nLab
von Neumann algebra

Definition

A von Neumann algebra is a unital $*$-subalgebra of the algebra of bounded operators on a complex Hilbert space, which is closed in weak operator topology. Clearly, they are automatically closed in norm topology, hence they form a (particularly nice) class of $C^{*}$-algebras.

Relevance

The Gel’fand–Naimark theorem? states that there is a contravariant equivalence between the category of commutative von Neumann algebras and the category of localizable measurable spaces; that is, the opposite category of one is equivalent to the other. General von Neumann algebras are seen then as a ‘noncommutative’ measurable spaces in a sense analogous to noncommutative geometry.

The importance of von Neumann algebras for (higher) category theory and topology lays in the evidence that von Neumann algebras are deeply connected with the low dimensional quantum field theory (2d CFT, TQFT in low dimensions, inclusions of factors, quantum groups and knot theory; elliptic cohomology: works of Wenzl, Vaughan Jones, Anthony Wasserman, Kerler, Kawahigashi, Ocneanu, Szlachanyi etc.).

The highlights of their structure theory include the results on classification of factors (A. Connes, 1970s) and theory of inclusions of subfactors (V. Jones). (Hilbert) bimodules over von Neumann algebras have a remarkable tensor product due Connes (Connes fusion). Following Segal’s manifesto

• Graeme Segal, Elliptic cohomology (after Landweber-Stong, Ochanine, Witten, and others). Séminaire Bourbaki, Vol. 1987/88. Astérisque No. 161-162 (1988), Exp. No. 695, 4, 187–201 (1989).

and its update

• G. Segal, What is an elliptic object? Elliptic cohomology, 306–317, London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser., 342, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, 2007.

on hypothetical connections between CFT and elliptic cohomology, Stolz and Teichner have made a case for a role von Neumann algebras seem to play in a partial realization of that program:

• S. Stolz and P. Teichner, What is an elliptic object? (pdf)

See also the Wikipedia entry entry for more on von Neumann algebras and a list of references and links.

Remarks

• Von Neumann algebras may also be defined abstractly as (abstract) $C^{*}$-algebras with a predual.

• Von Neumann algebras are also sometimes called $W^{*}$-algebras; they should not be confused with $W$-algebras in (logarithmic) conformal field theory.

• Combining the previous two remarks, some authors use ‘$W^{*}$-algebra’ for the abstract concept and ‘von Neumann algebra’ for the concrete concept. Equivalently, then, a von Neumann algebra is a $W^{*}$-algebra equipped with a free action on a Hilbert space (and it's a theorem that any $W^{*}$-algebra may be so equipped).

Tim van Beek: I’m confused by the remarks, to my knowledge, the situation is this: $W^{*}$-algebra is the abstract concept, von Neumann algebra is the concrete concept, meaning that the definition of a von Neumann algebra needs a Hilbert space $\mathscr{H}$, so that it can be defined as a e.g. weakly closed subalgebra of $ℒ(\mathscr{H})$, the algebra of all bounded linear operators on $\mathscr{H}$. Without the Hilbert space you can’t say what the weak topology should be.

According to

• Schaefer, Helmut H.; Wolff, M.P.: Topological vector spaces. 2nd ed., Springer 1999 (ZMATH entry)

the situation is then this:

Definition: A $W^{*}$-algebra is a $C^{*}$-algebra whose underlying normed space is a dual Banach space.

Theorem: Every $W^{*}$-algebra is $W^{*}$-isomorphic to a von Neumann algebra (“on a suitable Hilbert space” is added in corollary 3 in paragraph 7.1, which is redundant however) and vice versa.

Any objections to change the remarks accordingly?