3
$\begingroup$

If $T$ is a bounded linear operator on a Hilbert space $H$, then I have heard that the following two things are true:

  1. $T$ is compact if and only if $T(C_1)$ is compact where $C_1$ is the closed unit ball.
  2. $T$ is compact if and only if for every bounded sequence $(x_n)$, $T(x_n)$ has a convergent subsequence.

My question is, why are these two characterizations of compact operators on Hilbert spaces equivalent? Specifically, why does the the second clause of statement 2 imply the second clause of statement 1?

If for every bounded sequence $(x_n)$, $T(x_n)$ has a convergent subsequence, why does that imply $T(C_1)$ is compact? After all, couldn't it be there be a sequence $(x_n)$ in $C_1$ such that $(T(x_n))$ has subsequences which converge to points in $H$, but none of those subseqeunces converge to a point in $T(C_1)$?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ You can use the following: A bounded sequence is a Hilbert space has a weakly convergent subsequence. Bounded operators are weak-weak continuous. If $(y_n) $ converges weakly to $y$ and in norm to $z$, then $y=z$. $\endgroup$ – David Mitra Apr 26 '19 at 4:56
1
$\begingroup$

In general, if $X,Y$ are Banach spaces and $T$ is a linear operator from $X$ to $Y$, then the following are equivalent:

(i) For every bounded sequence $(x_n)\subset X$ there exists a convergent subsequence of $(Tx_n)\subset Y$

(ii) For every bounded set $E\subset X$ the set $T(E)$ has compact closure.

The implication $(ii)\implies (i)$ is obvious (consider $E=\{x_n:n\in\mathbb{N}\}$ for a bounded sequence $(x_n)\subset X$), so we will show the implication $(i)\implies (ii)$:

Let $E\subset X$ be a bounded set and let $(y_n)\subset \overline{T(E)}$. Now for each $n\in\mathbb{N}$ there exists $(x_m^{(n)})_{m=1}^\infty\subset E$ such that $Tx_m^{(n)}\to y_n$, as $m\to\infty$. So, for $n=1$ we can find $n_1$ such that $\|Tx_{n_1}^{(1)}-y_1\|<1$. For $n=2$, we can find $n_2>n_1$ such that $\|Tx_{n_2}^{(2)}-y_2\|<1/2$. So in general we find indexes $n_1<n_2<\dots$ such that $\|Tx_{n_k}^{(k)}-y_k\|<1/k$ for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$. We consider the sequence $(x_{n_k}^{(k)})_{k=1}^\infty\subset E$ which is bounded (since $E$ is bounded). By assumption $(i)$, there exists a subsequence of indexes $(k_l)$ such that $Tx_{n_{k_l}}^{(k_l)}\to y\in\overline{T(E)}$ for some $y\in\overline{T(E)}$. Now we will show that $y_{k_l}\to y$: it is $$\|y_{k_l}-y\|\leq\|y_{k_l}-Tx_{n_{k_l}}^{(k_l)}\|+\|Tx_{n_{k_l}}^{(k_l)}-y\|\leq1/k_l+\|Tx_{n_{k_l}}^{(k_l)}-y\|\to0$$ and we are done.

To fully answer your question, it still remains to show that $T(C_1)$ is closed. I suppose that the Hilbert structure comes in here.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ If $T(C_1)$ is compact then $T(C_1)$ is closed because we are in a Hausdorff space, where compact sets are necessarily closed. $\endgroup$ – DanielWainfleet Apr 27 '19 at 2:10
  • $\begingroup$ @DanielWainfleet yes but we only show that the closure of $T(C_1)$ is closed $\endgroup$ – JustDroppedIn Apr 27 '19 at 8:18

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.