1
$\begingroup$

I want to prove that $u^{-1}(u(x_0))$ is infinite for dimension $N\ge 2$, for $x_0\in \Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^N$ and $u$ harmonic. I've found $u$ harmonic then $u^{-1}\{u(x_0)\}$ is infinite for $N\ge 2$ but I think I have an idea

By the maximum principle, both the maximum and the minimum of $u$ are attained at $\partial \Omega$. So construct a ball around $x_0$. $x_1$ and $x_3$ are the maximum and minimum points of $u$ in the border of the ball. By the intermediate value theorem and using the fact that the ball is connected, the image of $u$ around a path that passes through $x_1$ and $x_3$ is an interval. By the intermediate value theorem, there exists a point $x_2$ such that $u(x_1)<u(x_2)=u(x_0)<u(x_3)$. Since I can take infinitely many paths (for $N\ge 2$), the result follows.

Is it ok?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ yes it is correct. Actually it is the same proof as Marco's answer in math.stackexchange.com/questions/2892657/… $\endgroup$ – Gio67 Oct 4 '18 at 10:38
  • $\begingroup$ @Gio67 but his proof uses the mean value property $\endgroup$ – Paprika Oct 4 '18 at 10:42
  • $\begingroup$ and you use the maximum principle. Yes I saw that. I like yours better. But the overall idea of using infinitely many paths is the same. $\endgroup$ – Gio67 Oct 4 '18 at 11:10
  • $\begingroup$ I deleted my previous comment because I see you did indeed reduce to a ball. But again, why do you say the first line in the second paragraph? $u$ is not defined on $\partial \Omega.$ And then you never mention $\partial \Omega$ again. That's confusing. $\endgroup$ – zhw. Oct 4 '18 at 17:45
  • $\begingroup$ @Gio67 Marco didn't use infinitely many paths. One path was chosen to reach a contradiction. $\endgroup$ – zhw. Oct 4 '18 at 17:48
1
+50
$\begingroup$

Take a closed ball $\overline B(x_0,r) \subset \Omega.$ Let $S_r=\partial \overline B(x_0,r).$ Then by the max/min principle, the minimum $m$ and maximum $M$ of $u$ over $\overline B(x_0,r)$ occur on $S_r.$ Now $S_r$ is connected. It follows that $u(S_r)$ is connected, hence is an interval, and therefore equals $[m,M].$ Since $m\le u(x_0)\le M,$ we have $u(x_0) = u(x)$ for some $x\in S_r.$

Now there are uncountably many $r$ such that $\overline B(x_0,r)\subset \Omega.$ For each one, the above shows there is $x_r \in S_r$ such that $u(x_r)=u(x_0).$ It follows that $u^{-1}(\{u(x_0)\})$ is not just infinite, but uncountable.

| cite | improve this answer | |
$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ what is $b$? shouldn't it be $x_0$? $\endgroup$ – Paprika Oct 4 '18 at 23:04
  • $\begingroup$ Also, do you see something wrong with my proof? $\endgroup$ – Paprika Oct 5 '18 at 0:34
  • $\begingroup$ Sorry, about $a,b.$ I started out with those and then thought it better to stick with $x_0,$ etc. I edited. $\endgroup$ – zhw. Oct 5 '18 at 1:29
  • $\begingroup$ Your proof has good ideas. But what does "infinitely many paths" mean? They could all be different and still go through $x_0.$ $\endgroup$ – zhw. Oct 5 '18 at 1:36
  • $\begingroup$ One way to use your path idea is start like Marco and I did previously: If the result is false, then there is a closed ball $\overline B (x_0,r)\subset \Omega$ such that $u\ne u(x_0)$ in $\overline B (x_0,r)\setminus \{x_0\}.$ Now choose a path from $x_1$ to $x_3$ in $\overline B (x_0,r)\setminus \{x_0\}.$ Then $u$ takes the value $u(x_0)$ somewhere on this path, contradiction. This avoids the mean value property. $\endgroup$ – zhw. Oct 5 '18 at 16:34

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.