Given complete, locally convex Hausdorff vector spaces $E$ and $F$, let $$ E \otimes_i F, \qquad E \otimes_\pi F$$ denote the (completed) inductive and projective tensor products respectively. The inductive (resp. projective) tensor product has the universal property for separately (resp. jointly) continuous bilinear maps out of $E \times F$. By the universal property, there is a continuous linear map $$E \otimes_i F \to E \otimes_\pi F.$$ If $E$ and $F$ are Frechet, then this map is an isomorphism. This is because separate and joint continuity coincide in this case. I am interested in knowing if this map is an isomorphism in situations where the hypotheses on $E$ are strengthened and the hypotheses on $F$ are relaxed.

More specifically, I am interested in the case $E = C^\infty(M)$, the nuclear Frechet space of smooth functions on a compact manifold $M$. In this case, $$C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F \cong C^\infty(M,F),$$ the space of smooth functions on $M$ with values in $F$. So I would like to know what hypotheses, if any, are needed on $F$ to ensure that $$C^\infty(M) \otimes_i F \to C^\infty(M,F)$$ is an isomorphism. For example, is it an isomorphism if $F$ is an $LF$-space, that is, an inductive limit of Frechet spaces?


If you mean by LF-space a strict inductive limit of Frechet spaces (as it was done by Dieudonne and Schwartz) I think the answer is yes.

Here is what I believe could be made a proof: Since the inductive tensor product respects inductive limits you have $C^\infty(M) \otimes_i F = \lim C^\infty(M) \otimes_i F_n$ if $F= \lim F_n$ is a strict LF-space. Since $F_n$ is a closed topological subspace of $F$ you get that $C^\infty(M) \otimes_i F_n = C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F_n$ and this implies that $C^\infty(M) \otimes_i F = \lim C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F_n$ is a dense topological subspace of $C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F$. On the other hand, it is complete because it remains strict (as for as I remember this is due either to Dieudnne-Schwartz or to Köthe).

EDIT: Sorry, I confused the Frechet case with the DF case -- only in the latter case $\lim E \otimes_\pi F_n$ is a topological subspace of $E\otimes_\pi \lim F_n$.

For strict LF-spaces the answer to your question was already given in Grothendieck's thesis (part I, page 47): If E is a proper (non-normable) Frechet space and $F=\lim F_n$ is a strict inductive limit with a strictly increasing sequence $F_n$ then $\lim E\otimes_\pi F_n$ is NEVER a topological subspace of $E \otimes_\pi \lim F_n$.

On the other hand, if the nuclear Frechet space $E$ has a continuous norm (as it is the case for $C^\infty(M)$) and $F=\lim F_n$ is a strict LF-space then $\lim E\otimes_\pi F_n = E\otimes_\pi F$ holds algebraically:

The latter space is the space of all continuous linear operators $T$ from $E'$ to $F$ and the former of those operators with values in some $F_n$. But $E'$ contains a bounded set (the polar of the $0$-neighborhood corresponding to the continuous norm) which is total, i.e., its linear span is dense in $E'$. For any continuous $T$ the bounded set $T(B)$ is contained in some $F_n$ (by the so called regularity of strict LF-spaces) and since $F_n$ is closed in $F$ one gets from the continuity $T(E') \subseteq \overline{[T(B)]} \subseteq F_n$.

There might be non-strict inductive limits where $\lim E \otimes_\pi F_n = E\otimes_\pi\lim F_n$ holds topologically but I do not know an example since both, the algebraic and the topological, conditions are very restrictive. If $F$ is the dual of a nuclear Frechet space $X$ then the arguments above should show that the algebraic coincidence is equivalent to $L(X,E) = LB(X,E)$, the space of all operators from mapping some $0$-neighborhood of $X$ into a bounded subset of $E$. This situation has been investigated by Vogt, J. Reine Angew. Math. 345 (1983), 182–200, and it implies Ext$^1(E,X)=0$. On the other hand, I believe results of Grothendieck and Vogt yield that the topological coincidence implies Ext$^1(X,E)=0$. If $X$ and $E$ are both power series spaces these conditions contradict each other.

In conclusion: The topological equality $C^\infty(M) \otimes_i F = C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F$ seems very unlikely whenever $F$ is not a Frechet space.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the reply. I think I am content with dealing with the LF case, and yes, I meant strict inductive limit. So if I understand correctly, the key is to see that the obvious map $\lim C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F_n \to C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F$ is a homeomorphism onto its image. This is certainly the case for the maps $C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F_n \to C^\infty(M) \otimes_\pi F$ by the properties of the injective tensor product and the nuclearity of $C^\infty(M)$. Is it automatic that the induced map from the inductive limit is a homeomorphism onto its image? $\endgroup$ – Allan Yashinski Mar 7 '13 at 20:46
  • $\begingroup$ After thinking about this some more, it seems to me that a proof of this would have to use compactness of $M$, and not just the fact that $C^\infty(M)$ is Frechet and nuclear. If we consider the case $F = \oplus F_n$, a topological direct sum of Frechet spaces, then $C^\infty(\mathbb{R}) \otimes_i (\oplus F_n) \cong \oplus C^\infty(\mathbb{R}, F_n)$ is strictly smaller than $C^\infty(\mathbb{R}) \otimes_\pi (\oplus F_n) \cong C^\infty(\mathbb{R}, \oplus F_n)$. $\endgroup$ – Allan Yashinski Mar 7 '13 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ @Allan: You are right, my answer was not correct. I hope that the new answer is better. $\endgroup$ – Jochen Wengenroth Mar 11 '13 at 16:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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