5
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be an infinite dimensional Banach space. Let $\Lambda_{0}$ be the set of all finite dimensional subspaces of $X$ directed by the inclusion $\subseteq$. For each $\alpha\in \Lambda_{0}$, let $I_{\alpha}:=\{\beta\in\Lambda_{0}:\alpha\subseteq \beta\}$. Then $\{I_{\alpha}:\alpha\in \Lambda_{0}\}$ is a filter basis and hence is contained in some ultrafilter $\mathcal{U}$.

For an infinite dimensional Banach space $Y$, let $(Y^{*})_{\mathcal{U}}$ be the ultrapower of $Y^{*}$ with respect to $\mathcal{U}$. Let $\widehat{Y}$ be the subspace of $(Y^{*})_{\mathcal{U}}$ defined by $$\widehat{Y}:=\{(y^{*}_{\alpha})_{\mathcal{U}}\in (Y^{*})_{\mathcal{U}}:w^{*}-\lim_{\mathcal{U}}y^{*}_{\alpha}=0\}.$$ For an operator $T:Y\rightarrow X$, we define $\widehat{T}:\widehat{X}\rightarrow \widehat{Y}$ by $\widehat{T}((x^{*}_{\alpha})_{\mathcal{U}})=(T^{*}x^{*}_{\alpha})_{\mathcal{U}}.$ It is easy to see that $\widehat{T}=0$ if $T$ is compact.

Question 1. Is $T$ compact if $\widehat{T}=0$?

Question 2. Let $K$ be a compact, convex and balanced subset of $B_{X}$ and let $\epsilon>0$. We set $A:=K+\epsilon B_{X}$ and define the gauge of $A$ by $$\|x\|_{A}:=\inf\{t>0:x\in tA\}, \quad x\in X.$$ It is easy to see that $$\epsilon\|x\|_{A}\leq \|x\|\leq (1+\epsilon)\|x\|_{A}, \quad x\in X.$$ We set $Y:=(X,\|\cdot\|_{A})$ and let $j:Y\rightarrow X$ be the formal identity. Is there a constant $C$ such that $\|\widehat{j}\|\leq C\cdot \epsilon$?

Thanks!

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Are you asking because you are thinking about following up on a lemma in my paper with March Boedihardjo? $\endgroup$ – Bill Johnson Jun 13 '20 at 18:58
  • $\begingroup$ Yes. I want to improve Theorem 2.1 in your paper with March Boedihardjo and characterize the bounded compact approximation property. $\endgroup$ – Dongyang Chen Jun 14 '20 at 0:16
5
$\begingroup$

The answer to question 1 is yes.

Suppose that $T^*B_{X^*}$ is not compact. Since it is norm closed, there is $\epsilon >0$ and an infinite subset $S$ of $B_{X^*}$ so that $\|T^{*}x_1^*-T^{*}x_2^*\| > \epsilon$ for all $x_1^*\not= x_2^*$ in $S$. Let $x^*$ be any weak$^*$ limit point of $S$. For $\alpha$ in $\Lambda_0$ pick $x_\alpha^*$ in $S$ with $T^*x^*_\alpha \not= T^*x^*$ so that $\|x^* - x_\alpha^*\|_\alpha < 1/\dim \alpha$, where $\|z^*\|:= \|z^*_{|\alpha}\|$. Then by the choice of $\Lambda_0$, $x^*_\alpha \to x^*$ weak$^*$ and hence $\widehat{T}(x^{*}_\alpha -x^{*})_\alpha =0$, which means $\|T^*x_\alpha^* - T^*x^*\| \to 0$. Since $S$ is $\epsilon$-separated, this forces $T^*x_\alpha^* = T^*x^*$ eventually, which is a contradiction.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, Bill. I think that in you answer, $\|T^{*}x^{*}-T^{*}x^{*}_{\alpha}\|_{\alpha}<1/\textrm{dim} \alpha$ should be $\|x^{*}-x^{*}_{\alpha}\|_{\alpha}<1/\textrm{dim} \alpha$. $\endgroup$ – Dongyang Chen Jun 15 '20 at 1:54
  • $\begingroup$ Moreover, I think that for each $\alpha$, we can pick $x^{*}_{\alpha}\in S$ such that $\|T^{*}x^{*}_{\alpha}-T^{*}x^{*}\|\geq \frac{\epsilon}{2}$. Can we do it? $\endgroup$ – Dongyang Chen Jun 15 '20 at 2:04
  • $\begingroup$ Yes; sorry for the typo. I'll fix it. $\endgroup$ – Bill Johnson Jun 15 '20 at 2:53
  • $\begingroup$ But I am not sure that we can pick $x^{*}_{\alpha}\in S$ such that $\|T^{*}x^{*}_{\alpha}-T^{*}x^{*}\|\geq \epsilon/2$ for all $\alpha$. $\endgroup$ – Dongyang Chen Jun 15 '20 at 3:10
2
$\begingroup$

The answer to question 2 is yes.

The proof you already know since you proved that $T$ compact implies $\hat{T}$ is zero. (For someone who has not thought about this, it is immediate from the elementary fact that a bounded net in $X^*$ that converges to zero weak$^*$ must converge uniformly to zero on compact subsets of $X$.) So if $(x^*_\alpha)_\alpha$ is in $\widehat{X}$ with $\sup \|x_\alpha^\alpha \| \le 1$ and $x^*_\alpha \to 0$ weak$^*$, then $x^*_\alpha \to 0$ uniformly on $K$. Since the unit ball of $Y$ is contained in $K+\epsilon B_{X}$, it follows that $\|\hat{j}\| \le \epsilon$, so $C$ can be one.

$\endgroup$

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.