Understanding why ##(y_n)_n## is a bounded sequence

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the question of whether a sequence ##(y_n)_n## in ##\mathbb{C}##, which satisfies a specific convergence property with respect to absolutely convergent series, can be concluded to be bounded. Participants explore different approaches and reasoning related to this question, including references to the Banach-Steinhaus theorem and subsequence arguments.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the implication that if ##y_n## is unbounded, then there exists a subsequence ##y_{n_k}## such that ##|y_{n_k}|>k^3##.
  • Another participant suggests using the Banach-Steinhaus theorem to prove that ##(y_j)## is bounded, outlining a functional defined on ##\ell^1## and its properties.
  • Some participants argue that if the sequence is unbounded, there must be elements exceeding certain bounds (e.g., ##|y_k|>1##, ##|y_l|>2^3##, etc.), and they propose constructing a subsequence based on these elements.
  • There is a request for clarification on the reasoning behind choosing specific bounds like 23 or 33 in the subsequence argument, indicating confusion about the logic used.
  • A later reply clarifies that the choice of bounds is arbitrary and relates to the earlier argument using ##k^3## as a comparison.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of the sequence being unbounded and the validity of the subsequence arguments. The discussion remains unresolved, with no consensus on the conclusions drawn from the various approaches.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the application of the Banach-Steinhaus theorem and the reasoning behind specific subsequence constructions. There are also unresolved questions regarding the implications of unboundedness and the choice of bounds in subsequences.

JD_PM
Messages
1,125
Reaction score
156
Suppose ##(y_n)_n## is a sequence in ##\mathbb{C}## with the following property: for each sequence ##(x_n)_n## in ##\mathbb{C}## for which the series ##\sum_n x_n## converges absolutely, also the series ##\sum_n \left(x_ny_n\right)## converges absolutely. Can you then conclude that ##(y_n)_n## is a bounded sequence?

Well, I am trying to understand two of the answers I got on Math Stack Exchange for this (see for more details: https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/3103987/concluding-whether-y-n-n-is-a-bounded-sequence ).

- In one of the answers, David C. Ullrich states:

Suppose ##y_n## is unbounded. There is a subsequence ##y_{n_k}## with ##|y_{n_k}|>k^3##. Define ##x_n## by saying

$$x_{n_k}=1/k^2,$$

##x_n=0## if ##n\ne n_k##. Then ##\sum x_n## converges absolutely, but ##\sum y_n x_n## diverges, since the terms do not even tend to ##0##. (Because ##|y_{n_k}x_{n_k}|>k##).

Here I do not see why ##y_n## being unbounded implies that there is a subsequence ##y_{n_k}## with ##|y_{n_k}|>k^3##

- In another answer, Rigel states:

You can prove this result by using the Banach-Steinhaus theorem.

More precisely, let ##A_n\colon \ell^1\to\mathbb{C}## be the functional defined by
$$
A_n x := \sum_{j=1}^n x_j y_j.
$$
As is customary, ##\ell^1## denotes the set of complex sequences ##x = (x_1, x_2, \ldots)## such that ##\|x\|_1 := \sum_{j=1}^\infty |x_j| < +\infty##.

Clearly ##|A_n x| \leq C_n \|x\|_1##, where ##C_n := \max\{|y_1|, \ldots, |y_n|\}##.
Hence, ##A_n \in (\ell^1)^* = \ell^\infty## and it is not difficult to check that ##\|A_n\|_* = C_n##.

By assumption, for every ##x\in\ell^1## there exists the limit
$$
Ax := \lim_n A_n x = \sum_{j=1}^\infty x_j y_j.
$$
Then, by the Banach-Steinhaus theorem, ##A\in (\ell^1)^*## and
$$
\|A\|_* \leq \liminf_n \|A_n\|_{*} = \sup_{j\in\mathbb{N}} |y_j| < \infty,
$$
so that ##(y_j)## is bounded.

I have been reading about Banach–Steinhaus theorem (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_boundedness_principle) but still do not see how the theorem is used to see if ##(y_j)## is bounded. Please either explain the general idea or recommend a book where I could read about it. I am currently using Rudin's and Abbott's (note I am a beginner).

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The sequence can't be bound by 1, there has to be an element such that ##|y_k|>1##. Take the first one as first element of your subsequence. The sequence can't be bound by 23, there has to be an element such that ##|y_l|>2^3##, even if you look at l>k only . Take that as second element of your subsequence. The sequence can't be bound by 33, there has to be an element such that ##|y_m|>3^3##, even if you look at m>l only . Take that as third element of your subsequence. And so on.
 
mfb said:
The sequence can't be bound by 1, there has to be an element such that ##|y_k|>1##. Take the first one as first element of your subsequence. The sequence can't be bound by 23, there has to be an element such that ##|y_l|>2^3##, even if you look at l>k only . Take that as second element of your subsequence. The sequence can't be bound by 33, there has to be an element such that ##|y_m|>3^3##, even if you look at m>l only . Take that as third element of your subsequence. And so on.

Sorry but I still do not understand the whole process. I get that if we suppose ##y_n## is unbounded then there has to be an element such that ##|y_k|>1##. But once you start with 'The sequence can't be bound by 23' I get lost. I mean, why the 23 factor?
 
It is an arbitrary choice. I picked it because the answer you quoted uses k3 as comparison: 13, 23, 33. There are many more sequences that work.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: JD_PM

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 44 ·
2
Replies
44
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K