From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.science.mathematics.categories/3738 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Yemon Choi" Newsgroups: gmane.science.mathematics.categories Subject: Re: C*-algebras Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 22:26:00 -0500 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1241019492 10076 80.91.229.2 (29 Apr 2009 15:38:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:38:12 +0000 (UTC) To: cat-dist@mta.ca Original-X-From: rrosebru@mta.ca Sun Apr 29 22:19:54 2007 -0300 Return-path: Envelope-to: categories-list@mta.ca Delivery-date: Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:19:54 -0300 Original-Received: from Majordom by mailserv.mta.ca with local (Exim 4.61) (envelope-from ) id 1HiKRq-0005zx-L4 for categories-list@mta.ca; Sun, 29 Apr 2007 22:13:02 -0300 Content-Disposition: inline Original-Sender: cat-dist@mta.ca Precedence: bulk X-Keywords: X-UID: 25 Original-Lines: 33 Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.science.mathematics.categories:3738 Archived-At: I'm not an expert but I don't think there is a `right one', it depends on what you want to do with your C*-algebras. The maximal C*-norm has better universal properties than the minimal one (it seems) but the resulting C*-algebra is then somewhat hard to get at. Actually, I'm not sure what significance the tensor product of _algebras_ (as opposed to _modules_) has. Of course for commutative unital algebras this is the coproduct, but commutative C*-algebras have unique C*-tensor norms anyway. On 28/04/07, Bas Spitters wrote: > It seems hard to find references to a categorical treatment of > C*-algebras. Concretely, there are several tensor products on > C*-algebras. Which one is `the right one' from a categorical perspective? > > Thanks, > > Bas Spitters > > -- Dr. Y. Choi 519 Machray Hall Department of Mathematics University of Manitoba Winnipeg. Manitoba Canada R3T 2N2