Wiki
Wiki

Research notes on every problem, and a library of the papers behind them. Built from the open erdos repository.

Updated


Source. Lemma 4.34, p. 21, of Cabrelli, Lacey, Molter and Pipher, Variations on the theme of Journé's lemma, in the edition named on the source card.

Statement

Setting (p. 21). For a collection U\mathcal U of rectangles in Rd\mathbb R^d whose shadow has finite measure, and a set VV containing the shadow,

emb⁡(R,V)=sup⁡{μ≥1:Dil⁡(μ,1,…,1)R⊂V},\operatorname{emb}(R,V)=\sup\{\mu\ge1:\operatorname{Dil}_{(\mu,1,\ldots,1)}R\subset V\}, F(I,j,U′)=⋃{I×R′:I×R′∈U′, 2j−1≤emb⁡(I×R′,V)<2j}.F(I,j,\mathcal U')=\bigcup\{I\times R':I\times R'\in\mathcal U',\ 2^{j-1}\le\operatorname{emb}(I\times R',V)<2^j\}.

This is the setting of Lemma 4.33 with the enlarged set replaced by VV.

Lemma 4.34 (p. 21). For all δ,ϵ>0\delta,\epsilon>0 and every such U\mathcal U one can choose V⊃sh⁡(U)V\supset\operatorname{sh}(\mathcal U) with ∣V∣≤(1+δ)∣sh⁡(U)∣\lvert V\rvert\le(1+\delta)\lvert\operatorname{sh}(\mathcal U)\rvert such that for every U′⊂U\mathcal U'\subset\mathcal U,

∑j=1∞∑I∈D2−ϵj∣F(I,j,U′)∣≲∣sh⁡(U′)∣,\sum_{j=1}^\infty\sum_{I\in\mathcal D}2^{-\epsilon j}\lvert F(I,j,\mathcal U')\rvert \lesssim\lvert\operatorname{sh}(\mathcal U')\rvert,

and moreover, for every integer n>1n>1 and every 1<p<∞1<p<\infty,

∥∑j=1∞∑I∈D2−ϵj(M1F(I,j,U′))n∥p≲∣sh⁡(U′)∣1/p.\Bigl\lVert\sum_{j=1}^\infty\sum_{I\in\mathcal D}2^{-\epsilon j}\bigl(M\mathbf 1_{F(I,j,\mathcal U')}\bigr)^n\Bigr\rVert_p \lesssim\lvert\operatorname{sh}(\mathcal U')\rvert^{1/p}.

The implied constants depend only on the dimension and on ϵ\epsilon and δ\delta.

Proof pointer

Pp. 21--22. With δ=(1+2d)−1\delta=(1+2^{\mathsf d})^{-1}, the set VV is the level set {M1Dd1Enl⁡1(U)>1−δ}\{M_1^{\mathcal D_{\mathsf d}}\mathbf 1_{\operatorname{Enl}_1(\mathcal U)}>1-\delta\} of the maximal function over Christ's shifted dyadic grids in the first coordinate, whose measure (1.7) controls. The rest repeats the disjointness argument of Lemma 4.33, with each set H(I)H(I) now keeping a δ/2\delta/2 share of every rectangle, at a cost of δ−1\delta^{-1}.

Dependencies

The proof follows that of Lemma 4.33. Read depth: claims checked; the setting and statement were read clause by clause on p. 21, the proof for structure only. Nothing here is independently reviewed.

Bears on

The paper names no Erdős problem.