Are you sure?
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
W. H. Schikhof
It is a pleasure to make many acknowledgements. First to Mar´ıa
Soledad Alca´ıno A. and Mar´ıa Eugenia Heckmann G. for typing
the manuscript. My thanks are also due to Carla Barrios R. and
Tonino Costa A., graduate students of the Pontiﬁcia Universidad
Cat´olica de Chile, who made a thorough revision of the typewrit
ten text, and materially assisted in its preparation.
Contents
1 BASICS 4
1.1 Ultrametric Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.1 Metrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
1.1.2 Ultrametrics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.1.3 Compact Ultrametric Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.1.4 Spherical Completeness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.2 NonArchimedean Valued Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2.1 Valued Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2.2 NonArchimedean Valued Fields . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1.2.3 Sequences and series in K . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.2.4 Power Series . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.2.5 Continuous Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
1.2.6 Diﬀerentiability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
1.3 Normed and Banach spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.3.1 Normed Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
1.3.2 Operators with an empty spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.3.3 Commutation Relations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.3.4 Addendum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
2 ORTHOGONALITY 23
2.1 Deﬁnition of orthogonality . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2.2 Orthogonal bases . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
3 COUNTABILITY 32
3.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
4 DUALITY 36
5 COMPACTOIDS 42
5.1 List of properties of compactoids . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 2
INTRODUCTION
In many branches of mathematics and its applications the ﬁelds R and C are playing a
fundamental role. For quite some time one has been discussing the consequences of replacing
in those theories R or C by a nonarchimedean valued ﬁeld. This story started in algebra
and number theory, where the padic ﬁelds, discovered by Hensel in 1909, could be used
successfully. Around 1930 analysis entered the picture through the work of Schnirlemann who
developed the basic theory of padic power series and analytic functions. From 1940 on the
Dutch mathematician A.F. Monna established the basics on padic Functional Analysis. At
this moment there are nonarchimedean activities in all feasible disciplines such as Elementary
Calculus, Theory of C
n
 and C
∞
functions, padic Lie Groups, Analytic Functions in one or
several variables, Algebraic and Analytic Number Theory, Algebraic Geometry, Functional
Analysis, ...
Of course, people are asking for applications.
1. There do exist several applications within mathematics.
2. In 1987 Igor Volovich raised the question as to whether at Planck distances (10
−34
cm)
space should be disordered or disconnected. He suggested the use of padic numbers
to build more adequate quantum mechanical models. Right now serious mathematician
are working in this area.
Ultrametrics also appear speculatively in Psychology, Social Sciences, Economy (stock
market). Attempts are made to build a padic Probability Theory. A conference on
these applications was held, for the ﬁrst time in history, in Moscow, October 2003.
Parts in the text, indicated ‘Background’are not needed for the course, but might be interesting
to hear about.
November, 2003.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 3
Chapter 1
BASICS
1.1 Ultrametric Spaces
In this section we recall wellknown facts.
1.1.1 Metrics
A metric on a set X is a map d : XX −→[0, ∞) (d = distance) such that for all x, y, z ∈ X
(i) d(x, y) = 0 if and only if x = y
(ii) d(x, y) = d(y, x)
(iii) d(x, z) ≤ d(x, y) +d(y, z) (triangle inequality).
X = (X, d) is called a metric space. (If we relax (i) to just d(x, x) = 0 then we have a
semimetric d)
For a ∈ X, r > 0 we set
B(a, r) := ¦x ∈ X : d(x, a) ≤ r¦,
called the ‘closed’ ball about a with radius r and
B(a, r
−
) := ¦x ∈ X : d(x, a) < r¦
called the ‘open’ ball about a with radius r.
A subset U ⊂ X is called open if for each a ∈ U there exists an r > 0 such that B(a, r
−
) ⊂ U.
The collection of open sets form a topology on X which is called the topology induced by d.
Observe that an ‘open’ ball is open and that a ‘closed’ ball is closed.
The diameter of a nonempty set Y ⊂ X is
diam Y := sup¦d(x, y) : x, y ∈ Y ¦
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 4
(possibly ∞). We set diam ∅ := 0. Y is called bounded if diam Y < ∞.
The distance between two nonempty sets Y, Z ⊂ X is
d(Y, Z) := inf¦d(y, z) : y ∈ Y, z ∈ Z¦.
For y ∈ X we write d(y, Z) rather than d(¦y¦, Z).
A sequence x
1
, x
2
, . . . in X converges to x ∈ X, notation lim
n→∞
x
n
= x, if lim
n→∞
d(x, x
n
) = 0.
A sequence x
1
, x
2
, . . . in X is called Cauchy sequence if lim
m,n→∞
d(x
m
, x
n
) = 0.
Exercise 1.A. A Cauchy sequence is bounded. Each convergent sequence is Cauchy, the
converse is not true.
Two metrics on a set X are called equivalent if they induce the same topology.
Exercise 1.B. Let d
1
, d
2
be equivalent metrics on a set X. Prove that a sequence is convergent
in (X, d
1
) if and only if it is convergent in (X, d
2
), but that a similar statement does not hold
for Cauchy sequences.
A metric space (X, d) is called complete if each Cauchy sequence converges.
Each metric space X can be embedded into its completion X
#
(a metric space X
#
that is
complete and contains X as a dense subset).
Let (X
1
, d
1
), (X
2
, d
2
) be two metric spaces. A map f : X
1
−→ X
2
is called an isometry if
d
2
(f(x), f(y)) = d
1
(x, y) for all x, y ∈ X
1
.
1.1.2 Ultrametrics
A metric d on a set X is called ultrametric (and (X, d) is called an ultrametric space) if it
satisﬁes the socalled strong triangle inequality
d(x, z) ≤ max(d(x, y), d(y, z))
for all x, y, z ∈ X. (Clearly this implies the ‘ordinary’ triangle inequality). In the spirit of
above one deﬁnes semiultrametrics. We have the fundamental
ISOSCELES TRIANGLE PRINCIPLE:
If d(x, y) = d(y, z) then d(x, z) = max(d(x, y), d(y, z)).
Example: Subsets of a nonarchimedean valued ﬁeld (see next Section) with the ultrametric
(x, y) →[x −y[.
[BACKGROUND: In fact we have this way all examples, since each ultrametric space can
isometrically be embedded into a nonarchimedean valued ﬁeld (Indag. Math. 46 (1984),
5153)]
Exercise 1.C. Let (X, d) be a metric space. Then, among all semiultrametric that are ≤ d
there is a largest one. It is called the subdominant semiultrametric for d.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 5
The next Exercise is essential. For this course it is necessary that you have proved all facts
yourself once in your lifetime.
Exercise 1.D. Let (X, d) be an ultrametric space.
(i) Let a ∈ Y ⊂ X. Then diam Y = sup¦d(x, a) : x ∈ Y ¦.
(ii) Each ball in X is both closed and open (‘clopen’).
(iii) Each point of a ball is a center. Each ball has an empty boundary.
(iv) The radii of a ball B form the set ¦r ∈ R, r
1
≤ r ≤ r
2
¦, where r
1
= diam B, r
2
=
dist (B, X ` B) (r
2
= ∞ if B = X). It may happen that r
1
< r
2
, so that a ball may
have inﬁnitely many radii.
(v) Two balls are either disjoint, or one is contained in the other.
(vi) If two balls B
1
, B
2
are disjoint, then dist (B
1
, B
2
) = d(x, y) for each x ∈ B
1
, y ∈ B
2
.
(vii) Let ε > 0. The relation d(x, y) < ε (x, y ∈ X) is an equivalence relation and induces
a partition of X into ‘open’ balls of radius ε. A similar story holds for d(x, y) ≤ ε and
‘closed’ balls.
(viii) Let Y ⊂ X, B ball in X, B ∩ Y = ∅. Then, B ∩ Y is a ball in Y .
The topology induced by an ultrametric is zerodimensional, i.e. there is a base of the topology
consisting of clopen sets. Hence, an ultrametric space is totally disconnected.
If (X, d) is an ultrametric space and Y ⊂ X is dense then
¦d(y
1
, y
2
) : y
1
, y
2
∈ Y ¦ = ¦d(x
1
, x
2
) : x
1
, x
2
∈ X¦.
Thus, completion of an ultrametric space does not create new values of the ultrametric.
1.1.3 Compact Ultrametric Spaces
Exercise 1.E. Let (X, d) be a compact ultrametric space. Show that ¦d(x, y) : x, y ∈ X¦ is
countable and has only 0 as possible accumulation point.
Let (X, d) be an inﬁnite compact ultrametric space (if X is ﬁnite the process below breaks oﬀ).
By the above exercise the set of nonzero values of d is a sequence r
1
> r
2
> . . . tending to 0.
We shall make a picture of the collection of all balls in X as follows. We have X = B(a, r
1
)
for any a ∈ X. The relation d(x, y) ≤ r
2
(or d(x, y) < r
1
if you want) decomposes X into
ﬁnitely many ‘closed’ balls of radius r
2
:
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 6
Level 1:
Level 2:
r
h
h
h
h
hr
e
e
e
e
er
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡r
¤
¤
¤
¤
¤r
X
.
.
.
.
.
.
dots represent balls of radius r
2
.
connecting lines indicate inclusion.
Each of the closed balls of level 2 decomposes into ﬁnitely many ‘closed’ balls of radius r
2
:
r
h
h
h
h
hr
r
e
e
e
e
er
d
d
d
d
dr
f
f
f
f
fr
e
e
e
e
er
¤
¤
¤
¤
¤r
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡r
¤
¤
¤
¤
¤r
¡
¡
¡
¡
¡r
.
.
.
.
.
.
¤
¤
¤
¤
¤r
r
i
i
i
i
i r
¥
¥
¥
¥
¥ r
.
.
.
.
.
.
etc. Continuing this way we arrive at a tree.
The dots represent the balls; the inﬁnite paths starting from X, going below represent the
elements of X.
The tree determines X up to homeomorphisms.
Trees appear in social sciences (hierarchical structures), so no wonder why compact ultrametric
spaces enter the scene!
1.1.4 Spherical Completeness
An ultrametric space (X, d) is called spherically complete if each nested sequence of balls
B
1
⊃ B
2
⊃ . . . has a nonempty intersection. (It is not required that the diameters of the B
n
approach 0).
It is not diﬃcult to see that a spherically complete ultrametric space is complete. Surprisingly,
the converse is not true, as we will see later.
Exercise 1.F. Prove that a compact ultrametric space is spherically complete.
The next exercise reveals the main reason why attention is devoted to spherical completeness.
Exercise 1.G. Let X be a spherically complete ultrametric space embedded in an ultrametric
space Y . Then each y ∈ Y has a best approximation in X, i.e.
min¦d(y, x) : x ∈ X¦
exists.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 7
1.2 NonArchimedean Valued Fields
Again, most of this section is old stuﬀ.
1.2.1 Valued Fields
Let K be a (commutative) ﬁeld. A valuation is a map [ [ : K −→ [0, ∞) such that for all
λ, µ ∈ K
(i) [λ[ = 0 if and only if λ = 0
(ii) [λµ[ = [λ[ [µ[
(iii) [λ +µ[ ≤ [λ[ +[µ[ (triangle inequality).
Obvious examples are Q, R, C with the ordinary absolute value function. The mapping
(λ, µ) → [λ − µ[ is a metric on K making it into a topological ﬁeld (i.e. the basic arithmetic
operations are continuous).
The metric completion of K is in a natural way again a valued ﬁeld.
Two valuations on a ﬁeld K are called equivalent if they induce the same topology.
[BACKGROUND: e.g. G. Bachman, Introduction to padic numbers and valuation theory,
Academic Press, New York, 1964: Two valuations [ . [
1
, [ . [
2
on K are equivalent if and only
if there is a positive constant c such that [ . [
1
= [ . [
2
c
.]
The following theorem essentially separates R, C from all other valued ﬁelds. It shows the
‘alternative character’ of our nonarchimedean analysis.
[BACKGROUND: Bachman, see before, page 127:
Theorem Let (K, [ . [) be a valued ﬁeld. Then, there are only two possibilities. Either
(i) K is a subﬁeld of C and [ . [ is equivalent to the absolute value function, restricted to
K, or
(ii) the valuation [ . [ is nonarchimedean (n.a) i.e. it satisﬁes the strong triangle inequality
[λ +µ[ ≤ max([λ[, [µ[) (λ, µ ∈ K). ]
So, by excluding C and its (valued) subﬁelds we obtain in return the strong triangle inequality.
1.2.2 NonArchimedean Valued Fields
In this subsection (K, [.[) is a nonarchimedean valued ﬁeld. The expression ‘nonarchimedean’
is explained by the fact that for each n ∈ N
[n 1[ = [1 + 1 +. . . + 1[ ≤ max([1[, [1[, . . . , [1[) = 1
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 8
contrasting with the Archimedean Axiom for R stating that N is unbounded.
We recall some facts that you know from a previous life.
– The completion of a nonarchimedean valued ﬁeld is nonarchimedean valued.
– Let (K, [.[) be a nonarchimedean valued ﬁeld. Then K
∗
:= ¦λ ∈ K, λ = 0¦ is a
multiplicative group and so is [K
∗
[ = ¦[λ[ : λ ∈ K
∗
¦; it is called the value group of K.
This value group can either be dense in (0, ∞) or discrete.
In the last case, if the valuation is not trivial, ρ := max¦r : r ∈ [K
∗
[, r < 1¦ exists. Any
element π ∈ K for which [π[ = ρ is called a uniformizing element.
Furthermore, B(0, 1), the ‘closed’ unit disk, is a ring and B(0, 1
−
), the ‘open’ unit disk,
is a maximal ideal in B(0, 1).
The quotient is a ﬁeld:
k := B(0, 1)/B(0, 1
−
)
and is called the residue class ﬁeld of K.
– The padic valuation on Q is determined by
[n[
p
:= p
−( number of factors p in n)
(n ∈ N).
The completion of (Q, [.[
p
) is called (Q
p
, [.[
p
), the ﬁeld of the padic numbers.
Its value group is ¦p
n
: n ∈ Z¦, its residue ﬁeld is the ﬁeld F
p
of p elements.
(Of course, in the above, p is a prime number)
p is a uniformizing element. The ﬁelds Q
2
, Q
3
, Q
5
, Q
7
, . . . are mutually nonisomorphic.
The closed unit disk of Q
p
is denoted Z
p
and called the ring of the padic integers. (This
name can be explained by the fact that Z
p
is the closure of Z).
Z
p
is compact. More generally, each ball in Q
p
is compact.
Q
p
is therefore spherically complete, separable, locally compact.
Q
p
is not algebraically closed.
[.[
p
can be extended uniquely to the algebraic closure Q
a
p
and the completion of (Q
a
p
, [.[
p
) is
called C
p
, the ﬁeld of the padic complex numbers.
C
p
is no longer locally compact, but separable and algebraically closed. Its value group is
¦p
r
: r ∈ Q¦,
so the valuation is dense, and the residue class ﬁeld is the algebraic closure of F
p
, hence
inﬁnite.
C
p
is spherically complete! This follows from:
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 9
Theorem 1 Let (K, [.[) be a n.a. valued ﬁeld. Suppose K is separable and has a dense
valuation. Then K is not spherically complete.
Proof There exist r
1
> r
2
> . . . in [K
∗
[ such that r := lim
n→∞
r
n
> 0. Let ¦s
1
, s
2
, . . .¦ be a
countable dense subset. There is a ‘closed’ ball B
1
of radius r
1
such that s
1
/ ∈ B
1
. Since B
1
decomposes into inﬁnitely many ‘closed’ balls of radius r
2
(why inﬁnite?) there is a ‘closed’
ball B
2
⊂ B
1
such that s
2
/ ∈ B
2
. Going on this way we ﬁnd a nested sequence B
1
⊃ B
2
⊃ . . .
of closed balls with radius B
n
= r
n
, and s
n
/ ∈ B
n
for each n.
Let B :=
¸
n
B
n
. If B = ∅, it would be a ‘closed’ ball of radius r, hence open so the set
¦s
1
, s
2
, . . .¦ must meet B. But on the other hand, by construction ¦s
1
, s
2
, . . .¦ ∩ B = ∅, a
contradiction.
FROM NOW ON IN THIS COURSE K = (K, [.[) IS A N.A. VALUED COMPLETE FIELD.
WE ASSUME THAT [.[ IS NONTRIVIAL I.E. THERE IS A λ ∈ K WITH [λ[ = 0, [λ[ = 1.
Exercise 1.H. Show that ¦λ ∈ K : [1 − λ[ < 1¦ is a multiplicative subgroup of ¦λ ∈ K :
[λ[ = 1¦.
1.2.3 Sequences and series in K
We recall a few fundamental facts.
– Let a
1
, . . . , a
n
∈ K and [a
i
[ = [a
j
[ whenever i = j.
Then THE STRONGEST WINS:
[a
1
+. . . +a
n
[ = max¦[a
i
[ : 1 ≤ i ≤ n¦.
– Let a
1
, a
2
, . . . ∈ K. This sequence is called summable if lim
n→∞
n
¸
i=1
a
i
exists. Then
A STUDENT’S DREAM COME TRUE:
lim
n→∞
a
n
= 0 =⇒a
1
, a
2
, . . . is summable.
– If lim
n→∞
a
n
= a = 0 then [a
n
[ = [a[ for large n. Thus, we have in Q
p
1
1 −p
= 1 +p +p
2
+. . .
Because lim
n→∞
n! = 0 in every Q
p
the sum
∞
¸
i=0
n! exists in every Q
p
. The following problem has
been open since 1971.
PROBLEM: Can
∞
¸
i=0
n! be rational for some prime p?
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 10
Everybody believes that
∞
¸
i=0
n! is irrational for every p. Several ‘proofs’ have proposed but
they all failed.
It is not even known if
∞
¸
i=0
n! = 0 in every Q
p
.
Recently Vladimirov (2002) introduced
!n :=
n−1
¸
k=0
k!
and proposed the following related CONJECTURE:
g.c.d.(!n, n!) = 2.
Exercise 1.I. Compute
∞
¸
n=0
n (n!) in Q
p
.
1.2.4 Power Series
Like in the archimedean case, given a
0
, a
1
, . . . ∈ K then
R := (limsup
n
[a
n
[)
−1
(where ∞
−1
:= 0 , 0
−1
:= ∞) is called the radius of convergence of the power series
¸
a
n
x
n
.
Just like in the complex case one proves that a
0
, a
1
x, a
2
x
2
, . . . is summable for [x[ < R, not
summable for [x[ > R. The behaviour on the ‘boundary’ [x[ = R is much easier that in the
complex case: a
0
, a
1
x, . . . is either summable everywhere on ¦x : [x[ = R¦ or nowhere. This is
because the region of convergence ¦x ∈ K : a
0
, a
1
x, . . . is summable¦ = ¦x ∈ K : lim
n→∞
a
n
x
n
=
0¦.
Exercise 1.J.
(i) Prove that the region of convergence of
∞
¸
n=0
x
n
is ¦x ∈ K : [x[ < 1¦.
(ii) Prove that, in C
p
,
∞
¸
n=1
x
n
n
exists if and only if [x[ < 1.
So, we can deﬁne the padic logarithm via the formula
−log
p
(1 −x) =
∞
¸
n=1
x
n
n
([x[ < 1)
Exercise 1.K. Let n ∈ N be written in base p as
n = a
0
+a
1
p +. . . +a
s
p
s
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 11
where a
i
∈ ¦0, 1, . . . , p −1¦ and a
s
= 0.
Deﬁne s
n
(the sum of digits) as a
0
+ a
1
+ . . . + a
s
. Show that the number of factors p in n!
equals
n −s
n
p −1
and prove with the help of this fact that in C
p
exp x :=
∞
¸
n=0
x
n
n!
is deﬁned for [x[ < p
1
1−p
and that the series is not summable if [x[ ≥ p
1
1−p
.
From now on we denote ¦x ∈ C
p
: [x[ < p
1
1−p
¦ by E
p
.
Exercise 1.L. By brute force one can prove that
exp(x +y) = exp x exp y for x, y ∈ E
p
and
log
p
(xy) = log
p
x + log
p
y for [x −1[ < 1, [y −1[ < 1, and
exp log
p
x = x (x ∈ 1 +E
p
)
log
p
exp x = x (x ∈ E
p
).
More surrealistic is the following. Prove that
[ exp x −exp y[ = [x −y[ (x, y ∈ E
p
)
[ log
p
x −log
p
y[ = [x −y[ (x, y ∈ 1 +E
p
).
[BACKGROUND: One can prove that the padic logarithm maps ¦x ∈ C
p
: [1 −x[ < 1¦ onto
C
p
and that log
p
x = 0 if and only if x is a root of unity.]
1.2.5 Continuous Functions
Let X be a topological space. The set of all continuous functions X −→ K is a Kvector
space (even a Kalgebra) under pointwise operations, and is denoted C(X −→ K), or C(X)
if no confusion about the scalar ﬁeld is to be expected.
We deﬁne the Kvalued characteristic function of a subset Y ⊂ X by
ξ
Y
(x) :=
1 if x ∈ Y
0 if x ∈ X ` Y
It is easily seen that ξ
Y
is continuous if and only if Y is clopen.
A function f : X −→ K is locally constant if each point of X has a neighbourhood on which
f is constant. Locally constant functions are of course continuous.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 12
Theorem 2 Let X be a topological space, f ∈ C(X −→ K), ε > 0. Then there is a locally
constant function g : X −→K such that [f(x) −g(x)[ < ε for all x ∈ X.
Proof (Compare Exercise 1.D (vii)) The relation [f(x)−f(y)[ < ε (x, y ∈ X) is an equivalence
relation and yields a partition of X into clopen sets: X =
¸
i∈I
U
i
.
Choose a
i
∈ U
i
for each i and deﬁne
g(x) := f(a
i
) whenever i ∈ I, x ∈ U
i
This g does the job.
1.2.6 Diﬀerentiability
Now we take for X a subset of K. To avoid problems, assume X is without isolated points.
A function f : X −→K is called diﬀerentiable at a ∈ X if
f
(a) := lim
x→a
f(x) −f(a)
x −a
exists (you can imagine how to deﬁne lim
x→a
). In the same spirit we deﬁne (everywhere) dif
ferentiable function, derivative. The wellknown rules for diﬀerentiation of sums, products,
quotients, compositions (‘chain rule’) hold also in the n.a. case. The proofs are classical.
A diﬀerentiable function is continuous. Rational functions without poles in X are diﬀeren
tiable.
To be able to deﬁne analytic functions properly we need the following exercise on ‘double
sequences’.
Exercise 1.M. For m, n ∈ N, let a
mn
∈ K. We say that lim
m+n→∞
a
mn
= 0 if, for each
ε > 0, the set ¦(m, n) ∈ N N : [a
mn
[ ≥ ε¦ is ﬁnite. Show that the following statements
(α), (β), (γ) below are equivalent.
(α) lim
m+n→∞
a
mn
= 0.
(β) For each n, lim
m→∞
a
mn
= 0; lim
n→∞
a
mn
= 0 uniformly in m.
(γ) For each m, lim
n→∞
a
mn
= 0; lim
m→∞
a
mn
= 0 uniformly in n.
If (α) −(γ) hold then
∞
¸
m=1
∞
¸
n=1
a
mn
and
∞
¸
n=1
∞
¸
m=1
a
mn
both exist and are equal.
Lemma 3 Suppose a power series in x −a converges in a neighbourhood of a ∈ K:
f(x) :=
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
(x −a)
n
(x ∈ B(a, r)) .
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 13
Then, for each b ∈ B(a, r), f can be expanded into a power series in x −b on the same ball:
there are b
0
, b
1
, . . . ∈ K such that
f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
b
n
(x −b)
n
(x ∈ B(b, r) = B(a, r)).
Proof We may assume r ∈ [K
∗
[. Then lim
n→∞
[a
n
[r
n
= 0.
Put
(x −a)
n
= (x −b +b −a)
n
=
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(x −b)
k
(b −a)
n−k
and
t
kn
:= a
n
n
k
(x −b)
k
(b −a)
n−k
.
Now clearly lim
k→∞
t
kn
= 0 for each n and since
[t
kn
[ ≤ [a
n
[
n
k
r
k
r
n−k
≤ [a
n
[ r
n
(
n
k
is an integer, hence
n
k
≤ 1)
we have that lim
n→∞
t
kn
= 0 uniformly in k. So, by the exercise we have
f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
∞
¸
k=0
t
kn
=
∞
¸
k=0
∞
¸
n=0
t
kn
=
∞
¸
k=0
b
k
(x −b)
k
where b
k
:=
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
n
k
(b −a)
n−k
.
Deﬁnition Let B be a ‘closed’ ball in K with radius r ∈ [K
∗
[. A function f : B −→ K is
called analytic if there exists an a ∈ B and a
0
, a
1
, . . . ∈ K such that
(∗) f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
(x −a)
n
(x ∈ B).
With the help of Lemma 3 one easily derives that sums and products of analytic functions on
B are analytic. Analytic functions are diﬀerentiable. If f is as in (∗) then
f
(x) =
∞
¸
n=1
na
n
(x −a)
n−1
.
If f is a complex analytic function deﬁned on some bounded domain the maximum principle
states that [f[ takes its maximum on the boundary. A similar result holds also for our n.a.
case; we include a proof since it is completely diﬀerent from the ‘complex’ proof.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 14
Theorem 4 (Maximum Principle) Let K = C
p
and B, r, f, a, a
n
be as in the above deﬁ
nition. Then [f[ attains its maximum on B and, moreover,
max¦[f(x)[ : x ∈ B¦ = max¦[f(x)[ : [x −a[ = r¦
= max¦[a
n
[r
n
: n ∈ ¦0, 1, 2, . . .¦¦.
Proof We only consider the case where B = B(0, 1). (The reader can furnish the missing
details). Thus, we have
(∗∗) f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
x
n
([x[ ≤ 1).
We clearly have [f(x)[ ≤ max
n
[a
n
x
n
[ ≤ max
n
[a
n
[.
To prove that max¦[f(x)[ : [x[ ≤ 1¦ ≥ max [a
n
[ we may assume that max
n
[a
n
[ = 1 and
derive a contradiction from the assumption [f(x)[ < 1 for all x ∈ B(0, 1). Let λ → λ be the
homomorphism B(0, 1) −→k (where k is the residue class ﬁeld). Then from (**) we obtain
f(x) = 0 =
N
¸
n=0
a
n
x
n
(x ∈ k)
for some N (since [a
n
[ < 1 for large n), for which a
N
= 0. Thus, a nonzero polynomial in k[x]
has each element of k as a root. But k is inﬁnite, a contradiction.
Thus we have max¦[f(x)[ : [x[ ≤ 1¦ = max
n
[a
n
[. To prove that also max¦[f(x)[ : [x[ = 1¦ =
max
n
[a
n
[ observe that [f(x)[ < 1 for all [x[ = 1 yields
0 =
N
¸
n=0
a
n
x
n
for all x ∈ k ` ¦0¦. Now reason as above, using that k ` ¦0¦ is inﬁnite as well.
[BACKGROUND: Krull Valued Fields.
When looking at the requirements for a nonarchimedean valuation:
(i) [x[ = 0 if and only if x = 0
(ii) [xy[ = [x[ [y[
(iii) [x +y[ ≤ max([x[, [y[)
one notices that, unlike for the archimedean triangle inequality, addition of real numbers
does not play a role; one only needs multiplication and ordering. This leads to the following
generalized concept of valued ﬁelds.
Let G be a commutative, multiplicatively written, totally ordered group such that
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 15
(∗) g
1
≤ g
2
=⇒hg
1
≤ hg
2
for all h ∈ G.
(Example: (0, ∞) with the usual multiplication and ordering. Observe that R`¦0¦ is a totally
ordered commutative group but that it does not satisfy (*)!)
Augment G with an element 0 and put for all g ∈ G
0 g = g 0 = 0 0 = 0
0 < g
Deﬁnition A Krull valuation on a ﬁeld K is a surjective map [ [ : K −→G∪ ¦0¦ satisfying
(i), (ii), (iii) of above for all x, y ∈ K. G is called the value group of K.
The map (x, y) →[x−y[ behaves like an ultrametric, and induces a zerodimensional topology
on K in the usual way. However, we have to keep in mind that its values are in G∪ ¦0¦, not
in R, and that G can be ‘very big’ so that K may not be metrizable!
Now let us ﬁrst construct a Krull valued ﬁeld, diﬀerent from the previous ones. For each
n ∈ N, let G
n
be the inﬁnite cyclic group with generator g
n
> 1. So G
n
consists of the
ordered sequence . . . , g
−2
n
, g
−1
n
, 1, g
n
, g
2
n
, . . . (In fact, each G
n
is isomorphic to the additive
group Z).
Now let G be the algebraic direct sum
G =
n
G
n
.
It becomes a totally ordered group if we order G antilexicographically: i.e. if
g = (g
n
1
1
, g
n
2
2
, . . . , g
n
k
k
, 1, 1, . . .)
g
= (g
m
1
1
, g
m
2
2
, . . . , g
m
k
k
, 1, 1, . . .)
are two distinct elements of G we say that g < g
if n
k
< m
k
. Or: if n
k
= m
k
and n
k−1
< m
k−1
.
Or if n
k
= m
k
, n
k−1
= m
k−1
and n
k−2
< m
k−2
, etc.
Observe that this G is not isomorphic as an ordered group to a multiplicative subgroup of
(0, ∞) since it contains bounded nontrivial subgroups like
G
1
G
1
⊕G
2
.
.
.
G
1
⊕G
2
⊕. . . ⊕G
n
.
.
.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 16
Now let F := R(X
1
, X
2
, . . .) be the ﬁeld of rational functions with real coeﬃcients in countably
many variables X
1
, X
2
, . . .. It is easily seen that the requirements
[0[ : = 0
[λ[ : = 1 if λ ∈ R ` ¦0¦
[X
n
[ = (1, 1, . . . , g
n
↑
nth place
, 1, 1, . . .)
determine a Krull valuation [ [ : F −→G∪ ¦0¦.
The completion of (F, [ [) can be constructed in the natural way and leads to a complete
Krull valued ﬁeld L. To see a striking diﬀerence with the ‘ordinary’ valuation, consider the
element X
−1
1
∈ F. Then [X
−1
1
[ = (g
−1
1
, 1, 1, . . .), so 0 < [X
−1
1
[ < 1. But X
−n
1
does not tend
to 0, as [X
−n
1
[ = (g
−n
1
, 1, 1, . . .) > (1, g
−1
2
, 1, . . .) > 0 for all n!
We will return to this subject later on.]
1.3 Normed and Banach spaces
1.3.1 Normed Spaces
Let E be a vector space over K. A norm on E is a map   : E −→[0, ∞) satisfying
(i) x = 0 if and only if x = 0,
(ii) λx = [λ[x,
(iii) x +y ≤ max(x, y)
for all x, y ∈ E, λ ∈ K.
(Requirement (iii) is not a logical necessity but there are good reasons for assuming it, see
also Exercise 1.N).
A complete normed space is, as customary, called a Banach space.
Two norms .
1
and .
2
on a Kvector space E are called equivalent if the metrics (x, y) −→
x −y
1
and (x, y) −→x −y
2
induce the same topology. The following Proposition can be
proved as in the archimedean case.
Proposition 5 Two norms on a Kvector space E, say  
1
and  
2
, are equivalent if and
only if there exist constants 0 < c < C such that
c 
1
≤  
2
≤ C 
1
.
On a ﬁnitedimensional space all norms are equivalent, and the space is a Banach space with
respect to each norm.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 17
Examples (See also page 22)
1. Let e
1
, . . . , e
n
be a base of an ndimensional space over K. Then
n
¸
i=1
λ
i
e
i
−→ max
i
[λ
i
[
is a norm.
2. Let l
∞
be the space (pointwise operations) of all bounded sequences in K. For x =
(λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) ∈ l
∞
, deﬁne
x
∞
:= sup¦[λ
n
[ : n ∈ N¦.
With this norm l
∞
is a Banach space.
3. c
0
:= ¦(λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) ∈ l
∞
, lim
n→∞
λ
n
= 0¦ is a closed subspace of l
∞
, hence a Banach
space.
4. Let X be a topological space, let BC(X) be the space of all f ∈ C(X) that are bounded.
It is a Banach space with respect to the supremum norm
f →f
∞
:= sup¦[f(x)[ : x ∈ X¦.
5. Let M be a complete valued ﬁeld containing K as a subﬁeld. Then, M is a Banach
space over K. Thus, in particular, C
p
is a Banach space over Q
p
. Observe that [C
p
[
strictly contains [Q
p
[ showing that nonzero vectors cannot always be normalized. This
leads to the following open problem.
PROBLEM (1960) Let (E, ) be a Banach space over K. Does there exist an equivalent
norm  
such that E
⊂ [K[, i.e. for each nonzero x ∈ E there exists a λ ∈ K such
that λx = 1?
There are some partial answers and reductions, but the answer is so far unknown! A
good test case would be l
∞
over C
p
.
Exercise 1.N. ANONEXAMPLE.
(i) Prove that l
2
:= ¦(λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) ∈ K
N
:
∞
¸
n=1
[λ
n
[
2
< ∞¦ is a Kvector space.
(ii) Show that x −→x :=
∞
¸
n=1
[ξ
n
[
2
satisﬁes (i), (ii) of page 17 and
x +y ≤ x +y (x, y ∈ l
2
)
but not the strong triangle inequality (iii) of page 17.
(iii) Compute the largest norm on l
2
that is ≤   (compare Exercise 1.C)
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 18
Exercise 1.O. Let (E,  ) be a normed space. Show that E`¦0¦ := ¦x : x ∈ E, x = 0¦
is a union of multiplicative cosets of [K
∗
[ in (0, ∞), and that, conversely, each such set equals
E ` ¦0¦ for some normed space (E,  ).
Consider in a normed space (E,  ) the ball with radius r > 0 about 0:
B(0, r) := ¦x ∈ E : x ≤ r¦.
Clearly x ∈ B(0, r), λ ∈ K, [λ[ ≤ 1 =⇒λx ∈ B(0, r), but also because of the strong triangle
inequality, x, y ∈ B(0, r) =⇒ x + y ∈ B(0, r). So, in algebraic language, B(0, r) is a module
over the ring ¦λ ∈ K : [λ[ ≤ 1¦! Such submodules are called absolutely convex.
[BACKGROUND: a seminorm on a Kvector space E is a map q : E −→ [0, ∞) satisfying
q(λx) = [λ[q(x), q(x + y) ≤ max(q(x), q(y)) but q(x) is allowed to be 0 for nonzero x. Like
in the classical case one can deﬁne a locally convex topology on E as the weakest topology
for which each member of a collection { of seminorms is continuous. A subbase of zero
neighbourhoods is formed by the sets ¦x ∈ E : q(x) < ε¦ where q ∈ {, ε > 0. By the above
observation these sets are absolutely convex. There is an extensive theory on locally convex
spaces on K.]
[BACKGROUND: Normed spaces over Krull valued ﬁelds?
Let (K, [ [) be a Krull valued ﬁeld with value group G. A norm   on a Kvector space E
should satisfy (i), (ii), (iii) of page 17 but it is not at once clear what a ‘natural home’ for norm
values should be. Only admitting G ∪ ¦0¦ turns out to be too restrictive. This leads to the
concept of a socalled Gmodule; this is an ordered set X on which G acts monotonically. For
full details see padic Functional Analysis, Lecture Notes in Pure and Applied Mathematics
207, 233293. Marcel Dekker. New York (1999).
Remark So far, nobody has attempted constructing a theory of locally convex spaces over
Krull valued ﬁelds!]
Let us return to the basic theory.
Proposition 6 Let E, F be normed spaces over K, let T : E −→ F be linear. Then, if T is
continuous at 0 then T is Lipschitz i.e. there is an M > 0 such that Tx −Ty ≤ Mx −y
for all x, y ∈ E.
Proof There is a δ > 0 such that x ∈ E, x ≤ δ implies Tx ≤ 1. Choose π ∈ K, 0 <
[π[ < 1, and let x ∈ E be arbitrary, nonzero. Then there is a λ ∈ K such that
(∗) [π[δ ≤ λx ≤ δ
(take the trouble to verify this!). Then T(λx) ≤ 1, so Tx ≤ [λ[
−1
which is, by (*),
≤ [π[
−1
δ
−1
x, and we have
Tx ≤ Mx (x ∈ E)
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 19
with M := [π[
−1
δ
−1
. Then by linearity, for x, y ∈ E, Tx −Ty = T(x −y) ≤ Mx −y.
[BACKGROUND: In theory of normed spaces over Krull valued ﬁelds (*) is not always possible
and there are, indeed, continuous linear maps that are not Lipschitz!]
Let L(E, F) be the space of all continuous linear operators E −→ F. For each T ∈ L(E, F),
among all M ≥ 0 such that Tx ≤ Mx for all x ∈ E there is a smallest one which is called
T.
We have Tx ≤ Tx for all x ∈ E and the map T −→T is a norm on L(E, F).
We write L(E) for L(E, E) and E
(dual space) for L(E, K), where K is normed by the
valuation [ [.
Exercise 1.P. In complex functional analysis the dual space of c
0
is isomorphic to l
1
. In the
nonarchimedean theory the situation is radically diﬀerent:
For x ∈ c
0
, y ∈ l
∞
, say x = (λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .), y = (µ
1
, µ
2
, . . .), put
< x, y >:=
∞
¸
n=1
λ
n
µ
n
(Show that the sum exists!). For each y ∈ l
∞
deﬁne Ty ∈ c
0
by
(Ty)(x) :=< x, y > (x ∈ c
0
).
Prove that, indeed, Ty ∈ c
0
and that T maps l
∞
linearly and isometrically onto c
0
. Hence,
in popular form: ‘the dual of c
0
is l
∞
’.
Like in the classical theory one can prove that L(E, F) is a Banach space as soon as F is a
Banach space. Hence, E
, E
, E
, . . . are all Banach spaces.
Here is a construction that works in both classical and n.a. context, but that you may not
have seen yet: forming of quotients.
Let E be a normed space over K, let D ⊂ E be a closed subspace. We deﬁne a natural norm
on E/D as follows. Let π : E −→ E/D be the canonical map (assigning to each x ∈ E the
coset x +D). Set
π(x) := dist(x, D) = inf¦x −d : d ∈ D¦.
Straightforward veriﬁcation shows that λz = [λ[z, z +u ≤ max(z, u) for all z, u ∈
E/D, λ ∈ K. Suppose z = 0; we prove that z = 0.
z has the form x + D, so z = inf¦x − d : d ∈ D¦ = 0. Hence, there are d
1
, d
2
, . . . ∈ D
with lim
n→∞
x −d
n
 = 0 i.e., x = lim
n→∞
d
n
. Since D is closed, x ∈ D which implies that
x +D is the zero element of E/D.
Theorem 7 If E is a Banach space, D is a closed subspace then E/D is a Banach space.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 20
Proof Let z
1
, z
2
, . . . be Cauchy in E/D. Then lim
n→∞
(z
n+1
−z
n
) = 0, so there are v
1
, v
2
, . . .
in E such that π(v
1
) = z
1
, π(v
n+1
) = z
n+1
−z
n
(n ≥ 1), and lim
n→∞
v
n
= 0. Then, x :=
∞
¸
n=1
v
n
exists in E and π(x) =
∞
¸
n=1
π(v
n
) = lim
n→∞
z
n
.
The Uniform Boundedness Principle, the Banach Steinhaus Theorem, the Closed Graph The
orem and the Open Mapping Theorem all rest on the Baire Category Theorem and some
linearity considerations and therefore remain valid in our n.a. theory.
We like to conclude this introductory chapter by signalling two striking diﬀerences with the
classical case.
1.3.2 Operators with an empty spectrum
Let E be a Banach space, T ∈ L(E). Like in the classical case one deﬁnes the spectrum of T,
σ(T) as
¦λ ∈ K : T −λI has no inverse ¦
(If dimE < ∞, σ(T) is the collection of eigenvalues). A famous classical result is that σ(T)
is nonempty if the scalar ﬁeld is C.
Now take the Banach space M of Example 5 in page 18 and let a ∈ M ` K and put
Tx := xa (x ∈ M)
Then T ∈ L(M) but for λ ∈ K we have (T − λI)x = (a − λ)x, hence T − λI has an inverse
x −→(a −λ)
−1
x. Hence, σ(T) = ∅.
PROBLEM. Develop a reasonable spectral theory for operators on a Banach space.
(So far, only partial results have been obtained for socalled compact operators.)
1.3.3 Commutation Relations
It is wellknown that in a complex Banach space E there do not exist A, B ∈ L(E) satisfying
(∗) AB −BA = I
an important relation in Quantum Mechanics. Turning to the nonarchimedean situation, let
E := c
0
. In 1996, A. Khrennikov and A. Kochubei independently found the following. Set
A(λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) = (λ
2
, λ
3
, . . .)
B(λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) = (0, λ
1
, 2λ
2
, 3λ
3
, . . .).
One veriﬁes immediately that A, B ∈ L(E) (B is bounded since [nλ
n
[ ≤ [λ
n
[!) and that (*)
holds.
PROBLEM. Try to ﬁnd all solutions of (*). (Last October 2003 I asked various experts about
this but nothing seems to be known apart from the above example!)
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 21
1.3.4 Addendum
On page 18 I should have included the following example of a space of analytic functions. Let
K = C
p
(more generally, let K have inﬁnite residue class ﬁeld), let r ∈ [K
∗
[ and consider the
space H
r
of all analytic functions B(0, r) −→K (see page 14).
From the maximum principle (Theorem 4) it follows that for f ∈ H
r
, f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
x
n
([x[ ≤ r):
f
∞
:= max¦[f(x)[ : [x[ ≤ r¦ = max
n
[a
n
[r
n
(so the sequence a
0
, a
1
, . . . is uniquely determined by f) and the space H
r
is (linearly) iso
metrically isomorphic to ¦(a
0
, a
1
, . . .) : [a
n
[r
n
−→0¦, with the max norm.
For r = 1 we see that H
1
∼
= c
0
. (Show that also H
r
∼
= c
0
if r ∈ [K
∗
[.) So, H
r
is a Banach
space.
COROLLARY. The uniform limit of a sequence of analytic functions on B(0, r) (r ∈ [K
∗
[) is
again analytic.
Exercise 1.Q. Show that  
∞
on H
r
is multiplicative i.e. for f, g ∈ H
r
fg
∞
= f
∞
g
∞
Hence, the ring H
r
has no zero divisors!
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 22
Chapter 2
ORTHOGONALITY
2.1 Deﬁnition of orthogonality
The ﬁnest examples of classical Banach spaces are Hilbert spaces, so one may look for a non
archimedean pendant.
An inner product ( , ) in a space over C satisﬁes
(i) x −→(x, y) is linear in x, for each y,
(ii) (x, y) = (y, x),
(iii) (x, x) > 0 whenever x = 0.
In the nonarchimedean case we replace complex conjugation by a ﬁeld automorphism λ →λ
∗
for which λ
∗∗
= λ and [λ
∗
[ = [λ[ for all λ ∈ K. (We allow ∗ to be the identity). As K is not
ordered, we replace (iii) by (x, x) = 0 whenever x = 0. So, on a K vector space E, let us say
that a map ( , ) : E E −→K is an inner product if
(i)’ x →(x, y) is linear for each y ∈ E
(ii)’ (x, y) = (y, x)
∗
for all x, y ∈ E
(iii)’ (x, x) = 0 whenever x = 0, x ∈ E.
Exercise 2.A. Requirement (iii)’ seems to be a kind of arbitrary relaxation of (iii), born out
of emergency. But it is not such a ‘wild’ generalization as one may think. In fact, prove the
following. In a vector space over C, any form ( , ) satisfying (i), (ii) and (iii)’ is either an
inner product or else −( , ) is an inner product!
For E as above and x ∈ E we put
x =
[(x, x)[.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 23
(Notice the valuation signs, compare with Exercise 2.A.)
¿From this point we could proceed with the theory like in classical theory. However, we will
never reach the goal we had in mind, according to the following theorem which we state
without proof.
Theorem 8 Let ( , ) be an inner product on a Banach space E over K such that [(x, x)[ =
x
2
for all x ∈ E. Suppose that each closed subspace has an orthogonal complement. Then
dimE < ∞.
[BACKGROUND: Theorem 8 is not the last word that is to be said about the subject. The
picture changes completely if we allow Krull valuations on the scalar ﬁeld. In fact, let L be
the completion of the Krull valued ﬁeld R(X
1
, X
2
, . . .) as constructed on pages 16–17. Put
X
0
= 1. Let E be the L vector space of all sequences (ξ
0
, ξ
1
, . . .) ∈ L
N
for which
¸
∞
i=0
ξ
2
i
X
i
converges in L. For x, y ∈ E, say x = (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) and y = (η
1
, η
2
, . . .) put
(x, y) :=
∞
¸
i=0
ξ
i
η
i
X
i
.
H. Keller showed in 1980 that ( , ) is an inner product in the sense of (i)
, (ii)
, (iii)
of page 23
(where λ
∗
= λ for all λ ∈ L), but, what is more, he proved has every closed subspace D of E has
an orthogonal complement, i.e. D + D
⊥
= E when D
⊥
= ¦x ∈ E : (x, y) = 0 for all y ∈ D¦.
The study those ‘nonclassical Hilbert spaces’ is in full progress.]
So, for our theory to develop, inner products do not seem appropriate. But we do have a
powerful nonarchimedean concept, valid in any normed space:
Deﬁnition Let x, y be elements of a normed space E over K. We say that the vector x is
(norm)orthogonal to y if the distance of x to the space Ky is precisely x:
x = min¦x −λy : λ ∈ K¦
(so the minimum is attained for λ = 0. Draw a picture). We denote this by x ⊥ y.
Before continuing we state
VAN ROOIJ’S PRINCIPLE:
If x, y ∈ E, x −y ≥ x, then x −y ≥ y.
The proof is obvious.
It can be used for
Proposition 9 If x ⊥ y then y ⊥ x.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 24
Proof We only have to prove that y − µx ≥ y for all µ ∈ K. This is clear for µ = 0. If
µ = 0 we have y −µx = [µ[ x −µ
−1
y, which by x ⊥ y is ≥ [µ[x = µx.
By van Rooij’s Principle, y −µx ≥ y.
It is the symmetry that makes ⊥ important. It is revealed in the following alternative deﬁni
tion.
Proposition 10 x ⊥ y if and only if for each λ, µ ∈ K
λx +µy = max(λx, µy).
Proof Left to the reader.
[BACKGROUND: The relation ⊥ can in the same way be introduced in archimedean normed
spaces, so one may wonder why you have never met it in the courses you took. The reason is
that in classical theory ⊥ is not symmetric. Essentially the only spaces where ⊥ is symmetric
are inner product spaces and there x ⊥ y is equivalent to (x, y) = 0.]
The following two Exercises show that one has to be careful by not automatically assuming
‘form orthogonality’ properties to hold for our norm orthogonality.
Exercise 2.B. Let K
2
be normed by
(λ
1
, λ
2
) −→max([λ
1
[, [λ
2
[).
Prove that (1, 0) ⊥ (0, 1) (not surprising), but also that (1, 1) ⊥ (1, 0) and (1, 1) ⊥ (0, 1).
Exercise 2.C. Let E be a normed space. Prove that ⊥ (‘not orthogonal’) is an equivalence
relation on E ` ¦0¦. Thus, if x ⊥ y and x ⊥ z then y ⊥ z!
Inspired by Proposition 10 we now deﬁne:
Deﬁnition A sequence e
1
, e
2
, . . . of nonzero vectors in a normed space E is called orthogonal
if for each n ∈ N, λ
1
, . . . , λ
n
∈ K
n
¸
i=1
λ
i
e
i
= max¦λ
i
e
i
 : 1 ≤ i ≤ n¦
(i.e. each e
i
is orthogonal to every vector in the linear span of ¦e
j
: j = i¦). The sequence is
orthonormal if, in addition, e
n
 = 1.
The diﬀerence with classical orthogonality is demonstrated again in the following
Theorem 11 (Perturbation theorem) Let e
1
, e
2
, . . . be an orthogonal sequence in a nor
med space E and let f
1
, f
2
. . . ∈ E be such that f
n
−e
n
 < e
n
 for all n. Then f
1
, f
2
, . . . is
orthogonal.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 25
Proof Choose λ
1
, . . . , λ
n
∈ K. Set x =
n
¸
i=1
λ
i
e
i
, y =
n
¸
i=1
λ
i
f
i
.
By assumption we have f
i
 = e
i
 for all i. Hence, y−x = 
n
¸
i=1
λ
i
(f
i
−e
i
) ≤ max
i
[λ
i
[f
i
−
e
i
 < (if not all λ
i
= 0) < max
i
[λ
i
[e
i
 = x. It follows that y = x = max
i
[λ
i
[e
i
 =
max
i
[λ
i
[f
i
.
2.2 Orthogonal bases
In this section E is a Banach space over K. It is not hard to see that, for an orthogonal
sequence e
1
, e
2
, . . . and λ
1
, λ
2
, . . . ∈ K with λ
n
e
n
 −→0 we have
∞
¸
i=1
λ
i
e
i
= max
i
λ
i
e
i
.
Deﬁnition e
1
, e
2
, . . . is called an orthogonal base for E if x ∈ E has an expansion x =
∞
¸
i=1
λ
i
e
i
for some suitable λ
i
∈ K.
Clearly such an expansion is unique.
Proposition 12 If e
1
, e
2
, . . . is orthogonal and [e
1
, e
2
, . . .] (Klinear span) is dense in E then
e
1
, e
2
, . . . is an orthogonal base.
Proof Let π ∈ K, 0 < [π[ < 1. Then there exists µ
1
, µ
2
, . . . ∈ K such that [π[ ≤ µ
n
e
n
 ≤ 1
for all n ∈ N. For (λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) ∈ c
0
, put T(λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) =
∞
¸
n=1
λ
n
µ
n
e
n
.
One veriﬁes immediately that T is a linear map c
0
−→E, that, for x = (λ
1
, λ
2
, . . .) ∈ c
0
:
[π[x = [π[ max
n
[λ
n
[ ≤ Tx ≤ x,
so that T is a homeomorphism, hence Tc
0
is complete. But also Tc
0
contains all ﬁnite linear
combinations of e
1
, e
2
, . . ., hence Tc
0
is dense. It follows that Tc
0
= E, which is what we
wanted to prove.
The most famous example of an orthogonal base is the socalled Mahler base of C(Z
p
−→C
p
):
For x ∈ Z
p
and n ∈ ¦0, 1, 2, . . .¦ we set
e
n
(x) :=
x
n
:=
x(x −1) . . . (x −n + 1)
n!
Then we have
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 26
1. e
n
is a polynomial of degree n,
2. e
n
(m) = 0 if n > m, e
n
(n) = 1,
3. e
n
(−1) = (−1)
n
,
4. e
n

∞
= 1 for all n,
5. e
0
, e
1
, . . . is an orthonormal sequence.
(Proof. Let λ
0
, λ
1
, . . . , λ
n
∈ K. Then by taking the value at 0, we get
λ
0
e
0
+. . . +λ
n
e
n

∞
≥ [λ
0
e
0
(0)[ = [λ
0
[e
0

∞
.
By van Rooij’s Principle,
λ
0
e
0
+. . . +λ
n
e
n

∞
≥ λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n

∞
.
By substituting the value x = 1 we get:
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n

∞
≥ [λ
1
e
1
(1)[ = [λ
1
[e
1
.
Continuing this way we obtain
λ
0
e
0
+. . . +λ
n
e
n

∞
≥ max¦λ
i
e
i
 : 0 ≤ i ≤ n¦
= max¦[λ
i
[ : 0 ≤ i ≤ n¦).
To conclude the proof that e
0
, e
1
, . . . is an orthonormal base some work has to be done. First,
we need
Exercise 2.D. (Continuation of Exercise 1.K)
(i) Show that for j ∈ ¦1, 2, . . . , p
n
¦
p
n
j
= p
−n
.
(ii) Show that s
pj
= s
j
for each j ∈ N (here again s
m
is the sum of digits of n in base p)
(iii) Use (i) and (ii) for
p
n
j
=
[p
n
[
[j[
(j ∈ ¦1, 2, . . . , p
n
¦).
To get an idea for the proof we imagine that f ∈ C(Z
p
−→C
p
) has an expansion. Then what
would be the candidates for the coeﬃcients? So suppose f(x) = a
0
x
0
+a
1
x
1
+. . .
By taking x = 0 we ﬁnd f(0) = a
0
.
By taking x = 1 we ﬁnd f(1) = a
0
+a
1
.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 27
By taking x = 2 we ﬁnd f(2) = a
0
+ 2a
1
+a
2
.
.
.
So, a
0
= f(0), a
1
= f(1) −f(0), a
2
= f(2) −2f(1) +f(0).
In general we proceed as follows: Let E : C(Z
p
−→ C
p
) −→ C(Z
p
−→ C
p
) be the shift
operator
(Ef)(x) = f(x + 1) (x ∈ Z
p
).
Then
(Ef)(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
x + 1
n
.
By using
x + 1
n
=
x
n
+
x
n −1
(n ≥ 1)
we ﬁnd
(Ef)(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
x
n
+
∞
¸
n=1
a
n
x
n −1
= f(x) +
∞
¸
n=0
a
n+1
x
n
so that
(E −I)f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n+1
x
n
(I =identity operator). By applying E −I k times
(E −I)
k
f(x) =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n+k
x
n
and by putting x = 0:
(E −I)
k
f(0) = a
k
.
Because (E −I)
n
=
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(−1)
n−k
E
k
we have
(*) a
n
=
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(−1)
n−k
f(k)
and
(E −I)
k
f(x) =
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(−1)
n−k
f(x +k).
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 28
Since
0 = (1 −1)
n
=
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(−1)
n−k
=
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(−1)
n−k
f(x)
we get
(**) (E −I)
n
f(x) =
n
¸
k=1
n
k
(−1)
n−k
(f(x +k) −f(x)).
We will prove that for f ∈ C(Z
p
−→C
p
), (E −I)
n
f
∞
−→0.
Since f
∞
≥ (E−I)f
∞
≥ (E−I)
2
f
∞
≥ . . . it suﬃces to show that (E−I)
p
n
f
∞
−→0.
Let ε > 0. By uniform continuity of f there is an l such that [k[ < p
−l
implies [f(x+k)−f(x)[ <
ε for all x.
Choose n so large that p
−n
< p
−l
ε. Let k ∈ ¦1, . . . , p
n
¦.
If [k[ < p
−l
then
p
n
k
(−1)
p
n
−k
(f(x +k) −f(x))
< ε.
If [k[ > p
−l
then
p
n
k
(−1)
p
n
−k
(f(x +k) −f(x))
≤
p
n
k
f
∞
≤
[p
n
[
[k[
f
∞
(by Exercise
2.D.) < p
−n+l
f
∞
< εf
∞
. Thus, we have proved that (E −I)
n
f
∞
−→0, using (∗∗).
From this fact and (∗) it follows that a
n
−→0 for every f ∈ C(Z
p
−→C
p
). This means that
g : x −→
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
x
n
is a welldeﬁned continuous function on Z
p
.
Inductively, from (E−I)
n
f(0) = (E−I)
n
g(0) for each n, we ﬁnd f(0) = g(0), f(1) = g(1), . . ..
Since N is dense in Z
p
we have f = g. So we have proved:
Theorem 13 (Mahler) The functions e
0
, e
1
, . . . given by
e
n
(x) =
x
n
form an orthonormal base of C(Z
p
−→C
p
). If f ∈ C(Z
p
−→C
p
) has the expansion
f =
∞
¸
n=0
a
n
e
n
then
a
n
=
n
¸
k=0
n
k
(−1)
n−k
f(k).
Corollary 14 (Weierstrass, padic version) Continuous functions on Z
p
can uniformly
be approximated by polynomial functions.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 29
[BACKGROUND: One can prove the following generalization.
STONE–WEIERSTRASS: Let X be a compact topological space, let H be a subalgebra of
C(X −→K) that contains the constants and separates the points of X. Then H is uniformly
dense in C(X −→K).]
Exercise 2.E. (Another application: the ‘indeﬁnite sum’).
In classical analysis a function of the form x −→
x
a
f(t)dt is often called ‘indeﬁnite integral’
of f. Show that in the padic case we have an ‘indeﬁnite sum’ for an f ∈ C(Z
p
−→ C
p
):
There is an F ∈ C(Z
p
−→C
p
) such that
F(n) = f(0) +f(1) +. . . +f(n −1) (n ≥ 1)
F(0) = 0.
Also prove the next
Corollary 15 (No padic Haar integral) Let ϕ ∈ C(Z
p
−→ C
p
)
have the property that
ϕ(f
1
) = ϕ(f) (f ∈ C(Z
p
−→C
p
), where f
1
is the ‘shift’ f
1
(x) = f(x + 1). Prove that ϕ = 0.
Exercise 2.F. Let α ∈ C
p
, [α[ < p
1
1−p
. Then exp αx is deﬁned for all x ∈ Z
p
. Show that its
Mahler expansion is
∞
¸
n=0
(exp α −1)
n
x
n
.
[BACKGROUND: One can prove that if a Banach space E has an orthogonal base then so has
every closed subspace D. However it is not always true that D has an orthogonal complement
i.e. a closed subspace S with D +S = E and D ⊥ S. It depends on K and E.]
In the next Chapter we will use the following version of ‘approximate orthogonality’.
Deﬁnition Let t ∈ (0, 1]. A sequence e
1
, e
2
, . . . in a normed space is called torthogonal if for
all n ∈ N, λ
1
, . . . , λ
n
∈ K
n
¸
i=1
λ
i
e
i
≥ t max¦λ
i
e
i
 : i ∈ ¦1, . . . , n¦¦.
In the same spirit we have the notion of torthogonal base of a Banach space.
1 orthogonal = orthogonal.
If e
1
, e
2
, . . . is a torthogonal base of E and we introduce a new norm  
∼
by
∞
¸
n=0
λ
n
e
n
∼
= max
n
λ
n
e
n

then e
1
, e
2
, . . . is an orthogonal base of E with respect to  
∼
, and the norms   and  
∼
are equivalent.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 30
Thus, the fact that E has a torthogonal base for some t ∈ (0, 1] means nothing else but: there
is an equivalent norm for which E has an orthogonal base.
Exercise 2.G. Verify the tversion of Van Rooij’s Principle: If t ∈ (0, 1] and x −y ≥ tx
then x −y ≥ ty.
Prove also a tversion of Proposition 12.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 31
Chapter 3
COUNTABILITY
3.1 Introduction
A topological space is called separable if it has a countable dense subset. If we have a metric
space that is separable then any subset is also separable.
In classical Functional Analysis some role is played by the separable Banach spaces.
In our n.a. case separability is not the right notion to work with. In fact, if K happens to be
nonseparable then each onedimensional space has the same property.
To overcome this problem one has “linearized”the deﬁnition of separability as follows.
Deﬁnition A normed space E is called of countable type if it has a countable subset whose
linear hull is dense.
It is an easy exercise to show that if K itself is separable then a normed space over K is of
countable type if and only if it is separable.
It has been an open question for quite some time as to whether each separable Banach space
over C has a Schauder base e
1
, e
2
, . . . i.e. each vector has a unique expansion
∞
¸
n=1
λ
n
e
n
, where
λ
n
∈ C. Only in 1974 Enﬂo proved that the answer was negative.
Further, in the complex case there are many nonisomorphic separable Banach spaces e.g. l
p
for 1 ≤ p < ∞. In the nonarchimedean case the situation is much simpler as we will show
now.
Lemma 16 Every ﬁnitedimensional space has, for each t ∈ (0, 1), a torthogonal base.
Proof Let E have dimension n, let x
1
, . . . , x
n
be an algebraic base for E. Choose t
1
, . . . , t
n−1
∈
(0, 1) such that their product t
1
t
2
. . . t
n−1
≥ t (e.g. t
i
=
n−1
√
t).
Set e
1
= x
1
, D
1
:= [e
1
] = [x
1
] ([] indicates linear span). Now D
1
is closed, x
2
/ ∈ D so
dist(x
2
, D
2
) > 0.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 32
Maybe this distance is not attained but certainly there is a d
1
∈ D
1
such that
x
2
−d
1
 ≤ t
−1
1
dist(x
2
, D
1
).
Set e
2
= x
2
−d
1
. Then D
2
:= [e
1
, e
2
] = [x
1
, x
2
] and dist(e
2
, D
1
) = dist(x
2
, D
1
), so
e
2
 ≤ t
−1
1
dist(e
2
, D
1
).
Continuing this way we can ﬁnd an d
2
∈ D
2
with
x
3
−d
2
 ≤ t
−1
2
dist(x
3
, D
2
).
By putting e
3
= x
3
−d
2
we have D
3
:= [x
1
, x
2
, x
3
] = [e
1
, e
2
, e
3
] and
e
3
 ≤ t
−1
2
dist(e
3
, D
2
).
Inductively we arrive at a base e
1
, . . . , e
n
of E such that
(∗)
e
2
 ≤ t
−1
1
dist(e
2
, [e
1
])
e
3
 ≤ t
−1
2
dist(e
3
, [e
1
, e
2
])
.
.
.
e
n
 ≤ t
−1
n
dist(e
n
, [e
1
, . . . , e
n−1
]).
We claim that e
1
, . . . , e
n
is torthogonal. In fact, let λ
1
, . . . , λ
n
∈ K. We have to prove
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t max¦λ
i
e
i
 : 1 ≤ i ≤ n¦.
By the last line of (∗) we have if λ
n
= 0
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 = [λ
n
[[λ
−1
n
λ
1
e
1
+. . . λ
−1
n
λ
n−1
e
n−1
+e
n

≥ [λ
n
[ dist(e
n
, [e
1
, . . . e
n−1
])
≥ t
n
[λ
n
[e
n
,
so we have
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t
n
λ
n
e
n

(this formula is also true for λ
n
= 0). By the extension of van Rooij’s Principle, Exercise 2.G,
we have
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t
n
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n−1
e
n−1
.
Now with the same trick as above we can prove
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n−1
e
n−1
 ≥ t
n−1
λ
n−1
e
n−1

P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 33
leading to
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t
n
t
n−1
λ
n−1
e
n−1
.
Inductively we arrive at
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t
n
λ
n
e
n

λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t
n
t
n−1
λ
n−1
e
n−1

.
.
.
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t
n
t
n−1
. . . t
1
λ
1
e
1
.
Now t
n
, t
n
t
n−1
, . . . are all ≥ t and we obtain
λ
1
e
1
+. . . +λ
n
e
n
 ≥ t max¦λ
i
e
i
 : 1 ≤ i ≤ n¦,
which was to be shown.
Remark. One can prove that, if K is spherically complete, all distances in the above proof
are attained and hence that each ﬁnitedimensional space has an orthogonal base! But, if K is
not spherically complete one can construct a twodimensional space without orthogonal base.
[It can be done with the knowledge built up so far. In fact, let B(λ
1
, r
1
) ⊃ B(λ
2
, r
2
) ⊃ . . . be
balls in K with empty intersection. Deﬁne for (α
1
, α
2
) ∈ K
2
(α
1
, α
2
) = lim
j→∞
[α
1
−α
2
λ
j
[
(show ﬁrst that this limit exists!). Verify that   is a norm in K
2
and that (α
1
, α
2
) ∈ [K[
for all (α
1
, α
2
) ∈ K
2
. Show that (α
1
, α
2
) ⊥ (1, 0) =⇒ α
1
= α
2
= 0. Finally, show that two
arbitrary nonzero vectors in K
2
are not orthogonal.]
Theorem 17 Let t ∈ (0, 1). Then each Banach space of countable type has a torthogonal
base.
Proof Let E be an inﬁnitedimensional Banach space of countable type.
Choose t
1
, t
2
, . . . ∈ (0, 1) such that
∞
¸
i=1
t
i
≥ t (show that this can be done). Let x
1
, x
2
, . . . be
such that [x
1
, x
2
, . . .] is dense in E. We may assume that x
1
, x
2
, . . . are linearly independent.
By continuing the induction of the proof of Lemma 16 to inﬁnity we obtain e
1
, e
2
, . . . ∈ E such
that [e
1
, e
2
, . . .] = [x
1
, x
2
, . . .] is dense in E and such that e
1
, . . . , e
n
is t
1
. . . t
n
 orthogonal for
each n. Then it follows that e
1
, . . . , e
n
is torthogonal for each n i.e. e
1
, e
2
, . . . is torthogonal.
Now apply Exercise 2.G.
Corollary 18 Each inﬁnitedimensional Banach space of countable type is linearly homeo
morphic to c
0
.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 34
A projection is an operator P ∈ L(E) with P
2
= P. If P = 0 then P ≥ 1. P is an
orthoprojection if P ≤ 1. Then Im P ⊥ Ker P and Im P ⊕Ker P = E.
Corollary 19 Let E be a Banach space of countable type, let D ⊂ E be a closed subspace.
Then D and E/D are of countable type. For each ε > 0 there is a projection P with PE = D
and P ≤ 1 +ε. Let 0 < t
< t < 1. Then each torthogonal base of D can be extended to a
t
orthogonal base of E.
Proof By Theorem 7 the space E/D is Banach. That it is of countable type is obvious. By
Theorem 17 it has a
t
/torthogonal base g
1
, g
2
, . . .. Let π : E −→ E/D be the canonical
map. By deﬁnition of the quotient norm there are f
1
, f
2
, . . . ∈ E with π(f
i
) = g
i
and f
i
 ≤
(t/t
)g
i
 for each i. It is easily seen that the map
Q :
∞
¸
i=1
λ
i
g
i
−→
∞
¸
i=1
λ
i
f
i
(λ
i
g
i
→0)
is in L(E/D, E) and that π ◦ Q is the identity on E/D, and that Q ≤ (t
)
−1
t. Then put
P := I − Q ◦ π; one veriﬁes that P ≤ (t
)
−1
, that P is a projection onto D. Finally, if
e
1
, e
2
, . . . is a torthogonal base of D then e
1
, f
1
, e
2
, f
2
, . . . is easily seen to be a t
orthogonal
base of E.
Corollary 20 ((1 +ε)HAHNBANACH) Let E be a Banach space of countable type, let
D be a subspace, let f ∈ D, let ε > 0. Then f can be extended to an f ∈ E
such that
f ≤ (1 +ε)f.
Proof We may assume that D is closed. Then choose f := f ◦ P, where P is a projection
onto D with norm ≤ 1 +ε.
[BACKGROUND: This is probably the strangest proof of the HahnBanach you ever encoun
tered! The classical proof for real scalars uses the fact that a collection of closed bounded
intervals with the ﬁnite intersection property has a nonempty intersection. If K is spheri
cally complete one can use this proof, with obvious modiﬁcations, to arrive at a HahnBanach
Theorem, the one you are used to (E arbitrary, ε = 0. See next Chapter). But if K is not
spherically complete then taking ε = 0 in Corollary 20 leads to a falsity. In fact one can prove
that in K
2
, normed like in Remark, page 34, the linear function f : (λ, 0) −→ λ cannot be
extended to an f ∈ (K
2
)
with f = 1].
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 35
Chapter 4
DUALITY
Theorem 21 (HAHNBANACH THEOREM) Let K be spherically complete, let E be
a normed space over K, let D be a subspace and f ∈ D
. Then f can be extended to an f ∈ E
such that f = f.
Proof Like in the classical case, through Zorn’s Lemma it suﬃces to prove it for the case
E = D +Ka where a ∈ E ` D. By linearity, if we ﬁx η := f(a) then f is determined:
λa +d −→λη +f(d) (λ ∈ K, d ∈ D).
The requirement f ≤ f means
(*) [λη +f(d)[ ≤ fλa +d (λ ∈ K, d ∈ D).
We notice that (*) is true for λ = 0. Then, to have (*) for λ = 0 it suﬃces to have (*) for
λ = 1:
[η +f(d)[ ≤ fa +d (d ∈ D).
Thus
η ∈ B(−f(d), fa +d) (d ∈ D).
To be able to choose η this way we need that the balls have a nonempty intersection. By
spherical completeness it suﬃces to prove that each two of them have a nonempty intersection,
i.e. we have to see if two ‘centers’−f(d
1
), −f(d
2
) have distance ≤ the maximum of fa +
d
1
, fa +d
2
. But that is true:
[f(d
1
) −f(d
2
)[ ≤ fd
1
−d
2
 ≤ fd
1
+a −a −d
2
 ≤ max(fa +d
1
, fa +d
2
).
For each normed space E over K we have, as in the complex case, the canonical map j
E
:
E −→E
given by
j
E
(x)(f) = f(x) (f ∈ E
, x ∈ E).
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 36
Exercise 4.A. (Has nothing to do with nonarchimedean aspects). Prove that j
E
is continu
ous, linear and that j
E
 ≤ 1. Also, let T ∈ L(E, F), where F is a second normed space, let
T
: F
−→E
be deﬁned as T
(f) := f ◦ T (f ∈ F
). T
is called the adjoint of F. Show that
the diagram:
E
E
F
T
c c
E
F
E
T
j
E
j
F
is commutative.
Exercise 4.B. Apply Corollary 20 and Theorem 21 for onedimensional subspaces D to prove
the following: Let E be a Banach space of countable type or let K be spherically complete.
Then the canonical map j
E
: E −→E
is isometrical.
A normed space E is called reﬂexive if j
E
is an isometrical bijection E −→ E
. Reﬂexive
spaces are complete.
One proves easily that ﬁnite  dimensional spaces are reﬂexive. We ﬁrst study reﬂexivity for
spherically complete K.
Lemma 22 Let K be spherically complete, let E be a reﬂexive Banach space over K. Then
every closed subspace is also reﬂexive.
Proof Let D be a closed subspace, let i : D −→ E be the inclusion and π : E −→ E/D the
quotient map.
By Exercise 4.A. we have the commutative diagram:
D
E
E
i
E
π
E/D
c c c
D
E
E
i
E
π
(E/D)
j
D
j
E
j
E/D
Observe that π ◦ i = 0, hence π
◦ i
= 0.
By Exercise 4.B., we only have to prove that j
D
is surjective. Let θ ∈ D
. Then i
(θ) ∈ E
.
By reﬂexivity of E there is an x ∈ E such that j
E
(x) = i
(θ). Applying π
at both sides we
ﬁnd 0 = π
i
(θ) = π
j
E
(x) = j
E/D
π(x). By injectivity of j
E/D
we have π(x) = 0 i.e. x ∈ D
i.e. x = i(d) for some d ∈ D. So i
◦ j
D
(d) = i
(θ) i.e. j
D
(d) − θ ∈ Ker i
. Now observe
that by the Hahn Banach Theorem i
is surjective so that i
is injective and it follows that
θ = j
D
(d): SURJECTIVITY !
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 37
Exercise 4.C. Show that if E and F are linearly homeomorphic and E is reﬂexive then so is
F (K is spherically complete).
Lemma 23 Let K be spherically complete. Then c
0
is not reﬂexive.
Proof We will construct a θ ∈ c
0
that is not in j
c
0
(c
0
). Let, for n ∈ N, δ
n
be the nth
coordinate function c
0
−→K :
(ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) −→ξ
n
.
Then δ
n
∈ c
0
. Let D = [δ
1
, δ
2
, . . .] ⊂ c
0
. The function (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) −→
∞
¸
n=1
ξ
n
is in c
0
but not
in D, so we have D = c
0
. Hence c
0
/D = ¦0¦ and there is a nonzero ω ∈ (c
0
/D)
(Here we
used that K is spherically complete). Combining ω with the quotient map c
0
−→c
0
/D:
θ : c
0
−→c
0
/D
ω
−→K
we ﬁnd a θ ∈ c
0
, θ = 0 on D. We claim that this θ is not in Im j
c
0
. In fact, suppose we would
have an x ∈ c
0
with j
c
0
(x) = θ i.e. θ(f) = f(x) for all f ∈ c
0
, say x = (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .). By taking
for f = δ
n
we ﬁnd
ξ
n
= δ
n
(x) = θ(δ
n
) = 0,
implying x = 0 hence θ = 0, a contradiction.
This leads to the disappointing result:
Theorem 24 Let K be spherically complete. Then, the only reﬂexive spaces are the ﬁnite
dimensional ones.
Proof Let E be inﬁnitedimensional. Then we can take a linearly independent sequence
x
1
, x
2
, . . .. If E were reﬂexive then so would [x
1
, x
2
, . . .] by Lemma 22. But the latter space
is of countable type so it is isomorphic to c
0
by Corollary 18. By Exercise 4.C. then c
0
would
be reﬂexive conﬂicting Lemma 23.
[BACKGROUND: The situation becomes more varied if we move to the locally convex theory:
here there are big classes of reﬂexive spaces over spherically complete K.]
Next, we investigate reﬂexivity for nonspherically complete scalar ﬁeld K. The results will
be surprising.
Lemma 25 Let E be a spherically complete Banach space (no condition on K). Suppose D
is a closed subspace of E. Then E/D is also spherically complete.
Proof Let B(y
1
, r
−
1
) ⊃ B(y
2
, r
−
2
) ⊃ . . . be a nested sequence of ‘open’ balls in E/D. It suﬃces
to show that their intersection is nonempty. Let π : E −→E/D be the quotient map. Choose
an x
1
∈ E with π(x
1
) = y
1
. Then, from the way the norm on E/D was deﬁned we infer that
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 38
π(B(x
1
, r
−
1
)) = B(y
1
, r
−
1
). Then we can choose an x
2
∈ B(x
1
, r
−
1
) with π(x
2
) = y
2
and form
B(x
2
, r
−
2
), whose image under π is exactly B(y
2
, r
−
2
), etc. By spherical completeness of E
there is an x ∈
¸
n
B(x
n
, r
−
n
). Then π(x) ∈
¸
n
B(y
n
, r
−
n
).
Lemma 26 (ANTIHAHN BANACH THEOREM) Let E be a Banach space over K.
If E is spherically complete and K is not then E
= ¦0¦.
Proof Let f ∈ E
, f = 0. Decompose f as follows.
(On E/Ker f the canonical norm.
ρ is the unique map making the
diagram conmute.)
E
E
K
f
e
e
e
f
1
E/Ker f
¡
¡
¡!
ρ
By Lemma 25, the space E/Ker f is spherically complete. But ρ is a linear homeomorphism
between two onedimensional spaces viz. E/Ker f and K. Then there is a constant c > 0
such that [ρ(x)[ = cx for all x ∈ E/Ker f. Hence, ρ maps balls onto balls and so K must
be spherically complete as well. Contradiction.
Proposition 27 For any K, the space l
∞
/c
0
is spherically complete.
Proof Let π : l
∞
−→l
∞
/c
0
be the quotient map. For x = (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) ∈ l
∞
we have
π(x) = lim
n→∞
sup([ξ
n
[, [ξ
n+1
[, . . .)
(verify this!) Like in the proof of Lemma 25 we can ﬁnd, for given balls B(y
1
, r
−
1
) ⊃
B(y
2
, r
−
2
) ⊃ . . . in l
∞
/c
0
, balls B(x
1
, r
−
1
) ⊃ B(x
2
, r
−
2
) ⊃ . . . in l
∞
such that π(x
n
) = y
n
,
π(B(x
n
, r
−
n
)) = B(y
n
, r
−
n
) for each n. Now write
x
1
= (x
11
, x
12
, . . .)
x
2
= (x
21
, x
22
, . . .)
.
.
.
and take the diagonal sequence
a := (x
11
, x
22
, . . .).
Clearly [x
nn
[ ≤ x
n

∞
for all n, so a
∞
≤ sup
n
x
n

∞
< ∞ and we see that a ∈ l
∞
. We
claim that π(a) ∈ B(y
n
, r
−
n
) for each n (which will ﬁnish the proof), i.e., we have to show
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 39
π(a) −π(x
n
) < r
n
. Now
π(a) −π(x
n
) = lim
k→∞
sup([x
kk
−x
nk
[, [x
k+1,k+1
−x
n,k+1
[, . . .)
≤ sup([x
n+1,n+1
−x
n,n+1
[, [x
n+2,n+2
−x
n,n+2
[, . . .)
≤ sup(x
n+1
−x
n

∞
, x
n+2
−x
n

∞
)
≤ sup(x
n+1
−x
n

∞
, r
n+1
, r
n+2
, . . .)
< r
n
and we are done.
Corollary 28 Let K be not spherically complete. Then (l
∞
/c
0
)
= ¦0¦. If f ∈ (l
∞
)
and
f = 0 on c
0
then f is identically zero.
Proof Combine Lemma 26 and Proposition 27. For the second statement, observe that f = 0
on c
0
implies that (with π : l
∞
−→l
∞
/c
0
the canonical map)
π(x) −→f(x) (x ∈ l
∞
)
deﬁnes an element of (l
∞
/c
0
)
which has to be 0, so f = 0.
Proposition 29 Let K be not spherically complete. Then
f : (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) −→
∞
¸
n=1
ξ
n
((ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) ∈ c
0
)
cannot be extended to an element of (l
∞
)
.
Proof With an ingenious trick. Suppose we could extend the given functional to a h ∈ (l
∞
)
.
Deﬁne the shift operator Ω : l
∞
−→l
∞
by the formula
Ω(ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) = (0, ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .).
Then Ω maps c
0
into c
0
and f ◦ Ω = f, so h ◦ Ω is also an extension of f. By Corollary 28 we
have h ◦ Ω = h. Now take any x ∈ l
∞
, x = (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .). Set
s = (ξ
1
, ξ
1
+ξ
2
, . . .)
Then s ∈ l
∞
and Ωs −s = x. Then h(x) = (h ◦ Ω −h)(s) = 0, a contradiction.
The idea of the proof of Proposition 29 can be generalized:
Proposition 30 Let K be not spherically complete. Let (a
1
, a
2
, . . .) ∈ l
∞
. Then
f : (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) −→
∞
¸
n=1
ξ
n
a
n
((ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) ∈ c
0
)
can be extended to an element of (l
∞
)
if and only if (a
1
, a
2
, . . .) ∈ c
0
.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 40
Proof We prove that if (a
1
, a
2
, . . .) / ∈ c
0
then f cannot be extended.
There is an ε > 0 such that X := ¦n ∈ N : [a
n
[ ≥ ε¦ is inﬁnite. Let n
1
, n
2
, . . . be an
enumeration of X. Deﬁne a continuous linear map T : l
∞
−→l
∞
by
T(ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) = (b
1
, b
2
, . . .),
where
b
n
=
0 if n / ∈ X
a
−1
n
i
ξ
i
if n = n
i
.
We have for (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) ∈ c
0
(∗) (f ◦ T)(ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .) = f(b
1
, b
2
, . . .) =
¸
n∈X
a
n
b
n
=
¸
∞
i=1
a
n
i
b
n
i
=
¸
∞
i=1
ξ
i
.
If f had an extension f ∈ (l
∞
)
then f ◦ T would be an extension of f ◦ T. But this is
impossible by the previous Proposition and (∗).
Theorem 31 (c
0
and l
∞
are reﬂexive) Let K be not spherically complete. For each x ∈ c
0
deﬁne f
x
∈ (l
∞
)
by
f
x
(y) =< x, y >=
∞
¸
n=1
ξ
n
η
n
(y ∈ l
∞
)
(x = (ξ
1
, ξ
2
, . . .), y = (η
1
, η
2
, . . .)). Then x →f
x
is an isometrical isomorphism. c
0
· (l
∞
)
.
Proof By Proposition 30, x → f
x
is surjective. Obviously it is linear. We have for x ∈ c
0
,
y ∈ l
∞
:
[f
x
(y)[ = [ < x, y > [ =
¸
ξ
n
η
n
≤ max [ξ
n
[[η
n
[
≤ x
∞
y
∞
so f
x
 ≤ x. But also, if we put y = e
n
(nth unit vector) we get
f
x
 = e
n
f
x
 ≥ [f
x
(e
n
)[ = [ξ
n
[
so, f
x
 ≥ max
n
[ξ
n
[ = x.
[BACKGROUND: The conclusion of Lemma 22 is not true if K is not spherically complete,
as one can construct nonreﬂexive subspaces of l
∞
. The class of reﬂexive spaces over non
spherically complete K is, so far, not yet welldescribed.]
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 41
Chapter 5
COMPACTOIDS
This little chapter treats a third important notion (next to ‘orthogonality’and ‘of countable
type’), namely that of a compactoid set. We do not have much time to explain it in the
lectures, so the only purpose of this chapter is to give you an idea about these notions, its
impact on the theory but without details and without proofs.
A subset X of a Banach space E (over K or over R or C) is called precompact if, for any ε > 0,
X can be covered by ﬁnitely many εballs. In other words, X is precompact if for every ε > 0
there is a ﬁnite set F ⊂ E such that
X ⊂ B(0, ε) +F
One proves by classical means that X is precompact if and only its closure X in E is compact.
(For this, it is necessary that E is complete).
In classical theory convex compact sets play an important role in Functional Analysis
(e.g. AlaogluBourbaki Theorem, KreinMilman Theorem, Choquet Theory). How are the
prospects in the nonarchimedean case? Recall that a subset C of a Kvector space is absolutely
convex if 0 ∈ C and for x, y ∈ C, λ, µ ∈ K, [λ[ ≤ 1 [µ[ ≤ 1 we have λx + µy ∈ C. So, if K is
not locally compact the only absolutely convex compact subset of a Banach space is ¦0¦. This
diﬃculty is similar to the separability problem on page 32, and we will solve it in a similar
way; this time by ‘convexifying’ the deﬁnition of precompactness.
Deﬁnition A subset X of a Banach space E over K is called compactoid if
for each ε > 0 there is a ﬁnite set F ⊂ E such that
X ⊂ B(0, ε) + aco F,
where ‘aco’ stands for ‘absolutely convex hull’, the smallest absolutely convex set containnig
the given set. In our case if F = ¦a
1
, . . . , a
n
¦ then aco F = ¦λ
1
a
1
+. . .+λ
n
a
n
: λ
i
∈ K, [λ
i
[ ≤ 1
for each i¦.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 42
One may hope now that absolutely convex complete compactoids will take over the role played
by absolutely convex compact sets in classical analysis. The following results show that this
is the case to a certain degree.
5.1 List of properties of compactoids
Compactoids are bounded.
The absolutely convex hull of a compactoid is a compactoid.
The closure of a compactoid is a compactoid.
The continuous linear image of a compactoid is a compactoid.
If K is locally compact then a subset of a KBanach space is a compactoid if and only if it is
precompact.
Those were easy properties. Now a few less trivial ones (we do not give proofs).
Let E be a KBanach space with norm  .
– X ⊂ E is a compactoid and only if there exists a sequence x
1
, x
2
, . . . tending to 0 such
that X ⊂ aco ¦x
1
, x
2
, . . .¦.
– If  
is a norm weaker than   and A is a closed absolutely convex compactoid in E,
then the topologies induced by   and  
coincide on A.
– Let A ⊂ E be a complete compactoid, absolutely convex. Let λ ∈ K, [λ[ > 1 if the
valuation is dense. λ = 1 otherwise. Let t ∈ (0, 1) if K is not spherically complete. Let
t ∈ (0, 1] otherwise. Then there exists a torthogonal sequence e
1
, e
2
, . . . in λA such that
A ⊂ aco ¦e
1
, e
2
, . . .¦ ⊂ λA
– Let X ⊂ E be bounded. Then X is a compactoid if and only if for every t ∈ (0, 1] each
torthogonal sequence in X tends to 0.
– Let X ⊂ E. Then X is a compactoid if and only if for each sequence x
1
, x
2
, . . . in X
lim
n→∞
n
Vol(x
1
, x
2
, . . . , x
n
) = 0
(Here, Vol(x
1
, . . . , x
n
) := x
1
 dist(x
2
, [x
1
]) dist(x
3
, [x
1
, x
2
]) . . . dist(x
n
, [x
1
, . . . x
n−1
])).
– (ArzelaAscoli) Let T ⊂ C(X) where X compact.
Then T is bounded and equicontinuous if and only if T is a compactoid.
– If A ⊂ E is an absolutely convex closed compactoid then (TA)
e
:=
¸
λ>1
λ(TA) is closed
(where T ∈ L(E)).
(Not always TA is closed)
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 43
– If T ∈ L(E) and A is a complete absolutely convex compactoid and z
1
, z
2
, . . . ∈
TA, z
n
→0 then for each λ ∈ K, [λ[ > 1 there exist x
1
, x
2
, . . . ∈ λA with Tx
n
= z
n
for
each n and x
n
→0 (The map T[A is ‘almost’ open).
An A ∈ L(E) is called compact operator if it maps the unit ball into a compactoid.
One can derive a theory a la Riesz for compact operators:
– nonzero elements of the spectrum are eigenvalues.
– 0 is the only possible accumulation point of the spectrum.
– Each eigenspace of a λ = 0 is ﬁnitedimensional.
– Alternative of Fredholm.
.
.
.
One may think of alternative ways of ‘convexifying’ notions of compactness. The following
was introduced by Springer.
Let A ⊂ E be convex. We call A ccompact if the following holds. A is closed and for each
collection of closed convex sets ¦C
i
: i ∈ I¦ in A such that C
i,1
∩ . . . ∩ C
i,n
= ∅ for any
i
1
, . . . , i
n
∈ I we have
¸
i
C
i
= ∅ (This translates a wellknown property of closed subset of a
compact set).
However:
– If K is not spherically complete each ccompact set is either empty or a singleton set.
But:
– If K is spherically complete and A ⊂ E is convex and bounded then
A is a complete compactoid ⇔A is ccompact.
P. Universidad Cat´olica de Chile – Fac. Matem´aticas – MECESUP PUC0103 – FONDECYT 7020710 44
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?