1
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be a separable Banach space and $1<p<\infty$. We say that a sequence $(x_{n})_{n}$ in $X$ is weakly $p$-convergent to $x\in X$ if the sequence $(x_{n}-x)_{n}$ is weakly $p$-summable. A subset $K$ of $X$ is said to be relatively weakly $p$-compact if $K$ is contained in $S(B_{l_{p^{*}}})$ for some operator $S$ from $l_{p^{*}}$ into $X(\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{p^{*}}=1)$. My question is: A subset $K$ of $X$ is relatively weakly $p$-compact if and only if every sequence in $K$ admits a weakly $p$-convergent subsequence? Thank you.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ You should add that $X$ is separable or replace "$B_{\ell_p^*}$" by "$B_{\ell_p^*(\Gamma)}$ for some $\Gamma$". $\endgroup$ Nov 15, 2015 at 15:49
  • $\begingroup$ Is my question is true if $X$ is separable? $\endgroup$ Nov 15, 2015 at 16:00

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

The answer is no even for separable $X$. Let $X=(\sum_{n=1}^\infty \ell_1^n)_{p^*}$. $B_X$ has your $p$-subsequence property (same argument as for the unit ball of $\ell_{p^*}$). It is not relatively weakly $p$-compact because $X$ is not isomorphic to a quotient space of $\ell_{p^*}$.

$\endgroup$
6
  • $\begingroup$ If $B_{X}$ is relatively weakly $p$-compact, then it seems that $X$ is only isomorphic to a complemented subspace of a quotient of $l_{p^{*}}$. Moreover, I do not understand why $X$ is not isomorphic to a quotient of $l_{p^{*}}$. $\endgroup$ Nov 16, 2015 at 15:27
  • $\begingroup$ If $TB_Y \supset B_X$ then $T$ is surjective and $X$ is isomorphic to quotient of $Y$. What is there not to understand? $\endgroup$ Nov 16, 2015 at 16:18
  • $\begingroup$ If $X$ is isomorphic to a quotient of $Y$, then $X^*$ is isomorphic to a subspace of $Y^*$. That is not the case here--the relevant $Y$ is super reflexive and the relevant $X$ is not. $\endgroup$ Nov 16, 2015 at 16:21
  • $\begingroup$ Does every sequence in $B_{c_{0}}$ admit a weakly $1$-summable subsequence? $\endgroup$ Nov 16, 2015 at 22:55
  • $\begingroup$ I guess you mean weakly 1-convergent rather than weakly 1-summable. The answer is no; consider the summing basis for $c_0$. $\endgroup$ Nov 17, 2015 at 22:44

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.