The spaces of analytic functions on open subsets of \(\mathbb R^{\mathbb N}\) and \(\mathbb C^{\mathbb N}\) (Q2344493)

From MaRDI portal
scientific article
Language Label Description Also known as
English
The spaces of analytic functions on open subsets of \(\mathbb R^{\mathbb N}\) and \(\mathbb C^{\mathbb N}\)
scientific article

    Statements

    The spaces of analytic functions on open subsets of \(\mathbb R^{\mathbb N}\) and \(\mathbb C^{\mathbb N}\) (English)
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    15 May 2015
    0 references
    Let \(E\) be a locally convex space over \(\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{R}\) or \(\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{C}\) and let \(\mathcal{A}(U)\) denote the space of \(\mathbb{K}\)-valued analytic functions on an open subset \(U\subset E\). The authors study topological properties of \(\mathcal{A}(U)\) where \(U\subset\mathbb{K}^\mathbb{N}\) satisfies the \(0\)-property, i.e., \(0\in U\) and there is \(d\in\mathbb{N}\) such that \((x_1,\dots,x_k,0,\dots)\in U\) for all \(k\geq d\) if \((x_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}\in U\). Extending and improving a result of Nachbin, it is shown that any \(f\in\mathcal{A}(U)\) only depends on finitely many variables if \(U\subset\mathbb{K}^\mathbb{N}\) is open and connected with the \(0\)-property. This allows to introduce a new topology \(\tau_\ell\) on \(\mathcal{A}(U)\) defined by the locally convex inductive limit \((\mathcal{A}(U),\tau_\ell)=\varinjlim_{k\geq d}\bigl(\pi_k^*(\mathcal{A}(\pi_k(U))),\tau_0\bigr)\) where \(\tau_0\) is the compact open topology, \(\pi_k\) is the canonical projection onto the first \(k\) variables and \(\pi_k^*:\mathcal{A}(\pi_k(U))\to \mathcal{A}(U)\) is the corresponding composition operator. Generally assuming that \(U\subset\mathbb{K}^\mathbb{N}\) is open and connected with the \(0\)-property, the authors show that the inductive limit is strict and hence regular. The topology \(\tau_\ell\) is then compared with the \(\tau_\delta\)-topology introduced by \textit{G. Cœuré} [Ann. Inst. Fourier 20, No. 1, 361--432 (1970; Zbl 0187.39003)] and \textit{L. Nachbin} [C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris, Sér. A 271, 596--598 (1970; Zbl 0205.12402)]. Here the real and the complex case differ considerably: in fact, both topologies coincide if \(\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{C}\), while \(\tau_\delta<\tau_\ell\) if \(\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{R}\). Also, \((\mathcal{A}(U),\tau_\delta)\) is complete if \(\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{C}\), while \((\mathcal{A}(U),\tau_\ell)\) is not complete if \(\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{R}\). Finally, \((\mathcal{A}(U),\tau)\) is not metrizable for any topology \(\tau_0\leq \tau\leq \tau_\ell\).
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    0 references
    analytic function
    0 references
    locally convex topology
    0 references
    inductive limit
    0 references