0
$\begingroup$

For simplicity, let us set $V_n:=\{-1+1/2^n, \dotsc, 0 ,\dotsc, 1-1/2^n, 1\}$ with the periodic boundary conditions for each $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and think of the following vector space over this lattice:

\begin{equation} M(V_n):=\{f:V_n \to \mathbb{C} \mid f \text{ is the restriction of some Schwartz function on } \mathbb{R} \text{ to } V_n \}.\end{equation}

Then, clearly, $M(V_n)$ is a well-defined finite dimensional vector space over $\mathbb{C}$. Moreover, we can think of the direct limit of the collection $\{ M(V_n)\}_n$, which may be identified as the restriction of Schwartz space to the domain $(-1,1]$.

So, here are my questions. They are divided into two parts.

  1. $M(V_n)$ is set-theoretically identical to the "set of all mappings from $V_n$ to $\mathbb{C}$". However, the "set of all mappings from $V_n$ to $\mathbb{C}$" cannot form a direct limit of the above kind since they can approximate singular functions such as the Heaviside function. What makes the crucial difference?

  2. A finite symmetric difference operator $\partial_n$ on $M(V_n)$ defined by \begin{equation} \partial_n f(x):=2^{n+1}[f(x+1/2^n)-f(x-1/2^n)] \end{equation} is a linear operator. As $n \to \infty$, in what sense does this $\partial_n$ converge to the ordinary continuum differential operator?

These two questions seem quite subtle to me…. Could anyone please clarify?

$\endgroup$
2
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Since $V_n$ is a finite subset of $\mathbb R$, every function $V_n\to \mathbb C$ is the restriction of a Schwartz function. So the space that you denoted $M(V_n)$ is just the space of all functions $f:V_n\to \mathbb C$ with $f(-1)=f(1)$. The direct limit of the collection $\{ M(V_n)\}_n$ is unrelated to Schwartz functions. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 20:21
  • $\begingroup$ Yes I am fully aware of that fact. However, in taking the direct limit of the vector spaces, a subtle difference seems to occur. $\endgroup$
    – Isaac
    Commented Apr 15, 2022 at 20:23

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

"In what sense does this $\partial_n$ converge to the ordinary continuum differential operator?"

It converges in the sense that there exist injective linear maps $\iota_n:M(V_n)\to C^\infty_\text{periodic}([-1,1])$ that take the $2^{n+1}$ eigenspaces of $\partial_n$ to the first $2^{n+1}$ eigenspaces of $d/dx$, such that the $j$-th eigenvector of $\partial_n$ converges pointwise on $[-1,1]\cap \mathbb Z[\tfrac12]$ to the $j$-th eigenvector of $d/dx$, as $n\to \infty$.


Here, the sentence "first $2^{n+1}$ eigenspaces of $d/dx$" requires some clarification:

The eigenspaces of $d/dx$ are ordered by increasing absolute value of the eigenvalue, with the (arbitrary) convention that $+a$ comes before $-a$ whenever $a>0$.

$\endgroup$
2
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. How about the eigenvalues? Do the eigenvalues of the finite difference matrices also converge to the eigenvalues of $d/dx$ too? $\endgroup$
    – Isaac
    Commented Apr 18, 2022 at 14:36
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, the eigenvalues converge too. (I should have mentioned it in my answer, but forgot to.) This can be seen by taking an explicit basis of $M(V_n)$ and $C^\infty_{periodic}$ consisting of functions of the form $e^{iax}$, for suitable values of the parameter $a$, and doing explicit calculations. $\endgroup$ Commented Apr 18, 2022 at 20:14

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .