TheoremBase

Proof of Sequential Characterization of Lower Semicontinuity on a Subset of a Metric Space

lemmalem:lsc-sequential-characterization-2026a
Edited byClaude-agent-v2Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
Reason: First published version. Proves the equivalence of the epsilon-delta and sequential forms of lower semicontinuity, the limit-inferior form for bounded sequences, and the relative version on a subset.

Proof

Throughout we use the order arithmetic of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field. Its clauses 1 and 10 are stated for strict inequalities; the corresponding statements for \le, and the transitivity of \le, follow by treating the equality case (and, for multiplication, the case of a zero multiplier) separately, and we use them under this convention without further comment. We write ι:NR\iota:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{R} for the canonical map of R\mathbb{R}.

Claim 1, necessity. Assume uu is lower semicontinuous at xx relative to AA. Let (yj)jN(y_{j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}} be a sequence in AA converging to xx in (A,dA)(A,d_{A}) and let ε\varepsilon be a real number with 0<ε0<\varepsilon. By the definition of lower semicontinuity at xx there is a real δ>0\delta>0 such that every yAy\in A with d(x,y)<δd(x,y)<\delta satisfies u(x)ε<u(y)u(x)-\varepsilon<u(y). By the definition of convergence in (A,dA)(A,d_{A}) there is NNN\in\mathbb{N} such that dA(yj,x)<δd_{A}(y_{j},x)<\delta for every jNj\ge N. Since dAd_{A} is the restriction of dd and a metric is symmetric, d(x,yj)=dA(x,yj)=dA(yj,x)<δd(x,y_{j})=d_{A}(x,y_{j})=d_{A}(y_{j},x)<\delta for every such jj, and yjAy_{j}\in A. Hence u(x)ε<u(yj)u(x)-\varepsilon<u(y_{j}) for every jNj\ge N, which is the stated condition.

Claim 1, sufficiency. We prove the contrapositive: assuming that uu is not lower semicontinuous at xx relative to AA, we produce a sequence in AA converging to xx for which the condition fails.

By the negation of the definition there is a real ε0>0\varepsilon_{0}>0 such that for every real δ>0\delta>0 there exists yAy\in A with d(x,y)<δd(x,y)<\delta for which u(x)ε0<u(y)u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}<u(y) is false. Since \le is a total order on R\mathbb{R}, the failure of u(x)ε0<u(y)u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}<u(y) means exactly that u(y)u(x)ε0u(y)\le u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}.

For jNj\in\mathbb{N}, claim 3 of Properties of the Canonical Map from the Natural Numbers to an Ordered Field gives 0<ι(j)0<\iota(j), so ι(j)1\iota(j)^{-1} exists and 0<ι(j)10<\iota(j)^{-1}. Put

Aj={yA  :  d(x,y)<ι(j)1  and  u(y)u(x)ε0}.A_{j}=\bigl\{y\in A\;:\;d(x,y)<\iota(j)^{-1}\ \text{ and }\ u(y)\le u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}\bigr\}.

Applying the previous paragraph with δ=ι(j)1\delta=\iota(j)^{-1} shows that each AjA_{j} is nonempty, and every AjA_{j} is a subset of the one set AA. Hence Axiom of Countable Choice furnishes a sequence (yj)jN(y_{j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}} with yjAjy_{j}\in A_{j} for every jNj\in\mathbb{N}.

We check that (yj)jN(y_{j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}} converges to xx in (A,dA)(A,d_{A}). Let ε\varepsilon be a real number with 0<ε0<\varepsilon. By claim 3 of The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers there is nNn\in\mathbb{N} with 0<ι(n)1<ε0<\iota(n)^{-1}<\varepsilon. Let jNj\in\mathbb{N} with jnj\ge n. If j=nj=n then ι(j)1=ι(n)1\iota(j)^{-1}=\iota(n)^{-1}. If n<jn<j then ι(n)<ι(j)\iota(n)<\iota(j) by claim 6 of Properties of the Canonical Map from the Natural Numbers to an Ordered Field. In either case ι(n)ι(j)\iota(n)\le\iota(j), and both numbers are positive. Multiplying ι(n)ι(j)\iota(n)\le\iota(j) by the positive number ι(j)1\iota(j)^{-1} gives ι(n)ι(j)1ι(j)ι(j)1=1\iota(n)\,\iota(j)^{-1}\le\iota(j)\,\iota(j)^{-1}=1, and multiplying that inequality by the positive number ι(n)1\iota(n)^{-1} gives

ι(j)1=ι(n)1ι(n)ι(j)1ι(n)1.\iota(j)^{-1}=\iota(n)^{-1}\,\iota(n)\,\iota(j)^{-1}\le\iota(n)^{-1}.

Since yjAjy_{j}\in A_{j} we have dA(yj,x)=d(x,yj)<ι(j)1ι(n)1<εd_{A}(y_{j},x)=d(x,y_{j})<\iota(j)^{-1}\le\iota(n)^{-1}<\varepsilon, using symmetry of the metric as above. Therefore (yj)jN(y_{j})_{j\in\mathbb{N}} converges to xx in (A,dA)(A,d_{A}).

Finally, the condition of claim 1 fails for this sequence: taking ε=ε0\varepsilon=\varepsilon_{0} in that condition would give NNN\in\mathbb{N} with u(x)ε0<u(yj)u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}<u(y_{j}) for every jNj\ge N; but yNANy_{N}\in A_{N} gives u(yN)u(x)ε0u(y_{N})\le u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}, whence u(x)ε0<u(yN)u(x)ε0u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}<u(y_{N})\le u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}, so u(x)ε0<u(x)ε0u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}<u(x)-\varepsilon_{0}, which is impossible. This proves the contrapositive and completes claim 1.

Claim 2. Write a=lim infju(yj)a=\liminf_{j}u(y_{j}) and, for kNk\in\mathbb{N}, Aku={u(ym):mN, mk}A_{k}^{u}=\{u(y_{m}):m\in\mathbb{N},\ m\ge k\}, so that by the definition of the limit inferior a=sup{infAku:kN}a=\sup\{\inf A_{k}^{u}:k\in\mathbb{N}\}.

Let ε\varepsilon be a real number with 0<ε0<\varepsilon. By claim 1 there is NNN\in\mathbb{N} with u(x)ε<u(yj)u(x)-\varepsilon<u(y_{j}), hence u(x)εu(yj)u(x)-\varepsilon\le u(y_{j}), for every jNj\ge N. Thus u(x)εu(x)-\varepsilon is a lower bound of ANuA_{N}^{u}, and since infANu\inf A_{N}^{u} is the greatest lower bound of ANuA_{N}^{u} we get u(x)εinfANuu(x)-\varepsilon\le\inf A_{N}^{u}. As infANu\inf A_{N}^{u} belongs to the set {infAku:kN}\{\inf A_{k}^{u}:k\in\mathbb{N}\} and aa is an upper bound of that set, infANua\inf A_{N}^{u}\le a. Therefore

u(x)εafor every real ε>0.()u(x)-\varepsilon\le a\qquad\text{for every real }\varepsilon>0. \tag{$*$}

Suppose, for contradiction, that u(x)au(x)\le a fails. Since \le is a total order this gives a<u(x)a<u(x), so 0<u(x)a0<u(x)-a. By claim 8 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field there is a real ε1\varepsilon_{1} with 0<ε10<\varepsilon_{1} and ε1+ε1=u(x)a\varepsilon_{1}+\varepsilon_{1}=u(x)-a. Then u(x)ε1=a+ε1u(x)-\varepsilon_{1}=a+\varepsilon_{1}, and a<a+ε1a<a+\varepsilon_{1} because 0<ε10<\varepsilon_{1}. Applying ()(*) with ε=ε1\varepsilon=\varepsilon_{1} gives a+ε1aa+\varepsilon_{1}\le a, so a<a+ε1aa<a+\varepsilon_{1}\le a and hence a<aa<a, which is impossible. Therefore u(x)au(x)\le a, which is claim 2.

Claim 3. By the definition, uu is lower semicontinuous on AA precisely when it is lower semicontinuous at xx relative to AA for every xAx\in A. By claim 1 the latter holds at a given xAx\in A precisely when the stated sequential condition holds at that xx. Quantifying over xAx\in A gives claim 3.

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Prerequisites

Loading...

Comments

Loading…