TheoremBase

Assuming the uniform estimate fails, the doubled envelopes have suprema bounded below by a positive number for every doubling parameter; a linear perturbation produces an exact maximum point, the penalised-supremum lemma makes the penalty small along a doubling sequence, and the test-datum estimate then bounds the positive number by an arbitrarily small quantity, a contradiction.

Proof

Each result cited is universally quantified over the data in its own statement. Replacing CC by ∣C∣|C| if necessary, we may assume 0≤C0\le C: indeed u(x)≤C≤∣C∣u(x)\le C\le|C| and −∣C∣≤−C≤v(x)-|C|\le-C\le v(x) for every x∈Hx\in H.

Notation. Let J={δ∈R:0<δ<1}J=\{\delta\in\mathbb{R}:0<\delta<1\}. For δ∈J\delta\in J the δ\delta-envelopes uδ−u^{-}_{\delta} and vδ+v^{+}_{\delta} are defined on VV, and by Basic Properties of the δ\delta-Envelopes: Semicontinuity, Duality, Closed Superlevel Sets, Bounds and Monotonicity (iv)

uδ−(x)≤C−δh(x)≤C−δ2∣x∣H2,−vδ+(y)≤C−δh(y)≤C−δ2∣y∣H2(x,y∈V),(i)u^{-}_{\delta}(x)\le C-\delta h(x)\le C-\tfrac{\delta}{2}|x|_{H}^{2},\qquad -v^{+}_{\delta}(y)\le C-\delta h(y)\le C-\tfrac{\delta}{2}|y|_{H}^{2}\qquad(x,y\in V), \tag{i}

and by Basic Properties of the δ\delta-Envelopes: Semicontinuity, Duality, Closed Superlevel Sets, Bounds and Monotonicity (iii) both uδ−u^{-}_{\delta} and −vδ+-v^{+}_{\delta} have closed superlevel sets in HH. The set VV is nonempty, since D(A)∩HD(A)\cap H is dense in HH by The Penalty Function h=12∣⋅∣V2h=\tfrac12|\cdot|_V^2 of a Hilbert Triple: Expansion Identities, Closed Sublevel Sets, Density and Local Bounds (v); fix x∗∈Vx_{*}\in V.

For δ∈J\delta\in J and real α>1\alpha>1 let Φδ,α:V×V→R\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}:V\times V\to\mathbb{R} be given by

Φδ,α(x,y)=uδ−(x)−vδ+(y)−α2∣x−y∣H2.\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y)=u^{-}_{\delta}(x)-v^{+}_{\delta}(y)-\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|x-y|_{H}^{2}.

By (i) and Closed Superlevel Sets of a Sum on a Product Space and of a Doubled Function (ii), applied with u1=uδ−u_{1}=u^{-}_{\delta}, u2=−vδ+u_{2}=-v^{+}_{\delta}, C1=C2=CC_{1}=C_{2}=C and κ=δ2\kappa=\tfrac{\delta}{2}, the function Φδ,α\Phi_{\delta,\alpha} has closed superlevel sets in H×HH\times H and

Φδ,α(x,y)≤2C−δ2∣(x,y)∣2for all (x,y)∈V×V.(ii)\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y)\le 2C-\tfrac{\delta}{2}|(x,y)|^{2}\qquad\text{for all }(x,y)\in V\times V. \tag{ii}

Let M(δ,α)M(\delta,\alpha) be the supremum of the values of Φδ,α\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}, and let N(α)N(\alpha) be the supremum of the set of all numbers Φδ,α(x,y)\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y) with δ∈J\delta\in J and (x,y)∈V×V(x,y)\in V\times V. Both are real numbers, and the needed properties come from Penalised Suprema: Monotonicity, Near-Maximisers, and Vanishing Penalty along a Doubling Sequence: applied with Z=V×VZ=V\times V, ψ(x,y)=uδ−(x)−vδ+(y)\psi(x,y)=u^{-}_{\delta}(x)-v^{+}_{\delta}(y), which is bounded above by 2C2C by (i), D(x,y)=12∣x−y∣H2D(x,y)=\tfrac12|x-y|_{H}^{2} and z0=(x∗,x∗)z_{0}=(x_{*},x_{*}), it gives claims 1 to 3 for the function α↦M(δ,α)\alpha\mapsto M(\delta,\alpha); applied with Z=J×V×VZ=J\times V\times V, ψ(δ,x,y)=uδ−(x)−vδ+(y)\psi(\delta,x,y)=u^{-}_{\delta}(x)-v^{+}_{\delta}(y), D(δ,x,y)=12∣x−y∣H2D(\delta,x,y)=\tfrac12|x-y|_{H}^{2} and z0=(12,x∗,x∗)z_{0}=(\tfrac12,x_{*},x_{*}), it gives claims 1, 2 and 4 for NN. In particular, with αk=2k+1\alpha_{k}=2^{k+1} for k∈Nk\in\mathbb{N},

the sequence whose k-th term is N(αk)−N(αk+1) converges to 0,(iii)\text{the sequence whose }k\text{-th term is }N(\alpha_{k})-N(\alpha_{k+1})\text{ converges to }0, \tag{iii}

this being claim 4 with β0=2\beta_{0}=2. Moreover M(δ,α)≤N(α)M(\delta,\alpha)\le N(\alpha) for every δ∈J\delta\in J, and by Basic Properties of the δ\delta-Envelopes: Semicontinuity, Duality, Closed Superlevel Sets, Bounds and Monotonicity (v) we have uδ′−≤uδ−u^{-}_{\delta'}\le u^{-}_{\delta} and vδ+≤vδ′+v^{+}_{\delta}\le v^{+}_{\delta'} on VV whenever δ≤δ′\delta\le\delta' in JJ, so

M(δ′,α)≤M(δ,α)for δ,δ′∈J with δ≤δ′.(iv)M(\delta',\alpha)\le M(\delta,\alpha)\qquad\text{for }\delta,\delta'\in J\text{ with }\delta\le\delta'. \tag{iv}

Proof of claim 1. Suppose the claim fails. Then there is a positive ϵ0∈R\epsilon_{0}\in\mathbb{R} such that for every positive θ∈R\theta\in\mathbb{R} there are x,y∈Vx,y\in V with ∣x−y∣H≤θ|x-y|_{H}\le\theta and ϵ0<u(x)−v(y)\epsilon_{0}<u(x)-v(y).

Step 1. ϵ0≤N(α)\epsilon_{0}\le N(\alpha) for every real α>1\alpha>1. Let α>1\alpha>1 and let μ∈R\mu\in\mathbb{R} be positive. Choose a positive θ\theta with α2θ2≤μ2\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\theta^{2}\le\tfrac{\mu}{2} and then x,y∈Vx,y\in V with ∣x−y∣H≤θ|x-y|_{H}\le\theta and ϵ0<u(x)−v(y)\epsilon_{0}<u(x)-v(y). By The Penalty Function h=12∣⋅∣V2h=\tfrac12|\cdot|_V^2 of a Hilbert Triple: Expansion Identities, Closed Sublevel Sets, Density and Local Bounds (i) and claim 2 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field the number h(x)+h(y)h(x)+h(y) is nonnegative, so there is δ∈J\delta\in J with δ(h(x)+h(y))≤μ2\delta\bigl(h(x)+h(y)\bigr)\le\tfrac{\mu}{2}: take δ=12\delta=\tfrac12 if h(x)+h(y)=0h(x)+h(y)=0, and otherwise any positive δ\delta below both 12\tfrac12 and μ2(h(x)+h(y))\tfrac{\mu}{2(h(x)+h(y))}. By Basic Properties of the δ\delta-Envelopes: Semicontinuity, Duality, Closed Superlevel Sets, Bounds and Monotonicity (i), u(x)−δh(x)≤uδ−(x)u(x)-\delta h(x)\le u^{-}_{\delta}(x) and vδ+(y)≤v(y)+δh(y)v^{+}_{\delta}(y)\le v(y)+\delta h(y), whence

N(α)≥Φδ,α(x,y)≥u(x)−v(y)−δ(h(x)+h(y))−α2∣x−y∣H2>ϵ0−μ,N(\alpha)\ge\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y)\ge u(x)-v(y)-\delta\bigl(h(x)+h(y)\bigr)-\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|x-y|_{H}^{2}>\epsilon_{0}-\mu ,

where ∣x−y∣H2≤θ2|x-y|_{H}^{2}\le\theta^{2} by Monotonicity of Squaring on the Nonnegative Elements of an Ordered Field. As μ\mu was an arbitrary positive real, Comparison of Real Numbers with Arbitrary Positive Slack gives ϵ0≤N(α)\epsilon_{0}\le N(\alpha).

Step 2 (constants that do not move). Set B=4C+4B=4C+4, so that 0≤C≤B0\le C\le B and 3B+23B+2 is positive. Let λ\lambda be a properness constant for FF at 3B+23B+2 and let (ω1,ω2,ω3)(\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\omega_{3}) be a structure triple for FF at 3B+23B+2; both exist by hypothesis. Set ϵ1=λϵ020\epsilon_{1}=\tfrac{\lambda\epsilon_{0}}{20}, a positive real, and use clause 2 of Modulus of Continuity to choose positive reals τ(1),τ(2),τ(3)\tau^{(1)},\tau^{(2)},\tau^{(3)} such that, for i∈{1,2,3}i\in\{1,2,3\}, every tt with 0≤t≤τ(i)0\le t\le\tau^{(i)} satisfies ωi(t)≤ϵ1\omega_{i}(t)\le\epsilon_{1}.

Step 3 (the parameters θ\theta and α\alpha). Choose a positive θ∈R\theta\in\mathbb{R} with

θ≤1,8θ≤ϵ0,48θ≤τ(2),48θ≤(τ(1))2.\theta\le1,\qquad 8\theta\le\epsilon_{0},\qquad 48\theta\le\tau^{(2)},\qquad 48\theta\le\bigl(\tau^{(1)}\bigr)^{2}.

By (iii) choose k∈Nk\in\mathbb{N} with N(αk)−N(αk+1)≤θN(\alpha_{k})-N(\alpha_{k+1})\le\theta and set α=αk+1\alpha=\alpha_{k+1}, so that 1<α1<\alpha and α2=αk\tfrac{\alpha}{2}=\alpha_{k}.

Step 4 (the parameter δ\delta). By the definition of N(α)N(\alpha) as a supremum there are δ1∈J\delta_{1}\in J and (x,y)∈V×V(x,y)\in V\times V with N(α)−θ<Φδ1,α(x,y)≤M(δ1,α)N(\alpha)-\theta<\Phi_{\delta_{1},\alpha}(x,y)\le M(\delta_{1},\alpha); by (iv), N(α)−θ<M(δ,α)N(\alpha)-\theta<M(\delta,\alpha) for every δ∈J\delta\in J with δ≤δ1\delta\le\delta_{1}. Choose such a δ\delta with in addition δ≤τ(3)ατ(2)\delta\le\tfrac{\tau^{(3)}}{\alpha\tau^{(2)}}. By Step 1 and 8θ≤ϵ08\theta\le\epsilon_{0},

0≤ϵ0−θ≤N(α)−θ<M(δ,α).(v)0\le\epsilon_{0}-\theta\le N(\alpha)-\theta<M(\delta,\alpha). \tag{v}

Step 5 (the maximum point). Choose (x2,y2)∈V×V(x_{2},y_{2})\in V\times V with M(δ,α)−θ2≤Φδ,α(x2,y2)M(\delta,\alpha)-\tfrac{\theta}{2}\le\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x_{2},y_{2}). By (ii), (v) and θ≤1\theta\le1,

δ2∣(x2,y2)∣2≤2C−Φδ,α(x2,y2)≤2C−M(δ,α)+θ2≤2C+1,\tfrac{\delta}{2}|(x_{2},y_{2})|^{2}\le2C-\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x_{2},y_{2})\le2C-M(\delta,\alpha)+\tfrac{\theta}{2}\le2C+1,

so ∣(x2,y2)∣≤Γ|(x_{2},y_{2})|\le\Gamma, where Γ\Gamma denotes the nonnegative square root of 4C+2δ\tfrac{4C+2}{\delta}. Let Γ′\Gamma' denote the nonnegative square root of 4δ(2C+12+2Γ+4δ)\tfrac{4}{\delta}\bigl(2C+\tfrac12+2\Gamma+\tfrac{4}{\delta}\bigr), let GG denote the nonnegative square root of 12αθ12\alpha\theta, and set

R=2B+1δ+3B+2+α+1+G+2α+1,R=\frac{2B+1}{\delta}+3B+2+\alpha+1+G+2\alpha+1 ,

so that the four inequalities 2B+1δ<R\tfrac{2B+1}{\delta}<R, 3B+2<R3B+2<R, α+1<R\alpha+1<R and G+2α<RG+2\alpha<R hold, all summands being positive. Let ω\omega be a shift modulus for FF at (δ,R)(\delta,R), which exists by hypothesis, and choose a positive τ(0)\tau^{(0)} such that every tt with 0≤t≤τ(0)0\le t\le\tau^{(0)} satisfies ω(t)≤ϵ1\omega(t)\le\epsilon_{1}.

Now choose a positive σ∈R\sigma\in\mathbb{R} with

σ≤1,σ≤τ(0)2,σ (2Γ+2Γ′)≤θ2.\sigma\le1,\qquad \sigma\le\tfrac{\tau^{(0)}}{2},\qquad \sigma\,(2\Gamma+2\Gamma')\le\tfrac{\theta}{2}.

The product H×HH\times H is a real Hilbert space by Properties of the Product of Two Real Inner Product Spaces (vi), and V×VV\times V is a nonempty subset of it. By (ii) and A Linear Perturbation Producing a Sequentially Strict Maximum under a Coercive Bound, applied to Φδ,α\Phi_{\delta,\alpha} with the constant 2C2C, the positive number δ2\tfrac{\delta}{2} and the positive number σ\sigma, there are (p,q)∈H×H(p,q)\in H\times H with ∣(p,q)∣≤σ|(p,q)|\le\sigma and (x^,y^)∈V×V(\hat{x},\hat{y})\in V\times V such that the function with value

Φδ,α(x,y)−⟨(p,q),(x,y)⟩=Φδ,α(x,y)−⟨p,x⟩H−⟨q,y⟩H\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y)-\langle(p,q),(x,y)\rangle=\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y)-\langle p,x\rangle_{H}-\langle q,y\rangle_{H}

at (x,y)(x,y) attains a sequentially strict maximum on V×VV\times V at (x^,y^)(\hat{x},\hat{y}), and in particular a maximum there, by the definition of a sequentially strict maximum; the displayed identity is the formula for the inner product of the product in The Product of Two Real Inner Product Spaces (i), and Properties of the Product of Two Real Inner Product Spaces (ii) gives ∣p∣H≤σ|p|_{H}\le\sigma and ∣q∣H≤σ|q|_{H}\le\sigma.

Step 6 (the maximum point nearly maximises Φδ,α\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}). Write ρ=∣(x^,y^)∣\rho=|(\hat{x},\hat{y})|, so that ∣x^∣H+∣y^∣H≤2ρ|\hat{x}|_{H}+|\hat{y}|_{H}\le2\rho and ∣x2∣H+∣y2∣H≤2Γ|x_{2}|_{H}+|y_{2}|_{H}\le2\Gamma. By the maximum property and The Cauchy–Schwarz Inequality in a Real Inner Product Space,

Φδ,α(x^,y^) ≥ Φδ,α(x2,y2)−σ(∣x2∣H+∣y2∣H)−σ(∣x^∣H+∣y^∣H) ≥ M(δ,α)−θ2−2σΓ−2σρ.(vi)\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(\hat{x},\hat{y})\ \ge\ \Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x_{2},y_{2})-\sigma\bigl(|x_{2}|_{H}+|y_{2}|_{H}\bigr)-\sigma\bigl(|\hat{x}|_{H}+|\hat{y}|_{H}\bigr)\ \ge\ M(\delta,\alpha)-\tfrac{\theta}{2}-2\sigma\Gamma-2\sigma\rho . \tag{vi}

Using σ≤1\sigma\le1, M(δ,α)≥0M(\delta,\alpha)\ge0, θ≤1\theta\le1 and (ii),

δ2ρ2≤2C−Φδ,α(x^,y^)≤2C+12+2Γ+2ρ,\tfrac{\delta}{2}\rho^{2}\le2C-\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(\hat{x},\hat{y})\le2C+\tfrac12+2\Gamma+2\rho ,

and since δ4(ρ−4δ)2≥0\tfrac{\delta}{4}\bigl(\rho-\tfrac{4}{\delta}\bigr)^{2}\ge0 gives 2ρ≤δ4ρ2+4δ2\rho\le\tfrac{\delta}{4}\rho^{2}+\tfrac{4}{\delta}, we obtain δ4ρ2≤2C+12+2Γ+4δ\tfrac{\delta}{4}\rho^{2}\le2C+\tfrac12+2\Gamma+\tfrac{4}{\delta}, that is, ρ≤Γ′\rho\le\Gamma'. Substituting ρ≤Γ′\rho\le\Gamma' into (vi) and using σ(2Γ+2Γ′)≤θ2\sigma(2\Gamma+2\Gamma')\le\tfrac{\theta}{2},

M(δ,α)−θ ≤ Φδ,α(x^,y^).(vii)M(\delta,\alpha)-\theta\ \le\ \Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(\hat{x},\hat{y}). \tag{vii}

Step 7 (the bounds required by the estimate). Since α2∣x^−y^∣H2≥0\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}\ge0, (vii), (v) and 8θ≤ϵ08\theta\le\epsilon_{0} give

uδ−(x^)−vδ+(y^) ≥ Φδ,α(x^,y^) ≥ M(δ,α)−θ ≥ ϵ0−2θ ≥ 34ϵ0 > 0.(viii)u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\ \ge\ \Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(\hat{x},\hat{y})\ \ge\ M(\delta,\alpha)-\theta\ \ge\ \epsilon_{0}-2\theta\ \ge\ \tfrac{3}{4}\epsilon_{0}\ >\ 0. \tag{viii}

By (i) we have uδ−(x^)≤Cu^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})\le C and −C≤vδ+(y^)-C\le v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y}); combined with (viii) this yields uδ−(x^)≥vδ+(y^)≥−Cu^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})\ge v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\ge-C and vδ+(y^)≤uδ−(x^)≤Cv^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\le u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})\le C, so

∣uδ−(x^)∣≤C≤B,∣vδ+(y^)∣≤C≤B.|u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|\le C\le B,\qquad |v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})|\le C\le B .

By (i) again, δh(x^)≤C−uδ−(x^)≤2C≤B\delta h(\hat{x})\le C-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})\le2C\le B and δh(y^)≤vδ+(y^)+C≤2C≤B\delta h(\hat{y})\le v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})+C\le2C\le B.

By (vii) the point (x^,y^)(\hat{x},\hat{y}) satisfies the hypothesis of Penalised Suprema: Monotonicity, Near-Maximisers, and Vanishing Penalty along a Doubling Sequence (iii) for the function α↦M(δ,α)\alpha\mapsto M(\delta,\alpha) with the parameter α\alpha and the number θ\theta, so

α4∣x^−y^∣H2=α2⋅12∣x^−y^∣H2≤M(δ,α2)−M(δ,α)+θ≤N(αk)−(N(αk+1)−θ)+θ≤3θ,\tfrac{\alpha}{4}|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}=\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\cdot\tfrac12|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}\le M\bigl(\delta,\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\bigr)-M(\delta,\alpha)+\theta\le N(\alpha_{k})-\bigl(N(\alpha_{k+1})-\theta\bigr)+\theta\le3\theta ,

using α2=αk\tfrac{\alpha}{2}=\alpha_{k}, M(δ,αk)≤N(αk)M(\delta,\alpha_{k})\le N(\alpha_{k}), Step 4 and Step 3. Hence

α∣x^−y^∣H2≤12θ,∣x^−y^∣H≤12θ≤τ(1)2,α∣x^−y^∣H=α⋅α∣x^−y^∣H2≤G,(ix)\alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}\le12\theta,\qquad |\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}\le\sqrt{12\theta}\le\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2},\qquad \alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}=\sqrt{\alpha\cdot\alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}}\le G , \tag{ix}

where the second inequality uses 1<α1<\alpha and 48θ≤(τ(1))248\theta\le(\tau^{(1)})^{2}, and square roots are compared by Monotonicity of Squaring on the Nonnegative Elements of an Ordered Field.

Step 8 (the contradiction). Choose a positive ε∈R\varepsilon\in\mathbb{R} with

ε≤1,(2α+1)ε≤τ(0)2,2ε≤τ(1)2,8αε2≤τ(2)2,2λε+2ε≤ϵ1.\varepsilon\le1,\qquad (2\alpha+1)\varepsilon\le\tfrac{\tau^{(0)}}{2},\qquad 2\varepsilon\le\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2},\qquad 8\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{2},\qquad 2\lambda\varepsilon+2\varepsilon\le\epsilon_{1}.

All the hypotheses of The Test-Datum Estimate at a Maximum Point of the Doubled Function now hold for the data δ,α,σ,ε,B,G,R\delta,\alpha,\sigma,\varepsilon,B,G,R, the vectors p,qp,q, the point (x^,y^)(\hat{x},\hat{y}), the constant λ\lambda, the triple (ω1,ω2,ω3)(\omega_{1},\omega_{2},\omega_{3}) and the modulus ω\omega, by Steps 2 to 7. It provides x1,y1∈D(A)x_{1},y_{1}\in D(A) and nonnegative τ1,τ2\tau_{1},\tau_{2} with ∣x1−x^∣H<ε|x_{1}-\hat{x}|_{H}<\varepsilon, ∣y1−y^∣H<ε|y_{1}-\hat{y}|_{H}<\varepsilon, τ1≤(2α+1)ε+σ≤τ(0)\tau_{1}\le(2\alpha+1)\varepsilon+\sigma\le\tau^{(0)}, τ2≤τ(0)\tau_{2}\le\tau^{(0)} and the estimate of The Test-Datum Estimate at a Maximum Point of the Doubled Function (i).

Write t=∣x1−y1∣Ht=|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H}. By The Norm Metric of a Real Inner Product Space: Triangle Inequalities, Limits and Continuity (i) and (ix), t≤∣x^−y^∣H+2ε≤τ(1)2+τ(1)2=τ(1)t\le|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}+2\varepsilon\le\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2}+\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2}=\tau^{(1)}. Since (a+b)2≤2a2+2b2(a+b)^{2}\le2a^{2}+2b^{2} for all real a,ba,b, because 2a2+2b2−(a+b)2=(a−b)2≥02a^{2}+2b^{2}-(a+b)^{2}=(a-b)^{2}\ge0, we get

αt2≤2α∣x^−y^∣H2+8αε2≤24θ+τ(2)2≤τ(2),\alpha t^{2}\le2\alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}+8\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le24\theta+\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{2}\le\tau^{(2)},

using (ix) and 48θ≤τ(2)48\theta\le\tau^{(2)}, and consequently, by the choice of δ\delta in Step 4,

δα2t2=δα (αt2)≤δα τ(2)≤τ(3).\delta\alpha^{2}t^{2}=\delta\alpha\,(\alpha t^{2})\le\delta\alpha\,\tau^{(2)}\le\tau^{(3)} .

Therefore each of ω(τ1)\omega(\tau_{1}), ω(τ2)\omega(\tau_{2}), ω1(t)\omega_{1}(t), ω2(αt2)\omega_{2}(\alpha t^{2}) and ω3(δα2t2)\omega_{3}(\delta\alpha^{2}t^{2}) is at most ϵ1\epsilon_{1}, and 2λε+2ε≤ϵ12\lambda\varepsilon+2\varepsilon\le\epsilon_{1}, so the estimate gives

λ(uδ−(x^)−vδ+(y^))≤6ϵ1=6λϵ020.\lambda\bigl(u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\bigr)\le6\epsilon_{1}=\tfrac{6\lambda\epsilon_{0}}{20}.

On the other hand (viii) and λ>0\lambda>0 give λ(uδ−(x^)−vδ+(y^))≥34λϵ0\lambda\bigl(u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\bigr)\ge\tfrac{3}{4}\lambda\epsilon_{0}. Dividing by the positive number λϵ0\lambda\epsilon_{0} yields 34≤310\tfrac{3}{4}\le\tfrac{3}{10}, which is false. This contradiction proves claim 1.

Proof of claim 2. Let x∈Vx\in V and let ϵ∈R\epsilon\in\mathbb{R} be positive. By claim 1 there is a positive θ\theta such that all x′,y′∈Vx',y'\in V with ∣x′−y′∣H≤θ|x'-y'|_{H}\le\theta satisfy u(x′)−v(y′)≤ϵu(x')-v(y')\le\epsilon; taking x′=y′=xx'=y'=x, which is legitimate because ∣x−x∣H=0≤θ|x-x|_{H}=0\le\theta, gives u(x)−v(x)≤ϵu(x)-v(x)\le\epsilon. As ϵ\epsilon was an arbitrary positive real, Comparison of Real Numbers with Arbitrary Positive Slack gives u(x)−v(x)≤0u(x)-v(x)\le0, that is, u(x)≤v(x)u(x)\le v(x).

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…