Extension operators and twisted sums of c₀ and C(K) spaces

DOI10.1016/J.JFA.2017.09.004MaRDI QIDQ1702572zbMATH OpenOpenAlexFDO

Authors Witold Marciszewski, Grzegorz Plebanek

Publication date 28 February 2018

Published in Journal of Functional Analysis (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1703.02139

\(C(K)\) space extension operator twisted sum

Consistency and independence results (03E35) Classical Banach spaces in the general theory (46B25) Nonseparable Banach spaces (46B26) Banach spaces of continuous, differentiable or analytic functions (46E15) Absolute neighborhood extensor, absolute extensor, absolute neighborhood retract (ANR), absolute retract spaces (general properties) (54C55) Remainders in general topology (54D40)

Abstract: We investigate the following problem posed by Cabello Sanch'ez, Castillo, Kalton, and Yost: Let

K

be a nonmetrizable compact space. Does there exist a nontrivial twisted sum of

c_{0}

and

C (K)

, i.e., does there exist a Banach space

X

containing a non-complemented copy

Z

of

c_{0}

such that the quotient space

X / Z

is isomorphic to

C (K)

? Using additional set-theoretic assumptions we give the first examples of compact spaces

K

providing a negative answer to this question. We show that under Martin's axiom and the negation of the continuum hypothesis, if either

K

is the Cantor cube

2^{o m e g a_{1}}

or

K

is a separable scattered compact space of height

3

and weight

o m e g a_{1}

, then every twisted sum of

c_{0}

and

C (K)

is trivial. We also construct nontrivial twisted sums of

c_{0}

and

C (K)

for

K

belonging to several classes of compacta. Our main tool is an investigation of pairs of compact spaces

K s u b s e t e q L

which do not admit an extension operator

C (K) o C (L)

.

Review text

The paper [\textit{F. Cabello Sánchez} et al., Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 355, No. 11, 4523--4541 (2003; Zbl 1066.46006)] ended with a comment on a problem that has been in our heads for a time: If \(X\) is a separable Banach space, then \(\mathrm{Ext}(X,c_0)=\{0\}\) by Sobczyk's theorem: we do not know, however, if there is a non-metrizable compact Hausdorff space \(K\) such that \(\mathrm{Ext}(C(K),c_0)=\{0\}\). The problem was followed by a list of cases in which a positive answer could be obtained, which included the statement ``\dots if \(X\) is any non-separable WCG-space, then \(\mathrm{Ext}(X,c_0)\neq\{0\}\) and this settles the case when \(K\) is an Eberlein compact; similar arguments can be used for Corson compact spaces. This last assertion about Corson compacta was not right, as \textit{C. Correa} and \textit{D. V. Tausk} [J. Funct. Anal. 270, No. 2, 842--853 (2016; Zbl 1347.46014)] noticed and amended. This paper, in turn, contains further advances on the problem attempting to arrive even at Valdivia compacta. In the meantime, there came all the work about separably injective Banach spaces gathered in [\textit{A. Avilés} et al., Separably injective Banach spaces. Cham: Springer (2016; Zbl 1379.46002)], in which the simplest examples of such spaces, the twisted sums \(Z(c_0, c_0(\Gamma))\) of \(c_0(\Gamma)\) and \(c_0\), were considered. The known examples of spaces \(Z(c_0, c_0(\Gamma))\) are \(C(K)\) spaces, although nobody knows if they have to be. So, a natural question, to the best of my knowledge asked by A. Avilés, was: do those \(C(K)\)-spaces admit nonrivial twisted sums with \(c_0\)? To put a resounding yes to the question, the paper [\textit{J. M. F. Castillo}, Topology Appl. 198, 107--116 (2016; Zbl 1366.46060)] was written. That paper proved more than announced: that any twisted sum space (\(C(K)\) or not) \(Z = Z(c_0(\Gamma'), c_0(\Gamma))\) can be twisted against \(c_0\); i.e., \(\mathrm{Ext}(Z, c_0)\neq 0\) and that the same occurs with all iterations \dots under the continuum hypothesis \mathsf{CH}. The proof goes quite smoothly once the first step has been done and no further trace of \mathsf{CH} appears. And it seems that the presence of \mathsf{CH} is just a technical tool set there simply because the first computation only seems to work for \(\mathfrak c\) and not for \(\aleph_1\). In this scenario, the paper under review appears and the authors show how things actually are: the first step cannot be done for \(\aleph_1\) under different set theoretic assumptions. More precisely, they show that the \(C(K)\) space \(Z(c_0, c_0(\aleph_1))\) cannot be twisted against \(c_0\) under Martin's axiom. And in doing that, they solve the Cabello, Castillo, Kalton, Yost original question. Of course, the paper does much more than that and contains many other significant ideas and advances on the problem of whether/when \(\mathrm{Ext}(C(K), c_0)=0\), but the crucial point is that no study of such questions can now be undertaken outside set theoretic assumptions.

Recommendations

Cites work

Cited in

(18)

This page was built for publication: Extension operators and twisted sums of \(c_{0}\) and \(C(K)\) spaces

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q1702572)