6
$\begingroup$

I am well aware of the problem of complementing subspaces in Banach spaces as it was discussed here and here .

Nevertheless, I wonder whether there are conditions for existence of a complement $M$ to the kernel $N$ of a bounded linear operator $T:V\to Q$. That is, under which conditions there is a closed subspace $M\subset V$ such that $N \oplus M = V$?

In my particular case, the operator $T\colon V \to Q$ fulfills these equivalent properties:

  • $T'\colon Q' \to V'$ is an homeomorphism on its range
  • $T'$ is injective and has a closed range
  • $T$ is surjective
  • $T$ has a bounded right inverse (I was wrong here, see comments below)

Any ideas?

Disclaimer: This relates to the problem I have posted the day before.

EDIT: I additionally assume that $V$ and $Q$ are reflexive and separable.

UPDATE: I have answered the questions, based on the comments.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ The fourth bullet does not seem to be equivalent to the other ones (or do you talk about a bounded right inverse that is allowed to be non-linear?). $\endgroup$ – Martin May 16 '13 at 19:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Notice that every closed subspace is the kernel of some map to another space, so our restriction to kernels is not very operative :-) $\endgroup$ – Mariano Suárez-Álvarez May 17 '13 at 9:40
  • $\begingroup$ @Mariano Right. But, this means that if there were conditions for existence of complements, than they would be expressible in terms of properties of the operator. $\endgroup$ – Jan May 17 '13 at 10:06
  • $\begingroup$ @Martin . Not sure. I was using the map $T_f:V/N \to Q$ that is a bijection and concluded that, choosing the right representative of $[v]\in V/N$, $T_f^{-1}$ is the 'right' inverse to $T$. However, this 'right' is maybe not safe. $\endgroup$ – Jan May 17 '13 at 10:11
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The problem is that $T_{f}^{-1} \colon Q \to V/N$, but you don't get from $V/N$ back up to $V$ with a linear map unless $N$ is complemented in $V$. In fact, if $T$ has a bounded and linear right inverse $R$ then $M = \ker{(1_V - RT)} = \operatorname{im} R$ is a complement of $N$. $\endgroup$ – Martin May 17 '13 at 10:16
3
$\begingroup$

Let me summarize the comments and my findings to answer this question:

Having read through this survey and some earlier papers, I have come the conclusion that the condition $T\colon V\to Q$ being bounded and surjective does not imply that $\ker T$ is complementable. Assume the contrary, then

  • For any $N$ subspace of $V$, one can take $Q:= V/N$ and the natural surjection $T\colon V \to Q=V/N$ having $N$ as the kernel
  • By boundedness of $T$ one has $V$ separable, then $Q$ separable
  • As $Q$ is a quotient space of a reflexive Banach space, $Q$ is reflexive, cf. Palmer's book (pp. 79)
  • and thus, one would have the contradictory outcome that every closed subset of a separable and reflexive B-space has a complement

This is equivalent to $V$ being isomorph to a Hilbert-space, cf. the discussion here. And this is known to be not true for $L^p$ spaces, $p\neq2$, see this paper.

$\endgroup$

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.