8
$\begingroup$

I found (without any proof) the following proposition:

Let $T \in \mathcal{L}(X,Y)$ be a linear continuous operator between two reflexive Banach spaces $X,Y$, then $T$ is compact if and only if for every sequence $\left(x_n\right)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \subseteq X$ weakly converging to $0$ and for every sequence $\left(y^*_n\right)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \subseteq Y^*$ weakly-$*$ converging to $0$ it turns out that $\left< y^*_n,T x_n \right> \to 0$

I already know that:

If $X$ is reflexive then $T$ is compact if and only if for every every sequence $\left(x_n\right)_{n\in\mathbb{N}} \subseteq X$ weakly converging to $0$ the sequence $\left(T x_n\right)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ converges strongly in $Y$.

I tried to prove that given $\left( y_n \right) \subseteq Y$ (with $Y$ reflexive) that converges weakly to $0$ if for every $\left( y^*_n \right) \subseteq Y^*$ that converges weakly-$*$ to zero it turns out that $\left< y^*_n, y_n \right> \to 0$ then $y_n \to 0$ strongly, but without success.

So I have a couple of questions:

  • Q1: is my last proposition true? Can we infer strong convergence from the weak one and with this "dual tests"?
  • Q2: how can I prove the original proposition?
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I'm guessing you mean, "given $(y_n) \subseteq Y$..." instead of "given $(y_n^*) \subseteq Y$..."? $\endgroup$ – Theo Bendit Jul 4 '18 at 12:14
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that's a typo. I'll edit the question. Thank you! $\endgroup$ – Enrico Polesel Jul 4 '18 at 12:21
  • $\begingroup$ You only need the $\Leftarrow$ part of the original proposition, right? Otherwise note that in general if $x_n \rightarrow x$ strongly and $y_n' \to y$ weakly-$\ast$, then $\left<y_n',x_n\right> \rightarrow \left<y, x\right>$ strongly. $\endgroup$ – ComFreek Jul 4 '18 at 16:17
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, I need only the $\Leftarrow$ since, as you said, I can use the second proposition to prove that. I know that in general with only weak convergence $\left< y^*_n, x_n \right> \not\to \left<y^*,x\right>$, so that's way I tried to prove this thing for reflexive spaces. (actually it would be enough to prove that exists a subsequence $n_k$ such that $Tx_{n_k}$ converges) $\endgroup$ – Enrico Polesel Jul 4 '18 at 16:49
1
$\begingroup$

I'll write down the proof of a friend of mine, we can prove both the second proposition (the "strong converging criterion" for sequences in a reflexive Banach space).

Let $(y_n)\subseteq Y$ (with $Y$ reflexive) be a sequence that converges weakly to $0$. If for every sequence $(y^*_n)\subseteq Y^*$ tha converges weakly-$*$ to zero it turns out that $\left<y^*_n,y_n\right> \rightarrow 0$ then $y_n \rightarrow 0$ strongly.

It's easy to prove that $y_n \rightarrow 0$ if and only if for every subseqence $(y_{n_k})$ we can find a sub-subseqence $(y_{n_{k_i}})$ such that $y_{n_{k_i}} \rightarrow 0$. To keep the notation simple we will just prove that $(y_n)$ has a subsequence that converges to $0$, but the same argument can be applied to subsequences.

Let $s_n := \left\lVert y_n \right\rVert$, we know that $\left\lVert y_n \right\rVert = \sup _{\left\lVert y^* \right\rVert =1} \left< y^*, y_n\right>$ and so for every $n$ we can choose $y^*_n$ with norm $1$ such that $\left< y^*_n, y_n\right> > s_n - \frac{1}{n}$ and construct a sequence $(y^*_n)\subseteq Y^*$.

Since every $y^*_n$ as norm $1$ it is a sequence in the unitary ball and so, by compactness, exists $(n_k)\subseteq \mathbb{N}$ and $y^*_\infty$ such that $y^*_{n_k} \overset{\ast}{\rightharpoonup} y^*_\infty$, since $Y$ is reflexive we have also $y^*_{n_k} \rightharpoonup y^*_\infty$.

We have that $\left<y^*_\infty, y_n\right> \rightarrow 0$ because by hypothesis $y_n \rightharpoonup 0$ (and so also $\left<y^*_\infty, y_{n_k}\right> \rightarrow 0$).

Since $y^*_{n_k} - y^*_\infty \rightharpoonup 0$ we can write $$ 0 = \lim _{k\to \infty} \left<y^*_n - y^*_\infty, y_{n_k}\right> = \lim _{k\to \infty} \left<y^*_{n_k}, y_{n_k}\right> - \lim _{k\to \infty} \left<y^*_\infty, y_{n_k}\right> = \lim _{k\to \infty} \left<y^*_{n_k}, y_{n_k}\right> = \lim _{k\to \infty} \left( s_{n_k} - \frac{1}{n_k} \right) $$

And so $\lim _{k \rightarrow \infty} s_{n_k} = 0$ that means $\left\lVert y_{n_k} \right\rVert \rightarrow 0$

$\endgroup$

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.