Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

If $H$ and $K$ are Hilbert spaces,show that if $T:H\longrightarrow K$ is a compact operator and $\{e_{n}\}$ is any orthonormal sequence in $H$ then $\|Te_{n}\|\to0$.Is the converse true?

thanks.

share|improve this question
    
I guess $H$ is a Hilbert space. What is $K$? Use the fact that the sequence $\{e_n\}$ is weakly convergent to $0$ and the fact that a compact operator transform a weakly convergent sequence in a convergent sequence (for the norm). –  Davide Giraudo Sep 21 '11 at 9:45
    
could you explain that why $\{e_{n}\}\to 0$ weakly? –  Vahid Sep 21 '11 at 9:50
3  
This really reads like a homework question; so perhaps it would be good to consult the FAQ: meta.math.stackexchange.com/questions/1803/… –  Matthew Daws Sep 21 '11 at 9:52
1  
If the Hilbert space $H$ is separable, we can show that $\lim_{n\to\infty}\langle e_n,v\rangle=0$ for all $v$ with $v=\sum_{k=1}^N\alpha_ke_k$. We can conclude that $\lim_{n\to\infty}\langle e_n,v\rangle=0$ for all $v$, since the vectors of the form $\sum_{k=1}^N\alpha_ke_k$, $N\in\mathbb N,\alpha_k\in\mathbb C$ is dense in $H$. –  Davide Giraudo Sep 21 '11 at 9:56
3  
@DavideGiraudo: Another way to see this is that by Bessel's inequality, $\sum_{n=1}^\infty |\langle e_n, v \rangle|^2 \le ||v||^2 < \infty$. Since the series converges, its terms must go to 0. –  Nate Eldredge Sep 21 '11 at 12:44
show 2 more comments

3 Answers 3

As people have suggested, since $T$ is a compact operator, it is in particular a bounded linear operator. Since the orthonormal basis ${e_n}$ is weakly convergent (there is one proof here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weak_convergence_(Hilbert_space)#Weak_convergence_of_orthonormal_sequences ), we get $\parallel T(e_n) \parallel \rightarrow 0.$ The converse would not be true since this applies to any bounded operator.

I would like to comment that a somewhat relevant result is the spectral theorem for compact symmetric operators: T is a compact symmetric operator on a separable Hilbert space $\mathscr{H}$ iff it has an orthornormal basis with eigenvalues $\lambda \rightarrow 0$ as $k \rightarrow \infty.$

share|improve this answer
4  
No, this cannot be right. If $H=K$ and $T$ is the identity operator then $||T e_n|| = 1$ for all $n$ and does not go to 0. You can't ignore the compactness assumption. –  Nate Eldredge Nov 17 '11 at 3:39
add comment

Let $ (e_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ be an orthonormal sequence in $ \mathcal{H} $. As a consequence of Bessel's Inequality, $ (e_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ is weakly convergent to $ 0_{\mathcal{H}} $. It follows that \begin{align} \forall y \in \mathcal{K}: \quad &\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \langle e_{n},{T^{*}}(y) \rangle = 0, \\ &\lim_{n \rightarrow \infty} \langle T(e_{n}),y \rangle = 0. \end{align} Therefore, $ (T(e_{n}))_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ is weakly convergent to $ 0_{\mathcal{K}} $.

Now, assume for the sake of contradiction that $ (T(e_{n}))_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ does not converge in norm to $ 0_{\mathcal{K}} $. Then there exists an $ \epsilon > 0 $ and a subsequence $ (e_{n_{k}})_{k \in \mathbb{N}} $ of $ (e_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ such that $ \| T(e_{n_{k}}) \|_{\mathcal{K}} \geq \epsilon $ for all $ k \in \mathbb{N} $. As $ (e_{n_{k}})_{k \in \mathbb{N}} $ is bounded in norm, by the compactness of $ T $ as an operator, there exists a subsequence $ (e_{n_{k_{l}}})_{l \in \mathbb{N}} $ of $ (e_{n_{k}})_{k \in \mathbb{N}} $ such that $ (T(e_{n_{k_{l}}}))_{l \in \mathbb{N}} $ converges to some limit in $ \mathcal{K} $. Call this limit $ y_{0} $. Clearly, $ y_{0} \neq 0_{\mathcal{K}} $. Therefore, \begin{equation} \lim_{l \rightarrow \infty} \langle T(e_{n_{k_{l}}}),y_{0} \rangle = \langle y_{0},y_{0} \rangle > 0. \end{equation} This contradicts the fact that $ (T(e_{n}))_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ is weakly convergent to $ 0_{\mathcal{K}} $.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Here is the second installment that answers the converse in the affirmative. The result is not easy to establish. One method of proof uses the spectral calculus for self-adjoint operators, but this is like cracking a nut with a sledgehammer. I provide a softer approach below, which exploits the geometric properties of Hilbert spaces.

Lemma 1 Every bounded sequence in a Hilbert space contains a weakly convergent subsequence.

Proof This follows from the reflexivity of Hilbert spaces. Q.E.D.

Lemma 2 Every weakly convergent sequence in a Hilbert space is bounded.

Proof This follows from the Uniform Boundedness Principle. Q.E.D.

Definition 1 Let $ \mathcal{H} $ be a Hilbert space, and let $ C $ be a fixed collection of sequences in $ \mathcal{H} $. Given a sequence $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ in $ \mathcal{H} $, we say that $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ can be approximated by $ C $ if for every sequence $ (\epsilon_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ of positive real numbers, there exists a $ (\mathbf{c}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \in C $ such that $ \| \mathbf{c}_{n} - \mathbf{x}_{n} \|_{\mathcal{H}} < \epsilon_{n} $ for all $ n \in \mathbb{N} $.

Definition 2 Let $ \mathcal{H} $ be a Hilbert space. We denote by $ \mathbf{BOS}(\mathcal{H}) $ the set of all bounded orthogonal sequences in $ \mathcal{H} $.

Lemma 3 Let $ \mathcal{H} $ be a Hilbert space, and let $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ be a weak null-sequence in $ \mathcal{H} $. Then $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ contains a subsequence that can be approximated by $ \mathbf{BOS}(\mathcal{H}) $.

Proof Let $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ be a weak null-sequence in $ \mathcal{H} $. Fix a sequence $ (\epsilon_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ of positive real numbers. We inductively define a new sequence $ (\mathbf{v}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ in $ \mathcal{H} $ and an increasing sequence $ (\alpha_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ of positive integers as follows:

  1. Set $ \alpha_{1} := 1 $ and $ \mathbf{v}_{1} := \mathbf{x}_{1} $.

  2. For each $ n \in \mathbb{N} $, suppose that $ \alpha_{1},\ldots,\alpha_{n} $ and $ \mathbf{v}_{1},\ldots,\mathbf{v}_{n} $ have been defined. As $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ converges weakly to $ 0_{\mathcal{H}} $, we can choose a smallest positive integer $ k > \alpha_{n} $ such that \begin{equation} \left\| \sum_{i=1}^{n} \lambda_{i} \mathbf{v}_{i} \right\|_{\mathcal{H}} < \epsilon_{n}, \end{equation} where \begin{equation} \lambda_{i} = \left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \dfrac{\langle \mathbf{x}_{k},\mathbf{v}_{i} \rangle}{\| \mathbf{v}_{i} \|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}} &\text{, if $ \| \mathbf{v}_{i} \|_{\mathcal{H}} > 0 $}; \\ 0 &\text{, if $ \| \mathbf{v}_{i} \|_{\mathcal{H}} = 0 $}. \end{array} \right. \end{equation} Then set \begin{equation} \alpha_{n+1} := k \quad \text{and} \quad \mathbf{v}_{n+1} := \mathbf{x}_{k} - \sum_{i=1}^{n} \lambda_{i} \mathbf{v}_{i}. \end{equation}

Notice that $ (\mathbf{v}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ is the result of applying the Gram-Schmidt orthogonalization procedure to $ (\mathbf{x}_{\alpha_{n}})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $, which is a subsequence of $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $. Therefore, $ (\mathbf{v}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ is an orthogonal sequence. By Lemma 2, $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ is bounded, so $ (\mathbf{v}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \in \mathbf{BOS}(\mathcal{H}) $. Finally, $ \| \mathbf{v}_{n} - \mathbf{x}_{\alpha_{n}} \|_{\mathcal{H}} < \epsilon_{n} $ for all $ n \in \mathbb{N} $. Q.E.D.

Theorem Let $ \mathcal{H} $ and $ \mathcal{K} $ be Hilbert spaces. Let $ T: \mathcal{H} \rightarrow \mathcal{K} $ be a bounded linear operator that maps every orthonormal sequence in $ \mathcal{H} $ to a strong null-sequence in $ \mathcal{K} $. Then $ T $ is a compact operator.

Proof Let $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ be a bounded sequence in $ \mathcal{H} $. By Lemma 1, there exists a weakly convergent subsequence $ (\mathbf{x}_{n_{k}})_{k \in \mathbb{N}} $ of $ (\mathbf{x}_{n})_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $. Let $ \mathbf{x} $ be the weak limit of this subsequence. Clearly, $ (\mathbf{x}_{n_{k}} - \mathbf{x})_{k \in \mathbb{N}} $ is then a weak null-sequence in $ \mathcal{H} $. By Lemma 3, there exists a subsequence $ (\mathbf{x}_{n_{k_{l}}} - \mathbf{x})_{l \in \mathbb{N}} $ of $ (\mathbf{x}_{n_{k}} - \mathbf{x})_{k \in \mathbb{N}} $ and a sequence $ (\mathbf{v}_{l})_{l \in \mathbb{N}} \in \mathbf{BOS}(\mathcal{H}) $ such that \begin{equation} \forall l \in \mathbb{N}: \quad \| \mathbf{v}_{l} - (\mathbf{x}_{n_{k_{l}}} - \mathbf{x}) \|_{\mathcal{H}} < \frac{1}{l}. \end{equation} Observe that $ T $ must map $ (\mathbf{v}_{l})_{l \in \mathbb{N}} $ to a strong null-sequence in $ \mathcal{K} $. Hence, by the approximation property, we have $ \displaystyle \lim_{l \rightarrow \infty} T(\mathbf{x}_{n_{k_{l}}} - \mathbf{x}) = 0_{\mathcal{K}} $. In other words, $ (T(\mathbf{x}_{n}))_{n \in \mathbb{N}} $ contains $ (T(\mathbf{x}_{n_{k_{l}}}))_{l \in \mathbb{N}} $ as a strongly convergent subsequence. Therefore, $ T $ is a compact operator. Q.E.D.

share|improve this answer
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.