Suppose $X$ is Banach and $N$ its closed subspace, then $X/N$ is in turn Banach. Now suppose we have a convergent sequence $\bar{x_n}\to \bar{x_0}$ in $X/N$, is it then possible to construct a sequence $x_n\in X$, with $\|x_n\|=\|\bar x_n\|, n=0\cup\Bbb N^+$ and $x_n\to x$?

By the first requirement, $x_n$ are actually already uniquely determined, i.e., they are the unique minimisers of $\|x\|,x\in \bar{x_n}$. So we must show that $x_n$ so defined must converge. Indeed, geometrical intuition tells me that $\bar{x_n}$ should be a collection of "parallel" hyperplanes in $X$, and that $\|x_n-x_0\|$ should be exactly the distance between the corresponding hyperplanes. But rather disappointingly I couldn't prove it. So, is my initial conjecture really true? If so is there any easy way to prove it?

As commented by Daniel, for a generic Banach space $X$, such a unique determination of $x_n$ may not exist. That closed convex sets always admit a unique modulus minimiser is only a result of Hilbert spaces (or more generally, reflexive spaces as in Daniel's comment).

Anyway, now let's relax the first requirement a little. We now drop the requirement that $\|\bar x_n\|$ be equal to $\|x_n\|$, rather, we only require that $\|x_n\|\le c\|\bar x_n\|$ (including $x_0$) for some $c<\infty$ and $x_n\to x_0$ in $X$. So is there a positive answer to this weaker problem?

I feel I should've included some context here. It all went from the following:

$X,N$ as above, if $Y$ is Banach, then if $A$ is a bounded linear operator from $X$ to $Y$, then for each convergent sequence $y_n\to y_0$, there exists a convergent sequence $x_n\to x_0$ such that $Ax_n=y_n$ (including $x_0$) and that $\|x_n\|\le M\|y_n\|$ for some $M<\infty$.

My approach was get everything into the quotient space $X/N$, then the resulting quotient operator $\bar A$ is bijective, whence, if we can recover $x_n\in\bar x_n$, convergent and dominated by $\|\bar x_n\|$, we readily prove the result with the Inverse Operator Theorem.

Okay after thinking for a while I finally got the answer to my modified question. It isn't hard actually, just an application of the inf definition of the quotient norm: for each $\bar x\ne 0$ we have $$\|\bar x\|:=\inf_{x\in\bar x}\|x\|>0,$$ and thus we are able to find $x'\in\bar x$ such that $\|x'\|\le \|\bar x\|+\|\bar x\|$ (taking $\epsilon=\|\bar x\|>0$ here). Then for our question, fixing any $x_0\in\bar x_0$, we just replace $\bar x$ with each $\bar x_n-\bar x_0=\overline{x_n-x_0}$ and we're almost done (noteworthy that in this step the well definedness of the quotient norm, as mentioned in Omnomnomnom's answer, is crucial.)

  • $\begingroup$ @user251257 that's the sad news of course. And my task is to find $y_n$ that do. $\endgroup$ – Vim Nov 21 '16 at 18:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Problem 1, there is not always an $x_n$ with $\lVert x_n\rVert_X = \lVert \overline{x}_n\rVert_{X/N}$. Problem 2, if there is, such a minimiser isn't necessarily unique. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Nov 21 '16 at 19:07
  • $\begingroup$ @DanielFischer but $X$ is a Banach space, and $\bar x_n$ is a closed, convex set. $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Nov 21 '16 at 19:08
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ If this construction fails to work, it would have to be in a space for which $$ X \ncong N \oplus X/N $$ that is, $N$ can't be complemented. $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Nov 21 '16 at 19:12
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @Omnomnomnom If $X$ is reflexive, a minimiser always exists, and if $X$ is uniformly convex (strictly convex suffices), it is unique. But if $X$ isn't reflexive, there needn't exist one. Take $X = C([0,1])$, and $N = \Bigl\{ f \in X : \int_0^{1/2} f(t)\,dt = \int_{1/2}^1 f(t)\,dt\Bigr\}$. Then $\lVert \overline{f}\rVert_{X/N} < \lVert f\rVert_X$ for all $f \neq 0$. $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Nov 21 '16 at 19:14

Edit: This answer doesn't reach the desired conclusion, but hopefully it will be a helpful step.

The key, one way or the other, is to remember that the addition/subtraction of the hyperplanes in $X/N$ is well-defined.

Consider the sequence $\bar y_n = (\bar x_n - \bar x_0)$. Then we can construct a sequence $y_n$ of minimizers in $\bar y_n$, and clearly $\|y_n\| \to 0$ just as $\|\bar y_n \| \to 0$.

Now, select the minimizer $x \in \bar x_0$, and define $x_n = x + y_n$. Clearly, $x_n \to x$, and we have $x_n \in \bar x_n$. It remains to be shown, however, that $\|x_n\| = \bar x_n$.

  • 1
    $\begingroup$ I don't think it's ok to select any $x_n$ since they must not exceed the lengths of $\bar x_n$, by the first requirement. $\endgroup$ – Vim Nov 21 '16 at 18:45
  • $\begingroup$ Ah, fair point, I missed that part $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Nov 21 '16 at 18:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Do we always have a projection onto a closed subspace? Shouldn't we switch to a minimizing sequence? $\endgroup$ – user251257 Nov 21 '16 at 18:48
  • $\begingroup$ @user251257 I'm not sure what either of your statements mean. Yes, the projection onto a closed subspace is always continuous, but I'm not sure this is what you're asking. What's a "minimizing sequence" in this context? $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Nov 21 '16 at 18:59
  • $\begingroup$ @Omnomnomnom the projection is continuous if and if $N$ is complemented. That I am pretty sure. I am not sure if the projection always exists. But, for $n$ we can select a $y_n \in \bar y_n$ with $\|y_n\| \le \|\bar y_n\| + 1/n$. $\endgroup$ – user251257 Nov 21 '16 at 19:04

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.