$v subseteq H implies V^bot$ is a closed subspace of the Hilbert space $H$












2












$begingroup$


Exercise :




Show that if $H$ is a Hilbert space and $V subseteq H$, then $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.




Attempt :



I thought of two possible approaches. One would be a classic one, getting an arbitrary sequence $v_n in V^bot$ and showing that $lim v_n = v in V^bot$. The other one would be showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$, which implies that $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.



For my first approach, let $v_n in V^bot$ and $v_n to h in H$ . Then, for all $v in V$, it is :



$$langle x,v rangle = langle lim v_n, vrangle = limlangle v_n, vrangle =0 implies x in V^bot $$



That's really straightforward and simple.



I am wondering how would one complete my thought for my second possible approach, meaningly showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$. I seem a little rusty on that.






functional-analysis hilbert-spaces normed-spaces inner-product-space orthogonality







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $V^perp$, by definition, is the intersection of closed subspaces, once you show that it is true for a singleton $V={v}$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:35










  • $begingroup$
    Also I believe that your second approach is a vicious circle, because how do you prove that $A=(A^perp)^perp$ implies that $A$ is closed? You invoke this result that you want to prove now
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:39












  • $begingroup$
    @Federico Thanks for your first input, but it's not needed as I've already proven what needs to be proven. My question is strictly regarding my second approach. It is already proven that $ A = A^{botbot}$ implies that $A$ is closed, thus no need for any elaboration.
    $endgroup$
    – Rebellos
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:41










  • $begingroup$
    Honestly, I really doubt that one can prove "$V=(V^perp)^perp implies V text{ is closed}$" without already knowing that $W^perp$ is closed for any $W$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 11 '18 at 13:25


















2












$begingroup$


Exercise :




Show that if $H$ is a Hilbert space and $V subseteq H$, then $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.




Attempt :



I thought of two possible approaches. One would be a classic one, getting an arbitrary sequence $v_n in V^bot$ and showing that $lim v_n = v in V^bot$. The other one would be showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$, which implies that $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.



For my first approach, let $v_n in V^bot$ and $v_n to h in H$ . Then, for all $v in V$, it is :



$$langle x,v rangle = langle lim v_n, vrangle = limlangle v_n, vrangle =0 implies x in V^bot $$



That's really straightforward and simple.



I am wondering how would one complete my thought for my second possible approach, meaningly showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$. I seem a little rusty on that.






functional-analysis hilbert-spaces normed-spaces inner-product-space orthogonality







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    $V^perp$, by definition, is the intersection of closed subspaces, once you show that it is true for a singleton $V={v}$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:35










  • $begingroup$
    Also I believe that your second approach is a vicious circle, because how do you prove that $A=(A^perp)^perp$ implies that $A$ is closed? You invoke this result that you want to prove now
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:39












  • $begingroup$
    @Federico Thanks for your first input, but it's not needed as I've already proven what needs to be proven. My question is strictly regarding my second approach. It is already proven that $ A = A^{botbot}$ implies that $A$ is closed, thus no need for any elaboration.
    $endgroup$
    – Rebellos
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:41










  • $begingroup$
    Honestly, I really doubt that one can prove "$V=(V^perp)^perp implies V text{ is closed}$" without already knowing that $W^perp$ is closed for any $W$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 11 '18 at 13:25
















2












2








2





$begingroup$


Exercise :




Show that if $H$ is a Hilbert space and $V subseteq H$, then $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.




Attempt :



I thought of two possible approaches. One would be a classic one, getting an arbitrary sequence $v_n in V^bot$ and showing that $lim v_n = v in V^bot$. The other one would be showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$, which implies that $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.



For my first approach, let $v_n in V^bot$ and $v_n to h in H$ . Then, for all $v in V$, it is :



$$langle x,v rangle = langle lim v_n, vrangle = limlangle v_n, vrangle =0 implies x in V^bot $$



That's really straightforward and simple.



I am wondering how would one complete my thought for my second possible approach, meaningly showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$. I seem a little rusty on that.






functional-analysis hilbert-spaces normed-spaces inner-product-space orthogonality







share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Exercise :




Show that if $H$ is a Hilbert space and $V subseteq H$, then $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.




Attempt :



I thought of two possible approaches. One would be a classic one, getting an arbitrary sequence $v_n in V^bot$ and showing that $lim v_n = v in V^bot$. The other one would be showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$, which implies that $V^bot$ is a closed subspace of $H$.



For my first approach, let $v_n in V^bot$ and $v_n to h in H$ . Then, for all $v in V$, it is :



$$langle x,v rangle = langle lim v_n, vrangle = limlangle v_n, vrangle =0 implies x in V^bot $$



That's really straightforward and simple.



I am wondering how would one complete my thought for my second possible approach, meaningly showing that $V^bot = (V^bot)^{botbot}$. I seem a little rusty on that.






functional-analysis hilbert-spaces normed-spaces inner-product-space orthogonality




functional-analysis hilbert-spaces normed-spaces inner-product-space orthogonality






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Dec 10 '18 at 19:31









RebellosRebellos

15.5k31250




15.5k31250












  • $begingroup$
    $V^perp$, by definition, is the intersection of closed subspaces, once you show that it is true for a singleton $V={v}$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:35










  • $begingroup$
    Also I believe that your second approach is a vicious circle, because how do you prove that $A=(A^perp)^perp$ implies that $A$ is closed? You invoke this result that you want to prove now
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:39












  • $begingroup$
    @Federico Thanks for your first input, but it's not needed as I've already proven what needs to be proven. My question is strictly regarding my second approach. It is already proven that $ A = A^{botbot}$ implies that $A$ is closed, thus no need for any elaboration.
    $endgroup$
    – Rebellos
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:41










  • $begingroup$
    Honestly, I really doubt that one can prove "$V=(V^perp)^perp implies V text{ is closed}$" without already knowing that $W^perp$ is closed for any $W$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 11 '18 at 13:25




















  • $begingroup$
    $V^perp$, by definition, is the intersection of closed subspaces, once you show that it is true for a singleton $V={v}$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:35










  • $begingroup$
    Also I believe that your second approach is a vicious circle, because how do you prove that $A=(A^perp)^perp$ implies that $A$ is closed? You invoke this result that you want to prove now
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:39












  • $begingroup$
    @Federico Thanks for your first input, but it's not needed as I've already proven what needs to be proven. My question is strictly regarding my second approach. It is already proven that $ A = A^{botbot}$ implies that $A$ is closed, thus no need for any elaboration.
    $endgroup$
    – Rebellos
    Dec 10 '18 at 19:41










  • $begingroup$
    Honestly, I really doubt that one can prove "$V=(V^perp)^perp implies V text{ is closed}$" without already knowing that $W^perp$ is closed for any $W$
    $endgroup$
    – Federico
    Dec 11 '18 at 13:25


















$begingroup$
$V^perp$, by definition, is the intersection of closed subspaces, once you show that it is true for a singleton $V={v}$
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 10 '18 at 19:35




$begingroup$
$V^perp$, by definition, is the intersection of closed subspaces, once you show that it is true for a singleton $V={v}$
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 10 '18 at 19:35












$begingroup$
Also I believe that your second approach is a vicious circle, because how do you prove that $A=(A^perp)^perp$ implies that $A$ is closed? You invoke this result that you want to prove now
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 10 '18 at 19:39






$begingroup$
Also I believe that your second approach is a vicious circle, because how do you prove that $A=(A^perp)^perp$ implies that $A$ is closed? You invoke this result that you want to prove now
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 10 '18 at 19:39














$begingroup$
@Federico Thanks for your first input, but it's not needed as I've already proven what needs to be proven. My question is strictly regarding my second approach. It is already proven that $ A = A^{botbot}$ implies that $A$ is closed, thus no need for any elaboration.
$endgroup$
– Rebellos
Dec 10 '18 at 19:41




$begingroup$
@Federico Thanks for your first input, but it's not needed as I've already proven what needs to be proven. My question is strictly regarding my second approach. It is already proven that $ A = A^{botbot}$ implies that $A$ is closed, thus no need for any elaboration.
$endgroup$
– Rebellos
Dec 10 '18 at 19:41












$begingroup$
Honestly, I really doubt that one can prove "$V=(V^perp)^perp implies V text{ is closed}$" without already knowing that $W^perp$ is closed for any $W$
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 13:25






$begingroup$
Honestly, I really doubt that one can prove "$V=(V^perp)^perp implies V text{ is closed}$" without already knowing that $W^perp$ is closed for any $W$
$endgroup$
– Federico
Dec 11 '18 at 13:25












2 Answers
2






active

oldest

votes


















1












$begingroup$

Presumably you already know that (1) $Xsubseteq (X^bot)^bot$ for all sets $X$ and (2) if $Xsubseteq Y$ then $X^botsupseteq Y^bot$. (If not, just check that both facts follow immediately from the definition of ${ }^bot$.)



Apply (1) with $V$ as your $X$ to get $Vsubseteq(V^bot)^bot$ and then use (2) to get $V^botsupseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



On the other hand, if you apply (1) with $V^bot$ as your $X$, then you get $V^botsubseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



So you have inclusions in both directions, and therefore $V^bot=((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    0












    $begingroup$

    Hint: An arbitrary intersection of closed subspaces is a closed subspace.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
      $endgroup$
      – Federico
      Dec 10 '18 at 19:37











    Your Answer





    StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
    return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
    StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
    StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
    });
    });
    }, "mathjax-editing");

    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%2f3034369%2fv-subseteq-h-implies-v-bot-is-a-closed-subspace-of-the-hilbert-space-h%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes








    2 Answers
    2






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    1












    $begingroup$

    Presumably you already know that (1) $Xsubseteq (X^bot)^bot$ for all sets $X$ and (2) if $Xsubseteq Y$ then $X^botsupseteq Y^bot$. (If not, just check that both facts follow immediately from the definition of ${ }^bot$.)



    Apply (1) with $V$ as your $X$ to get $Vsubseteq(V^bot)^bot$ and then use (2) to get $V^botsupseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



    On the other hand, if you apply (1) with $V^bot$ as your $X$, then you get $V^botsubseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



    So you have inclusions in both directions, and therefore $V^bot=((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      Presumably you already know that (1) $Xsubseteq (X^bot)^bot$ for all sets $X$ and (2) if $Xsubseteq Y$ then $X^botsupseteq Y^bot$. (If not, just check that both facts follow immediately from the definition of ${ }^bot$.)



      Apply (1) with $V$ as your $X$ to get $Vsubseteq(V^bot)^bot$ and then use (2) to get $V^botsupseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



      On the other hand, if you apply (1) with $V^bot$ as your $X$, then you get $V^botsubseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



      So you have inclusions in both directions, and therefore $V^bot=((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Presumably you already know that (1) $Xsubseteq (X^bot)^bot$ for all sets $X$ and (2) if $Xsubseteq Y$ then $X^botsupseteq Y^bot$. (If not, just check that both facts follow immediately from the definition of ${ }^bot$.)



        Apply (1) with $V$ as your $X$ to get $Vsubseteq(V^bot)^bot$ and then use (2) to get $V^botsupseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



        On the other hand, if you apply (1) with $V^bot$ as your $X$, then you get $V^botsubseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



        So you have inclusions in both directions, and therefore $V^bot=((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Presumably you already know that (1) $Xsubseteq (X^bot)^bot$ for all sets $X$ and (2) if $Xsubseteq Y$ then $X^botsupseteq Y^bot$. (If not, just check that both facts follow immediately from the definition of ${ }^bot$.)



        Apply (1) with $V$ as your $X$ to get $Vsubseteq(V^bot)^bot$ and then use (2) to get $V^botsupseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



        On the other hand, if you apply (1) with $V^bot$ as your $X$, then you get $V^botsubseteq((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.



        So you have inclusions in both directions, and therefore $V^bot=((V^bot)^bot)^bot$.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered Dec 10 '18 at 22:06









        Andreas BlassAndreas Blass

        50.3k452109




        50.3k452109























            0












            $begingroup$

            Hint: An arbitrary intersection of closed subspaces is a closed subspace.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
              $endgroup$
              – Federico
              Dec 10 '18 at 19:37
















            0












            $begingroup$

            Hint: An arbitrary intersection of closed subspaces is a closed subspace.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
              $endgroup$
              – Federico
              Dec 10 '18 at 19:37














            0












            0








            0





            $begingroup$

            Hint: An arbitrary intersection of closed subspaces is a closed subspace.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$



            Hint: An arbitrary intersection of closed subspaces is a closed subspace.







            share|cite|improve this answer












            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer










            answered Dec 10 '18 at 19:34









            Robert IsraelRobert Israel

            329k23217470




            329k23217470












            • $begingroup$
              See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
              $endgroup$
              – Federico
              Dec 10 '18 at 19:37


















            • $begingroup$
              See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
              $endgroup$
              – Federico
              Dec 10 '18 at 19:37
















            $begingroup$
            See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
            $endgroup$
            – Federico
            Dec 10 '18 at 19:37




            $begingroup$
            See my comment to the question. But actually, proving it for a generic $V$ as he does is not more complicated than proving ti for $V={v}$
            $endgroup$
            – Federico
            Dec 10 '18 at 19:37


















            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%2f3034369%2fv-subseteq-h-implies-v-bot-is-a-closed-subspace-of-the-hilbert-space-h%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

            How to change which sound is reproduced for terminal bell?

            Image
            3 Recently upgrade to 18.10 from 18.04, and using the terminal is becoming annoying: the new alert sound is a drip ( /usr/share/sounds/gnome/default/alerts/drip.ogg ), and the previous one is still located at ( /usr/share/sounds/ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg ). My issue is that at the gnome-terminal, when autocompleting or pressing left BOTH sounds are reproduced, at the same time. I want to just have ubuntu/stereo/bell.ogg active, not both . At the moment I have been only able to reduce the volume of the alerts (but still both are played), or turn the alerts down (but I dislike both "solutions"). gnome-terminal 18.10 teminal-bell share | improve this question
            Read more

            Title Spacing in Bjornstrup Chapter, Removing Chapter Number From Contents

            Image
            up vote 5 down vote favorite 2 I would like to make it so that the vertical space below the title of each chapter is the same when using the Bjornstrup package (i.e. so that the descenders do not affect the spacing - as shown by the red arrow in the picture below). I think I'm fairly happy with the spacing around "A chapter", so I'd really like titles without descenders (e.g. "Contents") to have the same vertical spacing as "A chapter" below the title. I would also like to remove the large "0" in the contents title. Any help appreciated, as always. documentclass[11pt,a4paper]{book} % Packages[![enter image description here][1]][1] usepackage[left=3.5cm, right=3.5cm, top=4.3cm, bottom=4.25cm]{geometry} usepackage[utf8]{inputenc} usepackage{libertine} usepackage[libertine]{newtx
            Read more

            Can I use Tabulator js library in my java Spring + Thymeleaf project?

            Image
            0 I want to add Tabulator js to my java project. I added tabulator.min.js, tabulator.min.css to resources folder. After that added to my html page these dependencies as recommending in readme.md. <link rel="stylesheet" th:href="@{/css/tabulator.min.css}"> <script type="text/javascript" th:src="@{/js/tabulator.min.js}"></script> Now my tables view all elements, that I have in the html page, but not correct. In the documentation of Tabulator is example how to create header and table, var table = new Tabulator("#example-table", { columns:[ {title:"Name", field:"name", sorter:"string", width:200, editor:true}, {title:"Age", field:"age", sorter:"
            Read more