9
$\begingroup$

It is well-known that every subspace of $l_2$ is isometric to $l_2$. When $p\neq 2$, $l_p$ has subspaces that are not even isomorphic, let alone isometric, to $l_p$. Suppose $X$ is a subspace of $l_p$ with $p\neq 2$ such that $X$ is isomorphic to $l_p$. What can one say about the Banach-Mazur distance between $X$ and $l_p$? More precisely, which one of the following mutually exclusive options holds true:

1) Given $K$, there exists a subspace $X$ of $l_p$, isomorphic to $l_p$, such that for any isomorphism $T:X\to l_p$ one has $||T||\cdot||T^{-1}||>K$.

OR

2) There exist a constant $K$ (possibly depending on $p$), such that for any subspace $X$ of $l_p$, isomorphic to $l_p$, there exist an isomorphism $T:X\to l_p$ such that $||T||\cdot||T^{-1}||\leq K$.

Intuitively, I very strongly suspect it is 1) but I do not have an argument to exclude 2) and, if it is indeed 1), I would like to see a concrete example of a subspace having that property.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ On MathOverflow this question would probably be tagged ask-johnson. Why not ask there? As far as I know, Bill Johnson does not read Math.SE. $\endgroup$
    – user53153
    Jan 12 '13 at 21:17
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Now asked and answered on mathoverflow. Theo, could you write a short summary and post that as an answer here to indicate that the matter is settled, at least after your bounty has expired? @PavelM: it didn't even take an hour after asking :) $\endgroup$
    – Martin
    Jan 13 '13 at 18:50
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin Yes, I will do that. $\endgroup$
    – Theo
    Jan 13 '13 at 22:22
1
$\begingroup$

This question was answered on mathoverflow, and the answer is the option 1) above. The construction is very non-trivial and it involves finding, for every $n$, $n$-dimensional subspaces of $l_p$ such that the $L_p$-factorization constant diverges to infinity. One way to construct such subspaces is a by-product of Szankowski's construction of subspaces of $l_p$ without the approximation property (see, for example, Theorem 1.g.4 in Lindenstrauss-Tzafriri, vol.2).

$\endgroup$

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.