3
$\begingroup$

Let me start with the following

Illustration: Let $G$ be a compact group, and let $\pi:G\to H$ be its (surjective) continuous homomorphism onto a (compact) group $H$. So we can think that $H$ is the quotient group of $G$ modulo the kernel $K=\operatorname{Ker}\pi$ of the mapping $\pi$ $$ H=G/K $$ (and $\pi$ is just the quotient mapping).

The map $\pi$ generates a (linear and continuous) mapping of the spaces of continuous functions: $$ P:C(H)\to C(G). $$ This operator is a coretraction in the category of Banach spaces (and, what is the same in this situation, in the category of locally convex spaces), since it has a left inverse operator, $$ S:C(G)\to C(H),\qquad S\circ P=\operatorname{id}_{C(H)} $$ defined by the formula $$ S(f)(t)=\int_K f(t\cdot s)\ \mu_K(d s),\qquad f\in C(G) $$ where $\mu_K$ is the normalized Haar measure on $K$. (This mapping turns each function $f\in C(G)$ into a function $S(f)\in C(G)$, invariant with respect to the shifts by the elements of $K$, and this means that $S(f)$ can be considered as a function on $H=G/K$).

Now the

Question: Let $X$ be a (Hausdorff) compact space, and let $\pi:X\to Y$ be a (surjective) continuous mapping onto a (compact) metrizable space $Y$. So we can think that $Y$ is the quotient space of $X$ modulo the equivalence relation $$ x\sim x' \quad\Leftrightarrow \quad \pi(x)=\pi(x') $$ (and $\pi$ is just the quotient mapping).

The map $\pi$ generates a (linear and continuous) mapping of the spaces of continuous functions: $$ P:C(Y)\to C(X). $$

Is this operator a coretraction in the category of Banach spaces (or, what is the same here, in the category of locally convex spaces)?

In other words, does there exist an operator $$ S:C(X)\to C(Y), $$ such that $$ S\circ P=\operatorname{id}_{C(Y)} $$ ?

In my considerations the space $Y$ is metrizable, but I don't know, perhaps this condition is extra. Similarly, I don't know, perhaps the space $X$ need not to be compact, but just locally compact, or belong to some wider class.

$\endgroup$
10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The transfer has a lot of similar ideas. The conceptual difference is that is not averaging but summing up or integrating over the fibers. This has the advantage that it also works with different rings than the real numbers, and the disadvantage that the upper composition usually is not the identity but multiplication with the cardinality of the fiber. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 26, 2023 at 11:06
  • $\begingroup$ @HenrikRüping what is meant by transfer? $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 26, 2023 at 11:10
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I wonder if a space-filling curve ($X=I$, $Y=I^2$) would give a counterexample. $\endgroup$ Commented Jul 26, 2023 at 11:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If $Y$ is formed from $X$ by contracting some closed subset $A$ of $X$ to a point $p$, then any retraction $S$ defines a bounded linear extension operator $E: C(A) \to C(X)$ by $E( f|_A )(x) := f(x) - PSf(x) + Sf(p)$ for any $f \in C(Y)$ (this is well-defined since $f(x) - PSf(x) + Sf(p)$ vanishes whenever $f$ vanishes on $A$, since in this latter case $f=Pg$ for some $g \in C(X)$ vanishing at $p$). Such extensions exist in the metrizable case, but this is a non-trivial result of Dugundi that fails in the non-metrizable case, see e.g. jstor.org/stable/pdf/2321900.pdf . $\endgroup$
    – Terry Tao
    Commented Jul 26, 2023 at 19:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ ... conversely, given an extension operator $E: C(A) \to C(X)$, one can define a retraction $S: C(X) \to C(Y)$ by the formula $Sf := f - E (f - f(a))$, where $a$ is some arbitrarily chosen point in $A$. So in this model case at least, the existence of a bounded linear retraction is equivalent to the existence of a bounded linear extension. This further suggests that the literature on bounded linear extensions will need to be consulted. $\endgroup$
    – Terry Tao
    Commented Jul 26, 2023 at 19:46

1 Answer 1

6
$\begingroup$

As stated (i.e., without assuming metrizability of $X$), the answer is negative: Let $Y=\alpha\mathbb N$ be the Alexandrov (one point) compactification, $X=\beta\mathbb N$ the Stone-Cech compactification and $\pi:X \to Y$ the unique continuous extension to $\beta\mathbb N$ of the inclusion $\mathbb N\hookrightarrow\alpha\mathbb N$. $C(Y)$ is the space $c$ of convergent sequences whereas $C(X)=\ell^\infty$ is the space of bounded sequences and $P$ is the embedding $c\to\ell^\infty$. Phillips's theorem ($c_0$ is not complemented in $\ell^\infty$) implies that $P$ does not have a continuous linear left inverse.


If $X$ is metrizable, such structural arguments are not very promising: On the one hand, Sobczyk's theorem ($c_0$ is complemented in every separable superspace) covers the case where $C(Y)$ is isomorphic to $c_0$ and on the other hand, Miljutin's theorem says that $C(X)$ is isomorphic to $C([0,1])$ for every uncountable compact metric space $X$.

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ I suspect that much more is known about the question also for metrizable spaces $X$. In good old times, there was an Ask-Johnson tag. @BillJohnson $\endgroup$ Commented Aug 2, 2023 at 15:53

You must log in to answer this question.

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