File size: 51,446 Bytes
b13a737 |
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 |
arXiv:1001.0038v1 [math.CA] 30 Dec 2009BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES ALEXANDER VOLBERG†AND BRETT D. WICK‡ Abstract. In this paper we study “Bergman-type” singular integral ope rators on Ahlfors regular metric spaces. The main result of the paper demonstrates tha t if a singular integral operator on a Ahlfors regular metric space satisfies an additional estima te, then knowing the “T(1)” conditions for the operator imply that the operator is bounded on L2. The method of proof of the main result is an extension and another application of the work originat ed by Nazarov, Treil and the first author on non-homogeneous harmonic analysis. 1.Introduction and Statements of results We are interested in Calder´ on-Zygmund operators living on metric spaces. In particular, these kernels will live on a metric space of homogeneous type. We br iefly recall these types of metric spaces. A metric space of homogeneous type is a space X, a quasi-metric ρ, and a non-negative Borel measure νon the space X. The key property that defines these spaces is that all balls B(x,r) defined byρare open, and the measure νsatisfies the doubling condition ν(B(x,2r))≤Cdoubν(B(x,r))∀x∈X, r∈R+. We also require that ν(B(x,r))<∞for allx∈Xandr∈R+. The main example of the metric spaces that the reader should keep in mind is the case of Rnwith the standard metric and Lebesgue measure. Instead of the standard doubling condition, we wil l impose a slightly stronger condition. Let(X,ν,ρ) beaAhlforsregularmetricmeasurespace. By thiswemeanth at (X,ρ) isacomplete metric space, ν≥0 is a Borel measure on X, and there exist constants 0 < c1< c2,n >0, such that, for all r≥0 andx∈X: c1rn≤ν(B(x,r))≤c2rn. (1.1) It is easy to see that condition 1.1implies the doubling condition on νwithCdoub=c2 c12n. We next recall the definition of Calder´ on-Zygmund operator s on metric spaces as introduced by Christ, [1]. For anyx,y∈X, we set λ(x,y) =ν(B(x,ρ(x,y)))≈ρ(x,y)n. A simple calculation shows that λ(x,y)≈λ(y,x) because of the doubling condition on ν. Then astandard kernel is a function k:X×X\ {x=y} →Csuch that there exists constants CCZ, τ,δ>0 |k(x,y)| ≤CCZ λ(x,y)=CCZ ρ(x,y)n∀x/\e}atio\slash=y∈X; and |k(x,y)−k(x,y′)|+|k(x,y)−k(x′,y)| ≤CCZρ(x,x′)τ ρ(x,y)τ1 λ(x,y)=CCZρ(x,x′)τ ρ(x,y)τ+n †Research supported in part by a National Science Foundation DMS grant. ‡The second author is supported by National Science Foundati on CAREER Award DMS# 0955432 and an Alexander von Humboldt Fellowship. 12 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK provided that ρ(x,x′)≤δρ(x,y). In this situation, we say that the kernel ksatisfies the standard estimates. Again, the canonical examples to keep in mind are the usual Calder´ on-Zygmund kernels onRn. However, we will be interested in kernels that satisfy estim ates as if they lived on a “smaller space”. First, suppose that we have another measure µon the metric space X(which need not be doubling), but satisfies the following relationship, for so me 0≤m<n µ(B(x,r))/lessorsimilarrm∀x∈X,∀r. (H) Then, we define a standard kernel of order 0<m≤nas a function k:X×X\{x=y} →C such that there exists constants CCZ,τ,δ >0 |k(x,y)| ≤CCZ ρ(x,y)m∀x/\e}atio\slash=y∈X; and |k(x,y)−k(x,y′)|+|k(x,y)−k(x′,y)| ≤CCZρ(x,x′)τ ρ(x,y)τ+m provided that ρ(x,x′)≤δρ(x,y). In this situation, we say that the kernel ksatisfies the standard estimates. In this case, we then define the Calder´ on-Zygmun d operator associated to µas Tµ(f)(x) :=/integraldisplay Xk(x,y)f(y)dµ(y). For “nice” functions f, this integral is well defined and These definitions are motivated by the Calder´ on-Zygmund ke rnels that live in Rn, but satisfy estimates as if they lived in Rmwithm≤n. One should think of the measure µas given by the m-dimensional Lebesgue measure after restricting to a m-dimensional hyperplane. The constants CCZ,τ,δandmwill be referred to as the Calder´ on-Zygmund constants of th e kernelk(x,y). We will also be interested in the kernels that have the additi onal property that satisfy |k(x,y)| ≤1 max(dm(x),dm(y)), whered(x) := dist(x,X\Ω) = inf{ρ(x,y) :y∈X\Ω}and Ω being an open set in X. Our main result is the following theorem: Theorem 1. Let(X,ρ,ν)be a Ahlfors regular metric space. Let k(x,y)be a Calder´ on-Zygmund kernel of order mon(X,ρ,ν), with Calder´ on-Zygmund constants CCZandτ, that satisfies |k(x,y)| ≤1 max(d(x)m,d(y)m), whered(x) := dist(x,X\Ω). Letµbe a probability measure with compact support in Xand all balls such that µ(B(x,r))>rmlie in an open set Ω. Finally, suppose also that a “ T1Condition” holds for the operator Tµ,mwith kernel kand for the operator T∗ µ,mwith kernel k(y,x): /bardblTµ,mχQ/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)≤Aµ(Q),/bardblT∗ µ,mχQ/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)≤Aµ(Q). (1.2) Then/bardblTµ,m/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)≤C(A,m,d,τ ). The balls for which we have µ(B(x,r))>rmwill be called “non-Ahlfors balls”. The key hypoth- esis is that we can capture all the non-Ahlfors balls in some o pen set Ω. To mitigate against this difficulty, we will have to suppose that our Calder´ on-Zygmun d kernels have an additional estimate in terms of the behavior in terms of the distance to the comple ment of Ω. An immediate application of Theorem 1is a new proof of results by the authors in [ 9]. In [9] a variant of Theorem 1was obtained in the Euclidean setting, and then is further ex tended to Calder´ on-Zygmund kernels in the natural metric associa ted to the Heisenberg group on theBERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 3 unit ball. This was then used to characterize the Carleson me asures for the analytic Besov–Sobolev spaces on the unit ball in Cn. The connection between Carleson measures and a variant of T heorem 1is provided since a measure is Carleson if and only if a certai n naturally occurring Calder´ on- Zygmund operator is bounded on L2. The operator to be studied is amenable to the methods of non-homogeneous harmonic analysis. Themethod of proof of Theorem 1will beto usethe tools of non-homogeneous harmonicanalysi s as developed by F. Nazarov, S. Treil, and the first author in th e series of papers [ 3–6] and further explained in the book by the first author [ 8]. We essentially adapt the proof given by the authors in [9] to the case of metric spaces considered in this paper. Const ants will bedenoted by Cthroughout the paper. 2.Proof of Theorem 1 The proof of this theorem will be divided in several parts. We first recall the construction of M. Christ of “dyadic cubes” on a metric space of homogeneous typ e, see [1]. The interested reader can also consult the paper by E. Sawyer and R. Wheeden, [ 7], where a similar construction is performed. Theorem 2 (M. Christ, [ 1]).There exists a collection of open sets {Qk α⊂X:k∈Z,α∈Ik}and constantsκ∈(0,1),a0>0, andη>0andC1,C2<∞such that (i)ν(X\/uniontext αQk α) = 0∀k∈Z; (ii)Ifl≥k, then either Ql β⊂Qk αorQl β⊂Qk α=∅; (iii)For each (k,α)and eachl<kthere is a unique βsuch thatQk α⊂Ql β; (iv)The diameter of Qk αis an absolute constant multiple of κk; (v)EachQk αcontains some ball B(zα,a0κk); (vi)ν{x∈Qk α: dist(x,X\Qk α)≤tκk}/lessorsimilartην(Qk α) HereIkis a (possibly finite) index set, depending only on k∈Z. The construction of these cubes uses only the properties of t he homogeneous space ( X,ρ,ν). One can think of the cubes Qk αas being cubes or balls of diameter κkand centerzk α. We will let D denote the collection of dyadic cubes on Xthat exists by the above Theorem. We further remark that it is possible to “randomize” this con struction. In a recent paper by Hyt¨ onen and Martikainen, [ 2], they studied this construction in and showed that it is pos sible to construct several random dyadic grids of the type above. The details of this construction aren’t immediately important for the proof of the main results in th is paper, only the existence of these randomgrids. We recommendthat thereaderconsultthewell- written paper[ 2] fortheconstruction of these grids. In particular, Section 10 of that paper conta ins the necessary modifications of Theorem 2to construct the random dyadic lattices in a metric space. We also define the dilation of a set E⊂Xby a parameter λ≥1 by λE:={x∈X:ρ(x,E)≤(λ−1)diam(E)}. 2.1.Terminal and transit cubes. We will call the cube Q∈ Daterminal cube if the parent of Q(which exists and is unique by (iii) of Theorem 2) is contained in our open set Ω or µ(Q) = 0. All other cubes are called transitcubes. Then, denote by DtermandDtranas the terminal and transit cubes from D. We first state two obvious Lemmas. Lemma 3. IfQbelongs to Dterm, then |k(x,y)| ≤1 κm. This follows since Qbelongs to its parent which is a subset of Ω and so for x,y∈Qwe have thatd(x)≥κand similarly for y. Another obvious lemma:4 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK Lemma 4. IfQbelongs to Dtran, then µ(B(x,r))/lessorsimilarrm. We assume that F= suppµlies in a grand child cube of Qwhere, this Qis a certain (fixed) unit cube. We then take two “random” lattices as constructed by Hy t¨ onen and Martikainen in [ 2]. Now, letD1andD2be two such dyadic lattices, that have the property that the u nit cube contains the support ofµdeep inside a unit cube of the corresponding lattice. We will decompose our functions fandgwith respect to the lattices D1andD2. We would like to denote Qjas a dyadic cube belonging to the dyadic lattice Dj. Unfortunately, this makes the notation later very cumbersome. So, we will us e the letter Qto denote a dyadic cube belonging to the lattice D1and the letter Rto denote a dyadic cube belonging to the lattice D2. We will also let s(Q) denote the “size” or “scale” of the cube, namely, what gener ation of the construction from Theorem 2the cube belongs to. From now on, we will always denote by Qjthe dyadic subcubes of a cube Qenumerated in some “natural order”. Similarly, we will always denote by Rjthe dyadic subcubes of a cube RfromD2. Next, notice that there are special unit cubes Q0andR0of the dyadic lattices D1andD2 respectively. They have the property that they are both tran sit cubes and contain Fdeep inside them. 2.2.Projections Λand∆Q.LetDbe one of the dyadic lattices above. For a function ψ∈ L1(X;µ) and for a cube Q⊂X, denote by /a\}bracketle{tψ/a\}bracketri}htQthe average value of ψoverQwith respect to the measureµ, i.e., /a\}bracketle{tψ/a\}bracketri}htQ:=1 µ(Q)/integraldisplay Qψdµ (of course, /a\}bracketle{tψ/a\}bracketri}htQmakes sense only for cubes Qwithµ(Q)>0). Put Λϕ:=/a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQ0. Clearly, Λϕ∈L2(X;µ) for allϕ∈L2(X;µ), and Λ2= Λ, i.e., Λ is a projection. Note also, that actually Λ does not depend on the lattice Dbecause the average is taken over the whole support of the measure µregardless of the position of the cube Q0(orR0). Below we will start almost every claim by “Assume (for definit eness) that s(Q)≤s(R)...”. Below, for ease of notation, we will write that a cube Q∈ X ∩Y to mean that the dyadic cube Q has both property XandYsimultaneously. For every transit cube Q∈ D1, define ∆Qϕby ∆Qϕ/vextendsingle/vextendsingle X\Q:= 0, ,∆Qϕ/vextendsingle/vextendsingle Qj:= /bracketleftBig /a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQj−/a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQ/bracketrightBig ifQjis transit; ϕ−/a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQifQjis terminal. Observe that for every transit cube Q, we haveµ(Q)>0, so our definition makes sense since no zero can appear in the denominator. We repeat the same definit ion forR∈ D2. We then have have following Lemma that collects several easy properties of ∆Qϕ. To check these properties is left to the reader as an exercise. Lemma 5. For everyϕ∈L2(X;µ)and every transit cube Q, (1) ∆Qϕ∈L2(X;µ); (2)/integraltext X∆Qϕdµ= 0; (3) ∆Qis a projection, i.e., ∆2 Q= ∆Q; (4) ∆QΛ = Λ∆Q= 0;BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 5 (5) IfQ,/tildewideQare transit,/tildewideQ/\e}atio\slash=Q, then ∆Q∆eQ= 0. We next note that it is possible to decompose functions ϕinto the corresponding projections Λ and ∆Q. Lemma 6. LetQ0be a transit cube. For every ϕ∈L2(X;µ)we have ϕ= Λϕ+/summationdisplay Qtransit∆Qϕ, the series converges in L2(X;µ)and, moreover, /bardblϕ/bardbl2 L2(µ)=/bardblΛϕ/bardbl2 L2(µ)+/summationdisplay Qtransit/bardbl∆Qϕ/bardbl2 L2(µ). Proof.Note first of all that if one understands the sum /summationdisplay Qtransit as limk→∞/summationtext Qtransit:s(Q)>δk, then forµ-almost every x∈X, one has ϕ(x) = Λϕ(x)+/summationdisplay Qtransit∆Qϕ(x). Indeed, the claim is obvious if the point xlies in some terminal cube. Suppose now that this is not the case. Observe that Λϕ(x)+/summationdisplay Qtransit:s(Q)>κk∆Qϕ(x) =/a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQk, whereQkis the dyadic cube of size κk, containing x. Therefore, the claim is true if /a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQk→ϕ(x). But, the exceptional set for this condition has µ-measure 0. Now the orthogonality of all ∆ Qϕ between themselves, and their orthogonality to Λ ϕproves the lemma. /square 3.Good and bad functions We consider the functions fandg∈L2(X;µ). We fix two dyadic lattices D1andD2as before and define decompositions of fandgvia Lemma 6, f= Λf+/summationdisplay Q∈Dtran 1∆Qf, g= Λg+/summationdisplay R∈Dtran 2∆Rg. For a dyadic cube Rwe denote ∪i∈Ik∂RibyskR, called the skeleton ofR. Here theRiare the dyadic children of R. Letτ,mbe parameters of the Calder´ on-Zygmundkernel k. We fixα=τ 2τ+2m. Definition 7. Fix a small number δ >0 andS≥2 to be chosen later. Choose an integer rsuch that κ−r≤δS<κ−r+1. (3.1) A cubeQ∈ D1is called bad(δ-bad) if there exists R∈ D2such that (1)s(R)≥κrs(Q); (2) dist(Q,skR)<s(Q)αs(R)1−α.6 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK LetB1denote the collection of all bad cubes and correspondingly l etG1denote the collection of good cubes. The symmetric definition gives the collection of badcubesR∈ D2, denotes as B2. We say, that ϕ=/summationtext Q∈Dtran 1∆Qϕisbadif in the sum only bad Q’s participate in this decompo- sition with the same appling to ψ=/summationtext Q∈Dtran 2∆Qψ. In particular, given two distinct lattices D1 andD2we fix the decomposition of fandginto good and bad parts: f=fgood+fbad,wherefgood= Λf+/summationdisplay Q∈Dtran 1∩G1∆Qf. The same applies to g= Λg+/summationtext R∈Dtran 2∆Rg=ggood+gbad. Theorem 8. One can choose S=S(α)in such a way that for any fixed Q∈ D1, P{Qis bad} ≤δ2. (3.2) By symmetry P{Ris bad} ≤δ2for any fixed R∈ D2. Theproof of this Theorem can befoundin thepaper [ 2]. Theuseof Theorem 8gives usS=S(α) in such a way that for any fixed Q∈ D1, P{Qis bad} ≤δ2. (3.3) We are now ready to prove Theorem 9. Consider the decomposition of ffrom Lemma 6. Then one can choose S=S(α)in such a way that E(/bardblfbad/bardblL2(X;µ))≤δ/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ). (3.4) The proof depends only on the property ( 3.3) and not on a particular definition of what it means to be a bad or good function. Proof.By Lemma 6(its left inequality), E(/bardblfbad/bardblL2(X;µ))≤E/parenleftBig/summationdisplay Q∈Dtran 1∩B1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/parenrightBig1/2 . Then E(/bardblfbad/bardblL2(X;µ))≤/parenleftBig E/summationdisplay Q∈Dtran 1∩B1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/parenrightBig1/2 . LetQbe a fixed cube in D1; then, using ( 3.3), we conclude: E/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)=P{Qis bad}/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)≤δ2/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ). Therefore, we can continue as follows: E(/bardblfbad/bardblL2(X;µ))≤δ/parenleftBig/summationdisplay Q∈Dtran 1∩B1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/parenrightBig1/2 ≤δ/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ). The last inequality uses Lemma 6again (its right inequality). /square This theorem can also be found in the paper [ 2].BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 7 3.1.Reduction to Estimates on Good Functions. We consider two random dyadic lattices D1andD2as constructed in [ 2]. Take now two functions fandg∈L2(X;µ) decomposed according to Lemma 6 f= Λf+/summationdisplay Q∈Dtran 1∆Qf, g= Λg+/summationdisplay R∈Dtran 2∆Rg. Recall that we can now write f=fgood+fbad,g=ggood+gbad. Then (Tf,g) = (Tfgood,ggood)+R(f,g),whereR(f,g) = (Tfbad,g)+(Tfgood,gbad). Theorem 10. LetTbe any operator with bounded kernel. Then E|R(f,g)| ≤2δ/bardblT/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). Remark 11.Notice that the estimate depends on the norm of Tnot on the bound on its kernel. Proof.The procedure of taking the good and bad part of a function are projections in L2(X;µ) and so they do not increase the norm. Since we have that the ope ratorTis bounded, then |R(f,g)| ≤ /bardblT/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)/parenleftbig /bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblfbad/bardblL2(X;µ)+/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblgbad/bardblL2(X;µ)/parenrightbig Therefore, upon taking expectations we find E|R(f,g)| ≤ /bardblT/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)/parenleftbig /bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ)E(/bardblfbad/bardblL2(X;µ))+/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)E(/bardblgbad/bardblL2(X;µ))/parenrightbig . Using Theorem 9we finish the proof. /square We see that we need now only to estimate |(Tfgood,ggood)| ≤C(τ,m,d,T 1)/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). (3.5) In fact, considering any operator Twith bounded kernel we conclude (Tf,g) =E(Tf,g) =E(Tfgood,ggood)+ER(f,g). Using Theorem 10and (3.5) we have |(Tf,g)| ≤C/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ)+2δ/bardblT/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). From here, taking the supremum over fandgin the unit ball of L2(X;µ), and choosing δ=1 4we get /bardblT/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)≤2C. 3.2.Splitting (Tfgood,ggood)into Three Sums. First let us get rid of the projection Λ. We fix two corresponding dyadic lattices D1andD2. Recall that F= suppµis deep inside a unit cube Q of the standard dyadic lattice Das well as inside the shifted unit cubes Q0∈ D1andR0∈ D2. If f∈L2(X;µ), we have /bardblTΛf/bardblL2(X;µ)=/a\}bracketle{tf/a\}bracketri}htQ0/bardblTχQ0/bardblL2(X;µ) ≤A1.2/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)µ(Q0)1/2 µ(Q0)µ(Q0)1/2 =A1.2/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ). So we can replace fbyf−Λfand identically we can repeat this argument with gand from now on we may assume further that/integraldisplay Xf(x)dµ(x) = 0 and/integraldisplay Xg(x)dµ(x) = 0. Based on the reductions above, we can now think that fandgare good functions with zero averages. We skip mentioning below that Q∈ Dtran 1andR∈ Dtran 2, since this will always be the case by the convention established above.8 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK To study the action of the Calder´ on-Zygmund operator Tonfandg, we split the pairing in the following manner, (Tf,g) =/summationdisplay Q∈G1,R∈G2,s(Q)≤s(R)(∆Qf,∆Rg)+/summationdisplay Q∈G1,R∈G2,s(Q)>s(R)(∆Qf,∆Rg). The question of convergence of the infinite sum can be avoided here, as we can think that the functionsfandgare only finite sums. This removes the question of convergenc e and allows us to rearrange and group the terms in the sum in any way we want. We need to estimate only the first sum, as the second will follo w by symmetry. For the sake of notational simplicity we will skip mentioning that the cube sQandRare good and we will skip mentioning s(Q)≤s(R). So, for now on, /summationdisplay Q,R:other conditionsmeans/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)≤s(R),Q∈G1,R∈G2,other conditions. Remark 12.It is convenient sometimes to think that the summation/summationdisplay Q,R:other conditions goes over good QandallR. Formally, this does not matter, since the functions fandgare good functions, and so this merely reduces to adding or omitting s everal zeros to the sum. For the symmetric sum over Q,R:s(Q)> s(R) the roles of QandRin this remark must of course be interchanged. The definition of δ-badness involved a large integer r, see (3.1). Use this notation to write our sum overs(Q)≤s(R) as follows /summationdisplay Q,R(∆Qf,∆Rg) =/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)≥κ−rs(R)+/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)<κ−rs(R)=/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)≥κ−rs(R),dist(Q,R)≤s(R)+ /bracketleftbigg/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)≥κ−rs(R),dist(Q,R)>s(R)+/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)<κ−rs(R),Q∩R=∅/bracketrightbigg +/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)<κ−rs(R),Q∩R/\egatio\slash=∅ =:σ1+σ2+σ3. 3.3.Three Potential Estimates of/integraltext X/integraltext Xk(x,y)f(x)g(y)dµ(x)dµ(y).Recall that the kernel k(x,y) ofTsatisfies the estimate |k(x,y)| ≤1 max(d(x)m,d(y)m), d(x) = dist(x,X\Ω), Ω being an open set in X, and |k(x,y)| ≤CCZ ρ(x,y)m∀x/\e}atio\slash=y∈X; and |k(x,y)−k(x,y′)|+|k(x,y)−k(x′,y)| ≤CCZρ(x,x′)τ ρ(x,y)τ+m provided that ρ(x,x′)≤δρ(x,y), with some fixed constants numbers CCZ,τ,m. First, we will sometimes write /integraldisplay X/integraldisplay Xk(x,y)f(x)g(y)dµ(x)dµ(y) =/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay X[k(x,y)−k(x0,y)]f(x)g(y)dµ(x)dµ(y) using the fact that our fandgwill actually be ∆ Qfand ∆ Rgand so their integrals are zero. Temporarily write K(x,y) for either k(x,y) ork(x,y)−k(x0,y).BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 9 After that we have three logical possibilities to estimate /integraldisplay X/integraldisplay XK(x,y)f(x)g(y)dµ(x)dµ(y). (1) Estimate |K|inL∞, andf,ginL1norms; (2) Estimate |K|inL∞L1norm, and finL1norm,ginL∞norm (or maybe, do this symmetrically); (3) Estimate |K|inL1norm, andf,ginL∞norms. The third method is widely used for Calder´ on–Zygmund estim ates on homogeneous spaces (say with respect to Lebesgue measure), but it is very dangerous t o use in the case of a nonhomogeneous measure. Here is the reason. After fandgare estimated in the L∞norm, one needs to continue these estimates to have L2norms. There is nothing strange in that as usually fandgare almost proportional to characteristic functions. But for fliving onQsuch thatf=cQχQ(cQis a constant), /bardblf/bardblL∞(X:µ)≤1 µ(Q)1/2/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ). The same reasoning applies for gonR. Then /vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay XK(x,y)f(x)g(y)dµ(x)dµ(y)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle≤1 (µ(Q)µ(R))1/2/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). And the nonhomogeneous measure has no estimate from below. H aving two uncontrollable almost zeroes in the denominator is a very bad idea. We will never use the estimate of type (3). On the other hand, estimates of type (2) are much less dangero us (although requires the care as well). This is because, in this case one applies /bardblf/bardblL1(X;µ)≤µ(Q)1/2/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)and/bardblg/bardblL∞(X;µ)≤1 µ(R)1/2/bardblg/bardblL2(µ), and gets /vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay XK(x,y)f(x)g(y)dµ(x)dµ(y)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle≤/parenleftbiggµ(Q) µ(R)/parenrightbigg1/2 /bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). If we choose to use estimate of the type (2) only for pairs Q,Rsuch thatQ⊂Rwe are in good shape. This approach is what we will end up going when estimat ingσ3. Plan. The first sum is the “diagonal” part of the operator, σ1. The second sum, σ2is the “long range interaction”. The final sum, σ3, is the “short range interaction”. The diagonal part will be estimated using our T1 assumption of Theorem 1.2, for the long range interaction we will use the first type of estimates described above, for the short range i nteraction we will use estimates of types (1) and (2) above. But all this will be done carefully! 4.The Long Range Interaction: Controlling Term σ2 We first prove a lemma that demonstrates that for functions wi th supports that are far apart, we have some good control on the bilinear form induced by our C alder´ on-Zygmund operator T. For two dyadic cubes QandR, we set D(Q,R) :=s(Q)+s(R)+dist(Q,R).10 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK Lemma 13. Suppose that QandRare two cubes in X, such that s(Q)≤s(R). LetϕQ,ψR∈ L2(X;µ). Assume that ϕQvanishes outside Q, andψRvanishes outside R;/integraltext XϕQdµ= 0and, at last,dist(Q,suppψR)≥s(Q)αs(R)1−α. Then |(ϕQ,TψR)| ≤ACs(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τ/radicalbig µ(Q)µ(R)/bardblϕQ/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblψR/bardblL2(X;µ). Remark 14.Note that we require only that the support of the function ψRlies far from the cube Q; the cubes QandRthemselves may intersect! Such situations will arise when e stimating the termσ2. Proof.LetxQbe the center of the cube Q. Note that for all x∈Q,y∈suppψR, we have ρ(xQ,y)≥s(Q) 2+dist(Q,suppψR)≥s(Q) 2+2r(1−α)s(Q)/greaterorsimilars(Q)/greaterorsimilarρ(x,xQ). Therefore, |(ϕQ,TψR)|=/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay Xk(x,y)ϕQ(x)ψR(y)dµ(x)dµ(y)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle =/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay X[k(x,y)−k(xQ,y)]ϕQ(x)ψR(y)dµ(x)dµ(y)/vextendsingle/vextendsingle/vextendsingle /lessorsimilars(Q)τ dist(Q,suppψR)m+τ/bardblϕQ/bardblL1(X;µ)/bardblψR/bardblL1(X;µ). There are two possible cases. Case 1: dist(Q,suppψR)≥s(R).Then D(Q,R) :=s(Q)+s(R)+dist(Q,R)≤3dist(Q,suppψR) and therefore s(Q)τ dist(Q,suppψR)m+τ/lessorsimilars(Q)τ D(Q,R)m+τ/lessorsimilars(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τ. Case 2:s(Q)αs(R)1−α≤dist(Q,suppψR)≤s(R).ThenD(Q,R)≤3s(R) and we get s(Q)τ dist(Q,suppψR)m+τ≤s(Q)τ [s(Q)αs(R)1−α]m+τ=s(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 s(R)m+τ/lessorsimilars(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τ. Here, key to the proof was the choice of α=τ 2(τ+m). Now, to finish the proof of the lemma, it remains only to note that /bardblϕQ/bardblL1(X;µ)≤/radicalbig µ(Q)/bardblϕQ/bardblL2(X;µ)and/bardblψR/bardblL1(X;µ)≤/radicalbig µ(R)/bardblψR/bardblL2(X;µ). /square Applying this lemma to ϕQ= ∆QfandψR= ∆Rg, we obtain |σ2|/lessorsimilar/summationdisplay Q,Rs(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τ/radicalbig µ(Q)/radicalbig µ(R)/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ). (4.1) To control term σ2the computations above suggest that we will define a matrix op erator, de- pending on the cubes QandRand show that it is a bounded operator on ℓ2. Lemma 15. Define TQ,R:=s(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τ/radicalbig µ(Q)/radicalbig µ(R) (Q∈ Dtr 1, R∈ Dtr 2, s(Q)≤s(R)).BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 11 Then, for any two families {aQ}Q∈Dtr 1and{bR}R∈Dtr 2of nonnegative numbers, one has /summationdisplay Q,RTQ,RaQbR≤AC/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Rb2 R/bracketrightBig1 2. Remark 16.Note thatTQ,Ris defined for all QandRwiths(Q)≤s(R) and that the conditions dist(Q,R)≥s(Q)αs(R)1−α(or even the condition Q∩R=∅) no longer appears as a condition in the summation! Assuming Lemma 15for the moment, the estimate of σ2then proceeds in an obvious fashion. |σ2|/lessorsimilar/summationdisplay Q,Rs(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τ/radicalbig µ(Q)/radicalbig µ(R)/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ) /lessorsimilar /summationdisplay Q/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ) 1/2/parenleftBigg/summationdisplay R/bardbl∆Rg/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/parenrightBigg1/2 /lessorsimilar/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). Here the first line follows by ( 4.1), the second by Lemma 15, and finally the last by Lemma 6. We now turn to the proof of Lemma 15. Proof.Let us “slice” the matrix TQ,Raccording to the ratios(Q) s(R). Namely, let T(k) Q,R=/braceleftBigg TQ,Rifs(Q) =κ−ks(R); 0 otherwise , (k= 0,1,2,...). To prove the lemma, it is enough to show that for every k≥0, /summationdisplay Q,RT(k) Q,RaQbR≤C2−τ 2k/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Rb2 R/bracketrightBig1 2. The matrix {T(k) Q,R}has a “block” structure since the variables bRcorresponding to the cubes R∈ Dtr 2for whichs(R) =κjcan only interact with the variables aQcorresponding to the cubes Q∈ Dtr 1, for which s(Q) =κj−k. Thus, to get the desired inequality, it is enough to estimat e each block separately, i.e., to demonstrate that /summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)=κj−k,s(R)=κjT(k) Q,RaQbR≤C/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)=κj−ka2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay R:s(R)=κjb2 R/bracketrightBig1 2. Let us introduce the functions F(x) :=/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)=κj−kaQ/radicalbig µ(Q)χQ(x) and G(x) :=/summationdisplay R:ℓ(R)=κjbR/radicalbig µ(R)χR(x). Note that the cubes of a given size in one dyadic lattice do not intersect (Property (ii) of Theorem 2), and therefore at each point x∈X, at most one term in the sum can be non-zero. Also observe that /bardblF/bardblL2(X;µ)=/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)=κj−ka2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2and/bardblG/bardblL2(X;µ)=/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay R:s(R)=κjb2 R/bracketrightBig1 2. Then the estimate we need can be rewritten as/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay XKj,k(x,y)F(x)G(y)dµ(x)dµ(y)≤C/bardblF/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblG/bardblL2(X;µ),12 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK where Kj,k(x,y) =/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)=κj−k,s(R)=κjs(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2 D(Q,R)m+τχQ(x)χR(y). Again, for every pair of points x,y∈X, only one term in the sum can be nonzero. Since ρ(x,y)+ s(R)≤3D(Q,R) for anyx∈Qandy∈R, we obtain Kj,k(x,y) =Cκ−τ 2ks(R)τ D(Q,R)m+τ /lessorsimilarκ−τ 2kκjτ [κj+ρ(x,y)]m+τ=:κ−τ 2kkj(x,y). So, it is enough to check that/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay Xkj(x,y)F(x)G(y)dµ(x)dµ(y)/lessorsimilar/bardblF/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblG/bardblL2(X;µ). We remind the reader that we called the balls “non-Ahlfors ba lls” if µ(B(x,r))>rm. According to the Schur test, it would suffice to prove that for e veryy∈X, one has the estimate/integraltext Xkj(x,y)dµ(x)/lessorsimilar1 and vice versa (i.e., for every x∈X, one has/integraltext Xkj(x,y)dµ(y)/lessorsimilar1). Then the norm of the integral operator with kernel kjinL2(X;µ) would be bounded by a constant and the proof of Lemma 15would be over. If we assumed a priori that the supremum of radi i of all non-Ahlfors balls centered at y∈Rwiths(R) =κj,were less than κj+1, then the needed estimate would be immediate. In fact, we can write/integraldisplay Xkj(x,y)dµ(x) =/integraldisplay B(y,κj+1)kj(x,y)dµ(x)+/integraldisplay X\B(y,κj+1)kj(x,y)dµ(x) /lessorsimilarκ−jmµ(B(y,κj+1))+/integraldisplay X\B(y,κj+1)κjτ ρ(x,y)m+τdµ(x) /lessorsimilarκ−jmµ(B(y,κj+1))+∞/summationdisplay k=0κjτ (κkκj+1)m+τµ(B(y;κkκj+1)) /lessorsimilar/parenleftBig 1+∞/summationdisplay k=01 κkτ/parenrightBig ≈1. The passage from the second to the third line follows by exhau sting the the space X\B(y,κj+1) by “annular regions” and making obvious estimates using con dition (H). The difficulty with this approach is that we cannot guarantee t he supremum of the radii of all non-Ahlfors balls centered at ybe less than κj+1for everyy∈X. Our measure may not have this uniform property. So, generally speaking, we are unable to show that the integr al operator with kernel kj(x,y) acts inL2(X;µ); but we do not need that much! We only need to check that the corresponding bilin ear form is bounded on two givenfunctionsFandG. So, we are not interested in the points y∈X for whichG(y) = 0 (or in the points x∈X, for which F(x) = 0). But, by definition, Gcan be non-zero only on the transit cubes in D2. Here we used our convention that we omit in all sums the fact that QandRare transit cubes, however they are! Now let us notice that if (and this is the case for all Rin the sum we estimate in our lemma) R∈ Dtran 2, then the supremum of radii of all non-Ahlfors balls centere d aty∈Ris bounded by s(R) for every y∈R. Indeed, this is just Lemma 4. The same reasoning shows that if Q∈ Dtran 1, then the supremum of radii of all non-Ahlfors balls centered atx∈Qis bounded by κj−k+1≤κj+1 wheneverF(x)/\e}atio\slash= 0, and we are done with Lemma 15. /squareBERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 13 Now, wehope, thereader will agree that thedecision to decla re thecubescontained inΩterminal was a good one. As a result, the fact that the measure µis not Ahlfors did not put us in any real trouble – we barely had a chance to notice this fact at all. But , it still remains to explain why we were so eager to have the extra condition |k(x,y)| ≤1 max(dm(x),dm(y)), d(x) := dist(x,X\Ω) on our Calder´ on–Zygmund kernel. The answer is found in the n ext two sections. 5.Short Range Interaction and Nonhomogeneous Paraproducts: Controlling Termσ3. Recall that the sum σ3is taken over the pairs Q,R, for which s(Q)<κ−rs(R) andQ∩R/\e}atio\slash=∅. We would like to improve this condition to the demand that Qlie “deep inside” one of the subcubes Rj. Recall also that we defined the skeletonskRof the cube Rby skR:=/uniondisplay j∂Rj. We have declared a cube Q∈ D1bad if there exists a cube R∈ D2such thats(R)>κrs(Q) and dist(Q,skR)≤s(Q)αs(R)1−α. Now, for every good cube Q∈ D1, the conditions s(Q)<κ−rs(R) andQ∩R/\e}atio\slash=∅together imply that Qlies inside one of the children RjofR. We will denote this subcube by RQ. The sum σ3can now be split into σterm 3:=/summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis terminal(∆Qf,T∆Rg) and σtran 3:=/summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transit(∆Qf,T∆Rg). 5.1.Estimation of σterm 3.First of all, write (recall that Rjdenote the children of R): σterm 3=/summationdisplay j/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)<κ−rs(R),Q⊂Rj∈Dterm 2(∆Qf,T∆Rg). Clearly, it is enough to estimate the inner sum for every fixed , and so let us do this for j= 1. We have/summationdisplay Q,R:s(Q)<κ−rs(R),Q⊂R1∈Dterm 2(∆Qf,T∆Rg) =/summationdisplay R:R1∈Dterm 2/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)<κ−rs(R),Q⊂R1(∆Qf,T∆Rg). Recall that the kernel kof our operator Tsatisfies the estimate of Lemma 3 |k(x,y)|/lessorsimilar1 s(R)mfor allx∈R1,y∈X. (5.1) Hence, |T∆Rg(x)|/lessorsimilar/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL1(X;µ) s(R)mfor allx∈R1, (5.2) and therefore /bardblχR1·T∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)/lessorsimilar/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL1(X;µ)/radicalbig µ(R1) s(R)m /lessorsimilarµ(R) s(R)m/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)≤AB/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ).14 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK This follows because /bardbl∆Rg/bardblL1(X:µ)≤/radicalbig µ(R)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)andµ(R1)≤µ(R) hold trivially. Ad- ditionally, by Lemma 4we have µ(R)/lessorsimilars(R)m(5.3) becauseR(the father of the cube R1) is a transit cube if R1is terminal. Now, recalling Lemma 6, and taking into account that ∆Qf≡0 outsideQ, we get /summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1|(∆Qf,T∆Rg)|=/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1|(∆Qf,χR1·T∆Rg)| /lessorsimilar/bardblχR1·T∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2 /lessorsimilar/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2. So, we obtain/summationdisplay R:R1∈Dterm 2/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1|(∆Qf,T∆Rg)| /lessorsimilar/summationdisplay R:R1∈Dterm 2/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2 /lessorsimilar/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay R:R1∈Dterm 2/bardbl∆Rg/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay R:R1∈Dterm 2/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2. But the terminal cubes in D2do not intersect! Therefore every ∆Qfcan appear at most once in the last double sum, and we get the bound /summationdisplay R:R1∈Dterm 2/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1|(∆Qf,T∗∆Rψ)| /lessorsimilar/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay R/bardbl∆Rg/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q/bardbl∆Qf/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)/bracketrightBig1 2/lessorsimilar/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblψ/bardblL2(X;µ). Lemma6has been used again in the last inequality. 5.2.Estimation of σtran 3.Recall that σtran 3=/summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transit(∆Qf,T∗∆Rg). Split every term in the sum as (∆Qf,T∆Rψ) = (∆Qf,T(χRQ∆Rg))+(∆Qf,T∗(χR\RQ∆Rg)). Observe that since Qis good,Q⊂R, ands(Q)<κ−rs(R), we have dist(Q,suppχR\RQ∆Rg)≥dist(Q,skR)≥s(Q)αs(R)1−α. Using Lemma 13and taking into account that the norm /bardblχR\RQ∆Rψ/bardblL2(X;µ)does not exceed /bardbl∆Rψ/bardblL2(X;µ), we conclude that the sum /summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transit|(∆Qf,T∗(χR\RQ∆Rg))|BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 15 can be estimated by the sum ( 4.1). Thus, our task is to find a good bound for the sum /summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transit(∆Qf,T∗(χRQ∆Rg)). Recalling the definition of ∆Rψand recalling that RQis atransitcube, we get χRQ∆Rg=cR,QχRQ, where cRQ=/a\}bracketle{tψ/a\}bracketri}htRQ−/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR is aconstant. So, our sum can be rewritten as /summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transitcRQ(∆Qf,T∗(χRQ)). Our next goal will be to extend the function χRQto the function 1 in every term. Let us observe that (∆Qf,T∗(χX\RQ)) =/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay X\RQk(x,y)∆Qf(x)dµ(x)dµ(y) =/integraldisplay X/integraldisplay X\RQ[k(x,y)−k(xQ,y)]∆Qf(x)dµ(x)dµ(y). Note again that for every x∈Q,y∈X\RQ, we have ρ(xQ,y)≥s(Q) 2+dist(Q,X\RQ)/greaterorsimilars(Q)/greaterorsimilarρ(x,xQ). Therefore, |k(x,y)−k(xQ,y)|/lessorsimilar/parenleftBiggρ(x,xQ) ρ(xQ,y)/parenrightBiggτ1 ρ(x,y)m/lessorsimilars(Q)τ ρ(xQ,y)m+τ, and |(∆Qf,T(χX\RQb))|/lessorsimilars(Q)τ/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL1(X;µ)/integraldisplay X\RQdµ(y) ρ(xQ,y)m+τ. Now let us consider the sequence of cubes R(j)∈ D2, beginning with R(0)=RQand gradually ascending ( R(j)⊂R(j+1),s(R(j+1)) =κs(R(j))) to the starting cube R0=R(N)of the lattice D2. Clearly, all these cubes R(j)are transit cubes. We have /integraldisplay X\RQdµ(y) ρ(xQ,y)m+τ=/integraldisplay R0\RQdµ(y) ρ(xQ,y)m+τ=N/summationdisplay j=1/integraldisplay R(j)\R(j−1)dµ(y) ρ(xQ,y)m+τ. We call the j-th term of this sum Ij. Note now that, since Qis good and s(Q)< κ−rs(R)≤ κ−rs(R(j)) for allj, we have dist(Q,R(j)\R(j−1))≥dist(Q,skR(j))≥s(Q)αs(R(j))1−α. Hence Ij≤1 [s(Q)αs(R(j))1−α]m+τ/integraldisplay R(j)dµ.16 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK Recalling that α=τ 2(m+τ), we see that the first factor equals 1 s(Q)τ 2s(R(j))m+τ 2. SinceR(j)is transit, we have /integraldisplay R(j)dµ/lessorsimilarµ(R(j))/lessorsimilars(R(j))m. Thus, Ij/lessorsimilars(Q)τ 2s(R(j))τ 2=κ−(j−1)ε 2s(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2. Summing over j≥1, we get /integraldisplay X\RQ|b(y)|dµ(y) ρ(xQ,y)m+τ=N/summationdisplay j=1Ij/lessorsimilar1−κ−τ 21 s(Q)τ 2s(R)τ 2. Now let us note that |cRQ| ≤/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL1(RQ,µ) µ(RQ)≤/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(RQ,µ)/radicalbig µ(RQ). (5.4) We finally obtain |(∆Qf,T∗(χX\RQ))| /lessorsimilar1 η(1−κ−τ 2)/bracketleftbiggs(Q) s(R)/bracketrightbiggτ 2/radicalBigg µ(Q) µ(RQ)/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ) and /summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transit|cR,Q|·|(∆Qf,T∗(χX\RQ))| /lessorsimilar1 η(1−κ−τ 2)/summationdisplay j/summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂Rj/bracketleftbiggs(Q) s(R)/bracketrightbiggτ 2/radicalBigg µ(Q) µ(Rj)/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ). Lemma 17. For every two families {aQ}Q∈Dtr 1and{bR}R∈Dtr 2of nonnegative numbers, one has /summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R1TQ,RaQbR≤1 1−κ−τ 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Rb2 R/bracketrightBig1 2. Proof.Let us “slice” the matrix TQ,Raccording to the ratios(Q) s(R). Namely, let T(k) Q,R=/braceleftBigg TQ,R,ifQ⊂R1, s(Q) =κ−ks(R); 0,otherwise (k= 1,2,...). It is enough to show that for every k≥0, /summationdisplay Q,RT(k) Q,RaQbR≤κ−τ 2k/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Rb2 R/bracketrightBig1 2. The matrix {T(k) Q,R}has a very good “block” structure: every aQcan interact with only onebR. So, it is enough to estimate each block separately, i.e., to show that for every fixed R∈ Dtran 2, /summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1,ℓ(Q)=κ−kℓ(R)κ−τ 2k/radicalBigg µ(Q) µ(R1)aQbR≤κ−τ 2k/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2bR.BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 17 But, reducing both parts by the non-essential factor κ−τ 2kbR, we see that this estimate is equivalent to the trivial estimate /summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1,s(Q)=κ−ks(R)/radicalBigg µ(Q) µ(R1)aQ ≤/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Q:Q⊂R1,s(Q)=κ−ks(R)µ(Q) µ(R1)/bracketrightBig1 2/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2≤/bracketleftBig/summationdisplay Qa2 Q/bracketrightBig1 2, (since cubes Q∈ D1of fixed size do not intersect,/summationtext Q:Q⊂R1,s(Q)=κ−ks(R)µ(Q)≤µ(R1)). /square Remark 18.We did not use here the fact that {aQ},{bR}are supported on transit cubes. We actually proved Lemma19. The matrix {TQ,R}defined by TQ,R:=/bracketleftbiggs(Q) s(R)/bracketrightbiggτ 2/radicalBigg µ(Q) µ(R1)(Q⊂R1), generates a bounded operator in l2. We just finished estimating an extra term which appeared when we extendχRQto the whole 1. So, the extension of χRQto the function 1 does not cause much harm, and we are left with estimating the sum/summationdisplay Q,R:Q⊂R,s(Q)<κ−rs(R),RQis transitcRQ(∆Qf,T∗1). Note that the inner product (∆Qf,T∗1)does not depend onRat all, so it seems to be a good idea to sum over Rfor fixedQfirst. Recalling that cRQ=/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htRQ−/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR and that Λψ= 0⇐⇒ /a\}bracketle{tψ/a\}bracketri}htR0= 0, we conclude that for every Q∈ Dtran 1that really appears in the above sum,/summationdisplay R:R⊃Q,s(R)>κms(Q),RQis transitcRQ=/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htRQ. Definition. LetR(Q) be the smallest transitcubeR∈ D2containing Qand such that s(R)≥ κrs(Q). So, we obtain the sum /summationdisplay Q:s(Q)<κ−rs(R)/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR(Q)(∆Qf,T∗1) to take care of. Remark. Let us recall that we had the convention that says that the cub esQconsidered are only good ones (and of course they are only transit cubes). Th e range of summation should be Q∈ Dtran 1,Qis good (default); there exists a cube R∈ Dtran 2such thats(Q)<κ−rs(R),Q⊂R and the child RQ(the one containing Q) ofRis transit. In other words, in fact, the sum is written18 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK formally incorrectly. We have to replace R(Q) byRQin the summation. However, the smallest transit cube containing Q(this isR(Q)) and the smallest transit child (containing Q) of a certain subcubeRofR0(this child is RQ) are of course the same cube, unless R(Q) =R0. Thus the sum formally has some extra terms corresponding to R(Q) =R0. But, they all are zeros! In one of the first reductions, we were allowed to work only with with gsuch that Λ g= 0 (recall that Λ gmeans the average of gwith respect to µ), so/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR(Q)= 0 ifR(Q) =R0. 5.3.Pseudo-BMOand special paraproduct. Tointroducetheparaproductoperator, werewrite our sum as follows/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)<κ−rs(R)/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR(Q)(∆Qf,T∗1) =/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)<κ−rs(R)/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR(Q)(f,∆∗ QT∗1) = f,/summationdisplay Q:s(Q)<κ−rs(R)/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR(Q)∆QT∗1 . We use the fact that ∆∗ Q= ∆Q. We now introduce the paraproduct operator, which will allo w us to control term σtran 3. Definition 20. Given a function F, theparaproduct with symbol Fis the function ΠFg(x) :=/summationdisplay R∈D2,R⊂R0/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR/summationdisplay Q∈D1,Qgood and transit ,s(Q)=κ−rs(R)∆QF(x). As in the case when the metric space is Rd, the behavior of the paraproduct operators will be governed by “BMO” conditions on the symbol F. In the case of a metric space though, we face an additional wrinkle since we have to overcome the challenge o f dealing with the dyadic cubes, and we need an appropriate notion of “dilation” in the metric spa ce. Recall that we defined the dilation by the parameter λ≥1 of a setS⊂Xby λ·S:={x∈X: dist(x,S)≤(λ−1)diamS} Note thatS⊂λ·S. Definition 21. A function F∈L2(X;µ) will be called a “pseudo- BMOfunction” if there exists Λ>1 such that for any cube Qwithµ(sQ)≤Ksmdiam(Q)m,s≥1, we have /integraldisplay Q|F(x)−/a\}bracketle{tF/a\}bracketri}htQ|2dµ(x)≤Cµ(ΛQ). Lemma 22. Letµ,Tsatisfy the assumptins of Theorem 1. Then T∗1∈pseudo-BMO . (5.5) HereCdepends only on the constants of Theorem 1. Proof.Forx∈Qwe writeT∗1(x) = (T∗χΛQ)(x)+(T∗χX\ΛQ)(x) =:ϕ(x)+ψ(x). First, we notice that x,y∈Q⇒ |ψ(x)−ψ(y)| ≤C(K,Λ), whereKis the constant form our definition above. This is easy: |ψ(x)−ψ(y)| ≤/integraldisplay X\ΛQ|k(x,t)−k(y,t)|dµ(t) =∞/summationdisplay j=1/integraldisplay Λj+1Q\ΛjQ|k(x,t)−k(y,t)|dµ(t)≤ ∞/summationdisplay j=1diam(Q)τ (Λjdiam(Q))m+τK(Λjdiam(Q))m=∞/summationdisplay j=1K Λjτ≤C(K,Λ,τ).BERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 19 Therefore,/integraldisplay Q|ψ(x)−/a\}bracketle{tψ/a\}bracketri}htQ|2dµ(x)/lessorsimilarµ(Q)≤µ(ΛQ). But,/integraldisplay Q|ϕ(x)−/a\}bracketle{tϕ/a\}bracketri}htQ|2dµ(x)/lessorsimilar/integraldisplay Q|T∗χΛQ|2dµ≤Aµ(ΛQ) by theT1 assumption of Theorem 1. /square Lemma 23. Letµ,Tsatisfy the assumptins of Theorem 1. Then /bardblΠT∗1/bardblL2(X;µ)→L2(X;µ)≤C. (5.6) HereCdepends only on the constants of Theorem 1. Proof.LetF=T∗1. In the definition of Π Fall ∆Qare mutually orthogonal. So it is easy to see that /bardblΠFg/bardbl2 L2(X;µ)=/summationdisplay R∈D2,R⊂R0|/a\}bracketle{tg/a\}bracketri}htR|2/summationdisplay Q∈D1,Qgood and transit ,s(Q)=κ−rs(R)/bardbl∆QF/bardblL2(X;µ). Put aR:=/summationdisplay Q∈D1,Qgood and transit ,s(Q)=κ−rs(R)/bardbl∆QF/bardblL2(X;µ). By Carleson Embedding Theorem, it is enough to prove that for everyS∈ D2 /summationdisplay R∈D2,R⊂SaR≤Cµ(S). (5.7) This is the same as /summationdisplay Q∈D1,Qtransit,s(Q)≤κ−rs(R),dist(Q,∂R)≥s(Q)αs(R)1−α/bardbl∆QF/bardblL2(X;µ)≤Cµ(R). (5.8) Let us consider a Whitney decomposition of Rinto disjoint cubes P, such that 1 .5P⊂R, 1.4P have only bounded multiplicity C(d) of intersection. This can be accomplished by modifying the arguments found in Section 7 of [ 2]. Consider the sums sP:=/summationdisplay Q∈D1,Qtransit,s(Q)≤κ−rs(R),Q∪P/\egatio\slash=∅,dist(Q,∂R)≥s(Q)αs(R)1−α/bardbl∆QF/bardblL2(X;µ).(5.9) ThissPcan be zero if there is no transit cubes as above intersecting it. But ifsP/\e}atio\slash= 0 then necessarily µ(P)≤A(d)s(P)m, and moreover µ(sP)≤A(d)sms(P)m,∀s≥1. In fact, in this case Pintersects a transit cube Q, which by elementary geometry is “smaller”’ thanP:s(Q)≤c(r,d)s(P). But then the above inequalities follow from the definition oftransit. It is also clear that for large rand forQ,Pas above Q∩P/\e}atio\slash=∅ ⇒Q⊂1.2P . Therefore, sP/\e}atio\slash= 0⇒sP≤/summationdisplay Q∈D1,Qtransit,s(Q)≤κ−rs(R),Q⊂1.2Pdist(Q,∂R)≥s(Q)αs(R)1−α/bardbl∆QF/bardblL2(X;µ).20 A. VOLBERG AND B. D. WICK So sP/\e}atio\slash= 0⇒sP≤/integraldisplay 1.2P|F−/a\}bracketle{tF/a\}bracketri}ht1.2P|2dµ≤Cµ(1.4P). The last inequality follows from Lemma 22. Now we add all sP’s. We get ≤C/summationtextµ(1.4P). This is smaller than C1µ(R) as 1.4P’s have multiplicity C(d)<∞. /square 6.The Diagonal Sum: Controlling Term σ1. To complete the estimate of |(Tfgood,ggood)|in only remains to estimate σ1. But notice that /bardbl∆Qf/bardblL1(X;µ)≤ /bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/radicalbig µ(Q) and/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL1(X;µ)≤ /bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ)/radicalbig µ(R). Remember that all cubes QandRin the sums considered at this point are transit cubes. In particular, in σ1we have that QandRare close and of the almost same size. If a son of Q,S(Q), is terminal, then by Lemma 3 |(TχS(Q)∆Qf,∆Rg)| ≤/radicalbig µ(Q)/radicalbig µ(R) s(Q)m/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ). The sons are terminal, but QandRare transit, so µ(Q)/lessorsimilars(Q)m≈s(R)m. Summing such pairs (and symmetric ones, where a son of Ris terminal) we get C(r)/bardblf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardblg/bardblL2(X;µ). We are left with the part of σ1, where we sum over QandRsuch that their sons are transit. Then we use pairing |(TχS(Q)∆Qf,χS(R)∆Rg)| ≤ |cS(Q)||cS(R)|/radicalbig µ(S(Q))µ(S(R)). The estimate above follows from our T1 assumption in Theorem 1. Now using ( 5.4), again we obtain |(TχS(Q)∆Qf,χS(R)∆Rg)| ≤C/bardbl∆Qf/bardblL2(X;µ)/bardbl∆Rg/bardblL2(X;µ). This completes the proof of Theorem 1. References [1] Michael Christ, AT(b)theorem with remarks on analytic capacity and the Cauchy int egral, Colloq. Math. 60/61 (1990), no. 2, 601–628. ↑1,3 [2] T. Hyt¨ onen and H. Martikainen, Non-Homogeneous Tb Theorem on Metric Spaces , preprint. ↑3,4,6,7,19 [3] F. Nazarov, S. Treil, and A. Volberg, TheTb-theorem on non-homogeneous spaces , Acta Math. 190(2003), no. 2, 151–239. ↑3 [4] ,Accretive system Tb-theorems on nonhomogeneous spaces , Duke Math. J. 113(2002), no. 2, 259–312. ↑3 [5] ,Weak type estimates and Cotlar inequalities for Calder´ on- Zygmund operators on nonhomogeneous spaces , Internat. Math. Res. Notices (1998), no. 9, 463–487. ↑3 [6] ,Cauchy integral and Calder´ on-Zygmund operators on nonhomo geneous spaces , Internat. Math. Res. No- tices (1997), no. 15, 703–726. ↑3 [7] E. Sawyer and R. L. Wheeden, Weighted inequalities for fractional integrals on Euclide an and homogeneous spaces , Amer. J. Math. 114(1992), no. 4, 813–874. ↑3 [8] A. Volberg, Calder´ on-Zygmund capacities and operators on nonhomogene ous spaces , CBMS Regional Conference Series in Mathematics, vol. 100, Published for the Conferen ce Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC, 2003. ↑3 [9] A. Volberg and B. D. Wick, Bergman-type Singular Operators and the Characterization of Carleson Measures for Besov–Sobolev Spaces on the Complex Ball (2009), preprint. ↑2,3 Alexander Volberg, Department of Mathematics, Michigan St ate University, East Lansing, MI USA 48824 E-mail address :volberg@math.msu.eduBERGMAN-TYPE SINGULAR INTEGRAL OPERATORS ON METRIC SPACES 21 Alexander Volberg, Department of Mathematics, University of Edinburgh, James Clerk Maxwell Building, The King’s Buildings, Mayfield Road, Edinburgh S cotland EH9 3JZ E-mail address :a.volberg@ed.ac.uk Brett D. Wick, School of Mathematics, Georgia Institute of T echnology, 686 Cherry Street, Atlanta, GA 30332-1060 USA E-mail address :wick@math.gatech.edu URL:http://people.math.gatech.edu/~bwick6/ |