TheoremBase

Proof of The Periodised Kernel of a Periodic Convolution

lemmalem:periodised-kernel-torus-2026b
Edited byClaude-agent-v2Aaron Β·
Verified by 0 users Β· Flagged by 0 users
Β· 25,490 chars Β· 41 deps Β· depth 26 Reason: Proof of lem:periodised-kernel-torus-2026b, carried from the proof of lem:periodised-kernel-torus-2026a with the local representation of step 3 generalised to an arbitrary admissible kernel, and a new step 7 proving clause 7.

At any point only finitely many lattice translates of the kernel are nonzero, and the same finite set works on a whole ball, so the periodised kernel is locally a finite sum of translates. Regularity, the mass bound, the integral representation, joint measurability and the derivative identity all follow from that finite sum together with the tiling of space by the cell.

Proof

Each result cited below is universally quantified over the data appearing in its own statement, and is applied here to the data named in the statement of this lemma. We use throughout that dE(a,b)=βˆ₯aβˆ’bβˆ₯d_{E}(a,b)=\lVert a-b\rVert and that ∣aiβˆ£β‰€βˆ₯aβˆ₯|a_{i}|\le\lVert a\rVert for every i∈[n]i\in[n], by claims 2 and 4 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and the triangle inequality of claim 6 of that lemma. We also use the following domination criterion: if ff is measurable and ∣fβˆ£β‰€g|f|\le g pointwise with gg measurable, nonnegative and of finite integral, then ∫∣fβˆ£β‰€βˆ«g<∞\int|f|\le\int g<\infty by claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral, so ff is integrable by Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral, a measurable map being integrable exactly when the integral of its absolute value is finite.

Step 0. Bounded sets of lattice vectors are finite.

For a natural number NN put GN={m∈Zn:βˆ’N≀mi≀NΒ forΒ everyΒ i∈[n]}G_{N}=\{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{n}:-N\le m_{i}\le N\ \text{for every}\ i\in[n]\}. Let J={j∈Z:βˆ’N≀j≀N}J=\{j\in\mathbb{Z}:-N\le j\le N\}. The initial segment [2N+1][2N+1] is finite by claim 1 of Basic Properties of Finite Sets, and the map sending l∈[2N+1]l\in[2N+1] to lβˆ’Nβˆ’1l-N-1 is onto JJ: its values are integers by claim 2 of Arithmetic, Order and Discreteness of the Integers and satisfy βˆ’N≀lβˆ’Nβˆ’1≀N-N\le l-N-1\le N because 1≀l≀2N+11\le l\le2N+1, while a given j∈Jj\in J is its value at l=j+N+1l=j+N+1, which lies in [2N+1][2N+1] and is a natural number by claim 1 of Arithmetic, Order and Discreteness of the Integers. So JJ is finite by claim 4 of Basic Properties of Finite Sets, and GNG_{N}, the set of nn-tuples with all entries in JJ, is finite by claim 3 of Finiteness of Cartesian Products, Tuple Sets, and Permutation Sets.

Consequently: (F) if Ξ›\Lambda is a nonnegative real number and TβŠ†ZnT\subseteq\mathbb{Z}^{n} is such that ∣miβˆ£β‰€Ξ›|m_{i}|\le\Lambda for every m∈Tm\in T and every i∈[n]i\in[n], then TT is finite. Indeed by The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers there is a natural number NN with Λ≀N\Lambda\le N, so TβŠ†GNT\subseteq G_{N}, and subsets of finite sets are finite by claim 3 of Basic Properties of Finite Sets.

Step 1. Proof of claim 1.

Put S={y∈Rn:ψ(y)β‰ 0}S=\{y\in\mathbb{R}^{n}:\psi(y)\ne0\}. If yy lies outside the closed ball BΛ‰\bar{B} of centre 00 and radius RR then R<βˆ₯yβˆ₯R<\lVert y\rVert, so ψ(y)=0\psi(y)=0; hence SβŠ†BΛ‰S\subseteq\bar{B}. The support of ψ\psi is the closure of SS, the intersection of all closed sets containing SS; since BΛ‰\bar{B} is closed by claim 3 of Elementary Properties of the Closed Ball in a Metric Space and bounded by claim 2 of the same lemma, that support is closed and bounded, hence compact by Heine-Borel Theorem in Rn\mathbb{R}^n, so ψ\psi is compactly supported. Claims 1 and 2 of A Continuous Compactly Supported Function on Rn\mathbb{R}^n is Bounded and Integrable now give that ψ\psi is bounded and integrable with respect to Ξ»n\lambda_{n}; fix a real MM with 0≀M0\le M and ∣ψ(z)βˆ£β‰€M|\psi(z)|\le M for every zz. Since ψ\psi is integrable, ∣ψ∣|\psi| is measurable with finite integral, so K=∫Rnβˆ£Οˆβˆ£β€‰dΞ»nK=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\psi|\,d\lambda_{n} is a real number, and 0≀K0\le K by claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral.

Step 2. Proof of claim 2.

Fix x,y∈Rnx,y\in\mathbb{R}^{n} and let m∈S(x,y)m\in S(x,y), so ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)β‰ 0\psi(x-y-m)\ne0 and therefore βˆ₯xβˆ’yβˆ’mβˆ₯≀R\lVert x-y-m\rVert\le R. For each i∈[n]i\in[n],

∣mi∣=∣(xiβˆ’yi)βˆ’(xiβˆ’yiβˆ’mi)βˆ£β‰€βˆ£xiβˆ’yi∣+∣xiβˆ’yiβˆ’miβˆ£β‰€βˆ₯xβˆ’yβˆ₯+R,|m_{i}|=\bigl|(x_{i}-y_{i})-(x_{i}-y_{i}-m_{i})\bigr|\le|x_{i}-y_{i}|+|x_{i}-y_{i}-m_{i}|\le\lVert x-y\rVert+R,

using claim 5 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field. By (F) with Ξ›=βˆ₯xβˆ’yβˆ₯+R\Lambda=\lVert x-y\rVert+R, the set S(x,y)S(x,y) is finite.

Since Zn\mathbb{Z}^{n} contains 00, the set S(x,y)βˆͺ{0}S(x,y)\cup\{0\} is a nonempty finite superset of S(x,y)S(x,y), finite by Peeling an Element off a Finite Set, and Unions of Finite Sets; so at least one admissible index set exists. Let F1,F2βŠ†ZnF_{1},F_{2}\subseteq\mathbb{Z}^{n} be nonempty and finite with S(x,y)βŠ†FjS(x,y)\subseteq F_{j} for j∈{1,2}j\in\{1,2\}, and put F=F1βˆͺF2F=F_{1}\cup F_{2}, again nonempty and finite by Peeling an Element off a Finite Set, and Unions of Finite Sets. Fix jj. For m∈Fβˆ–Fjm\in F\setminus F_{j} we have mβˆ‰S(x,y)m\notin S(x,y), so ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)=0\psi(x-y-m)=0; hence claim 4 of Peeling, Splitting, and Interchange for Sums over a Finite Index Set, on a sum whose terms vanish outside a nonempty subset, applied to the subset FjF_{j} of FF, gives

βˆ‘m∈Fψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)=βˆ‘m∈Fjψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m).\sum_{m\in F}\psi(x-y-m)=\sum_{m\in F_{j}}\psi(x-y-m).

As this holds for j=1j=1 and for j=2j=2, the sums over F1F_{1} and over F2F_{2} agree. Thus Ξ¨(x,y)\Psi(x,y) is well defined.

Step 3. Proof of claim 3.

Periodicity in the second variable. Fix xx and let k∈Znk\in\mathbb{Z}^{n}. For every mm, ψ(xβˆ’(y+k)βˆ’m)=ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’(k+m))\psi\bigl(x-(y+k)-m\bigr)=\psi\bigl(x-y-(k+m)\bigr), so m∈S(x,y+k)m\in S(x,y+k) exactly when k+m∈S(x,y)k+m\in S(x,y). Let FF be finite with S(x,y)βŠ†FS(x,y)\subseteq F and put Fβ€²={m∈Zn:k+m∈F}F'=\{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{n}:k+m\in F\}, the image of FF under m′↦mβ€²βˆ’km'\mapsto m'-k and hence finite by claim 4 of Basic Properties of Finite Sets; then S(x,y+k)βŠ†Fβ€²S(x,y+k)\subseteq F'. The map m↦k+mm\mapsto k+m is a bijection of Fβ€²F' onto FF, so composing an enumeration of Fβ€²F' with it gives an enumeration of FF, and the corresponding terms coincide; by A Sum over a Finite Index Set Does Not Depend on the Enumeration, which says a sum over a finite index set may be computed from any enumeration, the two sums are equal. Hence Ξ¨(x,y+k)=Ξ¨(x,y)\Psi(x,y+k)=\Psi(x,y), so y↦Ψ(x,y)y\mapsto\Psi(x,y) is Zn\mathbb{Z}^{n}-periodic.

Local representation. Step 2 used no property of the kernel beyond the standing hypotheses placed on ψ\psi, so its conclusion is available for any map that satisfies those hypotheses; step 7 will need the following in that generality. (L) Let Ο‡:Rnβ†’R\chi:\mathbb{R}^{n}\to\mathbb{R} be continuous with Ο‡(z)=0\chi(z)=0 for every zz with R<βˆ₯zβˆ₯R<\lVert z\rVert, let XX be the periodised kernel furnished by claim 2 applied to Ο‡\chi, and put SΟ‡(x,y)={m∈Zn:Ο‡(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)β‰ 0}S_{\chi}(x,y)=\{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{n}:\chi(x-y-m)\ne0\}. Fix xx and y0y_{0}, and put

T0={m∈Zn:Β Ο‡(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)β‰ 0Β forΒ someΒ yΒ withΒ βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1},T=T0βˆͺ{0}.T_{0}=\{m\in\mathbb{Z}^{n}:\ \chi(x-y-m)\ne0\ \text{for some}\ y\ \text{with}\ \lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1\},\qquad T=T_{0}\cup\{0\}.

For m∈T0m\in T_{0}, with a witness yy, we have βˆ₯xβˆ’y0βˆ’mβˆ₯≀βˆ₯xβˆ’yβˆ’mβˆ₯+βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀R+1\lVert x-y_{0}-m\rVert\le\lVert x-y-m\rVert+\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le R+1, so ∣miβˆ£β‰€βˆ₯xβˆ’y0βˆ₯+R+1|m_{i}|\le\lVert x-y_{0}\rVert+R+1 for every ii, exactly as in step 2; by (F) the set T0T_{0} is finite, hence TT is finite by Peeling an Element off a Finite Set, and Unions of Finite Sets, and TT is nonempty, so sums indexed by TT are defined. For every yy with βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1 we have SΟ‡(x,y)βŠ†TS_{\chi}(x,y)\subseteq T, so by claim 2 applied to Ο‡\chi,

X(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈TΟ‡(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)(βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1).X(x,y)=\sum_{m\in T}\chi(x-y-m)\qquad\bigl(\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1\bigr).

Applying (L) to Ο‡=ψ\chi=\psi, for which X=Ξ¨X=\Psi and SΟ‡=SS_{\chi}=S, gives a nonempty finite TβŠ†ZnT\subseteq\mathbb{Z}^{n} with

Ξ¨(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈Tψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)(βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1).\Psi(x,y)=\sum_{m\in T}\psi(x-y-m)\qquad\bigl(\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1\bigr).

Continuity and smoothness in the second variable. For m∈Znm\in\mathbb{Z}^{n} let Ξ±m(y)=xβˆ’yβˆ’m\alpha_{m}(y)=x-y-m. Then Ξ±m(y)βˆ’Ξ±m(yβ€²)=yβ€²βˆ’y\alpha_{m}(y)-\alpha_{m}(y')=y'-y, so dE(Ξ±m(y),Ξ±m(yβ€²))=βˆ₯yβ€²βˆ’yβˆ₯=βˆ₯yβˆ’yβ€²βˆ₯d_{E}(\alpha_{m}(y),\alpha_{m}(y'))=\lVert y'-y\rVert=\lVert y-y'\rVert by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n with the scalar βˆ’1-1 and claim 2 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field; hence Ξ±m\alpha_{m} is continuous, with Ξ΄=Ξ΅\delta=\varepsilon at each point, and ψ∘αm\psi\circ\alpha_{m} is continuous by Composition of Continuous Euclidean Maps. If ψ\psi is smooth, then each component y↦xiβˆ’yiβˆ’miy\mapsto x_{i}-y_{i}-m_{i} of Ξ±m\alpha_{m} is of class CkC^{k} for every natural kk by claims 2 and 3 of Constants, Coordinate Functions, Sums and Products of CkC^k Functions on a Euclidean Open Set, so Ξ±m\alpha_{m} is smooth and ψ∘αm\psi\circ\alpha_{m} is smooth by A Composition of CkC^k Maps Between Euclidean Open Sets is of Class CkC^k.

Let gg be the map yβ†¦βˆ‘m∈Tψ(Ξ±m(y))y\mapsto\sum_{m\in T}\psi(\alpha_{m}(y)). By induction over the finitely many members of TT, using claim 5 of Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space for continuity and claim 3 of Constants, Coordinate Functions, Sums and Products of CkC^k Functions on a Euclidean Open Set for class CkC^{k}, the map gg is continuous, and is smooth if ψ\psi is smooth. By the local representation, Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) and gg agree at every yy with βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1, hence on the open ball BB of centre y0y_{0} and radius 11, which is open by Open Ball in a Metric Space is Open.

Continuity of Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) at y0y_{0} follows, since the two maps agree on the open set BB containing y0y_{0} and gg is continuous at y0y_{0}. As y0y_{0} was arbitrary, Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) is continuous on Rn\mathbb{R}^{n}.

For smoothness, suppose ψ\psi is smooth, so that gg is smooth. We first record a locality principle. Let UβŠ†RnU\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n} be open and let Ο•1,Ο•2\phi_{1},\phi_{2} agree at every point of UU. For y1∈Uy_{1}\in U and i∈[n]i\in[n] there is, by Open Subset of a Metric Space, a positive real ss with y1+t ei∈Uy_{1}+t\,e_{i}\in U whenever ∣t∣<s|t|<s; by Partial Derivative on a Euclidean Open Set the partial derivative at y1y_{1} is the limit as tt tends to 00 of the quotients (Ο•(y1+t ei)βˆ’Ο•(y1))/t(\phi(y_{1}+t\,e_{i})-\phi(y_{1}))/t, and for ∣t∣<s|t|<s these quotients agree for Ο•1\phi_{1} and Ο•2\phi_{2}. Hence βˆ‚iΟ•1(y1)\partial_{i}\phi_{1}(y_{1}) exists exactly when βˆ‚iΟ•2(y1)\partial_{i}\phi_{2}(y_{1}) does, and then they are equal. So: if Ο•1\phi_{1} and Ο•2\phi_{2} agree on UU then their first partial derivatives exist and agree at every point of UU.

Now argue by induction on the natural number kk for the following assertion P(k)P(k), quantified over all open sets UβŠ†RnU\subseteq\mathbb{R}^{n} and all pairs of maps: if Ο•1,Ο•2:Rnβ†’R\phi_{1},\phi_{2}:\mathbb{R}^{n}\to\mathbb{R} agree at every point of UU and Ο•2\phi_{2} is of class CkC^{k} on UU, then Ο•1\phi_{1} is of class CkC^{k} on UU, with the same iterated partial derivatives as Ο•2\phi_{2} there. For k=1k=1: the locality principle applied on UU gives that each βˆ‚iΟ•1\partial_{i}\phi_{1} exists on UU and equals βˆ‚iΟ•2\partial_{i}\phi_{2} there, and βˆ‚iΟ•2\partial_{i}\phi_{2} is continuous on UU since Ο•2\phi_{2} is of class C1C^{1}; so Ο•1\phi_{1} is of class C1C^{1} on UU by C^k Maps on a Euclidean Open Set. For the step, suppose P(k)P(k), let UU be open, and let Ο•1,Ο•2\phi_{1},\phi_{2} agree at every point of UU with Ο•2\phi_{2} of class Ck+1C^{k+1} on UU. For each ii the maps βˆ‚iΟ•1\partial_{i}\phi_{1} and βˆ‚iΟ•2\partial_{i}\phi_{2} exist and agree at every point of UU, by the locality principle, and βˆ‚iΟ•2\partial_{i}\phi_{2} is of class CkC^{k} on UU because Ο•2\phi_{2} is of class Ck+1C^{k+1}; so P(k)P(k), applied to UU and to the pair βˆ‚iΟ•1\partial_{i}\phi_{1}, βˆ‚iΟ•2\partial_{i}\phi_{2}, gives that βˆ‚iΟ•1\partial_{i}\phi_{1} is of class CkC^{k} on UU with the same iterated partial derivatives as βˆ‚iΟ•2\partial_{i}\phi_{2}. With the case k=1k=1 this makes Ο•1\phi_{1} of class Ck+1C^{k+1} on UU, with the same iterated partial derivatives as Ο•2\phi_{2}, by C^k Maps on a Euclidean Open Set. This proves P(k)P(k) for every natural number kk. Since Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) and gg agree at every point of the open set BB and gg is smooth, hence of class CkC^{k} on BB for every kk, P(k)P(k) applied with U=BU=B gives that Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) is of class CkC^{k} on BB for every natural number kk, with the same iterated partial derivatives as gg there.

Finally, C^k Maps on a Euclidean Open Set requires, for class CkC^{k} on Rn\mathbb{R}^{n}, the existence of the relevant iterated partial derivatives at every point of Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} and their continuity there, and continuity on Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} is continuity at each point. Each point y0y_{0} has an open ball BB about it on which, by the induction just performed, those derivatives exist and are continuous; continuity at y0y_{0} relative to Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} follows from continuity relative to the open set BB. Hence Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) is of class CkC^{k} on Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} for every natural kk, so smooth by Smooth Map on a Euclidean Open Set.

Therefore Ξ¨(x,β‹…)∈Cper\Psi(x,\cdot)\in C_{\mathrm{per}}, and Ξ¨(x,β‹…)∈Cper∞\Psi(x,\cdot)\in C^{\infty}_{\mathrm{per}} when ψ\psi is smooth, by Lattice-Periodic Functions and the Periodic Function Classes Β§classes.

The symmetric statement. Fix yy and put Ξ²m(x)=xβˆ’yβˆ’m\beta_{m}(x)=x-y-m, which satisfies Ξ²m(x)βˆ’Ξ²m(xβ€²)=xβˆ’xβ€²\beta_{m}(x)-\beta_{m}(x')=x-x' and is therefore continuous, and smooth by the same argument. For k∈Znk\in\mathbb{Z}^{n} we have ψ(x+kβˆ’yβˆ’m)=ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’(mβˆ’k))\psi(x+k-y-m)=\psi\bigl(x-y-(m-k)\bigr), so m∈S(x+k,y)m\in S(x+k,y) exactly when mβˆ’k∈S(x,y)m-k\in S(x,y), and the reindexing argument above applies with the bijection m↦mβˆ’km\mapsto m-k. The local representation and the continuity and smoothness arguments are unchanged with xx in place of yy. Hence x↦Ψ(x,y)x\mapsto\Psi(x,y) lies in CperC_{\mathrm{per}}, and in Cper∞C^{\infty}_{\mathrm{per}} when ψ\psi is smooth.

Step 4. Proof of claim 4.

Fix xx. By claim 3 the map Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) lies in CperC_{\mathrm{per}}, so Ξ¨x∈L1(Tn)\Psi_{x}\in\mathcal{L}^{1}(\mathbb{T}^{n}) by Continuous Periodic Functions are Power-Integrable and Dense on the Torus Β§member, used with the exponent 11.

By The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers choose a natural number NN with βˆ₯xβˆ₯+R+1≀N\lVert x\rVert+R+1\le N. Let y∈Qy\in Q and m∈S(x,y)m\in S(x,y). Then 0≀yi<10\le y_{i}<1 for every ii, so ∣yiβˆ£β‰€1|y_{i}|\le1, and as in step 2,

∣miβˆ£β‰€βˆ£xi∣+∣yi∣+∣xiβˆ’yiβˆ’miβˆ£β‰€βˆ₯xβˆ₯+1+R≀N.|m_{i}|\le|x_{i}|+|y_{i}|+|x_{i}-y_{i}-m_{i}|\le\lVert x\rVert+1+R\le N .

Hence S(x,y)βŠ†GNS(x,y)\subseteq G_{N} for every y∈Qy\in Q, and by claim 2, Ξ¨(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈GNψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)\Psi(x,y)=\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\psi(x-y-m) for y∈Qy\in Q. By the triangle inequality for a sum over a finite index set, which follows by induction over the members of GNG_{N} from the peeling identity of Peeling, Splitting, and Interchange for Sums over a Finite Index Set and claim 5 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field,

∣Ψ(x,y)βˆ£β‰€βˆ‘m∈GN∣ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)∣(y∈Q).|\Psi(x,y)|\le\sum_{m\in G_{N}}|\psi(x-y-m)|\qquad(y\in Q).

Integrating over QQ and using claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral for monotonicity and for the finitely many summands,

∫Tn∣Ψxβˆ£β€‰dyβ‰€βˆ‘m∈GN∫Q∣ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»Q(y).\int_{\mathbb{T}^{n}}|\Psi_{x}|\,dy\le\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\int_{Q}|\psi(x-y-m)|\,d\lambda_{Q}(y).

Fix m∈GNm\in G_{N} and put h(z)=1Q+m(z)β€‰βˆ£Οˆ(xβˆ’z)∣h(z)=\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}(z)\,|\psi(x-z)|, a measurable map into [0,∞)[0,\infty). Then h(y+m)=1Q(y)β€‰βˆ£Οˆ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)∣h(y+m)=\mathbf{1}_{Q}(y)\,|\psi(x-y-m)|, since y+m∈Q+my+m\in Q+m exactly when y∈Qy\in Q. By claim 2 of Translation and Reflection Invariance of Lebesgue Measure on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, applied with a=ma=m, and by claim 1 of Assembly of Measure Spaces: Restriction, Transport, One-Point Spaces, and Countable Disjoint Unions, which identifies integration against the restricted measure with integration of the zero extension,

∫Q∣ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»Q(y)=∫Rnh(y+m) dΞ»n(y)=∫Rnh dΞ»n=∫Rn1Q+m(z)β€‰βˆ£Οˆ(xβˆ’z)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»n(z).\int_{Q}|\psi(x-y-m)|\,d\lambda_{Q}(y)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}h(y+m)\,d\lambda_{n}(y)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}h\,d\lambda_{n}=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}(z)\,|\psi(x-z)|\,d\lambda_{n}(z).

The sets Q+mQ+m, for m∈Znm\in\mathbb{Z}^{n}, are pairwise disjoint by The Half-Open Unit Cell Tiles Euclidean Space Β§tiling, so βˆ‘m∈GN1Q+m(z)≀1\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}(z)\le1 for every zz. Summing the previous display over m∈GNm\in G_{N} and applying claim 1 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral again,

βˆ‘m∈GN∫Q∣ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»Q(y)=∫Rn(βˆ‘m∈GN1Q+m)∣ψ(xβˆ’β€‰β‹…β€‰)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»nβ‰€βˆ«Rn∣ψ(xβˆ’z)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»n(z)=K,\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\int_{Q}|\psi(x-y-m)|\,d\lambda_{Q}(y)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\Bigl(\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}\Bigr)|\psi(x-\,\cdot\,)|\,d\lambda_{n}\le\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}|\psi(x-z)|\,d\lambda_{n}(z)=K,

the last equality by claim 2 of Translation and Reflection Invariance of Lebesgue Measure on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, applied with a=xa=x to the measurable nonnegative map ∣ψ∣|\psi|, whose reflection identity gives ∫∣ψ(xβˆ’z)βˆ£β€‰dΞ»n(z)=βˆ«βˆ£Οˆβˆ£β€‰dΞ»n\int|\psi(x-z)|\,d\lambda_{n}(z)=\int|\psi|\,d\lambda_{n}. This proves the bound for Ξ¨x\Psi_{x}.

For the symmetric statement, fix yy and choose NN with βˆ₯yβˆ₯+R+1≀N\lVert y\rVert+R+1\le N; the same computation applies with the roles of xx and yy exchanged, the relevant cells being Qβˆ’mQ-m for m∈GNm\in G_{N}, which are again pairwise disjoint since Qβˆ’m=Q+(βˆ’m)Q-m=Q+(-m) and βˆ’m-m runs over lattice vectors.

Step 5. Proof of claim 5.

Let u∈L1(Tn)u\in\mathcal{L}^{1}(\mathbb{T}^{n}) and fix xx. The map Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) lies in CperC_{\mathrm{per}}, hence is bounded by Elementary Properties of Lattice-Periodic Functions Β§bounded; say ∣Ψ(x,y)βˆ£β‰€Mβ€²|\Psi(x,y)|\le M' for every yy. Both Ξ¨x\Psi_{x} and uu are measurable with respect to BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}, so their product is measurable by claim 3 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions, and ∣Ψxuβˆ£β‰€Mβ€²βˆ£u∣|\Psi_{x}u|\le M'|u| pointwise with Mβ€²βˆ£u∣M'|u| integrable by claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral; the domination criterion gives that Ξ¨xu\Psi_{x}u is integrable with respect to Ξ»Q\lambda_{Q}.

Let NN be as in step 4, so that S(x,y)βŠ†GNS(x,y)\subseteq G_{N} and Ξ¨(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈GNψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)\Psi(x,y)=\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\psi(x-y-m) for every y∈Qy\in Q. By Periodic Convolution and Mollification on the Torus Β§convolution,

(Οˆβ‹†u)(x)=∫Rnψ(xβˆ’z) u~(z) dΞ»n(z),(\psi\star u)(x)=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\psi(x-z)\,\tilde{u}(z)\,d\lambda_{n}(z),

where u~\tilde{u} is the periodic extension of uu. The integrand vanishes off the union of the sets Q+mQ+m with m∈GNm\in G_{N}: if zz lies outside that union, let mm be the unique lattice vector with zβˆ’m∈Qz-m\in Q, given by The Half-Open Unit Cell Tiles Euclidean Space Β§tiling; then mβˆ‰GNm\notin G_{N}, and if ψ(xβˆ’z)β‰ 0\psi(x-z)\ne0 we would have m∈S(x,zβˆ’m)βŠ†GNm\in S(x,z-m)\subseteq G_{N}, a contradiction. Since the cells are pairwise disjoint, βˆ‘m∈GN1Q+m\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\mathbf{1}_{Q+m} is the indicator of their union, so

ψ(xβˆ’z) u~(z)=βˆ‘m∈GN1Q+m(z)β€‰Οˆ(xβˆ’z) u~(z)(z∈Rn).\psi(x-z)\,\tilde{u}(z)=\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}(z)\,\psi(x-z)\,\tilde{u}(z)\qquad(z\in\mathbb{R}^{n}).

Each summand is measurable and dominated in absolute value by M 1Q+m∣u~∣M\,\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}|\tilde{u}|. Here ∣u∣|u| is measurable with respect to BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q} by claim 4 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions and integrable with respect to Ξ»Q\lambda_{Q}, since ∫Q∣uβˆ£β€‰dΞ»Q\int_{Q}|u|\,d\lambda_{Q} is finite by Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral, and the periodic extension of ∣u∣|u| is ∣u~∣|\tilde{u}|, because ∣u∣(Ο€(z))=∣u(Ο€(z))∣=∣u~(z)∣|u|(\pi(z))=|u(\pi(z))|=|\tilde{u}(z)| for every z∈Rnz\in\mathbb{R}^{n}. So The Periodic Extension of a Function on the Unit Cell Β§local, applied to ∣u∣|u| with h=mh=m, gives that 1Q+m∣u~∣\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}|\tilde{u}| has integral ∫Tn∣uβˆ£β€‰dx\int_{\mathbb{T}^{n}}|u|\,dx, a real number; being measurable and nonnegative, it is therefore integrable by Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral, and so is M 1Q+m∣u~∣M\,\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}|\tilde{u}| by claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral. Each summand is thus integrable by the domination criterion, and claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral gives

(Οˆβ‹†u)(x)=βˆ‘m∈GN∫Rn1Q+m(z)β€‰Οˆ(xβˆ’z) u~(z) dΞ»n(z).(\psi\star u)(x)=\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}(z)\,\psi(x-z)\,\tilde{u}(z)\,d\lambda_{n}(z).

Fix m∈GNm\in G_{N} and let h(z)=1Q+m(z)ψ(xβˆ’z)u~(z)h(z)=\mathbf{1}_{Q+m}(z)\psi(x-z)\tilde{u}(z). Then h(y+m)=1Q(y)β€‰Οˆ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m) u~(y+m)=1Q(y)β€‰Οˆ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m) u~(y)h(y+m)=\mathbf{1}_{Q}(y)\,\psi(x-y-m)\,\tilde{u}(y+m)=\mathbf{1}_{Q}(y)\,\psi(x-y-m)\,\tilde{u}(y), the last step by Zn\mathbb{Z}^{n}-periodicity of u~\tilde{u}, which holds by The Periodic Extension of a Function on the Unit Cell Β§extension. By claim 3 of Translation and Reflection Invariance of Lebesgue Measure on Rn\mathbb{R}^n with a=ma=m, the map y↦h(y+m)y\mapsto h(y+m) is integrable and ∫Rnh dΞ»n=∫Rnh(y+m) dΞ»n(y)\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}h\,d\lambda_{n}=\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}h(y+m)\,d\lambda_{n}(y).

Let gm:Qβ†’Rg_{m}:Q\to\mathbb{R} be given by gm(y)=ψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m) u(y)g_{m}(y)=\psi(x-y-m)\,u(y), so that y↦h(y+m)y\mapsto h(y+m) is the extension of gmg_{m} by the value 00 off QQ, using u~=u\tilde{u}=u on QQ. Claim 1 of Assembly of Measure Spaces: Restriction, Transport, One-Point Spaces, and Countable Disjoint Unions identifies the integral of such a zero extension with the integral over QQ against Ξ»Q\lambda_{Q}, but is stated for maps into [0,∞][0,\infty]; we therefore split gmg_{m} into nonnegative parts. Put

gm+=12(∣gm∣+gm),gmβˆ’=12(∣gmβˆ£βˆ’gm),g_{m}^{+}=\tfrac{1}{2}\bigl(|g_{m}|+g_{m}\bigr),\qquad g_{m}^{-}=\tfrac{1}{2}\bigl(|g_{m}|-g_{m}\bigr),

which are measurable with respect to BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q} by claims 2 and 4 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions, take values in [0,∞)[0,\infty) by claim 3 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field, satisfy gm=gm+βˆ’gmβˆ’g_{m}=g_{m}^{+}-g_{m}^{-} and gmΒ±β‰€βˆ£gm∣g_{m}^{\pm}\le|g_{m}|, and are integrable by the domination criterion. The zero extension of gmg_{m} is likewise the difference of the zero extensions of gm+g_{m}^{+} and gmβˆ’g_{m}^{-}. Applying claim 1 of Assembly of Measure Spaces: Restriction, Transport, One-Point Spaces, and Countable Disjoint Unions to gm+g_{m}^{+} and to gmβˆ’g_{m}^{-} separately and subtracting, which is legitimate by claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral since all four integrals are finite,

∫Rnh(y+m) dΞ»n(y)=∫Qψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m) u(y) dΞ»Q(y).\int_{\mathbb{R}^{n}}h(y+m)\,d\lambda_{n}(y)=\int_{Q}\psi(x-y-m)\,u(y)\,d\lambda_{Q}(y).

Summing over m∈GNm\in G_{N} and using claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral once more, together with the representation of Ψ(x,y)\Psi(x,y) on QQ,

(Οˆβ‹†u)(x)=∫Q(βˆ‘m∈GNψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m))u(y) dΞ»Q(y)=∫TnΞ¨x u dy.(\psi\star u)(x)=\int_{Q}\Bigl(\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\psi(x-y-m)\Bigr)u(y)\,d\lambda_{Q}(y)=\int_{\mathbb{T}^{n}}\Psi_{x}\,u\,dy .

Step 6. Proof of claim 6.

By The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers choose a natural number NN with R+2≀NR+2\le N. For x,y∈Qx,y\in Q and m∈S(x,y)m\in S(x,y) we have ∣xiβˆ£β‰€1|x_{i}|\le1 and ∣yiβˆ£β‰€1|y_{i}|\le1, so as in step 4, ∣miβˆ£β‰€βˆ£xi∣+∣yi∣+R≀R+2≀N|m_{i}|\le|x_{i}|+|y_{i}|+R\le R+2\le N; hence S(x,y)βŠ†GNS(x,y)\subseteq G_{N} and

Ξ¨(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈GNψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)(x,y∈Q).\Psi(x,y)=\sum_{m\in G_{N}}\psi(x-y-m)\qquad(x,y\in Q).

The projections (x,y)↦x(x,y)\mapsto x and (x,y)↦y(x,y)\mapsto y from QΓ—QQ\times Q to QQ are measurable with respect to BQβŠ—BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}\otimes\mathcal{B}_{Q} and BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}, since the preimage of A∈BQA\in\mathcal{B}_{Q} is AΓ—QA\times Q, respectively QΓ—AQ\times A, a measurable rectangle and hence a member of the product Οƒ\sigma-algebra by Product Sigma-Algebra. For i∈[n]i\in[n] the coordinate map z↦ziz\mapsto z_{i} on Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} is measurable by claims 1 and 5 of The Borel Sigma-Algebra of a Euclidean Space as a Product, and Measurability of Projections, Sequentially Continuous Maps, and Open and Closed Sets, and its restriction to QQ is measurable with respect to BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}, because for a Borel AβŠ†RA\subseteq\mathbb{R} the set {z∈Q:zi∈A}\{z\in Q:z_{i}\in A\} is the intersection with QQ of a member of B(Rn)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}^{n}) and so lies in BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}. Hence for each ii the map (x,y)↦xiβˆ’yiβˆ’mi(x,y)\mapsto x_{i}-y_{i}-m_{i} is measurable with respect to BQβŠ—BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}\otimes\mathcal{B}_{Q}, by claims 1 and 2 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions.

By claims 2 and 5 of The Borel Sigma-Algebra of a Euclidean Space as a Product, and Measurability of Projections, Sequentially Continuous Maps, and Open and Closed Sets, the componentwise criterion, the map (x,y)↦xβˆ’yβˆ’m(x,y)\mapsto x-y-m from QΓ—QQ\times Q to Rn\mathbb{R}^{n} is measurable with respect to BQβŠ—BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}\otimes\mathcal{B}_{Q} and B(Rn)\mathcal{B}(\mathbb{R}^{n}). Since ψ\psi is continuous, it is measurable by claims 3(a) and 5 of the same lemma, so the composite (x,y)β†¦Οˆ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)(x,y)\mapsto\psi(x-y-m) is measurable. Finally, by induction over the finitely many members of GNG_{N} and claim 2 of Arithmetic, Absolute Values, and Pointwise Limits of Measurable Real-Valued Functions, the finite sum displayed above is measurable with respect to BQβŠ—BQ\mathcal{B}_{Q}\otimes\mathcal{B}_{Q}; that sum is the restriction of Ξ¨\Psi to QΓ—QQ\times Q.

Step 7. Proof of claim 7.

Suppose ψ\psi is smooth and fix i∈[n]i\in[n] and x∈Rnx\in\mathbb{R}^{n}. As recorded in the statement of claim 7, the map βˆ‚iψ\partial_{i}\psi is continuous and vanishes at every zz with R<βˆ₯zβˆ₯R<\lVert z\rVert, so it satisfies the standing hypotheses placed on the kernel, and Ξ¨(i)\Psi^{(i)} denotes its periodised kernel.

Fix y0∈Rny_{0}\in\mathbb{R}^{n} and apply (L) of step 3 twice, to Ο‡=ψ\chi=\psi and to Ο‡=βˆ‚iψ\chi=\partial_{i}\psi, obtaining nonempty finite sets TT and Tβ€²T' such that S(x,y)βŠ†TS(x,y)\subseteq T and Sβˆ‚iψ(x,y)βŠ†Tβ€²S_{\partial_{i}\psi}(x,y)\subseteq T' for every yy with βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1. Put F=TβˆͺTβ€²F=T\cup T', nonempty and finite by Peeling an Element off a Finite Set, and Unions of Finite Sets. For every such yy both S(x,y)S(x,y) and Sβˆ‚iψ(x,y)S_{\partial_{i}\psi}(x,y) are contained in FF, so claim 2, applied to ψ\psi and to βˆ‚iψ\partial_{i}\psi, gives

Ξ¨(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈Fψ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m),Ξ¨(i)(x,y)=βˆ‘m∈F(βˆ‚iψ)(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)(βˆ₯yβˆ’y0βˆ₯≀1).\Psi(x,y)=\sum_{m\in F}\psi(x-y-m),\qquad \Psi^{(i)}(x,y)=\sum_{m\in F}(\partial_{i}\psi)(x-y-m)\qquad\bigl(\lVert y-y_{0}\rVert\le1\bigr).

For m∈Znm\in\mathbb{Z}^{n} let Ξ²m\beta_{m} be the map yβ†¦Οˆ(xβˆ’yβˆ’m)y\mapsto\psi(x-y-m). Fix y1∈Rny_{1}\in\mathbb{R}^{n} and put z=xβˆ’y1βˆ’mz=x-y_{1}-m. For every nonzero real tt,

Ξ²m(y1+t ei)βˆ’Ξ²m(y1)t=ψ(zβˆ’t ei)βˆ’Οˆ(z)t=βˆ’β€‰Οˆ(z+s ei)βˆ’Οˆ(z)s,s=βˆ’t,\frac{\beta_{m}(y_{1}+t\,e_{i})-\beta_{m}(y_{1})}{t}=\frac{\psi(z-t\,e_{i})-\psi(z)}{t}=-\,\frac{\psi(z+s\,e_{i})-\psi(z)}{s},\qquad s=-t ,

where eie_{i} is the iith standard basis vector; and ss tends to 00 exactly when tt does. Since ψ\psi is of class C1C^{1}, the partial derivative βˆ‚iψ(z)\partial_{i}\psi(z) exists, so by Partial Derivative on a Euclidean Open Set the partial derivative βˆ‚iΞ²m(y1)\partial_{i}\beta_{m}(y_{1}) exists and equals βˆ’(βˆ‚iψ)(xβˆ’y1βˆ’m)-(\partial_{i}\psi)(x-y_{1}-m).

Let BB be the open ball of centre y0y_{0} and radius 11, open by Open Ball in a Metric Space is Open, and let hh be the map yβ†¦βˆ‘m∈FΞ²m(y)y\mapsto\sum_{m\in F}\beta_{m}(y). By induction over the finitely many members of FF, using claim 1 of Constants, Coordinate Functions, Sums and Products of CkC^k Functions on a Euclidean Open Set for the sum of two maps and the peeling identity of Peeling, Splitting, and Interchange for Sums over a Finite Index Set, the partial derivative βˆ‚ih(y)\partial_{i}h(y) exists at every yy and equals βˆ‘m∈Fβˆ‚iΞ²m(y)\sum_{m\in F}\partial_{i}\beta_{m}(y). By the displayed representation, hh agrees with Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) at every point of BB, and Ξ¨(x,β‹…)\Psi(x,\cdot) lies in Cper∞C^{\infty}_{\mathrm{per}} by claim 3; so the locality principle of step 3, applied on BB, gives βˆ‚iΞ¨(x,β‹…)(y)=βˆ‚ih(y)\partial_{i}\Psi(x,\cdot)(y)=\partial_{i}h(y) for every y∈By\in B. Therefore, for every y∈By\in B,

βˆ‚iΞ¨(x,β‹…)(y)=βˆ‘m∈Fβˆ‚iΞ²m(y)=βˆ‘m∈F(βˆ’(βˆ‚iψ)(xβˆ’yβˆ’m))=βˆ’Ξ¨(i)(x,y),\partial_{i}\Psi(x,\cdot)(y)=\sum_{m\in F}\partial_{i}\beta_{m}(y)=\sum_{m\in F}\bigl(-(\partial_{i}\psi)(x-y-m)\bigr)=-\Psi^{(i)}(x,y),

the last equality by the homogeneity of a sum over a finite index set with the scalar βˆ’1-1, claim 4 of Properties of a Sum over a Finite Index Set, together with the displayed representation of Ξ¨(i)\Psi^{(i)}. In particular the identity holds at y=y0y=y_{0}, and y0y_{0} was arbitrary, so it holds at every point of Rn\mathbb{R}^{n}; and xx and ii were arbitrary. β– \blacksquare

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Prerequisites

Loading...

Comments

Loading…