Lower semi continuous envelope is lower semi continuous
$begingroup$
Let X be a topological space and $F:X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}}$. The lower semi continuous envelope of $F$ is defined by $sc^-F(u)=sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$. Show that $sc^-F$ is lower semi continuous.
Here is my proof, but it seems a bit too easy, so it would be great if somebody could check if it is correct.
Let $u_k rightarrow u$ in $X$. The set $M:={phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$ is a family of l.s.c. functions, because every $phi in M$ is l.s.c. Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Because this is true for every $phi in M$ it is also true for the supremum of all $phi$ in $M$ (at this point I'm not really sure if it is correct) an we get
$sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = sc^-F(u) leq liminf ; sc^-F(u_k)$.
So the envelope of $F$ is l.s.c.
real-analysis calculus-of-variations semicontinuous-functions
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let X be a topological space and $F:X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}}$. The lower semi continuous envelope of $F$ is defined by $sc^-F(u)=sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$. Show that $sc^-F$ is lower semi continuous.
Here is my proof, but it seems a bit too easy, so it would be great if somebody could check if it is correct.
Let $u_k rightarrow u$ in $X$. The set $M:={phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$ is a family of l.s.c. functions, because every $phi in M$ is l.s.c. Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Because this is true for every $phi in M$ it is also true for the supremum of all $phi$ in $M$ (at this point I'm not really sure if it is correct) an we get
$sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = sc^-F(u) leq liminf ; sc^-F(u_k)$.
So the envelope of $F$ is l.s.c.
real-analysis calculus-of-variations semicontinuous-functions
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
If $X$ is not first-countable, it would be worth mentioning that $u_k$ is a net and how $liminf$ is understood here. Otherwise, it looks ok to me. Alternatively, a proof via epigraphs is more straightforward (as intersection of closed sets is closed).
$endgroup$
– A.Γ.
Dec 6 '18 at 11:03
$begingroup$
The set $M$ you define is not what you want it to be (it's a set of function values, not of functions).
$endgroup$
– MaoWao
Dec 6 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
We haven't mentioned epigraphs in the lecture so I don't know how to prove this assumption this way. Thanks for the comments, I'll add it to the proof.
$endgroup$
– mathstu
Dec 7 '18 at 9:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Let X be a topological space and $F:X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}}$. The lower semi continuous envelope of $F$ is defined by $sc^-F(u)=sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$. Show that $sc^-F$ is lower semi continuous.
Here is my proof, but it seems a bit too easy, so it would be great if somebody could check if it is correct.
Let $u_k rightarrow u$ in $X$. The set $M:={phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$ is a family of l.s.c. functions, because every $phi in M$ is l.s.c. Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Because this is true for every $phi in M$ it is also true for the supremum of all $phi$ in $M$ (at this point I'm not really sure if it is correct) an we get
$sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = sc^-F(u) leq liminf ; sc^-F(u_k)$.
So the envelope of $F$ is l.s.c.
real-analysis calculus-of-variations semicontinuous-functions
$endgroup$
Let X be a topological space and $F:X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}}$. The lower semi continuous envelope of $F$ is defined by $sc^-F(u)=sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$. Show that $sc^-F$ is lower semi continuous.
Here is my proof, but it seems a bit too easy, so it would be great if somebody could check if it is correct.
Let $u_k rightarrow u$ in $X$. The set $M:={phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F}$ is a family of l.s.c. functions, because every $phi in M$ is l.s.c. Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Because this is true for every $phi in M$ it is also true for the supremum of all $phi$ in $M$ (at this point I'm not really sure if it is correct) an we get
$sup{phi(u);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = sc^-F(u) leq liminf ; sc^-F(u_k)$.
So the envelope of $F$ is l.s.c.
real-analysis calculus-of-variations semicontinuous-functions
real-analysis calculus-of-variations semicontinuous-functions
edited Dec 6 '18 at 10:26
A.Γ.
22.7k32656
22.7k32656
asked Dec 6 '18 at 10:05
mathstumathstu
315
315
$begingroup$
If $X$ is not first-countable, it would be worth mentioning that $u_k$ is a net and how $liminf$ is understood here. Otherwise, it looks ok to me. Alternatively, a proof via epigraphs is more straightforward (as intersection of closed sets is closed).
$endgroup$
– A.Γ.
Dec 6 '18 at 11:03
$begingroup$
The set $M$ you define is not what you want it to be (it's a set of function values, not of functions).
$endgroup$
– MaoWao
Dec 6 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
We haven't mentioned epigraphs in the lecture so I don't know how to prove this assumption this way. Thanks for the comments, I'll add it to the proof.
$endgroup$
– mathstu
Dec 7 '18 at 9:20
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If $X$ is not first-countable, it would be worth mentioning that $u_k$ is a net and how $liminf$ is understood here. Otherwise, it looks ok to me. Alternatively, a proof via epigraphs is more straightforward (as intersection of closed sets is closed).
$endgroup$
– A.Γ.
Dec 6 '18 at 11:03
$begingroup$
The set $M$ you define is not what you want it to be (it's a set of function values, not of functions).
$endgroup$
– MaoWao
Dec 6 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
We haven't mentioned epigraphs in the lecture so I don't know how to prove this assumption this way. Thanks for the comments, I'll add it to the proof.
$endgroup$
– mathstu
Dec 7 '18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
If $X$ is not first-countable, it would be worth mentioning that $u_k$ is a net and how $liminf$ is understood here. Otherwise, it looks ok to me. Alternatively, a proof via epigraphs is more straightforward (as intersection of closed sets is closed).
$endgroup$
– A.Γ.
Dec 6 '18 at 11:03
$begingroup$
If $X$ is not first-countable, it would be worth mentioning that $u_k$ is a net and how $liminf$ is understood here. Otherwise, it looks ok to me. Alternatively, a proof via epigraphs is more straightforward (as intersection of closed sets is closed).
$endgroup$
– A.Γ.
Dec 6 '18 at 11:03
$begingroup$
The set $M$ you define is not what you want it to be (it's a set of function values, not of functions).
$endgroup$
– MaoWao
Dec 6 '18 at 11:15
$begingroup$
The set $M$ you define is not what you want it to be (it's a set of function values, not of functions).
$endgroup$
– MaoWao
Dec 6 '18 at 11:15
1
1
$begingroup$
We haven't mentioned epigraphs in the lecture so I don't know how to prove this assumption this way. Thanks for the comments, I'll add it to the proof.
$endgroup$
– mathstu
Dec 7 '18 at 9:20
$begingroup$
We haven't mentioned epigraphs in the lecture so I don't know how to prove this assumption this way. Thanks for the comments, I'll add it to the proof.
$endgroup$
– mathstu
Dec 7 '18 at 9:20
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
It is correct but the notation can be improved:
Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Here I strongly suggest to choose different variables for $phi$ inside the set (or outside).
For example:
$ liminf phi(u_k) leq liminf ; sup {psi(u_k);|; psi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; psi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
$endgroup$
add a 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%2f3028297%2flower-semi-continuous-envelope-is-lower-semi-continuous%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
$begingroup$
It is correct but the notation can be improved:
Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Here I strongly suggest to choose different variables for $phi$ inside the set (or outside).
For example:
$ liminf phi(u_k) leq liminf ; sup {psi(u_k);|; psi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; psi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is correct but the notation can be improved:
Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Here I strongly suggest to choose different variables for $phi$ inside the set (or outside).
For example:
$ liminf phi(u_k) leq liminf ; sup {psi(u_k);|; psi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; psi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It is correct but the notation can be improved:
Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Here I strongly suggest to choose different variables for $phi$ inside the set (or outside).
For example:
$ liminf phi(u_k) leq liminf ; sup {psi(u_k);|; psi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; psi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
$endgroup$
It is correct but the notation can be improved:
Then for every $phi in M$ we obtain: $phi(u) leq liminf ; phi(u_k) \
leq liminf ; sup {phi(u_k);|; phi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; phi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
Here I strongly suggest to choose different variables for $phi$ inside the set (or outside).
For example:
$ liminf phi(u_k) leq liminf ; sup {psi(u_k);|; psi :X rightarrow overline{mathbb{R}} ; mathrm{is ; l.s.c. ; and} ; psi leq F} = liminf ; sc^-F(u_k).$
answered Dec 6 '18 at 10:56
supinfsupinf
6,3261028
6,3261028
add a comment |
add a 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%2f3028297%2flower-semi-continuous-envelope-is-lower-semi-continuous%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
$begingroup$
If $X$ is not first-countable, it would be worth mentioning that $u_k$ is a net and how $liminf$ is understood here. Otherwise, it looks ok to me. Alternatively, a proof via epigraphs is more straightforward (as intersection of closed sets is closed).
$endgroup$
– A.Γ.
Dec 6 '18 at 11:03
$begingroup$
The set $M$ you define is not what you want it to be (it's a set of function values, not of functions).
$endgroup$
– MaoWao
Dec 6 '18 at 11:15
1
$begingroup$
We haven't mentioned epigraphs in the lecture so I don't know how to prove this assumption this way. Thanks for the comments, I'll add it to the proof.
$endgroup$
– mathstu
Dec 7 '18 at 9:20