Throughout, the notation is that of the statement. Convergence of a sequence in R q \mathbb{R}^{q} R q refers to d E d_{E} d E and convergence in S ( q ) \mathcal{S}(q) S ( q ) to d S ( q ) d_{\mathcal{S}(q)} d S ( q ) , as fixed in Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §norm . A constant sequence in a metric space converges to its value, directly from Convergent Sequence in a Metric Space , since the distance from that value to itself is 0 0 0 .
Step 0 (two elementary observations).
(0a) Inverses reverse the order. If a , b ∈ R a,b\in\mathbb{R} a , b ∈ R satisfy 0 < a ≤ b 0<a\le b 0 < a ≤ b , then b − 1 ≤ a − 1 b^{-1}\le a^{-1} b − 1 ≤ a − 1 . Indeed a − 1 a^{-1} a − 1 and b − 1 b^{-1} b − 1 exist and are positive by claim 7 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field , so c = a − 1 b − 1 c=a^{-1}b^{-1} c = a − 1 b − 1 is positive by claim 5 there; if a < b a<b a < b then c a < c b ca<cb c a < c b by claim 10 there, and c a = b − 1 ( a − 1 a ) = b − 1 ca=b^{-1}(a^{-1}a)=b^{-1} c a = b − 1 ( a − 1 a ) = b − 1 while c b = a − 1 ( b − 1 b ) = a − 1 cb=a^{-1}(b^{-1}b)=a^{-1} c b = a − 1 ( b − 1 b ) = a − 1 , so b − 1 < a − 1 b^{-1}<a^{-1} b − 1 < a − 1 ; while if a = b a=b a = b then a − 1 = b − 1 a^{-1}=b^{-1} a − 1 = b − 1 .
(0b) A null sequence. Let ι R : N → R \iota_{\mathbb{R}}:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{R} ι R : N → R be the canonical map of R \mathbb{R} R and put θ k = ι R ( k ) − 1 \theta_{k}=\iota_{\mathbb{R}}(k)^{-1} θ k = ι R ( k ) − 1 for k ∈ N k\in\mathbb{N} k ∈ N . By claim 3 of Properties of the Canonical Map from the Natural Numbers to an Ordered Field each θ k \theta_{k} θ k exists and is positive, and by claim 2 there 1 ≤ ι R ( k ) 1\le\iota_{\mathbb{R}}(k) 1 ≤ ι R ( k ) , so θ k ≤ 1 − 1 = 1 \theta_{k}\le 1^{-1}=1 θ k ≤ 1 − 1 = 1 by (0a). Moreover ( θ k ) k ∈ N (\theta_{k})_{k\in\mathbb{N}} ( θ k ) k ∈ N converges to 0 0 0 in R \mathbb{R} R : given a positive ε ′ ∈ R \varepsilon'\in\mathbb{R} ε ′ ∈ R , claim 3 of The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers provides p ∈ N p\in\mathbb{N} p ∈ N with 0 < ι R ( p ) − 1 < ε ′ 0<\iota_{\mathbb{R}}(p)^{-1}<\varepsilon' 0 < ι R ( p ) − 1 < ε ′ , and for k ∈ N k\in\mathbb{N} k ∈ N with p ≤ k p\le k p ≤ k we have ι R ( p ) ≤ ι R ( k ) \iota_{\mathbb{R}}(p)\le\iota_{\mathbb{R}}(k) ι R ( p ) ≤ ι R ( k ) by claim 6 of Properties of the Canonical Map from the Natural Numbers to an Ordered Field when p < k p<k p < k and trivially when p = k p=k p = k , whence θ k ≤ ι R ( p ) − 1 < ε ′ \theta_{k}\le\iota_{\mathbb{R}}(p)^{-1}<\varepsilon' θ k ≤ ι R ( p ) − 1 < ε ′ by (0a).
Step 1 (the reduction and the global theorem, for each k k k ). Fix k ∈ N k\in\mathbb{N} k ∈ N and put A k = A + θ k I N A_{k}=A+\theta_{k}I_{N} A k = A + θ k I N , which lies in S ( N ) \mathcal{S}(N) S ( N ) by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §symmetric . The hypotheses of Reduction of the Theorem on Sums to a Global Quadratic Bound hold with the present data and with θ = θ k \theta=\theta_{k} θ = θ k , so it provides a positive r k r_{k} r k , which may depend on k k k and is not used below, and functions v 1 ( k ) : R n 1 → R v^{(k)}_{1}:\mathbb{R}^{n_{1}}\to\mathbb{R} v 1 ( k ) : R n 1 → R and v 2 ( k ) : R n 2 → R v^{(k)}_{2}:\mathbb{R}^{n_{2}}\to\mathbb{R} v 2 ( k ) : R n 2 → R satisfying its three claims. By Reduction of the Theorem on Sums to a Global Quadratic Bound §localised each v i ( k ) v^{(k)}_{i} v i ( k ) is upper semicontinuous on R n i \mathbb{R}^{n_{i}} R n i , its set of values has an upper bound in R \mathbb{R} R , and v i ( k ) ( 0 R n i ) = 0 v^{(k)}_{i}(0_{\mathbb{R}^{n_{i}}})=0 v i ( k ) ( 0 R n i ) = 0 ; and by Reduction of the Theorem on Sums to a Global Quadratic Bound §bound ,
v 1 ( k ) ( ξ ) + v 2 ( k ) ( η ) ≤ 1 2 ι ( ξ , η ) ⋅ ( A k ι ( ξ , η ) ) for all ξ ∈ R n 1 , η ∈ R n 2 . v^{(k)}_{1}(\xi)+v^{(k)}_{2}(\eta)\ \le\ \tfrac{1}{2}\,\iota(\xi,\eta)\cdot\bigl(A_{k}\,\iota(\xi,\eta)\bigr)\qquad\text{for all }\xi\in\mathbb{R}^{n_{1}},\ \eta\in\mathbb{R}^{n_{2}}. v 1 ( k ) ( ξ ) + v 2 ( k ) ( η ) ≤ 2 1 ι ( ξ , η ) ⋅ ( A k ι ( ξ , η ) ) for all ξ ∈ R n 1 , η ∈ R n 2 .
These are exactly the hypotheses of The Theorem on Sums for a Global Quadratic Bound, in Two Groups of Variables , applied in the dimensions n 1 n_{1} n 1 and n 2 n_{2} n 2 with the functions v 1 ( k ) v^{(k)}_{1} v 1 ( k ) and v 2 ( k ) v^{(k)}_{2} v 2 ( k ) , the matrix A k A_{k} A k and the given positive ε \varepsilon ε . It provides Y 1 ( k ) ∈ S ( n 1 ) Y^{(k)}_{1}\in\mathcal{S}(n_{1}) Y 1 ( k ) ∈ S ( n 1 ) and Y 2 ( k ) ∈ S ( n 2 ) Y^{(k)}_{2}\in\mathcal{S}(n_{2}) Y 2 ( k ) ∈ S ( n 2 ) such that, by The Theorem on Sums for a Global Quadratic Bound, in Two Groups of Variables §test-data , the quadruple ( 0 R n i , v i ( k ) ( 0 R n i ) , 0 R n i , Y i ( k ) ) \bigl(0_{\mathbb{R}^{n_{i}}},v^{(k)}_{i}(0_{\mathbb{R}^{n_{i}}}),0_{\mathbb{R}^{n_{i}}},Y^{(k)}_{i}\bigr) ( 0 R n i , v i ( k ) ( 0 R n i ) , 0 R n i , Y i ( k ) ) is approximable by test data from above for v i ( k ) v^{(k)}_{i} v i ( k ) for i ∈ { 1 , 2 } i\in\{1,2\} i ∈ { 1 , 2 } , and, by The Theorem on Sums for a Global Quadratic Bound, in Two Groups of Variables §bounds ,
− ( ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ ) I N ⪯ Y 1 ( k ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k ) ⪯ A k + ε A k 2 . (1) -\bigl(\varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A_{k}\rVert\bigr)I_{N}\ \preceq\ Y^{(k)}_{1}\oplus Y^{(k)}_{2}\ \preceq\ A_{k}+\varepsilon A_{k}^{2}.\tag{1} − ( ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ ) I N ⪯ Y 1 ( k ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k ) ⪯ A k + ε A k 2 . ( 1 )
Applying Reduction of the Theorem on Sums to a Global Quadratic Bound §transfer to Y i ( k ) Y^{(k)}_{i} Y i ( k ) we obtain, for every k ∈ N k\in\mathbb{N} k ∈ N and i ∈ { 1 , 2 } i\in\{1,2\} i ∈ { 1 , 2 } , that
( x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) , p i , Y i ( k ) ) is approximable by test data from above for u i on Ω i . (2) \bigl(\hat{x}_{i},u_{i}(\hat{x}_{i}),p_{i},Y^{(k)}_{i}\bigr)\ \text{is approximable by test data from above for }u_{i}\ \text{on}\ \Omega_{i}.\tag{2} ( x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) , p i , Y i ( k ) ) is approximable by test data from above for u i on Ω i . ( 2 )
Step 2 (the two sides of (1) converge). Write E k = − ( ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ ) I N E_{k}=-\bigl(\varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A_{k}\rVert\bigr)I_{N} E k = − ( ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ ) I N , E = − ( ε − 1 + ∥ A ∥ ) I N E=-\bigl(\varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A\rVert\bigr)I_{N} E = − ( ε − 1 + ∥ A ∥ ) I N , C k = A k + ε A k 2 C_{k}=A_{k}+\varepsilon A_{k}^{2} C k = A k + ε A k 2 and C = A + ε A 2 C=A+\varepsilon A^{2} C = A + ε A 2 ; the matrices C k C_{k} C k and C C C lie in S ( N ) \mathcal{S}(N) S ( N ) by A Weighted Young Inequality and the Splitting of a Quadratic Form §matrix . Note that A k − A = θ k I N A_{k}-A=\theta_{k}I_{N} A k − A = θ k I N , so ∥ A k − A ∥ = θ k \lVert A_{k}-A\rVert=\theta_{k} ∥ A k − A ∥ = θ k by Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §identity , and hence, by claim 5 of Properties of the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix ,
∥ A k ∥ ≤ ∥ A ∥ + θ k ≤ ∥ A ∥ + 1 and ∥ A ∥ ≤ ∥ A k ∥ + θ k , \lVert A_{k}\rVert\le\lVert A\rVert+\theta_{k}\le\lVert A\rVert+1\qquad\text{and}\qquad\lVert A\rVert\le\lVert A_{k}\rVert+\theta_{k}, ∥ A k ∥ ≤ ∥ A ∥ + θ k ≤ ∥ A ∥ + 1 and ∥ A ∥ ≤ ∥ A k ∥ + θ k ,
so that ∣ ∥ A k ∥ − ∥ A ∥ ∣ ≤ θ k \bigl|\lVert A_{k}\rVert-\lVert A\rVert\bigr|\le\theta_{k} ∥ A k ∥ − ∥ A ∥ ≤ θ k by claim 6 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field .
The lower bounds converge. We have E k − E = ( ∥ A ∥ − ∥ A k ∥ ) I N E_{k}-E=\bigl(\lVert A\rVert-\lVert A_{k}\rVert\bigr)I_{N} E k − E = ( ∥ A ∥ − ∥ A k ∥ ) I N , so by Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §identity
d S ( N ) ( E k , E ) = ∥ E k − E ∥ = ∣ ∥ A ∥ − ∥ A k ∥ ∣ ≤ θ k , d_{\mathcal{S}(N)}(E_{k},E)=\lVert E_{k}-E\rVert=\bigl|\lVert A\rVert-\lVert A_{k}\rVert\bigr|\le\theta_{k}, d S ( N ) ( E k , E ) = ∥ E k − E ∥ = ∥ A ∥ − ∥ A k ∥ ≤ θ k ,
and since ( θ k ) (\theta_{k}) ( θ k ) converges to 0 0 0 , the sequence ( E k ) (E_{k}) ( E k ) converges to E E E in S ( N ) \mathcal{S}(N) S ( N ) .
The upper bounds converge. Let z ∈ R N z\in\mathbb{R}^{N} z ∈ R N with ∥ z ∥ ≤ 1 \lVert z\rVert\le1 ∥ z ∥ ≤ 1 . By Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §square we have z ⋅ ( A k 2 z ) = ∥ A k z ∥ 2 z\cdot(A_{k}^{2}z)=\lVert A_{k}z\rVert^{2} z ⋅ ( A k 2 z ) = ∥ A k z ∥ 2 and z ⋅ ( A 2 z ) = ∥ A z ∥ 2 z\cdot(A^{2}z)=\lVert Az\rVert^{2} z ⋅ ( A 2 z ) = ∥ A z ∥ 2 . Applying Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §quadratic-comparison with the matrix I N I_{N} I N to the points A k z A_{k}z A k z and A z Az A z , and using Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §identity in the case a = 1 a=1 a = 1 , which gives y ⋅ ( I N y ) = ∥ y ∥ 2 y\cdot(I_{N}y)=\lVert y\rVert^{2} y ⋅ ( I N y ) = ∥ y ∥ 2 and ∥ I N ∥ = 1 \lVert I_{N}\rVert=1 ∥ I N ∥ = 1 ,
∣ ∥ A k z ∥ 2 − ∥ A z ∥ 2 ∣ ≤ ∥ A k z − A z ∥ ∥ A k z + A z ∥ . \bigl|\lVert A_{k}z\rVert^{2}-\lVert Az\rVert^{2}\bigr|\le\lVert A_{k}z-Az\rVert\,\lVert A_{k}z+Az\rVert . ∥ A k z ∥ 2 − ∥ A z ∥ 2 ≤ ∥ A k z − A z ∥ ∥ A k z + A z ∥ .
By claims 1 and 2 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum , A k z − A z = ( θ k I N ) z = θ k z A_{k}z-Az=(\theta_{k}I_{N})z=\theta_{k}z A k z − A z = ( θ k I N ) z = θ k z , so ∥ A k z − A z ∥ = θ k ∥ z ∥ ≤ θ k \lVert A_{k}z-Az\rVert=\theta_{k}\lVert z\rVert\le\theta_{k} ∥ A k z − A z ∥ = θ k ∥ z ∥ ≤ θ k by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n ; and by claim 6 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n together with Vector, Entry and Comparison Bounds for the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix §vector-bound ,
∥ A k z + A z ∥ ≤ ∥ A k z ∥ + ∥ A z ∥ ≤ ( ∥ A k ∥ + ∥ A ∥ ) ∥ z ∥ ≤ 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1. \lVert A_{k}z+Az\rVert\le\lVert A_{k}z\rVert+\lVert Az\rVert\le\bigl(\lVert A_{k}\rVert+\lVert A\rVert\bigr)\lVert z\rVert\le 2\lVert A\rVert+1 . ∥ A k z + A z ∥ ≤ ∥ A k z ∥ + ∥ A z ∥ ≤ ( ∥ A k ∥ + ∥ A ∥ ) ∥ z ∥ ≤ 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1.
Since A k 2 − A 2 ∈ S ( N ) A_{k}^{2}-A^{2}\in\mathcal{S}(N) A k 2 − A 2 ∈ S ( N ) and, by claim 1 of Linearity of the Matrix-Vector Product and the Quadratic Form as a Double Sum and claim 5 of Bilinearity and Symmetry of the Dot Product on R n \mathbb{R}^n R n , z ⋅ ( ( A k 2 − A 2 ) z ) = z ⋅ ( A k 2 z ) − z ⋅ ( A 2 z ) z\cdot\bigl((A_{k}^{2}-A^{2})z\bigr)=z\cdot(A_{k}^{2}z)-z\cdot(A^{2}z) z ⋅ ( ( A k 2 − A 2 ) z ) = z ⋅ ( A k 2 z ) − z ⋅ ( A 2 z ) , the three displays give
∣ z ⋅ ( ( A k 2 − A 2 ) z ) ∣ ≤ θ k ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) whenever ∥ z ∥ ≤ 1. \bigl|z\cdot\bigl((A_{k}^{2}-A^{2})z\bigr)\bigr|\le\theta_{k}\bigl(2\lVert A\rVert+1\bigr)\qquad\text{whenever }\lVert z\rVert\le1 . z ⋅ ( ( A k 2 − A 2 ) z ) ≤ θ k ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) whenever ∥ z ∥ ≤ 1.
As ∥ A k 2 − A 2 ∥ \lVert A_{k}^{2}-A^{2}\rVert ∥ A k 2 − A 2 ∥ is the least upper bound of the numbers on the left, by Real Matrices, Symmetric Matrices and the Semidefinite Ordering: Standing Notation §norm , we get ∥ A k 2 − A 2 ∥ ≤ θ k ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) \lVert A_{k}^{2}-A^{2}\rVert\le\theta_{k}(2\lVert A\rVert+1) ∥ A k 2 − A 2 ∥ ≤ θ k ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) . Hence, by claim 5 of Properties of the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix ,
d S ( N ) ( C k , C ) = ∥ ( A k − A ) + ε ( A k 2 − A 2 ) ∥ ≤ θ k + ε θ k ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) = L θ k , d_{\mathcal{S}(N)}(C_{k},C)=\bigl\lVert(A_{k}-A)+\varepsilon\bigl(A_{k}^{2}-A^{2}\bigr)\bigr\rVert\le\theta_{k}+\varepsilon\,\theta_{k}\bigl(2\lVert A\rVert+1\bigr)=L\,\theta_{k}, d S ( N ) ( C k , C ) = ( A k − A ) + ε ( A k 2 − A 2 ) ≤ θ k + ε θ k ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) = L θ k ,
where L = 1 + ε ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) L=1+\varepsilon(2\lVert A\rVert+1) L = 1 + ε ( 2 ∥ A ∥ + 1 ) is positive. Since ( θ k ) (\theta_{k}) ( θ k ) converges to 0 0 0 , the sequence ( C k ) (C_{k}) ( C k ) converges to C C C in S ( N ) \mathcal{S}(N) S ( N ) .
Step 3 (a convergent subsequence of matrices). By Limits and Bounded Sequences of Symmetric Real Matrices §order-bound , applied to (1) with the nonnegative number ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ \varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A_{k}\rVert ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ and the matrix C k C_{k} C k ,
∥ Y 1 ( k ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k ) ∥ ≤ ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ + ∥ C k ∥ ≤ ε − 1 + ∥ A ∥ + 1 + ∥ C ∥ + L = : R , \bigl\lVert Y^{(k)}_{1}\oplus Y^{(k)}_{2}\bigr\rVert\le\varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A_{k}\rVert+\lVert C_{k}\rVert\le\varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A\rVert+1+\lVert C\rVert+L=:R, Y 1 ( k ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k ) ≤ ε − 1 + ∥ A k ∥ + ∥ C k ∥ ≤ ε − 1 + ∥ A ∥ + 1 + ∥ C ∥ + L =: R ,
using ∥ C k ∥ ≤ ∥ C ∥ + ∥ C k − C ∥ ≤ ∥ C ∥ + L θ k ≤ ∥ C ∥ + L \lVert C_{k}\rVert\le\lVert C\rVert+\lVert C_{k}-C\rVert\le\lVert C\rVert+L\theta_{k}\le\lVert C\rVert+L ∥ C k ∥ ≤ ∥ C ∥ + ∥ C k − C ∥ ≤ ∥ C ∥ + L θ k ≤ ∥ C ∥ + L from claim 5 of Properties of the Norm of a Symmetric Real Matrix and θ k ≤ 1 \theta_{k}\le1 θ k ≤ 1 . By Block Diagonal Symmetric Matrices and the Blocks of a Symmetric Matrix §norm the number ∥ Y 1 ( k ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k ) ∥ \lVert Y^{(k)}_{1}\oplus Y^{(k)}_{2}\rVert ∥ Y 1 ( k ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k ) ∥ is the larger of ∥ Y 1 ( k ) ∥ \lVert Y^{(k)}_{1}\rVert ∥ Y 1 ( k ) ∥ and ∥ Y 2 ( k ) ∥ \lVert Y^{(k)}_{2}\rVert ∥ Y 2 ( k ) ∥ , so both of these are at most R R R , for every k k k .
By Limits and Bounded Sequences of Symmetric Real Matrices §compactness , applied to the sequence ( Y 1 ( k ) ) k ∈ N (Y^{(k)}_{1})_{k\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 1 ( k ) ) k ∈ N in S ( n 1 ) \mathcal{S}(n_{1}) S ( n 1 ) with the bound R R R , there are a strictly increasing κ 1 : N → N \kappa_{1}:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{N} κ 1 : N → N and X 1 ∈ S ( n 1 ) X_{1}\in\mathcal{S}(n_{1}) X 1 ∈ S ( n 1 ) such that ( Y 1 ( κ 1 ( j ) ) ) j ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(\kappa_{1}(j))}_{1}\bigr)_{j\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 1 ( κ 1 ( j )) ) j ∈ N converges to X 1 X_{1} X 1 . Applying it again to the sequence ( Y 2 ( κ 1 ( j ) ) ) j ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(\kappa_{1}(j))}_{2}\bigr)_{j\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 2 ( κ 1 ( j )) ) j ∈ N in S ( n 2 ) \mathcal{S}(n_{2}) S ( n 2 ) , which is also bounded by R R R , there are a strictly increasing κ 2 : N → N \kappa_{2}:\mathbb{N}\to\mathbb{N} κ 2 : N → N and X 2 ∈ S ( n 2 ) X_{2}\in\mathcal{S}(n_{2}) X 2 ∈ S ( n 2 ) such that ( Y 2 ( κ 1 ( κ 2 ( l ) ) ) ) l ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(\kappa_{1}(\kappa_{2}(l)))}_{2}\bigr)_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 2 ( κ 1 ( κ 2 ( l ))) ) l ∈ N converges to X 2 X_{2} X 2 .
Put k l = κ 1 ( κ 2 ( l ) ) k_{l}=\kappa_{1}(\kappa_{2}(l)) k l = κ 1 ( κ 2 ( l )) for l ∈ N l\in\mathbb{N} l ∈ N ; the sequence ( k l ) l ∈ N (k_{l})_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( k l ) l ∈ N is strictly increasing by claim 2 of A Subsequence of a Subsequence is a Subsequence . By A Subsequence of a Convergent Sequence Has the Same Limit , the sequence ( Y 1 ( k l ) ) l ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(k_{l})}_{1}\bigr)_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 1 ( k l ) ) l ∈ N , being a subsequence of ( Y 1 ( κ 1 ( j ) ) ) j ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(\kappa_{1}(j))}_{1}\bigr)_{j\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 1 ( κ 1 ( j )) ) j ∈ N , converges to X 1 X_{1} X 1 ; and ( Y 2 ( k l ) ) l ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(k_{l})}_{2}\bigr)_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 2 ( k l ) ) l ∈ N converges to X 2 X_{2} X 2 . By the same lemma the sequences ( E k l ) l ∈ N (E_{k_{l}})_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( E k l ) l ∈ N and ( C k l ) l ∈ N (C_{k_{l}})_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( C k l ) l ∈ N converge to E E E and to C C C respectively.
Step 4 (proof of claim 1). Fix i ∈ { 1 , 2 } i\in\{1,2\} i ∈ { 1 , 2 } . For every l ∈ N l\in\mathbb{N} l ∈ N the quadruple ( x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) , p i , Y i ( k l ) ) \bigl(\hat{x}_{i},u_{i}(\hat{x}_{i}),p_{i},Y^{(k_{l})}_{i}\bigr) ( x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) , p i , Y i ( k l ) ) is approximable by test data from above for u i u_{i} u i , by (2). Consider the constant sequences with values x ^ i \hat{x}_{i} x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) u_{i}(\hat{x}_{i}) u i ( x ^ i ) and p i p_{i} p i , which converge to x ^ i \hat{x}_{i} x ^ i in R n i \mathbb{R}^{n_{i}} R n i , to u i ( x ^ i ) u_{i}(\hat{x}_{i}) u i ( x ^ i ) in R \mathbb{R} R and to p i p_{i} p i in R n i \mathbb{R}^{n_{i}} R n i , together with the sequence ( Y i ( k l ) ) l ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(k_{l})}_{i}\bigr)_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y i ( k l ) ) l ∈ N , which converges to X i X_{i} X i in S ( n i ) \mathcal{S}(n_{i}) S ( n i ) by Step 3. By Quadratic Test Functions, Limits, Translation and Locality for Approximability by Test Data §limits , applied with U = Ω i U=\Omega_{i} U = Ω i , u = u i u=u_{i} u = u i , x 0 = x ^ i x_{0}=\hat{x}_{i} x 0 = x ^ i , p = p i p=p_{i} p = p i and the matrix X i X_{i} X i , the quadruple
( x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) , p i , X i ) \bigl(\hat{x}_{i},u_{i}(\hat{x}_{i}),p_{i},X_{i}\bigr) ( x ^ i , u i ( x ^ i ) , p i , X i )
is approximable by test data from above for u i u_{i} u i , the domain being Ω i \Omega_{i} Ω i . This is claim 1.
Step 5 (proof of claim 2). By Block Diagonal Symmetric Matrices and the Blocks of a Symmetric Matrix §norm the sequence ( Y 1 ( k l ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k l ) ) l ∈ N \bigl(Y^{(k_{l})}_{1}\oplus Y^{(k_{l})}_{2}\bigr)_{l\in\mathbb{N}} ( Y 1 ( k l ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k l ) ) l ∈ N converges to X 1 ⊕ X 2 X_{1}\oplus X_{2} X 1 ⊕ X 2 in S ( N ) \mathcal{S}(N) S ( N ) , since its two block sequences converge to X 1 X_{1} X 1 and to X 2 X_{2} X 2 . By (1) we have E k l ⪯ Y 1 ( k l ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k l ) E_{k_{l}}\preceq Y^{(k_{l})}_{1}\oplus Y^{(k_{l})}_{2} E k l ⪯ Y 1 ( k l ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k l ) and Y 1 ( k l ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k l ) ⪯ C k l Y^{(k_{l})}_{1}\oplus Y^{(k_{l})}_{2}\preceq C_{k_{l}} Y 1 ( k l ) ⊕ Y 2 ( k l ) ⪯ C k l for every l l l , while ( E k l ) (E_{k_{l}}) ( E k l ) converges to E E E and ( C k l ) (C_{k_{l}}) ( C k l ) converges to C C C by Step 3. Two applications of Limits and Bounded Sequences of Symmetric Real Matrices §closed therefore give
− ( ε − 1 + ∥ A ∥ ) I N = E ⪯ X 1 ⊕ X 2 ⪯ C = A + ε A 2 , -\bigl(\varepsilon^{-1}+\lVert A\rVert\bigr)I_{N}=E\ \preceq\ X_{1}\oplus X_{2}\ \preceq\ C=A+\varepsilon A^{2}, − ( ε − 1 + ∥ A ∥ ) I N = E ⪯ X 1 ⊕ X 2 ⪯ C = A + ε A 2 ,
which is claim 2.