Timeline for Compact embedding of ${\rm L}^1_{loc}$ space
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
9 events
when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Mar 4, 2016 at 16:48 | comment | added | Semmel | Apologies for the late reply, but I believe that the author was a bit careless about the notation. I think he actually meant to say that "up to the multiplication with an arbitrary smooth function" where he would have spaces ${\rm L}^1(\Omega)$ and ${\rm W}^{-1,p}(\Omega)$. It is the only explanation I have managed to come up with and if I go through the proof with it, it works. | |
Oct 21, 2015 at 7:15 | comment | added | Jochen Wengenroth | In the paper appear expressions like $\|f\|_{L^1_{loc}(\mathbb R^2)}$ which make no sense for the space of locally integrable functions. | |
Oct 21, 2015 at 7:13 | comment | added | Jochen Wengenroth | If, as usual, $L^1_{loc}$ is the spaces of (equivalence classes of) measurable functions $f$ with $\int_k |f| <\infty$ for all compact sets $K$, it is not clear to me what compactness means. As Semmel comments, it is a (complete metrizable) locally convex space and in that category there are two candidates for a definition: Either a $0$-neighborhood is mapped to a relatively compact set (this is a very strong requirement) or all bounded sets are mapped to relatively compact ones (I know the name Montel-operator for the latter case). | |
Oct 21, 2015 at 6:37 | comment | added | Semmel | Could you explain a bit more, please? | |
Oct 21, 2015 at 0:03 | comment | added | Fan Zheng | Then could you just use a sequence of mollifiers exhausting $\Omega$ and the diagonalization argument? | |
Oct 20, 2015 at 21:13 | comment | added | Semmel | If it were normed, I could just use the standard Schauder's theorem. ${\rm L}^1_{loc}$ is complete metrizable locally convex space (the topology is generated by a countable family of seminorms). So, to say that a set is bounded it is to say that it is bounded with respect to all continuous seminorms. | |
Oct 20, 2015 at 20:48 | comment | added | Fan Zheng | How do you define "boundedness" in $L_{loc}^1$, which a priori doesn't have a norm on it? | |
Oct 20, 2015 at 20:35 | history | edited | Semmel |
added one tag more
|
|
Oct 20, 2015 at 16:12 | history | asked | Semmel | CC BY-SA 3.0 |