Let u be a partial operator on L2(U). If D−⊂u⊂D+, then u is closable and (tD)−⊂u∗⊂(tD)+.
Let φ and ψ belong to D(U). Then one has
⟨φ∣D(ψ)⟩=∣α∣⩽∑∫kUnαφ∂αψdμ
=∣α∣⩽k∑(−1)∣α∣⟨∂α(nαφ)∣ψ⟩=⟨tD(φ)∣ψ⟩
(cf. VAR, R2, 14.3.8). Since D(U) is dense in L2(U) (prop. 4 of IV, p. 202), this implies that φ∈ dom(u∗) and u∗(φ)=tD(φ). Hence one has (tD)−⊂u∗; in particular, u∗ has dense domain and u is closable (prop. 8 of IV, p. 237).
Let f∈ dom(u∗) and φ∈D(U). Since D(U)⊂ dom(u), the distribution associated with u∗(f) satisfies
⟨u∗(f),φ⟩=⟨φ∣u∗(f)⟩=⟨u(φ)∣f⟩
Since D−⊂u, u(φ) is calculated by formula (5), whence
⟨u∗(f),φ⟩=α∑⟨nα∂αφ∣f⟩=α∑⟨∂αφ∣nαf⟩
=α∑⟨nαf,∂αφ⟩=α∑(−1)∣α∣⟨∂α(nαf),φ⟩=⟨tD(f),φ⟩
The distributions u∗(f) and tD(f) are therefore equal; the distribution f therefore belongs to HtD and u∗(f)=tD(f), whence u∗⊂(tD)+.
Bourbaki sets the proof directly after the statement, and the corpus does not separate them, so what is above is the statement and its proof together.
Nothing.
Nothing.