5
$\begingroup$

I'm trying to prove the following statement.

Let $\mathcal H$ be a Hilbert space and $T: D \rightarrow \mathcal H$, $D \subset \mathcal H$, a linear operator. Let $\lambda_0 \in \rho(T)$ such that $(T - \lambda_0)^{-1}$ is a compact operator. Then $(T-\lambda)^{-1}$ is compact for each $\lambda \in \rho(T)$, $\sigma(T)$ consists only of a countable number of eigenvalues and doesn't have a limit point in $\mathbb C$.

It was said that this follows from well known facts about the spectral theory of compact operators.

Now, the notable facts that I recall are: (let $K$ be a compact operator)

  • each non-zero spectral value of $K$ is also an eigenvalue,
  • for non-zero eigenvalues of $K$, the dimension of their eigenspace is finite,
  • $\sigma(K)$ is countable and its only limit point is 0.

Unfortunately, I'm unable to cook up the desired conclusion from those properties alone. So I guess there is some missing link here.

Can someone point me into the right direction?

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

You didn't say that but I'm assuming you also want $T$ to be densely defined.

Let us write $R_\lambda=(T-\lambda)^{-1}$ for $\lambda\in\rho(T)$ to denote the resolvent. If $R_\lambda$ is compact for some $\lambda$, then $T$ is said to have compact resolvent (just to give you a term to search for more information).

The statements that you make are very well-known facts about operators with compact resolvent.

For your convenience I will prove them below.

Assume that $R_{\lambda_0}$ is compact for some $\lambda_0\in\rho(T)$.

Claim 1. $R_\lambda=(T-\lambda)^{-1}$ is compact for every $\lambda\in\rho(T)$.

Proof. Recall the resolvent relation:

$$R_\lambda-R_{\lambda_0} = (\lambda-\lambda_0)R_\lambda R_{\lambda_0}$$

Adding $R_{\lambda_0}$ on both sides we get

$$R_\lambda = ( (\lambda-\lambda_0)R_\lambda + I) R_{\lambda_0}.$$

Thus, we have written $R_\lambda$ as composition of a bounded operator and a compact operator and therefore it is compact. $\square$

Claim 2. $\sigma(T)$ is a discrete set (countable and no accumulation points) and consists only of eigenvalues.

Proof. Set $S=R_{\lambda_0}$. The assumptions is that $S$ is compact. We claim that this implies that $\sigma(S^{-1})$ is a discrete set of eigenvalues (which immediately implies the same for $\sigma(T)$ since $S^{-1}=T-\lambda$).

Because $S$ is invertible, we have $0\not\in\sigma(S)$, so by the spectral theorem $\sigma(S)$ consists of countably many non-zero eigenvalues with the only possible accumulation point being $0$.

Observe that $\lambda\not=0$ is an eigenvalue of $S$ if and only if $\lambda^{-1}$ is an eigenvalue of $S^{-1}$ (check that!).

Next, observe that $\sigma(S^{-1})$ consists only of eigenvalues. To see this, say $0\not=\lambda$ is not an eigenvalue of $S$. Then $\lambda\in\rho(S)$. So $S-\lambda$ is bounded and invertible. This implies that $S^{-1}-\lambda^{-1}$ is also bounded and invertible: $$S-\lambda = \lambda S(\lambda^{-1}-S^{-1})$$ $$(S^{-1}-\lambda^{-1})^{-1} = -\lambda (S-\lambda)^{-1}S$$ Thus $\lambda^{-1}\in \rho(S^{-1})$.

Putting these observations together we have proved that $$\sigma(S^{-1})=\sigma_p(S^{-1}) = \{\lambda^{-1}\,:\,\lambda\in\sigma(S)\}$$ which is a discrete set. $\square$

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I think, I understand both proofs. Thank you so much! $\endgroup$ – Amarus Nov 16 '16 at 22:19

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.