2
$\begingroup$

Let $C(\mathbb{R}^n;\mathbb{R}^d)$ be the space of continuous functions with the uniform-convergence on compacts topology. What are function spaces $X$ building on $C(\mathbb{R}^n;\mathbb{R}^d)$?

  • $X$ properly contains $C(\mathbb{R}^n;\mathbb{R}^d)$,
  • The subspace topology on $C(\mathbb{R}^n;\mathbb{R}^d)$ (with respect to $X$) agrees with the topology of uniform convergence on compact subsets,
  • The elements of $X$ are functions from $\mathbb{R}^n$ to $\mathbb{R}^d$
  • $C(\mathbb{R}^n;\mathbb{R}^d)$ is dense in $X$.
$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ This doesn't seem very restrictive: you can take any space of functions containing $C(\mathbb{R}^n; \mathbb{R}^d)$ and equip it with the topology of uniform convergence on compacts. What are you actually hoping to achieve? $\endgroup$ Feb 3, 2020 at 19:41
  • $\begingroup$ I out to mention, that I would need $C(\mathbb{R}^n,\mathbb{R}^d)$ to be dense in $X$. This makes the problem much more difficult... $\endgroup$
    – ABIM
    Feb 3, 2020 at 19:47
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AIM_BLB: I would say it is a strategic mistake to impose your second condition. Typically useful spaces $X$ would have to have a weaker topology. More precisely, the subspace topology on $C(\mathbb{R}^n,\mathbb{R}^d)$ coming from the topology of $X$ has to be weaker than the intrinsic/natural topology of $C(\mathbb{R}^n,\mathbb{R}^d)$ which is the one you gave. Otherwise you run into the kind of trouble explained in Nate's answer. $\endgroup$ Feb 3, 2020 at 22:43
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Since your space is complete, there is no way you can embed it densely into a a uniform space (in particular, a tvs or even a topological group) in a non-trivial way. Perhaps if you gave some hint of what you want (which new functions you are after, whether the function space should be a vector space, a tvs, a lcs, whether you can weaken the condition on its topology), we could offer some more positive information. $\endgroup$
    – user131781
    Feb 4, 2020 at 14:10
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @user131781: in "embed densely", careful about what "embed" means (which is a cultural issue). Folks who say read Munkres and studied point set topology would use the word in the strict sense of topological embedding which imposes equality with the subspace/induced topology. In analysis (think Sobolev embedding theorem), people don't do that and allow the small space to have a stronger topology than the one induced from the big space. This is the point I was trying to make above. This granted, there are lots of $LCS$'s where the given space "embeds densely". $\endgroup$ Feb 4, 2020 at 19:01

1 Answer 1

8
$\begingroup$

Any such topology will be fairly unpleasant. For instance, the topology of $X$ cannot be induced by any translation-invariant metric $d$.

Lemma. Let $Y_1, Y_2$ be two topological vector spaces whose topologies are induced by translation-invariant metrics $d_1, d_2$, and let $T : Y_1 \to Y_2$ be a continuous linear map. Then $T$ is uniformly continuous.

Proof. Since $T$ is continuous at 0, for any $\epsilon > 0$ there exists $\delta > 0$ such that if $d_1(x, 0) < \delta$ then $d_2(Tx, 0) < \epsilon$. Now if $d_1(x,y) < \delta$, then $d_1(x-y, 0) = d_1(x,y) < \delta$ and we have $d_2(Tx, Ty) = d_2(Tx-Ty, 0) = d_2(T(x-y), 0) < \epsilon$.

Now recall that $C(\mathbb{R}^n; \mathbb{R}^d)$ is a Fréchet space, so its usual topology is induced by a complete translation-invariant metric $d_0$. By assumption, the identity map $id$ from $(C(\mathbb{R}^n; \mathbb{R}^d), d_0)$ to $(C(\mathbb{R}^n; \mathbb{R}^d), d)$ is a homeomorphism, and so by our lemma, $id$ and $id^{-1}$ are uniformly continuous. In particular, $C(\mathbb{R}^n; \mathbb{R}^d)$ is complete with respect to $d$, and therefore closed in $X$.


Edit. Indeed, $X$ cannot even be a sequential Hausdorff topological vector space. In particular, assuming it is a TVS, its topology cannot be induced by any metric, translation-invariant or not.

In the following, let for brevity $Y = C(\mathbb{R}^n; \mathbb{R}^d)$; the same argument works for any Fréchet space.

Suppose that $Y \subset X$ and that the subspace topology on $Y$ equals the usual topology induced by the complete translation-invariant metric $d_0$ on $Y$. I claim $Y$ is closed in $X$.

Suppose $x$ is in the $X$-closure of $Y$, so that there is a sequence $y_n \in Y$ converging to $x$ in the topology of $X$. Let $\epsilon > 0$ and let $B$ be the open $\epsilon$-ball of the metric $d_0$ centered at $0$. By assumption $B$ is open in the subspace topology of $Y$ inherited from $X$, so there is an $X$-open set $U$ such that $B = U \cap Y$. In particular, $0 \in U$. Now since subtraction is jointly continuous in $X$, there is another $X$-open neighborhood $V$ of $0$ such that for all $a,b \in V$ we have $a-b \in U$.

Since $y_n - x \to 0$ in $X$, there exists $N$ so large that for all $n \ge N$ we have $y_n - x \in V$ (using again the fact that $X$ is a topological vector space). Now if $n,m \ge N$, we have $y_n - x, y_m - x \in V$, so that $y_n - y_m = (y_n - x) - (y_m - x) \in U$. Moreover, $y_n - y_m \in Y$ because $Y$ is a vector space. So $y_n - y_m \in U \cap Y = B$, meaning that $d_0(y_n, y_m) = d_0(y_n - y_m, 0) < \epsilon$, using the fact that $d$ is translation invariant.

Hence $y_n$ is Cauchy in the complete metric $d_0$, so converges in $d_0$-metric to some $y \in Y$. Thus we also have $y_n \to y$ in the topology of $X$. Since the latter is Hausdorff, $x=y$ and thus $x \in Y$.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ But it can still be metric? $\endgroup$
    – ABIM
    Feb 3, 2020 at 23:34
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ @AIM_BLB: No. See edit. $\endgroup$ Feb 4, 2020 at 0:29
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Concerning the edit, I think that it is not necessary to assume that $X$ is sequential. The point is that a vector space topology induces a unique uniformity and complete subspaces of Hausdorff topological vector spaces are closed. There are of course different uniformities (even metrics) which may induce the same topology -- but this does not affect the argument because we are speaking about THE uniformity induced by a vector space topology having the entourages (in Köthe's book they are called vincinities) $\{(x,y): x-y \in U\}$ for $0$-neighbourhoods $U$. $\endgroup$ Feb 4, 2020 at 8:00

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.