- #1
jostpuur
- 2,116
- 19
I don't have the whole book A First Course in Sobolev Spaces by G. Leoni myself, but I have obtained a pdf file of the third chapter of it, and I have got stuck in trying to understand the Lemma 3.13. Is there anyone here feeling like understanding it?
The claim is this: [itex]I\subset\mathbb{R}[/itex] is some interval, and [itex]u:I\to\mathbb{R}[/itex] is some function. We assume that [itex]E\subset I[/itex] is some set such that [itex]u[/itex] is differentiable at all points [itex]x\in E[/itex]. We also assume that a real constant [itex]M[/itex] exists such that [itex]|u'(x)|\leq M[/itex] for all [itex]x\in E[/itex]. It is emphasized that [itex]E[/itex] is not assumed measurable. The claim is that [itex]m^*(u(E))\leq Mm^*(E)[/itex] holds, where [itex]m^*[/itex] is the Lebesgue outer measure.
The proof is supposed to start like this: We fix some [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] until the end of the proof. For all [itex]N=1,2,3,\ldots[/itex] we define sets [itex]E_N[/itex] as
[tex]
E_N = \big\{x\in E\;\big|\; \big(x\in [\alpha,\beta]\subset [a,b]\quad\textrm{and}\quad \beta-\alpha < \frac{1}{N}\big)\implies m^*(u([\alpha,\beta])) \leq (M+\epsilon)(\beta-\alpha)\big\}
[/tex]
The next intermediate claim is
[tex]
E = \bigcup_{N=1}^{\infty} E_N
[/tex]
Since "[itex]\supset[/itex]" direction is obvious, the "[itex]\subset[/itex]" is the real task. We fix arbitrary [itex]x\in E[/itex]. Since we know [itex]|u'(x)|\leq M[/itex], we also know that there exists [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that
[tex]
|y-x|<\delta\implies |u(y)-u(x)|\leq (M+\epsilon) |y-x|
[/tex]
Therefore:
[tex]
\big(y<x<y'\quad\textrm{and}\quad y'-y < \delta\big)
[/tex]
[tex]
\implies\quad |u(y')-u(y)| \leq |u(y')-u(x)| + |u(x) - u(y)| \leq (M+\epsilon)(y'-y)
[/tex]
At this point Leoni states, that we now know [itex]x\in E_N[/itex] for all [itex]N[/itex] such that [itex]\frac{1}{N}<\delta[/itex]. At a quick glance it seems that there is a mistake. It seems that quantities [itex]|u(y')-u(y)|[/itex] and [itex]m^*(u([y,y']))[/itex] have been confused. Of course it could be that there is no mistake, and the proof of the intermediate claim can be completed with some additional information that was not explicitly mentioned in the book. However, I have been unable to figure out the additional information on my own, and that's why I wrote this post. I have made some changes to the notation, to improve clarity in my opinion. It could also be that I have made some mistakes in this, and I would very much appreciate if that turned out to be the case. I'm not aware of any mistakes myself though.
The claim is this: [itex]I\subset\mathbb{R}[/itex] is some interval, and [itex]u:I\to\mathbb{R}[/itex] is some function. We assume that [itex]E\subset I[/itex] is some set such that [itex]u[/itex] is differentiable at all points [itex]x\in E[/itex]. We also assume that a real constant [itex]M[/itex] exists such that [itex]|u'(x)|\leq M[/itex] for all [itex]x\in E[/itex]. It is emphasized that [itex]E[/itex] is not assumed measurable. The claim is that [itex]m^*(u(E))\leq Mm^*(E)[/itex] holds, where [itex]m^*[/itex] is the Lebesgue outer measure.
The proof is supposed to start like this: We fix some [itex]\epsilon > 0[/itex] until the end of the proof. For all [itex]N=1,2,3,\ldots[/itex] we define sets [itex]E_N[/itex] as
[tex]
E_N = \big\{x\in E\;\big|\; \big(x\in [\alpha,\beta]\subset [a,b]\quad\textrm{and}\quad \beta-\alpha < \frac{1}{N}\big)\implies m^*(u([\alpha,\beta])) \leq (M+\epsilon)(\beta-\alpha)\big\}
[/tex]
The next intermediate claim is
[tex]
E = \bigcup_{N=1}^{\infty} E_N
[/tex]
Since "[itex]\supset[/itex]" direction is obvious, the "[itex]\subset[/itex]" is the real task. We fix arbitrary [itex]x\in E[/itex]. Since we know [itex]|u'(x)|\leq M[/itex], we also know that there exists [itex]\delta > 0[/itex] such that
[tex]
|y-x|<\delta\implies |u(y)-u(x)|\leq (M+\epsilon) |y-x|
[/tex]
Therefore:
[tex]
\big(y<x<y'\quad\textrm{and}\quad y'-y < \delta\big)
[/tex]
[tex]
\implies\quad |u(y')-u(y)| \leq |u(y')-u(x)| + |u(x) - u(y)| \leq (M+\epsilon)(y'-y)
[/tex]
At this point Leoni states, that we now know [itex]x\in E_N[/itex] for all [itex]N[/itex] such that [itex]\frac{1}{N}<\delta[/itex]. At a quick glance it seems that there is a mistake. It seems that quantities [itex]|u(y')-u(y)|[/itex] and [itex]m^*(u([y,y']))[/itex] have been confused. Of course it could be that there is no mistake, and the proof of the intermediate claim can be completed with some additional information that was not explicitly mentioned in the book. However, I have been unable to figure out the additional information on my own, and that's why I wrote this post. I have made some changes to the notation, to improve clarity in my opinion. It could also be that I have made some mistakes in this, and I would very much appreciate if that turned out to be the case. I'm not aware of any mistakes myself though.