Alphabeta Math
DefinitionDefinition: Literature-sourcedProof: Not applicablePipeline-generatedaudited 2026-10-02
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.

The Poisson integral of a finite complex boundary measure

Definition

Assume countable choice. Identify the torus T=R/Z with the Euclidean unit circle through φ([t])=e2πit and write m for the normalized Haar measure of T (The one-dimensional torus and its normalized Haar integral). For z∈D and ζ∈T put P(z,ζ):=P(z,φ(ζ))=1−∣z∣2∣φ(ζ)−z∣2, where the second expression is the Poisson kernel of The Poisson kernel on the unit disc evaluated at the boundary point φ(ζ) of the unit circle. For each fixed z∈D the function ζ↦P(z,ζ) is continuous and positive on the compact space T, because φ is continuous and ∣φ(ζ)−z∣≥1−∣z∣>0.

Integral against a finite complex measure. Let μ be a finite regular complex Borel measure on T (Regular complex Borel measures). Define the Poisson integral of μ by P[μ](z):=∫TP(z,ζ) dμ(ζ)(z∈D), the integral being the one against a signed or complex measure (Integration against a signed or complex measure, and the class L^1(nu) = L^1(|nu|)). This is well defined: for fixed z the integrand is continuous on the compact space T, hence bounded, so it belongs to L1(∣μ∣), and by Integrals against signed or complex measures are bounded by total variation ∣P[μ](z)∣≤(sup⁡ζ∈TP(z,ζ))∣μ∣(T)<+∞. Linearity in μ is the linearity of the integral in the measure.

Integral against an L1 density. For f∈L1(T,m) (The class L1(μ) of integrable functions) let fm denote the finite complex measure (fm)(E):=∫Ef dm(E⊆T Borel), which is a complex measure with ∣fm∣(E)=∫E∣f∣ dm (A complex L^1 density defines a complex measure whose total variation is |h| dmu). Since T is compact Hausdorff and second-countable, the finite positive Borel measure ∣fm∣ is regular by Locally finite Borel measures on second-countable LCH spaces are regular under the assumed countable choice. Thus fm is a finite regular complex measure. The displayed measurable-set formula supplies the density f directly, uniquely up to m-almost-everywhere equality by Two integrable functions are equal almost everywhere exactly when all of their indefinite integrals agree. For a simple measurable g=∑j=1kcj1Ej in canonical disjoint form, each f1Ej is integrable since ∣f1Ej∣≤∣f∣, and ∣fm∣(Ej)≤∥f∥1<∞. Thus The simple integral against a signed or complex measure and The Lebesgue integral is linear on L1(μ) give ∫Tg d(fm)=∑j=1kcj(fm)(Ej)=∑j=1kcj∫Ejf dm=∫Tgf dm. For bounded measurable g, the same identity follows as follows. Set sn:=2−n(⌊2nRe⁡g⌋+i⌊2nIm⁡g⌋). Each sn is a measurable simple function with finite range, and ∣sn−g∣≤2 2−n. Hence ∫T∣sn−g∣ d∣fm∣≤2 2−n∥f∥1⟶0, so the definition of integration against a complex measure gives ∫sn d(fm)→∫g d(fm). Also, by The Lebesgue integral is linear on L1(μ) and The modulus of an integral is bounded by the integral of the modulus, ∣∫Tsnf dm−∫Tgf dm∣≤2 2−n∥f∥1⟶0. Passing to the limit in the simple-function identity proves it for every bounded measurable g. The density and approximants are supplied explicitly, so this argument uses no Radon-Nikodym existence theorem or additional choice assumption. In particular, for z∈D with g=P(z,⋅), P[f](z):=P[fm](z)=∫TP(z,ζ)f(ζ) dm(ζ). If f=f′ m-almost everywhere, then (fm)(E)=∫Ef dm=∫Ef′ dm for every Borel E (Two integrable functions are equal almost everywhere exactly when all of their indefinite integrals agree), so fm=f′m and P[f]=P[f′]: the Poisson integral of an L1 class is independent of the chosen representative.

Radial functions. For 0≤r<1 and f∈L1(T,m) write Pr∗f:T→C,(Pr∗f)(ζ):=∫TP(rζ,η)f(η) dm(η), so that (Pr∗f)(ζ)=P[f](rζ) by the preceding display. Equivalently, writing Pr(u):=(1−r2)/(1−2rcos⁡(2πu)+r2) for u∈T, one has (Pr∗f)(ζ)=∫TPr(ζ−η)f(η) dm(η), the torus convolution of f with the kernel Pr, in agreement with the second display of The Poisson kernel on the unit disc under the identification ζ=e2πiθ.

Agreement with the published continuous-data integral. Let ψ:∂D→R be continuous and let F:=ψ∘φ:T→R, a continuous hence bounded function. By the definition of the torus integral, ∫TP(z,ζ)F(ζ) dm(ζ)=∫[0,1)P(z,e2πit)ψ(e2πit) dt=12π∫02πP(z,eis)ψ(eis) ds, the last step by the linear change of variables s=2πt on (0,1) (A C^1 diffeomorphism satisfies the change-of-variables formula for L^1 functions). The right-hand side is exactly the Poisson integral of ψ from The Poisson integral on the unit disc, so P[ψ∘φ]=P[ψ] on D. The definition above therefore extends, and does not conflict with, the published real continuous-data definition.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

88 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