Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

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

If I have an inequality: $\lVert u\rVert_{L^p(R^n)} \le C\lVert\nabla u\rVert_{L^q(R^n)}$ , where $C \in (0,\infty)$ and $u \in C_c^1(R)$, is there a relation between $p, q, n$ such that the inequality holds ?

Thank you for your help.

share|cite|improve this question
Usually such questions can be answered quickly by means of a dimensional analysis. – Giuseppe Negro May 30 '12 at 8:08
@GiuseppeNegro: is it true that the follwoing condition should hold $q=(np)/(n-p)$ ? Is it sufficient ? – Theorem May 30 '12 at 9:03
Here is the 'dimensional analysis' I was referring to: Remark 10. The text refers to it as a 'scaling argument'. – Giuseppe Negro Jun 3 '12 at 10:53

This result is a special case of what is known as Friedrich's Inequality, also sometimes known as Poincare's inequality. It is always true with $n$ arbitrary and $p = q$, although $C$ will depend on $n$ and the size and shape of the support of $u$. However, if you fix the supports of all your $u$'s to lie inside of some fixed set $\Omega$ (i.e. $ u \in C_c(\Omega)$), then you can choose $C$ depending only on $n$ and $\Omega$. Of course, since the support is compact and hence of finite Lebesgue measure, the inequality will also be true with $q \geq p$ simply because in this case $\|f\|_p \le C\|f\|_q$ by Holder's inequality. Any reasonable book on PDEs/Sobolev Spaces should have a proof of Friedrich's inequality, although its not too hard to cook one up yourself. Hint: integration by parts.

share|cite|improve this answer
I think the OP's inequality is supposed to hold with $C$ not depending on $u$. If you allow for dependency on the size and shape of the support, then you could also say "for each $u$ the inequality holds for some $C$", which would be trivial. (Of course the version you propose is not trivial.) – Hendrik Vogt May 30 '12 at 12:13
@HendrikVogt Yes, the problem is that the OP only specified $u \in C_c(\mathbb{R}^n)$,rather than say $u \in C_c(\Omega)$ for some fixed bounded $Omega$ in which case $C$ could be chosen independently of $u$. – user12014 May 30 '12 at 18:34
Yep, for bounded $\Omega$ that's Friedrich's inequality. I'm pretty sure, however, that the OP wants the Gagliardo–Nirenberg–Sobolev inequality after all. – Hendrik Vogt May 30 '12 at 18:38
@HendrikVogt Hm I just checked Wikipedia, and yes that looks more like what the OP wants. I never realized one applied to more cases than the other... – user12014 May 30 '12 at 18:40

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.