format: text

text:
# HOMOTOPY OF VECTOR STATES11footnote 11991 Mathematics Subject Classification: 46L30, 46L05, 46L10.

## 1 Introduction

Tools from homotopy theory have been used in operator algebras for quite some time. Starting with N.H. Kuiper’s theorem , establishing the contractibility of the unitary group of an infinite dimensional Hilbert space, following with further generalizations, to properly infinite von Neumann algebras (, , ). The case of a finite von Neumann algebra was considered by Araki, M. Smith and L. Smith, who showed in  that the $`\pi _1`$ group of the unitary group of a II1 factor is isomorphic to the additive group of the reals $`\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$. This result was later extended by Schröder in . Also some results appeared computing the homotopy type of the unitary groups of certain classes of C-algebras (, ). The topology considered for the unitary groups of the von Neumann algebras in these papers is the one induced by the norm of the algebra. Only a few years ago Popa and Takesaki  studied the homotopy theory of the unitary and automorphism groups of a factor in the weak topologies.

In this paper we focus on the homotopy type of certain sets of states, namely the states having support equivalent to a fixed projection, both with uniform (norm) and weak topologies.

Let $``$ be a von Neumann algebra. The set of faithful and normal states of a $``$ is a convex set, and therefore is contractible. If the algebra is finite, this set is the same as the set of states with support equivalent to the identity $`1`$. This paper considers the question of what happens when one replaces $`1`$ by a proper projection $`p`$. In other words, what is the homotopy type of the set of normal states with support (Murray-von Neumann) equivalent to $`p`$.

It turns out that this set is closely related to the set of partial isometries of $``$ with initial space $`p`$, i.e. the elements $`v`$ such that $`v^{}v=p`$. Namely, by means of the map

$$v\times \phi \phi (v^{}v)$$

where $`\phi `$ is a given state with support $`p`$. The purpose of this paper is the study of the properties of this map: mainly, under which assumptions it is a fibration. And in the affirmative case, to use this fibration to compute the homotopy type of the set of states described.

First, there is the question of what is the right topology to consider in the set of partial isometries (among the various topologies available in $``$). It turns out the norm topology of $``$ forces on the set of states, via the map above, a topology stronger than the norm topology for functionals. In order to have fibration properties for this map, and have it induce the usual norm topology on the set of states, one has to consider on (the set of isometries of) $``$ the ultraweak topology. The paper by S. Popa and M. Takesaki , deals with the topologic properties of the unitary group in the weak topologies. There Michael’s theory of continuous selection  is used in a remarkable manner, to obtain cross sections (i.e. fibration properties) for the quotient of the unitary groups of an inclusion of factors. We shall profit from their technique in our context.

In sections 3 and 4 of this paper we shall put our problem in the broader context of Hilbert C-modules. All the concepts above have their analogue in this general setting. We shall therefore state first the results valid in the general context. In sections 5 and 6 we shall return again to our original situation, and shall be able to state the result described in the abstract, for a class of II1 factors considered in , which encloses the hyperfinite factor $`_0`$.

Let now $``$ be a C\- algebra, $`X`$ a right C-module over $``$, and $`_{}(X)`$ the C-algebra of adjointable operators of $`X`$. If $`p`$ is a projection, denote by $`𝒮_p(X)=\{xX:x,x=p\}`$ the $`p`$-sphere of $`X`$. We shall study the states of $`_{}(X)`$ which are pure in the modular sense. That is, for a state $`\phi `$ of $``$ and a vector $`x𝒮_p(X)`$, we consider the state $`\phi _x`$ with density $`x`$, given by

$$\phi _x(t)=\phi (x,t(x))t_{}(X).$$

We require that the state $`\phi `$ has support projection $`p`$.

If $`x,yX`$, let $`\theta _{x,y}_{}(X)`$ be the “rank one” operator given by $`\theta _{x,y}(z)=xy,z`$. If $`x,x=p`$ then the operator $`\theta _{x,x}=e_x`$ is a selfadjoint projection, and all projections arising in this manner, from vectors on $`𝒮_p(X)`$, are mutually (Murray-von Neumann) equivalent. It turns out that these modular, or vector states as we shall subsequently call them, are precisely the states of $`_{}(X)`$ with support of rank one, i.e. equal to one of these projections $`e_x`$.

Namely we are interested in the following sets of states,

$$𝒪_\phi =\{\phi _x:x𝒮_p(X)\}$$

for $`\phi `$ a fixed state in $``$, with support projection $`\text{supp}(\phi )=p`$ in $``$,

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()=\{\text{states of }\text{ with support }p\}$$

and

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}=\{\psi _x:\psi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p(),x𝒮_p(X)\}.$$

The (convex) set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ is considered with the relative topology induced by the usual norm of the conjugate space of $``$. The other two sets $`𝒪_\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ are endowed with two types of natural topologies.

First, in sections 3 and 4, with norm related topologies, given by

1. \- $`𝒪_\phi `$ with the metric $`d_\phi `$, $`d_\phi (\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi })=inf\{xy:\phi _x=\mathrm{\Phi },\phi _y=\mathrm{\Psi }\}`$.
2. \- $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ with the metric $`d`$, $`d(\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi })=\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }+\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Psi })`$.

These metrics $`d`$ and $`d_\phi `$ do come up naturally if one looks for continuity of the maps

$$𝒮_p(X)𝒪_\phi ,x\phi _x$$

and

$$𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},(x,\phi )\phi _x.$$

It turns out that these maps are also fibrations, a fact which enables one to examine the homotopy theory of these spaces, comparing it with the homotopy of the spheres $`𝒮_p(X)`$ studied in  and  For example, we obtain that if $`pp`$ is a von Neumann algebra and $`Xp`$ is selfdual (as a $`pp`$-module), then $`𝒪_\phi `$ is simply connected. Or that if $`pp`$ is a properly infinite von Neumann algebra, and again $`Xp`$ is selfdual, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ has trivial homotopy groups of all orders.

Second, in section 5, the sets $`𝒪_\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ are considered with weaker topologies, related to the w topology of the module $`X`$, (here $``$ is supposed to be a von Neumann algebra, and $`X`$ a selfdual module ). This is done by means of the natural representation $`\rho `$ of $`_{}(X)`$ in the Hilbert space $``$ based on the algebraic tensor product $`XH`$. We choose $`H`$ the Hilbert space of a standard representation $`B(H)`$. This representation $`\rho `$ was introduced in , and studied also in . Here we show that via $`\rho `$, the states in the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X}`$ are pure in the classic sense, i.e. they are induced by vectors of the form $`x\xi `$ of $``$. We denote by $`𝒜(X)`$ the set of all such density vectors. $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X}`$ appears then as the set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}=\{\omega _{x\xi }:x\xi 𝒜(X)\}`$, where $`\omega _{x\xi }`$ is the state induced by $`x\xi `$. Moreover $`𝒮_1(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ is in one to one correspondence with $`𝒜(X)`$, $`(x,\phi )x\xi `$ ($`\phi =\omega _\xi `$), and the map $`(x,\phi )\phi _x`$ translates as

$$𝒜(X)\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)},x\xi \omega _{x\xi }.$$

We endow $`𝒜(X)`$ with the Hilbert space norm topology and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ with the quotient topology induced by this map, which turns out to be the relative norm topology of the conjugate space of $`_{}(X)`$. We deal with $`=`$ a II1 factor with separable predual and the property that the tensor product $`B(H)`$ has a one parameter group of automorphisms which scales the trace  (a class which contains the hyperfinite II1 factor). It is shown that the map $`x\xi \omega _{x\xi }`$ is a trivial principal bundle (with structure group the unitary group $`U_{}`$ in the strong operator topology). This implies that in this case the homotopy groups of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ coincide with the groups of the sphere $`𝒮_1(X)`$ in the (relative ) w topology of $`X`$ (which is assumed selfdual).

Using these results, in section 6, we obtain that the set of states of such $``$ with support equivalent to a fixed $`p`$ has trivial homotopy groups of all orders. Also it is proven that the set $`𝒮_p()`$ of partial isometries of $``$ with initial space $`p`$, regarded with the ultraweak topology, has trivial homotopy groups.

Another application of these results enables one to relate the homotopy groups of the unitary orbit $`𝒰_\phi =\{\phi Ad(u):uU_{}\}`$ of $`\phi `$ in the norm topology, with the homotopy groups of the unitary group of the centralizer $`^\phi `$ in the strong operator topology. In particular one obtains that $`𝒰_\phi `$ is simply connected.

## 2 Preliminaries and notations

Let us establish some basic facts and notations about the vector states $`\phi _x`$.

We shall be concerned with states of $``$ that have their support in $``$, a fact which holds automatically if $``$ is a von Neumann algebra.

Each element $`x𝒮_p(X)`$ gives rise to a (non unital) $``$-isomorphism $`i_x:pp_{}(X)`$, $`i_x(a)=\theta _{xa,x}`$.

Fix $`x_0𝒮_p(X)`$. Let us recall from  the principal fibre bundle, which we shall call the projective bundle

$$\rho :𝒮_p(X)_{e_{x_0}}=\{\text{projections in }_{}(X)\text{ equivalent to }e_{x_0}\}$$

given by $`\rho (x)=e_x`$. Note that $`_{e_{x_0}}`$ depends only on $`p`$ and not on the choice of $`x_0`$ (all projections on $`_{e_{x_0}}`$ are of the form $`e_x`$ for some $`x𝒮_p(X)`$). The structure group of the projective bundle is the unitary group $`U_{pp}`$ of $`pp`$.

As is usual notation, if $`\phi `$ is a faithful state of $``$, $`^\phi `$ is the centralizer algebra of $`\phi `$, i.e. $`^\phi =\{a:\phi (ab)=\phi (ba)\text{for all }b\}`$. If the support $`\text{supp}(\phi )=p<1`$, then denote by $`_p^\phi `$ the centralizer of the restriction of $`\phi `$ to the reduced algebra $`pp`$.

Typically $`a,b,c`$ will denote elements of $``$, $`x,y,z`$ elements of $`X`$ and $`r,s,t`$ elements of $`_{}(X)`$. $`^{\prime \prime }`$ will denote the von Neumann enveloping algebra of $``$, and $`X^{}`$ the selfdual completion of $`X`$, which is a C-module over $`^{\prime \prime }`$ (). By fibre bundle we mean a locally trivial fibre bundle, and by fibration we mean a surjective map having the homotopy lifting property ().

###### Lemma 2.1

Let $`\phi `$ be a state of $``$ with $`\text{supp}(\phi )=p`$, and $`x`$ an element in $`𝒮_p(X)`$. Then $`\text{supp}(\phi _x)=e_x`$.

* Clearly $`\phi _x(e_x)=\phi (x,e_x(x))=\phi (x,xp)=\phi (p)=1`$. Put $`r=\text{supp}(\phi _x)_{^{\prime \prime }}(X^{})`$. We have $`re_x`$. In particular $`e_xr=re_x=r`$. This implies that $`r`$ is of the form $`e_y=\theta _{y,y}`$, namely, $`y=r(x)X^{}`$. Now $`r(x),r(x)=q`$ is a projection in $`^{\prime \prime }`$, with $`qp`$. Indeed,

$$\begin{array}{cc}\hfill r(x),r(x)r(x),r(x)& =r(x),r(x)r(x),r(x)\hfill \\ & \\ & =r(x),\theta _{r(x),r(x)}(r(x))=r(x),r(x).\hfill \end{array}$$

And $`r(x),r(x)p=r(x),r(xp)=r(x),r(x)`$, i.e. $`qp`$. Now it is clear that $`\phi (q)=\phi (r(x),r(x))=\phi (x,r(x))=\phi _x(r)=1`$, which implies that $`q=p`$, Therefore $`r(x)x,r(x)x=r(x),r(x)+x,xr(x),xx,r(x)=0`$, since all these products equal $`p`$ (because $`r(x),x=r^2(x),x=r(x),r(x)`$). Finally, $`r(x)=x`$ implies that $`r=e_{r(x)}=e_x`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Lemma 2.2

Let $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ be a state of $`_{}(X)`$ with $`\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })=e_x`$ for some $`x𝒮_p(X)`$. Then $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\phi _x`$ for $`\phi `$ a state in $``$ with $`\text{supp}(\phi )=p`$. Namely $`\phi (a)=\mathrm{\Phi }(i_x(a))`$.

* Put $`\phi =\mathrm{\Phi }i_x`$ as above. First note that if $`t_{}(X)`$, then $`e_xte_x=\theta _{xx,t(x),x}`$. Then $`\phi _x(t)=\mathrm{\Phi }(i_x(x,t(x)))=\mathrm{\Phi }(\theta _{xx,t(x),x})=\mathrm{\Phi }(e_xte_x)=\mathrm{\Phi }(t)`$. It remains to see that $`\text{supp}(\phi )=p`$. Clearly $`\phi (p)=\mathrm{\Phi }(\theta _{xp,x})=\mathrm{\Phi }(e_x)=1`$. Suppose that $`qp`$ is a projection in $`^{\prime \prime }`$ with $`\phi (q)=\mathrm{\Phi }(\theta _{xq,x})=1`$ ($`\phi `$ here denotes the normal extension of the former $`\phi `$ to $`^{\prime \prime }`$). Note that $`\theta _{xq,x}=\theta _{xq,xq}=e_{xq}`$ is in fact a projection (associated to $`xq𝒮_q(X^{})`$), and verifies $`e_{xq}e_x`$. It follows that $`\theta _{xq,xq}=\theta _{x,x}`$. Then $`xq=\theta _{xq,xq}(x)=\theta _{x,x}(x)=x`$, and therefore $`q=p`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 2.3

If $``$ is a von Neumann algebra, the inner product of $`X`$ is weakly continuous and the state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of the preceding result is normal, then $`\phi =\mathrm{\Phi }i_x`$ is also normal.

###### Proposition 2.4

Let $`\psi ,\phi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, $`x,y𝒮_p(X)`$. Then

1. $`\phi _x=\psi _x`$ if and only if $`\phi =\psi `$.
2. $`\phi _x=\psi _y`$ if and only if $`\psi =\phi Ad(u)`$, with $`y=xu`$ and $`uU_{pp}`$.
3. $`\phi _x=\phi _y`$ if and only if $`y=xv`$, for $`v`$ a unitary element in $`_p^\phi `$.

* Let us start with a): $`\phi (b)=\phi _x(\theta _{xb,x})=\psi _x(\theta _{xb,x})=\psi (b)`$.

To prove b), suppose that $`\phi _x=\psi _y`$. Then they have the same support, i.e. $`e_x=e_y`$, which implies that there exists a unitary element $`uU_{pp}`$ such that $`y=xu`$ (see ). Then

$$\phi _x(t)=\psi _y(t)=\psi (xu,t(xu))=\psi (u^{}x,t(x)u)=[\psi Ad(u^{})]_x(t).$$

Using part a), this implies that $`\phi =\psi Ad(u^{})`$, or $`\psi =\phi Ad(u)`$.

To prove c), use b), and note that the unitary element $`uU_{pp}`$ satisfies $`\phi =\phi Ad(u)`$, i.e. $`u_p^\phi `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 3 The set $`𝒪_\phi `$

In this section we shall consider the set $`𝒪_\phi =\{\phi _x:x𝒮_p(X)\}`$ for a fixed state $`\phi `$ of $``$ with $`\text{supp}(\phi )=p`$. Note that in the particular case when $`X=`$ is a finite von Neumann algebra and $`p=1`$, then $`𝒪_\phi `$ is just the unitary orbit of $`\phi `$. In the general case, there is a canonical map

$$\sigma :𝒮_p(X)𝒪_\phi ,\sigma (x)=\phi _x.$$

Let us consider the following natural metric in $`𝒪_\phi `$:

$$d_\phi (\phi _x,\phi _y)=inf\{x^{}y^{}:x^{},y^{}𝒮_p(X),\phi _x^{}=\phi _x,\phi _y^{}=\phi _y\}$$

It is clear that this metric induces the same topology as the quotient topology given by the map $`\sigma `$, also, that in view of 2.4 it can be computed as follows:

$$d_\phi (\phi _x,\phi _y)=inf\{xyv:v\text{ unitary in }_p^\phi \}.$$

First note that this is indeed a metric. For instance, if $`d_\phi (\phi _x,\phi _y)=0`$ then there exist unitaries $`v_n`$ in $`_p^\phi `$ such that $`xyv_n0`$, i.e. $`yv_nx`$ in $`𝒮_p(X)`$. In particular $`yv_n`$ is a Cauchy sequence, and therefore $`v_n`$ is a Cauchy sequence, converging to a unitary $`v`$ in $`_p^\phi `$. Then $`x=yv`$ and $`\phi _x=\phi _y`$. The other properties follow similarly.

With this metric, $`𝒪_\phi `$ is homeomorphic to the quotient $`𝒮_p(X)/U_{_p^\phi }`$. The following result implies that the inclusion $`𝒪_\phi ^{}`$ (=conjugate space of $``$) is continuous.

###### Lemma 3.1

If $`x,y𝒮_p(X)`$, then $`\phi _x\phi _y2xy`$. In particular

$$\phi _x\phi _y2d_\phi (\phi _x,\phi _y)$$

where the norm $``$ of the functionals denotes the usual norm of the conjugate space $`^{}`$

* If $`t_{}(X)`$, then $`|\phi _x(t)\phi _y(t)||\phi (x,t(xy)|+|\phi (xy,ty)|`$. Now by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality $`x,t(xy)txy`$, and $`xy,tyxyt`$. Then $`\phi _x(t)\phi _y(t)2txy`$, and the result follows. $`\mathrm{}`$

We want the map $`\sigma :𝒮_p(X)𝒪_\phi `$ to be a locally trivial fibre bundle. In order to obtain it we make the following assumption:

###### Hypothesis 3.2

There exists a conditional expectation $`E_\phi :pp_p^\phi `$.

This is the case if for example $``$ is a von Neumann algebra and $`\phi `$ is normal. For the remaining of this section, we suppose that 3.2 holds.

###### Theorem 3.3

The map $`\sigma :𝒮_p(X)𝒪_\phi `$, $`\sigma (x)=\phi _x`$ is a locally trivial fibre bundle. The fibre of this bundle is the unitary group $`U_{_p^\phi }`$ of $`_p^\phi `$.

* Since the spaces are homogeneous spaces, it suffices to show that there exist continuous local cross sections at every point $`x_0`$ of $`𝒮_p(X)`$. Suppose that $`d_\phi (\phi _x,\phi _{x_0})<r<1`$. Then there exists a unitary operator $`v`$ in $`_p^\phi `$ such that $`xvx_0<1`$. Then

$$pxv,x_0=x_0,x_0xv,x_0=x_0xv,x_0x_0xv<1$$

It follows that $`xv,x_0`$ is invertible in $`pp`$. Therefore, one can find $`r`$ such that also $`E_\phi (xv,x_0)=v^{}E_\phi (x,x_0)`$ is invertible in $`_p^\phi `$. Then $`E_\phi (x,x_0)`$ is invertible. Let us put

$$\eta _{x_0}(\phi _x)=x\mu (E_\phi (x,x_0))$$

defined on $`\{\phi _x:d_\phi (\phi _x,\phi _{x_0})<r\}`$, where $`\mu `$ denotes the unitary part in the polar decomposition (of invertible elements) in $`_p^\phi `$: $`c=\mu (c)(c^{}c)^{1/2}`$. First note that $`\eta _{x_0}`$ is well defined. If $`x^{}`$ is a vector in the fibre of $`\phi _x`$, then $`x^{}=xv`$ for $`vU_{_p^\phi }`$. Then $`x^{}\mu (E_\phi (x^{},x_0))=xv\mu (v^{}E_\phi (x,x_0))=x\mu (E_\phi (x,x_0))`$, where the last equality holds because $`\mu (ua)=u\mu (a)`$ if $`u`$ is unitary. Next, $`\eta _{x_0}(\phi _{x_0})=x_0\mu (E_\phi (x_0,x_0))=x_0`$, and $`\eta _{x_0}`$ is a cross section for $`\sigma `$, because $`\mu (E_\phi (x,x_0))`$ is a unitary in $`_p^\phi `$. Finally, let us see that $`\eta _{x_0}`$ is continuous. Suppose that $`d_\phi (\phi _{x_n},\phi _x)0`$, then there exist unitaries $`v_n`$ in $`_p^\phi `$ such that $`x_nv_nx`$. Then by the continuity of the operations, $`x_nv_n\mu (E_\phi (x_nv_n,x_0))=x_n\mu (E_\phi (x_n,x_0))x\mu (E_\phi (x,x_0))`$, i.e., $`\eta _{x_0}(x_n)\eta _{x_0}(x)`$. It is clear from 2.4 that the fibre is $`U_{_p^\phi }`$. Namely, $`\sigma ^1(\phi _x)=\{xv:vU_{_p^\phi }\}`$. Note that $`xv_nxv`$ in $`\sigma ^1(\phi _x)𝒮_p(X)`$ if and only if $`v_nv`$ in $`U_{_p^\phi }`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We shall use the following result, which is a straightforward fact from the theory of fibrations

###### Lemma 3.4

Suppose that one has the following commutative diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}E& \stackrel{\pi _1}{}& X\\ & \pi _2& p\\ & & Y,\end{array}$$

where $`E,X,Y`$ are topological spaces, $`\pi _1`$, $`\pi _2`$ are fibrations and $`p`$ is continuous and surjective. Then $`p`$ is also a fibration.

There is another natural bundle associated to $`𝒪_\phi `$, which is the mapping

$$𝒪_\phi _e,\phi _xe_x,$$

where $`e`$ is any projection of the form $`e_{x_0}`$ for some $`x_0𝒮_p(X)`$. Since $`e_x=\text{supp}(\phi _x)`$, we shall call this map supp. In general, taking support of positive functionals does not define a continuous map. However it is continuous in this context, i.e. restricted to the set $`𝒪_\phi `$ with the metric $`d_\phi `$. Indeed, as seen before, convergence of $`\phi _{x_n}\phi _x`$ in this metric implies the existence of unitaries $`v_n`$ of $`_p^\phi pp`$ such that $`x_nv_nx`$ in $`𝒮_p(X)`$. This implies that $`e_{x_nv_n}=e_{x_n}e_x`$. Moreover, one has

###### Theorem 3.5

The map $`\text{supp}:𝒪_\phi _e`$ is a fibration with fibre $`U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi }`$. One has the following commutative diagram of fibre bundles

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝒮_p(X)& \stackrel{\rho }{}& 𝒪_\phi \\ & \sigma & \text{supp}\\ & & _e.\end{array}$$

* That the diagram commutes is apparent. Since $`\rho `$ and $`\sigma `$ are fibre bundles, it follows using 3.4 that supp is a fibration. Note that if $`e_x=e_y`$, then there exists $`uU_{pp}`$ such that $`y=xu`$. Then $`\phi _y=\phi _{xu}=(\phi Ad(u^{}))_x`$, therefore $`\text{supp}^1(e_x)=\{(\phi Ad(u^{}))_x:uU_{pp}\}`$. In 2.4 it was shown that $`\phi _x=\psi _x`$ (where $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ are states of $``$ with support $`p`$) implies $`\phi =\psi `$. So $`\{\phi Ad(u):uU_{pp}\}`$ parametrizes the fibres of supp, and clearly this set is in one to one correspondence with $`U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi }`$. Now $`(\phi Ad(u_n))_x(\phi Ad(u))_x`$ in $`𝒪_\phi `$ if and only if $`inf_{vU_{_p^\phi }}xu_nxuv=inf_{vU_{_p^\phi }}u_nuv`$, i.e. the class of $`u_n`$ tends to the class of $`u`$ in $`U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi }`$ (with the quotient topology induced by the norm of $``$). $`\mathrm{}`$

One can use the homotopy exact sequences of these bundles to relate the homotopy groups of $`𝒪_\phi `$, $`𝒮_p(X)`$, $`_e`$, $`U_{pp}`$, $`U_{_p^\phi }`$ and $`U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi }`$. Namely:

$$\mathrm{}\pi _n(U_{_p^\phi },p)\pi _n(𝒮_p(X),x_0)\stackrel{\sigma _{}}{}\pi _n(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})\pi _{n1}(U_{_p^\phi },p)\mathrm{}$$

where $`x_0`$ is a fixed element in $`𝒮_p(X)`$, and

$$\mathrm{}\pi _n(U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi },[p])\pi _n(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})\stackrel{\text{supp}_{}}{}\pi _n(,e_{x_0})\pi _{n1}(U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi },[p])\mathrm{}$$

with $`\phi `$ a fixed state in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$.

The first result uses simply the fact that $`\sigma `$ is continuous and surjective.

###### Corollary 3.6

If $`pp`$ is a finite von Neumann algebra, then $`𝒪_\phi `$ is arcwise connected.

* If $`pp`$ is finite, it was shown in  that $`𝒮_p(X)`$ is connected. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 3.7

If $`pp`$ is a von Neumann algebra and the restriction of $`\phi `$ to $`pp`$ is normal, then

$$\pi _1(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _x)\pi _1(_e,e_x).$$

If moreover $`Xp`$ is selfdual, then $`\pi _1(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _x)=0`$.

* The proof follows by applying the tail of the homotopy exact sequence of the bundle supp, recalling from  that the fibre $`U_{pp}/U_{_p^\phi }`$ is simply connected. In the selfdual case, it was proven in  that the connected components of $`_e`$ are simply connected. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 3.8

If $`pp`$ is a von Neumann algebra, $`\phi `$ restricted to $`pp`$ is normal and $`Xp`$ is selfdual, then, for a fixed $`x_0𝒮_p(X)`$, the inclusion map

$$i:U_{_p^\phi }𝒮_p(X),vx_0v$$

induces an epimorphism

$$i_{}:\pi _1(U_{_p^\phi },p)\pi _1(𝒮_p(X),x_0).$$

* This time use the homotopy exact sequence of $`\sigma `$, and the fact that in this case $`\pi _1(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})=0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

In other words, this result says that regardless of the size of the selfdual module $`X`$, any closed continuous curve $`x(t)𝒮_p(X)`$ with $`x(0)=x(1)=x_0`$ is homotopic to a closed curve of the form $`x_0(t)=x_0v(t)`$, with $`v(t)`$ a curve of unitaries in $`_p^\phi `$ with $`v(0)=v(1)=p`$.

###### Corollary 3.9

Suppose that $`X`$ is selfdual. If either

1. $`pp`$ is a properly infinite von Neumann algebra,

or
2. $`pp`$ is a von Neumann algebra of type II1 with $`_{}(X)`$ properly infinite,

then for $`n1`$

$$\pi _n(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})\pi _{n1}(U_{_p^\phi },p).$$

* In both cases, a) and b), one has that $`𝒮_p(X)`$ is contractible (see ). Therefore the proof follows writing down the homotopy exact sequence of the fibre bundle $`\sigma `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Situation b) occurs for example if $`pp`$ is a II1 factor and $`Xp`$ is not finitely generated over $`pp`$.

Finally let us state an analogous result for general C-algebras $``$ (under the hypothesis 3.2) for the module $`X=H_{}=\mathrm{}^2`$. Here we use the fact , that $`𝒮_p(H_{})`$ is contractible. The proof follows similarly.

###### Corollary 3.10

If 3.2 holds, and $`X=H_{}`$, then for $`n1`$

$$\pi _n(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})\pi _{n1}(U_{_p^\phi },p).$$

These two results establish that in these cases, if $`U_{_p^\phi }`$ is connected, then $`\pi _1(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})`$ is trivial. This is granted if $`pp`$ is a von Neumann algebra. However, note that $`\pi _2(𝒪_\phi ,\phi _{x_0})`$ is not trivial. This is because $`_p^\phi `$ is a finite von Neumann algebra and therefore $`U_{_p^\phi }`$ has non trivial fundamental group (see , ).

## 4 Vector states in $`_{}(X)`$

In 2.2 it was shown that a state $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ of $`_{}(X)`$ with support $`e=e_x`$ for some $`x𝒮_p(X)`$ is of the form $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\phi _x`$ for some state $`\phi `$ in $``$ with support $`p`$. Recall that we denote by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ the set of states of $``$ with support $`p`$, and by $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ the set of states of $`_{}(X)`$ with support equivalent to $`e`$. In other words, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}=_{\phi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()}𝒪_\phi `$. One has the assignment

$$𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},(x,\phi )\phi _x.$$

Remember that $`\phi _x=\psi _y`$, with $`\phi ,\psi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, $`x,y𝒮_p(X)`$ if and only if $`\psi =\phi Ad(u)`$ with $`y=xu`$ and $`uU_{pp}`$ (see 2.4 part c)).

The unitary group $`U_{pp}`$ acts both on $`𝒮_p(X)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$. We may consider the diagonal action on $`𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, defined by $`u.(x,\phi )=(xu,\phi Ad(u))`$. It follows that if we denote the quotient

$$𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()/\{(x,\phi )(xu,\phi Ad(u)),uU_{pp}\}:=𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()$$

(as is usual notation), then the assignment above induces a bijection

$$𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}.$$

If we endow $`𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ with the quotient topology (where $`𝒮_p(X)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ are considered with the norm topologies), a natural question is what topology does this bijection induce in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$. The following result states that convergence of a sequence in the quotient topology is equivalent in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ to convergence (in norm) of the states and their supports.

###### Proposition 4.1

Consider in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ the metric $`d`$ given by

$$d(\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi })=\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }+\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Psi }).$$

Then the metric space $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},d)`$ is homeomorphic to $`𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, where the homeomorphism is given by the above bijection.

* Denote by $`[(x,\phi )]`$ the class of $`(x,\phi )`$ in $`𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$. Suppose that $`[(x_n,\phi _n)]`$ converge to $`[(x,\phi )]`$ in $`𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$. Then there exist unitaries $`u_n`$ in $`pp`$ such that $`x_nu_n`$ tends to $`x`$ and $`\phi _nAd(u_n)`$ tends to $`\phi `$ in the respective norms. By continuity of the inner product, it is clear then that $`e_{x_n}=\theta _{x_n,x_n}=\theta _{x_nu_n,x_nu_n}e_x`$ and $`\phi _{n}^{}{}_{x_n}{}^{}=(\phi _nAd(u_n))_{x_nu_n}\phi _x`$, and therefore the assignment $`[(x,\phi )]\phi _x`$ is continuous. On the other direction, suppose that $`d(\mathrm{\Phi }_n,\mathrm{\Phi })`$ tends to zero. There exist $`\phi _n,\phi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ and $`x_n,x𝒮_p(X)`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n=\phi _{n}^{}{}_{x_n}{}^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\phi _x`$. We have that $`\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi }_n)=e_{x_n}\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })=e_x`$. Now $`e_{x_n}=\rho (x_n)`$, $`e_x=\rho (x)`$, and $`\rho :𝒮_p(X)_e`$ is a fibre bundle with fibre $`U_{pp}`$, therefore there exist unitaries $`u_n`$ in $`pp`$ such that $`x_nu_nx`$. We may replace the $`x_n`$ by $`y_n=x_nu_n`$ and $`\phi _n`$ by $`\psi _n=\phi _nAd(u_n)`$, and still have $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n=\psi _{n}^{}{}_{y_n}{}^{}`$, with $`y_nx`$. We claim that $`\psi _n\phi `$. Indeed, if $`a`$, by a typical argument

$$|\psi _n(a)\phi (a)|=|\mathrm{\Phi }_n(\theta _{y_na,y_n})\mathrm{\Phi }(\theta _{xa,x})|\mathrm{\Phi }_n\theta _{y_na,y_n}\theta _{xa,x}+\mathrm{\Phi }_n\mathrm{\Phi }\theta _{xa,x}.$$

The first summand is bounded by (using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality)

$$\theta _{y_na,y_n}\theta _{xa,x}\theta _{y_na,y_nx}+\theta _{y_naxa,x}y_nay_nx+y_nxax,$$

which equals $`2ay_nx`$. The other summand equals $`\mathrm{\Phi }_n\mathrm{\Phi }a`$. It follows that $`[(y_n,\psi _n)]=[(x_n,\phi _n)][(x,\phi )]`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Since $`\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }d(\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi })`$, it is clear that the inclusion $`(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},d)(_{}(X)^{},)`$ is continuous. The following example shows that the topology given by the metric $`d`$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ does not coincide with the norm topology of the conjugate space of $`_{}(X)`$. In other words, that convergence of the vector states (which a priori have equivalent supports) does not imply convergence of the supports.

###### Example 4.2

Let $`=DB(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$ be the subalgebra of diagonal matrices (with respect to the canonical basis). Consider the conditional expectation $`E:B(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))D`$ which consists on taking the diagonal entries. Let $`aD`$ be a trace class positive diagonal operator with trace one, and no zero entries in the diagonal. Put $`\phi (x)=Tr(ax)`$, $`xB(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$. Clearly, $`\phi `$ is faithful and $`B(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))^\phi =D`$. Let $`b`$ be the unilateral shift in $`\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N})`$. Denote by $`q_n`$ the $`n\times n`$ Jordan nilpotent, and $`w_n`$ the unitary operator on $`\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N})`$ having the unitary matrix $`q_n+q_n^{n1}`$ on the first $`n\times n`$ corner and the rest of the diagonal completed with $`1`$.

We shall consider the $`D`$-right module $`X`$ as the completion of $`B(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$ with the $`D`$-valued inner product given by $`E`$, i.e. $`x,y=E(x^{}y)`$, $`x,yB(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$. Note that $`X`$ is also a $`B(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$-left module, and so the elements of $`B(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$ act as adjointable operators in $`X`$. Consider the faithful state $`\phi `$ of $`D`$ equal to the restriction of the former $`\phi `$. The elements $`w_n`$ and $`b`$ lie in the unit sphere of $`X`$.

We claim that the projections $`e_{w_n}`$ do not converge to $`e_b`$. Suppose that they do converge, again using that the map $`xe_x`$ is a bundle, there would exist unitaries $`v_nD`$ such that $`w_nv_nb`$ in $`𝒮_1(X)`$. In  it was shown that the element $`b`$ cannot be approximated by unitaries of $`B(\mathrm{}^2(\mathrm{I}\mathrm{N}))`$ in the norm topology of the module $`X`$.

On the other hand, the states $`\phi _{w_n}`$ converge to $`\phi _b`$ in the norm topology of the conjugate space of $`_{}(X)`$. Indeed

$$|\phi _{w_n}(t)\phi _b(t)|=\left|Tr\left(a(w_n,t(w_n)b,t(b))\right)\right|$$

$$\left|Tr\left(a(w_n,t(w_n)t(b))\right)\right|+\left|Tr\left(a(w_nb,t(b))\right)\right|.$$

The first summand can be bounded by $`tTr(a(2E(w_n^{}b)E(b^{}w_n)))`$. Since $`Tr(a)=1`$ and $`E`$ is trace invariant, this term equals

$$t\left(2Tr(aw_n^{}b+ab^{}w_n)\right)=2t\underset{kn}{}a_k,$$

where $`a_k`$ are the diagonal entries of $`a`$. It is clear that this term tends to zero when $`n\mathrm{}`$. The other summand can be dealt in a similar way, establishing our claim.

Summarizing, the states $`\phi _{w_n}`$ converge but their supports $`e_{w_n}`$ do not.

Next we shall see that the quotient map

$$\mathrm{}_1:𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p(),\mathrm{}_1(x,\phi )=[(x,\phi )]$$

and the projection

$$\mathrm{}_2:𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()𝒮_p(X)/U_{pp},\mathrm{}_2([(x,\phi )])=[x]$$

are fibrations. Equivalently, if $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ is considered with the topology induced by the metric $`d`$, the maps $`(x,\phi )\phi _x`$ and $`\phi _xe_x`$ are fibrations. In what follows, for brevity, we shall use $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ (considered with the metric $`d`$) instead of $`𝒮_p(X)\times _{U_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$. Therefore $`\mathrm{}_1(x,\phi )=\phi _x`$.

###### Theorem 4.3

The map $`\mathrm{}_1:𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$, $`\mathrm{}_1(x,\phi )=\phi _x`$ is a principal fibre bundle with fibre $`U_{pp}`$.

* It suffices to exhibit a local cross section around a generic base point $`\phi _x`$. We claim that there is a neighborhood of $`\phi _x`$ such that elements $`\psi _y`$ in this neighborhood satisfy that $`y,x`$ is invertible. Indeed, if $`d(\phi _x,\psi _y)<r`$, then $`e_xe_y<r`$. If we choose $`r`$ small enough so that $`e_y`$ lies in the ball around $`e_x`$ in which a local cross section of $`\rho (x)=e_x`$ is defined, then there exists a unitary $`u`$ in $`pp`$ such that $`xyu<1`$. Note that

$$pyu,x=xyu,xxyu<1.$$

Then $`yu,x=u^{}y,x`$ is invertible in $`pp`$, and therefore also $`y,x`$. In this neighborhood put

$$s(\psi _y)=(y\mu (y,x),\psi Ad(\mu (y,x)),$$

where $`\mu `$ denotes the unitary part in the polar decomposition of invertible elements in $`pp`$ as before. We claim that $`s`$ is well defined, is a local cross section and is continuous.

Suppose that $`\psi _y=\psi _y^{}^{}`$, then there exits a unitary $`u`$ in $`pp`$ such that $`y^{}=yu`$ and $`\psi =\psi ^{}Ad(u)`$. Then $`y^{}\mu (y^{},x)=yu\mu (u^{}y,x)=y\mu (y,x)`$. Also, $`\psi ^{}Ad(\mu (y^{},x))=\psi Ad(u)Ad(\mu (u^{}y,x))=\psi Ad(u)Ad(u^{})Ad(\mu (y,x))=\psi Ad(\mu (y,x))`$.

That it is a cross section is apparent. Let us see that $`s`$ is continuous. Suppose that $`\psi _{n}^{}{}_{y_n}{}^{}\phi _x^{}^{}`$ for $`\phi _x^{}^{}`$ in the neighborhood of $`\phi _x`$ where $`s`$ is defined. This implies that there exist unitaries $`u_n`$ in $`U_{pp}`$ such that $`y_nu_nx^{}`$ and $`\psi _nAd(u_n)\phi ^{}`$ in the norm topologies. The continuity of the inner product implies that $`y_nu_n\mu (y_nu_n,x)=y_n\mu (y_n,x)x^{}\mu (x^{},x)`$. Also $`\psi _nAd(u_n)Ad(\mu (y_nu_n,x))=\psi _nAd(\mu (y_n,x))\phi ^{}Ad(\mu (x^{},x))`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Next we consider the map $`\mathrm{}_2:\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}𝒮_p(X)/U_{pp}`$. Recall that $`𝒮_p(X)/U_{pp}_e`$, where the homeomorphism is given by $`[x]e_x`$. The following result states that taking support of a state in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ (regarded with the $`d`$ topology) is a fibration.

###### Theorem 4.4

The map $`\mathrm{}_2:\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}𝒮_p(X)/U_{pp}`$, given by $`\mathrm{}_2(\phi _x)=[x]`$ is a fibration with fibre $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$.

* Consider the diagram

$$\begin{array}{ccc}𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()& \stackrel{\mathrm{}_1}{}& \mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}\\ & p& \mathrm{}_2\\ & & 𝒮_p(X)/U_{pp},\end{array}$$

where $`p`$ is given by $`p(x,\phi )=[x]`$. Clearly $`p`$ is a fibre bundle, because it is the composition of the projective bundle $`x[x]`$ with the projection $`(x,\phi )x`$. The map $`\mathrm{}_1`$ was shown to be a fibration. It follows from 3.4 the $`\mathrm{}_2`$ is a fibration. The fibre $`\mathrm{}_2^1([x])`$ consists of all states $`\phi _y`$ with $`[y]=[x]`$. Then there exists $`uU_{pp}`$ such that $`\phi _y=(\phi Ad(u^{}))_x`$, so that one may fix $`x`$ (and not just $`[x]`$). Now $`\phi _x=\psi _x`$ implies $`\phi =\psi `$. It follows that the fibre over $`[x]`$ is the set $`\{\phi _x:\phi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()\}`$, which identifies with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

We will use the fibrations $`\mathrm{}_1`$ and $`\mathrm{}_2`$ to obtain information about the homotopy type of these spaces.

As in the previous section, applying the homotopy exact sequences of these fibrations, one obtains

$$\mathrm{}\pi _n(U_{pp},p)\pi _n(𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p(),(x_0,\phi ))\stackrel{(\mathrm{}_1)_{}}{}\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},\phi _{x_0})\pi _{n1}(U_{pp},p)\mathrm{}$$

and

$$\mathrm{}\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_p(),\phi )\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},\phi _{x_0})\stackrel{(\mathrm{}_2)_{}}{}\pi _n(,e_{x_0})\pi _{n1}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_p(),\phi )\mathrm{}$$

First note that since $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ is convex, $`𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ has the same homotopy type as $`𝒮_p(X)`$, and

$$\pi _{}(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X})=\pi _{}(_{e_x}).$$

###### Corollary 4.5

The space $`𝒮_p(H_{})\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ is contractible.

* It was remarked in the preceding section that $`𝒮_p(H_{})`$ is contractible. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 4.6

For $`\phi _0\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ and $`x_0𝒮_p(H_{})`$ fixed,

$$\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,H_{}},\phi _{0}^{}{}_{x_0}{}^{})\pi _{n1}(U_{pp},p),n1.$$

In particular, if $`U_{pp}`$ is connected, $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,H_{}},\phi _{0}^{}{}_{x_0}{}^{})=0`$. If moreover $`pp`$ is a properly infinite von Neumann algebra, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,H_{}}`$ has trivial homotopy groups of all orders.

* The first fact follows from the contractibility of $`𝒮_p(H_{})\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, which implies that in the homotopy sequence $`\pi _k(𝒮_p(H_{})\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_p(),(\phi _0,x_0))=0`$ for all $`k`$. The second fact follows using that $`U_{pp}`$ is connected. Using that () if $`pp`$ is properly infinite, then $`U_{pp}`$ is contractible, it follows that

$$\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,H_{}},\phi _{0}^{}{}_{x_0}{}^{})=0$$

for all $`n0`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

One can be more specific, since the homotopy groups of the unitary group of a C-algebra (at least for $`n=1`$) have been computed in many cases (, , ). For example, in the von Neumann algebra case, one can compute the fundamental group of the unitary group in terms of the type decomposition of the algebra.

###### Corollary 4.7

If $`pp`$ is a finite von Neumann algebra, then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ is connected.

* It was noted before that if $`pp`$ is finite, then $`𝒮_p(X)`$ is connected. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 4.8

If $`pp`$ is a properly infinite algebra, then for $`n0`$

$$\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},\phi _{0}^{}{}_{x_0}{}^{})\pi _n(𝒮_p(X),x_0).$$

If moreover $`Xp`$ is selfdual, then

$$\pi _n(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},\phi _{0}^{}{}_{x_0}{}^{})=0$$

for all $`n0`$.

* The proof follows writing the homotopy exact sequence of $`\mathrm{}_1`$. If $`pp`$ is properly infinite, its unitary group is contractible. If moreover $`Xp`$ is selfdual, it was pointed out before that $`𝒮_p(X)`$ is contractible. $`\mathrm{}`$

We turn now our attention to the bundle $`\mathrm{}_2`$.

###### Corollary 4.9

If $`pp`$ is a von Neumann algebra and $`Xp`$ is selfdual, then $`\pi _1(\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X},\phi _x)=0`$

* It was shown in  that $`\pi _1(_{e_x})=0`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 4.10

There is another map related to this situation, namely the other projection $`\mathrm{}_3`$,

$$\mathrm{}_3:\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()/U_{pp},\mathrm{}_3(\phi _x)=[\phi ].$$

This map is well defined and continuous, if one goes back to the notation $`𝒮_p(X)\times _{u_{pp}}\mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, $`\mathrm{}_3`$ is the map $`(x,\phi )\phi `$ at the quotient level,

$$[(x,\phi )][\phi ].$$

However this map is not, in general, even a weak fibration. To see this consider the case when $`X=`$ is a finite algebra, and $`p=1`$. Here $`_{}()=`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,}`$ consist of the states of $``$ with support equivalent to 1 (note that $`x𝒮_1(X)`$ verifies $`x^{}x=1`$, i.e. $`xU_{}`$, and $`e_x=1`$). That is, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,}`$ is the set of faithful states of $``$ ($`=\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ in our notation). It follows that $`\mathrm{}_3`$ is just the quotient map

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()/U_{}.$$

Moreover, take $`=M_n(\mathrm{C}\text{ })`$ ($`n<\mathrm{}`$). Then the quotient map above is not a weak fibration. Indeed, both sets $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(M_n(\mathrm{C}\text{ }))`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1(M_n(\mathrm{C}\text{ }))/U_{M_n(\mathrm{C}\text{ })}`$ are convex metric spaces. The latter can be identified, using the density matrices, as the $`n`$-tuples of eigenvalues $`(\lambda _1,\mathrm{},\lambda _n)`$ arranged in decreasing order and normalized such that $`\lambda _k=1`$, with the $`\mathrm{}_1`$ distance. If this quotient map were a weak fibration, then the fibre would have trivial homotopy groups of all orders. This is clearly not the case, since the fibre is the unitary group $`U(n)`$ of $`M_n(\mathrm{C}\text{ })`$.

###### Remark 4.11

The set $`𝒪_\phi `$ lies inside $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$, namely as the states $`\phi _x`$ with $`\phi `$ fixed. If one regards $`𝒪_\phi `$ with the metric $`d_\phi `$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ with the metric $`d`$, it is clear that the inclusion is continuous. Indeed, it was noted that supp is continuous in $`𝒪_\phi `$. Therefore if $`d_\phi (\phi _{x_n},\phi _x)0`$, then $`e_{x_n}e_x`$, which implies that $`d(\phi _{x_n},\phi _x)0`$.

However, the identity mapping $`(𝒪_\phi ,d_\phi )(𝒪_\phi ,d)`$ is not (in general) a homeomorphism. Indeed, take $`X=`$ and $`\phi `$ faithful. Then $`𝒪_\phi `$ is the unitary orbit $`\{\phi Ad(u):uU_{}\}U_{}/U_^\phi `$, and it is clear that $`d_\phi `$ induces the same topology as the quotient topology ($`U_{}`$ with the norm topology). On the other hand, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ coincides in this case with $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ the set of faithful states of $``$, and the metric $`d`$ is just the usual norm of the conjugate space $`^{}`$. In  it was shown that in general, the unitary orbit does not have norm continuous local cross sections to the unitary group, but it does have local cross sections which are continuous in the quotient topology $`U_{}/U_^\phi `$.

###### Remark 4.12

The metric $`d(\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi })=\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Psi }+\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Psi })`$ in the state space of $`_{}(X)`$ is weird. For example, in this metric, $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ is open. Moreover, any state $`\psi `$ of $`_{}(X)`$ such that $`d(\mathrm{\Psi },\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X})<1`$, actually lies in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$. Indeed, if $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is a state of $`_{}(X)`$, and $`d(\mathrm{\Phi },\phi _x)<1`$ for some $`x𝒮_p(X)`$ and $`\phi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$, then $`supp(\mathrm{\Phi })e_x<1`$, and therefore $`\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })`$ and $`e_x`$ are unitarily equivalent. That is $`\text{supp}(\mathrm{\Phi })=e_y`$, with $`y=U(x)`$ for some unitary $`U`$ in $`_{}(X)`$. Then, by 2.2, there exists $`\psi \mathrm{\Sigma }_p()`$ such that $`\mathrm{\Phi }=\psi _y\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$.

However, if $`X=`$ and $``$ is finite dimensional, then the topology of the $`d`$-metric coincides in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,}`$ with the usual norm topology. Indeed, it suffices to see that the map $`\phi _xe_x`$ is continuous in the norm topology. Since we are in the finite dimensional case, it suffices to argue with (positive) density matrices, with trace 1. Note that the states of the form $`\phi _x`$ have equivalent supports, i.e. their density matrices have kernels with the same dimension. Suppose that $`a_n`$ is a sequence of positive matrices with trace 1 and $`nul(a_n)=k`$, converging in norm to the matrix $`a`$, also with (a priori) $`nul(a)=k`$. Then the projections $`P_{\mathrm{ker}a_n}`$ onto the kernels converge in norm to $`P_{\mathrm{ker}a}`$. Indeed, we claim that one can find an open interval around zero and an integer $`n_0`$ such that for $`nn_0`$ no eigenvalue of $`a_n`$ (other than zero) lies inside this interval. And by a routine spectral theory (Riesz integral) argument, one has that $`P_{\mathrm{ker}a_n}P_{\mathrm{ker}a}`$. If one could find no such interval, then there would exist a sequence $`\lambda _n>0`$ such that $`\lambda _n`$ is an eigenvalue of $`a_n`$ and $`\lambda _n0`$. If $`q_n`$ is the spectral projection corresponding to $`\lambda _n`$, then $`a_n=b_n+\lambda _nq_n`$. Then $`b_na`$, where $`nul(a)=k`$ and $`nul(b_n)<k`$, which cannot happen.

## 5 Purification of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$

In this section $``$ is a von Neumann algebra. We will consider a natural representation for $`_{}(X)`$, studied in  and , in which all the states $`\phi _x\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ are induced by vectors in this Hilbert space. Consider the algebraic tensor product $`XH`$, where $`H`$ is a Hilbert space on which $``$ acts. We will choose $`H`$ the space of a standard representation of $``$. Recall the fact that for such a representation there exists a cone $`𝒫`$, called the positive standard cone, with many remarkable properties. Among them, any positive normal functional in $``$ is implemented by a unique vector in this cone. In the vector space $`XH`$ consider the semidefinite positive form given by $`[x\xi ,y\eta ]=(\xi ,x,y\eta )`$, where $`(,)`$ is the inner product of $`H`$. Denote by $`Z=\{zXH:[z,z]=0\}`$, and let $``$ be the Hilbert space obtained as the completion of $`XH/Z`$. The representation $`\rho :_{}(X)B()`$ is given by $`\rho (t)([x\xi ])=[t(x)\xi ]`$.

###### Lemma 5.1

In the representation $`\rho `$, the state $`\phi _x\mathrm{\Sigma }_{p,X}`$ is implemented by the vector $`x\xi `$, where $`\xi `$ is the unique vector in the positive cone $`𝒫`$ which implements $`\phi `$ ($`\phi (a)=\omega _\xi (a)=(a\xi ,\xi )`$), that is

$$\phi _x(t)=[\rho (t)(x\xi ),x\xi ],t_{}(X).$$

* Straightforward: $`[\rho (t)(x\xi ),x\xi ]=(\xi ,t(x),x\xi )=(x,t(x)\xi ,\xi )=\phi (x,t(x))=\phi _x(t)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

In order to simplify the exposition, we shall restrict to the case $`p=1`$. This is in fact no restriction at all, since the general case can be easily reduced to this situation (note that $`𝒮_p(X)`$ is the unit sphere of the $`pp`$ module $`Xp`$). Therefore, the unitary vectors of the cone implementing the faithful states of $``$ are the vectors which are cyclic and separating for $``$. Let us denote $`𝒜(X)=\{[x\xi ]:x𝒮_1(X),\xi 𝒫,\text{ cyclic and separating for },\xi =1\}`$.

###### Lemma 5.2

Let $`x,y𝒮_1(X)`$ and $`\xi ,\eta 𝒫`$ unit, cyclic and separating, then the elements $`x\xi `$ and $`y\eta `$ induce the same element in $`𝒜(X)`$ only if $`x=y`$ and $`\xi =\eta `$. In other words, there is a bijection

$$𝒮_1(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()𝒜(X),(x,\phi )x\xi .$$

* Suppose that $`x\xi y\eta `$, with $`x,y,\xi ,\eta `$ as above. Then

$$0=[x\xi y\eta ,x\xi y\eta ]=22Re((\xi ,x,y\eta )).$$

That is, $`(\xi ,x,y\eta )=1`$. Since $`\xi ,\eta `$ are unital and $`x,y1`$, by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality this implies that $`x,y\eta =\lambda \xi `$, for $`\lambda \mathrm{C}\text{ }`$, $`|\lambda |=1`$. Again, using that $`\xi ,\eta `$ are unital, this implies $`\lambda =1`$, i.e. $`x,y\eta =\xi `$. On the other hand, the states induced in $`_{}(X)`$ by the vectors $`[x\xi ]`$ and $`[y\eta ]`$ via the representation $`\rho `$ were shown to be $`\phi _x`$ and $`\psi _y`$, where $`\phi ,\psi `$ are the states induced in $``$ by $`\xi ,\eta `$, respectively, as shown in the lemma above. By 2.4, $`\phi _x=\psi _y`$ implies that there exists $`uU_{}`$ such that $`y=xu`$ and $`\psi =\phi Ad(u)`$. So $`x,y\eta =\xi `$ translates into $`u\eta =\xi `$. The other identity $`\psi =\phi Ad(u)`$ can also be interpreted in terms of these vectors in the cone $`𝒫`$. Namely, the unique vector in the cone associated to the state $`\phi Ad(u)`$ is $`u^{}Ju^{}J\xi `$, where $`J`$ denotes the modular conjugation of the standard representation $`B(H)`$. Indeed, clearly $`u^{}Ju^{}J\xi 𝒫`$, and $`(au^{}Ju^{}J\xi ,u^{}Ju^{}J\xi )=(Ju^{}Jau^{}\xi ,Ju^{}Ju^{}\xi )=(au^{}\xi ,u^{}\xi )=(uau^{}\xi ,\xi )=\phi (uau^{})`$. Therefore, by the uniqueness condition (on vectors in the cone inducing states), it follows that $`\eta =u^{}Ju^{}J\xi `$. Combining this with $`u\eta =\xi `$ yields

$$\xi =Ju^{}J\xi =Ju^{}\xi ,\text{ i.e. }\xi =u^{}\xi .$$

This implies that $`u^{}`$ acts as the identity operator on $`^{}\xi `$, which is dense in $`H`$, because $`\xi `$ is cyclic for $`^{}`$. Therefore $`u=1`$. Then $`x=y`$ and $`\xi =\eta `$. $`\mathrm{}`$

These two lemmas state that

$$\mathrm{}_1:𝒮_p(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X},\mathrm{}_1(x,\phi )=\phi _x,$$

in this representation looks like

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}:𝒜(X)\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)},\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}([x\xi ])=\omega _{[x\xi ]},$$

where $`\omega _{[x\xi ]}`$ is the state induced by the vector $`[x\xi ]`$, and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ is the space of all such states with symbols in $`𝒜(X)`$. What one gains by taking this standpoint is that $`𝒜(X)`$ has a natural topology, as a subset of the Hilbert space $``$. The set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X}`$ is therefore endowed with a weaker topology than the $`d`$ metric, namely the quotient topology induced by $`𝒜(X)`$ and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}`$. The fibre of this map is , as before, a copy of the unitary group $`U_{}`$ of $``$. The next result examines how the unitary group $`U_{}`$ appears inside $`𝒜(X)`$ and which is its relative topology. By the above result, we can omit the brackets when dealing with classes of elementary tensors of the form $`x\xi `$ in $`𝒜(X)`$ ($`x𝒮_1(X)`$, $`\xi `$ unit, cyclic and separating in $`𝒫`$). Also, note that the vectors $`x\xi 𝒜(X)`$ are cyclic for $`\rho `$, but not separating in general.

###### Proposition 5.3

Given a fixed element $`x\xi 𝒜(X)`$, the fibre $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}^1(\omega _{x\xi })`$ is the set $`\{xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi :uU_{}\}`$ which is in one to one correspondence with $`U_{}`$. The relative topology induced on $`U_{}`$ by this bijection is the strong operator topology.

* If $`y\eta `$ lies in the fibre $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}^1(\omega _{x\xi })`$, then $`\omega _{x\xi }=\omega _{y\eta }`$, or $`\phi _x=\psi _y`$, where as in the previous lemma $`\phi `$ and $`\psi `$ are the states of $``$ associated to the vectors $`\xi `$ and $`\eta `$. Again, this implies that there exists a unitary in $`U_{}`$ such that $`y=xu`$ and $`\eta =u^{}Ju^{}J\xi `$. Then $`y\eta =xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi `$. Now suppose that a net $`xu_\alpha u_\alpha ^{}Ju_\alpha ^{}J\xi `$ converges to $`xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi `$ in the Hilbert space topology (of $``$). This implies that

$$xu_\alpha u_\alpha ^{}Ju_\alpha ^{}J\xi xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi ^2=22Re((u_\alpha ^{}Ju_\alpha ^{}J\xi ,xu_\alpha ,xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi ))0$$

with $`\alpha `$. In other words,

$$(u_\alpha ^{}Ju_\alpha ^{}J\xi ,u_\alpha ^{}Ju^{}J\xi )=(u^{}\xi ,u^{}\xi )1.$$

Equivalently, $`(uu_\alpha ^{}\xi ,\xi )1`$. This implies that $`(uu_\alpha )\xi 0`$ in the Hilbert space norm (of $`H`$). Now let $`a^{}^{}`$, then

$$(uu_\alpha )a^{}\xi =a^{}(uu_\alpha )\xi a^{}(uu_\alpha )\xi 0.$$

That is $`u_\alpha \nu u\nu `$ in a dense subset of vectors $`\nu H`$. Since $`u,u_\alpha `$, being unitaries, are bounded in norm, this implies strong operator convergence of $`u_\alpha `$ to $`u`$. The converse implication is straightforward. $`\mathrm{}`$

The tensor product $`XH/Z`$ is a $``$-bimodule tensor product, in the sense that for any $`b`$, $`xX`$ and $`\nu H`$, one has $`xb\nu `$ equivalent to $`xb\nu `$. Then the elements $`xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi `$ in the fibre of $`\omega _{x\xi }=\phi _x`$ can be parametrized $`xJu^{}J\xi =xJu^{}\xi `$. We prefer the first presentation because the vector $`Ju^{}\xi `$ does not belong to $`𝒫`$. However the latter clarifies the action of $`U_{}`$ on $`𝒜(X)`$. Namely, the right-action

$$(x\xi )u=xJu^{}J\xi .$$

Note that it is indeed a right action: $`(x\xi )vu=xJ(vu)^{}J\xi =xJu^{}JJv^{}J\xi =((x\xi )v)u`$.

The sphere $`𝒮_1(X)`$ and the set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ of faithful states of $``$ lie inside $`𝒜(X)`$. Pick a fixed element $`x_0𝒮_1(X)`$ and $`\xi _0𝒫`$ unit, cyclic and separating, inducing the state $`\phi _0`$. The following maps are one to one:

$$𝒮_1(X)\{x\xi _0:x𝒮_1(X)\}𝒜(X),xx\xi _0,$$

and

$$\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()\{x_0\xi :\xi 𝒫\text{ unit, cyclic and separating}\},$$

$$\phi x_0\xi ,$$

where $`\xi `$ is the vector in the cone associated to $`\phi `$.

###### Proposition 5.4

The first bijection endows $`𝒮_1(X)`$ with the relative topology induced from $``$, which is given by the following: a net $`x_\alpha `$ converges to $`x`$ if and only if $`\phi _0(x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x)0`$, if and only if $`|x_\alpha x|0`$ in the strong operator topology of $`B(H)`$. The sphere $`𝒮_1(X)X`$ is closed in this topology.

The second bijection is a homeomorphism when $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ is regarded with the norm topology and $`\{x_0\xi :\xi 𝒫\text{ unit, cyclic and separating}\}`$ is regarded with the Hilbert space norm of $``$.

* The second statement is straightforward, because $`x_0\xi x_0\eta ^2=22Re(\xi ,\eta )=\xi \eta ^2`$ and the well known fact that the topology of the distance between the vectors in $`𝒫`$ yields a topology which is equivalent to the one given by the norm of the induced states in the conjugate space. Let $`x_\alpha \xi _0`$ be a net, and $`x\xi _0`$ an element in $`𝒜(X)`$. Then $`x_\alpha \xi _0x\xi _0^2=22Re(\xi _0,x_\alpha ,x\xi _0)=22Re(\phi _0(x_\alpha ,x))=\phi _0(x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x)`$. Next we check that the convergence of the net in the sense described is equivalent to convergence to zero of $`|x_\alpha x|`$ in the strong topology, where as is usual notation, $`|y|=y,y^{1/2}`$, for $`yX`$. Since $`\phi _0`$ is implemented by the vector $`\xi _0`$, $`\phi _0(x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x)=|x_\alpha x|\xi _0^2`$, and therefore convergence in the strong topology implies convergence in the former sense. Suppose now that $`|x_\alpha x|\xi _00`$, and take $`a^{}^{}`$. Then $`|x_\alpha x|a^{}\xi _0=a^{}|x_\alpha x|\xi _0a^{}|x_\alpha x|\xi _00`$. The set $`\{a^{}\xi _0:a^{}^{}\}`$ is dense in $`H`$, and the operators $`|x_\alpha x|`$ have bounded norms, therefore $`|x_\alpha x|`$ tends strongly to zero.

Let us prove now that the sphere $`𝒮_1(X)X`$ is closed in this topology. First note that this topology, on norm bounded sets, is induced by the seminorms $`n_\nu (x)=(x,x\nu ,\nu )`$, $`\nu H`$, $`\nu =1`$ . Then it suffices to see that if $`x_\alpha x`$ with $`x_\alpha 𝒮_1(X)`$, then $`x𝒮_1(X)`$. Now, $`(x,x\nu ,\nu )=1`$. Indeed, if $`\omega _\nu (a)=(a\nu ,\nu )`$, then

$$(x_\alpha x,x\nu ,\nu )=\omega _\nu (x_\alpha x,x)\omega _\nu (x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x)^{1/2}=n_\nu (x_\alpha x)^{1/2},$$

i.e. $`(x_\alpha ,x\nu ,\nu )(x,x\nu ,\nu )`$. Therefore

$$0(x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x\nu ,\nu )=1+((x,xx_\alpha ,xx,x_\alpha )\nu ,\nu )1(x,x\nu ,\nu ).$$

Since this is true for all unit vectors $`\nu H`$, it follows that $`x𝒮_1(X)`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 5.5

Since $`X`$ is selfdual, it is a conjugate space . The result above shows that the topology of $`𝒮_1(X)`$ induced by the Hilbert space norm of $``$ coincides with the $`w^{}`$ topology of $`X𝒮_1(X)`$. Indeed, it was shown in  that a net $`x_\alpha x`$ in the $`w^{}`$ topology if and only if $`\phi (x_\alpha ,y)\phi (x,y)`$ for all $`yX`$, $`\phi _{}^+`$. This clearly implies that $`\phi (x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x)0`$, which is the topology considered in the lemma (here the fact $`x,x=x_\alpha ,x_\alpha =1`$ is crucial). Conversely

$$\phi (x_\alpha x,y)\phi (x_\alpha x,x_\alpha x)^{1/2}\phi (y,y)^{1/2}$$

yields the other implication.

We have examined the topologies induced on $`𝒮_1(X)`$ and $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ by the described inclusions on $`𝒜(X)`$. We have seen before that $`𝒜(X)𝒮_1(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$. These facts alone however do not imply that $`𝒜(X)`$ is homeomorphic to $`𝒮_1(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ in the product topology (of the w topology and the norm topology respectively). The next result shows that this is the case.

###### Theorem 5.6

The bijection

$$𝒮_1(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()𝒜(X),(x,\phi )x\xi ,$$

is a homeomorphism when $`𝒮_1(X)\times \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ is endowed with the product topology of the w topology of $`𝒮_1(X)`$ and the norm topology of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$.

* By the result above, it is clear that if $`x_\alpha x`$ in $`𝒮_1(X)`$ and $`\phi _\beta \phi `$ in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$, then $`x_\alpha \xi _\beta x\xi `$, where $`\xi _\beta ,\xi `$ are the vectors in the positive cone inducing $`\phi _\beta ,\phi `$. On the other direction, suppose that $`x_\alpha \xi _\alpha x\xi `$ in $`𝒜(X)`$. This means that $`(x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha ,\xi )1`$. Then, since $`x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha 1`$, follows that $`x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha \xi ^2=1+x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha ^22Re(x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha ,\xi )0`$ and similarly $`x_\alpha ,x\xi \xi _\alpha 0`$. Then we get

$$x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha \xi 0\text{ and }x_\alpha ,x\xi \xi _\alpha 0$$
(5.1)
This implies that

$$\omega _{x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha }\omega _\xi =\phi _\alpha \left(x_\alpha ,xx,x_\alpha \right)\phi ()0$$
(5.2)
Using 5.1 follows that $`Jx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha \xi _\alpha 0`$ and so

$$\omega _{Jx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha }\omega _{\xi _\alpha }=\omega _{Jx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha }\phi _\alpha 0$$
(5.3)
Note that for every $`a`$

$`\omega _{Jx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha }(a)`$ $`=`$ $`(aJx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha ,Jx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha )`$ (5.4)
$`=`$ $`(x_\alpha ,xax,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha ,Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJ\xi _\alpha ).`$
But

$`Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJ\xi _\alpha \xi _\alpha `$ $``$ $`Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJ\xi _\alpha Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJx_\alpha ,x\xi `$
$`+Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJx_\alpha ,x\xi \xi _\alpha `$
It is easy to prove that the first addend tends to zero using 5.1. The second one is equal to $`Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJx_\alpha ,xJ\xi \xi _\alpha =JJx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,x\xi \xi _\alpha `$ which again tends to zero using 5.1. Therefore, $`Jx,x_\alpha x_\alpha ,xJ\xi _\alpha \xi _\alpha 0`$, and using 5.4 we get that

$$\omega _{Jx_\alpha ,xJx,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha }\phi _\alpha \left(x_\alpha ,xx,x_\alpha \right)0$$
(5.5)
Finally, using 5.2, 5.3 and 5.5 follows that $`\phi _\alpha \phi `$ in norm.

Equivalently, $`\xi _\alpha \xi `$ in $`H`$. Then $`(x,x_\alpha \xi _\alpha ,\xi )1`$ implies that $`(x,x_\alpha \xi ,\xi )1`$. Then $`\phi (|xx_\alpha |)0`$, i.e. $`x_\alpha x`$ in the w topology. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 5.7

The space $`𝒜(X)`$ is homotopically equivalent to the sphere $`𝒮_1(X)`$ with the w topology.

* Recall that $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$ is convex. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we focus on the map

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}:𝒜(X)\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)},\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}(x\xi )=\omega _{x\xi }.$$

In order to see if this map is a fibration, we shall look for local cross sections. A powerful tool to state the existence of cross sections is Michael’s theory of continuous selections . An example of the use of this theory in the context of operator algebras is the paper by S. Popa and M. Takesaki . To use Michael’s theorem one must check first that the set function $`\omega _{z\xi }\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}^1(\omega _{z\xi })`$ which assigns to each point in the base space the fibre over it, is lower semicontinuous .

###### Remark 5.8

In our context lower semicontinuity means that for any $`r>0`$, and $`x\xi `$ the set $`\{\omega _{y\eta }:yJu^{}\eta x\xi <r\}`$ is open in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$. In other words, for a state $`\omega _{y\eta }`$ close to $`\omega _{x\xi }`$ one should find an element $`yJu^{}\eta `$ in the fibre of $`\omega _{y\eta }`$ at distance less than $`r`$ to the fibre of $`\omega _{x\xi }`$. We have not specified yet the topology of this set $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$. Lower semicontinuity implies that whatever topology one chooses, it must be stronger than the quotient topology given by $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}`$. Indeed, two states in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ are close in this quotient topology if and only if there are elements in their fibres which are close in $`𝒜(X)`$.

On the other hand this quotient topology is stronger than the norm topology. Recall Bures metric for states, defined as the infimum of the distances between vectors inducing the states taken over all possible representations where the two states are vector states. The topology induced by Bures metric on the state space is equivalent to the norm topology. This raises the question of whether this two topologies, the norm topology and the one induced by this purification coincide in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}(=\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X})`$.

###### Theorem 5.9

The quotient and the norm topology coincide in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}.`$

* It was noted that the quotient topology is stronger than the norm topology. Let us check the other implication. Let $`\omega _{y_n\eta _n}`$ be a sequence in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ converging to $`\omega _{x\xi }`$ in norm. Testing convergence in operators of the form $`\theta _{y_na,y_n}`$, $`a`$, yields

$$a\omega _{y_n\eta _n}\omega _{x\xi }=\theta _{y_na,y_n}\omega _{y_n\eta _n}\omega _{x\xi }|\omega _{y_n\eta _n}(\theta _{y_na,y_n})\omega _{x\xi }(\theta _{y_na,y_n})|.$$

Note that $`\omega _{y_n\eta _n}(\theta _{y_na,y_n})=(a\eta _n,\eta _n)`$ and $`\omega _{x\xi }(\theta _{y_na,y_n})=(ay_n,x\xi ,y_n,x\xi )`$. This implies that

$$\omega _{\eta _n}\omega _{y_n,x\xi }0,\text{ as }n\mathrm{}.$$

In particular, testing this difference at $`1`$, implies $`(x,y_ny_n,x\xi ,\xi )1`$. Therefore,

$$x,y_ny_n,x\xi \xi ^2=1+x,y_ny_n,x\xi ^22Re(x,y_ny_n,x\xi ,\xi )0.$$

Coming back to $`\omega _{\eta _n}`$ and $`\omega _{y_n,x\xi }`$, note that the vectors $`\eta _n`$ belong to the cone $`𝒫`$, but not necesarilly the vectors $`y_n,x\xi `$. However $`\delta _n=y_n,xJy_n,x\xi =y_n,xJy_n,xJ\xi 𝒫`$ and we shall see that $`\omega _{\delta _n}\omega _{y_n,x\xi }0`$ in norm. Indeed, note that

$$\omega _{\delta _n}(a)=(ay_n,xJy_n,x\xi ,y_n,xJy_n,x\xi )$$

$$=(ay_n,xJx,y_ny_n,xJ\xi ,y_n,x\xi ),$$

and therefore

$$|(ay_n,x\xi ,y_n,x\xi )(a\delta _n,\delta _n)|=|(ay_n,x(\xi Jx,y_ny_n,xJ\xi ),y_n,x\xi )|$$

$$a\xi Jx,y_ny_n,x\xi ,$$

which tends to zero. Combining these results one obtains that $`\omega _{\delta _n}\omega _{\eta _n}0`$. Now, because the vectors $`\delta _n,\eta _n`$ lie in $`𝒫`$, and the fact that norm convergence of vector states with symbols in $`𝒫`$ implies norm convergence of those symbols, one has that $`\delta _n\eta _n0`$ in $`H`$. In other words,

$$Re(y_n,x\xi ,Jx,y_nJ\eta _n)1.$$

Suppose now that the states $`\omega _{y_n\eta _n}`$ do not converge to $`\omega _{x\xi }`$ in the quotient topology of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$. This means that the fibres of these states do not near in $`H`$, i.e., there exists a subsequence $`y_{n_k}\eta _{n_k}`$ such that $`x\xi y_{n_k}Ju^{}\eta _{n_k}d>0`$ for all $`uU_{}`$. Or equivalently,

$$Re(y_{n_k},x\xi ,Ju^{}\eta _{n_k})1d^2/2,\text{for all }uU_{}.$$

Clearly this inequality is preserved by taking convex combinations of unitaries $`uU_{}`$ (and leaving everything else fixed), as well as by taking norm limits of such combinations. It follows, using the Russo-Dye theorem, that for $`a`$, $`a1`$,

$$Re(y_{n_k},x\xi ,JaJ\eta _{n_k})1d^2/2.$$

This clearly contradicts the inequality above, taking $`a=x,y_{n_k}`$ for appropriate $`k`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The next result uses part of the proof of lemma 3. of

###### Theorem 5.10

If $``$ is a separable factor of type II1 such that the tensor product $`B(K)`$ ($`K`$ a separable Hilbert space) admits a one parameter automorphism group $`\{\theta _s:s\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}\}`$ scaling the trace of $`B(K)`$, i.e. $`\tau \theta _s=e^s`$, $`s\mathrm{I}\mathrm{R}`$, with $`\tau `$ a faithful semi-finite normal trace in $`B(K)`$, then the map

$$\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}:𝒜(X)\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)},\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}(x\xi )=\omega _{x\xi }$$

admits a (global) continuous cross section when $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ is endowed with the norm topology.

* In this case, since $``$ is finite, $`U_{}`$ is complete in the strong (=strong) operator topology . Moreover, Popa and Takesaki proved in  that it admits a geodesic structure in the sense of Michael . It has been already remarked that the set function $`\omega _{x\xi }\{xuu^{}Ju^{}J\xi :uU_{}\}`$ is lower semicontinuous in the norm topology. Therefore theorem 5.4 of  applies, and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}`$ has a continuous cross section. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 5.11

If $``$ is a II1 factor satisfying the conditions of 5.10, then for all $`n0`$, $`x𝒮_1(X)`$, $`\phi =\omega _\xi \mathrm{\Sigma }_1()`$,

$$\pi _n(\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)},\omega _{x\xi })=\pi _n(𝒮_1(X),x),$$

where $`\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ is considered with the norm topology, and $`𝒮_1(X)`$ with the w topology.

* In  it was proven that the unitary group $`U_{}`$ of such a factor is contractible in the ultra strong operator topology, and therefore also in the strong operator topology. The result follows using the above result, recalling that the fibre of the fibration $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{}_1}`$ is $`U_{}`$ with this topology. $`\mathrm{}`$

In  it is noted that remarkable examples of II1 factors enjoy this property (of having a one parameter group of automorphisms that scale the trace when tensored with an infinite type I factor), for example $`_0`$ the hyperfinite II1 factor.

## 6 States of the hyperfinite II1 factor

We will apply the results of the previous section to obtain our main result, namely, that the set of states of $`_0`$, or more generally, of a factor satisfying the hypothesis of 5.10, having support equivalent to a given projection $`p`$, considered with the norm topology, has trivial homotopy groups of all orders.

There is a first result which can be obtained directly from the previous section. If $``$ is a factor as in 5.10, and $`p`$ is a proper projection, put $`X=p`$ and $`=pp`$. Clearly $``$ is a factor which also verifies the hypothesis 5.10. Note that $`X,X=span\{px^{}yp:x,yp\}=pp=`$ in this case. Therefore by 2.2 of , $`\{\theta _{x,y}:x,yX\}`$ spans an ultraweakly dense two sided ideal of $`_{}(X)`$. On the other hand, it is clear that $`_{}(X)`$ as left multipliers, and also that $`\theta _{x,y}`$, for $`x,yX=p`$. Indeed, $`\theta _{x,y}(z)=xy,z=xpy^{}z`$, i.e. left multiplication by $`xpy^{}`$. Therefore $`_{}(X)=`$. In particular, if $`x𝒮_1(X)`$, $`e_x=\theta _{x,x}=xpx^{}`$ which is equivalent to $`px^{}xp=x,x=p`$ in $`_{}(X)`$. The set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X}=\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ equals then the set of states of $``$ with support (unitarily) equivalent to $`p`$. Note that this set is (arcwise) connected in the norm topology. Indeed, if $``$ is finite, $`𝒮_1(X)`$ is connected. Using the map $`\mathrm{}_1`$ of section 4, it follows that any two points in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X}`$ can be joined with a path (in $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_{1,X}`$) continuous in the $`d`$-topology, and therefore also in the norm topology.

Applying 5.10 in this situation implies the following:

###### Corollary 6.1

Let $``$ be a factor as in 5.10, and $`p`$ an arbitrary projection. The set of states of $``$ with support equivalent to $`p`$ considered with the norm topology has the same homotopy groups as the set

$$𝒮_p()=\{v:v^{}v=p\}$$

regarded with the (relative) ultraweak topology.

* In this case $`𝒮_1(X)`$ clearly equals $`𝒮_p()`$ above, and the topology is the w (i.e.) ultraweak topology of $``$. If $`p=0`$ the statement is trivial. If $`p=1`$ it follows from the strong operator contractibility of $`U_{}`$ for such $``$ proved in . The case of a proper projection follows from 5.10 and the above remark. $`\mathrm{}`$

If $`p=0,1`$, then $`𝒮_p()`$ is contractible (if $`p=1`$, $`𝒮_p()=U_{}`$). A natural question would be if $`𝒮_p()`$ is contractible for proper $`p`$.

We need the following elementary fact:

###### Lemma 6.2

Let $`B(H)`$ be a finite von Neumann algebra, and let $`a_n`$ such that $`a_n1`$ and $`a_n^{}a_n`$ tends to $`1`$ in the strong operator topology. Then there exist unitaries $`u_n`$ in $``$ such that $`u_na_n`$ converges strongly to zero.

* Consider the polar decomposition $`a_n=u_n|a_n|`$, where $`u_n`$ can be chosen unitaries because $``$ is finite. Note that $`|a_n|1`$ strongly. Indeed, since $`a_n1`$, $`a_n^{}a_n(a_n^{}a_n)^{1/2}`$. Therefore, for any unit vector $`\xi H`$, $`1(|a_n|\xi ,\xi )(a_n^{}a_n\xi ,\xi )1`$. Therefore

$$(a_nu_n)\xi ^2=u_n(|a_n|1)\xi ^2|a_n|\xi \xi ^2=1+(a_n^{}a_n\xi ,\xi )2(|a_n|\xi ,\xi ),$$

which tends to zero. $`\mathrm{}`$

In  it was proven that for a fixed $`x_0𝒮_1(X)`$ the map $`\pi _{x_0}:U_{_{}(X)}𝒮_1(X)`$ given by $`\pi _{x_0}(U)=U(x_0)`$ is onto when $``$ is finite. In that paper it was considered with the norm topologies. Here we shall regard it with the weak topologies and in the particular case at hand, namely $`X=p`$ and $`=pp`$ with $``$ as above. Then, choosing $`x_0=p𝒮_1(X)=𝒮_p()`$, the mapping $`\pi _p`$ is

$$\pi _p:U_{}𝒮_p(),\pi _p(u)=up.$$

###### Theorem 6.3

If $``$ is a factor satisfying the hypothesis of 5.10, then the map $`\pi _p`$ above is a trivial principal bundle, when $`U_{}`$ is regarded with the strong operator topology and $`𝒮_p()`$ is regarded with the ultraweak topology. The fibre is (homeomorphic to) the unitary group of $`qq`$, where $`q=1p`$, again with the strong operator topology.

* The key of the argument is again Lemma 3 of . In that result it is shown that the homogeneous space $`U_{}/U_{}`$ admits a global continuous cross section, where $``$ are factors satisfying the hypothesis of 5.10, and their unitary groups are endowed with the strong operator topology. In our situation, the fibre of $`\pi _p`$ (over $`p`$) is the set $`\{uU_{}:up=p\}=\{qwq+p:qwqU_{qq}\}=U_{qq}\times \{p\}`$. The fibre is not the unitary group of a subfactor with the same unit, nevertheless the argument carries on anyway. Therefore in order to prove our result it suffices to show that in $`𝒮_p()`$ the ultraweak topology (equal to the weak operator topology) coincides with the quotient topology induced by the map $`\pi _p`$. In other words, that the bijection

$$U_{}/U_{qq}\times \{p\}𝒮_p(),[u]up$$

is a homeomorphism in the mentioned topologies. It is clearly continuous. It suffices to check continuity of the inverse at the point $`p`$. Suppose that $`u_\alpha `$ is a net of unitaries in $`U_{}`$ such that $`u_\alpha p`$ converges weakly to $`p`$. Then we claim that there are unitaries $`qw_\alpha q`$ in $`qq`$ such that $`qw_\alpha q+pu_\alpha `$ converges strongly to zero, which would end the proof. This amounts to saying that there exists unitaries $`qw_\alpha q`$ verifying that

$$Re((qw_\alpha q+p)\xi ,u_\alpha \xi )\xi ^2$$

for all $`\xi H`$. Now since $`u_\alpha pp`$, one has $`u_\alpha p\xi p\xi `$, the former limit is equivalent to the following

$$Re(qw_\alpha q\xi ,u_\alpha q\xi )q\xi ^2.$$

Again, $`u_\alpha pp`$ strongly (and the fact that $``$ is finite), imply that $`qu_\alpha p`$, $`pu_\alpha q`$, $`qu_\alpha ^{}p`$ and $`pu_\alpha ^{}q`$ all converge to zero strongly. Using that $`u_\alpha `$ are unitaries, these facts imply that $`qu_\alpha ^{}qu_\alpha qq`$ strongly. Using the lemma above, for the algebra $`=qq`$, and $`a_\alpha =qu_\alpha q`$, it follows that there exist unitaries $`qw_\alpha q`$ in $`qq`$ such that $`qw_\alpha qqu_\alpha q`$ converges to zero strongly. Since $`pu_\alpha q`$ also tends to zero, it follows that

$$qw_\alpha qu_\alpha q=qw_\alpha qqu_\alpha qpu_\alpha q0$$

strongly. Clearly this last limit proves our claim. $`\mathrm{}`$

Our main result then follows easily

###### Theorem 6.4

Let $``$ be a factor satisfying the hypothesis of 5.10, and let $`p`$ be a projection in $``$. Then both $`𝒮_p()`$ with the ultraweak topology, and the set of normal states of $``$ with support equivalent to $`p`$ with the norm topology, have trivial homotopy groups of all orders.

* By the above theorem, $`𝒮_p()`$ has trivial homotopy groups, since it is the base space of a fibration with contractible space and contractible fibre. The same consequence holds for the set of normal states with support equivalent to $`p`$, using the corollary above. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 6.5

Consider now the restriction of the fibration $`𝒜(X)\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$ to the subset $`\{\omega _{x\xi _0}:x𝒮_1(X)\}\mathrm{\Omega }_{𝒜(X)}`$, for a fixed unit, cyclic and separating vector $`\xi _0`$ i.e.

$$\{x\xi _0:x𝒮_1(X)\}𝒮_1(X)\{\omega _{x\xi _0}:x𝒮_1(X)\},x\xi _0\omega _{x\xi _0},$$

which is again a fibration with the relative topologies. Note that the latter set is in one to one correspondence with $`𝒪_\phi `$ of section 2, where $`\phi =\omega _{\xi _0}`$. Therefore one recovers the map $`\sigma :𝒮_1(X)𝒪_\phi `$, $`\sigma (x)=\phi _x=\omega _{x\xi _0}`$ of section 2, now considered with the w topology for $`𝒮_1(X)`$ and the norm topology for $`𝒪_\phi `$. It follows that this map is a fibration, with fibre equal to $`U_^\phi `$ with the strong operator topology.

One can consider this fibration $`\sigma `$ in the particular case $`X==`$, for $``$ as above, to obtain the following:

###### Corollary 6.6

Let $`\phi `$ be a faithful normal state of a factor $``$ as in 5.10. Then the map

$$\sigma :U_{}𝒰_\phi =\{\phi Ad(u):uU_{}\},\sigma (u)=\phi Ad(u)$$

is a fibration when the unitary group $`U_{}`$ is considered with the strong operator topology and the unitary orbit $`𝒰_\phi `$ of $`\phi `$ is considered with the norm topology. The fibre is the unitary group $`U_^\phi `$ of the centralizer of $`\phi `$ also with the strong operator topology. Moreover, for $`n0`$ one has

$$\pi _{n+1}(𝒰_\phi ,\phi )=\pi _n(U_^\phi ,1).$$

* It was noted in section 2 that when $`X=`$ is a finite von Neumann algebra, then $`𝒮_1(X)`$ is $`U_{}`$ and $`𝒪_\phi `$ is the unitary orbit of $`\phi `$. $`𝒮_1(X)=U_{}`$ is endowed with the ultraweak topology, which coincides in $`U_{}`$ with the strong operator topology. The rest of the corollary follows using that in this case $`\sigma `$ is (the restriction) of a fibration, and again  that for such factors $``$ the unitary group is contractible in the strong operator topology. $`\mathrm{}`$

When $`n=0`$, since $`U_^\phi `$ is connected, one obtains that $`𝒰_\phi `$ is simply connected in the norm topology. A related result was obtained in , where it was shown that $`𝒰_\phi `$ is simply connected in the quotient topology ($`U_{}/U_^\phi `$) for any von Neumann algebra $``$.

Let $`p_1,..p_n`$ be projections in $``$ such that $`p_1+\mathrm{}+p_n=1`$ and put $`h=r_1p_1+\mathrm{}+r_np_n`$ where $`r_i`$ are positive real numbers such that $`r_ir_j`$ if $`ij`$ and $`\tau (h)=1`$. Consider the state $`\phi =\tau (h)`$. Then clearly $`^\phi =p_1p_1\mathrm{}p_np_n`$. Now $`U_{p_ip_i}`$ is contractible in the strong operator topology, and therefore $`U_^\phi `$ is contractible. It follows that the unitary orbit $`𝒰_\phi `$ (with the norm topology) has trivial homotopy groups of all orders for such $`\phi `$. Consider this other example: let $`𝒜`$ be a maximal abelian sub (von Neumann) algebra, then there exists a normal faithful state $`\phi `$ of $``$ such that $`^\phi =𝒜`$. Clearly, since $``$ is of type II1, $`𝒜`$ has no atomic projections. It follows that $`𝒜L^{\mathrm{}}(0,1)`$. It is fairly elemental to see that $`U_{L^{\mathrm{}}(0,1)}`$ is contractible in the ultraweak, i.e. w topology. For example consider the map $`F_t(\theta )=\theta \chi _{[0,t)}+\chi _{[t,1]}`$, $`F_t:U_{L^{\mathrm{}}(0,1)}U_{L^{\mathrm{}}(0,1)}`$, for $`t[0,1]`$. Then $`F_0(\theta )=\theta `$, $`F_1(\theta )=1`$ for $`\theta U_{L^{\mathrm{}}(0,1)}`$, $`F_t(1)=1`$ and $`F`$ is continuous in the w topology: suppose that $`t_\alpha t`$ and $`\theta _\alpha \theta `$ (w). Then if $`t_\alpha >t`$

$$_0^1[F_{t_\alpha }(\theta _\alpha )(s)F_t(\theta )(s)]\psi (s)𝑑s=_0^t[\theta _\alpha (s)\theta (s)]\psi (s)𝑑s+_t^{t_\alpha }[\theta _\alpha (s)1]\psi (s)𝑑s,$$

and clearly both integrals tend to zero for any $`\psi L^1(0,1)`$. If $`t_\alpha <t`$ one reasons analogously. Therefore the map $`F_t`$ deforms continuously $`U_{L^{\mathrm{}}(0,1)}`$ to the constant function $`1`$. It follows that also for such states $`\phi `$, $`𝒰_\phi `$ (in the norm topology) has trivial homotopy groups of all orders. We do not know if this holds for any faithful normal state of $``$.

Esteban Andruchow and Alejandro Varela
Instituto de Ciencias
Universidad Nacional de Gral. Sarmiento
J. A. Roca 850
(1663) San Miguel
Argentina
e-mail: eandruch@ungs.edu.ar, avarela@ungs.edu.ar