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

After reading several books on distribution theory, I got a strange feeling. Why do they all begin with the theory of distributions and then move on to tempered distributions? Why can't we just start with Schwartz class and tempered distributions since they are the ones we use most often?

I think the theory of Schwartz class and tempered distributions can pretty well live on their own, and this theory would be much easier to develop since schwartz class is metrizable and everything works well with tempered distributions.

So why do we begin with test functions and distributions, not schwartz class and tempered distributions?


share|cite|improve this question
You could try having a look at the book Real Analysis, by G. Folland. The author follows exactly the pattern you suggest. I am referring to the first edition (warning - not the second), especially in a neighborhood of pag. 262. – Giuseppe Negro Feb 4 '13 at 2:33
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Tempered distribution is a ideal place for fourier transform,since it is one-to-one and surjective on $\mathcal{S'}(\mathbb{R}^n)$,so it's extremely useful when you do fourier analysis.

On the other hand,the distributional space is essentially the smallest extention of the space of continuous functions where differentiation is always well defined. And this is perhaps a major purpose of the distribution theory

share|cite|improve this answer

Some problems with Schwartz class:

1) $\exp$ doesn't belong to $\mathcal{S}'(\mathbb{R})$. Do you like the idea of building a notion of "generalized function" which does not include the exponential?

2) If $\Omega$ is a proper open subset of $\mathbb{R}^n$, you do not have a "Schwartz space" on $\Omega$.

I think that this is enough to start with general distributions and then specialize to proper subclasses.

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.