Is $|x|^{-alpha}$ integrable for polynomially bounded measures on $mathbb{R}^n$
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
We know that $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 (xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1)$ with the normal Lebesgue measure for $alpha > n$. But what if we had a measure $mu$ on $mathbb{R}^n$ which is polynomially bounded, i.e., $mu(|x|le A) le C(1+A^N)$ where $C,N$ are fixed constants, then would we have something like $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 ({xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1},mu)$ for $alpha >N$?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
We know that $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 (xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1)$ with the normal Lebesgue measure for $alpha > n$. But what if we had a measure $mu$ on $mathbb{R}^n$ which is polynomially bounded, i.e., $mu(|x|le A) le C(1+A^N)$ where $C,N$ are fixed constants, then would we have something like $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 ({xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1},mu)$ for $alpha >N$?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
add a comment |
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
We know that $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 (xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1)$ with the normal Lebesgue measure for $alpha > n$. But what if we had a measure $mu$ on $mathbb{R}^n$ which is polynomially bounded, i.e., $mu(|x|le A) le C(1+A^N)$ where $C,N$ are fixed constants, then would we have something like $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 ({xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1},mu)$ for $alpha >N$?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
We know that $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 (xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1)$ with the normal Lebesgue measure for $alpha > n$. But what if we had a measure $mu$ on $mathbb{R}^n$ which is polynomially bounded, i.e., $mu(|x|le A) le C(1+A^N)$ where $C,N$ are fixed constants, then would we have something like $|x|^{-alpha}$ is in $L^1 ({xin mathbb{R}^n:|x| ge 1},mu)$ for $alpha >N$?
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
measure-theory lebesgue-measure
asked yesterday
Andrew Yuan
1228
1228
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
We split the integral into dyadic pieces in the following way:
begin{align}
int_{{|x| ge 1}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) &= sum_{n=0}^infty int_{{2^{n+1} > |x| ge 2^n}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) \
&le sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{2^n le |x| < 2^{n+1}}
end{align}
Now we can use the polynomially growth bound $mu(|x| le 2^{n+1}) le C(1+2^{(n+1)N})$ to get that the last term is bounded by
begin{align}
sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{|x| le 2^{n+1}} le C sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} (1+ 2^{(n+1)N}).
end{align}
Here the last sum is convergent if and only if $alpha >N$ and $alpha >0$. Thus, in this more general case, we have also integrability provided that $alpha > N,$ where I supposed that $N >0$.
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
We split the integral into dyadic pieces in the following way:
begin{align}
int_{{|x| ge 1}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) &= sum_{n=0}^infty int_{{2^{n+1} > |x| ge 2^n}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) \
&le sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{2^n le |x| < 2^{n+1}}
end{align}
Now we can use the polynomially growth bound $mu(|x| le 2^{n+1}) le C(1+2^{(n+1)N})$ to get that the last term is bounded by
begin{align}
sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{|x| le 2^{n+1}} le C sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} (1+ 2^{(n+1)N}).
end{align}
Here the last sum is convergent if and only if $alpha >N$ and $alpha >0$. Thus, in this more general case, we have also integrability provided that $alpha > N,$ where I supposed that $N >0$.
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
We split the integral into dyadic pieces in the following way:
begin{align}
int_{{|x| ge 1}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) &= sum_{n=0}^infty int_{{2^{n+1} > |x| ge 2^n}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) \
&le sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{2^n le |x| < 2^{n+1}}
end{align}
Now we can use the polynomially growth bound $mu(|x| le 2^{n+1}) le C(1+2^{(n+1)N})$ to get that the last term is bounded by
begin{align}
sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{|x| le 2^{n+1}} le C sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} (1+ 2^{(n+1)N}).
end{align}
Here the last sum is convergent if and only if $alpha >N$ and $alpha >0$. Thus, in this more general case, we have also integrability provided that $alpha > N,$ where I supposed that $N >0$.
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
up vote
1
down vote
We split the integral into dyadic pieces in the following way:
begin{align}
int_{{|x| ge 1}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) &= sum_{n=0}^infty int_{{2^{n+1} > |x| ge 2^n}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) \
&le sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{2^n le |x| < 2^{n+1}}
end{align}
Now we can use the polynomially growth bound $mu(|x| le 2^{n+1}) le C(1+2^{(n+1)N})$ to get that the last term is bounded by
begin{align}
sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{|x| le 2^{n+1}} le C sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} (1+ 2^{(n+1)N}).
end{align}
Here the last sum is convergent if and only if $alpha >N$ and $alpha >0$. Thus, in this more general case, we have also integrability provided that $alpha > N,$ where I supposed that $N >0$.
We split the integral into dyadic pieces in the following way:
begin{align}
int_{{|x| ge 1}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) &= sum_{n=0}^infty int_{{2^{n+1} > |x| ge 2^n}} |x|^{-alpha} , mathrm{d}mu(x) \
&le sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{2^n le |x| < 2^{n+1}}
end{align}
Now we can use the polynomially growth bound $mu(|x| le 2^{n+1}) le C(1+2^{(n+1)N})$ to get that the last term is bounded by
begin{align}
sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} mu{|x| le 2^{n+1}} le C sum_{n=0}^infty 2^{-nalpha} (1+ 2^{(n+1)N}).
end{align}
Here the last sum is convergent if and only if $alpha >N$ and $alpha >0$. Thus, in this more general case, we have also integrability provided that $alpha > N,$ where I supposed that $N >0$.
edited 3 hours ago
answered 16 hours ago
p4sch
3,940216
3,940216
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
Notice you can bypass the dyadic partitioning by setting up the first sum over dyadic ranges.
– Guacho Perez
9 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
I have simplified the proof with regard to your comment. Now the proof is simpler.
– p4sch
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
nice proof, (+1).
– Guacho Perez
3 hours ago
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3019483%2fis-x-alpha-integrable-for-polynomially-bounded-measures-on-mathbbrn%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown