AoPSWiki
Our Precalculus course starts on Dec. 4. Master trig, complex numbers, and vectors and matrices in 2 and 3 dimensions. Click here to enroll today!

Newman's Tauberian Theorem

From AoPSWiki

Newman's Tauberian Theorem is a tauberian theorem first proven by D.J. Newman in 1980, in his short proof of the prime number theorem.

Statement

Let f:(0,+\infty)\to\mathbb C be a bounded function. Assume that its Laplace transform F(s) = \int_0^\infty f(t)e^{-st}dt (which is well-defined by this formula for \Re s>0) admits an analytic extension (which we'll denote by the same letter F) to some open domain E containing the closed half-plane \{s\in\mathbb C : \Re s\ge 0\}. Then, the integral \int_0^\infty f(t) dt converges and its value equals F(0).

Proof

For every T>0, let F_T(s) = \int_0^T f(t)e^{-st} dt. The function F_T is defined and analytic on the entire complex plane \mathbb C. The conclusion of the theorem is equivalent to the assertion \lim_{T\to+\infty} F_T(0) = F(0). We choose some large R>0, and some arbitrarily small \delta > 0 such that F is defined on the set \{ z \in \mathbb{C} \mid \Re z \ge - \delta, \lvert z \rvert\le R \} . Let \Gamma be the counterclockwise contour on the boundary of this set. Let \Gamma_+ be the restriction of this contour to the half-plane \Re z \ge 0. Let \Gamma_-^1 be the restriction of the contour to the set \{ z \in \mathbb{C} \mid \Re z \in (-\delta,0), \lvert z \rvert= R \} , and let \Gamma_-^2 be the restriction to the set \{ z \in \mathbb{C} \mid \Re z = -\delta, \lvert z \rvert \le R\}. Let \Gamma_- = \Gamma_-^1 + \Gamma_-^2, as shown in the diagram below.

size(200);defaultpen(.7);path C=circle((0,0),1);path D=((-.3,-1.2)--(-.3,1.2));pair d1,d2;d1 = intersectionpoints(C,D)[0];d2 ...


By the Cauchy integral formula, we have F(0)-F_T(0) = \frac{1}{2\pi i} \int_\Gamma K(z) (F(z)-F_T(z))\frac{dz}{z} , where K(z) = \left( 1 + \frac{z^2}{R^2}\right) \right) e^{zT} . We will estimate this integral separately in the left and right half-planes. In principle, K could be arbitrary, but we have chosen K to make it easier to estimate this integral.

We first estimate the difference F(z) - F_T(z) for \Gamma_+. Let M be an upper bound for \lvert f(x) \rvert. In the the right half-plane \Re z > 0, we note that \lvert F(z) - F_T(z) \rvert = \biggl\lvert \int_T^{\infty}f(x)e^{-zt} dt \biggr\rvert \le M \int_T^{\infty} e^{-\Re (z) t} dt...

Thus, we should kill the denominator \Re z for the integral to converge. On the other hand, we can afford the kernel K(z) growth as e^{T\Re z} in the right half-plane, which will allow us corresponding decay in the left half-plane. Hence our choice K(z) = \left(1+\frac{z^2}{R^2}\right)e^{Tz}. This is convenient because for \lvert z \rvert = R, K(z) = \frac{2 z \Re z}{R^2} e^{Tz} , so that K kills the unpleasant denominator \Re z on \Gamma_+.

We then have \biggl\lvert \int_{\Gamma_+} K(z)\bigl[ F(z) - F_T(z) \bigr]\frac{dz}{z} \biggr\rvert\le\int_{\Gamma_+} \frac{2M}{R^2} \lvert...

To estimate the integral over \Gamma_-, we note that K(z)F_T(z)/z is analytic in the left half-plane, so we may change the integration path to the left semicircle \tilde\Gamma_- of radius R. Now, on \tilde\Gamma_-, we have \lvert F_T(z) \rvert \le M \int_{0}^T \lvert e^{-zt} \rvert dt= M \frac{e^{-T\Re z } - 1}{\lvert\Re z\rvert} < M \frac{e^{... Then as before, \biggl\lvert \int_{\Gamma_-} F_T(z)K(z) \frac{dz}{z} \biggr\rvert\le \frac{2\pi M}{R}.


Now, let N(R) be an upper bound for the quantity \left\lvert F(z) \left(1 + \frac{z^2}{R^2} \right) \frac{1}{z}\right\rvert on \Gamma_-. Then for \delta < R, \biggl\lvert \int_{\Gamma_-^1} F(z)K(z) \frac{dz}{z} \biggr\rvert\le N(R) \biggl\lvert \int_{\Gamma_-^1} e^{zT} dz \biggr\rve... and \biggl\lvert \int_{\Gamma_-^2} F(z)K(z) \frac{dz}{z} \biggr\rvert\le N(R) \int_{\Gamma_-^2} e^{-\delta T} \lvert dz \rvert&lt... Therefore \lvert F(0) - F_T(0) \rvert \le \frac{4\pi M}{R} + N(R) \cdot4\delta + N(R) \cdot 2Re^{-\delta T} . But as T becomes arbitrarily large, the last term vanishes, so that \limsup_{T \to \infty} \lvert F(0) - F_T(0) \rvert\le \frac{4\pi M}{R} + N(R)\cdot 4 \delta . We can make \delta arbitrarily small, so that the second term vanishes. Then we pick an arbitrarily large R, so that the first term vanishes, and the theorem follows. \blacksquare

See also

Add a glimpse of the Art of Problem Solving Forum to your own site!
Click here for details!
© Copyright 2008 AoPS Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. • FoundationPrivacyContact Us