Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

The Cesàro operator $T\colon \ell_{p}\to\ell_{p}$ is defined by $(Tx)_{k}=\frac{1}{k}\sum_{j=1}^{k}x_{j},\: k\in\mathbb{N}$, where $x=(x_{k})_{k=1}^{\infty}$ Show that $T$ is bounded if $1<p<\infty$. I can do it for $p=\infty$, but not when it is between $1$ and $\infty$. Thank you.

share|cite|improve this question
In addition to the answers below, note that you can also directly apply the Marcinkiewicz interpolation theorem for $\mathbb{N}$ with the counting measure. – Willie Wong Mar 14 '12 at 11:29
@WillieWong Could you please give some more detail on how are going to apply MI? – AD. Mar 14 '12 at 20:28
@AD. $T$ is bounded $\ell_1 \to \ell_1^w$ and $\ell_\infty\to\ell_\infty$. So by MI it is bounded $\ell_p\to\ell_p$. – Willie Wong Mar 15 '12 at 9:29
up vote 8 down vote accepted

Using Hardy inequality one may see that $$ \Vert T(x)\Vert_p= \left(\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty \left|\frac{1}{k}\sum\limits_{j=1}^k x_j\right|^p\right)^{1/p}\leq \left(\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty \left(\frac{1}{k}\sum\limits_{j=1}^k |x_j|\right)^p\right)^{1/p}\leq $$ $$ \left(\left(\frac{p}{p-1}\right)^p\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty |x_j|^p\right)^{1/p}= \frac{p}{p-1}\left(\sum\limits_{k=1}^\infty |x_j|^p\right)^{1/p}= \frac{p}{p-1}\Vert x\Vert_p $$ This means that $$ \Vert T\Vert\leq\frac{p}{p-1} $$

share|cite|improve this answer

Some hints: let $q$ the conjugate exponent of $p$: $1/p+1/q=1$. Write $$\left|\sum_{k=1}^Nx_k\right|^p=\left|\sum_{k=1}^Nx_kk^{1/(pq)}k^{-1/(pq)}\right|^p$$ and use Hölder's inequality to get that $$\left|\sum_{k=1}^Nx_k\right|^p\leq \sum_{k=1}^N\left|x_k\right|^pk^{1/q}N^{p/q-1q}$$ (we have to find a bound for $\sum_{k=1}^N k^{-1/(pq)}$ for example comparing with an integral). Then take the sum over $N$, change the order of summation and find a bound, comparing with an integral, of $\sum_{N\geq k}N^{-1-1/q}$ to get the result.

In fact, we used Hardy's inequality.

Note that for $p=1$ (even if it's not asked), $T$ is not well-defined since if we take $x:=(1,0,\ldots,0,\ldots)$ then $(Tx)_k=\frac 1k$ so $x\notin \ell^1$.

share|cite|improve this answer
Why didn't you just apply Hardy's inequality? – AD. Mar 14 '12 at 20:20
I just wanted to give the steps which lead to this inequality. I didn't read the proof of the link in details, so I don't know whether this approach is different or not. – Davide Giraudo Mar 14 '12 at 20:26
Okey, now I see what you mean! Btw, it would be much more interesting to put on a weight in the norm. – AD. Mar 14 '12 at 20:31

In the case p=1, $T$ is not defined in $l_1$, but it is well-defined on a subspace of $l_1$. So, the question is "Can $T$ be bounded?" The answer is NO. If you want, you can try to figure out how to prove that, that is interesting.

share|cite|improve this answer
Yes, you are right. My proof is wrong – Norbert Mar 15 '12 at 22:32
you see that your post is no longer make sense, since i have changed my answer. So you should delete it. – Norbert Mar 16 '12 at 7:55
I am sorry, Norbert. I deleted my post. – Tran Mar 16 '12 at 20:36

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.