Questions over a specific case of the Muntz-Szasz theorem proof

659 Views Asked by At

On page 157 of this site:

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0710.3570.pdf

the author is proving a specific case of one direction of the Muntz-Szasz theorem.

I do not understand the following 3 claims:

1) For $\lambda > 0$ and $x \in (0,1)$, $\lambda x^{\lambda}(1-x) <1$.

Why? I have tried various methods, including induction, and got nowhere.

2) The above claim implies (apparently) for some fixed positive integer $q$:

$||Q_n||_{C[0,1]} \leq |1-{q \over \lambda_{n}}|||Q_{n-1}||_{C[0,1]}$.

See the article for the definition of $Q_n$. It's on page 156 at the beginning of the section.

Why does this follow from my first claim?

3) Why is the last line of the proof true?

Specifically, as $\lambda_n$ goes to $\infty$ by assumption in the proof, how does the last product go to $0$?

I'd suggest quickly reading the section if you're confused by my question. It's very simple up to this point.

Thanks!

1

There are 1 best solutions below

1
On BEST ANSWER

This answers #1.

Fix $x \in (0,1)$ and set $f(\lambda) = \ln(\lambda x^\lambda (1-x)) = \ln \lambda + \lambda \ln x + \ln(1-x)$. Then $f'(\lambda) = \frac{1}{\lambda} + \ln x$, so if $\lambda_0 = -\frac{1}{\ln x}$, we have that $f$ is increasing on $(0, \lambda_0)$, decreasing on $(\lambda_0, \infty)$, and so achieves its global maximum at $\lambda = \lambda_0$.

Now $f(\lambda_0) = -\ln(-\ln x) - 1 + \ln(1-x)$. But by the elementary inequality $-\ln x > 1-x$ for $x \in (0,1)$, and the fact that $\ln$ is an increasing function, we have $\ln(-\ln x) > \ln(1-x)$. Hence $f(\lambda_0) < -1$.

We conclude that $f < -1$, which is to say $$\lambda x^\lambda (1-x) < \frac{1}{e} < 1.$$