Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Classical Hardy's inequality (cfr. Hardy-Littlewood-Polya Inequalities, Theorem 327)

If $p>1$, $f(x) \ge 0$ and $F(x)=\int_0^xf(y)\, dy$ then

$$\tag{H} \int_0^\infty \left(\frac{F(x)}{x}\right)^p\, dx < C\int_0^\infty (f(x))^p\, dx $$

unless $f \equiv 0$. The best possibile constant is $C=\left(\frac{p}{p-1}\right)^p$.

I would like to prove the statement in italic regarding the best constant. As already noted by Will Jagy here, the book suggests stress-testing the inequality with

$$f(x)=\begin{cases} 0 & 0\le x <1 \\ x^{-\alpha} & 1\le x \end{cases}$$

with $1/p< \alpha < 1$, then have $\alpha \to 1/p$. If I do so I get for $C$ the lower bound

$$\operatorname{lim sup}_{\alpha \to 1/p}\frac{\alpha p -1}{(1-\alpha)^p}\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\, dx\le C$$

but now I find myself in trouble in computing that lim sup. Can someone lend me a hand, please?

UPDATE: A first attempt, based on an idea by Davide Giraudo, unfortunately failed. Davide pointed out that the claim would easily follow from

$$\tag{!!} \left\lvert \int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\, dx - \int_1^\infty x^{-\alpha p }\, dx\right\rvert \to 0\quad \text{as}\ \alpha \to 1/p. $$

But this is false in general: for example if $p=2$ we get

$$\int_1^\infty (x^{-2\alpha} -x^{-2\alpha} + 2x^{-\alpha-1}-x^{-2})\, dx \to \int_1^\infty(2x^{-3/2}-x^{-2})\, dx \ne 0.$$

share|cite|improve this question
Addendum: The proof is complete if it is shown that $\operatorname{lim sup}_{\alpha \to 1/p} (\ldots) \ge \left( \frac{p}{p-1}\right)^p$, which is what we get if we formally neglect that $x^{-1}$. However I can't find a rigorous way to do that. – Giuseppe Negro Apr 1 '12 at 14:24
This is also an exercise in Rudin's book Real and Complex. – AD. Apr 3 '12 at 21:11
up vote 16 down vote accepted

What you need isn't

$$\lim_{\alpha\searrow1/p}\,\left\lvert \int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\mathrm dx - \int_1^\infty x^{-\alpha p }\mathrm dx\right\rvert=0$$


$$\lim_{\alpha\searrow1/p}\frac{\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\mathrm dx}{\int_1^\infty x^{-\alpha p }\mathrm dx}=1\;,$$

which is indeed the case, since as $\alpha\searrow1/p$, the integrals are more and more dominated by regions where $x^{-1}\ll x^{-\alpha}$. For arbitrary $b\gt1$ and $1/p\lt\alpha\lt1$, we have

$$ \begin{eqnarray} \int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx &\gt& \int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\mathrm dx \\ &\gt& \int_b^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\mathrm dx \\ &\gt& \int_b^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-b^{\alpha-1}x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx \\ &=& (1-b^{\alpha-1})^p\int_b^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx \\ &=& (1-b^{\alpha-1})^pb^{1-\alpha p}\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx \\ &=& (b^{1/p-\alpha}-b^{1/p-1})^p\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx\;. \end{eqnarray} $$

Then choosing $b=2^{1/\beta}$ with $\beta=\sqrt{\alpha-1/p}$ yields

$$\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx \gt \int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\mathrm dx \gt (2^{-\beta}-2^{(1/p-1)/\beta})^p\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx\;. $$

Since $\beta\to0$ as $\alpha\searrow1/p$, the factor on the right goes to $1$, and thus

$$\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha}-x^{-1})^p\mathrm dx\sim\int_1^\infty x^{-\alpha p }\mathrm dx\quad\text{as}\quad\alpha\searrow1/p$$

as required.

share|cite|improve this answer
In moving from the fourth to the fifth line in the big eqnarray, how do you get $$\int_b^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx = b^{1-\alpha p}\int_1^\infty (x^{-\alpha})^p\mathrm dx?$$ – Antonio Vargas Apr 3 '12 at 18:15
@Antonio: Substitute $u=x/b$. – joriki Apr 3 '12 at 18:22
Ah, of course. Very nice, by the way. – Antonio Vargas Apr 3 '12 at 18:26
+1 Nice estimate. – AD. Apr 3 '12 at 20:59
This is a master's solution and I learned a lot in working it out! Thank you very much. – Giuseppe Negro Apr 4 '12 at 10:07

We have the operator $T: L^p(\mathbb{R}^+) \to L^p(\mathbb{R}^+)$ with $p \in (1, \infty)$, defined by$$(Tf)(x) := {1\over x} \int_0^x f(t)\,dt.$$Calculate $\|T\|$.

For the operator $T$ defined above, the operator norm is $p/(p - 1)$. We will also note that this is also a bounded operator for $p = \infty$, but not for $p = 1$.

Assume $1 < p < \infty$, and let $q$ be the dual exponent, $1/p + 1/q = 1$. By the theorem often referred to as "converse Hölder,"$$\|Tf\|_p = \sup_{\|g\|_q = 1}\left|\int_0^\infty (Tf)(x)g(x)\,dx\right|.$$So, assume that$\|g\|_q = 1$,\begin{align*} \left| \int_0^\infty (Tf)(x)g(x)\,dx\right| & \le \int_0^\infty |Tf(x)||g(x)|\,dx \le \int_0^\infty \int_0^x {1\over x}|f(t)||g(x)|\,dt\,dx \\ & = \int_0^\infty \int_0^1 |f(ux)||g(x)|\,du\,dx = \int_0^1 \int_0^\infty |f(ux)||g(x)|\,dx\,du \\ & \le \int_0^1 \left(\int_0^\infty |f(ux)|^pdx\right)^{1\over p} \left(\int_0^\infty |g(x)|^q dx\right)^{1\over q}du \\ & = \int_0^1 u^{-{1\over p}}\|f\|_p \|g\|_q du = {p\over{p - 1}}\|f\|_p.\end{align*}So that gives us that the operator norm is at most $p/(p - 1)$. To show that this is tight, let $f(x) = 1$ on $(0, 1]$ and zero otherwise. We have $\|f\|_p = 1$ for all $p$. We can then compute that$$(Tf)(x) = \begin{cases} 1 & 0 < x \le 1 \\ {1\over x} & x > 1\end{cases}$$and by direct computation, $\|Tf\|_p = p/(p - 1)$ for $p > 1$.

The same example also shows that we can have $f \in L^1$ but $Tf \notin L^1$, so we must restrict to $p > 1$. However, it is straightforward to show that $T$ is bounded from $L^\infty \to L^\infty$ with norm $1$. Note that the range of the operator in that case is contained within the bounded continuous functions on $(0, \infty)$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Thank you for your interest! I see a problem here. The book's statement is that the inequality is strict (except for the trivial case $f=0$). You claim that we have equality for $f(x)=\mathbf{1}_{0<x<1}$. The two statements contradict each other so one of them is wrong. – Giuseppe Negro Jun 14 at 8:56
I think I have found an error. I suspect that it is not true that $\| Tf\|_p=\frac{p}{p-1}$. Instead, it is correct that $\| Tf\|_p = \left(\frac{p}{p-1}\right)^{\frac1p}$. – Giuseppe Negro Jun 14 at 9:00

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

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