Theorem
If is a Lipschitz map, that is, there exists such that , , then maps measurable sets into measurable sets.
\begin{proof}
We can prove that:
- maps -set to -set, because continuous map preserves compact sets and -set can be covered by countable union of compact sets;
- maps sets of measure zero into sets of measure zero by considering the cover of sets with cubes.
Recall that for any measurable set , there exists -set and of measure zero such that . Then we finish the proof.
\end{proof}
Lemma
If is measurable in , then the function is measurable in .
\begin{proof}
Define , then is measurable because . Define , then is Lipschitz. Note that and is measurable by ^179d20. Thus is measurable.
\end{proof}
Remark. If we take , the proof also works. ChatGPT tells me the choice of might simply reflect a convention or aesthetic preference.
Lemma
Assume that .
- , and
- If , and , then .
\begin{proof}
i) Note that if , then
Then for any , we have and so . Then by Fubini’s theorem, there is .
ii) Let , and let be the conjugate exponent to . By Holder’s inequality,
Then using the Fubini theorem, there is
and then taking roots gives our desire result.
When , for any given , we have
By the arbitrary of , we finish the proof.
\end{proof}
The definition of is written in this remark.
Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev
Let . Then for every is measurable in . Moreover,
- if , then for a constant that depends only on , and ;
- if , then
\begin{proof}
See here.
读了一遍,大概拿中文写个大纲:
- 先考虑nonnegative f的情况,估计 的大小。
- 把 分成 和 两部分来算积分,后者用Holder估计,前者用 the HardyLittlewood maximal function 在一系列圆环来做(因为这样可以避开奇点)
- 取一个 把前面两部分得到的丑陋的两个常数操作一下,得到 .
- 用^4tmmbv算 . 现在我们完成了 i) 的对于 nonnegative 的证明。
- 当 时,还是用 的估计,用一下 Hardy-Littlewood. 现在我们完成了 ii) 的对于 nonnegative 的证明。
- 现在考虑一般的 ,注意到 就可以了。
\end{proof}
Remark. Here is a motivation of ^z20dwo. Define
and note that it is a convolution of and . By Fubini’s theorem, we know and so exists but it is not necessary finite.
We aim to find and such that is a bounded operator from to . It will turn out that the values of and for which the norm inequality
is true, for some independent of , are limited to
To explain it, we need to verify the following observation:
- If , there exists such that everywhere in . That is, cannot hold if .
- If and , there exists such that . Thus, fails when and .
- If , the only value of for which can possibly hold for all satisfies .
The computation is omitted.
Remark. 这个证明不考。