5
$\begingroup$

Let $(e_n)$ (where $ e_n $ has a 1 in the $n$-th place and zeros otherwise) be unit standard vectors of $\ell_\infty$.

Why is $(e_n)$ not a basis for $\ell_\infty$?

Thanks.

$\endgroup$
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ basis in what sense? $\endgroup$ – Studzinski May 7 '15 at 19:58
  • $\begingroup$ Because $(1, 1, 1, \dots , 1, \dots )$ is not spanned by those. $\endgroup$ – Crostul May 7 '15 at 19:59
  • $\begingroup$ I suspect the meaning here is not a Hamel basis. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila May 7 '15 at 20:00
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Schauder basis $\endgroup$ – user62498 May 7 '15 at 20:01
10
$\begingroup$

There are basically two things to note here. First you need to understand what it means for a set to be a basis of an infinite dimensional normed space. In your context, I am all but certain that this means that it is a Schauder basis, which is a linearly independent set such that the set of all finite linear combinations of members of the set is dense in the space. The other kind of basis is a Hamel basis, which is an "algebraic" basis, i.e. a linearly independent set such that the set of all finite linear combinations of members spans the space.

For $\ell^\infty$, any member of the set of finite linear combinations of $e_n$ is eventually zero. But $[1,1,1,\dots] \in \ell^\infty$ but it is at least $1$ away from any sequence which is eventually zero.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ That last line is nailing it. $\endgroup$ – Asaf Karagila May 7 '15 at 20:00
  • $\begingroup$ @AsafKaragila In what manner? $\endgroup$ – Amitai Yuval May 7 '15 at 20:01
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ People still wear pants? $\endgroup$ – Matt Samuel May 7 '15 at 20:12
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Na'omi I explained that above: a Schauder basis requires that the span of the finite linear combinations be dense. One reason why this requirement is essential is that in fact $\sum_{j=1}^\infty e_j$ is not a well defined sum in $\ell^\infty$ because $v_N=\sum_{j=1}^N e_j$ has no limit in $\ell^\infty$. $\endgroup$ – Ian Apr 14 at 23:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @Na'omi It will help to drop the notion that infinite sums are really any different from general limits. $\sum_{j=1}^\infty e_j$ is a meaningless symbol in the $\ell^\infty$ setting because $x_n=\sum_{j=1}^n e_j$ is not Cauchy in $\ell^\infty$. That is easy to see because $\| x_n-x_m \|_{\ell^\infty}=1$ for all $n \neq m$. That's all there is to it. The only question is whether this normed vector space type analysis is the right way to look at $\ell^\infty$ in the first place. $\endgroup$ – Ian Apr 15 at 14:31
4
$\begingroup$

A Schauder basis is a dense countable subset. But there does not exist any dense countable subset in $\ell^\infty$.

Let us prove that no such set can exist:

By contradiction, assume that $D$ was a dense countable subset of $\ell^\infty$. Now consider the set $S = \{s\mid s_n \in \{0,1\}\}$, that is, all sequences only consisting of $0$ and $1$.

If we consider balls of radius ${1\over 3}$ around each $s$ then in every such ball there will have to be a $d$ in $D$ since $D$ is dense. But $S$ is uncountable therefore this cannot be the case. Hence $\ell^\infty$ cannot contain a dense countable subset.

In particular, $e_n$ cannot be a Schauder basis.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I'm a little late with this answer but I thought I'd add my 5 cents anyway... hope it helps! $\endgroup$ – ナウシカ May 8 '15 at 12:11
  • $\begingroup$ Technically a Schauder basis itself is not dense, but its rational span would be, while still being countable. $\endgroup$ – Ian Apr 17 at 12:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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