Let $x^{(n)}$ and $x$ belong to the unit sphere of $\ell^1$. I want to prove that

$x^{(n)}\to x$ if and only if $\lim_{n\to \infty} x^{(n)}_j=x_j$ for all $j\in \mathbb N$.

It's clear that $x^{(n)}\to x$ implies $x^{(n)}_j\to x_j$ since $$|x^{(n)}_j-x_j|\leq \sum_{j=1}^\infty|x^{(n)}_j-x_j|\to 0.$$

However the other side is not easy for me. If $x^{(n)}_j\to x_j$ for all $j$ and $\epsilon>0$ is given then there exists $N_j$ such that if $n\geq N_j$, then $|x^{(n)}_j-x_j|< \epsilon$.

But this doesn't help. I think maybe we should find a $N$ such that for $n\geq N$ we have $|x^{(n)}_j-x_j| <\frac{\epsilon}{2^j}$ for all $j$.

And I don't know how $\sum_j |x^{(n)}_j|=\sum_j|x_j|=1$ could help.

  • $\begingroup$ It is assumed in advance that $x^{(n)}$ converges? If not, you should be looking for a counterexample. $\endgroup$ – GEdgar Aug 9 '17 at 17:30
  • $\begingroup$ @GEdgar No! the problem is $(x^{(n)}),x$ are in the unit sphere of $\ell^1$ and $\lim_{n}x^{(n)}_j=x_j$ for all $j$. Now how can we prove $(x^{(n)})\to x$? $\endgroup$ – mac Aug 9 '17 at 17:35
  • $\begingroup$ "Unit sphere" means $\|x\| \le 1$ or $\|x\| = 1$ ? $\endgroup$ – GEdgar Aug 9 '17 at 17:38
  • $\begingroup$ @GEdgar Means $\|x\|=1$ $\endgroup$ – mac Aug 9 '17 at 17:40

Hint: Choose $J$ such that $\sum_{j=1}^{J}|x_j|> 1-\epsilon.$ Because $J$ is now fixed, we'll have

$$\sum_{j=1}^{J}|x_{nj}-x_j| < \epsilon$$

for large $n.$ For such $n,$ we then have

$$\sum_{j=1}^{J}|x_{nj}| \ge \sum_{j=1}^{J}|x_j|-\sum_{j=1}^{J}|x_{nj}-x_j| > 1-\epsilon - \epsilon.$$

Thus we will have both $\sum_{j>J}|x_{j}|, \sum_{j>J}|x_{nj}|$ small for large $n.$


Here is a more general statement:

Proposition. (Scheffé’s lemma) Let $(X, \mathcal{F}, \mu)$ be a measure space. Suppose that $f_n, f$ are $L^1$-functions on $X$ such that $f_n \to f$ pointwise. Then the followings are equivalent:

  1. $f_n \to f$ in $L^1$.
  2. $\int|f_n| \, d\mu \to \int |f| \, d\mu$

In our case, we can set $(X, \mathcal{F}, \mu) = (\mathbb{N}, \mathcal{P}(\mathbb{N}), \text{counting measure})$ so that $\ell^1(\mathbb{N})$ is the $L^1$-space on $\mathbb{N}$. Since the second condition is satisfied for our sequence, the claim follows. So it remains to prove the above proposition.

  • Proof. The direction $1 \Rightarrow 2$ is straightforward, so we prove the converse $2 \Rightarrow 1$. By the Fatou's lemma,

    $$ \liminf_{n\to\infty} \int_X (|f_n| + |f| - |f - f_n|) \, d\mu \geq \int_X \liminf_{n\to\infty} (|f_n| + |f| - |f - f_n|) \, d\mu. $$

    By the assumption that $\int_X |f_n| \, d\mu \to \int_X |f| \, d\mu$, the LHS is

    $$ \liminf_{n\to\infty} \int_X (|f_n| + |f| - |f - f_n|) \, d\mu = 2\int_X |f| \, d\mu - \limsup_{n\to\infty} \int_X |f - f_n| \, d\mu. $$

    On the other hand, the RHS is

    $$ \int_X \liminf_{n\to\infty} (|f_n| + |f| - |f - f_n|) \, d\mu = \int_X 2|f| \, d\mu. $$

    Plugging back and simplifying, we get

    $$ \limsup_{n\to\infty} \int_X |f - f_n| \, d\mu \leq 0 $$

    and therefore $f_n \to f$ in $L^1$. ////

Remark. Notice that this proof is almost identical to the proof of the dominated convergence theorem, where the role of dominating function being replaced by the convergence assumption $\int_X |f_n| \, d\mu \to \int_X |f| \, d\mu$.

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks. Where can I read about Scheffé’s lemma? could you please introduce a book? $\endgroup$ – mac Aug 9 '17 at 18:18
  • $\begingroup$ @mac, As far as I know, it is not widely spread outside probability/statistician community despite its long history. A couple of sources I know is David Williams' Probability with Martingales, and Berry Simon's Real Analysis: A Comprehensive Course in Analysis, Part 1. I should comment, however, that this lemma is by no means covered seriously in any of these books. $\endgroup$ – Sangchul Lee Aug 9 '17 at 18:49

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.