Continuous functions vanishing at infinity on a non-locally-compact space
$begingroup$
Let $X$ be a topological space which is not locally-compact (e.g., an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space).
Let $C_{0}(X)$ denote the space of complex-valued, continuous functions vanishing at infinity on $X$, that is, an element $fin C_{0}(X)$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on $X$ such that,for every $epsilon>0$, there exists a compact $Ksubset X$ such that $|f(x)|leq epsilon$ outside $K$.
It is my understanding that $C_{0}(X)$ is a Banach space just as $C_{0}(Y)$ with $Y$ a locally-compact space.
However, in the second page of this article, it is stated that $C_{0}(X)$ only contains the zero function when $X$ is not locally-compact, but the statement is not proved.
On the other hand, at the end of the first page of this article, it is said that $C_{0}(X)$ may be very small (which, I guess, means that there are non-vanishing elements in it), but the statement is also not proved.
Furthermore, in the accepted answer of this question, it is given an example of a non-vanishing functions vanishing at infinity on a non-locally compact space, but nothing is said about its continuity.
Since I have not a strong background in functional analysis, I really do not know where to start to prove/disprove the previous statements, thus I would appreciate any hint, or any suggestion about references dealing with these matters explicitely (that is, by giving explicit proofs).
functional-analysis banach-spaces
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $X$ be a topological space which is not locally-compact (e.g., an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space).
Let $C_{0}(X)$ denote the space of complex-valued, continuous functions vanishing at infinity on $X$, that is, an element $fin C_{0}(X)$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on $X$ such that,for every $epsilon>0$, there exists a compact $Ksubset X$ such that $|f(x)|leq epsilon$ outside $K$.
It is my understanding that $C_{0}(X)$ is a Banach space just as $C_{0}(Y)$ with $Y$ a locally-compact space.
However, in the second page of this article, it is stated that $C_{0}(X)$ only contains the zero function when $X$ is not locally-compact, but the statement is not proved.
On the other hand, at the end of the first page of this article, it is said that $C_{0}(X)$ may be very small (which, I guess, means that there are non-vanishing elements in it), but the statement is also not proved.
Furthermore, in the accepted answer of this question, it is given an example of a non-vanishing functions vanishing at infinity on a non-locally compact space, but nothing is said about its continuity.
Since I have not a strong background in functional analysis, I really do not know where to start to prove/disprove the previous statements, thus I would appreciate any hint, or any suggestion about references dealing with these matters explicitely (that is, by giving explicit proofs).
functional-analysis banach-spaces
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Consider the function $fcolon ell^2to mathbb R$ given by $$f(x_1, x_2, x_3, ldots)=e^{-x_1^2}.$$ Isn't this function in $C_0(ell^2)$?
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:00
$begingroup$
I was thinking to a similar example, however, if we fix $epsilon$, then $|f(x)|geqepsilon$ whenever $x=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...)$ is such that $x_{1}^{2}leq ln(epsilon)$ and $x_{j}$ is arbitrary for $j>1$, and I do not know if this is a compact set.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 11:30
$begingroup$
Of course that set is not compact. You are totally right. Sorry, my example is stupid; even the function $$f(x_1, x_2)=e^{-x_1^2}$$ is not in $C_0(mathbb R^2)$. The right example would be $$f(x_1, x_2, ldots) = e^{-x_1^2 -x_2^2 -ldots}.$$ And now it is not so obvious that this is in $C_0(ell^2)$. Actually, I am quite sure it is not.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:49
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let $X$ be a topological space which is not locally-compact (e.g., an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space).
Let $C_{0}(X)$ denote the space of complex-valued, continuous functions vanishing at infinity on $X$, that is, an element $fin C_{0}(X)$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on $X$ such that,for every $epsilon>0$, there exists a compact $Ksubset X$ such that $|f(x)|leq epsilon$ outside $K$.
It is my understanding that $C_{0}(X)$ is a Banach space just as $C_{0}(Y)$ with $Y$ a locally-compact space.
However, in the second page of this article, it is stated that $C_{0}(X)$ only contains the zero function when $X$ is not locally-compact, but the statement is not proved.
On the other hand, at the end of the first page of this article, it is said that $C_{0}(X)$ may be very small (which, I guess, means that there are non-vanishing elements in it), but the statement is also not proved.
Furthermore, in the accepted answer of this question, it is given an example of a non-vanishing functions vanishing at infinity on a non-locally compact space, but nothing is said about its continuity.
Since I have not a strong background in functional analysis, I really do not know where to start to prove/disprove the previous statements, thus I would appreciate any hint, or any suggestion about references dealing with these matters explicitely (that is, by giving explicit proofs).
functional-analysis banach-spaces
$endgroup$
Let $X$ be a topological space which is not locally-compact (e.g., an infinite-dimensional Hilbert space).
Let $C_{0}(X)$ denote the space of complex-valued, continuous functions vanishing at infinity on $X$, that is, an element $fin C_{0}(X)$ is a complex-valued, continuous function on $X$ such that,for every $epsilon>0$, there exists a compact $Ksubset X$ such that $|f(x)|leq epsilon$ outside $K$.
It is my understanding that $C_{0}(X)$ is a Banach space just as $C_{0}(Y)$ with $Y$ a locally-compact space.
However, in the second page of this article, it is stated that $C_{0}(X)$ only contains the zero function when $X$ is not locally-compact, but the statement is not proved.
On the other hand, at the end of the first page of this article, it is said that $C_{0}(X)$ may be very small (which, I guess, means that there are non-vanishing elements in it), but the statement is also not proved.
Furthermore, in the accepted answer of this question, it is given an example of a non-vanishing functions vanishing at infinity on a non-locally compact space, but nothing is said about its continuity.
Since I have not a strong background in functional analysis, I really do not know where to start to prove/disprove the previous statements, thus I would appreciate any hint, or any suggestion about references dealing with these matters explicitely (that is, by giving explicit proofs).
functional-analysis banach-spaces
functional-analysis banach-spaces
asked Jan 10 at 10:53
SepulzioNoriSepulzioNori
342217
342217
$begingroup$
Consider the function $fcolon ell^2to mathbb R$ given by $$f(x_1, x_2, x_3, ldots)=e^{-x_1^2}.$$ Isn't this function in $C_0(ell^2)$?
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:00
$begingroup$
I was thinking to a similar example, however, if we fix $epsilon$, then $|f(x)|geqepsilon$ whenever $x=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...)$ is such that $x_{1}^{2}leq ln(epsilon)$ and $x_{j}$ is arbitrary for $j>1$, and I do not know if this is a compact set.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 11:30
$begingroup$
Of course that set is not compact. You are totally right. Sorry, my example is stupid; even the function $$f(x_1, x_2)=e^{-x_1^2}$$ is not in $C_0(mathbb R^2)$. The right example would be $$f(x_1, x_2, ldots) = e^{-x_1^2 -x_2^2 -ldots}.$$ And now it is not so obvious that this is in $C_0(ell^2)$. Actually, I am quite sure it is not.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:49
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Consider the function $fcolon ell^2to mathbb R$ given by $$f(x_1, x_2, x_3, ldots)=e^{-x_1^2}.$$ Isn't this function in $C_0(ell^2)$?
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:00
$begingroup$
I was thinking to a similar example, however, if we fix $epsilon$, then $|f(x)|geqepsilon$ whenever $x=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...)$ is such that $x_{1}^{2}leq ln(epsilon)$ and $x_{j}$ is arbitrary for $j>1$, and I do not know if this is a compact set.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 11:30
$begingroup$
Of course that set is not compact. You are totally right. Sorry, my example is stupid; even the function $$f(x_1, x_2)=e^{-x_1^2}$$ is not in $C_0(mathbb R^2)$. The right example would be $$f(x_1, x_2, ldots) = e^{-x_1^2 -x_2^2 -ldots}.$$ And now it is not so obvious that this is in $C_0(ell^2)$. Actually, I am quite sure it is not.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:49
$begingroup$
Consider the function $fcolon ell^2to mathbb R$ given by $$f(x_1, x_2, x_3, ldots)=e^{-x_1^2}.$$ Isn't this function in $C_0(ell^2)$?
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:00
$begingroup$
Consider the function $fcolon ell^2to mathbb R$ given by $$f(x_1, x_2, x_3, ldots)=e^{-x_1^2}.$$ Isn't this function in $C_0(ell^2)$?
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:00
$begingroup$
I was thinking to a similar example, however, if we fix $epsilon$, then $|f(x)|geqepsilon$ whenever $x=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...)$ is such that $x_{1}^{2}leq ln(epsilon)$ and $x_{j}$ is arbitrary for $j>1$, and I do not know if this is a compact set.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 11:30
$begingroup$
I was thinking to a similar example, however, if we fix $epsilon$, then $|f(x)|geqepsilon$ whenever $x=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...)$ is such that $x_{1}^{2}leq ln(epsilon)$ and $x_{j}$ is arbitrary for $j>1$, and I do not know if this is a compact set.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 11:30
$begingroup$
Of course that set is not compact. You are totally right. Sorry, my example is stupid; even the function $$f(x_1, x_2)=e^{-x_1^2}$$ is not in $C_0(mathbb R^2)$. The right example would be $$f(x_1, x_2, ldots) = e^{-x_1^2 -x_2^2 -ldots}.$$ And now it is not so obvious that this is in $C_0(ell^2)$. Actually, I am quite sure it is not.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:49
$begingroup$
Of course that set is not compact. You are totally right. Sorry, my example is stupid; even the function $$f(x_1, x_2)=e^{-x_1^2}$$ is not in $C_0(mathbb R^2)$. The right example would be $$f(x_1, x_2, ldots) = e^{-x_1^2 -x_2^2 -ldots}.$$ And now it is not so obvious that this is in $C_0(ell^2)$. Actually, I am quite sure it is not.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:49
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The space $C_0(X)$ can certainly be non-trivial even if $X$ is not locally compact. Just take a locally compact space $Y$, a space $Z$ that is not locally compact and let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ and $Z$. Every $fin C_0(Y)$ induces a a function $Fin C_0(X)$ by setting $F|_Y=f$, $F|_Z=0$.
That $C_0(X)$ may be small if $X$ is not locally compact is not so much a rigorous statement, but gives a good intuition. If $X$ lacks compact sets, then the condition $fin C_0(X)$ is quite rigid. In the example above there are still enough compact subsets to produce some functions in $C_0(X)$.
In the special case of infinite-dimensional normed spaces, $C_0$ is indeed trivial. To see this, let $fin C_0(X)$ and $epsilon>0$. By definition there exists $Ksubset X$ compact such that $|f|leq epsilon$ on $Xsetminus K$. By Riesz's lemma, $K$ has empty interior. Thus $|f|leq epsilon$ everywhere. Since $epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we conclude $f=0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3068492%2fcontinuous-functions-vanishing-at-infinity-on-a-non-locally-compact-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The space $C_0(X)$ can certainly be non-trivial even if $X$ is not locally compact. Just take a locally compact space $Y$, a space $Z$ that is not locally compact and let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ and $Z$. Every $fin C_0(Y)$ induces a a function $Fin C_0(X)$ by setting $F|_Y=f$, $F|_Z=0$.
That $C_0(X)$ may be small if $X$ is not locally compact is not so much a rigorous statement, but gives a good intuition. If $X$ lacks compact sets, then the condition $fin C_0(X)$ is quite rigid. In the example above there are still enough compact subsets to produce some functions in $C_0(X)$.
In the special case of infinite-dimensional normed spaces, $C_0$ is indeed trivial. To see this, let $fin C_0(X)$ and $epsilon>0$. By definition there exists $Ksubset X$ compact such that $|f|leq epsilon$ on $Xsetminus K$. By Riesz's lemma, $K$ has empty interior. Thus $|f|leq epsilon$ everywhere. Since $epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we conclude $f=0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The space $C_0(X)$ can certainly be non-trivial even if $X$ is not locally compact. Just take a locally compact space $Y$, a space $Z$ that is not locally compact and let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ and $Z$. Every $fin C_0(Y)$ induces a a function $Fin C_0(X)$ by setting $F|_Y=f$, $F|_Z=0$.
That $C_0(X)$ may be small if $X$ is not locally compact is not so much a rigorous statement, but gives a good intuition. If $X$ lacks compact sets, then the condition $fin C_0(X)$ is quite rigid. In the example above there are still enough compact subsets to produce some functions in $C_0(X)$.
In the special case of infinite-dimensional normed spaces, $C_0$ is indeed trivial. To see this, let $fin C_0(X)$ and $epsilon>0$. By definition there exists $Ksubset X$ compact such that $|f|leq epsilon$ on $Xsetminus K$. By Riesz's lemma, $K$ has empty interior. Thus $|f|leq epsilon$ everywhere. Since $epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we conclude $f=0$.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The space $C_0(X)$ can certainly be non-trivial even if $X$ is not locally compact. Just take a locally compact space $Y$, a space $Z$ that is not locally compact and let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ and $Z$. Every $fin C_0(Y)$ induces a a function $Fin C_0(X)$ by setting $F|_Y=f$, $F|_Z=0$.
That $C_0(X)$ may be small if $X$ is not locally compact is not so much a rigorous statement, but gives a good intuition. If $X$ lacks compact sets, then the condition $fin C_0(X)$ is quite rigid. In the example above there are still enough compact subsets to produce some functions in $C_0(X)$.
In the special case of infinite-dimensional normed spaces, $C_0$ is indeed trivial. To see this, let $fin C_0(X)$ and $epsilon>0$. By definition there exists $Ksubset X$ compact such that $|f|leq epsilon$ on $Xsetminus K$. By Riesz's lemma, $K$ has empty interior. Thus $|f|leq epsilon$ everywhere. Since $epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we conclude $f=0$.
$endgroup$
The space $C_0(X)$ can certainly be non-trivial even if $X$ is not locally compact. Just take a locally compact space $Y$, a space $Z$ that is not locally compact and let $X$ be the disjoint union of $Y$ and $Z$. Every $fin C_0(Y)$ induces a a function $Fin C_0(X)$ by setting $F|_Y=f$, $F|_Z=0$.
That $C_0(X)$ may be small if $X$ is not locally compact is not so much a rigorous statement, but gives a good intuition. If $X$ lacks compact sets, then the condition $fin C_0(X)$ is quite rigid. In the example above there are still enough compact subsets to produce some functions in $C_0(X)$.
In the special case of infinite-dimensional normed spaces, $C_0$ is indeed trivial. To see this, let $fin C_0(X)$ and $epsilon>0$. By definition there exists $Ksubset X$ compact such that $|f|leq epsilon$ on $Xsetminus K$. By Riesz's lemma, $K$ has empty interior. Thus $|f|leq epsilon$ everywhere. Since $epsilon>0$ was arbitrary, we conclude $f=0$.
answered Jan 10 at 13:38
MaoWaoMaoWao
2,933617
2,933617
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
A very nice and exhaustive answer, thank you very much.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 15:53
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
$begingroup$
I agree, great answer, thank you.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 17:20
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3068492%2fcontinuous-functions-vanishing-at-infinity-on-a-non-locally-compact-space%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Consider the function $fcolon ell^2to mathbb R$ given by $$f(x_1, x_2, x_3, ldots)=e^{-x_1^2}.$$ Isn't this function in $C_0(ell^2)$?
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:00
$begingroup$
I was thinking to a similar example, however, if we fix $epsilon$, then $|f(x)|geqepsilon$ whenever $x=(x_{1},x_{2},x_{3},...)$ is such that $x_{1}^{2}leq ln(epsilon)$ and $x_{j}$ is arbitrary for $j>1$, and I do not know if this is a compact set.
$endgroup$
– SepulzioNori
Jan 10 at 11:30
$begingroup$
Of course that set is not compact. You are totally right. Sorry, my example is stupid; even the function $$f(x_1, x_2)=e^{-x_1^2}$$ is not in $C_0(mathbb R^2)$. The right example would be $$f(x_1, x_2, ldots) = e^{-x_1^2 -x_2^2 -ldots}.$$ And now it is not so obvious that this is in $C_0(ell^2)$. Actually, I am quite sure it is not.
$endgroup$
– Giuseppe Negro
Jan 10 at 11:49