7
$\begingroup$

Let $X$ be a Banach space such that $X'$ is strictly convex. Let $Y$ be a closed proper subspace of $X$. Then: $$\forall \varphi \in Y', \exists!\overline\varphi \in X', (\overline\varphi_{|Y}=\varphi) \land(\lVert\overline\varphi\rVert=\lVert\varphi\rVert).$$ Define: $$\Gamma:Y'\rightarrow X', \varphi \mapsto\overline\varphi.$$ Then $\Gamma$ is norm preserving but it's not clear if it is an isometry and, also if this is the case, the lack of surjectivity prevents us from using Mazur-Ulam theorem to show that $\Gamma$ is linear... so the question: is $\Gamma$ linear (and then, being norm preverving, also an isometry)? Thanks in advance.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ It's not obvious that $\Gamma$ is an isometry. If you're doign this naively (for each $\varphi$ separately, use Hahn-Banach to find an $\overline{\varphi}$), then the map has no reason to be linear, You know that $d(0,\overline{\varphi}) = d(0, \varphi)$, but that doesn't imply $d(\overline{\varphi}_1,\overline{\varphi}_2) = d(\varphi_1, \varphi_2)$ (in the same way that an arbitrary permutation of the unit sphere is not an Euclidean isometry). $\endgroup$ – D. Thomine Jun 12 '18 at 8:34
  • $\begingroup$ On the other hand, you can try to find $\overline{\varphi}$ coherently, maybe using a Hamel basis, so that $\Gamma$ is an isometry. But then, linearity will be obvious by construction. $\endgroup$ – D. Thomine Jun 12 '18 at 8:36
  • $\begingroup$ You are right, it's not clear if it is an isometry at all, i'll edit the question,... but the point is that anyway in a strict convex Banach space, for each $\varphi$ there is a unique $\overline\varphi$ that preserves the norm (so there aren't choices to make) and then the question about linearity remains open... $\endgroup$ – Bob Jun 12 '18 at 8:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ For uniqueness of the extension, isn't $X'$ the space you want to be strictly convex? $\endgroup$ – Rhys Steele Jun 12 '18 at 9:21
  • $\begingroup$ I'll edit again :) $\endgroup$ – Bob Jun 12 '18 at 9:26
0
+50
$\begingroup$

The function $\Gamma$ is not linear.

We can construct the following counterexample. Note that most of the details and calculations are not explained and only a rough sketch of the whole thing is given.

We choose $X=\mathbb R^3$ and define $$ \varphi(x) = x_1+ x_2, \quad \psi(x) = x_1+ x_3, \quad \lambda(x) = x_1+x_2+x_3. $$ Also, we define $Y=\ker \lambda$. As a norm, we use the $\ell^p$-Norm on $\mathbb R^3$ for $p\in (1,\infty)$.

It can be calculated that $$ \| \varphi\|_{Y'}=\|\psi\|_{Y'} = 2 ( 2+2^p )^{-\frac1p}. $$ and $$ \| \varphi+\psi\|_{Y'} = \| \varphi+\psi-\lambda\|_{Y'} = 2(2^p+2)^{-\frac1p}. $$

Next, it follows from the definitions, that $\Gamma\varphi = \varphi+\alpha\lambda$ and $\Gamma\psi = \psi+\alpha\lambda$. for some $\alpha\in\mathbb R$. We have $$ \|\Gamma\psi\|_{X'} = \|\Gamma\varphi\|_{X'} = \| (1+\alpha,1+\alpha,\alpha) \|_{\ell^q} = ( 2|1+\alpha|^q+|\alpha|^q)^{\frac1q} $$ where $q$ defined via $1=1/p+1/q$. Hence, $\alpha$ has to be chosen in such a way that $$ ( 2|1+\alpha|^q+|\alpha|^q)^{\frac1q} = 2 ( 2+2^p )^{-\frac1p}. $$ It can be seen that this is the case if $\alpha = -2^{p-1}(2^{p-1}+1)^{-1}$.

We also have $$ \|\Gamma\varphi+\Gamma\psi\|_{X'} = \| (2+2\alpha,1+2\alpha,1+2\alpha) \|_{\ell^q} = ( |2+2\alpha|^q + 2|1+2\alpha|^q )^{\frac1q}. $$

Now we assume that $\Gamma(\varphi+\psi)=$. This implies $$ ( |2+2\alpha|^q + 2|1+2\alpha|^q )^{\frac1q} = 2(2^p+2)^{-\frac1p}. $$ After some rearranging and substituting $\alpha$, this is equivalent to $$ 2(2^{p-1}-1)^q+2^q = 2^p+2. $$ This is true for $p=2$, but it is false when we choose $p=3$. In fact, if you plot these functions, you can see that The left-hand side is always larger than $2^p+2$ if $p\neq 2$.

$\endgroup$

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.