Generators of maximal left ideals in Banach algebras

Abstract: In 1971, Grauert and Remmert proved that a commutative, complex, Noetherian Banach algebra is necessarily finite-dimensional. More precisely, they proved that a commutative, complex Banach algebra has finite dimension over $\C$ whenever all the closed ideals in the algebra are (algebraically) finitely generated. In 1974, Sinclair and Tullo obtained a non-commutative version of this result. In 1978, Ferreira and Tomassini improved the result of Grauert and Remmert by showing that the statement is also true if one replaces `closed ideals' by `maximal ideals in the Šilov boundary of $A$'. We shall give a shorter proof of this latter result, together with some extensions and related examples.

\section{Introduction}

\subsection{Notation} The natural numbers and the integers are $\mathbb N$ and $\mathbb Z$, respectively. For $n \in \mathbb N$,
 we set $\mathbb N_n=\{1,\dots,n\}$.  The unit circle and open unit disc in the complex field $\mathbb C$ are $\mathbb T$ and $\mathbb D$, respectively; the real line is  $\mathbb R$,
and $\mathbb R^+= \{s \in\mathbb R : s\geq 0\}$. The algebra of all $n\times n$ matrices over $\mathbb C$ is denoted by $\mathbb M_{\,n}$; the matrix units in the matrix algebra
${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$  are denoted by $E_{i,j}$ for $i,j\in \mathbb N_n$; the identity matrix is denoted by $\iota_n$.

 We write $c_{\,0}$ and $\ell^{\,p}$ (for $p\in [1,\infty])$ for the standard sequence spaces on $\mathbb N$; we write $c =c_{\,0}\oplus \mathbb C 1$ for the Banach
space of all convergent sequences, where $1 =(1,1,1,\dots)$.

Let $A$ be an (associative) algebra, always taken to be over the complex field.
In the case where $A$ does not have an identity, the algebra formed by adjoining an identity to $A$ is denoted by $A^{\sharp}$;
we take $A^{\sharp}$ to be $A$ in the case where $A$ already has an identity.   A linear subspace $I$ of $A$ is a {\it left ideal\/} if $AI\subset I$,
 a {\it right  ideal\/} if $IA\subset I$,
 and an {\it ideal\/} if $AI+IA \subset I$.  The {\it Jacobson radical\/} of an algebra $A$ is denoted by $J(A)$;
$J(A)$ is the intersection of the  maximal modular left (or right) ideals of $A$, and it is an ideal in $A$.

Let  $S$  be a subset of $A$. Then the {\it left ideal generated by $S$\/} is the intersection of the left ideals of $A$ that contain $S$; this left ideal
is denoted by $\langle S \rangle$. Clearly,
$$ \langle S \rangle =\left\{\sum_{i=1}^n a_is_i : a_1,\dots,a_n \in  A^{\sharp}, \,s_1,\dots,s_n \in S,\,n\in\mathbb N\right\}\,.
$$
 The left ideal generated by a finite subset $\{a_1,\dots,a_n\}$ is equal t
\begin{equation}\label{(1.1)}
I= A^{\sharp}a_1 +\cdots+A^{\sharp}a_n \,,
\end{equation}
and it is denoted by $\langle a_1,\dots,a_n\rangle$.

Let  $I$ be a left ideal in the algebra $A$. Then:   $I$ is {\it countably generated\/}  if there is a countable set $S$
 with $I = \langle S \rangle$; $I$
is {\it finitely generated\/} if there are elements $a_1,\dots,a_n$ in $A$
with  $I=\langle a_1,\dots,a_n\rangle$, and  in this case,  $a_1,\dots,a_n$  are {\it generators\/} of $I$;  $I$ is {\it singly generated\/} (by $a$) if
$I= \langle a\rangle$ for some $a\in A$.

An algebra $A$ is {\it left Noetherian\/} if the family of left ideals in $A$ satisfies the ascending chain condition;
this is the case if and only if each left ideal in $A$ is  finitely generated.  See \cite[Chapter VIII]{Hun}, for example.\medskip

\subsection{The families  ${\frak I}_\infty (A)$ and ${\frak U}_\infty (A)$} Now suppose that $A$ is an algebra.
We  denote by ${\frak I}_\infty (A)$
the family of all    left ideals in $A$ which are not finitely generated, and by ${\frak U}_\infty (A)$ the family of all left ideals in $A$ which are not {countably generated}, so that
  ${\frak U}_\infty (A)\subset {\frak I}_\infty (A)$.

The  result of Grauert and Remmert which was stated  in the abstract
 can be formulated as follows. See  the Appendix to $\S5$ in \cite{GRe}. \vspace{-\baselineskip}\smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{1.1
 Let $A$ be a  commutative Banach algebra. Suppose that every closed ideal in $A$ is finitely generated.
Then $A$ is finite dimensional.\qed
\end{theorem}\smallskip

 This theorem was  generalized by Sinclair and Tullo \cite{ST} to the non-commutative case; we state their result as follows.\smallskip

 \begin{theorem} \label{1.2
Let $A$ be a Banach algebra. Suppose that every closed left ideal in $A$ is finitely generated.
Then $A$ is finite dimensional.\qed
\end{theorem}\smallskip

In the proof of their result, Grauert and Remmert used the following fact \cite[Bemerkung 2, p.~54]{GRe}.
 Let  $I$ be an ideal in a {commutative Banach algebra} $A$, and suppose that the closure ${\overline I}$ of $I$ is
finitely generated. Then $I$ is already closed,  so that $I={\overline I}$.  A non-commutative version of this result is proved by Sinclair and Tullo
\cite[Lemma 1]{ST}, and this result is stated in \cite[Proposition 2.6.37]{D}, as follows.\smallskip

 \begin{theorem} \label{1.3
 Let $A$ be a Banach algebra, and let $I$ be a left ideal of $A$ such that ${\overline I}$ is finitely generated. Then $I$ is closed in $A$.\qed
 \end{theorem}\smallskip

 In fact, the result is stated for more general algebras than Banach algebras.   Unfortunately, the proof of Proposition 2.6.37 in \cite{D} is not correct.
Let $A$ be a Banach algebra, and take $n\in\mathbb N$. We define ${\mathfrak A} ={\mathbb M}_{\,n}(A)$, the algebra of $n\times n$ matrices over $A$, so that
  ${\mathfrak A}$ is also a Banach algebra with respect to the norm $\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert$, where
$$
\left\Vert a \right\Vert =\max\{\left\Vert a_{i1}\right\Vert + \cdots + \left\Vert a_{in}\right\Vert  : i=1,\dots, n\}\quad (a=(a_{ij}) \in {\mathfrak A})\,;
$$
in the case where the algebra $A$ is unital, with identity $e_A$, the element $\iota=(\iota_{ij})$, where $\iota_{ij} =\delta_{ij}e_A\,\;(i,j=1,\dots,n)$
is the identity of ${\mathfrak A}$.  To prove Theorem \ref{1.3}, we may suppose that $A$ is unital. The proof in \cite{D}  refers to the `determinant'
of elements in ${\mathfrak A}$; however, the determinant of such elements  is only defined in the special case where $A$ is commutative.
Nevertheless, the proof in \cite[Lemma 1]{ST} is correct; we sketch the details.

Let $I$ be a left ideal in $A$ with ${\overline I} = \langle a_1,\dots,a_n\rangle$,
where $a_1,\dots,a_n\in \overline{I}$.  Then the open mapping theorem shows
that there are $b_1, \dots, b_n\in I$  and $x =(x_{ij}) \in {\mathfrak A}$  with $\left\Vert x \right\Vert <1$ such that
$$
a_i= b_i + x_{i1}a_1+\cdots + x_{in}a_n\quad (i=1,\dots, n)\,,
$$
and so $(b_1,\dots,b_n) = (\iota-x)(a_1, \dots, a_n)$ in $A^n$.   Since $\iota-x$ is invertible in ${\mathfrak A}$, it follows that
 $(a_1, \dots, a_n)= (\iota-x)^{-1}(b_1,\dots,b_n) \in I^n$, giving the result.

It follows that every left ideal in a Banach algebra $A$  is finitely generated whenever this is  true for each closed left ideal in $A$.

For various generalizations of versions of Theorem \ref{1.2} to certain topological algebras, see  \cite{CK,CKO,FT,Z1,Z2}.

 The following  generalizations of Theorems \ref{1.2} and \ref{1.3} were  given by Boudi  in \cite[Proposition 1 and Theorem 3]{Boudi}.\smallskip

  \begin{theorem} \label{1.3a
Let $A$ be a Banach algebra, and let $I$ be a left ideal of $A$ such that ${\overline I}$ is countably generated.
 Then $I$ is closed in $A$.\qed
 \end{theorem}\smallskip

   \begin{theorem} \label{1.3aa
   Let $A$ be a Banach algebra. Suppose that every closed left ideal in $A$ is countably generated. Then $A$ is finite dimensional.\qed
\end{theorem}\smallskip

 \begin{corollary} \label{1.3b
Each closed, countably-generated left  ideal   in a Banach algebra  is finitely generated.
 \end{corollary}

 \begin{proof}  Let $I$ be a closed, countably-generated left ideal in a Banach algebra $A$, say $I  =\langle S\rangle$, where $S= \{a_n : n\in\mathbb N\}$.  For $n\in \mathbb N$, set
 $J_n = \langle a_1, \dots, a_n\rangle$, so that $J_n \subset J_{n+1} \,\;(n\in \mathbb N)$ and $\bigcup\{J_n : n\in\mathbb N\} = I$.   By Baire's category theorem,
there exists $n_0\in\mathbb N$ such that  ${\rm int\/}\overline{J}_{n_0} \neq \emptyset$.  But then $\overline{J}_{n_0} = I$,
and so,  by Theorem \ref{1.3a},  $J_{n_0}$ is closed in $A$.  Thus $I = J_{n_0}$ is finitely generated.
 \end{proof}
\medskip

\section{The general case}

\subsection{The families ${\frak M}_\infty (A)$ and ${\frak N}_\infty (A)$} In this section, we shall consider algebras which are not necessarily  commutative.

Let $A$ be  an algebra.  Then the families ${\frak I}_\infty (A)$ and  ${\frak U}_\infty (A)$, which were defined above, are each
 a partially ordered set with respect to inclusion. \smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{2.1
Let $A$ be an algebra.  Then each member of the family ${\frak I}_\infty(A)$ is contained in a maximal element of the family.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}  Let $\mathcal C$ be a chain in the partially ordered set $({\frak I}_\infty(A), \subset )$, each member of which contains the
specified member of the family,  and define $I= \bigcup\{J: J\in {\mathcal C}\}$, so that  $I$ is a left ideal in $A$.

Assume towards a contradiction that $I$ is finitely generated, say $I=\langle a_1,\dots,a_n\rangle$, where $a_1,\dots,a_n\in I$. Then there
exists $ J\in {\mathcal C}$ such that $a_1,\dots,a_n\in J$, and hence $J= \langle a_1,\dots,a_n\rangle$ is finitely generated, a contradiction. Thus
$I\in {\frak I}_\infty (A)$.  Clearly,  $I$  is an upper bound for  $\mathcal C$.

It follows from Zorn's lemma that ${\frak I}_\infty(A)$ contains a maximal element, and that this maximal element contains the specified member of the family.
\end{proof}\smallskip

The following theorem   applies only to Banach algebras.\smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{2.1a
Let $A$ be a    Banach algebra.  Then each member of the family ${\frak U}_\infty(A)$
is contained in a maximal element of the family.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} As above,  consider a   chain $\mathcal C$   in the partially ordered set $({\frak U}_\infty(A), \subset)$,
and define $I= \bigcup\{J: J\in {\mathcal C}\}$.  Then $I$ is a left ideal in $A$ and $\overline{I}$ is a closed left ideal in $A$.

Assume towards a contradiction that $\overline{I}$ is {countably generated}. By  Corollary \ref{1.3b}, $\overline{I}$  is finitely generated.  By Theorem \ref{1.3}, $I$
 is closed, and so $I$ is finitely generated.  As in Theorem \ref{2.1}, this is a contra\-diction. Thus  $\overline{I}\in {\frak U}_\infty(A)$. Clearly,
$\overline{I}$  is an upper bound for  $\mathcal C$ in ${\frak U}_\infty(A)$, and so Zorn's lemma again applies.
 \end{proof}\smallskip

The sets of maximal elements in ${\frak I}_\infty(A)$ and ${\frak U}_\infty(A)$ are denoted by ${\frak M}_\infty(A)$
(for an algebra $A$) and ${\frak N}_\infty(A)$ (for a Banach algebra $A$), respectively.\smallskip

 \begin{corollary} \label{2.1b
 Let $A$ be an infinite-dimensional Banach algebra. Then the families  ${\frak M}_\infty(A)$ and
${\frak N}_\infty(A)$ are    non-empty and equal, and each member of this family is closed.
\end{corollary}

\begin{proof}  Clearly, both families are non-empty and each member of either of these families is closed because, by Theorem \ref{1.3a}, their closures belong to the respective families.

Take $M \in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$. Then $M \in {\frak I}_\infty(A)$, and so there exists an element $N \in {\frak N}_\infty(A)$  with $M\subset N$.
 The closed left ideal $N$  is not finitely generated, and so, by Corollary \ref{1.3b}, $N$ is not {countably generated}. Thus
 $N \in {\frak I}_\infty(A)$, and so
$M=N \in {\frak N}_\infty(A)$.

Take $N \in {\frak N}_\infty(A)$. Then $N \in  {\frak I}_\infty(A)$, and so there exists  an element  $M \in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$  with $N\subset M$.
By Corollary \ref{1.3b}, $M\in {\frak U}_\infty(A)$, and so $N=M \in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$.

We  have shown that ${\frak M}_\infty(A) = {\frak N}_\infty(A)$.
\end{proof}\smallskip

We wish to study the following conjecture.\smallskip

{\bf Conjecture}  {\it Let $A$ be a unital Banach algebra. Suppose that all maximal left ideals are finitely {\rm(}or even singly{\rm)} generated  in $A$.
  Then $A$ is finite dimensional.}\smallskip

We remark that this is a question about Banach algebras, not a purely algebraic  question.   For consider a large, infinite-dimensional field $F$
containing $\mathbb C$.  Then $F$ has only one proper ideal, namely $\{0\}$, and this is finitely generated, but $F$ is not finite-dimensional over $\mathbb C$.
 However, by the Gel'fand--Mazur theorem \cite[Theorem 2.2.42]{D}, such a field  $F$  cannot be a Banach algebra.\smallskip

The above conjecture  is  considered in \cite{DKKKL}  in the special case in which $A= {\mathcal B}(E)$, the Banach algebra of all bounded linear
operators on a Banach space $E$, and it will be established there  for `many' Banach spaces.  The question is left open for the Banach algebra
 ${\mathcal B}(C(\mathbb I))$, where $C(\mathbb I)$ is the Banach space  of all continuous functions on the closed unit interval $\mathbb I$.

 We  make the following remark  about a special case of the conjecture. Let $A$ be a unital $C^*$-algebra. Then it can be shown rather easily that each
 finitely-generated left ideal in $A$ is singly generated by a self-adjoint projection,  and then that $A$ is finite dimensional whenever each maximal left ideal
 is finitely generated, and so our conjecture holds for the class of $C^*$-algebras.

   Let $A$ be a unital Banach algebra,  and take $M \in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$.  One might suspect that $M$ is necessarily a maximal left ideal in $A$;
if this were true, then our conjecture would be immediately positively resolved. However this is not true.  Trivially, it is true in the special case
where ${\rm codim}\, M =1$; the following example shows that it need not be true in the case where ${\rm codim}\, M =2$.\smallskip

\begin{example}\label{3.12
{\rm  We begin with  the unital, three-dimensional algebra $B$  which consists of the upper-triangular matrices in  ${\mathbb M}_{\,2}$.
Thus we identify $$B =\mathbb C \/p \oplus \mathbb C\/ q\oplus \mathbb C\/ r\,,$$
 where
  \begin{equation}\label{(R)}
p= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\
0&0
 \end{array}
\right)\,, \quad q= \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0&0\\
0&1
 \end{array}
\right),\quad r = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0&1\\
0&0
 \end{array}\right).
\end{equation}
Hence the product in $B$ is specified by $$p^2=p,\; \;q^2=q,\;\;pq=qp=0,\;\;r^2=0,\;\;pr =rq=r,\;\; rp =qr = 0\,.
$$
The identity of $B$ is $e = p+q$; the radical of $B$ is $J(B) =\mathbb C r$.

 We define $M= \mathbb C p$. Then $M$ is a left ideal in $B$  of codimension $2$.

 We further define $I= \mathbb C p \oplus \mathbb C r$ and $J = \mathbb C q \oplus \mathbb C r$. Then both $I$ and $J$ are left ideals in $B$ of codimension $1$,  both are maximal
left ideals, and they are the only two maximal left ideals in $B$. Clearly, $M\subset I$, but $M\not\subset J$; further,  $I\cap J = \mathbb C\/r = J(B)$.
 Since $M\subsetneq I$, the left ideal $M$  is not a maximal left ideal.

We define $$\left\Vert \alpha p + \beta q + \gamma r\right\Vert= \max\{\left\vert \alpha\right\vert,\left\vert \beta\right\vert,\left\vert \gamma\right\vert\}\quad (\alpha,\beta,\gamma \in \mathbb C)\,.
$$
Then $(B, \left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert)$ is a Banach algebra with $\left\Vert e \right\Vert =1$.

 We now take $(E, \left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert)$ to be an infinite-dimensional Banach space, and set $K=E\oplus E\oplus E\oplus E$; a generic element of $K$ is regarded as a $2\times 2$ matrix
 $$
{\bf x}=  (x_{i,j}) = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x_{1,1}&x_{1,2}\\
x_{2,1}&x_{2,2}
 \end{array}
\right)\,,
 $$
where $x_{1,1},x_{1,2},x_{2,1},x_{2,2}\in E$, and so $K={\mathbb M}_{\,2}(E)$ as a linear space.  The norm on $K$ is given by
$$
\left\Vert {\bf x}\right\Vert = \left\Vert  x_{1,1}\right\Vert +\left\Vert  x_{1,2}\right\Vert  +\left\Vert  x_{2,1}\right\Vert + \left\Vert  x_{2,2}\right\Vert\quad ({\bf x} \in K)\,,
$$
so that $(K,\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert)$ is a Banach space.

 The left and right actions of $B$ on $K$ are   given by `matrix-multi\-plication  on the left and right', respectively; these actions are denoted by $\,\cdot\,$.
 Clearly, these are  associative actions, and $(K,\,\cdot\,,\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert)$ is a  unital Banach $B$-bimodule.

 We now define the linear space $A = B \oplus K$, with the norm given by
$$
\left\Vert (b, {\bf x}) \right\Vert= \left\Vert b \right\Vert + \left\Vert {\bf x}\right\Vert\quad (b\in B,\,{\bf x}\in K)
 $$
 and the product given by
 $$
 (b, {\bf x})\,(c,{\bf y}) = (bc,\,b\,\cdot\,{\bf y} + {\bf x}\,\cdot\, c)\quad (b,c \in B,\,{\bf x}, {\bf y} \in K)\,.
 $$
Then $A$ is a unital Banach algebra, with identity $(e,0)$. We regard $B$ and $K$ as subspaces of $A$; clearly, $K$ is an ideal in $A$.

The space $K$ satisfies $K^2=\{0\}$, and so $K\subset J(A)$. Thus
$$
J(A) = \mathbb C r \oplus K\,.
$$
  There are just two maximal left ideals  in $A$; they are $I+K$ and $J+K$, and $(I+K)\cap (J+K) = J(A)$.
The closed left ideal $M + K$ has codimension $2$ in $A$;  the only maximal left ideal that contains $M$ is $I+K$.

We  {\it  claim\/} that $I+K$ is a finitely-generated left ideal of $A$; indeed, we claim  that $I+K = Ap + Ar$. Since $p,r \in I$, we have $Ap+Ar\subset I+K$.
 Certainly, $p,r \in Ap + Ar$, and so $I\subset Ap+Ar$. Now take ${\bf x}\in K$. Then
$$
{\bf x} = \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x_{1,1}&0\\
x_{2,1}&0
 \end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
1&0\\
0&0
 \end{array}
\right)
 +
 \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x_{1,2}&0\\
x_{2,2}&0
 \end{array}
\right)\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0&1\\
0&0
 \end{array}\right) \in Ap + Ar\,,
$$
and so $K\subset Ap+Ar$, giving the claim.

We also {\it  claim\/} that $M+K$ is not finitely generated.   Indeed, assume towards a contradiction that
$$
K\subset Ap + \sum_{k=1}^n A{\bf x}^{(k)}\,,
$$
where ${\bf x}^{(1)},\dots, {\bf x}^{(n)}  \in K$.   Since $K^2=\{0\}$ and $Bp\cap K =\{0\}$, in fact
$$
K\subset Kp + \sum_{k=1}^n B{\bf x}^{(k)}\,.
$$
In particular,  for each $x \in E$,  there exits $\alpha_k, \beta_k, \gamma_k \in \mathbb C$ for $k=1,\dots,n$ such that
$$
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
0&0\\
0&x
 \end{array}
\right) \in Kp + \sum_{k=1}^n  \left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\alpha_k&\gamma_k\\
0&\beta_k
 \end{array}
\right){\bf x}^{(k)}\,,
$$
and so
$$x = \sum_{k=1}^n \beta_k x_{2,2}^{(k)}\,.$$
This shows that $E$ is spanned by $\{x_{2,2}^{(1)},\dots,x_{2,2}^{(n)}\}$, a contradiction of the fact that $E$ is infinite dimensional.  This gives the claim.

Thus $M +K\in {\mathfrak M}_\infty(A)$, but $M+K$ is not a maximal left ideal of $A$.

We also note that the maximal left ideal $J+K$ of $A$ is not finitely  generated, and so our example is not a counter-example to our conjecture.

Indeed, assume towards a contradiction that
$$
K \subset Aq + Ar + \sum_{k=1}^n A{\bf x}^{(k)}\,,
$$
where ${\bf x}^{(1)},\dots, {\bf x}^{(n)}  \in K$.  By considering the element
$$
\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
x&0\\
0&0
 \end{array}
\right)
$$
of $K$, we see that $E$ is spanned by $\{x_{1,1}^{(1)},\dots,x_{1,1}^{(n)}, x_{1,2}^{(1)},\dots,x_{1,2}^{(n)}\}$, again a contradiction of the
 fact that $E$ is infinite dimensional.}\qed
 \end{example}

Let $A$ be a unital Banach algebra. For a positive resolution of the above conjecture, we must prove that, whenever there exists an  element $M \in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$,
 $A$ contains a maximal left ideal that is not finitely generated (but this ideal need not contain $M$).  There is an algebraic argument that
does establish this in the special case where   $M$ has finite codimension in $A$. \smallskip

\begin{lemma}\label{1.6
Let $I$ be a left ideal in ${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$, where $n\in\mathbb N$.   Then:\smallskip

{\rm (i)} $\dim I =kn$ for some $k\in \{0,\dots, n\}$;\smallskip

{\rm (ii)}  $I$ is a maximal left ideal if and only if ${\rm codim}\, I= n$ in ${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$;\smallskip

{\rm (iii)}    in the case where $I$ is proper, there exists $x \in\mathbb C^{\,n}$ with $x\neq 0$ such that $ax =0\,\;(a\in I)$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}   By \cite[Exercise 3, p.~173]{J}, there is a bijective map
$$
F\mapsto \{a \in \mathbb M_{\,n}: ax=0\;\,(x\in F)\}
$$
from the family of linear subspaces of $\mathbb C^{\,n}$ onto the family of left ideals of $\mathbb M_{\,n}$.  The result follows easily from this.
\end{proof}\smallskip

\begin{lemma}\label{1.7
Let $A$ be a unital algebra with an ideal $L$ such that $A/L = {\mathbb M}_{\,n}$ for some $n \in \mathbb N$.
 Suppose that each maximal left ideal in $A$ that contains $L$ is finitely generated in $A$. Then $L$ is finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}  We identify $A$ with $\mathbb M_{\,n}\oplus L$  as a linear space, and  denote the product of matrices in ${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$ by $\,\cdot\,$.

Take  $j\in\mathbb N_n$.  Define $P_j = \iota_n-E_{j,j}$, where we recall that $(E_{i,j})$ is the set of matrix units of $\mathbb M_{\,n}$,
 and set $ M_j =\langle P_j\rangle\subset \mathbb M_{\,n}$, so that $M_j$ is the space of matrices with zeros
 in the $j^{\rm th}$ column. By Lemma \ref{1.6}(ii), $M_j$ is a maximal left ideal in ${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$,   and so $M_j+L$ is a  maximal left ideal in $A$.
By hypothesis, $M_j+L$  is finitely generated in $A$, and so there is a finite subset $S_j$ in $L$ such that  $L= AP_j +\langle S_j\rangle$.

Set $S = S_1\cup \cdots\cup S_n$, a finite subset of $L$. Then
$$
L\subset  AP_j +\langle S\rangle\quad(j\in\mathbb N_n)\,.
$$
By enlarging $S$, if necessary, we may suppose
 that $S$ contains the difference between the products in $A$ and $\mathbb M_{\,n}$ of any two  matrix units   $E_{i,j}$ in $\mathbb M_{\,n}$, and so we have
 $$
L\subset   {\mathbb M}_{\,n} \,\cdot\,P_j + LP_j +\langle S\rangle\quad(j\in\mathbb N_n)\,.
$$
Since $LP_j+ \langle S\rangle\subset L$  (where we note that $L$ is a right ideal) and since $(\mathbb M_{\,n}\,\cdot\,P_j) \cap L =\{0\}$, it follows that
 $$
L =   LP_j +\langle S\rangle\quad(j\in\mathbb N_n)\,.
$$

Set $T = S\cup SP_1 \cup \cdots \cup SP_n$, a finite subset of $L$. Then we now have
\begin{eqnarray*}
L &= & LP_1 + \langle S\rangle = (LP_2+ \langle S\rangle)P_1 + \langle S\rangle = LP_2P_1 + \langle S\cup SP_1\rangle\\
&=&  \cdots \;=\\
&=&  LP_n\cdots P_1 + \langle T\rangle = \langle T\rangle
\end{eqnarray*}
because the product of $P_n, \dots, P_1$ in  ${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$ is zero, and so the product in $A$ is an element of $T$.

This proves the result.
\end{proof}\smallskip

\begin{lemma}\label{1.8
Let $A$ be a unital algebra, and take ideals $I$, $J$, and $L$ in $A$  such  that $L = IJ +JI$.  Suppose that $I$ and $J$ are finitely generated as
 left ideals in $A$. Then $L$ is a finitely-generated   left ideal in $A$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
 Suppose that $I= Ax_1 + \cdots +Ax_m$ and $J= Ay_1+ \cdots +Ay_n$, where $x_1,\dots,x_m \in I$ and $y_1,\dots, y_n\in J$.
 Then  $$x_iy_j \in IJ\subset L\quad(i\in\mathbb N_m, j\in\mathbb N_n)\,.
 $$
Take $x\in I$ and $y \in J$.  Then $y=\sum_{j=1}^n a_jy_j$ for some $a_1,\dots, a_n \in A$.   For each $j\in \mathbb N_n$, we have  $xa_j \in I$, and so
$$
xa_j = \sum_{i=1}^m b_{i,j}x_i
$$
for some $b_{1,j}, \dots, b_{m,j} \in A$. Hence
$$
xy = \sum_{i=1}^m\sum_{j=1}^n b_{i,j}x_iy_j \in  \langle S_1\rangle\,,
$$
where $S_1$ is the finite set $\{x_iy_j : i\in \mathbb N_m,j\in\mathbb N_n\}$.  It follows that $IJ\subset \langle S_1\rangle$.
Similarly, we see that $JI\subset \langle S_2\rangle$, where $S_2$ is the finite set $\{y_jx_i : i\in \mathbb N_m,j\in\mathbb N_n\}$.

It follows that $L$ is generated by the finite set $S_1\cup S_2$.
\end{proof}\smallskip

 \begin{lemma}\label{1.9
 Let $A$ be a unital algebra, and let $L$ be an ideal in $A$ of finite codimension such that $A/L$ is semisimple.
 Suppose that each maximal left ideal in $A$ that contains $L$ is finitely generated in $A$. Then $L$ is finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$.
 \end{lemma}

 \begin{proof}  By Wedderburn's theorem   \cite[Theorem 1.5.9]{D}, we have $A/L = {\mathbb M}_{\,n_1}\oplus \cdots \oplus {\mathbb M}_{\,n_k}$
for some $n_1,\dots,n_k \in \mathbb N$.  For $j\in \mathbb N_k$, set
 $$
 I_j = \bigoplus \{{\mathbb M}_{\,n_i} : i\in\mathbb N_k,\, i\neq j\}+ L\,,
 $$
 so that $I_j$ is an ideal in $A$ with $A/I_j = \mathbb M_{\,n_j}$. By Lemma \ref{1.7}, each $I_j$  is a finitely-generated left ideal in $A$.

Take $j\in \mathbb N_k$.  The identity matrix in ${\mathbb M}_{\,n_j}$  is now denoted by $p_j$, and so the identity of $A$ has the form
$p_1+ \cdots+ p_k+ x_0$ for some $x_0\in L$.

Take $j_1,j_2 \in\mathbb N_k$ with $j_1\neq j_2$.  Clearly $I_{j_1}I_{j_2}+ I_{j_2}I_{j_1} \subset  I_{j_1}\cap I_{j_2}$. Now take
$x \in  I_{j_1}\cap I_{j_2}$. We have
$$
x = (p_1+ \cdots+ p_k+ x_0)x \in I_{j_1}I_{j_2}+ I_{j_2}I_{j_1}
$$
because each $p_i$ for $i\in\mathbb N_n$ belongs to either $I_{j_1}$ or to $I_{j_2}$ (or to both)  and  $x_0 \in I_{j_1}\cap I_{j_2}$.  Thus
$I_{j_1}\cap I_{j_2}\subset I_{j_1}I_{j_2}+ I_{j_2}I_{j_1}$. We have shown that  $I_{j_1}I_{j_2}+ I_{j_2}I_{j_1} =  I_{j_1}\cap I_{j_2}$.  By Lemma \ref{1.8},
$I_{j_1}\cap I_{j_2}$ is a finitely-generated   left ideal in $A$.

By repeating  this argument finitely many times, we see that the ideal $I_{1}\cap \cdots \cap I_{n}$ is a finitely generated  left ideal in $A$.
 However, $I_{1}\cap \cdots \cap I_{n} = L$, and so $L$ is finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$.
 \end{proof}\smallskip

  \begin{lemma}\label{1.10
 Let $A$ be a unital algebra, and let $K$ be an ideal in $A$ of finite codimension.
 Suppose that each maximal left ideal in $A$ that contains $K$ is finitely generated in $A$. Then $K$ is finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$.
 \end{lemma}

  \begin{proof}  By Wedderburn's principal theorem   \cite[Corollary 1.5.19]{D}, $A/K = B\oplus R$ for a subalgebra $B$
which is a direct sum of full matrix algebras and an ideal $R$ which is the radical of $A/K$. We identify $A$ with $B\oplus R\oplus K$ as a linear space.
The  ideal $R$ is nilpotent in $A/K$, say  $R^n =\{0\}$ in $A/K$, and so $R^n\subset K$ in $A$.

Set $L = R + K$. Then $L$ is an ideal of $A$ such that $A/L$ is semisimple, and so, by Lemma \ref{1.9}, $L$
is finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$.  Thus there exist $r_1,\dots, r_m \in R$ and a finite subset $S$ of $K$ such that
 $$
 K \subset Ar_1 + \cdots + Ar_m + \langle S \rangle\,.
 $$

By enlarging $S$,  if necessary, we may suppose $Br_1, \dots, Br_m \subset S$  and that $S$ contains any product $r_{i_1}\cdots r_{i_k}$ for any
$i_1,\dots, i_k \in\mathbb N_m$ and $k\in\mathbb N_n$; the enlarged set $S$ is still finite. Thus we see that
$$
K\subset \sum_{i=1}^n K r_i + \langle S \rangle\,.
$$
But now
$$
K\subset  \sum_{i_1,i_2=1}^m K r_{i_1}r_{i_2} + \langle S \rangle \subset \cdots \subset
\sum_{i_1,\dots,i_n=1}^m K r_{i_1}\cdots r_{i_n} + \langle S \rangle = \langle S \rangle\,.
$$
Thus $K$ is finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$.
\end{proof}\smallskip

 \begin{theorem}   Let $A$ be a unital, infinite-dimensional   algebra, and suppose that some element of $\,{\mathfrak M}_\infty(A)$ has finite codimension   in  $A$.
 Then one of the maximal left ideals in $A$ is not finitely generated.
  \end{theorem}

 \begin{proof} We suppose that ${\mathfrak M}_\infty(A)$ is such that  ${\rm codim}\, M =n$, where $n\in\mathbb N$, and we identify $A/M$ with $\mathbb C^{\,n}$ as a linear space.
 The identity of $A$ is denoted by $e$.

For each $a \in A$, set $T_a(b + M) = ab +M\,\;(b\in A)$. Then
$$
\theta : a\mapsto T_a\,,\,\;A \to {\mathbb M}_{\,n}\,,
$$
 is a unital homomorphism,  and its image $\theta(A)$ is a unital subalgebra of ${\mathbb M}_{\,n}$.  Define
 $$
 K =\ker \theta =\{ a \in A : aA \subset M\}\,,
 $$
 so that $K$ is an ideal in $A$ of codimension at most $n^2$.  For each
$a \in A$, we have $a=ae \in M$, and so $K\subset M$.  Clearly $M/K$ is a left ideal in $A/K$.

Assume towards a contradiction that each maximal left ideal in $A$ is finitely generated.  By Lemma \ref{1.10}, $K$ is finitely generated  as a left ideal
in $A$, and so $M$ is also finitely generated  as a left ideal in $A$ because $M/K$ is a finite-dimensional space, a contradiction of the hypothesis.

Thus $A$ contains a maximal left ideal that is not finitely generated.
\end{proof}\smallskip

We now introduce a slightly complicated algebraic condition.\smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{2.3
Let $A$ be an algebra.  Suppose that $I$ is a  left ideal in $A$ with the property that
there exist $a,b \in A\setminus I$ such that $ba \in I $ and $Ia\subset I$.  Then $I$ does not belong to  either ${\frak M}_\infty(A)$ or ${\frak U}_\infty(A)$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}  Assume towards a contradiction that $I\in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$.  We note that the   every left ideal $J$ that properly contains
$I$ is finitely generated.

Take $a$ and $b$ as specified.

Consider the left ideal $A^{\sharp}a+ I$ of $A$. Since $a\notin I$, the left ideal  $A^{\sharp}a+ I$ properly contains $I$, and so
is finitely generated, say
$$
 A^{\sharp}a+ I=  \langle b_1,\dots,b_m\rangle\,,
$$
where $b_1,\dots,b_m \in A^{\sharp}a+ I$. Each element $b_i$ has the form $a_ia +u_i$,
 where $a_i \in A^{\sharp}$ and $u_i\in I$, and so  $A^{\sharp}a+ I = \langle a, u_1,\dots,u_m\rangle$.

Define $J= \langle   u_1,\dots,u_m\rangle\subset I$, so that $A^{\sharp}a + I = A^{\sharp}a + J$,
and define  $K = \{c\in A : ca \in I\}$.   Then $K$ is a left ideal in $A$, and $I \subset K$ because $Ia\subset I$.
Further, we claim that $I\subset Ka +J$. For take $x \in I$. Since $I\subset A^{\sharp}a +J$,
there exist $c \in A^{\sharp}$ and $j\in J$ with $x =ca+j$. Then $ca= x-j\in I$, and so $c\in K$, giving the claim.
Since $Ka+ J \subset I$, it  follows that $Ka+ J =I$.

Since $b\in K\setminus I$, we have $I \subsetneq K$, and so $K$ is finitely generated, say $K= \langle c_1,\dots,c_n\rangle$, where $c_1,\dots,c_n \in A$.
But now $$I= \langle c_1a,\dots,c_na, u_1,\dots,u_m\rangle\,,
$$
 and so $I$ is finitely generated, a contradiction.  Thus $I \not\in {\frak M}_\infty(A)$.
\end{proof} \smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{3.1
Let $A$ be a Banach algebra.  Suppose that $I$ is an ideal in $A$ and that
$I\in{\frak M}_\infty(A)$. Then either $I$ is a maximal modular  ideal of co\-dimension $1$ in $A$ or $I=A$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}  We consider the case where  $I\neq A$.   By Corollary \ref{2.1b}, $I$ is closed.

Since $I$ is a closed  ideal in $A$, the space $A/I$ is a Banach algebra.  Each non-zero, left ideal in $A/I$ has the form $J/I$, where $J$ is a left
 ideal in $A$ with  $J\supsetneq I$. Since $J$ is finitely generated  in $A$ as a left ideal, the ideal $J/I$ is a finitely-generated left ideal
 in $A/I$,  and so  ${\frak I}_\infty(A/I)$ is  empty. By Theorem \ref{1.2},  $A/I$ is a finite-dimensional algebra.

Suppose that $A/I$ is semisimple.  Then $A/I$ is a finite direct sum of matrix algebras.  Assume towards a contradiction that  $\dim A/I\geq 2$. Then there
 are idempotents $p$ and $q$ in $A/I$ with $pq=0$, and so there are $a,b \in A\setminus  I$ with $ab \in I$. Since $Ia \subset I$,
 it is immediate from Theorem \ref{2.3}  that $I\notin{\frak M}_\infty(A)$, a contradiction.
Thus $\dim A/I=1$, and so $I$ is a maximal modular  ideal of co\-dimension $1$ in $A$.

 Assume towards a contradiction that $A/I$ is not semisimple. Since the radical of $A/I$ is finite dimensional, there exists $a\in A\setminus I$ with $a^2 \in I$, again
a contradiction of Theorem \ref{2.3}.

 Hence $I$ is a maximal modular ideal of codimension $1$ in $A$.\end{proof}
\medskip

\section{The commutative case}
\subsection{Finitely-generated maximal ideals} We shall now consider commutative Banach algebras.\smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{3.2
Let $A$ be a commutative, unital Banach algebra.  Suppose that each   maximal   ideal in $A$ is {countably generated}.
Then $A$ is finite dimensional.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} Since maximal ideals in $A$ are closed, each maximal ideal in  $A$ is finitely generated by Corollary  \ref{1.3b}.

Assume  towards a contradiction that ${\frak M}_\infty(A)\neq \emptyset$,  and then take $I\in{\frak M}_\infty(A)$.   Since $A$ is unital, with
 identity $e_A$, say,  $A$ itself is singly generated by $e_A$, and so $I \neq A$. By  Theorem \ref{3.1}, $I$ is a maximal ideal in $A$. Since each   maximal  ideal is
finitely generated, we have a contradiction, and so  ${\frak M}_\infty(A)= \emptyset$. By Corollary \ref{2.1b}, $A$ is finite dimensional.
\end{proof}\smallskip

The above theorem  requires that $A$ be unital, and this condition cannot be dispensed with. For let $A$ be the commutative, radical algebra $L^1([0,1])$, with convolution multiplication, as
in \cite[Definition 4.7.38]{D}; thus $A$ is the {\it Volterra algebra\/}.  Then  $A$ has no maximal ideals, but $A$ is infinite dimensional.

 Let $A$ be a commutative Banach algebra. It can happen that the sets ${\frak M}_\infty(A)$  has just one element,
 whilst the maximal ideal space of $A$ is infinite. For example, let $A$ be the algebra $c$, so that $c$ is a   commutative, unital
Banach algebra. A  maximal ideal  of $c$ of the form
$$
M_k=\{(x_i) \in c : x_k=0\}\,,
$$
 where $k\in \mathbb N$, is generated by the sequence $(a_i)$, where
$a_k=0$ and $a_i=1\,\;(i\neq k)$.   The only other maximal idea of $c$ is
$$
c_{\,0} = \{(x_i) \in c : \lim_{i\to \infty} x_i=0\}\,,
$$
and this ideal is not finitely generated, and hence not {countably generated}.\medskip

\subsection{The {\v S}ilov boundary}
 We first recall some standard notation;  see \cite[Chapter 4]{D}, for example.

Let $K$ be a non-empty, compact space. We write $C(K)$ for the  space of all continuous functions on  $K$ with the pointwise operations,  and  set
 $$
 \left\vert f \right\vert_K =\sup\{\left\vert f(x)\right\vert : x\in K\}\quad (f\in C(K))\,,
 $$
so that $(C(K), \left\vert \,\cdot\,\right\vert_K)$ is a commutative, unital  Banach algebra. A unital subalgebra $A$ of $C(K)$ that separates the points of $K$ and is a Banach
 algebra for some norm $\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert$ is a {\it Banach function algebra\/} on $K$; $A$ is a {\it uniform algebra\/} if it is closed in $(C(K), \left\vert \,\cdot\,\right\vert_K)$.

A Banach function algebra $A$ on $K$ is {\it natural\/} if every character on $A$ has the form $\varepsilon_x: f\mapsto f(x)$ for some $x \in K$ or,
equivalently, each maximal ideal of $A$ has the form $M_x=\{f\in A : f(x)=0\}$ for some $x \in K$.

Let $A$ be a   commutative, unital Banach algebra, and let $\Phi_A$ be the character space of $A$ as in \cite{D},
 so that $\Phi_A$ is identified with the  maximal ideal space of $A$; the maximal ideal corresponding to a character $\varphi\in \Phi_A$ is
$M_\varphi = \ker \varphi$. It is standard that $\Phi_A$ is a  compact space in the relative weak-$*$ topology $\sigma(A',A)$
 and that the Gel'fand transformation  maps $A$ onto a  Banach function algebra $\widehat{A}$ which is  natural on $\Phi_A$.

  Let $A$ be a natural Banach function algebra on a compact space $K$. A closed subset $F$ of $K$ is a {\it peak set\/} if there exists $f \in A$ such that
 $\left\vert f(x)\right\vert =1\,\;(x\in F)$ and  $\left\vert f(y)\right\vert <1\,\;(y\in K\setminus F)$; in this case, $f$ {\it peaks\/} on $F$; a point $x\in K$ is a  {\it peak point\/}
if $\{x\}$ is a peak set, and a {\it strong boundary point\/} if $\{x\}$  is an intersection of peak sets; the set of strong boundary points of $A$ is denoted
by $S_0(A)$.  A countable intersection of peak sets  is always a peak set, and so, in the case where $K$ is metrizable, $S_0(A)$ is the set of peak points of $A$.
(However even  a uniform algebra may have strong boundary points which are not peak points.)  A subset $S$ of $K$ is a {\it boundary\/} if $S\cap F\neq \emptyset$
for each peak set $F$ of $A$; the intersection of all the closed boundaries of $A$ is a closed boundary, called the    {\it {\v S}ilov boundary\/} and
denoted by   $\Gamma(A)$ \cite[Definition 4.3.1(iv)]{D}; for $x\in K$, we have $x \in   \Gamma(A)$ if and only if, for each open neighbourhood $U$
 of $x$ in $K$, there exists $f \in A$ with $\left\vert f\right\vert_K > \left\vert f\right\vert_{K\setminus U}$  \cite[Theorem 4.3.5]{D}.

In the case where $A$ is a natural
 uniform algebra on $K$, the  {\it Choquet boundary\/}  of $A$ is defined in \cite[Definition 4.3.3]{D};
 by  \cite[Theorem 4.3.5]{D}, it coincides with the  set $S_0(A)$; by \cite[Proposition 4.3.4]{D}, $S_0(A)$
 is a boundary for $A$ and, by  \cite[Corollary 4.3.7(i)]{D}, $S_0(A)$
is a dense subset  of $\Gamma(A)$.

 Let $A$ be a commutative, unital Banach algebra. Then we define $\Gamma(A)$ to be $\Gamma(\widehat{A})$.

The following two results are essentially  Corollary 1.7 of \cite{FT}, where an analogous result for more general topological algebras is proved.
 \smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{3.3
Let $A$ be a commutative, unital  Banach algebra.  Suppose that $\varphi \in  \Gamma(A)$ and  the  ideal $M_\varphi$ is
{countably generated}.  Then $\varphi$ is isolated in $\Phi_A$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} Since $M_\varphi$ is a closed ideal in $A$, it follows from  Corollary \ref{1.3b} that $M_\varphi$ is  finitely generated.

By  a theorem of Gleason (e.g., see \cite[Theorem 15.2]{Stout}),  there is an open neighbourhood $U$ of $\varphi$ in  $\Phi_A$
 and a homeomorphism $\gamma$ from $U$ onto an analytic variety   $V$  in a polydisc $\Delta$ in $\mathbb C^n$ for some $n\in \mathbb N$ such that, for each $a\in A$,
there is a holomorphic function $F$ on $\Delta$ such  that $\widehat{a} = F\,\circ\,\gamma$ on $U$.

We have $\partial U \subset K\setminus L$, where $\partial U$ denotes the frontier of $U$.  Assume that $\partial U \neq \emptyset$. Then
 there exists $z\in V$ such that $\left\vert F(z)\right\vert > \left\vert F \right\vert_{\partial V}$  for a holomorphic function $F$ on $\Delta$, a contradiction of the
 maximum principle for holomorphic functions on varieties \cite[III, Theorem 16]{GRo}. Thus $\partial U =\emptyset$ and $U$ is compact.  Hence $V$  is compact.
But there are no compact, infinite varieties in $\mathbb C^{\,n}$, and so $V$  and $U$ are finite.
 Thus $\varphi$ is isolated in $\Phi_A$.
\end{proof}\smallskip

\begin{theorem} \label{3.3c
Let $A$ be a commutative, unital  Banach algebra.  Suppose that $M_\varphi$ is {countably generated}
 for each $\varphi \in  \Gamma(A)$.  Then $A$ is finite dimensional.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}  Since $\Gamma (A)$ is compact and each point of  $\Gamma(A)$ is isolated in $\Phi_A$, the set   $\Gamma(A)$ is finite, and hence $\Phi_A = \Gamma(A)$.
By Theorem \ref{3.2}, $A$ is  finite dimensional.  \end{proof}\smallskip

One might suspect that ${\frak M}_\infty(A)\subset \Gamma(A)$ for a {commutative Banach algebra} $A$,
but the following  examples show that this is not necessarily the case.\smallskip

\begin{example}\label{3.4
{\rm  Let $A$ be an infinite-dimensional, commutative, unital  Banach algebra that is local, so that the unique maximal ideal
 in $A$ is $J(A)$. Then $J(A)$  is not finitely generated.

However an infinite-dimensional radical of a  commutative, unital  Banach algebra can be singly generated.
For example, let $B$ be  any infinite-dimensional, commutative, unital  Banach algebra, with identity $e$, and let $A$ be a unital subalgebra of $B$.
Set ${\mathfrak A}  = A\oplus B$, with  $$
\left\Vert (a,b)\right\Vert = \left\Vert a \right\Vert + \left\Vert b \right\Vert\quad(a  \in  A,\, b\in B)
$$
 and product defined by
$$
(a_1,b_1)(a_2,b_2)= (a_1a_2, a_1b_2+ a_2b_1)\quad (a_1 ,a_2 \in A,\,b_1,b_2 \in B)\,.
$$
Then ${\mathfrak A}$ is a commutative Banach algebra with identity  $(e,0)$. In the case where $A=B$ is semisimple,  $J({\mathfrak A}) =\{0\}\oplus B$,
which is infinite-dimensional; here the radical $J({\mathfrak A}) $ is generated by $(0,e)$ because $(0,b)= (b,0)(0,e)\,\;(b\in B)$.

Now suppose  that $B=C(\overline{\mathbb D})$, the uniform algebra  of all continuous functions on $\overline{\mathbb D}$, and that $A= A(\overline{\mathbb D})$,
the disc algebra, consisting of the functions in $C(\overline{\mathbb D})$ that are analytic on $\mathbb D$.  Then $\Phi_{{\mathfrak A}} = \overline{\mathbb D}$ and $\Gamma({\mathfrak A}) =\mathbb T$.
We recall that $$\{f\in A: f(0) =0\}= ZA\,,
$$
 where $Z$ is the coordinate functional.  Set
$$
M = \{(f,g) \in  {\mathfrak A} : f(0) =0\}\,.
$$
Then $M$ is a  maximal ideal of ${\mathfrak A}$, and it
corresponds to a character on ${\mathfrak A}$ which is not in $\Gamma({\mathfrak A})$.

We {\it claim\/} that the ideal $M$ is not finitely generated in ${\mathfrak A}$. Indeed, assume towards a contradiction that
$M$ is   finitely generated.  Then we can suppose that the generators are $(Zf_1,g_1), \dots ,(Zf_k,g_k)$, where $f_1,\dots,f_k \in A$ and
$g_1,\dots,g_k \in B$. Thus, for each $g \in B$, there exist  $r_1,\dots,r_k \in A$ and $s_1,\dots,s_k \in B$ such tha
\begin{equation}\label{(3.4)}
 (0,g) = \sum_{i=1}^k (r_i,s_i)(Zf_i, g_i)\,.
 \end{equation}
Set  $F= {\rm lin\/}\{g_1,\dots,g_k\}$, a  finite-dimensional subspace of $B$. Since  $r_i-r_i(0)1 \in ZA$, it follows
from (\ref{(3.4)}) that $g \in \sum_{i=1}^k r_i(0)g_i +ZB$. Thus $B = F + ZB$.  However it is not true that $B/ZB$  is a finite-dimensional space;
for example, the set  $\{\left\vert Z\right\vert^{1/n}+ZB: n\in\mathbb N$ is linearly independent  in  $B/ZB$.  This is the required contradiction.

Hence $M \in {\frak M}_\infty({\mathfrak A})$,   but $M \not\in \Gamma({\mathfrak A})$.\qed}
\end{example}\smallskip

We now  present a natural uniform algebra $A$ for which  we have ${\frak M}_\infty(A)\not\subset \Gamma(A)$.  \smallskip

\begin{example}\label{3.5
 {\rm  Let $A$ be a unital, {commutative Banach algebra}, and take $\varphi \in \Phi_A$; set $M=M_\varphi$.

Suppose that  $M = \langle f_1,\dots,f_n\rangle$.  Then $\dim (M/M^2 )\leq n$.
Indeed, for each $f \in M$, there exist $g_1,\dots,g_n$  with $f=\sum_{j=1}^ng_jf_j$; for $j=1,\dots, n$, write $g_j = g_j(\varphi)1 + h_j$,
 where $h_j \in M$. Then
$$
f\in \sum_{j=1}^ng_j(\varphi)f_j +M^2\,,
$$
 and so $M/M^2 ={\rm lin\,}\{f_1+M^2, \dots, f_n+M^2\}$.  Thus the space
of point derivations at $\varphi$ is finite-dimensional.

Now let $X= \prod_{n=1}^\infty \Delta_n$, where each $\Delta_n$ is the closed unit disc, and let $A$ be the  tensor product of countably many copies of the disc algebra,
as in \cite[Theorem 14.3]{Stout}. Then $A$ is semisimple, the character space of $A$ is $X$, and the {\v S}ilov boundary is $\Gamma (A)= \prod_{n=1}^\infty \mathbb T_n$,
 where each  $\mathbb T_n$ is the unit circle. The character corresponding to evaluation at the point $0=(0,0,\dots)$ is not in $\Gamma (A)$.
 Let $M$ be the corresponding maximal ideal.  Then each $f\in M$ is an analytic  function in each of the coordinate functionals $Z_1, Z_2, \dots  $,
 and each linear functional $d_n: f\mapsto (\partial f/\partial z_n)(0)$ is a (continuous) point derivation at $0$. Since these linear functionals are
 linearly independent, it is not true that $\dim (M/M^2)$ is finite,  and so $M$ is not finitely generated.\qed}
\end{example}
\medskip

\subsection{Strong boundary points}
Let $A$ be a be natural Banach function  algebra, and now suppose that  the closed ideal $M_\varphi$ is  {countably generated} for
each   $\varphi\in S_0(A)$, rather than for each  $\varphi \in \Gamma(A)$.  Is it still true that  $A$ must be  finite dimensional?
First we claim that this is true when $A$ is a uniform algebra  (and when the number of isolated points in $\Phi_A$ is countable).

We write $\delta_\varphi$ for the
 characteristic function of the singleton set  $\{\varphi\}$ when $\varphi \in \Phi_A$. By {\v S}ilov's idempotent theorem \cite[Theorem 2.4.33]{D},
 $\delta_\varphi\in A$ whenever $\varphi$ is isolated in $\Phi_A$.\smallskip

 \begin{theorem} \label{3.3a
 Let $A$ be a  uniform algebra on $\Phi_A$.  Suppose that $S_0(A)$ is countable and that the maximal ideal   $M_\varphi$ is
{countably generated} for each $\varphi \in  S_0(A)$.  Then $A$ is finite dimensional.
 \end{theorem}

\begin{proof} We set $S_0(A)= \{\varphi_n : n\in\mathbb N\}$.
By  Theorem \ref{3.3}, each point $\varphi \in S_0(A)$ is an isolated point of $\Phi_A$, and so $S_0(A) $
is open in $\Phi_A$.

Assume towards a contradiction that we have $S_0(A)\neq \Phi_A$, and set $L=\Phi_A\setminus S_0(A)$, a non-empty, compact subset of $\Phi_A$.
 Clearly each isolated point is  a peak point of $\Phi_A$, and so in $S_0(A)$.

Consider the function
$$
f:= 1 -\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n}\delta_{\varphi_n}\,,
$$
 so that $f \in A$.   At each $\varphi \in S_0(A)$, we have  $\left\vert f(\varphi)\right\vert < 1$, and, for each $\varphi \in L$, we have $f(\varphi)=1$. Hence $L$ is a
 peak  set for $A$.    Since  $S_0(A)$ is a boundary  for $A$,    $S_0(A)\cap L\neq \emptyset$, a contradiction.
 Thus  $S_0(A)=\Phi_A$.

It follows from Theorem \ref{3.3c} that $A$ is finite  dimensional.\end{proof}\smallskip

We do  not know if the above  theorem holds in the case where  $S_0(A)$ is not necessarily countable.\smallskip

Let $A$ be a uniform algebra, and let $\varphi \in S_0(A)$.  Then it is easy to see that the following are equivalent without resource to Gleason's theorem,
 which was used  in the proof of Theorem  \ref{3.3}: \smallskip

(a) $M_\varphi$ is singly generated; \smallskip

(b)  $M_\varphi$  is {countably generated}; \smallskip

(c) $\varphi$ is isolated in $\Phi_A$. \smallskip

\noindent It is sufficient to prove that (b) $\Rightarrow$ (c).  Thus, suppose that   $M_\varphi$  is {countably generated}, and assume towards a contradiction that $\varphi$ is not
isolated in $\Phi_A$.  Then it is easy to see that, given any countable  set $S$ in $M_\varphi$,  there exists $p \in C(\Phi_A)$
 such that  such that $\left\vert p \right\vert_{\Phi_A} < 1$ and  $\lim_{\psi\to \varphi}p(\psi)/g(\psi) = \infty$ for each $g\in \langle S \rangle$.
By \cite[Theorem 20.12]{Stout}, there exists  $f\in A$ with $f(\varphi) =1$ and $\left\vert  f(\psi)\right\vert < 1- p(\psi)$ for each $\psi \in \Phi_A$ with $\psi \neq \varphi$.
But now $1-f \in M_\varphi$, but $1-f\not\in  \langle S \rangle$.

Thus we have a direct proof of Theorem \ref{3.3a} avoiding Gleason's theorem.

 Let $\omega_1$ be the first uncountable   ordinal, set $A = C([0,\omega_1])$, and consider the maximal ideal $M_{\omega_1}$.
Then the above remark shows that  $M_{\omega_1}$ is not {countably generated}. This is related to \cite{Z3,Z4}.

We   show finally that the above theorem does not hold  if we replace   `uniform algebra' by `Banach function algebra'.\smallskip

 \begin{example} \label{3.3b
{\rm   Since our example is rather long, we divide the construction into a number of steps.\smallskip

(1)  {\it The set $K$.}  Our first step is the construction of a certain compact subset $K$ of the plane.  We start with $\overline{\mathbb D}$,
the closed unit disc.  For each $n\in\mathbb N$,   we consider the circle $\Gamma_n$ of radius $1 +1/n$. Then we place $n$ points equally spaced on $\Gamma_n$.
 The totality of these points is $U$, and  the union of    $U$ with  $\overline{\mathbb D}$ and with $\mathbb T$ form   the sets $K$ and $L$, respectively. Clearly $K$ and $L$
are compact,   $U$ is the set of isolated  points of $K$, $L=\overline{U}$, and the interior of $K$ is the open disc $\mathbb D$. \smallskip

(2)  {\it The algebra $B$.} We now define a  natural Banach function algebra $B$ of quasi-analytic functions on $\overline{\mathbb D}$. For the general theory
of such Banach function algebras,  see \cite[\S4.4]{D}; the specific example that we require is given in \cite{DM}.   Thus $(B, \left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_B) $ is an algebra of
infinitely-differentiable functions on  $\overline{\mathbb D}$ such that    $\left\Vert g \right\Vert_B< \infty$, where $\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_B$ is  specified by the formula
$$
 \left\Vert g \right\Vert_B = \sum_{k=0}^\infty \frac{1}{M_k}\left\vert  g^{(k)}\right\vert_{\overline{\mathbb D}}\quad (g \in B)
 $$
 for a suitable sequence $(M_k : k\in \mathbb Z^+)$.    The norm is chosen so that $(B, \left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_B)$ is a  natural Banach function on $\overline{\mathbb D}$ and such that the algebra $B$
is quasi-analytic, in the sense  that $g=0$ whenever $g\in B$ is such that $g^{(j)}(z_0) =0\,\;(j\in \mathbb Z^+)$ for any point $z_0 \in  \overline{\mathbb D}$.
 [In fact, we can take $M_k= k! \log 2 \cdots \log(k+2)$ for $k \in \mathbb N$, with $M_0=1$, for example.]

We note that the uniform closure of the algebra $B$ is $A(\overline{\mathbb D})$, the standard disc algebra,   a natural uniform algebra on $\overline{\mathbb D}$.\smallskip

(3)  {\it The algebra $C$.} Next, we consider the Banach function algebra $C = {\rm Lip\,}L$  of Lipschitz functions on $L$. These Lipschitz algebras
 are also discussed  in  \cite[\S4.4]{D}.   Thus $C$ consists of the continuous functions on $L$ such that  $\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_C< \infty$, where $\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_C$ is  specified by the formula
$$
 \left\Vert h \right\Vert_C = \left\vert h \right\vert_L + \sup\left\{ \frac{\left\vert f(z)-f(w)\right\vert}{\left\vert z-w\right\vert} : z,w \in L,\,z\neq w \right\}\,.
$$
It is shown in  \cite[Theorem 4.4.24]{D}  that $C$ is a natural Banach function algebra on $L$.  Clearly the uniform closure of $C$ is $C(L)$.\smallskip

(4)  {\it The algebra $A$.} We now form a   Banach function algebra $A$ which is the combination of $B$ and $C$. Indeed,
$$
A = \{ f \in C(K): f\mid  \overline{\mathbb D} \in B,\, f\mid L \in C\}\,.
$$
The norm $\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_A$ on $A$ is  specified by
$$
\left\Vert f \right\Vert_A = \max\{\left\Vert f\mid  \overline{\mathbb D}\right\Vert_B,\,\left\Vert f\mid L\right\Vert_C\} \quad (f \in A)\,.
$$
We see that $(A,\left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_A)$ is a Banach function algebra on $K$.  \smallskip

(5)  {\it The algebra $\frak A$.} We next look at the functions $f\in A$  such that
\begin{equation}\label{(3.1)}
\lim_{n\to \infty}  \frac{f(x_n)-f(z_0)}{x_n-z_0} =f'(z_0)
\end{equation}
whenever $z_0\in\mathbb T$ and $(x_n)$ is a sequence in $U$ with $\lim_{n\to \infty}x_n =z_0$.     These functions $f$ clearly form   a subalgebra, say $\mathfrak A$, of $A$.

We {\it claim\/} that $\mathfrak A$ is a closed subalgebra of $A$. Indeed, take a sequence $(f_k)$  in $\mathfrak A$ such that $f_k\to f $  in $(A, \left\Vert\,\cdot\,\right\Vert_A)$.
 To see that $f \in  \mathfrak A$, take $z_0\in\mathbb T$ and a sequence  $(x_n)$ in $U$ with $\lim_{n\to \infty}x_n =z_0$.  Fix $\varepsilon >0$.
   Since $\left\Vert f_k\mid \overline{\mathbb D} -f\mid \overline{\mathbb D}\right\Vert_B \to 0$, there exists $k_1 \in \mathbb N$ such that
$$
\left\vert f_k'(z_0)- f'(z_0)\right\vert <\varepsilon\quad(k\geq k_1)\,.
   $$
 Since $\left\Vert f_k\mid L -f\mid L\right\Vert_C\to 0$, there exists $k_2 \in \mathbb N$ such that
 $$
 \frac{\left\vert (f_k-f)(x_n) - (f_k-f)(z_0)\right\vert}{\left\vert x_n-z_0\right\vert}  <\varepsilon\quad(k\geq k_2)\,.
 $$
Set $k_0=\max\{k_1,k_2\}$. Then there exists $n_0 \in \mathbb N$ such that
$$
\left\vert   \frac{f_{k_0}(x_n)-f_{k_0}(z_0)}{x_n-z_0} - f'_{k_0}(z_0)\right\vert <  \varepsilon\quad (n\geq n_0)\,.
$$
Hence
$$
\left\vert   \frac{f(x_n)-f(z_0)}{x_n-z_0} - f'(z_0)\right\vert < 3\varepsilon\quad (n\geq n_0)\,.
$$
It follows that $\lim_{n\to \infty}   ({f(x_n)-f(z_0))}/(x_n-z_0) =f'(z_0)$, and so $f \in\mathfrak A$, giving the claim.

Since  $\mathfrak A$ contains the restrictions to $K$ of the polynomials, it is clear that  $\mathfrak A$ contains the constants and separates the points of $K$,
and so $\mathfrak A$ is a Banach function algebra on $K$.    Since $\mathfrak A$ also contains   $\delta_z$ for  each $z \in U$,
 it is easy to see that the uniform closure  of $\mathfrak A$ is $A(K)$,  the algebra of all continuous functions on $K$ that are analytic on ${\rm int} K= \mathbb D$.\smallskip

(6)  {\it The naturality of $\mathfrak A$.}  We next {\it claim\/} that $\mathfrak A$ is natural on $K$.  It is  a general result
that it suffices to prove: (i)   for each $f \in \mathfrak A$ such that ${\bf Z}(f) =\{z\in L : f(z)=0\}$ is void, it follows that $1/f \in \mathfrak A$;
(ii) the uniform closure $A(K)$ of  $\mathfrak A$ is natural on $K$. (This follows immediately from \cite[Proposition 4.1.5(i)]{D}.)
Clause (ii) is a standard result of Arens \cite[Theorem 4.3.14]{D}.   For (i), take $f \in \mathfrak A$  with ${\bf Z}(f) =\emptyset$,  and set $g =1/f \in C(K)$.
 Since $B$ and $C$ are each natural, it follows that  $g\mid \overline{\mathbb D} \in B$ and $g\mid L \in C$, and hence $g\in A$. It is clear that $g$
satisfies equation (\ref{(3.1)}), and so $g\in \mathfrak A$.   Thus $\mathfrak A$ is natural on $K$.\smallskip

(6)  {\it The peak points  of $\mathfrak A$.}
Certainly each point of $U$ is an isolated peak point for $A$.

We now {\it claim} that  there are no other peak points.  It is enough to show that the point $z=1$ is not a peak point.

Assume towards a contradiction that $f\in \frak A$ and that $f$ peaks at $1$, say with $f(1)=1$. Then $f\mid \overline{\mathbb D} =1 +g$ for a certain function $g\in B$.
 The function $g$ is not zero, and so, since $B$ is a quasi-analytic algebra, there exists  $k\in \mathbb N$ such that $g^{(k)} (1)\neq 0$, where the
 derivative is calculated with  respect to $\overline{\mathbb D}\/$;  we take $k_0\in \mathbb N$ to be the minimum such $k$.

 First, suppose that $k_0\geq 2$.  Then there exists $\alpha \in \mathbb C\setminus \{0\}$ such that
$$
f(z) =1 + \alpha (z-1)^{k_0} + o(\left\vert z-1\right\vert^{k_0})
$$
as  $z\to 1$ with $z\in \overline{\mathbb D}$.  But, whatever the value of $\alpha$, we can choose a sequence  $(z_n)$  in $\overline{\mathbb D}$ with
$\lim_{n\to\infty} z_n =1$ and $\Re (\alpha (z_n-1)^{k_0})  >0$  for each $n\in\mathbb N$.  This implies that  $\left\vert f(z_n)\right\vert > 1$ for all sufficiently
large $n\in\mathbb N$,  a contradiction.

 Second, suppose that $k_0= 1$. We must now use points outside  $\overline{\mathbb D}$, and so, at this point, we regard $g \in \frak A$ as a function on $K$ with $f=1+g$.
We know that   there exists $\alpha \in \mathbb C\setminus \{0\}$ such that
 $$
f(z) =1 + \alpha (z-1)  + o(\left\vert z-1\right\vert )
$$
as  $z\to 1$ with $z\in \overline{\mathbb D}$. Now the set $\{z \in  \mathbb C : \Re (\alpha (z-1))\geq 0\}$  is  a half-plane with
 $1$ on the boundary line.  In the case where $\alpha\not\in \mathbb R^+$, we can choose a sequence $(z_n)$  in $\overline{\mathbb D}$ as before to obtain a contradiction.
Thus we may suppose that  $\alpha \in \mathbb R^+$. But now, by the choice of the set $U$,  there is a sequence $(x_n)$  in $U$ with $\Re (\alpha (x_n-1)) >0$  for each $n\in\mathbb N$.
 By the construction of our algebra $\frak A$,  we know that
$$
\lim_{n\to \infty} \Re\left( \frac{f(x_n)-f(1)}{x_n-1} \right)=\alpha > 0\,.
$$
Thus   $\Re f(x_n) > 1$ for all sufficiently large $n\in\mathbb N$. It follows that $\left\vert f(x_n)\right\vert> 1$ for all sufficiently large $n\in\mathbb N$, and this is
the required contradiction.\smallskip

(7) {\it The conclusion.}  We have shown that $\mathfrak A$ is a natural Banach function algebra on $K$ such that $S_0({\mathfrak A})=U$,
the countable set of isolated points of $K$.  Let $z \in U$, with corresponding maximal ideal $M_z$. Then $M_z$ is singly generated  by the function
$1-\delta_z$, and so all maximal ideals corresponding to points of $\Gamma_0({\mathfrak A})$ are singly generated. However, ${\mathfrak A}$ is not
 a finite-dimensional algebra.}\qed
 \end{example}\medskip


On geometric properties of sets of positive reach in ${\bf E}^d$

Abstract: Some geometric facts concerning sets with positive reach in the Euclidean $d$-dimensional space ${\bf E}^d$ are proved. For $x_1$ and $x_2$ in ${\bf E}^d$ and $R>0$ let us denote by ${\mathfrak H}(x_1,x_2,R)$ the intersection of all closed balls of radius $R$ containing $x_1$ and $x_2$. For a compact subset $K$ of ${bf E}^d$ we prove that ${\rm reach}(K)\ge R$ if and only if for every $x_1,x_2\in K$ such that $\Vert x_1-x_2\Vert< 2R$, ${\mathfrak H}(x_1,x_2,R)\cap K$ is connected. A corollary is that if ${\rm reach}(K)\ge R>0$ and $D$ is a closed ball of radius less than or equal to $R$ (intersecting $K$) then ${\rm reach}(K\cap D)\ge R$. We also give a necessary and sufficient condition such that $A\subset{\bf E}^d$ admits a minimal cover (with respect to inclusion) of ${\rm reach}\ge R$.

\section{Introduction}
Sets of positive reach were introduced by Federer in \cite{Federer}. This
class of sets can be viewed as an extension of that of convex sets. It is well
known that every point $x$ external to a closed convex set $C$ in $\eud$ admits a
unique {\it projection} on $C$, i.e. a point which minimizes the distance from
$x$ among all points in $C$. Sets of positive reach are those for which the
projection is unique for the points of a parallel neighborhood of the set (and
not necessarily for all external points).

Along with their definition, Federer provided the main fundamental
properties of sets of positive reach. Namely, the validity of global and
local Steiner formulas and consequently the existence of curvature measures
and many relevant properties of such measures.

The study of properties of sets with positive reach has been continued by
several authors and along various directions. Let us mention the contributions
given by Z\"ahle \cite{Zhale} and Rataj and Z\"ahle \cite{Rataj-Zhale} on integral representation of curvature
measures, the results by Hug \cite{Hug}, and Hug and the first author
\cite{Colesanti-Hug} on singular points of sets with positive reach and the
extensions of Steiner type formulas by Hug, Last and Weil
\cite{Hug-Last-Weil}. Moreover, in \cite{Fu} Fu proved several interesting
connections between sets of positive reach and semi-convex functions.

As stated by Federer, closed convex sets represent a limit case of sets
of positive reach, as the reach tends to $\infty$. The following question was
at the origin of the research carried out in this paper. Is it possible to see
(at least some of) the geometric properties of convex sets as limit case of
suitable geometric properties of sets of positive reach?

The first property that we analyse is the very definition of convex set: if
$x_1$ and $x_2$ belong to a convex set $C$, then the segment joining them
is entirely contained in $C$. In \S 3 we prove a
possible counterpart of this fact for sets of positive reach. For two points
$x_1$ and $x_2$ in $\eud$ and $R>0$ we denote by $\fuso(x_1,x_2,R)$ the
intersection of all closed balls of radius $R$ containing $x_1$ and
$x_2$. The set $\fuso(x_1,x_2,R)$ is a rugby ball-shaped set with cusps in $x_1$ and
$x_2$; moreover for $R\to\infty$, $\fuso(x_1,x_2,R)$ tends to the segment
with endpoints $x_1$ and $x_2$. Theorem \ref{T2.1} states that
$\reach(K)\ge R$ if and only if for every $x_1,x_2\in K$ such that $\norma
x_1-x_2\norma< 2R$, $\fuso(x_1,x_2,R)\cap K$ is connected. The proof of this
result is geometric and does not require sophisticated techniques.
As a corollary (see Theorem \ref{T2.2}) we have the following fact: if
$\reach(K)\ge R>0$ and $D$ is a closed ball of radius less than or equal to
$R$, intersecting $K$, then $\reach(K\cap D)\ge R$. The latter property can be seen as a
counterpart, for sets with positive reach, of the well-known fact that the
intersection of a convex set with an half-space is convex (if it is non-empty).

Next, we consider the following problem: given a set $A$ and a number $R>0$
is it possible to find the minimal set (with respect to inclusion) containing $A$ and having
reach greater than or equal to $R$? The corresponding problem in the context of
convexity ($R=\infty$) has an affirmative answer: every set admits a least convex cover,
i.e. its convex hull. We will see through simple examples that this is not the
case for arbitrary $A$ and $R$ and we will find necessary and sufficient conditions so that
$A$ admits a minimal cover of reach greater than or equal to $R$.

The paper is organized as follows: in \S 2 we introduce some notations; in \S 3 we
prove Theorem \ref{T2.1} and some related results; in \S 4 we deal with the
least cover with prescribed reach of a given set.

\section{Notations}
Let $\eud$ be the $d$-dimensional Euclidean space; for $a,b\in\eud$,
let $\Vert b-a\Vert$ be their distance and let $(\cdot,\cdot)$ denote
the usual scalar product.

If $A$ is a subset of $\eud$, then ${\rm int}(A)$, ${\rm cl}(A)$ and $A^c$ will
denote the interior, the closure and the complement set of $A$,
respectively. For $x_0\in\eud$ and $r>0$ we set
$$
B(x_0,r)=\{x\in\eud\,:\,\Vert x-x_0\Vert<r\}\,,\quad{\rm and}\quad
D(x_0,r)={\rm cl}(B(x_0,r))\,.
$$
For $A\subset\eud$ and $a\in\eud$, the distance of $a$ from $A$ is given by
$$
\delta_A(a)=\inf\{\Vert a-x\Vert\,:\, x\in A\}\,.
$$

Let us recall the definition of {\em sets of positive reach}, introduced in
 \cite{Federer}. Let $K\subset\eud$ be closed; let ${\rm Unp}(K)$ be the set
 of points having a unique projection (or foot point) on $K$:
$$
{\rm Unp}(K):=\{a\in\eud\,:\,\exists!\,x\in K\;{\rm s.t.}\;\delta_K(x)=\Vert a-x\Vert\}\,.
$$
This definition implies the existence of a projection mapping
$\xi_K\,:{\rm Unp}(K)\to K$ which assigns to $x\in{\rm Unp}(K)$ the unique
point $\xi_K(x)\in K$ such that $\delta_K(x)=\Vert x-\xi_K(x)\Vert$. For a
point $a\in K$ we set:
$$
\reach(K,a)=\sup\{r>0\,:\, B(a,r)\subset\unp(K)\}\,.
$$
The reach of $K$ is then defined by:
$$
\reach(K)=\inf_{a\in K}\reach(K,a)\,,
$$
and $K$ is said to be of positive reach if $\reach(K)>0$.

If $K\subset\eud$ is compact and $x\in K$, the tangent and the normal spaces to
$K$ at $a$ are:
$$
\tang(K,a)=\{0\}\cup
\left\{u\,:\,\forall\,\epsilon>0\;\exists\,b\in K\,{\rm s.t.}\,
0<\Vert b-a\Vert<\epsilon\,,\,
\left\Vert\frac{b-a}{\Vert b-a\Vert}-\frac{u}{\Vert u\Vert}\right\Vert<\epsilon\right\}\,,
$$
$$
\nor(K,a)=\{v\,:\,(u,v)\le 0\,,\,\forall u\in\tang(K,a)\}\,.
$$
Notice in particular that $\nor(K,a)$ is a closed convex cone. Let
$\reach(K)>0$; for $a\in K$ we set:
$$
P_a=\{v\,:\,\xi_K(a+v)=a\}\,,\quad
Q_a=\{v\,:\,\delta_K(a+v)=\Vert v\Vert\}\,.
$$

\section{Characterization and geometrical properties of sets with positive reach }

The following definition will be useful later.

\begin{Def}\label{D2.1}  Let $a,b\in\eud$, $a\ne b$, $R>0$, $\Vert a-b\Vert<2R$. Let
$$
{\cal D}(a,b,R)=\{D(x,R)\,:\,\norma a-x\norma,\norma b-x\norma\le R\}\,.
$$
We set
$$
\fuso(a,b,R)=\bigcap_{D\in{\cal D}(a,b,R)} D\,.
$$
\end{Def}

It is clear from the definition that $\fuso(a,b,R)$ is a compact convex set,
containing $a$ and $b$. The boundary of $\fuso(a,b,R)$ is
obtained rotating an arc of circle of radius $R$ joining $a$ and $b$, about the
line through $a$ and $b$.

\begin{lm}\label{L2.3} Let $a,b\in\eud$ be such that $0<\Vert b-a\Vert< 2R$
  where $R>0$. If $c,d\in\fuso(a,b,R)$, then $\fuso(c,d,R)\subset\fuso(a,b,R)$.
\end{lm}
\noindent
\begin{dimo} If $D\in{\cal D}(a,b,R)$, then $c,d\in D$ so that $D\in{\cal D}(c,d,R)$.
The conclusion follows from Definition \ref{D2.1}.
\end{dimo}

A set is convex if and only if given any two points belonging to it, it contains
the line segment joining them.
In this section we prove (see Theorem \ref{T2.1})
a characterization of sets of positive reach that somehow
resembles the above characterization of convex sets.
 The proof of this result requires various lemmas.
The next proposition is Theorem 4.8 (7) of \cite{Federer}.

\begin{prop}\label{L2.2} Let $K\subset\eud$ be closed, $x\in\unp(K)$ and
  $\reach(K,\xi_K(x))>0$. Then, for every $b\in K$
\begin{equation}
\label{E2.2}
(x-\xi_K(x),\xi_K(x)-b)\ge-
\frac{\Vert\xi_k(x)-b\Vert^2\,\Vert x-\xi_K(x)\Vert}{2\,\reach(K,\xi_K(x))}\,.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}

Let $R>0$ and $a,b\in\eud$ be such that
$0<\norma a-b\norma<2R$. We define the cone
$$
{\cal C}(a,b,R)=\left\{v\ne0 \,:\,\left(\frac{v}{\norma v\norma},\frac{b-a}{\norma
      b-a\norma}\right)>\frac{\norma b-a\norma}{2R}\right\}\,.
$$
A geometric version of the above proposition follows.

\begin{coro}\label{C2.1} Let $K$ be a closed subset of $\eud$ such that
  $\reach(K)\ge R>0$. Let $x\in\unp(K)\setminus K$, $a=\xi_K(x)\in\partial K$ and $b\in K$
such that $0<\norma a-b\norma<2R$. Then
$$
x-a\notin{\cal C}(a,b,R)\,.
$$
\end{coro}

We proceed with some geometric considerations in the plane.
Given $v$ and $w$ vectors in $\eu$, $v,w\ne0$, we set
$$
{\cal S}(v,w)=\{z\,:\,z=tv+\tau w\,,\,t,\tau> 0\}\,.
$$

\begin{oss}\label{O2.1} Let $R>0$ and $z_1,z_2,z_3,z_4\in\eu$ be such that
$$
\norma z_1-z_2\norma=\norma z_2-z_3\norma=
\norma z_3-z_4\norma=\norma z_4-z_1\norma=R\,,\quad 0<\norma z_1-z_3\norma<2R\,.
$$
We have
$$
{\cal C}(z_1,z_3,R)={\cal S}(z_2-z_1,z_4-z_1)\,.
$$
\end{oss}

\begin{lm}\label{L2.5} Let $R>0$, $b_1,b_2\in\eu$ with $0<\Vert b_1-b_2\Vert<2R$,
  $\Gamma_j=\partial B(b_j,R)$, $j=1,2$, $b_3,b_4\in\eu$ such that
  $\{b_3,b_4\}=\Gamma_1\cap\Gamma_2$. Let
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $\Sigma\subset\Gamma_1$ be the closed
  arc joining $b_3$ and $b_4$ of smaller length;
\item[(ii)] $\Sigma'\subset\Gamma_1$
  be the closed arc having length $\pi R$ and such that
  $\Sigma\cap\Sigma'=\{b_4\}$.
\end{enumerate}
For every $a\in B(b_4,R)\setminus
  D(b_3,R)$ there exist $c\in\Sigma$, $c\ne b_3$, $c\ne b_4$, and
  $c'\in\Sigma'$, uniquely determined, such that
$$
\norma b_1-c' \norma=\norma c'-a   \norma=
\norma a-c    \norma=\norma c-b_1  \norma=R\,.
$$
\end{lm}

\vskip0.5cm
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{figura1}
\vskip0.5cm
{\sc Figure 1}
\end{center}

\noindent
\begin{dimo} We have $\Vert a-b_3\Vert>R$ and $\Vert a-b_4\Vert< R$.
  Let us notice that $b_3$ and $b_4$ are the endpoints of $\Sigma$. By continuity, there
  exists $c\in\Sigma$ such that $\Vert a-c\Vert=R$. Let $b_5$ be the endpoint
  of $\Sigma'$ which does not coincide with $b_4$; we have $\Vert
  b_4-b_5\norma=2R$ and $\Vert a-b_5\Vert+\norma a-b_4\norma\ge\norma
  b_4-b_5\norma=2R$; thus $\norma a-b_5\norma\ge2R-\norma a-b_4\norma> R$. By
  continuity, there exists $c'\in\Sigma'$ such that $\norma a-c'\norma=R$. The
  points $c$ and $c'$ are uniquely determined as intersection of
  $\Gamma_1$ and $\partial B(a,R)$.
\end{dimo}

\begin{lm}\label{L2.6} Let $R>0$, $b_1,b_2\in{\bf E}^2$, $0<\norma b_1-b_2\norma<2R$, $B_i=B(b_i,R)$,
  $\Gamma_i=\partial B_i$, $i=1,2$. Let $b_3,b_4$ be such that
  $\{b_3,b_4\}=\Gamma_1\cap\Gamma_2$, $B_i=B(b_i,R)$,
  $i=3,4$. Assume that $a\in B_3\cup B_4\setminus\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$ and $c_i,c'_i$ are
  such that
$$
\norma b_i-c'_i \norma=\norma c'_i-a   \norma=
\norma a-c_i    \norma=\norma c_i-b_i  \norma=R\,,
\quad{\rm for}\;i=1,2\,,
$$
and let $S_i=S(c_i-a,c'_i-a)$, for $i=1,2$. Then:
\begin{equation}
\label{E2.4}
S_1\cup S_2\supset S(b_2-a,b_1-a)\,.
\end{equation}
In particular
\begin{equation}\label{E2.4b}
\frac{1}{2}(b_1+b_2)\in{\rm int}(S_1\cup S_2)\,.
\end{equation}
\end{lm}

\vskip0.5cm
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{figura2}
\vskip0.5cm
{\sc Figure 2}
\end{center}

\noindent
\begin{dimo}
$S_1, S_2$ and $S(b_2-a,b_1-a)$ are open convex sectors with apex in $a$;
moreover $b_i-a\in S_i$ for $i=1,2$ so that $\{b_1-a,b_2-a\}\subset S_1\cup
S_2$.
Let $\Sigma_1=\Gamma_1\cap D(b_2,R)$ and $\Sigma_2=\Gamma_2\cap D(b_1,R)$. By
Lemma \ref{L2.5} we may assume that $c_i\in\Sigma_i\setminus\{b_3,b_4\}$ for $i=1,2$. This in turn
implies $\Vert c_1-c_2\Vert<2R$ (as $c_1,c_2\in\fuso(b_3,b_4,R)$). Hence it is uniquely determined
$a'\ne a$ such that $\{a,a'\}=\partial B(c_1,R)\cap\partial B(c_2,R)$.
The straight line through $a$ and $a'$ bounds two open half-planes such that $b_2$ and $c_1$
(resp. $b_1$ and $c_2$) are in the same half-plane. Thus
\begin{equation}
\label{E2.5}
a'-a\in S_1\cap S_2\ne\emptyset\,.
\end{equation}
This implies that $S_1\cup S_2$ is a convex cone and,
since it contains $b_1$ and $b_2$, (\ref{E2.4}) follows.
\end{dimo}

\begin{teo}\label{T2.1} If $K\subset\eud$ is closed then $\reach(K)\ge R>0$ if
  and only if for every $b_1,b_2\in K$, $\Vert b_1-b_2\Vert<2R$, $K\cap
  \fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$ is connected.
\end{teo}

\noindent
\begin{dimo} Let us assume that $\reach(K)\ge R>0$.
  By contradiction, assume that
  $K':=K\cap\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$
  is not connected; then there exist $K_1,K_2\subset K'$,
  closed, such that $K'=K_1\cup K_2$ and $K_1\cap
  K_2=\emptyset$. By compactness, there exist $c_i\in K_i$ for $i=1,2$
  such that
$$
\rho:=\Vert c_1-c_2\Vert=\inf\{\Vert x-y\Vert\,:\,x\in K_1\,,\, y\in
K_2\}>0\,.
$$
As $c_1,c_2\in\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$, $\rho\le R$. We have
$$
B(c_1,\rho)\cap B(c_2,\rho)\cap K'=\emptyset\,.
$$
On the other hand it is easy to check that
$\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)\subset[B(c_1,\rho)\cap B(c_2,\rho)]\cup\{c_1,c_2\}$. By
Lemma \ref{L2.3}, $\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)\subset\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$, so that
\begin{equation}
\label{E2.6}
\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)\cap K'=\{c_1,c_2\}\,.
\end{equation}
In particular, $c:=\ds{\frac{c_1+c_2}{2}}\notin K$; as
$\delta_K(c)<R$, $c\in\unp(K)\setminus K$. Let $c_3=\xi_K(c)\in\partial
K$. Notice that if $c_3\in\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)$ then either $c_3=c_1$ or $c_3=c_2$ so
that $\delta_K(c)=\Vert c-c_1\Vert=\Vert c-c_2\Vert$ in contradiction with
$c\in\unp(K)$. Consequently, $c_3\in K\setminus\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)$.
We also observe that, for $i=1,2$,
$$
\norma c_i-c_3\norma\le\norma c_i-c\norma+\norma c-c_3\norma<2R
$$
as $\norma c-c_3\norma=\delta_K(c)<R$.
We recall the definitions of the cones:
$$
{\cal C}_i(c_3,c_i,R)=\left\{v\ne0 \,:\,\left(\frac{v}{\norma v\norma},\frac{c_i-c_3}{\norma
      c_i-c_3\norma}\right)>\frac{\norma c_i-c_3\norma}{2R}
\right\}\,,\quad i=1,2\,.
$$
By Corollary \ref{C2.1} we have that
\begin{equation}
\label{E2.7}
c-c_3\notin{\cal C}_1\cup{\cal C}_2\,.
\end{equation}
Apply Remark \ref{O2.1} and Lemma \ref{L2.6} to the (uniquely determined) 2-dimensional plane
containing $c,c_1,c_2,c_3$ to obtain a contradiction with (\ref{E2.7}).

Vice-versa, assume that for every $b_1,b_2\in K$, $\Vert b_1-b_2\Vert<2R$, the set
  $K\cap
  \fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$ is connected. If, by contradiction, $\reach(K)< R$,
  then there exists $x\in K^c$ such that $\delta_K(x)=r<R$ and
  $\norma x-b_1\norma=\norma x-b_2\norma=r$ for some $b_1,b_2\in K$,
  $b_1\ne b_2$. As $\norma b_1-b_2\norma<2R$, $\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)\cap K$ is
  connected. On the other hand, $r<R$ implies that $\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)\subset
  B(x,r)\cup\{b_1,b_2\}$ so that there exists $b\in K\cap B(x,r)$ i.e. a
  contradiction.
\end{dimo}

\begin{oss} If $\reach(K)\ge R$ and $b_1,b_2\in K$ are such that
$\norma b_1-b_2\norma=2R$, then $K\cap\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$ is not necessarily
connected. Any set consisting of two points at distance $2R$ is an example.
\end{oss}

\begin{teo}\label{T2.2} Let $K$ be a closed set such that $\reach(K)\ge R>0$. If $D$ is a
closed ball of radius less than or equal to $R$ then $\reach(K\cap
D)\ge R$.
\end{teo}

\noindent
\begin{dimo} The argument is similar to the one used in the second part of
  the proof of Theorem \ref{T2.1}. Let $a\in(K\cap D)^c$ such that $r=\delta_{K\cap D}(a)<R$; let us show
that $a\in\unp(K\cap D)$. Assume by contradiction that there exist
$b_1,b_2\in(K\cap D)$ such that $b_1\ne b_2$ and
$\norma a-b_1\norma=\norma a-b_2\norma=r$. In particular $\norma b_1-b_2\norma<2R$.
Clearly, $\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)\subset D$; consequently, by Theorem \ref{T2.1},
$\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)\cap(K\cap D)$ is connected. Also, notice that
$$
(\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)\setminus\{b_1,b_2\})\subset B(a,r)\,.
$$
Then there exists $b'\in K\cap D$ such that $\norma a-b'\norma<r$, i.e. a
contradiction.
\end{dimo}

\begin{coro} If $\reach (K)\ge R>0$, $a,b\in K$, $\norma a-b\norma\le2R$, then
$\reach(K\cap\fuso(a,b,R))\ge R$.
\end{coro}

It is well known that, if $ K $ is a closed convex set in $\eud$ and
$ H $ is an open half space, satisfying $ H \cap K = \emptyset, $
then $ \partial H \cap K $ is either empty or a convex subset of $
\partial H. $ Let us show that a similar property holds for sets of
reach $ \ge R>0.$

\begin{Def}\label{D2.2}
Let  $S$  be a sphere of radius $  R>0 $ in $\eud$;  let $ K $ be
a closed subset of $S$. We say that $ K $ is convex in $ S $
if $ x_1 \in K,\; x_2 \in K, $ dist($ x_1, x_2$) $< 2R $ imply
that the arc of great circle of $S$ joining  $ x_1  $ and  $ x_2, $ and having
smaller length, is contained in $K$.
\end{Def}

\begin{teo}\label{T2.3} Let $K$ be a closed  set in $\eud$
and $\reach (K)\ge R>0$. Let $ B $ be an open ball of radius $R$
satisfying $ B \cap K = \emptyset$. Then $ \partial B \cap K $ is
either empty or a convex subset of $ \partial B $.
\end{teo}

\noindent
\begin{dimo}
Theorem \ref{T2.2} implies that $ (B\cup \partial B) \cap K $ $ =
 \partial B \cap K $ has reach $ \ge R. $ Then, by theorem
 \ref{T2.1}, if $b_1,b_2 \in K\cap \partial B$, $\Vert b_1-b_2\Vert<2R$, then $K\cap
 \partial B \cap \fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$ is connected. Now
$K\cap  \partial B \cap \fuso(b_1,b_2,R)$ is exactly the arc of great circle
 of $\partial B$, joining  $ b_1$ and  $ b_2$ and having smaller length.
\end{dimo}

\section{On the $R$-hull of a set}

Let $A$ be a subset of $\eud$ and let $R>0$. In this section we analyze
the problem of finding $K$ such that $\reach(K)\ge R$, $K\supset A$ and $K$ is
the {\em minimal} set (with respect to inclusion) having these properties. In
other words we look for a sort of hull of reach $R$ of $A$. Intuitively, when
$R=\infty$ we are dealing with the convex hull of $A$ which exists for
every $A$. On the other hand, for finite $R>0$ not every set $A$
admits a hull of reach $R$ (see the examples below). Our aim is to give necessary and
sufficient conditions for $A$ to have this property (see Theorems \ref{T4.1}
and \ref{T4.2}).

\begin{Def}\label{D4.1}
Let $A\subset\eud$, $R>0$. We say that $A$ admits a $R$-hull if
  there exists $\hat A\subset\eud$ such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $A\subset\hat A$;
\item[(ii)] $\reach(\hat A)\ge R$;
\item[(iii)] if $\reach(K)\ge R$ and $A\subset K$, then
  $\hat A\subset K$.
\end{enumerate}
If such a set exists, we call it the $R$-hull of $A$.
\end{Def}

\noindent
{\bf Example 1.} For an arbitrary $R>0$ we may construct
an example of set which does not admit a $R$-hull.
Let $n=2$  and $A=\{a,b\}$ with $\norma a-b\norma=R/2$. Assume by contradiction
that there exists the $R$-hull of $A$, and denote it by $\hat A$. Let $\hat A_1$ be the
closed line segment joining $a$ and $b$: $\reach(\hat A_1)=\infty$ so that
$\hat A_1\supset \hat A$. Let $\Gamma$ be a circle of radius $R$ passing through $a$ and
$b$ and let $\hat A_2\subset\Gamma$ be the closed arc of smaller length joining $a$
and $b$. We have $\reach(\hat A_2)=R$ so that $\hat A_2\supset \hat A$. As
$\hat A_1\cap \hat A_2=A$,
we must have $\hat A=A$; on the other hand $\reach(A)=R/2$ so we have a
contradiction.

\bigskip

\noindent
{\bf Example 2.} In $\eud$ consider a half-line $L$ with end-point in the origin. For
every $i=1,2,\dots$, let $a_i$ be the point of $L$ such that
$\norma a_i\norma=1/i$. The set $A=\{a_1,a_2,\dots\}$ does not admit a $R$-hull for any
$R\in(0,\infty)$.

\bigskip

For an arbitrary set $A\subset\eud$ and $R>0$, we set
$$
A'_R=\{x\in\eud\,:\,\delta_A(x)\ge R\}\,.
$$
The proof of the following proposition is an easy application of Theorem \ref{T2.1}.
\begin{prop} Let $A\subset\eud$, $R>0$; $\reach(A'_R)\ge R$
    if and only if for every $a$ and $b$ such that
     $\delta_A(a),\delta_A(b)\ge R$ and $B(a,R)\cap B(b,R)\ne\emptyset$,
    there exists a continuous arc $\Gamma$ joining
    $a$ and $b$, $\Gamma\subset\fuso(a,b,R)$,
such that $\delta_A(x)\ge R$ for every $x\in\Gamma$.
\end{prop}

\begin{lm}\label{L4.1}
Let $K\subset\eud$, then
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $K\subset (K'_R)'_R\subset\{z\in\eud\,:\,\delta_K(z)<R\}$,
\item[(ii)]  if $\reach(K)\ge R>0$ then $\reach(K'_R)\ge R$ and $K=(K'_R)'_R$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lm}
\noindent
\begin{dimo} If $x\in K$, then $\norma x-y\norma\ge R$ for every $y\in K'_R$ so that
$\delta_{K'_R}(x)\ge R$ and $x\in(K'_R)'_R$. On the other hand, if $z\in(K'_R)'_R$ then
$z\notin K'_R$ so that $\delta_K(z)<R$. Claim (i) is proved.

For $s\ge 0$ set $K'_s=\{x\in\eud\,:\,\delta_K(x)\ge s\}$.
Corollary 4.9 in \cite{Federer} implies that $\reach(K'_{R-1/i})\ge R-1/i$
for every $i=1,2,\dots$. Moreover, the sequence $K'_{R-1/i}$ converges to
$K'_R$ in the Hausdorff metric. On the other hand, the by Remark 4.14 in
\cite{Federer}, for every $\epsilon>0$ the family
$$
\{A\subset\eud\,:\,\reach(A)\ge R-\epsilon\}
$$
is closed with respect to the Hausdorff metric. Then $\reach(K'_R)\ge R-\epsilon$
for every $\epsilon>0$. Now let us prove that if $\reach(K)\ge R$ then
$(K'_R)'_R\setminus K$ is empty. Let $z\in(K'_R)'_R\setminus K$; (i) implies that
$z\in\unp(K)$. Let $x=\xi_K(z)$ and $y_t=x+t\frac{z-x}{\norma z-x\norma}$,
$t\ge 0$. Note that $\frac{z-x}{\norma z-x\norma}\in{\rm Nor}(K,x)$ so that,
by claim (12) of Theorem 4.8 of \cite{Federer}, if $0<t<R$, then $\delta_K(y_t)=t$ and by continuity
$\delta_K(y_R)=R$. Then $y_R\in K'_R$ and
$\norma z-y_R\norma<R$, i.e. a contradiction.
\end{dimo}

\begin{teo}\label{T4.1} Let $A\subset\eud$ and $R>0$. If $\reach(A'_R)\ge R$ then
$A$ admits $R$-hull $\hat A$ and
$$
\hat A=(A'_R)'_R\,.
$$
\end{teo}
\noindent
\begin{dimo} Let $A_1=(A'_R)'_R$; we prove
that $A_1$ is the $R$-hull of $A$. The inclusion $A\subset A_1$ is part (i) in Lemma
\ref{L4.1}.
By the same lemma, as $\reach(A'_R)\ge R$ we have $\reach(A_1)\ge R$. It remains to
show that $A_1$ satisfies (iii) in Definition \ref{D4.1}. Let $K$ be such
that $K\supset A$ and $\reach(K)\ge R$. Then $K'_R\subset A'_R$ and, by Lemma
\ref{L4.1}, $K=(K'_r)'_R\supset(A'_R)'_R=A_1$.
\end{dimo}

\begin{coro}Let $A\subset\eud$ and $R>0$. If for every $a$ and $b$ such that
$\delta_A(a),\delta_A(b)\ge R$ and $\norma a-b\norma<2R$, there exists a continuous
arc $\Gamma$,  joining $a$ and $b$ such that $\delta_A(x)\ge R$ for every $x\in\Gamma$,
$\Gamma\subset\fuso(a,b,R)$, then $A$ admits $R$-hull $\hat A$ and
$$
\hat A=(A'_R)'_R\,.
$$
\end{coro}

\begin{teo}\label{T4.2} Let $K\subset\eud$ and $R>0$. Assume that $K$ admits $R$-hull
$\hat K$. Then $\reach(K'_R)\ge R$.
\end{teo}
\noindent
\begin{dimo} We argue by contradiction. By using Theorem \ref{T2.1},
there exist $b_1$ and $b_2\in K'_R$ satisfying $\norma b_1-b_2\norma<2R$ and such that
$\fuso(b_1,b_2,R)\cap K'_R$ is not connected. Then, as we saw in the proof of
Theorem \ref{T2.1}, there exist $c_1$ and $c_2\in K'_R$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{4.1}
\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)\cap K'_R=\{c_1,c_2\}\,.
\end{equation}
For $j=1,2$ we have $\reach(B(c_j,R)^c)=R$ and $B(c_j,R)^c\supset K$ thus
$B(c_j,R)^c\supset\hat K$. This implies in particular that $c_1$, $c_2\in(\hat
K)'_R$. As $\reach(\hat K)\ge R$, by Lemma \ref{L4.1},
$\reach(\hat K'_R)\ge R$, then $\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)\cap\hat K'_R$ is connected.
Let $a\in[\fuso(c_1,c_2,R)\setminus\{c_1,c_2\}]\cap\hat K'_R$. We have
$B_a(R)\cap K\subset B_a(R)\cap\hat K=\emptyset$ then $a\in K'_R$ which contradicts
(\ref{4.1}).
\end{dimo}

From the above theorem another connection between convex sets and sets of
positive reach can be deduced. The convex hull of a closed set $C$ is the intersection of all the closed half-spaces
containing $C$. Let us prove that if $K$ admits $R$-hull $\hat K$, then $\hat K$ is the
intersection of the complement sets of all open balls that do not meet $K$.
Note that for an arbitrary, non-empty, subset $K$ of $\eud$ we have
$$
(K'_R)'_R=\bigcap_{\delta_K(x)\ge R}B_x(R)^c\,.
$$
This remark and Theorem \ref{T4.2} lead to the following result.

\begin{coro} Let $K\subset\eud$, $R\ge 0$. Assume that $K$ admits an $R$-hull
$\hat K$. Then
$$
\hat K=\bigcap_{\delta_K(x)\ge R}B_x(R)^c\,.
$$
\end{coro}