If every sequence $(x_{n}) subset X$ and $(lambda_{n}) subset mathbb{R}$ we have $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$,...
$begingroup$
Let $(V,Vert cdot Vert)$ a normed vector space.
(a) Prove that if $A,B subset V$ with $A$ open, then $A + B$ is open.
(b) Is there disjoint open sets $A_{1},A_{2}$ for which there is no disjoint closed sets $F_{1},F_{2}$ such that $A_{1} subset F_{1}$ and $A_{2} subset F_{2}$?
(c) Prove that if $X subset V$ is bounded, then for every sequence $(x_{n}) subset X$ and $(lambda_{n}) subset mathbb{R}$ with $lim lambda_{n} = 0$ we have $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$. What about the converse?
My attempt.
(a) Let $A$ be an open set. So, $A + b = {a+b mid a in A}$ is translation, therefore, is open. But $displaystyle A + B = bigcup_{b in B}(A+b)$, then $A+B$ is open.
(b) Take $A_{1} = mathbb{R}_{>0}$ and $A_{2} = mathbb{R}_{<0}$, because $overline{A_{1}} = A_{1}cup{0}$ and $overline{A_{2}} = A_{2}cup{0}$
(c) If $(x_{n})$ is a sequence in $X$, then $(x_{n})$ is bounded. But
$$(x_{n}) = ((x_{1,n}),(x_{2,n}),...,(x_{k,n}))$$
where each $(x_{i,n})$ is a bounded sequence in $mathbb{R}$. Thus, $lim lambda_{n}x_{i,n} = 0$ for each $i$, then $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$.
The converse seems true, but I cannot prove. Can someone help me?
general-topology metric-spaces
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $(V,Vert cdot Vert)$ a normed vector space.
(a) Prove that if $A,B subset V$ with $A$ open, then $A + B$ is open.
(b) Is there disjoint open sets $A_{1},A_{2}$ for which there is no disjoint closed sets $F_{1},F_{2}$ such that $A_{1} subset F_{1}$ and $A_{2} subset F_{2}$?
(c) Prove that if $X subset V$ is bounded, then for every sequence $(x_{n}) subset X$ and $(lambda_{n}) subset mathbb{R}$ with $lim lambda_{n} = 0$ we have $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$. What about the converse?
My attempt.
(a) Let $A$ be an open set. So, $A + b = {a+b mid a in A}$ is translation, therefore, is open. But $displaystyle A + B = bigcup_{b in B}(A+b)$, then $A+B$ is open.
(b) Take $A_{1} = mathbb{R}_{>0}$ and $A_{2} = mathbb{R}_{<0}$, because $overline{A_{1}} = A_{1}cup{0}$ and $overline{A_{2}} = A_{2}cup{0}$
(c) If $(x_{n})$ is a sequence in $X$, then $(x_{n})$ is bounded. But
$$(x_{n}) = ((x_{1,n}),(x_{2,n}),...,(x_{k,n}))$$
where each $(x_{i,n})$ is a bounded sequence in $mathbb{R}$. Thus, $lim lambda_{n}x_{i,n} = 0$ for each $i$, then $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$.
The converse seems true, but I cannot prove. Can someone help me?
general-topology metric-spaces
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Don't you need $lambda_nto0$?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Jan 4 at 22:18
1
$begingroup$
There are a couple issues with your part (c); one is your assumption that you can write $x_n$ in coordinates in this way (and why would you need to?), and second is that there is a quite large gap - some magic has happened when you say "Thus." What would happen if $lambda_n = 1$ for all $n$?
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft, oh, yes! I forgot to write!
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:20
1
$begingroup$
For another issue, note that in part (b) you're implicitly assuming that $V = mathbb{R}$. This is supposed to be a general normed space, although your idea is on the right track.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:21
$begingroup$
@T.Bongers, thanks for the hint! I'll try to correct the mistakes.
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:22
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $(V,Vert cdot Vert)$ a normed vector space.
(a) Prove that if $A,B subset V$ with $A$ open, then $A + B$ is open.
(b) Is there disjoint open sets $A_{1},A_{2}$ for which there is no disjoint closed sets $F_{1},F_{2}$ such that $A_{1} subset F_{1}$ and $A_{2} subset F_{2}$?
(c) Prove that if $X subset V$ is bounded, then for every sequence $(x_{n}) subset X$ and $(lambda_{n}) subset mathbb{R}$ with $lim lambda_{n} = 0$ we have $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$. What about the converse?
My attempt.
(a) Let $A$ be an open set. So, $A + b = {a+b mid a in A}$ is translation, therefore, is open. But $displaystyle A + B = bigcup_{b in B}(A+b)$, then $A+B$ is open.
(b) Take $A_{1} = mathbb{R}_{>0}$ and $A_{2} = mathbb{R}_{<0}$, because $overline{A_{1}} = A_{1}cup{0}$ and $overline{A_{2}} = A_{2}cup{0}$
(c) If $(x_{n})$ is a sequence in $X$, then $(x_{n})$ is bounded. But
$$(x_{n}) = ((x_{1,n}),(x_{2,n}),...,(x_{k,n}))$$
where each $(x_{i,n})$ is a bounded sequence in $mathbb{R}$. Thus, $lim lambda_{n}x_{i,n} = 0$ for each $i$, then $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$.
The converse seems true, but I cannot prove. Can someone help me?
general-topology metric-spaces
$endgroup$
Let $(V,Vert cdot Vert)$ a normed vector space.
(a) Prove that if $A,B subset V$ with $A$ open, then $A + B$ is open.
(b) Is there disjoint open sets $A_{1},A_{2}$ for which there is no disjoint closed sets $F_{1},F_{2}$ such that $A_{1} subset F_{1}$ and $A_{2} subset F_{2}$?
(c) Prove that if $X subset V$ is bounded, then for every sequence $(x_{n}) subset X$ and $(lambda_{n}) subset mathbb{R}$ with $lim lambda_{n} = 0$ we have $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$. What about the converse?
My attempt.
(a) Let $A$ be an open set. So, $A + b = {a+b mid a in A}$ is translation, therefore, is open. But $displaystyle A + B = bigcup_{b in B}(A+b)$, then $A+B$ is open.
(b) Take $A_{1} = mathbb{R}_{>0}$ and $A_{2} = mathbb{R}_{<0}$, because $overline{A_{1}} = A_{1}cup{0}$ and $overline{A_{2}} = A_{2}cup{0}$
(c) If $(x_{n})$ is a sequence in $X$, then $(x_{n})$ is bounded. But
$$(x_{n}) = ((x_{1,n}),(x_{2,n}),...,(x_{k,n}))$$
where each $(x_{i,n})$ is a bounded sequence in $mathbb{R}$. Thus, $lim lambda_{n}x_{i,n} = 0$ for each $i$, then $lim lambda_{n}x_{n} = 0$.
The converse seems true, but I cannot prove. Can someone help me?
general-topology metric-spaces
general-topology metric-spaces
edited Jan 4 at 22:20
Lucas Corrêa
asked Jan 4 at 22:13
Lucas CorrêaLucas Corrêa
1,6151321
1,6151321
$begingroup$
Don't you need $lambda_nto0$?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Jan 4 at 22:18
1
$begingroup$
There are a couple issues with your part (c); one is your assumption that you can write $x_n$ in coordinates in this way (and why would you need to?), and second is that there is a quite large gap - some magic has happened when you say "Thus." What would happen if $lambda_n = 1$ for all $n$?
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft, oh, yes! I forgot to write!
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:20
1
$begingroup$
For another issue, note that in part (b) you're implicitly assuming that $V = mathbb{R}$. This is supposed to be a general normed space, although your idea is on the right track.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:21
$begingroup$
@T.Bongers, thanks for the hint! I'll try to correct the mistakes.
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:22
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Don't you need $lambda_nto0$?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Jan 4 at 22:18
1
$begingroup$
There are a couple issues with your part (c); one is your assumption that you can write $x_n$ in coordinates in this way (and why would you need to?), and second is that there is a quite large gap - some magic has happened when you say "Thus." What would happen if $lambda_n = 1$ for all $n$?
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft, oh, yes! I forgot to write!
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:20
1
$begingroup$
For another issue, note that in part (b) you're implicitly assuming that $V = mathbb{R}$. This is supposed to be a general normed space, although your idea is on the right track.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:21
$begingroup$
@T.Bongers, thanks for the hint! I'll try to correct the mistakes.
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:22
$begingroup$
Don't you need $lambda_nto0$?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Jan 4 at 22:18
$begingroup$
Don't you need $lambda_nto0$?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Jan 4 at 22:18
1
1
$begingroup$
There are a couple issues with your part (c); one is your assumption that you can write $x_n$ in coordinates in this way (and why would you need to?), and second is that there is a quite large gap - some magic has happened when you say "Thus." What would happen if $lambda_n = 1$ for all $n$?
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
There are a couple issues with your part (c); one is your assumption that you can write $x_n$ in coordinates in this way (and why would you need to?), and second is that there is a quite large gap - some magic has happened when you say "Thus." What would happen if $lambda_n = 1$ for all $n$?
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft, oh, yes! I forgot to write!
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft, oh, yes! I forgot to write!
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:20
1
1
$begingroup$
For another issue, note that in part (b) you're implicitly assuming that $V = mathbb{R}$. This is supposed to be a general normed space, although your idea is on the right track.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:21
$begingroup$
For another issue, note that in part (b) you're implicitly assuming that $V = mathbb{R}$. This is supposed to be a general normed space, although your idea is on the right track.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:21
$begingroup$
@T.Bongers, thanks for the hint! I'll try to correct the mistakes.
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:22
$begingroup$
@T.Bongers, thanks for the hint! I'll try to correct the mistakes.
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:22
add a comment |
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your part (a) is fine, assuming that you know translation is continuous.
Your part (b) is on the right track, but it assumes that $V$ is the continuum, whereas it should be a normed vector space. You have the right idea of separating two sets by a very small set, but you shouldn't rely on coordinates (since you don't have any coordinates...). Use the norm instead.
Your part (c) has a similar issue: unless you're in a finite dimensional space, there is neither reason nor justification for writing the sequence in coordinates. Again, you need to be using the norm. Notice that
$$|lambda_n x_n| = |lambda_n| cdot |x_n| le |lambda_n| sup_{x in X} |x| to 0.$$
The converse is in fact true, and can be handled similarly; choose an unbounded sequence ${x_n}$ and craft $lambda_n$ depending on $x_n$ so that $|lambda_n x_n| notto 0$. Constant norm works.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
1
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The converse is true, we'll prove it by contraposition:
Assume that $X$ is unbounded. Hence for every $ninmathbb{N}$ exists $x_n in X$ such that $|x_n| ge n$. Consider the sequence $(lambda_n)_n = left(frac1nright)_n$. We have $lim_{ntoinfty} lambda_n = 0$ but
$ |lambda_nx_n| ge 1, forall ninmathbb{N}$ so it cannot converge to $0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For the converse: suppose $X$ is not bounded. Then it contains some sequence $(x_n)$ such that $(|x_n|)toinfty$ (take $x_n$ to be an example given by the negation of the definition of "bounded" with the constant set to $n$). Take $lambda_n = frac{1}{|x_n|}$. Then $(lambda_n)to 0$, but $(lambda_nx_n)notto 0$, since $(|lambda_nx_n|) = (1) notto 0$. Thus, taking the contrapositive, we have the converse (NB: you've got a bit missing out of the contrapositive you've given in the title: you've dropped the $limlambda_n = 0$ bit).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your approach to part (a) is correct; to be more explicit, you could show why $A+b$ is open.
You have the right idea for part (b), but it needs to be stated a bit more generally. Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be disjoint open balls that both have some point $z$ in their closure. Then if $F_1$, $F_2$ are closed sets containing $A_1$, $A_2$, respectively, we have $zin F_1$ and $zin F_2$ since $F_1supset overline{A_1}$ and $F_2supsetoverline{A_2}$, so $F_1$ and $F_2$ cannot be disjoint. To construct such $A_1$ and $A_2$, let $x,y$ be distinct points in $V$ with $|x|=|y|$ and consider the open balls centered at $x$ and $y$ with radius $frac 12 |x-y|$. Then the point $frac12(x+y)$ is in the closure of both of these balls.
For part (c) I will defer to the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062176%2fif-every-sequence-x-n-subset-x-and-lambda-n-subset-mathbbr-we%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
Your part (a) is fine, assuming that you know translation is continuous.
Your part (b) is on the right track, but it assumes that $V$ is the continuum, whereas it should be a normed vector space. You have the right idea of separating two sets by a very small set, but you shouldn't rely on coordinates (since you don't have any coordinates...). Use the norm instead.
Your part (c) has a similar issue: unless you're in a finite dimensional space, there is neither reason nor justification for writing the sequence in coordinates. Again, you need to be using the norm. Notice that
$$|lambda_n x_n| = |lambda_n| cdot |x_n| le |lambda_n| sup_{x in X} |x| to 0.$$
The converse is in fact true, and can be handled similarly; choose an unbounded sequence ${x_n}$ and craft $lambda_n$ depending on $x_n$ so that $|lambda_n x_n| notto 0$. Constant norm works.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
1
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your part (a) is fine, assuming that you know translation is continuous.
Your part (b) is on the right track, but it assumes that $V$ is the continuum, whereas it should be a normed vector space. You have the right idea of separating two sets by a very small set, but you shouldn't rely on coordinates (since you don't have any coordinates...). Use the norm instead.
Your part (c) has a similar issue: unless you're in a finite dimensional space, there is neither reason nor justification for writing the sequence in coordinates. Again, you need to be using the norm. Notice that
$$|lambda_n x_n| = |lambda_n| cdot |x_n| le |lambda_n| sup_{x in X} |x| to 0.$$
The converse is in fact true, and can be handled similarly; choose an unbounded sequence ${x_n}$ and craft $lambda_n$ depending on $x_n$ so that $|lambda_n x_n| notto 0$. Constant norm works.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
1
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your part (a) is fine, assuming that you know translation is continuous.
Your part (b) is on the right track, but it assumes that $V$ is the continuum, whereas it should be a normed vector space. You have the right idea of separating two sets by a very small set, but you shouldn't rely on coordinates (since you don't have any coordinates...). Use the norm instead.
Your part (c) has a similar issue: unless you're in a finite dimensional space, there is neither reason nor justification for writing the sequence in coordinates. Again, you need to be using the norm. Notice that
$$|lambda_n x_n| = |lambda_n| cdot |x_n| le |lambda_n| sup_{x in X} |x| to 0.$$
The converse is in fact true, and can be handled similarly; choose an unbounded sequence ${x_n}$ and craft $lambda_n$ depending on $x_n$ so that $|lambda_n x_n| notto 0$. Constant norm works.
$endgroup$
Your part (a) is fine, assuming that you know translation is continuous.
Your part (b) is on the right track, but it assumes that $V$ is the continuum, whereas it should be a normed vector space. You have the right idea of separating two sets by a very small set, but you shouldn't rely on coordinates (since you don't have any coordinates...). Use the norm instead.
Your part (c) has a similar issue: unless you're in a finite dimensional space, there is neither reason nor justification for writing the sequence in coordinates. Again, you need to be using the norm. Notice that
$$|lambda_n x_n| = |lambda_n| cdot |x_n| le |lambda_n| sup_{x in X} |x| to 0.$$
The converse is in fact true, and can be handled similarly; choose an unbounded sequence ${x_n}$ and craft $lambda_n$ depending on $x_n$ so that $|lambda_n x_n| notto 0$. Constant norm works.
answered Jan 4 at 22:28
T. BongersT. Bongers
23.1k54662
23.1k54662
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
1
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
1
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
$begingroup$
Awesome, I got it! But for (b), I have some troubles. I thinking in $A_{1}, A_{2}$ such that $partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2} neq emptyset$ and $Vsetminus(A_{1}cup A_{2}) = partial A_{1} cap partial A_{2}$. How can I ensure that $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$ exist? Or how can I make explicit $A_{1}$ and $A_{2}$?
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:38
1
1
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
$begingroup$
For your attempt, you used "positive" and "negative" as the separation condition. This doesn't work for the norm, because you cannot have a negative norm value... but there's no need to cut at zero. Try cutting somewhere else.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:39
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The converse is true, we'll prove it by contraposition:
Assume that $X$ is unbounded. Hence for every $ninmathbb{N}$ exists $x_n in X$ such that $|x_n| ge n$. Consider the sequence $(lambda_n)_n = left(frac1nright)_n$. We have $lim_{ntoinfty} lambda_n = 0$ but
$ |lambda_nx_n| ge 1, forall ninmathbb{N}$ so it cannot converge to $0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The converse is true, we'll prove it by contraposition:
Assume that $X$ is unbounded. Hence for every $ninmathbb{N}$ exists $x_n in X$ such that $|x_n| ge n$. Consider the sequence $(lambda_n)_n = left(frac1nright)_n$. We have $lim_{ntoinfty} lambda_n = 0$ but
$ |lambda_nx_n| ge 1, forall ninmathbb{N}$ so it cannot converge to $0$.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The converse is true, we'll prove it by contraposition:
Assume that $X$ is unbounded. Hence for every $ninmathbb{N}$ exists $x_n in X$ such that $|x_n| ge n$. Consider the sequence $(lambda_n)_n = left(frac1nright)_n$. We have $lim_{ntoinfty} lambda_n = 0$ but
$ |lambda_nx_n| ge 1, forall ninmathbb{N}$ so it cannot converge to $0$.
$endgroup$
The converse is true, we'll prove it by contraposition:
Assume that $X$ is unbounded. Hence for every $ninmathbb{N}$ exists $x_n in X$ such that $|x_n| ge n$. Consider the sequence $(lambda_n)_n = left(frac1nright)_n$. We have $lim_{ntoinfty} lambda_n = 0$ but
$ |lambda_nx_n| ge 1, forall ninmathbb{N}$ so it cannot converge to $0$.
answered Jan 4 at 22:28
mechanodroidmechanodroid
27.3k62446
27.3k62446
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For the converse: suppose $X$ is not bounded. Then it contains some sequence $(x_n)$ such that $(|x_n|)toinfty$ (take $x_n$ to be an example given by the negation of the definition of "bounded" with the constant set to $n$). Take $lambda_n = frac{1}{|x_n|}$. Then $(lambda_n)to 0$, but $(lambda_nx_n)notto 0$, since $(|lambda_nx_n|) = (1) notto 0$. Thus, taking the contrapositive, we have the converse (NB: you've got a bit missing out of the contrapositive you've given in the title: you've dropped the $limlambda_n = 0$ bit).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For the converse: suppose $X$ is not bounded. Then it contains some sequence $(x_n)$ such that $(|x_n|)toinfty$ (take $x_n$ to be an example given by the negation of the definition of "bounded" with the constant set to $n$). Take $lambda_n = frac{1}{|x_n|}$. Then $(lambda_n)to 0$, but $(lambda_nx_n)notto 0$, since $(|lambda_nx_n|) = (1) notto 0$. Thus, taking the contrapositive, we have the converse (NB: you've got a bit missing out of the contrapositive you've given in the title: you've dropped the $limlambda_n = 0$ bit).
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
For the converse: suppose $X$ is not bounded. Then it contains some sequence $(x_n)$ such that $(|x_n|)toinfty$ (take $x_n$ to be an example given by the negation of the definition of "bounded" with the constant set to $n$). Take $lambda_n = frac{1}{|x_n|}$. Then $(lambda_n)to 0$, but $(lambda_nx_n)notto 0$, since $(|lambda_nx_n|) = (1) notto 0$. Thus, taking the contrapositive, we have the converse (NB: you've got a bit missing out of the contrapositive you've given in the title: you've dropped the $limlambda_n = 0$ bit).
$endgroup$
For the converse: suppose $X$ is not bounded. Then it contains some sequence $(x_n)$ such that $(|x_n|)toinfty$ (take $x_n$ to be an example given by the negation of the definition of "bounded" with the constant set to $n$). Take $lambda_n = frac{1}{|x_n|}$. Then $(lambda_n)to 0$, but $(lambda_nx_n)notto 0$, since $(|lambda_nx_n|) = (1) notto 0$. Thus, taking the contrapositive, we have the converse (NB: you've got a bit missing out of the contrapositive you've given in the title: you've dropped the $limlambda_n = 0$ bit).
answered Jan 4 at 22:29
user3482749user3482749
4,266919
4,266919
add a comment |
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your approach to part (a) is correct; to be more explicit, you could show why $A+b$ is open.
You have the right idea for part (b), but it needs to be stated a bit more generally. Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be disjoint open balls that both have some point $z$ in their closure. Then if $F_1$, $F_2$ are closed sets containing $A_1$, $A_2$, respectively, we have $zin F_1$ and $zin F_2$ since $F_1supset overline{A_1}$ and $F_2supsetoverline{A_2}$, so $F_1$ and $F_2$ cannot be disjoint. To construct such $A_1$ and $A_2$, let $x,y$ be distinct points in $V$ with $|x|=|y|$ and consider the open balls centered at $x$ and $y$ with radius $frac 12 |x-y|$. Then the point $frac12(x+y)$ is in the closure of both of these balls.
For part (c) I will defer to the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your approach to part (a) is correct; to be more explicit, you could show why $A+b$ is open.
You have the right idea for part (b), but it needs to be stated a bit more generally. Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be disjoint open balls that both have some point $z$ in their closure. Then if $F_1$, $F_2$ are closed sets containing $A_1$, $A_2$, respectively, we have $zin F_1$ and $zin F_2$ since $F_1supset overline{A_1}$ and $F_2supsetoverline{A_2}$, so $F_1$ and $F_2$ cannot be disjoint. To construct such $A_1$ and $A_2$, let $x,y$ be distinct points in $V$ with $|x|=|y|$ and consider the open balls centered at $x$ and $y$ with radius $frac 12 |x-y|$. Then the point $frac12(x+y)$ is in the closure of both of these balls.
For part (c) I will defer to the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Your approach to part (a) is correct; to be more explicit, you could show why $A+b$ is open.
You have the right idea for part (b), but it needs to be stated a bit more generally. Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be disjoint open balls that both have some point $z$ in their closure. Then if $F_1$, $F_2$ are closed sets containing $A_1$, $A_2$, respectively, we have $zin F_1$ and $zin F_2$ since $F_1supset overline{A_1}$ and $F_2supsetoverline{A_2}$, so $F_1$ and $F_2$ cannot be disjoint. To construct such $A_1$ and $A_2$, let $x,y$ be distinct points in $V$ with $|x|=|y|$ and consider the open balls centered at $x$ and $y$ with radius $frac 12 |x-y|$. Then the point $frac12(x+y)$ is in the closure of both of these balls.
For part (c) I will defer to the accepted answer.
$endgroup$
Your approach to part (a) is correct; to be more explicit, you could show why $A+b$ is open.
You have the right idea for part (b), but it needs to be stated a bit more generally. Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be disjoint open balls that both have some point $z$ in their closure. Then if $F_1$, $F_2$ are closed sets containing $A_1$, $A_2$, respectively, we have $zin F_1$ and $zin F_2$ since $F_1supset overline{A_1}$ and $F_2supsetoverline{A_2}$, so $F_1$ and $F_2$ cannot be disjoint. To construct such $A_1$ and $A_2$, let $x,y$ be distinct points in $V$ with $|x|=|y|$ and consider the open balls centered at $x$ and $y$ with radius $frac 12 |x-y|$. Then the point $frac12(x+y)$ is in the closure of both of these balls.
For part (c) I will defer to the accepted answer.
answered Jan 4 at 22:40
Math1000Math1000
19.1k31745
19.1k31745
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3062176%2fif-every-sequence-x-n-subset-x-and-lambda-n-subset-mathbbr-we%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Don't you need $lambda_nto0$?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Jan 4 at 22:18
1
$begingroup$
There are a couple issues with your part (c); one is your assumption that you can write $x_n$ in coordinates in this way (and why would you need to?), and second is that there is a quite large gap - some magic has happened when you say "Thus." What would happen if $lambda_n = 1$ for all $n$?
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:20
$begingroup$
@SmileyCraft, oh, yes! I forgot to write!
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:20
1
$begingroup$
For another issue, note that in part (b) you're implicitly assuming that $V = mathbb{R}$. This is supposed to be a general normed space, although your idea is on the right track.
$endgroup$
– T. Bongers
Jan 4 at 22:21
$begingroup$
@T.Bongers, thanks for the hint! I'll try to correct the mistakes.
$endgroup$
– Lucas Corrêa
Jan 4 at 22:22