Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Absolute norm

Let $X$ and $Y$ be Banach spaces. Let $Z=X\times Y$ a norm $\|\cdot\|_N$ on $Z$ is called absolute if there is a function $N\colon R^2\rightarrow R$ such that $$ \|(x,y)\|_N=N((\|x\|, \|y\|)) \qquad \text{ for all } z=(x,y)\in Z. $$

For example, the $\ell_p$-norms are absolute norms.

1-unconditional sum

Let $E$ be a Banach space with a 1-unconditional normalized Schauder basis. We can think of the elements of $E$ as sequences with the property that $$ \|(a_1,a_2,\dots)\|_E=\|(|a_1|,|a_2|,...\|_E \qquad \text{ for all } (a_j)\in E. $$ Note that $E$ is naturally endowed with the structure of a Banach lattice with respect to the pointwise operations.

Suppose that $X_1, X_2,\dots$ are Banach spaces. Their $E$-sum $X=(X_1, X_2, \dots)_E$ consists of all sequences $(x_j)$ with $x_j\in X_j$ and $(\|{x_j}\|)\in E$ with the norm $\|(x_j)\|=\|(\|x_j\|)\|_E$.

Question

Let $Z=X_1\times X_2\times...$. Can I equip $Z$ with an absolute norm? If so is this norm equivalent to equipping $Z$ with an 1-unconditional norm?

Thanks in advance!

share|improve this question
1  
Welcome to Math.SE, and +1 for writing a thoughtful post. In the question, what structure does $Z=X_1\times X_2\times \dots$ have to begin with? Is it just an abstract product of vector spaces with no norm or topology, or something else? –  user53153 Jan 6 '13 at 19:13
    
If you mean the abstract product $Z=\{(x_n)_{n\ge 1}: x_n\in X_n \ \forall n\}$, then this product is naturally a Fréchet space which is not normable: its topology cannot be induced by any norm. –  user53153 Jan 6 '13 at 19:28
    
Also asked on MathOverflow. –  Martin Jan 6 '13 at 22:00
    
Thanks, Pavel! I forgot to add that: $X_1$, $X_2$, ... are Banach spaces and $Z$ is the product of Banach spaces. –  user55379 Jan 7 '13 at 5:18

1 Answer 1

Unconditional sums can be much more complicated than absolute sums. In an absolute sum, if you have linear operators $T_n$ on $X_n$ s.t. $\sup_n \|T_n\| < \infty$ and define $T$ on $Y$ by $Tx = (T_n x(n))$ for $x=(x(n))$ in $Y$, then $T$ is a bounded linear operator on $Y$. This is not true for unconditional sums. In fact, the Kalton-Peck space is (the completion of) an unconditional sum of a sequence of 2-dimensional spaces (which can all be taken to be two dimensional Hilbert spaces) and yet does not have an unconditional basis!

share|improve this answer
    
This is a verbatim copy of the answer by Bill Johnson on MO. I understand the desire to also have an answer here, but proper attribution is important (and required by SE). –  user103402 Nov 13 '13 at 3:22

Your Answer

 
discard

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.