0
$\begingroup$

enter image description here

I am studying converse of mean value theorem from the book Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order by Gilbarg and Trudinger. Here I find some difficulty. Here's this $:$

I know that if $u \in \Omega \subset_{\mathrm {domain}} \Bbb R^n$ then for any open ball $B \subset \subset \Omega$ $\exists$ a harmonic function $h$ such that $u=h$ on $\partial B$. From here how did the authors claim that the function $w:=u-h$ satisfies mean value property on any ball in $B$? (See the second sentence of Theorem 2.7 ).

I cannot convince myself by this reasoning. Why does this happen? Would anybody please point it out?

Thank you very much.

$\endgroup$
1
$\begingroup$

If $u$ is harmonic, it has the mean value property (and presumably the book proved this already). So the proof of this theorem is only of the MVP $\implies$ harmonic direction. So it assumes that $u$ has MVP. (And then it follows that $u-h$ also does since $h$ does.)

I agree that it's not very clear that this is what it's doing.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Oh! I have understood it now.I am so silly that I have failed to understand it. Many many thanks @Chappers for your kind cooperation. $\endgroup$ – Dbchatto67 Apr 21 '18 at 19:10

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.