Timeline for Essentially anti-Cauchy functions
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 15, 2019 at 7:50 | history | edited | James Baxter | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 15, 2019 at 7:45 | history | edited | James Baxter | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 1 character in body
|
| May 15, 2019 at 7:44 | comment | added | James Baxter | Yep, I think you nailed the difficulty, and hence the convoluted definition | |
| May 15, 2019 at 7:34 | comment | added | YCor | Note: one difficulty in the definition is that "to be a.e. differentiable" is not invariant under a.e. equality. This is a little issue (already when defining a.e. twice differentiable), which maybe is the reason the definition is formulated this way rather than directly introducing iterated derivatives. Indeed, for $f$ a.e. differentiable, to say that $f$ is a.e. twice differentiable does not a priori mean that there exists $g$ a.e. equal to $f$ such that $g'$ is a.e. differentiable. | |
| May 15, 2019 at 7:26 | comment | added | YCor | why anti-Cauchy rather than anti-Lipschitz? | |
| May 15, 2019 at 7:20 | history | asked | James Baxter | CC BY-SA 4.0 |