Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedjudge pass (gpt-5.6-terra)audited 2026-09-14
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

A Banach space is reflexive if and only if its dual is reflexive

Statement

Assume HB and the Axiom of Countable Choice ACω. A real or complex Banach space X is reflexive if and only if its dual X is reflexive.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: HB, ACω, and a real or complex Banach space X.

[F1]

A Banach space is reflexive exactly when its canonical map into its bidual is surjective; surjectivity means that every member of the bidual is evaluation at a vector (Reflexivity is surjectivity of the canonical map).

[F2]

Under HB the canonical map JE:EE of every real or complex normed space is scalar-linear and isometric, hence injective (Relative Hahn–Banach makes the canonical bidual map an isometry).

[F3]

Assuming ACω, a norm-complete subspace of a normed space is closed (A complete normed subspace is closed under countable choice).

[F4]

Under HB, a point outside a nonempty closed convex subset of a real or complex normed space is strictly separated from it by a nonzero bounded scalar-linear functional; the inequalities use its real part (Relative geometric Hahn–Banach with the exact open, closed, and compact hypotheses, part (ii)).

[F5]

HB is the real dominated-extension principle over ZF, and ACω is choice for each supplied sequence of nonempty sets (The real dominated-extension principle as an additional hypothesis over ZF, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

Proof

technique · direct in both directions
1.1

If X={0}, every scalar-linear functional on X is zero, so X=X=X={0} and both canonical maps are surjective. The equivalence therefore holds in the zero-space case.

F1algebra
1.2

Suppose first that X is reflexive. Let ΛX and define f=ΛJX. Scalar linearity of the two maps makes f scalar-linear, and [F2] gives f(x)ΛJXx=Λx, so fX.

F2given
1.3

Conversely, suppose that X is reflexive and put W=JX(X)X. The image W is a scalar-linear subspace by [F2]. It is complete: if (JXxn) is Cauchy in its restricted norm, then xnxm=JXxnJXxm makes (xn) Cauchy in the Banach space X; for its limit x, the same equality gives JXxnJXx in W.

F2given
2.1

For arbitrary xX, reflexivity of X supplies an xX with x=JXx. Then JX(f)(x)=x(f)=JXx(f)=f(x)=Λ(JXx)=Λ(x). Thus JX(f)=Λ. Since Λ was arbitrary, JX is surjective and X is reflexive. This chooses only one representing vector for one arbitrary x at a time.

F1step 1.2
2.2

Apply [F3] under the assumed ACω. The complete subspace W is closed in X. It is also nonempty and convex because it is a linear subspace.

F3F5step 1.3
3.1

Suppose for contradiction that some zXW exists. By [F4] there is a nonzero ΓX that strictly separates the point z from W. In particular, ReΓ is bounded above on W. For wW and every real t, also twW; boundedness of tReΓ(w) for all tR forces ReΓ(w)=0. In the complex case iwW as well, so 0=ReΓ(iw)=ImΓ(w); hence in either field ΓW=0.

F4step 2.2assume-contraalgebra
4.1

Reflexivity of X supplies fX with Γ=JX(f). For every xX, step 3.1 yields 0=Γ(JXx)=JXx(f)=f(x). Thus f=0, whence Γ=JX(0)=0, contradicting the nonzero separator in step 3.1.

F1step 3.1discharge-contradiction: step 3.1
5.1

No point of X lies outside W, so JX(X)=X and [F1] says that X is reflexive. This proves the reverse implication and hence the equivalence. HB is used only in the isometry [F2] and separation [F4]; ACω is used only in step 2.2 through [F3].

F1F2F3F4step 4.1

Source notes

Bühler–Salamon, Theorem 2.71(i), printed pp. 89–90, supplies the complete canonical-map and annihilator argument. The proof above replaces the source's ordinary-choice background by the repository's exact local bookkeeping: ACω is stated because the selected complete-subspace-closed supplier assumes it, while HB is stated separately for bidual isometry and geometric separation. The complex branch is supplied by the real-part and iW calculation in step 3.1.

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

26 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources