1
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ and $Y$ be sub-spaces of a large vector space, and both formed Banach spaces with associated norm.

If $X\cap Y$ with norm $\|u\|_{X\cap Y}=\|u\|_X+\|u\|_Y$, is dense in $X$ and $Y$ , it's easy to see $(X\cap Y)^*\ge X^*+Y^*$ by natural embedding.

But can we have $(X\cap Y)^*\le X^*+Y^*$? That means every bounded linear functional $X\cap Y\to\mathbb{R}$ can be written as a form of $f+g,f\in X^*,g\in Y^*$

The original problem come from a book of PDE, saying that "The space $H^{-1}(\Omega)+L^{p'}(\Omega)$ is given a strong topology, and is the dual space of $H_0^{1}(\Omega)\cap L^{p}(\Omega)$", $\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^n$ is bounded open set with $C^{\infty}$ boundary. It is just a footnote without further statement. So I want to proof this statement with the word of abstract norm space. If the title question is wrong, can we correct it?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ To clarify the situation: We do not assume any relation between the norms $\lVert \,\cdot\,\rVert_X$ and $\lVert\,\cdot\,\rVert_Y$? $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Mar 1 '16 at 14:46
  • $\begingroup$ @DanielFischer $X\cap Y$ is dense in $X$ and $Y$, is that work? $\endgroup$ – yaoliding Mar 1 '16 at 14:48
  • $\begingroup$ We can always come into that situation by replacing $X$ with $\operatorname{cl}_X(X\cap Y)$ and ditto for $Y$ if need be. So we may assume it from the start. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Mar 1 '16 at 14:53
  • $\begingroup$ I don't think your question can be answered in the affirmative, but I don't have a counterexample. :o( $\endgroup$ – Friedrich Philipp Mar 1 '16 at 14:56
  • $\begingroup$ It is certainly possible to have that situation, even excluding the trivial cases when e.g. $\lVert u\rVert_Y \leqslant C\cdot \lVert u\rVert_X$ for some constant $C$. Is your question whether that equality always holds, or what the conditions are under which it holds, or just whether there are situations in which it holds? $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Mar 1 '16 at 15:05
1
$\begingroup$

We always have $(X \cap Y)^{\ast} = X^{\ast} + Y^{\ast}$, viewing $X^{\ast}$ and $Y^{\ast}$ as subspaces of $(X\cap Y)^{\ast}$.

Consider the space $Z = X \times Y$, endowed with the norm $\lVert (x,y)\rVert_Z = \lVert x\rVert_X + \lVert y\rVert_Y$. This is a Banach space with dual $Z^{\ast} = X^{\ast} \oplus Y^{\ast}$, where $\lVert (\lambda,\mu)\rVert_{Z^{\ast}} = \max \{ \lVert \lambda\rVert_{X^{\ast}}, \lVert\mu\rVert_{Y^{\ast}}\}$.

Now $\Delta \colon X\cap Y \hookrightarrow Z$ given by $\Delta(u) = (u,u)$ is an isometric embedding, let $F := \operatorname{im}\Delta$. By the Hahn-Banach theorem, the restriction

$$\rho \colon Z^{\ast} \to F^{\ast} \cong (X\cap Y)^{\ast}$$

is surjective, and $\rho(f,g) \colon \Delta(u) \mapsto f(u) + g(u)$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks, I need to think for a while. Why Hahn-Banach is needed? $\endgroup$ – yaoliding Mar 1 '16 at 16:25
  • $\begingroup$ Hahn-Banach ensures that every continuous linear form on $F$ has a representation $f+g$ with $f\in X^{\ast},\; g \in Y^{\ast}$. If we had a continuous linear form on $F$ without a continuous extension to $X\times Y$, it would not be of the desired form. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Mar 1 '16 at 16:33

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.