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

The goal is to show that $\sup{|u|} \leq C|\Omega|^{\frac{1}{n} - \frac{1}{p}}||Du||_p$ in the case $p>n$.

There is a point in the proof that I just am not getting. First, the notation:
Let $n' = \frac{n}{n-1}, p' = \frac{p}{p-1}, \delta = \frac{n'}{p'}$ It is shown in the proof that if $\tilde{u} = \frac{\sqrt{n}|u|}{||Du||_p}$ that

$$||\tilde{u}||_{n'\delta^v} \leq \delta^{v\delta^{-v}}||\tilde{u}||_{n'\delta^{v-1}}^{1-\delta^{-v}} $$

This part I'm ok with. Then the book makes the statement "Iterating from $v=1$ ,we get for any $v$"

$$||\tilde{u}||_{\delta^v} \leq \delta^{\sum{v\delta^{-v}}}.$$

I don't see how this follows. Could you maybe give some insight?

share|cite|improve this question
Could you write the indexes in the sum? – Davide Giraudo Sep 29 '12 at 9:19
Write down the inequality when $\nu=1$, then $\nu=2$, then $\nu=3$. Can you plug the first case into the second, then nto the third, and so on? – Siminore Sep 29 '12 at 11:03
The book doesn't give indices in the sum. Presumably it's a sum over positive integers $v$. @Siminore I'm not sure exactly what you mean? – Euler....IS_ALIVE Sep 30 '12 at 1:04
Probably $$\|\tilde{u}\|_{\delta^\nu} \leq \delta^{\nu \delta^{-\nu}}\delta^{(\nu -1)\delta^{-\nu+1}} \delta^{(\nu -2)\delta^{-\nu+2}}\cdots$$ – Siminore Sep 30 '12 at 8:21
@Siminore Yes, but what happened to the $n'$? The statement just has $\delta^v$ – Euler....IS_ALIVE Oct 1 '12 at 23:33

This looks like the presentation given in Gilbarg-Trudinger. The sum is in fact $\sum_{\nu = 1}^\infty$. The lack of $n'$ is likely a typo, you should insert it in yourself (my lecture notes on Sobolev spaces uses the same proof as G-T but has the corresponding factor of $n'$; so most likely I've found that the factor is beneficial to be shown). It doesn't effect the final conclusion though:

for $\delta >1$ and any $n' > 0$, we identically have $\lim_{k\to\infty} n' \delta^k = \infty$ so the concluding step in the end does not depend on the value of $n'$.

share|cite|improve this answer

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.