Suppose I have a function $u\in L^{2}([0,T]\times\Omega)$ for some bounded domain $\Omega$ in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ or $\mathbb{R}^{3}$. I managed to prove that this implies $u\in L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$. Now I want to show that opposite is not true. This is where I struggle. According to Fubini's theorem, it is sufficient to give example of a function $u\in L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$ which violates condition $u\in L^{2}(\Omega; L^{2}(0,T))$. So could you please provide such function? Thanks to all!
Let me show you how I see space $L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$. The problem with it is that I couldn't find a single definition in any book whose rigorousness satisfied me. So, as far as I understand, $L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$ is a set of functions $\{f : [0,T]\times\Omega\to\overline{\mathbb{R}}|\text{for almost all } t\in[0,T] f(x,t)\in L^{2}(\Omega)|\int_{0}^{T}\int_{\Omega}f^{2}dxdt < +\infty\}$ and such that for any pair of functions $f, g$ from this set the function $\int_{\Omega}fgdx$ is measurable in time. The last condition is very crucial and is omitted everywhere like it's obvious or something. Note that condition that the integral is finite is well-defined, since $f^{2}$ is non-negative and to define Lebesgue integral for it you do not even have to make $f^{2}$ measurable. Also, integral $\int_{\Omega}fgdx$ is also well-defined for alsmot all $t$, since the integral of the absolute value is bounded via Holder's inequality and $f, g$ are assumed measurable since they are in $L^{2}$, so $\int_{\Omega}fgdx$ exists and is finite.
It troubles me that they keep using both $L^{2}([0,T]\times\Omega)$ and $L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$ in literature. If these spaces are indentical, why different notations? So I assumed that $L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$ is wider than $L^{2}([0,T]\times\Omega)$, which is why I ended up here at stackexchange.
My main concern is with PDEs. So, suppose I have some time-dependent second-order PDE in a form $Lu = f$. To make it simple, assume $u = 0$ on the boundary of $\Omega$ and $u(0) = 0$, $u_{t}(0) = 0$. You can think of $L$ as a wave operator. Now, if we multiply the equation by test function and integrate over entire $[0,T]\times\Omega$, we obtain some weak formulation. But we can instead integrate over $\Omega$ only and assume the integral relation holds for almost all $t$. Naturally, the test functions in both cases will be from different spaces, so are solutions we are looking for. One is, say, $L^{2}([0,T]\times\Omega)$, the other is $L^{2}(0,T; L^{2}(\Omega))$. So, the question is: if in both formulations we avoid all sorts of integrations by parts ( or do them similarly ), will we obtain the same existence-uniqueness results for $u$, as well as the same regularity results? I searched tons of literature, and looks like the only formulation people are interested in is the one with entire integration over $[0,T]\times\Omega$. But they keep using the second one when obtaining some a priori estimates in the papers devoted to Finite Element approximations. Which really pisses me off, since they don't bother proving existence and uniqueness for the second formulation.