Alphabeta Math
TheoremStatement: AI-adaptedProof: 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.

Morrey's inequality for p>n

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Choice (The Axiom of Choice). Let n≥2, n<p<∞, let Ω⊆Rn be open and let u∈W1,p(Ω;K). Then u has a continuous representative u∗, and for every ball B(x,r) with B(x,2r)⋐Ω one has ∣u∗(z)−u∗(y)∣≤C(n,p) ∣z−y∣1−n/p ∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r))(z,y∈B(x,r)); equivalently [u∗]C0,1−n/p(B(x,r))≤C(n,p)∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)).

Facts & Assumptions

Given: The Axiom of Choice, used through the Countable-Choice interfaces of the cited measure-theoretic and approximation results; n≥2; n<p<∞; an open set Ω⊆Rn; a field K∈{R,C}; and a class u∈W1,p(Ω;K).

[F1]

The ball oscillation estimate: for a ball B(x,ρ) and u∈W1,p(B(x,ρ)), ∣u(z)−uB(x,ρ)∣≤C0(n)∫B(x,ρ)∣Du(y)∣ ∣z−y∣1−ndy for almost every z∈B(x,ρ) (Ball-mean oscillation bound by the Riesz potential of the gradient).

[F2]

Holder's inequality ∫∣fg∣≤∥f∥p∥g∥p′ for conjugate exponents (Holder's inequality for integrals, including the endpoint cases), and ∫B(z,R)∣z−y∣(1−n)p′dy=ωn−1R n−(n−1)p′/(n−(n−1)p′) with n−(n−1)p′>0 because p>n, while (n−(n−1)p′)/p′=1−n/p by polar coordinates (Polar coordinates decompose Lebesgue measure into r^{n-1} dr d sigma).

[F3]

The ball average is the normalized integral, and Aρu(x)→u(x) as ρ↓0 for almost every x (The average of a locally integrable function over a Euclidean ball, Lebesgue differentiation theorem on Rn).

[F4]

W1,p consists of the Lp classes with weak gradient in Lp; Lp classes are determined up to null sets; for α=1−n/p∈(0,1) the local Holder norm is [v]C0,α(B)=sup⁡z≠y∈B∣v(z)−v(y)∣/∣z−y∣α (Integer-order Sobolev spaces and their norms, The space Lp(μ) as the quotient by null functions, Local Hölder and scaled C-two-alpha norms on balls).

[F5]

Countable Choice is available from the Axiom of Choice and is the hypothesis of the cited differentiation interface; the cited Holder theorem requires no choice hypothesis (The Axiom of Choice, The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)).

Proof

technique · direct
1.1F1F2givenalgebra

Oscillation on a ball. Fix a ball B(x,ρ)⊆Ω. By [F1], for almost every z∈B(x,ρ), ∣u(z)−uB(x,ρ)∣≤C0(n)∫B(x,ρ)∣Du(y)∣ ∣z−y∣1−ndy. Holder [F2] with exponents p and p′ bounds this by C0(n)∥Du∥Lp(B(x,ρ))(∫B(z,2ρ)∣z−y∣(1−n)p′dy)1/p′, where the integration region has been enlarged from B(x,ρ)⊆B(z,2ρ) to B(z,2ρ). By [F2] the kernel integral equals c(n,p)ρ n−(n−1)p′ with n−(n−1)p′>0 and exponent (n−(n−1)p′)/p′=1−n/p, so ∣u(z)−uB(x,ρ)∣≤C1(n,p) ρ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,ρ)) for almost every z∈B(x,ρ).

2.1F2F3F4F5step 1.1givenalgebra

Convergence of the ball means and the representative. Fix a ball B(x,r) with B(x,2r)⋐Ω and let 0<ρ≤σ≤r. For almost every z∈B(x,ρ) step 1.1 applied on B(x,σ) gives ∣u(z)−uB(x,σ)∣≤C1σ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,σ))≤C1σ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,r)); averaging in z over B(x,ρ) yields ∣uB(x,ρ)−uB(x,σ)∣≤C1σ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,r)). Hence the net (uB(x,ρ))ρ↓0 is Cauchy and we may define u∗(x):=lim⁡ρ↓0uB(x,ρ) for every x such that some B(x,2r)⋐Ω, with ∣u∗(x)−uB(x,ρ)∣≤C1ρ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,r)) for 0<ρ≤r. The zero extension of u to Rn lies in Lloc1(Rn) by Holder [F2] on bounded balls, since u∈Lp(Ω); its sufficiently small ball means at each interior point are those of u. Thus [F3] and [F4] give uB(x,ρ)→u(x) for almost every x, so u∗=u almost everywhere: u∗ is a representative of the class. The Countable-Choice interface used here is supplied by [F5].

3.1F4step 1.1step 2.1givenalgebra∎

The Holder bound and continuity. Let z,y∈B(x,r) and put ℓ:=∣z−y∣; the case ℓ=0 is trivial. If ℓ≤r/2, apply step 1.1 on the balls B(z,ℓ) and B(y,ℓ) and step 2.1 on their means: ∣u∗(z)−uB(z,ℓ)∣≤C1ℓ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(z,ℓ)) and similarly at y; both balls lie in B(x,r+ℓ)⊆B(x,2r) when ℓ≤r/2, so the two norms are at most ∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)). For the difference of the two means, both balls B(z,ℓ) and B(y,ℓ) lie in B(z,2ℓ)⊆B(x,r+2ℓ)⊆B(x,2r), and step 1.1 on B(z,2ℓ) bounds ∣u(a)−u(b)∣≤2C1(2ℓ)1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)) for almost every a∈B(z,ℓ), b∈B(y,ℓ); averaging gives ∣uB(z,ℓ)−uB(y,ℓ)∣≤2C1(2ℓ)1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)). Combining the three terms, ∣u∗(z)−u∗(y)∣≤C2(n,p)ℓ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)). If ℓ>r/2, use the mean over the fixed ball B(x,2r): by step 1.1 on B(x,2r), for almost every a∈B(x,2r) one has ∣u(a)−uB(x,2r)∣≤C1(2r)1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)), and since B(z,ρ)⊆B(x,2r) for 0<ρ<r, averaging over B(z,ρ) and letting ρ↓0 gives ∣u∗(z)−uB(x,2r)∣≤C1(2r)1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)), with the same bound at y; hence ∣u∗(z)−u∗(y)∣≤2C1(2r)1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r))≤C2′ ℓ1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,2r)) because (2r)1−n/p≤41−n/pℓ1−n/p when ℓ>r/2. This proves the displayed estimate with a constant depending only on n and p; since the exponent 1−n/p is positive, u∗ is continuous on every ball B(x,r) with B(x,2r)⋐Ω, hence on all of Ω, and the equivalent Holder-norm statement follows from [F4].

Source notes

Kinnunen proves Morrey's inequality by combining the ball oscillation estimate (Lemma 5.22, reproduced in the preceding item) with Holder's inequality in the form ∫B(x,r)∣Du(w)∣∣y−w∣1−ndw≤cr1−n/p∥Du∥Lp(B(x,r)), printed pp. 140 and 77-79; the present proof follows that route and records the two-regime comparison of means needed because the statement normalizes the right-hand norm on the fixed ball B(x,2r). The continuity of the representative and the identification u∗=u almost everywhere are the standard Lebesgue-point argument.

Depends on

Used by

Dependency tree · two levels

60 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