2
$\begingroup$

Let $(X,\|\cdot\|)$ be a normed space over complex or real field and $\tau_X$ is the topology generated by the norm $\|\cdot\|$, i.e. just norm topology. 1) Is there a locally convex topology $\tau$ such that $\tau$ is weaker than $\tau_X$ and stronger than $\sigma(X,X^*)$, where $X^*$ is Banach adjoint? 2) If $\tau$ is any locally convex topology on $X$, then is it true that $\tau=\sigma(X,Y)$ for some subset $Y$ of $X^+$, where $X^+$ means the algebraic adjoint of $X$, i.e. the set of all linear functionals on $X$?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ For the second question, have you tried to check whether the norm topology itself can be of the form $\sigma(X,Y)$? My intuition is that it cannot. $\endgroup$ – Nate Eldredge Dec 11 '19 at 13:27
3
$\begingroup$

Let's first consider the case that $X$ is finite-dimensional. Since then there is only one Hausdorff vector space topology on $X$, and $\sigma(X,X^{\ast})$ is Hausdorff, the answer to the first question is "no" if we understand "weaker" and "stronger" in the strict sense [in the non-strict sense the answer is trivially "yes"]. The answer to the second question is "yes" for finite-dimensional $X$, even if we consider also non-Hausdorff topologies (let $N$ be the $\tau$-closure of $\{0\}$, then $\tau = \sigma(X, N^{\perp})$).

If $X$ is infinite-dimensional, the answers are different. Every $\sigma(X,Y)$-neighbourhood of $0$ contains a linear subspace of finite codimension, thus no topology having a neighbourhood of $0$ that only contains subspaces of infinite codimension — like for example norm-topologies, that have neighbourhoods of $0$ containing no nontrivial subspace at all — can be a $\sigma(X,Y)$ for any subspace $Y \subset X^{+}$.

This property allows an easy construction of a topology strictly between the norm topology and the weak topology if $X$ contains infinite-dimensional closed subspaces with infinite codimension (all common spaces do): Let $Z$ be such a subspace. Put $U = B + Z$, where $B$ is the unit ball of $X$. Then the locally convex topology generated by $\sigma(X,X^{\ast}) \cup \{U\}$ is strictly finer than $\sigma(X,X^{\ast})$$U$ doesn't contain a subspace of finite codimension — and strictly weaker than the norm topology — every neighbourhood of $0$ contains an infinite-dimensional subspace.

If $X$ is such that every closed subspace has either finite dimension or finite codimension (I don't know whether that's possible), this construction doesn't work.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ If $f_0\in Y$ then the set $V=\{x\in X: |f_0(x)|\leq 1\}$ is $\sigma(X,Y)$ neighbourhood of 0. How the set $V$ could contain a linear subspace? I don't understand. $\endgroup$ – golomorfMath Dec 13 '19 at 5:17
  • $\begingroup$ $V$ contains the set $\{x \in X : f_0(x) = 0\} = \ker f_0$. This is a linear subspace of $X$, since $f_0$ is linear. As $f_0 \colon X \to \mathbb{C}$ (or $\mathbb{R}$), the codimension of $\ker f_0$ is $1$ (if $f_0 \neq 0$) or $0$ (if $f_0 = 0$). $\endgroup$ – Daniel Fischer Dec 13 '19 at 12:52
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. Understood now. $\endgroup$ – golomorfMath Dec 14 '19 at 16:06

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.