8
$\begingroup$

The question is really simple: Given $$ f, g\in C^\alpha_c(\mathcal{R}^d) $$ is $$ f*g\in C^d_c? $$

I came up with a formal argument using the decay of the Fourier transform of continuous functions, but it is really formal and I would appreciate a reference.

What I have though so far, which has a few holes is the following:

1) Because the Fourier transform, by interpolation, goes from $L^p\rightarrow L^q$, for every $p<\infty$, and I am thinking about compactly supported continuous functions, their Fourier transform has to behave roughly like $L^1$ in the far field. Using that if a function is in $L^\infty$ its Fourier transform is uniformly continuous, I claim that $\hat{f}, \hat{g}\sim O(\frac{1}{|\chi|^d})$ when $\chi\to\infty$.

1*) This step is the one I don't trust, though I am looking for a continuous function, for which it's fourier transform does not have this decay. I boiled it down to find a continuous function that has no integrable derivatives at all, any ideas? Because if we take $f,g\in H^{\frac{d}{2}}$ borderline continuous, just by dividing the derivatives we get

$$ \Delta^{\frac{d}{2}}(f*g)=\Delta^{\frac{d}{4}}f*\Delta^{\frac{d}{4}}g\sim L^2*L^2\in C^0 $$

Therefore, $f*g\in C^d$.

2) We use the Convolution Theorem, so $\widehat{f*g}\sim O(\frac{1}{|\chi|^{2d}})$.

3) Finally, if $h\in L^2$ and $\hat{h}\sim O(\frac{1}{|\chi|^{d+\alpha}})$. Then, $h\in C^{\alpha-\epsilon}$ $\forall \epsilon>0$. Therefore, $f*g\in C^{d-\epsilon}$ $\forall \epsilon>0$.

I know this argument is not completely rigorous, though it shows me that dimension should play a role.

Assuming nobody believes in the result (I don't think it's true, but it would be nice, what is in fact true), I have a similar question, which might be easier:

We know that if $\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1$ and $f\in L^p$ and $g\in L^q$ and assume they are compactly supported then, $$ f*g\in C^0_c $$ This can be easily seen by using than $L^q=(L^p)^*$, and the fact that convolution is translation invariant.

But, what happens if $p$ is better than the conjugate of $q$?

Lets say $f\in L^3$ and $g\in L^2$, is it true that $$ f*g\in C^\alpha_c, $$ for some $\alpha>0$?

Even simpler, take $f\in C^\alpha$ and $g\in L^2$, do you get $$ f*g\in C^{\alpha +\beta}_c, $$ for some $\beta>0$?

All of this assuming compact support of both functions.

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Just to clarify: when you write $C^d_c$ do you mean $C^\alpha_c$? $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Aug 24 '13 at 3:46
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Why don't you just write it by definition and then take derivative under the integral? $\endgroup$ – Tomas Aug 24 '13 at 6:07
  • $\begingroup$ To clarify, I do mean $C^d_c$, though I think it might be true that it is $C^{d-\epsilon}_c$ $\forall \epsilon>0$. I don't know how to make the argument not in Fourier space, because all the arguments that I can think of are not dependent in the dimension. $\endgroup$ – Sloth-Meister Aug 24 '13 at 14:30
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ It has nothing to do with $d$. Just follow shanlin's advise. $\endgroup$ – Alexandre Eremenko Aug 24 '13 at 15:25
  • $\begingroup$ I would be very surprised if convolving two functions in $C^1_c(R^8)$ gave me something in $C^4_c(R^8)$. I'm not convinced by your Step 1, for instance $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Aug 24 '13 at 18:39
7
$\begingroup$

$C^\alpha_c*C^\beta_c\subset C^{\alpha+\beta}_c$ but not much better than that. If you want it through Fourier analysis, the shortest route to go is to periodize and to use the Bernstein description of periodic $C^\alpha$ with non-integer $\alpha$ as the set of continuous functions $f$ such that for every $n$, there exists a trigonometric polynomial of degree $n$ such that $\|f-p\|_C\le Cn^{-\alpha}$. Then writing $f=p+r$ and $g=q+h$ and noticing that $p*g$ and $r*q$ are polynomials, you get away with the trivial bound $Cn^{-(\alpha+\beta)}$ for the term $r*h$, which you treat as an error term. The case of integer $\alpha$ (or $\beta$) is trivial: just differentiate $f$ all the way you can and only then switch to $g$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Fedja, your first sentence is what came to my mind but then I was having trouble writing down examples which show that one does not get the dramatic gain in smoothness that Matias is looking for. (Admittedly I had not worked very hard on it.) $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Aug 26 '13 at 2:38
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you, I never thought it to be really true. But, sometimes it is nice to dream! And to learn a characterization of $C^\alpha$, I hope to use it someday. $\endgroup$ – Sloth-Meister Aug 26 '13 at 3:11
  • $\begingroup$ @MatiasG.Delgadino the gain in differentiability that Fedja points out was never in question. You were claiming something which I think is much stronger, namely that in higher dimensions one can convolve two $C^1_c$ functions and get something $C^d_c$ for $d \gg 2$. (Perhaps I have misread something?) $\endgroup$ – Yemon Choi Aug 26 '13 at 3:14
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ The Bernstein theorem goes both ways and if you consider series with lacunary spectra (say, $\{\pm 2^k\}$ in dimension $1$, but the dimension hardly matters here), it can be easily restated in terms of coefficients directly, so the counterexample is at hand too. $\endgroup$ – fedja Aug 26 '13 at 3:20

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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