Real Analysis: L∞(E) Norm as Limit of a Sequence

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the properties of the L∞(E) norm in the context of real analysis, particularly focusing on its definition as the limit of a sequence of norms defined for various values of p. Participants explore the implications of the definitions and inequalities related to Lp spaces and their relationships.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the inequalities involving different p values, questioning the conditions under which the Lp norms are defined. Some explore the necessity of finite measure for the space E and the relationships between different Lp spaces.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the properties of the Lp norms, with some participants providing references and examples to support their points. Others express uncertainty about specific definitions and seek clarification from peers or instructors.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of the measure of the set E in the context of the Lp norms, with discussions referencing finite versus infinite measures and their impact on the properties of the functions involved.

SqueeSpleen
Messages
138
Reaction score
5
Real Analysis, L∞(E) Norm as the limit of a sequence.

|| f ||_{\infty} is the lesser real number M such that | \{ x \in E / |f(x)| > M \} | = 0 (| \cdot | used with sets is the Lebesgue measure).

Definition:
For every 1 \leq p < \infty and for every E such that 0 < | E | < \infty we define:
N_{p} [f] = (\frac{1}{ | E | } \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p})^{\frac{1}{p}}

a) p_{1} < p_{2} \Rightarrow N_{p_{1}} [f] \leq N_{p_{2}} [f]
b) N_{p} [f+g] \leq N_{p} [f] + N_{p} [g]
c) If \frac{1}{p} + \frac{1}{q} = 1 \frac{1}{ | E | } \displaystyle \int_{E} | f g | \leq N_{p} [f] N_{q} [g]
d) \lim_{p \to \infty} N_{p} [f] = | | f | |_{\infty}

I need help with the a), I couldn't solve it. I didn't got anything good in my attemps, so I'll show my work in the other three points (Also I'm taking the opportunity to someone find any mistake I could have overlooked).

b) By triangular inequality of the norm || \cdot ||_{p} and observing that:
| E |^{\frac{1}{p}} N_{p} = || \cdot ||_{p}
We have:
| E |^{\frac{1}{p}} N_{p} [f+g] \leq | E |^{\frac{1}{p}} N_{p} [f] + | E |^{\frac{1}{p}} N_{p} [g]
Divide both sides by | E |^{\frac{1}{p}} the work is done.c) By Hölder Inequality we have: \displaystyle \int_{E} | f g | \leq (\int_{E} | f |^{p} )^{\frac{1}{p}}(\int_{E} | g |^{q})^{\frac{1}{q}}
We divide both sides by | E | and knowing that as \frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1 we have:
\frac{1}{| E |} \displaystyle \int_{E} | f g | \leq \frac{1}{| E |} (\int_{E} | f |^{p} )^{\frac{1}{p}}(\int_{E} | g |^{q})^{\frac{1}{q}} = (\frac{1}{| E |} \int_{E} | f |^{p} )^{\frac{1}{p}}(\frac{1}{| E |} \int_{E} | g |^{q})^{\frac{1}{q}}d) Let be the sequence of nonnegative simple functions \{ \varphi_{n} \}_{n \in \mathbb{N}} with \varphi_{n} \leq \varphi_{n+1} \forall n \in \mathbb{N} and:
\lim_{n \to \infty} \varphi_{n} = | f |.
It's clear that \lim_{n \to \infty} \varphi_{n} = | f | if and only if \lim_{n \to \infty} \varphi_{n}^{p} = | f |^{p} as:
\phi_{n} = \displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m_{n}} \alpha_{i,n} X_{E_{i,n}} \Longrightarrow \phi_{n}^{p} = \displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m_{n}} \alpha_{i,n}^{p} X_{E_{i,n}}
Let be \varphi a non negative simple function such that:
\varphi \leq | f |

\varphi = \displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} \alpha_{i} X_{E_{i}} with | E_{i} | > 0 \forall i: 1 \leq i \leq m and:
\alpha_{1} < \alpha_{2} < ... < \alpha_{m}
\displaystyle \int_{E} \varphi^{p} = \displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} \alpha_{i}^{p} | E_{i} |
As p \to \infty \alpha_{m}^{p} | E_{m} | grows faster than \displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} \alpha_{i}^{p} | E_{i} |, to every \varepsilon > 0 \exists p \in \mathbb{R} such that:
| \frac{\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} \alpha_{i}^{p} | E_{i} |}{\alpha_{m}^{p} | E_{m} |} -1 | < \varepsilon
As all coefficients of the sumatory are positive, we can drop the absolute value bars.
\frac{\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} \alpha_{i}^{p} | E_{i} |}{\alpha_{m}^{p} | E_{m} |} -1 < \varepsilon
Then
\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} \alpha_{i}^{p} | E_{i} | < (1+\varepsilon) \alpha_{m}^{p} | E_{m} |
Then we have:
\alpha_{m}^{p} | E_{m} | \leq \int_{E} \varphi^{p} < (1 + \varepsilon) \alpha_{m}^{p} | E_{m} |
We divide by | E | sides and take power to \frac{1}{p} and we have:
((1 + \varepsilon) \frac{E_{m}}{| E |})^{1/p} \alpha_{m}
As p \to \infty this converges to \alpha_{m}
Now by Beppo-Levi we have:
\lim_{n \to \infty} \int_{E} \varphi_{n}^p = \int_{E} |f|^{p}
(We are using the simple functions \varphi_{n}^p to approximate | f |^{p}
We power both sides to \frac{1}{p} and we are almost done.
The only thing left it to prove that || f ||_{\infty} = \lim_{n \to \infty} (\lim_{p \to \infty} N_{p} [ \varphi_{n} ]) which is easy, because to every set with positive measure, taking n big enough we'll have a \varphi_{n} with that set, then the norm infinity is the supremum of that sequence, and as this is an increasing sequence then it's the limit.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
part a. See the following (the norm he defines here is the ##L_p## norm):

Moreover, if we're on a bounded domain, we also have the relatively standard result that if f∈Lp1 for some p1∈[1,∞), then it is in Lp for every p≤p1 (which can be shown using Hölder's inequality). http://math.stackexchange.com/quest...ble-for-a-function-to-be-in-lp-for-only-one-pThis is more general.
Let M be the set of all measures of subsets of your space. Then, if p<q, then Lp < Lq if M has a positive lower bound, and Lq < Lp if M has a finite upper bound. http://www.johndcook.com/blog/2012/11/11/how-lp-spaces-nest/
 
Thanks, tomorrow I'll ask my teacher about this problem.
 
Isn't the L^{p}(E) norm:
| | f | | = (\displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p} )^{\frac{1}{p}}
?
This one is different, it has the measure of E dividing before the root.
 
You are right, the E is inside the root, which I didn't quite see. Well, I found you a proof. The finite measure of E is necessary, and shown by the counterexample at the bottom. The division by |E| falls out of his final inequality.

http://math.stackexchange.com/questions/66029/lp-and-lq-space-inclusion

Theorem Let X be a finite measure space. Then, for any 1≤p<q≤+∞
Lq(X,B,m)⊂Lp(X,B,m).
The proof follows from Hölder inequality. Note that 1/p=1/q+1/r, with r>0. Hence
∥f∥Lp≤meas (X)1/r∥f∥Lq.

The case reported on the wikipedia link of commenter answer follows from this, since of course, if X does not contain sets of arbitrary large measure, X itself can't have an arbitrary large measure.

For the counterexample: f(x)=1/x belongs to L2([1,+∞)), but clearly it does not belong to L1([1,+∞)).

Has your prof discussed measure in detail?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
What do you mean by "discussed measure in detail"? (I wouldn't know, I have not any reference course to compare).
I think we did, our first set of practices were enterely of Lebesgue measure and we spend roughly 1/3 of the course (5-6 weeks) doing it.
Later we had a brief views about "abstract measures"

Elemental sets -> \sigma - elemental sets -> Borelians and a couple of ways of generate them.
External lebesgue measure.
Lebesgue Measure
Internal lebesgue measure, non-measurable sets.

That was more or less what we covered on measure before we moved to measurable functions.

We saw that for sets of finite measure L^{p}(E) \subset L^{q}(E) if q \leq p
For infinite measure I know it's false because I already had the oportunity to solve the following exercise:
Let be E = [0,\infty).
Prove that f(x) = x^{\frac{1}{2}} (1+|ln(x)|)^{-1} \in L^{2} (E) but f \notin L^{p} (E) \forall p \in [0,\infty) - \{ 2 \}
 
Last edited:
I'll transcribe here what I understood from the links.
| E | &lt; \infty
Let be p,q / 1 \leq p \leq q \Longrightarrow 1 &lt; \frac{q}{p}
Then there exists s \in \mathbb{R} such that:
1 = \frac{p}{q} + \frac{1}{s}
There exists a r \in \mathbb{R} such that s= \frac{r}{p}
1 = \frac{p}{q} + \frac{p}{r}
Now we apply the Hölder inequality:
\displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p} = \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p} \cdot X_{E} \leq | E |^{\frac{p}{r}} ( \displaystyle \int_{E} (| f |^{p})^{\frac{q}{p}} )^{\frac{p}{q}} = | E |^{\frac{p}{r}} ( \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{q} )^{\frac{p}{q}}
We power to \frac{1}{p}:
( \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p})^{\frac{1}{p}} \leq | E |^{\frac{1}{r}} ( \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{q} )^{\frac{1}{q}}
\frac{1}{r} = \frac{1}{p} - \frac{1}{q} \Longrightarrow | E |^{\frac{1}{r}} = \frac{| E |^{\frac{1}{p}}}{| E |^{\frac{1}{q}}}
\frac{1}{| E |^{\frac{1}{p}}} ( \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p})^{\frac{1}{p}} \leq \frac{1}{| E |^{\frac{1}{q}}} ( \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{q} )^{\frac{1}{q}}
\therefore ( \frac{1}{| E |} \displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{p})^{\frac{1}{p}} \leq ( \frac{1}{| E |}\displaystyle \int_{E} | f |^{q} )^{\frac{1}{q}}

 
It sounds like you did indeed cover a lot of measure theory -- certainly more than I ever did. I never took a course in it specifically; covered Lp spaces in a course either on real or functional analysis. So maybe you should be helping me?

It looks to me like your interpretation of the sketchy proof I sent you is correct.

I don't think you need the line about s. If p/q < 1 then there has to be a real number that fills in the gap, and p/r is as good as any (since r can be whatever works). This doesn't invalidate your proof in any way. It's just a little roundabout and where you can simplify that kind of thing it's a good idea.
 
The course is of real analysis, both we spend a lot of time in the first chapter.

And I found that you can directly apply the following generalization of Hölder inequality:
\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} p_{i} = \frac{1}{r} \wedge f_{i} \in L^{p_{i}} \forall i : 1 \leq i \leq m \Longrightarrow || \displaystyle \prod_{i=1}^{m} f_{i} ||_{r} \leq \displaystyle \prod_{i=1}^{m} | | f_{i} | |_{p_{i}}

Thank you very much for your help again, I think this is the hardest course I ever toke and I really need help (As I don't speak English very well I really feel I need to say it explicity because I may sound a little rude to people helping me but it's only because my English is quite basic).
 
Last edited:
  • #10
SqueeSpleen said:
The course is of real analysis, both we spend a lot of time in the first chapter.

And I found that you can directly apply the following generalization of Hölder inequality:
\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{m} p_{i} = \frac{1}{r} \wedge f_{i} \in L^{p_{i}} \forall i : 1 \leq i \leq m \Longrightarrow || \displaystyle \prod_{i=1}^{m} f_{i} ||_{r} \leq \displaystyle \prod_{i=1}^{m} | | f_{i} | |_{p_{i}}

Thank you very much for your help again, I think this is the hardest course I ever toke and I really need help (As I don't speak English very well I really feel I need to say it explicity because I may sound a little rude to people helping me but it's only because my English is quite basic).

I wish my real analysis course had spent more time on measures. You have not sounded rude to me, but it is nice to get thanked. I really enjoy helping with problems, and I learn a lot too.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K