Proving Convolution in R^n using Isometric Isomorphism and Lp Spaces

  • Thread starter Thread starter hatsoff
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Convolution Proof
hatsoff
Messages
16
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement



Prove the following: If \delta\in L_1(\mathbb{R}^n) and f\in L_p(\mathbb{R}^n) then the convolution \delta * f\in L_p(\mathbb{R}^n) with \lVert \delta * f\rVert_p\leq\lVert\delta\rVert_1\lVert f\rVert_p.

Homework Equations



We use the natural isometry (or isometric isomorphism, if you like) h\mapsto\lambda_h between L_q and L_p^*, where \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1, and where we define each \lambda_h by \lambda_h(f)=\int fh.

The Attempt at a Solution



Well I can show that \lVert (\delta * f)h\rVert_1\leq\lVert\delta\rVert_1 \lVert f\rVert_p\lVert h\rVert_q. Supposedly I can use this along with the natural isometry between L_q and L_p^* to finish the proof. But I don't see how that natural isometry is applicable.

Any help would be much appreciated. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you need to use here Minkowski inequality theorem, and the fact that dirac-delta measure is invriant under raising its power.

http://www.math.duke.edu/~wka/math204/conv.12.4.pdf
it's in page 2, but there's a misprint, and the LHS, the aboslute value integrand should be raised to power of p.
 
Thanks, I appreciate the link, and indeed that is a very nice proof of the theorem in question. However, I'm looking to finish the particular approach I was given.

Basically, I have to show, using the fact that for all h\in L_q we have

\lVert (\delta * f)h\rVert_1\leq\lVert\delta\rVert_1 \lVert f\rVert_p\lVert h\rVert_q

and also using the natural isometric isomorphism between Lp* and Lq, that the \delta *f\in L_p.
 
There are two things I don't understand about this problem. First, when finding the nth root of a number, there should in theory be n solutions. However, the formula produces n+1 roots. Here is how. The first root is simply ##\left(r\right)^{\left(\frac{1}{n}\right)}##. Then you multiply this first root by n additional expressions given by the formula, as you go through k=0,1,...n-1. So you end up with n+1 roots, which cannot be correct. Let me illustrate what I mean. For this...
Back
Top