L^2 convergence implies a.e. pointwise convergence? Since when?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter AxiomOfChoice
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convergence
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1 reply · 16K views
AxiomOfChoice
Messages
531
Reaction score
1
My functional analysis professor made the following assertion the other day: If [itex]f_n \to f[/itex] in the [itex]L^2[/itex] norm, then there is a subsequence [itex]f_{n_k}[/itex] that converges pointwise almost everywhere to [itex]f[/itex]. This is the first I've heard of that...can someone point me to a proof of this proposition? Does it have a name?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
To my knowledge, it doesn't have a name. I'll write the proof down for you: (I also assume that you are working in Lp(R)).

DEFINITION: Let fn be a measurable function. We say that fn converges in measure to f if for each [tex]\epsilon>0[/tex]

[tex]\lambda\{|f_n-f|>\epsilon\}\rightarrow 0[/tex]

THEOREM: If fn converges to f in the L2-norm, then the convergence is also in measure.

PROOF: [tex]\lambda\{|f_n-f|>\epsilon\}\leq \int_{\{|f_n-f|>\epsilon\}}{1dx}\leq\frac{1}{\epsilon^p}\int{|f_n-f|^p}\rightarrow 0[/tex]

Now we need some facts about convergence almost everywhere:

THEOREM: The following are equivalent:
(1) fn converges to f a.e.
(2) [tex]\lambda{(\limsup\{|f_n-f|>\epsilon\})}=0[/tex]

I'll assume you already seen this theorem. Otherwise, I'll prove it.

LEMMA: If for all [tex]\epsilon>0[/tex] holds that [tex]\sum_{n=1}^{+\infty}{\lambda\{|f_n-f|>\epsilon\}}<+\infty[/tex], then fn converges to f a.e.

PROOF [tex]\lambda{(\limsup\{|f_n-f|>\epsilon\})}=\lim_{n\rightarrow+\infty}\lambda\left( \bigcup_{m=n}{\{|f_m-f|>\epsilon\}}\right)[/tex]

This limit is 0, since

[tex]\lambda\left( \bigcup_{m=n}{\{|f_m-f|>\epsilon\}}\right)\leq \sum_{m=n}^{+\infty}{\lambda\{|f_m-f|>\epsilon\}}\rightarrow 0[/tex]


Now we can finally prove the result:

THEOREM Assume that fn converges to f in measure, then there is a subsequence fnk that converges to f a.e.

PROOF Choose a subsequence fnk such that [tex]\lambda\{|f_{n_k}-f|>1/k\}\leq 1/k^2[/tex]. Then

[tex]\sum_{k=1}^{+\infty}{\lambda\{|f_{n_k}-f|>\epsilon\}}<+\infty[/tex]

Thus our subsequence converges a.e.


If something about the previous proof is not clear, then feel free to ask. If you rather want a reference: I got this proof from Billingsley's "Probability and measure". But the proof is a bit spread out, so you will have to do some searching...