arxiv: v3 [math.ca] 8 Nov 2018

Transcription

1 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV arxiv: v3 [math.ca] 8 Nov 018 Abstract. We consider severa probems reated to the restriction of ( k ) ˆf to a surface Σ R d with nonvanishing Gauss curvature. Whie such restrictions ceary exist if f is a Schwartz function, there are few bounds avaiabe that enabe one to take imits with respect to the L p(r d ) norm of f. We estabish three scenarios where it is possibe to do so: When the restriction is measured according to a Soboev space H s (Σ) of negative index. We determine the compete range of indices (k, s, p) for which such a bound exists. Among functions where ˆf vanishes on Σ to order k 1, the restriction of ( k ) ˆf defines a bounded operator from (this subspace of) L p(r d ) to L (Σ) provided 1 p d+ d+3+4k. When there is a priori contro of ˆf Σ in a space H (Σ), > 0, this impies improved reguarity for the restrictions of ( k ) ˆf. If is arge enough then even ˆf L (Σ) can be controed in terms of ˆf H (Σ) and f L p(r d ) aone. The techniques underying these resuts are inspired by the spectra synthesis work of Y. Domar, which provides a mechanism for L p approximation by convoving aong surfaces", and the Stein Tomas restriction theorem. Our main inequaity is a biinear form bound with simiar structure to the Stein Tomas T T operator, generaized to accommodate smoothing aong Σ and derivatives transverse to it. It is used both to estabish basic H s (Σ) bounds for derivatives of ˆf and to bootstrap from surface reguarity of ˆf to reguarity of its higher derivatives. Contents 1. Introduction 1.1. Overview of the Derivative Restriction Probem 1.. Statement of resuts Overview of proofs Fredhom conditions and Soboev embeddings 10. Study of the spaces Σ L k p 1.1. Description of the annihiator and Domar s theory 1.. Coincedence of Σ L k p and the spaces defined as kernes of restriction operators Proofs of if part in Theorem 1.4 and Theorem Proof of Coroary Proof of Theorem Pointwise estimates of the kerne Interpoation 3.3. Strichartz estimates 4 4. Robust estimates Introduction to numeroogy Two simpe exampes 6 Date: September 10, 018. The authors woud ike to thank Tony Carbery for introducing them to Y. Domar s papers. M. G. received support from Simons Foundation grant #81057, D. S. received support from Russian Foundation for Basic Research grant #

2 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV 4.3. Convexity properties of the function N Statement of resuts by cases Sharpness Surface measure conditions Knapp exampes Pure shifts Shifted Knapp exampe Additiona emmas and suppementary materia Locaization argument A version of the Stein Weiss inequaity Some endpoint estimates 49 References Introduction 1.1. Overview of the Derivative Restriction Probem. Questions regarding the fine properties of the Fourier transform of a function in L p (R d ) have ong payed a centra roe in the deveopment of cassica harmonic anaysis. Whie the Hausdorff Young theorem guarantees that for 1 p, the Fourier transform of f L p beongs to its dua space L p/(p 1), it does not provide guidance on whether ˆf may be defined on a given measure-zero subset Σ R d. The canonica question of this type, originating in the work of Stein circa 1967, is to find the compete range of pairs (p, q) for which the inequaity (1) ˆf S d 1 Lq(S d 1 ) f Lp(R d ) hods true. The probem was soved in the case d = in [8] and remains an active subject of research in higher dimensions (e.g. [5, 13, 14]). In this paper we investigate the possibiity of defining the surface trace of higher order gradients of the Fourier transform of an L p function, with a focus on uniform estimates in the stye of (1). Let Σ be a cosed smooth embedded (d 1)-dimensiona submanifod of R d. Assume that the principa curvatures of Σ are non-zero at any point. Let K be a compact subset of Σ and k be a natura number. We consider as a mode probem the inequaity () ( k ˆf) ΣL(K) K f Lp(R ). d Here and in what foows the Fourier transform has priority over differentiation: we first compute the Fourier transform and then differentiate it. We choose the standard Hausdorff measure dσ on Σ to define the L -space on the eft hand-side. The notation K signifies that the constant in the inequaity may depend on the choice of K, but shoud not depend on f. We restrict our study to the case of L instead of L q with arbitrary q on the eft hand-side, because the Hibert space properties of L make this case more tractabe. In fact, the range of a possibe p in (1) when q = is described by the cassica Stein Tomas Theorem (estabished in [5] and [1]). Unfortunatey, inequaity () cannot hod true uness k = 0. To see that, consider the shifts of a function f, in other words f N (x) = f(x + Ny), where y 0 is a fixed point in R d. If we pug f N into () instead of f, the norm on the eft hand-side wi be of the order N k, whereas the quantity on right wi not depend on N. The next question aong these ines is: what modifications can be made so that () becomes a true statement for k 1? Since the origina inequaity (1) is shift-invariant, we seek transation invariant conditions for f. This rues out natura candidates such as requiring (1 + x ) k f L p.

3 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 3 One possibiity is to reax the desired oca reguarity from L (K) to a Soboev space of negative order. Consider the inequaity (3) φ( k ˆf) ΣH s (Σ) φ f Lp(R ). d Here φ C0 (Σ) is an arbitrary compacty supported smooth function (the constant in the inequaity may depend on it). The parameter s is a non-negative rea, and H s is the L -based Besse potentia space. Whenever (3) hods, there is a trace vaue for k ˆf in H s oc (Σ) for a f L p(r d ). One might guess that the inequaity (3) gets weaker as we increase s, opening the way to define the trace of k ˆf on Σ with an increasingy arge range of p. This is indeed the case. The case k = 0 in (3) was considered by Cho, Guo, and Lee in [6]. They observed Soboev-space trace vaues of ˆf for f L p with p going up to the sharp exponent dictated by the Fourier transform of a surface measure. As we wi see beow, the genera case k 0 of (3) requires ony one more arge-k endpoint estimate and a routine interpoation argument. There are two parameters that appear frequenty as bounds in our arguments: (4) (5) σ p = d p d + 1 ; κ p = d + 1 p d + 3. Where it occurs ater on, we aso use the standard notation p = p p 1 for the dua exponent to L p. Theorem 1.1 (Coroary of Theorem 1.1 in [6]). Let p > 1. The inequaity (3) is true if and ony if (6) (7) (8) k s; k < σ p ; k s κ p. For fixed k and p with k < σ p, that means s max(k, k κ p ). In the case p = 1, the case k = σ 1 is aso permitted if s > k. The parameter σ p is reated to the surface measure extremizer. When condition (7) does not hod, Theorem 1.1 fais by testing its dua statement against a surface measure on Σ. The parameter κ p, and its roe in condition (8) are simiary associated with Knapp exampes. In odd dimensions there is an endpoint case p = 1, k = σ 1 = d 1 N where inequaity (3) is true for s > d 1. This is stated more precisey in Coroary 6.13 beow. The proof of that bound is more direct than most of our other arguments (in fact it is neary equivaent to the dispersive bound for the Schrödinger equation) and it is competey independent. The paper contains two proofs of Theorem 1.1. First, it is a specia case of Theorem 1.16, whose proof is presented as Section 3. Then we show in Subsection 6.3 how to derive Theorem 1.1 from the resuts of [6]. To be more specific, one can interpoate between the resuts of [6] for k = 0 and the Besov-space bound in Proposition 6.1 for p = 1, k = d 1 to obtain the fu range of Theorem 1.1. If one is determined not to weaken the L (K) norm in (), it is necessary to consider f beonging to an a priori narrower space than L p (R d ). We introduce the main character. Definition 1.. Let Σ be a cosed smooth embedded (d 1)-dimensiona submanifod of R d, p [1, ), and k N. Define the space Σ L k p by the formua Σ Lk p = cos Lp ({f S(R d ) = 0, 1,,..., k 1 ˆf = 0 on Σ }). Define Σ L 0 p to be simpy L p (R d ). The first non-trivia space Σ L 1 p wi often be denoted by Σ L p.

4 4 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV The symbo S denotes the Schwartz cass of test functions. We note that in the definition above, we do not need any information about Σ. In fact, Σ may be an arbitrary cosed set. The restriction p < is taken so that the Schwartz cass is dense in L p, though one coud repace cosure with weak cosure in the case p = if needed. These generaities wi not arise in the present paper. From now on we assume that Σ is a cosed smooth embedded (d 1)-dimensiona submanifod of R d with non-vanishing principa curvatures. It wi turn out (See Theorem 1.6 beow) that for a certain range of p and k, the space Σ L k p contains precisey the functions f L p whose Fourier transform vanishes on Σ to order k 1. We take advantage of the additiona structure of the domain to formuate a second adaptation of inequaity (), this time with the trace of k ˆf sti beonging to L oc (Σ). (9) ( k ˆf) ΣL(K) K f Lp for a f Σ L k p. One might expect that a simiar statement with the L norm repaced by a weaker Soboev norm wi admit a arger range of p, that is: (10) (φ k ˆf) ΣH s (Σ) φ f Lp(R d ) for a f Σ L k p. However at this point in the discussion it is not cear why (10) shoud be true outside the range estabished in Theorem 1.1, or why (9) shoud be true at a. Given a generic function f L p (R d ), its Fourier transform ˆf is not differentiabe even to fractiona order. We have reduced the obstruction somewhat by seeking derivatives of ˆf ony at the points ξ Σ, and by specifying a substantia number of its partia derivatives via the assumption f Σ L k p. Never the ess, vaues of ˆf Σ aone do not uniquey determine f L p, nor are they known to shed much ight on the behavior of ˆf in a neighborhood of Σ. Theorem 1.4 beow finds the compete range of p for which an L gradient restriction (9) is true. In particuar the range is nonempty when d 4k + 1. This resut foows a cear pattern from the Stein Tomas restriction theorem, which is the k = 0 case. The range of p permitted in (10) is aso sharp in the same way as Theorem 1.1 and the resuts in [6]. The range of s we obtain here is much arger than what is true in the context of Theorem 1.1, but most ikey not optima due to some compications with inear programming over the integers. The k = 1 case of Theorem 1.4 shows that an a priori assumption ˆf Σ = 0 eads to nontrivia bounds on ˆf Σ. In fact there is a arger famiy of bounds for trace vaues of k ˆf, and one can begin the bootstrapping process with a much mider assumption ˆf Σ H (Σ) instead of requiring it to vanish. We expore these generaizations in Proposition 1.11, Theorem 1.1, and the reated discussion. The inequaity which takes the pace of (10) has the form (11) (φ k ˆf) ΣH s (Σ) φ ( f Lp(R d ) + φ ˆf H (Σ) ) for a f L p (the right hand-side may be infinite). Remarkaby, there are cases where this statement hods with ony an L (Σ) norm on the eft side. In Coroary 1.13 we find a sizabe range of indices (d, p, ) that admit a oca-l bound on the gradient of ˆf, (1) φ ˆf L(Σ) φ ( f Lp(R d ) + φ ˆf ) H (Σ) for a f L p. The spaces Σ L k p that arise in Definition 1. are not a new construction. They appeared in [1] (see Proposition 1 in that paper) and [11] where the authors investigated the action of Bochner Riesz operators of negative order on these spaces. They arose in [4] in connection with Soboev type embedding theorems. We describe this deveopment in Subsection 1.4. In fact, the spaces Σ L k 1 payed the centra roe in the study of the spectra synthesis probem in 60s and 70s. We stress the work of Domar here (e.g. [7]) and wi rey upon it in Section.

5 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 5 It is worth noting that the main inequaity used to derive (9) and (10) is vaid for a functions in L p, not just those whose Fourier restriction vanishes on Σ. Essentiay it is the Stein Tomas biinear T T bound modified by a smoothing operator within the surface Σ and partia derivatives transverse to it. The formuation of this inequaity, which may be of independent interest, is given in (9) beow and the sharp range of p for which it hods is found in Theorem Statement of resuts. It foows from Definition 1. that the spaces Σ L k p get more narrow as we increase k: L p Σ L 1 p Σ L p... Σ L k p... Σ L p. The fina space can be defined as the cosure in L p of the set of Schwartz functions whose Fourier transform vanishes in a neighborhood of Σ. We caim that Σ L k p = Σ L p when k is sufficienty arge (i.e. the chain of spaces stabiizes). Here is the precise formuation. Theorem 1.3. We have Σ L k p = Σ L k+1 p = Σ L p provided k σ p = d p d+1 and p > 1. If p = 1, this is true provided k > d 1 = σ 1. For the case p = 1, this theorem was proved in [7], and the proof works for arbitrary p (except for, possiby, p =, which we do not consider here). The theorem is sharp in the sense that Σ L k p Σ L k+1 p provided k < σ p. d+ Theorem 1.4. The inequaity (9) is true if and ony if p [1, d+3+4k ], or equivaenty k κ p. d More generay, inequaity (10) is true for p [1, d+1+k ) and s max(0, k + 1 σ p k, k κ p ), where the notation indicates the smaest integer greater than or equa to the encosed vaue. This covers the entire range k < σ p. When p = 1 and σ 1 = κ 1 = d 1 N the vaue s = max(0, k d 1 ) is aso permitted. Remark 1.5. The p = 1, k = σ 1 = d 1 N endpoint case is handed in Coroary 6.13 beow, with inequaity (10) hoding for a s > k. The first caim in the theorem above is an iff statement. Usuay, the if part is much more invoved than the ony if one. In fact, the ony if part of Theorem 1.4 is proved with the standard Knapp exampe. Some of other theorems in the paper wi have richer coection of extremizers. Moreover, one and the same extremizer may prove sharpness of severa reated estimates. We coect the descriptions of such type extremizers (and thus, the proofs of the ony if parts) in Section 5. Theorem 1.4 says that the operator R k K : f ( k f) Σ acts continuousy from the space Σ L k d+ p to L (K) when p [1, d+3+4k ], or from Σ Lk p to H s (K) for some d combinations of (p, s) with p [1, d+1+k ). This aows us to define a new space (13) Ker R k = Ker R k K, K Σ which consists of a L p functions for which the (L or H s ) traces of a partia derivatives of order k vanish on Σ. Note that R k 1 is formay defined on Σ L k 1 p Σ L k p, and so on, thus we have vanishing of ower order derivatives as we. We aso note that in the case when Σ is compact, one does not need to use the intersection in (13) and may simpy write Ker R k = Ker R k Σ. It foows from definitions that Σ L k+1 p Ker R k. In fact, the two spaces must coincide. This ooks ike a trivia approximation statement, however we do not know a straightforward proof. Theorem 1.6. For any p [1, d+ d+3+4k ], the spaces ΣL k+1 p and Ker R k coincide with R k being regarded as a map from Σ L k p to L oc (Σ). This occurs when k κ p.

6 6 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV d For any p [1, d+1+k ), the spaces Σ Lk+1 p and Ker R k coincide with R k being regarded as a map from Σ Lk p to H s oc (Σ) for the same range of s as in Theorem 1.4. This occurs when k < σ p, or k σ 1 when p = 1. Since R k acts nontriviay on the Schwartz functions contained in Σ L k p, it foows that Σ L k p Σ L k+1 p this range of k. Remark 1.7. Theorems 1.3 and 1.6 competey cassify the spaces Σ L k p, moduo some detais about the optima target space for R k. Remark 1.8. In the papers [11] and [1], the condition ˆf = 0 on the unit sphere was understood in the sense of L traces. Theorem 1.4 covers many combinations k > s 0 that are forbidden in Theorem 1.1 by demanding that ˆf vanishes to order k 1 on Σ. We now introduce a famiy of statements which assume ony smoothness of ˆf Σ instead of vanishing. Besse spaces aready appear on the eft hand-side of inequaity (3), so it is reasonabe to use the same scae to describe the smoothness of ˆf Σ. In effect this is a bootstrapping caim, that reguarity of ˆf in the d 1 directions tangent to Σ impies a certain reguarity in the transverse direction as we. It is notabe that the inequaities hod even though f L p (and hence ˆf) is not uniquey determined by ˆf Σ. Definition 1.9. Let k be a natura number, et and s be non-negative reas, et p [1, ). We say that the higher derivative restriction property HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) hods true if for any smooth compacty supported function φ in d variabes, the estimate (14) (φ k ˆf) Σ H s (Σ) φ hods true for any Schwartz function f. ( f Lp(R d ) + φ ˆf ) H (Σ) Remark A compete generaization of Theorem 1.4 woud incude a priori estimates on φ j ˆf H j (Σ) for j = 0, 1,..., J k 1. We consider ony the J = 0 case above for reative simpicity of notation. Proposition If HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) hods true and p > 1, then in (15) (16) (17) (18) (19) k s + ; k s + 1; k < σ p ; k s + k κ p when k > s; k s κ p, where the numbers σ p and κ p are defined by (4) and (5) respectivey. In the case p = 1, equaity in (17) may aso occur. The sufficient conditions we are abe to provide for the HDR inequaities do not aways coincide with the necessary ones isted above. In fact, they get cose to necessary conditions when is reativey sma and there is a gap if is arge. By getting cose for sma we mean that the non-sharpness comes ony from our inabiity to work with non-integer k. The sufficient conditions we are abe to obtain are rather buky (this is again due to integer arithmetic ). They are formuated in terms of certain convex hus of finite coections of points in the pane. Since we need to introduce more notation before formuating the strongest avaiabe statement, we refer the reader to Theorem 4.1 in Section 4 for the detais and state a representative subset of the resuts here.

7 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 7 Theorem 1.1. Let p > 1 and κ p N. If 1 (0) κ p κ p, then HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) hods true provided (15), (16), (17), (18), and (19) are satisfied. If (0) does not hod, then HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) hods true provided (15) (19) are satisfied as we as the inequaity (1) s k κ p k κ p [ κ p ]. Here and in what foows, is the upper integer part of a number, i.e. the smaest integer that is greater or equa to the number; the notation [ ] denotes the ower integer part of a number, i.e. the argest integer that does not exceed the number: () [x] = sup{z Z z x}; x = inf{z Z z x}. The s = 0, k = 1 cases of Theorem 1.1 iustrate its abiity to extract derivatives of ˆf in a directions when ony reguarity aong Σ is assumed. Coroary Suppose p = d+ d+3+m Then (3) d 1 d+ p(d+3) for some integer m <, and et d+ p(d+5) = ( ˆf L(K) K,φ f Lp(R d ) + φ ˆf ) H (Σ). for any Schwartz function f, compact subset K Σ, and smooth cutoff φ that is identicay 1 on K. m m 1. In Section 5.4 we construct a transated Knapp exampe to show that the ower bound for is sharp. The property HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) has a dua formuation in terms of the Fourier extension operator. We denote the Lebesgue measure on Σ by dσ. Coroary Suppose HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) hods true and p < (e.g. if the conditions of Theorem 1.1 or Theorem 4.1 are satisfied). Then for each g H s (Σ), muti-index α with α k, and smooth compacty supported φ, there exist F α L p (R d ) and g α H (Σ) such that (4) F α + (φg α dσ)ˇ = x α (φg dσ)ˇ, and furthermore d d+1 (5) F α Lp (R d ) + g α H (Σ) φ g Hs (Σ). Conversy, if for any compacty supported smooth function φ, for any g, and for any α there exist F α and g α such that (4) and (5), then HDR(Σ, k, s,, p) hods true (we sti assume p < d d+1 ). Finay, we present the main anaytic too used in our proofs of HDR inequaities. We wi formuate it in oca form: now Σ is a graph of a function on R d 1 rather than an arbitrary submanifod. Let U be a neighborhood of the origin in R d 1. Let h be a C -smooth function on U such that h(0) = 0 and h(0) = 0. We aso assume that the Hessian of h at zero does not vanish, det h (0) 0. ζ Moreover, we assume that the gradient of h is sufficienty cose to zero and the second differentia is sufficienty cose to h ζ (0): (6) ζ U h ζ (ζ) 1 10d, h ζ (ζ) h ζ (0) 1 det h. 10 ζ (0) The function h naturay defines the famiy of surfaces Σ r = { (ζ, h(ζ) + r) ζ U }, r (, ).

8 8 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV We aso take some sma number ε > 0 and consider the set V = U ( ε, ε). We wi be using Besse potentia spaces adjusted to these surfaces. Now we wi need the precise quantity defining the Besse norm. It is convenient to parametrize everything with U. For γ R and a compacty supported function φ on Σ r (for some fixed r), define its H γ -norm by the formua (7) φ H γ (Σ = [ r) F ζ z φ(ζ, hr (ζ)) ] (z) ( 1 + z ) γ dz. R d 1 The symbo F denotes the Fourier transform in (d 1) variabes, and we have used the notation h r (ζ) = h(ζ) + r. We wi aso use the homogeneous norm φ Ḣ γ (Σ = [ r) F ζ z φ(ζ, hr (ζ)) ] (z) ( z γ dz, γ 0, d 1 ). R d 1 Since a our functions are supported on U, this norm is equivaent to the inhomogeneous norm (7) when γ (0, d 1 ). We wi often use another formua for the homogeneous norm: ( (8) φ Ḣ γ (Σ = C r) d,γ φ(ζ, h r (ζ))φ(η, h r (η)) ζ η γ d+1 dζ dη, γ 0, d 1 ). U U The constant C d,γ may be computed expicity, however, we do not need the sharp expression for it. Let α and β be integers between 0 and d 1 d 1, et γ [0, ) be rea, et p [1, ]. Let aso ψ be an arbitrary C0 function supported in U. We are interested in the surface inequaity" (9) ) β ( α ˆf ψ r Ḣ γ (Σ r) f L p(r d ). r=0 ξ α d So we compute the Fourier transform of an L p function, cacuate its derivative with respect to d-th coordinate, compute the Ḣ γ -norms of traces of this derivative on the surfaces Σ r, and then differentiate β times with respect to r. We use the variabe ξ for points in R d on the spectra side and ζ for points in R d 1 decoding points on Σ r (for exampe, ξ is quite often equa to (ζ, h(ζ))). Definition Let h satisfy the assumptions imposed on it above. We say that the statement SI(h, α, β, γ, p) hods true if (9) is true. Theorem Let γ [0, d 1 ). The statement SI(h, α, β, γ, p) is true if and ony if (30) (31) (3) and the inequaity (31) is strict if p > 1. α γ, α + β σ p, α γ + β κ p, Note that Theorem 1.1, except the endpoint case p = 1, k = d 1, foows from Theorem 1.16 (pick β = 0) moduo a ocaization argument (see Subsection 6.1 beow). We aso show in Subsection 6.3 that Theorem 1.1 has a direct proof by interpoating between [6] and the p = 1, k = d 1 endpoint. It is not cear to the authors whether one can derive the fu statement of Theorem 1.16 from the resuts of [6] or from Theorem 1.1 (which correspond to the cases α = β = 0 and β = 0 respectivey). Our proof seems to use a competey different strategy than the one in [6]. Our method aso aows us to work with Strichartz estimates, i.e. consider the arger scae of mixed-norm Lebesgue spaces on the right hand-side of (9). At ast, we want to emphasize that the passage from Theorem 1.16 to HDR inequaities is not immediate. The reader is invited to read a preview of this argument in the next section, where we give an overview of the paper.

9 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM Overview of proofs. We wi now sketch the proof Theorem 1.4 in the simpest non-trivia case k = 1. It wi show the main ideas behind the proofs of Theorems 1.4 and 1.16, and aso give some hints to the proof of Theorem 1.1. Sketch of the proof of Theorem 1.4, k = 1, s = 0. We start with ocaization. We use the notation introduced before Theorem 1.16 (the sets U, V, the functions h, ψ, etc.). Proposition The inequaity U ˆf (ζ, h(ζ))ψ(ζ) dζ ψ f ξ d Σ Lp hods true provided p [1, d+ d+7 ] and {(ζ, h(ζ)) ζ U} Σ. One can reduce the case k = 1, s = 0 in Theorem 1.4 to Proposition 1.17 via a standard partition of unity argument (a sma part of Σ might be represented as the graph {(ζ, h(ζ)) ζ U}). There is a technicaity that the fu gradient may be repaced with the partia derivative in the direction of the norma at zero. We wi present the argument in Subsection 6.1 beow. Proof of Proposition We may assume that f is Schwartz by definition of the space Σ L k p. We use the condition ˆf(ζ, h(ζ)) = 0 to express the integrand in another form: ˆf (ζ, h(ζ)) = 1 ( ˆf(ζ, ) h(ζ) + r) ξ d r r=0 (simpy appy the product rue to the right hand-side and note that a but one summands are zeros). Now, it suffices to prove the inequaity ( ˆf(ζ, ) h(ζ) + r) r r=0 ψ(ζ) dζ ψ f L p. U It is convenient to biinearize it: ( (33) [ r)]) ˆf(ζ, h(ζ) + r)ˆḡ(ζ, r h(ζ) + r=0 ψ(ζ) dζ ψ f Lp g Lp. U We consider the compex measure σ on R d supported on Σ: F dσ = F (ζ, h(ζ))ψ(ζ) dζ for any F C(U ( ε, ε)). U We may use the notion of a distributiona derivative to express the eft hand-side of (33) as σ, ˆf ˆḡ, R ξ d which, by the Panchere theorem, is equa to ( f F 1[ σ ]) ξd ḡ, where F is the Fourier [ transform ] in d variabes. So, the probem has reduced to the question whether convoution with F 1 σ is L ξd p L p bounded: f F 1[ σ ] [ f Lp, p 1, d + ]. Lp d + 7 ξ d

10 10 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV This inequaity may be proved with the hep of the standard Stein Tomas method. In our further arguments, it is more convenient to use the fractiona integration approach (see [18], 11..). So, the proof is naturay spit into three parts: ocaization, agebraic tricks that aow to use the vanishing condition, and the estimate of an operator between Lebesgue spaces. The proofs of the if parts of Theorems 1.4 and 1.1 foow simiar scheme. The ocaization argument is universa, and we pace it in Subsection 6.1. Theorem 1.16 pays the roe of the estimate on Lebesgue spaces. Its proof is situated in Section 3. It foows the genera strategy of the fractiona integration approach to the Stein Tomas Theorem. First, we prove Theorem 1.16 in the case p = 1 and aso provide sharp estimates on the absoute vaue of the kerne. This step, which is a simpe consequence of the Van der Corput Lemma in the cassica setting, becomes technicay invoved in our case. It is presented in Subsection 3.1. Then, we need to interpoate it with L estimates. This is done with the hep of a weighted version of the Stein Weiss inequaity. Though simiar generaizations of the Stein Weiss inequaity appear in the iterature (see, e.g., [16]), we did not manage to find the specific version we need. We present the proof in Subsection 6. and prove Theorem 1.16 in Subsection 3.. Subsection 3.3 is devoted to generaizations of Theorem 1.16 in the spirit of Strichartz estimates. The agebraic part needed to prove Theorem 1.4 is a direct generaization of what was presented above. However, the HDR inequaities require additiona effort. The derivation of Theorem 1.1 from Theorem 1.16 occupies Section 4. We wi have to consider the quantity on the eft of (14) as a function of k and s and study its convexity properties. The sufficient conditions isted in Proposition 1.11 then provide the domain of the function, and the condition ˆf H (Σ) defines some boundary behavior. The difficuty that we cannot overcome in the case of arge comes from ack of convexity of the domain. Section 5 coects the ony if parts of Theorems 1.4 and 1.16 as we as the proof of Proposition We spit the extremizers into three groups: those which originate from the surface measure conditions, those which are reated to Knapp exampes, and those which correspond to shifts in the rea space. For exampe, conditions (15) and (16) come from shifting functions, (17) comes from pugging the surface measure into (14), and conditions (19) and (18) come from Knapp exampes. Condition (18) is dictated by a specific shift of a Knapp-type function in the rea space. This condition and its sharp numeroogy are sti quite surprising to the authors Fredhom conditions and Soboev embeddings. Fredhom conditions. Functions whose Fourier transform vanish on a compact surface in R d, and in particuar on a sphere, arise in the study of spectra theory of Schrödinger operators H = + V. It is we known that the Lapacian has absoutey continuous spectrum on the positive hafine [0, ), and no eigenvaues or singuar continuous spectrum. If V (x) can be approximated by bounded, compacty supported functions in a suitabe norm (for exampe V L d/ (R d ) suffices when d 3), then H is a reativey compact perturbation of the Lapacian and may have countaby many eigenvaues with a possibe accumuation point at zero. If V is rea-vaued, then H is a sef-adjoint operator whose eigenvaues must a be rea numbers as we. It is not immediatey obvious how the continuous spectrum of H reates to that of the Lapacian, and whether any eigenvaues are embedded within it. An argument due to Agmon [1] proceeds as foows: Suppose ψ is a forma soution of the eigenvaue equation ( λ)ψ = V ψ for some λ > 0. Then (34) ψ = im ɛ 0 +( (λ + iɛ)) 1 V ψ from which it foows that the imaginary parts of V ψ, ψ and im ɛ 0 V ψ, ( (λ + iɛ)) 1 V ψ must agree. The former is ceary zero since V (x) is rea-vaued. The atter turns out to be a mutipe of (V ψ)ˆ Σ L (Σ), where Σ is the sphere {ξ Rd ξ = λ}. Hence (V ψ)ˆ vanishes on the sphere of radius λ.

11 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 11 It is not surprising that the Fourier mutipication operator m ɛ (ξ) = ( ξ (λ + iɛ)) 1 might have favorabe mapping properties when appied specificay to V ψ, whose Fourier transform vanishes where m ɛ (ξ) is greatest. Bootstrapping arguments using (34) show that ψ L (R d ), even if it was not assumed a priori to beong to that space. Viewed another way, the eigenvaue probem ( λ)ψ = V ψ is an inhomogeneous partia differentia equation were the principa symbo is eiptic. The Fredhom condition for existence of soutions is that V ψ shoud be orthogona to the nu-space of the adjoint operator ( λ). As we wi argue ater in Subsection.1, this nuspace consists of a distributions whose Fourier transform acts as a inear functiona on C (Σ). Thus V ψ satisfies the Fredhom condition precisey if (V ψ)ˆ Σ = 0. The anaysis in [1] is carried out in poynomiay weighted L (R d ) and appies to a wide famiy of eiptic differentia operators H = P (i ) + V. The main non-degeneracy condition is that the gradient of P does not vanish on the eve set {ξ P (ξ) = λ}. Simiar arguments in [1], [15] and [11] are carried out (for P (ξ) = ξ ) in L q (R d ) and reated Soboev spaces for various ranges of q. Curvature of the eve sets of P is a crucia feature in these works, as it is in the present paper. Soboev type inequaities. We start with the cassica Soboev Embedding Theorem f Lq f Lp, f C0 (R d ), q = dp, 1 p < d, d. d p For p > 1, it foows from the Hardy Littewood Soboev inequaity. In the imiting case p = 1, the Hardy Littewood Soboev inequaity fais, however, as it was proved by Gagiardo and Nirenberg, the Soboev Embedding hods. This happens because the space }) Ẇ1 1 (R d ) = cos L1 ({ f f C0 (R d ) is stricty narrower than L 1 (they are even non-isomorphic as Banach spaces). Later, it was observed that there are many simiar inequaities where f may be repaced with a more compicated differentia vector-vaued expression (see [4], [19], and the survey [0]). In [4], the second named author studied the anisotropic biinear inequaity (35) f, g Ẇ α,β ( 1 k τ )f L1(R ( k ) 1 σ )g, f, g L1(R ) C 0 (R ) (R ) (such type inequaities were used in [17] for purposes of Banach space theory). Here anisotropic Besse potentia space equipped with the norm = F 1( ˆf(ξ, η) ξ α η β) Lq, f Ẇ α,β q Ẇ α,β (R ) is the the symbos σ and τ denote compex scaars, and 1 and are partia derivatives with respect to the first and the second coordinates correspondingy. It appeared that (35) hods even in the cases where the differentia poynomias on the right hand-side are not eiptic, however, this may happen ony in the anisotropic case k. This ead to natura conjecture that the inequaity (36) f Ẇ α,β q ( k 1 σ )f Lp, α k + β = 1 ( 1 p 1 q )( 1 k + 1 ), k, p > 1, q <, might hod true. We are especiay interested in the case where the operator on the right hand-side is non-eiptic, that is i k σ R. Assume this is so. Simiar to the cassica proof of the Soboev Embedding Theorem, one may express f in terms of ( 1 k σ )f using a certain integra operator. This wi be a Bochner Riesz type operator of order 1 with the singuarity on the curve { Γ k, = (ξ, η) R (πiξ) k = σ(πiη) }. Note that this curve is convex outside the origin. Appication of the Littewood Paey inequaity and homogeneity considerations (see [4]) reduce (36) to the case where the spectrum of f ies in a sma

12 1 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV neighborhood of a point on Γ k,. So, by the resuts of [], the inequaity (36) is true if 1 p 1 q 3, p < 4 3, and q > 4. Moreover, one may construct exampes to show that the conditions 1 p 1 q 3 and p < 4 3 are necessary. Note that the Fourier transform of the function ( k 1 σ )f vanishes on Γ k,, which is a smooth convex curve in the pane (with, possiby, a singuarity at zero). Thus, we need to anayze the action of Bochner Riesz-type operator on the space Σ L p with Σ = Γ k,. It appears that passing to a narrower space aows to get rid of the condition q > 4. This work was done haf year ater in [11]. Theorem 1.18 ([4]+[11]). The inequaity (36) hods true if 1 p 1 q 3, 1 < p < 4 3, and q <.. Study of the spaces Σ L k p.1. Description of the annihiator and Domar s theory. Let Σ derivative of order with respect to Σ, Σ : S(R d ) C (Σ), denote the operator of norma Σ[Φ](ξ) = Φ n Σ (ξ)(ξ), Φ S(Rd ), ξ Σ. The symbo n Σ (ξ) denotes the norma vector to Σ at the point ξ. In particuar, Σ 0 [Φ] is simpy the restriction of Φ to Σ. There are conjugate operators ( Σ ) : (C (Σ)) S (R d ). We can aso form an operator J Σ : S(Rd ) 0 s C (Σ) composed of pure norma derivatives: ( ) S(R d ) Φ J Σ[Φ] = Σ[Φ], 0 Σ[Φ], 1..., Σ[Φ] C (Σ). This operator aso has an adjoint, which maps a vector-vaued distribution Λ = {Λ s } 0 s with compact support on Σ to a Schwartz distribution on R d. Lemma.1. Let p [1, ). The annihiator of Σ L k p in L p (37) Ann Lp ( Σ L k p) = cos Lp ( { g L p Λ 0 s k 1 0 s can be described as ( C (Σ) ) such that ĝ = ( J k 1 ) } ) [Λ] Σ. Remark.. Since the distribution Λ has compact support, g has bounded spectrum. Ceary, if Σ is not compact, one may construct a function g in the annihiator of Σ L p whose spectrum is not bounded. That is why we need to add cosure on the right hand-side of (37). In the case where Σ is compact, this is not needed: ( C (Σ) ) Ann Lp ( Σ L k p) = { g L p Λ 0 s k 1 such that ĝ = ( J k 1 ) } [Λ] Σ, Σ is compact. The proof of Lemma.1 presented beow aso simpifies in the case where Σ is compact. The functions ψ and Ψ may be omitted in this case. We wi need a technica fact to prove Lemma.1. It is standard, so we omit its proof. Lemma.3. For any bounded domain Ω, consider the subspace C (Σ, Ω, ) of vector-vaued functions in 0 s C (Σ) supported in Ω Σ. There exists a inear operator Ext Ω, : C (Σ, Ω, ) S(R d ), which is inverse to J Σ in the sense ϕ C (Σ, Ω, ) J Σ[ ExtΩ, [ϕ] ] = ϕ.

13 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 13 Proof of Lemma.1. First, we note that since Σ L k p is a transation invariant space, the set of functions g with compact spectrum is dense in Ann Lp ( Σ L k p). Consider such a function g. It suffices to construct Λ ( C (Σ) ) 0 s k 1 such that ĝ = ( J k 1 ) [Λ]. Σ Let Ω be a bounded domain containing the spectrum of g. Consider the operator Ext Ω,k 1 constructed in Lemma.3 and define Λ (as a functiona on 0 s k 1 C (Σ)) by the formua Λ[ϕ] = ĝ [ Ext Ω,k 1 [ψϕ] ], ϕ C (Σ), 0 s k 1 where ψ is a smooth function on Σ supported in Ω that is equa to one in a neighborhood of supp ĝ Σ. We are required to show that ĝ = ( J k 1 ) [Λ], Σ which becomes ĝ, Φ = ĝ, Ext Ω,k 1 [ψj k 1 Σ [Φ]] for every Φ S(R d ). Since ψ = 1 in a neighborhood of the support of ĝ, we may write ĝ, Ext Ω,k 1 [ψj k 1 Σ [Φ]] = ĝ, Ext Ω,k 1[J k 1 [ΨΦ]] and ĝ, Φ = ĝ, ΨΦ, where Ψ is smooth function supported in Ω that equas one in a neighborhood of supp ĝ. It remains to prove ( ) ĝ, id Ext Ω,k 1 J k 1 Σ [ΨΦ] = 0. Since Ker J k 1 Σ Ker ĝ (reca that g annihiates Σ L k p), it suffices to show that J k 1 Σ ( id Ext Ω,k 1 J k 1 ) Σ = 0, which hods true since J k 1 Σ Ext Ω,k 1 = id by construction of Ext Ω,k 1. Lemma.4. The set { g Lp Λ 0 s k 1 Σ C0 (Σ) such that ĝ = ( J k 1 ) } [Λ] is dense in Ann Lp ( Σ L k p) if p > 1. In the case p = 1, this set is weaky dense. Proof. The case p = 1 had been considered in [7]. We repeat the argument for the genera case here. Let g be a function in the said annihiator. After appying a partition of unity, we may assume that the corresponding vector-vaued distribution Λ provided by Lemma.1 is supported in a chart neighborhood V of a point ξ Σ, as it wi ony be necessary to sum a finite number of such pieces. We may aso suppose that ξ = 0 and (38) Σ V = {(ζ, h(ζ)) ζ U}, here U is a neighborhood of the origin in R d 1 and h: R d 1 R is a smooth function such that h(0) = 0, h(0) = 0 (see Subsection 6.1 for detais). By our assumptions on the principa curvatures of Σ, the second differentia h ζ is non-degenerate on U. Consider the operator S that makes Σ V fat: (39) S[Φ](ξ) = Φ ( ξ d, ξ d + h(ξ d) ), Φ C 0 (V ), ξ R d. We use the notation ξ = (ξ d, ξ d ), so ξ d is the ast coordinate of ξ and ξ d R d 1 is the vector consisting of first d 1 coordinates. Σ

14 14 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV Let ψ be a compacty supported smooth function on R d 1 with unit integra, et ψ n (ζ) = n d 1 ψ(nζ) be its diations. The function ξ ψ n (ξ d) is aso denoted by ψ n. Consider the famiy of operators D n, n n 0, n 0 is sufficienty arge, given by the rue (40) D n [Φ] = F 1[ S 1[ S[ΨˆΦ] ψ n ] ], Φ S(R d ). Here Ψ C 0 (V ) is a function that equas one on the support of Λ. It is cear that the D n are uniformy bounded as operators on L (R d ). Lemma 4. in [7] says that the D n are aso (uniformy in n) bounded as operators on L 1, and since the dua operators have an identica structure they are aso bounded on L. By interpoation, the D n are uniformy bounded on L p. Aso, since {ψ n } n N is an approximate identity, D n [Φ] Φ Lp 0 when Φ S(R d ). Thus, for every g L p, p <, we have D n [g] g Lp 0. It remains to notice that D n maps compacty supported distributions of the form F 1[ ( ) J k 1 [Λ] Σ ], Λ ( C (Σ) ), 0 s k 1 to the ones for which Λ 0 s k 1 C 0 (Σ). Thus, if g Ann Lp ( Σ L k p) is a function with bounded spectrum, then D n [g] Ann Lp ( Σ L k p), D n [g] is generated by smooth Λ, and D n [g] g in L p. Proof of Theorem 1.3. By Lemma.1, it suffices to show that any function g Ann Lp ( Σ L k+1 p ) can be approximated by functions in Ann Lp ( Σ L k p) when k d p d+1 we may assume that (41) ĝ = ( J k ) [Λ], Σ Λ C0 (Σ). 0 s k, and k > d 1 when p = 1. By Lemma.4, It suffices to prove that Λ k = 0, where Λ = (Λ 0, Λ 1,..., Λ k ). We may suppose that Λ is supported in a neighborhood V of a point on Σ. We may aso assume (38) and repace norma derivatives by derivatives with respect to ξ d : ĝ = k s=0 s Λs ξd s, where Λ s are distributions generated by compex measures on Σ V whose densities with respect to the Lebesgue measure on Σ are smooth functions. Note that Λ k = 0 whenever Λ k = 0. Since each function Λ s has smooth density with respect to the Lebesgue measure on Σ, one may use the stationary phase method to compute the asymptotics of F 1 [ Λ s ] at infinity (see, e.g. []): F 1 [ Λ s ] = e(x) x d 1 + O( x d+1 ) for a x such that x n Σ (ξ) for some ξ Σ with Λ s (ξ) 0. Here e(x) is a non-zero osciating factor with constant ampitude that depends on h and the density of Λ s. This shows that d 1 k ĝ(x) x, x, x nσ (ξ), Λ k (ξ) 0. On the other hand, ĝ L p, which for p > 1 requires p (k d 1 ) < d, equivaenty k < d p d+1, contradicting our assumptions. Therefore, Λ k = 0 and, thus, Ann Lp ( Σ L k+1 p ) = Ann Lp ( Σ L k p). If p = 1 the contradiction is reached provided k d 1 > 0. To show that Σ L k p = Σ L p, we note that the annihiator of the atter space consists of a L p functions whose Fourier transform is supported on Σ, reca the Schwartz theorem that any distribution supported on Σ may be represented in the form ( [ζ] JΣ) for some, and use the reasoning above.

15 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 15.. Coincedence of Σ L k p and the spaces defined as kernes of restriction operators. We reate the Σ L k p spaces with restriction operators. Consider a neighborhood V such that (38) hods true. We may redefine V in such a way that V = {ξ R d ξ d h(ξ d) < δ, ξ d U}. This gives a natura parametrization of V by U ( δ, δ). We wi need the transated copies of Σ: Σ r = Σ + (0, 0,..., 0, r), Note that this definition depends on the choice of U. Consider the restriction operators r ( δ, δ). (4) R Σ,r [f] = ˆf V Σr, f S(R d ). Definition.5. We say that the statement R(Σ, p, s) hods true if the R Σ,r admit continuous extensions as L p (R d ) H s (V Σ r ) operators for any choice of U, and the norms of these extensions are uniform in r (however, we do not require any uniformity with respect to U). We say that R k (Σ, p, s) is true if R k 1 (Σ, p, s) is true and for any choice of U the operators R Σ,r extend continuousy from the domain {f S(R d ) < k ˆf = 0 on Σ} to a famiy of mappings Σ L k p H s (V Σ r ) whose norms are bounded uniformy by C r k. Remark.6. In the definitions above it is important to be consistent with regard to the construction of oca Soboev norms on Σ r. When we discuss R(Σ, p, s), we wi define the Soboev norm by the rue (8) for each particuar choice of U, h, and r. Definition.7. For a fixed s 0, define the set Σ Lk p by the formua { Σ L k p = f L p (R d ) U R Σ,r [f] } = H s (V Σ o( r k 1 ). r) Note that it is uncear whether Σ Lk p is cosed in L p or not. Lemma.8. Suppose that Σ has non-vanishing curvature, p [1, ), and R k 1 (Σ, p, s) hods. Then, Σ Lk p = ΣL k p. Proof. It is cear that Σ L k p cos( Σ Lk p ), as Σ Lk p contains a Schwartz functions whose Fourier transform vanishes to order k 1 on Σ. In fact, thanks to the uniform convergence impied by condition R k 1 (Σ, p, s) it is even true that Σ L k p Σ Lk p. So it suffices to show that Σ Lk p Σ L k p. Assume the contrary. By the Hahn Banach theorem, ( ) f Σ Lk p, g Ann Lp, f, g 0. By Lemma.4, we may assume that g is of the form (43) ĝ = (J k 1 Σ ) [ζ], ζ C0 (Σ). Σ Lk p 0 s k 1 Appying the same reasoning as in the proof of Lemma.4, we may aso assume that ζ has compact support within a chart neighborhood V where Σ V is the graph of a smooth function h : U R d 1 R, h(0) = 0, and h(0) = 0. Reca the fattening" operator S defined in (39). There exists another set of functions ζ 0 s k 1 C 0 (U) such that (S 1 ) (J k 1 Σ ) [ζ] = (J k 1 ) [ ζ]. If one considers each component of ζ as an R d 1 eement of C0 (U) via the parametrization of Σ V, then the components of ζ are constructed from ζ, its gradients (in R d 1 ) up to order k 1, and the partia derivatives of h.

16 16 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV Let ψ be a compacty supported function on the unit interva whose integra equas one. Consider its diations ψ n (ξ d ) = nψ(nξ d ) and the forma convoution in the d-th variabe k 1 (J k 1 ) [ ζ](ξ R d, ) ψ d 1 n (ξ d ) = s=0 ζ s (ξ d) s ψ n ξd s (ξ d ), which is a function in C0 (U [ 1 n, 1 n ]). This function is bounded pointwise by the maximum size of ψ n (k 1) (ξ d ), which is approximatey n k. A of its partia derivatives in the ξ d directions are bounded by n k as we, because those derivatives act on ζ, not on ψ n. Now define g n S(R d ) by the formua g n (ξ d, ξ d ) = S [(J k 1 R d 1 ) [ ζ](ξ d, ) ψ n ] = S [(S 1 ) (J k 1 Σ ) [ζ](ξ d, ) ψ n ] = S [(S 1 ) [ĝ](ξ d, ) ψ n ]. It shoud be cear that convoution in the ξ d direction commutes with operators S and its inverse, thus the construction simpifies to ĝ n (ξ d, ξ d ) = ĝ(ξ d, ) ψ n (ξ d ), or g n (x) = g(x) ˇψ(nx d ). It foows that g n g in L p (in the case p = we have weak-* convergence reative to L 1 instead), which means that, f, g n f, g. On the other hand, { n k, r n 1 ; R Σ,r [g n ] H s (U) 0, r n 1. That gives a bound f, g n = ˆf, ĝ n 1 n 1 n Σ r ˆf, ĝ n dσdr 1 n nk o(n 1 k ) = o(1), forcing f, g = im n f, g n = 0. This contradicts the origina assertion that f, g 0. Definition.9. We say that the statement R k w(σ, p, s) hods true if the mapping S(R d ) f k f Σ C (Σ) extends to a bounded inear operator between the spaces Σ L k p and H s (K Σ) for any compact set K. It is expained in the Remark 6.3 beow that R k (Σ, p, s) eads to R k w(σ, p, s). We end this subsection with an anaog of Lemma.8 for HDR inequaities. The proof is direct, i.e. does not use duaity. Lemma.10. For any function f L p such that φ ˆf Σ H (Σ), where φ C 0 (R d ), there exists a sequence {f n } n of Schwartz functions such that f f n Lp + φ( ˆf ˆf n ) Σ H (Σ) 0. Proof. As usua, we may assume that φ and ˆf are supported in a chart neighborhood V of a point ξ Σ. We may aso suppose that ξ = 0 and (38), where U is a neighborhood of the origin in R d 1 and h: R d 1 R is a smooth function such that h = 0, h = 0 (see Subsection 6.1 for detais). By Theorem 1.3, in the regime σ p 0, the set of Schwartz functions whose Fourier transform vanishes on Σ, is dense in L p, and there is nothing to prove. Let us assume σ p > 0. We construct the functions F n by the rue ( x ) F n (x) = f(x)ψ, a n

17 RESTRICTIONS OF HIGHER DERIVATIVES OF THE FOURIER TRANSFORM 17 where Ψ is a fixed Schwartz function with Ψ(0) = 1 and bounded spectrum, and a n is a arge number such that f F n Lp n. The functions F n approximate f in L p norm, however, their Fourier transforms may have infinite H (Σ) norms. There is a contro on a weaker quantity, namey, Theorem 1.4 (in the case k = 0) says that (44) φ( ˆf ˆF n ) H s (Σ) n for sufficienty arge s. Let now f n = D n [F n ], where D n is the Domar operator (40). We need to prove two imit identities The first identity is simpe since f f n Lp 0, and ˆf ˆf n H (Σ) 0. f f n Lp f D n f Lp + D n [f F n ] Lp o(1) + n by the properties of the operators D n (see the proof of Lemma.4). For the second identity, we write φ( ˆf ˆf n ) H (Σ) φf[f D n f] H (Σ) + φf [ Dn [f F n ] ] H (Σ). Note that D n convoves the restriction to Σ of the Fourier transform of the function with ψ n (see (40)). Thus, the first summand tends to zero by the approximation of identity properties (and since ˆf Σ H ), and the second summand is bounded by O(n +s n ) by formua (44)..3. Proofs of if part in Theorem 1.4 and Theorem 1.6. Since R k (Σ, p, s) eads to R k w(σ, p, s), Theorem 1.4 foows from the emma beow. Lemma.11. The statement R k d+ d (Σ, p, 0) hods true if p [1, d+3+4k ]. For every p [1, d+1+k ) there exists s max(0, [k σ p ] + 1, k κ p ) such that R k (Σ, p, s) is true. When p = 1 and σ 1 = d 1 the vaue s = max(0, k d 1 d 1 ) suffices. Finay, in odd dimensions R Proof. Consider the case s = 0. It suffices to prove the bound ψ( ) ˆf(, h( ) + r) L (U) ψ r k f, Σ Lk p N, (Σ, 1, s) hods for s > d 1 ψ C 0 (U). By definition of Σ L k p, we may assume that f is a Schwartz function. Then, the function Θ given by the rue (45) Θ(r) = ψ( ) ˆf(, h( ) + r) L (U) is smooth. We need to prove Θ(r) r k f and for that, it suffices to show an inequaity and Σ p, Lk severa equaities. The inequaity is (46) r ( δ, δ) k Θ r k (r) f Lp, which foows from Theorem 1.16 (take α = 0, β = k, γ = 0, Σ r in the roe of Σ, and notice that (30) is d+ satisfied automaticay, (3) is equivaent to p [1, d+3+4k ], and (31) foows from (3) in this case). The equaities are (47) j [0..k 1] Indeed, we use the product rue: (48) j r j [ ψ( ) ˆf(, h( ) + r) L (U)] r=0 = i j C i j j Θ (0) = 0. rj ψ( ) i ˆf ξd i (, h( )), ψ( ) j i ˆf ξ j i d (, h( )) L (U).

18 18 MICHAEL GOLDBERG AND DMITRIY STOLYAROV and notice that in each scaar product on the right hand-side, one of the functions is identicay zero since either i < k or j i < k. It remains to combine (46), (47), and the Tayor integra remainder formua to compete the proof in the case s = 0. When k > κ p, the choice of α = 0, β = k, and γ = 0 is no onger avaiabe in Theorem Suppose p > 1. In order to use the product-rue argument above, one must set α + β = k, and it is desirabe to keep α as sma as possibe since γ α is a prominent ower bound for s. We can appy Theorem 1.16 with α = [k σ p ] + 1, β = k α (note that β 0 and α 0 here), and s = γ = max(α, k κ p ), then foow the above steps for ( ) α Θ 1 (r) = ψ( ) ˆf(, h( ) + r) r H s (U) to concude that β Θ 1 (r) f r β L p for a r ( δ, δ), and every ower order derivative vanishes at r = 0 because f Σ L k p. Thus ψ( )( r )α ˆf(, h( ) + r) H s (U) r β/ f Σ L. Furthermore, ( k p r )j ˆf(, h( ) + r) is assumed to vanish at r = 0 for each 0 j < α k. The Tayor remainder formua and the Minkowski inequaity show that ˆf(, h( ) + r) r α+β/ f Σ L, and we previousy set α + β k p = k. When p = 1 and k < σ 1 = d 1 N, it is aso permissibe to appy Theorem 1.16 with α = k d 1, β = k α, and s = γ = k d 1 d 1. In the endpoint case p = 1, k = N, Coroary 6.13 beow directy states that Θ 1 (r) f L 1 for s > d 1 and α = k = d 1. Proof of Theorem 1.6. Ceary, Σ L k+1 p Ker R k whenever R k is suitaby defined as a map from Σ L k+1 p into H s oc (Σ). To prove the reverse embedding, it suffices to show that Ker Rk Σ Lk+1 p, since by Lemmas.11 (with the vaue of s specified there) and.8, we have Σ L k+1 p = Σ Lk+1 p and s. d+ We first consider the case s = 0, p [1, d+3+4k ]. By Definition.7, we need to prove Θ(r) = o( r k ), r 0, f Ker R k for these choices of p where the function Θ is defined by (45). By Tayor integra remainder formua and (47), we simpy need to show a sight refinement of (46): (49) im r 0 k Θ r k (r) = 0, f Ker R k. Note that (46) hods for a f L p. By approximating any such f by Schwartz functions, we see that k Θ(r) is aso continuous in r. If f r k Σ L k p, the computation in (48) with j = k shows that k Θ(0) = C k r k k L (U), and for f Ker Rk Σ L k p, the norm on the right hand-side is zero. ψ k ˆf ξ k d The remaining case is essentiay the same. This time β Θ 1 (r) is continuous for a f L r β p, the ower order derivatives vanish at r = 0 for f Σ L k p, and finay β Θ 1 (0) = 0 if f Ker R k. r β Thus β Θ 1 (r) = o( r β ) and the rest of the integrations are the same as in Lemma.11. r β.4. Proof of Coroary Let X be the vector space of functions {f L p (R d ) φ ˆf H (Σ)} equipped with the norm f X = f Lp + φ ˆf H (Σ). This space contains a functions in the Schwartz cass, and convergence with respect to the Schwartz cass topoogy impies convergence in the norm of X. Thus every bounded inear functiona on X beongs to the cass of distributions S (R d ). Lemma.10 asserts that the Schwartz cass is dense in X. To show competeness of X, observe that by the k = 0 case of Theorem 1.1 (i.e. by [6]), if f n f in L p, then there exists s max(0, k κ p ) so