Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dsjbd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-24T12:14:27.570Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Constructive Analysis of a Proof that the Numerical Range is Convex

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2010

Douglas Bridges  and
Robin Havea
Douglas Bridges
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 1, New Zealand, [email protected]
Robin Havea
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, University of Canterbury, Private Bag 4800, Christchurch 1, New Zealand, [email protected]

Abstract

Core share and HTML view are not available for this content. However, as you have access to this content, a full PDF is available via the ‘Save PDF’ action button.

It is shown where the classical proof of the convexity of the numerical range of an operator on a Hilbert space breaks down by using principles that are not valid in intuitionistic logic. Those breakdowns are then repaired, as far as possible, to provide constructive versions of the convexity theorem. Finally, it is shown that our results are the best possible in a constructive setting.

Type
Research Article
Information
LMS Journal of Computation and Mathematics , Volume 3 , 2000 , pp. 191 - 206
Copyright
Copyright © London Mathematical Society 2000

References

1. Bishop, Errett and Bridges, Douglas, Constructive analysis, Grundlehren Math. Wiss. 279 (Springer–Verlag, Heidelberg, 1985).Google Scholar
2. Bridges, Douglas, ‘Constructive mathematics: a foundation for computable analysis’, Theoretical Comput. Sci. 219 (1999) 95–109.Google Scholar
3. Bridges, Douglas and Ishihara, Hajime, ‘Locating the range of an operator on a Hilbert space’, Bull. London Math. Soc. 24 (1992) 599–605.Google Scholar
4. Bridges, Douglas and Richman, Fred, Varieties of constructive mathematics, London Math. Soc. Lecture Notes 97 (Cambridge University Press, 1987).Google Scholar
5. Bridges, Douglas, Richman, Fred and Schuster, Peter, ‘Adjoints, absolute values, and polar decompositions’, J. Operator Theory, to appear.Google Scholar
6. Halmos, Paul R., A Hilbert space problem book, Grad. Texts in Math. 19 (Springer-Verlag, Heidelberg, 1974).Google Scholar
7. Ishihara, Hajime, ‘Continuity and nondiscontinuity in constructive mathematics’, J. Symbolic Logic 56 (1991) 1349–1354.Google Scholar
8. Kushner, B. A., Lectures on constructive mathematical analysis (Amer. Math. Soc, Providence, RI, 1985).Google Scholar
9. Richman, Fred, ‘Intuitionism as generalization’, Philos. Math. 5 (1990) 124–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
10. Richman, Fred, ‘Polynomials and linear transformations’, Linear Algebra Appl. 131 (1990) 131–137.Google Scholar
11. Troelstra, A. S. and Van Dalen, D., Constructivism in mathematics: an introduction, two volumes (North Holland, Amsterdam, 1988).Google Scholar
12. Weihrauch, Klaus, ‘A foundation for computable analysis’, Combinatorics, complexity, & logic, (ed. Bridges, D. S., Calude, C. S., Gibbons, J., Reeves, S. and Witten, I. H.) Conference Proc, Auckland, 9–13 December 1996 (Springer–Verlag, Singapore, 1996).Google Scholar