0
$\begingroup$

Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space and $f: X \rightarrow [0, \infty )$ be a continuous function. Assume that for any $\epsilon > 0$, there exists a compact set $K_\epsilon \subseteq X$ such that $f(x) < \epsilon$ whenever $x \notin K_\epsilon.$ Show that $f$ has a maximum point.

Well, for any $\epsilon > 0$, we have a compact set $K_\epsilon$ such that if $f(x) \geq \epsilon$ then $x \in K_\epsilon$. Since each $K_\epsilon$ is compact and since $f$ is continuous, I know that $f$ obtains a maximum on each non-empty $K_\epsilon$. One of these must be the biggest, so $f$ has a maximum point? Is there a better way?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I'm afraid you are wrong. It is not always true that $f(x)\ge\varepsilon$ whenever $x\in K_{\varepsilon}$. Consider zero-function. You have made a classical logical mistake with contraposition. $\endgroup$ – szw1710 Feb 6 '17 at 15:26
  • $\begingroup$ We know however that if $f(x) \geq \epsilon$, then $x \in K_\epsilon$ $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Feb 6 '17 at 15:26
  • $\begingroup$ @Omnomnomnom, this is, of course, correct. :) $\endgroup$ – szw1710 Feb 6 '17 at 15:27
  • $\begingroup$ Whoops. Math before coffee does not work so well. :) $\endgroup$ – user389056 Feb 6 '17 at 15:28
  • $\begingroup$ How do you know that $f(x)\geq\epsilon$ for some $x\in K_\epsilon$ $\endgroup$ – user178826 Feb 6 '17 at 15:32
4
$\begingroup$

Here's a proof: suppose that $f$ is non-zero. Let $x_0 \in X$ be such that $f(x_0) > 0$. Take $\epsilon = f(x_0)$. We know that $x_0 \in K_\epsilon$, so $K_\epsilon$ is non-empty. Moreover, $f(x) < f(x_0)$ for all $x \notin K_\epsilon$. We conclude that if the restriction $f|_{K_\epsilon}$ attains a maximum, then $f$ attains this same maximum.

So, consider the restriction $f|_{K_\epsilon}$. This is a continuous map on a compact set, so it attains a maximum.


Another proof:

Suppose for contradiction that $f$ attains no maximum. Then, we may construct a sequence $\{x_i\}_{i \in \Bbb N}$ such that $\{f(x_i)\}$ is strictly increasing towards a supremum. However, $x_i$ must have a subsequence with a limit in $K_{f(x_1)}$. The value of $f$ at this limit must be an overall maximum, which is a contradiction.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ It seems that no matter how you approach the problem, there is no advantage from several $K_\epsilon$s, which I find surprising. $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Feb 6 '17 at 15:43
  • $\begingroup$ I was considering using the finite intersection property, but in that case one still must argue that $f$ attains the desired maximum on the intersection of the $K_\epsilon$s in question. $\endgroup$ – Ben Grossmann Feb 6 '17 at 15:45

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.