Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-v9fdk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T10:15:23.356Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Fronsdal *-quantization and Fell inducing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 October 2008

M. A. Hennings
M. A. Hennings
Affiliation:
St John's College, Oxford, OX1 3JP
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The process of Fronsdal inducing is discussed as a method of quantizing physical systems, and is seen to reduce to a technique for obtaining representations of *-algebras.

It is asked whether this above process is at all successful, and whether it is at all related to the representation inducing methods of Fell. The two inducing techniques are shown to be equivalent for algebras satisfying three specified properties, and it is also shown that all the strictly irreducible representations of such algebras can be found by these methods.

Examples are produced whereby it is shown that algebras of the type required by the theory are of physical interest.

Type
Research Article
Information
Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 99 , Issue 1 , January 1986 , pp. 179 - 188
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

[1]Bayen, F., Flato, M., Fronsdal, C., Lichnerowicz, A. and Sternheimer, D.. Deformation theory and quantisation. I. Deformations of symplectic structures. Ann. Physics 111 (1978), 61–110.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[2]Fell, J. M. G.. Induced Representations and Banach *-algebraic Bundles. Springer Lecture Notes in Mathematics 582 (Springer-Verlag, 1977).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3]Fronsdal, C.. Some ideas about quantisation. Rep. Math. Phys. 15·1 (1979), 111–145.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4]Hennings, M. A.. Fronsdal *-quantisation and the abstract inducing procedures of Fell and Rieffel. D.Phil, thesis (Oxford, 1984).Google Scholar
[5]Hudson, R. L., Wilkinson, M. D. and Peck, S. N.. Fourier analysis on multiplier representations of locally compact abelian groups. Rep. Math. Phys. 19·1 (1984), 91–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[6]Jacobson, N.. The radical and semisimplicity for arbitrary rings. Amer. J. Math. 67 (1945), 300–320.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[7]Kaplansky, I.. Dual rings. Ann. of Math. 49·3 (1948), 689–701.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[8]Michael, E. A.. Locally-multiplicatively-convex topological algebras. Mem. Amer. Math. Soc. 11 (1952).Google Scholar
[9]Moyal, J. E.. Quantum mechanics as a statistical theory. Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 45 (1949), 99–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[10]Phillips, J.. Complementation for right ideals in generalised Hilbert algebras. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 197 (1974), 409–417.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[11]Rickart, C. E.. General Theory of Banach Algebras (Van Nostrand, 1960).Google Scholar
[12]Rieffel, M. A.. Square-integrable representations of Hilbert algebras. J. Funct. Anal. 3 (1969), 265–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13]Stratila, S. and Zsido, L.. Lectures on von Neumann Algebras (Abacus Press, 1979).Google Scholar
[14]Wolfson, K. G.. Annihilator rings. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 31 (1956), 94–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15]Yood, B.. Hilbert algebras as topological algebras. Ark. Mat. 12 (1974), 131–151.CrossRefGoogle Scholar