This paper studies the spectral properties of the Cesàro operator on duals of smooth sequence spaces of infinite type, revealing significant differences based on nuclearity.
Contribution
It provides a detailed spectral analysis of the Cesàro operator on these dual spaces, highlighting the impact of nuclearity on the spectrum.
Findings
01
Spectrum differs markedly between nuclear and non-nuclear cases
02
Identifies conditions under which the spectrum exhibits specific properties
03
Advances understanding of operators on infinite-dimensional sequence spaces
Abstract
The discrete Ces\`aro operator C is investigated in strong duals of smooth sequence spaces of infinite type. Of main interest is its spectrum, which turns out to be distinctly different in the cases when the space is nuclear and when it is not.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Full text
The Cesàro operator on duals of smooth sequence spaces of infinite type
Ersin Kızgut
Instituto Universitario de Matemática Pura y Aplicada
The discrete Cesàro operator C is investigated in strong duals of smooth sequence spaces of infinite type. Of main interest is its spectrum, which turns out to be distinctly different in the cases when the space is nuclear and when it is not.
Key words and phrases:
Cesàro operator, duals of smooth sequence spaces, generalized power series spaces, spectrum, (LB)-space.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
47A10, 47B37, 46A45, 46A04
1. Introduction
The discrete Cesàro operator C acting on CN is defined by
[TABLE]
which is a bicontinuous isomorphism of CN onto itself with
[TABLE]
For a diverse family of classical Banach spaces, the fundamental questions of continuity and determination of the spectrum have been investigated, and precise answers have been obtained. We refer the reader to the introduction of [3]. The behaviour of C when acting on the Fréchet spaces CN, ℓp+=⋂q>pℓq,1≤p<∞, and on the strong duals (Λ∞(α))b′ of power series space of infinite type were studied in [2, 4, 5]. In this paper we generalize the results of [5] to the setting of the duals of certain types of Köthe echelon spaces, so called smooth sequence spaces of infinite type. These spaces were introduced by Terzioğlu [21, 22, 23, 18]. We also refer to Kocatepe [11, 12, 13]. The aim of this paper is to investigate the behaviour of C when it acts on the strong duals (λ1(A))b′ of smooth sequence spaces of infinite type. The reason for focusing on the infinite type dual spaces is that the Cesàro operator C fails to be continuous on most of the finite type dual spaces (see Proposition 2.5). Some of our proofs are inspired by [5], but new arguments are needed in this setting. We distinctly expain our context. Let A=(an)n, where an=(an(i))i. A is called a Köthe matrix if the following conditions are satisfied:
(K1)
0≤an(i)≤an+1(i), for all i,n∈N.
2. (K2)
For all i∈N, there exists n∈N such that an(i)>0.
The Köthe echelon space λ1(A) of order 1 is defined by
[TABLE]
which is a Fréchet space when equipped with the increasing system of seminorms
[TABLE]
Then λ1(A)=⋂n∈Nℓ1(an), where ℓ1(an) is the usual Banach space. The space λ1(A) is given by the projective limit topology, that is, λ1(A)=projnℓ1(an). For the theory of Köthe echelon spaces λp(A) of order p for 1≤p≤∞ or p=0, see [16, Section 27]. Let V=(vn)n=(an1)n. Then, the corresponding co-echelon space of λ1(A) is given by the (LB)-space k∞(V):=indnℓ∞(vn). For co-echelon spaces, the reader is referred to [6, 7, 14, 16]. A Köthe echelon space λ1(A) is said to be a smooth sequence space of infinite type (or a G∞-space) [21, Section 3] if A satisfies
(G∞-1)
1≤an(i)≤an(i+1), for all i,n∈N.
2. (G∞-2)
For all n∈N there exist m>n and M>0 such that an(i)2≤Mam(i), for all i∈N.
Proposition 1.1**.**
[21, 3.1][7, Theorem 4.9]*
For a G∞-Köthe matrix A, the following statements are equivalent:*
(1)
λ1(A)* is a Schwartz space.*
2. (2)
λ1(A)* is not isomorphic to ℓ1.*
3. (3)
There exists n∈N such that
[TABLE]
4. (4)
For all n∈N there exists m>n such that
[TABLE]
5. (5)
k∞(V)* is isomorphic to k0(V)=indnc0(vn).*
6. (6)
k0(V)* is a Montel space.*
In the light of Proposition 1.1, we deal with the Cesàro operator C defined on the co-echelon space k0(V) of order 0. Indeed, since the Köthe echelon space λ1(A) of order 1 is a Fréchet-Schwartz space (hence, distinguished) in our case, it follows that k0(V)=indnc0(vn)=indnℓ∞(vn)=(λ1(A))b′ is the strong dual of λ1(A). For each n∈N we define the norm
[TABLE]
whose restriction to c0(vn) is the norm in c0(vn). For each n∈N, c0(vn)⊆c0(vm), for every m≥n and
[TABLE]
Let us remind that nuclear spaces are in particular Schwartz. Since k0(V)=(λ1(A))b′, the nuclearity of k0(V) is equivalent to that of λ1(A). The following result is known (see [21, 3.1-b]), however, we give a partial proof.
Proposition 1.2**.**
For a G∞-Köthe matrix A, the following statements are equivalent:
(3) ⇒ (4) Since λ1(A) is a Schwartz space, by Proposition 1.1, we may pick n∈N as in ((3)). So there exists M>0 with vn(i)≤M, for all i∈N. Since k0(V) is nuclear, we may choose an m>n as in ((1)). Hence
[TABLE]
(4) ⇒ (3) Suppose that there exists n0 as in ((4)). For an n≥n0, if we pick m>n and C>0 as in (G∞-2), then
[TABLE]
since (G∞-1) implies that vn(i)<vn0(i), for all i∈N. That means ((1)) is satisfied, and so k0(V) is nuclear.
∎
A power series space Λ∞1(α)={x∈CN∣∑i=1∞exp(αin)∣xi∣<∞,∀n∈N} of infinite type associated with the strictly increasing sequence αii∞ is a G∞-space (see [16, Section 29] for power series spaces of infinite type). But the converse is false, in general as shown in Example 1.3 below. A Fréchet space E equipped with the increasing system (pn(⋅))n∈N of seminorms is said to have property (DN) [16, pp. 359] if there exists s∈N such that for all n∈N there exist m∈N and C>0 satisfying
[TABLE]
Here, such ps(⋅) is a norm and is called the dominating norm. It is straightforward to prove that a power series space Λ∞1(α) of infinite type satisfies property (1). Example 1.3 also illustrates that a G∞-space satisfying condition (1) is still not necessarily isomorphic to a power series space of infinite type.
A Dragilev space of infinite typeLf(αi,∞) is defined via f:R→R+ an odd, increasing, logarithmically convex (i.e., log∘f is convex function for x>0), and the strictly increasing sequence αii∞. If an(i)=exp(f(nαi)), then Lf(αi,∞) is isomorphic to the Köthe echelon space λ1(A) of order 1. Let 0<ρ<∞, then the limit τ(ρ)=limx→∞f(x)f(ρx)≤∞ exists. The function f is called rapidly increasing if τ(ρ)=∞, for all ρ>1. Otherwise, f is called slowly increasing. In [9, Section 3.2], it is explained that the space Lf(αi,∞) is isomorphic to a power series space of infinite type if and only if f is slowly increasing.
Example 1.3**.**
Let A be an infinite matrix defined by an(i):=exp(inein). Then, the space X:={x∈CN:∑i=1∞an(i)∣xi∣<∞,∀n∈N}, is a nuclear G∞-space satisfying property (1) which is not isomorphic to a power series space of infinite type.
Proof.
(i)
X* is a nuclear G∞-space*: It is trivial to check that for any n∈N one has 0<an(i)≤am(i), for all i∈N and for all m≥n, so X is a Köthe echelon space. It is also clear that for all i∈N we have 1≤an(i)≤an(i+1) so (G∞-1) is satisfied. Now given n∈N, choose m=2n. Then an(i)2=exp(2inein)≤exp(2ine2in)=am(i) holds for all i,n∈N. So (G∞-2) is also satisfied. Hence X is a G∞-space. For nuclearity, consider
[TABLE]
Given n∈N, select m>n and M>0 as in (G∞-2). Then,
[TABLE]
Therefore, ((1)) is satisfied. So X is nuclear, in particular Schwartz.
2. (ii)
X* enjoys property (1)*: Without loss of any generality assume that a1(i):=1. Let us pick s=1. For any i,n∈N, and for a constant C>0 we clearly have
[TABLE]
With the choice m=2n, we conclude that X has property (1).
3. (iii)
X* is not isomorphic to a power series space of infinite type*: Let us define f:R→R+ by
[TABLE]
Clearly f is an odd, positive, increasing, and logarithmically convex function. Then, for (αi)i∈N=(i)i∈N, X is isomorphic to the Dragilev space Lf(αi,∞) of infinite type. For any 1<ρ<∞,
[TABLE]
Hence, f is rapidly increasing. By the comments prior to Example 1.3, X cannot be isomorphic to a power series space of infinite type.
∎
2. Continuity and compactness of C on k0(V)
An operator T on a Fréchet space X into itself is called bounded (resp. compact) if there exists a neighborhood U of the origin of X such that TU is a bounded (resp. relatively compact) set in X. Recall that a Hausdorff inductive limit E=indnEn of Banach spaces is called regular if every bounded subset B of E is contained and bounded in some step En. The following lemma is well-known.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let E=indmEm and F=indnFn be (LB)-spaces such that E (resp. F) is the union of the sequence of Banach spaces Em (resp. Fn). Let T:E→F be a linear operator. Then
(1)
T* is continuous if and only if for all m∈N there exists n∈N such that T(Em)⊂Fn and T:Em→Fn is continuous.*
2. (2)
Let T be continuous and let F be regular. Then T is bounded if and only if there exists n∈N such that for all m, T(Em)⊂Fn and T:Em→Fn is continuous.
Proposition 2.2**.**
Let λ1(A) be a Schwartz Köthe echelon space of order 1. Then, C:k0(V)→k0(V) is continuous if and only if for all n∈N there exists m>n such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Follows directly from Lemma 2.1, and [3, Proposition 2.2(i)].
∎
Corollary 2.3**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix satisfying (G∞-1), and let λ1(A) be Schwartz. Then C∈L(k0(V)).
Proof.
Since λ1(A) is Schwartz, for any n∈N pick m>n as in condition ((4)). Hence, (G∞-1) yields
[TABLE]
Thus, (2.1) holds, and C∈L(k0(V)) by Proposition 2.2.
∎
Now let us give a characterization for the compactness of C in L(k0(V)). The following proposition is a direct consequence of Lemma 2.1 and [3, Proposition 2.2(ii)], so we omit its proof.
Proposition 2.4**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix satisfying (G∞-1), and let λ1(A) be Schwartz. Then, C:k0(V)→k0(V) is compact if and only if there exists n∈N such that for all m>n one has
[TABLE]
The Köthe echelon space λ1(A) of order 1 is said to be a smooth sequence space of finite type (or a G1-space) [21, Section 3] if A satisfies
(G1-1)
0<an(i+1)≤an(i), for all n∈N and i∈N.
2. (G1-2)
For all n∈N there exist m>n and C>0 such that an(i)≤Cam(i)2, for all i∈N.
The Cesàro operator on G1-spaces was studied by the author in [15]. The following proposition shows that C is not continuous on duals of nuclear G1-spaces.
Proposition 2.5**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix satisfying (G1-1), and suppose λ1(A) is nuclear. Then, the Cesàro operator C does not belong to L(k0(V)).
Proof.
Since k0(V) is nuclear, by [15, Theorem 1], vn(i)ii0, for all n∈N. Now suppose C is continuous on k0(V). Then by Proposition 2.2 and (G1-1), for n=1, there exists m>1 such that
[TABLE]
for a constant M>0. This is a contradiction. Hence, C∈/L(k0(V)).
∎
Let D:CN→CN be the formal operator of differentiation defined by D(x1,x2,x3,…)=(x2,2x3,3x4,…), x=(xi)i. D is closely related to the Cesàro operator C∈L(CN) by the identity C−1=(I−Sr)∘D∘Sr, where Sr∈L(CN) is the right-shift operator. The following result is proved via a similar argument in [15, Proposition 7].
Proposition 2.6**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix. Then, for the co-echelon space k0(V) and the formal differentiation operator D, the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
The differentiation operator D:k0(V)→k0(V) is continuous.
2. (2)
For all n∈N there exist m>n and M>0 such that
[TABLE]
Example 2.7**.**
Consider the nuclear G∞-space X constructed in Example 1.3. For Y:=k0(V)=(λ1(A))′=X′, choose m=2n to observe
[TABLE]
Hence, D:Y→Y is continuous.
Proposition 2.8**.**
For a G∞-Köthe matrix A, and the associated co-echelon space k0(V), the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
k0(V)* is nuclear.*
2. (2)
For all n∈N there exists m>n such that
[TABLE]
3. (3)
Given α∈R, for all n∈N there exists m>n such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
The proof reads as [15, Proposition 9]. In the implication (1) ⇒ (2) if we set bn(i):=∏j=1naj(i), the rest follows with the same arguments.
∎
Proposition 2.9**.**
Given a real number α≥1. Then, for a G∞-Köthe matrix A, and the associated co-echelon space k0(V), the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
k0(V)* is nuclear.*
2. (2)
There exists n∈N such that limi→∞iαvn(i)=0.
3. (3)
There exists n∈N such that limi→∞iαvn(i)=L<∞.
Proof.
(1) ⇒(2) Let k0(V) be nuclear. For any n∈N pick m>n as in ((2)). Then, by (G∞-1) and proof of [15, Proposition 9], we have
[TABLE]
(2) ⇒ (3) Trivial.
(3) ⇒ (1) Let us have n∈N with iαvn(i)iL, for a given α>1. For this n we pick m>n and C>0 as in (G∞-2) and similarly we find p>m and M>0 as in (G∞-2). Then, for all i∈N,
[TABLE]
Hence, (vn(i)vp(i))i∈ℓ1 and so ((1)) is satisfied. Therefore, λ1(A) is nuclear.
∎
3. Spectrum of C in the nuclear case
For a locally convex Hausdorff space X and T∈L(X), the resolvent setρ(X;T) of T consists of all λ∈C such that (λI−T)−1 exists in L(X). The set σ(T;X):=C∖ρ(T;X) is called the spectrum of T on X. The point spectrumσpt(T;X) of T on X consists of all λ∈C such that (λI−T) is not injective. Unlike for Banach spaces, it might happen that ρ(T;X)=∅ or that ρ(T;X) is not open in C. That is why some authors prefer the subset ρ∗(T;X) of ρ(T;X) consisting of all λ∈C for which there exists δ>0 such that the open disk B(λ,δ):={z∈C:∣z−λ∣<δ}⊆ρ(T) and {R(μ,T):μ∈B(λ,δ)} is equicontinuous in L(X). We denote Σ:={m1:m∈N} and Σ0:=Σ∪{0}. In this section we investigate the spectra σpt(C;k0(V)), σ∗(C;k0(V)), and σ(C;k0(V)) in case k0(V) is nuclear (equivalently, λ1(A) is nuclear).
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix satisfying (G∞-1). Then, the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
0∈/σ(C;k0(V)).
2. (2)
A* satisfies condition ((2)).*
Proof.
0∈/σ(C;k0(V)) if and only if C−1:k0(V)→k0(V) is continuous if and only if for all n∈N there exists m>n such that C−1:c0(vn)→c0(vm) is continuous. Hence the proof proceeds as in [15, Proposition 10].
∎
Lemma 3.2**.**
[3, Proposition 2.6]*
Let A be a Köthe matrix satisfying (G∞-1), and let λ1(A) be Schwartz. Then for s∈N and for the Cesàro operator C, the following statements are equivalent:*
(1)
s+11∈σpt(C;k0(V)).
2. (2)
There exists n∈N such that
limi→∞isvn(i)=0.
Proposition 3.3**.**
Let A be a (G∞-1) Köthe matrix satisfying ((2)), and let λ1(A) be Schwartz. Then, Σ=σpt(C;k0(V)).
Proof.
We clearly have σpt(C;k0(V))⊆σpt(C,CN)=Σ. Now we prove that there exists n∈N such that for all s∈N we have isvn(i)i0, by induction over s. Since λ1(A) is Schwartz, we may choose n∈N as in condition ((3)) so that vn(i)i0. Then, by assumption there exist m1>n and M>0 such that ivm1(i)≤Mvn(i) and hence ivm1(i)i0. Suppose that isvm1(i)i0, for s=1,…,r. Then, there exist m2>m1 and M~ satisfying
[TABLE]
That implies for some n∈N, we have isvn(i)i0, for all s∈N. Equivalently, by Lemma 3.2, s+11∈σpt(C;k0(V)), for all s∈N. Therefore Σ=σpt(C;k0(V)).
∎
Theorem 3.4**.**
Let λ1(A) be a G∞-space which is Schwartz. Then, the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
0∈/σ(C;k0(V)).
2. (2)
21∈σpt(C;k0(V)).
3. (3)
There exists s∈N such that s1∈σpt(C;k0(V)).
4. (4)
Σ=σpt(C;k0(V)).
Proof.
(1) ⇒ (2) Proposition 2.8 and Proposition 3.1 yield k0(V) is nuclear. Then, by Proposition 1.2 we may take n∈N as in ((4)), so that (vn(i))i∈ℓ1. We may also pick m>n and M>0 as in ((2)) so that ivm(i)≤Mvn(i), for all i∈N. Then, we have (ivm(i))i∈ℓ1. This implies ivm(i)i0. This is equivalent to (2) by Lemma 3.2.
(2) ⇒ (1) Since 21∈σpt(C;k0(V)), by Lemma 3.2 there is an n∈N such that ivn(i)i0. If we select m>n and M>0 as in (G∞-2), we obtain
(3) ⇒ (4) By Lemma 3.2 we have an s∈N with isvn(i)i0 for some n∈N. Then, clearly ivn(i)i0 as well. Now let us prove by induction that i2kvn(i)i0 for all k∈N. For k=0, it is already satisfied. Suppose i2kvn(i)i0, for k=1,…,r. Then, for some i0∈N, we have ∣i2rvn(i)∣<1 for all i≥i0. For m>n and C>0 selected as in (G∞-2) and for all i≥i0,
[TABLE]
Therefore s1∈σpt(C;k0(V)) for all s∈N. Hence, σpt(C;k0(V))=Σ.
(4) ⇒ (2) Trivial.
∎
The following example illustrates why assumption (G∞-2) in Theorem 3.4 cannot be removed.
Example 3.5**.**
(i)
For a fixed 0<α<1, and an increasing sequence (αn)n⊂(0,1) tending to α, let us define a Köthe matrix A by an(i):=iαnei, where i,n∈N. The Köthe echelon space λ1(A) of order 1 satisfies condition (G∞-1) and condition ((3)). Assume that (G∞-2) also holds. Then, given n=1 there is m>1 and M>0 with
[TABLE]
which is impossible. Hence A is not a G∞-matrix. For n=1,
[TABLE]
since 1+α1−αm>0, for all m>1. So ((2)) is not satisfied. On the other hand, for each s,n∈N and for large values of i∈N, we have 0<is−1vn(i)=is−1−αne−i≤is−1e−ii0. So (is−1)i∈k0(V) and by Lemma 3.2s1∈σpt(C;k0(V)) for each s∈N. This shows that condition (4) does not imply condition (1) in Theorem 3.4, in general.
2. (ii)
Fix s≥1, s∈N and define the Köthe matrix A=(an)n by an(i):=is−1+n1. The Köthe echelon space λ1(A) of order 1 satisfies (G∞-1) and condition ((3)), but it is not a G∞-space. Indeed, assume that (G∞-2) holds. Then for n=1, there exist m>1 and M>0 such that a1(i)2≤Mam(i). So for any s≥1,
[TABLE]
But this is impossible since s≥1. In this case, (im−1)i∈k0(V) for m=1,2,…s but (is)i∈/k0(V) since isvn(i)=i1+n1i∞, for all n∈N. Thus s+11∈/σpt(C;k0(V)), which implies m1∈/σpt(C;k0(V)) for each m>s. This shows us condition (3) in Theorem 3.4 does not imply (4), in general.
Let us define the continuous function a:C∖{0}→R by
[TABLE]
Observe that for all k∈N, the weighted Banach space c0(vk) is isometrically isomorphic to c0 via ϕk:c0(vk)→c0 defined by
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.6**.**
Let λ1(A) be a nuclear G∞-space. Then,
(1)
σ(C;k0(V))=σpt(C;k0(V))=Σ.
2. (2)
σ∗(C;k0(V))=σ(C;k0(V))∪{0}=Σ0.
Proof.
Since k0(V) is nuclear, by Theorem 3.4, we know that σpt(C;k0(V))=Σ⊆σ(C;k0(V)), and hence
[TABLE]
Moreover, Proposition 3.1 yields 0∈/σ(C;k0(V)). For the other inclusion, we show that for every λ∈C∖Σ0 there exists δ>0 such that the inverse operator (C−μI)−1:k0(V)→k0(V) is continuous for each μ∈B(λ,δ) and the set {(C−μI)−1:μ∈B(λ,δ)} is equicontinuous in L(k0(V)). Remember that (C−μI)−1 is continuous on CN for each μ∈C∖Σ. Fix λ∈C∖Σ0. Choose a δ1>0 such that B(λ,δ)∩Σ0=∅. To establish our claim, it suffices to show that there exists δ>0 such that for all n∈N there exist m>n and Dn>0 satisfying
[TABLE]
Now we separate in two cases.
(i)
a(λ)<1 (equivalently, ∣λ−21∣>21): Fix n∈N. Since a(λ)<1 we may pick ε>0 such that a(λ)<1−ε. By continuity of a, there exists δ2>0 such that a(μ)<1−ε, for all μ∈B(λ,δ2). By [5, Lemma 2.8] , there exist δ∈(0,δ2) and Mn,λ such that (3.3) is satisfied:
[TABLE]
2. (ii)
a(λ)≥1 (equivalently, ∣λ−21∣≤21): Let us recall the formula for the operator (C−μI)−1:CN→CN whenever μ∈/Σ0. By [19], the i-th row of the matrix for (C−μI)−1 has the entries:
[TABLE]
For Dμ=(dij)i,j and Eμ=(eij)i,j, one may formulate (C−μI)−1=Dμ−μ21Eμ, where dij=i1−μ1, for i=j otherwise dij=0; and eij=i∏k=j(1−kμ1)1, for 2≤j<i otherwise eij=0. Define d0(λ):=dist(B(λ,δ),Σ0)>0. We have ∣dii∣<d0(λ)1, for all μ∈B(λ,δ1) and i∈N. Fix n∈N. Then for every x∈c0(vn) and μ∈B(λ,δ1)
[TABLE]
So {Dμ:μ∈B(λ,δ1)}⊆L(c0(vm)). Then, it remains to show that Eμ:k0(V)→k0(V) is continuous for all μ∈B(λ,δ) for some δ>0. So by (3.2), it suffices to show that for all n∈N there exist m≥n and Dn>0 such that
[TABLE]
where ∥⋅∥0 is the usual c0-norm. For each n,m define E~μ,n,m:=ϕm∘Eμ∘ϕn−1∈L(CN) for μ∈CN∖{0}. Fix n∈N. For each m≥n the operator E~μ,m,n for μ∈B(λ,δ1) is the restriction to c0 of
[TABLE]
with (E~μ,m,n)1:=0. E~μ,m,n=(e~ijnm(μ)) is given by e~1jnm=0, e~ijnm=vn(j)vm(i)eij(μ) for i≥2 and 1≤j<i. So it suffices to verify, for some m≥n and δ>0 one has E~μ,m,n∈L(c0) for μ∈B(λ,δ), and {E~μ,m,n:μ∈B(λ,δ)} is equicontinuous in L(c0). To prove this, we observe [5, Lemma 2.7] implies that for every m≥n, and all μ∈B(λ,δ2) that
[TABLE]
for some Dλ′>0 and δ2∈(0,δ1). Since a is continuous, there exists δ∈(0,δ2) such that a(λ)−21<a(μ)<a(λ)+21 for all μ∈B(λ,δ). Then a(μ)>a(λ)−21≥21. By picking m>n and M>0 as in ((3)), for any μ∈B(λ,δ) we have
[TABLE]
Moreover, employing (3.5) and (G∞-1), respectively, we obtain
[TABLE]
for every μ∈B(λ,δ). Hence, [3, Lemma 2.1] implies that satisfying both (3.6) and ((ii)) yields E~μ,m,n∈L(c0) for all μ∈B(λ,δ). Moreover, the operator norm is given by ∥E~μ,m,n∥=supi∈N∑j=1i∣e~ijnm(μ)∣, and we have shown that there exists C>0 such that ∥E~μ,m,n∥≤CDλ′, for all μ∈B(λ,δ). This implies {E~μ,m,n:μ∈B(λ,δ)} is equicontinuous in L(c0).
∎
Corollary 3.7**.**
Let λ1(A) be a nuclear G∞-space. Then C∈L(k0(V)) is neither compact nor weakly compact.
Proof.
Since k0(V) is a Montel space, there is no distinction between compactness and weak compactness. So, suppose C is compact. Then σ(C;k0(V)) is necessarily a compact set in C [10, Theorem 9.10.2]. This contradicts Proposition 3.6.
∎
When acting on CN, the Cesàro matrix C is similar to the diagonal matrix diag(i1). Indeed, the identity C=Δdiag(i1)Δ holds in L(CN), where
[TABLE]
and all the three operators C, diag(i1), and Δ are continuous.
Proposition 3.8**.**
For a G∞-Köthe matrix A, and for the operator Δ, the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
There exists n∈N such that
[TABLE]
2. (2)
Δ∈L(k0(V)).
Proof.
For every k∈N, the surjective isomorphism ϕk:c0(vk)→c0 is defined by (3.2). Since k0(V)=indnc0(vn), we have Δ∈L(k0(V)) if and only if for all n∈N there exists m>n with Δ:c0(vn)→c0(vm) is continuous if and only if the operator Dnm:c0→c0 defined by Dnm:=ϕm∘Δ∘ϕn−1 is continuous, where ϕm=diag(vm(i)) and ϕn−1=diag(vn(i)1). Hence, Dnm has a lower triangular matrix whose entries are given by
[TABLE]
and dijnm=0 for j≥i. It follows by [20, Theorem 4.51-C] that Δ∈L(k0(V)) if and only if for each n∈N we find m>n so that both (3.8) and (3.9) hold:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Observe that
[TABLE]
(1) ⇒ (2) Let us assume that there exists n0∈N as in condition ((1)). Then, supi∈Niivn(i)<∞, for every n≥n0. In particular, limi→∞iαvn(i)=0, for a given real number α>1. First using (G∞-1) then (3) and then given n≥n0, taking m>n and C>0 as in (G∞-2) yield
[TABLE]
for all j∈N. This shows that (3.8) is satisfied. To prove that (3.9) also holds, we first use (G∞-1), then given n≥n0 we choose m>n and C~>0 as in (G∞-2), and then apply (3) to get
[TABLE]
by (1). Therefore, Δ∈L(k0(V)).
(2) ⇒ (1) Suppose Δ∈L(k0(V)). First we apply (3.9), and then (G∞-1) along with (3) to proceed
[TABLE]
for a constant S>0. Since for any j,
[TABLE]
and S<∞, one has supi∈Niivm(i)<∞.
∎
Remark 3.9**.**
Obviously, condition ((1)) implies nuclearity. However, the converse is not true, in general. Indeed, let an(i):=exp(in), for i,n∈N. Then, it is straightforward to show that A=(an)n is a G∞-matrix. Moreover, since
[TABLE]
for all i,n∈N, if we choose m>n and C>0 as in (G∞-2) we obtain
[TABLE]
Hence k0(V) is nuclear. On the other hand, we directly observe that for every n∈N, supi∈Neinii=∞, which means the failure of condition ((1)).
4. The spectrum of C in the non-nuclear case
In this section we give a description of the spectra σpt(C;k0(V)) and σ(C;k0(V)) when k0(V) is not nuclear (equivalently, λ1(A) is not nuclear). The following proposition is immediate from previous section.
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let λ1(A) be a G∞-space which is Schwartz. Then, the following statements are equivalent:
(1)
k0(V)* is not nuclear.*
2. (2)
σpt(C;k0(V))={1}.
3. (3)
0∈σ(C;k0(V)).
Since C∈L(k0(V)), its dual C′ is defined and continuous on k0(V)′ and is given by the formula
[TABLE]
see [3, pp.774]. The following lemma is well-known. For a proof, see e.g. [15, Lemma 16].
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let E be a Fréchet space, and let T:E→E be a continuous linear operator with the dual T′:E′→E′. Then
[TABLE]
For each r>0 we use the notation D(r):={λ∈C:∣λ−2r1∣<2r1}. Let α:=a(λ). Then, ∣λ−2r1∣=2r1 if and only if α=r.
Proposition 4.3**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix satisfying (G∞-1). Then,
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let λ∈Σ, that is, there exists s∈N such that λ=s1. Define u(s) by
[TABLE]
for 1<i≤s (with u1(s):=1) and ui(s):=0 for i>s. It is straightforward to show that u(s)∈k0(V)′ (since u(s) belongs to the space of finitely supported sequences c00) and C′u(s)=s1u(s), that is, λ∈σpt(C′,k0(V)′). By Lemma 4.2, λ∈σ(C;k0(V)). This shows Σ⊆σ(C;k0(V)). By [5, Lemma 2.8] we see that σ(Cn;c0(vn))⊆D(1) for all n∈N, for which Cn:c0(vn)→c0(vn) is the restriction of C∈L(CN). Hence ⋂s∈N(⋃j=s∞σ(Cj;c0(vj)))⊆D(1),
and so σ(C;k0(V))⊆D(1) by [5, Lemma 5.5].
∎
Proposition 4.4**.**
Let λ1(A) be a non-nuclear, Schwartz G∞-space. Then
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 4.1 and Proposition 4.3 we already know that Σ0⊆σ(C;k0(V))⊆D(1). So it remains to establish D(1)∖Σ⊆σ(C;k0(V)). Let λ∈D(1)∖Σ and suppose that λ∈/σ(C;k0(V)). Then the inverse operator (C−λI)−1 is continuous, equivalently, for all n∈N there exists m>n such that (C−λI)−1:c0(vn)→c0(vm) is continuous. Let β:=a(λ) as in (3.1). Retaining the notation of Proposition 3.6 it follows that the linear map E~λ,n,m:c0→c0 is continuous, where E~λ,n,m=(e~ijnm(λ))i,j is determined by the lower triangular matrix
[TABLE]
and e~ijnm(λ)=0, if j≥i. Indeed,
[TABLE]
and eij(λ)=0, if j≥i. Since E~λ,n,m∈L(c0), by the well-known criterion [20, Theorem 4.51-C] we necessarily have supi∈N∑j=1∞vn(j)vm(i)∣eij(λ)∣<∞. By [3, pp.776] and (G∞-1), there exists C>0 such that
[TABLE]
Since β>1, we have
[TABLE]
We have shown that for all n∈N there is m>n such that
[TABLE]
Taking n=1, we get supi∈Niβvm(i)<∞, for some m∈N. By Proposition 2.9, k0(V) is nuclear. This is a contradiction, and λ∈/ρ(C;k0(V)).
∎
Remark 4.5**.**
Let λ1(A) be a G∞-space. Then the condition
[TABLE]
cannot be a nuclearity criterion for k0(V). Let αi:=log(log(i)), for i≥33 and consider the associated power series space Λ∞1(α) of infinite type [5, Remark 3.5-(ii)]. By [16, Proposition 29.6], Λ∞1 is nuclear if and only if supi∈Nαi−1log(i)<∞. However, we directly observe that supi∈Nαilog(i)=∞. So, Λ∞1(α) is not nuclear. It is easy to check Λ∞1(α) satisfies ((4)) so it is Schwartz. Let an(i):=exp(log(log(i))n)=log(i)n. Then, Λ∞1(α) is isomorphic to the non-nuclear G∞-space λ1(A). For a fixed n∈N, it is easy to see that supi∈Nlog(i)vn(i)<∞. Therefore k0(V) satisfies condition (4.5).
Proposition 4.6**.**
Let λ1(A) be a non-nuclear, Schwartz G∞-space.
(1)
If k0(V) satisfies condition (4.5), then
σ(C;k0(V))={0,1}∪D(1).
2. (2)
If k0(V) fails condition (4.5), then
σ(C;k0(V))=D(1).
Proof.
Retaining the notation of the proof of Proposition 3.6, for each λ∈C∖Σ0, (C−λI)−1∈L(CN) satisfies (C−λI)−1=Dλ−λ21Eλ. In the previous section we have seen that the diagonal in Dλ is a bounded sequence, independent of nuclearity condition. So (C−λI)−1:k0(V)→k0(V) is continuous if and only if Eλ∈L(k0(V)). Since k0(V)=indnc0(vn), Eλ∈L(k0(V)) if and only if for each n∈N there exists m>n such that Eλ:c0(vn)→c0(vm) is continuous. With E~λ,n,m=(e~ijnm)i,j, where e~ijnm=vn(j)vm(i)enm(λ) for i,j∈N, it follows by the argument used in (ii) of the proof of Proposition 3.6 that Eλ:c0(vn)→c0(vm) is continuous if and only if E~λ,n,m:c0→c0 is continuous. By [20, Theorem 4.51-C] it suffices to show that both (4.2) and (4.3) are satisfied:
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
If λ∈/{0,1} belongs to the boundary ∂D(1) of D(1), then β:=a(λ)=1 and λ∈/Σ0. By [3, Lemma 3.3] there exist ν,γ>0 such that
[TABLE]
Since λ1(A) is Schwartz, for any n∈N, we find m>n such that,
[TABLE]
So (4.2) is satisfied. Let us recall the well-known inequality
[TABLE]
(1)
Let us assume that there exists n∈N as in (4.5). We apply (4.4), (G∞-1), (4.5) respectively, and then choose m>n and C>0 as in (G∞-2) to observe
[TABLE]
This implies (4.3) is satisfied for λ∈∂(D)∖{0,1}, hence λ∈ρ(C,k0(V)). Therefore, by Proposition 4.4, σ(C;k0(V))={0,1}∪D(1).
2. (2)
Let us apply (4.4), (G∞-1), and (4.5) respectively to obtain
[TABLE]
However, supi∈Nlog(i)vm(i)=∞, by assumption. This means (4.3) cannot be satisfied. Hence no λ∈∂D(1)∖{0,1} exists which satisfies λ∈ρ(C;k0(V)), that is, ∂D(1)∖{0,1}⊆σ(C;k0(V)). By Proposition 4.4, we are done.
∎
5. Mean ergodicity of C
Let X be a Fréchet space equipped with the increasing system of seminorms (pn(⋅))n∈N. For S∈L(X), the strong operator topology τs in L(X) is determined by the seminorms pn,x(S):=pn(Sx), for all x∈X and for all n∈N. In this case we write Ls(X). Let B(X) be the family of bounded subsets of X. Then, the uniform topology τb in L(X) is defined by the family of seminorms pn,B(S):=supx∈Bpn(Sx), for all n∈N and for all B∈B(X), where S∈L(X). In this case we write Lb(X). A Fréchet space operator T∈L(X) is called power bounded if (Tk)k=1∞ is an equicontinuous subset of L(X). Given T∈L(X), the averages T[k]:=k1∑j=1kTj, for k∈N are called the Cesàro means of T. The operator T is said to be mean ergodic (resp., uniformly mean ergodic) if (T[k])k is a convergent sequence in Ls(X) (resp., in Lb(X)).
Proposition 5.1**.**
Let λ1(A) be a G∞-space which is Schwartz. Then, the Cesàro operator C∈L(k0(V)) is power bounded and uniformly mean ergodic. In particular,
[TABLE]
with ker(I−C)={1} and
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let Ck be the k-th iterate of C. By (G∞-1), vn(i+1)≤vn(i), for all i∈N. Then, by [3, Corollary 2.3(i)] C∈L(c0(vn)) and qn(Cx)≤qn(x), for all x∈c0(vn). By (1.3), for every n∈N we have qn(Ckx)≤qn(x), for all x∈c0(vn), and k∈N. [5, Lemma 5.4] implies C is power bounded in k0(V). It follows by Propositions 2.4 and 2.8 in [1] that C is uniformly mean ergodic in k0(V) and hence (5.1) is also satisfied.
∎
Proposition 5.2**.**
Let λ1(A) be a Schwartz G∞-space satisfying condition (4.5). Then the range (I−C)j(k0(V)) is a closed subspace of k0(V) for each j∈N.
Proof.
First we consider the case j=1. Set X(V):={x∈k0(V):x1=0}. We claim that (I−C)(k0(V))=(I−C)(X(V)). We proceed as in the proof of the analogous result in [5, Proposition 4.3]. By condition ((3)), there exists n0∈N such that vn(i)i0, for all n≥n0. Since k0(V) is an inductive limit of increasing Banach spaces, we can clearly assume that vn(i)i0, for all n∈N. So each vk is strictly positive and decreasing with vn∈c0 and hence (I−C)(c0(vn))={x∈c0(vn):x1=0}=:Xn and (I−C)(Xk)=(I−C)(c0(vn)) by [3, Lemma 4.1 and Lemma 4.5]. If x∈X(V), then x∈Xn for some n∈N and (I−C)x∈(I−C)(Xn)=(I−C)(c0(vn))⊆(I−C)(k0(V)). That fulfills one inclusion. Now let x∈k0(V). Then x∈c0(vn) for some n∈N and hence (I−C)x∈(I−C)(c0(vn))=(I−C)(Xn)⊆(I−C)(X(V)). Hence (I−C)(k0(V))=(I−C)(X(V)). To prove that (I−C)(k0(V)) is closed in k0(V), it suffices to show that (I−C)∈L(X(V)) is surjective: if (I−C)(X(V))=X(V), then (I−C)(k0(V))=X(V) and hence (I−C)(k0(V)) is closed in k0(V). By [8, Lemma 6.3.1], (X(V),τ)=indnXn, where τ is the relative topology in X(V) induced from k0(V). If we set v~n(i):=vn(i+1), for all i,n∈N, then we have the topological isomorphism X(V)≃E:=indnc0(v~n) by the left shift operator S:X(V)→E which is a surjective isomorphism at each step S:Xn→c0(vn). Let T:=S∘(I−C)∣X(V)∘S−1∈L(E). We now prove that A is bijective with B:=T−1∈L(E). It is straightforward to see T:CN→CN is bijective and its inverse B is given by the lower triangular matrix (bij) whose entries are j1 for 1≤j<i, ii+1 for j=i, and [math] for j>i. To show that B is still the inverse of T when acting on E, we must prove B∈L(E), equivalently, for each n∈N there exists m>n such that ϕm∘B∘ϕn−1∈L(c0), where the surjective isometry ϕk:c0(v~k)→c0 is given by ϕkx=(vk(i+1)xi) for every x∈c0(v~k). The lower triangular matrix corresponding to ϕm∘B∘ϕn−1 is given by dij:=(vn(j+1)vm(i+1)bij), for all i,j∈N. For every j, limi→∞vn(j+1)vm(i+1)bij=jvn(j+1)1limi→∞vm(i+1)=0. We make use of (G∞-1) and (4.5), respectively, then pick m>n and C>0 as in (G∞-2), and then finally use condition (4.5) to observe
[TABLE]
Hence both the conditions (i) and (ii) of [3, Lemma 2.1] hold. Then, ϕm∘B∘ϕn−1∈L(c0) and hence (I−C)(k0(V)) is closed. Since (I−C)(k0(V)) is closed, (5.1) implies k0(V)=ker((I−C))⊕(I−C)(k0(V)). The proof of (2) ⇒ (5) in [2, Remark 3.6] implies that (I−C)j(k0(V)) is closed in k0(V), for all j∈N.
∎
Let X be a separable Fréchet space. Then the operator T∈L(X) is called hypercyclic if there exists x∈X such that the orbit {Tkx:k∈N0} is dense in X. If, for some z∈X, the projective orbit {λTkz:λ∈C,k∈N0} is dense in X, then T is called supercyclic. Clearly, if C is hypercyclic then C is supercyclic.
Proposition 5.3**.**
Let A be a Köthe matrix. Then C∈L(k0(V)) is not supercyclic, and hence not hypercyclic either.
Proof.
Follows from [4, Proposition 4.3] and [5, Proposition 4.4].
∎
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Prof. José Bonet for useful suggestions and discussions.
Bibliography23
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, and W. Ricker. Mean ergodic operators in Fréchet spaces. Ann. Acad. Sci. Fenn. Math. , 34:401–436, 2009.
2[2] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, and W. Ricker. Convergence of arithmetic means of operators in Fréchet spaces. J. Math. Anal. Appl. , 401:160–173, 2013.
3[3] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, and W. Ricker. Mean ergodicity and spectrum of the Cesàro operator on weighted c 0 subscript 𝑐 0 c_{0} spaces. Positivity , 20:761–803, 2016.
4[4] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, and W. Ricker. The Cesàro operator in the Fréchet spaces ℓ p + superscript ℓ limit-from 𝑝 \ell^{p+} and L p − superscript 𝐿 limit-from 𝑝 L^{p-} . Glasg. Math. J. , 59(2):273–287, 2017.
5[5] A. Albanese, J. Bonet, and W. Ricker. The Cesàro operator on duals of power series spaces of infinite type. J. Operator Theory , 79(2):373–402, 2018.
6[6] K. D. Bierstedt. An introduction to locally convex inductive limits. In H. Hogbe-Nlend, editor, Functional Analysis and its Applications , pages 35–133, Singapore, 1988. World Scientific.
7[7] K. D. Bierstedt, R. Meise, and W. H. Summers. Köthe sets and Köthe sequence spaces. In J. A. Barroso, editor, Functional Analysis, Holomorphy and Approximation Theory , volume 71 of North-Holland Math. Studies , pages 27–91, New York, 1982. North Holland.
8[8] P. Pérez Carreras and J. Bonet. Barrelled Locally Convex Spaces , volume 131 of North Holland Math. Studies . North Holland, Amsterdam, 1987.