§ Uniform Boundedness Principle / Banach Steinhauss
- Consider a set of bounded linear operators F. If F is pointwise bounded, that is, supT∈F{∣∣T(p)∣∣} exists for all p∈X, then the family is norm-bounded: supT∈F{∣∣T∣∣} exists.
§ Proof 1: Based on an ingenious inequality
- Reference: A really simple elementary proof of the uniform boundedness theorem by Alan D Sokal
§ Ingenious Inequality, Version 1
- Let T:X→Y be a bounded linear operator. Then for any r≥0 we have sup∣∣x∣∣≤r∣∣Tx∣∣≥∣∣T∣∣r.
- Proof: recall that ∣∣T∣∣≡sup∣∣x∣∣=1∣∣Tx∣∣.
- Now see that sup∣∣x∣∣≤r∣∣Tx∣∣≥sup∣∣x∣∣=r∣∣Tx∣∣.
- This can be rewritten as rsup∣∣x∣∣=r∣∣T(x/r)∣∣, but this rsup∣∣x^∣∣=1T(x^)=r∣∣T∣∣.
§ Ingenious Inequality, Version 2
- Let T:X→Y be a bounded linear operator, let p∈X be any basepoint. Then for any r≥0 we have supy′∈B(p,r)∣∣Ty′∣∣≥∣∣T∣∣r.
- We rewrite the optimization problem as sup∣∣x∣∣≤r∣∣T(p+x)∣∣.
- First, consider: max∣∣T(p+x)∣∣,∣∣T(p−x)∣∣≥1/2[∣∣T(p+x)∣∣+∣∣T(p−x)∣∣≥∣∣T(x)∣∣.
- The last inequality follows from ∣∣α∣∣+∣∣β∣∣=∣∣α∣∣+∣∣−β∣∣≤∣∣α+(−β)∣∣, that is, triangle inequality.
- Now we see that:
∣∣x∣∣≤rsup∣∣T(p+x)∣∣=∣∣x∣∣≤rsupmax(∣∣T(p+x)∣∣,∣∣T(p−x)∣∣)∣∣x∣∣≤rsupmax(∣∣T(p+x)∣∣,∣∣T(p−x)∣∣)≥∣∣x∣∣≤rsup∣∣T(x)∣∣∣∣x∣∣≤rsup∣∣T(x)∣∣=∣∣T∣∣r
- and thus we get the bound that ∣∣sup∣∣x∣∣≤r∣∣T(p+x)≥∣∣T∣∣r.
§ Proof of theorem
- Suppose for contradiction that supT∈F∣∣T∣∣=∞, which it is indeed pointwise bounded (for all p supT∈F∣∣Tp∣∣ is bounded).
- Then choose a sequence T[n] such that ∣∣T[n]∣∣≥4n. This is possible since the set is unbounded.
- Next, create a sequence of points, such that x[0]=0, and ∣∣x[n]−x[n−1]∣∣≤3−n (that is, x[n] is a 3−n radius ball around x[n−1].
- See that this sequence is cauchy, and thus converges. In particular, let the limit be L. Then we can show that ∣∣L−x[n]∣∣≤3−n(1−1/3))=2/33−n.
- Also see that we have the bound ∣∣TnL∣∣≥2/33−n4n=2/3(4/3)n.
- Thus, limn→∞∣∣TnL∣∣→∞.
- But this contradicts the pointwise boundedness of F at the point L. Hence proved.
§ Proof 2 using Baire category
- Suppose that for every x∈X, supT∈F∣∣T(x)∣∣<∞.
- We want to show that supT∈F∣∣T∣∣<∞.
- For every integer n∈N, we build the subset Xn≡{x∈X:supT∈F∣∣T(x)∣∣≤n}.
- Since for every l∈X, there is some nl such that ∣∣T(l)∣∣<nl (by assumption, F is pointwise bounded), we know that the sets Xn cover X.
- Furthermore, each Xn is closed: A cauchy sequence of points such that ∣∣Txn∣∣≤k will converge to a limit Lsuch that ∣∣TL∣∣≤k.
- Thus, by the baire category theorem, there is a ball B(p,r)⊆Xm for some m∈N, r>0.
- Now this means that the set B(p,r) is norm bounded as ≤m.
- But this is a linear space, once we trap one ball we trap them all. By rescaling and translation, we can move the norm boundedness of B(p,r) into the norm boundedness of B(origin,1) at which point we have proven that ∣∣T(x)∣∣≤infty∣∣.
- Now let ∣∣u∣∣≤1 and T∈F. Calculate:
∣∣Tu∣∣=1/r∣∣T(p+ru)−T(p)∣∣(triangle inequality:)≤1/r(∣∣T(p+ru)∣∣+∣∣T(p)∣∣≤1/r(m+m)(p+ru,p∈B(p,r))
- This bound of 2m/r does not in any way depend on T or u, then supT∈F∣∣T∣∣<∞, which establishes the bound.