Mixing
Confused by a section in the introduction to Hormanders first PDE book?
Clash Royale CLAN TAG#URR8PPP
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I have a question on the introduction to Hormanders first PDE book. The introduction seems poorly (i.e. confusingly) written to me, hopefully the rest of the book is better. Anyway, he says classical solutions of the wave equation
$$
fracpartial^2partial x^2v - fracpartial^2partial y^2v = 0,
$$
are twice continuously differentiable functions satisfying the equation
everywhere. These solutions are functions of the form
$$
v(x,y) = f(x+y) + g(x-y), quad quad (*)
$$
where $f$ and $g$ are twice continuously differentiable. So far so good. He then says that classical solutions have as uniform limits all functions of the form $(*)$ with $f$ and $g$ continuous. All such functions ought to be recognized as solutions of the wave equation so therefore the definition of a classical solution is too restrictive.
So is Hormander saying that if we take a sequence of classical solutions $v_n$ such that $v_n(x,y) = f_n(x+y) + g_n(x-y)$ with $f_n$ and $g_n$ twice continuously differentiable, then the uniform limit of the sequence $v_n$ may be just continuous? He says 'uniform limit' but uniform with respect to what, is he about talking pointwise uniform convergence? Finally he seems to be saying that we should recognise certain merely continuous functions as solutions of the wave equation..surely this can't be correct, we need functions to be at least continuously differentiable in order to have weak solutions?
Can anybody clarify this section in Hormanders book for me?
pde sobolev-spaces wave-equation
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I have a question on the introduction to Hormanders first PDE book. The introduction seems poorly (i.e. confusingly) written to me, hopefully the rest of the book is better. Anyway, he says classical solutions of the wave equation
$$
fracpartial^2partial x^2v - fracpartial^2partial y^2v = 0,
$$
are twice continuously differentiable functions satisfying the equation
everywhere. These solutions are functions of the form
$$
v(x,y) = f(x+y) + g(x-y), quad quad (*)
$$
where $f$ and $g$ are twice continuously differentiable. So far so good. He then says that classical solutions have as uniform limits all functions of the form $(*)$ with $f$ and $g$ continuous. All such functions ought to be recognized as solutions of the wave equation so therefore the definition of a classical solution is too restrictive.
So is Hormander saying that if we take a sequence of classical solutions $v_n$ such that $v_n(x,y) = f_n(x+y) + g_n(x-y)$ with $f_n$ and $g_n$ twice continuously differentiable, then the uniform limit of the sequence $v_n$ may be just continuous? He says 'uniform limit' but uniform with respect to what, is he about talking pointwise uniform convergence? Finally he seems to be saying that we should recognise certain merely continuous functions as solutions of the wave equation..surely this can't be correct, we need functions to be at least continuously differentiable in order to have weak solutions?
Can anybody clarify this section in Hormanders book for me?
pde sobolev-spaces wave-equation
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
1
Generalized functions which are solutions of the PDE need not be differentiable. They need not even be continuous. They can be just locally integrable, for example.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 1 at 6:42
Uniform means just ordinary uniform convergence. What on earth do you mean by “pointwise uniform convergenceâ€�
– Hans Lundmark
Aug 1 at 8:23
add a comment |Â
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
up vote
3
down vote
favorite
I have a question on the introduction to Hormanders first PDE book. The introduction seems poorly (i.e. confusingly) written to me, hopefully the rest of the book is better. Anyway, he says classical solutions of the wave equation
$$
fracpartial^2partial x^2v - fracpartial^2partial y^2v = 0,
$$
are twice continuously differentiable functions satisfying the equation
everywhere. These solutions are functions of the form
$$
v(x,y) = f(x+y) + g(x-y), quad quad (*)
$$
where $f$ and $g$ are twice continuously differentiable. So far so good. He then says that classical solutions have as uniform limits all functions of the form $(*)$ with $f$ and $g$ continuous. All such functions ought to be recognized as solutions of the wave equation so therefore the definition of a classical solution is too restrictive.
So is Hormander saying that if we take a sequence of classical solutions $v_n$ such that $v_n(x,y) = f_n(x+y) + g_n(x-y)$ with $f_n$ and $g_n$ twice continuously differentiable, then the uniform limit of the sequence $v_n$ may be just continuous? He says 'uniform limit' but uniform with respect to what, is he about talking pointwise uniform convergence? Finally he seems to be saying that we should recognise certain merely continuous functions as solutions of the wave equation..surely this can't be correct, we need functions to be at least continuously differentiable in order to have weak solutions?
Can anybody clarify this section in Hormanders book for me?
pde sobolev-spaces wave-equation
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
I have a question on the introduction to Hormanders first PDE book. The introduction seems poorly (i.e. confusingly) written to me, hopefully the rest of the book is better. Anyway, he says classical solutions of the wave equation
$$
fracpartial^2partial x^2v - fracpartial^2partial y^2v = 0,
$$
are twice continuously differentiable functions satisfying the equation
everywhere. These solutions are functions of the form
$$
v(x,y) = f(x+y) + g(x-y), quad quad (*)
$$
where $f$ and $g$ are twice continuously differentiable. So far so good. He then says that classical solutions have as uniform limits all functions of the form $(*)$ with $f$ and $g$ continuous. All such functions ought to be recognized as solutions of the wave equation so therefore the definition of a classical solution is too restrictive.
So is Hormander saying that if we take a sequence of classical solutions $v_n$ such that $v_n(x,y) = f_n(x+y) + g_n(x-y)$ with $f_n$ and $g_n$ twice continuously differentiable, then the uniform limit of the sequence $v_n$ may be just continuous? He says 'uniform limit' but uniform with respect to what, is he about talking pointwise uniform convergence? Finally he seems to be saying that we should recognise certain merely continuous functions as solutions of the wave equation..surely this can't be correct, we need functions to be at least continuously differentiable in order to have weak solutions?
Can anybody clarify this section in Hormanders book for me?
pde sobolev-spaces wave-equation
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
asked Aug 1 at 6:30
sonicboom
3,42182550
3,42182550
1
Generalized functions which are solutions of the PDE need not be differentiable. They need not even be continuous. They can be just locally integrable, for example.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 1 at 6:42
Uniform means just ordinary uniform convergence. What on earth do you mean by “pointwise uniform convergenceâ€�
– Hans Lundmark
Aug 1 at 8:23
add a comment |Â
1
Generalized functions which are solutions of the PDE need not be differentiable. They need not even be continuous. They can be just locally integrable, for example.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 1 at 6:42
Uniform means just ordinary uniform convergence. What on earth do you mean by “pointwise uniform convergenceâ€�
– Hans Lundmark
Aug 1 at 8:23
1
1
Generalized functions which are solutions of the PDE need not be differentiable. They need not even be continuous. They can be just locally integrable, for example.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 1 at 6:42
Generalized functions which are solutions of the PDE need not be differentiable. They need not even be continuous. They can be just locally integrable, for example.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 1 at 6:42
Uniform means just ordinary uniform convergence. What on earth do you mean by “pointwise uniform convergenceâ€�
– Hans Lundmark
Aug 1 at 8:23
Uniform means just ordinary uniform convergence. What on earth do you mean by “pointwise uniform convergenceâ€�
– Hans Lundmark
Aug 1 at 8:23
add a comment |Â
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
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
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f2868780%2fconfused-by-a-section-in-the-introduction-to-hormanders-first-pde-book%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
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
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
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
1
Generalized functions which are solutions of the PDE need not be differentiable. They need not even be continuous. They can be just locally integrable, for example.
– Kavi Rama Murthy
Aug 1 at 6:42
Uniform means just ordinary uniform convergence. What on earth do you mean by “pointwise uniform convergenceâ€�
– Hans Lundmark
Aug 1 at 8:23