Journal of Function Spaces and Applications

Volume 2013 (2013), Article ID 658527, 7 pages

http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2013/658527

Research Article

The Distance to in the Grand Orlicz Spaces

Fernando Farroni¹ and Raffaella Giova²

¹Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni “R. Caccioppoli”, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II, Via Cintia, 80126 Napoli, Italy

²Università degli Studi di Napoli “Parthenope”, Palazzo Pacanowsky, Via Generale Parisi 13, 80132 Napoli, Italy

Received 30 May 2013; Accepted 7 July 2013

Academic Editor: Carlo Sbordone

Copyright © 2013 Fernando Farroni and Raffaella Giova. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

We establish a formula for the distance to from the grand Orlicz space introduced in Capone et al. (2008). A new formula for the distance to from the grand Lebesgue space introduced in Iwaniec and Sbordone (1992) is also provided.

1. Introduction

Let be a bounded open subset of and let . The grand space, denoted by , consists of functions such that

where denotes the average over . Note that is a norm and is a Banach space. This space was introduced by Iwaniec and Sbordone in connection with the integrability of the Jacobian [1], and it comes into play in a various number of problems (see, e.g., [2–15]).

It is worth pointing out that is not a dense subspace of (see [9]); it is proved in [16] that the distance to in is given by

A generalization of the grand Lebesgue space is the grand Orlicz space , introduced by Capone et al. in [17]. Let us recall that is called an Orlicz function if it is continuous, strictly increasing, and satisfies and . The Orlicz space associated with consists of all measurable functions for which there exists such that

Let us introduce the Luxemburg functional defined as

Because of the monotonicity of we have

and among Orlicz functions we will consider the ones satisfying the following condition:

for some constant such that as . This will be done in order to ensure that the functional in (4) is a quasinorm. In what follows, we will lose no generality in assuming that

Suppose that

and let be the increasing weight defined as

Following a definition given in [18], we suppose that is tempered; that is,

for some .

An example of function satisfying (6)–(10) is for , and in this case as when and as when (see Section 5 for details).

The grand Orlicz space consists of all measurable functions for which there exists such that

where is the decreasing rearrangement of

and is the distribution function of

The quasinorm denoted by is defined as follows:

We address that if we take also the grand Orlicz space reduces to the grand Lebesgue space (see [17, Proposition ], [6]).

Our main result provides a formula for the distance of a function to , defined by

Theorem 1. Let be a bounded open set of . Assume that is an Orlicz function verifying (6)–(10). For every function , one has

Our theorem is in the framework of the results of paper [19], which cannot be directly applied to our context, without a preliminary check that the grand Orlicz spaces can be characterized as interpolation or extrapolation spaces. We also refer to [5, 16, 20–24] for the problem of finding formulae for the distance to a subspace in a given function space.

Theorem 1 gives, as byproduct, a characterization of the closure of in with respect to the norm, which will be denoted by .

Theorem 2. A function belongs to if and only if

For the special choice , Theorem 1 also provides new formula for the distance to in (see Theorem 5).

2. The Main Result

We start this section recalling few basic properties of the decreasing rearrangement of a measurable function defined in a bounded open set of . We refer the reader to [25, Propositions and ] for details.

Lemma 3. Let be measurable functions defined in a bounded open set of :

We need a technical result providing a useful property of the quantity

We recall that the goal of Theorem 1 consists in proving that is equal to . We notice that if , then , because from (8) and (10) it is as and the average remains bounded for every .

Lemma 4. Let be an Orlicz function satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 1. Assume that and . Then

Proof. Let and let so that

We use (18) with and and (20), and we get

We use (5) to get

We multiply by and we integrate over to get

We multiply by , and since as , we have

From (23) we get

We apply the definition of , and we have

and then, passing to the limit as , we have

By replacing with and with in (30), we obtain the converse inequality

Equality (22) is finally proved.

Now, we are in a position to prove Theorem 1.

Proof of Theorem 1. From Lemma 4 we know that

for every . This clearly proves that

since for every .

Now, we want to show that

In order to achieve the claimed inequality, we prove that if

then

Without loss of generality we may assume that . From (35) we find such that

For each there exists such that

Let be such that

and let . From (38), we find some constant (depending on ), with , such that

Using the monotonicity of weight , the fact that , and (39), we deduce from (40) that

We set if and, if , and we show that

Let us observe that

while

Using the fact that the distribution function is decreasing, we easily see that

Therefore, if we let , we see that condition

is verified for all . Thus for . On the other hand, if we let , we see that condition (46) is the same as requiring

Thus holds if , and (42) is proved.

It follows directly from (42) that

for every . Hence, we make use of (38) if and of (41) if to conclude that

In particular,

Since (50) holds for every , we obtain that its left-hand side is smaller than 1, and therefore . We get

Hence (36) is established. Since is any arbitrary number for which (35) holds, we may pass to the limit as approaches in (36) to get

Combining (52) with (33) we obtain (16) as desired.

Proof of Theorem 2. As a consequence of Theorem 1, it is clear that if and only if

We fix an arbitrary and we set . Using (6) we have

Hence, using (53) we have

and (17) follows since as .

3. The Case of the Grand Lebesgue Space

We denote by the functional as in (21) when . In this case, takes the form

Our next result proves that the distance given by formula (2) reduces to .

Theorem 5. Let be a bounded open set of . For every function , one has

Proof. First we prove that

To this aim, we consider and such that

Using Hölder's inequality we have

which in turn implies that

Since as , we deduce from (61) that

Since is any number strictly greater than 1, (62) immediately implies (58).

We wish to prove the converse inequality

For each , we have

Thus

We consider such that

Then

which proves (63).

4. Few Properties of the Distance

In this concluding section we provide certain properties of the functional .

Lemma 6. Let be an Orlicz function satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 1 and let . Assume that

for some constants positive and . Then, there exists a positive constant depending only on such that

Proof. Let be the constant appearing in (6). We may take such that

since as . We use (6) to get

We take the as and use (68) to get

Therefore, from (72) and (70) we have

The desired constant is obtained by setting . We address that is independent of , and thus the proof is completed.

Remark 7. It is clear from the definition of that we can pick if .

Our next lemma provides a sort of triangle inequality involving the functional .

Lemma 8. Let be an Orlicz function satisfying the assumptions of Theorem 1 and let . Then, there exists a constant depending only on such that

Proof. Take

Let . We use (18) with , the monotonicity of , to obtain

Fix . We multiply by and we integrate over to get

With the aid of two changes of variables in the integrals appearing at the right-hand side of (77) we have

which in turn implies

We multiply both sides of (79) by , and we take the as and use (75) to get

We appeal to Lemma 6 to conclude that there exists a constant such that

Finally, (74) follows letting and , respectively.

5. An Example

In this section we study the behaviour of weight as when with . We follow closely the lines of Example in [17].

Example 9. Let and let . We start by proving that

To see this, let . Then

We pick in such a way that

A similar argument leads to

Acknowledgment

The research of the first author has been supported by the 2008 ERC Advanced Grant 226234 “Analytic Techniques for Geometric and Functional Inequalities.”

References

T. Iwaniec and C. Sbordone, “On the integrability of the Jacobian under minimal hypotheses,” Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis, vol. 119, no. 2, pp. 129–143, 1992.

C. Capone, M. R. Formica, and R. Giova, “Grand Lebesgue spaces with respect to measurable functions,” Nonlinear Analysis. Theory, Methods & Applications, vol. 85, pp. 125–131, 2013.

F. Farroni and G. Moscariello, “A quantitative estimate for mappings of bounded inner distortion,” Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations. In press

A. Fiorenza, “Duality and reflexivity in grand Lebesgue spaces,” Collectanea Mathematica, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 131–148, 2000.

M. R. Formica, “The distance to Lip in the space of Hölder continuous functions,” Ricerche di Matematica, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 127–135, 2005.

A. Fiorenza and G. E. Karadzhov, “Grand and small Lebesgue spaces and their analogs,” Zeitschrift für Analysis und ihre Anwendungen, vol. 23, no. 4, pp. 657–681, 2004.

A. Fiorenza, A. Mercaldo, and J. M. Rakotoson, “Regularity and uniqueness results in grand Sobolev spaces for parabolic equations with measure data,” Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems. Series A, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 893–906, 2002.

A. Fiorenza and C. Sbordone, “Existence and uniqueness results for solutions of nonlinear equations with right hand side in ,” Studia Mathematica, vol. 127, no. 3, pp. 223–231, 1998.

L. Greco, “A remark on the equality det D f = Det D f,” Differential and Integral Equations, vol. 6, no. 5, pp. 1089–1100, 1993.

L. Greco, T. Iwaniec, and C. Sbordone, “Inverting the -harmonic operator,” Manuscripta Mathematica, vol. 92, no. 2, pp. 249–258, 1997.

S. Hencl, G. Moscariello, A. Passarelli di Napoli, and C. Sbordone, “Bi-Sobolev mappings and elliptic equations in the plane,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 355, no. 1, pp. 22–32, 2009.

T. Iwaniec and C. Sbordone, “Weak minima of variational integrals,” Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik, vol. 454, pp. 143–161, 1994.

C. Sbordone, “Nonlinear elliptic equations with right hand side in nonstandard spaces,” Atti del Seminario Matematico e Fisico dell'Università di Modena, vol. 46, pp. 361–368, 1998.

C. Sbordone, “Grand Sobolev spaces and their applications to variational problems,” Le Matematiche, vol. 51, no. 2, pp. 335–347, 1996.

F. Farroni and R. Giova, “Homeomorphisms of exponentially integrable distortion: composition operator,” Advances in Mathematical Sciences and Applications, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 169–185, 2013.

M. Carozza and C. Sbordone, “The distance to in some function spaces and applications,” Differential and Integral Equations, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 599–607, 1997.

C. Capone, A. Fiorenza, and G. E. Karadzhov, “Grand Orlicz spaces and global integrability of the Jacobian,” Mathematica Scandinavica, vol. 102, no. 1, pp. 131–148, 2008.

B. Jawerth and M. Milman, “Extrapolation theory with applications,” Memoirs of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 89, no. 440, 1991.

D. E. Edmunds and G. E. Karadzhov, “Formulae for the distance in some quasi-Banach spaces,” Arkiv för Matematik, vol. 43, no. 1, pp. 145–165, 2005.

F. Farroni and G. Moscariello, “A quantitative estimate for mappings of bounded inner distortion,” Calculus of Variations and Partial Differential Equations. In press

F. Farroni and R. Giova, “Quasiconformal mappings and exponentially integrable functions,” Studia Mathematica, vol. 203, no. 2, pp. 195–203, 2011.

F. Farroni and R. Giova, “Quasiconformal mappings and sharp estimates for the distance to in some function spaces,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 395, no. 2, pp. 694–704, 2012.

F. Farroni and R. Giova, “Change of variables for weights by means of quasiconformal mappings: sharp results,” Annales Academiae Scientiarum Fennicae. Mathematica, vol. 38, pp. 785–796, 2013.

J. B. Garnett and P. W. Jones, “The distance in BMO to ,” Annals of Mathematics. Second Series, vol. 108, no. 2, pp. 373–393, 1978.

C. Bennett and R. Sharpley, Interpolation of Operators, vol. 129 of Pure and Applied Mathematics, Academic Press, Boston, Mass, USA, 1988.