MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I am wondering whether $\ell^\infty(\mathbb N)$ has the Radon-Nikodým property. Of course $\ell^1(\mathbb N)$ does, but I was unable to find out whether (e.g.) duals of spaces with the R-N property have the R-N property themselves.

Thank you in advance.

UPDATE: A Banach space is Asplund if and only if its dual has the Radon-Nikodým property. On the other hand, a separable space is Asplund if and only if its dual is separable, too. This rules out the possibility that $\ell^\infty(\mathbb N)$ has the R-N property. But is there any other (more) elementary argument for this assertion?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 6 down vote accepted

Since a closed subspace of a space with RNP clearly also has RNP, in order to get the requested elementary example, it suffices to display a measure on the unit interval with values in $c_0$ which is absolutely continuous with respect to Lebesgue measure but whose derivative does not take its values there. This can be done via the usual trick with the sequence $\frac 1 n \cos n x$. I guess this example is in the classical text by Diestel and Uhl which is probably still the best reference for the RNP.

share|cite|improve this answer

For dual spaces, there is an important characterization: $X^*$ has the Radon-Nikodym property if and only if $X$ is Asplund (its separable subspaces have separable duals). Of course, $\ell_1$ is not Asplund.

share|cite|improve this answer
(I see the update just after posting) – Pietro Majer May 7 '13 at 17:52
Uh, thanks a lot. I found exactly the same answer simultaneously. I am not familiar with the theory of Asplund spaces, so why is $\ell^1$ "obviously" no Asplund space? For the reason I mention or is there some simpler explanation? – Delio Mugnolo May 7 '13 at 17:54
Separable dual spaces are ok (Dunford-Pettis theorem). – András Bátkai May 7 '13 at 18:00
András, I do not understand this comment, either. This shows that $\ell^1$ has the R-N property, of course. But why does anything about $\ell^\infty$, or weighted version thereof, follow? – Delio Mugnolo May 8 '13 at 4:34
$l^\infty$ has a subspace isometric to $l^1$. Indeed $l^\infty$ has a subspace isometric to any given separable space. – Gerald Edgar May 8 '13 at 12:42

See Proposition 1.2.9 in Arendt-Batty-Hieber-Neubrander. (I look at the first edition now)

share|cite|improve this answer
András, I am not sure I understand. That Proposition is about $c_0$, right? – Delio Mugnolo May 8 '13 at 4:33
See the later answer by jbc. – András Bátkai May 8 '13 at 5:59

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.