3
$\begingroup$

In $X=\ell^p$, $p\in[1,\infty]$ we consider: $$ T(x_1,x_2,x_3,\ldots)=(0,x_1,0,x_3,\ldots) $$ Prove that $T$ isn't a compact operator and that $T^2$ is a compact operator. I think I solved the second point of the exercise because $T^2 x= 0$ always considering $T^2=T(T(x))$ (but I'm not sure this is $T^2$...). Anyway I'd like to find a sequence $\{x_n\}$ such that $x_n\rightharpoonup x$ but $Tx_n\nrightarrow Tx$.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Second part's ok. For the first, you're not taking the correct approach. You need to find a bounded sequence $(x_n)$ such that $(Tx_n)$ has no convergent subsequence. Think of the action of $T$ on the unit vectors. $\endgroup$ – David Mitra Feb 4 '14 at 10:47
  • $\begingroup$ The approach of finding a weakly convergent series of $\ell^p$-series which doesn't converge in norm only works for reflexive banach spaces - but your range for $p$ is to large to allow that. In particular: What does $\ell^0$ mean in this context? $\endgroup$ – Roland Feb 4 '14 at 10:56
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, I wrote wrong! $\endgroup$ – rusca91 Feb 4 '14 at 10:57
  • $\begingroup$ That is my idea but I can't think about a single sequence $x_n$ which can make a proper counterexample, even thinking about unit vectors. $\endgroup$ – rusca91 Feb 4 '14 at 11:33
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Take the sequence of "odd" unit vectors $(e_1,e_3,\ldots)$. They are mapped by $T$ to the sequence of "even" unit vectors $(e_2,e_4,\ldots)$. The former sequence is bounded in norm, the latter sequence has no subsequence converging in norm. (Here, $e_i$ is the sequence of reals that has value $1$ in the $i$th coordinate and value $0$ elsewhere.) $\endgroup$ – David Mitra Feb 4 '14 at 11:38
1
$\begingroup$

Consider the subspace $U=\{(x_1,0,x_3,0,\dots)\}\subset\ell^p$. The restriction $T_{|_U}$ is the right shift operator on $U$. But we know that this is not a compact operator (e.g. looking at the spectrum).

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

Take $\boldsymbol{x}_n=\boldsymbol{e}_{2n+1},\,n\in\mathbb N$ - where $\boldsymbol{e}_{n}$is the element with all zeros except at position $n$, where it has an $1$. Then $\boldsymbol{x}_{n}$ is a bounded sequence in $\ell^p$, as $\|\boldsymbol{x}_{n}\|_p=1$, and $$T\boldsymbol{x}_n=T\boldsymbol{e}_{2n+1}=\boldsymbol{e}_{2n+2}$$ does not have a converging subsequence, since $$ \|\boldsymbol{e}_{m}-\boldsymbol{e}_{n}\|=2^{1/p}, $$ wherever $m\ne n$.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

Take the action of $T$ two distinct unit vectors $e_i$ (by vector I mean infinite dimensional) which is obviously bounded. Then use the equivalent formulation of a compact operator in terms of the properties of $(Tx_n)$.

$\endgroup$
-1
$\begingroup$

Define the operator : $$Tx= \sum_{n=1}^\infty \left(\sum_{k=0}^\infty a_{nk} x_n \right) e_n \qquad\text{with}\qquad a_{nk}=\frac{1}{n+2k}.$$ Show that T is compact. That is if $x^j \in l^2$ is a bounded sequence. Then there exists a subsequence such that $Tx^{kj}$ converges.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ I don't know how begin because the sum of $a_{nk}$ diverge... $\endgroup$ – Sylvain Lhermite Dec 1 '19 at 14:10

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.