Professional Documents
Culture Documents
r
X
i
v
:
0
8
0
1
.
1
5
1
2
v
1
[
m
a
t
h
.
C
V
]
9
J
a
n
2
0
0
8
Bergman Spaces Seminar
Lecture Notes
Department of Mathematics
University of Crete
Heraklion 2005
Contents
1 Introduction to Bergman Spaces 5
1.1 Basic Denitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
1.2 Growth of A
p
Functions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
1.3 The Bergman Kernel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
1.4 Some Density Matters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2 The Bergman Projection 21
2.1 The Bergman Projection on A
p
() . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2.2 A Bounded Projection of L
1
() onto A
1
() . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
2.3 A characterization of A
p
in terms of derivatives . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
3
Chapter 1
Introduction to Bergman Spaces
1.1 Basic Denitions
We begin our discussion with the Bergman Spaces on the unit disc of the complex plane
= z C : [z[ < 1. (1.1)
These are dened as
A
p
() = f H() : |f|
p
A
p
()
=
_
[f(z)[
p
dm(z) < (1.2)
where dm(z) =
1
[f(z)[
p
dA(z) < , 0 < p < (1.3)
where C is an open connected set, for the case p = 2. The interest was then focused on
the case = .
The study of the Bergman Spaces is inspired from that of the Hardy Spaces
H
p
() =
_
f H() : |f|
p
H
p
()
= sup
r[0,1)
1
2
_
2
0
[f(re
i
))[
p
d <
_
, 0 < p < (1.4)
and
H
() = f H() : |f|
H
()
= sup
z
[f(z)[ < (1.5)
since H
p
() A
p
(). Observe however that H
() = A
1
p
(z)
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
(1.6)
where (z) = dist(z, ).
Proof. Fix z and set = (z). We consider the disc (z, ) = : [ z[ < . Since
f is subharmonic in we have that
[f(z)[
p
1
2
_
2
0
[f(z +re
i
)[
p
d, 0 r <
and so
_
0
[f(z)[
p
rdr
_
0
1
2
_
2
0
[f(z +re
i
)[
p
d rdr.
Therefore,
2
[f(z)[
p
_
(z,)
[f()[
p
dA()
1
[f()[
p
dA()
which gives
[f(z)[
1
p
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
which is the desired result.
In the special case of the unit disc the statement of the theorem becomes
[f(z)[
1
(1 [z[)
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
. (1.7)
The analogous description of the growth of the derivatives of a function in A
p
() is con-
tained in the following Proposition.
Proposition 1.2. Let n be a positive integer greater than one and f A
p
(), 0 < p < .
Then
[f
(n)
(z)[
n!2
n
2
2
p
(1 [z[)
n+1+
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
(1.8)
7
Proof. Let r < 1 and set C = C : [[ =
1+r
2
. Using Cauchys integral formula for the
derivatives of the function f and the circle C we have that
[f
(n)
(z)[ =
n!
2i
_
C
f()
z
n+1
d
n!
2
_
C
[f()[
[ z[
n+1
[d[
n!
2
_
C
[f()[
[[ [z[
n+1
[d[
n!2
n+1
2(1 r)
n+1
_
C
[f(z)[[d[
n!2
n+1
2
2
p
2(1 r)
n+1+
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
2
_
1 +r
2
_
n!2
n
2
2
p
(1 r)
n+1+
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
.
Seting r = [z[ we get the desired estimate.
Let us take a look at the consequences implied by the growth of A
p
functions described in
Proposition 1.1.
First of all it is easy to see that convergence in A
p
() implies uniform convergence on the
compact sets of . While the proof is obvious, we will state this result as a lemma for future
reference.
Lemma 1.1. Let f
n
n
be a sequence of functions in A
p
() and f A
p
(). Suppose that f
n
converges to f in A
p
(). Then f
n
converges to f uniformly on the compact subsets of . As a
result, f
n
converges to f almost everywhere in .
We are now ready to show that the spaces A
p
(), 0 < p < , are complete. Of course,
| |
A
p
()
is a norm only when 1 p . When 0 < p < 1, A
p
() becomes a metric space by
dening d(f, g) =
_
[f(z) g(z)[
p
dm(z) = |f g|
p
A
p
()
as usual.
Theorem 1.1. The spaces A
p
(), 0 < p < , are complete.
Proof. It suces to show that A
p
() is a closed subspace of L
p
(). To this end, let f
n
be a sequence of functions in A
p
() and f L
p
() such that lim
n
|f
n
f|
p
L
p
()
= 0.
Then there exists a subsequence f
n
k
of f
n
which converges to f almost everywhere in .
Moreover, since f
n
converges in L
p
(), f
n
is Cauchy in L
p
(). Due to Lemma 1.1, f
n
1
p
dist(z, )
2
p
|f
n
|
A
p
()
1
p
2
p
M
for every z . It is easy to see now that the sequence f
n
is uniformly bounded on the
compact subsets of . According to Montels theorem, this is equivalent to f
n
being normal
on . By Denition 1.2, this means that there exists a subsequence f
n
k
of f
n
and a function
f C(, C) such that f
n
k
converges to f uniformly on the compact subsets of . It remains to
show that f is an element of A
p
(). But this is obvious since f must be analytic as a uniform
limit of analytic functions.
Remark. Baring in mind the growth condition (1.6)
[f(z)[
1
1
p
(z)
2
p
|f|
A
p
()
,
it is easy to see that A
p
(C) = 0. In order to avoid trivial cases like this one we must be a
little careful when chosing the set . In other words, has to be an open connected set such
that for every z one can nd an f A
p
() satisfying f(z) ,= 0. There are however several
open connected sets which give rise to non trivial spaces A
p
(). We give some examples
here.
9
(i) The unit disc and in general every bounded subset of C.
(ii) Let = C [0, ). Then the function : dened as
(z) =
_
i
1 +z
1 z
_
2
is a conformal mapping (one to one, onto) satisfying (0) = 1, (1) = 0 and (1) = .
Let
o
. We want to nd a function f A
p
() satisfying f(
o
) ,= 0. From (i), there exists
a function g A
p
() with g(
1
(
o
)) ,= 0. Dene f : C as
f(w) = g(
1
)(w) = (g
1
)(w).
Then
_
[f()[
p
dA() =
_
[g
1
()[
p
dA() =
_
()
[f(z)[
p
[
(z)[
2
dA(z)
=
_
[f(z)[
p
[
(z)[
2
dA(z) = 4
_
[f(z)[
p
i
1 +z
1 z
2
(1 z)
3
2
dA(z)
= 16
_
[f(z)[
p
1 +z
(1 z)
3
2
dA(z) < .
Since f(
o
) = g(
1
(
o
)) ,= 0, f is the function we were seeking for.
In general, if is an open, simply connected proper subset of C and
o
, there
always exists a unique one to one, analytic mapping from onto such that (
o
) = 0 and
(
o
) > 0. Then
_
(z)
2
p
[
p
dA(z) =
_
(z)[
2
dA(z) =
_
dA(z) < .
(iii) Let be an open connected. Suppose further that the boundary of , , has at least
one connected component S containing at least two points and that the the complement of S
in C
= C
S . Clearly
we are
nished.
1.3 The Bergman Kernel
For this section, well restrict our attention to the Hilbert space case p = 2. Let be an
open connected set such that the space A
p
() is non trivial. Fix a z and dene the point
evaluation functional
: A
2
() C, (f) = f(z).
The functional is bounded since for every f A
2
() we have that
[(f)[ = [f(z)[
1
1
p
(z)
2
p
|f|
A
2
()
10
from Poroposition 1.1 (remember that z is xed). From the Riesz representation theorem for
Hilbert spaces there exists a unique function K
z
A
2
() such that
(f) = f, K
z
)
A
2
()
=
_
f()K
z
()dA()
for every f A
2
().
Denition 1.3. The function K : C C C dened as
K(z, ) = K
z
()
is called the reproducing Kernel or the Bergman Kernel.
So the Bergman Kernel reproduces the values of every function in A
2
() by means of the
formula
f(z) =
_
(z) =
_
(w)K(z, w)dA(w) =
_
K
z
(w)K(, w)dA(w) = K
z
()
= K(z, ).
(ii) The function K(z, ) is analytic with respect to z and counter analytic with respect to .
This is just a consequence of (1.10) since, by dention, the functions K
z
, K
are in A
2
() and
hence analytic.
(iii) For every z we have that
K(z, z) = |K(z, )|
2
A
2
()
. (1.11)
This is a just a simple calculation
K(z, z) = K(z, z) = K
z
(z) =
_
K
z
()K
z
()dA()
=
_
[K
z
()[
2
= |K(z, |
2
A
2
()
> 0.
(iv) Fix a z . Then, for every function f A
2
() satisfying f(z) = 1 we have the estimate
|f|
A
2
()
|K(z, )|
1
A
2
()
. (1.12)
11
To see this, use formula (1.9) to write
[f(z)[ =
f()K(z, )dA()
[f()[[K(z, )[dA()
|f|
2
A
2
()
_
[K(z, )[
2
dA() = |f|
2
A
2
()
|K(z, )|
2
A
2
()
.
It is easy to see that estimate (1.12) is sharp. Indeed, x a z and dene
f() =
K(, z)
K(z, z)
=
K(, z)
|K(z, )|
2
A
2
()
.
Then, f(z) = 1 and
|f|
2
A
2
()
=
1
|K(z, )|
2
A
2
()
_
[K(, z)[
2
dA()
=
|K(z, )|
2
A
2
()
|K(z, )|
4
A
2
()
= |K(z, )|
2
A
2
()
.
(v) The Bergman Kernel K(z, ) is the only function in A
2
() which reproduces the value of
every function f A
2
() in the sense of (1.9). This is just a consequence of the denition of
the Bergman Kernel by means of the Riesz representation theorem.
We next turn to the question of calculating the Bergman Kernel in A
2
(). We consider an
orthonormal base
n
n=0
of A
2
(). To simplify notation we write , ) for the inner product
in A
2
(). Then
n
,
m
) =
nm
=
_
1, if n = m
0, if n ,= m .
The usual Hilbert space identities hold:
(i) Fourier series: Every f A
2
() has a series representation
f =
n=0
c
n
n
, (1.13)
where c
n
= f,
n
) and the series in (1.13) converges with respect to the A
2
() norm. Now,
Lemma (1.1) implies that the partial sums
N
n=0
c
n
n
converge to f uniformly on the compact
subsets of .
(ii) Parsevals Identity: For every in f A
2
() we have that
n=0
[c
n
[
2
= |f|
2
A
2
()
. (1.14)
(iii) A formula for the Bergman Kernel: For every z, , the Bergman Kernel can be
calculated as
K(z, ) =
n=0
n
(z)
n
() (1.15)
where the series in (1.15) converges with respect to the A
2
() norm and hence uniformly on
the compact sets of .
12
To see this, write the series representation of the function K(, ) as in (1.13). The Fourier
coecients of the function K(, ) are
c
n
= K(, ),
n
) =
_
K(w, )
n
(w)dA(w) =
_
K(w, )
n
(w)dA(w)
=
_
K(, w)
n
(w)dA(w) =
n
().
Writing the series representation of the function K(, )
K(z, ) =
n=0
c
n
n
(z) =
n=0
n
(z)
n
()
we get (1.15).
The next step is to try to calculate the Bergman Kernel in the case of the unit disc = .
In order to do this we will employ formula (1.15). First of all we have to dene an orthonormal
base in A
2
().
Proposition 1.4. The set
n
(z) =
n + 1 z
n
n=0
is an orthonormal base of A
2
().
Proof. The proof will be done in two steps:
step 1 The set
n
n=0
is orthonormal.
Indeed, for every n, m N we have that
n
,
m
) =
n + 1
m + 1
_
z
n
z
m
dm(z)
=
n + 1
m + 1
_
1
0
_
2
0
(re
i
)
n
(re
i
)
m
1
drdr
=
1
n + 1
m+ 1
_
1
0
r
n+m+1
dr
_
2
0
e
i(nm)
d
=
_
1 , if n = m
0 , if n ,= m .
step 2 The set
n
n=0
is a base of A
2
().
It is equivalent to show that Parsevals formula
|f|
A
2
()
=
n=0
[f,
n
)[
2
(1.16)
holds true for every f A
2
(). If we write the expansion of f in its Taylor series
f(z) =
n=0
a
n
z
n
it is clear that we have to show that
|f|
A
2
()
=
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
. (1.17)
13
Consider the partial sums of the Taylor series of f, S
N
(f)(z) =
N
n=0
a
n
z
n
and the disc
of
radius , centered at the origin, where 0 < < 1,
= z C : [z[ < .
Then,
_
[S
N
(f)(z)[
2
dm(z) =
_
_
N
n=0
a
n
z
n
_
2
_
N
n=0
a
n
z
n
_
2
dm(z)
=
N
n=0
a
n
N
m=0
a
n
_
0
r
n+m+1
1
_
2
0
e
i(nm)
ddr
= 2
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
_
0
r
2n+1
dr =
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
2(n+1)
n + 1
.
Since S
N
(f) converges to f uniformly in
as n , it is clear that
lim
N
_
[S
N
(f)(z)[
2
dm(z) =
_
[f(z)[
2
dm(z).
However,
lim
N
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
2(n+1)
n + 1
=
n=0
[a
n
[
2
2(n+1)
n + 1
and so, combining the last two formulas we get
_
[f(z)[
2
dm(z) =
n=0
[a
n
[
2
2(n+1)
n + 1
.
Letting 1
yields (1.17).
Having dened an orthonormal base of A
2
(),it is now easy to calculate an exact formula
for the Bergman Kernel. Indeed, employing (1.15), we have that
K(z, ) =
n=0
n
(z)
n
() =
n=0
(n + 1)(z)
n
=
1
(1 z)
2
.
We have actually established the following.
Theorem 1.3. (i) The Bergman Kernel in A
2
() is given by the formula
K(z, ) =
1
(1 z)
2
. (1.18)
(ii) For every function f A
2
() we have the representation
f(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
2
dm() . (1.19)
We close this section with a theorem that relates the Bergman Kernels of two open connected
sets through a univalent mapping.
14
Theorem 1.4. Let , T be open and connected subsets of C and : T, (z) = w, be
a univalent mapping of onto T. Suppose further that J(w, ) is the Bergman Kernel in T.
Then, the Bergman Kernel in is given by
K(z, ) = J((z), ())
(z)
(). (1.20)
Proof. Dene the operator T : A
2
(T) A
2
() as
T(f)(z) = (f )(z)
(z).
It easy to check that T is an isometry. Indeed,
|f|
2
A
2
(D)
=
_
D
[f(w)[
2
dA(w) =
_
()
[f(w)[
2
dA(w) =
_
[f((z))[
2
[
(z)[
2
dA(w)
=
_
[T(f)(z)[
2
dA(z) = |Tf|
2
A
2
()
.
If g A
2
() then dene the function f on T by the formula
f(w) = g(
1
(w))(
1
)
(w).
Then f A
2
(T) by a simple change of variable and T(f) = g which shows that T is onto.
Now, consider any g A
2
() and f A
2
(T) such thath g = T(f). Then
f(w) =
_
D
J(w, )f()dA().
and replacing w by (z) in the above we get
f((z)) =
_
D
J((z), )f()dA()
for z . Making the change of variable = () results to
f((z)) =
_
J((z), ())f(())[
(z)[
2
dA()
and multiplying by
(z),
f((z))
(z) =
_
J((z), ())
(z)
() f(())
()dA().
Remembering that g(z) = T(f)(z) we get
g(z) =
_
J((z), ())
(z)
() g()dA()
which is the desired result.
An application of Theorem 1.4 is contained in the Corollary below.
15
Corollary 1.1. Let be an open, connected, proper subset of C and K(z, ) be the Bergman
Kernel for . From Riemanns mapping theorem we know that for every there exists a
conformal mapping of onto with () = 0 and
(z) =
_
K(, )
K(z, ). (1.21)
Proof. Using theorem 1.4, the Bergman Kernel of is written as
K(z, ) = J((z), ())
(z)
()
where
J(w, ) =
1
1
(1 w)
2
is the Bergman Kernel for the unit disc (the constant
1
1
(1 (z)())
2
(z)
() =
1
(z)
()
since
())
2
and hence
K(z, ) =
1
(z)(K(, ))
1
2
which is just (1.21).
1.4 Some Density Matters
It is obvious from Proposition 1.4 that the polynomials are dense in A
2
(). In fact, some-
thing stronger is true.
Theorem 1.5. The set of polynomials is dense in A
2
(). Whatsmore, every function in A
2
()
can be approached in the A
2
() norm by the partial sums of its Taylor series, that is
lim
N
|S
N
(f) f|
A
2
()
= 0 (1.22)
where S
N
(f) =
N
n=0
a
n
z
n
is the partial sum of the Taylor series of f.
In order to prove this we shall need a simple lemma that relates the Taylor coecients of
f with its Fourier coecients with respect to the orthonormal base
n
.
Lemma 1.2. Suppose that f A
2
() has the Taylor expansion f(z) =
n=0
a
n
z
n
and that
n
=
n + 1 z
n
. Then, for every n N,
f,
n
) =
a
n
n + 1
(1.23)
16
Proof. Consider the disc
S
N
(f)(z)
n
(z)dm(z) =
_
_
N
k=0
a
k
z
k
(z)
_
n
(z)dm(z)
=
n + 1
N
k=0
a
k
_
z
k
z
n
dm(z)
=
n + 1 2 a
n
_
0
r
2n+1
dr =
n + 1a
n
2n+1
n + 1
.
Since S
N
(f) converges to f, uniformly on
as N , we get
_
S
N
(f)(z)
n
(z)dm(z) =
n + 1a
n
2n+1
n + 1
.
Letting 1
we get (1.23).
Proof of Theorem 1.5. We write the Taylor series of f as
f(z) =
n=0
a
n
z
n
=
n=0
a
n
n + 1
n + 1z
n
=
n=0
a
n
n + 1
n
(z) .
Then, for N N,
_
[f(z) S
N
(f)(z)[
2
dm(z) = f S
N
(f), f S
N
(f))
= |f|
2
A
2
()
f, S
N
(f)) f, S
N
(f)) +|S
N
(f)|
2
A
2
()
= |f|
2
A
2
()
n=0
a
n
f, z
n
)
N
n=0
a
n
f, z
n
) +
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
= |f|
2
A
2
()
n=0
a
n
n + 1
f,
n
)
N
n=0
a
n
n + 1
f,
n
) +
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
.
Employing Lemma 1.2, the right hand side is equal to
|f|
2
A
2
()
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
+
N
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
= |f|
2
A
2
()
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
.
However,
|f|
2
A
2
()
=
n=0
[a
n
[
2
n + 1
from Parsevals identity and so
|f S
N
(f)|
A
2
()
0 as N
and this nishes the proof.
Remark. It is not true that the polynomials are dense in A
2
() for every simply connected
set C. Consider for example the set = [0, 1]. This is obviously simply connected
17
and gives rise to the space A
2
(). On one can consider the function f(z) = z
1
2
which is
clearly analytic square integrable. However, it is not possible to approach f by polynomials in
the A
2
() sense.
To see this, suppose that one could nd a sequence of polynomials P
n
nN
, such that
lim
n
|f P
n
|
A
2
()
= 0 .
Then the sequence P
n
nN
is Cauchy in A
2
() and hence in A
2
() since |P
n
P
m
|
A
2
()
=
|P
n
P
m
|
A
2
()
. This means that the sequence P
n
nN
is uniformly Cauchy on the compact
subsets of which in turn means that it converges uniformly on the compact subsets of
to some A
2
() function, say g. Since P
n
nN
also converges to f uniformly on the compact
subsets of , it turns out that f g in . But this means that f has an analytic extension to
the whole of , a contradiction.
We will be able to show next that the polynomials are dense in A
p
() for general p,
0 < p < . However, we wont be able to approach a function in A
p
() by the partial sums of
its Taylor series.
Theorem 1.6. The polynomials are dense in A
p
(), 0 < p < .
Proof. Let f A
p
(). We consider the function f
is
analytic inside the disc
= z C : [z[ <
1
, S
N
(f
), converge to f
and hence
uniformly in . That is
S
N
(f
) f
uniformly in as N . (1.24)
It is immidiate from (1.24) that
lim
N
|S
N
(f
) f
|
p
A
p
()
= 0. (1.25)
It suces to show that
lim
1
|f f
|
p
A
p
()
= 0. (1.26)
Indeed, assuming for a moment (1.25), we have that
|f S
N
(f
)|
p
A
p
()
2
p
|f f
|
A
p
()
+ 2
p
|f
S
N
(f
))|
A
p
()
.
Let > 0. We chose close to 1 so that 2
p
|f f
|
A
p
()
<
2
(this is possible because of
(1.26)). Then, for N large enough, 2
p
|f
S
N
(f
))|
A
p
()
<
2
because of (1.25) and so
|f S
N
(f
)|
p
A
p
()
<
and so S
N
(f
|
p
A
p
()
=
_
[f(z) f
(z)[
p
dm(z)
=
_
1
0
1
_
2
0
[f(re
i
) f
(re
i
)[
p
drdr
18
For the inner integral we have the estimate
_
2
0
[f(re
i
) f
(re
i
)[
p
d
_
2
0
([f(re
i
)[ +[f
(re
i
)[)d
2
p
_
2
0
_
[f(re
i
)[
p
+[f
(re
i
)[
p
_
d
= 2
p
__
2
0
[f(re
i
)[
p
d +
_
2
0
[f(re
i
)[
p
d
_
2
p+1
_
2
0
[f(re
i
)[
p
d < .
The last inequality is due to the fact the function
F(r) =
_
2
0
[f(re
i
)[
p
d, 0 r < 1,
is an increasing function of r. Thus, since 0 < r < 1 (0 < < 1), we have that
F(r) < F(r).
This is a simple lemma which well prove after the proof of this theorem. Thus we get
_
2
0
[f(re
i
) f
(re
i
)[
p
d 2
p+1
_
2
0
[f(re
i
)[
p
d (1.27)
We show next that f
n=0
a
n
(1
n
)z
n
[
n=0
[a
n
[[1
n
[[z[
n
n=0
[a
n
[[1
n
[M
n
for some M < 1. Now, Lebesgues dominated convergence theorem for series yields that f
converges to f uniformly on the compact subsets of as 1. Thus, for r < 1 xed, we get
lim
1
[f(re
i
) f
(re
i
)[ = 0
and so
lim
1
_
2
0
[f(re
i
) f
(re
i
)[d = 0. (1.28)
Combining (1.27) with (1.28) and Lebesgues dominated convergence theorem we get (1.26).
We now give the proof of the Lemma we already used in the proof of Theorem 1.6.
Lemma 1.3. Suppose g is a nonnegative subharmonic function in and 0 r < 1. Then the
function
F(r) =
1
_
2
0
g(re
i
)d.
is a decreasing function of r.
19
Proof. Since g is a subharmonic function, for every open connected set B with B , there
exists a function U, harmonic in B, such that g(z) = U(z) in B and g(z) U(z) in B.
Suppose that 0 r
1
< r
2
< 1. Set B = z C : [z[ < r
2
. Then
F(r
1
) =
1
_
2
0
g(r
1
e
i
)d
1
_
2
0
U(r
1
e
i
)d = 2U(0)
by the mean value theorem. Again by the mean value theorem we have that
2U(0) =
1
_
2
0
U(r
2
e
i
)d
and so
F(r
1
)
1
_
2
0
U(r
2
e
i
)d =
1
_
2
0
g(r
2
e
i
)d = F(r
2
)
which shows that F is increasing.
Remark. In theorem 1.6 we used the fact that the function
F(r) =
_
2
0
[f(re
i
)[
p
d, 0 r < 1,
is an increasing function of r. This is an immidiate consequence of lemma 1.3 since the function
[f(z)[
p
is a subharmonic function.
20
Chapter 2
The Bergman Projection
2.1 The Bergman Projection on A
p
()
Let us recall the formula of the main theorem of the previous chapter, that is Theorem 1.3.
The latter states that for every function f A
2
() we have the representation
f(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
2
dm(). (2.1)
Although the discussion that led to Theorem 1.3 strongly depends on the Hilbert space structre
of A
2
(), one can try to see if the above formula has a meaning in a more general context.
This is the content of the following proposition.
Proposition 2.1. For f L
p
(), 1 p < , dene the function P(f) on as
P(f)(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
2
dm(), z . (2.2)
Then,
(i) The function P(f) is a well dened analytic function on .
(ii) If in addition f A
p
(), 1 p < and z , we have that
P(f)(z) = f(z). (2.3)
Proof. Let us rst note that the integral in (2.2) is well dened for every f L
p
(), 1 p < .
Indeed, x a z and let 1 p < and q be the conjugate exponent of p, that is,
1
p
+
1
q
= 1.
Then,
_
[f()[
[1 z[
2
dm()
_
_
1
[1 z[
2q
dm()
_1
q
|f|
L
p
()
.
However, for z xed and , the function
1
(1z)
2
is a bounded function of and hence in
every L
q
(), 1 < q . Since the integral in (2.2) denes an analytic function on whenever
it exists, this proves (i).
For (ii) observe that the spaces A
p
() are nested so Theorem 1.3 implies that formula (2.3)
holds true for every function f A
p
(), 2 p < . Its easy to extend this formula to A
1
()
21
22
and hence to every A
p
(), 1 p < . Indeed, consider an f A
1
(). For (0, 1) dene
the function f
() A
2
() and therefore we can write
f
(z) =
_
()
(1 z)
2
dm() =
1
f()
(1
z)
2
() d
where
is the characteristic function of the disc of radius centered at the origin. For every
and (0, 1) we have that
[f()[
[1
z[
2
()
1
[1 z[
2
[f()[ L
1
().
Empolying Lebesgues dominated convergence theorem yields formula (2.3) for f A
1
().
Denition 2.1. The linear operator P is called the Bergman Projection.
In the stronger L
2
() case, one can easily see that the Bergman Projection is the orthogonal
projection of L
2
() onto the closed subspace A
2
().
Proposition 2.2. The Bergman Projection is the orthogonal projection of L
2
() onto A
2
().
Proof. Since A
2
() is a closed subspace of L
2
(), there exists an orthogonal projection, say
P
o
, of L
2
() onto A
2
(). Then, for every f L
2
(), P
o
(f) A
2
() and so
P
o
(f)(z) = P
o
(f), K
z
) = f, P
o
(K
z
)) = f, K
z
) = P(f).
Consequently, P
o
coincides with P which shows the proposition.
When p ,= 2 there is no orthogonal projection. However, since P(L
p
()) A
p
(), it is
natural to ask whether the Bergman Projection is a bounded operator from L
p
() to A
p
()
which would also show that P(L
p
()) = A
p
().
Let us rst show that this is not the case when p = 1.
Proposition 2.3. The Bergman projection is not bounded from L
1
() to L
1
().
Proof. We will actually show that the adjoint operator of P, P
(). We therefore need to nd a formula for the adjoint operator. To that end, consider
f L
1
() and h L
we have that
f, P
(h)) = P(f), h) =
_
P(f)(z)h(z)dm(z) =
_
_
_
f()
(1 z)
2
dm()
_
h(z) dm(z)
=
_
f()
_
_
h(z)
(1 z)
2
dm(z)
_
dm(),
where the last equality follows by applying Fubinis theorem. Thus, we have established the
formula
P
(h) =
_
h()
(1 z)
2
dm(), h L
().
23
Suppose now, for the sake of contradiction, that P is a bounded operator on L
1
(), that
is, that P B(L
1
())
1
. This is equivalent to saying that P
B(L
() and |g
a
|
L
()
= 1. However,
P(g
a
)(a) =
_
g
a
()
(1 z)
2
dm() =
_
1
[1 a[
2
dm()
= 2
_
1
0
1
2
_
2
0
1
[1 are
i
[
2
d rdr = 2
_
1
0
n=0
a
2n
r
2n
rdr
= 2
_
1
0
n=0
a
2n
r
2n+1
dr =
n=0
1
n + 1
a
2n
= log
1
1 a
2
.
Now the hypothesis that P
B(L
) implies that
log
1
1 [a[
2
|P
g
a
|
L
()
|g
a
|
L
()
= 1.
Since this must hold for every a (0, 1) we ger a contradiction as a 1
.
Having got rided of the bad case p = 1 we will now show that the Bergman projection is
indeed a bounded operator from L
p
() onto A
p
() for all 1 < p < .
Theorem 2.1. The Bergman projection is a bounded linear operator from L
p
() onto A
p
()
for every 1 < p < .
Proof. We have already showed that P is onto since P(f) = f for every f A
p
() L
p
().
Now, x 1 < p < and an f L
p
(). It is clear that P(f) denes an anlytic function in the
unit disc so it remains to show that P(f) is in L
p
(). For z and q the conjugate exponent
of p we have the estimate
[P(f)(z)[
_
[f()[
[1 z[
2
dm() =
_
(1 [[
2
)
1
pq
[1 z[
2
q
[f()[(1 [[
2
)
1
pq
[1 z[
2
p
dm()
_
_
(1 [[
2
)
1
p
[1 z[
2
dm()
_1
q
_
_
(1 [[
2
)
1
q
[1 z[
2
[f()[
p
dm()
_1
p
= [I
1
(z)]
1
q
[I
2
(z)]
1
p
.
Taking p
th
powers and integrating we get
_
[P(f)(z)[
p
dm(z)
_
[I
1
(z)]
p
q
I
2
(z) dm(z). (2.4)
At this point we need to estimate integrals of the form
_
(1||
2
)
|1z|
(1 [[
2
)
t2
[1 z[
s
dm() C(1 [z[
2
)
ts
, (2.5)
for every z .
Postponing the proof of this lemma for a while, lets see how we can apply it to complete
the proof of the theorem. For I
1
take t = 2
1
p
and s = 2 in the lemma above to get
I
1
(z) C(1 [z[
2
)
1
p
. Plugging this estimate into formula (2.4) we get
_
[P(f)(z)[
p
dm(z) C
_
(1 [z[
2
)
1
q
_
_
(1 [[
2
)
1
q
[1 z[
2
[f()[
p
dm()
_
dm(z)
= C
_
[f()[
p
(1 [[
2
)
1
q
_
_
(1 [z[
2
)
1
q
[1 z[
2
dm(z)
_
dm(),
where the last equation comes from an application of Fubinis theorem. Now, using Lemma 2.1
on more time with t = 2
1
q
and s = 2 we get
_
[P(f)(z)[
p
dm(z) C
[f()[
p
(1 [[
2
)
1
q
(1 [[
2
)
1
q
dm() = C
|f|
p
L
(
)
which nishes the proof.
We now prove Lemma 2.1.
Proof of Lemma 2.1. Let s, t R with 1 < t < s and set I =
_
(1||
2
)
t2
|1z|
s
dm(). Using the
fact that
1
(1z)
s
2
=
n=0
(n+
s
2
)
n!(
s
2
)
z
n
n
and writing I in polar coordinates we have
I =
_
1
0
1
_
2
0
1
[(1 zre
i
)
s
2
[
2
d(1 r
2
)
t2
r dr
= 2
n=0
_
(n +
s
2
)
n!(
s
2
)
_
2
_
1
0
r
2n+1
(1 r
2
)
t2
dr[z[
2n
=
n=0
_
(n +
s
2
)
n!(
s
2
)
_
2
_
1
0
r
n
(1 r)
t2
dr[z[
2n
=
n=0
_
(n +
s
2
)
n!(
s
2
)
_
2
(n + 1)(t 1)
(n +t)
[z[
2n
=
(t 1)
(
s
2
)
2
n=0
_
(n +
s
2
)
n!
_
2
n!
(n +t)
[z[
2n
.
Using standard estimates for the Gamma function we see that
_
(n+
s
2
)
n!
_
2
n!
(n+t)
is of the order
(n+st)
n!
. But this means that
I C(s, t)
n=0
(n +s t)
n!
[z[
2n
= C(1 [z[
2
)
ts
which is just the statement of the lemma.
25
2.2 A Bounded Projection of L
1
() onto A
1
()
The Bergman projection seems to be the natural operator that maps L
p
() onto A
p
(),
that is, it denes for every L
p
() function, its analytic counterpart on the unit disc and it
is the identity when restricted to A
p
(). The image of L
p
() under the Bergman projection
is exactly A
p
() which reects the fact that, well, its a projection! This nice theory however,
fails to provide with a bounded projection of L
1
() onto A
1
() since all these nice properties
hold for 1 < p < . We therefore set ourselves the task to nd out if such a projection exists on
L
1
() and, if it does, to describe it. As a sideresult, we will also dene the weighted Bergman
spaces which arise naturally in the seek of such a projection.
First, recall the representation formula
f(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
2
dm(), z ,
for a nice function f, say f H
f()(1 [[
2
)
dm(). (2.6)
Proof. First of all notice that the integral is well dened since f is bounded and > 1. Now,
if f(z) =
n=0
a
n
z
n
is the Taylor series of f, the right hand side of (2.6) equals
_
n=0
a
n
n
(1 [[
2
)
dm() =
_
1
0
_
n=0
1
_
2
0
e
in
d r
n
_
(1 r
2
)
rdr
= 2a
0
_
1
0
r(1 r
2
)
dr = f(0)
_
1
0
r(1 r)
dr
= f(0)
1
+ 1
.
Multiplying by + 1 we get the lemma.
We now use a disc automorphism to get a representation formula for f at any z .
Lemma 2.3. Let f H
f()
(1 z)
+2
(1 [[
2
)
dm(). (2.7)
26
Proof. For z dene the disc automorphism
z
: as
z
(w) =
z w
1 zw
.
Clearly
z
(0) = z. Whatsmore, its easy to establish the properties
1
z
=
z
,
z
(w) =
1 [z[
2
(1 zw)
2
,
1 [
z
(w)[
2
= [
z
(w)[(1 [w[
2
).
Using these properties and Lemma 2.2, we can write, for any z ,
f(z) = (f
z
)(0) = ( + 1)
_
(f
z
)()(1 [[
2
)
dm()
= ( + 1)
_
z()
f()[
z
()[
2
(1 [
z
()[
2
)
dm()
= ( + 1)
_
f()
(1 [z[
2
)
2
[1 z[
4
(1 [z[
2
)
(1 [[
2
)
[1 z[
2
dm()
= ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
+2
_
f()
(1 [[
2
)
[1 z[
2+4
dm() .
Now, write the above identity for the function g, dened as g() = (1z)
+2
f(), in the place
of f to get
(1 [z[
2
)
+2
f(z) = ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
+2
_
f()(1 [[
2
)
(1 z)
+2
dm() .
This proves the lemma.
So formula (2.7) denes the family of representations we were seeking for, at least for nice
functions in H
(). The next step is to try to extend this formula to some bigger space
that will hopefully incude the spaces A
p
(), for 1 p < . This gives rise to the weighted
Bergman spaces.
Denition 2.2. For > 1 we dene the family of measures dm
(z) as
dm
dm(z). (2.8)
Let 0 < p < . The weighted Bergman spaces A
p
() are dened as
A
p
() =
_
f H() : |f|
p
A
p
()
=
_
[f(z)[
p
dm
(z) <
_
. (2.9)
The spaces A
p
() = L
p
(, dm
(f) on
as
P
(f)(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
+2
dm
(), z . (2.10)
Then,
(i) The function P
() onto A
2
()
and that the operator P
: L
p
() A
p
is a
bounded projection of L
p
() onto A
p
(). We already know this description when = 0 (this
is Theorem 2.1). The following Theorem gives an answer in the general case > 1.
Theorem 2.2. Let > 1 and 1 p < . For f L
p
() we dene the function P
(f) as
P
(f) = ( + 1)
_
f()
(1 z)
+2
(1 [[
2
)
dm().
Then P
carries boundedly L
p
() onto A
p
() for any
1 p < . More specically this means that there exists a bounded projection of L
1
() onto
A
1
() which is what we were seeking for. Remember that this is not the case for the Hardy
space H
1
().
(iii) There exists an even more general version of this theorem that says that if 1 < , <
then the operator P
: L
p
() A
p
() is a bounded projection of L
p
() onto A
p
() if and
only if + 1 < ( + 1)p. Since we wont need the result in this generality, we will only give the
proof for the case = 0.
Proof. Case p = 1. Let us rst show that if P
is bounded on L
1
() if and only if > 0. To
that end we will use the fact that the adjoint operator of P
, P
, is bounded on L
() if and
only if P
is bounded on L
1
(). The operator P
f(z)g(z)dm(z)
28
where f L
1
() and g L
on L
() so that for
every pair of functions f L
1
() and g L
() we have that
P
(f), g) = f, P
(g)).
The left hand-side inner product can be calculated as follows.
P
(f), g) =
_
(f)()g()dm() =
_
f(z)
(1 z)
2+
dm
(z)g() dm()
=
_
f(z)
_
g()
(1 z)
2+
dm() dm
(z)
=
_
f(z)
_
( + 1)g()(1 [z[
2
)
(1 z)
2+
dm() dm
(z).
We have thus found an explicit formula for the operator P
,
P
(g)(z) =
_
( + 1)g()(1 [z[
2
)
(1 z)
2+
dm(). (2.12)
It is now easy to see that P
is bounded on L
() if and only if
sup
z
(1 [z[
2
)
dm()
[1 z[
2+
< (2.13)
(just test P
dm()
[1 z[
2+
= (1 [z[
2
)
_
1
0
1
_
2
0
1
[1 zre
i
[
2+
d rdr
= (1 [z[
2
)
n=0
_
(n +
2
+ 1)
n!(
2
+ 1)
_
2
_
1
0
r
2n+1
dr[z[
2n
=
(1 [z[
2
)
n=0
_
(n +
2
+ 1)
n!(
2
+ 1)
_
2
1
n + 1
[z[
2n
C
(1 [z[
2
)
2
_
(
2
+ 1)
_
2
n=0
(n + 1)
1
[z[
2n
C
,
where C, C
1
[1 z[
2
dm() =
n=0
2
_
1
0
r
2n+1
dr[z[
2n
=
n=0
1
n + 1
[z[
2n
c log
1
1 [z[
,
for some absolute constant c. Finally, if 1 < < 0 then
(1 [z[
2
)
dm()
[1 z[
2+
(1 [z[
2
)
dm()
(1 +[z[)
2+
1
2
2+
(1 [z[
2
)
.
29
This shows that if P
is bounded on L
1
() then we must have that > 0.
Now let > 0. We will show that P
is bounded on L
1
(). We have that
_
[P
(f)(z)[dm(z) =
_
( + 1)
_
f()(1 [[
2
)
(1 z)
2+
dm()
dm(z)
( + 1)
_
[f()[
[1 z[
2+
(1 [[
2
)
dm()dm(z)
= ( + 1)
_
[f()[
_
1
[1 z[
2+
dm(z)(1 [[
2
)
dm().
However,
_
1
[1 z[
2+
dm(z) =
_
1
[(1 z)
2+
2
[
2
dm(z)
=
1
_
(
2
+ 1)
_
2
n=0
_
(n +
2
+ 1)
n!
_
2
1
n + 1
[[
2n
c
()
(
2
+ 1)
2
n=0
(n +)
n!()
[[
2n
=
()
(
2
+ 1)
1
(1 [[
2
)
.
Hence,
_
[P
(f)(z)[dm(z) C |f|
L
1
()
,
for some constant C depending only on . This nishes the case p = 1.
Case 1 < p < . Suppose now that P
B(L
p
(, dm)). This implies that P
B(L
q
(, dm))
where q =
p
p1
is the conjugate exponent of p. We will show that p( + 1) > 1. Suppose, for
the sake of contradiction, that p( + 1) 1 which is equivalent to
1
q
.
Remember that the operator P
(g)(z) =
_
( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
(1 z)
2+
dm()
= ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
_
1
0
1
_
2
0
1
(1 zre
i
)
2+
d rdr
= ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
_
1
0
1
_
2
0
n=0
(n + + 2)
n!( + 2)
r
n
z
n
e
in
drdr
= ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
_
1
0
n=0
1
_
2
0
e
in
dr
n
z
n
rdr
= ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
_
1
0
rdr = ( + 1)(1 [z[
2
)
.
However, the function (+1)(1[z[
2
)
is not in L
q
(, dm) and hence we have a contradiction.
Indeed, if <
1
q
then
( + 1)
q
_
(1 [z[
2
)
q
dm(z) = ( + 1)
q
_
1
0
x
q
dx
= ( + 1)
q
_
1
q + 1
_
1 lim
x0
1
x
1q
_
_
= .
30
On the other hand, if =
1
q
then
( + 1)
q
_
(1 [z[
2
)
1
dm(z) = ( + 1)
q
_
1
0
1
x
dx = .
In order to complete the proof we shall need a boundedness criterion known as Schurs Test.
Theorem 2.3. (Schurs Test) Let (X, ) be a measure space and K : XX R
+
a nonnegative
measurable function. For 1 < p < and f L
p
(X, d) we dene
T(f)(x) =
_
X
K(x, y)f(y)d(y), x X.
Suppose that there exists a positive constant C > 0 and a positive measurable function h on X
such that
(a)For almost every x X,
_
X
K(x, y)h(y)
q
d(y) Ch(x)
q
.
(b)For almost every y X,
_
X
K(x, y)h(x)
p
d(x) Ch(y)
p
.
Then, T B(L
p
(X, d)) and |T| C.
Remark. Suppose that (X, ) is a measure space and K : X X R
+
a nonnegative
measurable function. Suppose further that there exists some positive constant C and some
positive measurable function h, dened on X, such that
(i)
_
X
K(x, y)h(y)d(y) Ch(x) for -almost every x X.
(ii)
_
X
K(x, y)h(x)d(x) Ch(y) for -almost every y X.
Then, the operator T(f)(x) =
_
X
K(x, y)f(y)d(y) B(L
2
(X, d)) with |T| C.
We postpone the proof of Schurs test until after the end of the proof of Theorem 2.2
Lets x some p (1, ) and set q =
p
p1
. Suppose that p( + 1) > 1. We will now use
Schurs test in order to show that P
1
pq
and K(z, ) =
1
|1z|
2+
. We have
that
_
K(z, )h()
q
d() =
_
1
[1 z[
2+
h()
q
(1 [[
2
)
dm()
=
_
(1 [[
2
)
1
p
[1 z[
2+
d().
31
However, since
1
(1z)
2+
2
=
n=0
(n+
2
+1)
n!(
2
+1)
z
n
n
, we get that,
_
(1 [[
2
)
1
p
[1 z[
+2
dm()
n=0
_
(n +
2
+ 1)
n!(
2
+ 1)
_
2
_
1
0
r
n
(1 r)
1
p
dr[z[
2n
=
n=0
_
(n +
2
+ 1)
n!(
2
+ 1)
_
2
(n + 1)( + 1
1
p
)
(n + + 2
1
p
)
[z[
2n
=
( +
1
q
)
(
2
+ 1)
2
n=0
_
(n +
2
+ 1)
n!
_
2
1
(n++1+
1
q
)
n!
[z[
2n
C
( +
1
q
)
(
2
+ 1)
2
n=0
(n + 1
1
q
)
n!
[z[
2n
= C
( +
1
q
)
(
2
+ 1)
2
1
(1 [z[)
1
p
= C
h(z)
q
,
for some constant C
, depending only on .
Using a similar calculation, we show that
_
K(z, )h(z)
p
d(z) C
h()
p
.
Now, Schurs test tells us that P
B(L
p
(), A
p
()) and that |P
| C
.
Proof of theorem 2.3. Let f L
p
(X, d). Then,
[T(f)(x)[
_
X
K(x, y)h(y)
1
h(y)
[f(y)[d(y).
H olders inequality now yields
[T(f)(x)[
__
X
K(x, y)h(y)
q
d(y)
_1
q
__
X
K(x, y)
[f(y)[
p
h(y)
p
d(y)
_1
p
C
1
q
h(x)
__
X
K(x, y)h(y)
p
[f(y)[
p
d(y)
_1
p
(2.14)
for -almost every x X. Integrating with respect to x and using Fubini we get
_
X
[T(f)(x)[
p
d(x) C
p
q
_
X
h(x)
p
_
X
K(x, y)h(y)
p
[f(y)[
p
d(y) d(x)
= C
p
q
_
X
_
X
K(x, y)h(x)
p
d(x)h(y)
p
[f(y)[
p
d(y)
C
p
q
+ 1
_
X
[f(y)[
p
d(y),
where the last inequality follows by (2.14). Thus we have that
|T(f)|
p
L
p
(Xd)
C
p
q
+1
|f|
p
L
p
(Xd)
.
Taking p-th roots copletes the proof.
32
2.3 A characterization of A
p
in terms of derivatives
Suppose that f is an analytic function and x some p [0, ). Let n be a positve integer.
We want to nd a condition for f
(n)
that assures that f A
p
(). We actually get something
better, that is, a characterization of the space A
p
() in terms of derivatives. Our main result
for this section is the following.
Theorem 2.4. Let n be a positive integer greater than 1 and 1 p < . Suppose that
f H(). Then f A
p
() if and only if (1 [z[
2
)f
(n)
(z) L
p
().
The proof will be done in several steps. Lets begin with the necessity of the condition of
Theorem 2.4.
Lemma 2.4. Let n be a positive integer greater than 1 and 1 p < . Suppose that f A
p
().
Then (1 [z[
2
)
n
f
(n)
L
p
().
Proof. Case p = 1. Suppose that f A
1
(). For = 1, equation (2.10) of Proposition 2.4
emplies
f(z) = P
(f)(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
+2
dm
() = 2
_
(1 [[
2
)
(1 z)
3
f()dm().
Dierentiating n times we get
f
(n)
(z) = (n + 2)!
_
()
n
(1 [[
2
)
(1 z)
n+3
f()dm().
Thus,
_
(1 [z[
2
)
n
[f
(n)
(z)[dm(z) (n + 2)!
_
(1 [z[
2
)
n
_
(1 [[
2
)
[1 z[
n+3
[f()[dm()dm(z)
(n + 2)!
_
(1 [[
2
)[f()[
_
(1 [z[
2
)
n
[1 z[
n+3
dm(z)dm()
C
_
(1 [[
2
)[f()[
1
(1 [[)
dm()
= C|f|
A
1
()
.
Case 1 < p < . Suppose that f A
p
(). By Proposition 2.1 we have that
f(z) =
_
f()
(1 z)
2
dm().
Dierentiating n times we get
(1 [z[
2
)
n
f
(n)
(z) = (n + 1)!(1 [z[
2
)
n
_
()
n
f()
(1 z)
n+2
dm() = n!(P
n
S
n
)(f)(z),
where S
n
(f)(z) = z
n
f(z) and P
n
is described by equation (2.12). Consequently
_
[1 [z[
2
[
pn
[f
(n)
(z)[
p
dm(z) n!|P
n
| |S
n
| |f|
A
p
()
C
n
|f|
A
p
()
.
Remember that P
n
B(L
p
()) by Theorem 2.2.
33
To prove the suciency in Theorem 2.4 we need the following lemma.
Lemma 2.5. Let f H() and n be a positive integer greater than 1, such that
(i) (1 [z[
2
)
n
f
(n)
(z) L
1
(), and
(ii)f(0) = f
(0) = f
(0) = = f
(2n1)
(0) = 0.
Then, for every z ,
f(z) =
1
n!
_
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
()
n
(1 z)
2
dm().
Proof. First notice that condition (ii) implies
f
(n)
(z) =
m=2n
m(m1) . . . (mn + 1)a
m
z
mn
= z
n
m=2n
m(m1) . . . (mn + 1)a
m
z
m2n
.
As a result,
f
(n)
(z)
z
n
H().
For z , we write
_
(1 [[
2
)[f
(n)
()[
[1 z[
2
[
n
[
dm()
1
(1 [z[)
2
_
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
dm()
1
(1 [z[)
2
__
1
2
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
dm()
+
_
1
2
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
dm()
_
.
For the rst integral notice that sup
1
2
f
(n)
()
< . Hence
_
1
2
(1 [[
2
)
n
[f
(n)
()[dm() < .
On the other hand
_
1
2
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
dm() 2
n
_
1
2
(1 [[
2
)
n
[f
(n)
()[dm() <
due to hypothesis (i). This shows that the integral
_
(1||
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
()
n
(1z)
2
dm() exists. What we
actually showed is that the function F(z) =
(1|z|
2
)
n
f
(n)
(z)
z
n
is in L
1
(). But this means that
the integral
g(z) =
_
F()
(1 z)
2
dm() =
1
n!
_
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
(1 z)
2
n
dm()
34
denes an analytic function on . Hence
g
(n)
(z) = (n + 1)
_
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
(1 z)
n+2
n
n
dm()
= (n + 1)
_
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
(1 z)
n+2
dm() = P
n
(f
(n)
)(z).
Since f
(n)
A
1
n
(), part (ii) of Proposition 2.4 gives that P
n
(f
(n)
)(z) = f
(n)
(z). This means
that f
(n)
(z) = g
(n)
(z). However, for 0 k n 1, we have that
g
(k)
(z) =
(k + 1)!
n!
_
f
(n)()
(1 [[
2
)
k
(1 z)
n+2
n
dm().
But this implies
g
(k)
(0) =
(k + 1)!
n!
_
f
(n)()
(1 [[
2
)
nk
dm()
=
(k + 1)!
n!
_
1
0
m=2n
m(m1) . . . (mn + 1)r
m+k2n
1
2
_
2
0
e
i(mk)
d rdr
= 0 = f
(k)
(0).
Hence f = g and the proof is complete.
We are now ready to prove Theorem 2.4
Proof of Theorem 2.4. Let 1 p < and n be a postive integer, greater than 1. Suppose that
f H() is such that (1 [z[
2
)
n
f
(n)
(z) L
p
(). Suppose further that
f(0) = f
(0) = f
(0) = = f
(2n)
(0) = 0.
As weve seen in Lemma 2.5, if we set F(z) =
(1|z|
2
)
n
f
(n)
(z)
z
n
is in L
1
(), then
f(z) =
1
n!
_
(1 [[
2
)
n
f
(n)
()
(1 z)
2
n
dm() = P(f)(z).
If 1 < p < , then P B(L
p
(, dm)) and hence f A
p
().
Let p = 1. Then, for > 0, the operator
P
(f)(z) = ( + 1)
_
f()
(1 z)
+2
(1 [[
2
)dm()
is bounded on L
1
().
Bibliography
35