16
$\begingroup$

SHORT VERSION: Does the Meyers-Serrin theorem hold on complete, non-compact Riemannian manifolds, i.e. $W^{k,p}(M) = H^{k,p}(M)$? My guess is that this holds for the special case $k=1$ (and all $p\geq 1$), and can fail to hold in general, but I didn't find any explicit reference in the literature.

LONG VERSION: As it is well known (?), many facts about Sobolev spaces that are well known on $\mathbb{R}^n$ are no longer true when the base space is a complete, non-compact Riemannian manifold (e.g. $C^\infty_c(M)$ is not necessarily dense in $H^{k}(M)$, for $k \geq 2$).

On $\mathbb{R}^n$, Sobolev spaces are usually defined in two ways. I'm mainly interested in the case $p=2$ and $k=1$, so I will stick to this case.

The first definition is as follows:

$$W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n):=\{u \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^n) \mid D_i u \in L^2(\mathbb{R}^n),\; \forall i =1,\ldots,n\},$$

where $D_i u$ is a derivative in the sense of distributions. $W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ is equipped with the norm

$$\|u\|_{W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n)}^2 = \|u\|^2_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^n)} + \sum_{i=1}^n \| D_i u \|^2_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^n)}.$$

The second definition is as the completion

$$ H^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n):=\overline{C^\infty(\mathbb{R}^n) \cap W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n)},$$

with the norm defined above.

It is a textbook result (Meyers-Serrin theorem) that $W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n) = H^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n)$, i.e. the two definitions are equivalent. Actually $W^{k,p}(\mathbb{R}^n) = H^{k,p}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ for all $k \in \mathbb{N},p \geq 1$.

What happens on manifolds? Let $M$ be a Riemannian manifold (not compact, in general, but always without boundary and complete). Hebey, in his book (Chapter 3), defines Sobolev space $H^{1,2}(M)$, in the non-compact case, as the closure of the space $C^\infty(M)$ of smooth functions with the norm

$$\| u\|_{W^{1,2}(M)}^2:= \|u\|^2_{L^2(M)} + \int_M g(\nabla u,\nabla u) d\mu.$$

The fact that he does not present a definition similar to $W^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^n)$ for manifolds made me wonder. For a Riemannian manifold $M$ and an $L^2_{\mathrm{loc}}(M)$ function, the weak gradient $\nabla u$ is the following linear functional on smooth, compactly supported sections:

$$ \nabla u[ X] := (u, \nabla^* X)_{L^2(M)}, \qquad \forall X \in \Gamma_c^{\infty}(TM), $$

where $\nabla^* X = - \mathrm{div}(X)$ is the formal adjoint. If there exists an $L^2$ section $V$ of $TM$ such that

$$ (u,\nabla^* X) = \int_M g(V,X) d\omega, $$

then we say that $V = \nabla u \in L^2(TM)$. Then, we can define

$$ W^{1,2}(M) := \{ u \in L^2(M) \mid \nabla u \in L^2(TM) \}$$,

equipped with the norm

$$ \| u\|^2_{W^{1,2}(M)} : = \|u\|^2_{L^2(M)} + \int_M g(\nabla u,\nabla u)d\omega. $$

Does this definition make sense? Why did Hebey not mention it in his book (while he mentions both the possible definitions and their equivalence in the case of $M=\mathbb{R}^n$)? Are the two definitions equivalent? Is there a standard reference where the definition of $W^{1,2}(M)$ as above is presented ?

$\endgroup$
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Does mathoverflow.net/questions/126419/… answer your question? $\endgroup$ – Willie Wong Jul 14 '16 at 20:27
  • $\begingroup$ Not completely. I believe that, in the special case $k=1$, the answer should be yes. $\endgroup$ – Raziel Jul 14 '16 at 20:41
  • $\begingroup$ The way I read Michor's answer is that as long as the curvature tensor is bounded, then the answer is yes for $k = 1$. Do you specifically care about the case without any control whatsoever on the geometry? $\endgroup$ – Willie Wong Jul 14 '16 at 20:44
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, precisely. $\endgroup$ – Raziel Jul 14 '16 at 21:38
  • $\begingroup$ Let me also mention that I believe the result is true for $k=1$ because there always exist "good" cut-off functions with controlled gradient, while this does not hold for higher order derivatives (without some bounded geometry assumption). $\endgroup$ – Raziel Jul 15 '16 at 10:48
5
$\begingroup$

If $M$ is a complete Riemannian manifold, then \begin{equation}W^{1,p}(M) = H^p(M) := \overline{C^\infty(M) \cap W^{1,p}(M)} = \overline{C^\infty_c(M)}.\end{equation}

This is a special case of Satz 2.3 of the following work (in general it holds for differential forms):

Eichhorn, Jürgen: Sobolev-Räume, Einbettungssätze und Normungleichungen auf offenen Mannigfaltigkeiten [In English: Sobolev spaces, embedding theorems and norm inequalities on open manifolds]. Math. Nachr. 138 (1988), 157–168.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

If $(M,g)$ is complete, then $\overline{C^\infty_c(M)}^{||\cdot||_{p,k}}=L^p_k(M)$ for any $1\leq p< \infty$ and $k\in \{0,1,2,\cdots\}$, where $L^p_k(M)$ is the space of functions $u\in L^p(M)$ such that $Pu=f\in L^p(M)$ (in the weak sense) whenever $P$ is a smooth differential operator of order $\leq k$.

For a reference for this fact you might have a look at "The Yamabe problem" by Lee and Parker, section 2.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Is it clear that always $W^{k,p}(M) \subset L_k^p(M)$? It seems that the result you stated characterize the closure of smooth compactly supported functions with respect to the Sobolev norms. Does the condition $||\nabla u ||_p < \infty$ imply that $Pu \in L^p(M)$ for any smooth differential operator $P$ of order $1$? For example, you may choose the coefficients of a smooth differential operator $P$ to be unbounded since the manifold itself is noncompact. $\endgroup$ – Jesse Railo Aug 23 '19 at 22:52
  • $\begingroup$ Good observation: actually, in the aforementioned reference the result is only stated and not proved. But your remark is perfectly legitimate. $\endgroup$ – user590533 Aug 26 '19 at 6:58

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.