Let $$H=\{x\in C[0,1]: \forall s,t\in [0,1]: |x(s)-x(t)|\leq b|s-t|^\alpha\}$$ where $C[0,1]$ are the continuous functions on $[0,1]$ with $x(0)=0$ and $\alpha\in (0,1/2)$. Take a sequence $(x_n)\in H$. Choosing $\delta<(\frac{\varepsilon}{b})^{1/\alpha}$, shows $\{x_n\}$ shows the family is equicontinuous. Furthermore $|x(t)|\leq bt^\alpha$ so the family is bounded and by Arzela Ascoli its precompact. So there exists a subsequence, also denoted $x_n$ converging to some $x_0$ uniformly. For all $s,t\in [0,1]$ we have \begin{align*} |x_0(s)-x_0(t)|&\leq |x_0(s)-x_n(s)|+|x_0(t)-x_n(t)|+|x_n(s)-x_n(t)| \\ &\leq |x_0(s)-x_n(s)|+|x_0(t)-x_n(t)|+b|s-t|^\alpha \\ &\to b|s-t|^\alpha. \end{align*} so $x\in H$. So $H$ is compact subset of $C[0,1]$. This has to be wrong right?
Asked
Active
Viewed 1,150 times
5
-
1Why do you think it has to be wrong? – Jürgen Sukumaran Sep 22 '19 at 13:14
-
I doubt its compact... – Sep 22 '19 at 13:30
-
The space you defined is not compact. You have to assume also that one point in the domain has image in a fixed interval. – Moishe Kohan Sep 22 '19 at 13:39
-
Explain what you wrote? – Sep 22 '19 at 13:45
-
2What he means is it's nit true that $|x(t)|\le bt^\alpha$. The functions $x_n=n$ are in $H$ but have no convergent subsequence. – David C. Ullrich Sep 22 '19 at 16:21
-
Alpha strictly between 0 and 1/2 – Sep 22 '19 at 17:49
-
You are mis-using the Arzela Ascoli theorem: This theorem has two conditions, the first of which is that the sequence of functions is uniformly bounded, say, there exists $C\ge 0$ and $x_0\in [0,1]$ such that $|f(x_0)|\le C$ for all functions in $H$. Such a space will be indeed compact since Arzela Ascoli theorem now applies and your proof of the Holder property of the limit is correct. – Moishe Kohan Sep 22 '19 at 18:51
-
I added an assumption that should fix that problem – Sep 22 '19 at 19:22
-
Now it is all correct. – Moishe Kohan Sep 22 '19 at 19:28
-
@empty wrong. First of all; hölder continuous functions of exponent > 1 are constant – Sep 23 '19 at 06:26
-
@Empty What???? – David C. Ullrich Sep 24 '19 at 14:08
-
2It's correct now, but the way it's stated is very curious. Instead of making $x(0)=0$ part of the definition of $C[0,1]$ it would make more sense to define $C[0,1]$ as usual and add the condition $x(0)=0$ to the definition of $H$... (Also why $\alpha<1/2$? It's true for any $\alpha>0$, with the same proof.) – David C. Ullrich Sep 24 '19 at 14:11
-
1@DavidC.Ullrich sorry for not replying. I'm only using this for Wiener process which is Hölder continuous for alpha less than 1/2 so it's all I needed – Nov 03 '19 at 07:59