Global radiation and flux

Written by GPT-6.1 Sol (OpenAI) and GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI). Self-checked by the writing AI. Original exposition: CC0.

Working question: How much of a forced solution is measured by its far-field amplitudes? Adding a homogeneous shell wave changes the incoming and outgoing amplitudes without changing the forcing. Passing to the quotient by vanishing tails records exactly the persistent part. The flux pairing then relates the two amplitudes, while a stronger hypothesis is needed to identify which quotient classes admit a forcing representative.

At a regular energy, every homogeneous endpoint wave is an inverse Fourier transform of a square-integrable surface amplitude. A forced solution differs from either resolvent boundary value by such a wave. This gives a precise radiation condition and an exact flux identity, including the constants and the sign of the upper boundary.

Use the hypotheses and operators from Global polynomial resolvent estimates: pp is a nonzero real simply characteristic polynomial, allowing invariant directions; λ∉Z(p)\lambda\notin Z(p); R±(λ)R_\pm(\lambda) mean the two boundary values of (p(D)−z)−1(p(D)-z)^{-1}. Our Fourier transform is unitary, and (u,f)=∫uf‾(u,f)=\int u\overline f is linear in uu. Write

Mλ={ξ:p(ξ)=λ},g(ξ)=∣∇p(ξ)∣,ν(ξ)=∇p(ξ)/g(ξ). M_\lambda=\{\xi:p(\xi)=\lambda\},\quad g(\xi)=|\nabla p(\xi)|,\quad \nu(\xi)=\nabla p(\xi)/g(\xi).

On compact regular energy sets, the threshold lemma gives

g≥cp~>0on Mλ,∣Q∣/g≤Cκp(Q).(1) g\geq c\widetilde p>0\quad\hbox{on }M_\lambda,\qquad |Q|/g\leq C\kappa_p(Q). \tag{1}

The dependencies used below are the compact surface mass theorem in Fourier traces on curved energy surfaces, the compact frequency-coordinate bounds in Mild weights and frequency localization, and the local radiation formulas in Division and radiation at regular energies. We use the shell norms, duality and vanishing-tail subspace from Endpoint spaces and flat energy shells.

The polynomial shell may be unbounded. Fourier coordinates first identify every homogeneous wave with a surface amplitude; the local mass formulas then determine its global radiation and flux. Agmon's lectures [AT], Section 4, discuss radiation conditions for elliptic principal parts with long-range perturbations.

If p=c≠0p=c\ne0 is constant, then Z(p)={c}Z(p)=\{c\}, so λ≠c\lambda\ne c and the shell is empty. Every weaker polynomial is constant: its modulus is bounded by a multiple of p~=∣c∣\widetilde p=|c|, and any nonconstant polynomial is unbounded on a line on which its leading homogeneous part is nonzero. The boundary solutions are R±f=(c−λ)−1f∈B⊂B0∗R_\pm f=(c-\lambda)^{-1}f\in B\subset B^*_0, and the homogeneous equation has only the zero solution. Thus all surface amplitudes and radiation limits vanish, the flux pairing is real, and the forced quotient space below is zero. This proves every conclusion in the constant case. In the remaining proof pp is nonconstant, as in the preceding resolvent theorem.

1. Every homogeneous wave has an L2L^2 amplitude

For a compactly supported amplitude vv on MλM_\lambda, define

Ev(x)=(2π)−n/2∫Mλeix⋅ξv(ξ) dS(ξ). Ev(x)=(2\pi)^{-n/2}\int_{M_\lambda}e^{ix\cdot\xi}v(\xi)\,dS(\xi).

Lemma 1.1. If u∈B∗u\in B^* and (p(D)−λ)u=0(p(D)-\lambda)u=0, then u^=v dS\widehat u=v\,dS for a unique v∈L2(Mλ,dS)v\in L^2(M_\lambda,dS), with

∥v∥2≤C∥u∥B∗.(2) \|v\|_2\leq C\|u\|_{B^*}. \tag{2}

Proof. Put U=u^U=\widehat u. The equation (p−λ)U=0(p-\lambda)U=0 first implies supp⁡U⊂Mλ\operatorname{supp}U\subset M_\lambda: away from that level, divide a test function by the smooth nonzero factor.

Near a compact part of the level, rotate coordinates so that ∂1p>0\partial_1p>0, and use the inverse energy coordinates

ψ(τ,η)=(Σ(λ+τ,η),η). \psi(\tau,\eta)=(\Sigma(\lambda+\tau,\eta),\eta).

Choose χ∈Cc∞\chi\in C_c^\infty supported inside this coordinate patch and equal to one on a smaller patch, and put Uχ=χUU_\chi=\chi U. Fourier pullback by this diffeomorphism, with compact cutoffs, corresponds to a bounded operator on B∗B^*, by the coordinate theorem. Choose the output cutoff equal to one near ψ−1(supp⁡Uχ)\psi^{-1}(\operatorname{supp}U_\chi). Thus W=ψ∗UχW=\psi^*U_\chi, extended by zero outside the coordinate domain, has inverse Fourier transform in B∗B^* and satisfies τW=0\tau W=0.

Here is the elementary normal-variable assertion. Choose θ∈Cc∞(R)\theta\in C_c^\infty(\mathbb R) with θ(0)=1\theta(0)=1. Every compact test function can be written as

ϕ(τ,η)=θ(τ)ϕ(0,η)+τh(τ,η). \phi(\tau,\eta)=\theta(\tau)\phi(0,\eta)+\tau h(\tau,\eta).

The quotient defining hh is smooth at zero by the integral divided-difference formula and has compact support, since its numerator does. Define a(b)=W(θ⊗b)a(b)=W(\theta\otimes b) for tangential test functions bb. Since τW=0\tau W=0, the displayed identity gives W(ϕ)=a(ϕ(0,⋅))W(\phi)=a(\phi(0,\cdot)). Thus W=δ0(τ)a(η)W=\delta_0(\tau)a(\eta).

The inverse Fourier transform of WW is (2π)−1/2Fη−1a(y)(2\pi)^{-1/2}\mathcal F_\eta^{-1}a(y), independent of the first physical coordinate. The flat homogeneous-wave classification in the endpoint lesson proves that a B∗B^* function of this form has an Ly2L^2_y profile. For completeness, local L2L^2 gives a locally L2L^2 profile; the B∗B^* ball bound on cylinders ∣y∣<L, ∣t∣<R/2|y|<L,\ |t|<R/2, with RR large compared with LL, bounds its L2L^2 norm on every tangential ball by the same constant. Let L→∞L\to\infty and apply tangential Plancherel. Hence a∈Lη2a\in L^2_\eta.

Transforming back gives Uχ=a(η)δ(p−λ)U_\chi=a(\eta)\delta(p-\lambda). On the smaller patch where χ=1\chi=1, this is the original distribution UU. More explicitly, for a test function ϕ\phi supported in that smaller patch, scalar distribution pullback and det⁡Dψ=(∂1p)−1\det D\psi=(\partial_1p)^{-1} give

U(ϕ)=∫a(η) ϕ(Σ(λ,η),η)∂1p(Σ(λ,η),η) dη. U(\phi)=\int a(\eta)\, \frac{\phi(\Sigma(\lambda,\eta),\eta)} {\partial_1p(\Sigma(\lambda,\eta),\eta)}\,d\eta.

Thus δ(p−λ)=dS/g\delta(p-\lambda)=dS/g, and the surface density is a/ga/g. On the compact patch the positive ∂1p\partial_1p, gg and their reciprocals are bounded; the graph Jacobian is dS=g(∂1p)−1dηdS=g(\partial_1p)^{-1}d\eta. These bounds prove that the surface density is locally L2(dS)L^2(dS). The local densities agree on overlaps because they represent the same distribution; call the resulting density vv.

Choose a smooth frequency cutoff χR(ξ)=χ(ξ/R)\chi_R(\xi)=\chi(\xi/R), R≥1R\geq1, where χ=1\chi=1 on the unit ball and has compact support. Its derivatives through any fixed order are uniformly bounded, so χR(D)\chi_R(D) has a uniformly bounded B∗B^* norm. Now χR(D)u=E(χRv)\chi_R(D)u=E(\chi_Rv), with a compactly supported L2L^2 amplitude. The universal lower extension bound from the compact surface mass theorem gives

∥χRv∥2≤2π ∥χR(D)u∥B∗≤C∥u∥B∗. \|\chi_Rv\|_2 \leq2\sqrt\pi\,\|\chi_R(D)u\|_{B^*} \leq C\|u\|_{B^*}.

As χR=1\chi_R=1 on successively larger balls, this bounds the full surface L2L^2 norm and proves (2). Uniqueness follows from uniqueness of the density of a measure on each compact surface patch. □\square

2. The global trace and the converse extension

Theorem 2.1. Fourier restriction extends to a bounded map

Tλ:B⟶L2(Mλ,dS).(3) T_\lambda:B\longrightarrow L^2(M_\lambda,dS). \tag{3}

Its integral adjoint is a bounded map E:L2(Mλ,dS)→B∗E:L^2(M_\lambda,dS)\to B^*. Every such EvEv solves the homogeneous equation, and these are all its B∗B^* solutions. Uniformly on compact regular energy sets,

C−1∥v∥2≤∥Ev∥B∗≤C∥v∥2.(4) C^{-1}\|v\|_2\leq\|Ev\|_{B^*}\leq C\|v\|_2. \tag{4}

The boundary jump is

R+(λ)f−R−(λ)f=2πi E(Tλf/g).(5) R_+(\lambda)f-R_-(\lambda)f =2\pi i\,E\left(T_\lambda f/g\right). \tag{5}

Proof. First take ff with smooth compact Fourier support. The localized jump formula gives, for Q=∂jpQ=\partial_jp,

Q(D)(R+−R−)f=2πi E(∂jpgTλf). Q(D)(R_+-R_-)f =2\pi i\,E\left(\frac{\partial_jp}{g}T_\lambda f\right).

This is a homogeneous B∗B^* solution. The global resolvent estimate bounds its B∗B^* norm by C∥f∥BC\|f\|_B, because each ∂jp\partial_jp is weaker than pp. Apply Lemma 1.1 and sum the squared amplitude bounds over jj. Since ∑j∣∂jp∣2/g2=1\sum_j|\partial_jp|^2/g^2=1,

∥Tλf∥22=∑j∥∂jpgTλf∥22≤C∥f∥B2. \|T_\lambda f\|_2^2 =\sum_j\left\|\frac{\partial_jp}{g}T_\lambda f\right\|_2^2 \leq C\|f\|_B^2.

Density defines (3), agreeing with every compact trace. Integral duality defines Ev∈B∗Ev\in B^* with

(Ev,f)=(v,Tλf)L2(dS).(6) (Ev,f)=(v,T_\lambda f)_{L^2(dS)}. \tag{6}

For compactly supported amplitudes this is the previously defined extension, by Fubini and density. Testing locally in frequency shows that its Fourier transform is v dSv\,dS; the dual construction proves that this measure represents a tempered distribution even on the unbounded surface. The equation follows from its support. Lemma 1.1 gives the lower bound and classifies all homogeneous waves. All constants are uniform on compact regular energy sets.

Finally 1/g1/g is uniformly bounded there, by (1) and the positive lower bound for p~\widetilde p. Approximate arbitrary f∈Bf\in B by compact-frequency test functions in the local jump identity. The resolvent, trace and extension bounds let both sides converge in B∗B^*, proving (5). □\square

The radiation proof first needs only boundedness and compact trace surjectivity. Its global mass formula will then imply surjectivity on the entire shell, with an explicit lifting bound.

3. Radiation observed along normal rays

For Φ∈Cc(Rn)\Phi\in C_c(\mathbb R^n), put

A±(ξ)=∫{±t>0}Φ(tν(ξ)) dt,A(ξ)=∫RΦ(tν(ξ)) dt. A_\pm(\xi)=\int_{\{\pm t>0\}}\Phi(t\nu(\xi))\,dt,\qquad A(\xi)=\int_{\mathbb R}\Phi(t\nu(\xi))\,dt.

These integrals are bounded uniformly in ξ\xi. If QjQ_j is weaker than pp and fj∈Bf_j\in B, write aj=QjTλfj/ga_j=Q_jT_\lambda f_j/g. By (1) and (3), aj∈L2(dS)a_j\in L^2(dS).

Theorem 3.1. Let u=Evu=Ev, v∈L2(dS)v\in L^2(dS). Then

lim⁡R→∞1R∫Q1(D)R±f1 Q2(D)R±f2‾ Φ(x/R) dx=2π∫Mλa1a2‾A± dS,(7) \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int Q_1(D)R_\pm f_1\, \overline{Q_2(D)R_\pm f_2}\,\Phi(x/R)\,dx =2\pi\int_{M_\lambda}a_1\overline{a_2}A_\pm\,dS, \tag{7} lim⁡R→∞1R∫Q1(D)R+f1 Q2(D)R−f2‾ Φ(x/R) dx=0,(8) \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int Q_1(D)R_+ f_1\, \overline{Q_2(D)R_- f_2}\,\Phi(x/R)\,dx=0, \tag{8} lim⁡R→∞1R∫Q(D)R±f u‾ Φ(x/R) dx=±i∫Mλ(QTλf/g)v‾A± dS,(9) \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int Q(D)R_\pm f\,\overline u\,\Phi(x/R)\,dx =\pm i\int_{M_\lambda}(QT_\lambda f/g)\overline v A_\pm\,dS, \tag{9}

and

lim⁡R→∞1R∫∣u∣2Φ(x/R) dx=12π∫Mλ∣v∣2A dS.(10) \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int|u|^2\Phi(x/R)\,dx =\frac1{2\pi}\int_{M_\lambda}|v|^2 A\,dS. \tag{10}

In particular,

lim⁡R→∞1R∫∣x∣<R∣Q(D)R±f∣2 dx=2π∫Mλ∣QTλf/g∣2 dS,(11) \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int_{|x|<R}|Q(D)R_\pm f|^2\,dx =2\pi\int_{M_\lambda}|QT_\lambda f/g|^2\,dS, \tag{11} lim⁡R→∞1R∫∣x∣<R∣Ev∣2 dx=π−1∥v∥22.(12) \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int_{|x|<R}|Ev|^2\,dx =\pi^{-1}\|v\|_2^2. \tag{12}

Proof. For smooth compact-frequency forcing, (7) and (8) are the polarized local radiation formulas, with finitely many patches covering the Fourier support. Apply those formulas to Qj(D)fjQ_j(D)f_j, which are still smooth compact-frequency Schwartz functions. Polynomial multiplication commutes with the resolvent distributions, so these are exactly the waves on the left of (7) and (8). Their normal-ray version follows by t=sgt=sg from the gradient-ray version: g−1dsg^{-1}ds becomes g−2dtg^{-2}dt. Polarization permits different forcing terms and complex polynomial QjQ_j; complex conjugation stays on the second amplitude. It also gives the mixed-sign formula with different inputs. Split a complex observation Φ\Phi into real and imaginary parts and use linearity in the observation. The local proof treats overlapping patches in a common graph chart and disjoint supports by its vanishing off-diagonal term. For general BB forcing the extension below uses the bound for Qj(D)R±Q_j(D)R_\pm; boundedness of Qj(D)Q_j(D) on BB is not needed.

To obtain (9) first for a compact amplitude vv, choose a smooth compact cutoff χ\chi equal to one near its support. Let KK contain the entire intersection of the shell with supp⁡χ\operatorname{supp}\chi, within a slightly larger compact regular surface set. Compact trace surjectivity supplies h0∈Bh_0\in B with trace gv/(2πi)gv/(2\pi i) on the amplitude support and zero on the rest of KK. Set h=χ(D)h0h=\chi(D)h_0. Then its global trace is exactly gv/(2πi)gv/(2\pi i), extended by zero, so (5) gives Ev=(R+−R−)hEv=(R_+-R_-)h.

Substituting this into the left side of (9), (7) retains the matching sign and (8) removes the opposite sign. For the upper boundary the coefficient is 2π 1/(2πi)‾=i2\pi\,\overline{1/(2\pi i)}=i; for the lower boundary the subtraction gives −i-i. This proves (9) for compact amplitudes. Formula (10) for compact vv is the compact surface mass theorem.

Here is the uniform limiting argument for all inputs. If Φ\Phi is supported in a ball of radius LL, with L≥1L\geq1, the endpoint ball bound gives

∣1R∫w1w2‾Φ(x/R) dx∣≤4L∥Φ∥∞∥w1∥B∗∥w2∥B∗,R≥1.(13) \left|\frac1R\int w_1\overline{w_2}\Phi(x/R)\,dx\right| \leq4L\|\Phi\|_\infty\|w_1\|_{B^*}\|w_2\|_{B^*}, \qquad R\geq1. \tag{13}

The global resolvent and extension bounds make all left sides uniformly continuous in the relevant BB forcing and L2L^2 amplitude norms. On the right, Cauchy–Schwarz, bounded A±,AA_\pm,A, (1) and (3) give the same continuity. Approximate the forcing in BB by compact-frequency test functions and the amplitude in L2(dS)L^2(dS) by compactly supported amplitudes. First (7) and (8) pass to arbitrary forcing, making their use with the constructed hh legitimate; then (9) and (10) pass to arbitrary amplitudes.

For the ball formulas, sandwich its indicator between smooth radial functions supported in balls of radii 1−δ1-\delta and 1+δ1+\delta, as in the compact surface proof. Each half-normal line has intersection length 11 with the unit ball, and the whole line has length 22. The nonnegative diagonal formulas and δ↓0\delta\downarrow0 yield (11) and (12). □\square

Thus the upper boundary radiates along positive gradient rays; the lower boundary radiates along negative gradient rays. A homogeneous wave carries equal line-observation mass in the two directions.

Corollary 3.2 (the global trace is onto). For every v∈L2(Mλ,dS)v\in L^2(M_\lambda,dS),

dist⁡B∗(Ev,B0∗)=(2π)−1/2∥v∥2. \operatorname{dist}_{B^*}(Ev,B^*_0)=(2\pi)^{-1/2}\|v\|_2.

For every h∈L2(Mλ,dS)h\in L^2(M_\lambda,dS) and ε>0\varepsilon>0 there is f∈Bf\in B with

Tλf=h,∥f∥B≤(2π+ε)∥h∥2. T_\lambda f=h,\qquad \|f\|_B\le(\sqrt{2\pi}+\varepsilon)\|h\|_2.

The conclusion applies to an unbounded shell. It asserts existence of a preimage, without asserting a linear right inverse or attainment of the limiting constant.

Proof. Equation (12) gives the limiting ball mass L=π−1∥v∥22L=\pi^{-1}\|v\|_2^2. The exact dyadic distance formula, Proposition 2.4 of the endpoint lesson, gives distance squared L/2L/2. In particular the adjoint EE of TλT_\lambda has norm at least c∥v∥2c\|v\|_2, where c=(2π)−1/2c=(2\pi)^{-1/2}.

Here is the full onto argument. Let CC be the closure in the surface Hilbert space of the image of the closed unit ball of BB. This is convex and balanced; its real support function in direction vv is ∥Ev∥B∗\|Ev\|_{B^*}, by (6) and the exact duality of B,B∗B,B^*. It is at least c∥v∥2c\|v\|_2. If a vector hh of norm at most cc lay outside CC, the Hilbert closest-point argument proved in Endpoint spaces, Section 1 would give a nonzero vv with sup⁡w∈CRe⁡(w,v)<Re⁡(h,v)≤c∥v∥2, \sup_{w\in C}\operatorname{Re}(w,v) <\operatorname{Re}(h,v)\le c\|v\|_2, contradicting the support-function bound. Hence CC contains that Hilbert ball. By scaling, each target rr is approximable arbitrarily well by TfTf with ∥f∥B≤∥r∥2/c\|f\|_B\le\|r\|_2/c.

Choose 0<θ<10<\theta<1 so that [c(1−θ)]−1≤c−1+ε[c(1-\theta)]^{-1}\le c^{-1}+\varepsilon. Starting with residual r1=hr_1=h, choose successive fjf_j with ∥fj∥B≤∥rj∥2/c\|f_j\|_B\le\|r_j\|_2/c and ∥rj−Tfj∥2≤θ∥rj∥2\|r_j-Tf_j\|_2\le\theta\|r_j\|_2, and put rj+1=rj−Tfjr_{j+1}=r_j-Tf_j. A zero residual terminates the construction. The series converges in BB, since

∑j∥fj∥B≤∥h∥2c(1−θ)≤(2π+ε)∥h∥2. \sum_j\|f_j\|_B\le\frac{\|h\|_2}{c(1-\theta)} \le(\sqrt{2\pi}+\varepsilon)\|h\|_2.

Boundedness of TT and rj→0r_j\to0 give T(∑jfj)=hT(\sum_jf_j)=h. If the shell is empty its Hilbert space is zero and f=0f=0 suffices. □\square

4. Recognizing the solution with vanishing mass

Call a B∗B^* solution of (p(D)−λ)u=f∈B(p(D)-\lambda)u=f\in B outgoing when u=R+fu=R_+f, and incoming when u=R−fu=R_-f.

Theorem 4.1. For such a solution, the following are equivalent:

  1. uu is both outgoing and incoming.
  2. u∈B0∗u\in B^*_0.
  3. Q(D)u∈B0∗Q(D)u\in B^*_0 for every polynomial weaker than pp.

These conditions force Tλf=0T_\lambda f=0. Conversely zero trace gives a unique solution in B0∗B^*_0, namely the common boundary solution.

Proof. If the two boundary solutions coincide, (5) and injectivity of EE give Tλf=0T_\lambda f=0. Formula (11) then gives zero ball mass for every weaker derivative of that solution; the endpoint vanishing-mass criterion proves 3. Since 11 is weaker than pp, condition 3 implies 2.

We next show that 3 forces zero trace without imposing regularity on the Fourier forcing. Choose ψ∈Cc∞\psi\in C_c^\infty, equal to one on the unit ball and zero outside the ball of radius two, and let uR=ψ(x/R)uu_R=\psi(x/R)u. The exact polynomial Leibniz formula is

(p(D)−λ)uR=ψ(x/R)f+∑α≠0R−∣α∣α!(Dαψ)(x/R)(∂αp)(D)u.(14) (p(D)-\lambda)u_R =\psi(x/R)f+ \sum_{\alpha\ne0}\frac{R^{-|\alpha|}}{\alpha!} (D^\alpha\psi)(x/R)(\partial^\alpha p)(D)u. \tag{14}

For a monomial p(ξ)=ξβp(\xi)=\xi^\beta, (14) is the repeated product rule: for α≤β\alpha\leq\beta, the coefficient of (DαψR)Dβ−αu(D^\alpha\psi_R)D^{\beta-\alpha}u is (βα)\binom\beta\alpha, and (∂αξβ)/α!=(βα)ξβ−α(\partial^\alpha\xi^\beta)/\alpha!=\binom\beta\alpha\xi^{\beta-\alpha}. Summing monomials gives (14); the distributional product rule follows from its definition against compact smooth tests. Every derivative of pp is weaker. If w∈B0∗w\in B^*_0, the BB norm of R−kb(x/R)wR^{-k}b(x/R)w, with k≥1k\geq1 and bb supported in 1≤∣x∣≤21\leq|x|\leq2, tends to zero. Indeed at most a fixed number of dyadic shells meet that annulus. On each, ∥w∥2≤εRCR1/2\|w\|_2\leq\varepsilon_R C R^{1/2}, with εR→0\varepsilon_R\to0; multiplying by the BB shell weight and R−kR^{-k} gives CεRR1−k≤CεRC\varepsilon_R R^{1-k}\leq C\varepsilon_R. Thus the sum in (14) tends to zero in BB, and ψ(x/R)f→f\psi(x/R)f\to f in BB.

Both uRu_R and the right side of (14) are compactly supported L2L^2 functions, hence L1L^1. Their Fourier transforms are continuous, and the distributional polynomial identity is therefore a pointwise identity of continuous functions. On the shell the Fourier transform of the right side is zero. To identify this ordinary restriction with the BB trace, approximate a compactly supported L2L^2 function by smooth functions on a common compact physical support. The approximation converges both in BB, by the finitely many shell norms, and in L1L^1, by Cauchy–Schwarz. Its Fourier transforms converge uniformly; the trace convergence in L2L^2 on each compact surface patch follows from (3). Hence the limiting trace agrees there with the continuous restriction. Applying this to the right side of (14), then using its BB convergence to ff, gives Tλf=0T_\lambda f=0.

If only 2 is known, first apply any smooth compact Fourier cutoff χ(D)\chi(D). Then uχ=χ(D)uu_\chi=\chi(D)u solves the equation with fχ=χ(D)f∈Bf_\chi=\chi(D)f\in B. For every weaker QQ, the bounded smooth multiplier QχQ\chi preserves B0∗B^*_0, so uχu_\chi satisfies 3. The preceding argument gives Tλfχ=χTλf=0T_\lambda f_\chi=\chi T_\lambda f=0. Taking cutoffs equal to one on successively larger frequency balls proves zero trace globally.

With zero trace, (11) gives R+f=R−f∈B0∗R_+f=R_-f\in B^*_0. The difference u−R+fu-R_+f is a homogeneous B0∗B^*_0 wave. Lemma 1.1 and (12) force its amplitude to be zero. Hence uu is the common boundary solution. This proves 2 implies 1 and proves uniqueness. □\square

The global weighted division theorem gives additional decay for this solution when the forcing has the required weighted BB norm. Membership of B0∗B^*_0 alone is the vanishing-mass condition, not a claim of arbitrary polynomial decay.

5. The flux identity and the amplitude labels

Theorem 5.1. Every u∈B∗u\in B^* with (p(D)−λ)u=f∈B(p(D)-\lambda)u=f\in B has unique decompositions

u=R−f+Ev+=R+f+Ev−,v±∈L2(Mλ,dS).(15) u=R_-f+Ev_+=R_+f+Ev_-, \qquad v_\pm\in L^2(M_\lambda,dS). \tag{15}

The labels are attached to the homogeneous term added to the opposite boundary solution. They satisfy

v+−v−=2πi Tλf/g,(16) v_+-v_-=2\pi i\,T_\lambda f/g, \tag{16}

and

∫Mλg(∣v+∣2−∣v−∣2) dS=4π Im⁡(u,f).(17) \int_{M_\lambda}g\big(|v_+|^2-|v_-|^2\big)\,dS =4\pi\,\operatorname{Im}(u,f). \tag{17}

The integrand in (17) is absolutely integrable. The two nonnegative weighted integrals separately need not be finite.

Moreover (∂αp)(D)u∈B∗(\partial^\alpha p)(D)u\in B^* for every α\alpha if and only if p~ v+∈L2(dS)\widetilde p\,v_+\in L^2(dS); equivalently the condition can be imposed on v−v_-.

Proof. Subtract either boundary solution from uu; its equation is homogeneous. Theorem 2.1 gives (15) and uniqueness. Equation (5) gives (16).

Put Cf=(R+f+R−f)/2Cf=(R_+f+R_-f)/2 and write u=Cf+Ev0u=Cf+Ev_0. For nonreal conjugate points the Hilbert resolvents are adjoints. Passing to the weak-star boundaries against the fixed f∈B⊂L2f\in B\subset L^2 gives

(R−f,f)=(R+f,f)‾,Im⁡(Cf,f)=0. (R_-f,f)=\overline{(R_+f,f)},\qquad \operatorname{Im}(Cf,f)=0.

Thus (6) yields Im⁡(u,f)=Im⁡(v0,Tλf)\operatorname{Im}(u,f)=\operatorname{Im}(v_0,T_\lambda f). Formula (5) also gives

v±=v0±πi Tλf/g. v_\pm=v_0\pm\pi i\,T_\lambda f/g.

Expanding the two squares gives the pointwise identity

g(∣v+∣2−∣v−∣2)=4π Im⁡(v0Tλf‾). g(|v_+|^2-|v_-|^2) =4\pi\,\operatorname{Im} \big(v_0\overline{T_\lambda f}\big).

The right side belongs to L1(dS)L^1(dS) by Cauchy–Schwarz, proving convergence and (17). This argument makes no subtraction of two infinite integrals.

For the last assertion use either decomposition in (15). Every ∂αp\partial^\alpha p is weaker, so its derivative of the resolvent term belongs to B∗B^*. The corresponding derivative of Ev±Ev_\pm has Fourier density (∂αp)v±(\partial^\alpha p)v_\pm. The homogeneous classification says it belongs to B∗B^* exactly when that density is L2L^2. Summing the finitely many squared density norms gives precisely ∥p~ v±∥22\|\widetilde p\,v_\pm\|_2^2. Finally (1), (16) and the trace bound show

p~ (v+−v−)=2πi (p~/g)Tλf∈L2. \widetilde p\,(v_+-v_-) =2\pi i\,(\widetilde p/g)T_\lambda f\in L^2.

Hence the two weighted-amplitude conditions are equivalent. □\square

Corollary 5.2. If (u,f)(u,f) is real, then uu is outgoing if and only if it is incoming.

Proof. By (15), outgoing means v−=0v_-=0, and incoming means v+=0v_+=0. If either vanishes, (17) with zero right side forces the other to vanish, since g>0g>0. □\square

Corollary 5.3. For u=R±fu=R_\pm f,

±2 Im⁡(u,f)=2π∫Mλ∣Tλf∣2/g dS.(18) \pm2\,\operatorname{Im}(u,f) =2\pi\int_{M_\lambda}|T_\lambda f|^2/g\,dS. \tag{18}

Proof. For the upper solution v−=0v_-=0 and v+=2πiTλf/gv_+=2\pi iT_\lambda f/g; substitute in (17). For the lower solution the labels reverse and the sign is negative. The integral is finite because 1/g1/g is bounded and the trace is L2L^2. □\square

Corollary 5.4 (the exact norm of the two amplitudes). For every forced solution and the unchanged amplitude labels in (15),

lim⁡R→∞1R∫∣x∣<R∣u∣2 dx=∥v+∥22+∥v−∥222π,dist⁡B∗(u,B0∗)2=∥v+∥22+∥v−∥224π. \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int_{|x|<R}|u|^2\,dx =\frac{\|v_+\|_2^2+\|v_-\|_2^2}{2\pi},\qquad \operatorname{dist}_{B^*}(u,B^*_0)^2 =\frac{\|v_+\|_2^2+\|v_-\|_2^2}{4\pi}.

Proof. Put t=Tλf/gt=T_\lambda f/g, v0=(v++v−)/2v_0=(v_++v_-)/2. Equation (16) gives u=Cf+Ev0u=Cf+Ev_0 and v±=v0±πitv_\pm=v_0\pm\pi i t. The function tt is L2L^2, since 1/g1/g is bounded. For a nonnegative continuous radial compact observation Φ\Phi, let b=∫0∞Φ(sν) dsb=\int_0^\infty\Phi(s\nu)\,ds, independent of the unit normal. Equations (7), (8) and (10) give

lim⁡R→∞1R∫∣Cf∣2Φ(x/R) dx=πb∥t∥22,lim⁡R→∞1R∫∣Ev0∣2Φ(x/R) dx=bπ−1∥v0∥22. \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int|Cf|^2\Phi(x/R)\,dx =\pi b\|t\|_2^2,\qquad \lim_{R\to\infty}\frac1R\int|Ev_0|^2\Phi(x/R)\,dx =b\pi^{-1}\|v_0\|_2^2.

The two mixed limits in (9) are opposite, so their average, the mixed term between CfCf and Ev0Ev_0, is zero. Bound (13) justifies every limit for the original forcing and amplitudes. Sandwich the ball indicator between radial observations whose half-ray integrals tend to one. Nonnegativity yields the ball limit π∥t∥22+π−1∥v0∥22\pi\|t\|_2^2+\pi^{-1}\|v_0\|_2^2. Expanding the two amplitude squares shows that this is (∥v+∥22+∥v−∥22)/(2π)(\|v_+\|_2^2+\|v_-\|_2^2)/(2\pi). Proposition 2.4 of the endpoint lesson divides this limiting mass by two for the squared quotient norm. □\square

For a homogeneous wave the labels are both vv, recovering Corollary 3.2. For R+fR_+f, the minus label is zero, and the distance squared is π∥Tf/g∥22\pi\|Tf/g\|_2^2. The exact norm makes the vanishing-mass criterion quantitative.

Theorem 5.5 (the forced classes and their Hilbert completion). Let Q=B∗/B0∗\mathcal Q=B^*/B^*_0, and let Sλ\mathcal S_\lambda consist of classes represented by u∈B∗u\in B^* with (p(D)−λ)u∈B(p(D)-\lambda)u\in B. The amplitude map is a linear bijection from Sλ\mathcal S_\lambda onto

Dg={(v+,v−)∈L2(Mλ,dS)⊕L2(Mλ,dS):g(v+−v−)∈L2(Mλ,dS)}. \mathcal D_g=\{(v_+,v_-)\in L^2(M_\lambda,dS)\oplus L^2(M_\lambda,dS): g(v_+-v_-)\in L^2(M_\lambda,dS)\}.

Its inverse has squared norm (∥v+∥22+∥v−∥22)/(4π)(\|v_+\|_2^2+\|v_-\|_2^2)/(4\pi). It extends uniquely to the entire Hilbert direct sum, with the same norm, as a map onto the closed subspace Sλ‾\overline{\mathcal S_\lambda} of Q\mathcal Q. Exactly the pairs in Dg\mathcal D_g have a representative with BB forcing.

Proof. Two forced representatives of one class differ by w∈B0∗w\in B^*_0 with (p(D)−λ)w∈B(p(D)-\lambda)w\in B. Theorem 4.1 makes ww the common boundary solution, so both its amplitudes are zero. Thus the map is well defined; (15) gives linearity and Corollary 5.4 gives injectivity and its exact norm. Equation (16) proves necessity of the integrability condition.

Conversely, for a pair in Dg\mathcal D_g, Corollary 3.2 supplies f∈Bf\in B with Tf=g(v+−v−)/(2πi)Tf=g(v_+-v_-)/(2\pi i). Set u=R−f+Ev+u=R_-f+Ev_+; the jump formula gives its other amplitude v−v_-. A different forcing with that trace has zero-trace difference, whose boundary solution is in B0∗B^*_0, so it gives the same class. This proves surjectivity.

Pairs supported in compact surface subsets lie in Dg\mathcal D_g, since gg is bounded there. They are dense in the full direct sum, by truncation of L2L^2 amplitudes. The exact norm and completeness of the Banach quotient extend the inverse uniquely to all pairs. The quotient completeness proof is the summable-lift argument in Compact Fredholm operators, Elementary finite-dimensional tools; here B0∗B^*_0 is closed by the endpoint lesson. Its image is closed: a Cauchy sequence of classes has Cauchy amplitudes, whose Hilbert limit maps to its quotient limit. Its image is precisely the closure of Sλ\mathcal S_\lambda. Necessity already proved characterizes which completed classes have BB forcing. This proves a Hilbert structure on that closed subspace; it does not assert one on the entire quotient. □\square

For example, on the parabola of Exercise 6.5, let v(η)=(1+η2)−5/8v(\eta)=(1+\eta^2)^{-5/8}. Then v∈L2(dS)v\in L^2(dS), but gv∉L2(dS)gv\notin L^2(dS): the latter squared integrand is (1+4η2)3/2(1+η2)−5/4(1+4\eta^2)^{3/2}(1+\eta^2)^{-5/4}, comparable to ∣η∣1/2|\eta|^{1/2}. Thus (v,v)(v,v) is a forced pair (with zero forcing), while (v,0)(v,0) is a completed pair with no BB-forced representative.

The exact two-amplitude quotient norm and the forcing integrability condition.

Figure 1. For unit amplitude aa, the real coordinates (v+,v−)=(sa,ta)(v_+,v_-)=(sa,ta) have quotient norm squared (s2+t2)/(4π)(s^2+t^2)/(4\pi), so the unit disk has radius 2π2\sqrt\pi. This depicts a two-dimensional slice of the completion. On the parabola ξ=(η2,η)\xi=(\eta^2,\eta), the plotted exact squared-norm integrands for v=(1+η2)−5/8v=(1+\eta^2)^{-5/8} are g∣v∣2g|v|^2 and g3∣v∣2g^3|v|^2. The former is integrable, the latter is not. Consequently (v,0)(v,0) lies in the completion and (v,v)(v,v) is a forced pair. Corollary 5.4 and Theorem 5.5 give the proof and the retained gradient factor. Vector figure; reproducible plotting source accompanies the editable package.

All arguments in this lesson retain the invariant directions allowed by the preceding global free-resolvent estimate. The local coordinate maps, global cutoff exhaustion and identity ∑j∣∂jp∣2/g2=1\sum_j|\partial_jp|^2/g^2=1 impose no extra condition on Λ(p)\Lambda(p). Later compact-potential results retain their own hypotheses, as Example 4.3 in that preceding lesson explains.

Use the conclusion

Use the exact two-amplitude norm and the forced-class completion together. State the gradient integrability condition in the representative theorem; the completion must not be mistaken for an assertion that every class has such a representative.

6. Exercises

Exercise 6.1 (foundation). On the line take p(ξ)=ξ2p(\xi)=\xi^2, λ=k2>0\lambda=k^2>0. Write EvEv, (12), (16) and (18) using the two scalar amplitudes at ξ=±k\xi=\pm k. Identify the directions of the two upper outgoing waves.

Exercise 6.2 (foundation). With a pairing linear in its first argument, verify ∣b+ic∣2−∣b−ic∣2=4Im⁡(bc‾)|b+ic|^2-|b-ic|^2=4\operatorname{Im}(b\overline c). Use it to check the sign and constant in (17). Explain which label vanishes for R+fR_+f.

Exercise 6.3 (intermediate). Prove the annular estimate used after (14) when w∈B0∗w\in B^*_0. Then show why the same calculation for a general w∈B∗w\in B^* gives a bounded error for k=1k=1, rather than necessarily an error tending to zero.

Exercise 6.4 (intermediate). Let f=(p(D)−λ)hf=(p(D)-\lambda)h, where hh is Schwartz with smooth compact Fourier support. Find v+,v−v_+,v_- for the solution u=hu=h, determine its flux, and explain why it is both incoming and outgoing.

Exercise 6.5 (advanced). For p(ξ1,ξ2)=ξ1−ξ22p(\xi_1,\xi_2)=\xi_1-\xi_2^2, λ=0\lambda=0, parameterize the shell by (η2,η)(\eta^2,\eta) and take v(η)=(1+η2)−5/8,u=Ev,f=0. v(\eta)=(1+\eta^2)^{-5/8},\qquad u=Ev,\qquad f=0. Check that v∈L2(dS)v\in L^2(dS) while ∫g∣v∣2dS=∞\int g|v|^2dS=\infty. Apply Theorem 5.1 and explain why its flux integral is still absolutely convergent.

7. Complete solutions

Solution 6.1. Write vσ=v(σk)v_\sigma=v(\sigma k), σ=±1\sigma=\pm1. Surface measure in dimension one is counting measure, and g=2kg=2k at both points. Therefore

Ev(x)=(2π)−1/2(v1eikx+v−1e−ikx),lim⁡R→∞R−1∫−RR∣Ev∣2=π−1(∣v1∣2+∣v−1∣2). Ev(x)=(2\pi)^{-1/2}(v_1e^{ikx}+v_{-1}e^{-ikx}), \quad \lim_{R\to\infty}R^{-1}\int_{-R}^R|Ev|^2 =\pi^{-1}(|v_1|^2+|v_{-1}|^2).

For each point, the difference of the two decomposition amplitudes is 2πi f^(σk)/(2k)2\pi i\,\widehat f(\sigma k)/(2k). For the upper boundary, (18) becomes

2Im⁡(R+f,f)=πk(∣f^(k)∣2+∣f^(−k)∣2). 2\operatorname{Im}(R_+f,f) =\frac{\pi}{k} \big(|\widehat f(k)|^2+|\widehat f(-k)|^2\big).

The gradient is 2k2k at kk and −2k-2k at −k-k. Thus the kk upper component travels to positive xx, and the −k-k upper component to negative xx. Outgoing refers to the gradient direction, not to a fixed sign of the frequency.

Solution 6.2. The cross term in ∣b+ic∣2|b+ic|^2 is 2Re⁡(−ibc‾)=2Im⁡(bc‾)2\operatorname{Re}(-ib\overline c)=2\operatorname{Im}(b\overline c); the other square has its negative. Their difference is the displayed value. Take b=v0b=v_0 and c=πTλf/gc=\pi T_\lambda f/g, and multiply by gg. This gives 4πIm⁡(v0Tλf‾)4\pi\operatorname{Im}(v_0\overline{T_\lambda f}), whose integral is 4πIm⁡(u,f)4\pi\operatorname{Im}(u,f). For u=R+fu=R_+f, the decomposition with that same boundary has no homogeneous addition, so v−=0v_-=0. The opposite-boundary addition has label v+v_+.

Solution 6.3. Choose jRj_R with 2jR−1<R≤2jR2^{j_R-1}<R\leq2^{j_R}. The annulus R≤∣x∣≤2RR\leq|x|\leq2R meets at most three shells of comparable radius. Put εR=sup⁡j≥jR−12−j/2∥w∥L2(Aj)\varepsilon_R=\sup_{j\geq j_R-1}2^{-j/2}\|w\|_{L^2(A_j)}; it tends to zero for B0∗B^*_0. On each relevant shell the product's BB contribution is at most C R1/2R−kεRR1/2=CεRR1−k. C\,R^{1/2}R^{-k}\varepsilon_R R^{1/2} =C\varepsilon_R R^{1-k}. Summing the fixed number proves convergence to zero for k≥1k\geq1. For a general B∗B^* function, replace εR\varepsilon_R by its fixed norm; at k=1k=1 the remaining power is R0R^0. The estimate is only bounded, so it cannot justify the trace limit without the vanishing-tail hypothesis.

Solution 6.4. The shell trace of ff is zero because its Fourier transform is (p−λ)h^(p-\lambda)\widehat h. Boundary multiplication cancels this factor, giving R+f=R−f=hR_+f=R_-f=h. Both homogeneous additions in (15) are zero, hence v+=v−=0v_+=v_-=0 and the flux is zero. Alternatively the real polynomial multiplier is symmetric on this Schwartz hh, so (h,(p(D)−λ)h)(h,(p(D)-\lambda)h) is real. The solution is in L2⊂B0∗L^2\subset B^*_0 and is both boundary solutions.

Solution 6.5. On this graph, g=1+4η2,dS=g dη,∣v∣2=(1+η2)−5/4. g=\sqrt{1+4\eta^2},\qquad dS=g\,d\eta,\qquad |v|^2=(1+\eta^2)^{-5/4}. For large ∣η∣|\eta|, the L2(dS)L^2(dS) integrand is comparable to ∣η∣−5/2∣η∣=∣η∣−3/2|\eta|^{-5/2}|\eta|=|\eta|^{-3/2}, which is integrable. The weighted integrand g∣v∣2dSg|v|^2dS is comparable to ∣η∣−5/2∣η∣2=∣η∣−1/2|\eta|^{-5/2}|\eta|^2=|\eta|^{-1/2}, which is not. Thus Theorem 2.1 gives u∈B∗u\in B^* and its homogeneous equation. With f=0f=0, both resolvent terms vanish, so v+=v−=vv_+=v_-=v. The integrand in (17) is the pointwise zero function and has absolute integral zero. Writing the left side as the difference of its two separate weighted integrals would instead give an undefined expression; Theorem 5.1 requires the integral of the difference.

References