Functional Analysis, Show that the range of a bounded linear operator

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around demonstrating that the range of a bounded linear operator \( T: X \rightarrow Y \) is not necessarily closed, specifically in the context of the operator defined from \( l^{\infty} \) to \( l^{\infty} \).

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the idea of finding an element in \( l^{\infty} \) that does not belong to the range of \( T \) and constructing a convergent sequence in the range that approaches this element. There is also discussion about the behavior of sequences and their limits in relation to the boundedness condition of the operator.

Discussion Status

Some participants have offered insights into the nature of the sequences involved and the convergence properties required to address the problem. There is an ongoing exploration of different perspectives on how to approach the construction of limit points and the implications of boundedness.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the constraints of the problem, particularly regarding the boundedness of elements and the characteristics of the operator's range. There are hints of confusion around the construction of sequences and their limits, indicating that certain assumptions may need to be revisited.

Eduardo
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Show that the range [tex]\mathcal{R}(T)[/tex] of a bounded linear operator [tex]T: X \rightarrow Y[/tex] is not necessarily closed.
Hint: Use the linear bounded operator [tex]T: l^{\infty} \rightarrow l^{\infty}[/tex] defined by [tex](\eta_{j}) = T x, \eta_{j} = \xi_{j}/j, x = (\xi_{j})[/tex].

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


My idea was to find an element [tex]y \in l^{\infty}[/tex] that does not belong to the range and then try to build a convergent sequence in [tex]\mathcal{R}(T)[/tex] that has limit [tex]y[/tex]. The element [tex]y = (1, 1, \ldots)[/tex] satisfy the criteria because [tex]T^{-1}y = \{ x\}[/tex], with [tex]x = (\xi_{j}), \xi_{j} = j[/tex], but, clearly, [tex]x \not\in l^{\infty}[/tex], therefore, [tex]y \not\in \mathcal{R}(T)[/tex]. The problem arise when I try to build the sequence, because [tex](T x_{m})[/tex] with [tex]x_{m} \in l^{\infty}[/tex] cannot converge to [tex]y[/tex]. Briefly, my problem is that I can´t find a limit point of [tex]\mathcal{R}(T)[/tex] that doesn´t belong to [tex]\mathcal{R}(T)[/tex].
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Think from the other direction. Since x needs to be bounded, the elements in Tx must decrease to zero eventually. Which means that any element that's on the boundary of the image set must also have its elements converge to zero. Can you find a sequence nk that converges to zero, such that knk is unbounded?
 
Just, logged into thank you, Office Shredder, for your quick and helpful answer. which was very nice because it was precisely what I needed, to unblock my fixed ideas o a change of approach to face the problem and let me think or find an answer instead of just give me the result inmediately. Thanks again.
 
who did you find the find a limit point of
R(T)
that doesn´t belong to
R(T)?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
4K