Unique solution for $x = y + Tx$ if $T(x_1,x_2,dots) = (frac{1}{2}x_2,frac{1}{3}x_3,dots)$











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Exercise :




Let $T:ell^infty to ell^infty$ be an operator such that :
$$T(x_1,x_2,dots) = bigg(frac{1}{2}x_2,frac{1}{3}x_3,dotsbigg)$$
Show that for all $y in ell^infty$, the equation
$$x = y + Tx$$
has a unique solution.




Attempt :



I have proved that $T$ is a linear operator. Now, $ell^infty$ is the space defined as :
$$ell^infty = {x =(x_n) : |x|< infty} quad |x| :=sup|x_n|$$
From the definition of the norm over $ell^infty$, we can observe that



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|<|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



This means that there exists an $M<1$, such that :



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|leq M|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



Thus, $T$ is a bounded linear operator $T in B(ell^infty)$ with $|T| leq M <1$.



Now, it is



$$x = y + Tx Leftrightarrow x-Tx = y Leftrightarrow(1-T)x=y$$



where $1$ is the identity operator.



But $ell^infty$ is a Banach space and since $|T| <1$, then it is :



$$(1-T)^{-1}=sum_{n=0}^infty T^n Leftrightarrow (1-T)^{-1}y=sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$$



Thus $x = sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$ is a unique solution to the equation $x=y+Tx$ for all $y in ell^infty$.



Question : Is my approach correct and rigorous enough ?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|=dfrac12$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:01












  • @Batominovski I guess that stems from the fact that $T(x_n) = frac{x_{n+1}}{n+1}$ ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 17 at 18:04










  • Yes, see the answer below.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:14






  • 1




    Oh, just one more thing. I think the proof of existence of $M$ is a bit muddly. I didn't see notice it at first.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:18






  • 1




    The thing is there are some cases where you have an operator $T$ such that $big|T(x)big|< M|x|$ for all $xneq 0$, but it turns out that $|T|=M$. See for example this thread: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2997663/…. The operator $mathcal{T}$ in that example satisfies $big|mathcal{T}(f)big|<|f|$ for all nonzero $finmathcal{C}$, but $|mathcal{T}|=1$ (it is not proven there, but it is not too difficult to show that the equality does not happen unless $fequiv 0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 19:47

















up vote
2
down vote

favorite












Exercise :




Let $T:ell^infty to ell^infty$ be an operator such that :
$$T(x_1,x_2,dots) = bigg(frac{1}{2}x_2,frac{1}{3}x_3,dotsbigg)$$
Show that for all $y in ell^infty$, the equation
$$x = y + Tx$$
has a unique solution.




Attempt :



I have proved that $T$ is a linear operator. Now, $ell^infty$ is the space defined as :
$$ell^infty = {x =(x_n) : |x|< infty} quad |x| :=sup|x_n|$$
From the definition of the norm over $ell^infty$, we can observe that



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|<|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



This means that there exists an $M<1$, such that :



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|leq M|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



Thus, $T$ is a bounded linear operator $T in B(ell^infty)$ with $|T| leq M <1$.



Now, it is



$$x = y + Tx Leftrightarrow x-Tx = y Leftrightarrow(1-T)x=y$$



where $1$ is the identity operator.



But $ell^infty$ is a Banach space and since $|T| <1$, then it is :



$$(1-T)^{-1}=sum_{n=0}^infty T^n Leftrightarrow (1-T)^{-1}y=sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$$



Thus $x = sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$ is a unique solution to the equation $x=y+Tx$ for all $y in ell^infty$.



Question : Is my approach correct and rigorous enough ?










share|cite|improve this question
























  • You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|=dfrac12$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:01












  • @Batominovski I guess that stems from the fact that $T(x_n) = frac{x_{n+1}}{n+1}$ ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 17 at 18:04










  • Yes, see the answer below.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:14






  • 1




    Oh, just one more thing. I think the proof of existence of $M$ is a bit muddly. I didn't see notice it at first.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:18






  • 1




    The thing is there are some cases where you have an operator $T$ such that $big|T(x)big|< M|x|$ for all $xneq 0$, but it turns out that $|T|=M$. See for example this thread: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2997663/…. The operator $mathcal{T}$ in that example satisfies $big|mathcal{T}(f)big|<|f|$ for all nonzero $finmathcal{C}$, but $|mathcal{T}|=1$ (it is not proven there, but it is not too difficult to show that the equality does not happen unless $fequiv 0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 19:47















up vote
2
down vote

favorite









up vote
2
down vote

favorite











Exercise :




Let $T:ell^infty to ell^infty$ be an operator such that :
$$T(x_1,x_2,dots) = bigg(frac{1}{2}x_2,frac{1}{3}x_3,dotsbigg)$$
Show that for all $y in ell^infty$, the equation
$$x = y + Tx$$
has a unique solution.




Attempt :



I have proved that $T$ is a linear operator. Now, $ell^infty$ is the space defined as :
$$ell^infty = {x =(x_n) : |x|< infty} quad |x| :=sup|x_n|$$
From the definition of the norm over $ell^infty$, we can observe that



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|<|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



This means that there exists an $M<1$, such that :



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|leq M|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



Thus, $T$ is a bounded linear operator $T in B(ell^infty)$ with $|T| leq M <1$.



Now, it is



$$x = y + Tx Leftrightarrow x-Tx = y Leftrightarrow(1-T)x=y$$



where $1$ is the identity operator.



But $ell^infty$ is a Banach space and since $|T| <1$, then it is :



$$(1-T)^{-1}=sum_{n=0}^infty T^n Leftrightarrow (1-T)^{-1}y=sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$$



Thus $x = sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$ is a unique solution to the equation $x=y+Tx$ for all $y in ell^infty$.



Question : Is my approach correct and rigorous enough ?










share|cite|improve this question















Exercise :




Let $T:ell^infty to ell^infty$ be an operator such that :
$$T(x_1,x_2,dots) = bigg(frac{1}{2}x_2,frac{1}{3}x_3,dotsbigg)$$
Show that for all $y in ell^infty$, the equation
$$x = y + Tx$$
has a unique solution.




Attempt :



I have proved that $T$ is a linear operator. Now, $ell^infty$ is the space defined as :
$$ell^infty = {x =(x_n) : |x|< infty} quad |x| :=sup|x_n|$$
From the definition of the norm over $ell^infty$, we can observe that



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|<|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



This means that there exists an $M<1$, such that :



$$|T(x_1,x_2,dots)|leq M|(x_1,x_2,dots)|$$



Thus, $T$ is a bounded linear operator $T in B(ell^infty)$ with $|T| leq M <1$.



Now, it is



$$x = y + Tx Leftrightarrow x-Tx = y Leftrightarrow(1-T)x=y$$



where $1$ is the identity operator.



But $ell^infty$ is a Banach space and since $|T| <1$, then it is :



$$(1-T)^{-1}=sum_{n=0}^infty T^n Leftrightarrow (1-T)^{-1}y=sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$$



Thus $x = sum_{n=0}^infty T^ny$ is a unique solution to the equation $x=y+Tx$ for all $y in ell^infty$.



Question : Is my approach correct and rigorous enough ?







real-analysis sequences-and-series functional-analysis operator-theory






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Nov 17 at 18:01

























asked Nov 17 at 17:54









Rebellos

12.5k21041




12.5k21041












  • You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|=dfrac12$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:01












  • @Batominovski I guess that stems from the fact that $T(x_n) = frac{x_{n+1}}{n+1}$ ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 17 at 18:04










  • Yes, see the answer below.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:14






  • 1




    Oh, just one more thing. I think the proof of existence of $M$ is a bit muddly. I didn't see notice it at first.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:18






  • 1




    The thing is there are some cases where you have an operator $T$ such that $big|T(x)big|< M|x|$ for all $xneq 0$, but it turns out that $|T|=M$. See for example this thread: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2997663/…. The operator $mathcal{T}$ in that example satisfies $big|mathcal{T}(f)big|<|f|$ for all nonzero $finmathcal{C}$, but $|mathcal{T}|=1$ (it is not proven there, but it is not too difficult to show that the equality does not happen unless $fequiv 0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 19:47




















  • You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|=dfrac12$.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:01












  • @Batominovski I guess that stems from the fact that $T(x_n) = frac{x_{n+1}}{n+1}$ ?
    – Rebellos
    Nov 17 at 18:04










  • Yes, see the answer below.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:14






  • 1




    Oh, just one more thing. I think the proof of existence of $M$ is a bit muddly. I didn't see notice it at first.
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 18:18






  • 1




    The thing is there are some cases where you have an operator $T$ such that $big|T(x)big|< M|x|$ for all $xneq 0$, but it turns out that $|T|=M$. See for example this thread: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2997663/…. The operator $mathcal{T}$ in that example satisfies $big|mathcal{T}(f)big|<|f|$ for all nonzero $finmathcal{C}$, but $|mathcal{T}|=1$ (it is not proven there, but it is not too difficult to show that the equality does not happen unless $fequiv 0$).
    – Batominovski
    Nov 17 at 19:47


















You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|=dfrac12$.
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 18:01






You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|=dfrac12$.
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 18:01














@Batominovski I guess that stems from the fact that $T(x_n) = frac{x_{n+1}}{n+1}$ ?
– Rebellos
Nov 17 at 18:04




@Batominovski I guess that stems from the fact that $T(x_n) = frac{x_{n+1}}{n+1}$ ?
– Rebellos
Nov 17 at 18:04












Yes, see the answer below.
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 18:14




Yes, see the answer below.
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 18:14




1




1




Oh, just one more thing. I think the proof of existence of $M$ is a bit muddly. I didn't see notice it at first.
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 18:18




Oh, just one more thing. I think the proof of existence of $M$ is a bit muddly. I didn't see notice it at first.
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 18:18




1




1




The thing is there are some cases where you have an operator $T$ such that $big|T(x)big|< M|x|$ for all $xneq 0$, but it turns out that $|T|=M$. See for example this thread: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2997663/…. The operator $mathcal{T}$ in that example satisfies $big|mathcal{T}(f)big|<|f|$ for all nonzero $finmathcal{C}$, but $|mathcal{T}|=1$ (it is not proven there, but it is not too difficult to show that the equality does not happen unless $fequiv 0$).
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 19:47






The thing is there are some cases where you have an operator $T$ such that $big|T(x)big|< M|x|$ for all $xneq 0$, but it turns out that $|T|=M$. See for example this thread: math.stackexchange.com/questions/2997663/…. The operator $mathcal{T}$ in that example satisfies $big|mathcal{T}(f)big|<|f|$ for all nonzero $finmathcal{C}$, but $|mathcal{T}|=1$ (it is not proven there, but it is not too difficult to show that the equality does not happen unless $fequiv 0$).
– Batominovski
Nov 17 at 19:47












1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
1
down vote



accepted










You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|_text{op}$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|_text{op}=dfrac12$. To show this, let $z=(z_1,z_2,z_3,ldots)inell^infty$. Then,
$$T(z)=left(frac{z_2}{2},frac{z_3}{3},frac{z_4}{4},ldotsright)$$
so that
$$big|T(z)big|_{infty}=supleft{frac{|z_k|}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}leq supleft{frac{|z|_infty}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}=frac{|z|_infty}{2},.$$
Note that the equality holds for $z=(0,1,0,0,0,ldots)$. This implies $|T|_{text{op}}= dfrac{1}{2}$.



You can write an explicit solution $xinell^infty$ to $x=y+T(x)$. That is, $$x=(1-T)^{-1}y=left(sum_{k=1}^infty,frac{y_k}{k!},sum_{k=2}^infty,frac{2!y_k}{k!},sum_{k=3}^infty,frac{3!y_k}{k!},ldotsright)$$
Nonetheless, you did sufficient and good work. I was just making additional comments.






share|cite|improve this answer





















    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',
    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%2f3002622%2funique-solution-for-x-y-tx-if-tx-1-x-2-dots-frac12x-2-frac1%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








    up vote
    1
    down vote



    accepted










    You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|_text{op}$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|_text{op}=dfrac12$. To show this, let $z=(z_1,z_2,z_3,ldots)inell^infty$. Then,
    $$T(z)=left(frac{z_2}{2},frac{z_3}{3},frac{z_4}{4},ldotsright)$$
    so that
    $$big|T(z)big|_{infty}=supleft{frac{|z_k|}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}leq supleft{frac{|z|_infty}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}=frac{|z|_infty}{2},.$$
    Note that the equality holds for $z=(0,1,0,0,0,ldots)$. This implies $|T|_{text{op}}= dfrac{1}{2}$.



    You can write an explicit solution $xinell^infty$ to $x=y+T(x)$. That is, $$x=(1-T)^{-1}y=left(sum_{k=1}^infty,frac{y_k}{k!},sum_{k=2}^infty,frac{2!y_k}{k!},sum_{k=3}^infty,frac{3!y_k}{k!},ldotsright)$$
    Nonetheless, you did sufficient and good work. I was just making additional comments.






    share|cite|improve this answer

























      up vote
      1
      down vote



      accepted










      You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|_text{op}$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|_text{op}=dfrac12$. To show this, let $z=(z_1,z_2,z_3,ldots)inell^infty$. Then,
      $$T(z)=left(frac{z_2}{2},frac{z_3}{3},frac{z_4}{4},ldotsright)$$
      so that
      $$big|T(z)big|_{infty}=supleft{frac{|z_k|}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}leq supleft{frac{|z|_infty}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}=frac{|z|_infty}{2},.$$
      Note that the equality holds for $z=(0,1,0,0,0,ldots)$. This implies $|T|_{text{op}}= dfrac{1}{2}$.



      You can write an explicit solution $xinell^infty$ to $x=y+T(x)$. That is, $$x=(1-T)^{-1}y=left(sum_{k=1}^infty,frac{y_k}{k!},sum_{k=2}^infty,frac{2!y_k}{k!},sum_{k=3}^infty,frac{3!y_k}{k!},ldotsright)$$
      Nonetheless, you did sufficient and good work. I was just making additional comments.






      share|cite|improve this answer























        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        1
        down vote



        accepted






        You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|_text{op}$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|_text{op}=dfrac12$. To show this, let $z=(z_1,z_2,z_3,ldots)inell^infty$. Then,
        $$T(z)=left(frac{z_2}{2},frac{z_3}{3},frac{z_4}{4},ldotsright)$$
        so that
        $$big|T(z)big|_{infty}=supleft{frac{|z_k|}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}leq supleft{frac{|z|_infty}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}=frac{|z|_infty}{2},.$$
        Note that the equality holds for $z=(0,1,0,0,0,ldots)$. This implies $|T|_{text{op}}= dfrac{1}{2}$.



        You can write an explicit solution $xinell^infty$ to $x=y+T(x)$. That is, $$x=(1-T)^{-1}y=left(sum_{k=1}^infty,frac{y_k}{k!},sum_{k=2}^infty,frac{2!y_k}{k!},sum_{k=3}^infty,frac{3!y_k}{k!},ldotsright)$$
        Nonetheless, you did sufficient and good work. I was just making additional comments.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        You are correct and the proof looks sufficiently rigorous. However, $|T|_text{op}$ can be computed exactly. That is, $|T|_text{op}=dfrac12$. To show this, let $z=(z_1,z_2,z_3,ldots)inell^infty$. Then,
        $$T(z)=left(frac{z_2}{2},frac{z_3}{3},frac{z_4}{4},ldotsright)$$
        so that
        $$big|T(z)big|_{infty}=supleft{frac{|z_k|}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}leq supleft{frac{|z|_infty}{k},Big|,k=2,3,4,ldotsright}=frac{|z|_infty}{2},.$$
        Note that the equality holds for $z=(0,1,0,0,0,ldots)$. This implies $|T|_{text{op}}= dfrac{1}{2}$.



        You can write an explicit solution $xinell^infty$ to $x=y+T(x)$. That is, $$x=(1-T)^{-1}y=left(sum_{k=1}^infty,frac{y_k}{k!},sum_{k=2}^infty,frac{2!y_k}{k!},sum_{k=3}^infty,frac{3!y_k}{k!},ldotsright)$$
        Nonetheless, you did sufficient and good work. I was just making additional comments.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Nov 17 at 18:13









        Batominovski

        31.8k23190




        31.8k23190






























            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.





            Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


            Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


            • 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.


            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%2f3002622%2funique-solution-for-x-y-tx-if-tx-1-x-2-dots-frac12x-2-frac1%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

            Probability when a professor distributes a quiz and homework assignment to a class of n students.

            Aardman Animations

            Are they similar matrix