Let $I \subset \mathbb{R}$ and for $\forall n \in \mathbb{N}: f_n \in C(I, \mathbb{R})$. Prove that if for any $\sigma:\mathbb{N} \rightarrow \mathbb{N}$ bijection, the series $$\sum_n f_{\sigma(n)}$$ converges uniformly on $I$, then $$\sum_n |f_n|$$ also converges uniformly on $I$. I'm thinking of a proof by contradiction: Let's suppose that the latter series is not uniformly convergent, that is: $$\exists \varepsilon >0:\forall N\in\mathbb{N}:\exists n>N: \exists x \in I:$$ $$\sum_{k=N}^{n}|f_k(x)|\ge \varepsilon$$ Then $$\prod_{N \in \mathbb{N}} \{n|n>N \land \exists x \in I: \sum_{k=N}^{n}|f_k(x)|\ge \varepsilon \}\ne \emptyset$$ but then I stuck, because an element of the latter set is not necessarely a bijection, because it might fail to be injective. My thought was to construct somehow a rearrangement of the series that would not converge uniformly hence a contradiction. I also fail to see where the continuity of the functions $f_n$ comes in. I would appreciate any suggestions.
2026-03-25 15:44:10.1774453450
If every rearrangement of the series converges uniformly then the series converges absolutely uniformly
166 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in REAL-ANALYSIS
- how is my proof on equinumerous sets
- Finding radius of convergence $\sum _{n=0}^{}(2+(-1)^n)^nz^n$
- Optimization - If the sum of objective functions are similar, will sum of argmax's be similar
- On sufficient condition for pre-compactness "in measure"(i.e. in Young measure space)
- Justify an approximation of $\sum_{n=1}^\infty G_n/\binom{\frac{n}{2}+\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{n}{2}}$, where $G_n$ denotes the Gregory coefficients
- Calculating the radius of convergence for $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\left(\sqrt{ n^2+n}-\sqrt{n^2+1}\right)^n}{n^2}z^n$
- Is this relating to continuous functions conjecture correct?
- What are the functions satisfying $f\left(2\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{a_i}{3^i}\right)=\sum_{i=0}^{\infty}\frac{a_i}{2^i}$
- Absolutely continuous functions are dense in $L^1$
- A particular exercise on convergence of recursive sequence
Related Questions in SEQUENCES-AND-SERIES
- How to show that $k < m_1+2$?
- Justify an approximation of $\sum_{n=1}^\infty G_n/\binom{\frac{n}{2}+\frac{1}{2}}{\frac{n}{2}}$, where $G_n$ denotes the Gregory coefficients
- Negative Countdown
- Calculating the radius of convergence for $\sum _{n=1}^{\infty}\frac{\left(\sqrt{ n^2+n}-\sqrt{n^2+1}\right)^n}{n^2}z^n$
- Show that the sequence is bounded below 3
- A particular exercise on convergence of recursive sequence
- Proving whether function-series $f_n(x) = \frac{(-1)^nx}n$
- Powers of a simple matrix and Catalan numbers
- Convergence of a rational sequence to a irrational limit
- studying the convergence of a series:
Related Questions in ABSOLUTE-CONVERGENCE
- Does one-sided derivative of real power series at edge of domain of convergence
- Every rearrangement of an absolutely convergent series converges to the same sum (Rudin)
- Prove $\int_{\pi}^{\infty}\frac{\cos(x)}{x}dx$ is convergent
- Conditional convergent improper Riemann integral vs. Lebesgue Integral
- Pointwise, uniform and absolute convergence of function-series $\sum_{n=1}^\infty f_n$ with $f_n=(-1)^n\frac{x}{n}$
- Does it make mathematical sense to do an absolute convergence test if the original series diverges?
- Prove absolute convergence given the following inequality
- Proving a space is not complete by finding an absolutely convergent series
- Convergence and absolute convergence of sums
- Absolute convergence of $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}z_n^2$
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Assume otherwise. Then there exist $\epsilon > 0$ such that
$$ \forall n \in \mathbb{N}, \quad \exists x \in I \quad \text{s.t.} \quad \sum_{i=n}^{\infty} |f_i(x)| > \epsilon. \tag{*}$$
Now we would like to construct $\sigma$ which violates the assumption. To this end, we recursively define the triple $(A_j, n_j, x_j)_{j=1}^{\infty}$ as follows:
Construction. Assume that $(A_j, n_j, x_j)_{j=1}^{k-1}$ is well-defined so that $A_j$'s and $\{n_j\}$'s are mutually disjoint. Pick $n$ so that it is larger than any elements in $\bigcup_{j=1}^{k-1}A_j \cup \{n_j \}$. In the following picture, elements chosen up to the $(k-1)$-th stage are represented by black dots.
$\hspace{5em}$
By $\text{(*)}$, there exists $x_k \in I$ such that $\sum_{i=n}^{\infty} |f_i(x_k)| > \epsilon$. So, either the sum of positive parts or the sum of negative parts must exceed $\epsilon/2$, and in particular, there exists a finite subset $A_k \subset \mathbb{N} \cap [n, \infty)$ so that
$$\left| \sum_{i \in A_k} f_i(x_k) \right| > \epsilon / 2. \tag{2}$$
Then pick $n_k$ as the smallest element in $\mathbb{N}\setminus\left(\bigcup_{j=1}^{k-1}A_j \cup \{n_j \} \cup A_k\right)$. In the following figure, elements of $A_k$ are represented by red dots and $n_k$ is represented by the blue dot.
$\hspace{5em}$
By the construction, it is clear that $\mathbb{N} = \bigcup_{j=1}^{\infty} A_j \cup \{n_j\}$. From this, we may define $\sigma : \mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{N}$ as the function that enumerates elements in the sets of
$$(A_1, \{n_1\}, A_2, \{n_2\}, \cdots) $$
in order of appearance. In other words, if we regard $A_k$'s as ordered lists, then $\sigma$ is an infinite ordered list obtained by concatenating $A_1$, $\{n_1\}$, $A_2$, $\{n_2\}$, $\cdots$. Now, if we write $N_k = \#\big( \bigcup_{j=1}^{k} A_j \cup \{n_j\} \big)$, then
$$ \sup_{x \in I} \left| \sum_{i = N_{k-1} + 1}^{N_k} f_{\sigma(i)}(x) \right| \geq \left| \sum_{i \in A_k} f_i (x_k) \right| - |f_{n_k}(x_k)| \geq (\epsilon/2) - |f_{n_k}(x_k)|. $$
But it is easy to check that $f_n \to 0$ uniformly, and so, it follows that this lower bound is at least as large as $\epsilon/3$ for all sufficiently large $k$. This proves that partial sums of $(f_{\sigma(i)})$ cannot converge uniformly, contradicting the assumption. $\square$