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

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













































































            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?