arxiv: v2 [math.ca] 13 May 2014

Transcription

1 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES arxiv: v2 [math.ca] 13 May 2014 SEBASTIAN KRÓL Abstract. The paper provides a complement to the classical results on Fourier multipliers on L p spaces. In particular, e prove that if q (1,2) and a function m : R C is of bounded q-variation uniformly on the dyadic intervals in R, i.e. m V q(d), then m is a Fourier multiplier on L p (R,dx) for every p q and every eight satisfying Muckenhoupt s A p/q -condition. We also obtain a higher dimensional counterpart of this result as ell as of a result by E. Berkson and T.A. Gillespie including the case of the V q(d) spaces ith q > 2. Ne eighted estimates for modified Littleood-Paley functions are also provided. 1. Introduction and Statement of Results For an interval [a,b] in R and a number q [1, ) denote by V q ([a,b]) the space of all functions m : [a,b] C of bounded q-variation over [a,b], i.e., m Vq([a,b]) := sup m(x) + m Varq([a,b]) <, x [a,b] here m Varq([a,b]) := sup{( n 1 i=0 m(t i+1) m(t i ) q ) 1/q } and the supremum is taken over all finite sequences a =: t 0 < t 1 <... < t n := b (n N). We rite D for the dyadic decomposition of R, i.e., D := { ±(2 k,2 k+1 ] : k Z }, and set { } V q (D) := m : R C : sup m I Vq(I) < I D (q [1, )). Moreover, let A p (R) (p [1, )) be the class of eights on R hich satisfy the Muckenhoupt A p condition. Denote by [] Ap the A p -constant of A p (R). If A (R) := p 1 A p (R) e rite M p (R,) for the class of all multipliers on L p (R,) (p > 1), i.e., M p (R,) := {m L (R) : T m extends to a bounded operator on L p (R,)}. HereT m standsfor the Fouriermultiplier ith the symbolm, i.e., (T m f) = m f (f S(R)). Note that M p (R,) becomes a Banach space under the norm m Mp(R,) := T m L(L p (R,)) (m M p (R,)). The main result of the paper is the folloing complement to results due to D. Kurtz [18], R. Coifman, J.-L. Rubio de Francia, S. Semmes [8], and E. Berkson, T. Gillespie [4]. Theorem A. (i) Let q (1,2]. Then, V q (D) M p (R,) for every p q and every Muckenhoupt eight A p/q (R). (ii) Let q > 2. Then, V q (D) M p (R,) for every 2 p < ( q ) 1 and every Muckenhoupt eight A p/2 ith s > (1 p( q )) Mathematics Subject Classification. 42B25 (42B15). Key ords and phrases. eighted Fourier multipliers, eighted inequalities, Littleood-Paley square functions, Muckenhoupt eights. The author as supported by the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. 1

2 2 SEBASTIAN KRÓL Here, for every A (R), e set s := sup{s 1 : RH s (R)} and e rite RH s (R) if ( ) 1/s ( 1 b 1 (x) s 1 b dx (x)dx) <. b a b a sup a<b a Recall that, by the reverse Hölder inequality, s (1, ] for every Muckenhoupt eight A (R). For the convenience of the reader e repeat the relevant material from the literature, hich e also use in the sequel. Recall first that in [18] D. Kurtz proved the folloing eighted variant of the classical Marcinkieicz multiplier theorem. Theorem 1 ([18, Theorem 2]). V 1 (D) M p (R,) for every p (1, ) and every Muckenhoupt eight A p (R). As in the uneighted case, Theorem 1 is equivalent to a eighted variant of the Littleood-Paley decomposition theorem, hich asserts that for the square function S D correspondingto the dyadic decompositiond of R, S D f p, f p, (f L p (R,)) for every p (1, ) and A p (R); see [18, Theorem 1], and also [18, Theorem 3.3]. Here and subsequently, if I is a family of disjoint intervals in R, e rite S I for the Littleood-Paley square function corresponding to I, i.e., S I f := ( I I S If 2) 1/2 (f L 2 (R)). Recall also that in [26] J.-L. Rubio de Francia proved the folloing extension of the classical Littleood-Paley decomposition theorem. Theorem 2 ([26, Theorem 6.1]). Let 2 < p < and A p/2 (R). Then for an arbitrary family I of disjoint intervals in R the square function S I is bounded on L p (R,dx). Applying Rubio de Francia s inequalities, i.e. Theorem 2, R. Coifman, J.-L. Rubio de Francia, and S. Semmes [8] proved the folloing extension and improvement of the classical Marcinkieicz multiplier theorem. (See Section 2 for the definition of R 2 (D).) Theorem 3 ([8, Théorème 1 and Lemme 5]). Let 2 q <. Then, V q (D) M p (R) for every p (1, ) such that 1 p 1 2 < 1 q. Furthermore, R 2 (D) M 2 (R,) for every A 1 (R). Subsequently, a eighted variant of Theorem 3 as given by E. Berkson and T. Gillespie in [4]. According to our notation their result can be formulated as follos. Theorem 4 ([4, Theorem 1.2]). Suppose that 2 p < and A p/2 (R). Then, there is a real number s > 2, depending only on p and [] Ap/2, such that 1 s > p and V q (D) M p (R,) for all 1 q < s. Note that the part (i) of Theorem A fills a gap hich occurs in Theorem 1 and the eighted part of Theorem 3. The part (ii) identifies the constant s in Berkson- Gillespie s result, i.e., Theorem4, as( s p) 1, here s s := s 1, and in general, this constant is best possible. Except for some details, the proofs given belo reproduce ell-knon arguments from the Littleood-Paley theory; in particular, ideas hich have been a

3 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 3 presented in [18], [8], [26], and [29]. A ne point of our approach is the folloing result on eighted estimates for modified Littleood-Paley functions S I q( ) := ( I I S I( ) q ) 1/q (q (1,2]), hich may be of independent interest. Theorem B. (i) Let q (1,2), p > q, and A p/q (R). Then, there exists a constant C > 0 such that for any family I of disjoint intervals in R S I q f p, C f p, (f L p (R,dx)). Moreover, for every q (1,2), p > q and V A p/q (R) ith sup V [] Ap/q < sup { S I q f p, : V, I a family of disjoint intervals in R, f p, = 1 } <. (ii) For any family I of disjoint intervals in R and every Muckenhoupt eight A 1 (R), the operator S2 I maps L2 (R,dx) into eak-l 2 (R,dx), and { } sup S2f I L 2, : V, I a family of disjoint intervals in R, f L 2 = 1 < for every V A 1 (R) ith sup V [] A1 <. Moreover, if q (1, 2), then for any ell-distributed family I of disjoint intervals in R and every Muckenhoupt eight A 1 (R), the operator S I q maps L q (R,dx) into eak-l q (R,dx). Recall that a family I of disjoint intervals in R is ell-distributed if there exists λ > 1 such that sup x R I I χ λi(x) <, here λi denotes the interval ith the same center as I and length λ times that of I. Note that the validity of the A 1 -eighted L 2 -estimates for square function S I = corresponding to an arbitrary family I of disjoint intervals in R, i.e., S I 2 S I 2 f 2, C f 2, (f L 2 (R,dx), A 1 (R)), is conjectured by J.-L. Rubio de Franciain [26, Section 6, p.10]; see also [12, Section 8.2, p. 187]. Theorem B(ii), in particular, provides the validity of the eak variant of Rubio de Francia s conjecture. Notice that in contrast to the square function operatorss I 2, in general, operators S I q (q [1,2)) are not bounded on (uneighted) L q (R); see [9]. Moreover, in [24] T.S. Quek proved that if I is a ell-distributed family of disjoint intervals in R, then the operator S I q maps Lq (R) into L q,q (R) for every q (1,2). Note that this result is in a sense sharp, i.e., L q,q (R) cannot be replaced by L q,s (R) for any s < q ; see [24, Remark 3.2]. Therefore, Theorem B provides also a eighted variant of this line of researches. Cf. also relevant results given by S.V. Kisliakov in [17]. Furthermore, as a consequence of our approach e also get a higher dimensional analogueoftheorema,seetheoremcinsection4,hichextendsearlierresultsby Q.Xu[29]; seealsom. Lacey[19, Chapter4]. Sincethe formulationoftheoremc is more involved and its proof is essentially the iteration of one-dimensional arguments e refer the reader to Section 4 for more information. Thepart(ii)ofTheoremAisaquantitativeimprovementof[4, Theorem1.2]due to E. Berkson and T. Gillespie. Furthermore, e present an alternative approach based on a version of the Rubio de Francia extrapolation theorem that holds for limited ranges of p hich as recently given in [1]. The organisation of the paper is ell-reflected by the titles of the folloing sections. Hoever, e conclude ith an additional comment. The proof of Theorem A

4 4 SEBASTIAN KRÓL is based on eighted estimates from the part (i) of Theorem B. To keep the pattern of the proof of the main result of the paper, Theorem A, more transparent, e postpone the proof of Theorem B(ii) to Section Proofs of Theorems B(i) and A We first introduce auxiliary spaces hich are useful in the proof of Theorem A. Let q [1, ). If I is an interval in R e denote by E(I) the family of all step functions from I into C. If m := J I a Jχ J, here I is a decomposition of I into subintervals and (a J ) C, rite [m] q := ( J I a J q ) 1/q. Set R q (I) := {m E(I) : [m] q 1} and Moreover, let R q (D) := { m : R C : m I R q (I) for every I D }. R q (I) := λ j m j : m j R q (I), j and m Rq(I) := inf λ j : m = j j Note that ( R q (I), Rq(I)) is a Banach space. Set { } R q (D) := m : R C : sup m I Rq(I) < I D j λ j < λ j m j, m j R q (I) (m R q(i)). (q [1, )). In the sequel, if I is a family of disjoint intervals in R, e rite S I 1f := sup I I S I f (f L 1 (R)) and S I rf := ( I I S I(f) r ) 1/r (r (1,2],f L r (R)). We next collect main ingredients of the proof of Theorem B(i), hich provides crucial vector-valued estimates for eighted multipliers in the proof of Theorem A; see e.g. (3). Lemma 5 is a special version of the result on eighted inequalities for Carleson s operator given by J.-L. Rubio de Francia, F. J. Ruiz and J. L. Torrea in [25]; see also [25, Remarks 2.2, Part III]. Lemma 5 ([25, Theorem 2.1, Part III]). Let s (1, ) and A s (R). Then, there exists a constant C > 0 such that for any family I of disjoint intervals in R S I 1 f s, C f s, (f L s (R,dx)). Moreover, for every s > 1 and every set V A s (R) ith sup V [] As < sup { S I 1 s, : V, I a family of disjoint intervals in R } <. Remark 6. The second statement of Lemma 5 can be obtained from a detailed analysis of the constants involved in the results hich are used in the proof of [25, Theorem 2.1(a) (b), Part III], i.e., the eighted version of the Fefferman-Stein inequality and the reverse Hölder inequality. Recall the eighted version of the Fefferman-Stein inequality, hich in particular saysthatforeveryp (1, )andeverymuckenhoupteight A p (R)thereexists

5 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 5 a constant C p, > 0, hich depends only on p and [] Ap, such that Mf(t) p (t) dt C p, M # f(t) p (t) dt (f L p (R) L p (R,)), (1) R R herem andm denotethehardy-littleoodmaximaloperatorandthefefferman- Stein sharp maximal operator, respectively; see [15, Theorem, p.41], or [14, Theorem 2.20, Chapter IV]. We emphasize here that the constant C p, on the right-hand side of this inequality is not given explicitly in the literature, but it can be obtained fromadetailedanalysisofthe constantsinvolvedinthe resultshichareusedinthe proofof (1), sup V C p, < for every subset V A p (R) ith sup V [] Ap <. Furthermore, it should be noted that if V A p (R) ith sup V [] Ap <, then there exists ǫ > 0 such that V A p ǫ (R) and sup V [] Ap ǫ <. It can be directly obtained from a detailed analysis of the constants involved in main ingredients of the proof of the reverse Hölder inequality. Cf., e.g., [20, Lemma 2.3]. We refer the reader to [14, Chapter IV] and [12, Chapter 7] for recent expositions of the results involved in the proof of the reverse Hölder inequality and the Fefferman-Stein inequality, hich originally come from [7], and [22], [23]. The next lemma is a special variant of Rubio de Francia s extrapolation theorem; see [26, Theorem 3]. For the convenience of the reader e rephrase [26, Theorem 3] here in the context of Muckenhoupt eights merely. Lemma 7 ([27, Theorem 3]). Let λ and r be fixed ith 1 λ r <, and let S be a family of sublinear operators hich is uniformly bounded in L r (R,dx) for each A r/λ (R), i.e., Sf r dx C r, f r dx (S S, A r/λ (R)). If λ < p,α < and A p/λ (R), then S is uniformly bounded in L p (R,dx) and even more: ( S j f j α ) p/α dx C p,α, ( f j α ) p/α dx (f j L p (R,dx), S j S). j j Combining Lemma 5 ith Theorem 2 e get the intermediate eighted estimates for operators Sq I (q (1,2)) stated in Theorem B(i). For the background on the interpolation theory e refer the reader to [3]; in particular, see [3, Chapter 4 and Section 5.5]. Proof of Theorem B(i). Fix q (1,2) and A 2/q (R). By the reverse Hölder inequality, A 2/r (R) for some r (q,2). Note that there exist p (2,q ) and s > 1 such that p 1 q p +(1 p q ) 1 s = 1 r. Therefore, combining Theorem 2 ith Lemma 5, by complex interpolation, the operator S(2q I /p) is bounded on L r (R,v) for every v A 1 (R). Since p > 2, the same conclusion holds for Sq. I By Rubio de Francia s extrapolation theorem, Lemma 7, e get that Sq I is bounded on L 2 (R,v) for every v A 2/r (R). According to our choice of r, e get the boundedness of Sq I on L2 (R,). Since the eight as taken arbitrarily, e can again apply Rubio de Francia s extrapolation theorem, Lemma 7, to complete the proof of the first statement. The second statement follos easily from a detailed analysis of the first one. For a discussion on the character of the dependence of constants in Rubio de Francia s

6 6 SEBASTIAN KRÓL iteration algorithm, e refer the reader to [11], or [10, Section 3.4]. See also the comment on the reverse Hölder inequality in Remark 6. Note that R q (I) V q (I) for every interval I in R and q [1, ). Hoever, the folloing reverse inclusions hold for these classes. Lemma 8 ([8, Lemme 2]). Let 1 q < p <. For every interval I in R, V q (I) R p (I) ith the inclusion norm bounded by a constant independent of I. The patterns of the proofs of the parts (i) and (ii) of Theorem A are essentially the same. Therefore, e sketch the proof of the part (ii) belo. Proof of Theorem A. (i) We only give the proof for the more involved case q (1,2); the case q = 2 follos simply from Theorem 3 and interpolation arguments presented belo; see also Remark 9 belo. Fix q (1,2). We first sho that for every subset V A 2/q (R) such that sup V [] A2/q < e have sup { T mχi 2, : m R q (D), m Rq(D) 1, V,I D } <. Fix V A 2/q (R) ith sup V [] A2/q <. Note that, by the definition of the R q -classes, it is sufficient to prove the claim ith R q (D) replaced by R q (D). Fix m R q (D) and set mχ I =: J I I a I,J χ J for every I D, here I I = I I,m is a decomposition of I and (a I,J ) J II C is a sequence ith J I I a I,J q 1. Note that T mχi f = J a I,JS J f and T mχi f 2, Sq II f 2, for every I D, V and f L 2 (R,). Therefore, by Lemma 5, our claim holds. By interpolation argument, e next sharpen this claim and prove that for every subset V A 2/q (R) ith sup V [] A2/q < there exists α = α(q,v) > 1 such that sup { T mχi 2, : m R αq (D), m Rαq(D) 1, V,I D } <. (2) Note that, by the reverse Hölder inequality, see also Remark 6, there exists α > 1 such that α A 2/q (R) ( V) and sup V [ α ] A2/q <. From hat has already been proved and Plancherel s theorem, for every I D and V the bilinear operators R q (I) L 2 (R, α dx) (m,f) T m f L 2 (R, α dx) L (R) L 2 (R) (m,f) T m f L 2 (R) are ell-defined and bounded uniformly ith respect to V and I D. Therefore, by complex interpolation, (R q (I),L (R)) [ 1 α ] M 2(R,). Hoever, it is easy to check that R αq (I) (R q (I),L (R)) [ 1 α ] ith the inclusion norm bounded by a constant independent of I D. We thus get (2). In consequence, by Lemma 8, it follos that sup { T mχi 2, : m V q (D), m Vq(D) 1, V,I D } < (3) for every subset V A 2/q (R) ith sup V [] A2/q <. Hence, e can apply a truncation argument based on Kurtz eighted variant of Littleood-Paley s inequality. Namely, fix A 2/q (R), m V q (D) ith m Vq(D) 1, and f L 2 (R) L 2 (R,), g L 2 (R,) L 2 (R, 1 ). Note that

7 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 7 g L 2 (R) and A 2/q (R) A 2 (R). Therefore, combining the Cauchy-Scharz inequality and Kurtz result, [18, Theorem 1], e get: (T m f,g) L 2 (R,) = S I (T m f)s I (g)dx I D R C ( T mχi S I f 2 ) 1/2 ( S I (g) 2 ) 1/2 I D 2, I D 2, 1 C f 2, g 2,, here C is an absolute constant independent of m, f and g. No the converse of Hölder inequality and a density argument sho that m M 2 (R,). Consequently, V q (D) M 2 (R,), andrubiodefrancia sextrapolationtheorem, Lemma 7, yields V q (D) M p (R,) for every p > q and every Muckenhoupt eight A p/q (R). It remains to prove that V q (D) M q (R,) for every A 1 (R). Fix m V q (D) and A 1 (R). Then, by Theorem 3 (see also Remark 9), T m is bounded on L r (R) for every r (1, ). From hat has already been proved, T m is bounded on L r (R,) for every r > q. Therefore, the boundedness of T m on L q (R,) follos by the reverse Hölder inequality for and a similar interpolation argument as before. This completes the proof of the part (i). (ii) Fix q > 2 and s > q 2. Let V s := { A 1 (R) : RH s (R)}. Note that there exists r = r s > q such that 1 1 s s r < 1 q. Fix V s. By Theorem 3, the bilinear operators R r (D) L 2 (R) (m,f) T m f L 2 (R) R 2 (D) L 2 (R, s ) (m,f) T m f L 2 (R, s ) are ell-defined and bounded. By interpolation, it follos that M 2 (R,) (R 2 (D),R r (D)) [ 1 s ] R αq(i) uniformly ith respect to I D, here α = α s := ( 1 2s + 1 s r ) 1 /q > 1. As in the corresponding part of the proof of (i), by truncation and duality arguments, e get R αq (D) M 2 (R,). Consequently, since α s > 1 for every s > q 2, by Lemma 8, V q (D) M 2 (R,) for every V s (R). (4) Note that this is precisely the assertion of (ii) for p = 2. We can no proceed by extrapolation. Since for every s > q 2 e can rephrase V s as A2 (R) RH 2 ( (R), by [10, Theorem 3.31], e get 2s 2 ) V q (D) M p (R,) for every s > q 2, 2 < p < 2s, and A p(r) RH 2 ( (R). 2s p ) (5) Finally, it is easy to see that for every 2 p < q = 2(q 2 ) and A p/2 (R) ith s > (1 p( q )) 1 = ( 2 p (q 2 ) ) there exists s = s p, > q 2 such that p < 2s and RH ( 2s. Therefore, (5) completes the proof of (ii). p ) s> q 2

8 8 SEBASTIAN KRÓL Remark 9. In the proof of Theorem A e use Theorem 3 due to Coifman, Rubio de Francia, Semmes. Note that the patterns of all proofs are essentially the same. Indeed, e can rephrase the proof of [8, Théorème 1] as follos. First recall that M p (R) = M p (R) for every p (1, ). Let r 2. By the Littleood-Paley decomposition theorem, Rubio de Francia s inequalities, and Plancherel s theorem, the bilinear operators R 2 (D) L r (R) (m,f) T m f L r (R) L (R) L 2 (R) (m,f) T m f L 2 (R) are ell defined and bounded. Therefore, by interpolation, (R 2 (D),L (R)) [θ(r)] M p (R), here θ(r) (0,1) and p such that 1 p = θ(r)1 r +(1 θ(r))1 2. Note that if p 2 and q satisfies 1 q > p, then there exists r > 2 such that R αq (I) (R 2 (D),L (R)) [θ(r)] for an appropriateα > 1 and uniformly ith respect to I D. Indeed, 1 2 θ(r) ց p as r. Therefore, Lemma 8 completes the proof of Theorem 3(i). 3. Proof of Theorem B(ii) We obtain the proof of Theorem B(ii) by means of a Banach function space analogue of Kurtz eighted variant of Littleood-Paley inequalities and the Fefferman- Stein inequality; see Lemma 10 belo. Note that ithout loss of generality in the proof of Theorem B(ii) one can consider only families consisting of bounded intervals in R. For a bounded interval I I e rite W I for Whitney s decomposition of I (see [26, Section 2] for the definition). Note also that each decomposition W I, i I, is of dyadic type. Furthermore, the family W I := I I W I is ell-distributed, i.e., sup χ 2I (x) 5. x R I W I We referthe readerprimarilyto [2] for the backgroundonfunction spaces. In the sequel, let E denote a rearrangement invariant Banach function space over (R, dx). Recall that, by Luxemburg s representation theorem [2, Theorem 4.10, p.62], there exists a rearrangement invariant Banach function space E over (R +,dt) such that for every scalar, measurable function f on R, f E if and only if f E, here f stands for the decreasing rearrangement of f. In this case f = f for every f E. Folloing [21], e define the loer and upper Boyd indices respectively by logt p := lim t logh (t) and logt q := lim t 0+ logh (t), here h (t) = D t L( ) and D t : E E (t > 0) is the dilation operator defined by D t f(s) = f(s/t), 0 < t <, f E. One alays has 1 p q, see for example [2, Proposition 5.13, p.149], here the Boyd indices are defined as the reciprocals ith respect to our definitions. Let be a eight in A (R). Then e can associate ith E and a rearrangement invariant Banach function space over (R, dx) as follos E = {f : R C measurable : f E},

9 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 9 and its norm is f = f, here f denotes the decreasing rearrangement of f ith respect to dx. For further purposes, recall also that examples of rearrangement Banach function spaces are the Lorentz spaces L p,q (1 p, q ). Note that L p, = eak L p (R,) for every p (1, ) and A (R). The Boyd indices can be computed explicitly for many examples of concrete rearrangement invariant Banach function spaces, see e.g. [2, Chapter 4]. In particular, e have p = q = p for E := L p,q (1 < p <, 1 q ); see [2, Theorem 4.6]. Lemma 10. Let E be a rearrangement invariant Banach function space on (R, dx) such that 1 < p,q <. Then the folloing statements hold. (i) For every Muckenhoupt eight A pe (R) there exists a constant C, such that for any family I of disjoint bounded intervals in R C 1, SI f S WI f C, S I f (6) and Mf C, M f (7) for every f E. Moreover, if V A pe (R) ith sup V [] ApE <, then sup V C, <. (ii) For every r (1, ) and every Muckenhoupt eight A pe (R) there exists a constant C r,, such that for any family I of disjoint intervals in R ( ) 1/r ( ) 1/r S I f I r C r,, f I r (8) I I for every (f I ) I I E (l r (I)). The proof follos the idea of the proof of [26, Lemma 6.3], i.e., it is based on the iteration algorithm of the Rubio de Francia extrapolation theory. We refer the reader to [10] for a recent account of this theory; in particular, see the proofs of [10, Theorems 3.9 and 4.10]. We provide belo main supplementary observations hich should be made. Proof of Lemma 10. Note that e can restrict ourself to finite families I of disjoint bounded intervals in R. The final estimates obtained belo are independent of I, and a standard limiting argument proves the result in the general case. According to [18, Theorem 3.1], for every Muckenhoupt eight A 2 (R) there exists a constant C 2, such that C 1 2, SI f L 2 (R,) S WI f L 2 (R,) C 2, S I f L 2 (R,) (f L 2 (R,)). (9) Moreover, one can sho that sup V C 2, < for every subset V A 2 (R) ith sup V [] A2 <. Therefore, e are in a position to adapt the extrapolation techniques from A 2 eights; see for example the proof of [10, Theorem 4.10, p. 76]. Fix E and A pe (R) as in the assumption. Let E be the associate space of E, see [2, Definition I I

10 10 SEBASTIAN KRÓL 2.3, p. 9]. Let R = R : E E and R = R : E E be defined by M j h(t) Rh(t) = 2 j M j, 0 h E, and R h(t) = j=0 j=0 S j h(t) 2 j S j, 0 h E, here Sh := M(h)/ for h E. As in the proof of [10, Theorem 4.10, p. 76] the folloing statements are easily verified: (a) For every positive h E one has h Rh and Rh 2 h, and Rh A 1 ith [Rh] A1 2 M. (b) For every positive h E one has h R h and R h 2 h, and (R h) A 1 ith [(R h)] A1 2 S. The last lines in (a) and (b) follo from the estimates M(Rh) 2 M Rh and M((R h)) 2 S (R h)), respectively, hich in turn follo from the definitions of R and R. Note that f L 2 (R, f,h ) for every f E and every positive h E, here g,h := (Rg) 1 (R h) for every 0 g E and 0 h E. Moreover, by Boyd s interpolation theorem, the Hilbert transform is bounded on E. Therefore, by the ell-knon identity relating partial sum operators S I and the Hilbert transfopozostayrm, since I is finite, e get that S I f E for every f E. Similarly, combining Kurtz inequalities, [18, Theorem 3.1], ith Boyd s interpolation theorem, e conclude that S WI f E (I I), and consequently S WI f E for every f E. Finally, a close analysis of the proof of [10, Theorem 4.10] shos that e can take C, := 4sup{C 2,g,h : 0 g E,0 h E, g 2, h = 1}. Recall that for every p (1, ) there exists a constant C p > 0 such that M L p C p [] p /p A p for every Muckenhoupt eight A p (R); see [5]. A detailed analysisof Boyd sinterpolationtheorem shosthat sup V max( M, S ) < for every V A pe (R) ith sup V [] ApE <. By the so-called reverse factorization (or by Hölder s inequality; see e.g. [12, Proposition 7.2]), and by properties (a) and (b), e obtain that g,h A 2 (R) and [ g,h ] A2 [Rg] A1 [(R h)] A1 4 M S for every 0 g E and 0 h E. Therefore, on account of the remark on the constants C 2, in (9), e get the desired boundedness property of constants C,. This completes the proof of (6). Note that, by the eighted Fefferman-Stein inequality, see Remark 6, and the basic inequality M f 2Mf (f L 1 loc (R)), the analogous reasoning as before yields (7). Forthe proofofthe part (ii), forfixed r (1, ) it is sufficient to applyrubio de Francia sextrapolationalgorithmfroma r eightsinthesamemannerasabove.

11 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 11 Let W be a ell-distributed family of disjoint intervals in R, i.e., there exists λ > 1 such that sup x R I I χ λi(x) <. Folloing [26, Section 3], consider the smooth version of S W, G = G W, defined as follos: let φ be an even, smooth function such that ˆφ(ξ) = 1 on ξ [ 1 2, 1 2 ] and supp ˆφ [ λ/2,λ/2]. Let φ I (x) := e 2πicI x I φ( I x) (x R), here c I stands for the center of an interval I W and I for its length. Then, ( ) 1/2 Gf := G W f := φ I f 2 I W (f L 2 (R)). Since φ I (ξ) = 1 for ξ I, and φ I (ξ) = 0 for ξ / λi, by Plancherel s theorem, G is bounded on L 2 (R). Recall that the crucial step of the proof of [26, Theorem 6.1] consists in shoing that the Hilbert space-valued kernel related ith G satisfies eak-(d 2 ) condition (see [26, Part IV(E)] for the definition). This leads to the folloing pointise estimates for G: M (Gf)(x) CM( f 2 )(x) 1/2 ( a.e. x R) (10) for every f L (R) ith compact support, and a constant C depending only on λ. In particular, G is bounded on L p (R,) for every p > 2 and every Muckenhoupt eight A p/2 (R). Proof of Theorem B(ii). We can assume that I is a finite family of bounded intervals in R. By a standard limiting arguments e easily get the general case. We start ith the proof of the statement of Theorem B(ii) for q = 2. Recall that p = q = 2 for E := L 2, ; see [2, Theorem 4.6]. Fix A 1 (R) and f L (R) ith compact support. Note that the classical Littleood-Paley theory shos that G WI is bounded on L 2 for every I I. Consequently, G = G WI maps L 2 into itself. Therefore, combining Lemma 10, Lebesgue s differentiation theorem and (10) e get S I f L 2, C S WI f L 2, C Gf L 2, C M(Gf) L 2, C M (Gf) L 2, C M( f 2 ) 1/2 L 2, = C M( f 2 ) 1/2 C f L 2, L 1, here C is an absolute constant independent on I and f. The last inequality follos from the fact that the Hardy-Littleood maximal operator M is of eak (1,1) type. Furthermore, one can sho that for every subset V A 1 (R) ith sup V [] A1 < e have sup V C <. Since S I is continuous on L 2 and the space of all functions in L (R) ith compact support is dense in L 2 e get the desired boundedness for S I. This completes the proof of the statement of Theorem B(ii) for q = 2. We no proceed by interpolation to sho the case of q (1,2). Let W be a ell-distributed family of disjoint intervals in R, and G denote the corresponding smooth varsion of S W. First, it is easily seen that φ I f ( φdx)mf for every f L 1 loc (R) and I W. Moreover, analysis similar to the above shos that G maps L 2 (R) into L 2, (R) for every A 1 (R). Therefore, for every A 1 (R) the

12 12 SEBASTIAN KRÓL operators L 1 f (φ I f) I W L 1, (l ) L 2 f (φ I f) I W L 2, (l 2 ) are bounded. Fix q (1,2) and A 1 (R). By interpolation arguments, e conclude that the operator L q f (φ I f) I W L q, (lq ) is ell-defined and bounded. To sho it one can proceed analogously to the proof of a relevant result [24, Lemma 3.1]. Therefore, e omit details here. Since p = q = q for E := L q,, see [2, Theorem 4.6], by Lemma 10(ii), for every A 1 (R) e get S W q f L q, = ( I W C q, ( S I (φ I f) q ) 1/q L q, I W φ I f q ) 1/q L q, here C q, is an absolute constant. This completes the proof. C q, f L q, Remark 11. We concludeith the relevantresult on A 2 -eightedl 2 -estimatesfor square functions S I corresponding to arbitrary families I of disjoint intervals in R, i.e., S I 2, C f 2, (f L 2 ). Accordingto[25, PartIV(E)(ii)], theseeighted endpoint estimates can be reached by interpolation provided that I is a family such that S I admits an extension to abounded operatoron(uneighted) L p (R) for some p < 2. This observation leads to a natural question: for hich partitions I of R do there exist local variants of the Littleood-Paley decomposition theorem, i.e., there exists r 2 such that S I is bounded on L p (R) for all 1 p 1 2 < 1 r. Recall that L. Carleson, ho first noted the possible extension of the classical Littleood-Paley inequality for other types of partitions of R, proved in the special case I := {[n,n+1) : n Z} that the corresponding square function S I is bounded on L p (R) only if p 2; see [6]. Moreover, it should be noted that such lack of the boundedness of the square function S I on L p (R) for some p < 2 occurs in the case of decompositions of R determined by sequences hich are in a sense not too different from lacunary ones. Indeed, applying the ideas from [13, Section 8.5], e sho belo that even in the case of the decomposition I of R determined by a sequence (a j ) j=0 (0, ) such that a j+1 a j λ φ(j)j, here λ > 1 and φ(j) 0 + arbitrary sloly as j, the square function S I is not bounded on L p (R) for every p < 2. If I is a bounded interval in R, set f I for the function ith f I = χ I. Then, f I =, and for every p > 2 and every ǫ > 0 there exists c > 0 such that sin( I π ) π( ) 1 c I 1/p f I p c I 1/p for all intervals I ith I > ǫ. This simply observation allos to express [13, Theorem 8.5.4] for decompositions of R instead of Z. Namely, if a = (a j ) j=0 (0, ) is an increasing sequence such that a j a j 1 as j, and I a :=

13 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 13 {( a 0,a 0 )} {±[a j 1,a j )} j 1, then the boundedness of S Ia on L p (R) for some p > 2, 1/p +1/p = 1, implies that there exists a constant C p > 0 such that a 2/p k C p k (a j a j 1 ) 2/p (k 1). (11) j=1 Moreover, it is straightforard to adapt the idea of the proof of [13, Corollary 8.5.5] to give the folloing generalization. Let a = (a j ) j=0 (0, ) be an increasing sequence such that a j+1 a j λ ψ(j), here λ > 1, the function ψ C 1 ([0, )) is increasing and satisfies the condition: ψ(s)/s 0 and ψ (s) 0 as s. If the square function S Ia ere bounded on L p (R) for some p > 2, then (11) yields ( ) 2/p k 1 k+1 λ ψ(s) ds C p λ ψ(s)2/p ds (k 1). 0 Hoever, this leads to a contradiction ith the assumptions on ψ Higher dimensional analogue of Theorem A The higher dimensional extension of the results due to Coifman, Rubio de Francia and Semmes [8] as established essentially by Q. Xu in [29]; see also M. Lacey [19, Chapter 4]. We start ith higher dimensional counterparts of some notions from previous sections. Here and subsequently, e consider only bounded intervals ith sides parallel to the axes. Let q 1 and d N. For h > 0 and 1 k d e rite (k) h for the difference operator, i.e., ( (k) h m )(x) := m(x+he k ) m(x) (x R d ) for any function m : R d C, here e k is the k-th coordinate vector. Suppose that J is an interval in R d and set J =: Π d i=1 [a i,a i +h i ] ith h i > 0 (1 i d). We rite ( ) ( J m) := (1) h 1... (d) h d m (a), here a := (a 1,...,a d ) and m : R C. Moreover, for an interval I in R d and a function m : R d C e set ( ) 1/q m Varq(I) := sup J m q, J here J ranges over all decompositions of I into subintervals. Folloing Q. Xu [29], see also [19, Section 4.2], the spaces V q (I) for intervals in R d are defined inductively as follos. The definition of V q (I) (q [1, )) for one-dimensional intervals is introduced in Section 1. Suppose no that d N\{1} and fix an interval I = I 1... I d in R d. For a function m : R d C, e rite m V q (I) if m Vq(I) := sup m(x) + sup m(x 1, ) Vq(I 2... I d ) + m Varq (I) <. x I x 1 I 1 J J

14 14 SEBASTIAN KRÓL Subsequently, D d stands for the family of the dyadic intervals in R d. The definition of the spaces (V q (D d ), Vq(D d )) (d 2, q [1, )) is quite analogous to the corresponding ones in the case of d = 1 from Section 1. For a Banach space X, an interval I in R and q 1, e consider belo the vector-valued variants V q (I;X), R q (I;X), and R q (I;X) of the spaces V(I), R q (I), and R(I), respectively. Note that V q (I;X) R p (I;X) for any 1 q < p and any interval I in R ith the inclusion norm bounded by a constant depending only on p and q; see [29, Lemma 2]. Moreover, higher dimensional counterparts of these spaces e define inductively as follos: let I := Π d i=1 I i be a closed interval in R d (d 2). Set R q (I) := R q (I 1 ; R q (I 2... I d )) and Ṽq(I) := V q (I 1 ;Ṽq(I 2... I d )), here R q (I d ) := R(I d ) and Ṽq(I d ) := V q (I d ). Recall also that for any 1 q < p and any interval I in R d (d 1) e have V q (I) Ṽq(I) R p (I) (12) ith the inclusion norm bounded by a constant independent of I. Finally, edenote by A p(r d ) (p [1, )) the classofeightson R d hich satisfy the strong Muckenhoupt A p condition. Note that, in the case of d = 1, A p (R) is the classical Muckenhoupt A p (R) class (p [1, )). We refer the reader, e.g., to [18] or [14, Chapter IV.6] for the background on A p -eights. The folloing complement to [29, Theorem (i)] is the main result of this section. Theorem C. Let d 2 and q (1,2]. Then, V q (D d ) M p (R d,) for every p q and every eight A p/q (Rd ). (ii) Let d 2 and q > 2. Then, V q (D d ) M p (R d,) for every 2 p < ( q ) 1 and every eight A p/2 (Rd ) ith s > (1 p( q )) 1. Lemma 12. For every d N, q (1,2], p > q, and every subset V A p/q (Rd ) ith sup V [] A p/q (Rd ) < e have R q (D d ) M p (R d,) ( V) and { sup T mχi p, : m R q (D d ), m Rq(D d ) 1, V, I Dd} <. Here R q (D d ) (q 1) stands for the space of all functions m defined on R d such that mχ I R q (I) for every I D d and sup I D d mχ I Rq(I) <. Define Ṽq(D d ) similarly. The classes R q (D d ) and A p (Rd ) are ell adapted to iterate one-dimensional arguments from the proof of Theorem A(i). Therefore, belo e give only main supplementary observations should be made. Proof of Lemma 12. We proceed by induction on d. The proof of the statement of Lemma 12 for d = 1 and p = 2 is provided in the proof of Theorem A(i). The general case of d = 1 and p > q follos from this special one by means of Rubio de Francia s extrapolation theorem; see Lemma 7. Assume that the statement holds for d 1; e ill prove it for d + 1. Let m R q (D d+1 ) ith m Rq(D d+1 ) 1. By approximation, e can assume that m I R q (I 1 ; R q (I 2... I d+1 )) for every I := I 1... I d+1 D d+1. Set m I := J I I γ I,J a I,J χ J, here γ I,J 0 ith J γq I,J 1 and a I,J R q (I 2... I d+1 ) ith a I,J Rq(I 2... I d+1 ) = 1 for every I Dd+1. Here I I stands for a decomposition of I 1 corresponding to m I.

15 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 15 Let q (1,2], p q and V q,p A p/q (Rd+1 ) ith sup V [] A p/q (Rd+1 ) <. By Lebesque s differentiation theorem, for every A r(r d+1 ) (r > 1) one can easily shothat(,y) A p/q (R), (x, ) A p/q (Rd ),and[(,y)] Ap/q (R),[(x, )] A p/q (Rd ) [] A p/q (Rd+1 ) for almost every y R d and x R; see e.g. [18, Lemma 2.2]. Therefore, by induction assumption, for every q (1,2] and p [q, ) \ {2} there exists a constant C q,p > 0 independent of m and V q,p such that for every V q,p : sup { T ai,j p,(x, ) : J I I, I D d+1} C q,p for a.e. x R. (13) Let f(x,y) := φ(x)ρ(y) ((x,y) R d+1 ), here φ S(R) and ρ S(R d ). Note that the set of functions of this form is dense in L q (R d+1,). Indeed, by the strong doubling and open ended properties of A p-eights, e get (1+ ) dr L 1 (R d ) (r > 1, A r(r d )); see e.g. [28, Chapter IX, Proposition 4.5]. Hence, this claim follos from the standard density arguments. Moreover, e have T mi f = J γ I,JS J φt ai,j ρ. In the sequel, e consider the case of q (1,2) and q = 2 separately. For q (1,2), by Fubini s theorem, e get T mi f q q, J I I R S J φ q T ai,j ρ q dydx ( V q,q,i D d+1 ). R d Therefore, by Theorem B(i) and (13), e conclude that { sup T mi q, : V q,q, m R q (D d+1 ), m Rq(D d+1 ) 1, I Dd+1} <. Consequently, by Rubio de Francia s extrapolation algorithm, see [27, Theorem 3] or [10, Chapter 3], the same conclusion holds for all p > q. For q = 2, by Fubini s theorem and Minkoski s inequality, e conclude that T mi f p p, R S II φ(x) p ( J I I γ 2 I,J T a I,J ρ 2 p,(x, ) )p 2 dx ( V 2,p,I D d+1 ). for every p > 2. Hence, by Theorem 2 and (13), e get the statement of Lemma 12 also for q = 2. Proof of Theorem C. Note first that for every V A 1 (Rd ) ith sup V [] A 1 <, by the reverse Hölder inequality, there exists s > 1 such that s A 1 (Rd ) ( V) and sup p 2, V [ s ] A <. Thus, by Lemma (12) and an interpolation p/2 argument similar to that in the proof of Theorem A(i), e get { sup T mχi 2, : V, m R 2 (D d ), m R2(D d ) 1, I Dd} <. Therefore, as in the proofof Theorem A(i), one can sho that for every q (1,2] and every subset V A 2/q (Rd ) ith N := sup V [] A <, there exists a 2/q constant α = α(d,q,n) > 1 such that R αq (D d ) M 2 (R d,) ( V) and { sup T mχi 2, : m R αq (D d ), m Rαq(D d ) 1, V, I Dd} <. No, by means of (12), Kurtz eighted variant of Littleood-Paley s inequalities, [18, Theorem 1], and Rubio de Francia s extrapolation theorem, [27, Theorem 3], the rest of the proof of (i) runs analogously to the corresponding part of the proof of Theorem A(i).

16 16 SEBASTIAN KRÓL Consequently, by (i), the proof of the part (ii) follos the lines of the proof of Theorem A(ii). References [1] P. Auscher, J. M. Martell, Weighted norm inequalities, off-diagonal estimates and elliptic operators. Part I. General operator theory and eights. Adv. Math. 212 (2007), [2] C. Bennett and R. Sharpley, Interpolation of operators, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 129, Academic Press Inc., Boston, MA, [3] J. Berg and J. Löfström, Interpolation Spaces - An Introduction, Springer, Berlin [4] E. Berkson, T. A. Gillespie, Multipliers for eighted L p-spaces, transference, and the q- variation of functions, Bull. Sci. Math. 122 (1998), [5] S. M. Buckley, Estimates for operator norms on eighted spaces and reverse Jensen inequalities, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 340 (1993), [6] L. Carleson, On the Littleood-Paley theorem, Report, Mittag-Leffler Inst., Djursholm, [7] R. R. Coifman and C. Fefferman, Weighted norm inequalities for maximal functions and singular integrals, Studia Math. 51 (1974), [8] R. R. Coifman, J.-L. Rubio de Francia, S. Semmes, Multiplicateurs de Fourier de L p(r) et estimations quadratiques (French) C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Sr. I Math. 306 (1988), [9] M. Coling, T. Tao, Some light on Littleood-Paley theory, Math. Ann. 321 (2001), [10] D. V. Cruz-Uribe, J. M. Martell, and C. Pérez, Weights, extrapolation and the theory of Rubio de Francia, Operator Theory: Advances and Applications, vol. 215, Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, [11] O. Dragicević, L. Grafakos, M. C. Pereyra, S. Petermichl, Extrapolation and sharp norm estimates for classical operators on eighted Lebesgue spaces, Publ. Mat. 49 (2005), [12] J. Duoandikoetxea, Fourier analysis, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 29, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2001, Translated and revised from the 1995 Spanish original by David Cruz-Uribe. [13] R. E. Edards, G. I. Gaudry, Littleood-Paley and multiplier theory, Springer, Ne York, [14] J. García-Cuerva and J. L. Rubio de Francia, Weighted norm inequalities and related topics, North-Holland Math. Stud. 116, North-Holland, [15] J-L. Journé, Calderón-Zygmund operators, pseudodifferential operators and the Cauchy integral of Calderón, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, vol. 994, Springer, Berlin, [16] J.-L. Journé, Calderón-Zygmund operators on product spaces, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 1 (1985), [17] S. V. Kislyakov, The Littleood-Paley theorem for arbitrary intervals: eighted estimates, (Russian) Zap. Nauchn. Sem. S.-Peterburg. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (POMI) 355 (2008), Issledovaniya po Lineinym Operatoram i Teorii Funktsii. 36, , 239; translation in J. Math. Sci. (N. Y.) 156 (2009), [18] D. S. Kurtz, Littleood-Paley and multiplier theorems on eighted L p spaces, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 259 (1980), [19] M. T. Lacey, Issues related to Rubio de Francia s Littleood-Paley inequality, NYJM Monographs, 2. State University of Ne York, University at Albany, Albany, NY, pp. (electronic). [20] A. K. Lerner, S. Ombrosi, An extrapolation theorem ith applications to eighted estimates for singular integrals, J. Funct. Anal. 262 (2012), [21] J. Lindenstrauss and L. Tzafriri, Classical Banach Spaces I, II, Springer Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, Ne York, [22] B. Muckenhoupt, Weighted norm inequalities for the Hardy maximal function, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 165 (1972), [23] B. Muckenhoupt, The equivalence of to conditions for eight functions, Studia Math. 49 (1974), [24] T. S. Quek, Littleood-Paley type inequality on R, Math. Nachr. 248/249 (2003), [25] J.-L. Rubio de Francia, F. J. Ruiz and J. L. Torrea, Calderón-Zygmund theory for operatorvalued kernels, Adv. in Math. 62 (1986), [26] J.-L. Rubio de Francia, A Littleood-Paley inequality for arbitrary intervals, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 1 (1985), 1-14.

17 FOURIER MULTIPLIERS ON WEIGHTED L p SPACES 17 [27] J.-L. Rubio de Francia, Factorization theory and A p eights, Amer. J. Math. 106 (1984), [28] A. Torchinsky, Real-variable methods in harmonic analysis, Reprint of the 1986 original [Dover, Ne York; MR ]. Dover Publications, Inc., Mineola, NY, xiv+462 pp. [29] Q. Xu, Fourier multipliers for L p(r n ) via q-variation, Pacific J. Math. 176 (1996), S. Król, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Nicolaus Copernicus University, ul. Chopina 12/18, Toruń, Poland, and Institut für Analysis, Fachrichtung Mathematik, TU Dresden, Dresden, Germany address: sebastian.krol@mat.umk.pl