Past exam of the mathematics course of the University of Cambridge / 2013 / iii / Paper 60 / 2

The Malgrange–Ehrenpreis theorem states that every nonzero constant-coefficient linear differential operator on Euclidean space has a distributional fundamental solution. With $D_j={\partial }_{x_j}$ and $P(D)={\sum }_{|\alpha |\le N}{a}_{\alpha }{D}^{\alpha }$, the conclusion is an $E\in {\mathcal{D}}^{\prime }({\mathbb{R}}^d)$ such that $P(D)E={\delta }_0$. If $N=0$, simply take $E=a_0^{-1}{\delta }_0$; hence assume $N\ge 1$.

We construct a Hörmander staircase in frequency space. The highest-degree homogeneous part $P_N$ is not identically zero on real vectors, since a polynomial vanishing on all real vectors has all coefficients zero. After an orthogonal transformation of coordinates, we can arrange that $P_N(e_1)\ne 0$. Thus, for each real ${\xi }^{\prime }\in {\mathbb{R}}^{d-1}$, the polynomialhas degree $N$ in $z$ and the same nonzero leading coefficient $b=i^N{P}_N(e_1)$, independent of ${\xi }^{\prime }$. This constant leading coefficient of a polynomial is what makes a uniform staircase possible.

For a fixed ${\xi }^{\prime }$, factor $p(z,{\xi }^{\prime })=b{\prod }_{\nu =1}^N(z-z_{\nu })$, counting repeated roots of a polynomial. Consider the $N+1$ heights $h_j=3j$, $j=0,\dots ,N$. A given root has imaginary part within distance less than one of at most one of these heights. By the pigeonhole principle, some height avoids every root, and thenThis is finite-height polynomial root avoidance. Root labels need not be chosen continuously or even measurably. Instead define the closed setsContinuity in $s$ extends the inequality from rational $q$ to every real $s$. These Borel sets partition ${\mathbb{R}}^{d-1}$. The Hörmander staircase assigns the horizontal contour $s+i{h}_j$ over $A_j$; its height is bounded by $3N$, and the denominator has the uniform lower bound $|b|$. For $d=1$, the transverse space is a single point and only one horizontal contour is needed.

Use the Fourier transform convention $\hat{\phi }(\zeta )=\int e^{-ix\cdot \zeta }\phi (x)dx$, with inverse factor $(2\pi {)}^{-d}$. Define the candidate fundamental solution of a linear differential operator byFor a test function supported in a fixed compact set $K$, Fourier decay in a bounded complex strip gives, for any integer $M$,Indeed, this is the real Fourier transform of $e^{-h_j{x}_1}\phi (x)$ with reversed frequency, and repeated integration by parts with $(1-\Delta {)}^M$ proves the estimate. Taking $2M>d$ and using the denominator bound proves absolute convergence and a continuity estimate on ${\mathcal{D}}_K$. Thus $E$ is a distribution; no unsupported interpretation of a divergent inverse Fourier transform is being used.

For its distributional derivatives, the formal transpose of a differential operator is $P(-D)$. Sinceapplying $P(D)$ cancels the denominator. For each fixed ${\xi }^{\prime }$, the numerator is an entire function of $z$. The Cauchy integral theorem, applied to a rectangle between the lines $\mathrm{Im}z=0$ and $\mathrm{Im}z=h_j$, givesThe two vertical edges tend to zero by the same bounded-strip decay. The resulting contour deformation is performed separately for each transverse frequency, so discontinuities of the staircase height introduce no additional boundary terms. Absolute convergence permits integration over the partition $A_j$. The Fourier inversion theorem then yieldsThis proves the Malgrange–Ehrenpreis theorem. Undoing the orthogonal change of coordinates gives the fundamental solution of a linear differential operator for the original operator; the Dirac delta distribution is unchanged by that change of coordinates.

For a one-dimensional operator $L=P(D)$ of degree $N\ge 1$, with leading coefficient $a_N$, we may choose the single staircase contour below every pole. Take $\gamma >\max \{\mathrm{Re}\lambda :P(\lambda )=0\}$ and integrate on $\mathrm{Im}\zeta =-\gamma$. The corresponding formula is the Bromwich contour version of the construction above, after putting $\lambda =i\zeta$. Its poles all lie above the frequency contour. For $x<0$, close that contour downwards; the exponential function $e^{ix\zeta }$ decays and there are no enclosed poles. For $x>0$, close upwards, where the exponential function again decays, and apply the residue theorem. The bound $1/P(i\zeta )=O(|\zeta {|}^{-N})$ justifies the large arcs, including $N=1$ by the Jordan lemma away from their endpoints. Thus away from $x=0$ the retarded fundamental solution is $H(x)u(x)$, whereThe sum is over distinct roots of a polynomial, with the residue including the whole multiplicity. For simple characteristic roots of a constant-coefficient differential equation, it reduces to $u(x)={\sum }_{\lambda }{e}^{\lambda x}/P^{\prime }(\lambda )$. Repeated roots give exponential polynomial solutions of a constant-coefficient differential equation through differentiation of $e^{zx}$.

To establish the equality also at the origin, rather than leave a possible point-supported term undecided, verify the distributional jump formula for a Heaviside product. The residue expression is an entire function of $x$, andIts initial derivatives areThese identities follow by integrating over a large circle: for $j\le N-2$ the integrand is $O(|z{|}^{-2})$, whereas for $j=N-1$ its coefficient of $z^{-1}$ is $a_N^{-1}$. The distributional jump formula for a Heaviside product therefore gives $L(Hu)={\delta }_0$. Moreover, since $e^{-\gamma x}Hu$ is a tempered distribution, its Fourier transform satisfiesThere are no real zeros of this polynomial, so its reciprocal is the transform. This is exactly the shifted-contour construction, proving equality there as a distribution as well. HenceThe sign of $a_N$ matters: for the operator in the preceding solution, $a_N=-1$ and the last initial derivative is $-1$.