DOCSLIB.ORG

Banach-Alaoglu, Boundedness, Weak-To-Strong Principles 1. Banach

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Banach-Alaoglu, Boundedness, Weak-To-Strong Principles 1. Banach (April 12, 2004) Banach-Alaoglu, boundedness, weak-to-strong principles Paul Garrett <[email protected]> • Banach-Alaoglu theorem: compactness of polars • A variant Banach-Steinhaus theorem • Bipolars • Weak boundedness implies boundedness • Weak-to-strong differentiability 1. Banach-Alaoglu theorem Definition: The polar U o of an open neighborhood U of 0 in V is U o = fλ 2 V ∗ : jλ(u)j ≤ 1; for all u 2 Ug Theorem: (Banach-Alaoglu) In the weak star-topology on V ∗ the polar U o of an open neighborhood U of 0 in V is compact. Proof: For every v in V there is tv sufficiently large real such that v 2 tv · U. Then jλvj ≤ tv. Let Dv = fz 2 C : jzj ≤ tvg and give P = Y Dv v2V the product topology. By the Tychonoff theorem, P is compact. Certainly U o ⊂ V ∗ [ P To prove the compactness of U o it suffices to show that the weak topology on U o is identical to the subspace topology inherited from P , and that U o is closed in P . Regarding the topologies, the sub-basis sets ∗ fλ 2 V : jλv − λovj < δg for V ∗ and fp 2 P : jpv − λovj < δg for P , respectively, (for v 2 V and δ > 0) have identical intersections with U o. Thus, the weak star-topology on U o is the same as the product topology restricted to U o. To show that U o is closed, consider L in the closure of U o in P . Given x; y 2 V , a; b 2 C, the sets fp 2 P : j(p − L)xj < δg fp 2 P : j(p − L)yj < δg fp 2 P : j(p − L)ax+byj < δg are open in P and contain L, so meet U o. Let λ 2 U o lie in the simultaneous intersection of these three sets and U o. Then jaLx + bLy − Lax+byj ≤ jaj · jLx − λxj + jbj · jLy − λyj + jLax+by − λ(ax + by)j + jaλx + bλy − λ(ax + by)j ≤ jaj · δ + jbj · δ + δ + 0 1 Paul Garrett: Banach-Alaoglu, boundedness, weak-to-strong principles (April 12, 2004) This holds for every δ, so L is linear. Given " > 0, let N be a neighborhood of 0 in V such that x − y 2 N implies λx − λy 2 N Then jLx − Lyj = jLx − λxj + jLy − λyj + jλx − λyjδ + δ + " Thus, L is continuous. Also, jLx − λxj < δ for all x 2 U and all δ > 0, so L 2 U o. === 2. A variant Banach-Steinhaus theorem The following variant of the Banach-Steinhaus (uniform boundedness) theorem is used along with Banach-Alaoglu to show that weak boundedness implies (original) boundedness in a locally convex space, which is the starting point for weak-to-strong principles. Theorem: (Variant of Banach-Steinhaus) Let K be a compact convex set in an arbitrary topological vectorspace X, and T a set of continuous linear maps X ! Y from X to some other topological vectorspace Y . Suppose that for every individual x 2 K the collection of images T (x) = fT x : T 2 T g is a bounded subset of Y . Then there is a bounded set B in Y so that T (x) ⊂ B for every x 2 K. Proof: Let B be the union B = [ T (x) x2K Let U; V be balanced neighborhoods of 0 in Y so that U¯ + U¯ ⊂ V , and let −1 E = \ T (U¯) T 2T By the boundedness of T (x), there is a positive integer n so that T (x) ⊂ nU. Then x 2 nE. For each x 2 K there is such n (depending upon x), so surely K = [ (K \ nE) n Since E is closed, the version of the Baire Category Theorem applicable to locally compact Hausdorff spaces implies that at least one set K \ nE has non-empty interior in K. For such n, let xo be an interior point of K \ nE. Pick a balanced neighborhood W of 0 in X so that K \ (xo + W ) ⊂ nE Since K is compact, the set K is bounded, so K − xo is bounded, for large enough positive real t K ⊂ xo + tW For any x 2 K, for t ≥ 1, since K is convex the point (1 − t−1)x + t−1x 2 Paul Garrett: Banach-Alaoglu, boundedness, weak-to-strong principles (April 12, 2004) also is in K. At the same time, −1 z − xo = t (x − xo) 2 W for large enough t, from the boundedness of K, so z 2 xo + W . Thus, z 2 K \ (xo + V ) ⊂ nE with the latter inclusion following from above. From the definition of E, T (E) ⊂ U¯, so T (nE) = nT (E) ⊂ nU¯ And x = tz − (t − 1)xo yields T x 2 tnU¯ − (t − 1)nU¯ ⊂ tn(U¯ + U¯) by the balanced-ness of U. Since U¯ + U¯ ⊂ V , we have B ⊂ tnV Since V was arbitrary, this proves the boundedness of the set B. === 3. Bipolars The bipolar N oo of an open neighborhood N of 0 in a topological vector space V is N oo = fv 2 V : jλ vj ≤ 1 for all λ 2 N og where N o is the polar of N. Proposition: (On bipolars) Let V be a locally convex topological vectorspace. Let N be a convex and balanced neighborhood N of 0. Then the bipolar N oo of N is the closure N¯ of N. Proof: Certainly N is contained in N oo, and in fact N¯ is contained in N oo since N oo is closed. Now use the local convexity of V . The Hahn-Banach theorems imply that for v 2 V but v 62 N¯ there exists λ 2 V ∗ so that λv > 1 and jλv0j ≤ 1 for all v0 2 N¯. Thus, this λ is in N o, and we have proven that every element v 2 N oo is in N¯, so N oo = N¯ as claimed. === 4. Weak boundedness implies strong boundedness Theorem: Let V be a locally convex topological vectorspace. A subset E of V is bounded if and only if it is weakly bounded. Proof: That boundedness implies weak boundedness is trivial. On the other hand, suppose E is weakly bounded, and let U be a neighborhood of 0 in V , in the original topology. By the local convexity, there is a convex (and balanced) neighborhood N of 0 so that the closure N¯ is contained in U. ∗ By the weak boundedness of E, for each λ 2 V a bound bλ so that jλ xj ≤ bλ for x 2 E. By the Banach-Alaoglu theorem the polar N o of N is compact in V ∗. The functions λ ! λx are continuous, so by the variant Banach-Steinhaus theorem above there is a uniform constant b < 1 so that jλxj ≤ b for x 2 E and λ 2 N o. Thus, b−1x is in the bipolar N oo of N, which the previous proposition showed to be equal to the closure N¯ of N. That is, b−1x 2 N¯. Thus, by the balanced-ness of N, for any t > b E ⊂ tN¯ ⊂ tU This shows that E is bounded. === 3 Paul Garrett: Banach-Alaoglu, boundedness, weak-to-strong principles (April 12, 2004) 5. Weak-to-strong differentiability Here is a useful application of the fact that weak boundedness implies boundedness. It seems that the result below is well-known, at least folklorically, for the case of Banach-space-valued functions is well-known, but the simple general case seems to be apocryphal. Definition: Let f : [a; c] ! V be a V -valued function on an interval [a; c] ⊂ R. The function f is differentiable if for each xo 2 [a; c] 0 −1 f (xo) = lim (x − xo) (f(x) − f(xo)) x!xo exists. The function f is continuously differentiable if it is differentiable and if f 0 is continuous. A k-times continuously differentiable function is said to be Ck, and a continuous function is said to be Co. Definition: A V -valued function f is weakly Ck if for every λ 2 V ∗ the scalar-valued function λ ◦ f is Ck. If there were any doubt, the present sense of weak differentiability of a function f does not refer to distributional derivatives, but rather to differentiability of every scalar-valued function λ ◦ f where f is vector-valued and λ ranges over suitable continuous linear functionals. Theorem: Let V be a quasi-complete locally convex topological vector space. Let f be a V -valued function defined on an interval [a; c]. Suppose that f is weakly C k. Then the V -valued function f is (strongly) Ck−1. First we need Lemma: Let V be a quasi-complete locally convex topological vector space. Fix real numbers a ≤ b ≤ c. Let f be a V -valued function defined on [a; b)[(b; c]. Suppose that for each λ 2 V ∗ the scalar-valued function 1 λ ◦ f has an extension to a function Fλ on the whole interval [a; c] which is C . Then f(b) can be chosen so that the extended f(x) is (strongly) continuous on [a; c]. ∗ 1 Proof: For each λ 2 V , let Fλ be the extension of λ ◦ f to a C function on [a; c]. For each λ, the differentiability of Fλ implies that F (x) − F (y) Φ (x; y) = λ λ λ x − y has a continuous extension Φ~ λ to the compact set [a; c] × [a; c]. Thus, the image Cλ of [a; c] × [a; c] under this continuous map is a compact subset of R, so bounded.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Uniform Boundedness Principle for Unbounded Operators
    UNIFORM BOUNDEDNESS PRINCIPLE FOR UNBOUNDED OPERATORS C. GANESA MOORTHY and CT. RAMASAMY Abstract. A uniform boundedness principle for unbounded operators is derived. A particular case is: Suppose fTigi2I is a family of linear mappings of a Banach space X into a normed space Y such that fTix : i 2 Ig is bounded for each x 2 X; then there exists a dense subset A of the open unit ball in X such that fTix : i 2 I; x 2 Ag is bounded. A closed graph theorem and a bounded inverse theorem are obtained for families of linear mappings as consequences of this principle. Some applications of this principle are also obtained. 1. Introduction There are many forms for uniform boundedness principle. There is no known evidence for this principle for unbounded operators which generalizes classical uniform boundedness principle for bounded operators. The second section presents a uniform boundedness principle for unbounded operators. An application to derive Hellinger-Toeplitz theorem is also obtained in this section. A JJ J I II closed graph theorem and a bounded inverse theorem are obtained for families of linear mappings in the third section as consequences of this principle. Go back Let us assume the following: Every vector space X is over R or C. An α-seminorm (0 < α ≤ 1) is a mapping p: X ! [0; 1) such that p(x + y) ≤ p(x) + p(y), p(ax) ≤ jajαp(x) for all x; y 2 X Full Screen Close Received November 7, 2013. 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46A32, 47L60. Key words and phrases.
    [Show full text]
  • Weak Topologies
    Weak topologies David Lecomte May 23, 2006 1 Preliminaries from general topology In this section, we are given a set X, a collection of topological spaces (Yi)i∈I and a collection of maps (fi)i∈I such that each fi maps X into Yi. We wish to define a topology on X that makes all the fi’s continuous. And we want to do this in the cheapest way, that is: there should be no more open sets in X than required for this purpose. −1 Obviously, all the fi (Oi), where Oi is an open set in Yi should be open in X. Then finite intersections of those should also be open. And then any union of finite intersections should be open. By this process, we have created as few open sets as required. Yet it is not clear that the collection obtained is closed under finite intersections. It actually is, as a consequence of the following lemma: Lemma 1 Let X be a set and let O ⊂ P(X) be a collection of subsets of X, such that • ∅ and X are in O; • O is closed under finite intersections. Then T = { O | O ⊂ O} is a topology on X. OS∈O Proof: By definition, T contains X and ∅ since those were already in O. Furthermore, T is closed under unions, again by definition. So all that’s left is to check that T is closed under finite intersections. Let A1 and A2 be two elements of T . Then there exist O1 and O2, subsets of O, such that A = O and A = O 1 [ 2 [ O∈O1 O∈O2 1 It is then easy to check by double inclusion that A ∩ A = O ∩ O 1 2 [ 1 2 O1∈O1 O2∈O2 Letting O denote the collection {O1 ∩ O2 | O1 ∈ O1 O2 ∈ O2}, which is a subset of O since the latter is closed under finite intersections, we get A ∩ A = O 1 2 [ O∈O This set belongs to T .
    [Show full text]
  • Distinguished Property in Tensor Products and Weak* Dual Spaces
    axioms Article Distinguished Property in Tensor Products and Weak* Dual Spaces Salvador López-Alfonso 1 , Manuel López-Pellicer 2,* and Santiago Moll-López 3 1 Department of Architectural Constructions, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain; [email protected] 2 Emeritus and IUMPA, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain 3 Department of Applied Mathematics, Universitat Politècnica de València, 46022 Valencia, Spain; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] 0 Abstract: A local convex space E is said to be distinguished if its strong dual Eb has the topology 0 0 0 0 b(E , (Eb) ), i.e., if Eb is barrelled. The distinguished property of the local convex space Cp(X) of real- valued functions on a Tychonoff space X, equipped with the pointwise topology on X, has recently aroused great interest among analysts and Cp-theorists, obtaining very interesting properties and nice characterizations. For instance, it has recently been obtained that a space Cp(X) is distinguished if and only if any function f 2 RX belongs to the pointwise closure of a pointwise bounded set in C(X). The extensively studied distinguished properties in the injective tensor products Cp(X) ⊗# E and in Cp(X, E) contrasts with the few distinguished properties of injective tensor products related to the dual space Lp(X) of Cp(X) endowed with the weak* topology, as well as to the weak* dual of Cp(X, E). To partially fill this gap, some distinguished properties in the injective tensor product space Lp(X) ⊗# E are presented and a characterization of the distinguished property of the weak* dual of Cp(X, E) for wide classes of spaces X and E is provided.
    [Show full text]
  • On the Boundary Between Mereology and Topology
    On the Boundary Between Mereology and Topology Achille C. Varzi Istituto per la Ricerca Scientifica e Tecnologica, I-38100 Trento, Italy [email protected] (Final version published in Roberto Casati, Barry Smith, and Graham White (eds.), Philosophy and the Cognitive Sciences. Proceedings of the 16th International Wittgenstein Symposium, Vienna, Hölder-Pichler-Tempsky, 1994, pp. 423–442.) 1. Introduction Much recent work aimed at providing a formal ontology for the common-sense world has emphasized the need for a mereological account to be supplemented with topological concepts and principles. There are at least two reasons under- lying this view. The first is truly metaphysical and relates to the task of charac- terizing individual integrity or organic unity: since the notion of connectedness runs afoul of plain mereology, a theory of parts and wholes really needs to in- corporate a topological machinery of some sort. The second reason has been stressed mainly in connection with applications to certain areas of artificial in- telligence, most notably naive physics and qualitative reasoning about space and time: here mereology proves useful to account for certain basic relation- ships among things or events; but one needs topology to account for the fact that, say, two events can be continuous with each other, or that something can be inside, outside, abutting, or surrounding something else. These motivations (at times combined with others, e.g., semantic transpar- ency or computational efficiency) have led to the development of theories in which both mereological and topological notions play a pivotal role. How ex- actly these notions are related, however, and how the underlying principles should interact with one another, is still a rather unexplored issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Baire Category Theorem and Uniform Boundedness Principle)
    Functional Analysis (WS 19/20), Problem Set 3 (Baire Category Theorem and Uniform Boundedness Principle) Baire Category Theorem B1. Let (X; k·kX ) be an innite dimensional Banach space. Prove that X has uncountable Hamel basis. Note: This is Problem A2 from Problem Set 1. B2. Consider subset of bounded sequences 1 A = fx 2 l : only nitely many xk are nonzerog : Can one dene a norm on A so that it becomes a Banach space? Consider the same question with the set of polynomials dened on interval [0; 1]. B3. Prove that the set L2(0; 1) has empty interior as the subset of Banach space L1(0; 1). B4. Let f : [0; 1) ! [0; 1) be a continuous function such that for every x 2 [0; 1), f(kx) ! 0 as k ! 1. Prove that f(x) ! 0 as x ! 1. B5.( Uniform Boundedness Principle) Let (X; k · kX ) be a Banach space and (Y; k · kY ) be a normed space. Let fTαgα2A be a family of bounded linear operators between X and Y . Suppose that for any x 2 X, sup kTαxkY < 1: α2A Prove that . supα2A kTαk < 1 Uniform Boundedness Principle U1. Let F be a normed space C[0; 1] with L2(0; 1) norm. Check that the formula 1 Z n 'n(f) = n f(t) dt 0 denes a bounded linear functional on . Verify that for every , F f 2 F supn2N j'n(f)j < 1 but . Why Uniform Boundedness Principle is not satised in this case? supn2N k'nk = 1 U2.( pointwise convergence of operators) Let (X; k · kX ) be a Banach space and (Y; k · kY ) be a normed space.
    [Show full text]
  • FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS 1. Banach and Hilbert Spaces in What
    FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS PIOTR HAJLASZ 1. Banach and Hilbert spaces In what follows K will denote R of C. Definition. A normed space is a pair (X, k · k), where X is a linear space over K and k · k : X → [0, ∞) is a function, called a norm, such that (1) kx + yk ≤ kxk + kyk for all x, y ∈ X; (2) kαxk = |α|kxk for all x ∈ X and α ∈ K; (3) kxk = 0 if and only if x = 0. Since kx − yk ≤ kx − zk + kz − yk for all x, y, z ∈ X, d(x, y) = kx − yk defines a metric in a normed space. In what follows normed paces will always be regarded as metric spaces with respect to the metric d. A normed space is called a Banach space if it is complete with respect to the metric d. Definition. Let X be a linear space over K (=R or C). The inner product (scalar product) is a function h·, ·i : X × X → K such that (1) hx, xi ≥ 0; (2) hx, xi = 0 if and only if x = 0; (3) hαx, yi = αhx, yi; (4) hx1 + x2, yi = hx1, yi + hx2, yi; (5) hx, yi = hy, xi, for all x, x1, x2, y ∈ X and all α ∈ K. As an obvious corollary we obtain hx, y1 + y2i = hx, y1i + hx, y2i, hx, αyi = αhx, yi , Date: February 12, 2009. 1 2 PIOTR HAJLASZ for all x, y1, y2 ∈ X and α ∈ K. For a space with an inner product we define kxk = phx, xi . Lemma 1.1 (Schwarz inequality).
    [Show full text]
  • A Study of Optimization in Hilbert Space
    California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Theses Digitization Project John M. Pfau Library 1998 A study of optimization in Hilbert Space John Awunganyi Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project Part of the Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Awunganyi, John, "A study of optimization in Hilbert Space" (1998). Theses Digitization Project. 1459. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd-project/1459 This Project is brought to you for free and open access by the John M. Pfau Library at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Theses Digitization Project by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. A STUDY OF OPTIMIZATIONIN HELBERT SPACE A Project Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino In Partial Fulfillment ofthe Requirements for the Degree Master ofArts in Mathematics by John Awunganyi June 1998 A STUDY OF OPTIMIZATION IN HILBERT SPACE A Project Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino by John Awunganyi June 1998 Approved by; Dr. Chetan Prakash, Chair, Mathematics Date r. Wenxang Wang Dr. Christopher Freiling Dr. Terry Hallett, Graduate Coordinator Dr. Peter Williams, Department Chair ABSTRACT The primary objective ofthis project is to demonstrate that a certain field ofoptimization can be effectively unified by afew geometric principles ofcomplete normed linear space theory. By employing these principles, important and complex finite - dimensional problems can be interpreted and solved by methods springing from geometric insight. Concepts such as distance, orthogonality, and convexity play a fundamental and indispensable role in this development. Viewed in these terms, seemingly diverse problems and techniques often are found to be closely related.
    [Show full text]
  • A Hilbert Space Theory of Generalized Graph Signal Processing
    1 A Hilbert Space Theory of Generalized Graph Signal Processing Feng Ji and Wee Peng Tay, Senior Member, IEEE Abstract Graph signal processing (GSP) has become an important tool in many areas such as image pro- cessing, networking learning and analysis of social network data. In this paper, we propose a broader framework that not only encompasses traditional GSP as a special case, but also includes a hybrid framework of graph and classical signal processing over a continuous domain. Our framework relies extensively on concepts and tools from functional analysis to generalize traditional GSP to graph signals in a separable Hilbert space with infinite dimensions. We develop a concept analogous to Fourier transform for generalized GSP and the theory of filtering and sampling such signals. Index Terms Graph signal proceesing, Hilbert space, generalized graph signals, F-transform, filtering, sampling I. INTRODUCTION Since its emergence, the theory and applications of graph signal processing (GSP) have rapidly developed (see for example, [1]–[10]). Traditional GSP theory is essentially based on a change of orthonormal basis in a finite dimensional vector space. Suppose G = (V; E) is a weighted, arXiv:1904.11655v2 [eess.SP] 16 Sep 2019 undirected graph with V the vertex set of size n and E the set of edges. Recall that a graph signal f assigns a complex number to each vertex, and hence f can be regarded as an element of n C , where C is the set of complex numbers. The heart of the theory is a shift operator AG that is usually defined using a property of the graph.
    [Show full text]
  • Let H Be a Hilbert Space. on B(H), There Is a Whole Zoo of Topologies
    Let H be a Hilbert space. On B(H), there is a whole zoo of topologies weaker than the norm topology – and all of them are considered when it comes to von Neumann algebras. It is, however, a good idea to concentrate on one of them right from the definition. My choice – and Murphy’s [Mur90, Chapter 4] – is the strong (or strong operator=STOP) topology: Definition. A von Neumann algebra is a ∗–subalgebra A ⊂ B(H) of operators acting nonde- generately(!) on a Hilbert space H that is strongly closed in B(H). (Every norm convergent sequence converges strongly, so A is a C∗–algebra.) This does not mean that one has not to know the other topologies; on the contrary, one has to know them very well, too. But it does mean that proof techniques are focused on the strong topology; if we use a different topology to prove something, then we do this only if there is a specific reason for doing so. One reason why it is not sufficient to worry only about the strong topology, is that the strong topology (unlike the norm topology of a C∗–algebra) is not determined by the algebraic structure alone: There are “good” algebraic isomorphisms between von Neumann algebras that do not respect their strong topologies. A striking feature of the strong topology on B(H) is that B(H) is order complete: Theorem (Vigier). If aλ λ2Λ is an increasing self-adjoint net in B(H) and bounded above (9c 2 B(H): aλ ≤ c8λ), then aλ converges strongly in B(H), obviously to its least upper bound in B(H).
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 14. Duality for Normed Linear Spaces
    14.1. Linear Functionals, Bounded Linear Functionals, and Weak Topologies 1 Chapter 14. Duality for Normed Linear Spaces Note. In Section 8.1, we defined a linear functional on a normed linear space, a bounded linear functional, and the functional norm. In Proposition 8.1 (the proof is Exercise 8.2) it is shown that the collection of bounded linear functionals themselves form a normed linear space called the dual space of X, denoted X∗. In Chapters 14 and 15 we consider the mapping from X × X∗ → R defined by (x, ψ) 7→ ψ(x) to “uncover the analytic, geometric, and topological properties of Banach spaces.” The “departure point for this exploration” is the Hahn-Banach Theorem which is started and proved in Section 14.2 (Royden and Fitzpatrick, page 271). Section 14.1. Linear Functionals, Bounded Linear Functionals, and Weak Topologies Note. In this section we consider the linear space of all real valued linear function- als on linear space X (without requiring X to be named or the functionals to be bounded), denoted X]. We also consider a new topology on a normed linear space called the weak topology (the old topology which was induced by the norm we now may call the strong topology). For the deal X∗ of normed linear space X, the weak topology is called the weak-∗ topology. 14.1. Linear Functionals, Bounded Linear Functionals, and Weak Topologies 2 Note. Recall that if Y and Z are subspaces of a linear space then Y + Z is also a subspace of X (by Exercise 13.2) and that if Y ∩ Z = {0} then Y + Z is denoted T ⊕ Z and is called the direct sum of Y and Z.
    [Show full text]
  • HILBERT SPACES in MODELLING of SYSTEMS Jean Claude Dutailly
    HILBERT SPACES IN MODELLING OF SYSTEMS Jean Claude Dutailly To cite this version: Jean Claude Dutailly. HILBERT SPACES IN MODELLING OF SYSTEMS. 2014. hal-00974251 HAL Id: hal-00974251 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00974251 Preprint submitted on 5 Apr 2014 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. HILBERT SPACES IN MODELLING OF SYSTEMS Jean Claude Dutailly Paris April 4, 2014 Abstract This paper studies the quantitative models which are used to represent systems, whatever the field (Physics, Economics, Finances,...). We prove that models which meet some very general conditions can be associated to Hilbert vector spaces : the state of the system is then identified with a unique vector. The measure of this state is done through observables, whose properties are studied and we show that they can take only values which are eigen vectors of the observables, and a probability law can be associated to the occurence of these measures. The effect of a change of variables in a model is related to a unitary operator. This leads to general laws for the evolution of systems, and to powerful tools for the study of transitions of phases in a system.
    [Show full text]
  • Normal Families of Holomorphic Functions and Mappings on a Banach Space
    EXPOSITIONES Expo. Math. 21 (2003): 193-218 © Urban & Fischer Verlag MATHEMATICAE www. urbanfischer.de/journals/expomath Normal Families of Holomorphic Functions and Mappings on a Banach Space Kang-Tae Kim 1 and Steven G. Krantz 2 1Pohang University of Science and Technology, Pohang 790-784, Korea 2 Department of Mathematics, Washington University, St. Louis, Missouri 63130, U.S.A. Abstract: The authors lay the foundations for the study of nor- mal families of holomorphic functions and mappings on an infinite- dimensional normed linear space. Characterizations of normal fami- lies, in terms of value distribution, spherical derivatives, and other geo- metric properties are derived. Montel-type theorems are established. A number of different topologies on spaces of holomorphic mappings are considered. Theorems about normal families are formulated and proved in the language of these various topologies. Normal functions are also introduced. Characterizations in terms of automorphisms and also in terms of invariant derivatives are presented. Keywords: holomorphic function, holomorphic mapping, Banach space, normal family, normal function. Introduction The theory of holomorphic functions of infinitely many complex variables is about forty years old. Pioneers of the subject were Nachbin [NAC1-NAC17], Gruman and Kiselman [GRK], and Mujica [MUJ]. After a quiet period of nearly two decades, the discipline is now enjoying a rebirth thanks to the ideas of Lempert [LEM1-LEM6]. Lempert has taught us that it is worthwhile to restrict attention to particular Banach spaces, and he has directed our efforts to especially fruitful questions. The work of the present paper is inspired by the results of [KIK]. That paper studied domains in a Hilbert space with an automorphism group orbit accumulating at a boundary point.
    [Show full text]