Professional Documents
Culture Documents
15.11.2007
y := x − x1 h1 − x2 h2
Exercise 2 Let f ∈ Lp (a, b), and let q the conjugated exponent to p, i.e. it
holds 1/p + 1/q = 1. By Hölder’s inequality, for x ≤ y
Z y Z y
|(Jf )(y) − (Jf )(x)| =
f (s) ds ≤ |f (s)| ds
x x
Z y 1/p Z y 1/q
≤ |f (s)|p ds 1(s)q ds
x x
1/q 1− p1
≤ kf kp |y − x| = kf kp |y − x| .
Rb
This shows that c = (b−a)−1 a f (s) ds is uniquely determined by f . To prove
the claim of the exercise, let f ∈ C[a, b] be arbitrary, define c := (b−a)−1 hf, 1i
and g := f − c1. Then ϕ defined by
Z x
ϕ(x) := g(s) ds (x ∈ [a, b])
a
Solutions 2 Applied Functional Analysis 3
⇒ ϕ = ...
this has to be read as a statement about an object ϕ, that was already intro-
duced. If you actually mean “Therefore, we can chose ϕ := ... then you have
to write that, and not use the form above!
c) We have seen in a) that ϕ0 ⊥ 1 for every ϕ ∈ C01 [a, b]. This proves the
inclusion “⊃”. To prove the reverse inclusion take f ∈ H = L2 (a, b) such that
f ⊥ ϕ0 for all ϕ ∈ C01 [a, b]. Define e to be the constant function e := (b−a)−1 1.
Thus h1, ei = 1. Now.
f − hf, 1i e ⊥ ϕ0
for all ϕ ∈ C01 [a, b], but also
f − hf, 1i e ⊥ 1.
Hence by b),
f − hf, 1i e ⊥ C[a, b].
But C[a, b] is dense in L2 (a, b) and so
f − hf, 1i e ⊥ L2 (a, b)
Here is a different way to prove the second half of c). Define S := {ϕ0 | ϕ ∈
C01 [a, b]} and again e := (b − a)−1 1, and fix f ∈ S ⊥ . Since C[a, b] is dense in
L2 [a, b], we find a sequence (fn )n ⊂ C[a, b] such that fn → f in the L2 -norm.
Now, by 3b) we can write fn = ϕ0n + cn , with certain ϕn ∈ C01 [a, b] and cn ∈ R.
Then
hfn , ei = ϕ0n , e + hcn 1, ei = 0 + cn h1, ei = cn .
4 Applied Functional Analysis Solutions 2
ϕ0n = fn − cn 1 → f − c1
f, ϕ0 = − f 0 , ϕ = 0
for all ϕ ∈ C01 [a, b], by the definition of a weak derivative. Now this is nothing
else than
f ⊥ {ϕ0 | ϕ ∈ C01 [a, b]}
which by c) implies that f is a constant.
Jfn , ϕ0 → Jf, ϕ0
and hfn , ϕi → hf, ϕi
Jf, ϕ0 = − hf, ϕi
as claimed.
c) The statement in b) tells us that f is a weak derivative of Jf , for any
f ∈ L2 (a, b). I particular, Jf ∈ H 1 (a, b). Since 1 ∈ H 1 (a, b) anyway, we have
the inclusion “⊃”. Now let h ∈ H 1 (a, b) be arbitrary. Define f := h0 ∈ L2 (a, b).
Then Jf and h have the same weak derivative, i.e., the weak derivative of
h − Jf is 0. By Exercise 3 this implies that h − Jf = c1 for some c ∈ R. This
proves the other inclusion.
Remark. Sometimes the last argument was phrased in a somewhat different
way: take h ∈ H 1 (a, b) and define f = h0 and c := h(a). And then one tries
to show that h = Jf + c. The mistake here is that the expression “h(a)” is
not defined yet. Originally h is just a function from L2 (a, b) with some special
property (it has a weak derivative), and as such is just an equivalence class
of measurable functions. So you may change h on the null-set {a} as you like
without effectivley changing h as an element of L2 .
The point is, that after this exercise, we will know that there is a continuous
function h1 such that h = h1 almost everywhere. And then h(a) is defined by
using this (uniquely determined) continuous representative: h(a) := h1 (a).
To sum up: The upshot of Exercises 3 and 4 is to justify the formula
Z t
h(t) = h(a) + h0 (s) ds
a
for functions h ∈ H 1 (a, b), given that “h(a)” is meaningless in the first place.