I need to prove that $u \in W^{k,p}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ if and only if $u \in L^p(\mathbb{R}^n)$ with $D^l u \in L^p(\mathbb{R}^n)$ for every multi-index $l$ with $|l| = k$. This is related to the fact that $$\lVert u \rVert_p +\sum_{|l| = k}\lVert D^lu \rVert_p$$ is an equivalent norm for the space. Any advice?
2026-05-05 18:51:10.1778007070
Norm characterization on Sobolev Spaces $W^{k,p}(\mathbb{R}^n)$.
77 Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in SOBOLEV-SPACES
- On sufficient condition for pre-compactness "in measure"(i.e. in Young measure space)
- $\mbox{Cap}_p$-measurability
- If $u\in W^{1,p}(\Omega )$ is s.t. $\nabla u=0$ then $u$ is constant a.e.
- Weak formulation of Robin boundary condition problem
- Variational Formulation - inhomogeneous Neumann boundary
- Why the Sobolev space $W^{1,2}(M,N)$ weak-sequencially closed in $W^{1,2}(\mathbb R^K)$?
- Sobolev space $H^s(Q)$ is Hilbert
- Duhamel's principle for heat equation.
- How to define discrete Sobolev dual norm so that it can be computed?
- Weakly sequentially continuous maps
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
Added later: Upon revisiting this question I realised the proof I originally wrote was incorrect; crucially one cannot just iteratively apply the case $\ell=1, k=2$ to deduce the general case. My answer has been amended to more closely follow the proof in the cited text.
This is true, and is a consequence of the Gagliardo-Nirenberg interpolation inequality which can be found in many sources. We will follow Chapter 5 of the following reference:
Adams, Robert A.; Fournier, John J. F., Sobolev spaces, Pure and Applied Mathematics 140. New York, NY: Academic Press (ISBN 0-12-044143-8/hbk). xiii, 305 p. (2003). ZBL1098.46001.
The key ingredient is the one-dimensional inequality $$ |f'(0)|^p \leq \frac{2^{p-1}9^p}{\delta} \left(\delta^{-p}\int_0^1 |f(t)|^p \,\mathrm{d}t+ \delta^p\int_0^1 |f''(t)|^p \,\mathrm{d}t \right ), $$ for all $f \in C^2([0,\delta])$ with $\delta>0,$ and $1 \leq p < \infty.$
By rescaling we can assume $\delta=1.$ We use the fundamental theorem of calculus $$ f'(0) = f'(z) - \int_0^z f''(t) \,\mathrm{d}t, $$ and for $0 \leq x<y \leq 1$ the mean-value theorem gives $z \in (x,y)$ such that $$ f'(z) = \frac{u(y)-u(x)}{y-x}. $$ Chaining these we deduce that $$ |f'(0)| \leq |x-y|(|f(x)|+|f(y)|) \int_0^1 |f''(t)| \,\mathrm{d}t.$$ From here we can integrate along $x \in (0,1/3),$ $y \in (1/3,1)$ and apply Hölder to conclude.
Now given $u \in L^p(\Bbb R^n)$ whose $k$th order derivatives are in $L^p,$ by mollifying we can assume $u$ is smooth. We apply the above estimate to $f(r) = u(x+r\omega)$ for $\omega \in S^{n-1},$ and integrate over all $\omega \in S^{n-1}$ and $x \in B_R$ to obtain \begin{equation*}\begin{split} &\int_{B_R} |\nabla u|^p \,\mathrm{d}x \\ &\leq \frac{C(n,p)}{\delta} \int_{B_R} \int_{S^{n-1}} \left( \delta^{-p}\int_0^\delta |u(x+t\omega)|^p \,\mathrm{d} t +\delta^p\int_0^{\delta} |\nabla^2u(x+t\omega)|^p \,\mathrm{d}t \right) \,\mathrm{d} \omega\,\mathrm{d} x \\ &\leq C(n,p) \left(\delta^{-p} \int_{B_{R}} |u|^p \,\mathrm{d}x + \delta^p\int_{B_{R}} |\nabla^2u|^p \,\mathrm{d} x \right). \end{split}\end{equation*} I've been a bit brief here, but the last line uses an application of Fubini by (temporarily) assuming $u$ and its derivatives vanish outside of $B_R.$ We refer the reader to Lemma 5.4 of the cited text for the full details.
From here the idea is to apply similar estimates to $\nabla^j u$ and chaining the inequalities. This requires an induction argument, together with a carefully choosing the parameters $\delta$ so the relevant terms can be absorbed, as is done in Lemma 5.6. This will eventually give $$ \int_{B_R} |\nabla^j u|^p \,\mathrm{d}x \leq C(n,p,k) \left( \int_{B_{R}} |u|^p \,\mathrm{d}x + \int_{B_{R}} |\nabla^ku|^p \,\mathrm{d} x \right) $$ for each $1 < j < k.$ Note one could have proved this in the case $R=1,$ and deduced the general case by scaling. To conclude, we send $R \to \infty.$