Let $f : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ be approximated arbitrarily well by polynomials of bounded degree. Prove $f$...












6












$begingroup$


I am trying to prove that if a function $f : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ can be approximated arbitrarily well by polynomials of bounded degree, then $f$ itself must be a polynomial.



For starters, let ${ g_m mid g_m : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}}_{m=1}^infty$ be a sequence of polynomials with degree at most $d$ which uniformly converges to $f$. And let the coefficients of the $m$'th approximator be $a_{mn}$ so that $$
g_m(x) = sum_{n=0}^d a_{mn} , x^n.
$$



By "uniform convergence", I mean that given $epsilon > 0$, there exists an $M_epsilon$ such that for all $m ge M_epsilon$ we have $$
sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - g_m(x)| < epsilon.
$$



Clearly, proving the claim is equivalent to proving that for each $n$ between 0 and $d$, the sequence of coefficients $a_{1n}, a_{2n}, ldots$ converges to a some limiting value $a_n^*$.



However, it's not clear to me how to prove this statement. Any hints or guidance is greatly appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The way I see it, the space of polynomials of degree at most $d$ from $[a,b]$ to $mathbb{R}$ is finite-dimensional, and hence closed by any norm you can think of. I don't even know what uniform convergence of a sequence of functions from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ could mean.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:27










  • $begingroup$
    @Smiley Uniform convergence can be defined for any functions between metric spaces.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel So can you be more explicit? What would uniform convergence mean here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:31










  • $begingroup$
    @Simley For $epsilon>0$ there exists an $N$ such that for all $m>N$ we have $|g_m(x) - g(x) |<epsilon$ for all $x$. It's uniform because the same $N$ works for all $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:33






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel That is a very useless definition in this case, since the polynomial sequence $p_n(x)=frac1nx$ does not even converge to $p(x)=x$. A sequence of polynomials of degree $leq d$ converges uniformly with that definition if and only if all non-constant terms coefficients become constant eventually and the constant term coefficient converges.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:39


















6












$begingroup$


I am trying to prove that if a function $f : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ can be approximated arbitrarily well by polynomials of bounded degree, then $f$ itself must be a polynomial.



For starters, let ${ g_m mid g_m : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}}_{m=1}^infty$ be a sequence of polynomials with degree at most $d$ which uniformly converges to $f$. And let the coefficients of the $m$'th approximator be $a_{mn}$ so that $$
g_m(x) = sum_{n=0}^d a_{mn} , x^n.
$$



By "uniform convergence", I mean that given $epsilon > 0$, there exists an $M_epsilon$ such that for all $m ge M_epsilon$ we have $$
sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - g_m(x)| < epsilon.
$$



Clearly, proving the claim is equivalent to proving that for each $n$ between 0 and $d$, the sequence of coefficients $a_{1n}, a_{2n}, ldots$ converges to a some limiting value $a_n^*$.



However, it's not clear to me how to prove this statement. Any hints or guidance is greatly appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    The way I see it, the space of polynomials of degree at most $d$ from $[a,b]$ to $mathbb{R}$ is finite-dimensional, and hence closed by any norm you can think of. I don't even know what uniform convergence of a sequence of functions from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ could mean.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:27










  • $begingroup$
    @Smiley Uniform convergence can be defined for any functions between metric spaces.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel So can you be more explicit? What would uniform convergence mean here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:31










  • $begingroup$
    @Simley For $epsilon>0$ there exists an $N$ such that for all $m>N$ we have $|g_m(x) - g(x) |<epsilon$ for all $x$. It's uniform because the same $N$ works for all $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:33






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel That is a very useless definition in this case, since the polynomial sequence $p_n(x)=frac1nx$ does not even converge to $p(x)=x$. A sequence of polynomials of degree $leq d$ converges uniformly with that definition if and only if all non-constant terms coefficients become constant eventually and the constant term coefficient converges.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:39
















6












6








6





$begingroup$


I am trying to prove that if a function $f : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ can be approximated arbitrarily well by polynomials of bounded degree, then $f$ itself must be a polynomial.



For starters, let ${ g_m mid g_m : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}}_{m=1}^infty$ be a sequence of polynomials with degree at most $d$ which uniformly converges to $f$. And let the coefficients of the $m$'th approximator be $a_{mn}$ so that $$
g_m(x) = sum_{n=0}^d a_{mn} , x^n.
$$



By "uniform convergence", I mean that given $epsilon > 0$, there exists an $M_epsilon$ such that for all $m ge M_epsilon$ we have $$
sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - g_m(x)| < epsilon.
$$



Clearly, proving the claim is equivalent to proving that for each $n$ between 0 and $d$, the sequence of coefficients $a_{1n}, a_{2n}, ldots$ converges to a some limiting value $a_n^*$.



However, it's not clear to me how to prove this statement. Any hints or guidance is greatly appreciated.










share|cite|improve this question











$endgroup$




I am trying to prove that if a function $f : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ can be approximated arbitrarily well by polynomials of bounded degree, then $f$ itself must be a polynomial.



For starters, let ${ g_m mid g_m : mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}}_{m=1}^infty$ be a sequence of polynomials with degree at most $d$ which uniformly converges to $f$. And let the coefficients of the $m$'th approximator be $a_{mn}$ so that $$
g_m(x) = sum_{n=0}^d a_{mn} , x^n.
$$



By "uniform convergence", I mean that given $epsilon > 0$, there exists an $M_epsilon$ such that for all $m ge M_epsilon$ we have $$
sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - g_m(x)| < epsilon.
$$



Clearly, proving the claim is equivalent to proving that for each $n$ between 0 and $d$, the sequence of coefficients $a_{1n}, a_{2n}, ldots$ converges to a some limiting value $a_n^*$.



However, it's not clear to me how to prove this statement. Any hints or guidance is greatly appreciated.







functional-analysis uniform-convergence






share|cite|improve this question















share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited Dec 29 '18 at 8:01







ted

















asked Dec 28 '18 at 20:21









tedted

596412




596412












  • $begingroup$
    The way I see it, the space of polynomials of degree at most $d$ from $[a,b]$ to $mathbb{R}$ is finite-dimensional, and hence closed by any norm you can think of. I don't even know what uniform convergence of a sequence of functions from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ could mean.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:27










  • $begingroup$
    @Smiley Uniform convergence can be defined for any functions between metric spaces.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel So can you be more explicit? What would uniform convergence mean here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:31










  • $begingroup$
    @Simley For $epsilon>0$ there exists an $N$ such that for all $m>N$ we have $|g_m(x) - g(x) |<epsilon$ for all $x$. It's uniform because the same $N$ works for all $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:33






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel That is a very useless definition in this case, since the polynomial sequence $p_n(x)=frac1nx$ does not even converge to $p(x)=x$. A sequence of polynomials of degree $leq d$ converges uniformly with that definition if and only if all non-constant terms coefficients become constant eventually and the constant term coefficient converges.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:39




















  • $begingroup$
    The way I see it, the space of polynomials of degree at most $d$ from $[a,b]$ to $mathbb{R}$ is finite-dimensional, and hence closed by any norm you can think of. I don't even know what uniform convergence of a sequence of functions from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ could mean.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:27










  • $begingroup$
    @Smiley Uniform convergence can be defined for any functions between metric spaces.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:28










  • $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel So can you be more explicit? What would uniform convergence mean here?
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:31










  • $begingroup$
    @Simley For $epsilon>0$ there exists an $N$ such that for all $m>N$ we have $|g_m(x) - g(x) |<epsilon$ for all $x$. It's uniform because the same $N$ works for all $x$.
    $endgroup$
    – Matt Samuel
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:33






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    @Matt Samuel That is a very useless definition in this case, since the polynomial sequence $p_n(x)=frac1nx$ does not even converge to $p(x)=x$. A sequence of polynomials of degree $leq d$ converges uniformly with that definition if and only if all non-constant terms coefficients become constant eventually and the constant term coefficient converges.
    $endgroup$
    – SmileyCraft
    Dec 28 '18 at 20:39


















$begingroup$
The way I see it, the space of polynomials of degree at most $d$ from $[a,b]$ to $mathbb{R}$ is finite-dimensional, and hence closed by any norm you can think of. I don't even know what uniform convergence of a sequence of functions from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ could mean.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 28 '18 at 20:27




$begingroup$
The way I see it, the space of polynomials of degree at most $d$ from $[a,b]$ to $mathbb{R}$ is finite-dimensional, and hence closed by any norm you can think of. I don't even know what uniform convergence of a sequence of functions from $mathbb{R}$ to $mathbb{R}$ could mean.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 28 '18 at 20:27












$begingroup$
@Smiley Uniform convergence can be defined for any functions between metric spaces.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Dec 28 '18 at 20:28




$begingroup$
@Smiley Uniform convergence can be defined for any functions between metric spaces.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Dec 28 '18 at 20:28












$begingroup$
@Matt Samuel So can you be more explicit? What would uniform convergence mean here?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 28 '18 at 20:31




$begingroup$
@Matt Samuel So can you be more explicit? What would uniform convergence mean here?
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 28 '18 at 20:31












$begingroup$
@Simley For $epsilon>0$ there exists an $N$ such that for all $m>N$ we have $|g_m(x) - g(x) |<epsilon$ for all $x$. It's uniform because the same $N$ works for all $x$.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Dec 28 '18 at 20:33




$begingroup$
@Simley For $epsilon>0$ there exists an $N$ such that for all $m>N$ we have $|g_m(x) - g(x) |<epsilon$ for all $x$. It's uniform because the same $N$ works for all $x$.
$endgroup$
– Matt Samuel
Dec 28 '18 at 20:33




1




1




$begingroup$
@Matt Samuel That is a very useless definition in this case, since the polynomial sequence $p_n(x)=frac1nx$ does not even converge to $p(x)=x$. A sequence of polynomials of degree $leq d$ converges uniformly with that definition if and only if all non-constant terms coefficients become constant eventually and the constant term coefficient converges.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 28 '18 at 20:39






$begingroup$
@Matt Samuel That is a very useless definition in this case, since the polynomial sequence $p_n(x)=frac1nx$ does not even converge to $p(x)=x$. A sequence of polynomials of degree $leq d$ converges uniformly with that definition if and only if all non-constant terms coefficients become constant eventually and the constant term coefficient converges.
$endgroup$
– SmileyCraft
Dec 28 '18 at 20:39












4 Answers
4






active

oldest

votes


















4












$begingroup$

For each $n$ you can find some
$$P_n(x)=a_d^nx^d+...+a_1^nx+a_0^n$$
such that
$$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}$$



Then, for each $n,m$ you have
$$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_m(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m}$$



This shows that $P_m(x)-P_n(x)$ is a polynomial which is bounded on $mathbb R$ and hence a constant. Therefore, there exists some polynomial $P(x)$ and some $c_n in mathbb R$ such that
$$P_n(x)=P(x)+c_n$$



By the above you get
$$left| c_n -c_m right| =sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m} $$



Therefore, $c_n$ is Cauchy and hence convergent to some $c$.



We claim that $f(x)=P(x)+c$.



Let $epsilon >0$. Pick some $N$ such that, for all $n >N$ we have
$$frac{1}{n} < frac{epsilon}{2}\
|c_n-c|< frac{epsilon}{2}$$



Let $n >N$ be fixed but arbitrary. Then
$$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_n(x) - P(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ |c_n-c| <frac{epsilon}{2}+frac{epsilon}{2}=epsilon$$



This shows that
$$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| < epsilon$$
for all $epsilon >0$.






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$





















    2












    $begingroup$

    First pick a polynomial $g(x)$ for $varepsilon = 1$, i.e., $suplimits_{xin mathbb{R}}|f(x)-g(x)|< 1$.
    Let $h(x)= f(x)-g(x)$.
    Then the same condition holds for $h(x)$:
    To obtain an approximation with error $varepsilon$, find one for $f(x)$ and subtract $g(x)$.



    So it is enough to verify the assertion for bounded functions.
    But that is trivial: a bounded function with this property must be constant.
    Indirect proof: if it had two different values (say at points $x,y$), let $delta=|h(x)-h(y)|$, and put $varepsilon:=delta/3$. The approximating polynomial must be constant (otherwise we have a problem with the limit at infinity), but no constant is close enough at both $x$ and $y$.
    Hence, $h(x)$ is a constant, and then $f(x)= g(x)+h(x)$ is a polynomial.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$





















      2












      $begingroup$

      Since $f$ is a uniform limit of polynomials (contiunous functions), in particular it is continuous.



      Consider the space $C(mathbb{R})$ of continuous functions $mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ and equip it with a family of seminorms $|cdot|_{infty, [a,b]}$ given by
      $$|g|_{infty, [a,b]} = sup_{xin[a,b]}|g(x)|$$



      for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



      This turns $C(mathbb{R})$ into a locally convex topological vector space.



      Assume that $f$ can be uniformly approximated by polynomials $(p_k)_k$ of degree $le n$.



      The subspace $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$ of real polynomials of degree $le n$ is a finite dimensional subspace of $C(mathbb{R})$ and hence it is closed in $C(mathbb{R})$. Since $p_k to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$, in particular $|f -p_k|_{infty, [a,b]} to 0$ for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



      Hence $p_k to f$ in the above topology so $f$ is in the closure of $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$. Since the subspace is closed, we conclude $f in mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$





















        1












        $begingroup$

        Here is a different approach: Denote $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ the space of bounded functions on the interval $[-t,t]$. We consider this space with the supremum norm $Vert . Vert _infty $, which makes it a normed space. Denote the space of polynomials with degree at most $d$ by $W=mathbb{R}_{leq d} [x] $, these are continues thus bounded function on the interval $[-t,t]$. But we know more than that: W is a finite dimensional subspace of $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every t, thus it's closed.



        If you can approximate $f:mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ aritrarily well on $mathbb{R}$ by elements in $W$, of course you can approximate it arbitrarily well in $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every $t>0$ (and $f in mathcal{B} [-t,t]$). But $W$ is closed and thus $f vert _{[-t,t]} in W$ for all $t$, i.e. it is a polynomial on every $[-t,t]$. But every two polynomials that agree on an open set must be the same polynomial (they have the same derivatives, which give the coefficients, i.e. Taylor Expansion), thus we see $f$ is a polynomial on the whole of $mathbb{R}$






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$














          Your Answer








          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "69"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: true,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: 10,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });














          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3055254%2flet-f-mathbbr-to-mathbbr-be-approximated-arbitrarily-well-by-polynomi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes








          4 Answers
          4






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          4












          $begingroup$

          For each $n$ you can find some
          $$P_n(x)=a_d^nx^d+...+a_1^nx+a_0^n$$
          such that
          $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}$$



          Then, for each $n,m$ you have
          $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_m(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m}$$



          This shows that $P_m(x)-P_n(x)$ is a polynomial which is bounded on $mathbb R$ and hence a constant. Therefore, there exists some polynomial $P(x)$ and some $c_n in mathbb R$ such that
          $$P_n(x)=P(x)+c_n$$



          By the above you get
          $$left| c_n -c_m right| =sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m} $$



          Therefore, $c_n$ is Cauchy and hence convergent to some $c$.



          We claim that $f(x)=P(x)+c$.



          Let $epsilon >0$. Pick some $N$ such that, for all $n >N$ we have
          $$frac{1}{n} < frac{epsilon}{2}\
          |c_n-c|< frac{epsilon}{2}$$



          Let $n >N$ be fixed but arbitrary. Then
          $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_n(x) - P(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ |c_n-c| <frac{epsilon}{2}+frac{epsilon}{2}=epsilon$$



          This shows that
          $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| < epsilon$$
          for all $epsilon >0$.






          share|cite|improve this answer











          $endgroup$


















            4












            $begingroup$

            For each $n$ you can find some
            $$P_n(x)=a_d^nx^d+...+a_1^nx+a_0^n$$
            such that
            $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}$$



            Then, for each $n,m$ you have
            $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_m(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m}$$



            This shows that $P_m(x)-P_n(x)$ is a polynomial which is bounded on $mathbb R$ and hence a constant. Therefore, there exists some polynomial $P(x)$ and some $c_n in mathbb R$ such that
            $$P_n(x)=P(x)+c_n$$



            By the above you get
            $$left| c_n -c_m right| =sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m} $$



            Therefore, $c_n$ is Cauchy and hence convergent to some $c$.



            We claim that $f(x)=P(x)+c$.



            Let $epsilon >0$. Pick some $N$ such that, for all $n >N$ we have
            $$frac{1}{n} < frac{epsilon}{2}\
            |c_n-c|< frac{epsilon}{2}$$



            Let $n >N$ be fixed but arbitrary. Then
            $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_n(x) - P(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ |c_n-c| <frac{epsilon}{2}+frac{epsilon}{2}=epsilon$$



            This shows that
            $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| < epsilon$$
            for all $epsilon >0$.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$
















              4












              4








              4





              $begingroup$

              For each $n$ you can find some
              $$P_n(x)=a_d^nx^d+...+a_1^nx+a_0^n$$
              such that
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}$$



              Then, for each $n,m$ you have
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_m(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m}$$



              This shows that $P_m(x)-P_n(x)$ is a polynomial which is bounded on $mathbb R$ and hence a constant. Therefore, there exists some polynomial $P(x)$ and some $c_n in mathbb R$ such that
              $$P_n(x)=P(x)+c_n$$



              By the above you get
              $$left| c_n -c_m right| =sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m} $$



              Therefore, $c_n$ is Cauchy and hence convergent to some $c$.



              We claim that $f(x)=P(x)+c$.



              Let $epsilon >0$. Pick some $N$ such that, for all $n >N$ we have
              $$frac{1}{n} < frac{epsilon}{2}\
              |c_n-c|< frac{epsilon}{2}$$



              Let $n >N$ be fixed but arbitrary. Then
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_n(x) - P(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ |c_n-c| <frac{epsilon}{2}+frac{epsilon}{2}=epsilon$$



              This shows that
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| < epsilon$$
              for all $epsilon >0$.






              share|cite|improve this answer











              $endgroup$



              For each $n$ you can find some
              $$P_n(x)=a_d^nx^d+...+a_1^nx+a_0^n$$
              such that
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}$$



              Then, for each $n,m$ you have
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_m(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m}$$



              This shows that $P_m(x)-P_n(x)$ is a polynomial which is bounded on $mathbb R$ and hence a constant. Therefore, there exists some polynomial $P(x)$ and some $c_n in mathbb R$ such that
              $$P_n(x)=P(x)+c_n$$



              By the above you get
              $$left| c_n -c_m right| =sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_m(x) - P_n(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ frac{1}{m} $$



              Therefore, $c_n$ is Cauchy and hence convergent to some $c$.



              We claim that $f(x)=P(x)+c$.



              Let $epsilon >0$. Pick some $N$ such that, for all $n >N$ we have
              $$frac{1}{n} < frac{epsilon}{2}\
              |c_n-c|< frac{epsilon}{2}$$



              Let $n >N$ be fixed but arbitrary. Then
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| leq sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P_n(x)| +sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |P_n(x) - P(x)| < frac{1}{n}+ |c_n-c| <frac{epsilon}{2}+frac{epsilon}{2}=epsilon$$



              This shows that
              $$sup_{x in mathbb{R}} |f(x) - P(x)| < epsilon$$
              for all $epsilon >0$.







              share|cite|improve this answer














              share|cite|improve this answer



              share|cite|improve this answer








              edited Dec 28 '18 at 21:03

























              answered Dec 28 '18 at 20:57









              N. S.N. S.

              105k7115210




              105k7115210























                  2












                  $begingroup$

                  First pick a polynomial $g(x)$ for $varepsilon = 1$, i.e., $suplimits_{xin mathbb{R}}|f(x)-g(x)|< 1$.
                  Let $h(x)= f(x)-g(x)$.
                  Then the same condition holds for $h(x)$:
                  To obtain an approximation with error $varepsilon$, find one for $f(x)$ and subtract $g(x)$.



                  So it is enough to verify the assertion for bounded functions.
                  But that is trivial: a bounded function with this property must be constant.
                  Indirect proof: if it had two different values (say at points $x,y$), let $delta=|h(x)-h(y)|$, and put $varepsilon:=delta/3$. The approximating polynomial must be constant (otherwise we have a problem with the limit at infinity), but no constant is close enough at both $x$ and $y$.
                  Hence, $h(x)$ is a constant, and then $f(x)= g(x)+h(x)$ is a polynomial.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$


















                    2












                    $begingroup$

                    First pick a polynomial $g(x)$ for $varepsilon = 1$, i.e., $suplimits_{xin mathbb{R}}|f(x)-g(x)|< 1$.
                    Let $h(x)= f(x)-g(x)$.
                    Then the same condition holds for $h(x)$:
                    To obtain an approximation with error $varepsilon$, find one for $f(x)$ and subtract $g(x)$.



                    So it is enough to verify the assertion for bounded functions.
                    But that is trivial: a bounded function with this property must be constant.
                    Indirect proof: if it had two different values (say at points $x,y$), let $delta=|h(x)-h(y)|$, and put $varepsilon:=delta/3$. The approximating polynomial must be constant (otherwise we have a problem with the limit at infinity), but no constant is close enough at both $x$ and $y$.
                    Hence, $h(x)$ is a constant, and then $f(x)= g(x)+h(x)$ is a polynomial.






                    share|cite|improve this answer









                    $endgroup$
















                      2












                      2








                      2





                      $begingroup$

                      First pick a polynomial $g(x)$ for $varepsilon = 1$, i.e., $suplimits_{xin mathbb{R}}|f(x)-g(x)|< 1$.
                      Let $h(x)= f(x)-g(x)$.
                      Then the same condition holds for $h(x)$:
                      To obtain an approximation with error $varepsilon$, find one for $f(x)$ and subtract $g(x)$.



                      So it is enough to verify the assertion for bounded functions.
                      But that is trivial: a bounded function with this property must be constant.
                      Indirect proof: if it had two different values (say at points $x,y$), let $delta=|h(x)-h(y)|$, and put $varepsilon:=delta/3$. The approximating polynomial must be constant (otherwise we have a problem with the limit at infinity), but no constant is close enough at both $x$ and $y$.
                      Hence, $h(x)$ is a constant, and then $f(x)= g(x)+h(x)$ is a polynomial.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$



                      First pick a polynomial $g(x)$ for $varepsilon = 1$, i.e., $suplimits_{xin mathbb{R}}|f(x)-g(x)|< 1$.
                      Let $h(x)= f(x)-g(x)$.
                      Then the same condition holds for $h(x)$:
                      To obtain an approximation with error $varepsilon$, find one for $f(x)$ and subtract $g(x)$.



                      So it is enough to verify the assertion for bounded functions.
                      But that is trivial: a bounded function with this property must be constant.
                      Indirect proof: if it had two different values (say at points $x,y$), let $delta=|h(x)-h(y)|$, and put $varepsilon:=delta/3$. The approximating polynomial must be constant (otherwise we have a problem with the limit at infinity), but no constant is close enough at both $x$ and $y$.
                      Hence, $h(x)$ is a constant, and then $f(x)= g(x)+h(x)$ is a polynomial.







                      share|cite|improve this answer












                      share|cite|improve this answer



                      share|cite|improve this answer










                      answered Dec 28 '18 at 21:23









                      A. PongráczA. Pongrácz

                      6,0821929




                      6,0821929























                          2












                          $begingroup$

                          Since $f$ is a uniform limit of polynomials (contiunous functions), in particular it is continuous.



                          Consider the space $C(mathbb{R})$ of continuous functions $mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ and equip it with a family of seminorms $|cdot|_{infty, [a,b]}$ given by
                          $$|g|_{infty, [a,b]} = sup_{xin[a,b]}|g(x)|$$



                          for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                          This turns $C(mathbb{R})$ into a locally convex topological vector space.



                          Assume that $f$ can be uniformly approximated by polynomials $(p_k)_k$ of degree $le n$.



                          The subspace $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$ of real polynomials of degree $le n$ is a finite dimensional subspace of $C(mathbb{R})$ and hence it is closed in $C(mathbb{R})$. Since $p_k to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$, in particular $|f -p_k|_{infty, [a,b]} to 0$ for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                          Hence $p_k to f$ in the above topology so $f$ is in the closure of $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$. Since the subspace is closed, we conclude $f in mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$


















                            2












                            $begingroup$

                            Since $f$ is a uniform limit of polynomials (contiunous functions), in particular it is continuous.



                            Consider the space $C(mathbb{R})$ of continuous functions $mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ and equip it with a family of seminorms $|cdot|_{infty, [a,b]}$ given by
                            $$|g|_{infty, [a,b]} = sup_{xin[a,b]}|g(x)|$$



                            for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                            This turns $C(mathbb{R})$ into a locally convex topological vector space.



                            Assume that $f$ can be uniformly approximated by polynomials $(p_k)_k$ of degree $le n$.



                            The subspace $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$ of real polynomials of degree $le n$ is a finite dimensional subspace of $C(mathbb{R})$ and hence it is closed in $C(mathbb{R})$. Since $p_k to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$, in particular $|f -p_k|_{infty, [a,b]} to 0$ for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                            Hence $p_k to f$ in the above topology so $f$ is in the closure of $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$. Since the subspace is closed, we conclude $f in mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$.






                            share|cite|improve this answer









                            $endgroup$
















                              2












                              2








                              2





                              $begingroup$

                              Since $f$ is a uniform limit of polynomials (contiunous functions), in particular it is continuous.



                              Consider the space $C(mathbb{R})$ of continuous functions $mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ and equip it with a family of seminorms $|cdot|_{infty, [a,b]}$ given by
                              $$|g|_{infty, [a,b]} = sup_{xin[a,b]}|g(x)|$$



                              for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                              This turns $C(mathbb{R})$ into a locally convex topological vector space.



                              Assume that $f$ can be uniformly approximated by polynomials $(p_k)_k$ of degree $le n$.



                              The subspace $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$ of real polynomials of degree $le n$ is a finite dimensional subspace of $C(mathbb{R})$ and hence it is closed in $C(mathbb{R})$. Since $p_k to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$, in particular $|f -p_k|_{infty, [a,b]} to 0$ for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                              Hence $p_k to f$ in the above topology so $f$ is in the closure of $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$. Since the subspace is closed, we conclude $f in mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$.






                              share|cite|improve this answer









                              $endgroup$



                              Since $f$ is a uniform limit of polynomials (contiunous functions), in particular it is continuous.



                              Consider the space $C(mathbb{R})$ of continuous functions $mathbb{R} to mathbb{R}$ and equip it with a family of seminorms $|cdot|_{infty, [a,b]}$ given by
                              $$|g|_{infty, [a,b]} = sup_{xin[a,b]}|g(x)|$$



                              for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                              This turns $C(mathbb{R})$ into a locally convex topological vector space.



                              Assume that $f$ can be uniformly approximated by polynomials $(p_k)_k$ of degree $le n$.



                              The subspace $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$ of real polynomials of degree $le n$ is a finite dimensional subspace of $C(mathbb{R})$ and hence it is closed in $C(mathbb{R})$. Since $p_k to f$ uniformly on $mathbb{R}$, in particular $|f -p_k|_{infty, [a,b]} to 0$ for all segments $[a,b] subseteq mathbb{R}$.



                              Hence $p_k to f$ in the above topology so $f$ is in the closure of $mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$. Since the subspace is closed, we conclude $f in mathbb{R}_{le n}[x]$.







                              share|cite|improve this answer












                              share|cite|improve this answer



                              share|cite|improve this answer










                              answered Dec 29 '18 at 11:25









                              mechanodroidmechanodroid

                              28.9k62648




                              28.9k62648























                                  1












                                  $begingroup$

                                  Here is a different approach: Denote $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ the space of bounded functions on the interval $[-t,t]$. We consider this space with the supremum norm $Vert . Vert _infty $, which makes it a normed space. Denote the space of polynomials with degree at most $d$ by $W=mathbb{R}_{leq d} [x] $, these are continues thus bounded function on the interval $[-t,t]$. But we know more than that: W is a finite dimensional subspace of $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every t, thus it's closed.



                                  If you can approximate $f:mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ aritrarily well on $mathbb{R}$ by elements in $W$, of course you can approximate it arbitrarily well in $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every $t>0$ (and $f in mathcal{B} [-t,t]$). But $W$ is closed and thus $f vert _{[-t,t]} in W$ for all $t$, i.e. it is a polynomial on every $[-t,t]$. But every two polynomials that agree on an open set must be the same polynomial (they have the same derivatives, which give the coefficients, i.e. Taylor Expansion), thus we see $f$ is a polynomial on the whole of $mathbb{R}$






                                  share|cite|improve this answer









                                  $endgroup$


















                                    1












                                    $begingroup$

                                    Here is a different approach: Denote $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ the space of bounded functions on the interval $[-t,t]$. We consider this space with the supremum norm $Vert . Vert _infty $, which makes it a normed space. Denote the space of polynomials with degree at most $d$ by $W=mathbb{R}_{leq d} [x] $, these are continues thus bounded function on the interval $[-t,t]$. But we know more than that: W is a finite dimensional subspace of $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every t, thus it's closed.



                                    If you can approximate $f:mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ aritrarily well on $mathbb{R}$ by elements in $W$, of course you can approximate it arbitrarily well in $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every $t>0$ (and $f in mathcal{B} [-t,t]$). But $W$ is closed and thus $f vert _{[-t,t]} in W$ for all $t$, i.e. it is a polynomial on every $[-t,t]$. But every two polynomials that agree on an open set must be the same polynomial (they have the same derivatives, which give the coefficients, i.e. Taylor Expansion), thus we see $f$ is a polynomial on the whole of $mathbb{R}$






                                    share|cite|improve this answer









                                    $endgroup$
















                                      1












                                      1








                                      1





                                      $begingroup$

                                      Here is a different approach: Denote $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ the space of bounded functions on the interval $[-t,t]$. We consider this space with the supremum norm $Vert . Vert _infty $, which makes it a normed space. Denote the space of polynomials with degree at most $d$ by $W=mathbb{R}_{leq d} [x] $, these are continues thus bounded function on the interval $[-t,t]$. But we know more than that: W is a finite dimensional subspace of $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every t, thus it's closed.



                                      If you can approximate $f:mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ aritrarily well on $mathbb{R}$ by elements in $W$, of course you can approximate it arbitrarily well in $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every $t>0$ (and $f in mathcal{B} [-t,t]$). But $W$ is closed and thus $f vert _{[-t,t]} in W$ for all $t$, i.e. it is a polynomial on every $[-t,t]$. But every two polynomials that agree on an open set must be the same polynomial (they have the same derivatives, which give the coefficients, i.e. Taylor Expansion), thus we see $f$ is a polynomial on the whole of $mathbb{R}$






                                      share|cite|improve this answer









                                      $endgroup$



                                      Here is a different approach: Denote $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ the space of bounded functions on the interval $[-t,t]$. We consider this space with the supremum norm $Vert . Vert _infty $, which makes it a normed space. Denote the space of polynomials with degree at most $d$ by $W=mathbb{R}_{leq d} [x] $, these are continues thus bounded function on the interval $[-t,t]$. But we know more than that: W is a finite dimensional subspace of $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every t, thus it's closed.



                                      If you can approximate $f:mathbb{R} rightarrow mathbb{R}$ aritrarily well on $mathbb{R}$ by elements in $W$, of course you can approximate it arbitrarily well in $mathcal{B} [-t,t]$ for every $t>0$ (and $f in mathcal{B} [-t,t]$). But $W$ is closed and thus $f vert _{[-t,t]} in W$ for all $t$, i.e. it is a polynomial on every $[-t,t]$. But every two polynomials that agree on an open set must be the same polynomial (they have the same derivatives, which give the coefficients, i.e. Taylor Expansion), thus we see $f$ is a polynomial on the whole of $mathbb{R}$







                                      share|cite|improve this answer












                                      share|cite|improve this answer



                                      share|cite|improve this answer










                                      answered Dec 29 '18 at 11:11









                                      pitariverpitariver

                                      469213




                                      469213






























                                          draft saved

                                          draft discarded




















































                                          Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


                                          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

                                          But avoid



                                          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

                                          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


                                          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


                                          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




                                          draft saved


                                          draft discarded














                                          StackExchange.ready(
                                          function () {
                                          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3055254%2flet-f-mathbbr-to-mathbbr-be-approximated-arbitrarily-well-by-polynomi%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                                          }
                                          );

                                          Post as a guest















                                          Required, but never shown





















































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown

































                                          Required, but never shown














                                          Required, but never shown












                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Required, but never shown







                                          Popular posts from this blog

                                          Biblatex bibliography style without URLs when DOI exists (in Overleaf with Zotero bibliography)

                                          ComboBox Display Member on multiple fields

                                          Is it possible to collect Nectar points via Trainline?