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

I would like to show elementary - using the canonical embedding - that the Sobolevspace $W^{1,4}(0,1)$ is reflexive.

Therefore I set $X=W^{1,4}(0,1)$ and now I have to show that the canonical embedding

$$ i\colon X\to X'', i(x)(x')=x'(x) $$

is bijective and isometric.

I think the canonical embedding is always injective and isometric. So I only have to show here, that it is surjective.

Am I right?

How can I show that?

Let $x''$ be in $X''$. Now I have to find a $x\in X$ with $i(x)=x''$, right?

But - how?


share|cite|improve this question
I have removed the tag (reflexive). According to the tag-wiki, this tag is for questions about reflexive relations. – Martin Sleziak Aug 30 '13 at 9:14
up vote 2 down vote accepted
  1. Use Clarkson's inequality to see that $L^p(\Omega)$ is reflexive for any $p\in (1,\infty)$. So is $(L^p(\Omega))^{N+1}$.
  2. Show that $W^{1,p}(\Omega)$ is a closed subset of $(L^p(\Omega))^{N+1}$. We can use sequential closeness.
  3. Use the non-trivial fact that a closed subspace of a reflexive space is reflexive.
share|cite|improve this answer
1. und 3. are okay. I can use that. But i did not come along with 2. How can I show that it is a closed subset? – math12 Jan 24 '13 at 15:50
I think it is better to use the space $(L^p)^{N+1}$ instead of $L^p$ – Tomás Jan 24 '13 at 15:57
@Tomás Right, $L^p$ alone looks misleading. – Davide Giraudo Jan 24 '13 at 16:11
Why $(L^p(\Omega))^{N+1}$? And how can i show that it is closed subset? – math12 Jan 24 '13 at 16:15
Since uniform convexity is a condition on all 2-dimensional subspaces, it passes to closed subspaces. Hence the Milman-Pettis theorem already used in 1 can be applied again --- although Milman-Pettis (combined with Clarkson's inequality) is probably way harder than the non-trivial fact in 3. – Martin Jan 24 '13 at 17:43

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.