Interpolation inequality for Holder continuous functions.Proving an operator is compactfunctions in Holder spaceApproximate Holder continuous functions by smooth functions$f$ is a real function and it is $alpha$-Holder continuous with $alpha>1$. Is $f$ constant?Inclusion of Holder SpacesHolder norms inequalityInterpolation inequality involving Holder seminorms and Lebesgue normsHolder continuity EquivalenceDimension of Holder spaceClosure of Continuously DifferentiableFunctions in Holder Space

OP Amp not amplifying audio signal

Why do I get negative height?

Is this draw by repetition?

How to compactly explain secondary and tertiary characters without resorting to stereotypes?

Notepad++ delete until colon for every line with replace all

Is "/bin/[.exe" a legitimate file? [Cygwin, Windows 10]

Could the museum Saturn V's be refitted for one more flight?

how do we prove that a sum of two periods is still a period?

Could neural networks be considered metaheuristics?

Convert seconds to minutes

How seriously should I take size and weight limits of hand luggage?

Finitely generated matrix groups whose eigenvalues are all algebraic

Does Dispel Magic work on Tiny Hut?

How to find if SQL server backup is encrypted with TDE without restoring the backup

What are the G forces leaving Earth orbit?

Can I hook these wires up to find the connection to a dead outlet?

What Exploit Are These User Agents Trying to Use?

Does int main() need a declaration on C++?

How do conventional missiles fly?

How to remove border from elements in the last row?

How badly should I try to prevent a user from XSSing themselves?

How does a dynamic QR code work?

Can a virus destroy the BIOS of a modern computer?

What exactly is ineptocracy?



Interpolation inequality for Holder continuous functions.


Proving an operator is compactfunctions in Holder spaceApproximate Holder continuous functions by smooth functions$f$ is a real function and it is $alpha$-Holder continuous with $alpha>1$. Is $f$ constant?Inclusion of Holder SpacesHolder norms inequalityInterpolation inequality involving Holder seminorms and Lebesgue normsHolder continuity EquivalenceDimension of Holder spaceClosure of Continuously DifferentiableFunctions in Holder Space













2












$begingroup$


Let $Omega$ be a bounded open connected set in $mathbbR^n$ with $C^1$ boundary and let $0<alpha<1$. Then there exists a real number $sigma_0>0$ and a dimensional constant $C>0$ such that $$||Du||_L^infty(Omega)leq sigma^alpha [|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ and $$[u]_alpha,Omegaleq sigma[|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma^alpha||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ hold for all $0<sigma<sigma_0$ and for all $uin C^1,alpha(barOmega)$. Here $||u||_C^1,alpha=||u||_L^infty(Omega)+||Du||_L^infty(Omega)+[|Du|]_alpha$ and $[u]_alpha=sup_xneq yfrac$.



N.B. I have proved the above results for balls and then for domain with $C^2$ boundary. I cant proceed for $C^1$ boundary domain. Any help will be great.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    It might help if you showed how you dealt with $C^2$ boundaries.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn
    Mar 28 at 15:20










  • $begingroup$
    $C^2$ boundary have the interior ball property and i have the results for balls.
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 28 at 18:11















2












$begingroup$


Let $Omega$ be a bounded open connected set in $mathbbR^n$ with $C^1$ boundary and let $0<alpha<1$. Then there exists a real number $sigma_0>0$ and a dimensional constant $C>0$ such that $$||Du||_L^infty(Omega)leq sigma^alpha [|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ and $$[u]_alpha,Omegaleq sigma[|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma^alpha||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ hold for all $0<sigma<sigma_0$ and for all $uin C^1,alpha(barOmega)$. Here $||u||_C^1,alpha=||u||_L^infty(Omega)+||Du||_L^infty(Omega)+[|Du|]_alpha$ and $[u]_alpha=sup_xneq yfrac$.



N.B. I have proved the above results for balls and then for domain with $C^2$ boundary. I cant proceed for $C^1$ boundary domain. Any help will be great.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$











  • $begingroup$
    It might help if you showed how you dealt with $C^2$ boundaries.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn
    Mar 28 at 15:20










  • $begingroup$
    $C^2$ boundary have the interior ball property and i have the results for balls.
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 28 at 18:11













2












2








2


0



$begingroup$


Let $Omega$ be a bounded open connected set in $mathbbR^n$ with $C^1$ boundary and let $0<alpha<1$. Then there exists a real number $sigma_0>0$ and a dimensional constant $C>0$ such that $$||Du||_L^infty(Omega)leq sigma^alpha [|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ and $$[u]_alpha,Omegaleq sigma[|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma^alpha||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ hold for all $0<sigma<sigma_0$ and for all $uin C^1,alpha(barOmega)$. Here $||u||_C^1,alpha=||u||_L^infty(Omega)+||Du||_L^infty(Omega)+[|Du|]_alpha$ and $[u]_alpha=sup_xneq yfrac$.



N.B. I have proved the above results for balls and then for domain with $C^2$ boundary. I cant proceed for $C^1$ boundary domain. Any help will be great.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$




Let $Omega$ be a bounded open connected set in $mathbbR^n$ with $C^1$ boundary and let $0<alpha<1$. Then there exists a real number $sigma_0>0$ and a dimensional constant $C>0$ such that $$||Du||_L^infty(Omega)leq sigma^alpha [|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ and $$[u]_alpha,Omegaleq sigma[|Du|]_alpha,Omega+fracCsigma^alpha||u||_L^infty(Omega)$$ hold for all $0<sigma<sigma_0$ and for all $uin C^1,alpha(barOmega)$. Here $||u||_C^1,alpha=||u||_L^infty(Omega)+||Du||_L^infty(Omega)+[|Du|]_alpha$ and $[u]_alpha=sup_xneq yfrac$.



N.B. I have proved the above results for balls and then for domain with $C^2$ boundary. I cant proceed for $C^1$ boundary domain. Any help will be great.







real-analysis pde holder-spaces interpolation-theory






share|cite|improve this question













share|cite|improve this question











share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question










asked Mar 24 at 5:43









mudokmudok

374315




374315











  • $begingroup$
    It might help if you showed how you dealt with $C^2$ boundaries.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn
    Mar 28 at 15:20










  • $begingroup$
    $C^2$ boundary have the interior ball property and i have the results for balls.
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 28 at 18:11
















  • $begingroup$
    It might help if you showed how you dealt with $C^2$ boundaries.
    $endgroup$
    – robjohn
    Mar 28 at 15:20










  • $begingroup$
    $C^2$ boundary have the interior ball property and i have the results for balls.
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 28 at 18:11















$begingroup$
It might help if you showed how you dealt with $C^2$ boundaries.
$endgroup$
– robjohn
Mar 28 at 15:20




$begingroup$
It might help if you showed how you dealt with $C^2$ boundaries.
$endgroup$
– robjohn
Mar 28 at 15:20












$begingroup$
$C^2$ boundary have the interior ball property and i have the results for balls.
$endgroup$
– mudok
Mar 28 at 18:11




$begingroup$
$C^2$ boundary have the interior ball property and i have the results for balls.
$endgroup$
– mudok
Mar 28 at 18:11










1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes


















0





+100







$begingroup$

Since $Omega$ is bounded, its closure its compact. Also since $uin
C^1,alpha(overlineOmega)$
, you have that $Du$ is continuous. Hence
there exists $x_0inoverlineOmega$ such that
$$
|Du(x_0)|=max_xinoverlineOmega|Du(x)|.
$$

In particular, $u$ is differentiable $x_0$. Thus,
$$
fracpartial upartialnu(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu,
$$

where $fracpartial upartialnu$ is a directional derivative in an
admissible direction $nuinmathbbR^n$, with $|nu|=1$. Now since
$partialOmega$ is of class $C^1$, there is a cone $C$ such that every
point $xinoverlineOmega$ is the vertex of a cone $C_x$ congruent to $C$
and contained in $Omega$. Hence, if you consider the cone $C_x_0$, you
can find $n$ linearly independent directions $nu_1,ldots,nu_n$ such
that the segments $x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ are contained in the
cone $C_x_0$, where $h>0$. If you consider the system of $n$ equations
$$
fracpartial upartialnu_i(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu_i,
$$

in the $n$ unknowns $fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)$, you have that
the determinant is different from zero since the vectors are linearly
independent. Hence, you can write
$$
fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)=sum_j=1^nc_i,jfracpartial
upartialnu_j(x_0),
$$

where the numbers $c_i,j$ depent only on the directions $nu_1,ldots
,nu_n$
.



Along each segment $S_i=x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ you can apply
your inequality for $n=1$ to the function $g_i(t):=u(x_0+tnu_i)$,
$tinlbrack0,h]$.



Now you have to prove that the coefficients $c_i,j$ depend only on $Omega$.
I have to think about this, but if you rotate the cone, your new directions
are $Rnu_1,ldots,Rnu_n$, where $R$ is your rotation, so the determinant
should not change.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 15:56










  • $begingroup$
    yes, you are correct
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    Mar 30 at 16:08










  • $begingroup$
    one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 17:11










  • $begingroup$
    up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    2 days ago











  • $begingroup$
    $C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    2 days ago











Your Answer





StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["$", "$"], ["\\(","\\)"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");

StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "69"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);

else
createEditor();

);

function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: true,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: 10,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);



);













draft saved

draft discarded


















StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3160154%2finterpolation-inequality-for-holder-continuous-functions%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown

























1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes








1 Answer
1






active

oldest

votes









active

oldest

votes






active

oldest

votes









0





+100







$begingroup$

Since $Omega$ is bounded, its closure its compact. Also since $uin
C^1,alpha(overlineOmega)$
, you have that $Du$ is continuous. Hence
there exists $x_0inoverlineOmega$ such that
$$
|Du(x_0)|=max_xinoverlineOmega|Du(x)|.
$$

In particular, $u$ is differentiable $x_0$. Thus,
$$
fracpartial upartialnu(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu,
$$

where $fracpartial upartialnu$ is a directional derivative in an
admissible direction $nuinmathbbR^n$, with $|nu|=1$. Now since
$partialOmega$ is of class $C^1$, there is a cone $C$ such that every
point $xinoverlineOmega$ is the vertex of a cone $C_x$ congruent to $C$
and contained in $Omega$. Hence, if you consider the cone $C_x_0$, you
can find $n$ linearly independent directions $nu_1,ldots,nu_n$ such
that the segments $x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ are contained in the
cone $C_x_0$, where $h>0$. If you consider the system of $n$ equations
$$
fracpartial upartialnu_i(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu_i,
$$

in the $n$ unknowns $fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)$, you have that
the determinant is different from zero since the vectors are linearly
independent. Hence, you can write
$$
fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)=sum_j=1^nc_i,jfracpartial
upartialnu_j(x_0),
$$

where the numbers $c_i,j$ depent only on the directions $nu_1,ldots
,nu_n$
.



Along each segment $S_i=x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ you can apply
your inequality for $n=1$ to the function $g_i(t):=u(x_0+tnu_i)$,
$tinlbrack0,h]$.



Now you have to prove that the coefficients $c_i,j$ depend only on $Omega$.
I have to think about this, but if you rotate the cone, your new directions
are $Rnu_1,ldots,Rnu_n$, where $R$ is your rotation, so the determinant
should not change.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 15:56










  • $begingroup$
    yes, you are correct
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    Mar 30 at 16:08










  • $begingroup$
    one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 17:11










  • $begingroup$
    up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    2 days ago











  • $begingroup$
    $C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    2 days ago















0





+100







$begingroup$

Since $Omega$ is bounded, its closure its compact. Also since $uin
C^1,alpha(overlineOmega)$
, you have that $Du$ is continuous. Hence
there exists $x_0inoverlineOmega$ such that
$$
|Du(x_0)|=max_xinoverlineOmega|Du(x)|.
$$

In particular, $u$ is differentiable $x_0$. Thus,
$$
fracpartial upartialnu(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu,
$$

where $fracpartial upartialnu$ is a directional derivative in an
admissible direction $nuinmathbbR^n$, with $|nu|=1$. Now since
$partialOmega$ is of class $C^1$, there is a cone $C$ such that every
point $xinoverlineOmega$ is the vertex of a cone $C_x$ congruent to $C$
and contained in $Omega$. Hence, if you consider the cone $C_x_0$, you
can find $n$ linearly independent directions $nu_1,ldots,nu_n$ such
that the segments $x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ are contained in the
cone $C_x_0$, where $h>0$. If you consider the system of $n$ equations
$$
fracpartial upartialnu_i(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu_i,
$$

in the $n$ unknowns $fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)$, you have that
the determinant is different from zero since the vectors are linearly
independent. Hence, you can write
$$
fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)=sum_j=1^nc_i,jfracpartial
upartialnu_j(x_0),
$$

where the numbers $c_i,j$ depent only on the directions $nu_1,ldots
,nu_n$
.



Along each segment $S_i=x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ you can apply
your inequality for $n=1$ to the function $g_i(t):=u(x_0+tnu_i)$,
$tinlbrack0,h]$.



Now you have to prove that the coefficients $c_i,j$ depend only on $Omega$.
I have to think about this, but if you rotate the cone, your new directions
are $Rnu_1,ldots,Rnu_n$, where $R$ is your rotation, so the determinant
should not change.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 15:56










  • $begingroup$
    yes, you are correct
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    Mar 30 at 16:08










  • $begingroup$
    one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 17:11










  • $begingroup$
    up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    2 days ago











  • $begingroup$
    $C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    2 days ago













0





+100







0





+100



0




+100



$begingroup$

Since $Omega$ is bounded, its closure its compact. Also since $uin
C^1,alpha(overlineOmega)$
, you have that $Du$ is continuous. Hence
there exists $x_0inoverlineOmega$ such that
$$
|Du(x_0)|=max_xinoverlineOmega|Du(x)|.
$$

In particular, $u$ is differentiable $x_0$. Thus,
$$
fracpartial upartialnu(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu,
$$

where $fracpartial upartialnu$ is a directional derivative in an
admissible direction $nuinmathbbR^n$, with $|nu|=1$. Now since
$partialOmega$ is of class $C^1$, there is a cone $C$ such that every
point $xinoverlineOmega$ is the vertex of a cone $C_x$ congruent to $C$
and contained in $Omega$. Hence, if you consider the cone $C_x_0$, you
can find $n$ linearly independent directions $nu_1,ldots,nu_n$ such
that the segments $x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ are contained in the
cone $C_x_0$, where $h>0$. If you consider the system of $n$ equations
$$
fracpartial upartialnu_i(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu_i,
$$

in the $n$ unknowns $fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)$, you have that
the determinant is different from zero since the vectors are linearly
independent. Hence, you can write
$$
fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)=sum_j=1^nc_i,jfracpartial
upartialnu_j(x_0),
$$

where the numbers $c_i,j$ depent only on the directions $nu_1,ldots
,nu_n$
.



Along each segment $S_i=x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ you can apply
your inequality for $n=1$ to the function $g_i(t):=u(x_0+tnu_i)$,
$tinlbrack0,h]$.



Now you have to prove that the coefficients $c_i,j$ depend only on $Omega$.
I have to think about this, but if you rotate the cone, your new directions
are $Rnu_1,ldots,Rnu_n$, where $R$ is your rotation, so the determinant
should not change.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$



Since $Omega$ is bounded, its closure its compact. Also since $uin
C^1,alpha(overlineOmega)$
, you have that $Du$ is continuous. Hence
there exists $x_0inoverlineOmega$ such that
$$
|Du(x_0)|=max_xinoverlineOmega|Du(x)|.
$$

In particular, $u$ is differentiable $x_0$. Thus,
$$
fracpartial upartialnu(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu,
$$

where $fracpartial upartialnu$ is a directional derivative in an
admissible direction $nuinmathbbR^n$, with $|nu|=1$. Now since
$partialOmega$ is of class $C^1$, there is a cone $C$ such that every
point $xinoverlineOmega$ is the vertex of a cone $C_x$ congruent to $C$
and contained in $Omega$. Hence, if you consider the cone $C_x_0$, you
can find $n$ linearly independent directions $nu_1,ldots,nu_n$ such
that the segments $x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ are contained in the
cone $C_x_0$, where $h>0$. If you consider the system of $n$ equations
$$
fracpartial upartialnu_i(x_0)=Du(x_0)cdotnu_i,
$$

in the $n$ unknowns $fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)$, you have that
the determinant is different from zero since the vectors are linearly
independent. Hence, you can write
$$
fracpartial upartial x_i(x_0)=sum_j=1^nc_i,jfracpartial
upartialnu_j(x_0),
$$

where the numbers $c_i,j$ depent only on the directions $nu_1,ldots
,nu_n$
.



Along each segment $S_i=x_0+tnu_i$, $tinlbrack0,h]$ you can apply
your inequality for $n=1$ to the function $g_i(t):=u(x_0+tnu_i)$,
$tinlbrack0,h]$.



Now you have to prove that the coefficients $c_i,j$ depend only on $Omega$.
I have to think about this, but if you rotate the cone, your new directions
are $Rnu_1,ldots,Rnu_n$, where $R$ is your rotation, so the determinant
should not change.







share|cite|improve this answer












share|cite|improve this answer



share|cite|improve this answer










answered Mar 30 at 15:30









Gio67Gio67

12.7k1627




12.7k1627











  • $begingroup$
    Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 15:56










  • $begingroup$
    yes, you are correct
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    Mar 30 at 16:08










  • $begingroup$
    one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 17:11










  • $begingroup$
    up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    2 days ago











  • $begingroup$
    $C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    2 days ago
















  • $begingroup$
    Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 15:56










  • $begingroup$
    yes, you are correct
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    Mar 30 at 16:08










  • $begingroup$
    one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    Mar 30 at 17:11










  • $begingroup$
    up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
    $endgroup$
    – Gio67
    2 days ago











  • $begingroup$
    $C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
    $endgroup$
    – mudok
    2 days ago















$begingroup$
Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
$endgroup$
– mudok
Mar 30 at 15:56




$begingroup$
Very nice argument. What you essentially use is the interior cone property for $C^1$ domain. Which escaped my mind. I also think your $c_i,j$ dependence only on domain since it's come from the linear independent direction vectors depending on domain. Am I correct?
$endgroup$
– mudok
Mar 30 at 15:56












$begingroup$
yes, you are correct
$endgroup$
– Gio67
Mar 30 at 16:08




$begingroup$
yes, you are correct
$endgroup$
– Gio67
Mar 30 at 16:08












$begingroup$
one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
$endgroup$
– mudok
Mar 30 at 17:11




$begingroup$
one question : you say " a cone Cx congruent to C and contained in Ω" why congruent?
$endgroup$
– mudok
Mar 30 at 17:11












$begingroup$
up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
$endgroup$
– Gio67
2 days ago





$begingroup$
up to a translation and a rotation. And I should have said contained in the closure of $Omega$. You will need to rotate the cone.
$endgroup$
– Gio67
2 days ago













$begingroup$
$C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
$endgroup$
– mudok
2 days ago




$begingroup$
$C^1$ boundary imply uniform cone property or only cone property?
$endgroup$
– mudok
2 days ago

















draft saved

draft discarded
















































Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!


  • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

But avoid


  • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

  • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.

Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




draft saved


draft discarded














StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3160154%2finterpolation-inequality-for-holder-continuous-functions%23new-answer', 'question_page');

);

Post as a guest















Required, but never shown





















































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown

































Required, but never shown














Required, but never shown












Required, but never shown







Required, but never shown







Popular posts from this blog

Triangular numbers and gcdProving sum of a set is $0 pmod n$ if $n$ is odd, or $fracn2 pmod n$ if $n$ is even?Is greatest common divisor of two numbers really their smallest linear combination?GCD, LCM RelationshipProve a set of nonnegative integers with greatest common divisor 1 and closed under addition has all but finite many nonnegative integers.all pairs of a and b in an equation containing gcdTriangular Numbers Modulo $k$ - Hit All Values?Understanding the Existence and Uniqueness of the GCDGCD and LCM with logical symbolsThe greatest common divisor of two positive integers less than 100 is equal to 3. Their least common multiple is twelve times one of the integers.Suppose that for all integers $x$, $x|a$ and $x|b$ if and only if $x|c$. Then $c = gcd(a,b)$Which is the gcd of 2 numbers which are multiplied and the result is 600000?

Ingelân Ynhâld Etymology | Geografy | Skiednis | Polityk en bestjoer | Ekonomy | Demografy | Kultuer | Klimaat | Sjoch ek | Keppelings om utens | Boarnen, noaten en referinsjes Navigaasjemenuwww.gov.ukOffisjele webside fan it regear fan it Feriene KeninkrykOffisjele webside fan it Britske FerkearsburoNederlânsktalige ynformaasje fan it Britske FerkearsburoOffisjele webside fan English Heritage, de organisaasje dy't him ynset foar it behâld fan it Ingelske kultuergoedYnwennertallen fan alle Britske stêden út 'e folkstelling fan 2011Notes en References, op dizze sideEngland

Հադիս Բովանդակություն Անվանում և նշանակություն | Դասակարգում | Աղբյուրներ | Նավարկման ցանկ