arxiv: v1 [math.ca] 30 Aug 2018

Transcription

1 ON THE EXTENSION OF WHITNEY ULTRAJETS, II arxiv: v [math.ca] 30 Aug 08 ARMIN RAINER AND GERHARD SCHINDL Abstract. We characterize the validity of the Whitney extension theorem in the ultradifferentiable Roumieu setting with controlled loss of regularity. Specifically, we show that in the main Theorem.3 of [5] condition (.3) can be dropped. Moreover, we clarify some questions that remained open in [5].. Introduction The main goal of this paper is to prove: Theorem. Let ω be a non-quasianalytic concave weight function. Let σ be a weight function satisfying σ(t) = o(t) as t. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (i) For every compact E R n the jet mapping je : B{ω} (R n ) B {σ} (E) is surjective. (ii) There is C > 0 such that ω(tu) u du Cσ(t)+C for all t > 0. (Here B {ω} denotes the Roumieu class defined by the weight function ω; we use the symbol B to emphasize that the defining estimates are global, cf. [5,. and.6].) It means that Theorem.3 of [5] holds without the assumption (.3) that the associated weight matrix S of σ satisfies S S T S C j : S j js j C T T. () Theorem is proved in Section. In Section 3 we clarify some questions that remained open in [5] and obtain several characterizations of concave weight functions. For an overview of the bacground of Theorem we refer to the introduction in [5]. We use the notation and the definitions of said paper; the concept of weight matrices is recalled in the appendix at the end of this paper. Note that in the special case that ω and σ coincide we recover the result of []: Corollary. Let ω be a weight function. The following conditions are equivalent: (i ) For every compact E R n the jet mapping je : B{ω} (R n ) B {ω} (E) is surjective. (ii ) There is C > 0 such that ω(tu) u du Cω(t)+C for all t > 0. Date: August 3, Mathematics Subject Classification. 6E0, 30D60, 46E0, 58C5. Key words and phrases. Whitney extension theorem in the ultradifferentiable setting, Roumieu type classes, controlled loss of regularity, properties of weight functions. The first author was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) Project P 6735-N5. The second author was supported by FWF-Project J 3948-N35; within this project, he is an external researcher at the Universidad de Valladolid (Spain) for the period October 06 September 08.

2 A. RAINER AND G. SCHINDL Indeed, if ω satisfies (ii ) then it is non-quasianalytic, equivalent to a concave weight function [9, Proposition.3], and ω(t) = o(t) as t [, Remar 3.0]. That (ii ) is a necessary condition for (i ) is well-nown.. Proof of Theorem Preparations. First we recall a few definitions and facts. Let m = (m ) be a positive sequence satisfying m 0 = and m /. The log-convex minorant of m is given by t m := sup exp(ω m (t)), N, where ( t ) ω m (t) := suplog, t > 0. N m The function ω m is increasing, convex in logt, and zero for sufficiently small t > 0. Related is the function h m (t) := inf N m t, for t > 0, and h m (0) := 0. It is increasing, continuous, positive for t > 0, and equals for large t. Let m = (m ) be a positive log-convex sequence (i.e., m = m) such that m 0 = and m /. Then the functions Γ m and Γ m defined in [5, Definition 3.] coincide, we simply write Γ m in this case; note that log-convexity and m / imply m /m. Thus { Γ m (t) = min{ : h m (t) = m t } = min : m + }, t > 0. () m t By [5, Lemma 3.], Γ m is decreasing tending to as t 0 and m t is decreasing for Γ m (t). (3) Recall that with every weight function σ (always understood as defined in [5, Section.]) is associated a weight matrix S = {S ξ } ξ>0, where S ξ := exp( ξ ϕ (ξ ) ), (here ϕ = σ exp and ϕ is its Young conjugate), such that B {σ} = B {S} and B (σ) = B (S) algebraically and topologically; cf. [5,.5] and []. In the following we set s ξ := Sξ /!. The next proposition shows that for a weight function σ which is equivalent to a concave weight function and satisfies σ(t) = o(t) as t we additionally have B {σ} = B {S} and B (σ) = B (S), where S = {S ξ } ξ>0 and S ξ :=!sξ. In particular, S satisfies (). We say that S ξ is strongly log-convex meaning that s ξ = Sξ /! is log-convex. (Note the abuse of notation: Sξ is not necessarily the log-convex minorant of S ξ ; this will cause no confusion.) Recall that two weight functions ω and σ are called equivalent if ω(t) = O(σ(t)) and σ(t) = O(ω(t)) as t ; this means that they define the same ultradifferentiable class. Proposition 3. Let σ be a weight function satisfying σ(t) = o(t) as t which is equivalent to a concave weight function. For each ξ > 0 there exist constants A,B,C > 0 such that A s ξ/b s ξ sξ C s Bξ for all N. (4)

3 ON THE EXTENSION OF WHITNEY ULTRAJETS, II 3 Moreover, there is a constant H such that s ξ j+ Hj+ l for all ξ > 0 and all j, N and thus h s ξ(t) h (Ht) for all ξ > 0 and all t > 0. Proof. Clearly, s ξ s ξ. Let S ξ :=!sξ. By [6, Lemma 3.6], ω S ξ and ω S ξ are equivalent, in particular, there exists C such that By [5, Lemma.4(3)] and [4, Remar.5], we have ω S ξ Cω S ξ +C. (5) ω S ξ ω S ξ for all ξ > 0. If n is an integer such that B := n C, then ω S ξ ω S ξ/b +C and hence S ξ = sup t exp(ω S ξ(t)) e C sup t exp(ω S ξ/b(t)) = e C S ξ/b. This shows the first inequality in (4). By [5, Lemma 3.3], there exists D such that for all ξ > 0, and therefore s ξ = sup ω (t) ω s ξ(dt) for t > 0 (Dt) exp(ω s ξ(dt)) D sup t exp(ω (t)) = D ( ). Thus, by [6, Theorem 9.5.] (which is a generalization of [8]), that there exists a constant H such that s ξ j+ Hj+ j sξ for all j,. That h s ξ(t) h (Ht) for all ξ > 0 and all t > 0 follows from [5, Lemma 3.]. By [7, Proposition 3.6], ω S ξ(t) ω S ξ(ht) for t > 0 for some (possibly different) H. As above, using (5), we find ω S Bξ(bt) ω S ξ(t)+ for some constant 0 < b. Then S Bξ = sup The last inequality of (4) follows. (bt) exp(ω S Bξ(bt)) e b sup t exp(ω S ξ(t)) = e b S ξ. Proposition 3 alone is not enough to get rid of the assumption (). It is not clear that S has the property that for all S S there is a T S such that S /S T /T. Note that S has this property (see [5, Lemma.4(4)]) and it enters crucially in Lemma 3.4 and Proposition 3.7 of [5]. We deal with this problem by introducing another intimately related weight matrix V := {V ξ } ξ>0. For each ξ > 0 we define V ξ :=!vξ by setting v ξ := min 0 j sξ j sξ j, N. (6) That means that for the sequence of quotients v ξ /vξ we have (cf. [7, Lemma 3.5]) ( v ξ ) ( v ξ, vξ 0 v ξ, vξ 3 v ξ, vξ 4 s ξ ) v ξ,... =, sξ, sξ, sξ, sξ 3, sξ 3, Thus the sequence v ξ = (v ξ ) is log-convex and satisfies v ξ v ξ = vξ v ξ = sξ for all. (7)

4 4 A. RAINER AND G. SCHINDL So, in view of (), Γ (t) = Γ v ξ(t) for all t > 0. (8) By Proposition 3, there is H such that for all ξ > 0 s ξ H v ξ H for all N. (9) Thus, we also have B {σ} = B {V} and B (σ) = B (V) algebraically and topologically. Proof of Theorem. The implication (i) (ii) follows from []. So we only prove the opposite implication. Condition (ii) means that the weight function κ(t) := ω(tu) u du (0) satisfies κ(t) = O(σ(t)) as t, i.e., B {σ} B {κ}. Now κ is concave and κ(t) = o(t) as t, see [9, Proposition.3]. We will show that Whitney ultrajets of class B {κ} admit extensions of class B {ω}. Thus from now on we assume without loss of generality that σ = κ is concave. Since ω is increasing we have σ = κ ω and hence, if W = {W ξ } ξ>0 denotes the weight matrix associated with ω, S ξ S ξ W ξ for all ξ > 0. () Moreover, Proposition 3 as well as (8) and (9) apply. Let us now indicate the necessary changes in the proof of [5, Theorem.3]. The changes also lead to some simplifications. We provide details in the hope that this contributes to a better understanding. Every Whitney ultrajet F = (F α ) of class B {σ} on the compact set E R n is an element of B {V ξ} (E) for some ξ > 0, i.e., there exist C > 0 and ρ such that F α (a) Cρ α V ξ α, α Nn, a E, () (R af) α (b) Cρ + α!v ξ + b a + α, N, α, a,b E. (3) Let p N be fixed (and to be specified later). Let {ϕ i,p } i N be the partition of unity providedby [5, Proposition4.9], relativeto the family of cubes {Q i } i N from [5, Lemma 4.7], and let r 0 = r 0 (p) be the constant appearing in this proposition. The center of Q i is denoted by x i. We claim that an extension of class B {ω} of F to R n is provided by { i N f(x) := ϕ i,p(x)t p(xi) i F(x), if x R n \E, F 0 (x), if x E, where, given x R n \E, is any point in E with d(x) := d(x,e) = x and p(x) := max{γ (Ld(x)),0}. Recall that Q i is the closed cube with the same center as Q i expanded by the factor 9/8. By [5, Corollary 4.8], d(x) d(x i) 3d(x) for all x Q i. (4) Then d(x) < /(3L ) guaranteesthat both Γ (Ld(x i)) and Γ (Ld(x)) are, by (), thus p(x i ) = Γ (Ld(x i )) and p(x) = Γ (Ld(x)). Replace [5, Lemma 5.] by the following lemma. The only difference in the proof is that one uses (8) instead of [5, (5.4)].

5 ON THE EXTENSION OF WHITNEY ULTRAJETS, II 5 Lemma 4. There is a constant C 0 = C 0 (n) > such that, for all Whitney ultrajets F = (F α ) α of class B {V ξ} that satisfy () and (3), all L C 0 ρ, all x R n, and all α N n, and, if α < p(x), (T p(x) F) (α) (x) C(L) α + V ξ α, (5) (T p(x) F) (α) (x) F α () C(L) α + α!v ξ α +d(x). (6) We remar that (here and below) by (T p(x) F) (α) (x) we mean the α-th partial derivative of the polynomial y T p(x) F(y) evaluated at y = x. Replace [5, Lemma 5.3] by: Lemma 5. There is a constant C = C (n) > 0 such that for all L > C ρ, all β N n, and all x Q i with d(x) < /(3Lsξ ), β (T p(xi) i F T p(xi)) F)(x) CL β + S ξ β h (Ld(x i)). (7) Proof. It suffices to consider β p(x i ) = Γ (Ld(x i )) =: q. Let H denote the left-hand side of (7). By [5, Lemma 5. and Corollary 4.8] and (6), H C(n ρ) q β!v ξ q (6d(x i)) q β C(n ρ) q β!( q ) (6d(x i )) q β. By the definition of q, h (Ld(x i )) = q (Ld(x i)) q (Ld(x i)) for all. Thus ( n ρ ) ql H C β β! L β h (Ld(x i)). If L > n ρ, then (7) follows. Replace [5, Lemma 5.4] by: Lemma 6. There is a constant C = C (n) > 0 such that for all L > C ρ, all β N n, and all x Q i with d(x) < /(3Lsξ ), β (T p(xi) F T p(x) 3L ) β +S ξ F)(x) C( n β h sξ(3ld(x)). (8) Proof. Both p(x i ) and p(x) are majorized by Γ v ξ(ld(x)/), indeed, by (8), (4), and since Γ v ξ is decreasing, p(x i ) = Γ (Ld(x i )) Γ (Ld(x i )) = Γ v ξ(ld(x i )) Γ v ξ(ld(x)/). So the degree of the polynomial T p(xi) F T p(x) F is at most Γ v ξ(ld(x)/). The valuation of the polynomial is equal to min{p(x i ),p(x)}+ (unless p(x i ) = p(x) in which case (8) is trivial) and so at least Γ (3Ld(x)) =: q, by (4). So if H denotes the left-hand side of (8), then (see the calculation in [5, (5.7)]) H C β! Γ v ξ(ld(x)/) (n ρd(x)) j v ξ (nd(x)) β j. j=q By (3), v ξ j (Ld(x)/)j v ξ q (Ld(x)/)q for q j Γ v ξ(ld(x)/). By the definition of q, h (3Ld(x)) = q (3Ld(x)) q (3Ld(x)) for all. With (6) this

6 6 A. RAINER AND G. SCHINDL leads to H C β! (nd(x)) β C β! (nd(x)) β Γ v ξ(ld(x)/) j=q Γ v ξ(ld(x)/) j=q ( 3L ) β β!s ξ C n ( 4n ρ ) jv ξ q L ( 4n ρ ) j(s ξ L ( Ld(x) ) q q )( Ld(x) Γvξ(Ld(x)/) β h (3Ld(x)) j=q ) q ( 4n ρ ) j. L If we choose L 8n ρ, then the sum is bounded by, and (8) follows. Assume that L is chosen such that L > max{c 0,C,C }ρ (9) sothat (5), (6), (7), and (8) are valid. Recall that W denotes the weightmatrix associated with ω. The next lemma is a substitute for the claim in the proof of Theorem 5.5 in [5]. Lemma 7. There exist constants K j = K j (n,ω), j =,,3, such that the following holds. If p = K L and L > K ρ, then there exist a weight sequence W W and a constant M = M (n,ω,l) > 0 such that for all x R n \ E with d(x) < min{r 0 /(3B ),/(3L )} and all α Nn, α (f T p(x) F)(x) CM α + W α h s 4ξ(K 3 Ld(x)), (0) where C and ρ are the constants from () and (3) (and B is the universal constant from [5, Lemma 4.7]). Proof. By the Leibniz rule, α (f T p(x) F)(x) = β α ( ) α β i Now (7) and (8) imply, that for x Q i β (T p(xi) i ϕ (α β) i,p (x) β (T p(xi) F T p(x) F)(x). () i with d(x) < /(3Lsξ ), F T p(x) F)(x) C(6L) β + S ξ β h s ξ(3ld(x)). () As in [5] we conclude (using [5, Proposition4.9]) that there exist W = W(p) W and M = M(p) > 0 such that for all i N, all x R n \E with d(x) < r 0 /(3B ), and all β N n, ϕ (β) i,p (x) MW β Π(p,x) (3) where, by [5, Corollary 3.], ( A (n) Π(p,x) = exp σ ( b p )) p 9A (n) d(x) ( e ) A (n)b p h s η( bpd(x) 9A ) for some B and all η > 0. (4) (n)b

7 ON THE EXTENSION OF WHITNEY ULTRAJETS, II 7 (b is the universal constant from [5, Lemma 4.7] and A (n) A (n) areconstants depending only on n.) By (), we may assume that S ξ W. Then, by (), (), (3), and [5, Lemma 4.7], for x R n \E with d(x) < min{r 0 /(3B ),/(3L )}, α (f T p(x) F)(x) α! β!(α β)! n MW α β Π(p,x) C(6L) β + S ξ β h (3Ld(x)) β α ( α n α!n α +j ) CM j!( α j)! (6L)j+ W α j S ξ j Π(p,x)h (3Ld(x)) j=0 ( α 6 n LCMn α α! W α j!( α j)! (6Ln)j) Π(p,x)h (3Ld(x)) j=0 = 6 n LCM(n(+6Ln)) α W α Π(p,x)h (3Ld(x)). By Proposition 3, there is H (independent of ξ) such that h (t) h s 4ξ(Ht) for t > 0. Let us choose L according to (9) and such that p := 7A (n)bhl/b A (n)b is an integer. Then, by (4) and since h s 4ξ, Π(p,x)h (3Ld(x)) eh (3Ld(x)) h s 4ξ(3HLd(x)) eh s 4ξ(3HLd(x)) and we obtain (0). (Note that M depends on p, and hence on L, which results in the non-explicit dependence of M.) Let us finish the proof of Theorem. By (5) and (0), for all x R n \E with d(x) < min{r 0 /(3B ),/(3L )} and all α Nn, f (α) (x) (T p(x) F) (α) (x) + α (f T p(x) F)(x) CM α + W α (5) for a suitable constant M = M(n,ω,L). Let us fix a point a E and α N n. Since Γ (t) as t 0, we have α < p(x) if x R n \E is sufficiently close to a. Thus, as x a, f (α) (x) F α (a) α (f T p(x) F)(x) + (T p(x) F) (α) (x) F α () + F α () F α (a) = O(h s 4ξ(K 3 Ld(x)))+O(d(x)) +O( a ), by (3), (6), and (0). Hence f (α) (x) F α (a) as x a. We may conclude that f C (R n ). After multiplication with a suitable cut-off function of class B {ω} with support in {x : d(x) < min{r 0 /(3B ),/(3L )}}, we find that f B{ω} (R n ) thans to (), (5), and [5, Lemma.4(5)]. The proof of Theorem is complete. 3. Concave, good, and strong weight functions In [5, Definition 3.5] we called a weight function σ good if its associated weight matrix S satisfies (). A non-quasianalytic weight function ω is called strong if there is a constant C > 0 such that ω(tu) u du Cω(t)+C for all t > 0.

8 8 A. RAINER AND G. SCHINDL Otherwise put, ω is strong if and only if it is equivalent to the concave weight function κ = κ(ω) defined in (0). In [5] we ased the following questions: Question 3.: Is every concave weight function equivalent to a good one? Question 5.: Is every strong weight function equivalent to a good one? We will give partial answers to these questions and reveal some related connections in Theorem below. In [5] it was important that the associated weight matrix itself satisfies () as explained on page 3 (after the proof of Proposition 3). Since we could overcome this problem (by introducing V = {V ξ }), it is more natural to allow for a wider concept of goodness. For completeness we will also treat the Beurling case. A weight function ω is called R-good if there exists a weight matrix M satisfying M M N M C j : µ j j Cν such that B {ω} = B {M}. Recall that µ := M /M and ν := N /N. Similarly, ω is called B-good if there exists a weight matrix M satisfying N M M M C j : µ j j Cν such that B (ω) = B (M). The next lemma, which is inspired by [5, Proposition 4.5], implies that for any weight matrix M satisfying (6) (resp. (7)) there is a weight matrix S consisting of strongly log-convex weight sequences such that B {M} = B {S} (resp. B (M) = B (S) ). Lemma 8. Assume that = µ 0 µ and = ν 0 ν satisfy Then the sequence ν defined by ν C > 0 : µ j j Cν for all j. ν l := inf l l, ν 0 :=, is such that ν / is increasing and C µ ν ν. The next two corollaries are immediate from Lemma 8 and results of [], [3], and [4]. Corollary 9. Let M be a weight matrix. Consider the following conditions: (a) M satisfies (6). (b) There is a weight matrix S consisting of strongly log-convex weight sequences such that B {M} = B {S}. (c) B {M} is stable under composition. (d) M M N M C > 0 j : m /j j Cn /. Then (a) (b) (c) (d). If additionally M satisfies M M N M : µ N / (8) then all four conditions are equivalent. Corollary 0. Let M be a weight matrix. Consider the following conditions: (a) M satisfies (7). (b) There is a weight matrix S consisting of strongly log-convex weight sequences such that B (M) = B (S). (6) (7)

9 ON THE EXTENSION OF WHITNEY ULTRAJETS, II 9 (c) B (M) is stable under composition. (d) N M M M C > 0 j : m /j j Cn /. Then (a) (b) (c) (d). If additionally M satisfies then all four conditions are equivalent. N M M M : µ N / (9) In general, (c) (b) in neither ofthe corollarieswhichfollowsfrom [, Example 3.6]. Note that if M = N then (8) and (9) reduce to a condition which is usually called moderate growth of M. For weight functions ω we get a full characterization. Theorem. Let ω be a weight function satisfying ω(t) = o(t) as t. Then the following are equivalent. (a) ω is equivalent to a concave weight function. (b) C > 0 t 0 > 0 λ t t 0 : ω(λt) Cλω(t). (c) B {ω} is stable under composition. (d) B (ω) is stable under composition. (e) There is a weight matrix S consisting of strongly log-convex weight sequences such that B {ω} = B {S}. (f) There is a weight matrix S consisting of strongly log-convex weight sequences such that B (ω) = B (S). (g) ω is R-good. (h) ω is B-good. Notice that the conditions in the theorem are furthermore equivalent to the class B {ω} and B (ω) to be stable under inverse/implicit functions and solving ODEs and, in terms of the associated weight matrix W = {W ξ } ξ>0, to as well as ξ > 0 η > 0 : (w ξ j )/j C(w η )/ for j, η > 0 ξ > 0 : (w ξ j )/j C(w η )/ for j, see [3]. In the forthcoming paper [4] we shall see that they are also equivalent to the property that B {ω}, resp. B (ω), can be described by almost analytic extensions; see also []. Proof. The equivalence of the first four conditions (a) (d) is well-nown, see e.g. [3], which is based on [0, Lemma ] and [3]. That (a) implies (e) and (f) follows from Proposition 3. (e) (c) and (f) (d) are clear; cf. []. The equivalences (e) (g) and (f) (h) follow from Lemma 8. Appendix A. Weight matrices A weight matrix is a family M of weight sequences which is totally ordered with respect to the pointwise order relation on sequences, i.e., M R N, each M M is a weight sequence, which means that M 0 =, M /, and M is log-convex, for all M,N M we have M N or M N.

10 0 A. RAINER AND G. SCHINDL For a weight matrix M and an open U R n we consider the Roumieu class B {M} (U) := ind M M B {M} (U), and the Beurling class B (M) (U) := proj M M B (M) (U). For weight matrices M, N we have (cf. []) B {M} B {N} M M N N : (M /N ) / is bounded, B (M) B (N) N N M M : (M /N ) / is bounded. Analogous equivalences hold for the local classes E {M} (U) := proj V U B {M} (V) and E (M) (U) := proj V U B (M) (V). References [] J. Bonet, R. W. Braun, R. Meise, and B. A. Taylor, Whitney s extension theorem for nonquasianalytic classes of ultradifferentiable functions, Studia Math. 99 (99), no., [] J. Bonet, R. Meise, and B. A. Taylor, On the range of the Borel map for classes of nonquasianalytic functions, Progress in functional analysis (Peñiscola, 990), North-Holland Math. Stud., vol. 70, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 99, pp. 97. [3] C. Fernández and A. Galbis, Superposition in classes of ultradifferentiable functions, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci. 4 (006), no., [4] S. Fürdös, D. N. Nenning, A. Rainer, and G. Schindl, Almost analytic extensions of ultradifferentiable functions, in preparation. [5] J. Jiménez-Garrido and J. Sanz, Strongly regular sequences and proximate orders, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 438 (06), no., [6] J. Jiménez-Garrido, J. Sanz, and G. Schindl, Sectorial extensions, via Laplace transforms, in ultraholomorphic classes defined by weight functions, (07), arxiv: [7] H. Komatsu, Ultradistributions. I. Structure theorems and a characterization, J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Toyo Sect. IA Math. 0 (973), [8] W. Matsumoto, Characterization of the separativity of ultradifferentiable classes, J. Math. Kyoto Univ. 4 (984), no. 4, [9] R. Meise and B. A. Taylor, Whitney s extension theorem for ultradifferentiable functions of Beurling type, Ar. Mat. 6 (988), no., [0] J. Peetre, Concave majorants of positive functions, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. (970), [] H.-J. Petzsche and D. Vogt, Almost analytic extension of ultradifferentiable functions and the boundary values of holomorphic functions, Math. Ann. 67 (984), no., [] A. Rainer and G. Schindl, Composition in ultradifferentiable classes, Studia Math. 4 (04), no., [3], Equivalence of stability properties for ultradifferentiable function classes, Rev. R. Acad. Cienc. Exactas Fis. Nat. Ser. A Math. RACSAM. 0 (06), no., 7 3. [4], Extension of Whitney jets of controlled growth, Math. Nachr. 90 (07), no. 4-5, , doi:0.00/mana [5] A. Rainer and G. Schindl, On the extension of Whitney ultrajets, Stud. Math. (08), doi:0.4064/sm , arxiv: [6] G. Schindl, Exponential laws for classes of Denjoy Carleman differentiable mappings, Ph.D. thesis, Universität Wien, 04, [7], Characterization of ultradifferentiable test functions defined by weight matrices in terms of their Fourier transform, Note di Matematica 36 (06), no., 35, doi:0.85/i590093v36np.

11 ON THE EXTENSION OF WHITNEY ULTRAJETS, II A. Rainer: Faultät für Mathemati, Universität Wien, Osar-Morgenstern- Platz, A-090 Wien, Austria address: G. Schindl: Departamento de Álgebra, Análisis Matemático, Geometría y Topología, Facultad de Ciencias, Universidad de Valladolid, Paseo de Belén 7, 470 Valladolid, Spain address: gerhard.schindl@univie.ac.at