1
$\begingroup$

I know that if function is uniformly convergent ($ |f_n(x)-f(x)|<\epsilon. \forall n > N(\epsilon)$), it is Cauchy convergent ($ |f_n(x)-f_m(x)|<\epsilon. \forall n,m > N(\epsilon)$)

So my question is: if sequence is Cauchy convergent does this imply uniform convergence? I think the answer is no, but can't figure out example.

$\endgroup$
1
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Yes because The set of reals is complete. $\endgroup$ Jun 27 '20 at 14:25
1
$\begingroup$

Yes it does; suppose $\{f_n\}$ is a series of functions on a subset $E$ of $\mathbb{R}$ such that for all $\epsilon > 0$ there exists a $N(\epsilon)$ such that $m, n > N(\epsilon)$ implies that $|f_m(x) - f_n(x)| < \epsilon$ for all $x \in E$.

Since $f_n(x)$ is a Cauchy sequence for each particular $x \in E$, we know that our sequence $f_n(x)$ has a pointwise limit; we call it $f(x)$. We must now show that the convergence to $f(x)$ is uniform.

So let $\epsilon > 0$. By our assumption on $\{ f_n \}$ there exists an $N(\epsilon)$ such that $m, n > N(\epsilon)$ implies that $$|f_m(x) - f_n(x)| < \epsilon$$ for all $x \in E$. Now comes the interesting step: fix $n$, and take the limit $m \to \infty$ in the above expression. The result is that $$|f(x) - f_n(x)| \leq \epsilon$$ for all $x \in E$ and $n > N(\epsilon)$. This proves the uniform convergence.

(This last step has to be justified; it relies on the fact that the function $\phi(x) = |x - c|$ is continuous.)

$\endgroup$
9
  • $\begingroup$ does this last step use the fact that function is uniformly convergent? Because than we take limit we assume that function $f_m(x)$ converges to $f(x)$ $\endgroup$
    – Jack Havis
    Jun 27 '20 at 14:44
  • $\begingroup$ @JackHavis no, we use the fact that $\text{lim}_{m \to \infty} f_m(x) = f(x)$ for each $x \in E$, that is, pointwise convergence, which I proved above. $\endgroup$
    – Steven
    Jun 27 '20 at 14:49
  • $\begingroup$ But what if we take a sequence $1/n$ on $X=(0,1)$ which is Cauchy $|1/n-1/m|<2/N<\epsilon, so N=2/\epsilon$,but it is not pointwise convergent, because the limit is 0 and it is not in the domain of analysis, and it is not uniformly convergent $\endgroup$
    – Jack Havis
    Jun 27 '20 at 15:50
  • $\begingroup$ @JackHavis I think you're confused about the definition of pointwise convergence; I think it is more useful for you to look it up than for me to explain it. $\endgroup$
    – Steven
    Jun 27 '20 at 15:52
  • $\begingroup$ I actually can't figure out what's wrong. We write $f_k \rightarrow f \in X$ pointwise if $ \forall x \in X, \lim\limits_{k \to \infty} f_k(x) = f(x)$. So in my case $\lim\limits_{n \to \infty} 1/n = 0$ it is not in our domain. So convergence is not pointwise. Correct me, please, if I wrong $\endgroup$
    – Jack Havis
    Jun 27 '20 at 16:02

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.