Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×

Online ordering will be unavailable from 17:00 GMT on Friday, April 25 until 17:00 GMT on Sunday, April 27 due to maintenance. We apologise for the inconvenience.

  1. Home
  2. Search

Refine search

Refine search

Access:
Content type:
Publication date:
Apply   From and To filters
Subject: Show more
Journals Show more
Publishers: Show more
Societies Show more
Series: Show more
Collections: Show more

Actions for selected content:

Select all | Deselect all
  • View selected items
  • Export citations
  • Download PDF (zip)
  • Save to Kindle
  • Save to Dropbox
  • Save to Google Drive

Save Search

You can save your searches here and later view and run them again in "My saved searches".

Please provide a title, maximum of 40 characters.
Cancel
×

1 results

  • On equivalence of two approaches in index theory

  • V. Manuilov
  • Journal:
    Journal of K-Theory / Volume 2 / Issue 3 / December 2008
    Published online by Cambridge University Press:
    05 March 2008, pp. 445-452
    Print publication:
    December 2008

  • The algebra Ψ(M) of order zero pseudodifferential operators on a compact manifold M defines a well-known C*-extension of the algebra C(S*M) of continuous functions on the cospherical bundle S*M ⊂ T*M by the algebra К of compact operators. In his proof of the index theorem, Higson defined and used an asymptotic homomorphism T from C0(T*M) to К, which plays the role of a deformation for the commutative algebra C0(T*M). Similar constructions exist also for operators and symbols with coefficients in a C*-algebra. Recently we have shown that the image of the above extension under the Connes–Higson construction is T and that this extension can be reconstructed out of T. That is why the classical approach to the index theory coincides with the one based on asymptotic homomorphisms. But the image of the above extension is defined only outside the zero section of T*(M), so it may seem that the information encoded in the extension is not the same as that in the asymptotic homomorphism. We show that this is not the case.