I have the following proposition.

$\textbf{Proposition:}$ If $f:X\times K\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^n$ is a continuous function, $K$ is a compact set in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$. Fixed $x_0\in X$, prove that for every $\varepsilon>0$ exist $\delta>0$ such that if $\|x-x_0\|<\delta$ then $\|f(x,\alpha)-f(x_0,\alpha)\|<\varepsilon$ for every $\alpha\in K$.

$\textbf{Proof Sketch:}$ Fix $x_0\in X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$. Consider the set $A=\{x_0\}\times K\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{2n}$; then $A$ is compact in $X\times K\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{2n}$ with the usual metric since $\{x_0\}$ is a finite set and therefore compact and $K$ is also compact in $\mathbb{R}^n$ by hypothesis and Cartesian product of compact sets is compact.

Consider the open balls in $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$ centred in $(x_0,\alpha)\in A$ and radius 1, lets say for simplicity $$A(\alpha)=B_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}((x_0,\alpha),1)=\{y\in\mathbb{R}^{2n}\ :\ \|y-(x_0,\alpha)\|<1\}.$$

Then, we have an open cover for $A:$ $$A\subseteq\bigcup_{\alpha\in K}A(\alpha).$$

Since $A$ is compact there exist $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,\cdots,\alpha_m\in K$ such that $$A\subseteq\bigcup_{i=1}^{m}A(\alpha_i).$$

Applying $f$ to both sides, by property of the direct image then $$f(A)\subseteq f\left(\bigcup_{i=1}^{m}A(\alpha_i)\right)=\bigcup_{i=1}^{m}f(A(\alpha_i)).$$

Since $f$ is continuous then $f(A)$ is compact in $\mathbb{R}^n$, and by definition $$f(A)=\{f(x_0,\alpha)\in\mathbb{R}^n\ :\ \alpha\in K\}$$ $$f(A(\alpha_i))=\{f(x,\alpha)\in\mathbb{R}^n\ :\ \|(x,\alpha)-(x_0,\alpha_i)\|<1\}$$ for each $i=1,2,\cdots,m$.

Let $\varepsilon>0$ be arbitrary, consider the open balls in $\mathbb{R}^{n}$ centred in $f(x_0,k)$ and radius $\varepsilon$ for every $k\in K$ and define for simplicity $$B(k,\varepsilon)=B_{\mathbb{R}^n}(f(x_0,k),\varepsilon)=\{z\in\mathbb{R}^n\ :\ \|z-f(x_0,k)\|<\varepsilon\}.$$

Then, for every $\varepsilon>0$ we have an open cover for $f(A)$ $$f(A)\subseteq\bigcup_{k\in K}B(k,\varepsilon).$$

Since $f(A)$ is compact there exist $k_1,k_2,\cdots,k_{m'}\in K$ such that $$f(A)\subseteq\bigcup_{j=1}^{m'}B(k_j,\varepsilon).$$

Recall that $f$ is continuous and so there is $\delta_j>0$ such that $f(B'_j)\subseteq B(k_j,\varepsilon)$ where $B'_j$ is the open ball in $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$ centred in $(x_0,k_j)$ with radius $\delta_j$ for each $j=1,2,\cdots,m'$. That is to say, $$B'_j=B_{\mathbb{R}^{2n}}((x_0,k_j),\delta_j)=\{y\in\mathbb{R}^{2n}\ :\ \|y-(x_0,k_j)\|<\delta_j\}$$ $$f(B'_j)=\{f(x,\alpha)\in\mathbb{R}^{n}\ :\ \|(x,\alpha)-(x_0,k_j)\|<\delta_j\}$$

Then, doing the joint of sets $$\bigcup_{j=1}^{m'}f(B'_j)\subseteq\bigcup_{j=1}^{m'}B(k_j,\varepsilon)$$

$\textbf{¡Stack!:}$ This where I get stuck; I've been thinking for a long time without resolution how to relate each $\alpha_i$ with each $k_j$ so that considering something like $\delta=\min\{1,\delta_1,\delta_2,\cdots,\delta_{m'}\}$ and assuming $\|x-x_0\|<\delta$ then I can get the desired result.

I also think that this "proof" can be simpler without having to consider so many sets, however it's the path that comes to my mind. I have an introductory knowledge in real analysis so I look for any help you can give me.


Inspired by the contribution made by Mikhail Katz:

$\textbf{Proof Sketch 2:}$ Fix $x_0\in X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$. Consider the closed ball in $\mathbb{R}^n$ centred in $x_0$ with radius 1: $$B=B[x_0,1]=\{x\in\mathbb{R}^n:\|x-x_0\|\leq1\}$$ Every closed ball in $\mathbb{R}^n$ is compact so $B$ is compact and so closed and bounded in $\mathbb{R}^n$. Consider the adherence (closure) of $X$, this is $\overline{X}$.

Define $L=\overline{X}\cap B=\{x\in \overline{X}:\|x-x_0\|\leq1\}$.

Since $L\subseteq B$ then $L$ is bounded. Since $\overline{X}$ and $B$ are closed and intersection of closed sets is always closed then $L$ is closed. So, by Heine-Borel's Theorem $L$ is compact in $\mathbb{R}^n$.

Define $S=X\cap B=\{x\in X:\|x-x_0\|\leq1\}\subseteq X$.

Therefore $S\subseteq L$ and $\overline{S}=L$; so $S$ is dense in $L$.

By hypothesis $f$ is continuous in $X\times K$; particularly $f$ is continuous in $S\times K$. Since $S$ is dense in $L$ then $S\times K$ is dense in $L\times K$. Therefore exist a continuous extension of $f$ from $S\times K$ to $L\times K$, say $g$.

The set $L\times K$ is a Cartesian product of compact sets in $\mathbb{R}^n$ so it's compact in $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$. Since $g$ is continuous in $L\times K$ then $g$ is uniformly continuous.

For every $\varepsilon>0$ there is $\delta>0$ such that if $\|(x_1,\alpha_1)-(x_2,\alpha_2)\|<\delta$ then $\|g(x_1,\alpha_1)-g(x_2,\alpha_2)\|<\varepsilon$ for all $(x_1,\alpha_1),(x_2,\alpha_2)\in L\times K$.

In particular, for $x_1=x\in S$, $x_2=x_0\in S$ and $\alpha_1=\alpha_2=\alpha\in K$. Suppose: $$\|(x,\alpha)-(x_0,\alpha)\|=\|(x-x_0,\bar{0})\|=\|x-x_0\|<\delta$$

Since $g$ is an extension of $f$ and $x,x_0\in S$ then: $$\|g(x,\alpha)-g(x_0,\alpha)\|=\|f(x,\alpha)-f(x_0,\alpha)\|<\varepsilon$$ for all $\alpha\in K$.

$\textbf{Observation:}$ To guarantee the existence of $g$ it's sufficient that the set $S\times X$ be closed. If not, the statement may not be true. I don't know if this condition is satisfied or not in this context because $X$ is given as a nonempty set of $\mathbb{R}^n$ and nothing more about itself.

For example, if we had in the hypotheses that $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$ is closed then $X=\overline{X}$ and so $L=S$; the proof is complete and would be even simpler.

Edit 2

I made the following proof, let me know if it's correct.

$\textbf{Proposition:}$ If $f:X\times K\longrightarrow\mathbb{R}^n$ is a continuous function, $K$ is a compact set in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$. Fixed $x_0\in X$, prove that for every $\varepsilon>0$ exist $\delta>0$ such that for all $x\in X$ and for all $\alpha\in K$:

If $||x-x_0||<\delta$ then $||f(x,\alpha)-f(x_0,\alpha)||<\varepsilon$.

$\textbf{Proof by Contradiction:}$ Fix $x_0\in X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$. Suppose that there is $\varepsilon>0$ such that for all $\delta>0$ exist $x\in X$ and $\alpha\in K$ such that $$\|x-x_0\|<\delta\ \wedge\ \|f(x,\alpha)-f(x_0,\alpha)\|\geq\varepsilon$$

With $\varepsilon>0$ fixed, take $\delta_n=\frac{1}{n}>0$ for each $n\in\mathbb{N}$.

Then there is a sequence $(x_n)$ in $X$ and a sequence $(\alpha_n)$ in $K$ such that for $n=1,2,3,\cdots$ $$\|x_n-x_0\|<\frac{1}{n}\ \wedge\ \|f(x_n,\alpha_n)-f(x_0,\alpha_n)\|\geq\varepsilon$$

Since $\lim_{n\to\infty}\delta_n=\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{1}{n}=0$ then $\lim_{n\to\infty}x_n=x_0$.

Futhermore, $K$ is compact in $\mathbb{R}^n$ and so sequentially compact. Since $(\alpha_n)$ is a sequence in $K$ sequentially compact then there is a convergent subsequence $(\alpha_{n_k})$ and so exist $\alpha\in K$ such that $\lim_{k\to\infty}\alpha_{n_k}=\alpha$.

We have that the sequence $(x_n)$ converges to $x_0$ so that all subsequence converges and converges to $x_0$; in particular for the subsequence $(x_{n_k})$ then $\lim_{k\to\infty}x_{n_k}=x_0$.

By our assumption, for each $k=1,2,3,\cdots$ must hold $\|f(x_{n_k},\alpha_{n_k})-f(x_0,\alpha_{n_k})\|\geq\varepsilon$.

Since $f$ is continuous in $X\times K$ we have: $$\lim_{k\to\infty}f(x_{n_k},\alpha_{n_k})=f(x_0,\alpha)=\lim_{k\to\infty}f(x_0,\alpha_{n_k})$$

Therefore, $\lim_{k\to\infty}(f(x_{n_k},\alpha_{n_k})-f(x_0,\alpha_{n_k}))=f(x_0,\alpha)-f(x_0,\alpha)=\bar{0}$

By definition of limit, for the given $\varepsilon>0$ exist $N\in\mathbb{N}$ such that if $k>N$ then $$\|f(x_{n_k},\alpha_{n_k})-f(x_0,\alpha_{n_k})-\bar{0}\|=\|f(x_{n_k},\alpha_{n_k})-f(x_0,\alpha_{n_k})\|<\varepsilon$$

A contradiction. $\blacksquare$

  • $\begingroup$ Is there still a question here to be resolved? $\endgroup$ – T_M May 30 '18 at 22:01
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, in the "Observation"... $\endgroup$ – CrisPaint May 30 '18 at 22:20

Letting $x$ range through a compact set $L$, we obtain that $f$ is continuous on a compact set $L\times K$. Continuity on a compact set implies uniform continuity. Thus, for every epsilon you can choose a delta such that etc. In particular the estimate holds when $|x-x_0|<\delta$.

  • $\begingroup$ Can you explain in more detail how to choose the compact $L$? I don't see it so clear because in the proposition that part of the domain of $f$ is defined on $X\subseteq\mathbb{R}^n$ but we don't now anything else besides $x_0\in X$. Thanks for your answer! I appreciate it. $\endgroup$ – CrisPaint May 30 '18 at 17:34
  • $\begingroup$ I am not sure what kind of set $X$ you have in mind but in any case by Titse (sorry about the spelling) extension lemma you can extend the continuous function to an open neighborhood and then choose a compact ball containing $x$. $\endgroup$ – Mikhail Katz May 30 '18 at 17:39
  • $\begingroup$ The set $X$ from the hypotheses: $Dom(f)=X\times K$. But we need that the domain of $f$ be closed to use that lemma. I don't know if there is something that I'm missing. $\endgroup$ – CrisPaint May 30 '18 at 17:55
  • $\begingroup$ Mikhail, I edited my question with a simpler proof based on your answer. $\endgroup$ – CrisPaint May 30 '18 at 21:05

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.