ABDUL SAMI AWAN and MIHAI VOICU
The present paper is divided into two sections. In the first section we recall the notions of resolvent and pseudo-resolvent, and a few remarkable properties. In the second section we introduce a new concept, theL∞-type pseudo-resolvent, and prove a characterization theorem. The generators ofL∞-type pseudo-resolvents are characterized in spectral terms. The connection between theL∞-type pseudo- resolvents andCo-equicontinuous semigroups is pointed out.
AMS 2000 Subject Classification: 47A56.
Key words: pseudo-resolvent, generator, semigroup.
1. INTRODUCTION
The notion of pseudo-resolvent has been introduced by E. Hille in his remarkable monograph [4]. In 1959, Kato [6] made a few interesting remarks on pseudo-resolvents and infinitesimal generators of semigroups.
Contraction pseudo-resolvents on Banach spaces have been considered by Cuculescu ([1], p. 261–281). He investigated excessive functions with respect to a pseudo-resolvent of integral operators.
Hirsch [5] defined in 1972 the concept of L∞-type pseudo-resolvent on Banach spaces. Voicu ([9], [11], [12], [14]) investigated pseudo-resolvents on locally convex spaces.
In the present paper we define a new concept, the L∞-type pseudo- resolvent, and prove a characterization theorem. We give necessary and suffi- cient conditions under which a linear operator is the generator of a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent.
We also prove that the class of generators ofL∞-type pseudo-resolvents generalizes the class of infinitesimal generators of Co-equicontinuous semi- groups acting on sequentially complete locally convex spaces.
Throughout the paper, X is a complex Hausdorff locally convex space, C the complex field, Cs(X) the continuous seminorms on X and L(X) the algebra of the continuous linear operators.
Definition 1.1. A mappingR: ∆⊂C→L(X) is calledpseudo-resolvent if (1) R(λ)−R(µ) = (µ−λ)R(λ)R(µ)
MATH. REPORTS10(60),1 (2008), 1–9
for allλ, µ∈∆. The resolvent equation (1) has a few interesting consequences stated below.
Proposition 1.1([3], p. 208). If R: ∆→ L(X) is a pseudo-resolvent then
1. R(µ)R(λ) =R(λ)R(µ) for all λ, µ∈∆;
2. kerR(λ), ker(I−λR(λ)), R(λ)(X)and (I−λR(λ))(X)do not depend on λ∈∆.
Definition 1.2. Let V :D→ X be a linear operator and λ∈C. We say that λ∈ρ(V) if
1. λI−V :D→X is one to one;
2. (λI−V)(D) =X and (λI−V)−1 : (λI−V)(D)→X is continuous.
The mapping λ → (λI −V)−1 = R(λ, V), λ ∈ ρ(V), is called the resolventof V.
Remark1.1. The mappingλ→R(λ, V) is not a pseudo-resolvent because R(λ, V)∈/ L(X)
Proposition 1.2 ([15], p. 211). Let V :D → X be a linear operator.
Suppose that ρ(V) 6= ∅ and (λI −V)(D) = X for all λ ∈ ρ(V). Then R :ρ(V)→L(X) defined by R(λ) = (λI−V)−1 is a pseudo-resolvent.
2. PSEUDO-RESOLVENTS
Proposition 2.1. The resolvent of a closed linear operator acting on a complete locally convex space is a pseudo-resolvent.
Proof. Let X be a complete locally convex space, V : D→ X a closed linear operator such that ρ(V)6=∅, and λ∈ρ(V).
Let y ∈ X and (xδ)δ∈∆ ⊂D a net such that (λI −V)(xδ) → y. Since (λI−V)−1is continuous, (xδ)δ∈∆is Cauchy, hence convergent. Letx= lim
δ∈∆xδ. Then lim
δ∈∆V(xδ) =λx−y. In addition, we have (xδ, V(xδ))→(x, λx−y). Since V is closed,x∈Dand V(x) =λx−y. It follows that (λI−D)(D) =X.
By Proposition 1.2, R:ρ(V)→ L(X) defined by R(λ) = (λI−V)−1 is a pseudo-resolvent.
Definition 2.1. A pseudo-resolventR: ∆→L(X) is called generated if∃ a linear operatorV :D=R(λ)(X)→Xsuch that ∆⊂ρ(V), (λI−V)(D) = X and R(λ) = (λI−V)−1 =R(λ, V), λ∈∆.
Actually, if such aV exists, it is unique and is called thegeneratorofR.
Proposition 2.2. Let R : ∆ → L(X) be a pseudo-resolvent. The fol- lowing statements are equivalent:
1. R is generated;
2. kerR(λ) ={0}, λ∈∆.
Proof. 1 ⇒ 2 is a consequence of Definition 2.1. If kerR(λ) ={0} then λI−R−1(λ) does not depend onλ∈∆ andV =λI−R−1(λ) is the generator of R. For details see ([15], p. 216).
Example 2.1. Let K(R) the family of compact subsets of R and X = {x:R→C:xis bounded on the compact subsets ofR}. For eachK∈ K(R) consider the functional defined by
ρK(x) = sup
t∈K
|x(t)|.
Then (X, ρK)K∈K(R) is a Hausdorff locally convex space. LetK0 ∈ K(R) and T :X→X defined by
T(x)(t) =
x(t) fort∈K0 0 fort /∈K0.
It is clear that T is linear and for anyK ∈ K(R) we have ρK(T(x))6ρK(x).
Moreover, it follows that T2 =T, so T is a projection. Let ∆ = C\{0} and R : ∆→L(X) defined by R(λ) = λ1T. Let λ, µ∈∆. Then we have
(2) R(λ)−R(µ) = µ−λ
λµ T
(3) (µ−λ)R(λ)R(µ) = µ−λ λµ T.
Thus, we get
(4) R(λ)−R(µ) = (µ−λ)R(λ)R(µ), that is R is a pseudo-resolvent.
Remark 2.1. R is not generated because T is not one to one.
We now introduce a remarkable class of generated pseudo-resolvents, closely connected with semigroups.
Definition 2.2. A pseudo-resolvent R : ∆→ L(X) is called of L∞-type if∃ ω∈Rsuch that (ω,∞)⊂∆ and lim
n nR(n)(x) =x, ∀x∈X.
Remark 2.2. It is clear that aL∞-type pseudo-resolvent is generated and R(λ)(X) =X.
Example2.2. LetX =C([0,1]) be the set of all continuous real functions defined on [0,1]. It is well known that X is a Banach space with respect to
the norm
kfk= sup
t∈[0,1]
|f(t)|, f ∈X.
Consider also the subspace D={u :u ∈C1([0,1]), u(0) = 0} of X and the linear operator V : D → X defined by V(u) = −u0. Let λ∈ R and f ∈ X.
The first order differential equation λu+u0 =f has a unique solutionu∈D and u(x) = Rx
0 eλ(t−x)f(t)dt. This is equivalent to saying that ∀λ ∈ R, the linear operator λI−V :D→X is a bijection and (λI−V)(u) =f. For any x∈[0,1] the inequalities
(5)
(λI−V)−1(f)(x)
=|u(x)|6 Z x
0
eλ(t−x)|f(t)|dt61
λ(1−e−λx)kfk, ∀λ >0, do hold. Hence
(6)
(λI−V)−1(f)(x) 6 1
λkfk, ∀λ >0,
(7)
V−1(f)(x)
6kfk if λ= 0,
(8)
(λI−V)−1(f)(x) 6 1
|λ|e−λkfk if λ <0.
Hence ρ(V) = Rand, by Definition 2.1, R : R → L(X) defined by R(λ) = R(λ, V) = (λI−V)−1 is a generated pseudo-resolvent. On the other hand, one can remark that R is not a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent because D is not dense in X.
Remark 2.3. The class ofL∞-type pseudo-resolvents is strictly included in the class of generated pseudo-resolvents.
Theorem 2.1. Let R : ∆ → L(X) be a pseudo-resolvent and ω ∈ R such that (ω,∞)⊂∆. Then the two statements below are equivalent:
1. R is of L∞-type; 2.
a) R(λ) (X) =X b)
∀p∈Cs(X), ∃ q∈Cs(X) such that lim sup
n
p(nR(n) (x))≤q(x) ∀x∈X.
Proof. 1⇒2 is a simple consequence of Definition 2.2.
2⇒1.Letµ∈∆ and x∈X. By the resolvent equation we have (9) nR(n)R(µ)(x) = 1
µ−nnR(n)(x) + n
n−µR(µ)(x), n6=µ
By 2 b), the sequence (nR(n)(x))n∈N, n>ω is bounded inX and lettingn→ ∞ in (9) we get
limn nR(n)R(µ)(x) =R(µ)(x).
Let now a net xj ∈R(µ)(X), j ∈J, such that xj →x. For n > ω and j ∈J we have
(10) nR(n)(x)−x=nR(n)(x−xj) +nR(n)(xj)−xj+xj−x.
Let p, q∈Cs(X) given by 2 b). Then by (10) we have
p(nR(n)(x)−x)6p(nR(n)(x−xj)) +p(nR(n)(xj)−xj) +p(xj−x).
Moreover, (11) limsup
n
p(nR(n)(x)−x)6q(x−xj) + limsup
n
p(nR(n)(xj)−xj)+p(xj−x).
Hence limsup
n
p(nR(n)(x)−x) = 0. Consequently, limn nR(n)(x) =x In conclusion, R is aL∞-type pseudo-resolvent.
Theorem 2.2. Let R : ∆→ L(X) be a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent, V : D→X its generator, and W : ∆→ L(X) defined by W(λ) =λ(λR(λ)−I).
Then the following assertions hold.
1. D= n
x∈X:∃lim
n W(n)(x) o
; 2. V(x) = lim
n W(n)(x), x∈D.
Proof. LetR : ∆→L(X) be a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent. Put M =
n
x∈X:∃lim
n W(n)(x) o
.
Letµ∈∆, x∈X and n∈N∩∆. By the resolvent equation, n(nR(n)R(µ)(x)−R(µ)(x)) =µnR(n)R(µ)(x)−nR(n)(x) Lettingn→ ∞we get
limn W(n)R(µ)(x) =µR(µ)(x)−x=V R(µ)(x).
Therefore,
R(µ)(X) =D⊂M.
Let now x∈M and z= lim
n W(n)(x). Then R(µ)(z) = lim
n R(µ)W(n)(x) = lim
n W(n)R(µ)(x) =µR(µ)(x)−x.
Thus, we have
R(µ)(z) =µR(µ)(x)−x and x=R(µ)(µx−z).
In conclusion, x∈Dand the proof is complete.
Theorem 2.3. A linear operator V : D → X is the generator of a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent if and only
1. V is closed and D=X.
2. ∃ω∈Rsuch that (ω,∞)⊂ρ(V)and (λI−V)(D) =X for all λ > ω.
3. ∀p∈Cs(X), ∃q ∈Cs(X) such that limsup
n
p(n(nI−V)−1(x))6q(x), ∀x∈X.
In this case, the mapping R : (ω,∞) →L(X) defined by R(λ) = (λI− V)−1 is a pseudo-resolvent of L∞-type whose generator is V.
Proof. IfR: ∆→L(X) is aL∞-type pseudo-resolvent whose generator is V, then the three conditions on V are consequences of Definition 2.2 and Theorem 2.1. If V fulfills the three conditions, one can defineR : (ω,∞) → L(X) byR(λ) = (λI−V)−1.
It follows from the last condition that∀p∈Cs(X)∃q ∈Cs(X) such that limsup
n
p(nR(n)(x))6q(x), ∀x∈X.
Since R(λ)(X) = D, R fulfills the conditions of Theorem 2.1. Conse- quently, R is a pseudo-resolvent ofL∞-type andV is its generator.
Remark 2.4. IfR0: ∆0 →L(X) andR: ∆→L(X) are pseudo-resolvents with a common generator V :D→X, then
R0(λ) =R(λ) = (λI−V)−1 for all λ∈∆0∩∆.
Corollary 2.1.Let X be a complete locally convex space. A linear ope- rator V :D→X is the generator of a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent if and only if it fulfills the three conditions below.
1. V is closed and D=X.
2. ∃ω∈R such that (ω,∞)⊂ρ(V).
3. ∀p∈Cs(X), ∃q ∈Cs(X)such that limsup
n
p(n(nI−V)−1(x))6q(x), ∀x∈X.
Proof. If λ∈ρ(V) then, according to Proposition 2.1, (λI−V)(D) =X.
Corollary 2.2.Let X be a Banach space. A linear operator V :D→ X is the generator of a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent if and only if the three conditions below hold.
1. V is closed and D=X.
2. ∃ω∈R such that (ω,∞)⊂ρ(V).
3. The sequence (n(nI−V)−1)n>ω is equicontinuous.
Proof. Necessity: By Theorem 2.3, the sequence (n(nI −V)−1)n>ω is pointwise bounded and, consequently, uniformly bounded, i.e., equicontinuous.
Sufficiency: By Theorem 2.3 the three conditions are also sufficient.
Remark 2.5. Corollary 2.3 covers the similar result given by F. Hirsch in [5].
Example2.3. LetX=C([0,∞)) denote the set of all complex continuous functions defined on [0,∞). For each n∈N consider the seminormpn:X → R defined by
pn(u) = sup
x∈[0,n]
|u(x)|.
Thus,Xis a Fr`echet space whose topology is given by the family of seminorms (pn)n∈N. Let i∈X be the identity function (i.e., i(x) =x, ∀x ∈[0,∞)) and the linear operator V :X→X defined byV(u) =−i2u, i.e.,
V(u)(x) =−x2u(x), ∀x∈[0,∞).
Let λ∈Cwith the property that Re(λ)>0 andu∈X such that (λI−V)(u) = 0X, λI(u)−V(u) = 0X,
(λ+x2)u(x) = 0, ∀x∈[0,∞), u(x) = 0, ∀x∈[0,∞), u= 0X, hence λI−V is one to one.
Let now w ∈ X be an arbitrary function and u = λ+iw2. Then (λI− V)(u) = w which shows that (λI −V)(X) = X. Let now u ∈ X, x ∈ [0, n]
and n∈N. Then we have
((λI−V)(u)) (x) = (λ+x2)u(x) and |(λI−V)(u)(x)|>|λ| |u(x)|. Hence
pn(λI−V)(u)>|λ|pn(u) which is equivalent to
pn(λ(λI−V)−1(w))6pn(w), ∀w∈X.
Therefore, V fulfills the conditions of Theorem 2.3 and, consequently, is the generator of aL∞-type pseudo-resolventR:{λ∈C: Re(λ)>0} →L(X) defined by
R(λ)(w) = (λI−V)−1(w) = w
λ+i2 for all w∈X.
Theorem 2.3 suggests a connection between theL∞-type pseudo-resolvents and semigroups. We have in this sense the following result.
Theorem2.4. Let X be a sequentially complete locally convex space and V :D→X a linear operator. The statements below are equivalent.
1. V is the infinitesimal generator of a Co-equicontinuous semigroup.
2. V is the generator of a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent R: (0,∞)→L(X) such that (nR(n))k, n>1, k∈N, be equicontinuous.
Proof. 1⇒ 2. LetT : [0,∞)→L(X) be a semigroup whose generator is V. By the characterization theorem for Co-equicontinuous semigroups ([15], p. 246), D =X, (0,∞) ⊂ρ(V) and (λI−V)(D) = X, ∀λ > 0. Moreover, we have
R(λ, V)(x) = (λI−V)−1(x) = Z ∞
0
e−λtT(t)(x)dx, ∀λ >0 and x∈X.
Consequently, the family (λR(λ, V))k, k ∈N, λ > 0, is equicontinuous. By Theorem 2.3, the mapping R : (0,∞) → L(X) given by R(λ) = R(λ, V) is a L∞-type pseudo-resolvent whose generator isV.
2⇒ 1. By Theorem 2.3, D=X, (0,∞)⊂ρ(V) and (λI−V)(D) =X,
∀λ > 0. Now, it is sufficient to use the characterization theorem for Co- equicontinuous semigroups mentioned above. Therefore, V is the generator of a Co-equicontinuous semigroup S : [0,∞) → L(X). Let W : (0,∞) → L(X) introduced above byW(λ) =λ(λR(λ)−I).In this context, we haveS(t)(x) = limn etW(n)(x), ∀t>0 and x∈X.
Remark 2.6. The class of generators of L∞-type pseudo-resolvents is a proper extension of the class of the infinitesimal generators ofCo-equicontinuous semigroups acting on sequentially complete locally convex spaces.
REFERENCES
[1] I. Cuculescu, Markov Processes and Excessive Functions. Ed. Academiei, Bucure¸sti, 1968. (Romanian)
[2] E.B. Davies,One Parameter Semigroups. Academic Press, London, 1980.
[3] K. Engel and R. Nagel, One Parameter Semigroups for Linear Evolution Equations.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1999.
[4] E. Hille, Functional Analysis and Semigroups.Amer. Math. Soc., Colloq. Publ. 31., Providence, RI, 1948.
[5] F. Hirsch,Families r´esolvants, gen´erateurs, cogen´erateurs, potentiels.Ann. Inst. Fourier 22(1972), 89–210.
[6] T. Kato, Remarks on pseudo-resolvents and infinitesimal generators of semigroups.
Proc. Japan Acad.35(1959), 467–468.
[7] W. Arendt, A. Garabosch, G. Greiner, U. Groh, H.P. Lotz, U. Moustakas, R. Nagel, F. Neubrander and U Schlotterbeck,One-parameter Semigroups of Positive Operators.
Lecture Notes in Math.1184. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1986.
[8] A. Pazy,Semigroups of Linear Operators and Application to Partial Differential Equa- tions.Appl. Math. Sci.44. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1983.
[9] M. Voicu,Positive resolvents and the property of dispersiveness in locally convex lattices.
Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl.33(1988),5, 471–477.
[10] M. Voicu,Dissipative operators and resolvents. Rev. Roumaine Math. Pures Appl.42 (1997),5-6, 449–459.
[11] M. Voicu,Dissipative and accretive operators on locally convex spaces.Rend. Circ. Mat.
Palermo (2) Suppl. No.52, Vol. II (1998), 805–815.
[12] M. Voicu,Resolvents on locally convex spaces. In: Order Structures in Functional Analy- sis,4, pp. 204–258. Ed. Acad. Romˆane, Bucure¸sti, 2001.
[13] M. Voicu,Pseudo-resolvents and semigroups on locally convex spaces.In: Order Struc- tures in Functional Analysis,5, pp. 198–232. Ed. Acad. Romˆane, Bucure¸sti, 2006.
[14] M. Voicu, Pseudo-resolvents on locally convex spaces. Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo (2) Suppl. No.76(2005), 655–665.
[15] K. Yosida, Functional Analysis. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980.
Received 21 May 2007 School of Mathematical Sciences 68-B, New Muslim Town
Lahore, Pakistan abdulsamiawan@gmail.com
and
Technical University of Civil Engineering Department of Mathematics
B-dul Lacul Tei 124 020396 Bucharest, Romania
mvoicuy@yahoo.com