Take the 2-minute tour ×
MathOverflow is a question and answer site for professional mathematicians. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $\mu_{n}$ be the unit measure over $S^{n-1}$,and consider the convolution operator$$Tf=\mu_{n}\ast f,\quad f\in \mathcal{S}$$ then,it's well-known that T can be extend to a bounded operator on $L^{1}$.My question is whether it's bounded from $H^{1}$ to $H^{1}$ ?

The question is equivallent to say that whether $m(\xi)=\hat{\mu_{n}}$ is a $H^1$ multiplier(I also care about $\frac{d}{dr}m$,where $r=|\xi|$)or not.The theorem related to this is that(the most convenient one I know so far) if $\mathcal{F}^{-1}m$ has compact support,and $$|m(\xi)|\leq (1+|\xi|)^{-b},\quad b>0$$ then m is a $H^p$ multiplier,where $\frac{1}{p}-\frac{1}{2}=\frac{b}{n}$.In our case $p=1$,$b=\frac{n}{2}$.On the other hand,we also know that $\hat{\mu_{n}}=J_{\frac{n}{2}-1}(|\xi|)|\xi|^{-\frac{n}{2}+1}$,so $\hat{\mu_{n}}\sim |\xi|^{-\frac{n-1}{2}}$ when $|\xi|$ large.the problem is that this theorem cann't be applied since we need the decay of $|\xi|^{-\frac{n}{2}} $,and I don't know how to do with it.So are there other mathods to prove and disprove it?

share|improve this question
add comment

1 Answer

up vote 3 down vote accepted

The Hardy space $H^1(\mathbb R^n)$ is equal to {$u\in L^1(\mathbb R^n),\forall j, R_ju\in L^1(\mathbb R^n)$}, where $R_j$ are the Riesz operators (Fourier multiplier $\xi_j/\vert\xi\vert$) and the following norm is equivalent to the $H^1$ norm: $$ \Vert u \Vert_{H^1}=\Vert u \Vert_{L^1}+\sum_{1\le j\le n}\Vert R_ju \Vert_{L^1}. $$ Let $T$ be a Fourier multiplier (thus commuting with the $R_j$) bounded on $L^1$ : then for $u\in H^1$ $$ \Vert Tu \Vert_{H^1}=\Vert Tu \Vert_{L^1}+\sum_{1\le j\le n}\Vert R_jTu \Vert_{L^1} =\Vert Tu \Vert_{L^1}+\sum_{1\le j\le n}\Vert TR_ju \Vert_{L^1}\lesssim \Vert u \Vert_{L^1}+\sum_{1\le j\le n}\Vert R_ju \Vert_{L^1}, $$ and the last term is $\Vert u \Vert_{H^1}$, proving the $H^1$ boundedness.

share|improve this answer
    
A good lesson for me. sometimes the easiest way is getting back to the definition.Thanks very much. –  user23078 Aug 29 '12 at 11:50
add comment

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.