MHB Norm in R^d with Lebesgue measure

  • Thread starter Thread starter mathmari
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Measure Norm
Click For Summary
In the discussion about norms in R^d with Lebesgue measure, participants explore the properties of functions in L^p spaces under translation. It is established that if f is in L^p, then the translated function f_y remains in L^p, and their norms are equal due to the translation invariance of the Lebesgue measure. To show that the limit of the difference between f and f_y approaches zero as y approaches zero, it is suggested to first prove the result for continuous functions with compact support, as this simplifies the estimation process. The discussion emphasizes the importance of using dense subsets of L^p to extend results to all functions in the space. Overall, the conversation highlights foundational concepts in functional analysis related to translation and convergence in L^p spaces.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

In $\mathbb{R}^d$ with the Lebesgue measure if $f \in L^p, 1 \leq p < +\infty$, and if for each $y$ we set $f_y(x)=f(x+y)$ then:
  1. $f_y \in L^p$ and $||f||_p=||f_y||_p$
  2. $\lim_{y \rightarrow 0} ||f-f_y||_p=0$

Could you give me some hints how to show that?? (Wondering)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
1. follows from the fact that Lebesgue measure is translation-invariant.

For 2., I think that you may need to start by proving this for some class of functions that is dense in $L^p$. For example, can you show that it holds for continuous functions with compact support, or alternatively for simple functions in $L^p$? Then deduce that the result holds for all $L^p$ functions.
 
Opalg said:
1. follows from the fact that Lebesgue measure is translation-invariant.

For 2., I think that you may need to start by proving this for some class of functions that is dense in $L^p$. For example, can you show that it holds for continuous functions with compact support, or alternatively for simple functions in $L^p$? Then deduce that the result holds for all $L^p$ functions.

  1. $$L_p=\{f: X \rightarrow \overline{\mathbb{R}} \text{ or } \mathbb{C} : f \text{ measurable and } \int |f|^pd \mu<+\infty\}$$

    We have that $f \in L^p$, so $\int |f|^p d \mu < +\infty$.

    $\int |f_y|^pd \mu=\int |f(x+y)|^pd \mu \ \ \ \ \ \overset{\text{ translation-invariant }}{=} \ \ \ \ \ \int |f(x)|^pd \mu < +\infty$

    So, $\int |f_y|^p d \mu<+\infty$ that means that $f_y \in L^p$.

    Is this correct?? (Wondering)$||f||_p= \left ( \int |f|^p d \mu \right )^{1/p} \ \ \ \ \ \overset{\text{ translation-invariant }}{=} \ \ \ \ \ \left ( \int |f(x+y)|^p d \mu \right )^{1/p}=\left ( \int |f_y|^p d \mu \right )^{1/p}=||f_y||_p$

    Is this right?? (Wondering)
  2. $||f-f_y||_p \ \ \ \ \ \overset{\text{ Minkowsi }}{ \leq } \ \ \ \ \ ||f||_p+||f_y||_p=||f||_p+||f||_p=2||f||_p$

    Can we use this?? Or isn't it correct?? (Wondering)
 
As Opalg suggested, in part 2, first prove the result when $f$ is continuous with compact support. In the general case, given $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a continuous function $g$ with compact support such that $||f - g||_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$. Choose $\delta > 0$ such that $||g - g_y||_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$ whenever $|y| < \delta$. By translation invariance of the Lebesgue measure, $\|g_y - f_y\|_p = \|g - f\|_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$ for all $y$. Thus

$$ \|f - f_y\|_p \le \|f - g\|_p + \|g - g_y\|_p + \|g_y - f_y\|_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} = \varepsilon$$

for all $y$ with $|y| < \delta$. Since $\varepsilon$ was arbitrary, the result follows.
 
Euge said:
As Opalg suggested, in part 2, first prove the result when $f$ is continuous with compact support. In the general case, given $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a continuous function $g$ with compact support such that $||f - g||_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$. Choose $\delta > 0$ such that $||g - g_y||_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$ whenever $|y| < \delta$. By translation invariance of the Lebesgue measure, $\|g_y - f_y\|_p = \|g - f\|_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$ for all $y$. Thus

$$ \|f - f_y\|_p \le \|f - g\|_p + \|g - g_y\|_p + \|g_y - f_y\|_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} = \varepsilon$$

for all $y$ with $|y| < \delta$. Since $\varepsilon$ was arbitrary, the result follows.

Ok, I will think about it! (Wait)

Is my proof of the first sentence correct?? (Wondering)
 
mathmari said:
Is my proof of the first sentence correct?? (Wondering)

What you have is almost correct, but it's not a proof yet. Here's an example of a proof of part 1:

For each $y\in \Bbb R^d$, $f_y$ is the composition of the measurable function $f$ and the continuous map $x \mapsto x + y$ from $\Bbb R^d$ to $\Bbb R^d$. Hence $f_y$ is measurable for every $y$. By translational invariance of the Lebesgue measure, for all $y\in \Bbb R^d$,

$$\|f_y\|_p^p = \int_{\Bbb R^d}|f(x - y)|^p\, dx = \int_{\Bbb R^d} |f(x)|^p\, dx = \|f\|_p^p < \infty$$

Therefore, for all $y\in \Bbb R^d$, $f_y\in L^p$ with $\|f_y\|_p = \|f\|_p$.
 
Opalg said:
For 2., I think that you may need to start by proving this for some class of functions that is dense in $L^p$. For example, can you show that it holds for continuous functions with compact support, or alternatively for simple functions in $L^p$? Then deduce that the result holds for all $L^p$ functions.

Euge said:
As Opalg suggested, in part 2, first prove the result when $f$ is continuous with compact support. In the general case, given $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists a continuous function $g$ with compact support such that $||f - g||_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$. Choose $\delta > 0$ such that $||g - g_y||_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$ whenever $|y| < \delta$. By translation invariance of the Lebesgue measure, $\|g_y - f_y\|_p = \|g - f\|_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3}$ for all $y$. Thus

$$ \|f - f_y\|_p \le \|f - g\|_p + \|g - g_y\|_p + \|g_y - f_y\|_p < \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} = \varepsilon$$

for all $y$ with $|y| < \delta$. Since $\varepsilon$ was arbitrary, the result follows.

Could you explain it further to me?? (Wondering)
 
Which part do you need more explanation, mathmari?
 
Euge said:
Which part do you need more explanation, mathmari?

Why do we have to show it first for continuous functions with compact support??
 
  • #10
It doesn't have to be (look at Opalg's suggestions), but it makes things easier to find estimates for $\|f - f_y\|_p$ for compactly supported continuous functions $f$, as you have seen. Once the result is proven for this class of functions, then we can prove the general case by the argument I showed before or by application of Fatou's lemma. These are common methods of proof when dealing with convergence theorems involving $L^p$ norms.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K