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
$begingroup$
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.
real-analysis pde holder-spaces interpolation-theory
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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.
real-analysis pde holder-spaces interpolation-theory
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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.
real-analysis pde holder-spaces interpolation-theory
$endgroup$
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
real-analysis pde holder-spaces interpolation-theory
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
add a comment |
$begingroup$
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
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
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.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
|
show 1 more comment
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
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
$begingroup$
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.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
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.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
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
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
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.
$endgroup$
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.
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
|
show 1 more comment
$begingroup$
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
|
show 1 more comment
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.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
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
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
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
$begingroup$
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