Mathematics

Associated with Math.SE; for both general discussion & math qu...
Apr 9, 2020 10:31
I try to simplify the following singular integral:

>$$\int_{R^2}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi= A\int_{R^2}\int_{R^2}p(x) q(y) (-\log|x-y|)dxdy$$
where $p, q\in C_c^{\infty}$ and $\int q=0$ and $\hat{p}(\xi):= (1/(2\pi))\int e^{-ix\xi}p(x)dx$ which is the Fourier transform, and $A$ is a constant.

1. My way is LHS=
$$\int_{R^2\setminus B(\epsilon)}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi+\int_{B(\epsilon)}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi$$
But why the RHS appears $(-\log|x-y|)$ which is the log potential of Poisson equation.
Apr 9, 2020 10:31
Hi Can I ask a question?
 

 Hilbert's hotel

A room for posing problems and for solving problems and also f...
Apr 9, 2020 10:30
I try to simplify the following singular integral:

>$$\int_{R^2}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi= A\int_{R^2}\int_{R^2}p(x) q(y) (-\log|x-y|)dxdy$$
where $p, q\in C_c^{\infty}$ and $\int q=0$ and $\hat{p}(\xi):= (1/(2\pi))\int e^{-ix\xi}p(x)dx$ which is the Fourier transform, and $A$ is a constant.

1. My way is LHS=
$$\int_{R^2\setminus B(\epsilon)}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi+\int_{B(\epsilon)}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi$$
But why the RHS appears $(-\log|x-y|)$ which is the log potential of Poisson equation.
Apr 9, 2020 10:30
Hi, can I ask a question? THx
 
Apr 9, 2020 07:47
Its something like the Fourier transforms of $|x|^{-\alpha}$ for $0<\alpha<n$.
Apr 9, 2020 07:46
I try to simplify the following singular integral:

>$$\int_{R^2}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi= A\int_{R^2}\int_{R^2}p(x) q(y) (-\log|x-y|)dxdy$$
where $p, q\in C_c^{\infty}$ and $\int q=0$.

My way is LHS=
$$\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{R^2\setminus B(\epsilon)}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi$$
But why the RHS appears $(-\log|x-y|)$ which is the log potential of Poisson equation.
Apr 9, 2020 07:46
Hi Hermes. I have another question about the Fourier transform. Can you have a glance?
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
Sorry, I see.. thx
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
So that is $-|x|^{1/2}+3/|x|$?
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
well, there is still a wired term $|x|^{1/2}$.
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
So here your $f=-x/|x|$ and we need to compute $div(-x/|x|)$, right? But this is zeor...
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
I guess the result is $1/|x|$ but I compute $\partial_{x_1} x/|x|$ which is $(|x|^2-x_1^2)/|x|^3$.
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
Sorry, I mean $\nabla (x/|x|)$. I do not know how to compute it. Can you give me some advice?
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
But why $\Delta(x/|x|)=1/|x|$? Is it not the delta function?
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
Sorry, do you mean $\Delta (x/|x| )=1/|x|$? So term $(-1/|x|) fg$ in the integral will cancel?
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
I just get $<-\Delta e^{-|x|}, g>=<Ce^{-|x|}, g>$.
Apr 9, 2020 07:45
well, I have got $\Delta e^{-|x|}$. But how to deal with $<(-1/|x|)f, g>$?
 

 Calculus and analysis

For questions about calculus, real analysis, functional analys...
Apr 9, 2020 07:42
I try to simplify the following singular integral:

>$$\int_{R^2}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi= A\int_{R^2}\int_{R^2}p(x) q(y) (-\log|x-y|)dxdy$$
where $p, q\in C_c^{\infty}$ and $\int q=0$.

My way is LHS=
$$\lim_{\epsilon\to 0}\int_{R^2\setminus B(\epsilon)}\hat{p}(\xi)\hat{q}(\xi)|\xi|^{-2}d\xi$$
But why the RHS appears $(-\log|x-y|)$ which is the log potential of Poisson equation.
Apr 9, 2020 07:42
Hi Can I ask an analysis question?
 

 Martin Sleziak's room

Miscellaneous (not suitable elsewhere)
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:15
See you
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:15
Thank you very much
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:15
Yes
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:15
LIM $\frac{1}{n}\sum x_j$
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:14
I just follow your method to show that a generalized limit with cersaro sum (i.e. $\frac{1}{n}\sum x_j$) has shift-invariant property
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:13
I see.
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:12
I define the Banach limit with generalized+shift-invariant property
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:12
Just the definition of generalized limit we talked yesterday
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:11
If I want to construct a Banach limit from a generalized limit which is required that is shift-invariant
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:10
That is the same of generalized limit ?
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:09
"It only remains to prove the shift-invariance"
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:09
Okay
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:09
It only remains to prove the shift-invariance
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:09
Your proof of Construction of Banach limit.
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:09
In page 6
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:08
Oh, sorry for that
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:06
then the generalized limit is Banach limit
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:06
that states one proof of the ceraso limit is shift-invarinat
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:05
I see your a paper
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:04
So $\operatorname{LIM} x= \widehat f(x)$ because \operatorname{LIM}| \widehat M=\widehat f(x)?
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:02
Just the Banach limit
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 07:02
It's ok. I think I am right. I just want to make sure
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 06:58
Do you think if it is right?
Here is the key point: LIM((\frac{x_1-x_{n+1}}{n})+B(x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)=B(x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots) since $\Vert x_1-x_{n+1}\Vert \leq 2\Vert x\Vert_{\infty}$ which is bounded. Then LIM (\frac{x_1-x_{n+1}}{n})=0
Then I can show that $B(\{x_{n+1}\})=B(\{x_{n}\})$.
Remark: I use B(\{x_{n}\})=B(x_1,x_2,x_3,\dots)=B(x_1-x_2, x_2-x_3,x_3-x_4,\dots)+B(x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)=LIM(\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n(x_i-x_{i+1}))+B(x_2,x_3,x_4,\dots)
Denote the shift operator $T: l_{\infty}\to l_{\infty}$ by \[T: (x_1, x_2, x_3, \dots)\to (x_2, x_3, x_4, \dots).\] So we have $B(T\{x_{n}\})=B(\
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 06:58
For "If x is a sequence such that for any generalized limit we get the same value L". Do we need to use the result in part (1)?
Another question, if I consider the Banach sequence which is defined by a generalized limit with shift-invariant. Is B(\{a_n\})=LIM(1/n \sum_{j=1}^n x_{j}) a Banach limit?
Here is my proof:
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 06:58
Anther question:
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 06:58
Well, I am a little confused about your proof of question 1. I know your lemma shows that for the first extension(not the whole space) we still have the $\hat{f}$ is dominated and takes value \theta. But why we can apply H-B theorem again, state that $LIM$ still takes the same value $\theta$?
Use the fact $\liminf \leq LIM\leq \limsup$ then we need to let $\theta \in [\liminf, \limsup]$?
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 06:58
@MartinSleziak
TYG
Dec 3, 2019 06:57
Thanks Martin
The lemma of Extension to the dimension one higher
Is the result \hat{f}(x)=θ and \hat{f}(x)\leq p(x)?
In your conclusion, why "Now if we apply Hahn-Banach theorem once again to fˆ, we get a functional LIM:ℓ∞→R which is a generalized limit and we also have"
Why we have LIM(x_0)=\hat{f}(x_0)=\theta?
Do you mean for each extension of \hat{f}, \hat{f}(x_0) always take same value \theta?
TYG
Dec 2, 2019 23:56
Hence B(\{x_{n}\})=B(T^{k}\{x_{n}\})=B(\{x_{n+k\}).
TYG
Dec 2, 2019 23:55
Denote the shift operator $T: l_{\infty}\to l_{\infty}$ by \[T: (x_1, x_2, x_3, \dots)\to (x_2, x_3, x_4, \dots).\] So we have $B(T\{x_{n}\})=B(\{x_{n+1}\})$. Suppose for $k-1$ we have $B(T^{k-1}\{x_{n}\})=B(\{x_{n+k-1}\})=B(\{x_{n}\})$. Then for $k$, we have
\[B(T^{k}\{x_{n}\})=B(T(T^{k-1}\{x_{n}\}))=B(T\{x_{n}\})=B(\{x_{n}\}).
\]