Today’s problem appeared as Problem 2 on the UCLA Spring 2014 Analysis Qual:
Problem 2: For and
show that
for almost every
Solution: This problem might seem quite tricky at first, but it has a clever solution. The key thing to recognize is that the statement cannot hold true for all meaning that there should be some Lebesgue integral machinery involved.
In particular, consider the expression as a function of i.e.
given by




Remark: More generally, for where
one has
for a.e.
This shows that as an integral operator with kernel
the operator is a map
The generalization of this fact is known as Young’s inequality for integral operators, which states that if
then
for