If A is an algebra, then its uniform closure is an algebra.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the proof that the uniform closure of an algebra of continuous functions on a compact metric space is also an algebra. Participants explore the definitions and properties of uniform convergence, pointwise multiplication, and linear combinations within the context of functional analysis.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • One participant outlines a proof showing that if ##A## is an algebra, then the uniform closure ##\overline{A}## retains the algebraic structure through uniform convergence.
  • Another participant agrees with the proof but notes a minor error regarding a lost epsilon, suggesting that the algebraic structure extends from ##A## to ##\overline{A}##.
  • Further discussion highlights the value of explaining concepts to clarify understanding, with participants sharing personal insights on the learning process.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the validity of the proof with a minor correction noted. There is no significant disagreement on the main argument presented.

Contextual Notes

The discussion assumes familiarity with concepts such as uniform convergence, algebras of functions, and the properties of continuous functions on compact metric spaces. Specific mathematical steps and definitions are referenced but not exhaustively detailed.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and professionals in mathematics, particularly those studying functional analysis, algebra, or related fields involving continuous functions and convergence concepts.

member 587159
Let me give some context.

Let X be a compact metric space and ##C(X)## be the set of all continuous functions ##X \to \mathbb{R}##, equipped with the uniform norm, i.e. the norm defined by ##\Vert f \Vert = \sup_{x \in X} |f(x)|##

Note that this is well defined by compactness. Then, for a subset ##A \subset C(X)##, we define the uniform closure as the set ##\overline{A}## with respect to the uniform norm.

Now, in a proof I'm going through, it is claimed that if ##A## is an algebra (subvectorspace + closed under pointwise multiplication), then ##\overline{A}## is an algebra too.

I decided to prove this, and did the following:

Let ##f,g \in \overline{A}##. There are sequences of functions such that ##f_n \to f, g_n \to g## for the uniform norm. But convergence for the uniform norm is the same thing as uniform convergence of sequences of functions.

So, let ##\epsilon > 0##. Choose ##n_0## such that for all ##n \geq n_0, x \in X##, we have both

##|f_n(x) - f(x)| < \epsilon## and ##|g_n(x) - g(x)| < \epsilon##

Then, for ##n \geq n_0, x \in X##, we have:

##|f_n(x)g_n(x) - f(x)g(x)| \leq |f_n(x)||g_n(x)-g(x)| + |f_n(x) -f(x)||g(x)| \leq \Vert f_n \Vert \epsilon + \Vert g \Vert\epsilon < M \epsilon## for some number M (because all the functions are bounded, as they are continuous.

This shows that ##f_ng_n \to fg##, and hence ##fg\in \overline{A}## as ##f_ng_n \in A## because it is an algebra.

Analoguous, we can prove that linear combinations remain in the set. Is this a correct proof?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Math_QED said:
Let me give some context.

Let X be a compact metric space and ##C(X)## be the set of all continuous functions ##X \to \mathbb{R}##, equipped with the uniform norm, i.e. the norm defined by ##\Vert f \Vert = \sup_{x \in X} |f(x)|##

Note that this is well defined by compactness. Then, for a subset ##A \subset C(X)##, we define the uniform closure as the set ##\overline{A}## with respect to the uniform norm.

Now, in a proof I'm going through, it is claimed that if ##A## is an algebra (subvectorspace + closed under pointwise multiplication), then ##\overline{A}## is an algebra too.

I decided to prove this, and did the following:

Let ##f,g \in \overline{A}##. There are sequences of functions such that ##f_n \to f, g_n \to g## for the uniform norm. But convergence for the uniform norm is the same thing as uniform convergence of sequences of functions.

So, let ##\epsilon > 0##. Choose ##n_0## such that for all ##n \geq n_0, x \in X##, we have both

##|f_n(x) - f(x)| < \epsilon## and ##|g_n(x) - g(x)| < \epsilon##

Then, for ##n \geq n_0, x \in X##, we have:

##|f_n(x)g_n(x) - f(x)g(x)| \leq |f_n(x)||g_n(x)-g(x)| + |f_n(x) -f(x)||g(x)| \leq \Vert f_n \Vert \epsilon + \Vert g \Vert < M \epsilon## for some number M (because all the functions are bounded, as they are continuous.

This shows that ##f_ng_n \to fg##, and hence ##fg\in \overline{A}## as ##f_ng_n \in A## because it is an algebra.

Analoguous, we can prove that linear combinations remain in the set. Is this a correct proof?
Except for a lost ##\varepsilon ##, yes. You basically prove ##\lim (\alpha f_n + \beta g_n) = \alpha \lim f_n + \beta \lim g_n## and ##\lim (f_n \cdot g_n) = \lim f_n \cdot \lim g_n## so the algebraic structure extends from ##A## to ##\overline{A}##.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: member 587159
fresh_42 said:
Except for a lost ##\varepsilon ##, yes. You basically prove ##\lim (\alpha f_n + \beta g_n) = \alpha \lim f_n + \beta \lim g_n## and ##\lim (f_n \cdot g_n) = \lim f_n \cdot \lim g_n## so the algebraic structure extends from ##A## to ##\overline{A}##.

Except for a lost epsilon?

Edit: Nevermind, found it (also edited it out). This was a typo.

Thanks a lot! I actually had a question about this proof, but while typing it out the question resolved itself. As the question was already typed, I decided that I would post it. It is good to get feedback sometimes :)
 
Math_QED said:
I actually had a question about this proof, but while typing it out I saw it.
That's one of the best tricks: If you want to understand something, explain it to others!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: member 587159
fresh_42 said:
That's one of the best tricks: If you want to understand something, explain it to others!

Indeed, or just formulating the question in a formal way! I have had many times that even this was enough to made me realize what I was missing.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: fresh_42

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K