The original exercise had the aditional hypothesis that the codomain was complete. I think it's not necessary:

Let $f_n:E\rightarrow F$ be the sequence in question and let $D\subseteq E$ be the dense subset. Take $a$ in E. Let $\epsilon >0$ be given. Because of equicontinuity, there exists $\delta > 0$ such that $d(x,a) < \delta$ implies $d(f_n(x),f_n(a)) < \dfrac{\epsilon}{2}$, for every $n$ in $\mathbb{N}$. Let $y$ be a point in $B(a,\delta) \cap D$. By hypothesis, $f_n(y)$ converges to some value, call it $u$. Then:

$d(f_n(a),u)\le d(f_n(a), f_n(y))+d(f_n(y),u)$. For $n\ge N$, we have $d(f_n(y),u)<\dfrac{\epsilon}{2}$. Then $f_n(a)$ converges to $u$. My problem is the following: This proof implies that for every $x$ in $B(a,\delta) \cap D$, $f_n(x)$ converges to the same value $u$. Also, If I take some $b$ in $B(a,\delta)$, it can also be seen that there is some ball with center in $b$ in which at the same time equicontinuity applies and is contained in $B(a, \delta)$, which implies that $f_n(b)$ converges to $u$ too. So, this would imply that given $a$ in E, $f=\lim f_n$ is constant in some ball with center $a$. If we think now in $E=F=\mathbb{R}$, $f$ must be constant, because the pointwise limit of equicontinuous functions has to be continuous. Where is my flaw?


You need to use completeness to show that any sequence $(f_n(a))$ converges for $a \in E$.

Take any $a \in E$.

Since $D$ is dense in $E$, there exists $b \in D$ such that $d(b,a) < \delta$ and $d(f_n(b), f_n(a)) < \epsilon/3$ for all $n$.

We have for $m > n$

$$\tag{*}d(f_m(a),f_n(a)) \leqslant d(f_m(a),f_m(b)) + d(f_m(b),f_n(b)) + d(f_n(b),f_n(a)) \\< \frac{2\epsilon}{3} + d(f_m(b),f_n(b)) $$

Since $(f_n(b))$ is convergent we can show using (*) that $(f_n(a))$ is a Cauchy sequence.


I try an explanation

In fact, you have two $\varepsilon$. The first, say $\varepsilon_1$, is used when you say that we have $d(f_n(x),f_n(a))<\varepsilon_1/2$ for $d(x,a)<\delta(\varepsilon_1)$. Then you have obtained that for a fixed $y$ in the dense subset, with $f_n(y)\to u$, such that $d(y,a)<\delta(\varepsilon_1)$, you have $d(f_n(a),u) \leq d(f_n(y),f_n(a))+d(f_n(y),u)\leq \varepsilon_1/2 +d(f_n(y),u)$; you cannot now change $\varepsilon_1$, as $y$ is fixed. Now, for every $\varepsilon_2>0$, you can find an $N$ such that for $n\geq N$, you have $d(f_n(a),u)\leq \varepsilon_1/2+\varepsilon_2/2 =\varepsilon$. But $\varepsilon\geq \varepsilon_1/2$, so it is not abritrary. You have not obtained the convergence of $f_n(a)$. You have only obtained that if $f_n(a)\to v$, then $v$ is close to $u$.


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.