Does Closure of Y Guarantee Continuity of Projection in Norm Space X?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter jostpuur
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Continuity Projection
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the relationship between the closure of a subspace Y and the continuity of a projection P from a norm space X onto another subspace Z. Participants explore whether the closure of Y guarantees the continuity of the projection and consider the implications of finite dimensionality of Z.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that if the projection P is continuous, then Y must be closed, leading to the question of whether the converse is true.
  • Others argue that the converse is false in general, noting that Z may not be closed even if Y is, using the example of Y=c_0 and X=ℓ_∞.
  • A participant mentions that if Z is finite-dimensional, then P is always continuous, but does not provide a definitive explanation.
  • Another participant questions the correctness of the claim regarding finite-dimensionality, suggesting that it might be possible to define P such that it is not continuous.
  • Some participants clarify that when Z is finite-dimensional and Y is closed, the projection is continuous, but they express uncertainty about how to demonstrate this.
  • There is a discussion about whether the statement "If Y and Z are closed, then the projection X->Z is continuous" holds true.
  • A later reply introduces the consideration that X is only a normed space, not necessarily a Banach space, which complicates the continuity of the projection even if Z and its complement are closed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally do not reach consensus on the implications of closure for the continuity of the projection. Multiple competing views remain regarding the conditions under which the projection is continuous.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the assumption that X is a Banach space, which is later questioned, and the potential for Z to be non-closed despite Y being closed. The discussion also highlights the complexity introduced by finite-dimensionality.

jostpuur
Messages
2,112
Reaction score
19
Let X be a norm space, and X=Y+Z so that [itex]Y\cap Z=\{0\}[/itex]. Let P:X->Z be the projection [itex]y+z\mapsto z[/itex], when [itex]y\in Y[/itex] and [itex]z\in Z[/itex].

I see, that if P is continuous, then Y must be closed, because [itex]Y=P^{-1}(\{0\})[/itex].

Is the converse true? If Y is closed, does it make the projection continuous?

If yes, fine. If not, would finite dimensionality of Z make P continuous then?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Assuming Y and Z are linear subspaces, the converse is false in general. The root of the problem is that Z may not be a closed subspace, even when Y is. For instance, take [itex]Y=c_0[/itex] and [itex]X=\ell_\infty[/itex]. It is a well-known theorem that [itex]c_0[/itex] is not complemented in [itex]\ell_\infty[/itex], i.e. that there does not exist a closed subspace Z such that [itex]X=Y \oplus Z[/itex]. But using a standard Zorn's lemma argument, we can produce a linear subspace Z of X such that [itex]X=Y \oplus Z[/itex]. This implies that I-P is not continuous, since ker(I-P)=Z is not closed. As a result, P is not continuous either.

Edit:
If Z is finite-dimensional, then P is always going to be continuous. I'll let you figure out why.
 
Last edited:
morphism said:
Edit:
If Z is finite-dimensional, then P is always going to be continuous. I'll let you figure out why.

Frankly, I think you left a pretty damn big task for me! Fortunately I had got some explanations for this from elsewhere too. I think I understood how this is done now, by considering some basis [itex]\{e_1,\ldots,e_n\}[/itex] of Z, linear functionals [itex]f_i:Z\to\mathbb{C}[/itex], [itex]\alpha_1 e_1+\cdots\alpha_n e_n\mapsto \alpha_i[/itex], and Hahn-Banach theorem. To be fully precise, I was told how to choose Y so that it becomes closed. Now I realized how the same procedure gives also the continuous projection.
 
morphism said:
If Z is finite-dimensional, then P is always going to be continuous.

Are you sure this is fully correct? I think it is possible to choose P:X->Z so that it is continuous, but isn't it also possible to choose it so that it is not continuous?

Edit: I see. You meant, that when Z is finite dimensional and Y is fixed and closed, then [itex]y+z\mapsto z[/itex] is always going to be continuous? It could be true, but I'm not sure how to show it.
 
Last edited:
jostpuur said:
Edit: I see. You meant, that when Z is finite dimensional and Y is fixed and closed, then [itex]y+z\mapsto z[/itex] is always going to be continuous? It could be true, but I'm not sure how to show it.
That is what I meant. This follows from the fact that finite dimensional subspaces are closed.

But since, as you observed, finite dimensional subspaces are always complemented, we don't really need to start with the assumption that Y is closed.
 
morphism said:
That is what I meant. This follows from the fact that finite dimensional subspaces are closed.

But since, as you observed, finite dimensional subspaces are always complemented, we don't really need to start with the assumption that Y is closed.

Do you also mean that this is true: "If Y and Z are closed, then projection X->Z is continuous."?
 
Hold on... All along I've been assuming that X is a Banach space, but I've just reread your original post and noticed that X is only normed. In this case, it's not necessarily true that the projection X->Z is continuous, even if Z and its complement are closed, but I can't come up with an easy example.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
3K