3
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $f \in C^{\infty}_c ( \mathbb{R}^2 )$, i.e. $f$ is a $C^{\infty}$ function with compact support defined on $\mathbb{R}^2$. The following link

Approximation of smooth compactly supported functions on $\mathbb{R}^2$ using sums of products of one variable functions

tells us that $f$ can be approximated by a sequence of functions $(f_n)$ in $C^{\infty}_c ( \mathbb{R}) \otimes C^{\infty}_c ( \mathbb{R})$ in the infinity norm, where each $f_n$ is of the form

$$ f_n( x,y) = \sum_{i=1}^{k_n} a^{(n)}_i (x) b^{(n)}_i (y), $$

for some functions $a^{(n)}_i, b^{(n)}_i \in C^{\infty}_c ( \mathbb{R})$, $1 \leq i \leq k_n$.

I wonder whether it is possible to construct such a sequence of functions $(f_n)$ such that $$ \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}, 1 \leq i \leq k_n} \big\| a^{(n)}_i \big\|_{\infty} < + \infty, \quad \quad \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}, 1 \leq i \leq k_n} \big\| b^{(n)}_i \big\|_{\infty} < + \infty, $$ and $$ \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}, 1 \leq i \leq k_n} \big\| \big( a^{(n)}_i \big)' \big\|_{\infty} < + \infty, \quad \quad \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}, 1 \leq i \leq k_n} \big\| \big( b^{(n)}_i \big)' \big\|_{\infty} < + \infty,$$ where as usual, $h'$ denotes the derivative to the function $h$.

This proposition would be very useful for my proof. But is this statement true? I am unable to prove this by the standard construction of the sequence $(f_n)$ using the Stone-Weierstrass theorem. Any ideas?

$\endgroup$
5
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Am I missing something? As you put it, it is not forbidden to break the $a_i^{(n)}$ and $b_i^{(n)}$ as a sum of a large number $N=N(i,n)$ of repeated $a_i^{(n)}/N$ resp. $b_i^{(n)}/N$, gaining the properties you want. $\endgroup$ – Pietro Majer Nov 25 '16 at 0:20
  • $\begingroup$ @PietroMajer You're right that we can break the $a^{(n)}_i$ and $b^{(n)}_i$ into repeated smaller parts respectively. But if their infinity norms explode to infinity, then this still doesn't solve the problem, regardless of how large the $N$ is chosen to be. Am I right? $\endgroup$ – Richard Nov 25 '16 at 0:55
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ Why, $N$ is not fixed for all $n$. You can write each single $f_n$ as a sum of several $a(x)b(y)$, each function $a$ and $b$ having $C^1$ norm less than $1$. $\endgroup$ – Pietro Majer Nov 25 '16 at 8:01
  • $\begingroup$ If you look at the accepted answer of the question mathoverflow.net/questions/166149/… you mention you get an answer to your version, too. $\endgroup$ – Jochen Wengenroth Nov 25 '16 at 9:07
  • $\begingroup$ @PietroMajer Sorry, of course you're right. But actually what I really want in my proof is for the sequence $(k_n)_{n \in \mathbb{N}}$ to bounded as well... Do you think that this is possible? $\endgroup$ – Richard Nov 26 '16 at 2:19
5
$\begingroup$

Let $Q$ be a square with side $T$ which contains the support. Extend your function to a doubly periodic one with periods $(0,T)$ and $(T,0)$. Then expand into the double Fourier series: $$f(x,y)=\sum a_{m,n}e^{2\pi inx/T}e^{2\pi im/T}.$$ This series can be differentiated term-by-term. As $f\in C^\infty$ this converges uniformly, so you have the approximation. Fourier coefficients are evidently bounded. Differentiating in $x$ you obtain a Fourier series of $f_x$ whose coefficients are also bounded. Same for $f_y$.

$\endgroup$

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.