).

Suppose that T is injective and analytic. Let M^⊥ be finite dimensional.

Since T is injective, it follows from (i) that T |_M⊥ is invertible. But then analyticity of T gives that M^⊥ ⊆ T

n∈NTⁿ(H) = {0}. This completes the verification of (ii).

To see (iii), assume that T is circular. In view of Proposition 2.2(iii), we have

M^⊥= \

w∈bpe(T )

ker Ew = \

w∈bpe(T )

cl ran(T − w).

Let θ ∈ R. Since T is circular, there exists a unitary Uθ on H such that U_θT = e^iθT U_θ. Let x ∈ ran (T − w). Then x = (T − w)y for some y ∈ H.

This gives that

U_θx= Uθ(T − w)y = (e^iθT− w)Uθy.

Thus U_θran (T − w) ⊆ ran (e^iθT − w). Consequently, U_θcl ran(T − w) ⊆ cl ran(e^iθT− w), which implies that

U_θ \

w∈bpe(T )

cl ran(T − w) ⊆ \

w∈bpe(T )

cl ran(e^iθT− w). (2.5)

Since bpe(T ) has circular symmetry (by Proposition 2.3), we have e^iθbpe(T ) = bpe(T ). This gives that

\

w∈bpe(T )

cl ran(e^iθT − w) = \

u∈bpe(T )

cl ran(e^iθT− e^iθu)

= \

u∈bpe(T )

cl ran(T − u) = M^⊥. (2.6)

The identities (2.5) and (2.6) together show that UθM^⊥ ⊆ M^⊥. Similarly, using U_θ^∗T = e^−iθT U_θ^∗, we get that U_θ^∗M^⊥⊆ M^⊥. Thus Uθ|_M⊥ is a unitary on M^⊥, and for all x ∈ M^⊥, we have U_θT x = e^iθT U_θx. Hence, T |_M⊥ is circular. This establishes (iii). The conclusion in (iv) follows easily from the following observation:

\

n∈N

Tⁿ(M^⊥) ⊆ \

n∈N

Tⁿ(H) = {0}.

For the proof of (v), let x ∈ ker T^∗. Then we get 0 = T^∗x= T^∗P_Mx+ T^∗P_M⊥x,

which, in turn, implies that 0 = P_M⊥T^∗x = P_M⊥T^∗P_M⊥x. Thus P_M⊥x ∈

ker(T |_M⊥)^∗. This completes the proof. 

The following corollary is an immediate fallout of the preceding proposi- tion and the fact that the spectrum of an analytic operator is connected [3, Lemma 5.2].

Corollary2.8. Let T be an analytic and circular operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Let M :=

W

w∈bpe(T )E_w^∗(ker T^∗). Then the spectrum of T |_M⊥ is a closed disc centred at the origin with radius being equal to the spectral radius of T|_M⊥.

As mentioned earlier, the investigation of the equality W

w∈σ(T )ker(T^∗− w) = H is a pivotal part in the study of the function theoretic behaviour of T . Clancey and Rogers proved that the aforementioned equality holds for a completely non-normal hyponormal operator whose approximate point spectrum has area measure zero [4, Theorem 2]. We give below another sufficient condition which ensures that the said equality holds for a left- invertible operator with the wandering subspace property. Before proceeding towards the result, we need the following prerequisites from the local spectral theory.

Let X be a Banach space and T be a bounded linear operator on X. For x ∈ X, the local resolvent of T at x, denoted by ρT(x), is the union of all open subsets G of C for which there is an analytic function f : G −→ X satisfying (λ − T )f (λ) = x for all λ ∈ G. The complement of ρT(x) is called the local spectrum of T at x and is denoted by σ_T(x). The following theorem will be needed in the subsequent proposition.

Theorem 2.9. [8, Theorem 1.6.3] Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex Banach space X. If T is analytic, then 0 ∈ σT(x) for all non-zero x∈ X.

Proposition 2.10. Let T be a left-invertible operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H and let T^′ denote the Cauchy dual of T . Sup- pose that T has the wandering subspace property. If T is analytic, then W

w∈D(0,r(T^′)⁻¹)E_w^∗(ker T^∗) = H.

Proof. Suppose that T is analytic. Note that (T^∗T)⁻¹ = T^′∗T^′ 6 kT^′k²I. This gives that T − w is left-invertible for all w ∈ D(0, kT^′k⁻¹). In view of Corollary 2.6, set

M := _

w∈D(0,kT^′k⁻¹)

E_w^∗(ker T^∗).

Let x ∈ M^⊥. Then x ∈ ran (T − w) for all w ∈ D(0, kT^′k⁻¹), and hence, x= (T − w)x(w) for all w ∈D(0, kT^′k⁻¹). Consequently, we get

T^′∗x= T^′∗(T − w)x(w) = (I − wT^′∗)x(w) for all w ∈D(0, kT^′k⁻¹).

Since (I − wT^′∗) is invertible for all w ∈D(0, kT^′k⁻¹), we have x(w) = (I − wT^′∗)⁻¹T^′∗x=X

n∈N

wⁿT^′∗n+1x for all w ∈D(0, kT^′k⁻¹).

This shows that the map w 7→ x(w) is analytic onD(0, kT^′k⁻¹) which satisfies that (T − w)x(w) = x for all w ∈D(0, kT^′k⁻¹). ThusD(0, kT^′k⁻¹) ⊆ ρ_T(x).

On the other hand, by Theorem 2.9, we have that 0 ∈ σT(x) for all non-zero x. Hence, we must have x = 0. Thus, we get

H = M ⊆ _

w∈D(0,r(T^′)⁻¹)

E_w^∗(ker T^∗).

This completes the proof. 

3. Analytic bounded point evaluation

Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. If bpe(T ) has non-empty interior, then define the map U : {p(T ) : p ∈ P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗)} → P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗) by

U(p(T )) = p, p∈ P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗), (3.1) where P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗) is the vector space of all ker T^∗-valued polynomials defined on bpe(T ). It is easy to see that U is a well-defined bijective linear map. Thus, we can define the inner product on P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗) by

hp, qi := hp(T ), q(T )i_H, p, q∈ P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗). (3.2) Let H be the completion of P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗) with respect to the inner product given by (3.2). Since {p(T ) : p ∈ P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗)} is a dense subspace of H and U is unitary on this subspace, U extends to a unitary from H onto H . We denote this extension of U by U itself. We say that w∈C is a bounded point evaluation on H if there exists a positive constant c such that kp(w)k_H 6 ckpkH for all p ∈ P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗). If w is a bounded point evaluation on H , then the evaluation map E_w : H → ker T^∗ is continuous. In the following proposition, besides recording the properties of U , we also show that the notion of bounded point evaluation defined for T agrees with the usual notion of bounded point evaluation on H .

Remark 3.1. The Corollary 2.6 shows that the interior of bpe(T ) is non- empty for every operator T in the class of left-invertible operators with the wandering subspace property.

Proposition 3.2. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex sep- arable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Suppose that bpe(T ) has non-empty interior. Let H be the Hilbert space as described above and U : H → H be the unitary given by (3.1). Then the following statements hold:

(i) U maps ker T^∗ onto the subspace of constant polynomials in H and U|_{ker T}^∗ is the identity map.

(ii) The set of all bounded point evaluations on H is equal to bpe(T ).

(iii) For w ∈ bpe(T ), if Ew and E_w are respective evaluation maps on H and H , then U Ew= EwU .

Proof. The proofs of (i) and (ii) are immediate from the definition of U and that of bounded point evaluation on H . To see (iii), let w ∈ bpe(T ) and x ∈ H. Then there exists a sequence of polynomials {pn}_n>1 in P(bpe(T ), ker T^∗) such that p_n(T ) → x as n → ∞. This, together with (i), gives that

p_n(w) = U pn(w) → U Ewx as n → ∞.

Further, we also have

p_n(w) = E_wp_n= E_wU p_n(T ) → E_wU x as n → ∞.

Thus we get that U Ewx= EwU x. This completes the proof. 

Theorem3.3. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Suppose that bpe(T ) has non-empty interior. Let H be the Hilbert space as described after (3.2).

Then the following statements are true:

(i) The operator M_z of multiplication by the coordinate function de- fined on the polynomials in H extends continuously on H . If the continuous extension of M_z is denoted by M_z itself, then M_zU = U T , where U : H → H is the unitary operator as defined by (3.1).

(ii) The elements of H are well-defined ker T^∗-valued functions on bpe(T ) if and only if W

w∈bpe(T )E_w^∗(ker T^∗) = H.

Proof. The proof of (i) follows by imitating the arguments of the proof of [14, Theorem 3.1]. For the proof of (ii), assume thatW

w∈bpe(T )E_w^∗(ker T^∗) = H. Let f ∈ H and f (w) = 0 for all w ∈ bpe(T ). Then there exists a vector x∈ H such that U x = f . Using Proposition 3.2, we get that

0 = f (w) = EwU x= U Ewx= Ewxfor all w ∈ bpe(T ).

Thus we get

x∈ \

w∈bpe(T )

ker Ew = _

w∈bpe(T )

E_w^∗(ker T^∗)⊥

= H^⊥= {0}.

This gives that f = 0. The proof of the converse is obvious.  Let H be the Hilbert space as described after (3.2). Then for f ∈ H and w ∈ bpe(T ), we define

fˆ(w) := E_w(f ).

Thus ˆf is a well-defined ker T^∗-valued function on bpe(T ). The largest open subset of bpe(T ) on which ˆf is analytic (or holomorphic) for all f ∈ H , is said to be the set of all analytic bounded point evaluations for T , and is denoted by abpe(T ). It follows from Proposition 3.2 and Theorem 3.3(ii) that f ∈ H can be identified with ˆf if and only if W

w∈bpe(T )E^∗

w(ker T^∗) = H. In this case, H turns out to be a reproducing kernel Hilbert space of ker T^∗-valued functions defined on bpe(T ) with the reproducing kernel κ : bpe(T ) × bpe(T ) → B(ker T^∗) given by κ(z, w) = E_zE_w^∗, z, w ∈ bpe(T ), [11, Chapter 6].

The following theorem gives several equivalent characterizations of abpe(T ).

Its proof can be easily obtained by following the arguments of the proof of [14, Theorem 3.4] along with the help of Theorem 2.4, Proposition 2.2 and Theorem 3.3.

Theorem3.4. Let T be a bounded linear operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Suppose that bpe(T ) has non-empty interior. Let H be the Hilbert space as described after (3.2).

Then the following statements hold:

(i) Suppose that O is an open set contained in bpe(T ). Then O ⊆ abpe(T ) if and only if the map w 7→ E_w^∗ of O into B(ker T^∗, H) is bounded on compact subsets ofO.

(ii) A point w ∈ abpe(T ) if and only if there exists a neighbourhood O ⊆ bpe(T ) of w such that the map λ 7→ E_λ^∗x of O into H is conjugate analytic for all x∈ ker T^∗.

(iii) Let {xn: 1 6 n 6 dim ker T^∗} be an orthonormal basis of ker T^∗. A point w∈ abpe(T ) if and only if there exist a neighbourhood O of w and conjugate analytic maps ψ_j : O → H , j = 1, . . . , dim ker T^∗, such that ψ_j(λ) ∈ ker(M_z^∗− λ) and hψj(λ), xii = δij for all λ∈ O and i, j= 1, . . . , dim ker T^∗.

We give below a complete description of abpe(T ) for a left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace property. Its proof is immediate from Theorem 2.5 and Theorem 3.4(i).

Theorem 3.5. Let T be a left-invertible operator on a complex separable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Let T^′ denote the Cauchy dual of T . For each w ∈C and n ∈ N, set

M_n:=

n

_

k=0

T^k(ker T^∗) and S_n(w) :=

n

X

k=0

w^kT^′k.

Then u ∈ abpe(T ) if and only if there exists an open set O ⊆ bpe(T ) con- taining u such that the map w7→ sup

n∈N

kP_MnSn(w)|kerT^∗k of O into [0, ∞) is bounded on compact subsets of O.

The proof of the following corollary is analogous to that of Corollary 2.6.

Corollary 3.6. Let T be a left-invertible operator on a complex sepa- rable Hilbert space H with the wandering subspace property. Let T^′ denote the Cauchy dual of T . Then the following statements hold:

(i) The open discD 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
is contained in the abpe(T ).

(ii) If the power series P

n∈NwⁿT^′nx converges weakly for all x ∈ ker T^∗, then D(0, r) ⊆ abpe(T ), where r = inf

x∈ker T^∗

1 r_T^′(x).

It can be easily seen from Theorem 3.3, Proposition 2.10 and the preced- ing corollary that if T is a left-invertible analytic operator with the wandering subspace property, then T is unitarily equivalent to M_z on the Hilbert space of ker T^∗-valued holomorphic functions defined on D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹

with the reproducing kernel given by

κ(z, w) = (I − zT^′∗)⁻¹(I − wT^′)⁻¹ for all z, w ∈D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
.

This is precisely Shimorin’s model [12] for a left-invertible analytic operator with the wandering subspace property. We conclude this paper with an example of a left-invertible operator T with the wandering subspace property for which

D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
$ abpe(T ) $ bpe(T ).

This example is motivated from [3, Example 2].

Example3.7. Consider the unilateral weighted shift T on ℓ²(N) defined as T en= w_n+1e_n+1, n ∈N, where {en: n ∈N} is the standard orthonormal

basis of ℓ²(N) and the weights wn are described as follows:

First, set

λ₁ = λ₂ = λ₃= λ₄ = 1, and λ_k = (1

2, if 2ⁿ+ 1 ≤ k ≤ 3.2ⁿ⁻¹, n≥ 2, 1, otherwise.

Then define w₁ := λ₁ and wn:= _n−1ⁿ λnfor all n > 1. Note that inf_n≥1wn=

1

2 and w₁w₂· · · w_n= nλ₁λ₂· · · λ_nfor all n > 1. Thus T is left-invertible and the Cauchy dual T^′ of T is again a unilateral weighted shift on ℓ²(N) with weights {_w¹

n : n > 1}. That T has the wandering subspace property follows from the fact that T is cyclic with cyclic vector e₀ and span{e₀} = ker T^∗. Further, for any n > 1, the total number of ¹₂’s occurring in first 2ⁿ places in {λ_n: n > 1} is equal to 2ⁿ⁻¹− 2ⁿ⁻²+ 2ⁿ⁻²− 2ⁿ⁻³+ · · · + 4 − 2 = 2ⁿ⁻¹− 2.

Therefore, we get

λ₁λ₂· · · λ₂ⁿ = 1

2²ⁿ⁻¹⁻² = 4 2²ⁿ⁻¹.

Let n be any positive integer. Then there are unique non-negative integers m_n and k_n such that n = 2^mn+ k_n with 0 6 k_n<2^mn. Thus, we have

λ₁λ₂· · · λn= 1

2^{2mn −1−2+αkn} = 4

2^2mn−1+αkn, (3.3) where

α_kn=

(k_n if 0 6 k_n62^mn−1, 2^mn−1 if 2^mn−1< k_n<2^mn. Also, observe that if 0 6 kn<2^mn−1, then

2^mn−1+ αkn

2^mn+ kn

= 1 2

2^mn + 2kn

2^mn + kn

= 1 2+1

2 1

2^mn

kn + 1 < 1 2+1

2 1 3 = 2

3. Further, for 2^mn−16k_n<2^mn, we have

2^mn−1+ αkn

2^mn + kn

= 2^mn 2^mn+ kn

6 2^mn

3 · 2^mn−1 = 2 3. Consequently, we get

2^mn−1+ αkn

2^mn+ kn

6 2

3 for all n > 1.

This together with (3.3) implies that for all n > 1, (λ₁λ₂· · · λn)ⁿ¹ > 4ⁿ¹

2²³ which gives that lim inf

n→∞ (λ₁λ₂· · · λn)¹ⁿ >2⁻²³. But for k_n= 2^mn−1, we note that

2^mn−1+ α_kn 2^mn+ kn

= 2

3, and hence, (λ₁λ₂· · · λ_n)¹ⁿ = 4¹ⁿ 2²³ .

Thus, we must have lim inf_n→∞(λ₁λ₂· · · λ_n)ⁿ¹ = 2⁻²³. This, in turn, gives that lim inf_n→∞(w₁w₂· · · wn)ⁿ¹ = 2⁻²³. Note that Mn = span {e₀, . . . , en},

and hence, sup_n∈NkP_MnS_n(w)e₀k < ∞ if and only if the power series X

n∈N

wⁿT^′ne₀ =X

n∈N

wⁿ w₁w₂· · · wn

e_n

converges absolutely. From above calculations, it is easy to infer that abpe(T ) = D(0, 2⁻²³). Further, let w = 2⁻²³e^iθ for some θ ∈R. Then

X

n∈N

wⁿ

w₁w₂· · · w_ne_n= 1 4

X

n∈N

e^−inθ

n 2^{2mn −1+αkn−32(2mn+kn)}e_n. Observe that

2^mn−1+ αkn−2

3(2^mn+ kn) = 3α_kn− 2k_n− 2^mn−1

3 60 for all n > 1.

Hence P

n∈N wⁿ

w1w2···wne_n converges for all w ∈ D(0, 2⁻²³). This establishes that bpe(T ) =D(0, 2⁻²³). On the other hand, r(T^′) = 2 (see [3, Example 2]

for the details). Thus, we have

D 0, r(T^′)⁻¹
$ abpe(T ) = D(0, 2⁻²³)$ bpe(T ) = D(0, 2⁻²³).

Acknowledgment. The author conveys his sincere thanks to Md. Ramiz Reza for his several helpful suggestions.

References

[1] W. Arveson, D. Hadwin, T. Hoover and E. Kymala, Circular operators, Indiana Univ.

Math. J. 33(1984), 583-595.

[2] A. Bourhim, C. Chidume and E. Zerouali, Bounded point evaluations for cyclic oper- ators and local spectra, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 130 (2002), 543-548.

[3] S. Chavan and S. Trivedi, An analytic model for left-invertible weighted shifts on directed trees, J. London Math. Soc. 94 (2016), 253-279.

[4] K. Clancey, and D. Rogers, Cyclic vectors and seminormal operators, Indiana Univ.

Math. J. 27(1978), 689-696.

[5] R. Gellar, Circularly symmetric normal and subnormal operators, J. Analyse Math.

32(1977), 93-117.

[6] M. El Guendafi, M. Mbekhta and E. Zerouali, Bounded point evaluations for mul- ticyclic operators, Topological algebras, their applications, and related topics, 199-217, Banach Center Publ. 67, Polish Acad. Sci. Inst. Math., Warsaw, 2005.

[7] R. Gupta, S. Kumar and S. Trivedi, Unitary equivalence of operator-valued multishifts, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 487 (2020), 23 pp.

[8] K. Laursen, and M. Neumann, An introduction to local spectral theory, London Math- ematical Society Monographs. New Series, 20. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 2000. xii+591 pp.

[9] M. Mbekhta, N. Ourchane and E. Zerouali, The interior of bounded point evaluations for rationally cyclic operators, Mediterr. J. Math. 13 (2016), 1981-1996.

[10] T. Miller, V. Miller and M. Neumann, Analytic bounded point evaluations for ratio- nally cyclic operators on Banach spaces, Integral Equations Operator Theory 51 (2005), 257-274.

[11] V. Paulsen and M. Raghupathi, An Introduction to the Theory of Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Spaces, Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 152. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016.

[12] S. Shimorin, Wold-type decompositions and wandering subspaces for operators close to isometries, J. Reine Angew. Math. 531 (2001), 147-189.

[13] T. Trent, H²(µ)spaces and bounded point evaluations, Pacific J. Math. 80 (1979), 279-292.

[14] S. Trivedi, Bounded point evaluation for a finitely multicyclic commuting tuple of operators, Bull. Sci. Math. 162 (2020), 20 pp.

[15] L. Williams, Bounded point evaluations and the local spectra of cyclic hyponormal operators, Dynam. Systems Appl. 3 (1994), 103-112.

Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Indian Institute of Technol- ogy Kanpur, India

Email address: [email protected]