6
$\begingroup$

How do you prove the Schwartz functions in $\mathbb{R}^n$ are dense in the space $W^{2,p}(\mathbb{R}^n)?$

Terrence tao has a version of the proof of

The space $C_c^{\infty}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ of test function is a dense subspace of $W^{k,p}(\mathbb{R}^d)$, then the fact $\mathcal{S}(\mathbb{R}^d)$ is dense in $L^p(\mathbb{R}^d)$ is a corollary from that. I do not understand his proof. (See lemma2)

enter link description here

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So the proof is already there. Which parts do you not understand? $\endgroup$ – user99914 Dec 14 '15 at 11:05
2
$\begingroup$

The Schwartz space contains in particular $C^\infty_0(\mathbb R^n)$ and $C^\infty_0(\mathbb R^n)$ is by definition dense in $W^{k,p}_0(\mathbb R^n)$. But we have $W^{k,p}_0(\mathbb R^n) = W^{k,p}(\mathbb R^n)$. Thus the Schwartz space is dense in $W^{k,p}(\mathbb R^n)$.

The fact that $W^{k,p}(\mathbb R^n)= W^{k,p}_0(\mathbb R^n)$ can be found in Adam's Sobolev spaces (Corollary 3.23). The following is part of the proof of Theorem 3.22 in the book.

Let $f : C^\infty_0(\mathbb R^n)$ be a smooth function so that $0\le f\le 1$ and

$$f(x) = \begin{cases} 1 & \text{ when }|x|\le 1 \\ 0 & \text{ when }|x|\ge 2, \end{cases}$$

For each $\epsilon >0$, let $f_\epsilon(x) = f(\epsilon x)$. Then all derivatives of $f_\epsilon$ by bounded independent of $\epsilon <1$.

For all $u\in W^{k,p}(\mathbb R^n)$, consider $u_\epsilon = uf_\epsilon$. Then using the product rule, we have

$$\|u-u_\epsilon\|_{W^{k,p}(\mathbb R^n)} \le C \|u\|_{W^{k,p}(\Omega_\epsilon)},$$

where $\Omega_\epsilon = \{x\in \mathbb R^n : |x| \ge 1/\epsilon\}$. As $\epsilon\to 0$, the right hand side converges to $0$. Thus $u $ can be approximated by elements $u_\epsilon$ with compact support. Using mollifiers, this $u_\epsilon$ can be approximated by elements in $C^\infty_0(\mathbb R^n)$. Thus $C^\infty_0(\mathbb R^n)$ is dense in $W^{k,p}(\mathbb R^n)$.

In general it is not true that $W^{k,p}_0(\Omega) = W^{k,p}(\Omega)$.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ @ John Ma: why is $W_0^{k,p}=W^{k,p}?$ $\endgroup$ – math101 Dec 14 '15 at 5:10
  • $\begingroup$ @math101 Please see the edit. $\endgroup$ – user99914 Dec 14 '15 at 6:27
  • $\begingroup$ thanks I will need to spend some time on what you wrote, feel free to edit as I go along $\endgroup$ – math101 Dec 14 '15 at 6:36
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ Even for extremely nice domains (e.g. balls), we have $W_0^{k,p}(\Omega) \neq W^{k,p}(\Omega)$. $\endgroup$ – PhoemueX Dec 14 '15 at 7:24
  • $\begingroup$ @PhoemueX : Thanks. Edited. $\endgroup$ – user99914 Dec 14 '15 at 7:53

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.