Mathematics · Book 5 · Bachelor Year 3

University Mathematics — Year 3

University Mathematics — Year 3 · Bachelor Year 3

15Compact Operators and the Spectral Theorem

Diagonalization is finite-dimensional linear algebra’s crown jewel: a symmetric matrix has an orthonormal basis of eigenvectors. In infinite dimension this fails for bounded self-adjoint operators in general — multiplication by xx on L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01) has no eigenvalues at all (Exercise 15.6) — but it survives, in perfect form, for the operators that are almost finite dimensional: the compact ones. The spectral theorem for compact self-adjoint operators is the single most used theorem of applied functional analysis: it diagonalizes integral equations, drives the Fredholm alternative, and (weekend problem) solves the vibrating string, producing the sine basis of Fourier analysis from pure operator theory — with Euler’s ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6 falling out of a trace formula as a parting gift. Throughout, HH is a Hilbert space over C\C (or R\R; statements adapt), and operators are bounded.

15.1 Compact operators

Definition 15.1

TL(E,F)T \in \mathcal L(E, F) (E,FE, F Banach) is compact if the image T(B)T(B) of the unit ball is relatively compact in FF — equivalently, every bounded sequence (xn)(x_n) has a subsequence with (Txnk)(Tx_{n_k}) convergent. Finite-rank operators are compact (bounded sets in finite dimension); the identity of an infinite-dimensional space never is (Riesz’s theorem, Year 2).

Proposition 15.2

The compact operators K(E,F)\mathcal K(E, F) form a closed subspace of L(E,F)\mathcal L(E, F), and a two-sided ideal: SS compact \Rightarrow ASAS and SBSB compact for bounded A,BA, B. Moreover, in a Hilbert space, every compact operator is a norm-limit of finite-rank operators.

Proof. Subspace: clear from the sequence characterization. Ideal: bounded maps send convergent sequences to convergent ones and bounded to bounded. Closedness: let TnTT_n \to T with TnT_n compact, and (xk)(x_k) bounded by 11; a diagonal extraction makes (Tnxkj)j(T_nx_{k_j})_j convergent for every nn; then (Txkj)(Tx_{k_j}) is Cauchy, since

TxkjTxkl2TTn+TnxkjTnxkl,\norm{Tx_{k_j} - Tx_{k_l}} \leq 2\vertiii{T - T_n} + \norm{T_nx_{k_j} - T_nx_{k_l}} ,

choosing first nn then the indices. Approximation in Hilbert spaces: let TT be compact, K=T(B)K = \overline{T(B)} compact; given ε\varepsilon, cover KK by finitely many balls B(yi,ε)B(y_i, \varepsilon) and let PP be the orthogonal projection onto V=Vect(y1,,ym)V = \operatorname{Vect}(y_1, \dots, y_m) (closed: finite-dimensional). Then PTPT has finite rank, and for x1\norm x \leq 1: picking yiy_i with Txyi<ε\norm{Tx - y_i} < \varepsilon,

TxPTxTxyi+P(yiTx)2ε\norm{Tx - PTx} \leq \norm{Tx - y_i} + \norm{P(y_i - Tx)} \leq 2\varepsilon

(yi=Pyiy_i = Py_i; P1\vertiii P \leq 1): TPT2ε\vertiii{T - PT} \leq 2\varepsilon.

Example 15.3

(a) Diagonal operators on 2\ell^2: T(xn)=(λnxn)T(x_n) = (\lambda_nx_n) is compact iff λn0\lambda_n \to 0 (Exercise 15.2). (b) Kernel operators on C([0,1])\mathcal C(\intcc01): compact by Ascoli (Exercise 7.7). (c) Hilbert–Schmidt operators: for kL2([0,1]2)k \in L^2(\intcc01^2),

(Tkf)(x)=01k(x,y)f(y) ⁣dy(T_kf)(x) = \int_0^1k(x, y)\,f(y)\,\dd y

defines a compact operator on L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01) with TkkL2\vertiii{T_k} \leq \norm k_{L^2} (Exercise 15.4: truncating the basis expansion of kk exhibits TkT_k as a limit of finite-rank operators).

15.2 Self-adjoint operators

Definition 15.4

TL(H)T \in \mathcal L(H) is self-adjoint if T=TT = T^* (Exercise 13.8), i.e. Tx,y=x,Ty\langle Tx, y\rangle = \langle x, Ty\rangle for all x,yx, y. Then x,TxR\langle x, Tx\rangle \in \R for every xx (equal to its conjugate).

Proposition 15.5

For self-adjoint TT:

T=supx1 x,Tx.\vertiii T = \sup_{\norm x \leq 1}\ \abs{\langle x, Tx\rangle} .

Eigenvalues of TT are real, and eigenvectors for distinct eigenvalues are orthogonal.

Proof. Let MM be the supremum; MTM \leq \vertiii T by Cauchy–Schwarz. Conversely, the polarization-type identity

x+y,T(x+y)xy,T(xy)=4Rey,Tx\langle x{+}y, T(x{+}y)\rangle - \langle x{-}y, T(x{-}y)\rangle = 4\operatorname{Re}\langle y, Tx\rangle

(expand; the cross terms y,Tx+x,Ty=2Rey,Tx\langle y, Tx\rangle + \langle x, Ty\rangle = 2\operatorname{Re}\langle y, Tx\rangle by self-adjointness) gives, with the parallelogram law,

4Rey,TxM(x+y2+xy2)=2M(x2+y2).4\operatorname{Re}\langle y, Tx\rangle \leq M\bigl(\norm{x{+}y}^2 + \norm{x{-}y}^2\bigr) = 2M\bigl(\norm x^2 + \norm y^2\bigr).

For x=1\norm x = 1 with Tx0Tx \neq 0, take y=Tx/Txy = Tx/\norm{Tx}: 4Tx4M4\norm{Tx} \leq 4M. So TM\vertiii T \leq M. Eigenvalues: Tx=λxTx = \lambda x, x0x \ne 0 gives λx2=x,TxR\lambda\norm x^2 = \langle x, Tx\rangle \in \R. Orthogonality: λx,y=Tx,y=x,Ty=μx,y\lambda\langle x, y\rangle = \langle Tx, y\rangle = \langle x, Ty\rangle = \mu\langle x, y\rangle with λμ\lambda \neq \mu real.

15.3 The spectral theorem

Lemma 15.6 (Existence of an extreme eigenvalue)

Let T0T \neq 0 be compact and self-adjoint. Then T\vertiii T or T-\vertiii T is an eigenvalue of TT.

Proof. By Proposition 15.5, pick unit vectors xnx_n with xn,Txnμ\langle x_n, Tx_n\rangle \to \mu, where μ=T>0\abs\mu = \vertiii T > 0 (pass to a subsequence to fix the sign). Then

Txnμxn2=Txn22μxn,Txn+μ2T22μxn,Txn+μ22μ22μμ=0.\norm{Tx_n - \mu x_n}^2 = \norm{Tx_n}^2 - 2\mu\langle x_n, Tx_n\rangle + \mu^2 \leq \vertiii T^2 - 2\mu\langle x_n, Tx_n\rangle + \mu^2 \longrightarrow 2\mu^2 - 2\mu\cdot\mu = 0 .

By compactness, a subsequence TxnkyTx_{n_k} \to y; then μxnk=Txnk(Txnkμxnk)y\mu x_{n_k} = Tx_{n_k} - (Tx_{n_k} - \mu x_{n_k}) \to y, so xnkx=y/μx_{n_k} \to x = y/\mu, a unit vector, and continuity gives Tx=μxTx = \mu x.

Theorem 15.7 (Spectral theorem for compact self-adjoint operators)

Let TT be a compact self-adjoint operator on a Hilbert space HH.

  1. HH admits an orthonormal system (en)nN(e_n)_{n \in N} (NN finite or countable) of eigenvectors of TT, with real nonzero eigenvalues (λn)(\lambda_n), such that

    Tx=nNλnen,xen(xH),Tx = \sum_{n\in N}\lambda_n\,\langle e_n, x\rangle\, e_n \qquad (x \in H),

    and H=kerTVect(en:nN)H = \ker T \,\oplus^\perp\, \overline{\operatorname{Vect}}(e_n : n \in N).

  2. If NN is infinite, λn0\lambda_n \to 0; for each δ>0\delta > 0 only finitely many nn have λnδ\abs{\lambda_n} \geq \delta, and each eigenspace ker(Tλ)\ker(T - \lambda), λ0\lambda \neq 0, is finite-dimensional.
  3. Completing (en)(e_n) by an orthonormal basis of kerT\ker T yields, when HH is separable, an orthonormal basis of HH made of eigenvectors: TT is diagonalized.

Proof. (2) first. If infinitely many orthonormal eigenvectors xkx_k had λ(k)δ\abs{\lambda_{(k)}} \geq \delta: TxkTxl2=λ(k)2+λ(l)22δ2\norm{Tx_k - Tx_l}^2 = \lambda_{(k)}^2 + \lambda_{(l)}^2 \geq 2\delta^2 (orthogonality, Pythagoras): no convergent subsequence of (Txk)(Tx_k), contradicting compactness of TT on the bounded (xk)(x_k). This bounds by a finite number, for each δ\delta, the total multiplicity of eigenvalues outside (δ,δ)\intoo{-\delta}\delta; countability and λn0\lambda_n \to 0 follow.

(1) Let H0H_0 be the closed span of all eigenvectors with nonzero eigenvalues, organized (by (2) and Gram–Schmidt within each finite-dimensional eigenspace, orthogonality across eigenspaces from Proposition 15.5) into an orthonormal system (en)(e_n) with eigenvalues λn0\lambda_n \neq 0. TT maps H0H_0 into H0H_0, and also H0H_0^\perp into H0H_0^\perp: for yH0y \perp H_0 and ee an eigenvector, e,Ty=Te,y=λe,y=0\langle e, Ty\rangle = \langle Te, y\rangle = \lambda\langle e, y\rangle = 0. The restriction T=TH0T' = T\restriction_{H_0^\perp} is compact self-adjoint on the Hilbert space H0H_0^\perp; if T0T' \neq 0, Lemma 15.6 produces an eigenvector of TT with nonzero eigenvalue inside H0H_0^\perp — impossible, such vectors live in H0H_0. So T=0T' = 0: H0kerTH_0^\perp \subseteq \ker T. Conversely kerT\ker T \perp every ene_n (en,z=1λnTen,z=1λnen,Tz=0\langle e_n, z\rangle = \frac1{\lambda_n}\langle Te_n, z\rangle = \frac1{\lambda_n}\langle e_n, Tz\rangle = 0): kerTH0\ker T \subseteq H_0^\perp, whence kerT=H0\ker T = H_0^\perp and the orthogonal decomposition. The expansion: for x=z+ncnenx = z + \sum_nc_ne_n (zkerTz \in \ker T, cn=en,xc_n = \langle e_n, x\rangle; Theorem 13.7(1) on H0H_0), continuity of TT gives Tx=ncnλnenTx = \sum_nc_n\lambda_ne_n.

(3) kerT\ker T, a closed subspace of a separable space, is separable: it has an orthonormal basis (Proposition 13.8); the union is an orthonormal basis of HH by the decomposition in (1).

Theorem 15.8 (Fredholm alternative)

Let TT be compact self-adjoint and λR{0}\lambda \in \R\setminus \{0\}.

  1. If λ\lambda is not an eigenvalue, then TλIT - \lambda I is bijective with bounded inverse: for every ff, the equation Txλx=fTx - \lambda x = f has exactly one solution, depending continuously on ff.
  2. If λ\lambda is an eigenvalue, Txλx=fTx - \lambda x = f is solvable iff fker(TλI)f \perp \ker(T - \lambda I), and the solution is unique up to that (finite-dimensional) kernel.

Proof. Decompose x=z+cnenx = z + \sum c_ne_n and f=w+dnenf = w + \sum d_ne_n along Theorem 15.7 (z,wkerTz, w \in \ker T). The equation reads

λz=w,(λnλ)cn=dn (nN).-\lambda z = w, \qquad (\lambda_n - \lambda)\,c_n = d_n\ (n \in N).

(1) λ{λn}{0}\lambda \notin \{\lambda_n\}\cup\{0\}: by (2) of the spectral theorem, infnλnλ=δ>0\inf_n\abs{\lambda_n - \lambda} = \delta > 0 (eigenvalues accumulate only at 0λ0 \neq \lambda). Solve: z=w/λz = -w/\lambda, cn=dn/(λnλ)c_n = d_n/(\lambda_n - \lambda), with cn2δ2dn2\sum\abs{c_n}^2 \leq \delta^{-2}\sum\abs{d_n}^2: a unique solution with xCf\norm x \leq C\norm f. (2) λ=λn\lambda = \lambda_{n} for nn in a finite set FF: solvability of (λnλ)cn=dn(\lambda_n - \lambda)c_n = d_n for nFn \in F requires dn=0d_n = 0, i.e. fenf \perp e_n (nFn \in F), i.e. fker(TλI)f \perp \ker(T - \lambda I); the cnc_n, nFn \in F, are then free.

Example 15.9

On L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01), let Tf(x)=01min(x,y)f(y) ⁣dyTf(x) = \int_0^1\min(x, y)f(y)\dd y: a Hilbert–Schmidt operator with real symmetric kernel: compact and self-adjoint. Solving Tf=λfTf = \lambda f: the relation (Tf)(x)=0xyf(y) ⁣dy+xx1f(y) ⁣dy\bigl(Tf\bigr)(x) = \int_0^xyf(y)\dd y + x\int_x^1f(y)\dd y shows u=Tfu = Tf satisfies u=fu'' = -f (two differentiations, legitimate for continuous ff, and TfTf is continuous for fL2f \in L^2: dominated convergence), with u(0)=0u(0) = 0 and u(1)=0u'(1) = 0. So eigenfunctions solve λu=u\lambda u'' = -u, u(0)=0u(0) = 0, u(1)=0u'(1) = 0:

un(x)=sin((n+12)πx),λn=1(n+12)2π2(n0),u_n(x) = \sin\Bigl(\bigl(n + \tfrac12\bigr)\pi x\Bigr), \qquad \lambda_n = \frac{1}{\bigl(n + \frac12\bigr)^2\pi^2} \quad (n \geq 0),

and the spectral theorem asserts — with no Fourier theory — that these sines form an orthonormal basis of L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01) after normalization (the kernel of TT is 00: Tf=0Tf = 0 forces, by the two differentiations, f=0f = 0 a.e.). The weekend problem runs the same circle of ideas for the vibrating string and extracts ζ(2)\zeta(2) from the trace.

Method 15.10

Given an integral or differential equation: (1) recast it as (IλK)u=f(I - \lambda K)u = f or Ku=λuKu = \lambda u with KK an integral operator; (2) verify KK compact (Hilbert–Schmidt kernel, or Ascoli) and, if possible, self-adjoint (symmetric real kernel); (3) diagonalize with the spectral theorem or invoke the Fredholm alternative for solvability; (4) read off existence, uniqueness, stability, and series formulas for solutions in the eigenbasis. Differential operators are unbounded, but their inverses (Green operators) are compact: always invert first.

15.4 Exercises

Exercise 15.1

(a) Show that a bounded operator with finite-dimensional range is compact. (b) Show that the identity of a normed space is compact iff the dimension is finite (Riesz, Year 2). Deduce that a compact operator on an infinite-dimensional space is never invertible with bounded inverse.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.1.

(a) T(B)T(B) is a bounded subset of the finite-dimensional imT\operatorname{im}T: relatively compact by Heine–Borel (Corollary 6.17, transported by a linear homeomorphism with Rn\R^n). (b) II compact means the closed unit ball is compact, which by Riesz’s theorem (Year 2) happens exactly in finite dimension. If a compact TT had bounded inverse T1T^{-1}, then I=T1TI = T^{-1}T would be compact (Proposition 15.2): impossible in infinite dimension.

Exercise 15.2

Let T(x1,x2,)=(λ1x1,λ2x2,)T(x_1, x_2, \dots) = (\lambda_1x_1, \lambda_2x_2, \dots) on 2\ell^2, with (λn)(\lambda_n) bounded. (a) Show T=supλn\vertiii T = \sup\abs{\lambda_n}. (b) Show that TT is compact iff λn0\lambda_n \to 0. (For \Leftarrow, truncate; for \Rightarrow, test on (en)(e_n).) (c) When is TT self-adjoint? Verify the spectral theorem by inspection in that case.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.2.

(a) Tx2=λn2xn2supλn2x2\norm{Tx}^2 = \sum\abs{\lambda_n}^2\abs{x_n}^2 \leq \sup\abs{\lambda_n}^2\norm x^2, with near-equality on the ene_n realizing the sup. (b) (\Leftarrow) The truncations TNT_N (keep nNn \leq N, zero beyond) have finite rank and TTN=supn>Nλn0\vertiii{T - T_N} = \sup_{n>N}\abs{\lambda_n} \to 0: compact by Proposition 15.2. (\Rightarrow) If λnkδ>0\abs{\lambda_{n_k}} \geq \delta > 0 along a subsequence: TenkTenl2=λnk2+λnl22δ2\norm{Te_{n_k} - Te_{n_l}}^2 = \abs{\lambda_{n_k}}^2 + \abs{\lambda_{n_l}}^2 \geq 2\delta^2: no convergent subsequence of (Tenk)(Te_{n_k}). (c) T=T^* = diagonal with (λˉn)(\bar\lambda_n): self-adjoint iff all λnR\lambda_n \in \R. Then the standard basis (en)(e_n) is an orthonormal basis of eigenvectors, eigenvalues λn0\lambda_n \to 0: the spectral theorem verbatim.

Exercise 15.3 ★★

Give the details of the ideal property (Proposition 15.2): if SS is compact and A,BA, B bounded, then ASBASB is compact. Deduce that if ST=TS=IST = TS = I for some bounded SS, and dimH=\dim H = \infty, then TT is not compact — and reconcile with Exercise 15.1(b).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.3.

Let (xn)(x_n) be bounded. Then (Bxn)(Bx_n) is bounded (B<\vertiii B < \infty); compactness of SS extracts SBxnkySBx_{n_k} \to y; continuity of AA gives ASBxnkAyASBx_{n_k} \to Ay: ASBASB is compact. If ST=TS=IST = TS = I with TT compact and dimH=\dim H = \infty: I=STI = ST would be compact, contradicting Exercise 15.1(b) — which is the same statement seen from the other side.

Exercise 15.4 ★★

(Hilbert–Schmidt) Let kL2([0,1]2)k \in L^2(\intcc01^2) and (en)(e_n) a Hilbert basis of L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01). (a) Show that TkkL2\vertiii{T_k} \leq \norm k_{L^2} (Cauchy–Schwarz in the yy-variable, then Tonelli). (b) Expand k(x,y)=m,ncmnem(x)en(y)k(x,y) = \sum_{m,n}c_{mn}e_m(x)\overline{e_n(y)} in L2L^2 of the square (justify that the products form a Hilbert basis there), and show that truncating the sum gives finite-rank operators converging to TkT_k in operator norm: TkT_k is compact.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.4.

(a) By Cauchy–Schwarz in yy: Tkf(x)2(k(x,y)2 ⁣dy)f22\abs{T_kf(x)}^2 \leq \bigl(\int\abs{k(x,y)}^2\dd y\bigr)\norm f_2^2; integrate in xx (Tonelli): Tkf2kL2()f2\norm{T_kf}_2 \leq \norm k_{L^2(\square)} \norm f_2.

(b) The family emn(x,y)=em(x)en(y)e_{mn}(x,y) = e_m(x)\overline{e_n(y)} is orthonormal in L2([0,1]2)L^2(\intcc01^2) (Tonelli separates the double integral). Total: if hh \perp all emne_{mn}, then for each mm, the function yh(x,y)em(x) ⁣dxy \mapsto \int h(x,y)\overline{e_m(x)}\dd x (in L2L^2 by Cauchy–Schwarz and Tonelli) is orthogonal to every en\overline{e_n} — and the conjugates (en)(\overline{e_n}) form a Hilbert basis whenever (en)(e_n) does (conjugation is an isometric bijection of L2L^2 preserving orthogonality and totality) — so it is 00 a.e.; then for a.e. yy, h(,y)h(\cdot, y) \perp every eme_m: h(,y)=0h(\cdot, y) = 0 a.e.: h=0h = 0 (Tonelli). So (emn)(e_{mn}) is a Hilbert basis; expand k=cmnemnk = \sum c_{mn}e_{mn}. The truncation kNk_N (indices N\leq N) gives TkNT_{k_N} of finite rank (range in Vect(e1,,eN)\operatorname{Vect}(e_1, \dots, e_N)), and by (a),

TkTkNkkNL20:\vertiii{T_k - T_{k_N}} \leq \norm{k - k_N}_{L^2} \to 0 :

TkT_k is a norm-limit of finite-rank operators: compact (Proposition 15.2).

Exercise 15.5 ★★

Let TT be self-adjoint with x,Tx0\langle x, Tx\rangle \geq 0 for all xx (positive operator). (a) Show that eigenvalues are 0\geq 0 and that T=supx1x,Tx\vertiii T = \sup_{\norm x\leq1}\langle x, Tx\rangle. (b) Prove the generalized Cauchy–Schwarz inequality x,Ty2x,Txy,Ty\abs{\langle x, Ty\rangle}^2 \leq \langle x, Tx\rangle\langle y, Ty\rangle.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.5.

(a) λx2=x,Tx0\lambda\norm x^2 = \langle x, Tx\rangle \geq 0 on an eigenvector. The formula is Proposition 15.5 with all values x,Tx0\langle x, Tx\rangle \geq 0: the absolute value is redundant. (b) (x,y)x,Ty(x, y) \mapsto \langle x, Ty\rangle is a Hermitian positive (possibly degenerate) sesquilinear form; the usual Cauchy–Schwarz proof (expand x+teiθy,T(x+teiθy)0\langle x + t\eu^{\iu\theta}y, T(x + t\eu^{\iu\theta}y)\rangle \geq 0 and take the discriminant) never uses definiteness.

Exercise 15.6 ★★

On L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01), let (Mf)(x)=xf(x)(Mf)(x) = x\,f(x). (a) Show that MM is bounded, self-adjoint, with M=1\vertiii M = 1, but has no eigenvalues. (b) Show MM is not compact (exhibit a bounded sequence whose image has no convergent subsequence, e.g. normalized indicators of shrinking intervals near 11 — or invoke the spectral theorem). (c) Where does Lemma 15.6’s proof break for MM?

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.6.

(a) Mf2f2\norm{Mf}_2 \leq \norm f_2, and on fn=n1[11/n,1]f_n = \sqrt n\, \mathbf 1_{\intcc{1 - 1/n}1} (unit vectors), Mfn211n\norm{Mf_n}_2 \geq 1 - \frac1n: M=1\vertiii M = 1; self-adjoint since the multiplier is real. Eigenvalues: xf(x)=λf(x)xf(x) = \lambda f(x) a.e. forces f=0f = 0 a.e. off the null set {x=λ}\{x = \lambda\}: f=0f = 0 in L2L^2. (b) With the same fnf_n: Mfnfn21n0\norm{Mf_n - f_n}_2 \leq \frac1n \to 0, while fn0f_n \rightharpoonup 0 (for fixed gL2g \in L^2, g,fng1[11/n,1]20\abs{\langle g, f_n\rangle} \leq \norm{g\,\mathbf 1_{\intcc{1-1/n}1}}_2 \to 0 by DCT). If MfnkhMf_{n_k} \to h in norm, then fnkhf_{n_k} \to h, forcing h=0h = 0 (weak limit) yet h=1\norm h = 1: no convergent subsequence. (c) In Lemma 15.6, precisely the extraction “TxnkyTx_{n_k} \to y” uses compactness; for MM the maximizing sequences concentrate near x=1x = 1 and their images converge weakly to 00, never in norm: the eigenvector at the top of the numerical range simply fails to exist.

Exercise 15.7 ★★

(Volterra) On L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01), let Vf(x)=0xf(y) ⁣dyVf(x) = \int_0^xf(y)\dd y. (a) Show VV is compact (Hilbert–Schmidt with kernel 1y<x\mathbf 1_{y < x}) but not self-adjoint; compute VV^*. (b) Show that VV has no nonzero eigenvalue. (From Vf=λfVf = \lambda f: ff has a continuous representative, then is C1\mathcal C^1, and solves λf=f\lambda f' = f, f(0)=0f(0) = 0.) (c) Conclude that compactness alone yields no eigenvectors: self-adjointness in Theorem 15.7 is essential.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.7.

(a) V=TkV = T_k with k(x,y)=1y<xL2([0,1]2)k(x, y) = \mathbf 1_{y < x} \in L^2(\intcc01^2): compact (Exercise 15.4). Its adjoint is the kernel operator with kernel k(y,x)=1y>x\overline{k(y, x)} = \mathbf 1_{y > x}: Vf(x)=x1fV^*f(x) = \int_x^1f; VVV \neq V^* (test on f=1f = \mathbf 1). (b) If Vf=λfVf = \lambda f, λ0\lambda \ne 0: VfVf is continuous on [0,1]\intcc01 (dominated convergence in 0xf\int_0^x f), so f=1λVff = \frac1\lambda Vf has a continuous representative; then VfVf is C1\mathcal C^1 (fundamental theorem of calculus for continuous integrands), so ff is C1\mathcal C^1, and λf=f\lambda f' = f with f(0)=1λVf(0)=0f(0) = \frac1\lambda Vf(0) = 0: f=Cex/λf = C\eu^{x/\lambda} with C=f(0)=0C = f(0) = 0. (c) VV is compact with no eigenvalue at all except possibly 00 (Vf=0Vf = 0 forces f=0f = 0 a.e. by differentiating the integral — so not even 00): the spectral machinery genuinely requires self-adjointness, not just compactness.

Exercise 15.8 ★★★

(Courant–Fischer) Let TT be compact, self-adjoint, positive, with eigenvalues μ1μ2>0\mu_1 \geq \mu_2 \geq \dots > 0 (repeated by multiplicity, eigenvectors e1,e2,e_1, e_2, \dots). Show:

μk=maxVHdimV=k minxVx=1 x,Tx=minWHcodimW=k1 maxxWx=1 x,Tx.\mu_{k} = \max_{\substack{V \subseteq H \\ \dim V = k}}\ \min_{\substack{x \in V\\ \norm x = 1}}\ \langle x, Tx\rangle = \min_{\substack{W \subseteq H\\ \operatorname{codim}W = k-1}}\ \max_{\substack{x\in W\\ \norm x = 1}}\ \langle x, Tx\rangle .

(Test V=Vect(e1,,ek)V = \operatorname{Vect}(e_1,\dots,e_k); for the upper bound intersect any VV with Vect(ek,ek+1,)\operatorname{Vect}(e_k, e_{k+1}, \dots)-type spaces: dimension counting forces a nonzero intersection.) Deduce that eigenvalues depend monotonically on TT (TSμk(T)μk(S)T \leq S \Rightarrow \mu_k(T) \leq \mu_k(S)).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.8.

Write x=iciei+zx = \sum_ic_ie_i + z, zkerTz \in \ker T, so x,Tx=iμici2\langle x, Tx\rangle = \sum_i\mu_i\abs{c_i}^2. Lower bound: on the unit sphere of Vk=Vect(e1,,ek)V_k = \operatorname{Vect}(e_1, \dots, e_k), x,Tx=ikμici2μk\langle x, Tx\rangle = \sum_{i\leq k}\mu_i\abs{c_i}^2 \geq \mu_k: the max over VV of the min is μk\geq \mu_k. Upper bound: let dimV=k\dim V = k and Wk=Vect(ek,ek+1,)+kerTW_k = \overline{\operatorname{Vect}}(e_k, e_{k+1}, \dots) + \ker T, of codimension k1k - 1 (its orthogonal complement is Vk1V_{k-1}); VWk{0}V \cap W_k \neq \{0\} (a linear map VH/WkVk1V \to H/W_k \cong V_{k-1} of rank k1\leq k - 1 has nontrivial kernel), and a unit xVWkx \in V\cap W_k has x,Tx=ikμici2μk\langle x, Tx\rangle = \sum_{i \geq k}\mu_i\abs{c_i}^2 \leq \mu_k: the min over VV is μk\leq \mu_k. Together: the first formula; the second is proved symmetrically (test W=WkW = W_k; for arbitrary WW of codimension k1k-1, WVk0W \cap V_k \neq 0 gives a unit vector with x,Txμk\langle x, Tx\rangle \geq \mu_k). Monotonicity: x,Txx,Sx\langle x, Tx\rangle \leq \langle x, Sx\rangle pointwise transfers through maxmin\max\min.

Exercise 15.9 ★★

Using Theorem 15.8 for Tf(x)=01min(x,y)f(y) ⁣dyTf(x) = \int_0^1\min(x,y)f(y)\dd y (Example 15.9): for which λR\lambda \in \R does the integral equation

f(x)λ01min(x,y)f(y) ⁣dy=g(x)f(x) - \lambda\int_0^1\min(x,y)\,f(y)\,\dd y = g(x)

have a unique solution fL2f \in L^2 for every gL2g \in L^2? What happens at the exceptional values?

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.9.

Rewrite fλTf=gf - \lambda Tf = g. For λ=0\lambda = 0: f=gf = g, always uniquely solvable. For λ0\lambda \neq 0: this is (T1λ)f=gλ(T - \frac1\lambda)f = -\frac g\lambda, and by the Fredholm alternative (Theorem 15.8) with the eigenvalues λn=((n+12)π)2\lambda_n = \bigl((n + \frac12)\pi\bigr)^{-2} of TT (Example 15.9): unique solvability for all gg iff 1λλn\frac1\lambda \neq \lambda_n for every nn, i.e.

λ(n+12)2π2(n=0,1,2,).\lambda \neq \Bigl(n + \tfrac12\Bigr)^2\pi^2 \qquad (n = 0, 1, 2, \dots).

At an exceptional λ=(n+12)2π2\lambda = (n+\frac12)^2\pi^2: solutions exist iff gsin((n+12)πx)g \perp \sin\bigl((n{+}\frac12)\pi x\bigr), and are then unique up to adding multiples of that sine.

Exercise 15.10 ★★★

Let SS be the shift on 2\ell^2 (Exercise 8.1). (a) Show that SS has no eigenvalues, while every λ\lambda with λ<1\abs\lambda < 1 is an eigenvalue of SS^* (find the eigenvectors explicitly, geometric sequences). (b) Neither SS nor SS^* is compact: verify via Exercise 15.2-style testing on (en)(e_n). (c) Comment: for non-self-adjoint, non-compact operators, the eigenvalue landscape can be anything from empty to a full disc — the notion that survives is the spectrum, studied in a later course.

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.10.

(a) Sx=λxSx = \lambda x: comparing coordinates, 0=λx10 = \lambda x_1 and xn=λxn+1x_n = \lambda x_{n+1}; if λ0\lambda \ne 0 then x1=0x_1 = 0 and inductively x=0x = 0; if λ=0\lambda = 0, Sx=0Sx = 0 forces x=0x = 0 (SS isometric). No eigenvalues. Sx=λxS^*x = \lambda x reads xn+1=λxnx_{n+1} = \lambda x_n: x=x1(1,λ,λ2,)x = x_1(1, \lambda, \lambda^2, \dots), in 2\ell^2 exactly when λ<1\abs\lambda < 1: a full open disc of eigenvalues. (b) SenSem=en+1em+1=2\norm{Se_n - Se_m} = \norm{e_{n+1} - e_{m+1}} = \sqrt2: the image of the bounded (en)(e_n) has no Cauchy subsequence; likewise Sen+1=enS^*e_{n+1} = e_n. Neither is compact. (c) For compact self-adjoint operators the eigenvalues capture everything (Theorem 15.7); dropping either hypothesis, eigenvalues may vanish entirely (SS, Volterra) or fill a disc (SS^*): the robust object is the spectrum {λ:TλI not invertible}\{\lambda : T - \lambda I \text{ not invertible}\}, whose theory belongs to a later course.

Exercise 15.11 ★★

(Square roots) Let TT be compact, self-adjoint, positive (x,Tx0\langle x, Tx\rangle \geq 0) on a Hilbert space HH, with spectral decomposition Tx=nμnen,xenTx = \sum_n\mu_n\langle e_n, x\rangle e_n (μn>0\mu_n > 0). (a) Define Sx=nμnen,xenSx = \sum_n\sqrt{\mu_n}\,\langle e_n, x\rangle e_n; show SS is compact, self-adjoint, positive, with S2=TS^2 = T. (b) Prove uniqueness: any compact positive self-adjoint RR with R2=TR^2 = T preserves the eigenspaces of TT (RT=R3=TRRT = R^3 = TR: RR commutes with TT, so R(ker(Tμ))ker(Tμ)R(\ker(T - \mu)) \subseteq \ker(T - \mu)), and on ker(Tμ)\ker(T - \mu), RR is a positive operator squaring to μid\mu\,\mathrm{id} on a finite-dimensional space: diagonalize it there and conclude R=μidR = \sqrt\mu\,\mathrm{id} on each eigenspace, hence R=SR = S. (c) Compute G\sqrt G for the string operator GG of Problem 15.1: which kernel has eigenvalues 1nπ\frac1{n\pi} on the sine basis? (Express G\sqrt G as the L2L^2-limit of kernels; no closed form is required.)

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.11.

(a) SS is the diagonal operator with coefficients μn0\sqrt{\mu_n} \to 0: compact (Exercise 15.2(b), transported to the basis (en)(e_n) completed by kerT\ker T, where S=0S = 0), self-adjoint (real diagonal), positive (x,Sx=μnen,x2\langle x, Sx\rangle = \sum\sqrt{\mu_n}\abs{\langle e_n, x\rangle}^2), and S2=TS^2 = T termwise.

(b) RR commutes with T=R2T = R^2; for an eigenvector xx of TT with eigenvalue μ\mu: T(Rx)=RTx=μRxT(Rx) = RTx = \mu Rx, so the finite-dimensional eigenspace Eμ=ker(Tμ)E_\mu = \ker(T - \mu) is RR-stable. On EμE_\mu, RR is symmetric positive with R2=μidR^2 = \mu\,\mathrm{id}: its eigenvalues ρ\rho satisfy ρ2=μ\rho^2 = \mu, ρ0\rho \geq 0: all equal μ\sqrt\mu, and a diagonalizable operator with a single eigenvalue is scalar: R=μidR = \sqrt\mu\,\mathrm{id} on EμE_\mu. On kerT\ker T: Rx2=x,R2x=x,Tx=0\norm {Rx}^2 = \langle x, R^2x\rangle = \langle x, Tx\rangle = 0. So RR agrees with SS on kerT\ker T and on every eigenspace, whose closed span is HH (spectral theorem): R=SR = S.

(c) G\sqrt G acts as 1nπ\frac1{n\pi} on en=2sin(nπx)e_n = \sqrt2\sin(n\pi x): it is the kernel operator with

k(x,y)=n12sin(nπx)sin(nπy)nπ,k(x, y) = \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{2\sin(n\pi x)\sin(n\pi y)}{n\pi},

the series converging in L2([0,1]2)L^2(\intcc01^2) (coefficients 1nπ2\frac1{n\pi} \in \ell^2; the partial-sum kernels give the finite-rank approximations). No elementary closed form is needed: the spectral side is the operator.

Exercise 15.12 ★★★

(Singular value decomposition) Let TL(H)T \in \mathcal L(H) be compact, not necessarily self-adjoint. (a) Show that TTT^*T is compact, self-adjoint, positive; let (en)(e_n) be an orthonormal family of eigenvectors with TTen=sn2enT^*Te_n = s_n^2e_n, sn>0s_n > 0 (the singular values), completed by ker(TT)=kerT\ker(T^*T) = \ker T (prove this equality). (b) Set fn=Tensnf_n = \frac{Te_n}{s_n}; show (fn)(f_n) is orthonormal, and establish the SVD:

Tx=nsnen,xfn(xH),Tx = \sum_n s_n\,\langle e_n, x\rangle\,f_n \qquad (x \in H),

with convergence in HH. (c) Deduce: T=maxnsn\vertiii T = \max_ns_n; TT is a norm-limit of finite-rank operators (re-proving Proposition 15.2’s converse for Hilbert spaces); and for the Volterra operator VV of Exercise 15.7, which has no eigenvalues, explain why the SVD nevertheless exists and what its ingredients are (identify VVV^*V as a string-type kernel operator — computing its eigenvalues explicitly is Exercise 15.9’s territory).

Solution

Solution of Exercise 15.12.

(a) TTT^*T is compact (product of a bounded and a compact operator, Exercise 15.3), self-adjoint ((TT)=TT(T^*T)^* = T^*T), positive (x,TTx=Tx2\langle x, T^*Tx\rangle = \norm{Tx}^2). Kernel: TTx=0Tx2=x,TTx=0Tx=0T^*Tx = 0 \Rightarrow \norm{Tx}^2 = \langle x, T^*Tx\rangle = 0 \Rightarrow Tx = 0, and conversely: kerTT=kerT\ker T^*T = \ker T. The spectral theorem supplies the orthonormal (en)(e_n) with TTen=sn2enT^*Te_n = s_n^2e_n, sn>0s_n > 0, spanning (kerT)(\ker T)^\perp.

(b) fm,fn=Tem,Tensmsn=em,TTensmsn=sn2smsnδmn=δmn\langle f_m, f_n\rangle = \frac{\langle Te_m, Te_n\rangle}{s_ms_n} = \frac{\langle e_m, T^*Te_n\rangle}{s_ms_n} = \frac{s_n^2}{s_ms_n}\delta_{mn} = \delta_{mn}. Expand x=x0+nen,xenx = x_0 + \sum_n\langle e_n, x\rangle e_n with x0kerTx_0 \in \ker T (Parseval in the closed span plus kernel); applying the continuous TT:

Tx=nen,xTen=nsnen,xfn,Tx = \sum_n\langle e_n, x\rangle\,Te_n = \sum_ns_n\langle e_n, x\rangle\,f_n,

the series converging because its partial sums are Cauchy (N<nMsnen,xfn2=sn2en,x2\norm{\sum_{N<n\leq M}s_n\langle e_n, x\rangle f_n}^2 = \sum s_n^2\abs{\langle e_n, x\rangle}^2, dominated by supn>Nsn2x2\sup_{n>N}s_n^2\cdot\norm x^2, and sn0s_n \to 0).

(c) Tx2=nsn2en,x2(maxsn)2x2\norm{Tx}^2 = \sum_ns_n^2\abs{\langle e_n, x\rangle}^2 \leq (\max s_n)^2\norm x^2, attained at the maximizing ene_n: T=maxsn\vertiii T = \max s_n. Truncating the SVD at rank NN leaves an operator of norm supn>Nsn0\sup_{n>N}s_n \to 0: finite-rank approximation. The Volterra operator has no eigenvalues (Exercise 15.7), but VVV^*V does: VVf(x)=x10tf(s) ⁣ds ⁣dtV^*Vf(x) = \int_x^1\int_0^tf(s)\,\dd s\,\dd t is a symmetric positive kernel operator (kernel 1max(x,y)1 - \max(x,y), a string-type Green kernel), whose eigenpairs — computed via the boundary value problem u=λ1u-u'' = \lambda^{-1}u, u(0)=u(1)=0u'(0) = u(1) = 0, i.e. Exercise 15.9’s family — give singular values sn=((n+12)π)1s_n = \bigl((n + \frac12)\pi\bigr)^{-1}. The SVD lives on two orthonormal families precisely because VV rotates its eigengeometry away: no eigenvectors, yet perfect diagonal structure between two different bases.

15.5 Problem: the vibrating string and ζ(2)\zeta(2)

Problem 15.1

Weekend problem — Green’s operator, the sine basis, and a trace formula

We solve the eigenvalue problem of the vibrating string with fixed ends — u=νu-u'' = \nu u, u(0)=u(1)=0u(0) = u(1) = 0 — by operator theory, obtain the sine orthonormal basis without any Fourier computation, and evaluate ζ(2)\zeta(2) by comparing two expressions for the trace of the Green operator. Define, on L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01),

(Gf)(x)=01g(x,y)f(y) ⁣dy,g(x,y)=min(x,y)(1max(x,y)).(Gf)(x) = \int_0^1 g(x,y)\,f(y)\,\dd y, \qquad g(x, y) = \min(x,y)\,\bigl(1 - \max(x,y)\bigr).

Part I — The Green operator.

  1. Show that gg is continuous, symmetric, with 0g140 \leq g \leq \frac14, and that GG is compact and self-adjoint (Example 15.3(c)).
  2. For ff continuous, show that u=Gfu = Gf is C2\mathcal C^2 with

    u=f,u(0)=u(1)=0-u'' = f, \qquad u(0) = u(1) = 0

    (write u(x)=(1x)0xyf(y) ⁣dy+xx1(1y)f(y) ⁣dyu(x) = (1-x)\int_0^xyf(y)\dd y + x\int_x^1(1-y)f(y)\dd y and differentiate twice). Conversely, if uC2u \in \mathcal C^2 with u(0)=u(1)=0u(0) = u(1) = 0, then G(u)=uG(-u'') = u: GG inverts the string operator.

  3. Show kerG={0}\ker G = \{0\} (if Gf=0Gf = 0 with fL2f \in L^2: test against continuous φ\varphi, transfer GG by symmetry/Fubini onto φ\varphi, and use the fundamental lemma Corollary 12.11 — or regularize), and that GG is a positive operator: f,Gf0\langle f, Gf\rangle \geq 0. (For continuous ff: f,Gf=01(u)2\langle f, Gf\rangle = \int_0^1 (u')^2 with u=Gfu = Gf, by parts; conclude by density.)

Part II — Diagonalization: the sine basis.

  1. Show that the eigenfunctions of GG with eigenvalue λ0\lambda \ne 0 are, up to scalars, the solutions of λu=u-\lambda u'' = u, u(0)=u(1)=0u(0) = u(1) = 0 (an eigenfunction has a continuous representative — GfGf is continuous for fL2f \in L^2, why? — hence is C2\mathcal C^2 by bootstrapping question 2).
  2. Solve the boundary value problem: the eigenvalues of GG are λn=1n2π2\lambda_n = \frac1{n^2\pi^2} (n1n \geq 1), with normalized eigenfunctions en(x)=2sin(nπx)e_n(x) = \sqrt2\,\sin(n\pi x); check orthonormality by direct integration as a sanity test.
  3. Conclude from Theorem 15.7 and question 3 that (2sin(nπx))n1\bigl(\sqrt2\sin(n\pi x)\bigr)_{n\geq1} is an orthonormal basis of L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01) — no Stone–Weierstrass, no Fourier series needed. Expand f(x)=x(1x)f(x) = x(1-x) in this basis and write Parseval for it.

Part III — The trace formula and ζ(2)\zeta(2).

  1. Prove the two identities

    en,Gen=λnandn1λn=01g(x,x) ⁣dx.\langle e_n, Ge_n\rangle = \lambda_n \quad\text{and}\quad \sum_{n\geq1}\lambda_n = \int_0^1 g(x,x)\,\dd x .

    For the second (the trace formula): expand g(x,)g(x, \cdot), for fixed xx, in the basis (en)(e_n) — show that the coefficients are λnen(x)\lambda_ne_n(x), so that g(x,)=nλnen(x)eng(x, \cdot) = \sum_n\lambda_ne_n(x)\,e_n in L2L^2. Here the sines are explicit: verify directly that nλnen(x)en(y)\sum_n\lambda_ne_n(x)e_n(y) converges uniformly on the square (compare with 2n2π2\sum \frac2{n^2\pi^2}), so its sum is continuous and, having the same L2L^2-expansions in yy for each xx, equals g(x,y)g(x,y) everywhere. Set y=xy = x and integrate term by term.

  2. Compute 01g(x,x) ⁣dx=01x(1x) ⁣dx=16\int_0^1g(x,x)\dd x = \int_0^1x(1-x)\dd x = \frac16, and conclude

    n11n2π2=16,i.e. ζ(2)=π26 :\sum_{n\geq1}\frac{1}{n^2\pi^2} = \frac16, \qquad\text{i.e.}\qquad \boxed{\ \zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}{6}\ } :

    Euler’s sum from an operator trace.

  3. Re-derive ζ(2)\zeta(2) a third way: apply Parseval in the sine basis to the constant function 1\mathbf 1, compute n odd1n2\sum_{n \text{ odd}}\frac1{n^2}, and conclude. Then compare mechanisms: in what sense is the trace argument of questions 7–8 “Parseval applied to the whole kernel at once”?

Part IV — The string vibrates.

  1. (Separation of variables, synthesized) For fL2f \in L^2, define

    u(t,x)=n1  cncos(nπt)2sin(nπx),cn=en,f.u(t, x) = \sum_{n\geq1}\;c_n\, \cos(n\pi t)\,\sqrt2\sin(n\pi x), \qquad c_n = \langle e_n, f\rangle .

    Show the series converges in L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01) for each tt, that tu(t,)t\mapsto u(t, \cdot) is continuous into L2L^2, and that for ff in the span of finitely many ene_n it solves the wave equation t2u=x2u\partial_t^2u = \partial_x^2u with u(0)=fu(0) = f, tu(0)=0\partial_tu(0) = 0, fixed ends. The eigenvalues n2π2n^2\pi^2 are the squared frequencies: the string’s harmonics — explain the musical interpretation of Theorem 15.7 in one paragraph.

Part V — Variational dividends: the power method, Weyl stability, and a rigorous bound on π\pi. Let AA be a compact self-adjoint positive operator with eigenvalues μ1μ2>0\mu_1 \geq \mu_2 \geq \cdots > 0 and orthonormal eigenvectors (un)(u_n); R(x)=x,Axx2R(x) = \frac{\langle x, Ax\rangle}{\norm x^2}. The min–max formulas are Exercise 15.8; here we spend them.

  1. (Power method) For x0x \neq 0 write mp=nμnpun,x2m_p = \sum_n\mu_n^p\abs{\langle u_n, x\rangle}^2. Show mpmp+2mp+12m_pm_{p+2} \geq m_{p+1}^2 (Cauchy–Schwarz), deduce the chain

    R(x)    Ax,Axx,Ax    R(Ax)    μ1,R(x) \;\leq\; \frac{\langle Ax, Ax\rangle}{\langle x, Ax\rangle} \;\leq\; R(Ax) \;\leq\; \mu_1,

    and prove that if u1,x0\langle u_1, x\rangle \neq 0, then R(Akx)μ1R(A^kx) \to \mu_1: iterating the operator on any generic vector computes the top eigenvalue — the power method of numerical analysis, certified.

  2. (Weyl stability) For compact self-adjoint positive A,BA, B, deduce from Exercise 15.8 that

    μn(A)μn(B)    ABfor every n:\abs{\mu_n(A) - \mu_n(B)} \;\leq\; \vertiii{A - B} \qquad\text{for every } n :

    the full spectrum is 11-Lipschitz in the operator norm — eigenvalues of big symmetric systems can be computed from approximations with guaranteed error.

  3. Apply the Rayleigh bound to GG with the test function u(x)=x(1x)u(x) = x(1-x): solve w=u-w'' = u, w(0)=w(1)=0w(0) = w(1) = 0 to get Gu=w=x(1x)(1+xx2)12Gu = w = \frac{x(1-x)(1 + x - x^2)}{12}, compute

    u22=130,u,Gu=112(130+1140)=175040,R(u)=17168,\norm u_2^2 = \frac1{30}, \qquad \langle u, Gu\rangle = \frac1{12}\Bigl(\frac1{30} + \frac1{140}\Bigr) = \frac{17}{5040}, \qquad R(u) = \frac{17}{168},

    and conclude the rigorous bound 1π2=λ117168\frac1{\pi^2} = \lambda_1 \geq \frac{17}{168}, i.e. π168/17<3.1437\pi \leq \sqrt{168/17} < 3.1437.

  4. One step of question 11’s chain, on the same test function: using 01(xx2)4 ⁣dx=1630\int_0^1(x - x^2)^4\dd x = \frac1{630}, compute

    Gu22=1144(130+2140+1630)=3190720,Gu,Guu,Gu=31306,\norm{Gu}_2^2 = \frac1{144}\Bigl(\frac1{30} + \frac2{140} + \frac1{630}\Bigr) = \frac{31}{90720}, \qquad \frac{\langle Gu, Gu\rangle}{\langle u, Gu\rangle} = \frac{31}{306},

    and conclude π306/31<3.1419\pi \leq \sqrt{306/31} < 3.1419: two integrals, four correct digits. (Each further iteration roughly squares the accuracy: the eigenvector gap λ1/λ2=4\lambda_1/\lambda_2 = 4 drives geometric convergence.)

Part VI — The trace of G2G^2, and ζ(4)\zeta(4).

  1. Show that nλn2=[0,1]2g(x,y)2 ⁣dx ⁣dy\sum_n\lambda_n^2 = \iint_{\intcc01^2}g(x,y)^2\,\dd x\,\dd y (expand gg on the product basis (em(x)en(y))m,n(e_m(x)e_n(y))_{m,n} of L2([0,1]2)L^2(\intcc01^2) — a Hilbert basis, cf. Exercise 15.5 — and apply Parseval on the square; question 7 identifies the coefficients).
  2. Compute the double integral:

    g2=201(1x)2(0xy2 ⁣dy) ⁣dx=2301x3(1x)2 ⁣dx=190.\iint g^2 = 2\int_0^1(1-x)^2\Bigl(\int_0^x y^2\,\dd y\Bigr)\dd x = \frac23\int_0^1x^3(1-x)^2\,\dd x = \frac1{90} .
  3. Conclude ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \dfrac{\pi^4}{90}; explain, without computation, how traces of higher powers GkG^k produce ζ(2k)π2kQ\zeta(2k) \in \pi^{2k}\,\Q for all k1k \geq 1, and why the odd values ζ(3),ζ(5),\zeta(3), \zeta(5), \dots are structurally out of this machine’s reach.
  4. (π\pi from below) From λ12nλn2=190\lambda_1^2 \leq \sum_n\lambda_n^2 = \frac1{90} deduce π901/4>3.080\pi \geq 90^{1/4} > 3.080, and assemble with question 14 the two-sided verdict

    3.080  <  π  <  3.1419,3.080 \;<\; \pi \;<\; 3.1419,

    obtained entirely from the vibrating string’s arithmetic. Which side converges faster if one uses higher traces (trG2k)1/4k(\operatorname{tr}G^{2k})^{-1/4k}, and why?

Part VII — Forcing and resonance. Fix νR\nu \in \R and consider the forced string uνu=f-u'' - \nu u = f, u(0)=u(1)=0u(0) = u(1) = 0, with fL2f \in L^2 and cn=en,fc_n = \langle e_n, f\rangle.

  1. Suppose ν{n2π2:n1}\nu \notin \{n^2\pi^2 : n \geq 1\}. Show that

    u=n1cnn2π2νenu = \sum_{n\geq1}\frac{c_n}{n^2\pi^2 - \nu}\,e_n

    converges in L2L^2 and uniformly on [0,1]\intcc01 (Cauchy–Schwarz between (cn)(c_n) and the tails of n4\sum n^{-4}, with en=2\norm{e_n}_\infty = \sqrt2), and that it satisfies u=Gf+νGuu = Gf + \nu Gu — the explicit-coordinates form of the Fredholm alternative (Theorem 15.8), with uniqueness.

  2. Suppose ν=m2π2\nu = m^2\pi^2. Show that u=Gf+νGuu = Gf + \nu Gu has a solution iff cm=0c_m = 0, unique up to adding multiples of eme_m. Physical reading: pushing a swing exactly at its own frequency.
  3. For ν<π2\nu < \pi^2, show that the solution operator Rν ⁣:fuR_\nu\colon f \mapsto u is bounded on L2L^2 with norm 1π2ν\frac1{\pi^2 - \nu}, compact, self-adjoint, and positive: the whole spectral analysis restarts, shifted by ν\nu.
  4. (Synthesis) Compile the dictionary of this problem: eigenvalue \leftrightarrow squared frequency (harmonics); trace \leftrightarrow ζ(2)\zeta(2); Hilbert–Schmidt norm \leftrightarrow ζ(4)\zeta(4); Fredholm alternative \leftrightarrow resonance; min–max \leftrightarrow variational bounds (π<3.1437\pi < 3.1437 from one polynomial). One integral operator, five chapters of analysis cashed in.

Part VIII — Three last echoes.

  1. (ζ(6)\zeta(6), for free) Question 6’s Parseval identity gave n oddn6=π6960\sum_{n\text{ odd}}n^{-6} = \frac{\pi^6}{960}. Split ζ(6)\zeta(6) into odd and even nn and conclude

    ζ(6)=π6945,\zeta(6) = \frac{\pi^6}{945},

    with no new integral: the machine of question 17 (traces of G3G^3) would have produced the same value at the cost of an iterated kernel — Parseval on one well-chosen function is the cheaper route here.

  2. (The ground state is positive) Let AA be a compact self-adjoint positive operator on L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01) given by a continuous symmetric kernel k>0k > 0 on (0,1)2\intoo01^2, with largest eigenvalue μ1\mu_1. Show: (a) any maximizer of the Rayleigh quotient is a μ1\mu_1-eigenfunction; (b) if uu is one, then u,Auu,Au\langle\abs u, A\abs u\rangle \geq \langle u, Au\rangle, with strict inequality if uu takes both signs on sets of positive measure — hence uu has a.e. constant sign, and u=μ11Auu = \mu_1^{-1}Au never vanishes on (0,1)\intoo01; (c) μ1\mu_1 is a simple eigenvalue. Verify every claim on GG: e1=2sin(πx)>0e_1 = \sqrt2\sin(\pi x) > 0, and each ene_n, n2n \geq 2, being orthogonal to e1e_1, must change sign (it does: n1n - 1 interior zeros).
  3. (Distance to the spectrum, and the price of resonance) For ν{n2π2}\nu \notin \{n^2\pi^2\}, show that the solution operator RνR_\nu of question 19 is bounded, self-adjoint, compact, with

    Rν=1minn1n2π2ν=1dist(ν,{n2π2}),\vertiii{R_\nu} = \frac1{\min_{n\geq1}\,\abs{n^2\pi^2 - \nu}} = \frac1{\operatorname{dist}\bigl(\nu, \{n^2\pi^2\}\bigr)},

    the norm being attained on the nearest mode. Then quantify question 20’s swing: forcing with f=e1f = e_1 at ν=(1ε)π2\nu = (1 - \varepsilon)\pi^2 produces u=1επ2e1u = \frac{1}{\varepsilon\pi^2}\,e_1, an amplification by 1ε\frac1\varepsilon of the static response Ge1=1π2e1Ge_1 = \frac1{\pi^2}e_1 — at one percent below the fundamental (ε=102\varepsilon = 10^{-2}), the string answers a hundred times louder.

Solution

Solution of Problem 15.1.

1. Continuity: min\min and max\max are continuous; symmetry: swapping x,yx, y swaps neither min(x,y)\min(x,y) nor 1max(x,y)1 - \max(x,y). Bounds: 0g0 \leq g, and g(x,y)max(1max)g(x,y) \leq \max\cdot(1-\max)-type bounds give g14g \leq \frac14 (for u=maxu = \max: minu\min \leq u so gu(1u)14g \leq u(1-u) \leq \frac14). gL2()g \in L^2(\square): Hilbert–Schmidt, hence GG compact (Exercise 15.4); the kernel is real symmetric: GG self-adjoint.

2. Splitting at y=xy = x:

u(x)=(1x)0xyf(y) ⁣dy+xx1(1y)f(y) ⁣dy.u(x) = (1 - x)\int_0^x y\,f(y)\,\dd y + x\int_x^1(1 - y)\,f(y)\,\dd y .

For continuous ff, differentiate (product and fundamental theorem):

u(x)=0xyf+x1(1y)f(the boundary terms cancel),u'(x) = -\int_0^xyf + \int_x^1(1-y)f \qquad\text{(the boundary terms cancel)},

and u(x)=xf(x)(1x)f(x)=f(x)u''(x) = -xf(x) - (1 - x)f(x) = -f(x); clearly u(0)=u(1)=0u(0) = u(1) = 0. Conversely if uC2u \in \mathcal C^2 vanishes at both ends, w=uG(u)w = u - G(-u'') satisfies w=0w'' = 0, w(0)=w(1)=0w(0) = w(1) = 0: ww is affine and vanishes twice, so w=0w = 0.

3. Let Gf=0Gf = 0, fL2f \in L^2. For ψCc((0,1))\psi \in \mathcal C_c^\infty(\intoo01): ψ=G(ψ)\psi = G(-\psi'') by question 2, so

f,ψ=f,G(ψ)=Gf,ψ=0\langle f, \psi\rangle = \langle f, G(-\psi'')\rangle = \langle Gf, -\psi''\rangle = 0

(GG self-adjoint): by the fundamental lemma (Corollary 12.11), f=0f = 0 a.e. Positivity: for continuous ff, with u=Gfu = Gf,

f,Gf=01fu=01(u)u=[uu]01+01(u)2=01(u)20;\langle f, Gf\rangle = \int_0^1 fu = \int_0^1(-u'')u = \bigl[-u'u\bigr]_0^1 + \int_0^1(u')^2 = \int_0^1(u')^2 \geq 0 ;

for fL2f \in L^2, approximate in L2L^2 by continuous fnf_n: both sides pass to the limit (GG bounded).

4. If Gu=λuGu = \lambda u, λ0\lambda \neq 0: GuGu is continuous (Gu(x)Gu(x)g(x,)g(x,)2u2\abs{Gu(x) - Gu(x')} \leq \norm{g(x,\cdot) - g(x',\cdot)}_2\norm u_2, and the kernel is uniformly continuous), so uu has a continuous representative; then question 2’s formulas show GuC2Gu \in \mathcal C^2, so u=1λGuC2u = \frac1\lambda Gu \in \mathcal C^2 with λu=(Gu)=u-\lambda u'' = -(Gu)'' = u and u(0)=u(1)=0u(0) = u(1) = 0.

5. λu=u-\lambda u'' = u, u(0)=0u(0) = 0: u=Asin(x/λ)u = A\sin(x/\sqrt \lambda) (positive λ\lambda: by question 3, λ=u,Gu/u2>0\lambda = \langle u, Gu\rangle/\norm u^2 > 0 on eigenvectors). u(1)=0u(1) = 0 forces 1λ=nπ\frac1{\sqrt\lambda} = n\pi: λn=1n2π2\lambda_n = \frac1{n^2\pi^2}, eigenfunctions sin(nπx)\sin(n\pi x), normalized en=2sin(nπx)e_n = \sqrt2\sin(n\pi x) (012sin2(nπx) ⁣dx=1\int_0^12\sin^2(n\pi x)\dd x = 1). Orthogonality check: 2sin(mπx)sin(nπx)=cos((mn)πx)cos((m+n)πx)2\sin(m\pi x)\sin(n\pi x) = \cos((m-n)\pi x) - \cos((m+n)\pi x) integrates to 00 for mnm \neq n.

6. kerG={0}\ker G = \{0\} (question 3), so Theorem 15.7(1) gives H=Vect(en)H = \overline{\operatorname{Vect}}(e_n): the sines are a Hilbert basis of L2([0,1])L^2(\intcc01). For f(x)=x(1x)f(x) = x(1 - x):

cn=201x(1x)sin(nπx) ⁣dx=2  2(1(1)n)n3π3={42n3π3n odd,0n even,c_n = \sqrt2\int_0^1x(1-x)\sin(n\pi x)\,\dd x = \sqrt2\;\frac{2\bigl(1 - (-1)^n\bigr)}{n^3\pi^3} = \begin{cases}\dfrac{4\sqrt2}{n^3\pi^3} & n \text{ odd},\\ 0 & n \text{ even},\end{cases}

(two integrations by parts). Parseval: 01x2(1x)2 ⁣dx=130=n odd32n6π6\int_0^1x^2(1-x)^2\dd x = \frac1{30} = \sum_{n \text{ odd}}\frac{32}{n^6\pi^6}, i.e. n oddn6=π6960\sum_{n\text{ odd}}n^{-6} = \frac{\pi^6}{960}.

7. en,Gen=λnen2=λn\langle e_n, Ge_n\rangle = \lambda_n\norm{e_n}^2 = \lambda_n. For fixed xx, the coefficients of g(x,)g(x, \cdot): en,g(x,)=(Gen)(x)=λnen(x)\langle e_n, g(x,\cdot)\rangle = (Ge_n)(x) = \lambda_ne_n(x), so g(x,)=nλnen(x)eng(x,\cdot) = \sum_n\lambda_ne_n(x)\,e_n in L2L^2. The explicit series nλnen(x)en(y)=n2sin(nπx)sin(nπy)n2π2\sum_n\lambda_ne_n(x)e_n(y) = \sum_n\frac{2\sin(n\pi x)\sin(n\pi y)}{n^2\pi^2} converges normally on the square (term2n2π2\abs{\text{term}} \leq \frac2{n^2\pi^2}): its sum is continuous, and for each xx it has the same L2( ⁣dy)L^2(\dd y)-coefficients as g(x,)g(x, \cdot): the two continuous functions agree for every (x,y)(x, y). Setting y=xy = x and integrating (normal convergence allows term-by-term integration):

01g(x,x) ⁣dx=nλn01en(x)2 ⁣dx=nλn.\int_0^1g(x,x)\,\dd x = \sum_n\lambda_n\int_0^1e_n(x)^2\dd x = \sum_n\lambda_n .

8. 01g(x,x) ⁣dx=01x(1x) ⁣dx=16\int_0^1g(x,x)\dd x = \int_0^1x(1 - x)\dd x = \frac16, so n11n2π2=16\sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^2\pi^2} = \frac16:

ζ(2)=n11n2=π26.\zeta(2) = \sum_{n\geq1}\frac1{n^2} = \frac{\pi^2}6 .

9. For f=1f = \mathbf 1: cn=201sin(nπx) ⁣dx=21(1)nnπc_n = \sqrt2\int_0^1\sin(n\pi x)\dd x = \sqrt2\,\frac{1 - (-1)^n}{n\pi}: cn=22nπc_n = \frac{2\sqrt2}{n\pi} for odd nn, 00 for even. Parseval: 1=n odd8n2π21 = \sum_{n\text{ odd}}\frac{8}{n^2\pi^2}, so n oddn2=π28\sum_{n\text{ odd}}n^{-2} = \frac{\pi^2}8, and ζ(2)=π281114=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}8\cdot\frac{1}{1 - \frac14} = \frac{\pi^2}6 (even terms are 14ζ(2)\frac14\zeta(2)). Comparison: Parseval for one ff sums en,f2\abs{\langle e_n, f\rangle}^2; the trace formula integrates the diagonal of the kernel, which amounts to summing Parseval over an entire orthonormal family at once — nen,Gen\sum_n\langle e_n, Ge_n\rangle — and is therefore blind to any particular choice of test function.

10. cncos(nπt)cn\abs{c_n\cos(n\pi t)} \leq \abs{c_n} with cn2<\sum\abs{c_n}^2 < \infty: for each tt the series converges in L2L^2 (orthonormal expansion, Theorem 13.7(3)); the tail bound u(t)uN(t)22n>Ncn2\norm{u(t) - u_N(t)}_2^2 \leq \sum_{n>N}\abs{c_n}^2 is uniform in tt, and each partial sum is continuous in tt (finitely many cosines): tu(t,)t \mapsto u(t,\cdot) is continuous into L2L^2. For f=nNcnenf = \sum_{n\leq N}c_ne_n: each mode cos(nπt)sin(nπx)\cos(n\pi t)\sin(n\pi x) satisfies t2=n2π2=x2\partial_t^2 = -n^2\pi^2 = \partial_x^2 applied to it, vanishes at x=0,1x = 0, 1, has value sin(nπx)\sin(n\pi x) and time-derivative 00 at t=0t = 0: the finite sum solves everything. Musically: the string’s motion is a superposition of standing waves ene_n, whose frequencies nπn\pi are the fundamental and its overtones; the spectral theorem says every initial shape decomposes uniquely into these pure tones, the coefficients cnc_n being the timbre. Hearing a string is computing an orthonormal expansion.

11. With an=un,x2a_n = \abs{\langle u_n, x\rangle}^2: mp+1=nμnp+1an=n(μnp/2an)(μnp/2+1an)mpmp+2m_{p+1} = \sum_n\mu_n^{p+1}a_n = \sum_n\bigl(\mu_n^{p/2} \sqrt{a_n}\bigr)\bigl(\mu_n^{p/2+1}\sqrt{a_n}\bigr) \leq \sqrt{m_p\,m_{p+2}} (Cauchy–Schwarz in 2\ell^2). Hence the ratios mp+1/mpm_{p+1}/m_p are nondecreasing in pp; since R(x)=m1m0R(x) = \frac{m_1}{m_0}, Ax,Axx,Ax=m2m1\frac{\langle Ax, Ax\rangle} {\langle x, Ax\rangle} = \frac{m_2}{m_1} and R(Ax)=m3m2R(Ax) = \frac{m_3}{m_2}, the chain follows, each term μ1\leq \mu_1 because mp+1μ1mpm_{p+1} \leq \mu_1m_p termwise. Convergence: if a1>0a_1 > 0 (writing the top eigenvalue’s total weight as a1a_1), then

μ1R(Akx)=m2k+1m2k=μ1a1+μn<μ1(μn/μ1)2k+1ana1+μn<μ1(μn/μ1)2kanμ1,\mu_1 \geq R(A^kx) = \frac{m_{2k+1}}{m_{2k}} = \mu_1\,\frac{a_1 + \sum_{\mu_n<\mu_1}(\mu_n/\mu_1)^{2k+1} a_n}{a_1 + \sum_{\mu_n<\mu_1}(\mu_n/\mu_1)^{2k}a_n} \longrightarrow \mu_1,

by dominated convergence of the sums (ratios <1< 1): the power method converges for every starting vector not orthogonal to the top eigenspace.

12. Pointwise, x,(AB)xABx2\abs{\langle x, (A - B)x\rangle} \leq \vertiii{A - B}\,\norm x^2, so RA(x)RB(x)+ABR_A(x) \leq R_B(x) + \vertiii{A - B} for every xx. Feeding this into the max–min formula of Exercise 15.8: μn(A)μn(B)+AB\mu_n(A) \leq \mu_n(B) + \vertiii{A - B}, and symmetrically in A,BA, B: μn(A)μn(B)AB\abs{\mu_n(A) - \mu_n(B)} \leq \vertiii{A - B} for all nn at once.

13. w=xx2-w'' = x - x^2 integrates to w=x36+x412+cxw = -\frac{x^3}6 + \frac{x^4}{12} + cx (with w(0)=0w(0) = 0), and w(1)=0w(1) = 0 gives c=112c = \frac1{12}:

w=x42x3+x12=x(1x)(1+xx2)12=Gu.w = \frac{x^4 - 2x^3 + x}{12} = \frac{x(1-x)(1 + x - x^2)}{12} = Gu .

Then u22=01x2(1x)2=130\norm u_2^2 = \int_0^1x^2(1-x)^2 = \frac1{30}, and with 01x3(1x)3=B(4,4)=1140\int_0^1x^3(1-x)^3 = B(4,4) = \frac1{140}:

u,Gu=112(130+1140)=175040,R(u)=17/50401/30=17168.\langle u, Gu\rangle = \frac1{12}\Bigl(\frac1{30} + \frac1{140}\Bigr) = \frac{17}{5040}, \qquad R(u) = \frac{17/5040}{1/30} = \frac{17}{168} .

So 1π2=λ117168\frac1{\pi^2} = \lambda_1 \geq \frac{17}{168}, i.e. π216817=9.8824\pi^2 \leq \frac{168}{17} = 9.8824: π3.14364<3.1437\pi \leq 3.14364 < 3.1437 (true value π2=9.8696\pi^2 = 9.8696). A polynomial, an integral, a digit.

14. Write u=xx2u = x - x^2, so Gu=u(1+u)12Gu = \frac{u(1 + u)}{12} and, using u2=130\int u^2 = \frac1{30}, u3=1140\int u^3 = \frac1{140}, u4=B(5,5)=4!4!9!=1630\int u^4 = B(5,5) = \frac{4!\,4!}{9!} = \frac1{630}:

Gu22=1144u2(1+u)2=1144(130+2140+1630)=1144621260=3190720.\norm{Gu}_2^2 = \frac1{144}\int u^2(1+u)^2 = \frac1{144}\Bigl(\frac1{30} + \frac2{140} + \frac1{630}\Bigr) = \frac1{144}\cdot\frac{62}{1260} = \frac{31}{90720} .

Hence Gu,Guu,Gu=31/9072017/5040=31306\frac{\langle Gu, Gu\rangle}{\langle u, Gu\rangle} = \frac{31/90720}{17/5040} = \frac{31}{306}, and by question 11 this is still μ1=1π2\leq \mu_1 = \frac1{\pi^2}: π230631=9.87097\pi^2 \leq \frac{306}{31} = 9.87097, i.e. π3.14181<3.1419\pi \leq 3.14181 < 3.1419 — four digits (and the next iterate would give about eight, the error contracting by (λ2/λ1)2=116(\lambda_2/\lambda_1)^2 = \frac1{16} per step).

15. The family (emen)(x,y)=em(x)en(y)(e_m \otimes e_n)(x,y) = e_m(x)e_n(y) is a Hilbert basis of L2([0,1]2)L^2(\intcc01^2) (orthonormality by Tonelli; totality as in Exercise 15.5). By question 7, for fixed xx: g(x,)=nλnen(x)eng(x, \cdot) = \sum_n\lambda_ne_n(x)e_n, so the coefficient of gg on emene_m\otimes e_n is

emen, g=01em(x)λnen(x) ⁣dx=λnδmn.\langle e_m\otimes e_n,\ g\rangle = \int_0^1 e_m(x)\,\lambda_n e_n(x)\,\dd x = \lambda_n\,\delta_{mn} .

Parseval in the square:

g2=m,nemen,g2=nλn2.\iint g^2 = \sum_{m,n}\abs{\langle e_m\otimes e_n, g\rangle}^2 = \sum_n\lambda_n^2 .

16. By symmetry of gg,

g2=2y<xy2(1x)2=201(1x)2x33 ⁣dx=23B(4,3)=233!2!6!=23160=190.\iint g^2 = 2\iint_{y<x}y^2(1-x)^2 = 2\int_0^1(1-x)^2\,\frac{x^3}3\,\dd x = \frac23\,B(4, 3) = \frac23\cdot\frac{3!\,2!}{6!} = \frac23\cdot\frac1{60} = \frac1{90} .

17. Combining: n1n4π4=190\sum_n\frac1{n^4\pi^4} = \frac1{90}, i.e. ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90}. In general, tr(Gk)=λnk=ζ(2k)π2k\operatorname{tr}(G^k) = \sum\lambda_n^k = \frac{\zeta(2k)}{\pi^{2k}} equals an iterated integral of products of the rational-polynomial kernel gg over the kk-cube: a rational number. Hence ζ(2k)π2kQ\zeta(2k) \in \pi^{2k}\Q for every kk. The machine only reaches even arguments because eigenvalues enter through their powersλnk\sum\lambda_n^k — and λn=1n2π2\lambda_n = \frac1{n^2\pi^2}: no combination of traces produces n3\sum n^{-3}; the arithmetic nature of ζ(3)\zeta(3) (irrational by Apéry, transcendence open) lies beyond spectral bookkeeping.

18. The top term of a sum of positive terms is at most the sum: λ12λn2=190\lambda_1^2 \leq \sum\lambda_n^2 = \frac1{90}, so 1π2190\frac1{\pi^2} \leq \frac1{\sqrt{90}} and π901/4=3.0801\pi \geq 90^{1/4} = 3.0801\ldots With question 14: 3.080<π<3.14193.080 < \pi < 3.1419, by string arithmetic alone. Higher traces sharpen the lower bound geometrically: λ1(trG2k)1/2k=λ1(1+n2(λn/λ1)2k)1/2k\lambda_1 \leq (\operatorname{tr}G^{2k})^{1/2k} = \lambda_1\bigl(1 + \sum_{n\geq2}(\lambda_n/\lambda_1)^{2k} \bigr)^{1/2k}, and the parasitic factor dies like (14)2k12k\bigl(\tfrac14\bigr)^{2k}\cdot\frac1{2k}-fast — the same spectral-gap mechanism as the power method’s convergence (question 11), seen from the trace side.

19. n2π2νδ>0\abs{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} \geq \delta > 0 for all nn (the sequence n2π2n^2\pi^2 \to \infty avoids ν\nu by a margin), and n2π2νn2π22\abs{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} \geq \frac{n^2\pi^2}2 for nn large. L2L^2 convergence: the coefficients cnn2π2ν\frac{c_n}{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} are square-summable (dominated by cnδ\frac{\abs{c_n}}\delta). Uniform convergence: the tail sup-norms are bounded by 2n>Ncnn2π2ν22π2(cn2)1/2(n>Nn4)1/20\sqrt2\sum_{n>N} \frac{\abs{c_n}}{\abs{n^2\pi^2 - \nu}} \leq \frac{2\sqrt2}{\pi^2}\bigl(\sum\abs{c_n}^2\bigr)^{1/2} \bigl(\sum_{n>N}n^{-4}\bigr)^{1/2} \to 0 (Cauchy–Schwarz). Verification: Gf+νGuGf + \nu Gu has ene_n-coefficient

λncn+νλncnn2π2ν=cnn2π2(1+νn2π2ν)=cnn2π2ν:\lambda_nc_n + \frac{\nu\lambda_nc_n}{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} = \frac{c_n}{n^2\pi^2}\Bigl(1 + \frac{\nu}{n^2\pi^2 - \nu}\Bigr) = \frac{c_n}{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} :

exactly the coefficients of uu, so u=Gf+νGuu = Gf + \nu Gu; uniqueness because a difference vv of solutions satisfies v=νGvv = \nu Gv, i.e. en,v(n2π2ν)=0\langle e_n, v\rangle(n^2\pi^2 - \nu) = 0 for all nn: v=0v = 0.

20. As in question 19, the equation u=Gf+νGuu = Gf + \nu Gu is equivalent to the family of coefficient equations (n2π2ν)en,u=cn(n^2\pi^2 - \nu)\,\langle e_n, u\rangle = c_n, n1n \geq 1. For n=mn = m the left side is 00: solvability forces cm=0c_m = 0, and then em,u\langle e_m, u\rangle is free while all other coefficients are determined: solutions form the line u0+Remu_0 + \R e_m. Resonance: a forcing with a component on the eigenmode pumps energy into it without bound — the swing pushed at its own frequency.

21. From question 19’s formula, Rνf22=cn2(n2π2ν)2f2(π2ν)2\norm{R_\nu f}_2^2 = \sum\frac{\abs{c_n}^2}{(n^2\pi^2 - \nu)^2} \leq \frac{\norm f^2}{(\pi^2 - \nu)^2} (for ν<π2\nu < \pi^2 the closest eigenvalue is π2\pi^2), with equality approached on f=e1f = e_1: operator norm 1π2ν\frac1{\pi^2 - \nu}. Compactness: RνR_\nu is the norm-limit of its finite-rank truncations (the tail coefficients 1n2π2ν0\frac1{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} \to 0); self-adjointness and positivity are read off the diagonal form (all coefficients 1n2π2ν>0\frac1{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} > 0). RνR_\nu has eigenvalues 1n2π2ν\frac1{n^2\pi^2 - \nu}: the analysis of Parts I–VI restarts verbatim.

22. The dictionary: eigenvalue λn=1n2π2\lambda_n = \frac1{n^2\pi^2} \leftrightarrow squared frequency n2π2n^2\pi^2 of the nn-th harmonic; trace λn=16\sum \lambda_n = \frac16 \leftrightarrow ζ(2)=π26\zeta(2) = \frac{\pi^2}6; Hilbert–Schmidt norm g2=190\iint g^2 = \frac1{90} \leftrightarrow ζ(4)=π490\zeta(4) = \frac{\pi^4}{90}; Fredholm alternative \leftrightarrow resonance of the forced string; min–max \leftrightarrow variational estimates, down to π<3.1437\pi < 3.1437 from one polynomial. Behind each pairing, the same object: one compact self-adjoint operator, diagonalized once, exploited five ways.

23. Splitting over parity and substituting n=2mn = 2m in the even part,

ζ(6)=n odd1n6+m11(2m)6=π6960+ζ(6)64,\zeta(6) = \sum_{n\text{ odd}}\frac1{n^6} + \sum_{m\geq1}\frac1{(2m)^6} = \frac{\pi^6}{960} + \frac{\zeta(6)}{64},

so 6364ζ(6)=π6960\frac{63}{64}\zeta(6) = \frac{\pi^6}{960} and ζ(6)=64π663960=π6945\zeta(6) = \frac{64\,\pi^6}{63\cdot960} = \frac{\pi^6}{945}. The trace route would compute trG3=λn3=ζ(6)/π6\operatorname{tr}G^3 = \sum\lambda_n^3 = \zeta(6)/\pi^6 as gg2\iint g\,g_2 with the iterated kernel g2(x,y)=01g(x,z)g(z,y) ⁣dzg_2(x,y) = \int_0^1g(x,z)g(z,y)\dd z — three integrations of piecewise polynomials; Parseval on x(1x)x(1-x) needed only one.

24. (a) Diagonalize: v=nanunv = \sum_na_nu_n (plus a possible kernel component, on which v,Av\langle v, Av\rangle gains nothing and v2\norm v^2 grows, so a maximizer has none). Then v,Av=μnan2μ1an2\langle v, Av\rangle = \sum\mu_na_n^2 \leq \mu_1\sum a_n^2, with equality iff an=0a_n = 0 whenever μn<μ1\mu_n < \mu_1: a maximizer lies in the μ1\mu_1-eigenspace. (b) For any uu,

u,Auu,Au=k(x,y)(u(x)u(y)u(x)u(y)) ⁣dx ⁣dy    0,\langle\abs u, A\abs u\rangle - \langle u, Au\rangle = \iint k(x,y)\,\bigl(\abs{u(x)}\abs{u(y)} - u(x)u(y)\bigr)\dd x\,\dd y \;\geq\; 0,

the integrand being pointwise nonnegative. If P={u>0}P = \{u > 0\} and N={u<0}N = \{u < 0\} both have positive measure, then on P×NP\times N the integrand equals 2ku(x)u(y)>02k\abs{u(x)}\abs{u(y)} > 0 on a set of positive measure: strict inequality. A μ1\mu_1-eigenfunction uu maximizes the Rayleigh quotient, and u\abs u has the same norm, so strictness would exhibit R(u)>μ1R(\abs u) > \mu_1 — impossible; hence uu has constant sign a.e., say u0u \geq 0. Then u(x)=μ11(Au)(x)=μ11k(x,y)u(y) ⁣dy>0u(x) = \mu_1^{-1}(Au)(x) = \mu_1^{-1}\int k(x,y)u(y)\dd y > 0 for every x(0,1)x \in \intoo01 (k(x,)>0k(x,\cdot) > 0 and u0u \neq 0). (c) If the eigenspace had dimension 2\geq 2, it would contain two orthogonal eigenfunctions u,vu, v, each of constant sign and interior-nonvanishing by (b); but then u,v=uv>0\abs{\langle u, v\rangle} = \int\abs u\,\abs v > 0 — contradiction. On the string: k=g>0k = g > 0 on the open square, μ1=λ1=1π2\mu_1 = \lambda_1 = \frac1{\pi^2} is indeed simple, e1=2sin(πx)e_1 = \sqrt2\sin(\pi x) is positive on (0,1)\intoo01; and each en=2sin(nπx)e_n = \sqrt2\sin(n\pi x), n2n \geq 2, orthogonal to the positive e1e_1, must integrate to zero against it, hence changes sign — as its n1n - 1 interior zeros kn\frac kn confirm.

25. Since n2π2n^2\pi^2 \to \infty, the minimum d=minnn2π2νd = \min_n\abs{n^2\pi^2 - \nu} is attained, at some mode mm, and d>0d > 0 because ν\nu avoids the spectrum. Question 19’s diagonal formula gives

Rνf22=ncn2(n2π2ν)21d2f22,\norm{R_\nu f}_2^2 = \sum_n\frac{\abs{c_n}^2}{(n^2\pi^2 - \nu)^2} \leq \frac1{d^2}\,\norm f_2^2,

with equality for f=emf = e_m: Rν=1d\vertiii{R_\nu} = \frac1d, the reciprocal of the distance from ν\nu to the spectrum — the general resolvent principle, here in explicit coordinates. Self-adjointness is read off the real diagonal coefficients; compactness follows as in question 21 (the coefficients tend to 00, so finite-rank truncations converge in norm). Resonance price: for f=e1f = e_1 and ν=(1ε)π2\nu = (1-\varepsilon)\pi^2, the formula gives u=c1π2νe1=1επ2e1u = \frac{c_1}{\pi^2 - \nu}e_1 = \frac1{\varepsilon\pi^2}e_1, against the static response Ge1=1π2e1Ge_1 = \frac1{\pi^2}e_1: amplification 1ε\frac1\varepsilon. At ε=102\varepsilon = 10^{-2} the response is 100100 times the static one — and it diverges as ε0\varepsilon \to 0, which is question 20’s alternative seen from the bounded side: the closer the forcing frequency to a natural one, the less bounded the inverse.