5

It is well-known that $L^{1}(\mathbb R)$ is a closed with respect to convolution(product), that is, $L^{1}(\mathbb R)\ast L^{1}(\mathbb R)\subset L^{1}(\mathbb R),$ more specifically, if $f, g\in L^{1}(\mathbb R) $, then $f\ast g \in L^{1}(\mathbb R);$ and further more, we have $\|f\ast g\|_{L^{1}(\mathbb R)}\leq \|f\|_{L^{1}(\mathbb R)} \cdot \|g\|_{L^{1}(\mathbb R)}.$ (Infect, it is Banach algebra)

We note that, $L^{p}(\mathbb R) (1<p<\infty)$ is not closed under convolution. (It is a Banach space but not a Banach algebra with respect to convolution )

Note that, $L^{1}(\mathbb R)\ast C^{k}(\mathbb R)\subset C^{k}(\mathbb R).$ (Bit roughly speaking, this tells us that, convolution is a smooth process)

Consider the Schwartz space, $\mathcal{S}(\mathbb R)= \{f\in C^{\infty}(\mathbb R): \sup_{x\in \mathbb R} (1+|x|)^{m} |\partial^{n} f(x) |< \infty, \forall m, n \in \mathbb N \} $

We also note that, $\mathcal{S(\mathbb R)}\ast \mathcal{S}(\mathbb R)\subset \mathcal{S}(\mathbb R),$ and $\mathcal{S}(\mathbb R)\subset L^{p}(\mathbb R).$

My Question is: Can we expect, $S(\mathbb R)\ast L^{p}(\mathbb R) \subset L^{p}(\mathbb R), (1<p<\infty);$ if yes, can we expect, $\|f\ast g\|_{L^{p}(\mathbb R)} \leq \|f\|_{L^{p}(\mathbb R)} \cdot \|g\|_{L^{p}(\mathbb R)}$ for $f\in \mathcal{S}(\mathbb R), g\in L^{p}(\mathbb R), (1<p<\infty)$ ?

Thanks,

Inquisitive
  • 3,877

2 Answers2

4

The inclusion stated in the title follows from the fact that $\mathcal{S}\subset L^1$. But the inequality would involve the $L^1$ norm of $f$, not its $L^p$ norm. (Namely, Young's inequality for convolution.) The point is, smoothness is irrelevant to $L^p$ norm estimates of this sort.

To see why you can't have $\|f\|_{L^p}$, consider $f=\chi_{[0,M]}$ (okay, this is not smooth, but you can make it taper off smoothly at the ends without changing the norm much). The $L^p$ norm of $f$ is $M^{1/p}$. Convolution $f*f$ is a kind of triangle with height $M$ and base $2M$. So, its $L^p$ norm is $M^{1+1/p}$. The inequality $M^{1+1/p}\lesssim M^{1/p}M^{1/p}$ fails when $M$ is large.

  • is much healthier; Thanks a lot; Can we think of any other sub class of $L^{p};$ where we have inequality like, $|f\ast g|{L^{p}} \leq |f|{p} |g|_{L^{p}}$ ? Thanks; – Inquisitive Jul 16 '14 at 17:17
  • 2
    @DivyangBhimani The basic problem is that scaling is wrong. Try to rescale $f$ and $g$ at the same time: that is, replace them with $f(tx)$ and $g(tx)$ for some fixed $t>0$. You will see that two parts of the inequality in your post will have different powers of $t$. The only way to avoid this is to restrict the support of function $f$ to some interval. Then $L^p$ norm controls $ L^1$ norm, by Holder's inequality. –  Jul 16 '14 at 17:20
3

Here's another explanation of the failure of inequality $$\tag{1} \|f\ast g\|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^N)}\le C \|f\|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^N)}\|g\|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^N)},\qquad f, g\in \mathcal{S}$$ for $p>1$. (The OP is about $N=1$ but there is no added difficulty in considering the general case). It is a routine application of the so-called scaling argument.

Assume by contradiction that (1) holds for some constant $C>0$. We fix two non-vanishing functions $f$ and $g$ such that $f\ast g$ is non-vanishing (this is to avoid trivialities). Then we define $$ f_\lambda(x)=f(\lambda x),\quad g_\lambda(x)=g(\lambda x),$$ where $\lambda >0$ is a parameter. Since $f, g\in \mathcal{S}$, their scaled versions $f_\lambda, g_\lambda$ are in $\mathcal{S}$ too. Therefore, we should have $$\tag{2} \| f_\lambda \ast g_\lambda \|_{L^p}\le C \|f_\lambda\|_{L^p}\|g_\lambda\|_{L^p}.$$ However, by the change of variable formula for integrals, we also have $$f_\lambda \ast g_\lambda (x)=\lambda^{-N}f\ast g(\lambda x)$$ and so \begin{align*} \|f_\lambda \ast g_\lambda \|_{L^p}&=\lambda^{-N\left(1+\frac{1}{p}\right)}\|f\ast g\|_{L^p}\\ \|f_\lambda \|_{L^p}&=\lambda^{-\frac{N}{p}}\|f\|_{L^p}\\ \|g_\lambda \|_{L^p}&= \lambda^{-\frac{N}{p}}\|g\|_{L^p}. \end{align*} Inserting those identities in (2) we obtain $$\tag{!!} \lambda^{-N\left(1+\frac{1}{p}\right)} \|f\ast g\|_{L^p(\mathbb{R}^N)}\le C \lambda^{-2\frac{N}{p}}\|f\|_{L^p} \|g \|_{L^p}.$$ As you can see, the exponents on $\lambda$ are different on the left and on the right hand side unless $p=1$. This is a signal that, when $p>1$, (!!) cannot hold for all values of $\lambda>0$, and so that (2) cannot hold for all functions $f$ and $g$, no matter the value of $C$. To wit, just let $\lambda$ tend to $0$ or to $+\infty$ and see what happens.

(Final note: In spirit, this is exactly the same answer as the one by This is much healtier. )

  • Wow...; thanks a lot; – Inquisitive Jul 16 '14 at 17:41
  • 1
    You are welcome, but this is completely standard. It is something that people do all the time to check consistency of inequalities and to guess new ones before trying to prove them. For example, now you know that it would be a waste of time trying to prove that $|f\ast g|_p\le C |f|_p|g|_p$ with $p>1$, since it is false. – Giuseppe Negro Jul 16 '14 at 17:51