Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Let $\omega:\mathbb{Z}\to (0,\infty)$ and let $1\leq p<\infty$. Consider the space $\ell^p(\mathbb{Z},\omega)$ of complex valued sequences $f=(a_n)_{n \in \mathbb{Z}}$ such that $$\|f\|=\|f\|_{\ell^p(\mathbb{Z},\omega)}:=\left(\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}|a_n|^p\omega(n)^p\right)^{1/p}<\infty.$$

Next, given two complex sequences $f=(a_n)_{n \in \mathbb{Z}}$ and $g=(b_n)_{n \in \mathbb{Z}}$ their formal convolution is defined by $f*g=(c_n)_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}$ where $c_n=\sum_{k\in\mathbb{Z}}a_kb_{n-k}$.

The problem is to find necessary and sufficient conditions on $\omega$ such that $\ell^p(\mathbb{Z},\omega)$ is a Banach algebra. In other words, if $f,g\in\ell^p(\mathbb{Z},\omega)$ then $f*g\in \ell^p(\mathbb{Z},\omega)$ and $\|f*g\|\leq\|f\|\cdot\|g\|$.

For $p=1$ the condition is $\omega(n+k)\leq\omega(n)\omega(k)$.

--- Reformulated the problem so that $f\in\ell^p(\omega)$ is the same as $f\omega\in\ell^p$.

I believe this is an open problem, there are however sufficient conditions: $\omega^{-p'}*\omega^{-p'}\leq \omega^{-p'}$ where $1/p̈́'+1/p=1$ (the history of the condition is hard to tell but it is given as Lemma 8.11 in Acta Mathematica Volume 174, Number 1, 1-84, "Completeness of translates in weighted spaces on the half-line" by Alexander Borichev and Håkan Hedenmalm). The proof is based on Hölder's inequality: $$\|f*g\|^p =\sum_n \left|\sum_k a_kb_{n-k}\right|^p\omega(n)^p\leq $$ $$\leq\sum_n \left(\sum_k |a_k|^p|b_{n-k}|^p\omega(n-k)^p\omega(k)^p\right)\left(\sum_k\frac{1}{\omega(n-k)^{p'}\omega(k)^{p'}}\right)^{\frac{p}{p'}}\omega(n)^p\leq $$ $$\qquad\leq\|f\|^p\|g\|^p$$

share|improve this question
@Kaestur Hakarl Thanks. –  AD. Aug 24 '10 at 10:15
@YemonChoi What was your edit? Did I miss something? –  AD. Jan 8 '12 at 10:55
Yemon only added the (banach-algebras) tag. In general, you can see what was done in an edit by clicking edited xx time ago above an editor's name. –  t.b. Jan 8 '12 at 13:33
@t.b. Great thanks! –  AD. Jan 8 '12 at 13:38

1 Answer 1

up vote 4 down vote accepted

This is supposed to be a comment, but I don't seem to be able to write one :

I'm quite sure it is an open problem : it was a few years ago when I last checked up on it. It's a very difficult one. There are indeed sufficient conditions, but necessary and sufficient ones seem very hard to find.

I recommend you take a look at the recent work of Kuznetsova, Yu. N. on the subject.


share|improve this answer
Thanks, yes I think so too. There is however an easy necessary condition, let $e_k=(\delta\_n(k))\_n$ (Kronecker delta $\delta\_k(k)=1$ and $\delta\_n(k)=0$ for other $n\not=k$), then (an easy calculation shows) $e\_n*e\_k=e\_{n+k}$ which leads to $\omega(n+k)\leq\omega(n)\omega(k)$. That is any such $\omega$ must be sub-multiplicative. –  AD. Aug 27 '10 at 5:12
Yes, this is indeed a necessary condition. –  Malik Younsi Aug 27 '10 at 15:55
I accepted this because it lead to interesting readings.. :) –  AD. May 17 '12 at 10:41

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.