Alphabeta Math
CorollaryStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-adaptedPipeline-generated
How statement and proof provenance work

The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.

  • Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
  • AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
  • AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.

These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.

L-infinity embeds continuously into BMO modulo constants

Statement

Every b∈L∞(Rn) lies in BMO(Rn) with ∥b∥BMO≤2∥b∥L∞, so the class map L∞(Rn)/C→BMO(Rn)/C is a continuous injection. Whether the injection is surjective is not claimed here; the companion examples page records an unbounded BMO function, which exhibits strictness independently.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: A bounded function b∈L∞(Rn) and a cube Q, with the cube convention, the mean bQ and the seminorm and quotient of BMO seminorm and the quotient by constants.

[F1]

The mean is defined by bQ=∣Q∣−1∫Qb, and the seminorm is ∥b∥BMO=sup⁡Q∣Q∣−1∫Q∣b−bQ∣; the zero-seminorm class is exactly the class of functions constant almost everywhere (BMO seminorm and the quotient by constants).

[F2]

On a cube of finite volume, a bounded function is integrable and ∣bQ∣≤∥b∥L∞ (BMO seminorm and the quotient by constants).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2algebra

For every cube Q the triangle inequality and [F2] give ∣Q∣−1∫Q∣b−bQ∣≤∣Q∣−1∫Q∣b∣+∣bQ∣≤2∥b∥L∞, so b is locally integrable and ∥b∥BMO≤2∥b∥L∞; in particular L∞(Rn)⊆BMO(Rn).

1.2F1

Adding a constant c to a representative gives (b+c)Q=bQ+c by linearity of the integral, so the class map is well defined on L∞(Rn)/C: both quotients identify functions whose difference is almost everywhere constant. If two classes b1,b2∈L∞(Rn)/C have the same image in BMO(Rn)/C, then b1−b2 is almost everywhere constant by the definition of that quotient as the quotient of BMO by the constants, so b1 and b2 already represent the same class in L∞(Rn)/C; that is injectivity.

2.1step 1.1step 1.2∎

By invariance of the BMO seminorm under constants and step 1.1, for every c∈C one has ∥b∥BMO=∥b−c∥BMO≤2∥b−c∥L∞. Taking the infimum over c gives ∥[b]∥BMO/C≤2∥[b]∥L∞/C for the quotient norms, so the induced class map is continuous; step 1.2 gives injectivity. Both statements are choice-free: only linearity of the integral and the definition of the seminorm are used.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

5 results within two dependency steps of this one, each drawn at its shortest distance from it. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, so the chart reads left to right and ends at this result, which carries a heavier outline. Every node is a link to that result. Click elsewhere on the chart to enlarge it.

Sources