Upload
others
View
0
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
“A tribute to Eric Sawyer”
Carlos Perez
Universidad de Sevilla
Conference in honor of Eric Sawyer
Fields Institute, Toronto
July, 2011
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
Advisor: Kohur N. Gowrisankaran
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
Advisor: Kohur N. Gowrisankaran
Posdoctoral position at the University of Wisconsin, Madison
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
Advisor: Kohur N. Gowrisankaran
Posdoctoral position at the University of Wisconsin, Madison
McMaster University, 1980
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
Advisor: Kohur N. Gowrisankaran
Posdoctoral position at the University of Wisconsin, Madison
McMaster University, 1980
McKay Professor since 2000
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
Advisor: Kohur N. Gowrisankaran
Posdoctoral position at the University of Wisconsin, Madison
McMaster University, 1980
McKay Professor since 2000
Two PhD students: Scott Rodney and Lu Qi Wang
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
cv
B.Sc. McGill University, Mathematics 1973
Ph.D. McGill University, Mathematics 1977
Title of his thesis:
“Inner Functions on Polydiscs”
Advisor: Kohur N. Gowrisankaran
Posdoctoral position at the University of Wisconsin, Madison
McMaster University, 1980
McKay Professor since 2000
Two PhD students: Scott Rodney and Lu Qi Wang
Many posdoctoral researchers: Steve Hofman, Cristian Rios, Alex Iose-vich, Yong Sheng Han, Serban Costea.
1
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, Albert
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, Sagun
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, Serban
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, Jozsef
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong Sheng
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, Ronald
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco Javier
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
Rochberg, Richard
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
Rochberg, RichardSeeger, Andreas
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
Rochberg, RichardSeeger, Andreas
Uriarte-Tuero, Ignacio
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
Rochberg, RichardSeeger, Andreas
Uriarte-Tuero, IgnacioWheeden, Richard L.
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
Rochberg, RichardSeeger, Andreas
Uriarte-Tuero, IgnacioWheeden, Richard L.
Wick, Brett D.
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Co-authors
Andersen, Kenneth F.Arcozzi, Nicola
Baernstein, AlbertChanillo, SagunChen, Wengu
Costea, SerbanCsima, JozsefGuan, Pengfei
Han, Yong ShengIosevich, Alexander
Kerman, RonaldLacey, Michael T.
Martin-Reyes, Francisco JavierRios, Cristian
Rochberg, RichardSeeger, Andreas
Uriarte-Tuero, IgnacioWheeden, Richard L.
Wick, Brett D.Zhao, Shi Ying
2
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
More informationNumber of publications: 70
Areas of research:
3
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
More informationNumber of publications: 70
Areas of research:
Convex and discrete geometryFourier analysisFunctional analysisFunctions of a complex variableMeasure and integrationNumber theoryOperator theoryPartial differential equationsPotential theoryReal functionsSeveral complex variablesAnalytic spaces
3
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators and the theory of weightsFefferman-Phong problem
4
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators and the theory of weightsFefferman-Phong problem
Let
−∆− V
be a Schrodinger operator with potential V .
4
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators and the theory of weightsFefferman-Phong problem
Let
−∆− V
be a Schrodinger operator with potential V .
Consider the first eigenvalue defined by its quadratic, called the Rayleigh quo-tient
λ1 = infg∈C∞o
〈Hg, g〉〈g, g〉
4
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators and the theory of weightsFefferman-Phong problem
Let
−∆− V
be a Schrodinger operator with potential V .
Consider the first eigenvalue defined by its quadratic, called the Rayleigh quo-tient
λ1 = infg∈C∞o
〈Hg, g〉〈g, g〉
By a formula due to of R. Kerman and E. Sawyer
4
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators and the theory of weightsFefferman-Phong problem
Let
−∆− V
be a Schrodinger operator with potential V .
Consider the first eigenvalue defined by its quadratic, called the Rayleigh quo-tient
λ1 = infg∈C∞o
〈Hg, g〉〈g, g〉
By a formula due to of R. Kerman and E. Sawyer
−λ1 = infλ ≥ 0 : Cλ(V ) ≤ 1,
where Cλ(V ) is the smallest constant satisfying
4
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators and the theory of weightsFefferman-Phong problem
Let
−∆− V
be a Schrodinger operator with potential V .
Consider the first eigenvalue defined by its quadratic, called the Rayleigh quo-tient
λ1 = infg∈C∞o
〈Hg, g〉〈g, g〉
By a formula due to of R. Kerman and E. Sawyer
−λ1 = infλ ≥ 0 : Cλ(V ) ≤ 1,
where Cλ(V ) is the smallest constant satisfying
∫Rng(y)2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn
(∇g(y)2 + λ2g(y)2
)dy
4
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
where Jα,λ, α, λ > 0 is the Bessel potential defined by
Jα,λf = Kα,λ ? f.
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
where Jα,λ, α, λ > 0 is the Bessel potential defined by
Jα,λf = Kα,λ ? f.
This is a what is called a trace inequality.
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
where Jα,λ, α, λ > 0 is the Bessel potential defined by
Jα,λf = Kα,λ ? f.
This is a what is called a trace inequality.
In other words Cλ(V ) = ‖J1,λ‖L2→L2(V )
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
where Jα,λ, α, λ > 0 is the Bessel potential defined by
Jα,λf = Kα,λ ? f.
This is a what is called a trace inequality.
In other words Cλ(V ) = ‖J1,λ‖L2→L2(V )
The case λ = 0 is specially interesting and we have
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
where Jα,λ, α, λ > 0 is the Bessel potential defined by
Jα,λf = Kα,λ ? f.
This is a what is called a trace inequality.
In other words Cλ(V ) = ‖J1,λ‖L2→L2(V )
The case λ = 0 is specially interesting and we have
C0(V ) = ‖I1‖L2→L2(V )
where now Iα , 0 < α < n , is the Riesz potential operator defined by
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality IBy taking the Fourier transform, is easy to see that this is equivalent to,∫
Rn|J1,λf |2 V (y)dy ≤ Cλ(V )2
∫Rn|g(y)|2 dy λ > 0
where Jα,λ, α, λ > 0 is the Bessel potential defined by
Jα,λf = Kα,λ ? f.
This is a what is called a trace inequality.
In other words Cλ(V ) = ‖J1,λ‖L2→L2(V )
The case λ = 0 is specially interesting and we have
C0(V ) = ‖I1‖L2→L2(V )
where now Iα , 0 < α < n , is the Riesz potential operator defined by
Iαf(x) =∫Rn
f(y)
|x− y|n−αdy.
5
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality II
Then, is interesting to find conditions on the positive measure dµ such that
6
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality II
Then, is interesting to find conditions on the positive measure dµ such that
∫RnTΦf(x)p dµ(x) ≤ c
∫Rnf(x)p dx
6
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality II
Then, is interesting to find conditions on the positive measure dµ such that
∫RnTΦf(x)p dµ(x) ≤ c
∫Rnf(x)p dx
Kerman and Sawyer related these operators with their dual ones, namely
6
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality II
Then, is interesting to find conditions on the positive measure dµ such that
∫RnTΦf(x)p dµ(x) ≤ c
∫Rnf(x)p dx
Kerman and Sawyer related these operators with their dual ones, namely
TµΦ(f)(x) =
∫Rn
Φ(x− y)f(y) dµ(y)
6
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality II
Then, is interesting to find conditions on the positive measure dµ such that
∫RnTΦf(x)p dµ(x) ≤ c
∫Rnf(x)p dx
Kerman and Sawyer related these operators with their dual ones, namely
TµΦ(f)(x) =
∫Rn
Φ(x− y)f(y) dµ(y)
and its associated maximal type fractional operators
6
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The trace inequality II
Then, is interesting to find conditions on the positive measure dµ such that
∫RnTΦf(x)p dµ(x) ≤ c
∫Rnf(x)p dx
Kerman and Sawyer related these operators with their dual ones, namely
TµΦ(f)(x) =
∫Rn
Φ(x− y)f(y) dµ(y)
and its associated maximal type fractional operators
MµΦ
(f)(x) = supx∈Q
Φ(`(Q))
|Q|
∫Qf(y) dµ(y).
6
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Kerman-Sawyer’s theorem for the trace inequality
Φ is a decreasing function and µ a positive measure on Rn.
7
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Kerman-Sawyer’s theorem for the trace inequality
Φ is a decreasing function and µ a positive measure on Rn.
theoremT.F.A.E.:i) The trace inequality holds:(∫
RnTΦf(x)p dµ(x)
)1/p≤ c
(∫Rnf(x)p dx
)1/pf ≥ 0
ii) (∫RnTµΦ(χQ)(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ c µ(Q)1/p′ Q ∈ D
iii) (∫QMµΦ
(χQ)(x)p′dx
)1/p′
≤ c µ(Q)1/p′ Q ∈ D
7
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
Control by the maximal function:
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
Control by the maximal function:
∥∥∥TµΦ(f)∥∥∥Lp′ ≈
∥∥∥MµΦ
(f)∥∥∥Lp′
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
Control by the maximal function:
∥∥∥TµΦ(f)∥∥∥Lp′ ≈
∥∥∥MµΦ
(f)∥∥∥Lp′
Proof by good-λ as in the work of Muckenhoupt-Wheeden
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
Control by the maximal function:
∥∥∥TµΦ(f)∥∥∥Lp′ ≈
∥∥∥MµΦ
(f)∥∥∥Lp′
Proof by good-λ as in the work of Muckenhoupt-Wheeden
Replace cubes by dyadic cubes:
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
Control by the maximal function:
∥∥∥TµΦ(f)∥∥∥Lp′ ≈
∥∥∥MµΦ
(f)∥∥∥Lp′
Proof by good-λ as in the work of Muckenhoupt-Wheeden
Replace cubes by dyadic cubes:
≈∥∥∥Mµ,d
Φ(f)
∥∥∥Lp′
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments about of the proofUse of duality:
(∫RnTµΦf(x)p
′dx
)1/p′
≤ Cµ(∫
Rnf(x)p
′dµ(x)
)1/p′
f ≥ 0
Control by the maximal function:
∥∥∥TµΦ(f)∥∥∥Lp′ ≈
∥∥∥MµΦ
(f)∥∥∥Lp′
Proof by good-λ as in the work of Muckenhoupt-Wheeden
Replace cubes by dyadic cubes:
≈∥∥∥Mµ,d
Φ(f)
∥∥∥Lp′
Finally step: prove a testing type condition “a la Sawyer”
8
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Solution to the Fefferman-Phong problem
After proving
9
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Solution to the Fefferman-Phong problem
After provingCλ(V ) ≈ sup
Q
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx
9
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Solution to the Fefferman-Phong problem
After provingCλ(V ) ≈ sup
Q
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx
they proved,
9
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Solution to the Fefferman-Phong problem
After provingCλ(V ) ≈ sup
Q
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx
they proved,
Theorem (Kerman-Sawyer)There are dimensional constans c, C such that such that the least eigenvalueλ1 of satisfies
Esmall ≤ −λ1 ≤ Elargewhere
Esmall = supQ
|Q|−2/n :
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≥ C
and
Elarge = supQ
|Q|−2/n :
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≥ c
9
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The power bump condition
In the work of of Fefferman and Phong the functionals
supQ
`(Q)2(
1
|Q|
∫Qvr dx
)1/r
was first considered instead of
10
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The power bump condition
In the work of of Fefferman and Phong the functionals
supQ
`(Q)2(
1
|Q|
∫Qvr dx
)1/r
was first considered instead of
supQ
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≈ Cλ(V )
10
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The power bump condition
In the work of of Fefferman and Phong the functionals
supQ
`(Q)2(
1
|Q|
∫Qvr dx
)1/r
was first considered instead of
supQ
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≈ Cλ(V )
Related work by Chang-Wilson-Wolff
10
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The power bump condition
In the work of of Fefferman and Phong the functionals
supQ
`(Q)2(
1
|Q|
∫Qvr dx
)1/r
was first considered instead of
supQ
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≈ Cλ(V )
Related work by Chang-Wilson-WolffReferences:
10
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The power bump condition
In the work of of Fefferman and Phong the functionals
supQ
`(Q)2(
1
|Q|
∫Qvr dx
)1/r
was first considered instead of
supQ
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≈ Cλ(V )
Related work by Chang-Wilson-WolffReferences:R. Kerman and E. Sawyer:”Weighted norm inequalities for potentials with applications to Schrodingeroperators, Fourier transforms and Carleson measures”, Bulletin of theA.M.S (1985)
10
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The power bump condition
In the work of of Fefferman and Phong the functionals
supQ
`(Q)2(
1
|Q|
∫Qvr dx
)1/r
was first considered instead of
supQ
1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx ≈ Cλ(V )
Related work by Chang-Wilson-WolffReferences:R. Kerman and E. Sawyer:”Weighted norm inequalities for potentials with applications to Schrodingeroperators, Fourier transforms and Carleson measures”, Bulletin of theA.M.S (1985)
”The trace inequality and eigenvalue estimates for Schrodinger opera-tors”, Annales de l’Institut Fourier, 36 (1986).
10
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators with change of sign
Schrodinger operators: H = −∆− V +W , V,W ≥ 0
11
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators with change of sign
Schrodinger operators: H = −∆− V +W , V,W ≥ 0
where C is the smallest constant satisfying∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
11
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators with change of sign
Schrodinger operators: H = −∆− V +W , V,W ≥ 0
where C is the smallest constant satisfying∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
In this connection, Eric considered the following functional:
11
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators with change of sign
Schrodinger operators: H = −∆− V +W , V,W ≥ 0
where C is the smallest constant satisfying∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
In this connection, Eric considered the following functional:
E(Q, v,w) = minZ(Q, v),v(Q)
w(Q)
where
11
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Schrodinger operators with change of sign
Schrodinger operators: H = −∆− V +W , V,W ≥ 0
where C is the smallest constant satisfying∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
In this connection, Eric considered the following functional:
E(Q, v,w) = minZ(Q, v),v(Q)
w(Q)
where
Z(Q, v) =1
v(Q)
∫QI2(vχQ) vdx
11
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The main result
Theorem (Sawyer)If
supQ
E(Q, v,w) <∞
and v and w satisfy some extra condition then
∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
12
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The main result
Theorem (Sawyer)If
supQ
E(Q, v,w) <∞
and v and w satisfy some extra condition then
∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
The proof is really complicated!!!
12
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The main result
Theorem (Sawyer)If
supQ
E(Q, v,w) <∞
and v and w satisfy some extra condition then
∫Rn|f(y)|2 v(y)dy ≤ C
∫Rn
(|∇f(y)|2 + (w + λ)|f(y)|2
)dy
The proof is really complicated!!!
Eric Sawyer: A weighted inequality and eigenvalue estimates for Schrodingeroperators”, Indiana Journal of Mathematics, 35, (1986)
12
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The model example: Muckenhoupt Ap class of weights
The Hardy–Littlewood maximal function:
Mf(x) = supx∈Q
1
|Q|
∫Q|f(y)| dy.
13
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The model example: Muckenhoupt Ap class of weights
The Hardy–Littlewood maximal function:
Mf(x) = supx∈Q
1
|Q|
∫Q|f(y)| dy.
TheoremLet 1 < p <∞, then
M : Lp(w) −→ Lp(w)
if and only if w satisfies the Ap condition:
supQ
(1
|Q|
∫Qw dx
)(1
|Q|
∫Qw1−p′ dx
)p−1<∞
13
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
The natural Ap condition
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
The natural Ap condition
(Ap) supQ
(1
|Q|
∫Qu dx
)(1
|Q|
∫Qv1−p′ dx
)p−1<∞
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
The natural Ap condition
(Ap) supQ
(1
|Q|
∫Qu dx
)(1
|Q|
∫Qv1−p′ dx
)p−1<∞
is NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
The natural Ap condition
(Ap) supQ
(1
|Q|
∫Qu dx
)(1
|Q|
∫Qv1−p′ dx
)p−1<∞
is NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT
(known from the 70’s, Muckenhoupt and Wheeden.)
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
The natural Ap condition
(Ap) supQ
(1
|Q|
∫Qu dx
)(1
|Q|
∫Qv1−p′ dx
)p−1<∞
is NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT
(known from the 70’s, Muckenhoupt and Wheeden.)However:
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two weight theory for the maximal functionModel example of Eric “testing philosphy”
∫Rn
(Mf)p udx ≤ C∫Rn|f |p vdx
The natural Ap condition
(Ap) supQ
(1
|Q|
∫Qu dx
)(1
|Q|
∫Qv1−p′ dx
)p−1<∞
is NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT
(known from the 70’s, Muckenhoupt and Wheeden.)However:
(u, v) ∈ Ap ⇐⇒ M : Lp(v) −→ Lp,∞(u)
14
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Eric’s theorem and Eric’s condition
Theorem [Sawyer] (1981)Let 1 < p <∞ and let (u, v) be a couple of weights, then
∫RnMf(x)p udx ≤ C
∫Rn|f(x)|pvdx
if and only if (u, v) satisfies the Sp condition: there is a constant c s.t.
(Sp)∫QM(χ
Qσ)p udx ≤ c σ(Q)
where σ = v1−p′
15
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Eric’s theorem and Eric’s condition
Theorem [Sawyer] (1981)Let 1 < p <∞ and let (u, v) be a couple of weights, then
∫RnMf(x)p udx ≤ C
∫Rn|f(x)|pvdx
if and only if (u, v) satisfies the Sp condition: there is a constant c s.t.
(Sp)∫QM(χ
Qσ)p udx ≤ c σ(Q)
where σ = v1−p′
He tested this “philosophy” with many other operators.
15
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Eric’s theorem and Eric’s condition
Theorem [Sawyer] (1981)Let 1 < p <∞ and let (u, v) be a couple of weights, then
∫RnMf(x)p udx ≤ C
∫Rn|f(x)|pvdx
if and only if (u, v) satisfies the Sp condition: there is a constant c s.t.
(Sp)∫QM(χ
Qσ)p udx ≤ c σ(Q)
where σ = v1−p′
He tested this “philosophy” with many other operators.
For instance: One sided maximal Hardy–Littlewood maximal function
M+f(x) = suph>0
1
h
∫ x+h
x|f(t)| dt
15
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
First E. Sawyer’s theorem for fractional integrals
Recall the definition of the classical fractional integral: if 0 < α < n
Iα(f)(x) =∫Rn
f(y)
|x− y|n−αdy.
16
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
First E. Sawyer’s theorem for fractional integrals
Recall the definition of the classical fractional integral: if 0 < α < n
Iα(f)(x) =∫Rn
f(y)
|x− y|n−αdy.
Theorem [Sawyer] (1985)
∥∥∥Iα(f)∥∥∥Lp,∞(u)
≤ c ‖f‖Lp(v)
if and only if (u, v) satisfies the following condition:
∫QIα(uχ
Q)p′σdx ≤ c u(Q)
where σ = v1−p′
16
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Second E. Sawyer’s theorem for fractional integrals
Theorem [Sawyer] (1988)
∫Rn|Iα(f)|p udx ≤ C
∫Rn|f |p vdx
if and only if (u, v) satisfies the Sp condition:
∫QIα(σχ
Q)p udx ≤ c σ(Q) &
∫QIα(uχ
Q)p′σdx ≤ c u(Q)
where σ = v1−p′
17
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Second E. Sawyer’s theorem for fractional integrals
Theorem [Sawyer] (1988)
∫Rn|Iα(f)|p udx ≤ C
∫Rn|f |p vdx
if and only if (u, v) satisfies the Sp condition:
∫QIα(σχ
Q)p udx ≤ c σ(Q) &
∫QIα(uχ
Q)p′σdx ≤ c u(Q)
where σ = v1−p′
”A characterization of two weight norm inequalities for fractional andPoisson integrals”, Trans. A.M.S. (1988)
17
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Sawyer-Wheeden two weight bump condition
The two weight Fefferman-Phong condition in 1992 by Sawyer and Wheedenshowed that the
Theorem [Sawyer-Wheeden] (1992)Suppose that (u, v) be a couple of weights such that for some r > 1
K = supQ
`(Q)α(
1
|Q|
∫Qur dx
)1/r ( 1
|Q|
∫Qv−r dx
)1/r<∞
Then ∫Rn|Iαf(x)|2 u(x)dx ≤ C
∫Rn|f |2v(x)dx.
18
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Sawyer-Wheeden two weight bump condition
The two weight Fefferman-Phong condition in 1992 by Sawyer and Wheedenshowed that the
Theorem [Sawyer-Wheeden] (1992)Suppose that (u, v) be a couple of weights such that for some r > 1
K = supQ
`(Q)α(
1
|Q|
∫Qur dx
)1/r ( 1
|Q|
∫Qv−r dx
)1/r<∞
Then ∫Rn|Iαf(x)|2 u(x)dx ≤ C
∫Rn|f |2v(x)dx.
E. Sawyer and R.L. Wheeden, ”Weighted inequalities for fractional in-tegrals on Euclidean and homogeneous spaces, American Journal ofMathematics, (1992)
18
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Tips of the proof
Iαf(x) ≈∑Q∈D
|Q|α/n
|Q|
∫Qf(y) dy χQ(x),
19
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Tips of the proof
Iαf(x) ≈∑Q∈D
|Q|α/n
|Q|
∫Qf(y) dy χQ(x),
and then after “averaging”
19
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Tips of the proof
Iαf(x) ≈∑Q∈D
|Q|α/n
|Q|
∫Qf(y) dy χQ(x),
and then after “averaging”
Iαf(x) ≈∑k,j
|Qj,k|α/n
|Qj,k|
∫Qj,k
f(y) dy χQj,k(x),
19
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Tips of the proof
Iαf(x) ≈∑Q∈D
|Q|α/n
|Q|
∫Qf(y) dy χQ(x),
and then after “averaging”
Iαf(x) ≈∑k,j
|Qj,k|α/n
|Qj,k|
∫Qj,k
f(y) dy χQj,k(x),
where the family Qj,k is formed by special dyadic Calderon-Zyygmund cubes.
19
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments
• This and other similar results were extended to spaces of homogeneoustype.
20
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments
• This and other similar results were extended to spaces of homogeneoustype.
• The case when α = 0 corresponds to the Hilbert transform is due to Neuge-bauer.
20
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments
• This and other similar results were extended to spaces of homogeneoustype.
• The case when α = 0 corresponds to the Hilbert transform is due to Neuge-bauer.
• Improves: Chang-Wilson-Wolff and Fefferman-Phong
20
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments
• This and other similar results were extended to spaces of homogeneoustype.
• The case when α = 0 corresponds to the Hilbert transform is due to Neuge-bauer.
• Improves: Chang-Wilson-Wolff and Fefferman-Phong
• The failure of the Besicovitch covering lemma for the Heisenberg group wasobtained (also independently by Koranyi and Reimann).
20
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments
• This and other similar results were extended to spaces of homogeneoustype.
• The case when α = 0 corresponds to the Hilbert transform is due to Neuge-bauer.
• Improves: Chang-Wilson-Wolff and Fefferman-Phong
• The failure of the Besicovitch covering lemma for the Heisenberg group wasobtained (also independently by Koranyi and Reimann).
• A construction of a dyadic grid for spaces of homogeneous type was given(also independently by Christ, see as well David)
20
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Some comments
• This and other similar results were extended to spaces of homogeneoustype.
• The case when α = 0 corresponds to the Hilbert transform is due to Neuge-bauer.
• Improves: Chang-Wilson-Wolff and Fefferman-Phong
• The failure of the Besicovitch covering lemma for the Heisenberg group wasobtained (also independently by Koranyi and Reimann).
• A construction of a dyadic grid for spaces of homogeneous type was given(also independently by Christ, see as well David)
• later with Cruz-Uribe and Martell, obtained nice results for singular integralsin this vein.
20
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
E. Sawyer, “A weighted weak type inequality for the maximal function”,Proceedings of the A.M.S., 93(1985).
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
E. Sawyer, “A weighted weak type inequality for the maximal function”,Proceedings of the A.M.S., 93(1985).• Of course, the case v = u = 1 is the classical unweighted result.
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
E. Sawyer, “A weighted weak type inequality for the maximal function”,Proceedings of the A.M.S., 93(1985).• Of course, the case v = u = 1 is the classical unweighted result.• The case v = 1 is the classical Fefferman-Stein’s inequality and the caseu = 1 is also immediate:
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
E. Sawyer, “A weighted weak type inequality for the maximal function”,Proceedings of the A.M.S., 93(1985).• Of course, the case v = u = 1 is the classical unweighted result.• The case v = 1 is the classical Fefferman-Stein’s inequality and the caseu = 1 is also immediate:
M(f)
v≤ CMv(
f
v)
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
E. Sawyer, “A weighted weak type inequality for the maximal function”,Proceedings of the A.M.S., 93(1985).• Of course, the case v = u = 1 is the classical unweighted result.• The case v = 1 is the classical Fefferman-Stein’s inequality and the caseu = 1 is also immediate:
M(f)
v≤ CMv(
f
v)
• The problem in general is that the product uv can be very singular...
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Mixed weak type inequalities and Eric’s conjecture
This result of E. Sawyer can be seen as a very sophisticated version of theclassical weak type (1,1) estimate for the Hardy-Littlewood maximal function.
Theorem (E. Sawyer) Let u, v ∈ A1(R), then there is a constant c suchthat, ∥∥∥M(f)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|udx.
E. Sawyer, “A weighted weak type inequality for the maximal function”,Proceedings of the A.M.S., 93(1985).• Of course, the case v = u = 1 is the classical unweighted result.• The case v = 1 is the classical Fefferman-Stein’s inequality and the caseu = 1 is also immediate:
M(f)
v≤ CMv(
f
v)
• The problem in general is that the product uv can be very singular...• To assume that u ∈ A1 is natural because of the case v = 1.
21
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
Indeed, let
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
Indeed, let
Sv(f) =M(f v)
v
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
Indeed, let
Sv(f) =M(f v)
v
Then, Eric’s result says that Sv is of weak type (1,1) w. r. to the measureuv:
Sv : L1(uv)→ L1,∞(uv)
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
Indeed, let
Sv(f) =M(f v)
v
Then, Eric’s result says that Sv is of weak type (1,1) w. r. to the measureuv:
Sv : L1(uv)→ L1,∞(uv)
But observe that Sv is also bounded on L∞, (v ∈ A1 ) and hence onL∞(uv).
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
Indeed, let
Sv(f) =M(f v)
v
Then, Eric’s result says that Sv is of weak type (1,1) w. r. to the measureuv:
Sv : L1(uv)→ L1,∞(uv)
But observe that Sv is also bounded on L∞, (v ∈ A1 ) and hence onL∞(uv).
Then by the Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem:
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Why Eric look for such a sophisticated a result?
To give a different proof of Muckenhoupt’s Ap theorem assuming that theweights are already factored:
w = uv1−p u, v ∈ A1.
Indeed, let
Sv(f) =M(f v)
v
Then, Eric’s result says that Sv is of weak type (1,1) w. r. to the measureuv:
Sv : L1(uv)→ L1,∞(uv)
But observe that Sv is also bounded on L∞, (v ∈ A1 ) and hence onL∞(uv).
Then by the Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem:
M : Lp(uv1−p)→ Lp(uv1−p)
22
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two conjectures by Eric
• First conjecture: to replace M by the Hilbert transform H , namely
23
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two conjectures by Eric
• First conjecture: to replace M by the Hilbert transform H , namely
∥∥∥H(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|uv dx
23
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two conjectures by Eric
• First conjecture: to replace M by the Hilbert transform H , namely
∥∥∥H(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|uv dx
• Second conjecture: to replace M in one dimension by M in Rn, namely
23
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Two conjectures by Eric
• First conjecture: to replace M by the Hilbert transform H , namely
∥∥∥H(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫R|f(x)|uv dx
• Second conjecture: to replace M in one dimension by M in Rn, namely
∥∥∥M(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
23
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-Uribe
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-UribeT is any Calderon-Zygmund .
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-UribeT is any Calderon-Zygmund .
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥M(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and ∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-UribeT is any Calderon-Zygmund .
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥M(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and ∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and also
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-UribeT is any Calderon-Zygmund .
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥M(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and ∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and also
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A∞(u), then the same conclusion holds.
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-UribeT is any Calderon-Zygmund .
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥M(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and ∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and also
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A∞(u), then the same conclusion holds.
Example: u = 1 and v ∈ A∞
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Results
Joint work with J. M. Martell and D. Cruz-UribeT is any Calderon-Zygmund .
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥M(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and ∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
and also
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A∞(u), then the same conclusion holds.
Example: u = 1 and v ∈ A∞Some special cases were considered in the 70’s by Muckenhoupt-Wheedenfor the Hilbert Transform.
24
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Key Lemma
Our approach is completely different
We found a sort of “mechanism” (a very general extrapolation type theorem) toreduce everything to prove the corresponding estimate for the dyadic maximaloperator.
25
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Key Lemma
Our approach is completely different
We found a sort of “mechanism” (a very general extrapolation type theorem) toreduce everything to prove the corresponding estimate for the dyadic maximaloperator.
Lemma Let u ∈ A1(Rn) and v ∈ A∞(Rn), then∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
25
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Key Lemma
Our approach is completely different
We found a sort of “mechanism” (a very general extrapolation type theorem) toreduce everything to prove the corresponding estimate for the dyadic maximaloperator.
Lemma Let u ∈ A1(Rn) and v ∈ A∞(Rn), then∥∥∥T (fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
In fact this results holds for non A∞ weights on v.
25
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The final key inequality and Sawyer’s conjectureThen the proof of the Theorem is reduced to prove a Sawyer´s type esti-mate for the dyadic maximal operator but in Rn:
26
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The final key inequality and Sawyer’s conjectureThen the proof of the Theorem is reduced to prove a Sawyer´s type esti-mate for the dyadic maximal operator but in Rn:
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
26
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The final key inequality and Sawyer’s conjectureThen the proof of the Theorem is reduced to prove a Sawyer´s type esti-mate for the dyadic maximal operator but in Rn:
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
We were very lucky because the proof is basically the same as in theEric’s paper, we have reduced everything to the dyadic and is a bit sim-pler but
26
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The final key inequality and Sawyer’s conjectureThen the proof of the Theorem is reduced to prove a Sawyer´s type esti-mate for the dyadic maximal operator but in Rn:
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
We were very lucky because the proof is basically the same as in theEric’s paper, we have reduced everything to the dyadic and is a bit sim-pler butWe DON’T UNDERSTAND IT
26
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The final key inequality and Sawyer’s conjectureThen the proof of the Theorem is reduced to prove a Sawyer´s type esti-mate for the dyadic maximal operator but in Rn:
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
We were very lucky because the proof is basically the same as in theEric’s paper, we have reduced everything to the dyadic and is a bit sim-pler butWe DON’T UNDERSTAND ITWe are not happy neither with the proof nor with the result.
26
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The final key inequality and Sawyer’s conjectureThen the proof of the Theorem is reduced to prove a Sawyer´s type esti-mate for the dyadic maximal operator but in Rn:
Theorem If u ∈ A1(Rn), and v ∈ A1(Rn), then there is a constant c suchthat ∥∥∥Md(fv)
v
∥∥∥L1,∞(uv)
≤ c∫Rn|f(x)|uv dx
We were very lucky because the proof is basically the same as in theEric’s paper, we have reduced everything to the dyadic and is a bit sim-pler butWe DON’T UNDERSTAND ITWe are not happy neither with the proof nor with the result.
Sawyer’s conjecture: The result should hold in the following case
u ∈ A1(Rn) & v ∈ A∞(Rn)
which corresponds to the most singular case.
26
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Proof: the two basic Ingredients
• The Coifman-Fefferman’s estimate: if 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞
27
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Proof: the two basic Ingredients
• The Coifman-Fefferman’s estimate: if 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞
Let T be any Calderon-Zygmund Operator and let 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then
‖Tf‖Lp(w)
≤ c ‖Mf‖Lp(w)
27
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Proof: the two basic Ingredients
• The Coifman-Fefferman’s estimate: if 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞
Let T be any Calderon-Zygmund Operator and let 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then
‖Tf‖Lp(w)
≤ c ‖Mf‖Lp(w)
• and the use of the so called Rubio de Francia’s algorithm for a non standardoperator, namely Eric’s operator:
27
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Proof: the two basic Ingredients
• The Coifman-Fefferman’s estimate: if 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞
Let T be any Calderon-Zygmund Operator and let 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then
‖Tf‖Lp(w)
≤ c ‖Mf‖Lp(w)
• and the use of the so called Rubio de Francia’s algorithm for a non standardoperator, namely Eric’s operator:
Rh(x) =∞∑k=0
Skvh(x)
2k ‖Sv‖k.
27
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Proof: the two basic Ingredients
• The Coifman-Fefferman’s estimate: if 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞
Let T be any Calderon-Zygmund Operator and let 0 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then
‖Tf‖Lp(w)
≤ c ‖Mf‖Lp(w)
• and the use of the so called Rubio de Francia’s algorithm for a non standardoperator, namely Eric’s operator:
Rh(x) =∞∑k=0
Skvh(x)
2k ‖Sv‖k.
where
Svf(x) =M(fv)(x)
v(x)
27
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Singular Integrals and the Cp class of weights
Motivation: to understand the following version of the theorem of Coifman-Fefferman.
28
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Singular Integrals and the Cp class of weights
Motivation: to understand the following version of the theorem of Coifman-Fefferman.
Let H be the Hilbert transform let 1 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then ∫
R|Hf |pw dx ≤ C
∫R
(Mf)pw dx
28
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Singular Integrals and the Cp class of weights
Motivation: to understand the following version of the theorem of Coifman-Fefferman.
Let H be the Hilbert transform let 1 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then ∫
R|Hf |pw dx ≤ C
∫R
(Mf)pw dx
This question was raised by Muckenhoupt in the 70’s. He showed that if theweight satisfies this estimate then:
28
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Singular Integrals and the Cp class of weights
Motivation: to understand the following version of the theorem of Coifman-Fefferman.
Let H be the Hilbert transform let 1 < p <∞ and w ∈ A∞.Then ∫
R|Hf |pw dx ≤ C
∫R
(Mf)pw dx
This question was raised by Muckenhoupt in the 70’s. He showed that if theweight satisfies this estimate then:
ω(E) ≤ C(|E||Q|
)ε ∫R
(M(χQ))pw dx
for any cube Q and for any set E ⊂ Q.
28
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Cp condition: necessity
Rj will denote the Riesz transforms.
29
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Cp condition: necessity
Rj will denote the Riesz transforms.
Theorem (Eric)Let 1 < p <∞ . If the weight w satisfies
∫Rn|Rjf |pw dx ≤ C
∫Rn
(Mf)pw dx, 1 ≤ j ≤ n, f ∈ L∞c
Then w satifies the Cp condition:
ω(E) ≤ C(|E||Q|
)ε ∫Rn
(M(χQ))pw dx
for any cube Q and for any set E ⊂ Q.
29
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Cp condition: sufficiency
Theorem (Eric)Let 1 < p <∞ and let ε > 0. Let T be a Singular Integral, then if weight wsatisfies the Cp+δ condition:
ω(E) ≤ C(|E||Q|
)ε ∫Rn
(M(χQ))p+δ w dx
for any cube Q and for any set E ⊂ Q.Then ∫
Rn|Tf |pw dx ≤ C
∫Rn
(Mf)pw dx.
30
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Monge-Ampere Equation
uxxuyy − u2xy = k(x, y)
near the origin with 0 ≤ k(x, y) ∈ C∞(R2).
31
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Monge-Ampere Equation
uxxuyy − u2xy = k(x, y)
near the origin with 0 ≤ k(x, y) ∈ C∞(R2).Then under minimal assumption on k and a minimal initial assumption on uthen u ∈ C∞ near the origin.
31
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Monge-Ampere Equation
uxxuyy − u2xy = k(x, y)
near the origin with 0 ≤ k(x, y) ∈ C∞(R2).Then under minimal assumption on k and a minimal initial assumption on uthen u ∈ C∞ near the origin.This theorem is due to P. Guan.
31
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Monge-Ampere Equation
uxxuyy − u2xy = k(x, y)
near the origin with 0 ≤ k(x, y) ∈ C∞(R2).Then under minimal assumption on k and a minimal initial assumption on uthen u ∈ C∞ near the origin.This theorem is due to P. Guan.Improved in joint work with Eric (TAMS)
31
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
The Monge-Ampere Equation
uxxuyy − u2xy = k(x, y)
near the origin with 0 ≤ k(x, y) ∈ C∞(R2).Then under minimal assumption on k and a minimal initial assumption on uthen u ∈ C∞ near the origin.This theorem is due to P. Guan.Improved in joint work with Eric (TAMS)
Theorem [Rios, Sawyer and Wheeden] (2008)Let n ≥ 3 and suppose k ≈ |x|2m can be written as a sum of squares ofsmooth functions in Ω ⊂ Rn . If u is a C2 convex solution u to the subellipticMonge-Ampere equation
detD2u(x) = k(x, u,Du) x ∈ Ω,
then u is smooth if the elementary (n − 1)st symmetric curvature kn−1 of uis positive (the case m ≥ 2 uses an additional nondegeneracy condition onthe sum of squares).
Advances in Math 2008
31
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
Comments
As a conseqence they obtain the following geometric result: a C2 convex func-tion u whose graph has smooth Gaussian curvature k ≈ |x|2 is itself smoothif and only if the subGaussian curvature kn−1 of u is positive in Ω.
32
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
future
I am sure that Eric is going to produce more mathematics for us!!!
33
Some theorems by E. Sawyer [email protected]
future
I am sure that Eric is going to produce more mathematics for us!!!
THANK YOU VERYMUCH
33