(李丹)
School of Mathematics and Statistics,Beijing Technology and Business University,Beijing 100048,China E-mail:danli@btbu.edu.cn
Junfeng LI (李俊峰)?
School of Mathematical Sciences,Dalian University of Technology,Dalian 116024,China E-mail:junfengli@dlut.edu.cn
Jie XIAO (肖杰)
Department of Mathematics and Statistics,Memorial University,St.John’s NL A1C 5S7,Canada E-mail:jxiao@math.mun.ca
Abstract Given n≥2 and,we obtained an improved upbound of Hausdorff’s dimension of the fractional Schr?dinger operator;that is,.
Key words The Carleson problem;divergence set;the fractional Schrdinger operator;Hausdorff dimension;Sobolev space
f
:R→C such thatIf(??)f
stands for the(0,
∞)?α
-pseudo-differential operator de fined by the Fourier transformation acting onf
∈S(R),that is,ifTaking into account the Carleson problem of deciding such a critical regularity numbers
such thatTheorem 1.1
s,n,α
).In general,we have the following development:
Theorem 1.1 actually recovers Cho-Ko’s[1]a.e.-convergence result
as follows:
in[3]and[4],it was proved that
In particular,we have the following case-by-case treatment:
Bourgain’s counterexample in[9]and Luc`a-Rogers’result in[20]showed that
On the one hand,in[5],Du-Zhang proved that
Thus there is still a gap in terms of determining the exact value of d(s,n,
1);see also[5,20–23]for more information.Very recently,Cho-Ko[1]proved that(1.3)holds for
e
f
(x
),we need a law forH
(R)to be embedded intoL
(μ
)with a lower dimensional Borel measureμ
on R.Proposition 2.1
For a nonnegative Borel measureμ
on Rand 0≤κ
≤n
,letand letM
(B)be the class of all probability measuresμ
withC
(μ
)<
∞that are supported in the unit ball B=B
(0,
1).Suppose that(i)Ift
∈R,thenthen d(s,n,α
)≤κ
.Proof
(i)(2.1)is the elementary stopping-time-maximal inequality[3,(4)].(ii)The argument is split into two steps.
Step 1
We show the following inequality:In a similar way as to the veri fication of[3,Proposition 3.2],we achieve
It is not hard to obtain(2.3)if we have the inequalities
(2.4)follows from the fact that(2.2)implies
To prove(2.5),we utilize
By(2.2)and(2.6),we obtain
thereby reaching(2.5).
Step 2
We now show thatBy the de finition,we have
then a combination of(2.3)and(2.1)gives that
Upon first letting?
→0,and then lettingλ
→∞,we havewheneverμ
∈M
(B)withκ>κ
.If Hdenotes theκ
-dimensional Hausdorff measure which is of translation invariance and countable additivity,then Frostman’s lemma is used to derive thatWe begin with a statement of the following key result,whose proof will be presented in Section 3,due to its nontriviality:
Theorem 2.2
IfConsequently,we have the following assertion:
Corollary 2.3
IfProof
Employing Theorem 2.2 and its notations,as well as[1](see[10,11,24,25]),we get thatNext,we use parabolic rescaling.More precisely,if
Consequently,ifT
=t
andX
=x
,thenand hence Littlewood-Paley’s decomposition yields that
Finally,by Minko wski’s inequality and(2.12),as well as
we arrive at
Next we use Corollary 2.3 to prove Theorem 1.1.
whence(2.2)follows.Thus,Proposition 2.1 yields that
Next,we make the following two-fold analysis:
On the one hand,we ask for
On the other hand,it is natural to request that
is required in the hypothesis of Theorem 1.1.
,
2],wherej
is an integer.The key ingredient of the proof of Theorem 2.2 is the following,which will be proved in Section 4:Theorem 3.1
Letsuch that if
From Theorem 3.1,we can get the followingL
-restriction estimate:Corollary 3.2
LetThen,forany?>
0,there exists a constantC
>
0 such that ifProof
For any 1≤λ
≤R
,we introduce the notationBy pigeonholing,we fixλ
such thatIt is easy to see that
Next,we assume that the following inequality holds(we will prove this inequality later):
We thereby reach
Hence,it remains to prove(3.5).
In order to use the result of Theorem 3.1,we need to extend the size of the unit cube to theK
-cube according to the following two steps:Step 1
Letβ
be a dyadic number,let B:={B
:B
?Z
,
and for any latticeK
?cubeB
??Step 2
Next,fixingβ
,lettingλ
be a dyadic number,and denotingwe find that the pair{β,λ
}satis fiesFrom the de finitions ofλ
andγ
,we havewhich is the desired(3.6).
In this section,we use Corollary 3.2 to prove Theorem 2.2.
We have
which decays rapidly,then for any(x,t
)∈R,denotes the center of the unit lattice cube containing(x,t
),and henceBy pigeonholing,we getthat for any small?>
0,In what follows,we always assume that
Nevertheless,estimate(3.2)underR
?1 is trivial.In fact,from the assumptions of Theorem 3.1,we see thatFurthermore,by the short-time Strichartz estimate(see[26,27]),we get that
thereby verifying Theorem 3.1 forR
?1.K
-cubesτ
.WriteSecond,we recall the de finitions of narrow cubes and broad cubes.
We say that aK
-cubeB
is narrow if there is ann
-dimensional subspaceV
such that for allτ
∈S(B
),whereG
(τ
)?Sis a spherical cap of radius~K
given byand∠(G
(τ
),V
)denotes the smallest angle between any non-zero vectorv
∈V
andv
∈G
(τ
).Otherwise,we say that theK
-cubeB
is broad.In other words,a cube being broad means that the tilesτ
∈S(B
)are so separated that the norm vectors of the corresponding spherical caps cannot be in ann
-dimensional subspace;more precisely,for any broadB
,Third,with the setting
we will handleY
according to the sizes ofY
andY
.Thus,4.2.1 The broad case
Let 0<c
?1 andL
∈N be sufficiently large.We consider a collection of the normalized phase functions as follows:Next we begin the proof of Theorem 4.1.
Proof
We prove a linear re fined Strichartz estimate in dimensionn
+1 by four steps.and we have that the functionsf
are approximately orthogonal,thereby giving usBy computation,we have that the restriction ofe
f
(x
)toB
(0,R
)is essentially supported on a tubeT
,which is de fined as follows:Herec
(θ
)&c
(D
)denote the centers ofθ
andD
,respectively.Therefore,by a decoupling theorem,we have thatIn fact,as in Remark 4.2,we get that
thereby giving us that,iff
=f
,(thanks to|H
|~1),
namely that,(4.7)holds.Third,we shall choose an appropriateY
.For eachT
,we classify tubes inT
in the following ways:Next,we choose the tubesY
according to the dyadic size of‖f
‖.We can restrict matters toO
(logR
)choices of this dyadic size,so we can choose a set ofT
’s with T such thatLastly,we choose the cubesQ
?Y
according to the number ofY
that contain them.Denote thatBecause(4.10)holds for≈1 cubes andν
are dyadic numbers,we can use(4.9)to getthereby finding that
Fourth,we combine all of our ingredients and finish our proof of Theorem 4.1.
By making a sum overQ
?Y
and using our inductive hypothesis at scaleR
2,we obtain thatFor eachQ
?Y
,sincewe get that
thereby utilizing(4.11)and the fact that‖f
‖is essentially constant among allT
∈T to derive thatTaking theq
-th root in the last estimation producesMoreover,Theorem 4.1 can be extended to the following form,which can be veri fied by[22]and Theorem 4.1:
Theorem 4.4
(Multilinear re fined Strichartz estimate in dimensionn
+1.)For 2≤k
≤n
+1 and 1≤i
≤k
,letf
:R→C have frequenciesk
-transversely supported in B,that is,Next,we prove the broad case of Theorem 3.1.
Then,for eachB
∈Y
,In order to exploit the transversality and to make good use of the locally constant property,we breakB
into small balls as follows:However,the second equivalent inequality of(4.14)follows from de finition(3.1)ofγ
,which ensures thatM
≤γR
andγ
≥K
.
4.2.2 The narrow case
In order to prove the narrow case of Theorem 3.1,we have the following lemma,which is essentially contained in Bourgain-Demeter[28]:
Lemma 4.5
Suppose that(i)B
is a narrowK
-cube in Rthat takesc
(B
)as its center;(ii)S denotes the set ofK
-cubes which tile B;(iii)ω
is a weight function which is essentially a characteristic function onB
;more precisely,thatNext,we prove the narrow case of Theorem 3.1.
Proof
The main method we use is the parabolic rescaling and induction on the radius.We prove the narrow case step by step.Fourth,let
Then,forY
,we can writeThe error termO
(R
)‖f
‖can be neglected.In particular,on each narrowB
,we haveWithout loss of generality,we assume that
Therefore,there are onlyO
(logR
)signi ficant choices for each dyadic number.By(4.17),the pigeonholing,and(4.15),we can chooseη,β
,λ
,β
,M
,γ
such thatholds for?(logR
)narrowK
-cubesB
.Fifth,we fixη,β
,λ
,β
,M
,γ
for the rest of the proof.LetLetY
?Y
be a union of narrowK
-cubesB
each of which obeys(4.18)By our assumption that‖e
f
‖is essentially constant ink
=1,
2,...,M
,in the narrow case,we have thatBy(4.20)and(4.21),we have
Sixth,regarding each‖e
f
‖,we apply parabolic rescaling and induction on the radius.For eachK
-cubeτ
=τ
in B,we writeξ
=ξ
+K
η
∈τ
,whereξ
=c
(τ
).In a fashion similar to the argument in(4.6),we also consider a collection of the normalized phase functionsBy a similar parabolic rescaling,
More precisely,we have that
Hence,by the inductive hypothesis(3.2)(replacing(??)with Φ)at scaleR
,we have thatBy(4.23)and‖g
‖=‖f
‖,we get thatSince(4.24)also holds whenever one replaces Φ with(??),we get that
By(4.22)and(4.25),we obtain that
where the third inequality follows from the assumption that‖f
‖is essentially constant inT
∈B,and then implies thatEighth,we consider the lower bound and the upper bound of
On the one hand,by the de finition ofν
in(4.19),there is a lower boundOn the other hand,byurchoices ofM
andη
,for eachT
∈B,Therefore,we get
Ninth,we want to obtain the relation betweenγ
andγ
.By our choices ofγ
,as in(4.16)andη
,we get thatTenth,we complete the proof of Theorem 3.1.
On the one hand,
Thus it follows that
Inserting(4.27),(4.29)and(4.28)into(4.26)gives that
Acta Mathematica Scientia(English Series)2021年4期