Alphabeta Math
LemmaStatement: Literature-sourcedProof: AI-generatedprecheck pass
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 periodic Sobolev space H^k of the three-torus is a Banach algebra for k at least four

Statement

Assume the Axiom of Countable Choice ACω (The Axiom of Countable Choice (ACω)). Let k≥4 be an integer and let u,v∈Hk(T2π3;R) with the objects and notation of The 2 pi-periodic three-torus, its normalized measure, test functions and the Sobolev spaces H^s. Then:

(a) For every ∣γ∣≤k−2 the weak derivative Dγu has a continuous representative and sup⁡x∈T2π3∣Dγu(x)∣≤Ck∥u∥Hk, with Ck depending only on k;

(b) the pointwise product uv of the continuous representatives lies in Hk and ∥uv∥Hk≤Ck ∥u∥Hk ∥v∥Hk;

(c) if φ∈Ck(T2π3;R) and w∈Hk(T2π3;R), then φw∈Hk and ∥φw∥Hk≤Ck ∥φ∥Ck ∥w∥Hk.

Facts & Assumptions

Given: Countable Choice, an integer k≥4, and u,v∈Hk(T2π3;R).

[L1]

Sobolev embedding: for integers s≥m≥0 with s−m>3/2, every Hs class has a unique continuous representative which is Cm, with ∥u∥Cm≤C(s,m)∥u∥Hs, and the derivative series converges uniformly (Periodic Sobolev embedding: H^s on the three-torus controls C^m when s minus m exceeds three halves).

[L2]

∥Dαw∥2≤∥w∥Hk for ∣α∣≤k, and Cm functions on the torus have finite sup norm; the L∞ norm of the constant function 1 on the probability space is 1, so ∥g∥2≤∥g∥∞ (The 2 pi-periodic three-torus, its normalized measure, test functions and the Sobolev spaces H^s).

[L3]

For Ck functions φ,ψ on the torus and ∣α∣≤k, the classical multi-index Leibniz rule is Dα(φψ)=∑β≤α(αβ)Dβφ Dα−βψ, a finite sum over β≤α; it follows by induction on ∣α∣ from the one-variable product rule (Ck maps and multi-index derivative notation in Euclidean space, The 2 pi-periodic three-torus, its normalized measure, test functions and the Sobolev spaces H^s). For smooth factors this also gives the weak-derivative identity.

[L4]

(αβ)≥1 is an integer and the number of multi-indices β≤α is at most (k+1)3 (Ck maps and multi-index derivative notation in Euclidean space).

[L5]

Fourier truncations are smooth and converge in every stated Hk norm (The Galerkin projection is self-adjoint, commutes with derivatives, is a contraction in every H^r, converges to the identity and has the sharp Fourier-tail bound). The periodic space Hk is complete: every Hk-Cauchy sequence converges in Hk; this follows from completeness of the weighted Fourier coefficient space and the Fourier characterization of Hk (Completeness of the periodic Sobolev spaces H^s(T^3_{2 pi}; R^N)).

[L6]

If f is Ck and periodic, its classical derivatives through order k are its weak derivatives: for C1 periodic G, integrating ∂iG over one period gives zero by the fundamental theorem of calculus and equality of endpoint values; applying this coordinatewise to G=(Dβf)η for smooth periodic tests η proves the weak identities. The same periodic integration-by-parts argument is used in Periodic Fourier differentiation identity and equivalence of the derivative and Fourier-weight Sobolev norms, proof step 1.1.

Proof

technique · direct
1.1L1

(Embedding control (a).) Since k−(k−2)=2>3/2, [L1] with (s,m)=(k,k−2) gives a Ck−2 representative of u and the bound sup⁡∣Dγu∣≤∥u∥Ck−2≤Ck∥u∥Hk for every ∣γ∣≤k−2.

2.1step 1.1L2L3algebra

(Each Leibniz term for smooth factors is bounded by ∥u∥Hk∥v∥Hk.) First take smooth u,v and fix ∣α∣≤k. Expand by [L3]. In a term Dβu Dα−βv two cases occur. If ∣β∣≥k−1, then ∣α−β∣≤1≤k−2, so step 1.1 bounds the second factor in L∞ and [L2] bounds the first in L2. If ∣β∣≤k−2, step 1.1 bounds the first factor in L∞, while [L2] bounds the second in L2. Both cases give an L2 bound Ck∥u∥Hk∥v∥Hk. They exhaust the possibilities because both orders cannot be at least k−1 when ∣α∣≤k and k≥4.

3.1step 2.1L1L3L5algebra

(Conclusion of (b).) Summing the finitely many terms of [L3] and using [L4] gives the stated product bound for smooth u,v. For general u,v∈Hk, put uN=PNu and vN=PNv. By [L5], these converge in Hk and, by [L1], uniformly. The smooth estimate applied to uNvN−uMvM=(uN−uM)vN+uM(vN−vM) shows that (uNvN) is Cauchy in Hk. Completeness [L5] gives a limit, and uniform convergence identifies it with uv. For every smooth test function η, pass to the limit in ∫uNvNDαη=(−1)∣α∣∫Dα(uNvN)η; uniform convergence on the left and L2 convergence of the derivatives on the right show that the limits are the weak derivatives of uv. The product estimate passes to the limit by norm continuity and ∥PNw∥Hk≤∥w∥Hk.

4.1L2L3L5L6algebra∎

((c): smoothing by a classical factor.) First take wN=PNw, which is smooth. The Ck Leibniz rule [L3] and [L6] give its weak derivatives by the displayed finite sum. Since ∣Dβφ∣≤∥φ∥Ck and ∥Dα−βwN∥2≤∥wN∥Hk, summing the binomial coefficients gives ∥φwN∥Hk≤Ck∥φ∥Ck∥wN∥Hk. Applying this estimate to wN−wM and using completeness [L5] shows that φwN converges in Hk; uniform convergence identifies its limit as φw. Passing the weak derivative identities against smooth test functions gives φw∈Hk, and the bound follows from ∥wN∥Hk≤∥w∥Hk.

Remarks

Depends on

Dependency tree · 2 levels

Sources