4
$\begingroup$

Let us recall that a basis $(x_{n})_{n}$ for a Banach space $X$ is boundedly complete if for every scalar sequence $(a_{n})_{n}$ with $\sup\limits_{n}\|\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n}a_{i}x_{i}\|<\infty$, the series $\sum\limits_{n=1}^{\infty}a_{n}x_{n}$ converges in norm.

Let $(x_{n})_{n}$ be a bounded sequence in a Banach space $X$. We set

$$ \textrm{ca}((x_{n})_{n})=\inf_{n}\sup_{k,l\geq n}\|x_{k}-x_{l}\|.$$

Then $(x_{n})_{n}$ is norm-Cauchy if and only if $\textrm{ca}((x_{n})_{n})=0$.

Let $(x_{n})_{n}$ be a basis for a Banach space $X$. We introduce a quantity measuring non-bounded completeness as follows: $$\textrm{bc}((x_{n})_{n})=\sup\Bigg\{\textrm{ca}\Big(\big(\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_{i}x_{i}\big)_{n}\Big)\colon \big(\sum_{i=1}^{n}a_{i}x_{i}\big)_{n}\subseteq B_{X}\Bigg\},$$ where $B_{X}$ is the closed unit ball of $X$. Clearly, $(x_{n})_{n}$ is boundedly complete if and only if $\textrm{bc}((x_{n})_{n})=0$.

We think about the $\textrm{bc}$-values of some known bases and obtain the following:

  1. $\operatorname{bc}((e_{n})_{n})=1$, where $(e_{n})_{n}$ is the unit vector basis of $c_{0}$.
  2. $\operatorname{bc}((s_{n})_{n})=1$, where $(s_{n})_{n}$ is the summing basis of $c_{0}$.
  3. $\operatorname{bc}((e_{n})_{n=0}^{\infty})=2$, where $(e_{n})_{n=0}^{\infty}$ is the unit vector basis of $c$ ($e_{0}=(1,1,1,\ldots)$).
  4. $\operatorname{bc}((e_{n})_{n})=1$, where $(e_{n})_{n}$ is the unit vector basis of the James space $\mathcal{J}$.
  5. Let $x_{1}=e_{1}$ and $x_{n}=-x_{n-1}+(n-1)e_{n}$ for $n\geq 2$, where $(e_{n})_{n}$ is the unit vector basis of $c_{0}$. Then $\operatorname{bc}((x_{n})_{n})=1$.
  6. $\operatorname{bc}((f_{n})_{n})=2$, where $(f_{n})_{n}$ is the Haar basis of $L_{1}[0,1]$.
  7. $\operatorname{bc}((f_{n})_{n})=2$, where $(f_{n})_{n}$ is the Faber-Schauder basis of $C[0,1]$.

The examples above yield naturally the following question:

Question. $\textrm{bc}((x_{n})_{n})=1$ or $2$ for every basis $(x_{n})_{n}$ that is not boundedly complete ?

Prof. William B. Johnson has the following guess with respect to Question:

Guess. Let $(x_{n})_{n}$ be a basis for a Banach space $X$ that is not boundedly complete. If $(x_{n})_{n}$ is monotone and shrinking, then $\textrm{bc}((x_{n})_{n})=1$ or $2$.

I can not prove Guess. Thank you !

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Full disclosure: Historically my guesses are correct with probability .5. $\endgroup$ Commented May 28, 2022 at 20:48
  • $\begingroup$ @BillJohnson Besides your guess, under what conditions the bc-value of a basis $(x_{n})_{n}$ must be 1 or 2 ? $\endgroup$ Commented May 29, 2022 at 9:02

1 Answer 1

2
$\begingroup$

As to the question, the answer is "no". The simplest counterexample is the closure of finite support sequences in the norm $\sup_{j\ge 1}|a_j|+\sum_{j\ge 1}{|a_j-a_{j+1}|}$ (decaying to $0$ sequences of finite total variation) with the standard basis $x_n(k)=\delta_{nk}$. Then for any partial sum sequence in the unit ball, the total variation component of the norm gets exhausted eventually and the differences become essentially $(0,0,\dots,0,a\dots, a,0,0,\dots)$ with norm $3|a|\le 3/2$ (every entry of a sequence in the unit ball should be at most $1/2$ in absolute value). On the other hand, the coefficient sequence $1/2,1/2,1/2,\dots$ realizes this bound giving $\mathbf{bc}((x_n)_n)=3/2$.

I cannot tell anything about the Guess because I don't know what the adjectives "monotone" and "shrinking" mean applied to a basis in a Banach space and you didn't bother to explain ;-)

Edit: OK, since Bill explained the words, I'll attempt to refute the guess as well. It will be essentially the same construction but using the quadratic variance instead of the usual one.

Define $X$ to be the space of decaying to $0$ sequences $a=(a_j)_{j\ge 1}$ with $$ \|a\|_0=\sup_{j\ge 1}|a_j|+\left[\sum_{j\ge 1}|a_j-a_{j+1}|^2\right]^{\frac 12}<+\infty\,. $$ To make the standard basis monotone, we'll just change the norm to the equivalent one given by $\|a\|=\sup_m\|a^m\|_0$ where $a^m=(a_1,\dots,a_m,0,0,\dots)$.

Now, if $\|a\|\le 1$, then we still have all $|a_j|\le\frac 12$, so, since the variation component of the norm will eventually exhaust itself except for the endpoint jump, we still can say that $\mathbb{bc}\le \frac12(1+\sqrt 2)$ with the sequence of all $1/2$ giving exactly that value.

The only thing that remains to show is that our standard basis is shrinking. One can, probably, compute the dual space directly, but we'll take a shortcut.

One key property of our space is that if we have finitely many elements $a_q\in X$ of norm $1$ with separated supports and numbers $b_q$ with $\sum_q|b_q|^2\le 1$, then $\|\sum_q b_qa_q\|\le 1$.

Now let $\psi$ be a linear functional on $X$ corresponding to the sequence $(\psi_1,\psi_2,\dots)$ with the usual pairing $$ \psi(a)=\sum_{j\ge 1}\psi_ja_j\,. $$ If an arbitrarily faraway tail of $\psi$ has norm at least $\varepsilon$, then for every $Q$, we can inductively construct $Q$ sequences $a_q\in X$ of norm $1$ with finite separated supports such that $\psi(a_q)\ge\varepsilon/4$. But then $\psi(Q^{-1/2}\sum_qa_q)\ge \varepsilon\sqrt Q/4$, which contradicts the boundedness of $\psi$. Thus the tails must tend to $0$ in the norm and we are done.

If you look at this construction closely, you'll realize that it can yield any $\mathbb bc\in(1,2)$ but not one in $(0,1)$. So, the interesting question really is

Question: Can we construct a basis (any or monotone and shrinking) in a Banach space with $\mathbb{bc}\in (0,1)$?

$\endgroup$
15
  • $\begingroup$ I check your counterexample carefully. It is right. Thanks a lot. As to the Guess, I refer you to F. Albiac and N. J. Kalton's book ``Topics in Banach space theory'' for the definitions of monotone bases and shrinking bases if you want. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30, 2022 at 10:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @fedja: "Monotone" means that for every $n$, the partial sum projection onto the span of the first $n$ basis vectors is contractive. "Shrinking" means that the norm closure of the linear span of the biorthogonal functionals is the entire dual space. So your example is monotone but not shrinking. $\endgroup$ Commented May 30, 2022 at 17:01
  • $\begingroup$ @BillJohnson Ah, thanks! So the problem with "shrinking" in my example is due to using the $\ell^1$-norm, after which the dual space essentially becomes $\ell^\infty$, which is not separable, right? $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Commented May 30, 2022 at 17:44
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @BillJohnson OK, seems like your historical probability of guessing correctly just went down to $0.499$. Thanks for the explanation of the terminology again! $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Commented May 30, 2022 at 21:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @DongyangChen You meant $\lambda\in(1,2)$? As I said, for the first ($\ell^1$-total variation) construction just use for the norm $t$ times the $c$-norm plus the total variation. Then the sequence with all elements $\frac 1{t+1}$ has partial sums staying in the unit ball, is optimal, and gives $\lambda=\frac{t+2}{t+1}$ where you can use any $t>0$. $\endgroup$
    – fedja
    Commented May 31, 2022 at 2:25

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .