ScalingStacks

Proof. [025W]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

Proof.

(1) Let (e1,…,er)(e_{1},\ldots,e_{r}) be an orthogonal basis of (V,‖.‖)(V,\|\raisebox{1.72218pt}{.}\|) (cf. Proposition 1.3). Then

‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖=max⁡{|a1|​‖e1‖,…,|ar|​‖er‖}\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|=\max\{|a_{1}|\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,|a_{r}|\|e_{r}\|\}

for all a1,…,ar∈ka_{1},\ldots,a_{r}\in k, so that

‖a1​e1+⋯+ar​er‖∈{0,‖e1‖,…,‖er‖}.\|a_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a_{r}e_{r}\|\in\{0,\|e_{1}\|,\ldots,\|e_{r}\|\}.

(2) First we assume that

‖e1‖=⋯=‖er‖=c.\|e_{1}\|=\cdots=\|e_{r}\|=c.

Then, for any v∈Vv\in V,

‖v‖={cif v≠0,0if v=0.\|v\|=\begin{cases}c&\text{if $v\not=0$},\\ 0&\text{if $v=0$}.\end{cases}

Let us see that

‖a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er‖′=c​max⁡{|a1′|′,…,|ar′|′}\|a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|^{\prime}=c\max\{|a^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}

for a1′,…,ar′∈k′a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime}. Clearly we may assume that

(a1′,…,ar′)≠(0,…,0).(a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r})\not=(0,\ldots,0).

We set γ:=max⁡{|a1′|′,…,|ar′|′}\gamma:=\max\{|a^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}. We fix ω∈k′\omega\in k^{\prime} with |ω|′=γ|\omega|^{\prime}=\gamma. By the assumption (i), for each j=1,…,rj=1,\ldots,r, we can find aj∈ka_{j}\in k and bj′∈k′b^{\prime}_{j}\in k^{\prime} such that

aj′=aj​ω+bj′and|bj′|′<γ.a^{\prime}_{j}=a_{j}\omega+b^{\prime}_{j}\quad\text{and}\quad|b^{\prime}_{j}|^{\prime}<\gamma.

Note that

a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er=ω⁡(∑j=1raj​ej)+b1′​e1+⋯+br′​er.a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}=\omega\left(\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\right)+b^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+b^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}.

Moreover, as ∑j=1raj​ej≠0\sum_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\not=0, we have

‖ω⁡(∑j=1raj​ej)‖′\displaystyle\left\|\omega\left(\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\right)\right\|^{\prime} =γ⁡‖∑j=1raj​ej‖=c​γ\displaystyle=\gamma\left\|\sum\nolimits_{j=1}^{r}a_{j}e_{j}\right\|=c\gamma
and
‖b1′​e1+⋯+br′​er‖′\displaystyle\|b^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+b^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|^{\prime} ≤c​max⁡{|b1′|′,…,|br′|′}<c​γ.\displaystyle\leq c\max\{|b^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|b^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}<c\gamma.

Therefore,

‖a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er‖′=c​γ=c​max⁡{|a1′|′,…,|ar′|′}.\|a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}\|^{\prime}=c\gamma=c\max\{|a^{\prime}_{1}|^{\prime},\ldots,|a^{\prime}_{r}|^{\prime}\}.

In general, we take positive numbers c1<⋯<cbc_{1}<\cdots<c_{b} and non-empty subsets I1,…,IbI_{1},\ldots,I_{b} of {1,…,r}\{1,\ldots,r\} such that {‖el‖∣l∈Is}={cs}\{\|e_{l}\|\mid l\in I_{s}\}=\{c_{s}\} for s=1,…,bs=1,\ldots,b and I1∪⋯∪Ib={1,…,r}I_{1}\cup\cdots\cup I_{b}=\{1,\ldots,r\}. Note that Is∩Is′=∅I_{s}\cap I_{s^{\prime}}=\emptyset for s≠s′s\not=s^{\prime}. Let us consider

x=a1′​e1+⋯+ar′​er=∑s=1bxs∈Vk′(a1′,…,ar′∈k′),x=a^{\prime}_{1}e_{1}+\cdots+a^{\prime}_{r}e_{r}=\sum_{s=1}^{b}x_{s}\in V_{k^{\prime}}\quad(a^{\prime}_{1},\ldots,a^{\prime}_{r}\in k^{\prime}),

where xs=∑l∈Isal′​elx_{s}=\sum_{l\in I_{s}}a^{\prime}_{l}e_{l}. Note that (el)l∈Is(e_{l})_{l\in I_{s}} forms an orthogonal basis of ⨁l∈Isk​el\bigoplus_{l\in I_{s}}ke_{l} and ‖el‖=cs\|e_{l}\|=c_{s} for all l∈Isl\in I_{s}. Therefore, by the above observation,

‖xs‖′=cs​maxl∈Is​{|al′|′}=maxl∈Is⁡{‖al′​el‖′},\left\|x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}=c_{s}\max_{l\in I_{s}}\{|a^{\prime}_{l}|^{\prime}\}=\max_{l\in I_{s}}\{\|a^{\prime}_{l}e_{l}\|^{\prime}\},

so that it is sufficient to see that

‖x‖′=maxs=1,…,b⁡{‖xs‖′}.\|x\|^{\prime}=\max_{s=1,\ldots,b}\left\{\left\|x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}\right\}.

Clearly we may assume that x≠0x\not=0. We set

Σ:={s∈{1,…,b}∣xs≠0}.\Sigma:=\left\{s\in\{1,\ldots,b\}\mid x_{s}\not=0\right\}.

For s,s′∈Σs,s^{\prime}\in\Sigma with s≠s′s\not=s^{\prime}, we have ‖xs‖′≠‖xs′‖′\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}\not=\|x_{s^{\prime}}\|^{\prime}. Indeed, we choose ls∈Isl_{s}\in I_{s} and ls′∈Is′l_{s^{\prime}}\in I_{s^{\prime}} with ‖xs‖′=‖als′​els‖′\left\|x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}=\|a^{\prime}_{l_{s}}e_{l_{s}}\|^{\prime} and ‖xs′‖′=‖als′′​els′‖′\left\|x_{s^{\prime}}\right\|^{\prime}=\|a^{\prime}_{l_{s^{\prime}}}e_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\|^{\prime}. If ‖xs‖′=‖xs′‖′\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}=\|x_{s^{\prime}}\|^{\prime}, then

|als′/als′′|′=‖els′‖/‖els‖,\left|a^{\prime}_{l_{s}}/a^{\prime}_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\right|^{\prime}=\|e_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\|/\|e_{l_{s}}\|,

so that, by the assumption (ii), ‖els′‖=‖els‖\|e_{l_{s^{\prime}}}\|=\|e_{l_{s}}\|, which is a contradiction. Therefore,

‖x‖′=‖∑s∈Σxs‖′=maxs∈Σ⁡{‖xs‖′}=maxs=1,…,b⁡{‖xs‖′},\|x\|^{\prime}=\left\|\sum\nolimits_{s\in\Sigma}x_{s}\right\|^{\prime}=\max_{s\in\Sigma}\{\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}\}=\max_{s=1,\ldots,b}\{\|x_{s}\|^{\prime}\},

as required. ∎

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.