Skip to main content
13 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Jan 8, 2023 at 10:23 comment added S Argyros I also add a Remark in my last answer concerning your Theorem.
Jan 8, 2023 at 9:42 comment added S Argyros Yes I mean" strongly suggests"
Jan 8, 2023 at 0:44 comment added Bill Johnson Right, if by "indicates" you mean "suggests". In the example I was looking at $X/Y=c_0(\Gamma)$, which of course has a separable quotient.
Jan 7, 2023 at 21:51 comment added S Argyros Bill, your theorem is strong and indicates that the problem that every separable subspace of a Banach space is quasi complemented has a positive solution. In the example you mention $c_0$ is indeed quasi complemented.
Jan 7, 2023 at 16:40 comment added Bill Johnson (Continued) Thinking along these lines reminded me of a Pacific J. Math. paper I wrote in 1972 titled "Quasi-complements", where I improved some results of James and do some other things. In Theorem 2, I showed that if $Y^*$ is weak$^*$ separable and $X/Y$ has a separable quotient, then $Y$ is quasi-complemented in $X$. I mentioned in the paper that the result was due to Lindenstrauss and Rosenthal [unpublished]. (After I told Haskell I had proved this, he informed me that both he and Joram had observed the same thing. I guess neither thought it worth publishing.)
Jan 7, 2023 at 16:18 comment added Bill Johnson Spyros, I thought there might be example by taking $X$ to be the closure in $\ell_\infty$ of $c_0$ and the characteristic functions of an uncountable almost disjoint family of infinite subsets of the natural numbers (which can be given by branches of a tree, as in the examples you mentioned). Here also $Y=c_0$, but $Y^\perp$ is $\ell_1$ saturated. Nevertheless, Rosenthal's construction yields that there is a non separable closed subspace of $X$ that intersects $Y$ trivially (and maybe is even a quasi-complement of $Y$, but I did not verify that). (TBC)
Jan 6, 2023 at 11:45 comment added S Argyros Bill, thank you very much for pointing out to me the $ 𝑙_1$ case. I believe that it is correct but it needs much more explanation. The 𝑤∗ closure of $𝑙_1 $ is one point but also how we adapt Haskell' s proof is another one. I will try to write an answer discussing this matter
Jan 6, 2023 at 11:38 history edited S Argyros CC BY-SA 4.0
deleted 5 characters in body
Jan 5, 2023 at 23:04 comment added Bill Johnson Spyros, by "I think that the result remains valid if $Y_\perp$ contains $\ell_1$" do you mean "$Y_\perp$ contains a weak$^*$ closed subspace that is isomorphic to $\ell_1$?"
Jan 5, 2023 at 13:04 history edited S Argyros CC BY-SA 4.0
added 241 characters in body
Jan 5, 2023 at 12:46 history edited S Argyros CC BY-SA 4.0
added 404 characters in body
Jan 5, 2023 at 11:24 history edited S Argyros CC BY-SA 4.0
added 111 characters in body
Jan 5, 2023 at 10:50 history answered S Argyros CC BY-SA 4.0