Take the 2-minute tour ×
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.

Let $S = [0,1]\times [0,T]$ for $0 < T \leq 1$. Let $X([0,T]) = \tilde{C}^{2, \alpha}(S\times [0,T])$ and $Y([0,T])=\tilde{C}^{0, \alpha}(S\times [0,T])$ be functions in the respective parabolic Hölder spaces.

Consider the PDE $$u_t = a(x,t)u_{xx} + b(x,t)u_x + c(x,t)u + f$$ $$u(\cdot, 0) \equiv 0$$ If $a, b, c, f \in Y([0,T])$, then we have the a-priori estimate $$\lVert u \rVert_{X([0,T])} \leq C(T)\lVert f \rVert_{Y([0,T])}$$ where $C(T)$ is a constant depending on $T$. This is a standard result.

Now define coefficients $a'(x,t) = \begin{cases}a(x,t) &\text{if $0 \leq t \leq T$}\\ a(x,T) &\text{if $T \leq t \leq 1$} \end{cases}$ and likewise for the other coefficients.

Then it holds that $$\lVert a'(x,t) \rVert_{Y([0,1])} \leq \lVert a(x,t) \rVert_{Y([0,T])}$$ and similarly for the others.

From this, $$\lVert u \rVert_{X([0,T])} \leq C\lVert f \rVert_{Y([0,T])}$$ where $C$ does not depend on $T$ anymore.

Is this a valid argument? Can someone elaborate a bit on this? This seems a very easy to get rid of dependence on $T$, so why are people not using it more often?

Thanks

share|improve this question
    
@DavideGiraudo Suppose that it is. (It would be anyway I think since we're just taking supremums and we only made the domain bigger but not added any more values that the function can take). –  TagWoh Aug 2 '12 at 20:23
    
@DavideGiraudo You're right. I should take $k=0$, so the coefficients need only be continuous. Thanks –  TagWoh Aug 2 '12 at 21:00
    
@DavideGiraudo That is the point that I do not fully understand. I think, since we can bound the coefficients on $[0,1]$, we can perhaps use standard results to give that a-priori bound (the last displayed equation). PS: the constant $C$ corresponds to taking $T=1$. –  TagWoh Aug 2 '12 at 21:41
    
@DavideGiraudo Sorry for confusion. This is something I saw in paper so it must be true. I am trying to understand it. –  TagWoh Aug 2 '12 at 21:47
add comment

2 Answers

up vote 1 down vote accepted

The equation is the same for $t\leq T$, and the initial condition doesn't change, and using the a priori estimate: $$\lVert u\rVert_{Y([0,T])}\leq \rVert u'\rVert_{Y([0,1])}\leq C(1)\lVert f'\rVert_{Y([0,1])}.$$ But the supremum norm $f'$ is the same as the supremum norm of $f$, since they reach the same values, and the Hölder semi-norm is the same. Indeed, we have to make $|x-y|^{\alpha}$ smaller hence we should take them in $[0,T]$ (taking $y>T$ won't make the $\sup$ relevant).

share|improve this answer
add comment

As for the question why people are not using it more often, it is kind of trivial because you restrict $T$ to be smaller than $1$. It essentially means that you replaced $C(T)$ by its maximum over $T\in(0,1]$.

share|improve this answer
    
But there's nothing special about choosing 1 here, right? So one can choose a bigger time. –  Court Aug 13 '12 at 11:46
1  
@Court: Yes, with the constant increasing as you choose bigger time. In particular, one cannot choose $T=\infty$ because the constant $C(T)$ may blow up. –  timur Aug 13 '12 at 14:33
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

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.