Conversation started Sep 29, 2013 at 22:08.
Sep 29, 2013 22:08
The last paragraph of page 5 gives an argument math.uchicago.edu/~vipul/sometransforms.pdf but I was wondering if you could clarify something for me?
@masfenix OK.
i love real and complex analysis for walter rudin
How to prove that $\frac d{dx}e^x=e^x$ using it's infinite series? I got $\sum^\infty_{n=0}\frac{x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}$ so far but I am having trouble saying that it is equal to the series expansion of $e$
@Alizter how did you get a $\frac{1}{x}$ term?
Well just so I am understanding this correctly. There is a function $f \in S$ which is multiplied with some polynomial in the form $\frac{1}{x_1^2x_2^2...}$. Now my first question is that what do they mean "outside of a compact set, f is being dominated by..."
Sep 29, 2013 22:13
@KevinDriscoll Where?
@Kevin: NO. Try $1/\sqrt x$ on $[0,1]$.
@Alizter the n=0 term
$$ e^x = f(x) = 1 + \frac{x}{1!} + \frac{x^2}{2!} + \cdots $$

$$ f'(x) = 1 + \frac{x}{1!} + \frac{x^2}{2!} + \cdots = f(x) = e^x $$
sigh ... I have to write this out
@Ted AH yes. Integrable singularities then become non-integrable. Thanks
Sep 29, 2013 22:15
The reverse inequality on finite measure spaces is right, though.
@Alizter I think it should be $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty} \frac{x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}$
@PedroTamaroff I posted by question a few posts above
@TedShifrin In the case @masfenix is interested in, the functions are all $C^{\infty}(\mathbb{R})$. Is my claim then true?
@KevinDriscoll $$\frac d{dx}\sum^\infty_{n=0}\frac{x^n}{n!}=\sum^\infty_{n=0}\frac1{n!}\frac d{dx}x^n=\sum^\infty_{n=0}\frac{nx^{n-1}}{n!}=\sum^\infty_{n=0}\frac{x^{n-1}}{(n-1)!}$$
and the $ 1 $ term
Sep 29, 2013 22:17
@Alizter The last step fails for n=0
@masfenix They mean that there is a compact set $K\subseteq \Bbb R^n$ such that over $\Bbb R^n\setminus K$ your function is dominated by $$\frac{1}{x_1^{2p}\cdots x_n^{2p}}$$ meaning it is less than that. Being positive, it is integrable by comparison.
Continuous would be the issue, I guess. I haven't been paying attention.
@KevinDriscoll Yeah this is where I need help I don't know what went wrong
Then inside $K$ we can integrate the function for it is continuous.
Sep 29, 2013 22:18
@ALizter if $n=0$ then $$\frac{n}{n!} \neq \frac{1}{(n-1)!}$$
@PedroTamaroff so how can we say that is it dominated? Is it because its a Schwartz function?
@KevinDriscoll Oops
errrr well I guess you could say it does.....but its ambiguous
@masfenix Indeed.
Just make a limit argument.
@PedroTamaroff and because its a schwarts function (lets say $f$) then $f$ times the expression above makes it go to zero fast?
Sep 29, 2013 22:20
@masfenix times the inverse of that function
Say $$(x_1^{2p}\cdots x_n^{2p}){f({\bf x})}\to 0$$
@masfenix which proves that $f$ decreases FASTER than @Pedro 's given function
Then we out of some big ball $K=\bar{B}({\bf 0},R)$ we have
$$(x_1^{2p}\cdots x_n^{2p}){f({\bf x})}<1$$
@PedroTamaroff Yes, I was trying to think of how to make the argument that SOMEWHERE the product is less than 1 formal
Thus $$\int_{\Bbb R^n\smallsetminus K}f({\bf x})d{\bf x}<\int_{\Bbb R^n\smallsetminus K}\frac{1}{x_1^{2p}\cdots x_n^{2p}}d{\bf x}<+\infty$$
@KevinDriscoll Take $\varepsilon =1$.
Sep 29, 2013 22:24
@Pedro: Do we know something about $p$ ? Sorry, I didn't come in on the beginning.
@TedShifrin p $\ge$ 1
@TedShifrin $p\geqslant 1$.
@PedroTamaroff eeeeeeeewwwwwww.......... slanty line
Hmm ... need to be a bit careful here.
@KevinDriscoll Damn you. The slanty line is awesome.
@TedShifrin Oops?
Sep 29, 2013 22:25
I don't use slanty lines.
@TedShifrin You too? Oh, this is a tragedy.
LOL, good, Lady Macbeth can get bloody again :P
@TedShifrin What needs to be taken care of?
OUT DAMNED SPOT!!!!!!
@PedroTamaroff thank you. okay so let me recap. We want to show that every Schwartz function (a function that decreases rapidly when multiplied by inverse power). Now, consider some function $f \in S$ where S is the Schwartz space. Now clearly, inside some compact set, f is continuous so that argument is easy. But outside the compact support K (ie, consider some ball with radius R), we have that $f$ times $x_1^{2p}...x_n^{2p} < 1$ is so its bounded (correct?)
Sep 29, 2013 22:27
I admit I'm being stupid, but I'm switching to spherical coordinates. With trig stuff in the denominator, is it obvious there's no problem? @Kevin... You missed an OUT.
@Ted :-(
@TedShifrin Of course. Fubini ad nauseam?
It's been........ 6 or 7 years?
OK, I'm stupid. Do a big cube instead of a ball.
Time to go cook dinner and vanish.
@TedShifrin LAWLZ.
Sep 29, 2013 22:29
It's been 46 for me, @Kevin.
Poof
@PedroTamaroff so what does the integral say?
@TedShifrin I bow to your superior theatrical ability then
I mean, what is the intuition and interpretation?
@masfenix ?
@KevinDriscoll Eh?
@PedroTamaroff we were just musing about Macbeth
Sep 29, 2013 22:30
@KevinDriscoll Was I? Never read that one.
@PedroTamaroff I wrote a recap of everything which I think is correct, but I am a bit confused on what the interpretation of the integral you wrote down is
@PedroTamaroff You called it a tragedy!
@masfenix What do you mean "interpretation of the integral"?
@masfenix The interpretation is that all $f \in S$ decrease so fast at infinity that the area underneath them is bounded, even though the domain is unbounded
and we proved that by finding a function that also has bounded area from a large cube out to infinity and then argued that outside that cube all $f \in S$ are less than the function we found
thus their area is also bounded
ahh I see. Also last question and I think I have it then. When you wrote down $x_1^{2p}...x_n^{2p} \cdot f(x) < 1 $ what does that mean? is that what @KevinDriscoll just wrote?
Sep 29, 2013 22:33
@masfenix What does it mean?
I means the function $g({\bf x})={\bf x}^{2p}f({\bf x})$ is less than one outside the ball.
You're not a math student?
nevermind, $x^{2p}f(x) \rightarrow 0$ so clearly $x^{2p} < \epsilon = 1$.
@masfenix if $x_1^{2p}.....x_n^{2p} f(x) < 1$ then $f$ is less than $\frac{1}{x_1^{2p}...x_n^{2p}}$
@PedroTamaroff, @KevinDriscoll thank you very much.
 
Conversation ended Sep 29, 2013 at 22:35.