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

This problem is puzzling me, even though it should be really simple.

Let $L=-\partial_x^2 + \frac 1 2 x^{-2}$ be an operator defined on $D(L)=C^\infty_c(0,+\infty)\subset L^2(0,+\infty)$. Its adjoint operator on $L^2$, will then be $L^*=-\partial_x^2 + \frac 1 2 x^{-2}$ with domain $D(L^*)=\{u\in L^2\colon\: (-\partial_x^2 + \frac 1 2 x^{-2})u\in L^2 \text{ in the sense of distributions} \}$.

Now, I want to find the kernel of $L^*$, that I know to have dimension $1$. Hence, I solve $(-\partial_x^2 + \frac 1 2 x^{-2})u=0$, and find that it has two solutions: $x^{\frac{1\pm\sqrt 3} 2}$. The problem is that, while both of these functions are in $L^2$ near $0$, none of them is in $L^2$ at $+\infty$.

Which is the right way to reason here? I cannot just consider the functions near $0$, otherwise I would end up with two of them, nor I see any justification in taking their sum as the generator of the kernel.

Thank you for any answers!

share|cite|improve this question
If $\partial_x$ is just differentiation (once), then wouldn't the adjoint of $L$ be $L^\ast = \partial_x + \tfrac{1}{2}x^{-2}$? – Branimir Ćaćić Jan 25 '13 at 18:40
you are right, there is a typo, it should be $\partial^2_x$. – dario.prn Jan 25 '13 at 18:55
Why must the kernel of $L^*$ be of dimension 1? – A Blumenthal Jan 25 '13 at 20:01
@ABlumenthal By the proof of Theorem X.7 in the Reed & Simon II, it follows that $L$ has deficiency index $n_+=n_-=1$. Moreover by the Hardy inequality the operator is semibounded. Hence, by the Corollary at Theorem X.1, $\dim \ker(L^*)=n_+=1$. – dario.prn Jan 26 '13 at 9:39

Indeed it was quite simple. It is enough to consider \begin{equation} \phi(x)=\begin{cases} x^{\frac {1+\sqrt 3 }{2}}-x^{\frac{1-\sqrt 3} 2}&\quad \text{if } 0<x\le 1,\\ 0&\quad \text{otherwise}. \end{cases} \end{equation}

Clearly $\phi(x)$ is in $L^2$ and such that $L^* \phi=0$. Hence $\ker(L^*)=\text{span}\{\phi\}$.

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.