MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Does exists a short, simple proof of the inequality

$ \|u\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)} \leqslant C \|Du\| _{L^{2}(\Omega)} + \|u\| _{L^2{(\partial{\Omega})}} $ for $u\in H^{1}=W^{1,2}(\Omega) $

(Sobolev space with one weak derivative integrable in square), where $\Omega = \{ x\in\mathbb{R}^{n}:\ 1<|x|<2 \}$?

(we do not assume, that the trace of $u$ vanishes).

share|cite|improve this question
This question is perhaps not suitable for this website. Anyway, a quick sketch for your specific case: using a density argument it suffices to prove for $C^\infty\cap H^1$. For smooth functions, use the fundamental theorem of calculus to get $$ | u(r,\theta) | \leq |u(1,\theta)| + \int_1^2 |\partial_r u(s,\theta)| ds \leq |u(1,\theta)| + \left(\int_1^2 | DU(s,\theta) |^2 ds\right)^2 $$ Now square, integrate over $r,\theta$, and you are done. – Willie Wong Mar 8 '11 at 15:24
Ack, the outer exponent in the far right of the displayed equation should be $1/2$, not $2$. – Willie Wong Mar 8 '11 at 15:25
Granted this question has an easy answer, but is this really worth the votes to close? – J.C. Ottem Mar 12 '11 at 3:45
By the way, the name is Friedrichs, not Friedrich. – Michael Renardy May 17 '12 at 23:26
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Let $\Omega$ be an open subset of $\mathbb R^n$ with a $C^1$ boundary and $u\in H^1(\Omega)$. We compute with $D_{x_1}=-i\partial_{x_1}$, $$ 2\Re\langle D_{x_1}u, i x_1u\rangle=-2\Re\int_\Omega x_1(\partial_{x_1}u)\ \overline{u} dx =-\int_\Omega x_1\partial_1(\vert u\vert^2) dx= -\int_\Omega \partial_1(x_1\vert u\vert^2) dx+ \int_\Omega \vert u\vert^2 dx, $$ so that with Green's formula $$ 2\Re\langle D_{x_1}u, i x_1u\rangle=\Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 -\int_{\partial \Omega} x_1\vert u\vert^2\nu_1 d\sigma, $$ and thus (Cauchy-Schwarz) $ \Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)}^2\le \sup_{x\in \partial \Omega}{\vert x_1\vert} \Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\partial\Omega)}^2 +2\sup_{x\in \partial \Omega}{\vert x_1\vert}\Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)} \Vert D_{x_1}u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)} $ implying $$ \Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)}^2\le \sup_{x\in \partial \Omega}{\vert x_1\vert} \Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\partial\Omega)}^2 +\frac 12 \Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)}^2 +2 \sup_{x\in \partial \Omega}{\vert x_1\vert}^2 \Vert D_{x_1}u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)}^2. $$ The term $\frac 12\Vert u\Vert_{L^2(\Omega)}^2$ in the rhs can be absorbed in the lhs, yielding the sought inequality. One could also fiddle with the choice of the multiplier $x_1$ and get better constants by replacing $x_1$ by another function and $\partial _1$ by another vector field.


share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.