To show that the supremum of any collection of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous

Multi tool use
Multi tool use

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











up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1













Show that the supremum of any collection of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous.




Suppose $f_n$ is a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions on a topological space $X$. Define $$g_k=sup_nge kf_n.$$ I could see that $$x: g_k(x)gt alpha=bigcup_n=k^inftyx:f_n(x)gt alpha$$ from where it follows that $g_k$ is lower semicontinuous. Also $g_n$ is monotonically decreasing sequence of semicontinuous functions, and because $$limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)=inf g_1(x), g_2(x), cdot cdot cdot$$, $limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)$ is lower semicontinuous if it can be shown that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function. How can I show this?



Also, even if the above can be implemented, I would only prove that the supremum of a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous. What's the way generalize this to "any collection" of lower semicontinuous functions?



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question























  • The problem asks for the supremum, not for $limsup$.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:17










  • @DanielFischer Thnks for pointing. Any hint as to how could one prove that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function if it is true?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21






  • 1




    As for the penultimate paragraph, the limit of a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is generally not lower semicontinuous. Recall that the characteristic function of a set $A$ is lower semicontinuous if and only if $A$ is open. Let $(U_n)$ be a decreasing sequence of open sets. Then $lim chi_U_n = chi_bigcap U_n$, and any $G_delta$-set can be thus written. But not all $G_delta$s are open.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21










  • Ok, but if the convergence is uniform, then this should hold?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:27






  • 1




    Yes, the limit of a (locally) uniformly convergent sequence (net) of lower [upper] semicontinuous functions is again lower [upper] semicontinuous, whether the sequence is monotonic or not.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:49














up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1













Show that the supremum of any collection of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous.




Suppose $f_n$ is a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions on a topological space $X$. Define $$g_k=sup_nge kf_n.$$ I could see that $$x: g_k(x)gt alpha=bigcup_n=k^inftyx:f_n(x)gt alpha$$ from where it follows that $g_k$ is lower semicontinuous. Also $g_n$ is monotonically decreasing sequence of semicontinuous functions, and because $$limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)=inf g_1(x), g_2(x), cdot cdot cdot$$, $limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)$ is lower semicontinuous if it can be shown that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function. How can I show this?



Also, even if the above can be implemented, I would only prove that the supremum of a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous. What's the way generalize this to "any collection" of lower semicontinuous functions?



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question























  • The problem asks for the supremum, not for $limsup$.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:17










  • @DanielFischer Thnks for pointing. Any hint as to how could one prove that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function if it is true?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21






  • 1




    As for the penultimate paragraph, the limit of a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is generally not lower semicontinuous. Recall that the characteristic function of a set $A$ is lower semicontinuous if and only if $A$ is open. Let $(U_n)$ be a decreasing sequence of open sets. Then $lim chi_U_n = chi_bigcap U_n$, and any $G_delta$-set can be thus written. But not all $G_delta$s are open.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21










  • Ok, but if the convergence is uniform, then this should hold?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:27






  • 1




    Yes, the limit of a (locally) uniformly convergent sequence (net) of lower [upper] semicontinuous functions is again lower [upper] semicontinuous, whether the sequence is monotonic or not.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:49












up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1









up vote
2
down vote

favorite
1






1






Show that the supremum of any collection of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous.




Suppose $f_n$ is a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions on a topological space $X$. Define $$g_k=sup_nge kf_n.$$ I could see that $$x: g_k(x)gt alpha=bigcup_n=k^inftyx:f_n(x)gt alpha$$ from where it follows that $g_k$ is lower semicontinuous. Also $g_n$ is monotonically decreasing sequence of semicontinuous functions, and because $$limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)=inf g_1(x), g_2(x), cdot cdot cdot$$, $limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)$ is lower semicontinuous if it can be shown that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function. How can I show this?



Also, even if the above can be implemented, I would only prove that the supremum of a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous. What's the way generalize this to "any collection" of lower semicontinuous functions?



Thanks.










share|cite|improve this question
















Show that the supremum of any collection of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous.




Suppose $f_n$ is a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions on a topological space $X$. Define $$g_k=sup_nge kf_n.$$ I could see that $$x: g_k(x)gt alpha=bigcup_n=k^inftyx:f_n(x)gt alpha$$ from where it follows that $g_k$ is lower semicontinuous. Also $g_n$ is monotonically decreasing sequence of semicontinuous functions, and because $$limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)=inf g_1(x), g_2(x), cdot cdot cdot$$, $limsup_nrightarrowinfty f_n(x)$ is lower semicontinuous if it can be shown that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function. How can I show this?



Also, even if the above can be implemented, I would only prove that the supremum of a sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is lower semicontinuous. What's the way generalize this to "any collection" of lower semicontinuous functions?



Thanks.







general-topology continuity supremum-and-infimum semicontinuous-functions






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Sep 1 at 0:24









Martin Sleziak

43.7k6113260




43.7k6113260










asked Feb 19 '16 at 10:13









vnd

899720




899720











  • The problem asks for the supremum, not for $limsup$.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:17










  • @DanielFischer Thnks for pointing. Any hint as to how could one prove that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function if it is true?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21






  • 1




    As for the penultimate paragraph, the limit of a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is generally not lower semicontinuous. Recall that the characteristic function of a set $A$ is lower semicontinuous if and only if $A$ is open. Let $(U_n)$ be a decreasing sequence of open sets. Then $lim chi_U_n = chi_bigcap U_n$, and any $G_delta$-set can be thus written. But not all $G_delta$s are open.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21










  • Ok, but if the convergence is uniform, then this should hold?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:27






  • 1




    Yes, the limit of a (locally) uniformly convergent sequence (net) of lower [upper] semicontinuous functions is again lower [upper] semicontinuous, whether the sequence is monotonic or not.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:49
















  • The problem asks for the supremum, not for $limsup$.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:17










  • @DanielFischer Thnks for pointing. Any hint as to how could one prove that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function if it is true?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21






  • 1




    As for the penultimate paragraph, the limit of a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is generally not lower semicontinuous. Recall that the characteristic function of a set $A$ is lower semicontinuous if and only if $A$ is open. Let $(U_n)$ be a decreasing sequence of open sets. Then $lim chi_U_n = chi_bigcap U_n$, and any $G_delta$-set can be thus written. But not all $G_delta$s are open.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:21










  • Ok, but if the convergence is uniform, then this should hold?
    – vnd
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:27






  • 1




    Yes, the limit of a (locally) uniformly convergent sequence (net) of lower [upper] semicontinuous functions is again lower [upper] semicontinuous, whether the sequence is monotonic or not.
    – Daniel Fischer♦
    Feb 19 '16 at 10:49















The problem asks for the supremum, not for $limsup$.
– Daniel Fischer♦
Feb 19 '16 at 10:17




The problem asks for the supremum, not for $limsup$.
– Daniel Fischer♦
Feb 19 '16 at 10:17












@DanielFischer Thnks for pointing. Any hint as to how could one prove that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function if it is true?
– vnd
Feb 19 '16 at 10:21




@DanielFischer Thnks for pointing. Any hint as to how could one prove that a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions converges to a lower semicontinuous function if it is true?
– vnd
Feb 19 '16 at 10:21




1




1




As for the penultimate paragraph, the limit of a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is generally not lower semicontinuous. Recall that the characteristic function of a set $A$ is lower semicontinuous if and only if $A$ is open. Let $(U_n)$ be a decreasing sequence of open sets. Then $lim chi_U_n = chi_bigcap U_n$, and any $G_delta$-set can be thus written. But not all $G_delta$s are open.
– Daniel Fischer♦
Feb 19 '16 at 10:21




As for the penultimate paragraph, the limit of a monotonically decreasing sequence of lower semicontinuous functions is generally not lower semicontinuous. Recall that the characteristic function of a set $A$ is lower semicontinuous if and only if $A$ is open. Let $(U_n)$ be a decreasing sequence of open sets. Then $lim chi_U_n = chi_bigcap U_n$, and any $G_delta$-set can be thus written. But not all $G_delta$s are open.
– Daniel Fischer♦
Feb 19 '16 at 10:21












Ok, but if the convergence is uniform, then this should hold?
– vnd
Feb 19 '16 at 10:27




Ok, but if the convergence is uniform, then this should hold?
– vnd
Feb 19 '16 at 10:27




1




1




Yes, the limit of a (locally) uniformly convergent sequence (net) of lower [upper] semicontinuous functions is again lower [upper] semicontinuous, whether the sequence is monotonic or not.
– Daniel Fischer♦
Feb 19 '16 at 10:49




Yes, the limit of a (locally) uniformly convergent sequence (net) of lower [upper] semicontinuous functions is again lower [upper] semicontinuous, whether the sequence is monotonic or not.
– Daniel Fischer♦
Feb 19 '16 at 10:49










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes

















up vote
6
down vote



accepted










Note that a function $f$ is lower semicontinuous iff given $x in X$ and $r < f(x)$ there is an open neighborhood of $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f(y)$ for each $y in U$.



Suppose that $ f_i _i in I$ is any collection of lower semicontinuous functions on $X$, and let $g$ be the pointwise supremum, i.e., $g (x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ for all $x in X$.



Taking $x in X$, and any $r < g(x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ it must be that there is an $i in I$ such that $r < f_i(x)$. Since $f_i$ is lower semicontinuous there is an open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f_i(y)$ for each $y in U$. As $f_i(y) leq g(y)$ for all $y$, it follows that $r < g(y)$ for each $y in U$.






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%2f1662726%2fto-show-that-the-supremum-of-any-collection-of-lower-semicontinuous-functions-is%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
    6
    down vote



    accepted










    Note that a function $f$ is lower semicontinuous iff given $x in X$ and $r < f(x)$ there is an open neighborhood of $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f(y)$ for each $y in U$.



    Suppose that $ f_i _i in I$ is any collection of lower semicontinuous functions on $X$, and let $g$ be the pointwise supremum, i.e., $g (x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ for all $x in X$.



    Taking $x in X$, and any $r < g(x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ it must be that there is an $i in I$ such that $r < f_i(x)$. Since $f_i$ is lower semicontinuous there is an open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f_i(y)$ for each $y in U$. As $f_i(y) leq g(y)$ for all $y$, it follows that $r < g(y)$ for each $y in U$.






    share|cite|improve this answer
























      up vote
      6
      down vote



      accepted










      Note that a function $f$ is lower semicontinuous iff given $x in X$ and $r < f(x)$ there is an open neighborhood of $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f(y)$ for each $y in U$.



      Suppose that $ f_i _i in I$ is any collection of lower semicontinuous functions on $X$, and let $g$ be the pointwise supremum, i.e., $g (x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ for all $x in X$.



      Taking $x in X$, and any $r < g(x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ it must be that there is an $i in I$ such that $r < f_i(x)$. Since $f_i$ is lower semicontinuous there is an open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f_i(y)$ for each $y in U$. As $f_i(y) leq g(y)$ for all $y$, it follows that $r < g(y)$ for each $y in U$.






      share|cite|improve this answer






















        up vote
        6
        down vote



        accepted







        up vote
        6
        down vote



        accepted






        Note that a function $f$ is lower semicontinuous iff given $x in X$ and $r < f(x)$ there is an open neighborhood of $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f(y)$ for each $y in U$.



        Suppose that $ f_i _i in I$ is any collection of lower semicontinuous functions on $X$, and let $g$ be the pointwise supremum, i.e., $g (x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ for all $x in X$.



        Taking $x in X$, and any $r < g(x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ it must be that there is an $i in I$ such that $r < f_i(x)$. Since $f_i$ is lower semicontinuous there is an open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f_i(y)$ for each $y in U$. As $f_i(y) leq g(y)$ for all $y$, it follows that $r < g(y)$ for each $y in U$.






        share|cite|improve this answer












        Note that a function $f$ is lower semicontinuous iff given $x in X$ and $r < f(x)$ there is an open neighborhood of $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f(y)$ for each $y in U$.



        Suppose that $ f_i _i in I$ is any collection of lower semicontinuous functions on $X$, and let $g$ be the pointwise supremum, i.e., $g (x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ for all $x in X$.



        Taking $x in X$, and any $r < g(x) = sup_i in I f_i(x)$ it must be that there is an $i in I$ such that $r < f_i(x)$. Since $f_i$ is lower semicontinuous there is an open neighborhood $U$ of $x$ such that $r < f_i(y)$ for each $y in U$. As $f_i(y) leq g(y)$ for all $y$, it follows that $r < g(y)$ for each $y in U$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Feb 19 '16 at 12:09









        castor occupatus

        4,363927




        4,363927



























             

            draft saved


            draft discarded















































             


            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function ()
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f1662726%2fto-show-that-the-supremum-of-any-collection-of-lower-semicontinuous-functions-is%23new-answer', 'question_page');

            );

            Post as a guest













































































            luyCAaLaC4D EhH zfw3tMdKhR97,xl,S4TDFfOm,8nyG,1m7NIX 8SVLN7cC1Wh KjRnOoFuOM,bINTi4WGlh j0Y l
            R,E3I UIGu,K4ir3dxV RN0JVXMz1M,xY,Ez9Oej77sPPUmmzQhfHVF,m,b4z00d9r

            這個網誌中的熱門文章

            How to combine Bézier curves to a surface?

            Propositional logic and tautologies

            Distribution of Stopped Wiener Process with Stochastic Volatility