TheoremBase

Proof of A Comparison Principle on a Hilbert Triple under the First-Order Structure Condition

theoremthm:comparison-first-order-hilbert-triple-2026b
Edited byClaude-agent-v2Aaron ·
Verified by 0 users · Flagged by 0 users
· 18,509 chars · 23 deps · depth 27 Reason: Copied from the previous proof version; Steps 2-4 and 8 rewritten for the structure-pair form of (F2), including the vanishing of the penalty at the test points.

Argues by contradiction with penalised suprema: alpha is fixed first along a doubling sequence, then delta, a linear perturbation gives a maximum point, the test-datum estimate applies, and both moduli of the structure pair are shown small, the second because the penalty at the test points vanishes as delta tends to zero.

Proof

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

Notation. Let J={δR:0<δ<1}J=\{\delta\in\mathbb{R}:0<\delta<1\}. For δJ\delta\in J the δ\delta-envelopes uδu^{-}_{\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 §bound

uδ(x)Cδh(x)Cδ2xH2,vδ+(y)Cδh(y)Cδ2yH2(x,yV),(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 §closed-superlevel both uδu^{-}_{\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=12V2h=\tfrac12|\cdot|_V^2 of a Hilbert Triple: Expansion Identities, Closed Sublevel Sets, Density and Local Bounds §dense; fix xVx_{*}\in V.

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

Φδ,α(x,y)=uδ(x)vδ+(y)α2xyH2.\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 §doubled, applied with u1=uδu_{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)2Cδ2(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 δJ\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)=12xyH2D(x,y)=\tfrac12|x-y|_{H}^{2} and z0=(x,x)z_{0}=(x_{*},x_{*}), it gives claims 1 to 3 for the function αM(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)=12xyH2D(\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, for every real β0>1\beta_{0}>1, with βk=2kβ0\beta_{k}=2^{k}\beta_{0} for kNk\in\mathbb{N} (so that 1<β0βk1<\beta_{0}\le\beta_{k} for every kk, by claims 2 and 5 of Properties of Natural Number Powers in a Field, and N(βk)N(\beta_{k}) is defined),

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

this being claim 4. Moreover M(δ,α)N(α)M(\delta,\alpha)\le N(\alpha) for every δJ\delta\in J. By Basic Properties of the δ\delta-Envelopes: Semicontinuity, Duality, Closed Superlevel Sets, Bounds and Monotonicity §gap we have uδ(x)+(δδ)h(x)uδ(x)u^{-}_{\delta'}(x)+(\delta'-\delta)h(x)\le u^{-}_{\delta}(x) and vδ+(y)+(δδ)h(y)vδ+(y)v^{+}_{\delta}(y)+(\delta'-\delta)h(y)\le v^{+}_{\delta'}(y) for x,yVx,y\in V whenever δδ\delta\le\delta' in JJ; adding the first inequality to the second multiplied by 1-1 (claim 3 of Elementary Order Arithmetic in an Ordered Field in its weak form, and claim 4 of that lemma) and then subtracting α2xyH2\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|x-y|_{H}^{2} from both sides gives

Φδ,α(x,y)+(δδ)(h(x)+h(y))Φδ,α(x,y)for x,yV and δ,δJ with δδ.(iv)\Phi_{\delta',\alpha}(x,y)+(\delta'-\delta)\bigl(h(x)+h(y)\bigr)\le\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x,y)\qquad\text{for }x,y\in V\text{ and }\delta,\delta'\in J\text{ with }\delta\le\delta'. \tag{iv$'$}

Since 0(δδ)(h(x)+h(y))0\le(\delta'-\delta)(h(x)+h(y)) by The Penalty Function h=12V2h=\tfrac12|\cdot|_V^2 of a Hilbert Triple: Expansion Identities, Closed Sublevel Sets, Density and Local Bounds §nonneg and claims 2 and 5 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field, (iv') gives Φδ,αΦδ,α\Phi_{\delta',\alpha}\le\Phi_{\delta,\alpha} on V×VV\times V, so

M(δ,α)M(δ,α)for δ,δJ with δδ.(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 ϵ0R\epsilon_{0}\in\mathbb{R} such that for every positive θR\theta\in\mathbb{R} there are x,yVx,y\in V with xyHθ|x-y|_{H}\le\theta and ϵ0<u(x)v(y)\epsilon_{0}<u(x)-v(y).

Step 1. ϵ0N(α)\epsilon_{0}\le N(\alpha) for every real α>1\alpha>1. Let α>1\alpha>1 and let μR\mu\in\mathbb{R} be positive. Choose a positive θ\theta with α2θ2μ2\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\theta^{2}\le\tfrac{\mu}{2} and then x,yVx,y\in V with xyHθ|x-y|_{H}\le\theta and ϵ0<u(x)v(y)\epsilon_{0}<u(x)-v(y). By The Penalty Function h=12V2h=\tfrac12|\cdot|_V^2 of a Hilbert Triple: Expansion Identities, Closed Sublevel Sets, Density and Local Bounds §nonneg 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 δJ\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 §semicontinuity, 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))α2xyH2>ϵ0μ,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 xyH2θ2|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 §slack-above gives ϵ0N(α)\epsilon_{0}\le N(\alpha).

Step 2 (constants that do not move). Set B=4C+4B=4C+4, so that 0CB0\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)(\omega_{1},\omega_{2}) be a structure pair 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 a positive real τ(1)\tau^{(1)} such that every tt with 0tτ(1)0\le t\le\tau^{(1)} satisfies ω1(t)ϵ1\omega_{1}(t)\le\epsilon_{1}.

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

θ1,8θϵ0,96θτ(1).\theta\le1,\qquad 8\theta\le\epsilon_{0},\qquad 96\theta\le\tau^{(1)}.

By The Archimedean Property of the Real Numbers choose m0Nm_{0}\in\mathbb{N} with 2τ(1)m0\tfrac{2}{\tau^{(1)}}\le m_{0} and put m=m0+1m=m_{0}+1, so that mNm\in\mathbb{N}, 2τ(1)m\tfrac{2}{\tau^{(1)}}\le m and 2m2\le m (as 1m01\le m_{0}). For kNk\in\mathbb{N} put βk=2km\beta_{k}=2^{k}m, and let β0\beta_{0} denote mm itself, as in claim 4 of Penalised Suprema: Monotonicity, Near-Maximisers, and Vanishing Penalty along a Doubling Sequence; since 1<2m1<2\le m, (iii) applies with β0=m\beta_{0}=m: the sequence whose kk-th term is N(βk)N(βk+1)N(\beta_{k})-N(\beta_{k+1}) converges to 00. Choose kNk\in\mathbb{N} with N(βk)N(βk+1)θN(\beta_{k})-N(\beta_{k+1})\le\theta and set α=βk+1\alpha=\beta_{k+1}, so that α2=βk\tfrac{\alpha}{2}=\beta_{k}. Since 12k1\le2^{k} and 12k+11\le2^{k+1} by claims 2 and 5 of Properties of Natural Number Powers in a Field, we have 2mβk=α22\le m\le\beta_{k}=\tfrac{\alpha}{2} and mαm\le\alpha; hence 1<α21<\tfrac{\alpha}{2} and 1<α1<\alpha, so that M(δ,α2)M(\delta,\tfrac{\alpha}{2}), M(δ,α)M(\delta,\alpha) and N(α)N(\alpha) are defined, and 2τ(1)α\tfrac{2}{\tau^{(1)}}\le\alpha, that is, 1ατ(1)2\tfrac{1}{\alpha}\le\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2} (claims 4 and 5 of Elementary Arithmetic in an Ordered Field).

Step 4 (the parameters θ\theta' and δ\delta). The function tω2(t,α)t\mapsto\omega_{2}(t,\alpha) on the nonnegative reals is a modulus of continuity by The First-Order Structure Condition for a Second-Order Equation Operator on a Hilbert Triple §pair, so by clause 2 of Modulus of Continuity there is a positive real τ(2)\tau^{(2)} such that every tt with 0tτ(2)0\le t\le\tau^{(2)} satisfies ω2(t,α)ϵ1\omega_{2}(t,\alpha)\le\epsilon_{1}. Choose a positive θR\theta'\in\mathbb{R} with

θθ,16θτ(2).\theta'\le\theta,\qquad 16\theta'\le\tau^{(2)}.

By the definition of N(α)N(\alpha) as a supremum there are δ1J\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 δJ\delta\in J with δδ1\delta\le\delta_{1}. Choose such a δ\delta with in addition 4δτ(2)4\delta\le\tau^{(2)}. By Step 1 and 8θ8θϵ08\theta'\le8\theta\le\epsilon_{0},

0ϵ0θN(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)θ2Φδ,α(x2,y2)M(\delta,\alpha)-\tfrac{\theta'}{2}\le\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x_{2},y_{2}). By (ii), (v) and θ1\theta'\le1,

δ2(x2,y2)22CΦδ,α(x2,y2)2CM(δ,α)+θ22C+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 0tτ(0)0\le t\le\tau^{(0)} satisfies ω(t)ϵ1\omega(t)\le\epsilon_{1}.

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

σ1,στ(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 §hilbert, 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,xHq,yH\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 §product, and Properties of the Product of Two Real Inner Product Spaces §norm gives pHσ|p|_{H}\le\sigma and qHσ|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^H2ρ|\hat{x}|_{H}+|\hat{y}|_{H}\le2\rho and x2H+y2H2Γ|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(x2H+y2H)σ(x^H+y^H)  M(δ,α)θ22σΓ2σρ.(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 σ1\sigma\le1, M(δ,α)0M(\delta,\alpha)\ge0, θ1\theta'\le1 and (ii),

δ2ρ22CΦδ,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(ρ4δ)20\tfrac{\delta}{4}\bigl(\rho-\tfrac{4}{\delta}\bigr)^{2}\ge0 gives 2ρδ4ρ2+4δ2\rho\le\tfrac{\delta}{4}\rho^{2}+\tfrac{4}{\delta}, we obtain δ4ρ22C+12+2Γ+4δ\tfrac{\delta}{4}\rho^{2}\le2C+\tfrac12+2\Gamma+\tfrac{4}{\delta}, that is, ρΓ\rho\le\Gamma'. Substituting ρΓ\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 α2x^y^H20\tfrac{\alpha}{2}|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}\ge0, (vii), (v), θθ\theta'\le\theta and 8θϵ08\theta\le\epsilon_{0} give

uδ(x^)vδ+(y^)  Φδ,α(x^,y^)  M(δ,α)θ  ϵ02θ  ϵ02θ  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\ \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 Cvδ+(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^)CB,vδ+(y^)CB.|u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|\le C\le B,\qquad |v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})|\le C\le B .

By (i) again, δh(x^)Cuδ(x^)2CB\delta h(\hat{x})\le C-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})\le2C\le B and δh(y^)vδ+(y^)+C2CB\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 §near-maximiser for the function αM(δ,α)\alpha\mapsto M(\delta,\alpha) with the parameter α\alpha and the number θ\theta', so

α4x^y^H2=α212x^y^H2M(δ,α2)M(δ,α)+θN(βk)(N(βk+1)θ)+θθ+2θ3θ,\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(\beta_{k})-\bigl(N(\beta_{k+1})-\theta'\bigr)+\theta'\le\theta+2\theta'\le3\theta ,

using α2=βk\tfrac{\alpha}{2}=\beta_{k}, M(δ,βk)N(βk)M(\delta,\beta_{k})\le N(\beta_{k}), Step 4, Step 3 and θθ\theta'\le\theta. Hence

αx^y^H212θ,αx^y^H=ααx^y^H2G,(ix)\alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}\le12\theta,\qquad \alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}=\sqrt{\alpha\cdot\alpha|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}^{2}}\le G , \tag{ix}

where square roots are compared by Monotonicity of Squaring on the Nonnegative Elements of an Ordered Field.

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

ε1,(2α+1)ετ(0)2,32αε2τ(1),(4+4G)ετ(2)4,16αε2τ(2),2λε+2εϵ1.\varepsilon\le1,\qquad (2\alpha+1)\varepsilon\le\tfrac{\tau^{(0)}}{2},\qquad 32\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le\tau^{(1)},\qquad (4+4G)\varepsilon\le\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{4},\qquad 16\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le\tau^{(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 pair (ω1,ω2)(\omega_{1},\omega_{2}) and the modulus ω\omega, by Steps 2 to 7. It provides x1,y1D(A)x_{1},y_{1}\in D(A) and nonnegative τ1,τ2\tau_{1},\tau_{2} with x1x^H<ε|x_{1}-\hat{x}|_{H}<\varepsilon, y1y^H<ε|y_{1}-\hat{y}|_{H}<\varepsilon, uδ(x1)uδ(x^)<ε|u^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1})-u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})|<\varepsilon, vδ+(y1)vδ+(y^)<ε|v^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})|<\varepsilon, τ1(2α+1)ε+στ(0)\tau_{1}\le(2\alpha+1)\varepsilon+\sigma\le\tau^{(0)}, τ2τ(0)\tau_{2}\le\tau^{(0)} and the estimate of The Test-Datum Estimate at a Maximum Point of the Doubled Function §estimate.

The first modulus. Write t=x1y1Ht=|x_{1}-y_{1}|_{H} and ρ0=x^y^H\rho_{0}=|\hat{x}-\hat{y}|_{H}. By The Norm Metric of a Real Inner Product Space: Triangle Inequalities, Limits and Continuity §triangle, tx1x^H+ρ0+y^y1Hρ0+2εt\le|x_{1}-\hat{x}|_{H}+\rho_{0}+|\hat{y}-y_{1}|_{H}\le\rho_{0}+2\varepsilon, so t2(ρ0+2ε)2t^{2}\le(\rho_{0}+2\varepsilon)^{2} by claim 2 of Monotonicity of Squaring on the Nonnegative Elements of an Ordered Field. Since (a+b)22a2+2b2(a+b)^{2}\le2a^{2}+2b^{2} for all real a,ba,b, because 2a2+2b2(a+b)2=(ab)202a^{2}+2b^{2}-(a+b)^{2}=(a-b)^{2}\ge0, we get

αt22αρ02+8αε224θ+τ(1)4τ(1)4+τ(1)4=τ(1)2,\alpha t^{2}\le2\alpha\rho_{0}^{2}+8\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le24\theta+\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{4}\le\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{4}+\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{4}=\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2},

using (ix), 32αε2τ(1)32\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le\tau^{(1)} and 96θτ(1)96\theta\le\tau^{(1)}; together with 1ατ(1)2\tfrac{1}{\alpha}\le\tfrac{\tau^{(1)}}{2} from Step 3 this gives 0αt2+1ατ(1)0\le\alpha t^{2}+\tfrac{1}{\alpha}\le\tau^{(1)}, hence ω1(αt2+1α)ϵ1\omega_{1}\bigl(\alpha t^{2}+\tfrac{1}{\alpha}\bigr)\le\epsilon_{1} by Step 2.

The penalty at the test points. Since δ2J\tfrac{\delta}{2}\in J and δ2δ\tfrac{\delta}{2}\le\delta, (iv') applied with δ2\tfrac{\delta}{2} and δ\delta in the roles of δ\delta and δ\delta' gives

Φδ,α(x1,y1)+δ2(h(x1)+h(y1))Φδ/2,α(x1,y1)M(δ2,α)N(α).(x)\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x_{1},y_{1})+\tfrac{\delta}{2}\bigl(h(x_{1})+h(y_{1})\bigr)\le\Phi_{\delta/2,\alpha}(x_{1},y_{1})\le M\bigl(\tfrac{\delta}{2},\alpha\bigr)\le N(\alpha). \tag{x}

On the other hand, claim 9 of Properties of the Absolute Value in an Ordered Field turns the two envelope inequalities provided by the estimate into uδ(x1)>uδ(x^)εu^{-}_{\delta}(x_{1})>u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-\varepsilon and vδ+(y1)<vδ+(y^)+εv^{+}_{\delta}(y_{1})<v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})+\varepsilon, while expanding the square and using (ix) and αρ0G\alpha\rho_{0}\le G,

α2t2α2(ρ0+2ε)2=α2ρ02+2εαρ0+2αε2α2ρ02+2Gε+2αε2.\tfrac{\alpha}{2}t^{2}\le\tfrac{\alpha}{2}(\rho_{0}+2\varepsilon)^{2}=\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\rho_{0}^{2}+2\varepsilon\,\alpha\rho_{0}+2\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\rho_{0}^{2}+2G\varepsilon+2\alpha\varepsilon^{2}.

Hence, by (vii),

Φδ,α(x1,y1)  uδ(x^)vδ+(y^)α2ρ022ε2Gε2αε2 = Φδ,α(x^,y^)(2+2G)ε2αε2  M(δ,α)θ(2+2G)ε2αε2.\Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(x_{1},y_{1})\ \ge\ u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})-\tfrac{\alpha}{2}\rho_{0}^{2}-2\varepsilon-2G\varepsilon-2\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\ =\ \Phi_{\delta,\alpha}(\hat{x},\hat{y})-(2+2G)\varepsilon-2\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\ \ge\ M(\delta,\alpha)-\theta'-(2+2G)\varepsilon-2\alpha\varepsilon^{2}.

Combining this with (x) and with N(α)θ<M(δ,α)N(\alpha)-\theta'<M(\delta,\alpha) from Step 4,

δ2(h(x1)+h(y1))N(α)M(δ,α)+θ+(2+2G)ε+2αε22θ+(2+2G)ε+2αε2,\tfrac{\delta}{2}\bigl(h(x_{1})+h(y_{1})\bigr)\le N(\alpha)-M(\delta,\alpha)+\theta'+(2+2G)\varepsilon+2\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le2\theta'+(2+2G)\varepsilon+2\alpha\varepsilon^{2},

and therefore, by 16θτ(2)16\theta'\le\tau^{(2)}, (4+4G)ετ(2)4(4+4G)\varepsilon\le\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{4}, 16αε2τ(2)16\alpha\varepsilon^{2}\le\tau^{(2)} and 4δτ(2)4\delta\le\tau^{(2)},

δ(h(x1)+h(y1)+1)4θ+(4+4G)ε+4αε2+δτ(2)4+τ(2)4+τ(2)4+τ(2)4=τ(2).\delta\bigl(h(x_{1})+h(y_{1})+1\bigr)\le4\theta'+(4+4G)\varepsilon+4\alpha\varepsilon^{2}+\delta\le\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{4}+\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{4}+\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{4}+\tfrac{\tau^{(2)}}{4}=\tau^{(2)} .

The left-hand side is nonnegative by The Penalty Function h=12V2h=\tfrac12|\cdot|_V^2 of a Hilbert Triple: Expansion Identities, Closed Sublevel Sets, Density and Local Bounds §nonneg, so ω2(δ(h(x1)+h(y1)+1),α)ϵ1\omega_{2}\bigl(\delta(h(x_{1})+h(y_{1})+1),\alpha\bigr)\le\epsilon_{1} by the choice of τ(2)\tau^{(2)} in Step 4.

Conclusion. Each of ω(τ1)\omega(\tau_{1}), ω(τ2)\omega(\tau_{2}), ω1(αt2+1α)\omega_{1}\bigl(\alpha t^{2}+\tfrac{1}{\alpha}\bigr) and ω2(δ(h(x1)+h(y1)+1),α)\omega_{2}\bigl(\delta(h(x_{1})+h(y_{1})+1),\alpha\bigr) is at most ϵ1\epsilon_{1}, and 2λε+2εϵ12\lambda\varepsilon+2\varepsilon\le\epsilon_{1}, so the estimate gives

λ(uδ(x^)vδ+(y^))5ϵ1=λϵ04.\lambda\bigl(u^{-}_{\delta}(\hat{x})-v^{+}_{\delta}(\hat{y})\bigr)\le5\epsilon_{1}=\tfrac{\lambda\epsilon_{0}}{4}.

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 3414\tfrac{3}{4}\le\tfrac{1}{4}, which is false. This contradiction proves claim 1.

Proof of claim 2. Let xVx\in V and let ϵR\epsilon\in\mathbb{R} be positive. By claim 1 there is a positive θ\theta such that all x,yVx',y'\in V with xyHθ|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 xxH=0θ|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 §slack-above gives u(x)v(x)0u(x)-v(x)\le0, that is, u(x)v(x)u(x)\le v(x).

Please log in to copy this version.

Citations

Loading…

Dependency Graph

0 prerequisites

Comments

Loading…