14
$\begingroup$

The following seems a very basic question in the theory of complemented subspaces of Banach spaces, but I was not able to find a reference, so I wish to ask it here.

Question. Let $X$ be a Banach space, and let $V$ and $W$ be complemented subspaces of $X$. Is it true that $V \cap W$ is a complemented subspace? If not, is it true under (nontrivial) additional assumptions?

In the case of a Hilbert space $X$, where the answer is of course yes, the orthogonal projector onto $V \cap W$ may be found as a strong limit of operators $P_{V\cap W}=\lim_{n\to \infty}(P_V P_W)^n $ . Is there a similar procedure to obtain a linear projector onto $V\cap W$ in the general case of a Banach space $X$?

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ If they are complemented then there are continuous projections $P:X\to V$, $Q:X\to W$. If they commute then everything is simple: Take $PQ=QP:X\to V\cap W$. Then $(PQ)^2=PQ$ and its image is the whole of $V\cap W$: $x=Px=Qx$ implies that $PQx=Px=x$. Now if they don't commute: $PQ(X)$ still contains $V\cap W$ but may not equal it. $\endgroup$ Jan 12, 2012 at 15:01
  • $\begingroup$ Why does the proof for Hilbert spaces fail in the Banach space case? As Yulia said, there are continuous projections $P_W$ and $P_V$: wouldn't the strong limit $$ lim_{n\to \infty} (P_V P_W)^n $$ work as well? $\endgroup$ Jan 13, 2012 at 3:35
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @Ruben: it's not immediately clear to me why that limit should exist ($P_VP_W$ might have norm greater than $1$, which makes convergence in the operator topology problematic; now of course we could still hope for SOT convergence, but it doesn't seem obvious to me at the moment.) $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Jan 13, 2012 at 4:53
  • 6
    $\begingroup$ I was considering adding the "ask-Johnson" tag, but he has pre-emptied us... $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Jan 13, 2012 at 6:36

1 Answer 1

16
$\begingroup$

The answer to the first question is "no". You can see this with specific examples, but here is a more conceptual approach: Take $Y$ an uncomplemented subspace of $X$ and in $Z:= X\oplus_1 X$ identify $Y\oplus 0$ with $0 \oplus Y$ in the obvious way; that is, mod out from $Z$ the subspace $\{(y,-y) | y \in Y\}$. $X\oplus 0$ and $0 \oplus X$ are norm one complemented in the resulting quotient space of $Z$ but their intersection $Y \oplus 0 = 0 \oplus Y$ is not complemented. (This is just a categorical push out construction specialized to the appropriate category of Banach spaces.)

The answer is yes if the subspaces are norm one complemented and the space $X$ is uniformly convex. This is intuitive, because if $P$ is a norm one projection on a uniformly convex space and $x$ is not in the range of $P$, then $\|Px\| < \|x\|$, since otherwise all vectors on the line segment from $x$ to $Px$ would have norm $\|x\|$. Hence one guesses that playing ping pong with two norm one projections $P$ and $Q$ will produce a norm one projection onto $PX\cap QX$. To see that this works without doing any computations or calculating rates of convergence (at the risk of making experts cringe), set $P_1=P$, $P_{2n} = QP_{2n-1}$, $P_{2n+1}=PP_{2n}$. Let $x\in X$ and let $a=a(x)$ be the limit of the nonincreasing sequence $\|P_n x\|$. I claim that $\|P_{n+1}x - P_{n}x\| \to 0$. Indeed, (1/2)$\|P_{n+1}x + P_{n}x\|$ also converges to $a$, so the claim follows from the uniform convexity of $X$. Let $V$ be a limit in the weak operator topology of some subnet of $P_{2n}$. By the claim, the corresponding subnet of $P_{2n+1}$ also converges to $V$ in the weak operator topology. From this it is evident that $V$ is a norm one projection onto $PX\cap QX$.

ADDED 13 Jan. 2012: Notice that in the first construction $X$ can be uniformly convex, in which case $Z$ (and therefore also every quotient of $Z$) is isomorphic to a uniformly convex space.

$\endgroup$
5
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ I am almost literally kicking myself for not spotting the pullback/pushout argument. Very cute! $\endgroup$
    – Yemon Choi
    Jan 13, 2012 at 6:35
  • $\begingroup$ @PietroMajer [$X\oplus 0$ and $0 \oplus X$ are norm one complemented in the resulting quotient space of $Z$]---> I cannot prove this, could you give me a clue ? $\endgroup$ Feb 26, 2017 at 13:13
  • $\begingroup$ @YemonChoi [$X\oplus 0$ and $0 \oplus X$ are norm one complemented in the resulting quotient space of $Z$]---> I cannot prove this (I am ashamed), could you give me a clue ? $\endgroup$ Feb 26, 2017 at 13:14
  • $\begingroup$ @BillJohnson [$X\oplus 0$ and $0 \oplus X$ are norm one complemented in the resulting quotient space of $Z$]---->I cannot prove this (I am ashamed), could you give me a clue ? $\endgroup$ Feb 26, 2017 at 13:22
  • $\begingroup$ $(x,u)\mapsto (x+u, 0)$ is a norm one projection on $Z$ (that is why the $\ell_1$ sum is used in the definition of $Z$) that vanishes on the subspace being modded out. $\endgroup$ Feb 27, 2017 at 14:25

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.