Alphabeta Math
CounterexampleConstruction: AI-adaptedVerification: AI-adaptedPipeline-generatedaudited 2026-09-22
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

Compactness is not preserved by strong operator limits

Statement refuted

The false general statement is: the strong operator limit of a sequence of compact operators is compact. On H:=2(N,K), with K=R or C (Square-summable families on an arbitrary index set and the space 2(I)), let

PNx:=n<Nxnen(NN)

be the N-th coordinate projection. Each PN is compact (Compact linear operator), the sequence converges to the identity in the strong operator topology (Strong and weak operator topologies), IPN=1 for every N, and the identity is not compact.

Facts & Assumptions

[A1]

In 2(N,K) one has x22=nNxn2 with the finite-subset meaning of the sum, ei,ej=δij, and the coordinate bound xnx2 (Square-summable families on an arbitrary index set and the space 2(I)).

[A2]

A bounded finite-rank operator is compact (Bounded finite rank operators are compact, A bounded linear operator between normed spaces); the identity of 2(N,K) is not compact (Identity is compact iff the space is finite dimensional).

[A3]

Strong operator convergence means (TjT)x0 for every fixed x (Strong and weak operator topologies, Convergence of a sequence in a metric space: xkx iff d(xk,x)0 in R); the operator norm satisfies SSx/x for x0 (The operator norm as the least bound and as the unit-sphere or unit-ball supremum, Open ball, closed ball and sphere in a metric space).

Counterexample

technique · direct

Given: K{R,C}, the Hilbert space H=2(N,K), and the coordinate projections PNx=n<Nxnen.

1.1

Each PN is linear with PNx22=n<Nxn2x22, hence bounded with PN1, and its range is contained in the linear span of e0,,eN1, a finite-dimensional subspace; so PN is compact by [A2].

A1A2
1.2

For every xH one has xPNx22=nNxn20: given ε>0, the convergence of the nonnegative sum gives a finite FN with nFxn2<ε, and for N>maxF the tail {n:nN} is contained in NF, so the tail sum is below ε.

A1A3
1.3

IPN=1 for every N: the upper bound (IPN)x22=nNxn2x22 follows from [A1], and the lower bound holds because (IPN)eN=eN with eN2=1.

A1A3
2.1

By [step 1.2] the sequence (PN) converges to I in the strong operator topology; by [step 1.3] the convergence is not in operator norm; and the limit I is not compact by [A2].

step 1.1step 1.2step 1.3A2A3
3.1

With [step 1.1] and [step 1.2] this shows that a strong operator limit of compact operators need not be compact, refuting the general statement.

step 1.1step 2.1

Depends on

Used by

Nothing in the library uses this result yet.

Dependency tree · two levels

70 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources