Each result cited is universally quantified over the data in its own statement. Write Θ : V × V → R \Theta:V\times V\to\mathbb{R} Θ : V × V → R for the function in the hypothesis, so that Θ \Theta Θ attains a maximum at ( x ^ , y ^ ) (\hat{x},\hat{y}) ( x ^ , y ^ ) .
Step 1 (test functions). Let φ : H → R \varphi:H\to\mathbb{R} φ : H → R be given by φ ( x ) = α 2 ∣ x − y ^ ∣ H 2 + ⟨ p , x ⟩ H \varphi(x)=\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|x-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}+\langle p,x\rangle_{H} φ ( x ) = 2 α ∣ x − y ^ ∣ H 2 + ⟨ p , x ⟩ H . By claims 3 and 1 of Affine and Quadratic Functions on a Real Hilbert Space are of Class C 2 C^2 C 2 its two summands belong to C 2 ( H ) C^{2}(H) C 2 ( H ) , with gradients α ( x − y ^ ) \alpha(x-\hat{y}) α ( x − y ^ ) and p p p and Hessians α I H \alpha I_{H} α I H and 0 S y m 0_{\mathrm{Sym}} 0 Sym at every x ∈ H x\in H x ∈ H , so by Constants, Sums, Scalar Multiples and Differences of Differentiable Functions on an Open Subset of a Real Inner Product Space §sum φ ∈ C 2 ( H ) \varphi\in C^{2}(H) φ ∈ C 2 ( H ) with
D φ ( x ^ ) = α ( x ^ − y ^ ) + p , D 2 φ ( x ^ ) = α I H . D\varphi(\hat{x})=\alpha(\hat{x}-\hat{y})+p,\qquad D^{2}\varphi(\hat{x})=\alpha I_{H}. D φ ( x ^ ) = α ( x ^ − y ^ ) + p , D 2 φ ( x ^ ) = α I H .
Let ψ : H → R \psi:H\to\mathbb{R} ψ : H → R be given by ψ ( y ) = − α 2 ∣ y − x ^ ∣ H 2 − ⟨ q , y ⟩ H \psi(y)=-\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|y-\hat{x}|_{H}^{2}-\langle q,y\rangle_{H} ψ ( y ) = − 2 α ∣ y − x ^ ∣ H 2 − ⟨ q , y ⟩ H ; by the same two lemmas together with Constants, Sums, Scalar Multiples and Differences of Differentiable Functions on an Open Subset of a Real Inner Product Space §scalar , ψ ∈ C 2 ( H ) \psi\in C^{2}(H) ψ ∈ C 2 ( H ) with
D ψ ( y ^ ) = − α ( y ^ − x ^ ) − q = α ( x ^ − y ^ ) − q , D 2 ψ ( y ^ ) = − α I H . D\psi(\hat{y})=-\alpha(\hat{y}-\hat{x})-q=\alpha(\hat{x}-\hat{y})-q,\qquad D^{2}\psi(\hat{y})=-\alpha I_{H}. D ψ ( y ^ ) = − α ( y ^ − x ^ ) − q = α ( x ^ − y ^ ) − q , D 2 ψ ( y ^ ) = − α I H .
For x ∈ V x\in V x ∈ V one has Θ ( x , y ^ ) = ( u δ − ( x ) − φ ( x ) ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) − ⟨ q , y ^ ⟩ H \Theta(x,\hat{y})=\bigl(u^{-}_{\delta}(x)-\varphi(x)\bigr)-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})-\langle q,\hat{y}\rangle_{H} Θ ( x , y ^ ) = ( u δ − ( x ) − φ ( x ) ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) − ⟨ q , y ^ ⟩ H , and Θ ( x , y ^ ) ≤ Θ ( x ^ , y ^ ) \Theta(x,\hat{y})\le\Theta(\hat{x},\hat{y}) Θ ( x , y ^ ) ≤ Θ ( x ^ , y ^ ) ; hence the function on V V V with value u δ − ( x ) − φ ( x ) u^{-}_{\delta}(x)-\varphi(x) u δ − ( x ) − φ ( x ) at x x x satisfies
u δ − ( x ) − φ ( x ) ≤ u δ − ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) for every x ∈ V , u^{-}_{\delta}(x)-\varphi(x)\le u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-\varphi(\hat{x})\qquad\text{for every }x\in V, u δ − ( x ) − φ ( x ) ≤ u δ − ( x ^ ) − φ ( x ^ ) for every x ∈ V ,
and so has a local maximum relative to V V V at x ^ \hat{x} x ^ , the condition of Local Maximum of a Function Relative to a Subset of a Metric Space holding with any positive radius. Likewise, for y ∈ V y\in V y ∈ V one has Θ ( x ^ , y ) = u δ − ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , x ^ ⟩ H − ( v δ + ( y ) − ψ ( y ) ) \Theta(\hat{x},y)=u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-\langle p,\hat{x}\rangle_{H}-\bigl(v^{+}_{\delta}(y)-\psi(y)\bigr) Θ ( x ^ , y ) = u δ − ( x ^ ) − ⟨ p , x ^ ⟩ H − ( v δ + ( y ) − ψ ( y ) ) , so the function with value v δ + ( y ) − ψ ( y ) v^{+}_{\delta}(y)-\psi(y) v δ + ( y ) − ψ ( y ) at y y y has a local minimum relative to V V V at y ^ \hat{y} y ^ .
Step 2 (test data). Applying Viscosity Subsolution, Supersolution and Solution of a Second-Order Equation on a Hilbert Triple §subsolution with δ \delta δ , the test function φ \varphi φ , the point x ^ \hat{x} x ^ and the number ε \varepsilon ε yields x 1 ∈ D ( A ) x_{1}\in D(A) x 1 ∈ D ( A ) , s 1 ∈ R s_{1}\in\mathbb{R} s 1 ∈ R , p 1 ∈ H p_{1}\in H p 1 ∈ H and X 1 ∈ S y m ( H ) X_{1}\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) X 1 ∈ Sym ( H ) with
∣ x 1 − x ^ ∣ H < ε , ∣ u δ − ( x 1 ) − u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ s 1 − u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ p 1 − D φ ( x ^ ) ∣ H < ε , ∥ X 1 − α I H ∥ < ε , |x_{1}-\hat{x}|_{H}<\varepsilon,\quad |u^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1})-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|<\varepsilon,\quad |s_{1}-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|<\varepsilon,\quad |p_{1}-D\varphi(\hat{x})|_{H}<\varepsilon,\quad \lVert X_{1}-\alpha I_{H}\rVert<\varepsilon, ∣ x 1 − x ^ ∣ H < ε , ∣ u δ − ( x 1 ) − u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ s 1 − u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ p 1 − D φ ( x ^ ) ∣ H < ε , ∥ X 1 − α I H ∥ < ε ,
and F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , p 1 , X 1 ) ≤ ε F^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1},s_{1},p_{1},X_{1})\le\varepsilon F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , p 1 , X 1 ) ≤ ε . Applying Viscosity Subsolution, Supersolution and Solution of a Second-Order Equation on a Hilbert Triple §supersolution with δ \delta δ , ψ \psi ψ , y ^ \hat{y} y ^ and ε \varepsilon ε yields y 1 ∈ D ( A ) y_{1}\in D(A) y 1 ∈ D ( A ) , t 1 ∈ R t_{1}\in\mathbb{R} t 1 ∈ R , q 1 ∈ H q_{1}\in H q 1 ∈ H and Y 1 ∈ S y m ( H ) Y_{1}\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) Y 1 ∈ Sym ( H ) with
∣ y 1 − y ^ ∣ H < ε , ∣ v δ + ( y 1 ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ t 1 − v δ + ( y ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ q 1 − D ψ ( y ^ ) ∣ H < ε , ∥ Y 1 + α I H ∥ < ε , |y_{1}-\hat{y}|_{H}<\varepsilon,\quad |v^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})|<\varepsilon,\quad |t_{1}-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})|<\varepsilon,\quad |q_{1}-D\psi(\hat{y})|_{H}<\varepsilon,\quad \lVert Y_{1}+\alpha I_{H}\rVert<\varepsilon, ∣ y 1 − y ^ ∣ H < ε , ∣ v δ + ( y 1 ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ t 1 − v δ + ( y ^ ) ∣ < ε , ∣ q 1 − D ψ ( y ^ ) ∣ H < ε , ∥ Y 1 + α I H ∥ < ε ,
and − ε ≤ F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , q 1 , Y 1 ) -\varepsilon\le F^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1},t_{1},q_{1},Y_{1}) − ε ≤ F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , q 1 , Y 1 ) .
Step 3 (the data are admissible). By Basic Properties of the δ \delta δ -Envelopes: Semicontinuity, Duality, Closed Superlevel Sets, Bounds and Monotonicity §bound , u δ − ( x 1 ) ≤ C − δ h ( x 1 ) u^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1})\le C-\delta h(x_{1}) u δ − ( x 1 ) ≤ C − δ h ( x 1 ) , so, using C ≤ B C\le B C ≤ B , − u δ − ( x ^ ) ≤ B -u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})\le B − u δ − ( x ^ ) ≤ B and ε ≤ 1 \varepsilon\le1 ε ≤ 1 ,
δ h ( x 1 ) ≤ C − u δ − ( x 1 ) ≤ C − u δ − ( x ^ ) + ε ≤ 2 B + 1 , \delta h(x_{1})\le C-u^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1})\le C-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})+\varepsilon\le 2B+1 , δ h ( x 1 ) ≤ C − u δ − ( x 1 ) ≤ C − u δ − ( x ^ ) + ε ≤ 2 B + 1 ,
whence h ( x 1 ) ≤ 2 B + 1 δ < R h(x_{1})\le\frac{2B+1}{\delta}<R h ( x 1 ) ≤ δ 2 B + 1 < R . By the same claim − C + δ h ( y 1 ) ≤ v δ + ( y 1 ) -C+\delta h(y_{1})\le v^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1}) − C + δ h ( y 1 ) ≤ v δ + ( y 1 ) , so δ h ( y 1 ) ≤ v δ + ( y 1 ) + C ≤ v δ + ( y ^ ) + ε + C ≤ 2 B + 1 \delta h(y_{1})\le v^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1})+C\le v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})+\varepsilon+C\le2B+1 δ h ( y 1 ) ≤ v δ + ( y 1 ) + C ≤ v δ + ( y ^ ) + ε + C ≤ 2 B + 1 and h ( y 1 ) < R h(y_{1})<R h ( y 1 ) < R . Next ∣ s 1 ∣ ≤ ∣ u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ + ε ≤ B + 1 < R |s_{1}|\le|u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|+\varepsilon\le B+1<R ∣ s 1 ∣ ≤ ∣ u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ + ε ≤ B + 1 < R and ∣ t 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 < R |t_{1}|\le B+1<R ∣ t 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 < R , because B + 1 ≤ 3 B + 2 < R B+1\le3B+2<R B + 1 ≤ 3 B + 2 < R and 0 ≤ B 0\le B 0 ≤ B .
Since ∣ I H ( x , y ) ∣ = ∣ ⟨ x , y ⟩ H ∣ ≤ ∣ x ∣ H ∣ y ∣ H |I_{H}(x,y)|=|\langle x,y\rangle_{H}|\le|x|_{H}|y|_{H} ∣ I H ( x , y ) ∣ = ∣ ⟨ x , y ⟩ H ∣ ≤ ∣ x ∣ H ∣ y ∣ H for x , y ∈ H x,y\in H x , y ∈ H by The Cauchy-Schwarz Inequality in a Real Inner Product Space , claim 2 of Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity gives ∥ I H ∥ ≤ 1 \lVert I_{H}\rVert\le1 ∥ I H ∥ ≤ 1 , and hence ∥ α I H ∥ ≤ α \lVert\alpha I_{H}\rVert\le\alpha ∥ α I H ∥ ≤ α and ∥ − α I H ∥ ≤ α \lVert-\alpha I_{H}\rVert\le\alpha ∥ − α I H ∥ ≤ α by the homogeneity of the norm in Elementary Properties of Bounded Symmetric Bilinear Forms: Norm, Quadratic Form, Order and Continuity §norm-axioms . Therefore, by the triangle inequality of that same claim,
∥ X 1 ∥ ≤ ∥ α I H ∥ + ∥ X 1 − α I H ∥ ≤ α + 1 < R , ∥ Y 1 ∥ ≤ α + 1 < R . \lVert X_{1}\rVert\le\lVert\alpha I_{H}\rVert+\lVert X_{1}-\alpha I_{H}\rVert\le\alpha+1<R,\qquad \lVert Y_{1}\rVert\le\alpha+1<R . ∥ X 1 ∥ ≤ ∥ α I H ∥ + ∥ X 1 − α I H ∥ ≤ α + 1 < R , ∥ Y 1 ∥ ≤ α + 1 < R .
Finally, by The Norm Metric of a Real Inner Product Space: Triangle Inequalities, Limits and Continuity §triangle ,
∣ p 1 ∣ H ≤ ∣ D φ ( x ^ ) ∣ H + ε ≤ α ∣ x ^ − y ^ ∣ H + ∣ p ∣ H + ε ≤ G + σ + ε ≤ G + 2 < G + 2 α < R , |p_{1}|_{H}\le|D\varphi(\hat{x})|_{H}+\varepsilon\le\alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}+|p|_{H}+\varepsilon\le G+\sigma+\varepsilon\le G+2<G+2\alpha<R, ∣ p 1 ∣ H ≤ ∣ D φ ( x ^ ) ∣ H + ε ≤ α ∣ x ^ − y ^ ∣ H + ∣ p ∣ H + ε ≤ G + σ + ε ≤ G + 2 < G + 2 α < R ,
using 1 < α 1<\alpha 1 < α , and likewise ∣ q 1 ∣ H ≤ G + 2 < R |q_{1}|_{H}\le G+2<R ∣ q 1 ∣ H ≤ G + 2 < R . Thus ξ 1 = ( x 1 , s 1 , p 1 , X 1 ) \xi_{1}=(x_{1},s_{1},p_{1},X_{1}) ξ 1 = ( x 1 , s 1 , p 1 , X 1 ) and η 1 = ( y 1 , t 1 , q 1 , Y 1 ) \eta_{1}=(y_{1},t_{1},q_{1},Y_{1}) η 1 = ( y 1 , t 1 , q 1 , Y 1 ) are R R R -bounded test data, and
F δ − ( ξ 1 ) − F δ + ( η 1 ) ≤ ε + ε ≤ 2 < α + 1 < R . F^{-}_{\delta}(\xi_{1})-F^{+}_{\delta}(\eta_{1})\le\varepsilon+\varepsilon\le2<\alpha+1<R . F δ − ( ξ 1 ) − F δ + ( η 1 ) ≤ ε + ε ≤ 2 < α + 1 < R .
Hence ξ 1 ∈ S δ , R − \xi_{1}\in S^{-}_{\delta,R} ξ 1 ∈ S δ , R − and η 1 ∈ S δ , R + \eta_{1}\in S^{+}_{\delta,R} η 1 ∈ S δ , R + by Test Data for a Second-Order Equation Operator on a Hilbert Triple and the Admissible Sets §admissible , each datum serving as the witness required for the other.
Step 4 (moving the gradient arguments). Put P = α ( x 1 − y 1 ) P=\alpha(x_{1}-y_{1}) P = α ( x 1 − y 1 ) , τ 1 = ∣ P − p 1 ∣ H \tau_{1}=|P-p_{1}|_{H} τ 1 = ∣ P − p 1 ∣ H and τ 2 = ∣ P − q 1 ∣ H \tau_{2}=|P-q_{1}|_{H} τ 2 = ∣ P − q 1 ∣ H ; these are nonnegative. By the triangle inequality,
τ 1 ≤ α ∣ ( x 1 − y 1 ) − ( x ^ − y ^ ) ∣ H + ∣ α ( x ^ − y ^ ) + p − p 1 ∣ H + ∣ p ∣ H ≤ α ( ε + ε ) + ε + σ = ( 2 α + 1 ) ε + σ , \tau_{1}\le\alpha\bigl|(x_{1}-y_{1})-(\hat{x}-\hat{y})\bigr|_{H}+\bigl|\alpha(\hat{x}-\hat{y})+p-p_{1}\bigr|_{H}+|p|_{H}\le\alpha(\varepsilon+\varepsilon)+\varepsilon+\sigma=(2\alpha+1)\varepsilon+\sigma , τ 1 ≤ α ( x 1 − y 1 ) − ( x ^ − y ^ ) H + α ( x ^ − y ^ ) + p − p 1 H + ∣ p ∣ H ≤ α ( ε + ε ) + ε + σ = ( 2 α + 1 ) ε + σ ,
and the same bound holds for τ 2 \tau_{2} τ 2 , since D ψ ( y ^ ) = α ( x ^ − y ^ ) − q D\psi(\hat{y})=\alpha(\hat{x}-\hat{y})-q D ψ ( y ^ ) = α ( x ^ − y ^ ) − q and ∣ q ∣ H ≤ σ |q|_{H}\le\sigma ∣ q ∣ H ≤ σ .
Apply the first condition of The Shift-Continuity Condition on Admissible Test Data §modulus to ξ 1 \xi_{1} ξ 1 with the perturbations P − p 1 ∈ H P-p_{1}\in H P − p 1 ∈ H and 0 S y m ∈ S y m ( H ) 0_{\mathrm{Sym}}\in\mathrm{Sym}(H) 0 Sym ∈ Sym ( H ) : since p 1 + ( P − p 1 ) = P p_{1}+(P-p_{1})=P p 1 + ( P − p 1 ) = P , X 1 + 0 S y m = X 1 X_{1}+0_{\mathrm{Sym}}=X_{1} X 1 + 0 Sym = X 1 and ∥ 0 S y m ∥ = 0 \lVert 0_{\mathrm{Sym}}\rVert=0 ∥ 0 Sym ∥ = 0 ,
F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , P , X 1 ) ≤ F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , p 1 , X 1 ) + ω ( τ 1 ) ≤ ε + ω ( τ 1 ) . F^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1},s_{1},P,X_{1})\le F^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1},s_{1},p_{1},X_{1})+\omega(\tau_{1})\le\varepsilon+\omega(\tau_{1}). F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , P , X 1 ) ≤ F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , p 1 , X 1 ) + ω ( τ 1 ) ≤ ε + ω ( τ 1 ) .
Apply the second condition to η 1 \eta_{1} η 1 with the perturbations P − q 1 P-q_{1} P − q 1 and 0 S y m 0_{\mathrm{Sym}} 0 Sym :
− ε − ω ( τ 2 ) ≤ F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , q 1 , Y 1 ) − ω ( τ 2 ) ≤ F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , P , Y 1 ) . -\varepsilon-\omega(\tau_{2})\le F^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1},t_{1},q_{1},Y_{1})-\omega(\tau_{2})\le F^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1},t_{1},P,Y_{1}). − ε − ω ( τ 2 ) ≤ F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , q 1 , Y 1 ) − ω ( τ 2 ) ≤ F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , P , Y 1 ) .
Step 5 (the structure condition). We have x 1 , y 1 ∈ D ( A ) = W x_{1},y_{1}\in D(A)=W x 1 , y 1 ∈ D ( A ) = W , ∣ t 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 ≤ 3 B + 2 |t_{1}|\le B+1\le3B+2 ∣ t 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 ≤ 3 B + 2 , 1 < α 1<\alpha 1 < α , 0 < δ < 1 0<\delta<1 0 < δ < 1 and P = α ( x 1 − y 1 ) P=\alpha(x_{1}-y_{1}) P = α ( x 1 − y 1 ) , so The First-Order Structure Condition for a Second-Order Equation Operator on a Hilbert Triple §triple , applied to the structure triple ( ω 1 , ω 2 , ω 3 ) (\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\omega_{3}) ( ω 1 , ω 2 , ω 3 ) at 3 B + 2 3B+2 3 B + 2 with the value argument t 1 t_{1} t 1 and the form arguments X 1 X_{1} X 1 and Y 1 Y_{1} Y 1 , gives
F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , P , Y 1 ) − ω 1 ( ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H ) − ω 2 ( α ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) − ω 3 ( δ α 2 ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) ≤ F δ − ( x 1 , t 1 , P , X 1 ) . F^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1},t_{1},P,Y_{1})-\omega_{1}\bigl(|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}\bigr)-\omega_{2}\bigl(\alpha|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}^{2}\bigr)-\omega_{3}\bigl(\delta\alpha^{2}|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}^{2}\bigr)\ \le\ F^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1},t_{1},P,X_{1}). F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , P , Y 1 ) − ω 1 ( ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H ) − ω 2 ( α ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) − ω 3 ( δ α 2 ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) ≤ F δ − ( x 1 , t 1 , P , X 1 ) .
Step 6 (properness and conclusion). Since ∣ s 1 − u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ < ε |s_{1}-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|<\varepsilon ∣ s 1 − u δ − ( x ^ ) ∣ < ε and ∣ t 1 − v δ + ( y ^ ) ∣ < ε |t_{1}-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})|<\varepsilon ∣ t 1 − v δ + ( y ^ ) ∣ < ε ,
u δ − ( x ^ ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) ≤ ( s 1 + ε ) − ( t 1 − ε ) = s 1 − t 1 + 2 ε . ( ∗ ) u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\le(s_{1}+\varepsilon)-(t_{1}-\varepsilon)=s_{1}-t_{1}+2\varepsilon . \tag{$*$} u δ − ( x ^ ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) ≤ ( s 1 + ε ) − ( t 1 − ε ) = s 1 − t 1 + 2 ε . ( ∗ )
Suppose first that t 1 ≤ s 1 t_{1}\le s_{1} t 1 ≤ s 1 . By Step 3 we have 0 ≤ δ h ( x 1 ) ≤ 2 B + 1 0\le\delta h(x_{1})\le2B+1 0 ≤ δ h ( x 1 ) ≤ 2 B + 1 , ∣ s 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 |s_{1}|\le B+1 ∣ s 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 and ∣ t 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 |t_{1}|\le B+1 ∣ t 1 ∣ ≤ B + 1 , so both s 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) s_{1}+\delta h(x_{1}) s 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) and t 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) t_{1}+\delta h(x_{1}) t 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) lie between − ( 3 B + 2 ) -(3B+2) − ( 3 B + 2 ) and 3 B + 2 3B+2 3 B + 2 , and t 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) ≤ s 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) t_{1}+\delta h(x_{1})\le s_{1}+\delta h(x_{1}) t 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) ≤ s 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) . Applying Locally Strictly Proper Second-Order Equation Operator on a Hilbert Triple §constant at the level 3 B + 2 3B+2 3 B + 2 , with the point x 1 x_{1} x 1 , the gradient argument P + δ A x 1 ∈ H P+\delta Ax_{1}\in H P + δ A x 1 ∈ H and the form argument X 1 ∣ V + δ I V ∈ S y m ( V ) X_{1}|_{V}+\delta I_{V}\in\mathrm{Sym}(V) X 1 ∣ V + δ I V ∈ Sym ( V ) , and reading the two resulting values of F F F through Second-Order Equation Operator on an Open Subset of a Hilbert Triple and Its δ \delta δ -Shifts §shifted , we obtain
λ ( s 1 − t 1 ) = λ ( ( s 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) ) − ( t 1 + δ h ( x 1 ) ) ) ≤ F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , P , X 1 ) − F δ − ( x 1 , t 1 , P , X 1 ) . \lambda(s_{1}-t_{1})=\lambda\bigl((s_{1}+\delta h(x_{1}))-(t_{1}+\delta h(x_{1}))\bigr)\le F^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1},s_{1},P,X_{1})-F^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1},t_{1},P,X_{1}). λ ( s 1 − t 1 ) = λ ( ( s 1 + δ h ( x 1 )) − ( t 1 + δ h ( x 1 )) ) ≤ F δ − ( x 1 , s 1 , P , X 1 ) − F δ − ( x 1 , t 1 , P , X 1 ) .
Combining this with Steps 4 and 5,
λ ( s 1 − t 1 ) ≤ ε + ω ( τ 1 ) − F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , P , Y 1 ) + ω 1 ( ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H ) + ω 2 ( α ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) + ω 3 ( δ α 2 ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) \lambda(s_{1}-t_{1})\le\varepsilon+\omega(\tau_{1})-F^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1},t_{1},P,Y_{1})+\omega_{1}\bigl(|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}\bigr)+\omega_{2}\bigl(\alpha|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}^{2}\bigr)+\omega_{3}\bigl(\delta\alpha^{2}|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}^{2}\bigr) λ ( s 1 − t 1 ) ≤ ε + ω ( τ 1 ) − F δ + ( y 1 , t 1 , P , Y 1 ) + ω 1 ( ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H ) + ω 2 ( α ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) + ω 3 ( δ α 2 ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 )
≤ 2 ε + ω ( τ 1 ) + ω ( τ 2 ) + ω 1 ( ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H ) + ω 2 ( α ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) + ω 3 ( δ α 2 ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) . \le\ 2\varepsilon+\omega(\tau_{1})+\omega(\tau_{2})+\omega_{1}\bigl(|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}\bigr)+\omega_{2}\bigl(\alpha|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}^{2}\bigr)+\omega_{3}\bigl(\delta\alpha^{2}|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}^{2}\bigr). ≤ 2 ε + ω ( τ 1 ) + ω ( τ 2 ) + ω 1 ( ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H ) + ω 2 ( α ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) + ω 3 ( δ α 2 ∣ x 1 − y 1 ∣ H 2 ) .
Multiplying ( ∗ ) (*) ( ∗ ) by the positive number λ \lambda λ and adding 2 λ ε 2\lambda\varepsilon 2 λ ε to the previous display gives the asserted estimate.
Suppose now that s 1 < t 1 s_{1}<t_{1} s 1 < t 1 . Then ( ∗ ) (*) ( ∗ ) gives u δ − ( x ^ ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) < 2 ε u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})<2\varepsilon u δ − ( x ^ ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) < 2 ε , so λ ( u δ − ( x ^ ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) ) < 2 λ ε \lambda\bigl(u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\bigr)<2\lambda\varepsilon λ ( u δ − ( x ^ ) − v δ + ( y ^ ) ) < 2 λ ε , and the asserted estimate holds because its remaining right-hand terms are nonnegative: the values of the moduli of continuity ω \omega ω , ω 1 \omega_{1} ω 1 , ω 2 \omega_{2} ω 2 , ω 3 \omega_{3} ω 3 are nonnegative by clause 1 of Modulus of Continuity , and 0 < 2 ε 0<2\varepsilon 0 < 2 ε .
In both cases x 1 , y 1 ∈ D ( A ) x_{1},y_{1}\in D(A) x 1 , y 1 ∈ D ( A ) satisfy ∣ x 1 − x ^ ∣ H < ε |x_{1}-\hat{x}|_{H}<\varepsilon ∣ x 1 − x ^ ∣ H < ε and ∣ y 1 − y ^ ∣ H < ε |y_{1}-\hat{y}|_{H}<\varepsilon ∣ y 1 − y ^ ∣ H < ε by Step 2, and τ 1 , τ 2 \tau_{1},\tau_{2} τ 1 , τ 2 satisfy the stated bounds by Step 4.