3
$\begingroup$

Consider the symbols introduced by Beals and Fefferman in which the symbol estimates are of the form: \begin{equation}\tag{1} \label{eq1} |\partial_x^\beta\partial_\xi^\alpha a(x,\xi)| \leq C_{\alpha \beta} M(x,\xi) \Phi(x,\xi)^{-|\alpha|} \varphi(x,\xi)^{-|\beta|}, \quad (x,\xi) \in \mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}^n, \end{equation} where the positive functions $M,\Phi, \varphi$ satisfy certain conditions.

Now from the book- Metric on the Phase Space and Non-Selfadjoint Pseudodifferential Operators by N. Lerner (Chapter 2 Section 2.2), it is said that by considering the following Riemannian structure on $\mathbb{R}^{2n}$ $$ g_{x,\xi} = \frac{|dx|^2}{\varphi(x,\xi)^2} + \frac{|d\xi|^2}{\Phi(x,\xi)^2}: \; \text{ for }(t,\tau)\in \mathbb{R}^n \times \mathbb{R}^n, g_{x,\xi}(t,\tau) = \frac{|t|^2}{\varphi(x,\xi)^2} + \frac{|\tau|^2}{\Phi(x,\xi)^2}, $$ one can write the symbol estimate in (\ref{eq1}) for $|\alpha|+|\beta|=1,$ in terms of the metric as below: \begin{equation}\label{eq2}\tag{2} |\nabla a(X)\cdot T|\leq C g_{X}(T)^{1/2}, \end{equation} for $X=(x,\xi), T=(t,\tau).$

I tried to see the estimate (\ref{eq2}), in the following two ways:

For the sake of demonstration let's take $n=1.$

(I) Considering $\nabla$ w.r.t Euclidean metric: I have $$ \begin{aligned} |\nabla a(X)\cdot T| &= |(\partial_xa,\partial_\xi a) \cdot (t,\tau)|\\ &= |t\partial_xa +\tau \partial_\xi a|\\ &\leq C \Big( |t| \frac{M}{\varphi} + |\tau| \frac{M}{\Phi}\Big)\\ &= CM \Big\{\frac{|t|}{\varphi} + \frac{|\tau|}{\Phi}\Big\}\\ &\leq CM(g_X(T)^{1/2} + g_X(T)^{1/2})\\ &= 2CMg_X(T)^{1/2} \end{aligned} $$

(II) Considering $\nabla$ w.r.t metric $g$, in which case $$ \nabla a = (\varphi^2\partial_x a,\Phi^2\partial_\xi a). $$ Then $$ \begin{aligned} |\nabla a(X)\cdot T| &= |(\varphi^2\partial_x a,\Phi^2\partial_\xi a) \cdot (t,\tau)|\\ &= |t\varphi^2\partial_xa +\tau \Phi^2\partial_\xi a|\\ &\leq C \Big( \varphi^2|t| \frac{M}{\varphi} + \Phi^2 |\tau| \frac{M}{\Phi}\Big)\\ &= CM \{\varphi|t| + \Phi|\tau|\}, \end{aligned} $$ after this I am unable to go further to establish (\ref{eq2}).

My questions:

  1. When the author (N .Lerner) says to consider the metric $g$ what does he mean? Should we consider gradient $\nabla$ w.r.t Euclidean metric or w.r.t $g$?

  2. If $\nabla$ has to be considered w.r.t $g$, how do I proceed further in my calculations?

  3. If $\nabla$ has to be considered w.r.t Euclidean metric, then what exactly is the role of $g$?

Thank you in advance.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

You are given a metric on the phase space, i.e. at each point $(x,\xi)$ in $\mathbb R^{2n}$ a positive definite quadratic form $g_{x,\xi}$ on $\mathbb R^{2n}$. You will use that metric (and the affine connection on $\mathbb R^{2n}$) to express the conditions on the symbols.

In the first place, the metric $g$ must be slowly varying, temperate and should satisfy the uncertainty principle according to the references to Lerner's book. Next, you introduce a weight function $m$ defined on the phase space and valued in $(0,+\infty)$, with slow variation and temperate requirements as in the same reference.

Then you define the space of symbols $S(m,g)$ as the set of smooth functions $a$ on the phase space such that $$\forall k\in \mathbb N, \exists C_k,\forall X\in \mathbb R^{2n},\forall T\in \mathbb R^{2n}, \quad \vert a^{(k)}(X) T^k\vert\le C_k m(X)g_X(T)^{k/2}. \tag 1$$ Since the tensor products $T_1\otimes\dots\otimes T_k$ are sums of powers $S^{\otimes k}$ where $S$ is a linear combination of the vectors $T_j$, it turns out that $(1)$ is equivalent to \begin{multline}\forall k\in \mathbb N, \exists C_k,\forall X\in \mathbb R^{2n},\forall \{T_j\}_{1\le j\le k}\in \mathbb R^{2n}, \quad \\ \vert a^{(k)}(X) (T_1,\dots, T_k)\vert\le C_k m(X)\prod_{j=1}^{j=k}g_X(T_j)^{1/2}. \tag{2}\end{multline} When you have chosen some symplectic coordinates such that, for a given point $(x,\xi)$ in the phase space, you have
$$ g_{x,\xi}(t_1,\dots,t_n, \tau_1,\dots, \tau_n)=\frac{\vert t_1\vert^2}{r_1^2} +\dots+\frac{\vert t_n\vert^2}{r_n^2} + \frac{\vert \tau_1\vert^2}{\rho_1^2} +\dots+\frac{\vert \tau_n\vert^2}{\rho_n^2}, $$ the estimates $(1), (2)$ are equivalent to $$ \bigl\vert\bigl(\partial_{t_1}^{b_1}\dots\partial_{t_n}^{b_n} \partial_{\tau_1}^{\beta_1}\dots\partial_{\tau_n}^{\beta_n} a\bigr)(t,\tau)\bigr\vert \le C_{b_1,\dots, b_n,\beta_1,\dots,\beta_n} m(t,\tau)\Bigl(\prod_{j=1}^{j=n} r_j^{-b_j}\Bigr)\Bigl(\prod_{j=1}^{j=n} \rho_j^{-\beta_j}\Bigr). $$ Note that in this framework, you have $$ g^\sigma_{x,\xi}= {\vert t_1\vert^2}{\rho_1^2} +\dots+{\vert t_n\vert^2}{\rho_n^2} + {\vert \tau_1\vert^2}{r_1^2} +\dots+{\vert \tau_n\vert^2}{r_n^2}, $$ so that the "uncertainty principle" condition $g_{x,\xi}\le g^\sigma_{x,\xi}$ reads $$ \min_{1\le j\le n}\rho_j r_j\ge 1. $$

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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