MathOverflow Asked on December 18, 2021
This is a cross-posted on MSE here.
Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. Say that $x_nin X$ is a P-sequence if $lim_{nrightarrowinfty}d(x_n,y)$ converges for every $yin X.$ Say that $(X,d)$ is P-complete if every P-sequence converges. Problem 1133 of the College Mathematics Journal (proposed by Kirk Madsen, solved by Eugene Herman) asks you to prove that $$text{compact}Longrightarrowtext{P-complete}Longrightarrowtext{complete}$$ and that none of these implications go both ways. The implications follow by showing that $$text{sequence}Longleftarrowtext{P-sequence}Longleftarrowtext{Cauchy sequence},$$ since a P-sequence (and thus a Cauchy sequence) converges iff it has a convergent subsequence. To give counterexamples to the converses, there are several possible directions. My question specifically involves normed vector spaces (although it is overkill for the original problem).
For any $ngeq 0$, any norm on $mathbb R^n$ induces a P-complete metric. This distinguishes compactness and P-completeness, since $mathbb R^n$ obviously isn’t compact when $n>0$. To differentiate P-completeness and completeness, we can note that a Hilbert space is P-complete iff it is finite-dimensional (otherwise, we take a non-repeating sequence of vectors from an orthonormal basis and get a P-sequence that doesn’t converge). I wonder if other infinite-dimensional normed spaces (necessarily Banach) might be P-complete. But my knowledge of Banach spaces is very limited, so I don’t have much intuition about what examples to try. Also, the property of P-completeness (unlike compactness and completeness) is not closed-hereditary, so we can’t just try an something by embedding it in a larger example.
Question: What is an example of an infinite dimensional, P-complete Banach space?
Examples I’ve tried:
That every Banach space is contained in a $P$-complete Banach space follows immediately from the following
Theorem. Let $X$ be a Banach space. Then there exists a Banach space $Y$ containing $X$ in which no separated sequence is a $P$-sequence.
Modulo "abstract nonsense", which I will explain later, the theorem follows from the following proposition, which comes from Christian Remling's remark that the unit vector basis $(e_n)$ of $c_0$ is not a $P$-sequence in $ell_infty$.
Proposition. Suppose that $(x_n)$ is a normalized basic sequence in a Banach space $X$. Then there is an isometric embedding $S$ from $X$ into $X oplus_infty ell_infty$ such that no subsequence of $(Sx_n)$ is a $P$-sequence.
Proof: Since $(x_n)$ is normalized and basic and $ell_infty$ is $1$-injective, there is $alpha >0$ and a contraction $T: X to ell_infty$ such that for all $n$, $Tx_n = alpha e_n$. Define $S$ from $X$ into $X oplus_infty ell_infty$ by $Sx := (x,Tx)$. Since $T$ is a contraction, $S$ is an isometric embedding. We show that $(Sx_n)$ does not contain a $P$-convergent subsequence; this is basically Christian's comment. Let $A$ be any infinite set of natural numbers and take an infinite subset $B$ of $A$ so that $Asetminus B$ is also infinite. Then the distance from $Sx_n$ to $-1_B$ is $1+alpha$ if $n$ is in $B$ and one otherwise, so $(x_n)_{nin A}$ is not a $P$-sequence.
Now comes the soft souping up. By iterating the Proposition transfinitely, we get for any Banach space $X$ a superspace $Z$ such that no normalized basic sequence in $X$ is a $P$-sequence in $Z$. Iterate this $omega_1$ times to get an increasing transfinite sequence $X_lambda$, $lambda < omega_1$, of Banach spaces with $X_1 = X$ so that no normalized basic sequence in $X_lambda$ is a $P$-sequence in $X_{lambda+1}$. Let $Y$ be the union of $X_lambda$ over $lambda < omega_1$. Every sequence in $Y$ is in some $X_lambda$, hence no normalized basic sequence in $Y$ is a $P$-sequence. This property carries over to the completion of $Y$ by the principle of small perturbations.
Now suppose that $Y$ is a Banach space in which no normalized basic sequence is a $P$-sequence. We claim that also no separated sequence in $Y$ is a $P$-sequence. Certainly no non norm null basic sequence in $Y$ is a $P$-sequence, and $P$-sequences are bounded, so it is enough to consider a general separated sequence $(x_n)$ that is bounded and bounded away from zero. If the sequence has a basic subsequence, we are done. But it is known (and contained, for example, in the book of Albiac and Kalton), that if such an $(x_n)$ has no basic subsequence then it has a subsequence that converges weakly, so without loss of generality we can assume that $x_n - x$ converges weakly to zero but is bounded and bounded away from zero. But then $x_n - x$ has a basic subsequence, hence $x_n - x$ cannot have a $P$-subsequence, whence neither can $x_n$.
EDIT 7/27/20: The reduction of the problem to the theorem above is a consequence of things proved, but perhaps not always explicitly stated, in any course that contains an introduction to metric spaces:
Theorem. Let $M$ be a metric spaces. Then one and only one of the following is true.
A. $M$ is totally bounded.
B. $M$ contains a separated sequence.
A corollary is that every sequence in a metric space either contains a Cauchy subsequence or a separated subsequence.
Answered by Bill Johnson on December 18, 2021
It seems to me that you can show that no infinite-dimensional separable Banach space $X$ is P-complete as follows. Pick any bounded separated sequence ${x_n}_{n=1}^infty$ in $X$ and pick a dense sequence ${y_i}$ in $X$. Pick a subsequence in ${x_n}$ for which $|x_n-y_1|$ converges. Then from this subsequence pick further subsequence for which $|x_n-y_2|$ converges. So on. After doing this for all $i$, pick a diagonal subsequence ${x_{n(k)}}_{k=1}^infty$ and show that it satisfies the desired conditions.
Answered by Mikhail Ostrovskii on December 18, 2021
Get help from others!
Recent Questions
Recent Answers
© 2024 TransWikia.com. All rights reserved. Sites we Love: PCI Database, UKBizDB, Menu Kuliner, Sharing RPP