Inverting the Laplacian
$begingroup$
I've had a hard time looking for literature on this, so here's my question:
We take a look at the Laplacian $-Delta$ as an unbounded operator on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$. We know that $-Delta$ is unitary equivalent to the multiplication operator with $|p|^2$ in Fourier space, so $-Delta=mathcal{F}^{-1} |p|^2 mathcal{F}$.
So one could now use functional calculus and define an inverse Laplacian by setting $(-Delta)^{-1}=mathcal{F}^{-1} (1/|p|^2 )mathcal{F}$, which will also be unbounded of course.
It is also known from theory of PDEs that one can invert the Laplacian on Schwartz functions using the Green's function $1/4pi |x|$, which is derived as a distributional Fourier transform of $1/|p|^2$. So define $G$ on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$ by convolution with $1/4pi |x|$:
$$(Gphi)(x)=int frac{phi(y)}{4pi |x-y|} dy$$
$G$ is also unbounded and coincides at least for the Schwartz functions with the above defined inverse Laplacian, $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi inmathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$.
Now my question is: Are both operators the same? Does $G=(-Delta)^{-1}$ hold, i. e. is $D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$ and $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi in D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$?
My guess is that $mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a core of $(-Delta)^{-1}$, and as $(-Delta)^{-1}|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}=G|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}$ equality should follow by closing the restrictions.
Any comments, hints on how to proceed or references are welcome! Thank you.
functional-analysis pde operator-theory functional-calculus
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've had a hard time looking for literature on this, so here's my question:
We take a look at the Laplacian $-Delta$ as an unbounded operator on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$. We know that $-Delta$ is unitary equivalent to the multiplication operator with $|p|^2$ in Fourier space, so $-Delta=mathcal{F}^{-1} |p|^2 mathcal{F}$.
So one could now use functional calculus and define an inverse Laplacian by setting $(-Delta)^{-1}=mathcal{F}^{-1} (1/|p|^2 )mathcal{F}$, which will also be unbounded of course.
It is also known from theory of PDEs that one can invert the Laplacian on Schwartz functions using the Green's function $1/4pi |x|$, which is derived as a distributional Fourier transform of $1/|p|^2$. So define $G$ on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$ by convolution with $1/4pi |x|$:
$$(Gphi)(x)=int frac{phi(y)}{4pi |x-y|} dy$$
$G$ is also unbounded and coincides at least for the Schwartz functions with the above defined inverse Laplacian, $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi inmathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$.
Now my question is: Are both operators the same? Does $G=(-Delta)^{-1}$ hold, i. e. is $D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$ and $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi in D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$?
My guess is that $mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a core of $(-Delta)^{-1}$, and as $(-Delta)^{-1}|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}=G|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}$ equality should follow by closing the restrictions.
Any comments, hints on how to proceed or references are welcome! Thank you.
functional-analysis pde operator-theory functional-calculus
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've had a hard time looking for literature on this, so here's my question:
We take a look at the Laplacian $-Delta$ as an unbounded operator on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$. We know that $-Delta$ is unitary equivalent to the multiplication operator with $|p|^2$ in Fourier space, so $-Delta=mathcal{F}^{-1} |p|^2 mathcal{F}$.
So one could now use functional calculus and define an inverse Laplacian by setting $(-Delta)^{-1}=mathcal{F}^{-1} (1/|p|^2 )mathcal{F}$, which will also be unbounded of course.
It is also known from theory of PDEs that one can invert the Laplacian on Schwartz functions using the Green's function $1/4pi |x|$, which is derived as a distributional Fourier transform of $1/|p|^2$. So define $G$ on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$ by convolution with $1/4pi |x|$:
$$(Gphi)(x)=int frac{phi(y)}{4pi |x-y|} dy$$
$G$ is also unbounded and coincides at least for the Schwartz functions with the above defined inverse Laplacian, $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi inmathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$.
Now my question is: Are both operators the same? Does $G=(-Delta)^{-1}$ hold, i. e. is $D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$ and $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi in D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$?
My guess is that $mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a core of $(-Delta)^{-1}$, and as $(-Delta)^{-1}|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}=G|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}$ equality should follow by closing the restrictions.
Any comments, hints on how to proceed or references are welcome! Thank you.
functional-analysis pde operator-theory functional-calculus
$endgroup$
I've had a hard time looking for literature on this, so here's my question:
We take a look at the Laplacian $-Delta$ as an unbounded operator on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$. We know that $-Delta$ is unitary equivalent to the multiplication operator with $|p|^2$ in Fourier space, so $-Delta=mathcal{F}^{-1} |p|^2 mathcal{F}$.
So one could now use functional calculus and define an inverse Laplacian by setting $(-Delta)^{-1}=mathcal{F}^{-1} (1/|p|^2 )mathcal{F}$, which will also be unbounded of course.
It is also known from theory of PDEs that one can invert the Laplacian on Schwartz functions using the Green's function $1/4pi |x|$, which is derived as a distributional Fourier transform of $1/|p|^2$. So define $G$ on $mathrm{L}^2(mathbb{R}^3)$ by convolution with $1/4pi |x|$:
$$(Gphi)(x)=int frac{phi(y)}{4pi |x-y|} dy$$
$G$ is also unbounded and coincides at least for the Schwartz functions with the above defined inverse Laplacian, $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi inmathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$.
Now my question is: Are both operators the same? Does $G=(-Delta)^{-1}$ hold, i. e. is $D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$ and $Gphi=(-Delta)^{-1}phi$ for all $phi in D(G)=D((-Delta)^{-1})$?
My guess is that $mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a core of $(-Delta)^{-1}$, and as $(-Delta)^{-1}|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}=G|_{mathcal{S}(mathbb{R}^3)}$ equality should follow by closing the restrictions.
Any comments, hints on how to proceed or references are welcome! Thank you.
functional-analysis pde operator-theory functional-calculus
functional-analysis pde operator-theory functional-calculus
asked Dec 23 '18 at 13:53
MrMatzetoniMrMatzetoni
1516
1516
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The operator $(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1} : L^2(mathbb{R}^3)rightarrow W^{2,2}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a bicontinuous bijection that is equivalently defined by the Fourier transform $mathscr{F}$ as
$$
(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1}f = mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2+epsilon}(mathscr{F}f)(xi),;;; fin L^2(mathbb{R}^3).
$$
Suppose $fin L^2$. If $g(xi)=|xi|^{-2}(mathscr{F}f)(xi)$ is also in $L^2$, then
$$
g=L^2mbox{-}lim_{epsilondownarrow 0}(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}f = frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy.
$$
It is also true that, for such an $f$, the right side of the following converges to $f$ in $L^2$ as $epsilondownarrow 0$:
$$
-Delta(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=f-epsilon(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f.
$$
And $(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f$ converges to $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-1}mathscr{F}f)$. Because $-Delta : W^{2,2}subset L^2rightarrow L^2$ is selfadjoint, it follows that $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-2}mathscr{F}f)inmathcal{D}(-Delta)$ and
$$
-Deltaleft[mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}fright] = f,
$$
which is equal to
$$ -Delta frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy=f.
$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
});
});
}, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function() {
var channelOptions = {
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
};
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
createEditor();
});
}
else {
createEditor();
}
});
function createEditor() {
StackExchange.prepareEditor({
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader: {
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
},
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
});
}
});
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%2f3050362%2finverting-the-laplacian%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The operator $(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1} : L^2(mathbb{R}^3)rightarrow W^{2,2}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a bicontinuous bijection that is equivalently defined by the Fourier transform $mathscr{F}$ as
$$
(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1}f = mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2+epsilon}(mathscr{F}f)(xi),;;; fin L^2(mathbb{R}^3).
$$
Suppose $fin L^2$. If $g(xi)=|xi|^{-2}(mathscr{F}f)(xi)$ is also in $L^2$, then
$$
g=L^2mbox{-}lim_{epsilondownarrow 0}(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}f = frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy.
$$
It is also true that, for such an $f$, the right side of the following converges to $f$ in $L^2$ as $epsilondownarrow 0$:
$$
-Delta(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=f-epsilon(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f.
$$
And $(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f$ converges to $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-1}mathscr{F}f)$. Because $-Delta : W^{2,2}subset L^2rightarrow L^2$ is selfadjoint, it follows that $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-2}mathscr{F}f)inmathcal{D}(-Delta)$ and
$$
-Deltaleft[mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}fright] = f,
$$
which is equal to
$$ -Delta frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy=f.
$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The operator $(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1} : L^2(mathbb{R}^3)rightarrow W^{2,2}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a bicontinuous bijection that is equivalently defined by the Fourier transform $mathscr{F}$ as
$$
(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1}f = mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2+epsilon}(mathscr{F}f)(xi),;;; fin L^2(mathbb{R}^3).
$$
Suppose $fin L^2$. If $g(xi)=|xi|^{-2}(mathscr{F}f)(xi)$ is also in $L^2$, then
$$
g=L^2mbox{-}lim_{epsilondownarrow 0}(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}f = frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy.
$$
It is also true that, for such an $f$, the right side of the following converges to $f$ in $L^2$ as $epsilondownarrow 0$:
$$
-Delta(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=f-epsilon(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f.
$$
And $(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f$ converges to $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-1}mathscr{F}f)$. Because $-Delta : W^{2,2}subset L^2rightarrow L^2$ is selfadjoint, it follows that $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-2}mathscr{F}f)inmathcal{D}(-Delta)$ and
$$
-Deltaleft[mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}fright] = f,
$$
which is equal to
$$ -Delta frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy=f.
$$
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The operator $(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1} : L^2(mathbb{R}^3)rightarrow W^{2,2}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a bicontinuous bijection that is equivalently defined by the Fourier transform $mathscr{F}$ as
$$
(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1}f = mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2+epsilon}(mathscr{F}f)(xi),;;; fin L^2(mathbb{R}^3).
$$
Suppose $fin L^2$. If $g(xi)=|xi|^{-2}(mathscr{F}f)(xi)$ is also in $L^2$, then
$$
g=L^2mbox{-}lim_{epsilondownarrow 0}(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}f = frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy.
$$
It is also true that, for such an $f$, the right side of the following converges to $f$ in $L^2$ as $epsilondownarrow 0$:
$$
-Delta(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=f-epsilon(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f.
$$
And $(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f$ converges to $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-1}mathscr{F}f)$. Because $-Delta : W^{2,2}subset L^2rightarrow L^2$ is selfadjoint, it follows that $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-2}mathscr{F}f)inmathcal{D}(-Delta)$ and
$$
-Deltaleft[mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}fright] = f,
$$
which is equal to
$$ -Delta frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy=f.
$$
$endgroup$
The operator $(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1} : L^2(mathbb{R}^3)rightarrow W^{2,2}(mathbb{R}^3)$ is a bicontinuous bijection that is equivalently defined by the Fourier transform $mathscr{F}$ as
$$
(-Delta +epsilon I)^{-1}f = mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2+epsilon}(mathscr{F}f)(xi),;;; fin L^2(mathbb{R}^3).
$$
Suppose $fin L^2$. If $g(xi)=|xi|^{-2}(mathscr{F}f)(xi)$ is also in $L^2$, then
$$
g=L^2mbox{-}lim_{epsilondownarrow 0}(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}f = frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy.
$$
It is also true that, for such an $f$, the right side of the following converges to $f$ in $L^2$ as $epsilondownarrow 0$:
$$
-Delta(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f=f-epsilon(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f.
$$
And $(-Delta+epsilon I)^{-1}f$ converges to $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-1}mathscr{F}f)$. Because $-Delta : W^{2,2}subset L^2rightarrow L^2$ is selfadjoint, it follows that $mathscr{F}^{-1}(|xi|^{-2}mathscr{F}f)inmathcal{D}(-Delta)$ and
$$
-Deltaleft[mathscr{F}^{-1}frac{1}{|xi|^2}mathscr{F}fright] = f,
$$
which is equal to
$$ -Delta frac{1}{4pi}int_{mathbb{R}^3}frac{1}{|x-y|}f(y)dy=f.
$$
edited Jan 3 at 4:57
answered Jan 1 at 3:38
DisintegratingByPartsDisintegratingByParts
59.2k42580
59.2k42580
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
I already see this calculation as given. My question is about the technical aspect behind the inverse laplacian, specifically whether operators defined by functional calculus and defined by convolution are the same especially in terms of their natural domains. The calculation of the inv. FT just shows that both operators coincide on the schwartz functions, but their natural domains are larger.
$endgroup$
– MrMatzetoni
Jan 2 at 21:42
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
$begingroup$
@MrMatzetoni : Take another look at my latest operator-based revision.
$endgroup$
– DisintegratingByParts
Jan 4 at 2:04
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.
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%2f3050362%2finverting-the-laplacian%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