Proof of the Riesz-Schauder Theorem (for compact operators) using the Analytical Fredholm Theorem

The name of the pictureThe name of the pictureThe name of the pictureClash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP











up vote
5
down vote

favorite
3












First of all sorry for my bad English, I'm an Italian student, hope to let you understand!



I'm having a little troubles with the proof of the Riesz-Schauder theorem for Compact Operators.
Some infos in advance:



Let $B(mathbbH)$ the Algebra of bounded operators in the Hilbert space $mathbbH$.



The resolvent of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 in B(mathbbH)$.



The spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma(A)=mathbbCsetminus rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 notin B(mathbbH)$.



The point spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma_p (A)$=$lambda in mathbbC: Ay=lambda y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, in other words $sigma_p (A)$ is the set of eigenvalues of $A$ and holds that $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$.



For the proof of the Riesz-Schauder Theorem I will use the following:



Analytic Fredholm Theorem. Let $D$ an open connected subset of $mathbbC$. Let $f: D$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ be an analytic operator-valued function such that $f(z)$ is compact for all $z in D$.
Then, either:



(a) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for no $z in D$



or



(b) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for all $z in Dsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $D$ (i.e. a set with has no limit points in $D$).



(Note that $I$ is the identity operator of $B(mathbbH)$.)



Finally, the main theorem



Riesz-Schauder Theorem. The spectrum $sigma(A)$ of a compact operator $A$ is a discrete set having no limit points except (perhaps) $0$. $sigma(A)$ is finite or countable and in this case $0$ is the only limit point. Further, any nonzero $lambda in sigma(A)$ is an eigenvalue of finite multiplicity.



For the proof (as suggested here http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~hg94/pdst11/pdst11_AFTcompact.pdf ) , I will proceed like this:



Let $f: mathbbC$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ such that $f(lambda)=lambda A$, where $A$ is a fixed compact operator.
It is easy to see that $f$ is analitical for all $lambda in mathbbC$. Because $K(mathbbH)$=A $in B(mathbbH)$: $A$ is compact operator is a $mathbbC$-subspace of $B(mathbbH)$ then $f(lambda)$ is compact for all $lambda in mathbbC$. So we can use the Analytical Fredholm Theorem.
Then either
(a) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for no $z in mathbbC$
or
(b) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for all $z in mathbbCsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $mathbbC$ with no limit points.



But, if $lambda=0$, then $(I-f(lambda))^-1=(I-0A)^-1=I$ exists, so option (b) is true.
Furthermore, from the Analytic Fredholm Theorem proof we know that $S=$$lambda in mathbbC$: $lambda A y=y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and it is easy to see that $0 notin S$.
We can observe that if $1/lambda notin S$, then
$$(A-lambda I)^-1=-1/lambda (I-1/lambda A)^-1$$
and so $lambda in rho(A)$.
But holds even the viceversa so, $1/lambda notin S Leftrightarrow lambda in rho(A)$.
Then we have $1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda notin rho(A)$, thus
$$1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda in sigma(A).$$
Here are my doubts. How can I prove that $sigma(A)$=$0$$cup sigma_p (A)$?
Maybe it is possible to prove that $sigma(A)=Scup 0$? In this way, it is easy to see that the only limit point is zero.
Instead, I've done something like this:



If $lambda in sigma(A)$ and $lambda ne 0$ then $1/lambda in S$. Thus $1/lambda A y =y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and $lambda in sigma_p (A)$. So, because for a compact operator it holds that $0 in sigma(A)$, I can state that
$$sigma(A)=sigma_p (A) cup 0.$$
But in this way I have some troubles attempting to prove that zero is the only limit point.
Certainly I can state that either $sigma_p (A)$ is finite, or, on the contrary, because $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$ and $sigma(A)$ is a limited set, then for the Bolzano - Weirstrass theorem $sigma_p (A)$ has a limit point. But $sigma(A)$ is norm-closed, so if $mu$ is a limit point for $sigma_p (A)$ then $mu in sigma(A)$. But how can I state that is $mu = 0$??



Thank you in advance for your time and sorry again for my English!







share|cite|improve this question
























    up vote
    5
    down vote

    favorite
    3












    First of all sorry for my bad English, I'm an Italian student, hope to let you understand!



    I'm having a little troubles with the proof of the Riesz-Schauder theorem for Compact Operators.
    Some infos in advance:



    Let $B(mathbbH)$ the Algebra of bounded operators in the Hilbert space $mathbbH$.



    The resolvent of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 in B(mathbbH)$.



    The spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma(A)=mathbbCsetminus rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 notin B(mathbbH)$.



    The point spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma_p (A)$=$lambda in mathbbC: Ay=lambda y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, in other words $sigma_p (A)$ is the set of eigenvalues of $A$ and holds that $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$.



    For the proof of the Riesz-Schauder Theorem I will use the following:



    Analytic Fredholm Theorem. Let $D$ an open connected subset of $mathbbC$. Let $f: D$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ be an analytic operator-valued function such that $f(z)$ is compact for all $z in D$.
    Then, either:



    (a) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for no $z in D$



    or



    (b) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for all $z in Dsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $D$ (i.e. a set with has no limit points in $D$).



    (Note that $I$ is the identity operator of $B(mathbbH)$.)



    Finally, the main theorem



    Riesz-Schauder Theorem. The spectrum $sigma(A)$ of a compact operator $A$ is a discrete set having no limit points except (perhaps) $0$. $sigma(A)$ is finite or countable and in this case $0$ is the only limit point. Further, any nonzero $lambda in sigma(A)$ is an eigenvalue of finite multiplicity.



    For the proof (as suggested here http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~hg94/pdst11/pdst11_AFTcompact.pdf ) , I will proceed like this:



    Let $f: mathbbC$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ such that $f(lambda)=lambda A$, where $A$ is a fixed compact operator.
    It is easy to see that $f$ is analitical for all $lambda in mathbbC$. Because $K(mathbbH)$=A $in B(mathbbH)$: $A$ is compact operator is a $mathbbC$-subspace of $B(mathbbH)$ then $f(lambda)$ is compact for all $lambda in mathbbC$. So we can use the Analytical Fredholm Theorem.
    Then either
    (a) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for no $z in mathbbC$
    or
    (b) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for all $z in mathbbCsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $mathbbC$ with no limit points.



    But, if $lambda=0$, then $(I-f(lambda))^-1=(I-0A)^-1=I$ exists, so option (b) is true.
    Furthermore, from the Analytic Fredholm Theorem proof we know that $S=$$lambda in mathbbC$: $lambda A y=y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and it is easy to see that $0 notin S$.
    We can observe that if $1/lambda notin S$, then
    $$(A-lambda I)^-1=-1/lambda (I-1/lambda A)^-1$$
    and so $lambda in rho(A)$.
    But holds even the viceversa so, $1/lambda notin S Leftrightarrow lambda in rho(A)$.
    Then we have $1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda notin rho(A)$, thus
    $$1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda in sigma(A).$$
    Here are my doubts. How can I prove that $sigma(A)$=$0$$cup sigma_p (A)$?
    Maybe it is possible to prove that $sigma(A)=Scup 0$? In this way, it is easy to see that the only limit point is zero.
    Instead, I've done something like this:



    If $lambda in sigma(A)$ and $lambda ne 0$ then $1/lambda in S$. Thus $1/lambda A y =y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and $lambda in sigma_p (A)$. So, because for a compact operator it holds that $0 in sigma(A)$, I can state that
    $$sigma(A)=sigma_p (A) cup 0.$$
    But in this way I have some troubles attempting to prove that zero is the only limit point.
    Certainly I can state that either $sigma_p (A)$ is finite, or, on the contrary, because $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$ and $sigma(A)$ is a limited set, then for the Bolzano - Weirstrass theorem $sigma_p (A)$ has a limit point. But $sigma(A)$ is norm-closed, so if $mu$ is a limit point for $sigma_p (A)$ then $mu in sigma(A)$. But how can I state that is $mu = 0$??



    Thank you in advance for your time and sorry again for my English!







    share|cite|improve this question






















      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite
      3









      up vote
      5
      down vote

      favorite
      3






      3





      First of all sorry for my bad English, I'm an Italian student, hope to let you understand!



      I'm having a little troubles with the proof of the Riesz-Schauder theorem for Compact Operators.
      Some infos in advance:



      Let $B(mathbbH)$ the Algebra of bounded operators in the Hilbert space $mathbbH$.



      The resolvent of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 in B(mathbbH)$.



      The spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma(A)=mathbbCsetminus rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 notin B(mathbbH)$.



      The point spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma_p (A)$=$lambda in mathbbC: Ay=lambda y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, in other words $sigma_p (A)$ is the set of eigenvalues of $A$ and holds that $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$.



      For the proof of the Riesz-Schauder Theorem I will use the following:



      Analytic Fredholm Theorem. Let $D$ an open connected subset of $mathbbC$. Let $f: D$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ be an analytic operator-valued function such that $f(z)$ is compact for all $z in D$.
      Then, either:



      (a) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for no $z in D$



      or



      (b) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for all $z in Dsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $D$ (i.e. a set with has no limit points in $D$).



      (Note that $I$ is the identity operator of $B(mathbbH)$.)



      Finally, the main theorem



      Riesz-Schauder Theorem. The spectrum $sigma(A)$ of a compact operator $A$ is a discrete set having no limit points except (perhaps) $0$. $sigma(A)$ is finite or countable and in this case $0$ is the only limit point. Further, any nonzero $lambda in sigma(A)$ is an eigenvalue of finite multiplicity.



      For the proof (as suggested here http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~hg94/pdst11/pdst11_AFTcompact.pdf ) , I will proceed like this:



      Let $f: mathbbC$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ such that $f(lambda)=lambda A$, where $A$ is a fixed compact operator.
      It is easy to see that $f$ is analitical for all $lambda in mathbbC$. Because $K(mathbbH)$=A $in B(mathbbH)$: $A$ is compact operator is a $mathbbC$-subspace of $B(mathbbH)$ then $f(lambda)$ is compact for all $lambda in mathbbC$. So we can use the Analytical Fredholm Theorem.
      Then either
      (a) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for no $z in mathbbC$
      or
      (b) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for all $z in mathbbCsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $mathbbC$ with no limit points.



      But, if $lambda=0$, then $(I-f(lambda))^-1=(I-0A)^-1=I$ exists, so option (b) is true.
      Furthermore, from the Analytic Fredholm Theorem proof we know that $S=$$lambda in mathbbC$: $lambda A y=y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and it is easy to see that $0 notin S$.
      We can observe that if $1/lambda notin S$, then
      $$(A-lambda I)^-1=-1/lambda (I-1/lambda A)^-1$$
      and so $lambda in rho(A)$.
      But holds even the viceversa so, $1/lambda notin S Leftrightarrow lambda in rho(A)$.
      Then we have $1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda notin rho(A)$, thus
      $$1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda in sigma(A).$$
      Here are my doubts. How can I prove that $sigma(A)$=$0$$cup sigma_p (A)$?
      Maybe it is possible to prove that $sigma(A)=Scup 0$? In this way, it is easy to see that the only limit point is zero.
      Instead, I've done something like this:



      If $lambda in sigma(A)$ and $lambda ne 0$ then $1/lambda in S$. Thus $1/lambda A y =y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and $lambda in sigma_p (A)$. So, because for a compact operator it holds that $0 in sigma(A)$, I can state that
      $$sigma(A)=sigma_p (A) cup 0.$$
      But in this way I have some troubles attempting to prove that zero is the only limit point.
      Certainly I can state that either $sigma_p (A)$ is finite, or, on the contrary, because $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$ and $sigma(A)$ is a limited set, then for the Bolzano - Weirstrass theorem $sigma_p (A)$ has a limit point. But $sigma(A)$ is norm-closed, so if $mu$ is a limit point for $sigma_p (A)$ then $mu in sigma(A)$. But how can I state that is $mu = 0$??



      Thank you in advance for your time and sorry again for my English!







      share|cite|improve this question












      First of all sorry for my bad English, I'm an Italian student, hope to let you understand!



      I'm having a little troubles with the proof of the Riesz-Schauder theorem for Compact Operators.
      Some infos in advance:



      Let $B(mathbbH)$ the Algebra of bounded operators in the Hilbert space $mathbbH$.



      The resolvent of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 in B(mathbbH)$.



      The spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma(A)=mathbbCsetminus rho(A)=lambda in mathbbC: (A-lambda I)^-1 notin B(mathbbH)$.



      The point spectrum of an operator $A$ is the subset of $mathbbC$, $sigma_p (A)$=$lambda in mathbbC: Ay=lambda y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, in other words $sigma_p (A)$ is the set of eigenvalues of $A$ and holds that $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$.



      For the proof of the Riesz-Schauder Theorem I will use the following:



      Analytic Fredholm Theorem. Let $D$ an open connected subset of $mathbbC$. Let $f: D$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ be an analytic operator-valued function such that $f(z)$ is compact for all $z in D$.
      Then, either:



      (a) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for no $z in D$



      or



      (b) $(I-f(z))^-1$ exists for all $z in Dsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $D$ (i.e. a set with has no limit points in $D$).



      (Note that $I$ is the identity operator of $B(mathbbH)$.)



      Finally, the main theorem



      Riesz-Schauder Theorem. The spectrum $sigma(A)$ of a compact operator $A$ is a discrete set having no limit points except (perhaps) $0$. $sigma(A)$ is finite or countable and in this case $0$ is the only limit point. Further, any nonzero $lambda in sigma(A)$ is an eigenvalue of finite multiplicity.



      For the proof (as suggested here http://www.macs.hw.ac.uk/~hg94/pdst11/pdst11_AFTcompact.pdf ) , I will proceed like this:



      Let $f: mathbbC$ $rightarrow$ $B(mathbbH)$ such that $f(lambda)=lambda A$, where $A$ is a fixed compact operator.
      It is easy to see that $f$ is analitical for all $lambda in mathbbC$. Because $K(mathbbH)$=A $in B(mathbbH)$: $A$ is compact operator is a $mathbbC$-subspace of $B(mathbbH)$ then $f(lambda)$ is compact for all $lambda in mathbbC$. So we can use the Analytical Fredholm Theorem.
      Then either
      (a) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for no $z in mathbbC$
      or
      (b) $(I-f(lambda))^-1$ exists for all $z in mathbbCsetminus S$, where $S$ is a discrete subset of $mathbbC$ with no limit points.



      But, if $lambda=0$, then $(I-f(lambda))^-1=(I-0A)^-1=I$ exists, so option (b) is true.
      Furthermore, from the Analytic Fredholm Theorem proof we know that $S=$$lambda in mathbbC$: $lambda A y=y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and it is easy to see that $0 notin S$.
      We can observe that if $1/lambda notin S$, then
      $$(A-lambda I)^-1=-1/lambda (I-1/lambda A)^-1$$
      and so $lambda in rho(A)$.
      But holds even the viceversa so, $1/lambda notin S Leftrightarrow lambda in rho(A)$.
      Then we have $1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda notin rho(A)$, thus
      $$1/lambda in S Leftrightarrow lambda in sigma(A).$$
      Here are my doubts. How can I prove that $sigma(A)$=$0$$cup sigma_p (A)$?
      Maybe it is possible to prove that $sigma(A)=Scup 0$? In this way, it is easy to see that the only limit point is zero.
      Instead, I've done something like this:



      If $lambda in sigma(A)$ and $lambda ne 0$ then $1/lambda in S$. Thus $1/lambda A y =y$ has a solution $y ne 0$, and $lambda in sigma_p (A)$. So, because for a compact operator it holds that $0 in sigma(A)$, I can state that
      $$sigma(A)=sigma_p (A) cup 0.$$
      But in this way I have some troubles attempting to prove that zero is the only limit point.
      Certainly I can state that either $sigma_p (A)$ is finite, or, on the contrary, because $sigma_p (A) subseteq sigma(A)$ and $sigma(A)$ is a limited set, then for the Bolzano - Weirstrass theorem $sigma_p (A)$ has a limit point. But $sigma(A)$ is norm-closed, so if $mu$ is a limit point for $sigma_p (A)$ then $mu in sigma(A)$. But how can I state that is $mu = 0$??



      Thank you in advance for your time and sorry again for my English!









      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Dec 29 '14 at 17:08









      eleguitar

      68114




      68114




















          1 Answer
          1






          active

          oldest

          votes

















          up vote
          0
          down vote













          http://individual.utoronto.ca/jordanbell/notes/SVD.pdf



          check out the end of page 4; the equality you're trying to prove only holds for the infinite dimension case.






          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: false,
            showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
            reputationToPostImages: 10,
            bindNavPrevention: true,
            postfix: "",
            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%2f1084762%2fproof-of-the-riesz-schauder-theorem-for-compact-operators-using-the-analytical%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest






























            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes








            1 Answer
            1






            active

            oldest

            votes









            active

            oldest

            votes






            active

            oldest

            votes








            up vote
            0
            down vote













            http://individual.utoronto.ca/jordanbell/notes/SVD.pdf



            check out the end of page 4; the equality you're trying to prove only holds for the infinite dimension case.






            share|cite|improve this answer
























              up vote
              0
              down vote













              http://individual.utoronto.ca/jordanbell/notes/SVD.pdf



              check out the end of page 4; the equality you're trying to prove only holds for the infinite dimension case.






              share|cite|improve this answer






















                up vote
                0
                down vote










                up vote
                0
                down vote









                http://individual.utoronto.ca/jordanbell/notes/SVD.pdf



                check out the end of page 4; the equality you're trying to prove only holds for the infinite dimension case.






                share|cite|improve this answer












                http://individual.utoronto.ca/jordanbell/notes/SVD.pdf



                check out the end of page 4; the equality you're trying to prove only holds for the infinite dimension case.







                share|cite|improve this answer












                share|cite|improve this answer



                share|cite|improve this answer










                answered Sep 14 '17 at 10:56









                Mariah

                1,016517




                1,016517






















                     

                    draft saved


                    draft discarded


























                     


                    draft saved


                    draft discarded














                    StackExchange.ready(
                    function ()
                    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1084762%2fproof-of-the-riesz-schauder-theorem-for-compact-operators-using-the-analytical%23new-answer', 'question_page');

                    );

                    Post as a guest













































































                    這個網誌中的熱門文章

                    How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

                    Mutual Information Always Non-negative

                    Why am i infinitely getting the same tweet with the Twitter Search API?