Some examples of meager sets in Banach spaces. (Q1852425)
From MaRDI portal
| This is the item page for this Wikibase entity, intended for internal use and editing purposes. Please use this page instead for the normal view: Some examples of meager sets in Banach spaces. |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1848885
| Language | Label | Description | Also known as |
|---|---|---|---|
| default for all languages | No label defined |
||
| English | Some examples of meager sets in Banach spaces. |
scientific article; zbMATH DE number 1848885 |
Statements
Some examples of meager sets in Banach spaces. (English)
0 references
5 January 2003
0 references
The paper contains three results: (1) The set of all pairs \((x,y)\in c_0\times c_0\) whose pointwise product has bounded partial sums is a first category \(F_\sigma\)-set. (2) The set of \((f,g)\in L^1(0,1)\times L^1(0,1)\) such that the product \(fg\) is integrable is a first category \(F_\sigma\)-set. (3) The set of all \(f\in C[0,1]\) which have a finite unilateral I-approximative derivative at points of a second category subset of \([0,1]\) is of first category in \(C[0,1]\). Reviewer's remarks: The first two results are trivial. The third one is correct but the proof contains some serious mistakes. Lemma 2.1 on a characterization of a I-density points is false (if \(A\) is the set of all irrational numbers, then any real number is I-density point of \(A\) but the ``equivalent'' condition is not satisfied). Fortunately, the lemma is true if \(A\) is the intersection of an open and a closed sets which is needed in the proof of the result (3). Lemma 2.1 is claimed to be taken from \textit{K.~Ciesielski, L.~Larson} and \textit{K.~Ostaszewski} [``\({\mathcal I}\)-density continuous functions'' (Mem. Am. Math. Soc. 515) (1994; Zbl 0801.26001)]. The correct condition contains the regular open set \(\widetilde A\) such that \(\widetilde A\triangle A\) is of first category in place of \(A\). Further, the Kharazisvilli theorem given in Proposition 2.1 is also incorrectly quoted. In the conclusion, the roles of \(X\) and \(Y\) are interchanged. This is crucial for the end of the proof of the result (3). Proposition 2.1 as stated is almost trivial and useless.
0 references
Baire category
0 references
I-approximative derivative
0 references
0.84511685
0 references
0.84097505
0 references
0.8398229
0 references
0.8396107
0 references
0.82888776
0 references
0 references
0 references