Let $\tau:c_0\rightarrow\ell_\infty$ be the inclusion map. Let $x_0=\{1,1,\cdots\}$. Then $x_0\in\ell_\infty-c_0$. Since $\tau(x)=x\in c_0$ for all $x\in c_0$, there is no $x\in c_0$ such that $\tau(x)=x_0$. Hence, $\tau:c_0\rightarrow\ell_\infty$ is not surjective.

But my professor told me my logic is wrong on this proof. Can any one help me on this? Thank you!

  • $\begingroup$ This isn't a proof (or, at least, it's unnecessarily verbose for one); you're just asserting that $x_0\in \ell^\infty$ has $x_0\notin c_0$, which is exactly what you're trying to prove. Still, there's not much to say beyond noting that (as a sequence) $x_0$ is bounded but doesn't converge to $0$. If I were doing this problem, I'd just simply write, "The sequence $x_0\in (1, 1, \dots)$ clearly lies in $\ell^\infty$ but not $c_0$"; there's nothing more useful to say. $\endgroup$ – anomaly Jun 26 '18 at 21:48

Your proof is perfectly correct. Perhaps your professor expects you to show more details in some steps, such as when you claim that $x_0\in\ell_\infty-c_0$. You could also spell out more explicitly why there is no $x\in c_0$ such that $\tau(x)=x_0$ (namely, that $\tau(x)=x$ so this would mean $x_0=x\in c_0$ but $x_0\not\in c_0$).

  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for your answer! Do you find anything unclear on the logic part? $\endgroup$ – Answer Lee Jun 27 '18 at 2:21
  • $\begingroup$ Not sure what you mean by "the logic part", but it seems fine to me. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Jun 27 '18 at 2:27
  • $\begingroup$ Because my professor said my proof is logically wrong and I didn't understand the definition of non-surjectivity at all. $\endgroup$ – Answer Lee Jun 27 '18 at 2:36
  • $\begingroup$ It sounds like your professor misunderstood your proof. $\endgroup$ – Eric Wofsey Jun 27 '18 at 2:37

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.