arxiv: v3 [math.lo] 14 Sep 2015

Transcription

1 On the relation of three theorems of functional analysis to the axiom of choice arxiv: v3 [math.lo] 14 Sep 2015 Adrian Fellhauer May 7, 2018 Abstract In the following, we prove by extending methods of Rhineghost, that both the Arzelà Ascoli theorem and the Fréchet Kolmogorov theorem are equivalent to the axiom of countable choice for real sets. We further present supposedly new proofs for the facts that the uniform boundedness principle implies the axiom of countable multiple choice, and that the axiom of countable choice implies the uniform boundedness principle, show equivalence of the axiom of countable multiple choice to a weak version of the uniform boundedness principle, and prove that the uniform boundedness principle implies the axiom of countable partial choice for sequences of sets with cardinality bounded by a natural number. Along the way, we also give a proof for a Tietze extension theorem-like result for equicontinuous function sets. That proof may be new. Contents 1 Tools we need The lexicographic order Sets of continuous functions The dyadic grid Simplicial vector spaces Choice-free versions of Arzelà Ascoli and Fréchet Kolmogorov Arzelà Ascoli Fréchet Kolmogorov Full theorems and the axiom of choice Arzelá Ascoli and Fréchet Kolmogorov Uniform boundedness principle Acknowledgements 16 1 Tools we need In this section, we present some tools which we will need in the course of the argument. 1

2 1.1 The lexicographic order The lexicographic order defined here is inspired by the one defined in [6]. Definition We define the lexicographic order on R d as follows: (x 1,...,x d ) (y 1,...,y d ) : x 1 < y 1 (x 1 = y 1 x 2 < y 2 ) (x 1 = y 1 x d = y d ) Definition For n {1,...,d}, we define the n-th projection as follows: pr n : R d R,(x 1,...,x d ) x n Lemma For n [d], the n-th projection is a closed map. Proof. If(x l ) l N convergestox R d, then (pr n (x l )) l N convergesto pr n (x). Lemma Let S be a bounded subset of R d. Then the set of accumulation points of S is bounded and closed. Proof. Let A denote the set of accumulation points of S. Since every accumulation point contains at least one element of S in a unit ball around it, it is clear that A is bounded. Further, if ǫ > 0 and x R d is an accumulation point of A, then we may choose y A such that x y < ǫ/2 and z S such that z y < ǫ/2. The triangle inequality yields: x z < ǫ Since ǫ > 0 was arbitrary, x is an accumulation point of S. Lemma Let C be a compact subset of R d. With respect to the lexicographic order on R d, C has a unique smallest point. Proof. We choose y 1 := minpr 1 (C) y 2 := minpr 2 (C {(z 1,...,z d ) R d z 1 = y 1 }). y d := minpr d ( C {(z1,...,z d ) R d z j = y j,j [d 1]} ) and y := (y 1,...,y d ); the projected sets are non-empty by finite induction and lemma y construction, with respect to the lexicographic order on R d y is a lower bound of K and y K. Uniqueness follows from the totality of the lexicographic order. Lemma Let S be a bounded subset of R d. With respect to the lexicographic order on R d, S has a unique smallest accumulation point. Proof. Due to lemma 1.1.4, the set of accumulation points of S is compact. Thus, lemma yields the claim. 2

3 1.2 Sets of continuous functions In this subsection, we elevate two results from real analysis about continuous functions to equicontinuous sets of functions. For the first result, we use that in a separable space sequential compactness is equivalent to compactness, even without choice. Theorem (Heine-Cantor for equicontinuous sets). Let C R d be compact, and let F C(C) be equicontinuous. Then F is uniformly equicontinuous. Proof. Let ǫ > 0. From the hypothesis easily follows that for each x C, there exists a maximal δ x > 0 such that ( ) y C : y x < δ x sup f(x) f(y) < ǫ/2 f F Obviously, the sets δx/2(x),x C cover C. Since C is compact, we may extract a finite subcover δxk /2(x k ),k {1,...,n}. We define. δ := 1 2 min 1 k n δ x k. Let now x y < δ. Then there exists j {1,...,n} such that x δxj /2(x j ). Furthermore, due to the triangle inequality, y x j y x + x x j < δ +δ xj /2 δ xj. Therefore, from the triangle inequality we may infer sup f F f(x) f(y) sup f F f(y) f(x j ) + sup f(x j ) f(x) < ǫ/2+ǫ/2. f F This proof can be found, for example, in [10]. The aim of the remainder of this subsection is to prove that given a closed set A R d and a uniformly bounded as well as equicontinuous set F C(A), we find an equicontinuous and uniformly bounded subset G C(R d ) such that G consists of continuous extensions of all the functions of F. We follow the lines of a proof of Tietze s extension theorem given in [1]. Lemma Let (M 1,d 1 ), (M 2,d 2 ), (M 3,d 3 ) be metric spaces. If f : M 1 M 2 is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant L f and g : M 2 M 3 is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant L g, then g f is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant L f L g. Proof. d 3 ((g f)(x),(g f)(y)) L g d 2 (f(x),f(y)) L g L f d 1 (x,y) 3

4 Lemma Let b > 0. The function {(x,y) R 2 x >0 x+y b} R,(x,y) x+y is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1/b (where {(x,y) R 2 >0 x+y b} is equipped with the -norm). x Proof. We first consider the case x+y z z+w 0. x x+y z z +w = x x+y z z +w x b z z +w x(z +w) bz = b(z +w) x z z +w 1/b x z z The case z+w x x+y 0 is proven analogously. Theorem (Extended Urysohn s theorem). Let (M, d) be a complete metric space, and let A, M be nonempty, closed and disjoint. Then there exists a continuous function f : M [ 1/3,1/3] such that f A = 1/3 and f = 1/3, which is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1/dist(A,). Proof. We choose f(x) := 2 dist(a, x) 3dist(A,x)+dist(,x) 1 3 Lipschitz continuity with respect to the respective constant follows from lemmas 1.2.2, (p = ) and the Lipschitz continuity of the distance. Lemma Let (M, d) be a metric space, let A M be closed, and let f : A [ 1,1] be continuous. Let further (( b := dist (f 1, 1 ]) ([ ))) 1,f 1 3 3, Then there exists a function g : M R such that 1. g is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1/b, 2. g 1/3 and 3. f g 2/3. Proof. We define := f 1((, 1 3]) and C := f 1 ([ 1 3, )). Due to theorem 1.2.4, we may choose a function g : M [ 1/3,1/3]such that g = 1/3, g C = 1/3, and g is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1/b. On and C we immediately have f g 2/3, and in A \ ( C) we have f g f + g 2/3. The following lemma takes less work using choice, but we want to demonstrate that it holds without any variant of the axiom of choice. 4

5 Lemma Let C R d be compact, and let F C(C) be uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Then: (( inf (f dist 1, 1 ]) ([ ))) 1,f 1 f F 3 3, > 0 Proof. First, for convenience of notation we define for each f F: (( A f := f 1, 1 ]) 3 ([ )) 1 f := f 1 3, Assume that the lemma was false. Then, for each n N the set { S n := x R d f F : max{dist(a f,x),dist( f,x)} 1 } n is nonempty. Further, this set is bounded (uniformly in n) since A f and f are uniformly bounded in f as subsets of C. Hence, S n is compact, and thus lemma yields a unique smallest point with respect to the lexicographic order of R d, which we shall denote by x n. The sequence (x l ) l N is bounded, and hence due to lemma has a unique smallest accumulation point with respect to the lexicographic order of R d, which we shall denote by x. We have x C, since C is closed and for each ǫ > 0, we may choose n N such that 1/n < ǫ/3, then N k n such that x x k < ǫ/3 and further y S k such that x k y < ǫ/3, and from the definition of S k follows that there exists an f F such that dist(a f,y),dist( f,y) 1/k 1/n < ǫ/3. Further, F can not be equicontinuous at x, since due to what we just found, there must be a point z either in some A f or in some f such that x z ǫ and f(x) f(z) 1/3 for arbitrary ǫ. Theorem Let C R d be compact, and let F C(C) be uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Then for each function f F, we can find an extension g f : R d R such that g f f = f and the set {g f f F} is uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that F is uniformly bounded by 1. We define: (( b 1 := inf (f dist 1, 1 ]) ([ ))) 1,f 1 f F 3 3, Due to lemma 1.2.6, we have b 1 > 0. Let now f F be arbitrary. Lemma allows us to choose a Lipschitz continuous g f 1 : Rd R with Lipschitz constant 1/b 1 such that f g f 1 < 2/3 and g f 1 < 1/3. Further, if g f 1,...,gf n and b 1,...,b n are already defined, lemma allows us to define g f n+1 and b n+1 such that: 1. f n+1 g f j j=1 ( ) n

6 2. g f n+1 < 1 3 ( ) n g f n+1 is Lipschitz continuous with Lipschitz constant 1/b n+1, where b n+1 := inf dist n 1 (( f g f j, 1 ]) n 1 ([ )), f g f 1 j f F 3 3, j=1 j=1 For reasonsthat will become obviouslater, we now want to show b n > 0 for each n N. We proceed by induction on n. We had already deduced the induction base n = 1 from lemma Assume now that b 1,...,b n > 0. Then the set n F n := f j=1 g f j f F is equicontinuous, since for each ǫ > 0, we may choose δ 0 > 0 such that f F : x y < δ 0 f(x) f(y) < ǫ/(n + 1) and for k {1,...,n} δ k := ǫ/(b k (n+1)), to obtain for δ := min j {0,...,n} δ j and x y < δ: n n f g f j (x) f g f n j (y) f(x) f(y) + g f j (x) gf j (y) j=1 j=1 As F n is also clearly uniformly bounded, lemma gives that b n+1 > 0. The calculation g f ( ) j 1 2 j 3 3 j=n+1 < ǫ j=n+1 proves that the sum g f := j=1 gf j converges uniformly in x and f. Hence, it defines a continuous function, which, due to the first property of the gf n (see above), is equal to f where f is defined. Furthermore, the set {g f f F} is equicontinuous, since if ǫ > 0 is arbitrary, then we may first choose n N such that 1 ( ) j 1 2 < ǫ/ and then δ := j=n+1 ǫ 2nmax j {1,...,n} b j to obtain for x y < δ: g f (x) g f (y) < j=1 n g f j (x) gf j (y) +ǫ/2 j=1 < ǫ/2+ǫ/2 6

7 1.3 The dyadic grid Definition The n-th dyadic grid on R d is defined as { } 1 G n := 2 n(k 1,...,k d ) k 1,...,k d Z. Lemma Let R d be a bounded set. Then for all n N the set is finite. Proof. The set is finite for every j N, and surject. G n {(k 1,...,k d ) k 1,...,k d { j,...,j}} We also choose a standard way to count sets of the form G n. Definition Let R d be a bounded set. The standard way of counting G n is defined to be the counting in the order of the lexicographic order of R d. Furthermore, we want to establish the following definition: Definition A set S R d is called dyadic gridable if and only if there exist infinitely many n N such that for each x S there exists a y S G n such that x y 1 2 n. 1.4 Simplicial vector spaces Inthis subsection, weshalldefineatypeofvectorspacewhichhelpsustodeduce the axiom of partial countable choice for sets of bounded finite cardinality from the uniform boundedness principle. Definition Let S be a set of finite cardinality. We define R S := {(b σ ) σ S σ S : b σ R} with the usual component-wise addition and multiplication. Definition Let S be a set of cardinality n+1. We define the equivalence relation S on R S as the transitive closure of the relation R S given by, where (b σ ) σ S R S (c σ ) σ S : a R,τ S : (b σ ) σ S = (b σ ) σ S +(d a,τ,σ ) σ S d a,τ,σ = { a/n σ τ a σ = τ. Definition Let S be a set of cardinality n +1, and let v 0,...,v n R be the coordinates of the vertices of the n-simplex centered at the origin with distance 1 to the origin. A natural bijection between R n and R S \ S is a function which, if σ 1,...,σ n+1 is an enumeration of the elements of S, is defined by n [(b σ ) σ S ] b σj v j j=0 7

8 Definition Let S be a set of cardinality n+1. We equip the set R S \ S with component-wise addition and scalar multiplication. Lemma R S \ S together with component-wise addition and scalar multiplication is a vector space. Proof. We only need to prove that addition and multiplication are well-defined. ut this follows from the symmetry properties of the n-simplex and that any natural bijection preserves the equivalence relation. Definition Let S be a set of cardinality n+1. The simplicial space of S is defined to be the set R S \ S together with the norm [(b σ ) σ S ] := f((b σ ) σ S ) 2, where f is any natural bijection between R n and R S \ S, and 2 is the Euclidean norm. Lemma Let S be a set of cardinality n+1, let R S \ S be the simplicial space of S and let v R S \ S \{0}. Then we may define a unique proper subset of S with respect to v. Proof. Let f be any natural bijection between R n and R S \ S. Then x := f(v) is a vector in R n, and hence defines a hyperplane orthogonal to it through the origin, which splits R n in half. We define a partition as the elements of S associated to the vertices on the side of x, and the others. oth sets are nonempty, since as the vertices of the n-simplex are equally distributed on the unit sphere, they can t be just on one half-sphere. The subset we choose to be the one of the elements associated to the vertices at the side of x. 2 Choice-free versions of Arzelà Ascoli and Fréchet Kolmogorov Following ideas of Rhineghost [7], we present a version of the Arzelà Ascoli and Fréchet Kolmogorov theorem each, which do not require choice. 2.1 Arzelà Ascoli Here is our version of the Arzelà Ascoli theorem: Theorem Let R d be a compact and dyadic gridable set, and let F C(). Then the following two statements are equivalent: 1. For each sequence in F, there exists a convergent subsequence. 2. Each countable subset of F is uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Proof. We begin with Assume that there is a countable subset {f n n N} F which is not uniformly bounded. For each n N, we define k(n) := min{j N f j > n}. 8

9 Then the sequence (f k(l) ) l N does not have a convergent subsequence. Assume that there is a countable subset of {f n n N} F which is not equicontinuous. Then there exists an x K and an ǫ > 0 such that for each n N, we may choose k n := min{j N y [x 2 n,x+2 n ] : f j (x) f j (y) ǫ}, and g n := f kn y n := min{y [x 2 n,x+2 n ] g n (x) g n (y) ǫ}. Assume there is a subsequence (h m ) m N of (g m ) m N such that h m converges to a function h. Then we would have h m (x) h(x) h m (x) h m (y m ) ( h m (y m ) h(y m ) + h(y m ) h(x) ), which contradicts the convergence (h is continuous since C() is closed). Now we prove Let (f l ) l N be a sequence in F. First, we choose {x 1 1,...,x 1 d(1) } to be equal to G 1 and ordered in the standard way (see definition 1.3.3). Further, by defining y 1 n := (f n(x 1 1 ),...,f n(x 1 d(1) )) for each n N, we obtain a bounded sequence in R d(1), from which we might extract a convergent subsequence (zl 1) l N and the subsequence of (f l ) l N with the same indices as (zl 1) l N, which we shall denote by (gl 1) l N. If now (gl n) l N is already defined, we define (g n+1 l ) l N to coincide with (gl n) l N on the first n indices, and for the further indices we proceed as follows: We define for each k N y n+1 k := (g n k(x n+1 1 ),...,g n k(x n+1 d(n+1) )), where {x n+1 1,...,x n+1 d(n+1) } equals (G n+1\g n ) counted in the standard way. Then we choose y n+1 to be the smallest accumulation point w. r. t. the lexicographic order of R d(n+1) (see lemma 1.1.6) of (y n+1 l ) l N. Then we choose a subsequence (z n+1 l ) l N of (y n+1 l ) l N such that for all k N z n+1 k is the element of (y n+1 l ) l N with smallest index such that z n+1 k y n+1 < 1/k, and finally, if k n+1, we choose g n+1 k to be the k-th element of the subsequence of (gl n) l N with the same indices as (z n+1 l ) l N. Now we choose for each n N h n := g n n. y definition, this defines a subsequence of (f l ) l N. Let now ǫ > 0 be arbitrary. We choose n N such that 1. 1/n < 1 4 ǫ and 2. x y 1 2 sup n f F f(x) f(y) < 1 4ǫ (theorem 1.2.1). Then by construction, for each k n and x G n h n (x) h k (x) h n (x) h(x) + h(x) h k (x) < 1 2 ǫ. 9

10 Furthermore, for every y, there exists an x n j=1 G j such that x y 1 2 n. Then we have h n (y) h k (y) h n (y) h n (x) + h n (x) h k (x) + h k (x) h k (y) < ǫ. Hence, (h l ) l N is a Cauchy sequence and thus convergentsince C() is a anach space. Corollary Let C R d be a compact set, and let F C(C). Then the following two statements are equivalent: 1. For each sequence in F, there exists a convergent subsequence. 2. Each countable subset of F is uniformly bounded and equicontinuous. Proof. We extend F to a sufficiently large cube (theorem 1.2.7) (which is dyadic gridable) and apply the last theorem. 2.2 Fréchet Kolmogorov For the version of Fréchet Kolmogorov, we need a lemma, which can be found, for example, in [2]. We define any f L p () to be zero outside. Lemma Let be an open and bounded set and let f L p (). Then f(x) f(x+y) p = 0 lim y 0 Proof. For y R d and f : R d R, we define τ y (f) := f(y + ). Let η be the standard mollifier. Then for each R R, we have f τ y (f) p f f η R p + f η R τ y (f) η R p + τ y (f) η R τ y (f) p. SinceduetheHeine-Cantortheoremf η R isuniformlycontinuouson + R (0), we may choose y so small that f η R τ y (f) η R < ǫ 3 p, from which follows f η R τ y (f) η R p < ǫ 3. Furthermore, we choose R sufficiently small such that f f η R p, τ y (f) η R τ y (f) p < ǫ/3, from which follows f τ y (f) p < ǫ. Now analogously, here is our version of the Fréchet Kolmogorov theorem: 10

11 Theorem Let R d be an open and bounded set, and let F L p (). Then the following two statements are equivalent: 1. For each sequence in F, there exists a convergent subsequence. 2. Each countable G F is uniformly bounded and we have lim sup f(x+y) f(x) p dx = 0. y 0f G Proof. We begin with 2 1 : Let (f l ) l N be asequence in F and G := {f n n N}. For each m,n N, we define and for each m N, we define f n,m := f n η 1/m, F m := {f n,m n N}. For each m N, the set F m is bounded and equicontinuous since for all x f(x) f(y) η m (x y) dy η m f 1 R d and for all n {1,...,d} xn f(x) f(y) xn η m (x y) dy xn η m f 1, R d and due to Hölder s inequality ( f(x) dx f(x) p ) 1/p ( 1 q dx) 1/q, where q is the Hölder conjugate of p (i. e. 1/q +1/p = 1). Furthermore, direct calculation proves that the support of f n,m is contained in A := + 1 (0) for all n,m. Therefore, we may define the subsequence (f kn(l),n) l N of F n for all n N as follows: y the previous theorem, the sequence (f l,1 ) l N contains a subsequence (f k1(l),1) l N which converges to a g C(A). Furthermore, if (f kn(l),n) l N is already defined, we choose (f kn+1(l),n+1) l N to be a convergent sequence such that (f kn+1(l)) l N is a subsequence of (f kn(l)) l N, again by the previous theorem. For each n N, we then define g n := f kn(n). This is a Cauchy sequence in L p () as is proven as follows: Let ǫ > 0. Due to Hölder s inequality and Fubini, we have for all n N and f G p (f η 1/n )(x) f(x) p dx = η 1 (y)(f(x y/n) f(x))dy dx 1(0) ( p/q f(x y/n) f(x) p dy η 1 (y) dy) q dx 1(0) 1(0) b f(x y/n) f(x) p dxdy 1(0) bc sup y 1 f(x y/n) f(x) p dx, 11

12 where b,c are real constants dependent only on d. We take the supremum on the right and then on the left over f G to obtain (f η 1/n )(x) f(x) p dx bc sup sup f(x y/n) f(x) p dx. sup f G y 1f G Due to the above and the assumption, we may choose j N such that for all f G f η 1/j f p < ǫ/3. Further, due to our choice of the sequence (f kj(l),j) l N, we may choose N N such that for all m n N, we have Therefore, for all m n N, we have g n g m p = f kn(n) f km(m) p f kn(n),j f km(m),j < ǫ/3. f kn(n) f kn(n),j p + f kn(n),j f km(m),j p + f km(m),j f km(m) p < ǫ/3+ǫ/3+ǫ/3 = ǫ. Therefore, (g l ) l N is a Cauchy sequence : Uniform boundedness follows as in the proof of the modified Arzelà Ascoli theorem. Now assume that there exists a countable G = {f n n N} F such that not lim sup f(x) f(x+y) p dx 0. y 0f G Then for each n N, we define g n to be the element of G with smallest index such that y n 1/n (0) : g n (x) g n (x+y n ) p dx ǫ for a suitable ǫ > 0, and we choose (h l ) l N to be a convergent subsequence, with h being it s limit. Then we have h n τ yn (h n ) p h n h p + h τ yn (h) p + τ yn (h) τ yn (h n ) p. The first and last terms on the right go to zero because of the convergence, and the middle term tends to zero due to lemma Hence, we have arrived at a contradiction. The proof used material from the standard proof found for example in [2]. 3 Full theorems and the axiom of choice 3.1 Arzelá Ascoli and Fréchet Kolmogorov We first prove that both theorems are true if the axiom of countable choice for subsets of the real numbers is true. Again, we follow ideas of Rhineghost [7]. Theorem Let the axiom of countable choice for subsets of the reals be true. Then the theorem of Arzelà Ascoli holds. 12

13 Proof. Since corollary holds in ZF, we only need to prove that if C R d is compact and F C(C) is sequentially compact, then F is bounded and equicontinuous. Assume that F is not bounded. We note that C(C) has the same cardinality as the real numbers, and thus we may choose a sequence of functions (f l ) l N such that for all n N f n n. This would be a countable unbounded subset, hence contradicting corollary Assume that F is not equicontinuous. As before, we choose x C, ǫ > 0 and a sequence of functions (f l ) l N such that n N : y (x 1/n,x+1/n) : f n (x) f n (y) ǫ. This gives a countable subset which is not equicontinuous, which, due to corollary 2.1.2, contradicts the sequential compactness of F. Theorem Let the axiom of countable choice for subsets of the reals be true. Then the theorem of Fréchet Kolmogorov holds. Proof. Let be open and bounded and let F L p () be sequentially compact. As in the last theorem, we see that F is bounded, since the cardinality of L p () is equal to that of R. Further, we obtain a sequence (g l ) l N with the property n N : y 1/n (0) : g n (x) g n (x+y) p dx ǫ by choosing from the sets { g F y 1/n(0) : } g(x) g(x+y) p dx ǫ. Hence, we obtain from theorem that F is not sequentially compact. Now we prove, similarly to Rhineghost, that the theorems both imply that each unbounded subset of the reals has a countable subset. Theorem Let the Arzelà Ascoli theorem be true. Then each unbounded subset of the reals has a countable subset. Proof. Let be an unbounded subset of the real numbers. For each b, we define f b : [0,1] R,f(x) = b to be the function with constant value b. Surely, the set {f b b } is not bounded. Hence, it is not sequentially compact, and due to corollary 2.1.2, there exists {f n n N} {f b b } countable. Hence, the set {c R n N : f n c} is a countable, unbounded subset of. Theorem Let the Fréchet Kolmogorov theorem be true. Then each unbounded subset of the reals has a countable subset. Proof. Let be an unbounded subset of the real numbers. For each b, we define f b : [0,1] R,f(x) = b (f b L p (( 1/2,3/2))) to be the function with constant value b on [0,1] and zero everywhere else. Surely, the set F := {f b b } is not bounded. Hence, due to the Fréchet Kolmogorov theorem, F is not sequentially compact, and due to theorem 2.2.2, there exists an unbounded countable subset {f n n N}. Hence, the set {c R n N : f n c on [0,1]} is a countable, unbounded subset of. In the light of [9], we may deduce that both theorems imply the axiom of countable choice for subsets of the reals and thus are equivalent to that axiom. 13

14 3.2 Uniform boundedness principle In this section, we prove that the uniform boundedness principle follows from the axiom of countable choice, that it implies the axiom of countable partial choice for sets of bounded finite cardinality, and that a weak version of the uniform boundedness principle is equivalent to the axiom of countable multiple choice. The proofs in the following section are new, although runner [3] previously proved that if all anach spaces are barrelled, the axiom of countable multiple choice holds, and that the axiom of countable choice suffices to prove that all anach spaces are barrelled. Together with the respective ourbaki machinery ( [4] p.362 and [5] chapter 3.4.1), which implies that the uniform boundedness principle holds exactly for barrelled spaces, this means that runner has implicitly proven that the uniform boundedness principle follows from the axiom of countable choice and that it implies the axiom of countable multiple choice. Using the axiom of countable choice, we can prove the uniform boundedness principle. We proceed similarly to Sokal s proof [8]. Lemma Let X,Y be normed spaces and T : X Y be a linear function. Then for all x,y X max{ T(x y), T(x+y) } T(y). Proof. Since the mean value is smaller than the maximum and due to the triangle inequality a b a + b max{ T(x y), T(x+y) } 1/2( T(x+y) + T(x y) ) T(y). Theorem Let the axiom of countable choice be true. If {T υ } υ Υ is a set of linear, continuous functions from a anach space X to a normed space Y such that x X : sup T υ (x) <, υ Υ then sup T υ <. υ Υ Proof. We first apply the axiom of countable choice to the sets {T {T υ } υ Υ T 4 n } to obtain a sequence (T l ) l N of operators such that T n 4 n for all n N. Further, we define the sets { S n := x X x 1 T n(x) 2 } 3 T n. y applying the axiom of countable choice a second time, we obtain a sequence (x l ) l N in X such that for all n N x n S n. Thus, we can define the two functions { 1 x 3 n x n 3 n S n g : X N {0,1},g(x,n) := 0 otherwise 14

15 and f : X N X N,f(x,n) := ( ) x+( 1) g(x,n+1) 3 (n+1) x n+1,n+1. We choose a sequence ((y l,k l )) l N in S N such that y 1 = x 1 and for all n N (y n+1,k n+1 ) = f((y n,k n )). Induction proves that n N : k n = n and lemma ensures that n N : T n (y n ) n T n. If n < k, the estimate proves that y k y n y j+1 y j n j=n 1. (y l ) l N is a Cauchy sequence, hence convergent to a y X and 2. for all n N, by letting k, y y n n and thus T n (y) T n (y n ) T n (y y n ) n T n We now prove that the uniform boundedness principle implies the axiom of partial countable multiple choice. Theorem The uniform boundedness principle implies the axiom of partial countable multiple choice. Proof. Let (S l ) l N be a sequence of non-empty sets. We define Further, we define the operators We easily find X := l 1( (l 1 (S l )) l N ). T n : X R,T n (((x m σ ) σ S m ) m N ) := 4 n T n 4 n. σ S n x n σ. Therefore,theuniformboundednessprincipleimpliestheexistenceofan((x m σ ) σ Sm ) m N X such that the set { T n (((x m σ ) σ Sm ) m N ) n N} is unbounded. Then for infinitely many n T n (((x m σ ) σ Sm ) m N ) = σ S n x n σ 0. For each of those n, we choose k(n) N minimal such that and max σ S n x n σ 1/k(n) f(n) := {σ S n x n σ 1/k(n)}. 15

16 Theorem Let the uniform boundedness principle hold. Then the axiom of countable partial choice for sets of bounded cardinality holds. Proof. Let (S l ) l N be a sequence of sets such that k N : S k n. We define Further, we define for k N and σ S X := l 1 ((S l \ Sl ) l N ). T k,σ : X R,T k,σ (((b ρ ) ρ S1,...,(b ρ ) ρ Sk,...)) = 4 k v σ, ρ S k v ρ b ρ where v ρ,ρ S k are the vertices of the S k -simplex centered at the origin and at distance 1 from the origin in any order (these functions are well-defined since they are the orthogonal projections on the v σ which don t change if the v ρ are permuted or rotated). It is easy to see that T k,σ = 4 k. Thus, the uniform boundedness principle implies the existence of an x = ((b ρ ) ρ S1,...,(b ρ ) ρ Sk,...) X such that { T k,σ (x) k N,σ S k } is unbounded. Then for an infinite S N, we have k S : 4 k v σ, v ρ b ρ 0, ρ S from which follows (b ρ ) ρ Sk 0. y lemma 1.4.7, we now can define a proper subset of S k, and if we choose proper subsets n times, the claim follows. Theorem Let the axiom of countable multiple choice hold. If X is a anach space and (T l ) l N is a pointwise bounded sequence of operators X R, then it is uniformly bounded. Proof. For each k N there is a unique T n(k) {T n n N} of smallest index such that T n(k) 4 k. Further, if we define S k as in the proof of theorem 3.2.2, the axiom of countable choice permits us to choose for each k A k S k finite. Now for each k N, we define { x T n(k) (x) > 0 f k : A k X,f k (x) =. x otherwise Then x k := 1 f k (x) n x A k is an element of S k and we may continue the proof as in Acknowledgements I would like to thank Stackexchange users PhoemueX and Nate Eldredge for pointing out to me that every separable metric space has at most cardinality of R, and how to prove this., 16

17 References [1] M. A. Armstrong. asic Topology. Springer Science+usiness Media, [2] Martin rokate. Funktionalanalysis. lecture notes, [3] Norbert runner. Garnir s dream spaces with hamel bases. Arch. math. Logik, [4] The ourbaki collective. General Topology Chapters 1-4. [5] The ourbaki collective. Topological Vector Spaces Chapters 1-5. [6] Carlos Pabst Raúl Naulin. The roots of a polynomial depend continuously on its coefficients. Revista Colombiana de Matemáticas, [7] Y. T. Rhineghost. The naturals are lindelof iff ascoli holds. Categorical Perspectives, [8] Alan D. Sokal. A really simple elementary proof of the uniform boundedness theorem. The American Mathematical Monthly, [9] Horst Herrlich; George E. Strecker. When is N lindelöf? Commentationes Mathematicae Universitatis Carolinae, [10] Several unknown authors. 17