Semigroups of Operators and Spectral Theory (Research Notes in Mathematics Series) (PDFDrive)
Semigroups of Operators and Spectral Theory (Research Notes in Mathematics Series) (PDFDrive)
Shmuel Kantorovitz
Semigroups of
operators and
spectral theory
AAA
NNW LONGMAN
Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics
Series
Main Editors
H. Brczis, University de Paris
R.G. Douglas, State University of New York at Stony Brook
A. Jeffrey, University of Newcastle upon Tyne (Founding Editor)
Editorial Board
H. Amann, University of Zurich K. Kirchgiissncr, Univcrsitiit Stuttgart
R. Aris, University of Minnesota B. Lawson, State University of New York at
G.I. Barenblatt, University of Cambridge Stony Brook
A. Bensoussan, INRIA, France B. Moodie, University of Alberta
P. Bullen, University of British Columbia S. Mori, Kyoto University
S. Donaldson, University of Oxford L.E. Payne, Comell University
R.J. Elliott, University of Alberta OF. Roach, University of Strathclyde
R.P. Gilbert, University of Delaware W.A. Strauss, Brown Univcrsity
D. Jerison, Massachusetts Institute of S.J. Taylor, University of Virginia
Technology
Semigroups of operators
and spectral theory
mom
A LONGMAN
Copublished in the United States with
John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York.
Longman Group Limited
Longman House, Burnt Mill, Harlow
Essex CM20 2JE, England
and Associated companies throughout the world
ISSN 0269-3674
These "Lecture Notes" were written for a second year graduate course on "Top-
ics in Spectral Theory". They present some aspects of the theory of semigroups
of operators, mostly from the point of view of its application to spectral theory,
and even more specifically, to the integral representation of operators or families
of operators. There is no attempt therefore to cover either the subject of "semi-
groups" or the subject of "spectral theory" thoroughly. These theories and their
many applications to Differential Equations, Stochastic Processes, Mathematical
Physics, etc..., have been the subject of many excellent books, such as [D], [ Fat],
[G],[HP],[Katl], [P], [RS], and others. We refer the interested reader to these (and
other) texts. Nevertheless, in order to permit a smooth reading of this monograph-
type notes, and/or to make them convenient for a course or seminar, we have made
them self contained by including a concise description of the basic facts on semi-
groups. The Hille-Yosida theory, concentrating on the concept of the generator
(or infinitesimal generator) of the semigroup, is presented in Section A (Part I),
culminating with the wellknown Hille-Yosida Theorem on the characterization of
generators. A semigroup of operators is a function
(where B(X) denotes the Banach algebra of all bounded linear operators on a given
Banach space X), such that T(0) is the identity I and
The generator is bounded if and only if T(.) is uniformly continuous, and is then
an ordinary exponential T(t) = e1A. In general, the generator can be approximated
pointwise on D(A) by bounded operators
A,\ :=.[)R(A) - I]
(the so-called Hille-Yosida approximations of A), where R(\) := (XI - A)-' is the
resolvent of A.
The Hille-Yosida theorem establishes that a closed densely defined operator A
generates a C0-semigroup with exponential growth IIT(t)II _< Mean if and only if
the resolvent exists for A > a and satisfies for all m = 1, 2, ...
(in the strong operator topology), and with the "Trotter Product Formula"
U(t) = 1im[S(t/n)T(t/n)]n
n
Introduction
C. DISSIPATIVITY 23
E. EXPONENTIAL FORMULAS 31
H. ANALYTICITY 58
A. PRE-SEMIGROUPS 75
Bibliography 132
PART I. GENERAL THEORY
A. THE HILLE-YOSIDA THEORY
THE GENERATOR.
Let X be a Banach space, and let B(X) denote the Banach algebra of all bounded
(linear) operators on X into X.
and
T(0) = I,
where I denotes the identity operator.
for allt>0.
3
PROOF. Let cn = sup{IIT(t)II;t E [0,1/n]} for n = 1,2,....
If cn = oo for all n, there exist t,, E [0,1/n] such that IIT(tn)II > n (for n =
1, 2, 3, ...). Then
sup I IT(tn)II = 00,
n
and so, by the Uniform Boundedness Theorem, there exists x such that
However the sequence IIT(tn)xII converges to IIxii (by the Co condition, since to
0+), and is therefore bounded. This contradiction shows that there exists an n for
which cn < oo. Fix such an n, and let c = cn. Note that c > IIT(0)II = 11111 = 1.
For any t > 0, the semigroup property gives
T(t) = T(1/n)n[t]T({t}/n)n,
where [t] denotes the entire part of t, and {t) its fractional part. Since 1/n and
{t}/n are both in [0,1/n], we have IIT(1/n)II c and IIT({t}/n)II < c, so that
IIT(t)II < (cn)(t]+i < (n)t+i = Me", where M = cn > 1 and a = nlogc > 0 (we
used the fact that c > 1 ).
Continuity at t > 0. (1) For h > 0, we have for all x E X
IIT(t + h)x - T(t)xII = IIT(h)[T(t)x] - [T(t)x]II 0
4
PROOF. For each given x E X, the function T(.)x is continuous on [0, oo), by
Theorem 1.1, and has therefore a Riemann integral over any finite interval [0, t].
Denote this integral by xt. Also let Ah = [T(h) - I]/h for h > 0. Then
= t+h
h_1
- h-' fo h T(s)xds
it
t
The C0-condition implies that xt/t(E D(A)) -+ x, and therefore D(A) is dense in
X.
If x E D(A), then for each t > 0,
AT(t)x = T(t)Ax.
The left hand side in (**) is also equal to h-' [T(t + h)x - T(t)x], and so the right
derivative of T(.)x exists, is equal to A[T(.)x] = T(.)(Ax), and is in particular
continuous.
If0<k<t,wehave forxED(A)
II(-k)-'[T(t - k)x - T(t)x] -T(t)AxII
last term has limit T(t)v'(t), by strong continuity of T(.). Hence (d/dt)[T(t)v(t)] _
T(t)[Av(t)+v'(t)]. Suppose now that v solves ACP with a given x E D(A), in some
interval [0, r]. Fix s E (0,,r]. Then (by the fundamental theorem of calculus):
for t > 0 and x E D(A). Suppose xn E D(A) are such that xn -+ x and Ax,, -+ y
in X. If V(.) : [0,r] --> B(X) is strongly continuous, then IIV(.)II is a bounded
measurable function and for each x E X,
(see below).
Therefore, as n -+ oo,
I I f0
t
T(s)Ax,,ds - f t T(s)ydsll <
0
fo
t
I IT(s)I IdsllAxn - yl l < const.ll Axn - yll 0.
Hence t
/t
Atx = limAtxn = limt-1 T(s)Ax,, = t-1 fo T(s)yds -> y
n n /o
ast -0+.
This shows that x E D(A) and Ax = y, i.e., A is closed.
Back to the claim about V(.), the boundedness of IIV(.)Il follows immediately
from the strong continuity of V(.) and the Uniform Boundedness Theorem. To
6
prove the measurability of it suffices to show that the set C = it E
[0, r]; IIV(t)II > c} is Borel for each c > 0. If t E C, there exists x E X with
norm 1 such that IIV(t)xII > c, and by continuity of IIV(.)xII, there is a neighbor-
hood of tin [0,7-1 where I I V (. )x I i > c, and so I I V I > c there. Hence C is open,
I
1.3. LEMMA. Let p : [0, oo) - [-oo, oo) be subadditive (i.e., p(t+s) < p(t)+p(s)
for all t, s in the domain of p) and bounded above in [0, 1]. Then
PROOF. If p(to) _ -oo for some to, then for all t > to, p(t) < p(to) + At - to) _
-oo, and the result is trivial. So we may assume that p is finite. Fix s > 0 and
r > p(s)/s. For t > 0 arbitrary, let n be the unique positive integer such that
ns<t<(n+1)s. Then
p(t)/t = p(ns + (t - ns))/t < np(s)/t + p(t - ns)/t
< rns/t + sup p/t.
[0,9]
Since the hypothesis imply that p is bounded above on any interval [0, s], it follows
that limsupt-. 9(-) < r, for any r > p(s)/s. Hence
PROOF. Since the claim is trivial for t = 0, fix t > 0, and let r(T(t)) denote the
spectral radius of T(t). By the Beurling-Gelfand formula and Lemma 1.3, we have
UNIFORM CONTINUITY.
The next theorem shows that the stronger hypothesis of continuity at zero in
the uniform operator topology (that is, in the norm topology of B(X)) yields to a
rather uninteresting class of semigroups.
8
Since 11h h-1 f " T(s)ds - III -4 0 when h -p 0+ by norm-continuity of T(.), we can
fix h so small that the above norm is less than 1, and therefore V := f h T(s)ds is
invertible in B(X). Hence,
t
T(t) - I = f T(s)ds.A,
0
1.6. Let A be any closed operator with domain D(A) in X. The "graph-norm"
on D(A) is the norm
IXIA := Ilxll+IlAxll
induced on the graph of A by the norm on X2. D(A) is a Banach space under
the graph-norm (because A is closed), and we shall use the notation [D(A)] for
this Banach space. Any subspace Do dense in [D(A)] is called a "core" for A.
Explicitely, a subspace Do of D(A) is a core for A if for any x E D(A), there exists
a sequence {x } in Do such that x -+ x and Ax,, -+ Ax (i.e., A equals the closure
(A/Do)- of its restriction to Do).
Since it is often difficult to determine D(A), it is important (and sufficient in
most case) to know a core for A. The following theorem gives a simple useful tool
in this direction for the generator A of the semigroup T(.).
PROOF. Note first that T(.) is a Co-semigroup in the Banach space [D(A)],
since for all x E D(A), when t -+ 0+,
Therefore, for x E Do, Riemann integrals (over finite intervals) of T(.)x make sense
in the graph-norm, and belong to Do , the closure of Do in [D(A)]. Let x E D(A).
By density of Do in X, there exists a sequence C Do such that x,, -+ x in X.
9
The elements xt and (xn)t (see notation in proof of Theorem 1.2) are in D(A), and
for each t > 0
I(xn)t - xtIA = j T(s)(x-
t x)dsll
--H][T(t)xn - xn] - [T(t)x - x]II -+ 0
when n -+ oo. Since (xn)t E D. for each n, we have also xt E Do . Finally, by
the C°-property of T(.) in [D(A)], t-'xt(E Do !) -+ x in the graph-norm, and so
x E Do .III
A useful core for A is the space D°° = D°°(A) of all "C°°-vectors" for A, that
is, the set of all x E X for which the function T(.)x is of class C°° on [0, oo).
10
THE RESOLVENT
1.10. DEFINITION. The "resolvent set" p(A) of the closed operator A is the
set of all complex A for which AI - A is bijective (i.e., one-to-one and onto X). Its
complement is the "spectrum" Q(A) of A.
The operator R(A) = R(A; A):= (Al - A)-' for A E p(A) is closed (see 1.9) and
everywhere defined, and belongs therefore to B(X) by the closed graph theorem.
It is called the "resolvent of A". It is useful to observe that A E p(A) if there exists
an operator R(A) E B(X) with range in D(A) such that
(AI - A)R(A)x = x (x E X)
and
R(A)(AI - A)x = x (x E D(A)).
It is useful to write the above relations in the form
+E(-1)"R(A)n(( - A)nx = X.
Next, for any x E X, let x,n denote the m-th partial sum of the series S(C)x. Then
xm E D(A) (because x,n E ran R(A) = D(A)), x,,, -+ S(()x, and by (*)
-E0<n<m(-1)nR(A)n(( - A)nx
AS(()x + ((- A)S(()x - x
=(S(()x-x.
Since A is closed, it follows that S(()x E D(A) and ((I - A)S(()x = x, and we
conclude that ( E p(A) and R(() = S(() for all ( such that I( - Al < S. Hence p(A)
is open and R(.) is analytic on p(A). Also, since the disc of radius 6 around A is
contained in p(A), we have d(A,v(A)) > 6 lIR(A)II-'
Finally, for A, p E p(A) and x E X,
Then R(.) is the resolvent of a closed densely-defined operator if the range of R(A)
is dense in X for some (hence for all)A.
when p -+ oo, by the growth condition. Since ran R(A) is dense in X, it follows
from the growth condition that pR(p)x --+ x for all x E X
Suppose X E ker R(A) for some A > w. Then X E ker R(µ) for all p > w, but
then x = limµR(µ)x = 0, i.e., ker R(A) = 0, and so R(A) = R(A; A) with A closed
(by Theorem 1.13) and D(A) = ran R(A) dense, by hypothesis.I
LAPLACE TRANSFORM.
R(A)x = je_)tT(t)xdt.
PROOF. For any a > w, IIT(t)II = O(eat), and therefore the Laplace integral
L(A)x defined in 2. converges absolutely for to > a, and defines an operator
L(A) E B(X) satisfying
IIL(A)II <- M
R,\-a'
If x c D(A),
L(A)(AI - A)x =
J0
F{Ae-atT(t)x - e-at[T(t)x]'}dt
j [eT(t)x]'dt = x.
On the other hand, for any x E X and h > 0,
->h-.o+ AL(A)x - X.
Since A is closed, it follows that L(A)X C D(A) and (AI - A)L(.A)x = x for all
x E X, and we conclude that L(A) = R(A; A) for all A in the half-plane WA > a.
Since a > w was arbitrary, Statements 1. and 2. are proved.
To obtain 3., we observe that T(.)x is of class C1 on (0, oo) (by Theorem 1.2),
and we may therefore apply the (vector version of the) classical Complex Inversion
Theorem for the Laplace transform (cf. Theorem 7.3 in [W]). II I I
IIR(A;A)II M (*)
A a
for all A > a (where a > w is fixed). Consider now any closed densely defined
operator A with (a, oo) C p(A), which satisfies (*) for all A > Ao (for some A0 > a).
For short, call such an operator an abstract potential.
1.16. LEMMA. Let A be an abstract potential, and consider the bounded oper-
ators
AA := AAR(A) = A[AR(A) - I]
ford > a. Then as A -+ oo,
1. Aax -pAxforall x E D(A);
2. AR(A) -> I strongly (equivalently, AR(A) -> 0 strongly).
Since
0(1)
IIAR(A)II = IIAR(A) - III < - a +1
when A -> oo, and since D(A) is dense in X, it follows that
AR(A)x 0
15
Note that the notation AA in the present context should not be confused with
the notation Ah used in previous sections.
When A is the generator of a semigroup T(.) satisfying IIT(t)II < Meat the
growth property (*) can be strengthened as follows:
For any finite set ofAk>a, k=1,...,m,
I Ink(Ak - a)R(Ak; A)II < M.
In particular (with all Ak equal A),
M
I IR(A; A)m I I < (a a)-
for all A > a and m = 1, 2, 3,....
= II f
0
00
J
0
00
nk(Ak -a)e-Alt,-...-AmtmT(tj +...+-t..)xdt1...dt,,,II
<Mf
0
... f
0
00
nk(Ak - a)e-(a1-a)tdtll
xll
We prove now that (***) characterizes generators among all abstract potentials.
PROOF. We already saw the necessity of (1) and (2). Let then A satisfy (1)
and (2). In particular, it is an abstract potential, and so Lemma 1.16 is satisfied.
Define
Ta(t) = etAX.
16
We have for A > 2a (so that aaa < 2a):
tnn! n nA2n
I (t)II 5 e-atE, I IR(A) II < Me-"tEn n!(A a)n - Me t < Me2at
CLAIM: Ta(t) converge in the strong operator topology (as A -+ oo), uniformly
for t in bounded intervals.
t
= II TA(t - s)T,(s)(A, - AA)xdsIj < M2eaattI JAax - AAxII -; 0
0
when A, p --+ oo, by Lemma 1.16, uniformly for tin bounded intervals.
Since IIT,\(.)II is uniformly bounded in bounded intervals (by (1)), it follows from
the density of D(A) that {TA(t)x} is Cauchy (as A --+ oo) for all x E X, uniformly
for t in bounded intervals.
Define therefore
T(t)x = slim TA(t)x
-00
for x E X (limit in X-norm).
By (1), IIT(t)I I < Meat for all t > 0. The semigroup property of T(.) follows from
that of T,,(.). The uniform convergence on bounded intervals implies the continuity
of T(.)x on [0, oo), for each x E X. Let A' denote the generator of T(.). We have
Tax - x = f TA(s)A,xds.
0
t
T(t)x - x = f 0
t
T(s)Axds.
17
Dividing by t > 0 and letting t -> 0+, we conclude that x E D(A') and Ax = Ax.
Thus, for A > a, AI - A and AI - A' are both one-to-one and onto X, and coincide
on D(AI - A) = D(A). Therefore D(A) = D(A'), and the proof is complete. I I I I
For contraction semigroups (i.e., IIT(.)II < 1), the Hille-Yosida characterization
is especially simple (case M = 1, a = 0).
18
B. THE HILLE-YOSIDA SPACE
The inequalities (**) following the proof of Lemma 1.16 can be used to construct,
for an arbitrary (unbounded) operator A with (a, oo) C p(A), a maximal Banach
subspace Z of X such that AZ, the "part of A in Z", generates a Co-semigroup in
Z.
1.20. DEFINITION. Let A be an arbitrary operator with (a, oo) C p(A) for
some real a. Denote
where the supremum is taken over all finite subsets {A1,...,A,,,} of (a,oo) (the
product over the empty set is defined as x). Set
Y= {xEX;IIXIIY <oo}.
Ilnk(Ak - a)R(Ak; A)xl I = lim I Illk(Ak - a)R(kk; A)xn II < lim sup IIxnIIY < K,
n n
if n,p > no. Letting p --* oo, and then taking the supremum over all finite subsets
{Ak}, we obtain Iix,, - xlly < e for all n > no. Thus Y is a Banach subspace of X.
If U E B(X) commutes with A, it commutes also with R(A; A) for each A > a.
Therefore, for x E Y,
1.23. THEOREM. Let A be an unbounded operator with (a, oo) C p(A) for
some real a. Let Z be the Hille-Yosida space for A. Then Az, the part of A in Z,
generates a Co-semigroup T(.) in Z that satisfies IIT(t)IIB(z) <- eat.
Moreover, Z is maximal in the following sense: if W = (W, I I I w) is a Ba-
I
PROOF. Since R(A; A) commutes with A for each A > a, the linear manifold Y
is R(A; A)-invariant and IIR(A; A)IYIIB(y) S IIR(,; A)IIB(x) < oo by Lemma 1.21.
The identities
(Al-A)R(A;A)y=y (yEY)
R(A; A)(AI - A)y = y (y E D(Ay))
show then that R(A; A)IY = R(A; Ay) for all A > a.
If y E D(Ay), then y, Ay E Y, so that R(A; A)y(E D(A)) E Y and AR(A; A)y =
AR(A; A)y - y E Y, that is, R(,1; A)D(Ay) C D(Ay). Since R(A; A)IY E B(Y), it
follows that Z is R(A; A)- invariant, and
(1)
IIR(A; A)IZIIB(z) <_ IIR(A; A)IYIIB(y) < 00.
20
In particuBlar, Az is closed.
For all y E Y and all finite sets {Ak} C (a, oo),
= sup
µj >a
IIH;(µ; - a)R(rii; A)nk(Ak - a)R(Ak; A)yII
Therefore
Ilnk(Ak - a)R(Ak; AY)IIB(Y) C 1 (3)
for any finite set {Ak} C (a,oo), and the same is true with Y replaced by Z. In
particular, taking singleton subsets of (a, oo), we have
IIAzily --, 0
A-a
as A --p oo, since Az E Y. Thus AR(A; A)z --a z in Y for all z E D(Ay). For z E Z
arbitrary, if e > 0 is given, there exists zo E D(Ay) such that I Iz - zo I I y < e, since
D(Ay) is dense in Z by Definition 1.22. Then
I1AR(A; Az)z - zIIY <- II(AR(A; Az) - I)(z - zoIIY + IIAR(A; A)zo - zoIIY
21
Therefore W is a Banach subspace of Y. In particular D(Aw) C D(Ay). Since
Aw generates a Co-semigroup in W,
W = W-closure(D(Aw)) C W-closure(D(Ay))
C Y-closure(D(Ay)) := Z,
and we conclude that W is a Banach subspace of Z. 1111
Note in particular the case a = 0: if (0, oo) C p(A), the Hille-Yosida space for
A is a maximal Banach subspace such that the part of A in it generates a Co-
semigroup of contractions in it.
22
C. DISSIPATIVITY
Sufficiency. For all unit vectors x E D(A),x* E X* such that x*x = 1, and
for all A > 0, we have
23
because t(x*Ax) < 0. Therefore ,\I - A is one-to-one (for all A > 0) and onto
X (by hypothesis) for all A > At,. Thus A E p(A), and I IAR(A; A)II < 1 for all
A > A,. This proves that A generates a C,-contraction semigroup, by Corollary
1.18 (it is clear from the proof of Theorem 1.17 that for the sufficiency part, the
growth condition on the resolvents is needed for large A only).I i I I
Note that in (1), we used only some unit vector x* with the needed properties.
This allows the following weakening of the hypothesis in the sufficiency part of the
theorem.
1.27. THEOREM. Let A be a closable densely defined operator such that A0I-A
has dense range for some \, > 0. Suppose that for each x E D(A), there exists a
unit vector x* E X* such that x*x = IIxii and 2(x*Ax) < 0. Then the closure A-
of A generates a C,- semigroup of contractions.
PROOF. As in (1), II(AI - A)xil > AIIxII for all A > 0 and x E D(A). Let
x E D(A-), and let then x,, E D(A) be such that x,, -+ x and Ax,, -4 A-x.
Letting n -+ oo in the inequalities I J (AI - A)xn I I > Al Ixn 11, we obtain
(0, 2n A.) C p(A-) for all n, and so (0, oo) C p(A-) and AR(A; A-) are contractions
for all A > 0, by (2). The result follows now from Corollary 1.18.IIII
Since a < 1, (Axn) is Cauchy, and since A is closed, it follows that x E D(A)(=
D(A + B)) and Axn -, Ax. Since B is continuous on [D(A)], also Bx,, -> Bx, and
therefore (A + B)x,, -> (A + B)x.III I
(2a + a)IIxII
25
since AR(A; A) are contractions, by Corollary 1.18.
In case a< 1/2, 2a + -X < 1 for A> Ao, and therefore I IBR(A; A)II < 1, hence
I - BR(A; A) is invertible in B(X), and so AI - (A + B) is surjective for A > ao,
by (*)-
Consider now the general case a < 1. Let ti = i 2 a . For any s E [0,1] and
x E D(A),
1
IItBxII < 2asIIBxII 2II(A+sB)xlI+2IIxjI,
26
D. THE TROTTER-KATO CONVERGENCE THEOREM
PROOF. In the following, the numbers 1,2,3 refer to the three types of conver-
gence formulated in Definition 1.31.
Denoting y, = (AI - A,)x, and y = (,\I - A)x for all x E Do, we see that 1. is
equivalent to
1t . [ye, R(A; A,)y,] - [y, R(A; A)y]
for all y E (Al - A)DO (for suitable y and for all A > a).
By (2), Property 1'. is equivalent to
for all y E (AI - A)Do. Since Do is a core for A, for each x E D(A), there exist
xn E Do, n = 1, 2,..., such that [xn, Ax,,] -r [x, Ax], hence [xn, (AI - A)xn]
[x, (AI - A)x]. In particular, X = (Al - A)D(A) = [(AI - A)D0]-.
Thus (3) is valid for y in a dense subspace of X, hence for all y E X, by (2).
This is Property 2.
LEMMA. Let A, B generate the C.-semigroups T(.) and V(.) respectively, both
O(eae)forsome a>0. Then for Re A > a, t > 0 and x E X,
I
R(A; B)[V(t) - T(t)]R(A; A)x = V(t - s)[R(A; B) - R(A; A)]T(s)xds.
J0
28
+T,(t)[R(A; A) - R(A; A8)]y
+[R(A; A,) - R(A; A)]T(t)y = I + 11 + III (s, t > 0,.A > a).
We estimate I for y = R(A; A)x, using the lemma. Thus for 0 < t < r,
11111:5
J0 r Me°lr-", II[R(A; A,) - R(A; A)]T(u)xI du.
The right hand side converges to zero when s -+ 0, by 2.; therefore I -+ 0 uniformly
on every compact t-interval. Since R(A; A)X = D(A) is dense in X, and the
operators in I are uniformly bounded with respect to s (and with respect to t
in compacta (cf. (1) and (2)), it follows that I converges to zero for all y E X,
uniformly on compact t-intervals (when s -+ 0).
By (1)and 2.,for 0<t<r,
111111 < Mear11R(A; A)y - R(A; A3)y1I --,-o 0,
1.33. COROLLARY. (Same "basic hypothesis" (1)). Suppose that for each x
in a core D,, for A, there exists So E (0, c) such that x E D(A,) for all s E (0, so )
and A,x -r Ax when s -+ 0+. Then T,(t)x -+ T(t)x for all x E X, uniformly on
compact t-intervals (when s --+ 0+).
PROOF. Let r > w, and choose a = re'. Let T,(t) = etA, fort > 0, s E (0,1),
and To(.) = T(.). For M = Mr, we have IIT(t)II < Me't < Meat and
IIT9(t)II =
Me-t/ 3E(t/s)ne'28'/n! = Mexp[ts-1(e*` - 1)] < Meat
30
E. EXPONENTIAL FORMULAS
iiet(C-1)11 =
e-tlle'Cll < e-tetllCll < 1.
IICmx - xi[ =
II(C'n
+... + I)(C - I)xii < miiCx - xli,
and therefore the last expression is
A = (t/n)-1 [F(t/n) - I]
for t fixed. By hypothesis, Anx -+ Ax for all x E Do. For all unit vectors x E X
and x* E X* such that x*x = 1, we have 3t(x*Anx) = (n/t)[3t(x*F(t/n)x) -1] < 0
because Ix*F(.)xl < IIx*II.IIF(.)II.IIxII < 1. Thus An is dissipative, and so, by 1.26,
e°An are contraction semigroups satisfying trivially the "basic hypothesis" (with
M = 1 and a = 0). By Corollary 1.33,
e'An
-' T(s) (1)
IletAnx
- F(tln)nxll <_ n1"2II[F(tln) - I]xII = nt1/2IIAnxII --> 0 (2)
as n -* oo, for all x E Do. Since D,, is dense in X (as a core) and IIetAn -F(t/n)n11:5
2 for all n because both operators are contractions, it follows that (2) is valid for
all x E X. By (1) and (2), the theorem follows.IIII
1.36. THEOREM. Let T(.) be a C0-semigroup, with generator A. Then for all
t>0,
T(t)=lim['R(t;A)]n
in the strong operator topology (as n -> oo).
PROOF. We consider first the case when IIT(t)II < eat for all t _> 0 (with some
a>0).
Let S(t) := e-atT(t). This is a C0-semigroup of contractions, with generator
A - aI.
We set
F(s) :_ (s-1
- a)R(s-1; A) = (s-1
- a)R(s-1
- a; A - al) (s E (0,1/a)),
and F(0) = I.
By Corollary 1.18, F(.) is contraction-valued. By Lemma 1.16,
32
for all x E D(A) = D(A - aI), as s -> 0+. We may then apply Theorem 1.35; thus,
in the strong operator topology and uniformly in compact t-intervals,
S(t) = lim
n
F(t/n)n,
and therefore
T(t) = eatS(t) = lim[(1 - n)-1F(t/n)]n
n n-at R(n;A)]n
=lim[
n n- at t t n t t
=lim[nR(n;A)]n.
General case. Fix a > w. We have IIT(t)II < Meat for all t > 0 (with a
suitable M depending only on a). Renorm X by IxI := sups>0 e-atllT(t)xll. Then
IIxii < IxI < Mllxll, i.e., the norms are equivalent, and
We may then apply the preceding case to the semigroup T(.) on the space (X,
yielding the result with respect to the 1.1-norm, hence also with respect to the given
norm (since the two norms are equivalent).I I I I
U(t) = lim[S(t/n)T(t/n)]n
n
strongly.
PROOF. Take F(t) = S(t)T(t) in Theorem 1.35. For x E D,, and t > 0,
t-' [F(t)x - x] = S(t)t-' [T(t)x -- x] + t-' [T(t)x - x] - Bx + Ax = Cx,
33
F. THE HILLE-PHILLIPS PERTURBATION THEOREM
lim sup
t-.oo t
Therefore, for any a > w, there exists a constant Ma > 0 such that IIBT(t)II <
Ma eat -
The non-negative measurable function [IBT(.)II has an integral over [0,1] (that
could be infinite). We assume
More details about the structure of the semigroup generated by the perturbation
A + B will be obtained in Lemma 3. and in (**) below.
LEMMA 1. (Hypothesis Hi, H2). For R. > w, D(A)(= R(A; A)X) C D(B) and
PROOF. The Riemann sums S,, for the integral fb (with 0 < a < b < oo) ap-
proximating the Laplace integral of T(.)x are in D(B) by H1, converge to f °, and by
linearity of B and continuity of BT(.)x in [a, b), BS,, converge to fb e-a'BT(t)xdt.
Since B is closed, it follows that fb E D(B) and B fb = fb e-XtBT(t)xdt. Since
00 0°
f IIe-atBT(t)Ildt < e-xA j IIBT(t)Ildt + f e-RAtIIBT(t)Ildt < oo
by H2 and the remarks following H1, the Laplace integral of BT(.)x converges
absolutely in X to an element L(.\)x E X. By Theorem 1.15, fb e"T(t)xdt(E
D(B)) -+ R(A; A)x (when a -+ 0 and b -+ oo), and we observed before that
B f°(...) -+ L(A)x. Since B is closed, it follows that R(A; A)x E D(B) and
BR(A;A)x = L(A)x.II]I
q jePIBT(t)Idt < 1.
For WA > r,
R(A; A + B) = R(a; A)En>o [BR(A; A)]', (*)
where the series converges in B(X).
In particular, A + B is closed (and densely defined, since D(A + B) = D(A), by
Lemma 1.).
PROOF. Fix c > w. By H1, for all A > c, e-atIIBT(t)II < e-`jJBT(t)II E
L1(0, oo), and e-at I IBT(t)II --+ O as A -+ oo. By Dominated Convergence, it follows
that f °° e-at II BT(t)I jdt -+ 0 when A -+ oo. We may then choose r > c such that
q < 1. Then, by Lemma 1., IIBR(A; A)II < q < 1 for RA > r, and therefore
the right hand side of (*) converges in B(X) to an operator K(A) with range in
D(A) = D(A + B). We have for RA > r
35
= x + R(A; A) { -Bx + En>o [BR(A; A)] n [BR(.; A)] [(AI - A) - B]x }
= x + R(A; A){-Bx + En>o [BR(7; A)]'Bx - En>1 [BR(A; A)]?Bx} = x.I I II
The functions f := and g := IIBT(.)II are both in the class of locally
integrable functions on (0, oo) (cf. remarks following H1, together with H2). The
"Laplace" convolution
j
a function in and therefore the repeated convolutions
9(n)=g*...*g n times
are in Lia. We consider also the h(n) = f *g(n) , and we set 0> = f.
The next lemma will justify the following inductive definition:
LEMMA 3. For all n = 0, 1, 2,..., Sn(.) are well-defined bounded operators such
that, for all x E X,
a. S,,(.)x : [0, oo) --+ D(B) is continuous, and for r, q as in Lemma 2. and all
t>0,
IISn(t)II C h(n)(t) < Mertgn;
as a -* 0+ and b -4 t-. The Riemann sums for each integral over [a, b] are
in D(B) by H1, and when B is applied to them, the new sums converge to
fa BT(t - s)BS,,(s)xds, because the latter's integrand is continuous on [a, b] by
b. (for n). Since B is closed, it follows that each integral in (*) belongs to D(B),
and B fa(...) = fa B(...). The same type of argument with a --> 0+ and b -r t-
(using again the closeness of B) shows that Sn+1(t)x E D(B) and
36
Since T(.), BT(.) and BSn(.) are continuous on (0, oo) and majorized by L1oc-
functions (using the induction hypothesis), the integral representations for
and BSn+1(.)x imply their continuity on (0, oo) for each x E X. The function
Sn+l(.) is even norm-continuous at 0, since
when t -+ 0+, because the integrand is in Lioc. Note that Sn(0) = 0 for all n > 1.
The estimates in a. and b. for n + 1 are trivial consequences of the induction
hypothesis. For example,
h(n+1) _ f * g(n+l) = If *g (n)] * g = h(n) *,q,
so that
The exponential growth of Sn(.) (as in a.) shows that its Laplace transform
converges absolutely for RA > r. We show next
PROOF. The case n = 0 is verified by Theorem 1.15. Assuming the lemma for
n, we have by Theorem 1.15,
00
_ j etT(t)B J eS(s)xdsdt, 0
where we used the induction hypothesis. Since B is closed, the argument we used
before (cf. Lemmas 1. and 3.) allows us to move B inside the inner integral, and
37
then do the same with the bounded operator T(t). We then obtain the repeated
integral
00
= J e-Ausn+t(u)xdu,
0
R(A; A)x =
J "o e-atS(t)xdt,
0
38
PROOF OF THEOREM 1.38. For 0 < t <,r, we have by Lemma 3. IIS,,(t)II <
Merrgn, with q < 1. Therefore the series
converges in B(X)-norm, uniformly on every interval [0, T]. By Lemma 3., it follows
that S(.) is strongly continuous on [0, oo), and IIS(t)II < QMi e rt
Since Sn(0) = 0 for n _> 1 (cf. Lemma 3.), we have S(0) = I.
The exponential growth of I IS(.)I I shows that the Laplace transform of S(.)x con-
verges absolutely for *A > r, and a routine application of the Lebesgue Dominated
Convergence Theorem shows that
or
0
e-atS(t)xdt = En>o f
0
"o e-'\tSn(t)xdt
39
G. GROUPS AND SEMI-SIMPLICITY MANIFOLD
for IRA > w' becomes IIR(,\; A)nII < M/[(-w') - Rea]n for RU < -w'. Thus the
growth condition on the resolvent outside the strip (*) is
40
where da = d(A, S) denotes the distance of A to the strip S.
The sufficiency of (**) (together with the usual conditions that A be closed and
densely defined) for A to generate a C,,-group is easily obtained from the Hille-
Yosida Theorem. Indeed, applying the theorem separately in the half-planes ?A >
w and W.1 > w', we obtain two C,,-semigroups T(.) and S(.) with the respective
generators A and -A. Using Theorem 1.2, we have for all x E D(A):
o(A) C iR.
When X is a Hilbert space (with inner product (., .)), the case of a bounded group
reduces to that of a unitary group:
PROOF. Let B(R) denote the Banach algebra of all bounded complex functions
on R, with the supremum norm, and let LIM be the "generalized Banach limit"
functional on it (cf. [DS-I]). Define
11-11T 5
41
so that X is a Hilbert space under the equivalent inner product (.,.)T, and there
exists therefore a (strictly) positive operator P such that (x, y)T = (Px, y) for all
x, y E X. Let Q be the positive square root of P. For s E R and x, y E X fixed,
write x = Qu and y = Qv. Then
(QT(s)Q-1
x,QT(s)Q-1
y) = (PT(s)u,T(s)v) =
LIMt(T(t)T(s)u,T(t)T(s)v) = LIMt(T(t+s)u,T(t+s)v) = LIM(T(t)u,T(t)v)
= (u, v)T = (Pu, v) = (Qu, Qv) = (x, y).lI I I
As usual, [D(A*)] denotes the Hilbert space D(A*) with the (Hilbert) graph-
norm, induced by the graph-inner- product
where E(.) is the resolution of the identity for H. A trivial application of dominated
convergence shows that estH is a C,-group with generator iH = A. Therefore
T(t) = e`tH. Since any C,-semigroup of unitary operators extends in an obvious
manner to a C,-group, we have
Using the terminology of [DS-III], the generator of T(.) equals is, where S is
a scalar-type spectral operator with real spectrum, and T(t) = e'ts (using the
operational calculus for S). Also QSQ-' is selfadjoint, with Q as in Theorem 1.40.
REMARK. A neat way to deal with the Hilbert adjoint is to consider its graph
G(A") C X2, where the cartesian product X2 is a Hilbert space under the inner
product
([x,y], [x',y']) :_ (x,x') + (y,y')
The operator
j : [x, y] - [y, -x]
is a unitary operator on X2, and a simple calculation shows that
G(A*) = {JG(A)}-L.
44
One reads from this formula that A* is closed (its graph is closed as an orthocom-
plement!), and that A* = (A-)*. Also, since J is unitary with J2 = I,
G(A**) = [JG(A*)]1 = JG(A*)1
PROOF. Let X° be the complex vector space of all complex functions on R with
finitely many non-zero values. Let
(T(t)x, x) = e`tay(ds;x)
J
for all t E R and x E X.
Define
x, y) (1/4)Eo<k<3zk11 x + iky) (x, y E X).
These are (finite) complex Borel measures, and
From this representation and the uniqueness property of the Fourier-Stieltjes trans-
form, it is easy to deduce the existence of a resolution of the identity E such that
T(t) = f e=t'E(ds) = e:ta for the selfadjoint operator A := f sE(ds) with domain
D(A) = {x E X; f s2(E(ds)x,x) < oo}. The details are given in an analogous
proof below, with X a reflexive Banach space.
For the Banach space setting, we start with another theorem of Bochner, char-
acterizing the Fourier-Stieltjes transforms of complex Borel measures.
BfO := Eicif(t.i),
for ¢ E P as above, and set
IIBfll,
IIfIIB
where the norm on the right is the operator norm (that could be infinite a priori).
We refer to I I I I B as the "Bochner norm", and consider the vector space
so that
IIf IIB >_ IIfII.:= sup II1(011. (1)
t
Thus all functions in F(Y) are bounded, and 11.11B is a norm on that space. By
(1), if { fn } C FF(Y) is I I. I I B-Cauchy, it converges uniformly in Y to some f. Given
E > 0, let no be such that l lfn - fm I l B < E for all n > no. Then
for all n > no, and all c.,, tj as above. Thus I lfn - f II B < E < oo (for n > no), i.e.,
fn - f E IF(Y ), and so f = fn - (f. - f) E F(Y), and fn fin the Bochner norm.
This shows that F(Y) is a Banach space with the Bochner norm.
A simple calculation shows that IF(Y) contains all Fourier-Stieltjes transforms
of Y-valued vector measures m (cf. [DS-I], Section IV.10): if f(t) f1e't'm(ds),
then for all ¢ as above with II0Ii... = 1,
so that IIfuIB < IImII < oo, where IImII denotes the "semi-variation" of m.
In particular, ]F(Y) contains the constant functions c, and IIcIIB = Ilcll.
47
The Bochner norm is invariant under additive translation f (t) -4f (t + c) and
non-zero multiplicative translation f(t) -' f(ct) (c E R).
If Y, Z are Banach spaces and U E B(Y, Z), then UF(Y) C F(Z) and
IIUfIIB <_
and
IIfIIBIIY*II-
The uniqueness of the integral representation implies that for each 6 E 8(R) (the
Borel algebra of R), µ(b; .) is a linear functional on Y* with norm < IllIIB There-
fore
p(b; y*) = m(b)y* (y* E Y*, b E S(R)),
where m : 8(R) -+ Y** is such that m(.)y* is a regular finite Borel measure for
each y* E Y*. The element ff e't'm(ds) E Y**, well-defined by the relation
coincides with the element f (t) E X (imbedded in Y** as usual). In this weakened
sense, the weakly continuous elements of F(Y) are Fourier-Stieltjes transforms of
Y**- valued measures like m. When Y is reflexive, m is a weakly countably addi-
tive (hence strongly countably additive, by Pettis' theorem, cf. [DS-I]) Y-valued
measure, and we can write
48
so that the weakly continuous functions in F(Y) are precisely the Fourier-Stieltjes
transforms of vector measures m as above. We summarize the above discussion
formally:
1.45. PROPOSITION. The space F(Y) is a Banach space for the Bochner norm,
and contains all the Fourier-Stieltjes transforms of Y-valued measures with finite
variation. Every weakly continuous function in the space is the Fourier-Stieltjes
transform of a Y**-valued measure m such that m(.)y* is a regular complex Borel
measure for each y* E Y*. When Y is reflexive, every weakly continuous function
in the space is the Fourier- Stieltjes transform of a strongly countably additive Y-
valued measure m (such that y*m(.) is a regular complex Borel measure for each
y*), and is in particular strongly continuous as well.
Z=ZT= {xEX;IInIIT<oo}.
1.47. LEMMA. (Z, 11-11T) is a Banach subspace of X, invariant for any U E B(X)
which commutes with T(.). Also Z = X if and only if oo (in this case,
the two norms on X are equivalent).
PROOF. Since IIxIIT > IIT(.)xlloo > IIxII, (Z, II.IIT) is a normed space. We prove
completeness. If {xn} is Cauchy in (Z, II.I IT), it is also Cauchy in X; let x be its
X-limit. Then T(t)xn --1 T(t)x for each t E R. By definition of the II.IIT-norm,
{T(.)xn} is Cauchy in the Banach space (F(X), Therefore T(.)xn -+ fin
that space, and since II.IIB > II.Iloo> f(t) = limn,T(t)xn = T(t)x (limit in X), for
each t. Thus T(.)x E F(X), i.e., x E Z, and IIxn - xIIT = IIT(.)x - T(.)xll B -> 0,
and Z (with the is a Banach subspace of X.
If U E B(X) commutes with T(t) for each t E R, then for each x E Z, we have
T(.)x E F(X), and therefore UT(.)x E F(X) and II UT(.)xII n 5 IIUII.IIT(.)xIIB
(see above), which is equivalent in our present situation to T(.)[Ux] E F(X) (i.e.,
Ux E Z) and IIUxIIT < This shows that Z is U-invariant, and
IIUIIB(z) <- IIUIIB(x) If IIT(.)IIB < oo, then for all trigonometric polynomials
0 as above, and for all x E X, IIE;c;T(tj)xIl < IIE3cjT(tj)II.IIxII <
and therefore IIxIIT < oo, i.e., Z = X. Conversely, if Z = X,
then sup II [EicjT(tj)]xII < oo (supremum over all ¢ as above), and therefore
II E;cjT(tj)ll < oo by the Uniform Boundedness Theorem. The
49
equivalence of the norms is a consequence of the Closed Graph Theorem, or ex-
plicitely from the above discussion,
1.48. DEFINITION. Let W be a linear manifold in X, and let T(W) denote the
algebra of all operators with domain W and range in W.
A "spectral measure on W" is a function
We then extend r to the algebra ]Bia,(R) of all complex Borel functions on R that
are bounded on each interval [a, b], by letting
for h E 31o0(R), where lima,b stands for the limit in X when a --i -oo and b --i oo;
the domain of r(h) is the set of all x E W for which the limit exists.
We are now ready to state our Banach space version of the Stone Theorem.
50
(3) r (corresponding to E) is a norm-decreasing algebra homomorphism of E(R)
into B(Z, such that T(ot) = T(t)/Z for ct(s) = e't s,t E R;
(4) If fl(s) = s (s E R), then Az = r(fl)z (where the subscript Z means the
part of the relevant operator in Z), that is,
(i) D(AZ) = {x E Z; fla sE(ds)x exists and belongs to Z}, and
(ii) Ax = fa sE(ds)x (x E D(AZ)).
In addition, Z is maximal and E is unique in the following sense: if W is a
Banach subspace of X and F is a spectral measure on W for which (3) is valid,
then W is a Banach subspace of Z and F(.) = E(.)/W.
IIE.icjT(ti)r(h)xUI = IIr(h)EJc.iT(t.i)xII
r : B(R) -* B(Z,
has norm < 1 ; actually, I Ir I I = 1, because
IIr*)xllT = IIT(r)xIIT :=
IIT(. + r)xII B = IIT(.)xll B = IISIIT,
by the translation invariance of the Bochner norm on IF(R).
Taking h = X6 (the characteristic function of b E 8(R)), we get that
IIE(b)IIB z) 51,
so that surely E(b) E T(Z). For t,u E R and X E Z, with all integrals below
extending over R, we have
E(u)T(t)x = J e't9X6(s)E(ds)x
for all b E B(R), etc. However the left side equals T(t)E(b)x = f e'" F,(ds)E(b)x
since E(b)x E Z for X E Z. Therefore, again by uniqueness for Fourier-Stieltjes
transforms,
E(ds)E(b)x = XoE(ds)x, (3)
so that
E(v)E(b)x = J XoX6E(ds)x = E(v fl b)x
52
for all o,bEB(R)andxEZ.
We conclude that E is a spectral measure on Z.
By (3),
for all00tER,zEX.ForzEZ,,wegetf
00
R(t)z =
f e-"
J
e't"'E(ds)zdu
Ja
b
sE(ds)x =
Ja
b s(1 - its)-'E(ds)z f s(1 - its)-1E(ds)z
when a -+ -oo and b -> oo. Writing s(1 - its)-1 = it-'[1 - (1 - its)-1], the last
integral is seen to equal
This shows that D(Az) C {x E Z; f]k sE(ds)x exists and belongs to Z}, and
Ax = f sE(ds)x on D(Az).
On the other hand, if x belongs to the set on the right of (i) (in the statement
of the theorem), then denoting the integral in (i) by z E Z, we obtain from the
multiplicativity of r for t # 0:
jb f
- its)1 E(ds)x =
JE s(1 - its)1 E(ds)x = it' [x - R(t)x]
(cf. preceding calculation).
Therefore x = R(t)(x - itz) E R(t)Z = D(Az) by (4), and we conclude that
Property (4) in the statement of the theorem is valid.
Finally, suppose (W,11.11w) is a Banach subspace of X for which Property (3)
(in the statement of the theorem) is valid, with (W,11.11w) replacing (Z, II.IIT) and
16(R) - B(W,11.11w) (induced by F) replacing r. Then for all 0 E P with
I ICI I,,,, = 1 and parameters cj, t
Using the terminology of [DS-III], the operator A is spectral of scalar type (with
real spectrum). The map r defined above is now the usual operational calculus
for the scalar-type spectral operator A, and in particular, the semigroup T(.) is
precisely eitA, as defined through this operational calculus. Note that when X is
a Hilbert space, the condition IIT(.)Iloo < oo was necessary and sufficient for the
above conclusions (Corollary 1.42), while our generalization to reflexive Banach
space requires the stronger assumption IIT(.)IIB < oo. This latter condition is
however necessary as well, by Proposition 1.45 and Lemma 1.47.
We formalize the above discussion in
Actually, we can restate this corollary without assuming a priori that iA gener-
ates a C,,-group. We need only to assume that A is densely defined, and has real
spectrum. Let then
R(t) := (I - itA)-' (t E IR).
We first establish some identities.
and
IIT(.)IIB = sup 1IR"IIB.
n>0
55
Each norm on the right is < IIRn(./n)xIIB = IIRnxlIB, by the invariance of the
Bochner norm under multiplicative translations, and this implies the inequality <
in (*).
On the other hand, the Taylor expansion of the resolvent obtained in the proof
of Theorem 1.11 shows that
We can restate now Corollary 1.50 without assuming a priori that iA is a gen-
erator.
(in that case, iA generates the group eitA, which is the Fourier-Stieltjes transform
of the resolution of the identity for A).
56
PROOF. If VA < oo, we surely have IIR"II',. < VA < oo for all n.
Since
)R(A; iA) = R(1/A) (0 A E R),
we have
II[\R(A;iA)1nII < V A (n = 1,2,...;0 54 A E R).
Also iA is closed (since p(iA) is non-empty) and densely defined (by hypothesis).
The conditions of the Hille-Yosida theorem for groups (Theorem 1.39) are therefore
satisfied by the operator iA, with w' = w = 0. If T(.) denotes the group generated
by iA, we have IIT(.)IIB = VA < oo, and Corollary 1.50 applies to establish that A
is a scalar-type spectral operator.
Conversely, if A is scalar-type spectral, let E : 13(R) --+ B(X) be its resolution
of the identity. Then iA generates the Co-group T(.) = e'=A := fj e" E(ds). In
particular IIT(.)IIB < oo by Proposition 1.45, that is, VA < oo (by Theorem 1.51).III I
57
H. ANALYTICITY
exists in the uniform operator topology, for all z E D. This is equivalent to the
existence of that limit in the strong operator topology, and in the weak operator
topology as well (cf. [HP, Theorem 3.10.1]).
Sufficiency. Suppose that for each or E (-0, 0), e'"A generates a C0- contrac-
tion semigroup Tc(.). By Theorem 1.36,
59
for allxEX,x* EX*,t>0, and aE(-0,0).
Define T(z) = Ta(t), for z = teia E Se. By (3), T(.) is analytic in Se. It coincides
with the original semigroup on [0, oo) and is contraction-valued in the sector (by
definition). It remains to verify that
as z -4 0, z E So (for all x E X). Since I IT(.)-III < 2 in the sector, we may consider
only x in the dense set D(A) = D(e'aA). For such x, writing z = teia E Soi we
have (since eiaA generates the C0-contraction semigroup Ta(t) = T(teia)),
for all unit vectors x E D(A) and x* E X* such that x*x = 1, and for all a E (-0, 9).
PROOF. For all a E (-9, 9), eiaA is closed, densely defined, and for all A > 0,
AI-e'aA = eta (Ae-"1-A] is surjective, since 2(Ae-'a) = A cos a > 0 (cf. Theorem
1.26). Therefore, by Theorem 1.26, e`'A generates a C0-semigroup of contractions
if and only if it is dissipative, i.e., if and only if
t(x*eiaAx) < 0
for all unit vectors x E D(A) and x* E X* such that x*x = 1. This is precisely
Condition (*), so that the corollary follows immediately from Theorem 1.54.
When 0 = n/2 (i.e., for analytic semigroups in the right halfplane C+), we may
consider "boundary values" on the imaginary axis.
Q := {z = t+ is E C; t E (0,1], s E[-1,1]}.
Let v := log[supQ (of course, 0 < v < oo). Then for each s E R,
T(is) := t-.o+
lim T(t + is)
60
exists in B(X) in the strong operator topology, and has the following properties:
(1) T(i.) is a C0-group;
(2) T(is) commutes with T(z) for all s E R, z E C+;
(3) T(t + is) = T(t)T(is) for all t > 0, s E R;
(4) T(.) is of exponential type < v in the closed right halfplane, i.e.,
PROOF. Condition (*) of the previous corollary reduces here to cos a R(x*Ax) <
0 (for all parameters in their proper ranges), which is trivially satisfied (since Ia] <
0 < r/2, and by Theorem 1.26 applied to A). Observe finally that a group of
contractions consists in fact of isometries.
PROOF. For real numerical range, the inequality in Corollary 3 (3) reduces to
cosy x*Ax < 0 (for all parameters in their proper ranges), which is satisfied by
hypothesis. The conclusion follows then from Corollaries 2 and 3.
v(A) _ {(Ax, lr(x* )); x E D(A), x* E X*, Ilxl I= I Ix* II = (x, lr(x* )) = 1).
Ilx-y112=IIxI12-2t(x,y)+IlylI2=1-2+1=0,
so that y = x, and
We then have
62
PROOF. By Corollary 2, A generates an analytic C0-semigroup of contractions
in 3?z > 0. Since (Ax, x) is real for all x E D(A), A is symmetric. The boundary
group {T(is);s E R} in that corollary (with generator iA) satisfies (cf. Theorem
1.36):
T(is)x = lim[n R(n; iA)]"x = lim[ n R(n ; A)]nx
n s 8 n 2s 2s
for all s > 0 and x E X. Since -iA is the generator of the C0-semigroup
{T(-is); s > 0}, we also have
i.e.,
Note that the relation T(t)x = limn[ R(i ; A)]"x shows that the operators T(t)
i
are selfadjoint (for A symmetric). The longer discussion given above illustrates the
"method of analytic continuation to the imaginary axis", that will be used in Section
2.37 in the more general case of a "local semigroup" of unbounded symmetric
operators to produce a selfadjoint operator H such that each T(t) is a restriction
of a-tx
63
K. NON-COMMUTATIVE TAYLOR FORMULA
1.56. LEMMA. Let S,T E A and z E p(S) fl p(T). Then f o r all n = 0,1, 2,...,
The formula of the lemma simplifies as follows when S, T are commuting elements
of A:
64
1.57. LEMMA. Let S, T E A commute, and let z E p(S) fl p(T). Then
R(z; T) = E, 0R(z; S)i+1(T - S)i
1.58. LEMMA. Let A, B E A and z E p(A) fl p(B). Then for all n = 0, 1, 2,...,
R(z; B) = E, oR(z; A).i+' (RB - LA)'I
Applying this operator to the identity I E A, we obtain the first formula of the
lemma. The second formula is deduced in the same manner, through the choice
S = RA and T = LB in Lemma 1.57.1111
The non-commutative Taylor formula for analytic functions on the Banach al-
gebra A uses the Riesz-Dunford analytic operational calculus. Let f be a complex
analytic function in an open neighborhood 1 of the spectrum a(B) of B E A. If
K C Sl is compact, we denote by F(K, Sl) any finite union of positively oriented
simple closed Jordan contours in fl, that contains K in its interior. The element
f (B) E A is defined by
f(B) o fiA)
, (RB -LA)3I+L"(f,A, B)
and
-RA)il.f0)'A)
f(i)(A) =
tai f rf(z)R(z;A)i+'dz,
and the theorem follows from Lemma 1.58 by integration. I I I I
Note that
(RB - LA)-I = Ek=0 Wk (-A)kBi-k,
1.60. THEOREM. Let A be a complex Banach algebra with identity I, and let
.4, B E A. Suppose f is a complex function analytic on the closed disc
Then
f(i) (A) f(i) (A)
f(B) = E0 7!
(RB - LA)j I = E;=0(LB - RA)Y1.' ,a!
rA1r LA)n+IIII,
IILnII < II(RB -
(r - IIAII)n+1(r - IIBII)
with a, similar estimate for R (replace the last factor by II(LB - RA)n+IIII)-
However
A)iBn+1-iII
II(RB - LA)n+IIII = 11E;=+01n 5 (IIAII + IIBII)n+1
Taking f(z) = ft(z) := et: (for t > 0 fixed) in the "Taylor formula" of Theorem
1.59, we obtain
etB = etAEn t?
= o!( RB - LA)iI + Ln, (1)
67
with the appropriate expression for the remainder L,,.
This is the "non-commutative Taylor formula" we wish to generalize to the case
of strongly continuous semigroups.
k=0
The dense T(.; A)-invariant core for A consisting of all the C°°-vectors for A (cf.
Theorem 1.8) is denoted by D°°(A). The type of T(.; A) is w(A) (cf. Section 1.3).
We can state now
L,, A B)x = 1
-27ri ffO+a et zR(z A)"+'(B-A)I"+1]R(4`,B)xdz;
O
for all s, it > r and t > 0. In particular, A, and B. have their spectra in the closed
halfplane {z E C; Rz < a}, and
68
with a similar estimate for R(z; B,,,) (for all s, u > r).
Recall that, in the strong operator topology,
[A9R(z;
A)]'
-'s [AR(z; A)]' (8')
69
For 0 < k < j, x c D(Bi-k ), and s > r fixed, it follows from (9) that
(-A,)kBj-kx -, (-A,)kBi-kx
for Rz > a.
On the other hand, by Lemma 1.58, for all x E X, the left hand side of (14) is
equal to
R(z; Bu)x - R(z; A,)n+1(Bu - A,)[n+']R(z; Bu)x. (15)
If x E D(B'n-')(= R(z; B)'-'X) (for any m E N), writing x = R(z; B)'n-1 y for a
suitable y E X, we have
B)]"'-1 y.
Bu R(z; Bu)x = [BuR(z; Bu)][BuR(z;
The operators in the first bracket on the right are equal to zR(z; Bu) - I, and are
therefore uniformly bounded (with respect to u) by 1+ R Z a (by (3)), and converge
(as it -* oo) to zR(z; B) - I = BR(z; B) (by (5)) in the strong operator topology.
The second bracket converges to [BR(z; B)]"-'y, by (8') for B. It follows that
R(z; Bu)x -
Ek+1(n
asS-->00.
We then conclude from (14) that the following generalization of Lemma 1.58
(first formula) is valid:
Assume now that D°°(B) C D°O(A). If 0 < k < j and x E D°°(B), then
B'-kx E D°°(B) C D°°(A) C D(Ak), so that x E D((-A)kBJ-k). Hence x E
n;=o D((B - A)[3]) for all n. Since also R(z; B)x E D°°(B), we have R(z; B)x E
D((B - A)["+1]) as well, and the formula in the lemma is valid for all x E D°°(B).
LEMMA 2. Let A generate the Co-semigroup T(.; A). Then for t > 0, c > w(A),
and j = 0, 1, 2,...,
lim 1 rc+ir
r-co 21ri Jc-ir 7
j
etzR(z; 9)J+1xdz = t ]T(t; A)x (x E D(A)).
71
PROOF ( of Lemma 2). Since R(z; A)i+' _ ZR(z; A)(3), we may integrate
by parts j times to show that the integral appearing in the lemma is equal to
-etzEk-o (j - k - 1)!tkR(z; A)i-kxlc+ir
j! Jc-ir
ti
+: etzR(z;A)xdz.
J fir
Jc-ir
(16)
B)xdz - E'=0 f
c+ir et-R(z; et:R(z; o+ir
This shows that the remainder L in Theorem 1.61 converges (as a "Cauchy Prin-
cipal Value"), and its "value" is independent of c > a, and is equal to
T(t; B) - T(t;
t' (B - A)!il x.l III
J
72
PART II. GENERALIZATIONS
A. PRE-SEMIGROUPS
Property 3. There exists a > 0 such that e-atS(t)x is bounded and uniformly
continuous on [0, oo), for each x E X.
By 2., equating the values of S(t - u)S(u) with the value at u = t, we see that
Ax = S(0)-1[S(.)x]'(0) (x E D(A)).
75
Note that if T(.) is a C,,-semigroup with generator A, and C E B(X) is injective
and commutes with T(.), then S(.) := CT(.) is a pre-semigroup with S(O) = C and
with generator A.
on [0, oo).
by definition of A.
The third term on the right -+ 0 by continuity of S(.)[S(0)Ax].
76
Thus we proved that S(0)S(.)x is differentiable on [0, oo) for each x E D(A),and
[S(O)S(.)x]'(t) = S(O)S(t)Ax (t > 0; x E D(A)). (2)
Integrating from 0 to t and using the boundedness and injectivity of S(0), we obtain
S(t)x - S(0)x =
f S(s)Axds = J
t
t AS(s)xds (x E D(A)). (3)
0 0
t+h
= S(0)[h-' it S(s)xds - h-' fo S(s)xds] -a S(0)[S(t)x - S(0)x] E S(0)X,
t
We show now that A is closed. If x E D(A), x --f x, and Ax,, -+ y, then with
K as before (for t fixed) and L = supnjlAx,,jj, we have JIS(s)AxnII < KL for all
n and s E [0, t], and S(s)Ax,, -+ S(s)y pointwise. By dominated convergence and
(3),
t t
S(t)x - S(0)x = lim[S(t)x,, - limJ J S(s)yds.
0 0
Dividing by t and letting t --a 0+, we obtain that the right hand side converges to
S(O)y E S(0)X, so that x E D(A) and Ax = y, as wanted.
We read also from (3) that S(.)x is of class C' and solves ACP on [0, oo) for
each x E D(A).I1II
2.4. THEOREM. Let S(.) have Property 1. and commute with A, and either
D(A) is dense or p(A) is non-empty. If S(.)x solves ACP for each x E D(A), then
S(.) is a pre-semigroup generated by an extension of A.
77
PROOF. For x E D(A) and 0 < u < t,
If v : [0, oo) -+ D(A) is any solution of ACP with x = S(0)y E S(0)D(A), then
de[S(t-s)v(s)] = -S(t-s)A'v(s)+S(t-s)Av(s) = 0 since v(s) E D(A). Equating
therefore the values of the constant s-function S(t - s)v(s) at s = 0 and s = t, we
get S(O)v(t) = S(t)S(0)y, hence v(t) = S(t)y = S(t)S(O)-'x, meaning that ACP
has a unique solution for each x E S(0)D(A).
78
Conversely, assume ACP with initial value x E D(B) has the unique C1- solution
u(.; x) on [0, oo). If v := R(A; A)u(.; x), then
S(.)x := (AI - A)u(.; R(0; B)x) = Au(.; R(0; B)x) - u'(.; R(0; B)x). (2)
Since R(0; B)x E D(B), and u(.; y) has values in D(A) for any y E D(B), the
operator S(t) is everywhere defined on X, and is linear by the uniqueness hypothesis
(for each t > 0). By (2), S(.)x is continuous for each x E X.
By (1) with R(0; B)x(E D(B)) replacing x,
R(A; A)S(t)x = u(t; R(0; B)x) _ (Al - A)R(A; A)u(t; R(0; B)x)
_ (AI - A)u(t; R(A; A)R(0; B)x) = (AI - A)u(t; R(0; B)R(A; A)x) = S(t)R(A; A)x,
and it follows that S(t) commutes with A for all t.
Consider now U(.)x := u(.; R(0; B)x).
The operator U(.) : X -, C1([0, b]; X) into the Banach space of all X-valued
C'-functions on [0, b] with the usual norm, is shown to be closed. Indeed, if x -> x
in X, and U(. )x --' v in C' ([0, b]; X), then for each t E [0, b],
Au(t; R(0; [u(.; R(0;
[U(.)xn]'(t) v'(t).
Since A is closed, v(t) E D(A) and Av(t) = v'(t). Also
2.6. COROLLARY. Let A E p(A). Then ACP for A has a unique C1-solution
on [0, oo) for each x E D(An+1) if and only if an extension of A generates a pre-
semigroup S(.) with S(0) = R(A; A)", which commutes with A.
We consider next an exponentially tamed pre-semigroup S(.), that is, all three
properties 1.,2.,3. are satisfied.
By the injectivity of S(0) and the Uniform Boundedness Theorem,
where Cb(...) denotes the Banach space of all X-valued bounded uniformly contin-
uous functions on [0, oo), normed by 11f I Iu = sups>o Ilf(t)I1.
For x E Y, set
IIxI1Y := 11S(0)-'e-°tS(t)xllu.
Finally, we denote by [S(0)X] the Banach space S(0)X with the norm
MIIS(0)-'xll.
IIxIIo :=
80
2.8. THEOREM. Let A generate an exponentially tamed pre-semigroup S(.),
and let Y be the space defined in 2.7. Then Y is a Banach subspace of X containing
[S(O)X] as a Banach subspace, and Ay (the part of A in Y) generates a C,-
semigroup T(.) in Y satisfying IIT(t)IIB(y) < eat.
PROOF. Let be Cauchy in Y. Since II.IIy > 11.1 1, it is Cauchy in X. Let then
{S(0)-'e-a"S(t)x,,}
x = limx in X. By definition of the Y-norm, the sequence
is Cauchy in Cb := C6([0, oo); X ). Let U E C6 be its Cb-limit. The bound-
edness of S(O) implies that e-atS(t)x = S(0)u(t) E S(O)X for all t, so that
S(0)-le-atS(t)x = u(t) E C6, i.e., x E Y, and clearly II x,, - xfl y - 0. Thus
Y is indeed a Banach subspace of X.
If x = S(O)y E S(O)X, then S(0)-1e-a"S(t)x = e-"S(t)y E C6 by Property 3.,
so that S(0)X C Y. Also
Therefore
IIS(0)-1e-atS(t)[T(h)x - x]II <
S(0)-le-atS(t)xll
eahllS(0)-1e-a(t+h)S(t+ h)x -
eahe + (eah - 1)IIxIIY
+(eah -1)IIS(0)-le-atS(t)xII 5
Taking the supremum over all t > 0, and letting then h -+ 0, we obtain
82
B. SEMI-SIMPLICITY MANIFOLD (real spectrum case)
Let 11. 11 1 denote the L'(R)-norm (with respect to the Lebesgue measure).
Note that Condition (1) is valid for all x E X when iA generates a C0-group;
indeed, since R(t + iu; A) = iR(-u + it; iA), we have in that case II R(t + iu; A)I I =
O(1/lul) for 0 # u E R.
PROOF. First, for s > 0 and x E X fixed, assume that x*P(.,s)x E V(R) for
all x* E X*, and consider then the linear map
V, : x* -+ x*P(.,s)x
of X* into L'(R).
If xn -+ x* in X* and V,x,*, -+ f in L',, then by Fatou's lemma,
83
i.e., V,x* = f, so that V, is closed, hence bounded, by the Closed Graph Theorem.
When Condition (2) is satisfied by x, the family of bounded operators V, satisfies
By the Uniform Boundedness Theorem, sup,>0 I I V, I I < oo, which means precisely
that IIxIIA < 00. IIII
2.11. THEOREM. Let A be an operator with real spectrum acting in the reflexive
Banach space X, and let Z be its semi-simplicity manifold, normed by Then
Z is a Banach subspace of X, invariant for any U E B(X) commuting with A, and
there exists a spectral measure on Z, E(.), such that
1. for each b E 8(R), E(b) commutes with every U E B(X) which commutes
with A;
2. D(Az) _ {x E Z; f,uE(ddu)x exists and belongs to Z}, and
Ax = fuE(du)x (x E D(Az));
Note that the "existence" of the integral in 2. is in the sense of Section 1.48, i.e.,
as the strong limit in X
r b
uE(du)x := lima,b 1. uE(du)x.
J
PROOF. For fixed x E Z and. x* E X*, the function x*P(t, s)x is an analytic
function of t + is in C+, hence (complex) harmonic there, and satisfies
84
and
x*P(t, s)x = fp(t - u, s),u(du; x, x*) (t E R, s > 0), (2)
where p(t, s) _ a +e is the Poisson kernel for the upper half-plane (cf. [SW,
pp. 49-53]). The uniqueness of the Poisson integral representation implies that for
each b E 8(R), µ(b;.,.) is a bilinear form; hence, by (1) and the reflexivity of X,
there exists a unique linear transformation
E(b):Z-4X
such that
µ(b; x, x*) = x*E(5)x, (x E Z, x* E X*) (3)
and
IIE(b)xII < IIxIIA (x E Z). (4)
It follows from (3) and Pettis' theorem that E(.)x is a regular countably additive
X-valued measure on 8(R), and we may rewrite (2) in the form
85
for all (EC-R andxEZ.
We shall verify now that (7) (i.e., Statement 3. of our theorem) imply all the
other statements of Theorem 2.11.
Let U E B(X) commute with A. Then U commutes with R((; A) for all non-real
(. If X E Z, then R(t + iu; A)Ux = UR(t + iu; A)x -+ 0 as lul -r oo, for all t E R.
Also, with notations as in Lemma 2.10, we have for fixed x E Z,
IIx*P(.,S)Uxlll = Ilx*UP(.,s)xlli =
I I I
II I (x E Z). (8)
(- U
E(du)Ux = R((; A)Ux = UR((; A)x
UE(du)x
86
Therefore, if {xn} C Z is it is also 11.11-Cauchy (and of course, II.IIA-
bounded, say by the constant K). Let x = limn xn in X. Then by (7) and (1),
II IuIIIA <
IIR(t+iu;A)xnII s
IuI,
n Kllx*Il,
and we conclude that x E Z.
Also, given e > 0, let no be such that I Ixn - xm I IA < e for all n, m > no. Then
I l x*P(., s)(xn - x,n)I II < e for all unit vectors x* E X*, ,q > 0, and n, m > n0.
Letting m - oo, Fatou's lemma implies that IIxn - XIIA < e for all n > no, i.e.,
xn -, x in the We then conclude that (Z, II.IIA) is a Banach subspace
of X.
-
ForxEZandAEp(A),
1
E(du)R(A; A)x = R((; A)R(A; A)x
U
_ 1 [ 1
E(du)x],
for all x E Z, A E p(A), and b E 8(R) (where X6 denotes the characteristic function
of b).
Since R(A; A) commutes with E(b), it follows from (11) that for x E Z,
R(A;A)E(b)x = f 1 uE(du)x -+ 0
IIx*P(.,s)E(b)xlll =
This shows that E(b) E T(Z); in fact E(b) E B(Z, II.IIA), with operator norm < 1.
By (11) and (7), since E(b)x E Z for X E Z,
for anyAEC - R.
Let x E D(Az). Write then x = R(A; A)y for a fixed non-real A and a suitable
yEZ. For-oo<a<b<oo,wehave by(11)
L A_ uE(du)y
88
= AR(a; A)y - y = AR(A; A)y = Ax E Z (14)
(since x E D(Az)). Thus D(Az) C Z1, where Z1 denotes the set on the right of
Statement 2. of the theorem. On the other hand, if x E Z1, denote z = f! uE(du)x;
we have z E Z, and for non-real A, we obtain from (11)
Hence
x = R(A; A)[Ax - zI E R(A; A)Z = D(Az),
so that D(AZ) = Z1. By (14), Ax = fauE(du)x for all x E D(Az).
Finally, let W and F be as in the statement of the theorem. For x E W, the
representation 3. (with F) of the resolvent implies (1) in Definition 2.9. Also, for
all x* E X*,
IIx*P(., s)xIIl =
-s f I x* J (t - u1 + S2
F(du)xjdt
s dt
I x*Fxl (du) = I x*FxI (R),
(t - u)2 + sz
so that (2) in Definition 2.9 is satisfied as well, i.e., x E Z. Thus W C Z, and
the uniqueness property of the Stieltjes transform implies that F(.)x = E(.)x for
xEW.IIII
89
2.13. THEOREM. The operational calculus r is a norm-decreasing algebra ho-
momorphism of B(R) into B(Z). Moreover, for each h E B(R), r(h) maps D(AZ)
into itself, and
Note that the "improper" integral appearing in (1) is r(uh(u)), defined as usual
for functions in Bio,(R).
PROOF. For x E Z and h E B(R), we have by (11) (in the proof of Theorem
2.11)
R(A;A)r(h)x = f h(u)R(A; A)E(du)x = fm (u) E(du)x. (2)
Therefore
IIhIII.IIIIA
IIR(A; A)r(h)xll <
I
(A EC-R).
In particular, r(h)x satisfies 2.9 (1).
By (2), for all x* E X*,
This establishes that r is norm-decreasing from B(R) into B(Z). Since E is a spec-
tral measure on Z, it follows that r is multiplicative on the simple Borel functions,
hence on B(R) as well.
Next, let x E D(AZ). Then x = R(.1; A)y for A non-real and y E Z. Therefore,
for any h E B(R),
exists in X and belongs to Z, and equals AT(h)x (by Theorem 2.11). Finally, we
observe that the bounded operator AR(A; A) = .\R(A; A) - I commutes with E,
hence with r(h), and therefore
Then T(.) is a group of contractions in Z, which map D(AZ) into itself. It is con-
tinuous with respect to the X-norm (as follows at once by dominated convergence),
but not necessarily with respect to the Z-norm.
Consider the continuous functions on R
eitu -1
kt(u) itu (t,u 36 0),
and kt(0) = 1 (for t 54 0). We have jkt(u)I _< 1 and kt(u) --+ 1 as t -+ 0 (for
all u E R). For x E D(Az), we apply (1) (in Theorem 2.13) and the Dominated
Convergence Theorem for vector measures:
(limit in X), since T(t)x E D(AZ) for x E D(Az), by Theorem 2.13. We formalize
the above discussion in
The basic properties of the operational calculus r on Bloc (R) are collected in the
following
In the last integral, the integrand is majorized by the bounded function Ihj, and
converges pointwise to hX6 when a --+ -oo and b -+ oo. By dominated convergence
for vector measures, it follows that lima,b of that integral exists in X and equals
T(hX6)x E Z (since hX6 E 3(R)). Hence E(b)x E D(T(h)) and T(h)E(b)x =
r(hXb)x.
We also have r(h)x E Z, because x E D(T(h)). Therefore, by (11) in the proof
of Theorem 2.11, we have for A E C - R
Hence
E(b)T(h)x = f h(u)X6(u)E(du)x = 7-(hX6)x,
by the uniqueness property of the Stieltjes transform. This completes the proof of
(iii).
h(u)g(u)E(du)x =
a
PROOF (of Lemma). (i) is easily verified by induction. The validity of (ii)
for n = 1 was observed before. Assume (ii) for n - 1 (where n > 2). Since Z is
R(A; A)-invariant,
95
C. SEMI-SIMPLICITY MANIFOLD (Case R+ C p(-A))
and
S:= AR(I - AR).
The function S(t) = tR(t) [I - tR(t)] is a well-defined B(X)-valued function on R+,
and for all k = 1, 2,..., the powers Sk are of class C°°.
B(s,t) :=
r(s)r(t)
(s, t E l[8+).
r(s + t)
2.17. DEFINITION. Let -A be an operator with (0, oo) C p(-A), and let S be
the operator function defined above. The "semi-simplicity manifold" for -A is the
set Z of all x E X such that
Ilx*Skxlli
sup < oo
kEN B(k,k)
for all x* E X*.
Using the Closed Graph Theorem, Fatou's lemma, and the Uniform Boundedness
Theorem as in the proof of Lemma 2.10, we obtain
96
2.19. LEMMA. The space Z :_ (Z, is a Banach subspace of X, invariant
for any U E B(X) commuting with A. and IIUIIB(z) IIUIIB(x)
PROOF. The proof is analogous to the one we gave for the real-spectrum case
(see proof of Theorem 2.11).
such that
1. for each b E B(R+), E(5) commutes with every U E B(X) which commutes
with A;
2. (i) D(Az) = {x E Z; limb-0 f o'6 sE(ds)x exists in X and belongs to Z}, and
(ii) Ax = f°° sE(ds)x (x E D(Az)),
where the last integral is defined as the limit in (i);
3. R(t)x = f0'00 1-+'-;E(ds)x (x E Z,t > 0).
Moreover, Z is maximal-unique relative to Property 3., in the sense of Theorem
2.11.
where
M : f(t) -. tf(t); D : f -> f'
__
Ck (k > 2) .
By Leibnitz' rule,
Lk =
trivially for k = 1, and because B B(k+1 = kkl < 1 for k > 1. We now rely on
the following complex version of Widder's theorem (cf. [W; Theorem 16, p. 361]):
Let f be a C°° complex function on R+, such that
kEN 0
Then the limit c = t f (t) exists, and there exists a unique complex regular
Borel measure p on R+ such that Ilkll < 2K + lcl and
f(t) = f 0
t(+s) (t E )
Taking f = x*Rx with x E Z and x* EX*fixed, wehave K<llxllzllx*II<ooby
(1). Thus limt-o+x*tR(t)x exists for each x* E X*. By the Uniform Boundedness
Theorem,
H= := sup lltR(t)xll < oo (x E Z). (2)
0<t<1
Let MZ := 2IIxilz + Hx. By Widder's theorem, there exists a unique complex
regular Borel measure p(.; x, x*) such that
Mzllx*II
and
µ(ds; x, x*)
x*R(t)x = f (t E II8+)
o t+s '
forallxEZandx* EX*.
This implies in particular that
The uniqueness of the Stieltjes transform implies that for each fixed 6 E B(R+) and
x E Z, µ(6; x,.) is a continuous linear functional on X*, so that, by reflexivity of
98
X, there exists a unique function E(.)x : 13(R+) - X (for each fixed x E Z) such
that
p(.;x,x`) = x*E(.)x (x" E X*).
Necessarily, E(b) is a linear operator with domain Z, and
tR(t)x = R(u)x,
= limtR(t)R(u)x = lim t uR(u)x - lim
t
by the resolvent equation and (2'). Since R(u) is one-to-one, it follows that E(1R+)
I/Z.
For t, u > 0, t # u, and x E Z, we have by Property 3., the resolvent equation,
and the fact that R(u)x E Z,
E(ds)R(u)x = R(t)R(u)x
t+s
t luu Fs
t+sJE(ds)x=J
for all u > 0, k E N, and x E Z. Property 1. for U = Sk(u) implies then that
k
x*Sk(u)E(b)x = f (
(+ ))2k x*E(ds)x.
u
By Tonelli's theorem,
(+ )kzk du
IIx*SkE(b)xIIi 16 / (
(1 +t)2k B(k,k)Ix*ExI(6)
JaJo
< B(k,k)MxIIx*II,
for all x* E X*, k E N, b E 13(R+), and x E Z. Therefore E(b)x E Z for x E Z (i.e.,
E(b) E T(Z)), and
IIE(b)xIIz <_ M. (x E Z,b E B(R+). (4)
It now follows from Property 3. with the vector E(b)x E Z (whenever x E Z),
Property 1. (with U = R(u) for any u > 0), and (3):
=EbRux=
() ( )' J 6
()sEdsx
( ) ,
100
for all a, b E 13(R+). In conclusion, E is a spectral measure on Z.
Since D(AZ) = R(t)Z for any t > 0, write any given x E D(Az) as x = R(t)y
for a fixed t > 0 and a suitable y E Z. Then
b
= f[i - t+s
t ]E(ds)y
[I - tR(t))y(E Z)
= AR(t)y = Ax.
If Z1 denotes the set on the right of Property 2(i), we obtained that D(Az) C Zi
;uid Property 2(ii) is valid on D(AZ). On the other hand, if x E Z1, denote the
limit in Property 2(i) by z E Z. Then for any t > 0,
J' t s s
E(ds)x = x - tR(t)x.
Rk(t)r =
J0
(I t s )kF(ds)x
(5)
=Jo' (ts)k2k
(t + s) P(d,),.
101
Therefore, for all x* E X* and k E N, we have by Tonnelli's theorem
B(k, k)-1 00
F (1 + u)2k uu I x*FxI (ds)
=
IIx*FxII < oo.
Hence x E Z, i.e., W C Z. Also, for all x E W C Z, we have
PROOF. Since I I I < I I Iz, the equivalence of (a) and (b) follows from the Closed
I I
Graph Theorem.
Assume now (a). By (2) and the Uniform Boundedness Theorem,
and so
M. < MIIxII (x E X),
where M := 2K + H.
It now follows from (4) that E(b) E B(X) (actually, II E(b)II s(x) < M) for all
n E B(R+). Therefore E is a spectral measure in the usual sense, and Property 2.
of Theorem 2.20 just states that A is a scalar-type spectral operator with resolution
of the identity E, and then necessarily a(A) C [0, 00) (cf. [DS,III]).
We show finally that (c) implies (a) (even without the reflexivity hypothesis).
Let E be the resolution of the identity of the scalar-type operator A with spectrum
102
in (0, oo). Then E is a spectral measure on X satisfying Property 3. of the theorem
(on X). By the maximality property of Z, we have necessarily X = Z.I
The operational calculus results contained in Theorems 2.13, 2.15, and 2.16, and
in Corollary 2.14 (with the obvious modification), are generalized in a routine way
to the present situation (i.e., with the assumption R+ C p(-A)).
Observe that Theorem 2.20 applies in particular to the case where -A generates
a C,,-semigroup of contractions, T(.). In that case, by (5) (for the spectral measure
on Z, E(.)), we have
[t R(t
)]' x f t i 1 s]"E(ds)x = J
° [E(dt)x
n
ao
-In-oo e-t'E(ds)x
Jo
for all x E Z and t > 0, by the Lebesgue Dominated Convergence Theorem for
vector measures. By Theorem 1.36, it follows that
that is, T(.)x is the Laplace-Stieltjes transform of the vector measure E(.)x for all
xEZ.
We may consider the more general question of constructing a maximal Banach
subspace on which an arbitrary family of closed operators is the Laplace-Stieltjes
transform of a vector measure. This will be done in the next section.
103
D. LAPLACE-STIELTJES SPACE
2.22. DEFINITION. Let F : [0, oo) --> K(X) be such that F(O) = I. The
"Laplace-Stieltjes space" for F is the set W of all x in the "common domain" of F,
D:= n D(F(s)),
s>0
104
meaning that Y is continuously imbedded in W and E'(b) = E(b)ly for all 5 E
a([0, oo)).
The proof depends on a general criterion for belonging to the range of the adjoint
T* of a densely defined operator T.
PROOF. If u* = T*v* with v* E D(T*) such that IIv*ll < M, then for all
u E D(T),
lu*ul = I(T*v*)(u)I = Iv*(Tu)I
<_ IIv*II.IITuII <_ MllTull
Conversely, if (*) is satisfied, define
7r:ran (T)-+ C
by
ir(Tu) = u*u (u E D(T)).
If u, u' E D(T) are such that Tu = Tu', then by (*),
so that 7r is well-defined. It is linear and bounded on ran(T), with norm < M (by
(*)). By the Hahn-Banach Theorem, there exists v* E F* such that IIv*II < M and
Thus
v*(Tu) = u*u (u E D(T)).
This shows that v* E D(T*) and T*v* = u*.IIII
Note that for T E B(£,.F), Condition (*) needs to be required only for all u in
a dense subset of E.
f'
the integrals f000 h(t)cb(t)dt make sense for all 0 E C°°, and
I h(t)O(t)dtI = I j(L4')(s)z(ds)i
0
we have necessarily Ilhll,,. < M, i.e., h E (L1)*, and by Lemma 2.24, there exists
p E M([0,oo)) with IIuII < M such that h = £ p (everywhere, by continuity of
both sides).II11
106
for all ¢ E C"°, hence necessarily
Hence
II F(t)(xn - xm )I I C e (n, m > n,; t > 0),
that is, {F(t)xn} is uniformly Cauchy in X on [0, oo). Let then g(t) := limn F(t)xn
(limit in X, uniformly in t E [0, oo)). Since xn E D(F(t)) and xn --+ x in X, it
follows that x E D(F(t)) and F(t)x = g(t) for each t > 0, because F(t) is a closed
operator. Thus F(.)xn -* F(.)x uniformly on [0, oo), so that F(.)x is continuous
on (0, oo) and
<_ 117'IIB(x)IIxIIwII1C0II-,
so that TW C W and IITIIB(w) <_
if
'
complex continuous function on (0, oo) satisfying
107
By Lemma 2.25, there exists a unique p = µ(.; x, x*) E M([0, oo)) such that
for all t > 0, x E W, and x* E X *. The uniqueness of the representation (5) implies
the bilinearity of µ(b; ., .) for each fixed b E 8([0, oo)), and since X is reflexive, it
follows from (4) that there exists a unique E(b) E B(W, X), such that
µ(b; x, x*) = x*E(b)x (6)
108
Moreover, E(.) commutes with every operator U E B(X) such that UD C V and
UT(.)x = T(.)Ux for all x E D. Also, if
T : h --r f r h(s)E(ds)x,
0
PROOF. Let (W.E) be associated with the family F(.) = T(.) as in Theorem
2.23. Let X E W. Then for each s > 0, T(.)T(s)x = T(.-fs)x is strongly continuous
on [0, oo), and for all 0 E C°° := C°°(R+), denoting 0,(u) :_ ¢(u - s), we have
II f
0
q5(t)T(t)[T(s)x]dtll = II f b,(u)T(u)xdull
11
f 0
0(t)T(t)[T(h)x]dtII =11 f 0(t) f e-tuh(u)E(du)xdt11
0 0
= 11 fr(G0)(u)h(u)E(du)x11 S 11h11o11x11w11C011oo.
0
f °° e-tuE(du)[E(b)x] = T(t)[E(b)x] _
0 f
By the uniqueness property of the Laplace-Stieltjes transform of regular measures,
it follows that
E(du)E(b)x = X6(u)E(du)x,
and therefore
E(o,)E(b)x = E(o, n b)x
for all a,b E B([0,oo)) and x E W. Thus E is a spectral measure on W, and r is
necessarily multiplicative on B([0, oo)), since it is multiplicative on the simple Borel
functions, and satisfies (2) on B([0, oo)).
In view of Theorem 2.23, this completes the proof of Theorem 2.28.1111
oo
J0
' e-(t+u)'dsE(du)x
J0 0
E(du)x,
= Jo Jo = fo 0 t + u
where the change of integration order is easily justified by the Tonnelli and Fubini
theorems. By the multiplicativity of the map r induced by E(.), the spectral
measure on W, we get for all k E N,
=B(k,k)IIx*E(.)xll <B(k,k)I1xJJw.
Hence
that is, W C Z.
We thus proved that Z = W, and since both are Banach spaces and 1 I.1 I z < I1.11 w,
it follows that the norms are equivalent (by a well-known theorem of Banach). 1111
It then makes sense to replace the norm 11.11 by the norm 11.111 in the constraint
on 0 (in Definition 2.22).
111
2.30. DEFINITION. Let {F(t); t > 0) be a family of closed operators with
common domain V. The "Integrated Laplace space" for F(.) is the set Y of all
x E V such that F(.)x is X-continuous on R+, and
is finite.
2.31. THEOREM. Let Y be the Integrated Laplace space for the family F(.) of
closed operators on the arbitrary Banach space X. Then Y is a Banach subspace
of X, invariant for every T E B(X) commuting with F(t)Ip for all t > 0 (and
IITIIB(Y) <_ IITIIB(x)), and there exists a uniquely determined map
S(.) : [0, oo) - B(Y, X)
with the following properties: (1) S(0) = 0;
(2) I IS(t)x - S(u)xII < It - uI IIxI IY (t, u > O; x E Y);
(3) F(t)x = t f o' e-t"S(u)xdu (t > O; x E Y).
Moreover, the pair (Y,S) is "maximal-unique" in the usual sense.
PROOF. The basic properties of Y are verified in precisely the same way as the
corresponding properties of the Laplace-Stieltjes space W.
Denote by Lip, the space of all complex functions f on [0, oo) such that f (0) = 0
and
I f(t) - f(u)I <_ MIt - uI (t, u > 0).
The smallest possible constant M above is called the Lipshitz constant for the
"Lipshitz function" f.
The remainder of the proof depends on the following
LEMMA. Let h : R+ --+ C and K > 0 be given. Then there exists f E Lip, with
Lipshitz constant < K such that h(t)lt is the Laplace transform of f on R+ if and
only if h is continuous and
I f
0
q(t)h(t)dtI < KIIC0II1 (*)
PROOF (of Lemma). If h(t)/t = (,C f)(t) for all t > 0, where f E Lip, has
Lipshitz constant < K, then h is clearly continuous, and f is locally absolutely
continuous, its derivative (which exists a.e.) satisfies IIf'II0o < K, and
112
For any 0 E C°°, integration by parts and Fubini's theorem give
00
¢(t)h(t)dt = F m te-t°(Jf')(u)du¢(t)dt
J J0 J0
0J J ef'(u)duO(t)dt = j(Jcb)(u)f'(u)du.
0
Thus
is a contraction.
We identify [L'(dt/t)]* with the space of all complex measurable functions h on
R+ such that th(t) E L°° := L°°(R+,dt), normed by the essential supremum norm
of th(t), with the duality given by
F F
< O, h >= f c6(t)h(t)dt = f 4)(t)[th(t)](dt/t).
0 0
The uniqueness of the representation (1) implies that f(t;.,.) is a bounded bilinear
form (for each fixed t), and there exists therefore a uniquely determined operator
S(t) E B(Y, X **) such that
(3) f (t; x, x*) = [S(t)x](x*) for all x E Y and x* E X *,
and by (2),
(4) II S(t)x - S(u)xll x** 5 It - uI.I IxIIy for all t, u > 0 and x E Y.
For t = 0, the left side of (3) vanishes for all x, x*, and therefore S(0) = 0.
By (4), the integral fo e-t"S(u)xdu (with t > 0 and x E Y) converges strongly
in X**, and we may then rewrite (1) in the form
rc[F(t)x] = t M e-t"S(u)xdu,
J0
where rc denotes the canonical imbedding of X into X**.
Let 7r denote the canonical homomorphism
it : X** -+ X**/kX.
Note that Statement (2) in Theorem 2.31 means that S(.) is of class Lipo,l as a
B(Y, X)-valued function (where the index 1 indicates that the Lipshitz constant is
< 1), that is,
II S(t) - S(u)II B(y,x) 5 It - uI (t, u > 0).
In particular, the Laplace transform CS exists in the B(Y, X)-norm on (0, oo),
and by Statement (3) of the theorem, F(.) is B(Y,X)-valued and F(t) = t(GS)(t)
for allt>0.
We express this relation between F(.) and S(.) by saying that F(.) is the inte-
grated Laplace transform of the B(Y, X)- valued Lipo,l-function S(.).
2.32. COROLLARY. Let F(.) be a family of closed operators on (0, oo), oper-
ating on the arbitrary Banach space X, and let Y :_ (Y, II.IIy) be its Integrated
Laplace space. Then the following statements are equivalent.
(1) Y = X.
(2) K:= IIxIIy < oo.
(3) F(.) is the integrated Laplace transform of a B(X)-valued Lipo,K-function.
2.33. DEFINITION. The operator A on the Banach space X, with (0, oo) C p(A)
is said to generate an integrated semigroup of bounded type < K if R(.; A) is
the integrated Laplace transform of a B(X)-valued Lipo,K-function S(.) on [0, oo).
The (uniquely determined) function S(.) is called the integrated semigroup
generated by A.
By Corollary 2.32, we have
116
E. SEMIGROUPS OF UNBOUNDED SYMMETRIC OPERATORS
D:=U{Dt;0<t<c}
is dense in X.
The semigroup condition takes domains into account as follows:
for t, s, t + s E A, we have T(s)Dt+, C Dt, and
For any n E N, if tl, ..., t E [0, s] are such that ti + tj E [0, s], then x E
Dt;, T(ti)x E D,_t; C Dt, (since s - t, > tj), and T(tj)T(ti)x = T(ti + tj)x.
Therefore, by the symmetry hypothesis,
For n, m E N, Cl, ..., Cn; dl, ..., dnt complex, and s1, ..., sn; tl, ..., t,,,, real such that
.tit +ti E [0, s], the preceding calculation shows that
f(Eicie-9`u)(Eidie-tiu)-a(du). (2)
=
Let Y be the closed span of {T(t)x;t E [0,s/21}, and let U(T(t)x) := e-"(E
L'(a), since e-"u E L1(a) for t E [O,s/2]). If g E L2(a) is orthogonal to all
the functions a-tu with t E [0, s/2], then the function G(z) := f]R e-zug-(u)a(du),
which is analytic in the strip S := {z E C;Rez E (0,s/2)} and continuous in its
closure S-, must vanish identically. Hence f1 e-irug(u)-a(du) = 0 for all real
r. By the uniqueness property of the Fourier-Stieltjes transform, it follows that
g(u)-a(du) = 0, and therefore f,gg-da = 0, i.e., g is the zero element of L2(a).
Thus {e-tu;t E [0,s/2]} is fundamental in L2(a), and it follows from (2) that U
extends linearly to a unitary operator from Y onto L2(a).
For each z E S-, the function hz(u) = e-:u is in L2(a). The L2(a)-valued
function z -* hz is continuous in S-. Indeed, let O(u) = 1 for u > 0 and O(u) = e-'u
for it < 0. Let z, w E S-, and denote Rez = t, Rew = r. Then
Ie-zu - e-wu12 < (e-tu + e-ru)2
HHhz - h.1122(a) - 0
when w --f z.
118
For each g E L2(a), (h ,z, g) = fA e--g(u)-a(du) is the Laplace-Stieltjes trans-
form of the measure g-dce; it converges absolutely in S- since a-'u E L2(a) for
t E [0, s/2], and is therefore analytic in S. Hence the L2(a)-valued function hr is
analytic in S.
Define
x(z) := U-lhz(E Y) (z E S-). (3)
Now, given x c D, there exists 0 < s C A such that x E D,. Let x(.) be the
function constructed above in the strip S-, and define
By (4) and the analyticity of x(.), V(.) is well- defined on D. For r, r' E R, we have
= f Re-i(r-r)ua(du) (6)
Thus, by (1),
IIV(r)x112 = a(R) = f(0) = IIxII2 (7)
and therefore, by analyticity of x(.) and y(.) in S and their continuity in S-, the
same relation is valid with t replaced by ir, i.e., V (r)(.1x +µy) = AV (r)x + µV (r)y
for all real r.
Since V(r) is isometric on the dense linear manifold D, it extends as a linear
isometry on X.
The function r --} V(r)x = x(ir) is continuous for each x E D (as observed
above), and V(r) is isometric on X; therefore V(.)x is continuous on R for all
xEX.
Let X E D. and t, t' E 0 such that t+t' E A. The semigroup property T(t+t')x =
T(t)T(t')x implies, by uniqueness of the analytic continuation onto the imaginary
axis, that V (r)V (r' )x = V (r + r')x for all r, r' E R and x E D hence for all
x E X, by density of D. Thus V(.) is a group of operators on R; in particular,
the isometries V(r) are onto, i.e., V(.) is a strongly continuous unitary group.
119
By Stone's theorem, we have V(r) = e-irH with H selfadjoint. Let E be the
resolution of the identity for H. For all r E R and x E D we have by (6)
and therefore (E(.)x, x) = a(.; x), by the uniqueness property of the Fourier-
Stieltjes transform.
Since e-z" E L2(a) for z E S-, we have x E D(e-,H). The vector functions
e-zHx and x(z) are both analytic in S and continuous in S-; on the imaginary
axis, we have a-irHx = V(r)x = x(ir), so that a-zHx = x(z) for all z E S In
particular, by (4),
If also H' is a selfadjoint operator satisfying (8), then the analytic continuation
employed in the construction gives a-irHx = e-irH'x for all real r and all x E D,
hence for all x E X, and therefore H = H' by the uniqueness in Stone's theorem.I I I I
<oo.
These are linear manifolds such that D, C Dt for s > t and U,>0 Dt = D is dense,
by hypothesis. Define T(0) = I and
R
T(t)x=E'0-A"x
for x E Dt, t > 0 (the series converges in X for such x).
120
If x E Dt+,,
EmEnmin,IIAm+nXII = r-k(1/k!)Em_0(k)tmSk-mUUAkxll
k's)k
= Ek (t IIAkxlI < oo. (9)
Thus En n, I IAn(A'nx)II < oo, that is, Atmx E D. for all m = 0, 1, 2,..., and since A
is closed, one verifies by induction that T(s)x E D(Am), and
sn
T(s)Amx = AmT(s)x = En An+n`x. (10)
W!
Therefore
Em mM II AmT(S)xII = E. tM +IEn n Am+nxll < 00
W!
k's)k
= Ek (t Akx = T(t + s)x
(for all t,s>0and xEDt+,).
foralltE[0,s]
n
(T(t)x,x) = Ennt, (Anx,x),
where the series converges absolutely; in particular, (T(.)x, x) is continuous on [0, s].
By symmetry of A, we clearly have (T(t)x, y) = (x, T(t)y) for all x, y E Dt.
We conclude that {T(t); t > 0} is a symmetric local semigroup. Let H be the
sel f adj oint operator associated with it as in Theorem 2.37. If x E D, then x E D.
for some s > 0, and
in
e-eHx = T(t)x := En Anx t' (11)
n!
H = (HID)- = (AID)- C A- = A,
and since A is symmetric and H is selfadjoint, it follows that
AcA*cH`=H,
i.e., A = H, so that A is indeed selfadjoint.I I II
If A is not assumed to be closed, the theorem applies to its closure A-, which
is closed and symmetric, and every analytic vector for A is certainly an analytic
vector for A-. We then have
122
F. LOCAL COSINE FAMILIES OF SYMMETRIC OPERATORS
U'= Au u(0) = X.
A result parallel to Theorem 2.37 for local cosine families of symmetric operators
in Hilbert space is stated below, first for the special case when all the operators
C(t) are bounded below, that is,
Condition (1) implies in particular that all the operators C(t) are symmetric. The
general case of a symmetric local cosine family is dealt with in Theorem 2.45.
Since no parallel to Widder's theorem [W1] is known for the cosine transform,
the proof will proceed differently.
123
2.43. THEOREM. Let D be a dense linear manifold in the (complex) Hilbert
space X, and let C(.) be a local cosine family of bounded below operators on D.
Then there exists a unique positive selfadjoint operator A such that
C(t)x = cosh(tA'/2)x
PROOF. Since C(t) is symmetric for each t, it is closable, and its closure C(t)-
clearly satisfies (i), (ii), and (1). We may then assume that C(.) is a local cosine
family of closed bounded below operators on D, replacing C(t) by C(t)- if needed
(by (i), the conclusion of the theorem remains unchanged).
Fix a sequence {hn) of non-negative C°°- functions on R, such that hn(t) = 0
for ItI > 1/n and ff hn(t)dt = 1.
Let x E D, and fix n(x) > 1/e(x). Denote
(ItI < en(x)). Let u > 0 be such that It + UI, It - uI < en(x) (for a given t such that
ItI < En(x)) By (3)
[C(t + u) + C(t - u) - 2C(t)]xn
124
j hn(s)C(s)[...]xds = hn(s)C(s)[2C(t)C(u) - 2C(t)]xds
J
_ hn(s)C(t)[2C(s)C(u) - 2C(s)]xds
r
= J hn(s)C(t)[C(s + u) + C(s - u) - 2C(s)]xds
In the last integral, integration extends over an interval where Iti, Ivi, Jt+vj, It-vj <
e(x), so that Conditions (i),(ii) imply that C(t)C(v)x is strongly continuous there
(as a function of v), and therefore
Writing y = C(t)xn for some n > n(x) and some t E [0, en(x)), we have
By (4), the last expression has a (strong) limit as u -+ 0, which we denote Aoy.
The operator Ao is linear on the dense domain D1, and positive (by (5) and (6)),
i.e.,
(Aoy, y) ? 0 (y E D1).
Let A be the Friedrichs selfadjoint extension of Ao (cf. Theorem XII.5.2 in [DS,II]),
and let E be its resolution of the identity. Denote E,n = E([0, m]) and An =
E,,,A = fo sE(ds) for m E N. Note that An, is a bounded positive (selfadjoint)
operator. Let xn E Do; for It! < en(x),
E,,,.C(t)xn, = cosh(tA7z2)E,,,xn =
for all x E D and Itl < e(x). The uniqueness of A is proved as follows. If B is also
a positive selfadjoint operator satisfying the identity in the theorem, and if E and
F are the resolutions of the identity for A and B respectively, then
Since I cosh z < cosh( 2z), the above identity (written in term of the corresponding
spectral integrals) extends analytically to t complex in the strip J*tj < e(x). In
particular for t E iR, we have cos(sA1/2)x = cos(sB1/2)x for all x E D, hence for
all x E X by density (since the operators are bounded), and for all s E R. Thus
126
for all x E X and s E R. By the uniqueness property of the cosine transform, it
follows that E = F, and therefore A = B.IIII
We consider next the general case of a local cosine family of symmetric operators.
The following notation will be used. If A is a selfadjoint operator, and E is its
resolution of the identity, we let
PROOF. Let J[x, y] := [y, -x]. Then J is unitary, J2 = I (the identity operator
on X2), and JD(T) = D(T). One verifies that
T - iI = J(T + iI)J.
Therefore
[ran (T - iI)]1 = J[ran (T + U)]-L.
This implies that T (which is obviously symmetric) has equal deficiency indices
(n_ = n+), and has therefore a selfadjoint extension (cf. [DS,II], Chapter XII).III]
for allxEDandlt]<e(x).
PROOF. As in the proof of Theorem 2.43, we may assume that each C(t) is
closed. With notation as in the proof of that theorem, we obtain the operator A0
defined on D1 (up to that point, the "bounded below" hypothesis was not used).
Since
(C(u)y - y, y) = (y, C(u)y - y) (y E D1, I uI < e '(y)),
127
it follows from (4) and (6) that A0, with the dense domain D1, is symmetric. Let A
be a selfadjoint extension of the operator A0 associated with AO (cf. Lemma 2.44),
and let E be its resolution of the identity. Consider the projections Em := E([0, co))
and the bounded positive selfadjoint operators Am := E,+nA for m E N.
For xn E Do, let
When m -; oo,
6+ (t) E([O, oo))[C (t)xn, o] Sn (t)
for Iti < en(x). In particular, nm(0) 6,+, (0), and cosh[t(A+)1/2]6ri (0) 6n (t)
by (9). Since cosh[...] is closed (it is selfadjoint!), it follows that 6n (0) belongs to
its domain, and
cosh[t(A+)1/27tn
Jb (0) = J0 cosh(tu1/2)E(du)[x,,,01
/00
= J0 cosh(tu112)[E(du)P][xn, 0] = cosh[t(A+)112]xn,
and similarly for the second term in (12) (we have identified [xn,0] with xn). Thus
The details of the proof are omitted. Note that if A is not assumed to be closed,
the conclusion is that A is essentially selfadjoint.
129
NOTES and REFERENCES
The standard books on semigroups are [D, G, HP, P], with chapters in general
texts like [DS I-III, Katl, RS].
The Hille-Yosida space. The terminology and Theorem 1.23 are from [K5].
Groups. Theorem 1.40 is from [N]. Theorem 1.41 is the classical Stone theorem.
Theorem 1.49 and the following analysis are from [K3].
Analyticity. Theorem 1.54 is from [Liu], but the short proof given here is new.
Non-commutative Taylor formula. The results of this section are from [K7].
131
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[Al] Arendt, W., Resolvent positive operators, Proc. London Math. Soc. 54
(1987), 321-349.
[A2] Arendt, W., Vector valued Laplace transforms and Cauchy problems, Israel
J. Math. 59 (1987), 327-352.
[Bo] Bochner, S., A theorem on Fourier-Stieltjes integrals, Bull. Amer. Math.
Soc. 40 (1934), 271-276.
[BZ1] Burnap, C. and Zweifel, P.F., A note on the spectral theorem, Integral
Equations and Oper. Theory 9 (1986), 305-324.
[BZ2] Burnap, C. and Zweifel, P.F., Cauchy problems involving non-selfadjoint
operators, Appl. Anal. 25 (1987), 301-318.
[Cl] Chernoff, P.R., Note on product formulas for operator semigroups, J. Funct.
Anal. 2 (1968), 238-242.
[C2] Chernoff, P.R., Product formulas, nonlinear semigroups, and addition of
unbounded operators, Memoir Amer. Math. Soc. 140' Providence, R.I., 1974.
[DP] Da Prato, G., Semigruppi regolarizzabili, Ricerche Mat. 15 (1966), 223-248.
(1966), 2
[D] E.B. Davies, One-Parameter Semigroups, Academic Press, London, 1980.
[DPg] Davies, E.B. and Pang, M.M., The Cauchy problem and a generalization
of the Hille-Yosida theorem, Proc. London Math. Soc. 55 (1987), 181-208.
[DL1] deLaubenfels, R., C-semigroups and the Cauchy problem, J. Funct. Anal.
111 (1993), 44-61.
[DL2] deLaubenfels, R., C-semigroups and strongly continuous semigroups, Israel
J. Math. 81 (1993), 227-255.
[DL3] deLaubenfels, R., Integrated semigroups, C-semigroups, and
the Abstract Cauchy problem, Semigroup Forum, to appear.
[DL4] deLaubenfels, R., Existence Families, Functional Calculi, and Evolution
Equations, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, Vol. 1570, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-
Heidelberg-New York, 1994.
[DLK] deLaubenfels, R. and Kantorovitz, S., Laplace and Laplace-Stieltjes space,
J. Funct. Anal. 116 (1993), 1-61.
[DLK1] deLaubenfels, R. and Kantorovitz, S., The semi-simplicity manifold on
arbitrary Banach spaces, J. Funct. Analysis, to appear.
[De] Devinatz, A., A note on semi-groups of unbounded self-adjoint operators,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 5 (1954), 101-102.
132
[DS I-III] Dunford, N. and Schwartz, J.T., Linear Operators, Part I-III, Inter-
science, New York, 1958, 1963, 1971.
[F1] Faris, W.G., The product formula for semigroups defined by Friedrichs
extensions, Pac. J. Math. 22 (1967), 47-70.
[F2] Faris, W.G., Self-adjoint Operators, Lecture Notes in Math. Vol. 433,
Springer, Berlin, 1975.
[Fat] Fattorini, H.O., The Abstract Cauchy Problem, Addison Wesley, Reading,
Mass., 1983.
[Fr] Frohlich, J., Unbounded symmetric semigroups on a separable Hilbert space
are essentially selfadjoint, Adv. Appl. Math. 1 (1980), 237-256.
[G] Goldstein, J.A., Semigroups of Operators and Applications, Oxford, New
York, 1985.
[HiK] Hieber, M. and Kellermann, H., Integrated semigroups, J. Funct. Anal.
84 (1989), 160-180.
[HP] Hille, E. and Phillips, R.S., Functional Analysis and Semigroups, Amer.
Math. Soc. Colloquium Publ. 31, Providence, R.I., 1957.
[H1] Hughes, R.J., Semigroups of unbounded linear operators in Banach space,
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 230 (1977), 113-145.
[H2] Hughes, R.J., On the convergence of unbounded sequences of semigroups,
J. London Math. Soc. (2), 16 (1977), 517-528.
[H3] Hughes, R.J., A version of the Trotter product formula for quadratic-form
perturbations, J. London Math. Soc. (2), 30 (1984), 322-334.
[HK] Hughes, R.J. and Kantorovitz, S., Boundary values of holomorphic semi-
groups of unbounded operators and similarity of certain perturbations, J. Funct.
Anal. 29 (1978), 253-273.
[Kl] Kantorovitz, S., The semi-simplicity manifold of arbitrary operators, Trans.
Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1966), 241-252.
[K2] Kantorovitz, S., Characterization of unbounded spectral operators with
spectrum in a half-line, Comment. Math. Helvetici 56 (1981), 163-178.
[K3] Kantorovitz, S., Spectrality criteria for unbounded operators with real spec-
trum, Math. Ann. 256 (1981), 19-28.
[K4] Kantorovitz, S., Spectral Theory of Banach Space Operators, Lecture Notes
in Math., Vol. 1012, Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg- New York, 1983.
[K5] Kantorovitz, S., The Hille-Yosida space of an arbitrary operator, J. Math.
Anal. Appl. 138 (1988),107-111.
[K6] Kantorovitz, S., Sur le calcul fonctionnel dans les algebres de Banach, C.R.
Acad. Sci. Paris, 317 (1993), 951-953.
[K7] Kantorovitz, S., C"-operational calculus, non-commutative Taylor formula,
and perturbation of semigroups, J. Funct. Anal. 113 (1993), 139-152.
[K8] Kantorovitz, S., On Liu's analyticity criterion for semigroups, Semigroup
Forum, to appear.
133
[KH1] Kantorovitz, S. and Hughes, R.J., Spectral representation of local semi-
groups, Math. Ann. 259 (1982), 455-470.
[KH2] Kantorovitz, S. and Hughes, R.J., Spectral representation for unbounded
operators with real spectrum, Math. Ann. 282 (1988), 535-544.
[KH3] Kantorovitz, S. and Hughes, R.J., Spectral analysis of certain operator
functions, J. Operator Theory 22 (1989), 243-262.
[Katl] Kato, T., Perturbation Theory for Linear Operators, Springer- Verlag,
New York, 1966.
[Kat2] Kato, T., A characterization of holomorphic semigroups, Proc. Amer.
Math. Soc. 25 (1970), 495-498.
[Kat3] Kato, T., Trotter's product formula for an arbitrary pair of self-adjoint
contraction semigroups, Topics in Functional Analysis, Adv. in Math. Supplemen-
tary Studies I, Acad. Press, New York, 1978 (185-195).
[KL] Klein, A. and Landau, L.J., Construction of a unique selfadjoint generator
for a symmetric local semigroup, J. Funct. Anal. 44 (1981), 121-137.
[L] Lions, J.L., Semi-groupes distributions, Portugalae Math. 19 (1960), 141-164.
[Liu] Liu, Y., An equivalent condition for analytic C,, semigroups, J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 180 (1993), 71-78.
[Ml] Miyadera, I., On the generators of exponentially bounded C-semigroups,
Proc. Japan Acad. 62 (1986), 239-242.
[M2] Miyadera, I., A generalization of the Hille-Yosida theorem, Proc. Japan
Acad. 64 (1988), 223-226.
[MT1] Miyadera,I. and Tanaka, N., Exponentially bounded C-semigroups and
integrated semigroups, Tokyo J. Math. 12 (1989), 99-115.
[MT2] Miyadera, I. and Tanaka, N., Exponentially bounded C-semigroups and
generation of semigroups, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 143 (1989). 358-378.
[MT3] Miyadera, I. and Tanaka, N., A remark on exponentially bounded C-
semigroups, Proc. Japan Acad. Ser. A 66 (1990), 31-35.
[N] Nagy, B.Sz., On uniformly bounded linear transformations in Hilbert space,
Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 11 (1947), 152-157.
[Nell Nelson, E., Analytic vectors, Ann. Math. 70 (1959), 572-615.
[Neu] Neubrander, F., Integrated semigroups and their application to the ab-
stract Cauchy problem, Pacific J. Math. 135 (1988), 111-155.
[Nus] Nussbaum, A.E., Spectral representation of certain one-parameter families
of symmetric operators in Hilbert space, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 152 (1970),
419-429.
[P] Pazy, A., Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Dif-
ferential Equations, Springer, New York, 1983.
[RS] Reed, M. and Simon, B., Methods of Modern Mathematical Physics II,
Acad. Press, New York, 1975.
[Rl] Rudin, W., Real and Complex Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1966.
134
[R2] Rudin, W., Fourier Analysis on Groups, Interscience Publishers, New York,
1962.
[SW] Stein, E.M. and Weiss, G., Introduction to Fourier Analysis on Euclidean
Space, Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1971.
[Ti] Tanaka, N., On the exponentially bounded C-semigroups, Tokyo J. Math.
10 (1987), 107-117.
[T2] Tanaka, N., Holomorphic C-semigroups and holomorphic semigroups, Semi-
group Forum 38 (1989), 253-263.
[Tr] Trotter, H.F., Approximation of semi-groups of operators, Pacific J. Math.
8 (1958), 887-919.
[W1] Widder, D.V., Necessary and sufficient conditions for the representation
of a function by a doubly infinite Laplace integral, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 40
(1934), 321-326.
[W] Widder, D.V., The Laplace Transform, Princeton University Press, Prince-
ton, 1941.
135
ABOUT THIS VOLUME
This Research Note presents some aspects of the theory of semigroups of
operators, mostly from the point of view of its interaction with spectral theory.
In order to make it self-contained, a concise description of the the basic theory
of semigroups, with complete proofs, is included in Part I. Some of the author's
recent results, such as the construction of the Hille-Yosida space for general
operators. the semi-simplicity manifold, and a Taylor formula for semigroups as
functions of their generator. are also included in Part 1.
Part II describes recent generalizations (most of them in book form for the
first time), including pre-semigroups, semi-simplicity manifolds in situations
more general than that considered in Part I. semigroups of unbounded
symmetric operators. and an analogous result on "local cosine families" and
semi-analytic vectors. It is hoped that the book will inspire more research in
this field.
LM7778
A
AAA ISBN 0-582-27778-7
NOR LONGMAN
Copublished in the United States with
John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York
0-470-23561-6 (USA only) 9 780582 277786