1048 CHAPTER 29. THE AREA FORMULA

showing that for each y ∈ S, B(y,ε)∩ ((1− t)hm + thk)(∂Ω) = /0. By Lemma 23.1.11, forall y ∈ S, ∫

φ ε (hm (x)−y)det(Dhm (x))dx =∫Ω

φ ε (hk (x)−y)det(Dhk (x))dx (29.11.66)

for all k,m ≥M. By this lemma again, which says that for small enough ε the integral isconstant and the definition of the degree in Definition 23.1.10,

d (y,Ω,hm) =∫

φ ε (hm (x)−y)det(Dhm (x))dx (29.11.67)

for all ε small enough. For x ∈ ∂Ω, y ∈ S, and t ∈ [0,1],

|(1− t)h(x)+hm (x) t−y| ≥ |h(x)−y|− t |h(x)−hm (x)|> 3ε0− t2ε0 > 0

and so by Theorem 23.2.2, the part about homotopy, for each y ∈ S,

d (y,Ω,h) = d (y,Ω,hm) =∫Ω

φ ε (hm (x)−y)det(Dhm (x))dx

whenever ε is small enough. Fix such an ε < ε0 and use 29.11.66 to conclude the right sideof the above equation is independent of m > M.

By 29.11.64, there exists a subsequence still denoted by m such that Dhm (x)→Dh(x)a.e. Since p > n, det(Dhm) is bounded in Lr (Ω) for some r > 1 and so the integrands inthe following are uniformly integrable. By the Vitali convergence theorem, one can pass tothe limit as follows.

d (y,Ω,h) = limm→∞

∫Ω

φ ε (hm (x)−y)det(Dhm (x))dx

=∫

φ ε (h(x)−y)det(Dh(x))dx.

This proves the proposition.Next is an interesting change of variables theorem. Let Ω be a bounded open set with

the property that ∂Ω has measure zero and let h be Lipschitz continuous on Rn. Then fromLemma 29.1.1, h(∂Ω) also has measure zero.

Now suppose f ∈Cc

(h(∂Ω)C

). There are finitely many components of h(∂Ω)C which

have nonempty intersection with spt( f ). From the Proposition above,∫f (y)d (y,Ω,h)dy =

∫f (y) lim

ε→0

∫Ω

φ ε (h(x)−y)detDh(x)dxdy

Actually, there exists an ε small enough that for all y ∈ spt( f ) ,

limε→0

∫Ω

φ ε (h(x)−y)detDh(x)dx =∫

φ ε (h(x)−y)detDh(x)dx

= d (y,Ω,h)

1048 CHAPTER 29. THE AREA FORMULAshowing that for each y € S, B(y,€)((1 —t) hy, + thy) (9Q) = 0. By Lemma 23.1.11, forally €S,[Ge lm (x) ~y) det (Dy, (x) dx =[ ¢ (ny (x) — y) det (Dhhy (x)) dx (29.11.66)for all k,m > M. By this lemma again, which says that for small enough € the integral isconstant and the definition of the degree in Definition 23.1.10,d(y,Q,h,,) =f, ¢ (Mm (x) —y) det (Dyn (x)) dx (29.11.67)for all € small enough. For x € JQ, y € S, and t € [0, 1],(1-1) h(x) +n (x)t—y| 2 |h(x) —y| —2 h(x) — hin (x)|> 3&9 —1t2& >0and so by Theorem 23.2.2, the part about homotopy, for each y € S,d(y,Q,h) =d(y,Q,h,,) =[Gln ( — y) det (Dh, (x)) dxwhenever € is small enough. Fix such an € < €o and use 29.11.66 to conclude the right sideof the above equation is independent of m > M.By 29.11.64, there exists a subsequence still denoted by m such that Dh,, (x) + Dh (x)a.e. Since p > n, det(Dh,,) is bounded in L” (Q) for some r > 1 and so the integrands inthe following are uniformly integrable. By the Vitali convergence theorem, one can pass tothe limit as follows.d(y.Q,h) = lim A 0 ¢ (Bn (X) —y) det (Dn (x)) dx- J gecn( y) det (Dh (x)) dx.This proves the proposition.Next is an interesting change of variables theorem. Let Q be a bounded open set withthe property that QQ has measure zero and let h be Lipschitz continuous on R”. Then fromLemma 29.1.1, h (9Q) also has measure zero.Now suppose f € C, (h (9)°) . There are finitely many components of h (9Q)° whichhave nonempty intersection with spt (f). From the Proposition above,[f0)d(y.2.h)ay= | F() im [96 (n(x) —y) detDh (x) dndyActually, there exists an € small enough that for all y € spt(f),tim | (h(x) —y) detDh (x) dx -f[ bo( y) det Dh (x) dx= Soy