Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I know that weak* topology is the weakest topology so that $Jx$ is continuous for $\forall x\in X$, where $J$ is the isometry from $X$ to $X''$. But what exactly is this topology? What is the open set in general look like?

And moreover, I want to prove another topology induced by metric is exactly the weak* topology. How can I prove this topology is weaker than weak* topology, so that it is exactly the weak* topology?

share|cite|improve this question
Concerning your second question: can you make it a bit more precise, please? From context, I assume that you're working on the closed unit ball of the dual space $X'$ for $X$ separable, is that it? [Note also that the weak$^\ast$-topology on all $X'$ is never metrizable if $X$ is infinite-dimensional.] – t.b. May 2 '12 at 2:46
@t.b. yes, you're right. But I'd really like to know more about weak* topology. And also, what is the relationship between this topology and weak* convergence? – henryforever14 May 2 '12 at 2:49
What do you mean? A sequence (or net) is weak$^\ast$-convergent in the sense that $\varphi_i(x) \to \varphi(x)$ for all $x$ if and only if $\varphi_i \to \varphi$ in the weak$^\ast$-topology (it is simply the topology of pointwise convergence of linear functionals on $X$). For more detail you'll have to wait for a full-fledged answer because I don't have time right now. – t.b. May 2 '12 at 2:56
@t.b. Thanks anyway. I am aware of the definition for weak* convergence. It's just that they share the a common part "weak*" in their names. Is it just a coincidence? – henryforever14 May 2 '12 at 2:59
@henryforever14 The weak* topology is defined by specifying neighborhood bases of the form $\{\Lambda \in X^* : |\Lambda(x_j)-\Lambda_0(x_j)|<\epsilon$ for some finite collection $j=1,...,n$ and $x_j \in X \}$. – Chris Janjigian May 2 '12 at 3:05

Weak*-open (non-empty) sets contain infinite-dimensional subspaces, so in this sense they are huge.

Roughly, we have less open sets, hence more compact setes. This is reflected in the Banach-Alaoglu theorem which says that a polar set of any nbhd of the origin in $X$ is weak* compact in $X^*$.

You work with Banach spaces with separable duals. In this case, the dual ball (which is weak*-compact) is metrisable. Thus, you cannot find any other compact Hausdorff topology (in particular, any other metric giving topology which is compact) which is weaker that the (relative) weak* topology since compact Hausdorff topologies are minimal.

share|cite|improve this answer
You don't need the dual to be separable, only the space itself. This guarantees the metrizability of the unit ball of the dual space. – Vobo May 5 '12 at 7:00

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.