Using the Banach fixed point Theorem












4












$begingroup$


In Chapter 7, The Hille-Yosida Theorem,




Functional Analysis,
Sobolev Spaces and Partial
Differential Equations - Brezis, 2011.




Brezis showed the following claim (in Proposition 7.1).



Claim: Suppose that $A$ is a maximal monotone operator, $(I+lambda A): D(A) to R(I+lambda A)$ is a injective operator, and $|(I+lambda A)^{-1}u| leq |u| $ for all $u in R(I+lambda A)$ for all $lambda >0$. Then $R(I+lambda A) = H$.



The proof of Brezis:




We will prove that if $R(I+lambda_{0} A) = H$ for some $lambda_{0}>0$ then
$R(I+lambda A) = H$ for every $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$.



For some $f in H$, we try to solve the equation



$u+lambda Au = f$ with $lambda >0$. (1)



Equation (1) may be written as



$u+ lambda_{0}Au = frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)$



or alternatively



$u= (I+lambda A)^{-1}big[frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)big]$ $(2)$



If $|1-frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}|< 1$, i.e., $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$, we may apply the contraction mapping principle (the Banach Fixed point Theorem) and deduce that (2) has a solution.




My question: how to prove that (2) has a solution using the the Banach Fixed point Theorem?



Thanks





Definitions:



An unbounded linear operator $A: D(A)subseteq H to H$ is said to be monotone if it satisfies



$langle A u, u rangle geq 0$ for all $uin D(A)$.



It is called maximal monotone if, in addition, $R(I+A)=H$.










share|cite|improve this question









$endgroup$

















    4












    $begingroup$


    In Chapter 7, The Hille-Yosida Theorem,




    Functional Analysis,
    Sobolev Spaces and Partial
    Differential Equations - Brezis, 2011.




    Brezis showed the following claim (in Proposition 7.1).



    Claim: Suppose that $A$ is a maximal monotone operator, $(I+lambda A): D(A) to R(I+lambda A)$ is a injective operator, and $|(I+lambda A)^{-1}u| leq |u| $ for all $u in R(I+lambda A)$ for all $lambda >0$. Then $R(I+lambda A) = H$.



    The proof of Brezis:




    We will prove that if $R(I+lambda_{0} A) = H$ for some $lambda_{0}>0$ then
    $R(I+lambda A) = H$ for every $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$.



    For some $f in H$, we try to solve the equation



    $u+lambda Au = f$ with $lambda >0$. (1)



    Equation (1) may be written as



    $u+ lambda_{0}Au = frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)$



    or alternatively



    $u= (I+lambda A)^{-1}big[frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)big]$ $(2)$



    If $|1-frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}|< 1$, i.e., $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$, we may apply the contraction mapping principle (the Banach Fixed point Theorem) and deduce that (2) has a solution.




    My question: how to prove that (2) has a solution using the the Banach Fixed point Theorem?



    Thanks





    Definitions:



    An unbounded linear operator $A: D(A)subseteq H to H$ is said to be monotone if it satisfies



    $langle A u, u rangle geq 0$ for all $uin D(A)$.



    It is called maximal monotone if, in addition, $R(I+A)=H$.










    share|cite|improve this question









    $endgroup$















      4












      4








      4





      $begingroup$


      In Chapter 7, The Hille-Yosida Theorem,




      Functional Analysis,
      Sobolev Spaces and Partial
      Differential Equations - Brezis, 2011.




      Brezis showed the following claim (in Proposition 7.1).



      Claim: Suppose that $A$ is a maximal monotone operator, $(I+lambda A): D(A) to R(I+lambda A)$ is a injective operator, and $|(I+lambda A)^{-1}u| leq |u| $ for all $u in R(I+lambda A)$ for all $lambda >0$. Then $R(I+lambda A) = H$.



      The proof of Brezis:




      We will prove that if $R(I+lambda_{0} A) = H$ for some $lambda_{0}>0$ then
      $R(I+lambda A) = H$ for every $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$.



      For some $f in H$, we try to solve the equation



      $u+lambda Au = f$ with $lambda >0$. (1)



      Equation (1) may be written as



      $u+ lambda_{0}Au = frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)$



      or alternatively



      $u= (I+lambda A)^{-1}big[frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)big]$ $(2)$



      If $|1-frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}|< 1$, i.e., $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$, we may apply the contraction mapping principle (the Banach Fixed point Theorem) and deduce that (2) has a solution.




      My question: how to prove that (2) has a solution using the the Banach Fixed point Theorem?



      Thanks





      Definitions:



      An unbounded linear operator $A: D(A)subseteq H to H$ is said to be monotone if it satisfies



      $langle A u, u rangle geq 0$ for all $uin D(A)$.



      It is called maximal monotone if, in addition, $R(I+A)=H$.










      share|cite|improve this question









      $endgroup$




      In Chapter 7, The Hille-Yosida Theorem,




      Functional Analysis,
      Sobolev Spaces and Partial
      Differential Equations - Brezis, 2011.




      Brezis showed the following claim (in Proposition 7.1).



      Claim: Suppose that $A$ is a maximal monotone operator, $(I+lambda A): D(A) to R(I+lambda A)$ is a injective operator, and $|(I+lambda A)^{-1}u| leq |u| $ for all $u in R(I+lambda A)$ for all $lambda >0$. Then $R(I+lambda A) = H$.



      The proof of Brezis:




      We will prove that if $R(I+lambda_{0} A) = H$ for some $lambda_{0}>0$ then
      $R(I+lambda A) = H$ for every $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$.



      For some $f in H$, we try to solve the equation



      $u+lambda Au = f$ with $lambda >0$. (1)



      Equation (1) may be written as



      $u+ lambda_{0}Au = frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)$



      or alternatively



      $u= (I+lambda A)^{-1}big[frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}f+ big( 1- frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}u big)big]$ $(2)$



      If $|1-frac{lambda_{0}}{lambda}|< 1$, i.e., $lambda > frac{1}{2}lambda_{0}$, we may apply the contraction mapping principle (the Banach Fixed point Theorem) and deduce that (2) has a solution.




      My question: how to prove that (2) has a solution using the the Banach Fixed point Theorem?



      Thanks





      Definitions:



      An unbounded linear operator $A: D(A)subseteq H to H$ is said to be monotone if it satisfies



      $langle A u, u rangle geq 0$ for all $uin D(A)$.



      It is called maximal monotone if, in addition, $R(I+A)=H$.







      functional-analysis pde






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 30 '18 at 22:42









      Joao MaiaJoao Maia

      1586




      1586






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          2












          $begingroup$

          There are some typos in your derivation. Specifically the correct form of $(2)$ is:
          $$u=(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1} left[frac{lambda_0}lambda fright]+(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}left[(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)uright].$$
          Your equation is of the form
          $$u=v + Bu$$
          for a constant $v$ and a linear map $B$. In the case that $B$ is a contraction then $v+Bu$ is a contraction and you are done. So why is $B=(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)(I+lambda_0A)^{-1}$ a contraction? Here note that $|(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}|≤1$, use the positivity of $A$ if you wish. This gives you
          $$|B|≤|1-frac{lambda_0}lambda|<1,$$
          now you are finished.






          share|cite|improve this answer









          $endgroup$





















            1












            $begingroup$

            Banach's fixed point theorem states that if an operator $T colon X to X$ on the non-empty complete metric space $(X, d)$ is a contraction, then $T$ has a unique fixed point $x^* in X$ such that $Tx^* = x^*$. This means that if you can show that $T$ is a contraction, i.e. $d(Tx, Ty) leq Kd(x, y)$ for some constant $0 leq K < 1$, then $T$ has a fixed point. If you can show that (2) is indeed a contraction, then there will exist a unique solution.






            share|cite|improve this answer









            $endgroup$













              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
              });


              }
              });














              draft saved

              draft discarded


















              StackExchange.ready(
              function () {
              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3020747%2fusing-the-banach-fixed-point-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
              }
              );

              Post as a guest















              Required, but never shown

























              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes








              2 Answers
              2






              active

              oldest

              votes









              active

              oldest

              votes






              active

              oldest

              votes









              2












              $begingroup$

              There are some typos in your derivation. Specifically the correct form of $(2)$ is:
              $$u=(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1} left[frac{lambda_0}lambda fright]+(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}left[(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)uright].$$
              Your equation is of the form
              $$u=v + Bu$$
              for a constant $v$ and a linear map $B$. In the case that $B$ is a contraction then $v+Bu$ is a contraction and you are done. So why is $B=(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)(I+lambda_0A)^{-1}$ a contraction? Here note that $|(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}|≤1$, use the positivity of $A$ if you wish. This gives you
              $$|B|≤|1-frac{lambda_0}lambda|<1,$$
              now you are finished.






              share|cite|improve this answer









              $endgroup$


















                2












                $begingroup$

                There are some typos in your derivation. Specifically the correct form of $(2)$ is:
                $$u=(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1} left[frac{lambda_0}lambda fright]+(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}left[(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)uright].$$
                Your equation is of the form
                $$u=v + Bu$$
                for a constant $v$ and a linear map $B$. In the case that $B$ is a contraction then $v+Bu$ is a contraction and you are done. So why is $B=(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)(I+lambda_0A)^{-1}$ a contraction? Here note that $|(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}|≤1$, use the positivity of $A$ if you wish. This gives you
                $$|B|≤|1-frac{lambda_0}lambda|<1,$$
                now you are finished.






                share|cite|improve this answer









                $endgroup$
















                  2












                  2








                  2





                  $begingroup$

                  There are some typos in your derivation. Specifically the correct form of $(2)$ is:
                  $$u=(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1} left[frac{lambda_0}lambda fright]+(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}left[(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)uright].$$
                  Your equation is of the form
                  $$u=v + Bu$$
                  for a constant $v$ and a linear map $B$. In the case that $B$ is a contraction then $v+Bu$ is a contraction and you are done. So why is $B=(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)(I+lambda_0A)^{-1}$ a contraction? Here note that $|(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}|≤1$, use the positivity of $A$ if you wish. This gives you
                  $$|B|≤|1-frac{lambda_0}lambda|<1,$$
                  now you are finished.






                  share|cite|improve this answer









                  $endgroup$



                  There are some typos in your derivation. Specifically the correct form of $(2)$ is:
                  $$u=(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1} left[frac{lambda_0}lambda fright]+(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}left[(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)uright].$$
                  Your equation is of the form
                  $$u=v + Bu$$
                  for a constant $v$ and a linear map $B$. In the case that $B$ is a contraction then $v+Bu$ is a contraction and you are done. So why is $B=(1-frac{lambda_0}lambda)(I+lambda_0A)^{-1}$ a contraction? Here note that $|(I+lambda_0 A)^{-1}|≤1$, use the positivity of $A$ if you wish. This gives you
                  $$|B|≤|1-frac{lambda_0}lambda|<1,$$
                  now you are finished.







                  share|cite|improve this answer












                  share|cite|improve this answer



                  share|cite|improve this answer










                  answered Nov 30 '18 at 23:11









                  s.harps.harp

                  8,42812049




                  8,42812049























                      1












                      $begingroup$

                      Banach's fixed point theorem states that if an operator $T colon X to X$ on the non-empty complete metric space $(X, d)$ is a contraction, then $T$ has a unique fixed point $x^* in X$ such that $Tx^* = x^*$. This means that if you can show that $T$ is a contraction, i.e. $d(Tx, Ty) leq Kd(x, y)$ for some constant $0 leq K < 1$, then $T$ has a fixed point. If you can show that (2) is indeed a contraction, then there will exist a unique solution.






                      share|cite|improve this answer









                      $endgroup$


















                        1












                        $begingroup$

                        Banach's fixed point theorem states that if an operator $T colon X to X$ on the non-empty complete metric space $(X, d)$ is a contraction, then $T$ has a unique fixed point $x^* in X$ such that $Tx^* = x^*$. This means that if you can show that $T$ is a contraction, i.e. $d(Tx, Ty) leq Kd(x, y)$ for some constant $0 leq K < 1$, then $T$ has a fixed point. If you can show that (2) is indeed a contraction, then there will exist a unique solution.






                        share|cite|improve this answer









                        $endgroup$
















                          1












                          1








                          1





                          $begingroup$

                          Banach's fixed point theorem states that if an operator $T colon X to X$ on the non-empty complete metric space $(X, d)$ is a contraction, then $T$ has a unique fixed point $x^* in X$ such that $Tx^* = x^*$. This means that if you can show that $T$ is a contraction, i.e. $d(Tx, Ty) leq Kd(x, y)$ for some constant $0 leq K < 1$, then $T$ has a fixed point. If you can show that (2) is indeed a contraction, then there will exist a unique solution.






                          share|cite|improve this answer









                          $endgroup$



                          Banach's fixed point theorem states that if an operator $T colon X to X$ on the non-empty complete metric space $(X, d)$ is a contraction, then $T$ has a unique fixed point $x^* in X$ such that $Tx^* = x^*$. This means that if you can show that $T$ is a contraction, i.e. $d(Tx, Ty) leq Kd(x, y)$ for some constant $0 leq K < 1$, then $T$ has a fixed point. If you can show that (2) is indeed a contraction, then there will exist a unique solution.







                          share|cite|improve this answer












                          share|cite|improve this answer



                          share|cite|improve this answer










                          answered Nov 30 '18 at 23:03









                          Erik AndréErik André

                          857




                          857






























                              draft saved

                              draft discarded




















































                              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.




                              draft saved


                              draft discarded














                              StackExchange.ready(
                              function () {
                              StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3020747%2fusing-the-banach-fixed-point-theorem%23new-answer', 'question_page');
                              }
                              );

                              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







                              Popular posts from this blog

                              Bundesstraße 106

                              Verónica Boquete

                              Ida-Boy-Ed-Garten