Is there a version of the rearrangement inequality for nonnegative functions on [0,1]?











up vote
2
down vote

favorite












First, let us recall the sequence version of the rearrangement inequality.



Rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences: Let $Ninmathbb{N}$ with $x_1leq x_2leqcdotsleq x_N$ and $y_1leq y_2leqcdotsleq y_N$ nondecreasing sequences of nonnegative real numbers. If $sigma$ is a permutation of ${1,2,cdots,N}$ then we have
$$sum_{i=1}^Nx_{N+1-i}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_{sigma(i)}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_iy_i.$$



(Actually, this is valid for finite real-valued sequences, not just nonnegative ones. But I wish to restrict my attention to the nonnegative case for now.)



A rearrangement inequality for measurable nonnegative functions on $[0,1]$ may be conjectured as follows. If $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is measurable then we define its distribution function $mu_f:[0,infty]to[0,infty]$ by the rule
$$mu_f(t)=muleft{xin[0,1]:|f(x)|>tright}$$
where $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue measure. Two functions are called equimeasurable of they have the same distribution function. It is known, in particular, that $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is equimeasurable with its nonincreasing rearrangement $f^*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by
$$f^*(x)=infleft{t:mu_f(t)leq xright}.$$
Hence, it is also equimeasurable with what we might call its nondecreasing rearrangement $f_*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by the rule
$$f_*(x)=f^*(1-x).$$



Observe that the rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences is equivalent to the following: If $f:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ and $g:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ are measurable functions, then
$$sum_{i=1}^Nf_*(i)g^*(i)leq sum_{i=1}^Nf(i)g^*(i)leqsum_{i=1}^Nf^*(i)g^*(i),$$
where the definitions above are extended in the obvious way to measurable functions $f,g:{1,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$. I conjecture the following.



Conjecture. Let $f,g:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ be nonnegative measurable functions. Then
$$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dxleqint_0^1f^*(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



The last inequality is just Hardy-Littlewood. But I am curious if it is known whether the first inequality holds, i.e. whether
$$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



Thanks!










share|cite|improve this question


























    up vote
    2
    down vote

    favorite












    First, let us recall the sequence version of the rearrangement inequality.



    Rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences: Let $Ninmathbb{N}$ with $x_1leq x_2leqcdotsleq x_N$ and $y_1leq y_2leqcdotsleq y_N$ nondecreasing sequences of nonnegative real numbers. If $sigma$ is a permutation of ${1,2,cdots,N}$ then we have
    $$sum_{i=1}^Nx_{N+1-i}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_{sigma(i)}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_iy_i.$$



    (Actually, this is valid for finite real-valued sequences, not just nonnegative ones. But I wish to restrict my attention to the nonnegative case for now.)



    A rearrangement inequality for measurable nonnegative functions on $[0,1]$ may be conjectured as follows. If $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is measurable then we define its distribution function $mu_f:[0,infty]to[0,infty]$ by the rule
    $$mu_f(t)=muleft{xin[0,1]:|f(x)|>tright}$$
    where $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue measure. Two functions are called equimeasurable of they have the same distribution function. It is known, in particular, that $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is equimeasurable with its nonincreasing rearrangement $f^*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by
    $$f^*(x)=infleft{t:mu_f(t)leq xright}.$$
    Hence, it is also equimeasurable with what we might call its nondecreasing rearrangement $f_*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by the rule
    $$f_*(x)=f^*(1-x).$$



    Observe that the rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences is equivalent to the following: If $f:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ and $g:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ are measurable functions, then
    $$sum_{i=1}^Nf_*(i)g^*(i)leq sum_{i=1}^Nf(i)g^*(i)leqsum_{i=1}^Nf^*(i)g^*(i),$$
    where the definitions above are extended in the obvious way to measurable functions $f,g:{1,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$. I conjecture the following.



    Conjecture. Let $f,g:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ be nonnegative measurable functions. Then
    $$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dxleqint_0^1f^*(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



    The last inequality is just Hardy-Littlewood. But I am curious if it is known whether the first inequality holds, i.e. whether
    $$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



    Thanks!










    share|cite|improve this question
























      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite









      up vote
      2
      down vote

      favorite











      First, let us recall the sequence version of the rearrangement inequality.



      Rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences: Let $Ninmathbb{N}$ with $x_1leq x_2leqcdotsleq x_N$ and $y_1leq y_2leqcdotsleq y_N$ nondecreasing sequences of nonnegative real numbers. If $sigma$ is a permutation of ${1,2,cdots,N}$ then we have
      $$sum_{i=1}^Nx_{N+1-i}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_{sigma(i)}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_iy_i.$$



      (Actually, this is valid for finite real-valued sequences, not just nonnegative ones. But I wish to restrict my attention to the nonnegative case for now.)



      A rearrangement inequality for measurable nonnegative functions on $[0,1]$ may be conjectured as follows. If $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is measurable then we define its distribution function $mu_f:[0,infty]to[0,infty]$ by the rule
      $$mu_f(t)=muleft{xin[0,1]:|f(x)|>tright}$$
      where $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue measure. Two functions are called equimeasurable of they have the same distribution function. It is known, in particular, that $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is equimeasurable with its nonincreasing rearrangement $f^*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by
      $$f^*(x)=infleft{t:mu_f(t)leq xright}.$$
      Hence, it is also equimeasurable with what we might call its nondecreasing rearrangement $f_*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by the rule
      $$f_*(x)=f^*(1-x).$$



      Observe that the rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences is equivalent to the following: If $f:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ and $g:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ are measurable functions, then
      $$sum_{i=1}^Nf_*(i)g^*(i)leq sum_{i=1}^Nf(i)g^*(i)leqsum_{i=1}^Nf^*(i)g^*(i),$$
      where the definitions above are extended in the obvious way to measurable functions $f,g:{1,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$. I conjecture the following.



      Conjecture. Let $f,g:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ be nonnegative measurable functions. Then
      $$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dxleqint_0^1f^*(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



      The last inequality is just Hardy-Littlewood. But I am curious if it is known whether the first inequality holds, i.e. whether
      $$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



      Thanks!










      share|cite|improve this question













      First, let us recall the sequence version of the rearrangement inequality.



      Rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences: Let $Ninmathbb{N}$ with $x_1leq x_2leqcdotsleq x_N$ and $y_1leq y_2leqcdotsleq y_N$ nondecreasing sequences of nonnegative real numbers. If $sigma$ is a permutation of ${1,2,cdots,N}$ then we have
      $$sum_{i=1}^Nx_{N+1-i}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_{sigma(i)}y_ileqsum_{i=1}^Nx_iy_i.$$



      (Actually, this is valid for finite real-valued sequences, not just nonnegative ones. But I wish to restrict my attention to the nonnegative case for now.)



      A rearrangement inequality for measurable nonnegative functions on $[0,1]$ may be conjectured as follows. If $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is measurable then we define its distribution function $mu_f:[0,infty]to[0,infty]$ by the rule
      $$mu_f(t)=muleft{xin[0,1]:|f(x)|>tright}$$
      where $mu$ is the standard Lebesgue measure. Two functions are called equimeasurable of they have the same distribution function. It is known, in particular, that $f:[0,1]to[-infty,infty]$ is equimeasurable with its nonincreasing rearrangement $f^*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by
      $$f^*(x)=infleft{t:mu_f(t)leq xright}.$$
      Hence, it is also equimeasurable with what we might call its nondecreasing rearrangement $f_*:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ defined by the rule
      $$f_*(x)=f^*(1-x).$$



      Observe that the rearrangement inequality for nonnegative finite sequences is equivalent to the following: If $f:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ and $g:{1,2,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$ are measurable functions, then
      $$sum_{i=1}^Nf_*(i)g^*(i)leq sum_{i=1}^Nf(i)g^*(i)leqsum_{i=1}^Nf^*(i)g^*(i),$$
      where the definitions above are extended in the obvious way to measurable functions $f,g:{1,cdots,N}to[0,infty]$. I conjecture the following.



      Conjecture. Let $f,g:[0,1]to[0,infty]$ be nonnegative measurable functions. Then
      $$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dxleqint_0^1f^*(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



      The last inequality is just Hardy-Littlewood. But I am curious if it is known whether the first inequality holds, i.e. whether
      $$int_0^1f_*(x)g^*(x);dxleq int_0^1f(x)g^*(x);dx.$$



      Thanks!







      real-analysis measure-theory






      share|cite|improve this question













      share|cite|improve this question











      share|cite|improve this question




      share|cite|improve this question










      asked Nov 21 at 4:53









      Ben W

      1,148510




      1,148510



























          active

          oldest

          votes











          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',
          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%2f3007277%2fis-there-a-version-of-the-rearrangement-inequality-for-nonnegative-functions-on%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown






























          active

          oldest

          votes













          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes
















           

          draft saved


          draft discarded



















































           


          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3007277%2fis-there-a-version-of-the-rearrangement-inequality-for-nonnegative-functions-on%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

          Wiesbaden

          Marschland

          Dieringhausen