Abstract:We study a question of density of Lipschitz mappings in the Sobolev class of mappings from a closed manifold into a singular space. The main result of the paper shows that if we change the metric in the target space to a bi-Lipschitz equivalent one, than the property of the density of Lipschitz mappings may be lost.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?
The main problem that this paper attempts to solve is to explore whether the density of Lipschitz mappings in Sobolev spaces is a bi - Lipschitz invariant of the target space. Specifically, the author studies whether the density of Lipschitz mappings in Sobolev - class mappings will be lost when the metric of the target space is changed to a bi - Lipschitz equivalent metric.
### Background and Motivation of the Main Problem
Sobolev spaces play an important role in the study of nonlinear partial differential equations and the calculus of variations. For Sobolev mappings \(W^{1,p}(M, N)\) between manifolds, where \(M\) and \(N\) are closed manifolds, an important question is: Are smooth mappings dense in the class of Sobolev mappings? This question was raised by Eells and Lemaire and has been partially answered by Schoen, Uhlenbeck, and others. However, in more general cases, especially when generalizing Sobolev mappings to metric - space - valued mappings, this problem becomes more complicated.
### Main Results of the Paper
The main result of the paper shows that the density of Lipschitz mappings in Sobolev spaces is not a bi - Lipschitz invariant of the target space. Specifically:
- **Theorem 1.7**: There exist two bi - Lipschitz homeomorphic compact subsets \(X\) and \(Y\) such that for any \(n\)-dimensional closed manifold \(M\), Lipschitz mappings \(\text{Lip}(M, X)\) are dense in \(W^{1,n}(M, X)\), but \(\text{Lip}(M, Y)\) are not dense in \(W^{1,n}(M, Y)\).
- Other main results include Theorems 1.2, 1.3, 1.6, and 1.8, which further illustrate the changes in the density of Lipschitz mappings under different metrics through specific constructions and counterexamples.
### Conclusion
The results of the paper reveal an important phenomenon: Even if two metric spaces are bi - Lipschitz equivalent, the density of Lipschitz mappings in Sobolev spaces may change due to the change of the metric. This provides a new perspective for understanding the behavior of Sobolev mapping theory in metric spaces and points out the areas that require special attention when dealing with such problems.
### Formula Summary
The formulas involved in the paper mainly include:
- Definition of Sobolev spaces:
\[
W^{1,p}(M, N)=\{u \in W^{1,p}(M, \mathbb{R}^{\nu}): u(x) \in N \text{ a.e.}\}
\]
- Hardy - Littlewood maximal function:
\[
M|\nabla u|(x)=\sup_{r > 0} \frac{1}{|B(x, r)|} \int_{B(x, r)}|\nabla u(z)| \, dz
\]
- Poincaré inequality:
\[
\int_B|u - u_B| \leq C r \int_B|\nabla u|
\]
\[
|u(x)-u_B| \leq C r M|\nabla u|(x)
\]
These formulas play a crucial role in proving the density of Lipschitz mappings and constructing counterexamples.