Generalized localization for spherical partial sums of multiple Fourier series
Ravshan Ashurov

TL;DR
This paper proves the generalized localization principle for spherical partial sums of multiple Fourier series in the $L_2$ class, showing convergence to zero almost everywhere on sets where the function is zero, and clarifies the limits of this property in other $L_p$ spaces.
Contribution
It establishes the validity of generalized localization for $L_2$ functions and completes the characterization of this property across all $L_p$ spaces.
Findings
Generalized localization holds for $L_2$ functions.
Localization fails for $L_p$ with $p<2$.
The problem is fully solved for all $L_p$ spaces.
Abstract
In this paper the generalized localization principle for the spherical partial sums of the multiple Fourier series in the - class is proved, that is, if and on an open set , then it is shown that the spherical partial sums of this function converge to zero almost - everywhere on . It has been previously known that the generalized localization is not valid in when . Thus the problem of generalized localization for the spherical partial sums is completely solved in , : if then we have the generalized localization and if , then the generalized localization fails.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsAdvanced Harmonic Analysis Research Β· Mathematical Analysis and Transform Methods Β· Advanced Banach Space Theory
Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society
Ravshan Ashurov
National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek and Institute of Mathematics, Uzbekistan Academy of Science Institute of Mathematics, Uzbekistan Academy of Science, Tashkent, 81 Mirzo Ulugbek str. 100170 [email protected]
Generalized localization for spherical partial sums of multiple
Fourier series
Ravshan Ashurov
National University of Uzbekistan named after Mirzo Ulugbek and Institute of Mathematics, Uzbekistan Academy of Science Institute of Mathematics, Uzbekistan Academy of Science, Tashkent, 81 Mirzo Ulugbek str. 100170 [email protected]
Abstract.
In this paper the generalized localization principle for the spherical partial sums of the multiple Fourier series in the - class is proved, that is, if and on an open set , then it is shown that the spherical partial sums of this function converge to zero almost - everywhere on . It has been previously known that the generalized localization is not valid in when . Thus the problem of generalized localization for the spherical partial sums is completely solved in , : if then we have the generalized localization and if , then the generalized localization fails.
*AMS 2000 Mathematics Subject Classifications : Primary 42B05; Secondary 42B99.
Key words: Multiple Fourier series, spherical partial sums, convergence almost-everywhere, generalized localization.*
1. Introduction
Let , , be the Fourier coefficients of a function , . Consider the spherical partial sums of the multiple Fourier series:
[TABLE]
The aim of this paper is to investigate convergence almost-everywhere (a.e.) of these partial sums. One of the first questions which arise in the study of a.e. convergence of the sums (1.1) is the question of the validity of the Luzin conjecture: is it true that the spherical sums (1.1) of the Fourier series of an arbitrary function converge a.e. on ? In other words, does Carlesonβs theorem extend to -fold Fourier series when the latter is summed spherically? The answer to this question is open so far. What is known is only that Huntβs theorem (convergence a.e. for functions) does not extend to -fold () series summed by circles (see [1] and references therein). Historically progress with solving the Luzin conjecture has been made by considering easier problems. One of such easier problems is to investigate convergence a.e. of the spherical sums (1.1) on .
Ilβin [2] was the first to introduce the concept of generalized principle of localization for an arbitrary eigenfunction expansions. Following Ilβin we say that the generalized localization principle for holds in , if for any function the equality
[TABLE]
holds a.e. on .
Observe, unlike the classical Riemann localization principle, here it suffices the equality (1.2) to be hold only a.e. (not everywhere) on .
For the spherical partial integrals of multiple Fourier integrals (we denote by ) the generalized localization principle in has been investigated by many authors (see [3]-[9]). In particular, in the remarkable paper of A. Carbery and F. Soria [5] the validity of the generalized localization for has been proved in when . Note, that the method introduced by these authors can be easily applied to non-spherical partial integrals too [10].
If we turn back to the multiple Fourier series (1.1) and consider the classes when , then as A. Bastys [4] has proved, following Fefferman in making use of the Kakeyaβs problem, that the generalized localization for is not valid, i.e. there exists a function , such that on some set of positive measure, contained in we have
[TABLE]
It may be worth mentioning that in [4] this result is also proved for the spherical partial integrals .
The main result of this paper is the following statement.
Theorem 1.1**.**
Let and on an open set . Then the equality (1.2) holds a.e. on .
Thus the problem of generalized localization for is completely solved in classes , : if then we have the generalized localization and if , then the generalized localization fails.
In the study of a.e. convergence it is convenient to introduce the maximal operator
[TABLE]
The prove of Theorem 1.1 is based on the following estimate of this operator.
Theorem 1.2**.**
Let and on the ball . Then for any there exists a constant , such that
[TABLE]
The formulated theorems are easily transferred to the case of non-spherical partial sums of multiple Fourier series (see [10], [11]).
2. Auxiliary assertions
The proofs of Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 are based on several auxiliary assertions, which are given in this section. Here we have borrowed some original ideas from A. Carbery and F. Soria [5], where the authors have investigated the multiple Fourier integrals.
So we assume that on the fixed ball and fix a number .
Let be the characteristic function of the segment . We denote by a smooth function with and put . Now we define a new function as follows: , when and otherwise it is a - periodical on each variable function.
Let us denote
[TABLE]
Then by definition of the Fourier coefficients we may write
[TABLE]
If we define , then we have
[TABLE]
since is supported in . Therefore to prove the estimate (1.3) it suffices to obtain the inequality
[TABLE]
where is taken over all integers.
Now we need some estimates for the Fourier coefficients of the function , which we denote by .
Lemma 2.1**.**
For an arbitrary integer there exists a constant , depending on and , such that for all and one has
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let be the Fourier coefficients of the function . Then
[TABLE]
If then we have
[TABLE]
Similarly, if then making use of the equality (observe, is an infinitely differentiable and - periodical function) , we obtain
[TABLE]
Now it is sufficient to note that for any integer there exists a constant , depending on , such that
[TABLE]
and to estimate the last sum by comparing it with the corresponding integral. β
We will apply the estimate (2.2) further, so the corresponding constants will depend on and . In addition, as we have done above, in order to estimate number series we compare them with the corresponding integrals.
Let , that is,
[TABLE]
(if the Diophantine equation does not have a solution, then ). These numbers have a better estimate than in the following sense. Suppose , i.e. , or , then according to Lemma 2.1, has the same estimate. But, as we will see below, the numbers vanish in the same interval in some sense. In particular, the following statement is true.
Lemma 2.2**.**
For any , there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
Let ; otherwise estimates are similar. By virtue of estimate (2.2) we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Since , Lemma is proved. β
Corollary 2.3**.**
Uniformly on one has
[TABLE]
If we properly group the numbers by parameter , then a stronger result than Lemma 2.2 can be obtained. Our nearest aim is to implement this grouping.
Denote by (the nearest one to the origin) the intersection point of the ball with the straight line that passes through the origin and point . Let be the tangential hyperplane to the ball at the point . Let and , where . Let , , be the dimensional cylinders with the base and with the axis parallel to and the length . Consider the ring and divide it in to the following sets: , .
Let us define the sets , , as follows. Let be the set of those integers , , for which the Diophantine equation has a solution in . If does not contain any of solutions of equation , for any , then we assign to the set one of those parameters that are not included in the previous sets , . If there are no such left, then we define , as empty set.
In the proof of Lemma 2.7 we need to know how many at most parameters does the set contain. Observe, if we fix , then the Diophantine equation may have a solution only for one (note, in fact, here it suffices to consider the βprojectionβ of this equation onto the hyperplane passing through the point and parallel to ). The length of the projection of on the axis of is less than ; (without loss of generality, we can assume that the angle between and is less than or equal to ). Consequently, if, for a fixed , there is a solution of the Diophantine equation , provided , then the first coordinates of the numbers , take less than ( is the integer part of the number ) different values. When varies from [math] to , then each of these numbers can take at most two adjacent integer numbers. Hence each set has less than parameters with the above property .
With this choice of we have the following statement.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let and (). If , then
[TABLE]
If , then
[TABLE]
If , then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Note that it is sufficient to estimate the minimum distance from the origin to the set . If , then it is not hard to verify that the distance from the origin to the set is equal to . Obviously, this value is less or equal to the distance between the origin and . In case of arguments are similar.
If , then minimum distance from the origin to the set is less than or equal to . But we can estimate this number from below by . β
As we mentioned above for one has a more stronger result than Lemma 2.2.
Lemma 2.5**.**
For any , there exists a constant such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
From the definition of one has
[TABLE]
(and by virtue of estimates (2.2) and (2.4) (we assume that ; otherwise arguments are similar) we finally have)
[TABLE]
Now (2.5) follows from the estimate . β
Next statement is an easy consequence of this Lemma.
Corollary 2.6**.**
Uniformly on , one has
[TABLE]
Now we turn back to the Fourier coefficients . From Lemma 2.1 we have the following estimate.
Lemma 2.7**.**
Uniformly on , one has
[TABLE]
Proof.
As we mentioned above, each has less than parameter . Therefore, by virtue of Lemma 2.1 one has
[TABLE]
β
3. Proofs of Theorems
First, we prove the estimate (2.1). Let . Then . Note the Fourier coefficients of the function are the numbers , introduced above.
If for a sequence of numbers we have , then
[TABLE]
Hence
[TABLE]
or
[TABLE]
Integrating over and making use of the inequality one has
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
(making use of Corollaries 2.3 and 2.6 and Lemma 2.7 and since is - function)
[TABLE]
Thus, the estimate (2.1) and, consequently, Theorem 1.2 is proved.
Now we prove Theorem 1.1. So let and on an open set . We extend to outside of - periodically on each variable . In these conditions we must prove that the equality (1.2) holds a.e. on . If an arbitrary point, then to do this it suffices to show validity of (1.2) a.e. on a ball with center at and sufficiently small radius , so that this ball belongs to . Therefore without loss of generality we may suppose, that is supported outside of this ball or by translation invariance, is supported in , and prove convergence to zero of a.e. on the ball for any . But this statement can be proved by a standard technique based on Theorem 1.2 (see [12]). Thus Theorem 1.1 is also proved.
4. Acknowledgement
The author conveys thanks to Sh. A. Alimov for discussions of this result and gratefully acknowledges Marcelo M. Disconzi (Vanderbilt University, USA) for support and hospitality.
The author was supported by Foundation for Support of Basic Research of the Republic of Uzbekistan (project number is OT-F4-88).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Alimov, Sh.A., Ashurov, R.R., Pulatov, A.K.: Multiple Fourier Series and Fourier Integrals. Commutative Harmonic Analysis, vol. IV, pp. 1 97. Springer, Berlin (1992)
- 2[2] Ilβin, V.A.: On a generalized interpretation of the principle of localization for Fourier series with respect to fundamental systems of functions, Sib. Mat. Zh., 9 , 1093-1106 (1968)
- 3[3] Bastys, A.J.: The generalized localization principle for an N-fold Fourier integral, Dokl. Akd. Nauk SSSR, 278 , 777-778 (1984)
- 4[4] Bastys, A.J.: Generalized localization of Fourier series with respect to the eigenfunctions of the Laplace operator in the classes Lp, Litovskii Matematicheskii Sbornik, 31 , 387-405 (1991)
- 5[5] Carbery, A., Soria F.: Almost everywhere convergence of Fourier integrals for functions in Sobolev spaces, and an L 2 subscript πΏ 2 L_{2} -localization principle, Revista Mat. Iberoamericana 4 , 319- 337 (1988)
- 6[6] Carbery, A., Rubio de Francia, J. L., Vega, L.: Almost everywhere summability of Fourier integrals, J. London Math. Soc. 38 , 513-524 (1988)
- 7[7] Carbery, A., Romera, E., Soria, F.: Radial weights and mixed norm inequalities for the disc multiplier, J. Funct. Anal. 109 , 52-75 (1992)
- 8[8] Carbery, A. Soria, F.: Pointwise Fourier inversion and localization in R n superscript π π R^{n} , J. Fourier Anal. Appl., 3 , Special Issue, 847-858 (1997)
