TheoremBase

Proof

Throughout, d(z,w)=∥z−w∥d(z,w)=\lVert z-w\rVert by claim 2 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and topological notions refer to the topology of the sets open in (Rn,d)(\mathbb{R}^n,d), a topology by Metric Open Sets Form a Topology. On R=R1\mathbb{R}=\mathbb{R}^{1} claim 1 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n identifies the Euclidean norm of a real number with its absolute value, so by claim 2 there d(s,t)=∣s−t∣d(s,t)=|s-t|, which is the metric on the real line supplied by The Absolute Value Metric on the Real Line and used in Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space. Put

U1={y∈Rn:x−y∈Ω},U2={y∈Rn:∥y∥>δ}.U_1=\{y\in\mathbb{R}^n:x-y\in\Omega\},\qquad U_2=\{y\in\mathbb{R}^n:\lVert y\rVert>\delta\}.

Step 1: U1U_1 and U2U_2 are open and cover Rn\mathbb{R}^n. Let y0∈U1y_0\in U_1. Since x−y0∈Ωx-y_0\in\Omega and Ω\Omega is open there is a real r>0r>0 with the open ball B(x−y0,r)B(x-y_0,r) contained in Ω\Omega. If d(y,y0)<rd(y,y_0)<r then, since (x−y)−(x−y0)=y0−y(x-y)-(x-y_0)=y_0-y, we get d(x−y,x−y0)=∥y0−y∥=d(y,y0)<rd(x-y,x-y_0)=\lVert y_0-y\rVert=d(y,y_0)<r, so x−y∈Ωx-y\in\Omega and y∈U1y\in U_1. Hence U1U_1 is open.

Let y0∈U2y_0\in U_2 and put r=∥y0∥−δ>0r=\lVert y_0\rVert-\delta>0. If d(y,y0)<rd(y,y_0)<r then claim 6 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, applied to the points yy and y0−yy_0-y whose sum is y0y_0, gives ∥y0∥≤∥y∥+∥y0−y∥<∥y∥+r\lVert y_0\rVert\le\lVert y\rVert+\lVert y_0-y\rVert<\lVert y\rVert+r, so ∥y∥>∥y0∥−r=δ\lVert y\rVert>\lVert y_0\rVert-r=\delta and y∈U2y\in U_2. Hence U2U_2 is open.

If y∉U2y\notin U_2 then ∥y∥≤δ\lVert y\rVert\le\delta, and since (x−y)−x=−y(x-y)-x=-y has norm ∥y∥\lVert y\rVert by claim 5 of Elementary Properties of the Euclidean Norm on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, the point x−yx-y lies in Bˉ(x,δ)⊆Ω\bar B(x,\delta)\subseteq\Omega; so y∈U1y\in U_1. Thus U1∪U2=RnU_1\cup U_2=\mathbb{R}^n.

Step 2: hxh_x is continuous. On U1U_1 we have hx(y)=f(x−y)ρ(y)h_x(y)=f(x-y)\rho(y) by definition. The map y↦f(x−y)y\mapsto f(x-y) is continuous on U1U_1: given y0∈U1y_0\in U_1 and a real ε>0\varepsilon>0, continuity of ff at x−y0x-y_0 relative to Ω\Omega supplies a real θ>0\theta>0 such that every z∈Ωz\in\Omega with d(z,x−y0)<θd(z,x-y_0)<\theta satisfies ∣f(z)−f(x−y0)∣<ε|f(z)-f(x-y_0)|<\varepsilon; and for y∈U1y\in U_1 with d(y,y0)<θd(y,y_0)<\theta the point z=x−yz=x-y lies in Ω\Omega and satisfies d(x−y,x−y0)=d(y,y0)<θd(x-y,x-y_0)=d(y,y_0)<\theta, as computed in step 1. The map ρ\rho, being continuous on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, is continuous on U1U_1 relative to U1U_1, since a θ\theta that works for points of Rn\mathbb{R}^n works in particular for points of U1U_1. Hence hxh_x is continuous on U1U_1 by Continuity of Sums and Products of Real-Valued Functions on a Metric Space.

On U2U_2 we have hx(y)=0h_x(y)=0: either x−y∉Ωx-y\notin\Omega, and then hx(y)=0h_x(y)=0 by definition, or x−y∈Ωx-y\in\Omega, and then hx(y)=f(x−y)ρ(y)=0h_x(y)=f(x-y)\rho(y)=0 because ∥y∥>δ\lVert y\rVert>\delta forces ρ(y)=0\rho(y)=0. A constant function is continuous on U2U_2.

Now let y0∈Rny_0\in\mathbb{R}^n and let ε>0\varepsilon>0 be real. By step 1 the point y0y_0 lies in UiU_i for some i∈{1,2}i\in\{1,2\}, and UiU_i is open, so there is a real r>0r>0 with B(y0,r)⊆UiB(y_0,r)\subseteq U_i. Continuity of hxh_x on UiU_i at y0y_0 relative to UiU_i supplies a real θ>0\theta>0 such that every y∈Uiy\in U_i with d(y,y0)<θd(y,y_0)<\theta satisfies ∣hx(y)−hx(y0)∣<ε|h_x(y)-h_x(y_0)|<\varepsilon. Let θ′\theta' be the smaller of rr and θ\theta; every y∈Rny\in\mathbb{R}^n with d(y,y0)<θ′d(y,y_0)<\theta' lies in UiU_i and satisfies ∣hx(y)−hx(y0)∣<ε|h_x(y)-h_x(y_0)|<\varepsilon. Hence hxh_x is continuous at y0y_0 relative to Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and as y0y_0 was arbitrary, hxh_x is continuous on Rn\mathbb{R}^n.

Step 3: support and integrability. By step 2, hx(y)=0h_x(y)=0 whenever ∥y∥>δ\lVert y\rVert>\delta, so hxh_x is compactly supported by claim 2 of Compact Support on Rn\mathbb{R}^n Means Vanishing Outside a Bounded Set, applied with R=δR=\delta. Claims 1 and 2 of A Continuous Compactly Supported Function on Rn\mathbb{R}^n is Bounded and Integrable now give that hxh_x is bounded, measurable and integrable with respect to λn\lambda_n. This proves claim 1. The same two claims, applied to ρ\rho, which is continuous and vanishes off the same ball and is therefore compactly supported, show that ρ\rho is integrable; hence ∫Rn∣ρ∣ dλn\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}|\rho|\,d\lambda_n is a real number, by Integrable Function and the Lebesgue Integral.

Step 4: the bound. Let M≥0M\ge0 be real with ∣f(z)∣≤M|f(z)|\le M for every z∈Bˉ(x,δ)z\in\bar B(x,\delta), and let y∈Rny\in\mathbb{R}^n. If ∥y∥>δ\lVert y\rVert>\delta then hx(y)=0h_x(y)=0 and ρ(y)=0\rho(y)=0, so ∣hx(y)∣=0=M∣ρ(y)∣|h_x(y)|=0=M|\rho(y)|. If ∥y∥≤δ\lVert y\rVert\le\delta then, as in step 1, x−y∈Bˉ(x,δ)⊆Ωx-y\in\bar B(x,\delta)\subseteq\Omega, so hx(y)=f(x−y)ρ(y)h_x(y)=f(x-y)\rho(y) and ∣hx(y)∣=∣f(x−y)∣ ∣ρ(y)∣≤M∣ρ(y)∣|h_x(y)|=|f(x-y)|\,|\rho(y)|\le M|\rho(y)|. Thus ∣hx∣≤M∣ρ∣|h_x|\le M|\rho| pointwise.

Both ∣hx∣|h_x| and M∣ρ∣M|\rho| are integrable with respect to λn\lambda_n: the first because hxh_x is integrable, the second by claim 2 of Linearity and Monotonicity of the Lebesgue Integral applied to the integrable function ∣ρ∣|\rho|. By claim 2 of that theorem,

∣∫Rnhx dλn∣≤∫Rn∣hx∣ dλn≤∫RnM∣ρ∣ dλn=M∫Rn∣ρ∣ dλn,\Bigl|\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}h_x\,d\lambda_n\Bigr|\le\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}|h_x|\,d\lambda_n\le\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}M|\rho|\,d\lambda_n=M\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}|\rho|\,d\lambda_n,

the middle inequality by the monotonicity clause there and the last equality by its linearity clause. This proves claim 2.

Citations

Loading…

Dependencies

Uses0

Loading…

Comments

Log in to comment.

Loading…