A divided difference inequality for n-convex functions

For a₍₁₎ ? a₍₂₎ ? ··· ? a_(n) ? 0, b₍₁₎ ? b₍₂₎ ? ··· ? b_(n) ? 0, the ordered values of a_i, b_i, i = 1, 2,…, n, m fixed, m ? n, and p ? 1 it is shown that

$\text{∑}\text{1}\text{n}\text{a}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{b}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{?}\text{∑}\text{1}\text{m}\text{a}{}^{\mathrm{p}}{}_{\mathrm{(i)}}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>1</mtext><mtext>p</mtext>}}\text{∑}\text{1}\text{m?k?1}\text{b}{}^{\mathrm{q}}{}_{\mathrm{(i)}}\text{+}\text{b}{}^{\mathrm{q}}{}_{\mathrm{[m?k]}}\text{(k+1)}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>q</mtext><mtext>p</mtext>}}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>1</mtext><mtext>q</mtext>}}$

where $\text{1}\text{p}\text{+}\text{1}\text{q}\text{= 1, b}{}_{\mathrm{[j]}}\text{= b}{}_{\mathrm{(j)}}\text{+ b}{}_{\mathrm{(j\; +\; 1)}}\text{+ ··· + b}{}_{\mathrm{(n)}}\text{,}\text{and}\text{k}$ is the integer such that $\text{b}{}_{\mathrm{(m\; ?\; k\; ?\; 1)}}\text{?}\text{b[m ? k]}\text{(k + 1)}$ and $\text{b}{}_{\mathrm{(m\; ?\; k)}}\text{<}\text{b}{}_{\mathrm{[m\; ?\; k\; +\; 1]}}\text{k}$. The inequality is shown to be sharp. When p < 1 and a_(i)'s are in increasing order then the inequality is reversed.     

Sublinear perturbations of the differential equation y(n) = 0 and of the analogous difference equation

According to a result of A. Ghizzetti, for any solution y(t) of the differential equation where $\text{y}{}^{\mathrm{(n)}}\text{(t)+}\text{∑}\text{i=0}\text{n?1}\text{g}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{(t) y}{}^{\mathrm{i}}\text{(t)=0}\text{(t ? 1)}$, $\text{∝}{}_1{}^{\mathrm{\infty }}\text{¦g}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{(x)¦x}{}^{\mathrm{n?I?1}}\text{dx < ∞}$ (0 ?i ? n ?1, either y(t) = 0 for t ? 1 or there is an integer r with 0 ? r ? n ? 1 such that $\text{lim}\text{t → ∞}\text{y(t)}\text{t}{}^{\mathrm{r}}$ exists and ≠0. Related results are obtained for difference and differential inequalities. A special case of the former has interesting applications in the study of orthogonal polynomials.     

Compositions of singular integral operators

The composition of two Calderón-Zygmund singular integral operators is given explicitly in terms of the kernels of the operators. For φ?L¹(Rⁿ) and ε = 0 or 1 and ∝ φ = 0 if ε = 0, let Ker(φ) be the unique function on R^{n + 1} homogeneous of degree ?n ? 1 of parity ε that equals φ on the hypersurface x₀ = 1. Let Sing(φ, ε) denote the singular integral operator , which exists under suitable growth conditions on ? and φ. Then Sing(φ, ε₁) Sing(ψ, ε₂)f = ?2π²(∝ φ)(∝ ψ)f + Sing(A, ε₁, + ε₂)f, where

(with notation $\text{¦t¦}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{a}}\text{= ¦t¦}{}^{\mathrm{a}}\text{and}\text{¦t¦}{}_1{}^{\mathrm{a}}\text{= ¦t¦}{}^{\mathrm{a}}\text{sgn}\text{t}$). This result is used to show that the mapping ψ → A is a classical pseudo-differential operator of order zero if φ is smooth, with top-order symbol

$\text{ω}{}_0\text{(x,?)=?πiθ(?)∫θ(x?y)}\text{sgn}\text{y·?dy}\text{if}\text{?}{}_1\text{=1}$

,

$\text{=?2θ(?)∫θ(x?y)}\text{log}\text{|y·?|dy}\text{if}\text{?}{}_1\text{=0}$

where θ(ξ) is a cut-off function. These results are generalized to singular integrals with mixed homogeneity.     

Temporal exponential decay for the Stark effect in atoms

Let $\text{H}{}_1\text{= ?∑}{}_{\mathrm{i\; =\; 1}}{}^{\mathrm{N}}\text{(Δ}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{+ V(}\text{x}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{)) + ∑}{}_{\mathrm{1\; ?\; i\; <j\; ?\; N}}\text{¦}\text{x}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{?}\text{x}{}_{\mathrm{j}}\text{¦}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{, V(}\text{x}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{) = N ∝ ¦}\text{x}\text{?}\text{y}\text{¦}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{?(}\text{y}\text{)d}\text{y}$, with ? a normalized Gaussian. Suppose $\text{E}$ ≠ 0 and that $\text{H = H}{}_1\text{+}\text{E}\text{· (∑}{}_{\mathrm{i\; =\; 1}}{}^{\mathrm{N}}\text{x}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{)}$ has no eigenfunctions in L²($\text{R}$^3N. If H₁ψ = μψ with μ < infσ_ess(H₁), then (ψ, e^?itHψ) decays exponentially at a rate governed by the positions of the resonances of H.     

Lp estimates for the wave equation

Let u(x, t) be the solution of u_tt ? Δ_xu = 0 with initial conditions $\text{u(x, 0) = g(x)}\text{and}\text{u}{}_{\mathrm{t}}\text{(x, 0) = ?;(x)}$. Consider the linear operator $\text{T: ?; → u(x, t)}$. (Here g = 0.) We prove for t fixed the following result. Theorem 1: T is bounded in L^p if and only if . Theorem 2: If the coefficients are variables in C and constant outside of some compact set we get: (a) If n = 2k the result holds for $\text{¦ p}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{? 2}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{¦ < (n ? 1)}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}$. (b) If n = 2k ? 1, the result is valid for $\text{¦ p}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{? 2}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{¦ ? (n ? 1)}$. This result are sharp in the sense that for p such that $\text{¦ p}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{? 2}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{¦ > (n ? 1)}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}$ we prove the existence of $\text{?; ? L}{}^{\mathrm{P}}$ in such a way that $\text{T?; ? L}{}^{\mathrm{P}}$. Several applications are given, one of them is to the study of the Klein-Gordon equation, the other to the completion of the study of the family of multipliers $\text{m(ξ) = ψ(ξ) e}{}^{\mathrm{i¦\xi ¦}}\text{¦ ξ ¦}{}^{\mathrm{?b}}$ and finally we get that the convolution against the kernel $\text{K(x) = ?(x)(1 ? ¦ x ¦)}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}$ is bounded in H¹.     

On Lp estimates for the wave equation

New and more elementary proofs are given of two results due to W. Littman: (1) Let $\text{n ? 2, p ?}\text{2n}\text{(n ? 1)}$. The estimate $\text{∫∫ (¦▽u¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{+ ¦u}{}_{\mathrm{t}}\text{¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{) dx dt ? C ∫∫ ¦□u¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{dx dt}$ cannot hold for all u?C₀^∞(Q), Q a cube in $\text{R}{}^{\mathrm{<mi\; mathvariant="italic"\; is="true">n</mi>}}\text{× R}$, some constant C. (2) Let n ? 2, p ≠ 2. The estimate $\text{∫ (¦▽(t)¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{+ ¦u}{}_{\mathrm{t}}\text{(t)¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{) dx ? C(t) ∫ (¦▽u(0)¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{+ ¦u}{}_{\mathrm{t}}\text{(0)¦}{}^{\mathrm{p}}\text{) dx}$ cannot hold for all C^∞ solutions of the wave equation □u = 0 in $\text{R}{}^{\mathrm{n}}\text{x R}$; all t ?$\text{R}$; some function C: $\text{R}$ → $\text{R}$.     

Asymptotic properties of general symmetric hyperbolic systems

Results on partition of energy and on energy decay are derived for solutions of the Cauchy problem $\text{?u}\text{?t}\text{+ ∑}{}_{\mathrm{j\; =\; 1}}{}^{\mathrm{n}}\text{A}{}_{\mathrm{j}}\text{?u}\text{?x}{}_{\mathrm{j}}\text{= 0, u(0, x) = ?(x)}$. Here the A_j's are constant, k × k Hermitian matrices, x = (x₁,…, x_n), t represents time, and u = u(t, x) is a k-vector. It is shown that the energy of Mu approaches a limit $\text{E}{}_{\mathrm{M}}\text{(?)}\text{as}\text{¦ t ¦ → ∞}$, where M is an arbitrary matrix; that there exists a sufficiently large subspace of data ?, which is invariant under the solution group U₀(t) and such that $\text{U}{}_0\text{(t)? = 0}\text{for}\text{¦ x ¦ ? a ¦ t ¦ ? R, a}\text{and}\text{R}$ depending on ? and that the local energy of nonstatic solutions decays as $\text{¦ t ¦ → ∞}$. More refined results on energy decay are also given and the existence of wave operators is established, considering a perturbed equation $\text{E(x)}\text{?u}\text{?t}\text{+ ∑}{}_{\mathrm{j\; =\; 1}}{}^{\mathrm{n}}\text{A}{}_{\mathrm{j}}\text{?u}\text{?x}{}_{\mathrm{j}}\text{= 0,}\text{where}\text{¦ E(x) ? I ¦ = O(¦ x ¦}{}^{\mathrm{?1\; ?\; ?}}\text{)}$ at infinity.     

Exposants de Lyapounov pour opérateurs de Schrödinger discrètes quasi-périodiquesLyapounov exponents for discrete,quasi-periodic Schrödinger operators

We consider quasi-periodic Schrödinger operators H on $\text{Z}$ of the form H=H_λ,x,ω=λv(x+nω)δ_n,n′+Δ where v is a non-constant real analytic function on the d-torus $\text{T}{}^{\mathrm{d}}\text{(d?1)}$ and Δ denotes the discrete lattice Laplacian on $\text{Z}$. Denote by L_ω(E) the Lyapounov exponent, considered as function of the energy E and the rotation vector $\text{ω∈}\text{T}{}^{\mathrm{d}}$. It is shown that for |λ|>λ₀(v), there is the uniform minoration $\text{L}{}_{\mathrm{\omega }}\text{(E)>}\text{1}\text{2}\text{log}\text{|λ|}$ for all E and ω. For all λ and ω, L_ω(E) is a continuous function of E. Moreover, L_ω(E) is jointly continuous in (ω,E), at any point $\text{(ω}{}_0\text{,E}{}_0\text{)∈}\text{T}{}^{\mathrm{d}}\text{×}\text{R}$ such that k·ω₀≠0 for all $\text{k∈}\text{Z}{}^{\mathrm{d}}\text{?{0}}$. To cite this article: J. Bourgain, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Ser. I 335 (2002) 529–531.     

A canonical decomposition of the probability measure of sets of isotropic random points in Rn

The probability measure of X = (x₀,…, x_r), where x₀,…, x_r are independent isotropic random points in $\text{R}$ⁿ (1 ≤ r ≤ n ? 1) with absolutely continuous distributions is, for a certain class of distributions of X, expressed as a product measure involving as factors the joint probability measure of (ω, ?), the probability measure of p, and the probability measure of $\text{Y}{}^1\text{= (y}{}_0{}^1\text{,…, y}{}_{\mathrm{r}}{}^1\text{)}$. Here ω is the r-subspace parallel to the r-flat η determined by X, ? is a unit vector in ω^⊥ with ‘initial’ point at the origin [ω^⊥ is the (n ? r)-subspace orthocomplementary to ω], p is the norm of the vector z from the origin to the orthogonal projection of the origin on η, and $\text{y}{}_{\mathrm{i}}{}^1\text{=}\text{(x}{}_{\mathrm{i}}\text{? z)}\text{α(p}{}^2\text{)}$, where α is a scale factor determined by p. The probability measure for ω is the unique probability measure on the Grassmann manifold of r-subspaces in $\text{R}$ⁿ invariant under the group of rotations in $\text{R}$ⁿ, while the conditional probability measure of ? given ω is uniform on the boundary of the unit (n ? r)-ball in ω^⊥ with centre at the origin. The decomposition allows the evaluation of the moments, for a suitable class of distributions of X, of the r-volume of the simplicial convex hull of {x₀,…, x_r} for 1 ≤ r ≤ n.     

Sharp nonlogarithmic Kneser theorems for fourth-order elliptic equations

Let D(?) be the Doob's class containing all functions f(z) analytic in the unit disk Δ such that f(0) = 0 and lim $\text{inf}\text{¦f(z) ¦ ? 1}$ on an arc A of ?Δ with length $\text{¦A ¦? ?}$. It is first proved that if f?D(?) then the spherical norm ∥ f ∥ = sup_z?Δ$\text{(}\text{1 ? ¦z¦}{}^2\text{)¦f′(z)¦}\text{(1 + ¦f(z)¦}{}^2\text{) ? C}{}_1\text{sin}\text{(π ? (}\text{?}\text{2}\text{))/ (π ? (}\text{g9}\text{2}\text{))}$, where C₁ = lim_n→∞$\text{∥ z}{}^{\mathrm{n}}\text{∥}\text{and}\text{1}\text{2}\text{< C}{}_1\text{<}\text{2}\text{e}$. Next, U represents the Seidel's class containing all non-constant functions f(z) bounded analytic in Δ such that $\text{¦tf(e}{}^{\mathrm{i0}}\text{)¦ = 1}$ almost everywhere. It is proved that inf_f?U∥f∥ = 0, and if f has either no singularities or only isolated singularities on ?Δ, then ∥f∥ ? C₁. Finally, it is proved that if f is a function normal in Δ, namely, the norm ∥f∥< ∞, then we have the sharp estimate ∥f^p∥ ? p∥f∥, for any positive integer p.     

Weak-1 generators for a class of subalgebras of l1

Let α ? 0 and let $\text{D(}\text{α}\text{) = {f(z) = ∑}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{\infty }}\text{α}{}_{\mathrm{n}}\text{z}{}^{\mathrm{n}}\text{¦ ∑}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{\infty }}\text{(n + 1)}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>\alpha </mtext>}}\text{¦ a}{}_{\mathrm{n}}\text{¦ < ∞}}$. Then D(α) is a subalgebra of l¹. We discuss the weak-1 generators of D(α). We use some of our techniques to prove that if ? is a weak-1 generator of H^∞ and ∥ ? ∥_∞ ? 1, then the composition operator C_? on the Dirichlet space has dense range.     

Integral inequalities for generalized concave or convex functions

Let ψ be convex with respect to ?, B a convex body in Rⁿ and f a positive concave function on B. A well-known result by Berwald states that $\text{1}\text{¦B¦}\text{∝}{}_{\mathrm{B}}\text{ψ(f(x)) dx ? n ∝}{}_0{}^1\text{ψ(ξt)(1 ? t)}{}^{\mathrm{n\; ?\; 1)}}\text{dt}$ (1) if ξ is chosen such that $\text{1}\text{¦B¦}\text{∝}{}_{\mathrm{B}}\text{?(f(x)) dx = n ∝}{}_0{}^1\text{?(ξt)(1 ? t)}{}^{\mathrm{n\; ?\; 1)}}\text{dt}$.The main purpose in this paper is to characterize those functions f : B → R₊ such that (1) holds.     

A completeness theorem for a nonlinear multiparameter eigenvalue problem

In this paper we study the linked nonlinear multiparameter system

$\text{y}{}_{\mathrm{r}}{}^{\mathrm{n}}\text{(X}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{) + M}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{Y}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{+}\text{∑}\text{s=1}\text{k}\text{λ}{}_{\mathrm{s}}\text{(a}{}_{\mathrm{rs}}\text{(X}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{) + P}{}_{\mathrm{rs}}\text{) Y}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{(X}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{) = 0, r = l,…, k}$

, where x_r? [a_r, b_r], y_r is subject to Sturm-Liouville boundary conditions, and the continuous functions a_rs satisfy ¦ $\text{A ¦ (x) =}\text{det}\text{a}{}_{\mathrm{rs}}\text{(x}{}_{\mathrm{r}}\text{) > 0}$. Conditions on the polynomial operators M_r, P_rs are produced which guarantee a sequence of eigenfunctions for this problem yⁿ(x) = Π_r=1^ky_rⁿ(x_r), n ? 1, which form a basis in $\text{L}{}^2\text{([a, b], ¦ A ¦)}$. Here [a, b] = [a₁, b₁ × … × [a_k, b_k].     

Coding theory in white Gaussian channel with feedback

The message m = {m(t)} is a Gaussian process that is to be transmitted through the white Gaussian channel with feedback: $\text{Y(t) = ∫}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{t}}\text{F(s, Y}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{s}}\text{, m)ds + W(t)}$. Under the average power constraint, $\text{E[F}{}^2\text{(s, Y}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{s}}\text{, m)] ≤ P}{}_0$, we construct causally the optimal coding, in the sense that the mutual information I_t(m, Y) between the message m and the channel output Y (up to t) is maximized. The optimal coding is presented by $\text{Y(t) = ∫}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{t}}\text{A(s)[m(s) ?}\text{m}\text{?}\text{(s)] ds + W(t)}$, where $\text{m}\text{?}\text{(s) = E[m(s) ¦ Y(u), 0 ≤ u ≤ s]}$ and A(s) is a positive function such that $\text{A}{}^2\text{(s) E |m(s) ?}\text{m}\text{?}\text{(s)|}{}^2\text{= P}{}_0$.     

Spectral representation for Schrödinger operators with long-range potentials

A spectral representation for the self-adjoint Schrödinger operator H = ?Δ + V(x), x? R³, is obtained, where V(x) is a long-range potential: $\text{V(x) = O(¦ x ¦}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>?</mtext><mtext>(1</mtext><mtext>2)</mtext><mtext>?\delta </mtext>}}\text{)}$, grad $\text{V(x) = O(¦ x ¦}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>?</mtext><mtext>(3</mtext><mtext>2)</mtext><mtext>?\delta </mtext>}}\text{)}$, $\text{ΛV(x) = O(¦ x}\text{s}\text{?}{}^{\mathrm{?\delta }}\text{) (δ > 0), Λ}$ being the Laplace-Beltrami operator on the unit sphere Ω. Namely, we shall construct a unitary operator $\text{F}$ from PL₂(R³) onto $\text{L}{}_2\text{((0, ∞); L}{}_2\text{(Ω)), P}$ being the orthogonal projection onto the absolutely continuous subspace for H, such that for any Borel function α(λ),

$\text{(α(H)(Pf,g)=}\text{∫}\text{0}\text{∞}\text{(α(λ)(Ff)(λ),(Fg)(λ))L}{}_2\text{(ω) dλ}$

.     

Concrete model theory for a class of operators with unitary part

Let m and v_t, 0 ? t ? 2π be measures on T = [0, 2π] with m smooth. Consider the direct integral $\text{H}$ = ⊕L²(v^t) dm(t) and the operator $\text{(L?)(t, λ) = e}{}^{\mathrm{?i\lambda }}\text{?(t, λ) ? 2e}{}^{\mathrm{?i\lambda }}\text{∫}{}_{\mathrm{t}}{}^{\mathrm{2\pi }}\text{∫}{}_{\mathrm{T}}\text{?(s, x) e(s, t) dv}{}_{\mathrm{s}}\text{(x) dm(s)}$ on $\text{H}$, where e(s, t) = exp ∫_s^t ∫_Tdv_λ(θ) dm(λ). Let μ_t be the measure defined by $\text{∫}{}_{\mathrm{T}}\text{?(x) dμ}{}_{\mathrm{t}}\text{(x) = ∫}{}_0{}^{\mathrm{t}}\text{∫}{}_{\mathrm{T}}\text{?(x) dv}{}_{\mathrm{s}}\text{dm(s)}$ for all continuous ?, and let ?_t(z) = exp[?∫ (e^iθ + z)(e^iθ ? z)^?1dμ_t(gq)]. Call {v_t} regular iff for all $\text{t, ¦?}{}_{\mathrm{t}}\text{(e}{}^{\mathrm{i\theta }}\text{)¦ = ¦?}{}_{\mathrm{2\pi }}\text{(e}{}^{\mathrm{i\theta }}\text{)¦}$ for 1 a.e.     

On the absolute continuity of Schrödinger operators with spherically symmetric,long-range potentials,II

Let H = ?Δ + V, where the potential V is spherically symmetric and can be decomposed as a sum of a short-range and a long-range term, V(r) = V_S(r) + V_L. Let λ = lim sup_r→∞V_L(r) < ∞ (we allow λ = ? ∞) and set λ⁺ = max(λ, 0). Assume that for some r₀, V_L(r) ?C^2k(r₀, ∞) and that there exists δ > 0 such that $\text{(}\text{d}\text{dr}\text{)}{}^{\mathrm{j}}\text{V}{}_{\mathrm{<mtext>L</mtext>}}\text{(r) · (λ}{}^{\mathrm{+}}\text{? V}{}_{\mathrm{<mtext>L</mtext>}}\text{(r) + 1)}{}^{\mathrm{?1}}\text{= O(r}{}^{\mathrm{?j\delta }}\text{), j = 1,…, 2k,}\text{as}\text{r → ∞}$. Assume further that $\text{∝}{}_1{}^{\mathrm{\infty }}\text{(}\text{dr}\text{¦ V}{}_{\mathrm{<mtext>L</mtext>}}\text{(r)¦}{}^{\mathrm{<mtext>1</mtext><mtext>2</mtext>}}\text{) = ∞}$ and that 2kδ > 1. It is shown that: (a) The restriction of H to C^∞(Rⁿ) is essentially self-adjoint, (b) The essential spectrum of H contains the closure of (λ, ∞). (c) The part of H over (λ, ∞) is absolutely continuous.     

An integral operator connected with the Helmholtz equation

Let Lu be the integral operator defined by $\text{(L}{}_{\mathrm{k?}}\text{)(x, y) = ∝ s ∝ ?(x′, y′)(}\text{e}{}^{\mathrm{ik?}}\text{?}\text{) dx′ dy′, (x, y) ? S}$ where S is the interior of a smooth, closed Jordan curve in the plane, k is a complex number with Re k ? 0, Im k ? 0, and ?² = (x ?x′)² + (y ? y′)². We define $\text{q(x, y) = [}\text{dist}\text{((x, y), ?S)]}\text{1}\text{2}\text{, (x, y) ? S; L}{}_2\text{(q, S) = {? : ∝ s ∝ ¦ ?(x, y)¦}{}^2\text{q(x, y) dx dy < ∞}; W}{}_2{}^1\text{(q, S) = {? : ? ? L}{}_2\text{(q, S),}\text{??}\text{?x}\text{,}\text{?f}\text{?y}\text{? L}{}_2\text{(q, S)}}$, where in the definition of W₂¹(q, S) the derivatives are taken in the sense of distributions. We prove that L_k is a continuous 1-l mapping of L₂(q, S) onto W₂¹(q, S).