This is a follow-up question to Decomposition of functionals on sobolev spaces.

Let $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^n$ be a bounded, open set and $\mu \in H^{-1}(\Omega) = H_0^1(\Omega)^*$. Moreover, let $\mu(v) \le C \, \|v\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)}$ for all $v \in H_0^1(\Omega) \cap C_0(\Omega)$. Then, we can extend $\mu$ uniquely to $C_0(\Omega)$ and by the Riesz representation theorem, it is a regular Borel measure with finite total variation. Moreover, we have the Hahn-Jordan decomposition $\mu = \mu^+ - \mu^-$.

Do we have $\mu^+ \in H^{-1}(\Omega)$ as well?

(This means: if we restrict $\mu^+$ to $H_0^1(\Omega) \cap C_0(\Omega)$, it is continuous w.r.t. the $H_0^1(\Omega)$-norm and we can extend it uniquely to a bounded functional on $H_0^1(\Omega)$.)

I already know the following:

  • It does not work, if we drop the assumption that $\mu$ is already a measure (see the linked question above). Moreover, the counterexamples in that question are not measures.

  • It does work in case $n = 1$, since every finite Borel measure is in $H^{-1}(\Omega)$ due to the continuous embedding $H_0^1(\Omega) \hookrightarrow C(\bar\Omega)$.

  • We cannot get a bound $\| \mu^+ \|_{H^{-1}} \le C \| \mu \|_{H^{-1}}$. This can be seen by considering $\mu_n(x) = \sin(n \, x)$ on $\Omega = (0,1)$. Note that the assertion of the question still holds.

  • It would be sufficient to show that $\mu$ is order bounded, see https://mathoverflow.net/questions/149151/is-any-order-bounded-continuous-linear-functionals-a-difference-of-positive-cont, but I was not successful. This would mean: for $v,w \in H_0^1(\Omega)$ we find $C > 0$ such that $$|\mu(y)| \le C \qquad \text{for all } y \in H_0^1(\Omega), v \le y \le w.$$ Then, the link would yield the desired splitting.

  • $\begingroup$ Since you have counterexamples to $ \| \mu^+ \|_{H^{-1}} \le C \| \mu \|_{H^{-1}}$, would not gluing them (with disjoint subsets) give a negative answer to the question? Make it so that $\sum \|\mu_n\|_{H^{-1}}^2$ converges but $\sum \|\mu_n^+\|_{H^{-1}}^2$ diverges (disjoint supports, so they are orthogonal). $\endgroup$ – user147263 Aug 21 '15 at 0:18
  • $\begingroup$ @NormalHuman: The $H^{-1}$ norm is not local, thus measures with disjoint support may not be orthogonal. Moreover, it is not clear why this strategy would fail in 1 dimensions. I think I managed to construct a counterexample in dimension 2, but I need to check it again. $\endgroup$ – gerw Aug 22 '15 at 7:58

The following provides a counterexample.

$\newcommand\R{\mathbb{R}}\newcommand\norm[1]{\lVert#1\rVert}\newcommand\abs[1]{\lvert#1\rvert}\newcommand\d{\mathrm{d}}\newcommand\MM{\mathcal{M}}\newcommand{\floor}[1]{\lfloor #1 \rfloor}\newcommand{\dual}[2]{\langle #1 ,\, #2 \rangle}$Let $\Omega = B_1(0) \subset \R^2$ be the (open) unit ball. We denote by $\delta_{\hat r}$ the line measure which is located at the radius $\hat r \in (0,1)$ and with mass $2 \, \pi$ (i.e., line density $1/\hat r$).

By $(-\Delta_0)^{-1}$ we denote the solution mapping associated with the Laplace equation with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition on $\Omega$.

We have \begin{equation*} v_{\hat r}(x,y) := (-\Delta_0)^{-1}(\delta_{\hat r}) (x,y) = \begin{cases} \log(1 / \hat r), & \text{if } r \le \hat r , \\ \log(1 / r), & \text{if } r > \hat r . \end{cases} \end{equation*} Here and in the sequel, we use $r = \sqrt{x^2 + y^2}$. We find \begin{equation*} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} v_{\hat r}(x,y) = \begin{cases} 0 & \text{if } r \le \hat r \\ -1/r & \text{if } r > \hat r \end{cases} \end{equation*} and, thus, \begin{equation*} \norm{v_{\hat r}}_{H_0^1(\Omega)}^2 = \int_\Omega \abs{\nabla v}^2 \, \d (x,y) = \int_\Omega (\frac{\partial}{\partial r} v)^2 \, \d (x,y) = \int_{\hat r}^1 1/r \, \d r = \log(1/\hat r). \end{equation*}

Now, let $q \in (0,1)$ and a sequence $\{c_i\}_{i = 1}^\infty \subset \R^+$ be given. We set $r_i = q^i$.

We define a sequence $\{\mu_k\} \subset H^{-1}(\Omega) \cap \MM(\Omega) = (H_0^1(\Omega))^* \cap (C_0(\Omega))^*$ by \begin{equation*} \mu_k := \sum_{i = 1}^k c_i \, (\delta_{r_{2 \, i}} - \delta_{r_{2\,i-1}}) . \end{equation*} Since all line measures have mass $2 \, \pi$, the sequence $\{\mu_k\}$ is Cauchy in $\MM(\Omega)$ iff $\{c_i\}$ is summable.

In order to compute the $H^{-1}(\Omega)$-norm of $\mu_k$, we set \begin{equation*} v_k := (-\Delta_0)^{-1} \mu_k \end{equation*} and have \begin{equation*} \norm{v_k}_{H_0^1(\Omega)} = \norm{\mu_k}_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}. \end{equation*}

Since \begin{equation*} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} v_k(x,y) = \begin{cases} -c_i/r & \text{if } r_{2\,i} \le r \le r_{2\,i-1} \text{ with } i \in \{1,\ldots,k\}, \\ 0 & \text{else}, \end{cases} \end{equation*} we find for $n \le k$ \begin{align*} \norm{\mu_n - \mu_k}_{H^{-1}(\Omega)}^2 &= \norm{v_n - v_k}_{H_0^1(\Omega)}^2 \\ &= \int_\Omega \abs{\nabla (v_n - v_k)}^2 \, \d (x,y) \\ &= \int_\Omega (\frac{\partial}{\partial r} (v_n - v_k))^2 \, \d (x,y) \\ &= \sum_{i = n + 1}^k c_i^2 \, \int_{r_{2\,i}}^{r_{2\,i-1}} 1/r \, \d r \\ &= \sum_{i = n + 1}^k c_i^2 \, \log(r_{2\,i-1}/r_{2\,i}) \\ &= \log(1/q) \, \sum_{i = n + 1}^k c_i^2 \end{align*} Hence, the sequence $\{\mu_k\}$ is Cauchy in $H^{-1}(\Omega)$ iff $\{c_i\}$ is square-summable.

In case $\{c_i\}$ is summable, the limits of $\mu_k$ in $H^{-1}(\Omega) = H_0^1(\Omega)^*$ and $\MM(\Omega) = C_0(\Omega)^*$ coincide, since $C_0^\infty(\Omega)$ is a dense subspace of $H_0^1(\Omega)$ and of $C_0(\Omega)$.

Now, we choose $c_i = i^p$ for some $-3/2 < p < -1$. Then $c_i$ is summable and square summable.

The positive part of \begin{equation*} \mu = \sum_{i = 1}^\infty c_i \, (\delta_{r_{2\,i}} - \delta_{r_{2\,i-1}}) \end{equation*} is \begin{equation*} \mu^+ = \sum_{i = 1}^\infty c_i \, \delta_{r_{2\,i}}. \end{equation*} Note that $\mu$ belongs to $\MM(\Omega)$ and $H^{-1}(\Omega)$.

Let $\varphi \in C_0^\infty(\Omega)$ with $0 \le \varphi \le 1$ and $\varphi \equiv 1$ on $B_q(0)$ be given. For $0 < s < 1/2$, the function \begin{equation*} v(x,y) = \log \big(1/r\big)^s \, \varphi(x,y) \end{equation*} belongs to $H_0^1(\Omega)$.

For given $K > \log(1/q)^s$, we consider the truncation $v_K$ of $v$ at $K$ and have \begin{equation*} v_K(x,y) = \begin{cases} K & r \le \exp(-K^{1/s}), \\ v(x,y) & r > \exp(-K^{1/s}). \end{cases} \end{equation*} Moreover, $v_K \to v$ in $H_0^1(\Omega)$ as $K \to \infty$.

But \begin{equation*} \dual{\mu^+}{v_K} = 2\,\pi\,\sum_{i = 1}^\infty c_i \, v_K(r_i) \ge 2\,\pi\,\sum_{i = 1}^{n(K)} c_i \, \log \big(1/q^i\big)^s = 2\,\pi\, \log \big(1/q\big)^s \, \sum_{i = 1}^{n(K)} i^{p + s} , \end{equation*} where $n(K) = \floor{K^{1/s} / \log(1/q)}$. Note that $n(K) \to \infty$ as $K \to \infty$ and, hence, \begin{equation*} \dual{\mu^+}{v_K} \ge 2\,\pi\, \log \big(1/q\big)^s \, \sum_{i = 1}^{n(K)} i^{p + s} \to \infty \end{equation*} as $K \to \infty$ if $p + s \ge -1$. Note that for all $p \in (-3/2,-1)$, we can choose $s \in (0,1/2)$ such that $p + s \ge -1$.

This shows that $\mu^+ \in \MM(\Omega)$ is not bounded on $H_0^1(\Omega) \cap C_0(\Omega)$ w.r.t.\ the $H_0^1(\Omega)$-norm.

I would be glad if anyone who checked the counterexample would leave a comment.


Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.