<oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
<dc:title>Operator subspaces of $\mathcal{L}(H)$ with induced matrix orderings</dc:title>
<dc:creator>Chi-Keung Ng</dc:creator>
<dc:subject>46L07</dc:subject><dc:subject>47L25</dc:subject><dc:subject>operator spaces</dc:subject><dc:subject>operator systems</dc:subject><dc:subject>matrix orderings</dc:subject><dc:subject>injectivity</dc:subject>
<dc:description>In this paper, we study (possibly non-self-adjoint) subspaces of $\mathcal{L}(H)$ together with the induced partially defined involutions and the sequence $\{M_n(X)\}_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ of ordered normed spaces. These are called &quot;non-self-adjoint OSs&quot;. Two particular concerns are the abstract characterization of non-self-adjoint OSs and the injectivity in the category of non-self-adjoint OSs (known as &quot;MOS-injectivity&quot;). In order to define MOS-injectivity, we need the notion of &quot;unitalization&quot; and &quot;MOS-subspace&quot;. We show that in the case of an operator algebra $A$ (which is a non-self-adjoint OS), its unitalization coincides with another unitalization defined in [D.P. Blecher and C. Le Merdy, \textit{Operator Algebras and Their Modules---an Operator Space Approach}, London Mathematical Society Monographs, New Series, vol. 30, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004] if and only if a form of Stinespring dilation theorem holds for $A$. On the other hand, through the study of injective objects, we define &quot;MOS-injective envelopes&quot; and &quot;MOS-$C^{*}$-envelopes&quot; of non-self-adjoint OSs. It is interesting to note that in the case of a unital operator space $V$ (which is a non-self-adjoint OS), its &quot;MOS-injective envelope&quot; need not coincide with the ordinary injective envelope $V_{\mathrm{inj}}$ (they are the same if $V$ is an operator system), but one can identify $V_{\mathrm{inj}}$ with the MOS-injective envelope of a unital operator system associated with $V$. Similarly, the &quot;MOS-$C^{*}$-envelope&quot; of an operator algebra $A$ need not be the same as the ordinary $C^{*}$-envelope $C^{*}(A)$, but one can recover $C^{*}(A)$ as the MOS-$C^{*}$-envelope of a unital operator system associated with $A$.</dc:description>
<dc:publisher>Indiana University Mathematics Journal</dc:publisher>
<dc:date>2011</dc:date>
<dc:type>text</dc:type>
<dc:format>pdf</dc:format>
<dc:identifier>10.1512/iumj.2011.60.4159</dc:identifier>
<dc:source>10.1512/iumj.2011.60.4159</dc:source>
<dc:language>en</dc:language>
<dc:relation>Indiana Univ. Math. J. 60 (2011) 577 - 610</dc:relation>
<dc:coverage>state-of-the-art mathematics</dc:coverage>
<dc:rights>http://iumj.org/access/</dc:rights>
</oai_dc:dc>