IMAGES OF OPERATORS IN REARRANGEMENT

INVARIANT SPACES AND INTERPOLATION

S. V. ASTASHKIN
Samara State University,
Acad. Pavlov Street,1
443011, Samara, Russia
E-mail: astashkn@ssu.samara.ru
For every closed set G [0, 1] there exists an injective linear operator T = T
G
bounded on L
1
[0, 1] and L

[0, 1] such that T is normally solvable in an Orlicz space

L
M
[0, 1] if and only if G [
M
,
M
] = (
M
and
M
are the Boyd indices of
the space L
M
). Analogous result holds also for isomorphisms of spaces of functions
dened on the semiaxis [0, ).
1. Introduction
Let (X
0
, X
1
) be a Banach couple, i.e., X
0
and X
1
are two Banach spaces
linearly and continuously embedded in some Hausdor topological vector
space. Suppose that a linear operator A dened on the sum X
0
+ X
1
is
a continuous injection from X
i
into itself for i = 0, 1. Moreover, let A
be normally solvable in the both spaces X
0
and X
1
(this means that the
images A(X
0
) and A(X
1
) are closed subspaces of the spaces X
0
and X
1
,
respectively).
If F is an interpolation functor [1], then a natural formula to hope for
is
F(A(X
0
), A(X
1
)) = A(F(X
0
, X
1
)) (isomorphism). (1)
In fact, J. Lofstrom proved [2,p.57] that formula (1) is true for any functor
F of the real method of interpolation [1] if
A(X
0
X
1
) = A(X
0
) A(X
1
). (2)
Nevertheless, equality (1) does not guarantee that A is a normally solvable
operator in the interpolation space F(X
0
, X
1
). The point is that the space
F(A(X
0
), A(X
1
)) is not always a subspace of the last space.
At rst, the situation when X
0
and X
1
are Hilbert spaces and X
1
X
0
was considered (see, for example, [3,p.131] or [4,p.136,589]). In this case
1
2
condition (2) is fullled, and therefore equality (1) is valid for any functor
of the real method of interpolation. Later, in the paper [5], V. Shevchik
and I. Shneiberg showed that for arbitrary closed subset F of the interval
(0, 1) there exist a Banach couple (H
0
, H
1
) of Hilbert spaces and a couple
(N
0
, N
1
) of their subspaces such that the norms of lower complex method in-
terpolation spaces [N
0
, N
1
]

and [H
0
, H
1
]

(see [1] or [6]) are non-equivalent

if and only if F.
Moreover, we cannot interpolate even the property of two-sided invert-
ibility. If A : X
0
+ X
1
X
0
+ X
1
is an isomorphism on both spaces X
0
and X
1
, then, clearly,
F(A(X
0
), A(X
1
)) = F(X
0
, X
1
) (isomorphism).
At the same time the space A(F(X
0
, X
1
)) is not always a subspace of the
space F(X
0
, X
1
) in view of the failure of isomorphism (1), in general.
In [2,p.59-61], J. Lofstrom considered the operators T

= IS ( R),
where I is the identity mapping and Sa = (a
n1
)

n=
(a = (a
n
)

n=
).
These operators act injectively and continuously on the sequence spaces E
r
(r R) with norms:
a
E
r
=
_

n=
(2
nr
|a
n
|)
2
_
1/2
.
In addition, the image T

(E
r
) = E
r
if and only if || = 2
r
. Let 1 p < r <
q < and F be the functor
,2
of the real method of interpolation [1],
where (0, 1) and r = (1)p+q. Then (1) is not true for the operator
A = T
2
r and the spaces X
0
= E
p
, X
1
= E
q
[1, p.157].
Another interesting example was treated by N.Krugljak, L.Maligranda,
and L.-E. Persson in [7]. For arbitrary p [1, ) and R, denote by
G
p,
the Banach space of all functions x = x(t) measurable on (0, ) such
that
x
p,
=
__

0
_
|x(t)|
t

_
p
dt
t
_
1/p
< .
For all > 1 the operator
Ax(t) = x(t)
1
t
_
t
0
x(s) ds
acts continuously from G
p,
into itself and has a bounded inverse one if
and only if (1, 0)(0, ). Therefore equality (1) fails for X
0
= G
p,
0
,
X
1
= G
p,
1
(1 <
0
< 0 <
1
< ), and an appropriate functor of the
real or complex method of interpolation [1, p.154-155].
3
An investigation of normally solvability and invertibility of functional
operators in various spaces plays an important role in studying of Fredholm
property and n(d) -normality of singular integral operators, stability of
functional-dierential equations, in the theory of dynamic systems, etc.
(see [8] and references therein).
We will consider here these problems in the setting of general rearrange-
ment invariant spaces and, especially, of Orlicz spaces.
For any linear operator T dened on the space L
1
[0, 1] we introduce the
set of exceptional points
(T) = { [0, 1] : T isnt normally solvable in L
1/
}.
We will show that for arbitrary closed set G [0, 1] there exists an injective
linear operator T = T
G
such that T acts continuously on every space L
p
[0, 1]
(1 p ) and (T) = G. Moreover, we will prove that the image
T(L
M
) of any Orlicz space L
M
on the segment [0, 1] is closed in L
M
if and
only if G [
M
,
M
] = (
M
and
M
are the Boyd indices of the space
L
M
). Analogous results hold also for isomorphisms of spaces of functions
measurable on the semiaxis [0, ).
We remind now some denitions from the theory of rearrangement in-
variant spaces (for the detailed exposition of their properties see, for exam-
ple, [6] or [9]).
For every function x = x(t) measurable on [0, 1], x(t) 0, its distribu-
tion function n
x
() and non-increasing rearrangement x

(t) are given by

formulas
n
x
() = m{t [0, 1] : x(t) > }, for > 0,
and
x

(t) = inf{ 0 : n
x
() < t}, for t [0, 1].
Here m is usual Lebesgue measure. Two non-negative measurable functions
x and y are called equimeasurable if n
x
() = n
y
() ( > 0). In particular,
any x(t) 0 and its rearrangement x

(t) are equimeasurable functions. By

x

(t) we will denote, also, the non-increasing rearrangement of |x(t)| for

arbitrary measurable function x(t).
A Banach space E of functions measurable on [0, 1] is called a rear-
rangement invariant space (RIS) if
1) the relations |y(t)| |x(t)| and x(t) E imply that y(t) E and
y x;
2) if |y(t)| and |x(t)| are equimeasurable functions and x(t) E then
y(t) E and y = x.
4
For every > 0, the dilation operator

given by

x(t) = x(t/)
[0,min(1,)]
(t)
s well dened in every RIS E and

EE
max(1, ). Here and next, we
write
F
(t) for the characteristic function of a measurable set F. At last,
dene the lower and upper Boyd indices of an RIS E

E
= lim
0+
ln

EE
ln
and
E
= lim
+
ln

EE
ln
.
We have 0
E

E
1 for every RIS E.
An important example of RISs is an Orlicz space. If M is a non-negative
convex function on [0, ) and M(0) = 0, then the Orlicz space L
M
(cf. [10],
[11]) consists of all measurable functions x(t) on [0, 1] for which the norm
x
M
= inf
_
> 0 :
_
1
0
M
_
|x(t)|

_
dt 1
_
is nite. The Boyd indices of an Orlicz space L
M
are calculated as follows
[9,p.139]

M
= sup
_
> 0 : sup
u,v1
M(uv)
M(u)v
1/
<
_
and

M
= inf
_
> 0 : inf
u,v1
M(uv)
M(u)v
1/
> 0
_
.
In particular, for M(t) = t
p
we obtain L
p
-spaces with usual norms, and

L
p
=
L
p
= 1/p for all 1 p < .
Similarly, it can be dened RISs and Orlicz spaces of functions mea-
surable on the semiaxis [0, ) and their Boyd indices (see [6], [9]).
2. Auxiliary Results
Lemma 2.1. Let E be an RIS on [0, 1]. If || < 2

E
, then the operator
L

y(t) =

k=0

k
y(t2
k
) (3)
acts continuously on E.
Proof. By the denition of the Boyd indices, for arbitrary > 0 there
exists C
1
= C
1
() > 0 such that

EE
C
1

E
+
, for all 1. (4)
5
Take > 0 such that
||2

E
+
< 1. (5)
By (4) and (5), we have
L

y
E
C
1

k=0
||
k
(2
k
)

E
+
y
E
=
C
1
1 ||2

E
+
y
E
.
Hence the series from (3) converges absolutely a.e., and
L

EE
C
1
(1 ||2

E
+
)
1
.
Let us dene the operators
T

x(t) = x(2t)
[0,1/2]
(t) x(t) ( R) (6)
for all functions x = x(t) measurable on the segment [0, 1]. It is easily shown
that every T

acts continuously on any RIS E on [0, 1]. Moreover, it is not

hard to check that T

is an injection from any RIS E into itself.

Let
M
= [2

M
, 2

M
], where
M
and
M
are the Boyd indices of an
Orlicz space L
M
. By (z, F) we will denote the distance from a point z R
to a set F R, i.e., (z, F) = inf
aF
|z a|.
Lemma 2.2. Let L
M
be an Orlicz space on [0, 1], R, and (||,
M
) =
. Then for every l = 1, 2, .. there exists a sequence {w
k
}

k=1
L
M
such
that supp w
k
= {t [0, 1] : w
k
(t) = 0} [0, 2
l
],
1
2
w
k

M
2 (k = 1, 2, ..), (7)
and
T

w
k

M
2 + max(1, ||)
k
, where
k
0. (8)
Proof. At rst, suppose that = | |, for < 1 (
M
). Then
= 2
1/q
, where q is a nite number from the segment [
1
M
,
1
M
].
The Boyd indices
M
and
M
of an Orlicz space L
M
can be character-
ized in the following way [12,4.a.9] (cf. [9,p.141]): for every p [
1
M
,
1
M
],
> 0, and positive integer n, L
M
contains a (1+) -copy of l
p
(n) generated
by n disjointly supported equimeasurable functions in L
M
. Therefore for
every m = 1, 2, .. there exist functions x
k
(k = 1, 2, ., m) such that
supp x
k
[(k 1)/m, k/m] , n
|x
k
|
() = n
|x
1
|
() ( > 0), (9)
and for any a
k
R
1
2
_
m

k=1
|a
k
|
q
_
1/q

_
_
_
_
_
m

k=1
a
k
x
k
_
_
_
_
_
M
2
_
m

k=1
|a
k
|
q
_
1/q
. (10)
6
Let m = 2
n
, where n l. If {x
k
}
2
m
k=1
is a collection satisfying conditions
(9) and (10), then put
y
0
= x
1
, y
s
=
2
s

i=2
s1
+1
x
i
(s = 1, 2, ., n l).
By (9), y
s
are disjointly supported functions, supp y
s
[0, 2
l
], and
n
|y
s
|
() = 2
s1
n
|y
0
|
() ( > 0), for every s = 1, 2, ., n l. (11)
Then
z
0
(t) = y

0
(t) , z
s
(t) = z
0
(2
1s
t 2
n
) (s = 1, 2, ., n l)
are disjointly supported functions, and supp z
s
[0, 2
l
]. In addition, rela-
tion (11) implies that n
z
s
() = n
|y
s
|
() ( > 0), for any s = 0, 1, 2, ., nl.
Since L
M
is an RIS, then
_
_
_
nl

s=0
b
s
z
s
_
_
_
M
=
_
_
_
nl

s=0
b
s
y
s
_
_
_
M
, for all b
s
R. (12)
Hence, if z
0
(t) = z
0
(t) and z
s
(t) = 2
(1s)/q
z
s
(t), for s = 1, 2, ., n l, then
from (10) we get
1
2
z
s

M
2 and
1
2
(n l + 1)
1/q

_
_
_
_
_
nl

s=0
z
s
_
_
_
_
_
M
2(n l + 1)
1/q
. (13)
In particular, for every n l the function
v
n
(t) = (n l + 1)
1/q
nl

s=0
z
s
(t)
satises inequality (7), and supp v
n
[0, 2
l
].
Next, by the denition of z
s
, we have
z
s+1
(2t) = 2
1/q
z
s
(t), for t [0, 1/2] and s = 1, 2, ., n l 1.
In view of (6), it follows that
T

v
n
(t) = (n l + 1)
1/q
_
nl

s=0
z
s
(2t)
[0,1/2]
(t)
nl

s=0
z
s
(t)

=
= (n l +1)
1/q
_
z
0
(2t) + z
1
(2t) ( z
0
(t) + z
nl
(t)) +( )
nl1

s=1
z
s
(t)

.
Hence relations (13) imply
T

v
n

M
2 + 8 max(1, ||)(n l + 1)
1/q
,
7
and the functions w
k
= v
k+l
(k = 1, 2, ..) satisfy (7) and (8).
Suppose now = |1| (in this case
M
= 0). Again, for any m = 1, 2, ..
we can nd functions x
k
(k = 1, 2, ., m) satisfying relations (9) such that
for arbitrary a
k
R
1
2
max
k=1,2,.,m
|a
k
|
_
_
_
_
_
m

k=1
a
k
x
k
_
_
_
_
_
M
2 max
k=1,2,.,m
|a
k
|. (14)
Let m = 2
n
, where n > l + 6 and n l is an odd positive integer. In
addition, let the functions z
s
(t) (s = 0, 1, 2, ., nl) be such as above. Dene
the functions u
n
(t) =

nl1
s=1
z
s
(t), where
z
s
(t) =
2s
n l
z
s
(t), if 0 s <
n l
2
,
and
z
s
(t) =
2(n l s)
n l
z
s
(t), if
n l
2
< s n l.
Since
z
s+1
(2t) = z
s
(t), for t [0, 1/2] and s = 1, 2, ., n l 1,
then we obtain
T

u
n
(t) =
nl1

s=1
z
s
(2t)
[0,1/2]
(t)
nl1

s=1
z
s
(t) =
= z
1
(2t) z
nl1
(t) +
nl2

s=1
[ z
s+1
(2t) z
s
(t)] + (1 )
nl1

s=1
z
s
(t) =
=
2
n l
[z
1
(2t) + (1 )
(nl3)/2

s=1
z
s
(t) (1 )
nl2

s=(nl+1)/2
z
s
(t)
z
nl1
(t)] + (1 )
nl1

s=1
z
s
(t).
Therefore, by the denition of functions z
s
, (12), and (14), we have
T

u
n

M
2 +
12 max(1, ||)
n l
,
for all natural n such that n l is an odd positive integer which is more
than 6. If w
k
= u
2k+l+5
(k = 1, 2, ..), then the last inequality implies
T

w
k

M
2 +
12 max(1, ||)
2k + 5
,
8
and w
k
satisfy relations (7) and (8).
Let us consider now the case < 0. Then = | + |, where
M
.
Arguing as above, we dene, instead of z
s
(t), the functions
z

0
(t) = y

0
(t) and z

s
(t) = (1)
s
z
0
(2
1s
t 2
n
) (s = 1, 2, ., n l).
At rst, suppose = 2
1/q
< 1. Dene the functions
z

s
(t) = 2
(1s)/q
z

s
(t) and v

n
(t) = (n l + 1)
1/q
nl

s=0
z

s
(t) for n l.
The equalities
z

s+1
(2t) = 2
1/q
z

s
(t), for t [0, 1/2] and s = 1, 2, ., n l 1,
yield
T

n
(t) = (n l + 1)
1/q
[ z

0
(2t) + z

1
(2t)
( z

0
(t) + z

nl
(t)) ( +)
nl1

s=1
z

s
(t)].
Since the relations similar to (13) are fullled for z

s
(t) also, then we have,
hence, that the functions w
k
= v

k+l
(k = 1, 2, ..) satisfy conditions (7) and
(8).
In the case = 1 for every n > l + 6 such that n l is an odd positive
integer we put u

n
(t) =

nl1
s=1
z

s
(t), where
z

s
(t) =
2s
n l
z

s
(t), if 0 s <
n l
2
,
and
z

s
(t) =
2(n l s)
n l
z

s
(t), if
n l
2
< s n l.
Since
z

s+1
(2t) = z

s
(t), for t [0, 1/2] and s = 1, 2, ., n l 1,
then, arguing as above, we get that the functions w
k
= u

2k+l+5
(k = 1, 2, ..)
satisfy conditions (7) and (8).
Corollary 2.1. If ||
M
, then the operator T

is not normally solvable

in an Orlicz space L
M
.
9
Proof. In this case = 0. Therefore, by Lemma 2.2, there exists a sequence
of functions {w
k
} L
M
such that
1
2
w
k

M
2 (k = 1, 2, ..) and T

w
k

M
0 as k . (15)
Suppose that T

(L
M
) is a closed subspace of L
M
. As we have already re-
marked, T

is an injective operator in every RIS. Hence, T

x
M
cx
M
,
for some c > 0. Since the last inequality contradicts (15), then the result
follows.
3. Main Results
It is clear that the projector P
1
x(t) = x(t)
[1/2,1]
(t) has norm 1 on any
RIS.
Theorem 3.1. 1) T

is a normally solvable operator in an RIS E on [0, 1]

whenever || [2

E
, 2

E
]. Moreover, if || > 2

E
, then T

(E) = E; if
0 < || < 2

E
, then T

(E) = Ker (P
1
L

); and T
0
(E) = Ker P
1
= {y E :
supp y [0, 1/2]};
2) T

is a normally solvable operator in an Orlicz space L

M
on [0, 1] if
and only if ||
M
, where
M
= [2

M
, 2

M
].
Proof. At rst, suppose || > 2

E
. Consider the following equation for
x(t) :
T

x(t) = y(t),
or
x(2t)
[0,1/2]
(t) x(t) = y(t), (16)
where y = y(t) E. Hence, x(t) =
1
y(t) (1/2 < t 1). Besides, from
(16) it follows

1
x(2
2
t)
[0,2
2
]
(t) x(2t)
[0,1/2]
(t) =
1
y(2t)
[0,1/2]
.
Summing the last equality and (16), we obtain

1
x(2
2
t)
[0,2
2
]
(t) x(t) = y(t) +
1
y(2t)
[0,1/2]
.
Hence,
x(t) =
1
(y(t) +
1
y(2t)) (2
2
< t 2
1
).
Arguing as above, we get
x(t) =
1

n=1
n

k=1

1k
y(2
k1
t)
(2
n
,2
1n
]
(t) =
10
=
1

n=1

1n
y(2
n1
t)
(0,2
1n
]
(t) (0 t 1). (17)
Let > 0 be arbitrary. By the denition of the Boyd indices, there
exists a constant C
2
= C
2
() > 0 such that

EE
C
2

, for 0 < 1. (18)

Take > 0 such that ||2

> 1. Then relations (17) and (18) imply

x
E
||
1

n=1
||
1n

2
1ny
E

C
2
||
1

n=1
_
||2

_
1n
y
E
=
C
2
2

||2

1
y
E
,
and so x E. It is easily shown that (17) implies y = T

x. Therefore,
ImT

= E.
Suppose now 0 < || < 2

E
. For 0 < t 1, from (16) it follows
x(t) x(2
1
t) = y(2
1
t) and x(2
1
t)
2
x(2
2
t) = y(2
2
t).
Summing these equalities, we get x(t)
2
x(2
2
t) = y(2
1
t) + y(2
2
t).
Arguing as above, we have
x(t)
n
x(2
n
t) =
n

k=1

k1
y(2
k
t), for arbitrary n N.
If > 0 satises inequality (5), then from (4) it follows
n
x(2
n
t) 0 as
n (convergence in E). Therefore the last equality implies
x(t) =

k=1

k1
y(2
k
t) (convergence in E). (19)
Thus, if a solution of equation (16) exists, then it is dened by (19).
The direct substitution shows that (19) is a solution of (16) if and only if
P
1
L

y(t) = 0. In other words, in the case 0 < || < 2

E
equation (16)
has a solution x E if and only if y Ker (P
1
L

). Therefore, T

(E) =
Ker (P
1
L

), and, by Lemma 2.1, this subspace is closed in E.

Since the case = 0 is trivial, the rst assertion of Theorem 3.1 is
proved. The second one follows now from Corollary 2.1.
Similarly, on the set of all functions x = x(t) measurable on the semiaxis
[0, ) dene the operators

x(t) = x(2t) x(t) ( R).

11
It is not hard to check that

T

is an injection from the space L

p
= L
p
[0, )
into itself for any R and p [1, ).
Arguing as in the proof of Theorem 3.1, one can prove the following
assertion.
Theorem 3.2. 1)

T

is an isomorphism of an RIS E on [0, ) whenever

|| [2

E
, 2

E
].
2)

T

is a normally solvable operator (or an isomorphism) on an Orlicz

space L
M
on [0, ) if and only if ||
M
, where
M
= [2

M
, 2

M
].
Remark 3.1. Theorem 3.1 shows that we cannot interpolate the property
of normally solvability of operators even in the case of embedded RISs. In
fact, if 1 p
0
< p < p
1
and = 2
1/p
, then the image T

(L
p
i
) is
closed in the space L
p
i
(i = 0, 1), but the image T

(L
p
) is not closed in L
p
.
The point is that not all interpolation spaces for the couple (L
p
0
, T

(L
p
1
))
(by Theorem 1, T

(L
p
0
) = L
p
0
) are subspaces of corresponding interpola-
tion spaces for the couple (L
p
0
, L
p
1
).
In the case of RISs on the semiaxis [0, ) we cannot interpolate the
property of two-sided invertibility. Indeed, by Theorem 3.2, if 1 p
0
<
p < p
1
and = 2
1/p
, then

T

is an isomorphism in the spaces L

p
0
and L
p
1
, but not in L
p
. We cannot interpolate the inverse operator

T
1

,
because

T

is not an injection as operator dened on the sum L

p
0
(0, ) +
L
p
1
(0, ). This implies that the inverse operator (on this sum) does not
exist. Equivalently, equality (2) fails for A =

T

, X
0
= L
p
0
(0, ), and
X
1
= L
p
1
(0, ) (cf. [2,p.57]).
Theorem 3.3. Let G [0, 1] be a closed set. Then there exists an injective
linear operator T = T
G
such that T acts continuously on every Orlicz space
and has the following property:
T is normally solvable in an Orlicz space L
M
if and only if
G [
M
,
M
] = . (20)
Proof. Let the set F consist of all = 2
t
, where t G, and {
k
}

k=1
be a
sequence from F such that its closure {
k
} = F. Clearly, (20) is equivalent
to the condition
F
M
= . (20

)
For any k = 1, 2, .. and i = 0, 1, 2, .., denote d
i
k
= (2
k
, (2
i
+1)2
ki
]. Then
d
0
k
are pairwise disjoint intervals, and (0, 1] =

k=1
d
0
k
. Next, let h
k
be an
ane map from d
1
k
onto d
0
k
, i.e., h
k
(t) = 2t 2
k
for t d
1
k
, h
1
k
: d
0
k
d
1
k
12
be the inverse map of h
k
, and h
0
k
(t) = t (t d
0
k
) (k = 1, 2, ..). In addition,
for every i = 1, 2, .. we introduce the maps
h
i
k
(t) = h
k
(h
k
( (h
k
. .
i
(t)) )) and h
i
k
(t) = h
1
k
(h
1
k
( (h
1
k
. .
i
(t)) )).
It is obvious that h
i
k
: d
i
k
d
0
k
and h
i
k
: d
0
k
d
i
k
. Denote, also, by a
i
k
the extension of h
i
k
to the whole segment [0, 1] by zero (k = 1, 2, ..; i =
0, 1, 2, ). At last, we dene the projectors P
k
x(t) = x(t)
d
0
k
(t) (k =
1, 2, ..) and the operator
Tx(t) =

k=1
T
k
x(t), where T
k
x(t) = P
k
x(a
1
k
(t))
k
P
k
x(t).
Since T
k
x(t) are pairwise disjoint functions for every x L
1
, then
Tx
1
=

k=1
T
k
x
1
2

k=1
P
k
x
1
= 2x
1
and
Tx

= sup
k=1,2,..
T
k
x

2 sup
k=1,2,..
P
k
x

= 2x

,
i.e., T acts continuously on the spaces L
1
and L

. By the interpolation
theorem [6,p.142], T : L
M
L
M
is a bounded operator on every Orlicz
space L
M
. Also, it is easily to check that this operator is injective in every
RIS.
At rst, we prove that the image T(L
M
) is closed in an Orlicz space
L
M
whenever condition (20) (or (20

)) is fullled. Since F is a closed set,

there exists > 0 such that any positive integer belongs to the one of the
sets K
1
= {k N :
k
2

M
+2
} or K
2
= {k N :
k
2

M
2
}. For
arbitrary x L
1
[0, 1] we put
x =
1
x +
2
x, where
i
x(t) =

kK
i
P
k
x(t) (i = 1, 2).
Let us x a k = 1, 2, and consider the following equation for P
k
x :
P
k
x(a
1
k
(t))
k
P
k
x(t) = P
k
y(t) (y E). (21)
Assume that k K
1
. In the same way as in the proof of Theorem 3.1,
we obtain
P
k
x(t) =

n=1

n
k
P
k
y(a
n1
k
(t))
d
n1
k
(t).
13
By the denition of K
1
,
|
1
x(t)|

kK
1
|P
k
x(t)|

n=1
_
2

M
+2
_
n
g
1
n
(t),
where
g
1
n
(t) =

kK
1
|P
k
y(a
n1
k
(t))|
d
n1
k
(t).
Since g
1
n
(t) and
2
1n|
1
y(t)| are equimeasurable functions for every n N,
then from (18) it follows

1
x
M
C
2

n=1
_
2

M
+2
_
n
_
2
1n
_

1
y
M

2C
2
2

1
y
M
.
(22)
Next, let k K
2
. Arguing as in the proof of Theorem 3.1 in the case
0 < || < 2

M
, we conclude that a solution of equation (21) must be of
the form
P
k
x(t) =

n=1

n1
k
P
k
y(a
n
k
(t)). (23)
By the denition of K
2
,
|
2
x(t)|

kK
2
|P
k
x(t)|

n=1
_
2

M
2
_
n1
g
2
n
(t),
where
g
2
n
(t) =

kK
2
|P
k
y(a
n
k
(t))|.
Again, g
2
n
(t) and
2
n|
2
y(t)| are equimeasurable functions (n N), and
from (4) it follows

2
x
M
C
1

n=1
_
2

M
2
_
n1
_
2

M
+
_
n

2
y
M

4C
1

n=1
2
n

2
y
M

4C
1
2

1
y
M
. (24)
Moreover, it is not hard to check that function (23) is a solution of equation
(21) as k K
2
if and only if a function y from L
M
satises the condition

n=0

n
P
k
y(a
n
k
(t)) = 0 for t d
0
k
\ d
1
k
.
14
Hence the image T(L
M
) consists of all y L
M
for which the last equality
is fullled for every k K
2
. Combining (22) and (24), we get
x
M

1
x
M
+
2
x
M

2(2C
1
+C
2
)
2

1
y
M
,
for an unique solution x of the equation Tx = y. Thus the image T(L
M
) is
closed in the space L
M
.
Assume now that relation (20) is not fullled. In this case there exists
a
M
such that
= lim
i

k
i
, (25)
for some sequence {
k
i
} {
k
}. By Lemma 2.2, for every i = 1, 2, .. there is
a sequence {w
i
s
}

s=1
L
M
such that for all s = 1, 2, supp w
i
s
[0, 2
k
i
],
1
2
w
i
s

M
2, (26)
and
T

k
i
w
i
s

M
2
i
+
i
s
, (27)
where
i
= (
k
i
,
M
) and
i
s
0 as s .
For every i = 1, 2, .. we can choose s
i
such that
i
s
i
< 1/i. By (25),
lim
i

i
= 0. Therefore (27) implies
lim
i
T

k
i
w
i
s
i

M
= 0. (28)
Let v
i
(t) = w
i
s
i
(t 2
k
i
). Taking into account (26), we get
1
2
v
i

M
2 (i = 1, 2, ..). (29)
In addition, supp v
i
d
0
k
i
= [2
k
i
, 2
1k
i
], and thus
Tv
i
(t) = T
k
i
v
i
(t) = v
i
(a
1
k
i
(t))
k
i
v
i
(t).
By the denition of a
1
k
(t), we see that Tv
i
(t) and T

k
i
w
i
s
i
(t) are equimea-
surable functions. Therefore, by (28),
lim
i
Tv
i

M
= 0.
Combining the last relation and (29), we conclude that the image T(L
M
)
is not closed in L
M
. This completes the proof.
For any linear operator T that is dened on the space L
1
[0, 1] we intro-
duce the set of exceptional points
(T) = { [0, 1] : T isnt normally solvable in L
1/
}.
15
By Theorem 3.3, we get the folowing assertion.
Corollary 3.1. For arbitrary closed set G [0, 1] there exists an injective
linear operator T = T
G
such that T is bounded on every space L
p
[0, 1]
(1 p ) and (T) = G.
Analogous theorems hold also for spaces on the semiaxis [0, ).
Theorem 3.4. Let G [0, 1] be a closed set. Then there exists a linear
operator U = U
G
dened on the sum L
1
[0, ) + L

[0, ) such that U acts

continuously on every Orlicz space and has the following property:
if L
M
is an Orlicz space on [0, ), then the operator U is an isomor-
phism of L
M
if and only if
G [
M
,
M
] = .
For arbitrary linear operator U that is dened on the sum L
1
[0, ) +
L

[0, ) we introduce the set of exceptional points

(U) = { [0, 1] : U is not an isomorphism of L
1/
[0, )}.
From Theorem 3.4 we obtain
Corollary 3.2. For any closed set G [0, 1] there exists a linear oper-
ator U = U
G
dened on the sum L
1
[0, ) + L

[0, ) such that U acts

injectively and continuously on every space L
p
[0, ) (1 p ) and
(U) = G.
Proof. The arguments used here are mostly similar to the ones used in
the proof of Theorem 3.3. Therefore we can restrict our consideration to
the construction of the operator U. The set of non-negative integers can be
representable as an union

i=1
A
i
, where A
i
are innite disjoint sets. Then
the sets
R
i
=
kA
i
(k, k + 1] (i = 1, 2, ..)
are disjoint, also, and

i=1
R
i
= (0, ). Let f
k
(t) = 2t k, for t (k, k +
1/2], and f
k
(t) = 0, otherwise, and b
i
(t) =

kR
i
f
k
(t) (i = 1, 2, ).
Finally, if Q
i
x(t) = x(t)
R
i
(t) and a sequence {
k
} F = { : =
2
t
, t G} is such that its closure {
k
} = F, then we put
Ux(t) =

i=1
U
i
x(t), where U
i
x(t) = Q
i
x(b
i
(t))
i
Q
i
x(t).
16
Remark 3.2. We use here an important property of an Orlicz space L
M
to contain of a (1 + ) -copy of l
p
(n) generated by n disjointly supported
equimeasurable functions, for every p [
1
M
,
1
M
], > 0, and integer n.
Note that in the case of arbitrary RISs the last is true only for some (but
not all,in general) p [
1
M
,
1
M
] (see [13], [9,p.141]).
References
1. J. Bergh and J. Lofstrom, Interpolation Spaces. An introduction, Springer-
Verlag, Berlin 1976; Russian transl.: Mir, Moscow 1980.
2. J. Lofstrom, Interpolation of subspaces, Technical report, Univ. of Goteborg
10(1997), 1-63.
3. J.L. Lions and E. Magenes, Problemes aux Limites Non Homogenes et Ap-
plications 1, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1972; Russian transl.: Mir,
Moscow 1971.
4. H. Triebel, Interpolation Theory. Function Spaces. Dierential Operators,
VEB Deutscher Verlag der Wissenschaften, Berlin 1978; Russian transl.: Mir,
Moscow 1980.
5. V.V. Shevchik and I.Ya. Shneiberg, On a set of exclusive values of the inter-
polation parameter, Mat. Zametki, 34(1983), No. 1, 71-76 (in Russian).
6. S.G. Krein, Yu.I. Petunin, and E.M. Semenov, Interpolation of Linear Oper-
ators, Nauka, Moscow 1978 (in Russian); English transl.: Amer. Math. Soc.,
Providence 1982.
7. N. Krugljak, L. Maligranda, and L.-E. Persson, On an elementary approach
to the fractional Hardy inequality, Lulea Univ. of Technology, Dept. of Math.,
Research Report 7(1998), 1-9.
8. A.B. Antonevich, Linear Functional Equations. Operator Approach, Univer-
sity Press, Minsk 1988 (in Russian); English transl.: Birkhauser Verlag,
Basel, Boston, Berlin 1995.
9. J. Lindenstrauss and L. Tzafriri, Classical Banach spaces 2. Functions Spaces,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1979.
10. M.A. Krasnoselskii and Ya.B. Rutickii, Convex Functions and Orlicz Spaces,
Noordhof Ltd., Groningen 1961.
11. L. Maligranda, Orlicz Spaces and Interpolation, Seminars in Math. 5, Univ.
of Campinas, Campinas SP, Brazil 1989.
12. J. Lindenstrauss and L. Tzafriri, Classical Banach spaces 1. Sequence Spaces,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin-New York 1977.
13. J.L. Krivine, Sous-espaces de dimension nite des espaces de Banach
reticules, Ann. of Math., 104(1976), 1-29.