This note is to concern a recent result by David G. Costa [here]. Here the statement
Theorem 1.1. For all
and
one has
where
. In addition, if
, then
where the constant
is sharp.
Here’s the proof.
This note is to concern a recent result by David G. Costa [here]. Here the statement
Theorem 1.1. For all
and
one has
where
. In addition, if
, then
where the constant
is sharp.
Here’s the proof.
In the literature, there is an inequality called the Alexandrov-Bol inequality which is frequently used in partial differential equations. Here we just recall its statement without any proof.
Theorem. Let
be a good domain in
. Assume
be a positive function satisfying the elliptic inequality
in
. Then it holds
where
and
.
An analytic proof was given by C. Bandle aroud 1975 when she assumed to be real analytic. The above version was due to Suzuki in an elegant paper published in the Ann. Inst. H. Poincare in 1992 [here]. The proof is mainly depended on the isoperimetric inequality for the flat Riemannian surfaces. We refer the reader to the paper by Suzuki for the proof.
In this entry, we shall discuss a geometric meaning of subharmonic functions. This will help us to easily remember the definition of subharmonic functions.
In mathematics, a harmonic function is a twice continuously differentiable function (where
is an open subset of
) which satisfies Laplace’s equation, i.e.
everywhere on . This is usually written as
.
In 1D, this condition is about to say that is harmonic if and only if
is linear. Concerning to the case of functions with one-variable, we have the s0-called convexity saying that function
is convex if and only if the function lies below or on the straight line segment connecting two points, for any two points in the interval. Mathematically, a function
is said to be convex if
.
In higher dimension, the notion of linearity and convexity become harmonicity and subharmonicity. Precisely, two points mentioned above become a hyper-surface, for e.g. like a curve in 2D and a straight line becomes a graph of harmonic function. In practice, the closed interval connecting those two points will be replaced by a closed ball. Therefore, we have
Definition. A
function that satisfies
is called subharmonic. More generally, a function is subharmonic if and only if, in the interior of any ball in its domain, its graph lies below that of the harmonic function interpolating its boundary values on the ball.
Let us consider several examples in 2D.
It is well-known that in 2D function , where
, is harmonic. Therefore, every functions lying below the graph of
turns out to be subharmonic.
Again, one can easily show that is harmonic.
We now prove the following result
Theorem. Let
and
be two smooth functions on
satisfying
.
Suppose that
is bounded and also
and
.
Then
.
Long time ago, we studied [here] the following fact
Suppose
with
. Define
.
Show that
is finite for all
and
.
In this entry, from now on we continue to prove several useful results appearing in PDE. We shall prove the following
Theorem. Assume
is a solution to
with finite energy
.
Then
.
Usually, we can find the inverse of the Laplace transform by looking it up in a table. In this entry, we show an alternative method that inverts Laplace transforms through the powerful method of contour integration.
Consider the piece-wise differentiable function that vanishes for
. We can express the function
by the complex Fourier representation of
for any value of the real constant , where the integral
exists. By multiplying both sides of first equation by and bringing it inside the first integral
.
With the substitution , where
is a new, complex variable of integration,
.
The quantity inside the square brackets is the Laplace transform . Therefore, we can express
in terms of its transform by the complex contour integral
Let us consider the following equation
for and
. In this entry, by using boothstrap argument, we show that
Theorem. If positive function
solves the equation, then
.
In the process of proving the result, we need the following result
Proposition. Let
be a non-negative function and set
.
For
, there exist positive constants
and
depending only on
and
such that for any
with
,
and
satisfying
we have
.
The following theorem is well-known
Theorem (Liouville). Let
be a simply connected domain in
. Then all real solutions of
in
where
a constant, are of the form
where
is a locally univalent meromorphic function in
.
In geometry, our PDE
says that under the case , it holds
where denotes the standard metric on
with constant curvature
. Thus we have
Corollary. All solutions of the PDE in
with
and
are of the form
.
As suggested from this topic, we are interested in evaluating the following complex integral
.
The trick here is to use the Fourier transform. Thanks to ZY for teaching me this interesting technique.
In , the Fourier transform of function
, denoted by
, is defined to be
.
If we apply the Fourier transform twice to a function, we get a spatially reversed version of the function. Precisely,
where denotes the inverse Fourier transform.
My purpose is to derive some regularity result concerning the following integral equation
where is open and bounded and
. To this purpose, in this entry we first consider the equation
for a suitable choice of .
The case . We will prove that
for any
. Indeed, up to a constant factor, the first derivative of
are given by
.
From this formula,
.
By the intermediate value theorem, on the line from to
, there exists some
with
.
Theme: Shocking Blue Green. Blog at WordPress.com.