E extracta mathematicae Vol. 32, Núm. 1, 1 – 24 (2017) A Note on Some Isomorphic Properties in Projective Tensor Products Ioana Ghenciu Mathematics Department, University of Wisconsin-River Falls, Wisconsin, 54022, USA ioana.ghenciu@uwrf.edu Presented by Jesús M. F. Castillo Received May 23, 2016 Abstract: A Banach space X is sequentially Right (resp. weak sequentially Right) if every Right subset of X∗ is relatively weakly compact (resp. weakly precompact). A Banach space X has the L-limited (resp. the wL-limited) property if every L-limited subset of X∗ is relatively weakly compact (resp. weakly precompact). We study Banach spaces with the weak sequentially Right and the wL-limited properties. We investigate whether the projective tensor product of two Banach spaces X and Y has the sequentially Right property when X and Y have the respective property. Key words: R-sets, L-limited sets, sequentially Right spaces, L-limited property. AMS Subject Class. (2010): 46B20, 46B25, 46B28. 1. Introduction A bounded subset A of a Banach space X is called a Dunford-Pettis (DP) (resp. limited) subset of X if every weakly null (resp. w∗-null) sequence (x∗n) in X∗ tends to 0 uniformly on A; i.e., lim n ( sup{|x∗n(x)| : x ∈ A} ) = 0. A sequence (xn) is DP (resp. limited) if the set {xn : n ∈ N} is DP (resp. limited). A subset S of X is said to be weakly precompact provided that every sequence from S has a weakly Cauchy subsequence. Every DP (resp. limited) set is weakly precompact [37, p. 377], [1] (resp. [4, Proposition]). An operator T : X → Y is called weakly precompact (or almost weakly compact) if T(BX) is weakly precompact and completely continuous (or Dunford-Pettis) if T maps weakly convergent sequences to norm convergent sequences. In [35] the authors introduced the Right topology on a Banach space X. It is the restriction of the Mackey topology τ(X∗∗, X) to X and it is also the 1 2 i. ghenciu topology of uniform convergence on absolutely convex σ(X∗, X∗∗) compact subsets of X∗. Further, τ(X∗∗, X) can also be viewed as the topology of uniform convergence on relatively σ(X∗, X∗∗) compact subsets of X∗ [26]. A sequence (xn) in a Banach space X is Right null if and only if it is weakly null and DP (see Proposition 1). An operator T : X → Y is called pseudo weakly compact (pwc) (or Dunford-Pettis completely continuous (DPcc)) if it takes Right null sequences in X into norm null sequences in Y ([35], [25]). Every completely continuous operator T : X → Y is pseudo weakly compact. If T : X → Y is an operator with weakly precompact adjoint, then T is a pseudo weakly compact operator ([18, Corollary 5]). A subset K of X∗ is called a Right set (R-set) if each Right null sequence (xn) in X tends to 0 uniformly on K [26]; i.e., lim n ( sup{|x∗(xn)| : x∗ ∈ K} ) = 0. A Banach space X is said to be sequentially Right (SR) (has property (SR)) if every pseudo weakly compact operator T : X → Y is weakly compact, for any Banach space Y [35]. Banach spaces with property (V ) are sequentially Right ([35, Corollary 15]). A subset A of a dual space X∗ is called an L-limited set if every weakly null limited sequence (xn) in X converges uniformly on A [39]; i.e., lim n ( sup{|x∗(xn)| : x∗ ∈ A} ) = 0. A Banach space X has the L-limited property if every L-limited subset of X∗ is relatively weakly compact [39]. An operator T : X → Y is called limited completely continuous (lcc) if T maps weakly null limited sequences to norm null sequences [40]. In this paper we introduce the weak sequentially Right (wSR) and wL- limited properties. A Banach space X is said to have the weak sequentially Right (wSR) (resp. the wL-limited) property if every Right (resp. L-limited) subset of X∗ is weakly precompact. We obtain some characterizations of these properties with respect to some geometric properties of Banach spaces, such as the Gelfand-Phillips property, the Grothendieck property, and properties (wV ) and (wL). We generalize some results from [39]. We also show that property (SR) can be lifted from a certain subspace of X to X. We study whether the projective tensor product X ⊗ πY has the (SR) (resp. the L-limited) property if L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗), and X and Y have the respective property. We prove that in some cases, if X⊗π Y has the (wSR) property, then L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 3 2. Definitions and notation Throughout this paper, X, Y , E, and F will denote Banach spaces. The unit ball of X will be denoted by BX and X ∗ will denote the continuous linear dual of X. An operator T : X → Y will be a continuous and linear function. We will denote the canonical unit vector basis of c0 by (en) and the canonical unit vector basis of ℓ1 by (e ∗ n). The set of all operators, weakly compact operators, and compact operators from X to Y will be denoted by L(X, Y ), W(X, Y ), and K(X, Y ). The projective tensor product of X and Y will be denoted by X ⊗π Y . A bounded subset A of X∗ is called an L-set if each weakly null sequence (xn) in X tends to 0 uniformly on A; i.e., lim n ( sup{|x∗(xn)| : x∗ ∈ A} ) = 0. A Banach space X has the Dunford-Pettis property (DPP) if every weakly compact operator T : X → Y is completely continuous, for any Banach space Y . Schur spaces, C(K) spaces, and L1(µ) spaces have the DPP . The reader can check [8], [9], and [10] for a guide to the extensive classical literature dealing with the DPP . A Banach space X has the Dunford-Pettis relatively compact property (DPrcP) if every Dunford-Pettis subset of X is relatively compact [14]. Schur spaces have the DPrcP . The space X does not contain a copy of ℓ1 if and only if X∗ has the DPrcP if and only if every L-set in X∗ is relatively compact ([14, Theorem 1], [13, Theorem 2]). The space X has the Gelfand-Phillips (GP) property if every limited sub- set of X is relatively compact. The following spaces have the Gelfand-Phillips property: Schur spaces; spaces with w∗-sequential compact dual unit balls (for example subspaces of weakly compactly generated spaces, separable spaces, spaces whose duals have the Radon-Nikodým property, reflexive spaces, and spaces whose duals do not contain ℓ1); dual spaces X ∗ whith X not contain- ining ℓ1; Banach spaces with the separable complementation property, i.e., every separable subspace is contained in a complemented separable subspace (for example L1(µ) spaces, where µ is a positive measure) [42, p. 31], [4, Prop- osition], [12, Theorem 3.1 and p. 384], [11, Proposition 5.2], [13, Corollary 5]. A series ∑ xn in X is said to be weakly unconditionally convergent (wuc) if for every x∗ ∈ X∗, the series ∑ |x∗(xn)| is convergent. An operator T : X → Y is called unconditionally converging if it maps weakly unconditionally convergent series to unconditionally convergent ones. 4 i. ghenciu A bounded subset A of X∗ is called a V -subset of X∗ provided that lim n ( sup{ |x∗(xn)| : x∗ ∈ A } ) = 0) for each wuc series ∑ xn in X. A Banach space X has property (V ) if every V -subset of X∗ is relatively weakly compact [33]. A Banach space X has property (V ) if every uncon- ditionally converging operator T from X to any Banach space Y is weakly compact [33, Proposition 1]. C(K) spaces and reflexive spaces have property (V ) ([33, Theorem 1, Proposition 7]). A Banach space X has property (wV ) if every V -subset of X∗ is weakly precompact [41]. A Banach space X has the reciprocal Dunford-Pettis property (RDPP) if every completely continuous operator T from X to any Banach space Y is weakly compact. The space X has the RDPP if and only if every L-set in X∗ is relatively weakly compact [28]. Banach spaces with property (V ) have the RDPP [33]. A Banach space X has property (wL) if every L-set in X∗ is weakly precompact [19]. A topological space S is called dispersed (or scattered) if every nonempty closed subset of S has an isolated point. A compact Hausdorff space K is dispersed if and only if ℓ1 ̸↪→ C(K) [34, Main theorem]. The Banach-Mazur distance d(X, Y ) between two isomorphic Banach spaces X and Y is defined by inf(∥T∥∥T −1∥), where the infinum is taken over all iso- morphisms T from X onto Y . A Banach space X is called an L∞-space (resp. L1-space) [5, p. 7] if there is a λ ≥ 1 so that every finite dimensional subspace of X is contained in another subspace N with d(N, ℓn∞) ≤ λ (resp. d(N, ℓn1) ≤ λ) for some integer n. Complemented subspaces of C(K) spaces (resp. L1(µ)) spaces) are L∞-spaces (resp. L1-spaces) ([5, Proposition 1.26]). The dual of an L1-space (resp. L∞-space) is an L∞-space (resp. L1- space) ([5, Proposition 1.27]). The L∞-spaces, L1-spaces, and their duals have the DPP ([5, Corollary 1.30]). 3. The weak sequentially Right and wL-limited properties The following result gives a characterization of Right null sequences. Proposition 1. A sequence (xn) in a Banach space X is Right null if and only if it is weakly null and DP. Proof. Suppose that (xn) is a Right null sequence in X. Then (xn) is weakly null, since the Right topology is stronger than the weak topology. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 5 Let (x∗n) be a weakly null sequence in X ∗. Since {x∗n : n ∈ N} is relatively weakly compact in X∗ and (xn) is Right null, (xn) converges uniformly on {x∗n : n ∈ N}. Therefore limn supi |x∗i (xn)| = 0, and thus limn |x ∗ n(xn)| = 0. Hence {xn : n ∈ N} is a DP set. Suppose that (xn) is a weakly null DP sequence. Let K be a relatively weakly compact subset of X∗. Suppose that (xn) does not converge uniformly on K. Let ϵ > 0 and let (x∗n) be a sequence in K so that |x∗n(xn)| > ϵ for all n. Without loss of generality suppose that (x∗n) converges weakly to x ∗, x∗ ∈ X∗. Since (x∗n − x∗) is weakly null in X∗ and (xn) is DP, limn(x∗n − x∗)(xn) = 0. Thus limn x ∗ n(xn) = 0, a contradiction. Hence (xn) converges uniformly to zero on K, and thus (xn) is Right null. A Banach space X is sequentially Right if and only if every Right subset of X∗ is relatively weakly compact [26, Theorem 3.25]. A Banach space X has the L-limited property if and only if every limited completely continuous operator T : X → Y is weakly compact, for every Banach space Y [39, Theorem 2.8]. In the next theorem we give elementary operator theoretic characterizations of weak precompactness, relative weak compactness, and relative norm compactness for Right sets and L-limited sets. The argument contains the theorems in [26] and [39] just cited. We say that a Banach space X is weak sequentially Right (wSR) or has the (wSR) property (resp. has the wL-limited property) if every Right (resp. L-limited) subset of X∗ is weakly precompact. If ℓ1 ̸↪→ X∗, then X is weak sequentially Right and has the wL-limited property, by Rosenthal’s theorem ([8, Ch. XI]). Theorem 2. Let X be a Banach space. The following assertions are equivalent: 1. (i) For every Banach space Y , every pseudo weakly compact operator T : X → Y has a weakly precompact (weakly compact, resp. compact) adjoint. (ii) Every pseudo weakly compact operator T : X → ℓ∞ has a weakly precompact (weakly compact, resp. compact) adjoint. (iii) Every Right subset of X∗ is weakly precompact (relatively weakly com- pact, resp. relatively compact). 6 i. ghenciu 2. (i) For every Banach space Y , every limited completely continuous operator T : X → Y has a weakly precompact (weakly compact, resp. compact) adjoint. (ii) Every limited completely continuous operator T : X → ℓ∞ has a weakly precompact (weakly compact, resp. compact) adjoint. (iii) Every L-limited subset of X∗ is weakly precompact (relatively weakly compact, resp. relatively compact). Proof. We will show that 1.(i)⇒1.(ii)⇒1.(iii)⇒1.(i) in the weakly precom- pact case as well as 2.(i)⇒2.(ii)⇒2.(iii)⇒2.(i) in the compact case. These two arguments are similar, and the arguments for the remaining implications of the theorem follow the same pattern. 1. (weakly precompact) (i)⇒(ii) is clear. (ii)⇒(iii) Let K be a Right subset of X∗ and let (x∗n) be a sequence in K. Define T : X → ℓ∞ by T(x) = (x∗i (x)). Let (xn) be a Right null sequence in X. Since K is a Right set, lim n ∥T(xn)∥ = lim n sup i |x∗i (xn)| = 0. Therefore T is pseudo weakly compact, and thus T ∗ : ℓ∗∞ → X∗ is weakly precompact. Hence (T ∗(e∗n)) = (x ∗ n) has a weakly Cauchy subsequence. (iii)⇒(i) Let T : X → Y be a pseudo weakly compact operator. Let (xn) be a Right null sequence in X. If y∗ ∈ BY ∗, ⟨T ∗(y∗), xn⟩ ≤ ∥T(xn)∥ → 0. Then T ∗(BY ∗) is a Right subset of X ∗. Therefore T ∗(BY ∗) is weakly precompact, and thus T ∗ is weakly precompact. 2. (compact) (i)⇒(ii) is clear. (ii)⇒(iii) Let K be an L-limited subset of X∗ and let (x∗n) be a sequence in K. Define T : X → ℓ∞ as above and note that T is limited completely continuous. Thus T ∗ : ℓ∗∞ → X∗ is compact, and (T ∗(e∗n)) = (x∗n) has a norm convergent subsequence. (iii)⇒(i) Let T : X → Y be a limited completely continuous operator. Let (xn) be a weakly null limited sequence in X. If y ∗ ∈ BY ∗, ⟨T ∗(y∗), xn⟩ ≤ ∥T(xn)∥ → 0. Then T ∗(BY ∗) is an L-limited subset of X∗. Therefore T ∗(BY ∗) is relatively compact, and thus T ∗ is compact. Corollary 3. If X is weak sequentially Right (has the wL-limited, resp. the L-limited property), then every quotient space of X has the same property. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 7 Proof. We only prove the result for the weak sequentially Right property. The proofs for the other properties are similar. Suppose that X is weak sequentially Right. Let Z be a quotient space of X and Q : X → Z be a quotient map. Let T : Z → E be a pseudo weakly compact operator. Then TQ : X → E is pseudo weakly compact, and thus (TQ)∗ is weakly precompact by Theorem 2. Since Q∗T ∗(B∗E) is weakly precompact and Q∗ is an isomorphism, T ∗(B∗E) is weakly precompact. Apply Theorem 2. Corollary 4. Suppose X is weak sequentially Right and Y is a Banach space. Then an operator T : X → Y is pseudo weakly compact if and only if T ∗ : Y ∗ → X∗ is weakly precompact. Proof. If T : X → Y is pseudo weakly compact, then T ∗ : Y ∗ → X∗ is weakly precompact by Theorem 2, since X is weak sequentially Right. The converse follows from [18, Corollary 5]. Corollary 5. (i) If X is weak sequentially Right (resp. has the wL- limited property), then every pseudo weakly compact (resp. limited com- pletely continuous) operator T : X → Y is weakly precompact. (ii) If X is an infinite dimensional space with the Schur property, then X is not weak sequentially Right (resp. does not have the wL-limited property). (iii) If X is weak sequentially Right (resp. has the wL-limited property), then ℓ1 ̸ c ↪→ X. Proof. (i) Suppose X is weak sequentially right (resp. has the wL-limited property). Let T : X → Y be pseudo weakly compact (resp. limited com- pletely continuous). Then T ∗ is weakly precompact by Theorem 2. Hence T is weakly precompact, by [2, Corollary 2]. (ii) Since X has the Schur property, the identity operator i : X → X is pseudo weakly compact (resp. limited completely continuous). Since X is an infinite dimensional space with the Schur property, i is not weakly precompact. Apply (i). (iii) Apply Corollary 3 and (ii). Corollary 6. A Banach space X has the L-limited property if every separable subspace of X has the same property. Proof. Let T : X → Y be a limited completely continuous operator. Then for every closed subspace Z of X, T |Z is limited completely continuous. Let 8 i. ghenciu (xn) be a sequence in BX and let Z = [xn : n ∈ N] be the closed linear span of (xn). Since Z is a separable subspace of X, Z has the L-limited property. Since T |Z is limited completely continuous, it is weakly compact by Theorem 2. Then there is a subsequence (xnk) of (xn) so that (T(xnk)) is weakly convergent. Thus T is weakly compact. Apply Theorem 2. Example. Corollary 6 cannot be reversed. Indeed, consider ℓ1 as a sub- space of ℓ∞. By [39, Theorem 2.11], ℓ∞ has the L-limited property. However, ℓ1 does not have the L-limited property, by [39, Corollary 2.9] (or Corollary 5 (ii)). Theorem 7. The Banach space X has the DPP if and only if every Right subset of X∗ is an L-set. Proof. Suppose X has the DPP . Then every weakly null sequence (xn) is DP ([9, Theorem 1]). Therefore every Right subset of X∗ is an L-set. Conversely, let T : X → Y be a pseudo weakly compact operator. Then T ∗(BY ∗) is a Right subset of X ∗, hence an L-set. Therefore T is completely continuous, and thus X has the DPP by [26, Proposition 3.17], [25, Theorem 1.5], [18, Theorem 10]. Corollary 8. Suppose that X has the DPP. Then the following are equivalent: (i) X does not contain a copy of ℓ1. (ii) Every L-set in X∗ is relatively compact. (iii) Every Right subset of X∗ is relatively compact. (iv) X∗ has the Schur property. Proof. (i)⇔(ii) by [13, Theorem 2]. (ii)⇔(iii) by Theorem 7. (i)⇔(iv) by [9, p. 23]. Corollary 9. X∗ has the Schur property if and only if every Right subset of X∗ is relatively compact. Proof. If X∗ has the Schur property, then X has the DPP and X does not contain a copy of ℓ1 ([9, p. 23]). Hence every Right subset of X ∗ is relatively compact by Corollary 8. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 9 Conversely, let (x∗n) be a weakly Cauchy sequence in X ∗. Then (x∗n) is a Right set, by the proof of [26, Corollary 3.26]. Thus (x∗n) is relatively compact, and X∗ has the Schur property. Corollary 10. (i) Suppose X has the DPP and Y has the DPrcP. Then any operator T : X → Y is completely continuous. (ii) The space X has the DPP and the DPrcP if and only if X has the Schur property. Proof. (i) Let T : X → Y be an operator. Since Y has the DPrcP , T is pseudo weakly compact. Then T ∗(BY ∗) is a Right set, thus an L-set in X ∗ (by Theorem 7). Hence T is completely continuous. (ii) Suppose X has the DPP and the DPrcP . Then the identity operator i : X → X is completely continuous by (i). Hence X has the Schur property. If X has the Schur property, then X has the DPP and the DPrcP . Corollary 10 (i) generalizes [13, Corollary 6] when Y is a dual space E∗ with E not containing ℓ1 (since E ∗ has the DPrcP [14, Theorem 1]). A bounded subset A of X∗ is called w∗- sequentially compact if every sequence from A has a subsequence which converges to a point in the w∗- topology of X∗. The following theorem generalizes [39, Theorem 2.2 (b), (c)]. Theorem 11. If (x∗n) is a w ∗-Cauchy sequence in X∗, then {x∗n : n ∈ N} is an L-limited set. Proof. Supppse that (x∗n) is a w ∗-Cauchy sequence in X∗ and {x∗n : n ∈ N} is not an L-limited set. By passing to a subsequence if necessary, there is an ϵ > 0 and a weakly null limited sequence (xn) in X such that |x∗n(xn)| > ϵ for all n. Let k1 = 1 and choose k2 > k1 so that |x∗k1(xk2)| < ϵ/2. We can do this since (xn) is weakly null. Continue inductively. Choose kn > kn−1 so that |x∗kn−1(xkn)| < ϵ/2 for all n. Then |(x∗kn − x ∗ kn−1 )(xkn)| = |x ∗ kn (xkn) − x ∗ kn−1 (xkn)| > ϵ/2. This is a contradiction, since (x∗kn − x ∗ kn−1 ) is w∗-null in X∗ and (xkn) is limited in X. A Banach space X has the Grothendieck property if every w∗- convergent sequence in X∗ is weakly convergent [10, p. 179]. A space X is weakly sequen- tially complete if every weakly Cauchy sequence in X is weakly convergent. 10 i. ghenciu Corollary 12. (i) If X has the L-limited property, then X∗ is weakly sequentially complete. (ii) ([39, Theorem 2.10]) If X has the L-limited property, then X is a Grothendieck space. Proof. (i) Suppose that X has the L-limited property. Let (x∗n) be a weakly Cauchy sequence in X∗. By Theorem 11, {x∗n : n ∈ N} is an L-limited set, and thus relatively weakly compact. Hence (x∗n) is weakly convergent. (ii) Let (x∗n) be a w ∗- convergent sequence in X∗. By Theorem 11, (x∗n) is an L-limited set, thus relatively weakly compact. Hence (x∗n) is weakly convergent. Corollary 13. (i) A Banach space X with the Gelfand-Phillips property has the wL-limited property if and only if X∗ contains no copy of ℓ1. (ii) A Banach space X with the DPrcP has the (wSR) property if and only if X∗ contains no copy of ℓ1. (iii) If X has the wL-limited property, then c0 is not complemented in X. (iv) ([39, Corollary 2.9]) A Banach space X is reflexive if and only if it has the Gelfand-Phillips property and the L-limited property. (v) ([7, Corollary 17]) A Banach space X is reflexive if and only if it has the DPrcP and the (SR) property. Proof. (i) Suppose that X has the Gelfand-Phillips property and the wL- limited property. Then the identity operator i : X → X is limited completely continuous (since X has the Gelfand-Phillips property) and i∗ : X∗ → X∗ is weakly precompact by Theorem 2. Hence X∗ contains no copy of ℓ1, by Rosenthal’s ℓ1 theorem. The converse follows by Rosenthal’s ℓ1 theorem. (ii) The proof is similar to that of (i). (iii) Suppose that X has the wL-limited property. Since c0 is separable, it has the Gelfand-Phillips property [4, Proposition]. By (i), c0 does not have the wL-limited property. Hence c0 is not complemented in X by Corollary 3. (iv) If X is reflexive, then it has the Gelfand-Phillips property [4, Propo- sition] and the L-limited property. Conversely, X∗ contains no copy of ℓ1 by (i) and X∗ is weakly sequentially complete by Corollary 12. Then X∗, thus X, is reflexive. (v) Suppose X is reflexive. Then X has the (SR) property and X∗ does not contain a copy of ℓ1. Hence X ∗∗, thus X, has the DPrcP ([13, Theorem 2]). Conversely, X∗ contains no copy of ℓ1 by (i) and X ∗ is weakly sequentially complete by [26, Corollary 3.26]. Then X is reflexive. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 11 Example. The converse of Corollary 12 (i) does not hold. Let X be the first Bourgain-Delbaen space [5, p. 25]. Then X has the Schur property and X∗ is weakly sequentially complete. Since X has the Schur property, X does not have the L-limited property (by Corollary 13 (iv)). Corollary 14. (i) If X has property (wV ), then X is weak sequentially Right. (ii) If X has the L-limited (resp. the wL-limited) property, then X is sequentially Right (resp. weak sequentially Right). (iii) If X is sequentially Right (resp. weak sequentially Right), then it has the RDPP (resp. property (wL)). (iv) If X is an infinite dimensional space with the L-limited property, then X∗ does not have the Schur property. Proof. (i) Suppose X has property (wV ). Let T : X → Y be pseudo weakly compact. Then T is unconditionally converging [35, Proposition 14]. Hence T ∗ is weakly precompact [19, Theorem 1]. Apply Theorem 2. (ii) Suppose X has the the L-limited (resp. the wL-limited) property. Let (xn) be a weakly null limited sequence in X. Then (xn) is a weakly null DP sequence. Hence every Right subset of X∗ is L-limited, thus relatively weakly compact (resp. weakly precompact). (iii) Suppose X is sequentially Right (resp. weak sequentially Right). Every L-set in X∗ is a Right set, thus relatively weakly compact (resp. weakly precompact). Hence X has the RDPP [28] (resp. property (wL)). (iv) Suppose that X has the L-limited property. Then X has the Grothendieck property, by Corollary 12 (ii). By the Jossefson-Nissezweig the- orem, there is a w∗-null sequence (x∗n) in X ∗ of norm one. Then (x∗n) is weakly null and not norm null, and X∗ does not have the Schur property. The fact that a space with property (SR) has the RDPP was obtained in [26, Corollary 3.3]. Example. The converse of Corollary 14 (i) is not true. Let Y be the second Bourgain-Delbaen space [5, p. 25]. The space Y is a non-reflexive L∞- space with the DPP that does not contain c0 or ℓ1 and such that Y ∗ ≃ ℓ1. The space Y is sequentially Right by Corollary 8. Since Y does not contain c0, the identity operator i : Y → Y is unconditionally converging ([8, p. 54]) and i∗ : Y ∗ → Y ∗ is not weakly precompact (since Y ∗ ≃ ℓ1). Thus Y does not have property (wV ) by [19, Theorem 1]. 12 i. ghenciu The converse of Corollary 14 (ii) (strong properties) is not true. The second Bourgain-Delbaen space Y is sequentially Right and does not have the L- limited property (by Corollary 14 (iv)). The converse of Corollary 14 (iii) (strong properties) is not true. Let J be the original James space [24]. Since J is separable and 1-codimensional in J∗∗, all duals of J are separable and ℓ1 fails to embed in any of them. Moreover, none of these spaces can be weakly sequentially complete. Thus J and its duals are weak sequentially Right, but none of these spaces are sequentially Right by [26, Corollary 3.26], since their duals are not weakly sequentially complete. Since J does not contain ℓ1, every completely continuous operator on J is compact (by a result of Odell [37, p. 377]), and thus weakly compact. Hence J has the RDPP . The following theorem shows that the space E has property (SR) if some subspace of it has property (SR). Lemma 15. ([23, Theorem 2.7]) Let E be a Banach space, F a reflexive subspace of E (resp. a subspace not containing copies of ℓ1), and Q : E → E/F the quotient map. Let (xn) be a bounded sequence in E such that (Q(xn)) is weakly convergent (resp. weakly Cauchy). Then (xn) has a weakly convergent (resp. weakly Cauchy) subsequence. Let E be a Banach space and F be a subspace of E∗. Let ⊥F = { x ∈ E : y∗(x) = 0 for all y∗ ∈ F } . Theorem 16. (i) Let E be a Banach space and F be a reflexive subspace of E∗. If ⊥F has property (SR) (resp. the L-limited property), then E has the same property. (ii) Let E be a Banach space and F be a subspace of E∗ not containing copies of ℓ1. If ⊥F has property (wSR) (resp. the wL-limited property), then E has the same property. Proof. We only prove (i) for the (SR) property. The other proofs are similar. Suppose that ⊥F has property (SR). Let Q : E∗ → E∗/F be the quotient map and i : E∗/F → (⊥F)∗ be the natural surjective isomorphism ([31, Theorem 1.10.16]). It is known that iQ : E∗ → (⊥F)∗ is w∗ − w∗ continuous, since iQ(x∗) is the restriction of x∗ to ⊥F ([31, Theorem 1.10.16]). Then there is an operator S :⊥ F → E such that iQ = S∗. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 13 Let T : E → G be a pseudo weakly compact operator. Then TS :⊥ F → G is pseudo weakly compact. Since ⊥F has property (SR), TS has a weakly compact adjoint, by Theorem 2. Since S∗T ∗ = iQT ∗ is weakly compact and i is a surjective isomorphism, QT ∗ is weakly compact. Let (x∗n) be a sequence in BG∗. By passing to a subsequence, we can assume that (QT ∗(x∗n)) is weakly convergent. Hence (T ∗(x∗n)) has a weakly convergent subsequence by Lemma 15. Thus E has property (SR). The w∗ − w continuous operators from X∗ to Y will be denoted by Lw∗(X ∗, Y ). Theorem 17. Let X be a Banach space and A be a bounded subset of X∗. The following are equivalent: (i) A is an L-limited set. (ii) Every operator T ∈ Lw∗(X∗, c0) that is w∗-norm sequentially continuous maps A into a relatively compact set. Proof. (i)⇒(ii) Let T ∈ Lw∗(X∗, c0) be an operator so that T is w∗-norm sequentially continuous. Note that T ∗ ∈ Lw∗(ℓ1, X), (xn) = (T ∗(e∗n)) is a weakly null sequence in X, and T(x∗) = (x∗(xi))i. If (x ∗ n) is a w ∗-null sequence in X∗ and y ∈ Bℓ1, then |⟨x∗n, T ∗(y)⟩| ≤ ∥T(x∗n)∥ → 0. Hence T ∗(Bℓ1), thus (xn), is limited. Since A is an L-limited set, supx∗∈A |x∗(xn)| → 0. Therefore T(A) is relatively compact in c0, by the characterization of relatively compact subsets of c0. (ii)⇒(i) Let (xn) be a weakly null limited sequence in X. Define T : X∗ → c0 by T(x∗) = (x∗(xn))n. Note that T ∗(b) = ∑ bnxn, b = (bn) ∈ ℓ1, T ∗(ℓ1) ⊆ X, and T ∈ Lw∗(X∗, c0). If (x∗n) is a w∗-null sequence in X∗, then ∥T(x∗n)∥ = sup i |x∗n(xi)| → 0, since (xi) is limited. Hence T is w ∗-norm sequentially continuous operator, and T(A) is relatively compact in c0. By the characterization of relatively compact subsets of c0, supx∗∈A |x∗(xn)| → 0, and thus A is an L-limited subset of X∗. An operator T : X → Y is called limited if T(BX) is a limited subset of Y ([4]). The operator T is limited if and only if T ∗ : Y ∗ → X∗ is w∗-norm sequentially continuous. 14 i. ghenciu Corollary 18. Let X be a Banach space and A be a bounded subset of X∗. The following are equivalent: (i) A is an L-limited set. (ii) For every limited operator S ∈ Lw∗(ℓ1, X), S∗(A) is relatively compact. Proof. (i)⇒(ii) Let S ∈ Lw∗(ℓ1, X) be a limited operator. Then S∗ ∈ Lw∗(X ∗, c0) and S ∗ is w∗-norm sequentially continuous. By Theorem 17, S∗(A) is relatively compact. (ii)⇒(i) Let T ∈ Lw∗(X∗, c0) be a w∗-norm sequentially continuous opera- tor and let S = T ∗. Then S ∈ Lw∗(ℓ1, X), S is limited, and S∗(A) is relatively compact. By Theorem 17, A is an L-limited set. Corollary 19. Suppose that A is a bounded subset of X∗ such that for every ϵ > 0, there is an L-limited subset Aϵ of X ∗ such that A ⊆ Aϵ + ϵBX∗. Then A is an L-limited set. Proof. Suppose that A satisfies the hypothesis. Let ϵ > 0 and Aϵ as in the hypothesis. Let T ∈ Lw∗(X∗, c0) be an operator such that T is w∗-norm sequentially continuous and ∥T∥ ≤ 1. Then T(A) ⊆ T(Aϵ) + ϵBc0, and T(Aϵ) is relatively compact by Theorem 17. Then T(A) is relatively compact [8, p. 5], and thus A is an L-limited set by Theorem 17. 4. The (wSR) and wL-limited properties in projective tensor products In this section we consider the (SR) and L-limited properties in the pro- jective tensor product X ⊗π Y . We begin by noting that there are examples of Banach spaces X and Y such that X ⊗π Y has the (SR) and L-limited properties. If 1 < q′ < p < ∞, then L(ℓp, ℓq′) = K(ℓp, ℓq′) ([36], [10, p. 247]). If q is the conjugate of q′, then ℓp ⊗π ℓq is reflexive (by [38, Theorem 4.19], [10, p. 248]), and thus has the (SR) and L-limited properties. Then the spaces X = ℓp and Y = ℓq are as desired. If H ⊆ L(X, Y ), x ∈ X and y∗ ∈ Y ∗, let H(x) = {T(x) : T ∈ H} and H∗(y∗) = {T ∗(y∗) : T ∈ H}. In the proofs of Theorems 23 and 25 we will need the following results. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 15 Theorem 20. ([20, Theorem 1]) Let H be a subset of K(X, Y ) such that (i) H(x) is weakly precompact compact for all x ∈ X. (ii) H∗(y∗) is relatively weakly compact for all y∗ ∈ Y ∗. Then H is weakly precompact. Theorem 21. ([20, Theorem 3]) Suppose that L(X, Y ) = K(X, Y ) and H is a subset of K(X, Y ) such that: (i) H(x) is relatively weakly compact for all x ∈ X. (ii) H∗(y∗) is relatively weakly compact for all y∗ ∈ Y ∗. Then H is relatively weakly compact. Lemma 22. Suppose L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). If (xn) is a weakly null DP sequence in X and (yn) is a DP sequence in Y , then (xn ⊗yn) is a weakly null DP sequence in X ⊗π Y . Proof. Suppose that (xn) is weakly null DP in X and ∥yn∥ ≤ M for all n ∈ N. Let T ∈ L(X, Y ∗) ≃ (X ⊗π Y )∗ ([10, p. 230]). Since T is completely continuous, ⟨T, xn ⊗ yn⟩ ≤ M∥T(xn)∥ → 0. Thus (xn ⊗ yn) is weakly null in X ⊗π Y . Let (An) be a weakly null sequence in (X ⊗π Y )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗) and let x∗∗ ∈ X∗∗. Since the map γx∗∗ : L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗) → Y ∗, γx∗∗(T) = T ∗∗(x∗∗) is linear and bounded, (A∗∗n (x ∗∗)) is weakly null in Y ∗. Therefore ⟨x∗∗, A∗n(yn)⟩ = ⟨A ∗∗ n (x ∗∗), yn⟩ → 0, since (yn) is DP in Y . Hence (A ∗ n(yn)) is weakly null in X ∗. Then ⟨An, xn ⊗ yn⟩ = ⟨A∗n(yn), xn⟩ → 0, since (xn) is DP in X. Thus (xn ⊗ yn) is DP in X ⊗π Y . Theorem 23. ([7, Theorem 18]) Suppose that L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). If X and Y are sequentially Right, then X ⊗π Y is sequentially right. 16 i. ghenciu Proof. Let H be a Right subset of (X ⊗π Y )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). We will use Theorem 20. We will verify the conditions (i) and (ii) of this theorem. Let (Tn) be a sequence in H and let x ∈ X. We prove that {Tn(x) : n ∈ N} is a Right subset of Y ∗. Let (yn) be a Right null sequence in Y . Thus (yn) is weakly null and DP. For each n, ⟨Tn(x), yn⟩ = ⟨Tn, x ⊗ yn⟩. We show that (x⊗yn) is Right null in X⊗πY . If T ∈ (X⊗πY )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗) ([10, p. 230]), then |⟨T, x ⊗ yn⟩| = |⟨T(x), yn⟩| → 0, since (yn) is weakly null. Thus (x ⊗ yn) is weakly null. Let (An) be a weakly null sequence in (X ⊗π Y )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗). Since the map ϕx : L(X, Y ∗) → Y ∗, ϕx(T) = T(x) is linear and bounded, (An(x)) is weakly null in Y ∗. Therefore |⟨An, x ⊗ yn⟩| = |⟨An(x), yn⟩| → 0, since (yn) is DP in Y . Thus (x ⊗ yn) is DP and (x ⊗ yn) is Right null. Since (Tn) is a Right set, |⟨Tn, x ⊗ yn⟩| = |⟨Tn(x), yn⟩| → 0. Thus {Tn(x) : n ∈ N} is a Right subset of Y ∗, hence relatively weakly compact (by Theorem 2). We thus verified (i) of Theorem 20. Let y∗∗ ∈ Y ∗∗. We show that {T ∗n(y∗∗) : n ∈ N} is a Right subset of X∗. Let (xn) be a Right null sequence in X. Thus (xn) is weakly null and DP. For each n, ⟨T ∗n(y ∗∗), xn⟩ = ⟨y∗∗, Tn(xn)⟩. It is enough to show that (Tn(xn)) is weakly null in Y ∗. Let (yn) be a Right null sequence in Y . By Lemma 22 and Proposition 1, (xn ⊗yn) is Right null in X ⊗π Y . Since (Tn) is a Right set, |⟨Tn, xn ⊗ yn⟩| = |⟨Tn(xn), yn⟩| → 0. Therefore (Tn(xn)) is a Right subset of Y ∗, thus relatively weakly compact (by Theorem 2). By passing to a subsequence, we can assume that (Tn(xn)) is weakly convergent. Let y ∈ Y . An argument similar to the one above shows that (xn ⊗ y) is Right null in X ⊗π Y . Then |⟨Tn, xn ⊗ y⟩| = |⟨Tn(xn), y⟩| → 0, isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 17 since (Tn) is a Right set. Hence (Tn(xn)) is w ∗-null. Since (Tn(xn)) is also weakly convergent, (Tn(xn)) is weakly null. Then {T ∗n(y∗∗) : n ∈ N} is a Right subset of X∗. Hence {T ∗n(y∗∗) : n ∈ N} is relatively weakly compact (by The- orem 2). By Theorem 20, H is weakly precompact. We can assume without loss of generality that (Tn) is weakly Cauchy. Since X and Y are sequen- tially Right, X∗ and Y ∗ are both weakly sequentially complete [26, Corollary 3.26], and thus L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗) is weakly sequentially complete, by [22, Theorem 3.10]. Then (Tn) is weakly convergent. Remark. Theorem 23 can also be proved as follows. Let H be a Right subset of (X ⊗π Y )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗) and let (Tn) be a sequence in H. By the proof of Theorem 23, {Tn(x) : n ∈ N} and {T ∗n(y∗∗) : n ∈ N} are relatively weakly compact for all x ∈ X and y∗∗ ∈ Y ∗∗. By Theorem 21, H is relatively weakly compact. Lemma 24. Suppose L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). If (xn) is a weakly null lim- ited sequence in X and (yn) is a limited sequence in Y , then (xn ⊗ yn) is a weakly null limited sequence in X ⊗π Y . Proof. By Lemma 22, (xn ⊗ yn) is a weakly null. Let (An) be a w∗-null sequence in (X ⊗π Y )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗). Then (A∗n(x)) is a w∗-null sequence in Y ∗. If x ∈ X, then ⟨An(x), yn⟩ = ⟨A∗n(yn), x⟩ → 0, since (yn) is limited in Y . Hence (A∗n(yn)) is w ∗-null in X∗. Since (xn) is limited, ⟨An, xn ⊗ yn⟩ = ⟨A∗n(yn), xn⟩ → 0. Thus (xn ⊗ yn) is limited in X ⊗π Y . Theorem 25. ([7, Theorem 25]) Suppose that L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). If X and Y have the L-limited property, then X⊗π Y has the L-limited property. Proof. The proof is similar to the proof of Theorem 23 and uses Lemma 24. Remark. Theorem 25 can also be proved with a method similar to the one in the previous remark. The fact that the (SR) and L-limited properties are inherited by quotients, immediately implies the following result. 18 i. ghenciu Corollary 26. (i) Suppose that L(X∗, Y ∗) = K(X∗, Y ∗), and X∗ and Y are sequentially Right. Then the space N1(X, Y ) of all nuclear operators from X to Y is sequentially Right. (ii) Suppose that L(X∗, Y ∗) = K(X∗, Y ∗), and X∗ and Y have the L- limited property. Then the space N1(X, Y ) of all nuclear operators from X to Y has the L-limited property. Proof. It is known that N1(X, Y ) is a quotient of X ∗ ⊗π Y ([38, p. 41]). (i) Apply Theorem 23. (ii) Apply Theorem 25. Observation 1. If T : Y → X∗ be an operator such that T ∗|X is (weakly) compact, then T is (weakly) compact. To see this, let T : Y → X∗ be an operator such that T ∗|X is (weakly) compact. Let S = T ∗|X. Suppose x∗∗ ∈ BX∗∗ and choose a net (xα) in BX which is w∗- convergent to x∗∗. Then (T ∗(xα)) w∗→ T ∗(x∗∗). Now, (T ∗(xα)) ⊆ S(BX), which is a relatively (weakly) compact set. Then (T ∗(xα)) → T ∗(x∗∗) (resp. (T ∗(xα)) w→ T ∗(x∗∗)). Hence T ∗(BX∗∗) ⊆ S(BX), which is relatively (weakly) compact. Therefore T ∗(BX∗∗) is relatively (weakly) compact, and thus T is (weakly) compact. It follows that if L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗), then L(Y, X∗) = K(Y, X∗). The following result improves Corollaries 19 and 21 of [7]. Corollary 27. If X is sequentially Right and Y ∗ has the Schur property (or Y is sequentially Right and X∗ has the Schur property), then X ⊗π Y is sequentially Right. Proof. Since Y ∗ has the Schur property, every Right set in Y ∗ is relatively compact (by Corollary 9). Let T : X → Y ∗ be an operator. Then T is pseudo weakly compact (since Y ∗ has the Schur property), hence compact (by Theorem 2). Apply Theorem 23. Theorem 28. Suppose that L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). The following state- ments are equivalent: 1. (i) X and Y are sequentially Right and at least one of them does not con- tain ℓ1. (ii) X ⊗π Y is sequentially Right. 2. (i) X and Y have the L-limited property and at least one of them does not contain ℓ1. (ii) X ⊗π Y has the L-limited property. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 19 Proof. We only prove 1. The other proof is similar. (i)⇒(ii) by Theorem 23. (ii)⇒(i) Suppose that X ⊗π Y is sequentially Right. Then X and Y are sequentially Right, since the sequentialy Right property is inherited by quo- tients [26, Proposition 3.8]. We will show that ℓ1 ̸↪→ X or ℓ1 ̸↪→ Y . Suppose that ℓ1 ↪→ X and ℓ1 ↪→ Y . Hence L1 ↪→ X∗ ([32, Theorem 3.4], [8, p. 212]). Also, the Rademacher functions span ℓ2 inside of L1, and thus ℓ2 ↪→ X∗. Sim- ilarly ℓ2 ↪→ Y ∗. Then c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) ([15, Theorem 3], [21, Corollary 21]). Thus ℓ1 c ↪→ X ⊗π Y ([3, Theorem 4], [8, Theorem 10, p. 48]), a contradiction with Corollary 5 (iii). Observation 2. If ℓ1 ↪→ X and ℓ1 ↪→ Y , then ℓ2 ↪→ X∗ and ℓ2 ↪→ Y ∗, and c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) ([15, Theorem 3], [21, Corollary 21]). More generally, if ℓ1 ↪→ X and ℓp ↪→ Y ∗, p ≥ 2, then c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) ([15], [21]). Thus ℓ1 c ↪→ X ⊗π Y ([3, Theorem 4], [8, Theorem 10, p. 48]). Hence X ⊗π Y is not weak sequentially Right (and does not have the wL-limited property), by Corollary 5 (iii). Corollary 29. Suppose that L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). 1. If X⊗πY is weak sequentially Right, then X and Y are weak sequentially Right and at least one of them does not contain ℓ1. 2. If X ⊗π Y has the wL-limited property, then X and Y have the wL- limited property and at least one of them does not contain ℓ1. Proof. We only prove 1. The other proof is similar. If X ⊗π Y is weak sequentially Right, then X and Y are weak sequentially Right, since the weak sequentially Right property is inherited by quotients (by Corollary 3). Apply Observation 2. Corollary 30. ([7, Theorem 22]) Suppose that X and Y have the DPP . The following statements are equivalent: (i) X and Y are sequentially Right and at least one of them does not con- tain ℓ1. (ii) X ⊗π Y is sequentially Right. 20 i. ghenciu Proof. (i)⇒(ii) Suppose that X and Y have the DPP . Without loss of generality suppose that ℓ1 ̸↪→ X. Then X∗ has the Schur property [9]. Apply Corollary 27. (ii)⇒(i) by Observation 2. By Corollary 30, the space C(K1) ⊗π C(K2) is sequentially Right if and only if either K1 or K2 is dispersed. Next we present some results about the necessity of the condition L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). It is implicit in [6] that a Banach space X has all bilinear forms weakly sequentially continuous if and only if every operator S : X → X∗ transforms weakly null sequences into L-sets. Emmanuelle shows in [13] that a Banach space X does not contain ℓ1 if and only if every L-set in X∗ is relatively compact. Then, it is easy to see that if X and Y are not containing ℓ1, then L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗) if and only if every operator T : X → Y ∗ transforms weakly null sequences into L-sets (for more details see [6]). A Banach space X has the approximation property if for each norm com- pact subset M of X and ϵ > 0, there is a finite rank operator T : X → X such that ∥Tx − x∥ < ϵ for all x ∈ M. If in addition T can be found with ∥T∥ ≤ 1, then X is said to have the metric approximation property. C(K) spaces, c0, ℓp, 1 ≤ p < ∞, Lp(µ) (µ any measure), 1 ≤ p < ∞, and their duals have the metric approximation property [10, p. 238]. A separable Banach space X has an unconditional compact expansion of the identity (u.c.e.i) if there is a sequence (An) of compact operators from X to X such that ∑ An(x) converges unconditionally to x for all x ∈ X [17]. In this case, (An) is called an (u.c.e.i.) of X. A sequence (Xn) of closed subspaces of a Banach space X is called an unconditional Schauder decomposition of X if every x ∈ X has a unique representation of the form x = ∑ xn, with xn ∈ Xn, for every n, and the series converges unconditionally [30, p. 48]. The space X has (Rademacher) cotype q for some 2 ≤ q ≤ ∞ if there is a constant C such that for for every n and every x1, x2, . . . , xn in X, ( n∑ i=1 ∥xi∥q )1/q ≤ C (∫ 1 0 ∥ri(t)xi∥qdt )1/q , where (rn) are the Radamacher functions. A Hilbert space has cotype 2 [8, p. 118]. Lp-spaces have cotype 2, if 1 ≤ p ≤ 2 [8, p. 118]. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 21 Theorem 31. Assume one of the following holds: (i) If T : X → Y ∗ is an operator which is not compact, then there is a sequence (Tn) in K(X, Y ∗) such that for each x ∈ X, the series ∑ Tn(x) converges unconditionally to T(x). (ii) X is an L∞-space and Y ∗ is a subspace of an L1-space. (iii) X = C(K), K a compact Hausdorff space, and Y ∗ is a space with cotype 2. (iv) Either X or Y ∗ has an (u.c.e.i.). (v) X has the DPP and ℓ1 ↪→ Y . (vi) X and Y have the DPP . If X ⊗π Y is weak sequentially Right, then L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). Proof. Suppose that X ⊗π Y is weak sequentially Right. Then X and Y are weak sequentially Right. (i) Let T : X → Y ∗ be a noncompact operator. Let (Tn) be a sequence as in the hypothesis. By the Uniform Boundedness Principle, { ∑ n∈A Tn : A ⊆ N, A finite} is bounded in K(X, Y ∗). Then ∑ Tn is wuc and not un- conditionally convergent (since T is noncompact). Hence c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) ([3, Theorem 5]), ℓ1 c ↪→ X ⊗π Y ([3, Theorem 4]), and we have a contradiction with Corollary 5 (iii). Suppose (ii) or (iii) holds. It is known that any operator T : X → Y ∗ is 2-absolutely summing ([8, p. 189]), hence it factorizes through a Hilbert space. If L(X, Y ∗) ̸= K(X, Y ∗), then c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) (by [16, Remark 3]), a contradiction. (iv) If L(X, Y ∗) ̸= K(X, Y ∗), then c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) (by [27, Theorem 6]), a contradiction. (v) Suppose that X has the DPP and ℓ1 ↪→ Y . By Observation 1, ℓ1 ̸↪→ X. Then X∗ has the Schur property ([9, Theorem 3]). Let T : Y → X∗ be an operator. Then T is pseudo weakly compact (since X∗ has the Schur property), and thus weakly precompact (by Corollary 5 (i)). Then L(Y, X∗) = K(Y, X∗). Hence L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗), by Observation 1. (vi) Suppose that X and Y have the DPP . Then L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗), either by (v) if ℓ1 ↪→ Y , or since Y ∗ has the Schur property ([9, Theorem 3]) if ℓ1 ̸↪→ Y (by an argument similar to the one in (v)). Assumption (i) of the previous theorem is satisfied, for instance, if X∗ (or Y ∗) has an (u.c.e.i.). 22 i. ghenciu Examples. By Theorem 31, the space ℓp ⊗ ℓq, where 1 < p ≤ q′ < ∞ and q and q′ are conjugate, is not weak sequentially Right, since the natural inclusion map i : ℓp → ℓq′ is not compact. The space C(K) ⊗π ℓp, with K not dispersed and 1 < p ≤ 2, is not weak sequentially Right (by Observation 2, since ℓ1 ↪→ C(K) and ℓ2 ↪→ ℓ∗p). For 1 < p1, p2 < ∞, Lp1[0, 1] ⊗π Lp2[0, 1] is not weak sequentially Right by Corollary 5 (iii), since ℓ1 c ↪→ Lp1[0, 1] ⊗π Lp2[0, 1] ([38, Corollary 2.26]). Theorem 32. (i) Suppose Y ∗ is complemented in a Banach space Z which has an unconditional Schauder decomposition (Zn), and L(X, Zn) = K(X, Zn) for all n. If X ⊗π Y is weak sequentially Right, then L(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). (ii) Suppose either X∗ or Y ∗ has the metric approximation property. If X ⊗π Y is sequentially Right, then W(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). Proof. (i) Let T : X → Y ∗ be a noncompact operator, Pn : Z → Zn, Pn( ∑ zi) = zn, and let P be the projection of Z onto Y ∗. Define Tn : X → Y ∗ by Tn(x) = PPnT(x), x ∈ X, n ∈ N. Note that PnT is compact since L(X, Zn) = K(X, Zn). Then Tn is compact for each n. For each z ∈ Z,∑ Pn(z) converges unconditionally to z; thus ∑ Tn(x) converges uncondi- tionally to T(x) for each x ∈ X. Then ∑ Tn is wuc and not unconditionally converging. Hence c0 ↪→ K(X, Y ∗) ([3, Theorem 5]), and we obtain a contra- diction. (ii) Since X ⊗π Y is sequentially Right, (X ⊗π Y )∗ ≃ L(X, Y ∗) is weakly sequentially complete ([26, Corollary 3.26]). Under assumption (ii), [29, Corol- lary 2.4] implies W(X, Y ∗) = K(X, Y ∗). References [1] K. Andrews, Dunford-Pettis sets in the space of Bochner integrable functions, Math. Ann. 241 (1979), 35 – 41. [2] E. Bator, P. Lewis, Operators having weakly precompact adjoints, Math. Nachr. 157 (1992), 99 – 103. [3] C. Bessaga, A. Pe lczyński, On bases and unconditional convergence of series in Banach spaces, Studia Math. 17 (1958), 151 – 164. [4] J. Bourgain, J. Diestel, Limited operators and strict cosingularity, Math. Nachr. 119 (1984), 55 – 58. [5] J. Bourgain, “New Classes of Lp-Spaces”, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 889, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1981. [6] J. M. F. Castillo, R. Garćıa, L-sets and the Pe lczyński-Pitt Theorem, Extracta Math. 20 (2) (2005), 185 – 197. isomorphic properties in projective tensor products 23 [7] R. Cilia, G. Emmanuele, Some isomorphic properties in K(X, Y ) and in projective tensor products, Colloq. Math. 146 (2) (2017), 239 – 252. [8] J. Diestel, “Sequences and Series in Banach Spaces”, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 92, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1984. [9] J. Diestel, A survey of results related to the Dunford-Pettis property, Con- temp. Math. 2 (1980), 15 – 60. [10] J. Diestel, J. J. Uhl, Jr., “Vector Measures”, Mathematical Surveys 15, American Mathematical Society, Providence, R.I., 1977. [11] L. Drewnowski, On Banach spaces with the Gelfand-Phillips property, Math. Z. 193 (3) (1986), 405 – 411. [12] L. Drewnowski, G. Emmanuele, On Banach spaces with the Gelfand- Phillips property, II, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) 38 (3) (1989), 377 – 391. [13] G. Emmanuele, A dual characterization of Banach spaces not containing ℓ1, Bull. Polish Acad. Sci. Math. 34 (3-4) (1986), 155 – 160. [14] G. Emmanuele, Banach spaces in which Dunford-Pettis sets are relatively compact, Arch. Math. 58 (5) (1992), 477 – 485. [15] G. Emmanuele, A remark on the containment of c0 in spaces of compact operators, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 111 (2) (1992), 331 – 335. [16] G. Emmanuele, Dominated operators on C[0, 1] and the (CRP), Collect. Math. 41 (1) (1990), 21 – 25. [17] G. Emmanuele, K. John, Uncomplementability of spaces of compact op- erators in larger spaces of operators, Czechoslovak Math. J. 47 (1) (1997), 19 – 32. [18] I. Ghenciu, L-sets and property (SR∗) in spaces of compact operators, Monatsh. Math. 181 (3) (2016), 609 – 628. [19] I. Ghenciu, On the properties (wL) and (wV ), Math. Slovaca 66 (6) (2016), 1399 – 1412. [20] I. Ghenciu, Property (wL) and the Reciprocal Dunford-Pettis property in projective tensor products, Comment. Math. Univ. Carolin. 56 (3) (2015), 319 – 329. [21] I. Ghenciu, P. Lewis, The embeddability of c0 in spaces of operators, Bull. Pol. Acad. Sci. Math. 56 (3-4) (2008), 239 – 256. [22] I. Ghenciu, P. Lewis, Strong Dunford-Pettis sets and spaces of operators, Monatsh. Math. 144 (4) (2005), 275 – 284. [23] M. Gonzalez, V. M. Onieva, Lifting results for sequences in Banach spaces, Math. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc. 105 (1) (1989), 117 – 121. [24] R. C. James, A non-reflexive Banach space isometric with its second conju- gate, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 37 (1951), 174 – 177. [25] Y. Wen, J. Chen, Characterizations of Banach spaces with relatively com- pact Dunford-Pettis sets, Adv. Math. (China) 45 (1) (2016), 122 – 132. [26] M. Kacena, On sequentially Right Banach spaces, Extracta Math. 26 (1) (2011), 1 – 27. [27] N. Kalton, Spaces of compact operators, Math. Ann. 208 (1974), 267 – 278. 24 i. ghenciu [28] T. Leavelle, “The Reciprocal Dunford-Pettis and Radon-Nikodym Proper- ties in Banach Spaces”, Thesis (Ph.D.), University of North Texas, 1984. [29] D. R. Lewis, Conditional weak compactness in certain inductive tensor prod- ucts, Math. Ann. 201 (1973), 201 – 209. [30] J. Lindenstrauss, L. Tzafriri, “Classical Banach spaces II”, Springer- Verlag, Berlin-New York, 1979. [31] R. E. Megginson, “An introduction to Banach Space Theory”, Graduate Texts in Mathematics 183, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1998. [32] A. Pe lczyński, On Banach spaces containing L1(µ), Studia Math. 30 (1968), 231 – 246. [33] A. Pe lczyński, Banach spaces on which every unconditionally converging op- erator is weakly compact, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Sér. Sci. Math. Astronom. Phys. 10 (1962), 641 – 648. [34] A. Pe lczyński, Z. Semadeni, Spaces of continuous functions (III), (Spaces C(Ω) for Ω without perfect subsets), Studia Math. 18 (1959), 211 – 222. [35] A. Peralta, I. Villanueva, J. D. M. Wright, K. Ylinen, Topo- logical characterization of weakly compact operators, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 325 (2) (2007), 968 – 974. [36] H. R. Pitt, A note on bilinear forms, J. London Math. Soc. S1-11 (3) (1936), 174 – 180. [37] H. Rosenthal, Pointwise compact subsets of the first Baire class, Amer. J. Math. 99 (2) (1977), 362 – 378. [38] R. A. Ryan, “Introduction to Tensor Products of Banach Spaces”, Springer- Verlag, London, 2002. [39] M. Salimi, M. Moshtaghioun, A New class of Banach spaces and its rela- tion with some geometric properties of Banach spaces, Abstract and Applied Analysis, Article ID 212957, Hindawi Publishing Corporation, 2012. [40] M. Salimi, M. Moshtaghioun, The Gelfand-Phillips property in closed subspaces of some operator spaces, Banach J. Math. Anal. 5 (2) (2011), 84 – 92. [41] E. Saab, P. Saab, On unconditionally converging and weakly precompact operators, Illinois J. Math. 35 (3) (1991), 522 – 531. [42] T. Schlumprecht, “Limited Sets in Banach Spaces”, Ph.D. Dissertation, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität, Munich, 1987.