637 reputation
214
bio website
location
age
visits member for 2 years, 9 months
seen Nov 8 at 20:09

May
13
accepted Min-Max Principle and Harnack's inequality
May
10
comment Min-Max Principle and Harnack's inequality
@GiuseppeNegro just trying to see if somebody might have an idea. I am not "requiring" people to know or answer. That's the purpose of this website, right? People raise questions and people discuss.
May
10
comment Min-Max Principle and Harnack's inequality
@GiuseppeNegro It was merely a sentence saying that. I can't find it again... sorry. But as for my doubt, there is at least no easy way to prove maximum principle with harnack, right?
May
10
asked Min-Max Principle and Harnack's inequality
May
3
asked Upper semi-continuity of log-concave functions
Apr
17
asked reducibility of an operator
Apr
6
revised proof on Poincare's inequality.
added 2 characters in body
Apr
6
comment proof on Poincare's inequality.
which notation do you need me to explain?
Apr
6
asked proof on Poincare's inequality.
Apr
5
accepted Minimizing sequence that has certain property
Apr
3
asked Minimizing sequence that has certain property
Mar
30
accepted Limiting argument when proving inequality in Sobolev space
Mar
29
comment Limiting argument when proving inequality in Sobolev space
this makes a hell lot more sense!! Thanks!
Mar
29
comment Limiting argument when proving inequality in Sobolev space
So I should interpret this inequality as: For any $f$ in $W^{1,1}$, there is a $\tilde{f}$, s.t. $\tilde{f}=f$ in the distributional sense with $\tilde{f}\in L^{\infty}$ and that inequality holds. Am I right?
Mar
29
comment Limiting argument when proving inequality in Sobolev space
first thank you for pointing out the Cauchy sequence part. I was stupid to not have seen this. But why does $f_n$ necessarily converge to this same $f$ in $L^{\infty}$?
Mar
29
asked Limiting argument when proving inequality in Sobolev space
Mar
26
awarded  Popular Question
Mar
21
accepted What does it mean for a distribution to be in $L_2$?
Mar
21
comment What does it mean for a distribution to be in $L_2$?
I am trying to get a little intuition here. So based on what you said, a lot of distributions are not in $L_2$ since for a general distribution, you are not even lucky enough to get that kind of representation. Am I right?
Mar
21
asked What does it mean for a distribution to be in $L_2$?