DOCSLIB.ORG

Mollifiers. from R. Showalter's Book on Pdes. (I) Mollifiers Are C

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Mollifiers. from R. Showalter's Book on Pdes. (I) Mollifiers Are C Mollifiers. From R. Showalter's book on PDEs. (i) Mollifiers are C01 approximations of the delta-function. (ii) Mollification is an operator of convolution with a mollifier: n f"(x) = Z f(x y)'"(y) dy ; x R : Rn − 2 n (iii) Mollification is a smoothening operator: f"(x) C (R ). 2 1 (iv) Mollification is a bounded linear operator with norm 1. ≤ p (v) Any function in L (G), p = or C0(G) can be approximated by its 6 1 p mollification. Hence C01(G) is dense in L (G) and C0(G). We shall begin with some elementary results concerning the approxima- tion of functions by very smooth functions. The \strong inclusion" K G between subsets of Euclidean space Rn means K is compact, G is⊂⊂ open, and K G. If A and B are sets, their Cartesian product is given by A B =⊂ [a; b]: a A; b B . If A and B are subsets of Kn (or any other× vectorf space) their2 set2 sumg is A + B = a + b : a A; b B . If G is not open, this definition can be extended iff there exists2 and2 openg set O such that O¯ = G¯, by saying that K G if K O. For each " > 0, let n ⊂⊂ ⊂⊂ '" C (R ) be given with the properties 2 01 n '" 0 ; supp('") x R : x " ; Z '" = 1 : ≥ ⊂ f 2 j j ≤ g Such functions are called mollifiers and can be constructed, for example, by taking an appropriate multiple of 2 2 1 exp( x " )− ; x < " , "(x) = 0 ; j j − jxj " . j j ≥ Let f L1(G), where G is open in Rn, and suppose that the support of f satisfies supp(2 f) G. Then the distance from supp(f) to @G is a positive number δ. We extend⊂⊂ f as zero on the complement of G and denote the extension in L1(Rn) also by f. Define for each " > 0 the mollified function n f"(x) = Z f(x y)'"(y) dy ; x R : (0.1) Rn − 2 1 Lemma 0.1 For each " > 0, supp(f") supp(f) + y : y " and n ⊂ f j j ≤ g f" C (R ). 2 1 Proof : The second result follows from Leibniz' rule and the representation f"(x) = Z f(s)'"(x s) ds : − The first follows from the observation that f"(x) = 0 only if x supp(f)+ y : y " . Since supp(f) is closed and y : y 6 " is compact,2 it follows f j j ≤ g f j j ≤ g that the indicated set sum is closed and, hence, contains supp(f"). p Lemma 0.2 If f C0(G), then f" f uniformly on G. If f L (G), 2 ! p 2 1 p < , then f" p f p and f" f in L (G). ≤ 1 k kL (G) ≤ k kL (G) ! Proof : The first result follows from the estimate f"(x) f(x) Z f(x y) f(x) '"(y) dy j − j ≤ j − − j sup f(x y) f(x) : x supp(f) ; y " ≤ fj − − j 2 j j ≤ g and the uniform continuity of f on its support. For the case p = 1 we obtain f" 1 ZZ f(x y) '"(y) dy dx = Z '" Z f k kL (G) ≤ j − j · j j by Fubini's theorem, since f(x y) dx = f for each y Rn and this R j − j R j j 2 gives the desired estimate. If p = 2 we have for each C0(G) 2 Z f"(x) (x) dx ZZ f(x y) (x) dx '"(y) dy ≤ j − j Z f 2 2 '"(y) dy = f 2 2 ≤ k kL (G)k kL (G) k kL (G)k kL (G) by computations similar to the above, and the result follows since C0(G) is dense in L2(G). (the result for p = 1 or 2 is proved as above but using the H¨olderinequality in place of Cauchy-Schwartz.)6 Finally we verify the claim of convergence in Lp(G). If η > 0 we have a g C0(G) with f g Lp η=3. The above shows f" g" Lp η=3 and we2 obtain k − k ≤ k − k ≤ f" f Lp f" g" Lp + g" g Lp + g f Lp k − k ≤ k − k k − k k − k 2η=3 + g" g Lp : ≤ k − k 2 For " sufficiently small, the support of g" g is bounded (uniformly) and − g" g uniformly, so the last term converges to zero as " 0. !The preceding results imply the following. ! p Theorem 0.3 C01(G) is dense in L (G). Theorem 0.4 For every K G there is a ' C01(G) such that 0 '(x) 1, x G, and '(x) =⊂⊂ 1 for all x in some neighborhood2 of K. ≤ ≤ 2 Proof : Let δ be the distance from K to @G and 0 < " < " + "0 < δ. Let f(x) = 1 if dist(x; K) "0 and f(x) = 0 otherwise. Then f" has its support within x : dist(x; K) ≤ " + " and it equals 1 on x : dist(x; K) " " , f ≤ 0g f ≤ 0 − g so the result follows if " < "0. 3 Distributions. From R. Showalter's book on PDEs. (i) Distributions are linear functionals on C01(G). (ii) For a `nice' function distributions are defined as integrals Tf (φ) = fφ RG (iii) A fundamental example of a distribution is the delta-function. (iv) Distributions are not bounded functionals, but they are closed func- tionals. (v) A derivative of a distribution is a distribution, well-defined by integra- tion by parts. (vi) A derivative of a distribution differs from from a regular derivative. Recall Cm(G) = f C(G): Dαf C(G) for all α m ; f 2 2 j j ≤ g α C1(G) = f C(G): D f C(G) for all α ; f 2 2 g C1(G) = f C1(G) : supp(f) is compact : 0 f 2 g All of them are linear spaces. Cm(G) is also a Banach space (check) with the norm α f Cm(G) = max D f C(G); f C(G) = sup f(x) : jj jj α jj jj jj jj x G j j 2 C1(G) is not a Banach space, but it is a complete metric space with the metric 1 1 f g Cn(G) ρ(f; g) = n jj − jj : X 2 1 + f g n n=1 jj − jjC (G) C1(G) is not even metrizable, but there is a (nonconstructive) `locally com- pact topological vector space' topology induced by the metric like C1(G), that makes it complete. 4 0.1 A distribution on G is defined to be a conjugate-linear functional on C01(G). That is, C01(G)∗ is the linear space of distributions on G, and we also denote it by (G). D∗ 1 1 Example. The space Lloc(G) = L (K): K G of locally integrable functions on G can be identified\f with a subspace⊂⊂ ofg distributions on G as in the Example of I.1.5. That is, f L1 (G) is assigned the distribution 2 loc Tf C (G) defined by 2 01 ∗ Tf (') = Z f';'¯ C01(G) ; (0.2) G 2 where the Lebesgue integral (over the support of ') is used. Theorem 0.3 1 shows that T : Lloc(G) C01(G)∗ is an injection. In particular, the (equiv- alence classes of) functions! in either of L1(G) or L2(G) will be identified with a subspace of (G). D∗ 0.2 We shall define the derivative of a distribution in such a way that it agrees with the usual notion of derivative on those distributions which arise from α continuously differentiable functions. That is, we want to define @ : ∗(G) (G) so that D ! D∗ α m @ (Tf ) = TDαf ; α m ; f C (G) : j j ≤ 2 But a computation with integration-by-parts gives α α TDαf (') = ( 1)j jTf (D ') ;' C1(G) ; − 2 0 and this identity suggests the following. Definition. The αth partial derivative of the distribution T is the distri- bution @αT defined by α α α @ T (') = ( 1)j jT (D ') ;' C1(G) : (0.3) − 2 0 α α Since D L(C01(G);C01(G)), it follows that @ T is linear. Every distri- bution has2 derivatives of all orders and so also then does every function, 1 e.g., in Lloc(G), when it is identified as a distribution. Furthermore, by the very definition of the derivative @α it is clear that @α and Dα are compatible with the identification of C (G) in (G). 1 D∗ 5 0.3 We give some examples of distributions on R. Since we do not distinguish 1 the function f L (R) from the functional Tf , we have the identity 2 loc 1 f(') = Z f(x)'(x) dx ; ' C1(R) : 2 0 −∞ (a) If f C1(R), then 2 @f(') = f(D') = Z f(D'¯ ) = Z (Df)' ¯ = Df(') ; (0.4) − − where the third equality follows by an integration-by-parts and all others are definitions. Thus, @f = Df, which is no surprise since the definition of derivative of distributions was rigged to make this so. (b) Let the ramp and Heaviside functions be given respectively by x ; x > 0 1 ; x > 0 r(x) = H(x) = 0 ; x 0 , 0 ; x < 0 . ≤ Then we have 1 1 @r(') = Z xD'¯(x) dx = Z H(x)' ¯(x) dx = H(') ;' C01(G) ; − 0 2 −∞ so we have @r = H, although Dr(0) does not exist. (c) The derivative of the non-continuous H is given by 1 @H(') = Z D'¯ =' ¯(0) = δ(') ;' C01(G); − 0 2 that is, @H = δ, the Dirac functional.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Sobolev Spaces, Theory and Applications
    Sobolev spaces, theory and applications Piotr Haj lasz1 Introduction These are the notes that I prepared for the participants of the Summer School in Mathematics in Jyv¨askyl¨a,August, 1998. I thank Pekka Koskela for his kind invitation. This is the second summer course that I delivere in Finland. Last August I delivered a similar course entitled Sobolev spaces and calculus of variations in Helsinki. The subject was similar, so it was not posible to avoid overlapping. However, the overlapping is little. I estimate it as 25%. While preparing the notes I used partially the notes that I prepared for the previous course. Moreover Lectures 9 and 10 are based on the text of my joint work with Pekka Koskela [33]. The notes probably will not cover all the material presented during the course and at the some time not all the material written here will be presented during the School. This is however, not so bad: if some of the results presented on lectures will go beyond the notes, then there will be some reasons to listen the course and at the same time if some of the results will be explained in more details in notes, then it might be worth to look at them. The notes were prepared in hurry and so there are many bugs and they are not complete. Some of the sections and theorems are unfinished. At the end of the notes I enclosed some references together with comments. This section was also prepared in hurry and so probably many of the authors who contributed to the subject were not mentioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Arxiv:0704.2891V3 [Math.AG] 5 Dec 2007 Schwartz Functions on Nash Manifolds
    Schwartz functions on Nash manifolds Avraham Aizenbud and Dmitry Gourevitch ∗ July 11, 2011 Abstract In this paper we extend the notions of Schwartz functions, tempered func- tions and generalized Schwartz functions to Nash (i.e. smooth semi-algebraic) manifolds. We reprove for this case classically known properties of Schwartz functions on Rn and build some additional tools which are important in rep- resentation theory. Contents 1 Introduction 2 1.1 Mainresults................................ 3 1.2 Schwartz sections of Nash bundles . 4 1.3 Restricted topologyand sheaf properties . .... 4 1.4 Possibleapplications ........................... 5 1.5 Summary ................................. 6 1.6 Remarks.................................. 6 2 Semi-algebraic geometry 8 2.1 Basicnotions ............................... 8 arXiv:0704.2891v3 [math.AG] 5 Dec 2007 2.2 Tarski-Seidenberg principle of quantifier elimination anditsapplications............................ 8 2.3 Additional preliminary results . .. 10 ∗Avraham Aizenbud and Dmitry Gourevitch, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, The Weizmann Institute of Science POB 26, Rehovot 76100, ISRAEL. E-mails: [email protected], [email protected]. Keywords: Schwartz functions, tempered functions, generalized functions, distributions, Nash man- ifolds. 1 3 Nash manifolds 11 3.1 Nash submanifolds of Rn ......................... 11 3.2 Restricted topological spaces and sheaf theory over them........ 12 3.3 AbstractNashmanifolds . 14 3.3.1 ExamplesandRemarks. 14 3.4 Nashvectorbundles ........................... 15 3.5 Nashdifferentialoperators . 16 3.5.1 Algebraic differential operators on a Nash manifold . .... 17 3.6 Nashtubularneighborhood . 18 4 Schwartz and tempered functions on affine Nash manifolds 19 4.1 Schwartzfunctions ............................ 19 4.2 Temperedfunctions. .. .. .. 20 4.3 Extension by zero of Schwartz functions . .. 20 4.4 Partitionofunity ............................. 21 4.5 Restriction and sheaf property of tempered functions .
    [Show full text]
  • Geometric Integration Theory Contents
    Steven G. Krantz Harold R. Parks Geometric Integration Theory Contents Preface v 1 Basics 1 1.1 Smooth Functions . 1 1.2Measures.............................. 6 1.2.1 Lebesgue Measure . 11 1.3Integration............................. 14 1.3.1 Measurable Functions . 14 1.3.2 The Integral . 17 1.3.3 Lebesgue Spaces . 23 1.3.4 Product Measures and the Fubini–Tonelli Theorem . 25 1.4 The Exterior Algebra . 27 1.5 The Hausdorff Distance and Steiner Symmetrization . 30 1.6 Borel and Suslin Sets . 41 2 Carath´eodory’s Construction and Lower-Dimensional Mea- sures 53 2.1 The Basic Definition . 53 2.1.1 Hausdorff Measure and Spherical Measure . 55 2.1.2 A Measure Based on Parallelepipeds . 57 2.1.3 Projections and Convexity . 57 2.1.4 Other Geometric Measures . 59 2.1.5 Summary . 61 2.2 The Densities of a Measure . 64 2.3 A One-Dimensional Example . 66 2.4 Carath´eodory’s Construction and Mappings . 67 2.5 The Concept of Hausdorff Dimension . 70 2.6 Some Cantor Set Examples . 73 i ii CONTENTS 2.6.1 Basic Examples . 73 2.6.2 Some Generalized Cantor Sets . 76 2.6.3 Cantor Sets in Higher Dimensions . 78 3 Invariant Measures and the Construction of Haar Measure 81 3.1 The Fundamental Theorem . 82 3.2 Haar Measure for the Orthogonal Group and the Grassmanian 90 3.2.1 Remarks on the Manifold Structure of G(N,M).... 94 4 Covering Theorems and the Differentiation of Integrals 97 4.1 Wiener’s Covering Lemma and its Variants .
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Sobolev Spaces
    Introduction to Sobolev Spaces Lecture Notes MM692 2018-2 Joa Weber UNICAMP December 23, 2018 Contents 1 Introduction1 1.1 Notation and conventions......................2 2 Lp-spaces5 2.1 Borel and Lebesgue measure space on Rn .............5 2.2 Definition...............................8 2.3 Basic properties............................ 11 3 Convolution 13 3.1 Convolution of functions....................... 13 3.2 Convolution of equivalence classes................. 15 3.3 Local Mollification.......................... 16 3.3.1 Locally integrable functions................. 16 3.3.2 Continuous functions..................... 17 3.4 Applications.............................. 18 4 Sobolev spaces 19 4.1 Weak derivatives of locally integrable functions.......... 19 1 4.1.1 The mother of all Sobolev spaces Lloc ........... 19 4.1.2 Examples........................... 20 4.1.3 ACL characterization.................... 21 4.1.4 Weak and partial derivatives................ 22 4.1.5 Approximation characterization............... 23 4.1.6 Bounded weakly differentiable means Lipschitz...... 24 4.1.7 Leibniz or product rule................... 24 4.1.8 Chain rule and change of coordinates............ 25 4.1.9 Equivalence classes of locally integrable functions..... 27 4.2 Definition and basic properties................... 27 4.2.1 The Sobolev spaces W k;p .................. 27 4.2.2 Difference quotient characterization of W 1;p ........ 29 k;p 4.2.3 The compact support Sobolev spaces W0 ........ 30 k;p 4.2.4 The local Sobolev spaces Wloc ............... 30 4.2.5 How the spaces relate.................... 31 4.2.6 Basic properties { products and coordinate change.... 31 i ii CONTENTS 5 Approximation and extension 33 5.1 Approximation............................ 33 5.1.1 Local approximation { any domain............. 33 5.1.2 Global approximation on bounded domains.......
    [Show full text]
  • Proving the Regularity of the Reduced Boundary of Perimeter Minimizing Sets with the De Giorgi Lemma
    PROVING THE REGULARITY OF THE REDUCED BOUNDARY OF PERIMETER MINIMIZING SETS WITH THE DE GIORGI LEMMA Presented by Antonio Farah In partial fulfillment of the requirements for graduation with the Dean's Scholars Honors Degree in Mathematics Honors, Department of Mathematics Dr. Stefania Patrizi, Supervising Professor Dr. David Rusin, Honors Advisor, Department of Mathematics THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN May 2020 Acknowledgements I deeply appreciate the continued guidance and support of Dr. Stefania Patrizi, who supervised the research and preparation of this Honors Thesis. Dr. Patrizi kindly dedicated numerous sessions to this project, motivating and expanding my learning. I also greatly appreciate the support of Dr. Irene Gamba and of Dr. Francesco Maggi on the project, who generously helped with their reading and support. Further, I am grateful to Dr. David Rusin, who also provided valuable help on this project in his role of Honors Advisor in the Department of Mathematics. Moreover, I would like to express my gratitude to the Department of Mathematics' Faculty and Administration, to the College of Natural Sciences' Administration, and to the Dean's Scholars Honors Program of The University of Texas at Austin for my educational experience. 1 Abstract The Plateau problem consists of finding the set that minimizes its perimeter among all sets of a certain volume. Such set is known as a minimal set, or perimeter minimizing set. The problem was considered intractable until the 1960's, when the development of geometric measure theory by researchers such as Fleming, Federer, and De Giorgi provided the necessary tools to find minimal sets.
    [Show full text]
  • Five Lectures on Optimal Transportation: Geometry, Regularity and Applications
    FIVE LECTURES ON OPTIMAL TRANSPORTATION: GEOMETRY, REGULARITY AND APPLICATIONS ROBERT J. MCCANN∗ AND NESTOR GUILLEN Abstract. In this series of lectures we introduce the Monge-Kantorovich problem of optimally transporting one distribution of mass onto another, where optimality is measured against a cost function c(x, y). Connections to geometry, inequalities, and partial differential equations will be discussed, focusing in particular on recent developments in the regularity theory for Monge-Amp`ere type equations. An ap- plication to microeconomics will also be described, which amounts to finding the equilibrium price distribution for a monopolist marketing a multidimensional line of products to a population of anonymous agents whose preferences are known only statistically. c 2010 by Robert J. McCann. All rights reserved. Contents Preamble 2 1. An introduction to optimal transportation 2 1.1. Monge-Kantorovich problem: transporting ore from mines to factories 2 1.2. Wasserstein distance and geometric applications 3 1.3. Brenier’s theorem and convex gradients 4 1.4. Fully-nonlinear degenerate-elliptic Monge-Amp`eretype PDE 4 1.5. Applications 5 1.6. Euclidean isoperimetric inequality 5 1.7. Kantorovich’s reformulation of Monge’s problem 6 2. Existence, uniqueness, and characterization of optimal maps 6 2.1. Linear programming duality 8 2.2. Game theory 8 2.3. Relevance to optimal transport: Kantorovich-Koopmans duality 9 2.4. Characterizing optimality by duality 9 2.5. Existence of optimal maps and uniqueness of optimal measures 10 3. Methods for obtaining regularity of optimal mappings 11 3.1. Rectifiability: differentiability almost everywhere 12 3.2. From regularity a.e.
    [Show full text]
  • University of Alberta
    University of Alberta Extensions of Skorohod’s almost sure representation theorem by Nancy Hernandez Ceron A thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate Studies and Research in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mathematics Department of Mathematical and Statistical Sciences ©Nancy Hernandez Ceron Fall 2010 Edmonton, Alberta Permission is hereby granted to the University of Alberta Libraries to reproduce single copies of this thesis and to lend or sell such copies for private, scholarly or scientific research purposes only. Where the thesis is converted to, or otherwise made available in digital form, the University of Alberta will advise potential users of the thesis of these terms. The author reserves all other publication and other rights in association with the copyright in the thesis and, except as herein before provided, neither the thesis nor any substantial portion thereof may be printed or otherwise reproduced in any material form whatsoever without the author's prior written permission. Library and Archives Bibliothèque et Canada Archives Canada Published Heritage Direction du Branch Patrimoine de l’édition 395 Wellington Street 395, rue Wellington Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Ottawa ON K1A 0N4 Canada Canada Your file Votre référence ISBN:978-0-494-62500-2 Our file Notre référence ISBN: 978-0-494-62500-2 NOTICE: AVIS: The author has granted a non- L’auteur a accordé une licence non exclusive exclusive license allowing Library and permettant à la Bibliothèque et Archives Archives Canada to reproduce, Canada de reproduire, publier, archiver, publish, archive, preserve, conserve, sauvegarder, conserver, transmettre au public communicate to the public by par télécommunication ou par l’Internet, prêter, telecommunication or on the Internet, distribuer et vendre des thèses partout dans le loan, distribute and sell theses monde, à des fins commerciales ou autres, sur worldwide, for commercial or non- support microforme, papier, électronique et/ou commercial purposes, in microform, autres formats.
    [Show full text]
  • L P and Sobolev Spaces
    NOTES ON Lp AND SOBOLEV SPACES STEVE SHKOLLER 1. Lp spaces 1.1. Definitions and basic properties. Definition 1.1. Let 0 < p < 1 and let (X; M; µ) denote a measure space. If f : X ! R is a measurable function, then we define 1 Z p p kfkLp(X) := jfj dx and kfkL1(X) := ess supx2X jf(x)j : X Note that kfkLp(X) may take the value 1. Definition 1.2. The space Lp(X) is the set p L (X) = ff : X ! R j kfkLp(X) < 1g : The space Lp(X) satisfies the following vector space properties: (1) For each α 2 R, if f 2 Lp(X) then αf 2 Lp(X); (2) If f; g 2 Lp(X), then jf + gjp ≤ 2p−1(jfjp + jgjp) ; so that f + g 2 Lp(X). (3) The triangle inequality is valid if p ≥ 1. The most interesting cases are p = 1; 2; 1, while all of the Lp arise often in nonlinear estimates. Definition 1.3. The space lp, called \little Lp", will be useful when we introduce Sobolev spaces on the torus and the Fourier series. For 1 ≤ p < 1, we set ( 1 ) p 1 X p l = fxngn=1 j jxnj < 1 : n=1 1.2. Basic inequalities. Lemma 1.4. For λ 2 (0; 1), xλ ≤ (1 − λ) + λx. Proof. Set f(x) = (1 − λ) + λx − xλ; hence, f 0(x) = λ − λxλ−1 = 0 if and only if λ(1 − xλ−1) = 0 so that x = 1 is the critical point of f. In particular, the minimum occurs at x = 1 with value f(1) = 0 ≤ (1 − λ) + λx − xλ : Lemma 1.5.
    [Show full text]
  • The Logarithmic Sobolev Inequality Along the Ricci Flow
    The Logarithmic Sobolev Inequality Along The Ricci Flow (revised version) Rugang Ye Department of Mathematics University of California, Santa Barbara July 20, 2007 1. Introduction 2. The Sobolev inequality 3. The logarithmic Sobolev inequality on a Riemannian manifold 4. The logarithmic Sobolev inequality along the Ricci flow 5. The Sobolev inequality along the Ricci flow 6. The κ-noncollapsing estimate Appendix A. The logarithmic Sobolev inequalities on the euclidean space Appendix B. The estimate of e−tH Appendix C. From the estimate for e−tH to the Sobolev inequality 1 Introduction Consider a compact manifold M of dimension n 3. Let g = g(t) be a smooth arXiv:0707.2424v4 [math.DG] 29 Aug 2007 solution of the Ricci flow ≥ ∂g = 2Ric (1.1) ∂t − on M [0, T ) for some (finite or infinite) T > 0 with a given initial metric g(0) = g . × 0 Theorem A For each σ > 0 and each t [0, T ) there holds ∈ R n σ u2 ln u2dvol σ ( u 2 + u2)dvol ln σ + A (t + )+ A (1.2) ≤ |∇ | 4 − 2 1 4 2 ZM ZM 1 for all u W 1,2(M) with u2dvol =1, where ∈ M R 4 A1 = 2 min Rg0 , ˜ 2 n − CS(M,g0) volg0 (M) n A = n ln C˜ (M,g )+ (ln n 1), 2 S 0 2 − and all geometric quantities are associated with the metric g(t) (e.g. the volume form dvol and the scalar curvature R), except the scalar curvature Rg0 , the modified Sobolev ˜ constant CS(M,g0) (see Section 2 for its definition) and the volume volg0 (M) which are those of the initial metric g0.
    [Show full text]
  • A Radial Basis Function Partition of Unity Method for Transport on the Sphere
    A RADIAL BASIS FUNCTION PARTITION OF UNITY METHOD FOR TRANSPORT ON THE SPHERE by Kevin Aiton A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Mathematics Boise State University May 2014 c 2014 Kevin Aiton ALL RIGHTS RESERVED BOISE STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COLLEGE DEFENSE COMMITTEE AND FINAL READING APPROVALS of the thesis submitted by Kevin Aiton Thesis Title: A Radial Basis Function Partition of Unity Method for Transport on the Sphere Date of Final Oral Examination: 06 December 2013 The following individuals read and discussed the thesis submitted by student Kevin Aiton, and they evaluated his presentation and response to questions during the final oral examination. They found that the student passed the final oral examination. Grady Wright, Ph.D. Chair, Supervisory Committee Donna Calhoun, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee Inanc Senocak, Ph.D. Member, Supervisory Committee The final reading approval of the thesis was granted by Grady Wright, Ph.D., Chair of the Supervisory Committee. The thesis was approved for the Graduate College by John R. Pelton, Ph.D., Dean of the Graduate College. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This work was supported, in part, by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant DMS-0934581 and also by the Boise State Mathematics Department under the 2013 summer graduate fellowship. I would like to express gratitude to Professor Grady Wright. He has been both kind and patient. I would also like to thank the MOOSE development team at Idaho National Laboratory for letting me work remotely so I could work on my thesis. Finally, I would like to give gratitude to my family.
    [Show full text]
  • 27. Sobolev Inequalities 27.1
    ANALYSIS TOOLS WITH APPLICATIONS 493 27. Sobolev Inequalities 27.1. Morrey’s Inequality. d 1 d Notation 27.1. Let S − be the sphere of radius one centered at zero inside R . d 1 d For a set Γ S − ,x R , and r (0, ), let ⊂ ∈ ∈ ∞ Γx,r x + sω : ω Γ such that 0 s r . ≡ { ∈ ≤ ≤ } So Γx,r = x + Γ0,r where Γ0,r is a cone based on Γ, seeFigure49below. Γ Γ Figure 49. The cone Γ0,r. d 1 Notation 27.2. If Γ S − is a measurable set let Γ = σ(Γ) be the surface “area” of Γ. ⊂ | | Notation 27.3. If Ω Rd is a measurable set and f : Rd C is a measurable function let ⊂ → 1 fΩ := f(x)dx := f(x)dx. − m(Ω) Ω ZΩ Z By Theorem 8.35, r d 1 (27.1) f(y)dy = f(x + y)dy = dt t − f(x + tω) dσ(ω) Γx,r Γ0,r 0 Z Z Z ZΓ and letting f =1in this equation implies d (27.2) m(Γx,r)= Γ r /d. | | d 1 Lemma 27.4. Let Γ S − be a measurable set such that Γ > 0. For u 1 ⊂ | | ∈ C (Γx,r), 1 u(y) (27.3) u(y) u(x) dy |∇ d | 1 dy. − | − | ≤ Γ x y − ΓZx,r | |ΓZx,r | − | 494 BRUCE K. DRIVER† d 1 Proof. Write y = x + sω with ω S − , then by the fundamental theorem of calculus, ∈ s u(x + sω) u(x)= u(x + tω) ωdt − ∇ · Z0 and therefore, s u(x + sω) u(x) dσ(ω) u(x + tω) dσ(ω)dt | − | ≤ 0 Γ |∇ | ZΓ Z Z s d 1 u(x + tω) = t − dt |∇ d | 1 dσ(ω) 0 Γ x + tω x − Z Z | − | u(y) u(y) = |∇ d | 1 dy |∇ d | 1 dy, y x − ≤ x y − ΓZx,s | − | ΓZx,r | − | wherein the second equality we have used Eq.
    [Show full text]
  • Sobolev Inequalities in Familiar and Unfamiliar Settings
    Sobolev Inequalities in Familiar and Unfamiliar Settings Laurent Salo®-Coste Abstract The classical Sobolev inequalities play a key role in analysis in Euclidean spaces and in the study of solutions of partial di®erential equations. In fact, they are extremely flexible tools and are useful in many di®erent settings. This paper gives a glimpse of assortments of such applications in a variety of contexts. 1 Introduction There are few articles that have turned out to be as influential and truly im- portant as S.L. Sobolev 1938 article [93] (the American translation appeared in 1963), where he introduces his famed inequalities. It is the idea of a func- tional inequality itself that Sobolev brings to life in his paper, as well as the now so familiar notion of an a priori inequality, i.e., a functional inequality established under some strong hypothesis and that might be extended later, perhaps almost automatically, to its natural domain of de¯nition. (These ideas are also related to the theory of distributions which did not exist at the time and whose magni¯cent development by L. Schwartz was, in part, anticipated in the work of S.L. Sobolev.) The most basic and important applications of Sobolev inequalities are to the study of partial di®erential equations. Simply put, Sobolev inequalities provide some of the very basic tools in the study of the existence, regularity, and uniqueness of the solutions of all sorts of partial di®erential equations, lin- ear and nonlinear, elliptic, parabolic, and hyperbolic. I leave to others, much better quali¯ed than me, to discuss these beautiful developments.
    [Show full text]