Added existence of the weak integral.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -9,7 +9,7 @@
|
|||||||
As I know so little about weak integrals, I will Dunning-Kruger myself right now, give an opinion, and laugh about it later. My gripe with seeing the definition comes from the need to test against \textit{every} continuous linear functional. To me, this seems quite inflexible: consider integrating a distribution-valued function. \textit{Surely} it is wiser to only test this function against test functions rather than \textit{the dual of $\mathcal{D}'$ (dual with respect to $\mathcal{D}'$ with the bounded convergence topology)}. As such, it may be more productive to consider a more flexible form of testing, such as using duality.
|
As I know so little about weak integrals, I will Dunning-Kruger myself right now, give an opinion, and laugh about it later. My gripe with seeing the definition comes from the need to test against \textit{every} continuous linear functional. To me, this seems quite inflexible: consider integrating a distribution-valued function. \textit{Surely} it is wiser to only test this function against test functions rather than \textit{the dual of $\mathcal{D}'$ (dual with respect to $\mathcal{D}'$ with the bounded convergence topology)}. As such, it may be more productive to consider a more flexible form of testing, such as using duality.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
\begin{definition}[Weakly Integrable*]
|
\begin{definition}[Weak Integrability*]
|
||||||
\label{definition:weakly-integrable}
|
\label{definition:weakly-integrable}
|
||||||
Let $(X, \cm, \mu)$ be a measure space, $\dpn{E, F}{\lambda}$ be a duality over $K \in \RC$, and $f: X \to E$, then $f$ is \textbf{Dunford $\lambda$-integrable*} if:
|
Let $(X, \cm, \mu)$ be a measure space, $\dpn{E, F}{\lambda}$ be a duality over $K \in \RC$, and $f: X \to E$, then $f$ is \textbf{Dunford $\lambda$-integrable*} if:
|
||||||
\begin{enumerate}[label=(I\arabic*)]
|
\begin{enumerate}[label=(I\arabic*)]
|
||||||
@@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ As I know so little about weak integrals, I will Dunning-Kruger myself right now
|
|||||||
\begin{enumerate}
|
\begin{enumerate}
|
||||||
\item[(I3+)] For each $A \in \cm$, the mapping
|
\item[(I3+)] For each $A \in \cm$, the mapping
|
||||||
\[
|
\[
|
||||||
F \to K \quad \phi \mapsto \int_X \dpn{f(x), \phi}{\lambda} d\mu
|
F \to K \quad \phi \mapsto \int_A \dpn{f(x), \phi}{\lambda} d\mu
|
||||||
\]
|
\]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
is a $\sigma(F, E)$-continuous linear functional on $F$.
|
is a $\sigma(F, E)$-continuous linear functional on $F$.
|
||||||
@@ -43,9 +43,34 @@ It is at this point that I start to understand why the bidual setup is useful: e
|
|||||||
|
|
||||||
\begin{proposition}
|
\begin{proposition}
|
||||||
\label{proposition:dunford-existence}
|
\label{proposition:dunford-existence}
|
||||||
Let
|
Let $(X, \cm, \mu)$ be a measure space, $\dpn{E, F}{\lambda}$ be a duality over $K \in \RC$, and $f: X \to E$. If
|
||||||
|
\begin{enumerate}[label=(I\arabic*)]
|
||||||
|
\item $f$ is weakly measurable.
|
||||||
|
\item For each $\phi \in F$, $\phi \circ f \in L^1(X; K)$.
|
||||||
|
\item[(C)] $F$ is a Fréchet space.
|
||||||
|
\end{enumerate}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
then $f$ is \hyperref[Dunford $\lambda$-integrable]{definition:weakly-integrable}.
|
||||||
\end{proposition}
|
\end{proposition}
|
||||||
|
\begin{proof}[Proof, {{\cite[Section 3.3]{RyanTensor}}}. ]
|
||||||
|
Let $T: F \to L^1(X; K)$ be defined by $T\phi = \phi \circ f$. To see that $T$ is continuous, it is sufficient to apply the \hyperref[Closed Graph Theorem]{theorem:closed-graph}.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Let $\seq{\phi_n} \subset F$, $\phi \in F$, $\seq{g_n} \subset L^1(X; K)$, and $g \in L^1(X; K)$ such that
|
||||||
|
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*)]
|
||||||
|
\item $g_n = \phi_n \circ f$ almost everywhere for all $n \in \natp$.
|
||||||
|
\item $\phi_n \to \phi$ and $g_n \to g$ as $n \to \infty$.
|
||||||
|
\end{enumerate}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
By passing through a subsequence using \autoref{theorem:cauchy-in-measure-limit}, assume further without loss of generality that $g_n \to g$ almost everywhere. In which case, $\phi_n \circ f \to g$ almost everywhere as well, and $\phi \circ f = g$ almost everywhere. Thus $T$ is continuous.
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Now, let $T^*: L^1(X; K)^* \to F^*$ be the adjoint of $T$. For each $A \in \cm$, the mapping $\Phi_A: L^1(X; K) \to K$ defined by $g \mapsto \int_A g d\mu$ is a continuous linear functional on $L^1(X; K)$. As such, for each $\phi \in F$,
|
||||||
|
\[
|
||||||
|
\int_A \dpn{f, \phi}{\lambda} d\mu = \int_A T\phi d\mu = \dpn{T\phi, \Phi_A}{L^1(X; K)} = \dpn{\phi, T^*\Phi_A}{F}
|
||||||
|
\]
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
Therefore $T^*\Phi_A = \int_A^* f d\mu$ is the desired Dunford $\lambda$-integral of $f$ over $A$.
|
||||||
|
\end{proof}
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|
|||||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user