Timeline for A space of distributions vanishing on the boundary
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Oct 1, 2015 at 20:06 | comment | added | Igor Khavkine | @JohannesHahn, the dependence on $f$ is rather loose. Any function that vanishes only on the boundary and has $0$ as a regular value would give the same definition. However, replacing $f$ by say $f^{1/2}$ or $e^{-1/f^2}$ would give different definitions, I think. | |
| Oct 1, 2015 at 17:59 | comment | added | Johannes Hahn | I suppose the fact that you chose $\mathcal{D}_f(U)$ instead of $\mathcal{D}(\partial U)$ as notation means that this space depends on the chosen function $f$ ? Can we have some notion of vanishing at the boundary that is independent of such arbitrary choices? | |
| Sep 25, 2015 at 21:53 | comment | added | Igor Khavkine | @AlexM., I'm afraid that after five minutes of staring at your definition, I still can't parse it. Sorry. | |
| Sep 25, 2015 at 18:10 | comment | added | Alex M. | I see what you are doing: you are mimicking the construction of the space of tempered distributions, replacing the monomials $x^\alpha$ ($\alpha$ multiindex) by $f^k$. Ingenious! Please note, though, that I have edited my post adding my own attempt at answering it and a completely new question. Would you please take a look at the new version? Thank you. | |
| Sep 24, 2015 at 9:10 | history | edited | Igor Khavkine | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 10 characters in body
|
| Sep 22, 2015 at 20:13 | history | answered | Igor Khavkine | CC BY-SA 3.0 |