Help Stuck in proof of Riesz Representation Theorem

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the proof of the Riesz Representation Theorem, specifically addressing the continuity of the function g as derived from a linear, bounded, and positive functional G on C(J). The inequality g(t + n^{-2}) ≤ g(t) + 2ε is established by demonstrating that for sufficiently large n, G(ϕ_{t + n^{-2}, n}) is bounded above by g(t) + 2ε. The participants highlight a mistake in the original proof and provide a clearer approach to show the right continuity of g at t, leveraging the properties of the functional G and the constructed functions ϕ_{t,n}.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of the Riesz Representation Theorem
  • Familiarity with linear functionals and continuity in functional analysis
  • Knowledge of the properties of bounded and positive functionals on C(J)
  • Basic grasp of limits and inequalities in mathematical proofs
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the Riesz Representation Theorem in detail, focusing on its implications for continuous functions
  • Explore the properties of linear functionals on C(J) and their applications in functional analysis
  • Learn about the Hahn-Banach Theorem and its relevance to extending measures
  • Investigate examples of proving continuity of functions in the context of measure theory
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, graduate students in analysis, and anyone studying functional analysis or the Riesz Representation Theorem will benefit from this discussion.

Tommy Jensen
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am lecturing out of R.Bartle, The Elements of Integration and Lebesgue Measure, for the first time. In the most recent lecture I got stuck not being able to argue an inequality on page 107. I cannot post the text here, sorry. But if anyone has the book, can you also explain how to derive the inequality in line 6:

g(t + n[itex]^{-2}[/itex]) [itex]\leq[/itex] g(t) + 2[itex]\epsilon[/itex] ?

The inequality G([itex]\psi[/itex][itex]_{n}[/itex]) [itex]\leq[/itex] g(t) + 2[itex]\epsilon[/itex] from the previous line does not seem to help much, since
G([itex]\psi[/itex][itex]_{n}[/itex]) [itex]\leq[/itex] G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t + n^{-2}, n}[/itex])
follows from G being positive, and this is the opposite inequality of the desired.
Or what am I missing here? Thanks for any enlightenment!

Kind regards, Tommy
 
Physics news on Phys.org
g(t + n−2) ≤ g(t) + 2ϵ

This looks like a result of g being continuous. Since I don't have the book, I can't comment on the rest.
 
Thanks for the reply!

Actually, in the part of the proof which I am asking about, the aim is the prove that the function g is continuous.

There appears to be a mistake in the proof though. So for those who do have the book, here is a fix for later reference.

Recall that J = [a,b] and C(J) is the set of real-valued continuous functions on J. A linear, bounded and positive functional G on C(J) is assumed given. Fix any t [itex]\in[/itex] [a,b) and a sufficiently large integer n. Let [itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex] be the function that maps x to 1 if a ≤ x ≤ t, maps x to 0 if t+[itex]\frac{1}{n}[/itex] ≤ x ≤ b, and maps x to 1 - n(x-t) if t < x < t+[itex]\frac{1}{n}[/itex]. Then [itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex] [itex]\in[/itex] C(J), and G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex]) is non-negative and non-increasing as a function of n.

Let g(t) = lim[itex]_{n → ∞}[/itex] G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex]). Let g(s)=0 if s < a, and g(s)=G(1) if s ≥ b. Then g is monotone increasing. The aim is to show that g is everywhere continuous from the right, then to extend the Borel-Stieltjes measure generated by g to a measure defined on the Borel algebra, using the Hahn Extension Theorem.

I cannot make the proof in the book work to prove continuity of g from the right. But the fix is easier than in the suggested proof.

Let ε > 0 and assume that n is large enough to satisfy n > 2, n > [itex]\frac{1}{ε}[/itex]||G||, and g(t) ≤ G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex]) ≤ g(t) + ε.
Then ||[itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},n}[/itex] - [itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex]|| = [itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},n}(t+\frac{1}{n})[/itex] = [itex]\frac{1}{n}[/itex] implies ||G|| ≥ |G(n([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},n}[/itex] - [itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex]))| = n(G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},n}[/itex]) - G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex])), hence
G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},n}[/itex]) ≤ G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t,n}[/itex]) + [itex]\frac{1}{n}[/itex]||G|| ≤ g(t) + 2ε.
The right continuity of g at t follows by noting that
g(t) ≤ g(t+[itex]\frac{1}{n^2}[/itex]) = lim[itex]_{k → ∞}[/itex] G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},k}[/itex]) ≤ G([itex]\varphi[/itex][itex]_{t+\frac{1}{n^2},n}[/itex]) ≤ g(t) + 2ε.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K