Continuity of Linear Operator Between Hilbert Spaces












2












$begingroup$



Note: Please do not give a solution; I am curious to understand why my solution is incorrect, and would prefer guidance to help me complete the question myself. Thank you.






Let $mathcal{H}$ be a Hilbert space, and suppose that $Tintext{Hom}(mathcal{H},mathcal{H})$. Suppose that there exists an operator $tilde{T}:mathcal{H}rightarrowmathcal{H}$ such that,
begin{align}
langle Tx,yrangle =langle x,tilde{T}yrangle,
end{align}

$forall x,yinmathcal{H}$. Show that $T$ is continuous.



My current solution is as follows:



Assume for all $delta>0$ there exists $n>Ninmathbb{N}$ such that,
begin{align}
|x_{n}-x|<delta.
end{align}

Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle &= |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}\
&leq|Tx_{n}-Tx|=|T(x_{n}-x)|\
&leq|T||x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}



What am I doing wrong? I notice I do not use the existence of $tilde{T}$.



Second Attempt:



Assume $langle x_{n},xrangle rightarrow langle x,xrangle$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then, given $langle Tx,yrangle = langle x,tilde{T}yrangle$,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n},yrangle &= langle x_{n},tilde{T}yranglerightarrow_{nrightarrowinfty}langle x,tilde{T}yrangle=langle Tx,yrangle.
end{align}

Therefore, $Tx_{n}rightarrow Tx$ as $nrightarrowinfty$.



Third Attempt:



Assume $|x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle=langle x_{n}-x,x_{n}-xrangle=|x_{n}-x|^{2}.
end{align}



By assumption $|x_{n}-x|^{2}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Hence,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle = |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}

Therefore, $T$ is continuous.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The last inequality basically implies that the norm of T is bounded or that it is continuous
    $endgroup$
    – Andres Mejia
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comment on the second attempt: you showed that $Tx_n to Tx$ weakly, not in norm. Off-topic comment: I admire your tenacity. Keep trying!
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. Do you have a hint?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Third attempt made. Although not sure if this holds either.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago
















2












$begingroup$



Note: Please do not give a solution; I am curious to understand why my solution is incorrect, and would prefer guidance to help me complete the question myself. Thank you.






Let $mathcal{H}$ be a Hilbert space, and suppose that $Tintext{Hom}(mathcal{H},mathcal{H})$. Suppose that there exists an operator $tilde{T}:mathcal{H}rightarrowmathcal{H}$ such that,
begin{align}
langle Tx,yrangle =langle x,tilde{T}yrangle,
end{align}

$forall x,yinmathcal{H}$. Show that $T$ is continuous.



My current solution is as follows:



Assume for all $delta>0$ there exists $n>Ninmathbb{N}$ such that,
begin{align}
|x_{n}-x|<delta.
end{align}

Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle &= |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}\
&leq|Tx_{n}-Tx|=|T(x_{n}-x)|\
&leq|T||x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}



What am I doing wrong? I notice I do not use the existence of $tilde{T}$.



Second Attempt:



Assume $langle x_{n},xrangle rightarrow langle x,xrangle$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then, given $langle Tx,yrangle = langle x,tilde{T}yrangle$,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n},yrangle &= langle x_{n},tilde{T}yranglerightarrow_{nrightarrowinfty}langle x,tilde{T}yrangle=langle Tx,yrangle.
end{align}

Therefore, $Tx_{n}rightarrow Tx$ as $nrightarrowinfty$.



Third Attempt:



Assume $|x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle=langle x_{n}-x,x_{n}-xrangle=|x_{n}-x|^{2}.
end{align}



By assumption $|x_{n}-x|^{2}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Hence,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle = |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}

Therefore, $T$ is continuous.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The last inequality basically implies that the norm of T is bounded or that it is continuous
    $endgroup$
    – Andres Mejia
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comment on the second attempt: you showed that $Tx_n to Tx$ weakly, not in norm. Off-topic comment: I admire your tenacity. Keep trying!
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. Do you have a hint?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Third attempt made. Although not sure if this holds either.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago














2












2








2


1



$begingroup$



Note: Please do not give a solution; I am curious to understand why my solution is incorrect, and would prefer guidance to help me complete the question myself. Thank you.






Let $mathcal{H}$ be a Hilbert space, and suppose that $Tintext{Hom}(mathcal{H},mathcal{H})$. Suppose that there exists an operator $tilde{T}:mathcal{H}rightarrowmathcal{H}$ such that,
begin{align}
langle Tx,yrangle =langle x,tilde{T}yrangle,
end{align}

$forall x,yinmathcal{H}$. Show that $T$ is continuous.



My current solution is as follows:



Assume for all $delta>0$ there exists $n>Ninmathbb{N}$ such that,
begin{align}
|x_{n}-x|<delta.
end{align}

Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle &= |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}\
&leq|Tx_{n}-Tx|=|T(x_{n}-x)|\
&leq|T||x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}



What am I doing wrong? I notice I do not use the existence of $tilde{T}$.



Second Attempt:



Assume $langle x_{n},xrangle rightarrow langle x,xrangle$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then, given $langle Tx,yrangle = langle x,tilde{T}yrangle$,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n},yrangle &= langle x_{n},tilde{T}yranglerightarrow_{nrightarrowinfty}langle x,tilde{T}yrangle=langle Tx,yrangle.
end{align}

Therefore, $Tx_{n}rightarrow Tx$ as $nrightarrowinfty$.



Third Attempt:



Assume $|x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle=langle x_{n}-x,x_{n}-xrangle=|x_{n}-x|^{2}.
end{align}



By assumption $|x_{n}-x|^{2}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Hence,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle = |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}

Therefore, $T$ is continuous.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$





Note: Please do not give a solution; I am curious to understand why my solution is incorrect, and would prefer guidance to help me complete the question myself. Thank you.






Let $mathcal{H}$ be a Hilbert space, and suppose that $Tintext{Hom}(mathcal{H},mathcal{H})$. Suppose that there exists an operator $tilde{T}:mathcal{H}rightarrowmathcal{H}$ such that,
begin{align}
langle Tx,yrangle =langle x,tilde{T}yrangle,
end{align}

$forall x,yinmathcal{H}$. Show that $T$ is continuous.



My current solution is as follows:



Assume for all $delta>0$ there exists $n>Ninmathbb{N}$ such that,
begin{align}
|x_{n}-x|<delta.
end{align}

Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle &= |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}\
&leq|Tx_{n}-Tx|=|T(x_{n}-x)|\
&leq|T||x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}



What am I doing wrong? I notice I do not use the existence of $tilde{T}$.



Second Attempt:



Assume $langle x_{n},xrangle rightarrow langle x,xrangle$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then, given $langle Tx,yrangle = langle x,tilde{T}yrangle$,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n},yrangle &= langle x_{n},tilde{T}yranglerightarrow_{nrightarrowinfty}langle x,tilde{T}yrangle=langle Tx,yrangle.
end{align}

Therefore, $Tx_{n}rightarrow Tx$ as $nrightarrowinfty$.



Third Attempt:



Assume $|x_{n}-x|rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Then,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle=langle x_{n}-x,x_{n}-xrangle=|x_{n}-x|^{2}.
end{align}



By assumption $|x_{n}-x|^{2}rightarrow 0$ as $nrightarrowinfty$. Hence,
begin{align}
langle Tx_{n}-Tx,Tx_{n}-Txrangle = |Tx_{n}-Tx|^{2}rightarrow 0text{ as }nrightarrowinfty.
end{align}

Therefore, $T$ is continuous.







functional-analysis continuity hilbert-spaces






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 4 hours ago







Jack

















asked 5 hours ago









JackJack

887




887








  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The last inequality basically implies that the norm of T is bounded or that it is continuous
    $endgroup$
    – Andres Mejia
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comment on the second attempt: you showed that $Tx_n to Tx$ weakly, not in norm. Off-topic comment: I admire your tenacity. Keep trying!
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. Do you have a hint?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Third attempt made. Although not sure if this holds either.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago














  • 2




    $begingroup$
    The last inequality basically implies that the norm of T is bounded or that it is continuous
    $endgroup$
    – Andres Mejia
    5 hours ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    Comment on the second attempt: you showed that $Tx_n to Tx$ weakly, not in norm. Off-topic comment: I admire your tenacity. Keep trying!
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago












  • $begingroup$
    Thank you. Do you have a hint?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    Third attempt made. Although not sure if this holds either.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago








2




2




$begingroup$
The last inequality basically implies that the norm of T is bounded or that it is continuous
$endgroup$
– Andres Mejia
5 hours ago




$begingroup$
The last inequality basically implies that the norm of T is bounded or that it is continuous
$endgroup$
– Andres Mejia
5 hours ago




1




1




$begingroup$
Comment on the second attempt: you showed that $Tx_n to Tx$ weakly, not in norm. Off-topic comment: I admire your tenacity. Keep trying!
$endgroup$
– Umberto P.
4 hours ago






$begingroup$
Comment on the second attempt: you showed that $Tx_n to Tx$ weakly, not in norm. Off-topic comment: I admire your tenacity. Keep trying!
$endgroup$
– Umberto P.
4 hours ago














$begingroup$
Thank you. Do you have a hint?
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Thank you. Do you have a hint?
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago












$begingroup$
Third attempt made. Although not sure if this holds either.
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
Third attempt made. Although not sure if this holds either.
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















5












$begingroup$

The problem is that we can't assume that $T$ has a finite norm. Before we add that condition about having an adjoint map $tilde{T}$, we're simply assuming that $T$ is a linear map.



In fact, a linear map between normed vector spaces is continuous if and only if it has a finite operator norm. You assumed the statement we were trying to prove.



Second attempt: The assumption here should have been that $x_nto x$, as in the others. Then, yes, $langle Tx_n,yrangle to langle Tx,yrangle$ for each $y$. This is real progress. But, as stated in the comments, it's weak convergence rather than convergence in norm. Not quite there.



Third attempt: No, $langle Tu,Turangle$ is not equal to $langle u,urangle$ - it's equal to $langle u,tilde{T}Turangle$, and you don't know what $tilde{T}T$ does. This is not helpful.



All, right, lets go back to the attempt that made some progress. Are you familiar with the uniform boundedness principle? One consequence of that theorem is that any sequence of points in a Hilbert space that converges weakly is bounded. Can we use this to ensure that $T$ is a bounded operator?






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    1 min ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});

function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});


}
});














draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3149977%2fcontinuity-of-linear-operator-between-hilbert-spaces%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









5












$begingroup$

The problem is that we can't assume that $T$ has a finite norm. Before we add that condition about having an adjoint map $tilde{T}$, we're simply assuming that $T$ is a linear map.



In fact, a linear map between normed vector spaces is continuous if and only if it has a finite operator norm. You assumed the statement we were trying to prove.



Second attempt: The assumption here should have been that $x_nto x$, as in the others. Then, yes, $langle Tx_n,yrangle to langle Tx,yrangle$ for each $y$. This is real progress. But, as stated in the comments, it's weak convergence rather than convergence in norm. Not quite there.



Third attempt: No, $langle Tu,Turangle$ is not equal to $langle u,urangle$ - it's equal to $langle u,tilde{T}Turangle$, and you don't know what $tilde{T}T$ does. This is not helpful.



All, right, lets go back to the attempt that made some progress. Are you familiar with the uniform boundedness principle? One consequence of that theorem is that any sequence of points in a Hilbert space that converges weakly is bounded. Can we use this to ensure that $T$ is a bounded operator?






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    1 min ago
















5












$begingroup$

The problem is that we can't assume that $T$ has a finite norm. Before we add that condition about having an adjoint map $tilde{T}$, we're simply assuming that $T$ is a linear map.



In fact, a linear map between normed vector spaces is continuous if and only if it has a finite operator norm. You assumed the statement we were trying to prove.



Second attempt: The assumption here should have been that $x_nto x$, as in the others. Then, yes, $langle Tx_n,yrangle to langle Tx,yrangle$ for each $y$. This is real progress. But, as stated in the comments, it's weak convergence rather than convergence in norm. Not quite there.



Third attempt: No, $langle Tu,Turangle$ is not equal to $langle u,urangle$ - it's equal to $langle u,tilde{T}Turangle$, and you don't know what $tilde{T}T$ does. This is not helpful.



All, right, lets go back to the attempt that made some progress. Are you familiar with the uniform boundedness principle? One consequence of that theorem is that any sequence of points in a Hilbert space that converges weakly is bounded. Can we use this to ensure that $T$ is a bounded operator?






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    1 min ago














5












5








5





$begingroup$

The problem is that we can't assume that $T$ has a finite norm. Before we add that condition about having an adjoint map $tilde{T}$, we're simply assuming that $T$ is a linear map.



In fact, a linear map between normed vector spaces is continuous if and only if it has a finite operator norm. You assumed the statement we were trying to prove.



Second attempt: The assumption here should have been that $x_nto x$, as in the others. Then, yes, $langle Tx_n,yrangle to langle Tx,yrangle$ for each $y$. This is real progress. But, as stated in the comments, it's weak convergence rather than convergence in norm. Not quite there.



Third attempt: No, $langle Tu,Turangle$ is not equal to $langle u,urangle$ - it's equal to $langle u,tilde{T}Turangle$, and you don't know what $tilde{T}T$ does. This is not helpful.



All, right, lets go back to the attempt that made some progress. Are you familiar with the uniform boundedness principle? One consequence of that theorem is that any sequence of points in a Hilbert space that converges weakly is bounded. Can we use this to ensure that $T$ is a bounded operator?






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$



The problem is that we can't assume that $T$ has a finite norm. Before we add that condition about having an adjoint map $tilde{T}$, we're simply assuming that $T$ is a linear map.



In fact, a linear map between normed vector spaces is continuous if and only if it has a finite operator norm. You assumed the statement we were trying to prove.



Second attempt: The assumption here should have been that $x_nto x$, as in the others. Then, yes, $langle Tx_n,yrangle to langle Tx,yrangle$ for each $y$. This is real progress. But, as stated in the comments, it's weak convergence rather than convergence in norm. Not quite there.



Third attempt: No, $langle Tu,Turangle$ is not equal to $langle u,urangle$ - it's equal to $langle u,tilde{T}Turangle$, and you don't know what $tilde{T}T$ does. This is not helpful.



All, right, lets go back to the attempt that made some progress. Are you familiar with the uniform boundedness principle? One consequence of that theorem is that any sequence of points in a Hilbert space that converges weakly is bounded. Can we use this to ensure that $T$ is a bounded operator?







share|cite|improve this answer














share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer








edited 2 hours ago

























answered 4 hours ago









jmerryjmerry

14.3k1629




14.3k1629












  • $begingroup$
    So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    1 min ago


















  • $begingroup$
    So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    @Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
    $endgroup$
    – Umberto P.
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    4 hours ago










  • $begingroup$
    I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
    $endgroup$
    – Jack
    1 min ago
















$begingroup$
So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
So is the idea for me to use $tilde{T}$ to cancel out the operator norm in my final inequality?
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago












$begingroup$
@Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
$endgroup$
– Umberto P.
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
@Jack no, that won't rescue the proof.
$endgroup$
– Umberto P.
4 hours ago












$begingroup$
New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago




$begingroup$
New proof attempt. Please check if you can.
$endgroup$
– Jack
4 hours ago












$begingroup$
I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
$endgroup$
– Jack
2 mins ago




$begingroup$
I am not familiar with that. I am only aware that given a family of linear operators $(T_{alpha})$ are such that $T_{alpha}:Erightarrow F$, where $E,F$ are Banach spaces. If $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}x|<infty$ then $sup_{alphain A}|T_{alpha}|<infty$.
$endgroup$
– Jack
2 mins ago












$begingroup$
Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
$endgroup$
– Jack
1 min ago




$begingroup$
Do you have a link to the corollary of Uniform Boundedness which you refer to?
$endgroup$
– Jack
1 min ago


















draft saved

draft discarded




















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid



  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3149977%2fcontinuity-of-linear-operator-between-hilbert-spaces%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

SQL Server 17 - Attemping to backup to remote NAS but Access is denied

Always On Availability groups resolving state after failover - Remote harden of transaction...

Restoring from pg_dump with foreign key constraints