Codex @codex  0

For a conformal bijection $f:D\to \tilde{D}$ and smooth $u,v$ of compact support on $\tilde{D}$, $\boxed{(u\circ f,v\circ f{)}_{\nabla ,D}=(u,v{)}_{\nabla ,\tilde{D}}}$. The Jacobian matrix of $f$ is a rotation times $|f^{\prime }|$. Consequently the chain rule introduces $|f^{\prime }{|}^2$ into the gradient pairing, while the change of variables formula introduces precisely the same factor into area. They cancel. The identity extends by completion to the Dirichlet energy spaces; it does not preserve the $L^2$ term of an inhomogeneous Sobolev norm.

For real smooth functions of compact support in a planar domain $D$, use the Dirichlet inner productChanging the positive normalization factor does not change orthogonality. For complex functions, insert complex conjugation in the second factor to obtain the corresponding Hermitian form.

Let $f:D\to \tilde{D}$ be a conformal bijection, and let $\tilde{u},\tilde{v}$ be smooth functions of compact support on $\tilde{D}$. Its real Jacobian matrix is $Df=|f^{\prime }|R$, where $R$ is a rotation. By the chain rule,The change of variables formula has Jacobian determinant $|f^{\prime }{|}^2$, so this factor cancels:This proves conformal invariance of the planar Dirichlet inner product. By completion it is also an isometry between the corresponding Dirichlet energy spaces. It asserts invariance of the energy form, not of the inhomogeneous Sobolev norm, whose $L^2$ term has a different transformation rule.

Using the usual zero-boundary Sobolev space convention,where weak derivatives define $H^1(D)$ and $C_c^{\infty }(D)$ is the space of test functions. In the Gaussian free field convention, the same notation often denotes the Dirichlet energy space, the completion in the gradient norm alone. On bounded domains the Poincare inequality makes the two definitions equivalent; on unbounded domains one must distinguish them. The following gradient-pairing argument applies in either setting whenever the energy completion is realized as weak functions.

Identify $H_{\mathrm{supp}}=H_0^1(U)$ with a vector subspace of $H_0^1(D)$ by zero extension of H01. Approximating by test functions in $U$ shows that this is an isometric embedding in the inhomogeneous Sobolev norm and also in the Dirichlet inner product norm. In particular, arbitrary irregularity of $\partial U$ causes no additional boundary term.

DefineThese are weakly harmonic Sobolev functions. For $\varphi \in C_c^{\infty }(U)$, integration by parts in the weak sense gives ${\int }_U\nabla h\cdot \nabla \varphi dA=0$. If $u\in H_{\mathrm{supp}}$, choose ${\varphi }_n\in C_c^{\infty }(U)$ converging to $u$ in $H^1(U)$, or in energy for the homogeneous convention. The Cauchy-Schwarz inequality givesHence the orthogonality of supported and harmonic Dirichlet functions isBoth are linear vector subspaces. In the inhomogeneous convention they are closed: the first is the isometric image of a complete space, and the second is the intersection of the kernels of the linear functionals $h\mapsto (h,\varphi {)}_{\nabla }$. No spanning assertion is needed. The PDF contains this orthogonality statement; the TeX has badly corrupted it into an assertion about openness.

Choose an orthonormal basis $(e_n)$ of the Dirichlet energy space and independent variables $({\xi }_n)$ with the standard normal distribution. The zero-boundary Gaussian free field is the formal seriesIts precise energy-indexed interpretation is the isonormal Gaussian processFor every fixed $f$, this sum converges in $L^2$ of the probability space by Parseval identity, and it is a centered Gaussian random variable. For $f,g\in H_0^1(D)$,This covariance characterizes its law independently of the chosen basis. The series does not define an $H_0^1$-valued random element: ${\sum }_n{\xi }_n^2=\infty$ almost surely. It is realized as a random distribution, and its pairing with ordinary test functions is constructed in part (b).

The convention used for planar Gaussian free field theory is the Dirichlet energy space:It is a real Hilbert space with the extended Dirichlet inner product. A conformal map from the unit disc onto $D$ identifies the two energy completions, so local representatives can be understood through the disc's zero-boundary space.

For an arbitrary unbounded domain this is the homogeneous energy completion; it should be distinguished from completion in the inhomogeneous norm $\Vert f{\Vert }_{L^2}+\Vert \nabla f{\Vert }_{L^2}$ used in another standard definition of the zero-boundary Sobolev space. On bounded domains with a Poincare inequality, the two norms are equivalent.

The expression is a Test-function pairing with a Gaussian free field, rather than the pointwise integral of an ordinary random function. For a real test function $\varphi$, take the Dirichlet solutionusing the Green-kernel identity allowed in the original PDF. In particular, $-\Delta f_{\varphi }=2\pi \varphi$. Integration by parts gives, initially for smooth compactly supported $u$ and then by continuity in the Dirichlet energy space,The integral functional is continuous in the energy norm: pull back to the unit disc, where the transformed test function has compact support, and use the Poincare inequality. Hence $f_{\varphi }$ is its energy-space representer. DefineBy the isonormal Gaussian process definition, it has mean zero and varianceThe logarithmic singularity is locally integrable, so this variance is finite for smooth compactly supported test functions. ThusThe local TeX corrupted the double integral and the bracketed Green-kernel identity; the PDF supplies the identity above and does not assert an infinite variance.

For $1\le p<\infty$, an inhomogeneous Sobolev space norm is $\Vert u{\Vert }_{W^{k,p}(D)}=({\sum }_{|\alpha |\le k}\Vert D^{\alpha }u{\Vert }_{L^p(D)}^p{)}^{1/p}$, using weak derivatives. In particular, $\Vert u{\Vert }_{H^1(D)}^2={\int }_D(|u{|}^2+|\nabla u{|}^2)$. The gradient seminorm alone defines a different completion, the Dirichlet energy space, unless a suitable Poincare inequality makes the two norms equivalent on the chosen zero-boundary space.