0

Let $f \in L^1(\mathbb{R})$ such that its distributional derivative $f'$ is also in $L^1(\mathbb{R})$ (in the sense that there exists a function $h\in L^1(\mathbb{R})$ such that $\langle f', \phi\rangle = -\langle f, \phi'\rangle = \langle h, \phi\rangle $ for all test functions $\phi \in \mathcal{D}(\mathbb{R})$, ie. we can identify the distributional derivative of $f$ with an $L^1$ function).

Now suppose that $f$ and $f'$ are also continuous. How could I prove that $f'$ coincides with the classical derivative of $f$, ie. defining

$$g(x) = \lim_{h\to0} \frac{f(x) - f(x+h)}{h},$$ how can I show that $g(x) = f'(x)$ for all $x\in\mathbb{R}$ ?

Thanks !

  • 4
    Did you change the sign on the definition of the derivative for a reason? – Ted Shifrin Feb 07 '25 at 19:46
  • @GiuseppeNegro The question you linked is about $L^p$-spaces, this one about about continuous functions (the questions are related, but different - this one is simpler, but not contained in the linked one) – user8268 Feb 09 '25 at 21:37
  • This way of identifying "duplicates" on this website may seem a bit aggressive, and that was not at all my point. It's not an aggression or a downplaying of your question. I actually wanted to point to the other one, hoping that it may help you. – Giuseppe Negro Feb 09 '25 at 23:05

1 Answers1

0

Use these two basic facts from distribution theory:

  1. If $s\in C^1(\mathbb R)$ then the distributional derivative of $s$ exists and is equal to the ordinary derivative of $s$. This follows from integration by parts.

  2. If $r\in\mathcal{D}'(\mathbb R)$ is a distribution and if $r'=0$ (the distributional derivative), then $r$ is a constant. (The main part of the proof is that if $\phi$ is a compactly supported $C^\infty$-function and $\int_{-\infty}^\infty\phi(x)dx=0$, then $\phi=\psi'$ for some compactly supported $\psi$.)

By 1., if $f$ is $C^1$, we are done, but we only know that $f$ is $C^0$. However, the distributional derivative $f'$ is assumed to be $C^0$, so $f'$ admits a primitive function $h\in C^1(\mathbb R)$, $h'=f'$. By 2. this implies that $f$ differs from $h$ by a constant , hence $f$ is $C^1$ (because $h$ is $C^1$), so we are done.

user8268
  • 22,450
  • Shouldn't be necessary for a distributionally derivative to prove that $(f-h)'=C\delta$ and then that the only possible scenario is $C=0$? – Joako Feb 07 '25 at 18:40
  • 1
    @Joako sorry, I don't understand your comment; where is that $\delta$ coming from? – user8268 Feb 07 '25 at 19:03
  • from this comment: Is not this a similar situation than from the eqn in the comment? Somehow under distribution theory things aren't just equal to zero, but you have to check also for Dirac's Delta functions (I don't really understand why) – Joako Feb 07 '25 at 22:02
  • 1
    @Joako $\delta$ in that comment comes from multiplication by $x$; no such thing happens here – user8268 Feb 07 '25 at 22:43