How to show that a Banach space $X$ is reflexive if and only if its dual $X'$ is reflexive?

  • 2
    $\begingroup$ First show that if $X'$ is reflexive then $X''$ is reflexive. Then what can you say about $\hat X$? $\endgroup$ – matt Jun 1 '12 at 6:26
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ @matt: what's $\hat{X}$? $\endgroup$ – t.b. Jun 1 '12 at 6:27
  • $\begingroup$ @t.b. $\hat X$ is canonical embedding of $X$ in $X''$. Sorry I should mentioned this. $\endgroup$ – matt Jun 1 '12 at 6:30

I'm assuming that you have two Theorems at your disposal, easily proven:

Theorem 1: If a Banach space $X$ is reflexive then its dual space $X'$ is reflexive.

Theorem 2: A closed subspace of a reflexive Banach space is reflexive.

Claim: Let $X$ be a Banach space. If $X'$ is reflexive then $X$ is reflexive.

Proof: Suppose $X'$ is reflexive. By Theorem 1 it follows that $X''$ is reflexive. If we consider the Canonical mapping $J : X \to X''$ it follows that $J(X)$ is a subspace of $X''$. Since $X \cong J(X)$ and $X$ is a Banach space, then $J(X)$ is a Banach space and hence closed. By Theorem 2 we can conclude that $J(X)$ is reflexive. But since $X \cong J(X)$ conclude that $X$ is reflexive.

Moreover a consequence of this is that a Banach space is reflexive if and only if its dual space is reflexive.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • $\begingroup$ Very nice proof! $\endgroup$ – Xiang Yu Oct 30 '15 at 9:08
  • $\begingroup$ Why is $J(X) =X$? $\endgroup$ – D1X Jun 26 '16 at 18:31
  • $\begingroup$ @D1X because $J$ is an isometric injection, so $X$ is isomorphic to its image under $J$. $\endgroup$ – Tony Mottaz Dec 4 '16 at 21:45

Really a Banach space $X$ is reflexive if and only if $X'$ is reflexive.

$$X\textrm{ is reflexive}\Longrightarrow X'\textrm{ is reflexive.}\tag{1}$$

Proof. By Banach-Alaoglu-Bourbaki theorem the closed ball $B_{X'}$ is closed w.r.t. the weak-* topology $\sigma(X',X)$. By the reflexivity of $X$ we have $\sigma(X',X'')=\sigma(X',X).$ So $B_{X'}$ is closed w.r.t. the weak topology $\sigma(X',X),$ that is $X'$ is reflexive.$\square$

$$X'\textrm{ is reflexive}\Longrightarrow X\textrm{ is reflexive.}\tag{2}$$

Proof. By hypothesis and by (1) we get that $X''$ is reflexive, and therefore even its closed vector subspace $J(X)$ is reflexive. But the canonical injection $J:X\to X''$ is an isometry so $X$ is reflexive.$\square$

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • 10
    $\begingroup$ Appealing to Alaoglu is a bit of an overkill: if $X$ is reflexive then the canonical map $\iota_{X}\colon X \to X^{\ast\ast}$ is an isomorphism. Hence $\iota_{X^\ast} = ((\iota_{X})^{\ast})^{-1} = ((\iota_{X})^{-1})^\ast$ is an isomorphism. $\endgroup$ – t.b. Jun 1 '12 at 7:00
  • $\begingroup$ Dear Theo, I haven't thought this argument, it is simpler than the one I have wrote. Thank you. $\endgroup$ – agtortorella Jun 1 '12 at 7:08
  • $\begingroup$ @t.b. could you expand that thought? I don't understand your argument. $\endgroup$ – Parakee Nov 9 '12 at 3:21
  • 7
    $\begingroup$ @Parakee: 1. Let $\iota_X\colon X \to X^{\ast\ast}$ and $\iota_{X^\ast}\colon X^\ast \to X^{\ast\ast\ast}$ be the canonical inclusions. Then we have that $(\iota_X)^\ast \circ (\iota_{X^\ast}) = \operatorname{id}_{X^\ast}$ by a direct verification. 2. If an operator is invertible then so is its adjoint $(\iota_X)^\ast$. 3. If an operator $S$ is right inverse to an invertible operator $T$ then $S$ is itself invertible and equal to the inverse: $S = T^{-1}$. 4. Apply this to $T = (\iota_X)^\ast$ and $S = \iota_{X^\ast}$. $\endgroup$ – t.b. Nov 29 '12 at 14:41

It can be shown directly:

Let $J : X \to X^{**}$ and $J_*: X^* \to X^{***}$ be the canonical injections. Suppose by contradiction that $JX \subsetneq X^{**}$; using Hahn-Banach theorem, there exists $\zeta \in X^{***}$ such that $\zeta \neq 0$ and $\zeta \equiv 0$ on $JX$.

Because $X^*$ is reflexive, there exists $\theta \in X^*$ such that $\zeta = J_*\theta$. For all $x \in X$:

$$0= \langle \zeta,Jx \rangle= \langle J_*\theta,Jx \rangle = \langle Jx,\theta \rangle= \langle \theta,x \rangle$$

You deduce that $\theta=0$ and therefore $\zeta=0$: a contradiction.

| cite | improve this answer | |
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Seirios, $\zeta \in X^{***}$ and $Jx \in X^{**}$, so how exactly can an inner product $\langle \zeta ,Jx \rangle $ be defined? Secondly, there is no assumption of inner products defined on $X, X^{**}$ , etc. $X$ is merely a Banach space by hypothesis. Indeed, if an inner product were defined on $X$, then we would immediately have that $X$ is reflexive, as every Hilbert space is reflexive. $\endgroup$ – Marc Nye Oct 4 '13 at 1:18
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ $\langle \cdot, \cdot \rangle$ is not an inner product, but a duality bracket, that is: $\langle \zeta,x \rangle$ is the evaluation of $\zeta \in X^*$ at $x \in X$. Isn't a usual notation? $\endgroup$ – Seirios Oct 4 '13 at 7:17
  • $\begingroup$ This is a nice proof. At the beginning shouldn’t you be saying canonical injection instead of surjection? Subjectivity is what you proved here. $\endgroup$ – gen Jun 5 '18 at 10:05
  • $\begingroup$ Answer edited. Thank you for your comment. $\endgroup$ – Seirios Jun 30 '18 at 11:47
  • $\begingroup$ that is a precise proof. $\endgroup$ – Lin Xuelei Apr 20 '19 at 20:37

Here's a different, more geometric approach that comes from Folland's book, exercise 5.24

Let $\widehat X$, $\widehat{X^*}$ be the natural images of $X$ and $X^*$ in $X^{**}$ and $X^{***}$.

Define $\widehat X^0 = \{F\in X^{***}: F(\widehat x) = 0 \text{ for all } \widehat x \in \widehat X\}$

1) It isn't hard to show that $\widehat{X^*} \bigcap \widehat X^0 = \{0\}$.

2) Furthermore, $\widehat{X^*} + \widehat X^0 = X^{***}$. To show this, let $f\in X^{***}$, and define $l \in X^*$ by $l(x) = f(\widehat x)$ for all $x\in X$.

Then $f(\phi) = \widehat l(\phi) + [f(\phi) - \widehat l(\phi)]$.

Clearly $\widehat l \in \widehat{X^*}$, and we claim $f - \widehat l \in \widehat X^0$. Let $\widehat x \in \widehat X$. Then $f(\widehat x) - \widehat l ( \widehat x) = f(\widehat x) - \widehat x (l) = f(\widehat x) - l(x) = 0$

Now that 1) and 2) are verified, we prove the claim:

If $X$ is reflexive, then $\widehat X^0 = \{0\}$, and so $X^{***} = \widehat{X^*}$, so $X^*$ is reflexive.

If $X^*$ is reflexive, then $X^{***} = \widehat{X^*}$, so $\widehat X^0 = \{0\}$. Since $\widehat X$ is a closed subspace of $X^{**}$ (on assumption $X$ is Banach), if $\widehat X$ were a proper subspace of $X^{**}$, we would be able to use Hahn-Banach to construct an $F \in X^{***}$ such that $F$ is zero on $\widehat X$ and has ||F|| = 1. This, however, would contradict $\widehat X^0 = \{0\}$. So we conclude $\widehat X = X^{**}$.

| cite | improve this answer | |

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.