Abstract
We consider a bounded balanced strictly convex domain \(\Omega \subset {\mathbb {C}}^{d}\) with \(C^{2}\) boundary. Then there exists a peak set E with Hausdorff dimension equal to 1 on each slice. In particular E has maximal possible Hausdorff dimension equal to \(2d-1\).
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Let \(\Omega \) be a bounded, convex and balanced domain with \(C^{2}\) boundary. Each \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \) sets out the slice \(\eta {\mathbb {D}}\) where \({\mathbb {D}}=\left\{ \lambda \in {\mathbb {C}}:|\lambda |\le 1\right\} \) is the unit disc.
1.1 Historical Background
If we have a compact set \(K\subset \partial \Omega \) and \(f\in A(\Omega )\) such that \(|f|<1\) on \({\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } K\) and \(f=1\) on K we say that K is a peak set forFootnote 1\(A(\Omega )\) and f is a peak function for K. It is possible to generalize this concept to a peak interpolation set:
If for a given continuous function g on K there exists \(f\in A(\Omega )\) such that \(f=g\) on K and \(\left\| f\right\| _{\infty }\le \left\| g\right\| _{\infty }\) then we say that K is a peak interpolation set.
Crucial sources of information about peak sets can be found in the following works: [4, 9, 11, 13].
Peak sets on the unit disc \({\mathbb {D}}\) are extensively studied. The most important result in this area is the Fatou-Rudin-Carleson theorem (see [1, 2, 8, 15] and [17, p 205]) which states that the classes of peak and peak interpolations sets for \(A({\mathbb {D}})\) coincide and are precisely the subsets of Lebesgue measure zero in \(\partial {\mathbb {D}}\).
However, as one can expect the situation in \({\mathbb {C}}^{d}\) is not so obvious. There exist non trivial examples of strange behavior of peak sets in several complex variables.
The regular caseFootnote 2 Rudin described in [14].
Topologically, peak sets are small in strictly pseudoconvex domains. The real topological dimension of a peak set is not bigger than \(d-1\) (see [16]). In particular, a peak set must have an empty interior. But from the measure-theoretic point of view peak sets no longer have to be so small. Tumanov [18] constructed a peak set of Hausdorff dimension 2.5 in the unit sphere \({\mathbb {B}}^{3}\subset {{\mathbb {C}}^{3}}\). Stensönes Henriksen proved [5] that every strictly pseudoconvex domain with \(C^{\infty }\) boundary in \({\mathbb {C}}^{d}\) has a peak set with a Hausdorff dimension \(2d-1\). Moreover, If \(\Omega \) is a circular, bounded, strictly convex domain with \(C^{2}\) boundary it is possible to construct a peak set \(K\subset \partial \Omega \) which intersects all the circles in \(\partial \Omega \) with the center at zero (see [8]). These examples indicate that the question of complete characterization of all peak sets for \(A(\Omega )\) for a strictly pseudoconvex domain is far from trivial.
It is known nowadays that every peak set K is also a peak interpolation set, which implies that any compact \(T\subset K\) is also a peak set (see [13, p. 206]). Moreover, any subset of euclidean space of Hausdorff dimension m contains a compact subset of Hausdorff dimension \(\beta \) for each \(0\le \beta \le m\). (see [3, Theorem 2.10.47]). Therefore the peak sets mentioned in [5, 8, 18] contain peak sets for any lower Hausdorff dimension. However, if we choose a compact set \(K\subset \partial \Omega \) then it is usually impossible to construct a peak set as in [5, 8, 18] inside K.
1.2 Main Result
In this paper we give an example (see Theorem 3.1) of peak set \(E\subset \partial \Omega \) such that \(\eta \mathbb {\partial {\mathbb {D}}}\cap E\) has Hausdorff dimension equal to 1 for all \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \). In fact our peak set has maximal possible Hausdorff dimension on \(\partial \Omega \) (see Remark 3.2).
Our inspiration is a Henriksen’s result [5]. Henriksen’s method is based on the \({\overline{\partial }}\) problem and requires \(C^{\infty }\) boundary of a considered domain. Our methods do not require the use of a theory related to the \({\overline{\partial }}\) problem. We consider domains with only \(C^{2}\) boundary. Note that our peak set crosses precisely all circles with the center at zero and has maximal possible Hausdorff dimension on each slice. Even in the case of the unit ball our result is new. Some generalizations are possible (see Remark 3.3).
1.3 Applications
Assume that \(K\subset \partial \Omega \) is a peak set for \(A(\Omega )\), then a set K has the following properties (see [13, 19]):
-
(1)
there exists \(f\in A(\Omega )\) such that \(K=f^{-1}(0)\) (K is a zero set).
-
(2)
if \(T\subset K\) is compact then T is a peak set.
-
(3)
\(\left. A(\Omega )\right| _{K}=C(K)\).
-
(4)
if g is a nonzero, continuous function on K then there exists \(f\in A(\Omega )\) such that \(f=g\) on K and \({|f(z)|}<\left\| g\right\| _{K}\) for \(z\in {\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } K\) (K is a peak interpolation set).
-
(5)
\(\left| \mu \right| (K)=0\) for all \(\mu \in A^{\bot }(\partial \Omega )\).
-
(6)
if \(G\in A(\Omega )\) is a peak function for K, then \(F=\exp (i\log (1-G))\) is a bounded holomorphic function on \(\Omega \) with no limit along any curve in \(\Omega \) that ends at a point of K.
1.4 Organization of the Paper
We start our paper by describing some property of compact set \(E\subset [0,1]\) that guarantees Hausdorff dimension equal to 1 (see Lemma 2.2). In fact it is enough to divide recursively into \(n_{i}\) equal intervals and choose inside smaller intervals with length controlled by \(\theta _{i}\) parameter. Then we will show that combination of special homogeneous polynomials retain this property (see Lemma 2.5). Next we amplify the big (\(\Re Q_{j}\ge \alpha )\) real part values of constructed polynomials \(Q_{j}\) and we suppress values that are too small \((\Re Q_{j}\le \frac{\alpha }{2})\) (see Theorem 3.1).
1.5 Notations
We use the following notation:
For \(\alpha >0\) and \(\delta >0\) and countable family \({\mathfrak {U}}\) of open sets \(U\in {\mathfrak {U}}\) with diameter d(U) we define
Now we have Hausdorff measure:
where the infimum is taken over all countable covers \({\mathfrak {U}}\) of E by open sets. We can define Hausdorff dimension
where \(H^{\alpha }(E)=\lim _{\delta \rightarrow 0}H_{\delta }^{\alpha }(E)\).
For a given \(z\in \partial \Omega \) and \(0\le a\le b\le 2\pi \) let us denote
2 Preliminary Estimates
2.1 Hausdorff Dimension
We use the following Tumanov’s Lemma to calculate Hausdorff dimension:
Lemma 2.1
[18, Lemma 3] Let \(1>\alpha >0\) and \(c>0.\) Let \(\{r_{j}\}_{j=0}^{\infty }\) be a sequence of positive numbers decreasing to zero. For a given \(j\in {\mathbb {N}}\) let \(\omega _{j}\) be a subset of [0, 1]. Let us define a sum of intervals \(E_{j}=\bigcup _{x\in \omega _{j}}[x,x+r_{j}]\).
Suppose that:
-
(1)
In each interval \([x,x+r_{j-1}]\) of \(E_{j-1}\) there are at least \(\left( \frac{r_{j-1}}{r_{j}}\right) ^{\alpha }\) intervals of \(E_{j}\).
-
(2)
Distance between intervals \([x,x+r_{j}]\) and \([y,y+r_{j}]\) is at least
$$\begin{aligned} \rho _{j} \,{:}{=}\, cr_{j-1}\left( \frac{r_{j}}{r_{j-1}}\right) ^{\alpha } \end{aligned}$$for \(x\ne y\in \omega _{j}\).
Then \(H^{\alpha }(E)>0\) where \(E=\bigcap _{j\in {\mathbb {N}}}E_{j}\).
In fact our crucial property of E gives us a so large set that it is impossible to use directly Tumanov’s Lemma. Fortunately, we can choose a subset of E for which we can easily use this method.
Lemma 2.2
Let \(\left\{ n_{j}\right\} \) be a sequence of natural numbers and \(\left\{ \theta _{j}\right\} \) be a sequence of positive numbers such that \(n_{j}>4\), \(\theta _{j}>1\) for \(j\ge 2\) and \(\lim _{j\rightarrow \infty }\frac{\theta _{j}}{n_{j}^{\alpha }}=0\) for \(\alpha \in (0,1)\). Let \(E_{1}=[0,1]\), \(r_{1}=1\) and \(r_{j}=\frac{r_{j-1}}{\theta _{j}n_{j}}\). Suppose that a decreasing sequence of compact sets \(\{E_{j}\}\) has the following property:
If \([z,z+r_{j-1}]\subset E_{j-1}\) and \(k\in \{0,\ldots ,n_{j}-1\}\) then there exists \(x_{z,k}\) such that
Then \(\dim _{H}(E)=1\) where \(E=\bigcap _{j\in {\mathbb {N}}}E_{j}\).
Proof
Let \(\alpha \in (0,1)\) and \({\tilde{\omega }}_{1}=\{0\}\). Let \({\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\) be a maximal possible subset of
such that distance between intervals \([x,x+r_{j}]\) and \([y,y+r_{j}]\) is at least
for \(x\ne y\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\). Let us observe that if \(z_{1}\ne z_{2}\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j-1}\) then distance between \([z_{1},z_{1}+r_{j-1}]\) and \([z_{2},z_{2}+r_{j-1}]\) is at least \(\rho _{j-1}>\rho _{j}\), so without lost of the generality we can assume that \(x_{z,0}\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\) for all \(z\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j-1}\).
For a given \({\tilde{\omega }}_{j-1}\) let us denote \({\tilde{E}}_{j-1}=\bigcup _{z\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j-1}}[z,z+r_{j-1}]\).
Let \(z\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j-1}\) and
Let \([a,b]\subset [z,z+r_{j-1}]\subset {\tilde{E}}_{j-1}\) with \(b-a\ge 2\rho _{j}+4\frac{r_{j-1}}{n_{j}}\). Since length of
is larger than \(\frac{r_{j-1}}{n_{j}}\) there exists \(k_{0}\in \{0,\ldots ,n_{j}-1\}\) such that
so there exists \(x_{z,k_{0}}\) with \(\left[ x_{z,k_{0}},x_{z,k_{0}}+r_{j}\right] \subset \left( a+\rho _{j}+r_{j},b-\rho _{j}-2r_{j}\right) \). But \({\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\) is maximal possible subset of
so there exists \(x_{z,k_{1}}\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\) with \(\left| x_{z,k_{0}}-x_{z,k_{1}}\right| \le \rho _{j}+r_{j}\), which implies that
so (a, b) contains at least one element of \({\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\).
Since \(x_{z,0}\in {\tilde{\omega }}_{j}\) we have:
iff \(16\theta _{j}^{\alpha }\left( n_{j}\right) ^{\alpha -1}\le 1\). Since \(0\le \lim _{j\rightarrow \infty }\theta _{j}^{\alpha }\left( n_{j}\right) ^{\alpha -1}\le \lim _{j\rightarrow \infty }\frac{\theta _{j}}{n_{j}^{1-\alpha }}=0\) we can use Lemma 2.1 and conclude that \(H^{\alpha }(E)\ge H^{\alpha }({\tilde{E}})>0\), which finishes the proof. \(\square \)
2.2 Homogeneous Polynomials
We need polynomials from [7] but with Lipschitz constants:
Lemma 2.3
There exists \(K\in {\mathbb {N}}\) such that for each \(N\in {\mathbb {N}}\) sufficiently large and \(N<m_{1}<m_{2}<\cdots <m_{K}\le 2N\), we can choose a sequence \(p_{m}\) of homogeneous polynomials of degree m which satisfy
-
(1)
\(\left| p_{m_{j}}(z)\right| \le 2\) for all \(z\in \partial \Omega \),
-
(2)
\(\max _{k\in \{1,\ldots ,K\}}\left| p_{m_{k}}(z)\right| \ge \frac{1}{2}\) for all \(z\in \partial \Omega \),
-
(3)
\(\left| p_{m_{j}}(z)-p_{m_{j}}(w)\right| \le 3m_{j}\left\| z-w\right\| \) for \(z,w\in \partial \Omega \)
Proof
Let \(0<c_{1}<c_{2}\) be from [7, Lemma 2.1]. For \(a=\frac{1}{4}\) we can choose C from [7, Lemma 2.5]. Let \(K=K(\alpha ,\beta )\) be from [7, Lemma 2.3] for \(\alpha =\frac{1}{4\sqrt{c_{2}}}\) and \(\beta =\frac{C}{\sqrt{c_{1}}}\). For \(N\in {\mathbb {N}}\) fix a maximal \(1/(4\sqrt{c_{2}N})\)-separated subset \(A\subset \partial \Omega \). Using [7, Lemma 2.3] we can divide A into at most K disjoint \(C/\sqrt{c_{1}N}\)-separated subsets \(A_{0},A_{1},\ldots ,A_{K-1}\). We define the same way as in [7, Theorem 2.6]:
for \(j=0,1,\ldots ,K-1\).
Using the same arguments as in [7, Theorem 2.6] we conclude properties (1)–(2).
Since \(m_{j}-1\ge N\) we can use [7, Lemma 2.5 (4)] and observe that
for \(z\in \partial \Omega \). Now we can estimate:
for \(z,w\in \partial \Omega \). \(\square \)
Since we use combinations homogeneous polynomials and Lipschitz functions we will need the following tool for efficient small interval integration.
Lemma 2.4
Let f be a Lipschitz function on [0, 1] then
Proof
If \(\left| f(t_{1})-f(t_{2})\right| \le C|t_{1}-t_{2}|\) then we can estimate
\(\square \)
Our crucial one-dimensional property of E (Lemma 2.2) is preserved by polynomials:
Lemma 2.5
There exists a constant \(\alpha \in (0,1)\) such that for a given Lipschitz positive function h on \(\partial \Omega \) there exists a constant \(\theta >1\) such that for all sufficiently large \(m\in {\mathbb {N}}\) we can choose polynomial \(P_{m}\) with:
-
(1)
\(|P_{m}|<h\) on \(\partial \Omega \),
-
(2)
\(|P_{m}(r\eta )|\le \left\| h\right\| r^{m}\) for \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \), \(r\in (0,1)\),
-
(3)
for all \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \) there exists \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{1}{m}\right] \) such that:
$$\begin{aligned} \Re P_{m}\ge \alpha h \end{aligned}$$on \(\eta _{\left[ x,x+\frac{1}{\theta m}\right] }\).
Proof
There exists \(N=N(\Omega )\in {\mathbb {N}}\) such that for a given continuous positive function h on \(\partial \Omega \) we can choose holomorphic functions \(f_{1},\ldots ,f_{N}\) on \({\mathbb {C}}^{d}\) such that (see [7]):
on \(\partial \Omega \). There exists \(C>0\) such that
for \(\eta ,\xi \in {\overline{\Omega }}\). Let \(K\in {\mathbb {N}}\) be as in Lemma 2.3. For a given \(m,n\in {\mathbb {N}}\) let \(m_{i,j}=m(n+K(i-1)+j-1)\). Now for sufficiently large \(n_{0}\) and all positive m we have: \(mn\le m_{1,1}<\cdots<m_{N,K}<2mn\) and there exist homogeneous polynomials \(p_{m_{i,j}}\) of degree \(m_{i,j}\) such that:
-
(1)
\(\left| p_{m_{i,j}}\right| \le 2\) on \(\partial \Omega \),
-
(2)
\(\max _{j\in \{1,\ldots ,K\}}\left| p_{m_{i,j}}\right| \ge \frac{1}{2}\) on \(\partial \Omega \),
-
(3)
\(\left| p_{m_{i,j}}(\eta )-p_{m_{i,j}}(\xi )\right| \le 3m_{i,j}\left\| \eta -\xi \right\| \le 6mn_{0}\left\| \eta -\xi \right\| \) for \(z,w\in \partial \Omega \).
We show that it is enough to define \(\beta =1-\frac{1}{2^{11}K^{2}N^{2}}\), \(\alpha =\frac{1}{2}(1-\beta ^{2})\),
and
for m large enough.
We have on \(\partial \Omega \):
and
for \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \) and \(r\in (0,1)\). Moreover for \(\eta ,\xi \in \partial \Omega \) and m sufficiently large:
Let us observe that \(\sqrt{1+x}\le 1+\frac{1}{2}x-\frac{1}{16}x^{2}\) holds for \(x\in (-1,1).\)
Now we can use Lemma 2.4 and estimate for m large enough, \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \):
In particular there exists \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{1}{m}\right] \) such that \(\left( h-\Re P_{m}\right) (\eta _{[x]})\le \beta ^{2}h(\eta _{[x]})\) so we have:
Without lost of the generality we can assume that m is so large that for \(t\in {\left[ x,x+\frac{1}{\theta m}\right] }\) we have
Since
we can estimate:
which implies
and finishes the proof. \(\square \)
3 Peak Set
Theorem 3.1
There exists a peak set \(E\subset \partial \Omega \) such that \(\eta \partial {\mathbb {D}}\cap E\) has Hausdorff dimension equal to 1 for all \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \).
Proof
Let \(\alpha \in (0,1)\) be from Lemma 2.5.
Before constructing the desired peak set and the function F exhibiting the definition of the peak set we present an inductive construction of several sequences (of \(Q_{j},E_{j}m_{j},\theta _{j},r_{j}\)) satisfying the following properties:
-
(1)
\(Q_{1}=1\), \(E_{1}=\partial \Omega \), \(m_{1}=1\), \(\theta _{1}=1\), \(r_{1}=1\), \(Q_{j}\) is a polynomial, \(E_{j}\)–compact subset of \(\partial \Omega \), \(m_{j},\theta _{j},\frac{1}{r_{j}}\)–natural numbers.
-
(2)
\(\frac{\theta _{j}}{\root j \of {m_{j}}}\le 2^{-j}\), \(r_{j}=\frac{r_{j-1}}{\theta _{j}m_{j}}\),
-
(3)
\(E_{j}=\left\{ \eta \in E_{j-1}:\Re Q_{j}(\eta )\ge \alpha \right\} \),
-
(4)
\(\left| Q_{j}\right| \le 1\) and \(\left| Q_{j}\right| \le 2^{-j}\) onFootnote 3
$$\begin{aligned} D_{j-1}\,{:}{=}\left( {\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } K(E_{j-1},2^{-j})\right) \cup \left( \bigcup _{k<j}\left\{ \Re Q_{k}\le \frac{\alpha }{2}\right\} \cap {\overline{\Omega }}\right) , \end{aligned}$$ -
(5)
If \(\eta _{\left[ 0,\frac{r_{j-1}}{m_{j}}\right] }\subset E_{j-1}\) then there exists \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{r_{j-1}}{2m_{j}}\right] \) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \eta _{\left[ x,x+r_{j}\right] }\subset E_{j}\cap \eta _{\left[ 0,\frac{r_{j-1}}{m_{j}}\right] }. \end{aligned}$$
Let us observe that \(Q_{1},E_{1},m_{1},\theta _{1},r_{1}\) are just defined by property (1), so suppose that \(Q_{j-1},E_{j-1}m_{j-1},\theta _{j-1},r_{j-1}\) have properties (1)–(5).
Since \(D_{j-1}\cap E_{j-1}=\emptyset \) therefore \(2\varepsilon =\inf _{(\xi ,\eta )\in E_{j-1}\times {D_{j-1}}}\left\| \xi -\eta \right\| >0\). For a given \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \cap D_{j-1}\) there exists an open neighbourhood \(V_{\eta }\) of \(\eta \) with the following properties:
-
\(V_{\eta }\cap K(E_{j-1},\varepsilon )=\emptyset \)
-
If f is holomorphic on \(\overline{V_{\eta }}\) then:
$$\begin{aligned} \sup _{\xi \in \overline{V_{\eta }}\cap \Omega }\left| f(\xi )\right| \le \sup _{\xi \in \partial \Omega \cap V_{\eta }}\left| f(\xi )\right| . \end{aligned}$$
To guarantee the last inequality, it suffices to choose the neighborhood \(U_{\eta }\) of \(\eta \) in \(\partial \Omega \) so that \(U_{\eta }\cap \overline{K(E_{j-1},\varepsilon )}=\emptyset \). Now it is enough to define \(V_{\eta }=\bigcup _{\omega :\partial \omega \subset U_{\eta }}\omega \) where \(\omega \) is any one-dimensional complex disc disjoint with \(\overline{K(E_{j-1},\varepsilon )}\).
Let \(V=\bigcup _{\eta \in {D_{j-1}}}V_{\eta }\). Since \(D_{j-1}\) is compact there exists \(s\in (0,1)\) such that \(D_{j-1}\subset s\Omega \cup V\). We can choose a positive Lipschitz function h on \(\partial \Omega \) such that
-
\(h\le 1\) on \(\partial \Omega \),
-
\(h\equiv 1\) on \(E_{j-1}\),
-
\(h\le 2^{-j}\) on \({\overline{V}}\cap \partial \Omega \).
Now for a given h we can use Lemma 2.5 and choose \(\theta >1\) such that for all sufficiently large \(m\in {\mathbb {N}}\) we can choose polynomial \(P_{m}\) with:
-
\(|P_{m}|<h\) on \(\partial \Omega \),
-
\(|P_{m}(r\eta )|\le r^{m}\) for \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \), \(r\in (0,1)\),
-
for all \(\eta \in \partial \Omega \) there exists \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{1}{m}\right] \) such that:
$$\begin{aligned} \Re P_{m}\ge \alpha h \end{aligned}$$(3.1)on \(\eta _{\left[ x,x+\frac{1}{\theta m}\right] }\).
We can define \(\theta _{j}=2\lceil \theta \rceil \). Since \(\frac{1}{r_{j-1}}\in {\mathbb {N}}\) we can also assume that \(m=\frac{2m_{j}}{r_{j-1}}\) for \(m_{j}\in {\mathbb {N}}\) sufficiently large. In particular \(m_{j}\) can be so large that \(\left| P_{m}\right| \le 2^{-j}\) on \(s{\overline{\Omega }}\) and \(\frac{\theta _{j}}{\root j \of {m_{j}}}\le 2^{-j}\). Now we can define \(r_{j}=\frac{r_{j-1}}{\theta _{j}m_{j}}\), \(Q_{j}=P_{m}\) and \(E_{j}=\left\{ \eta \in E_{j-1}:\Re Q_{j}(\eta )\ge \alpha \right\} \). If \(\eta \in D_{j-1}\) then \(\eta \in s{\overline{\Omega }}\) or \(\eta \in V\). In both cases \(|Q_{j}(\eta )|\le 2^{-j}\) so we have properties (1)–(4). Suppose that \(\eta _{\left[ 0,\frac{r_{j-1}}{m_{j}}\right] }=\eta _{\left[ 0,\frac{2}{m}\right] }\subset E_{j-1}\). Now for a given \(\eta \) there exists \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{1}{m}\right] =\left[ 0,\frac{r_{j-1}}{2m_{j}}\right] \) with (3.1). But \(\eta _{\left[ x,x+\frac{1}{\theta m}\right] }\subset \eta _{\left[ 0,\frac{2}{m}\right] }\subset E_{j-1}\) so \(h=1\) on \(\eta _{\left[ x,x+\frac{1}{\theta m}\right] }\) and
We just proved that our sequences fulfills properties (1)-(5).
Let us choose sequences \(Q_{j}E_{j},m_{j},\theta _{j},r_{j}\). The set \(E=\bigcap _{j}E_{j}\) is a compact subset of \(\partial \Omega \). Let us consider \(Q=\sum _{j}Q_{j}\). If \(j_{0}\in {\mathbb {N}}\) then we can observe \(\left| Q_{j}\right| \le 2^{-j}\) on \({\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } K(E_{j_{0}-1},2^{-j_{0}})\) for \(j\ge j_{0}\). In particular Q is holomorphic function on \(\Omega \) and continuous on \({\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } E\).
For a given \(\eta \in {\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } (D_{1}\cup E)\) let index \(j_{\eta }\ge 2\) be such that \(\eta \in D_{j_{\eta }}{\setminus } D_{j_{\eta }-1}\). We have \(\left| Q_{j}(\eta )\right| \le 2^{-j}\) for \(j\ge j_{\eta }+1\) and \(\Re Q_{j}(\eta )\ge \frac{\alpha }{2}\) for \(j\le j_{\eta }-1\), so we can estimate:
If \({\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus }(D_{1}\cup E)\ni \eta _{n}\rightarrow \xi \in E\) then \(j_{\eta _{n}}\rightarrow \infty \). In particular
and \(\Re Q(\eta )>-1\) for \(\eta \in {\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus }(D_{1}\cup E)\).
If \(\eta \in D_{1}\) then \(\left| Q_{j}(\eta )\right| \le 2^{-j}\) for \(j\ge 2\), so we have \(\Re Q(\eta )\ge -1-\sum _{j\ge 2}2^{-j}>-2\). In particular
on \({\overline{\Omega }}{\setminus } E\), which implies that E is a peak set for the function \(F=\exp \left( \frac{-1}{Q+2}\right) \).
Now we calculate Hausdorff dimension of E on each slice. Let \(\alpha \in (0,1)\) we can observe for \(\frac{1}{j}\le \alpha \):
For a given \(\xi \in \partial \Omega \) we have \(\xi _{[0,1]}\subset E_{1}\). Moreover if \(\xi _{[z,z+r_{j-1}]}\) \(\subset E_{j-1}\) for some \(z\in [0,1]\) and \(k\in \{0,\ldots ,m_{j}-1\}\) then we can set \(\eta =\xi _{z+s}\in E_{j-1}\) for \(s=\frac{kr_{j-1}}{m_{j}}\). In particular
so there exists \(x\in \left[ 0,\frac{r_{j-1}}{2m_{j}}\right] \) such that
Now we have:
so we can use Lemma 2.2 and conclude that \(\xi _{[0,1]}\cap E\) has Hausdorff dimension equal 1. \(\square \)
Remark 3.2
Peak set E with Hausdorff dimension equals to 1 on each slice has maximal possible Hausdorff dimension equal to \(2d-1\).
Proof
It follows from Fubini theorem for Hausdorff measure see ([18, Proposition 2] and [20]). \(\square \)
Remark 3.3
Let \(\varepsilon ,r\in (0,1)\) and \(S_{\varepsilon }=\left\{ \eta \in \partial \Omega :\eta _{1}\ge \varepsilon \right\} \), \(\Lambda _{[0,r]}=\exp \left( 2\pi i[0,r]\right) \). Then there exists \(E\subset S_{\varepsilon }\Lambda _{r}\) peak set such that \(\eta \Lambda _{r}\cap E\) has Hausdorff dimension equal to 1 for \(\eta \in S_{\varepsilon }\).
Proof
Let \(r_{i}\) be as in the proof of Theorem 3.1. It is enough to observe that \(S_{\varepsilon }\Lambda _{[0,r_{i}]}\) contains a peak set with Hausdorff dimension equal to 1 on each slice crossing \(S_{\varepsilon }\). \(\square \)
Data availability statement
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were generated or analysed during the current study.
Notes
As usually, by \(A(\Omega )\) we denote a space of all functions which are holomorphic in \(\Omega \) and continuous to the boundary.
The paper [14] is in fact generalization Fatou-Rudin-Carleson theorem to a higher dimension for \(C^{1}\) peak sets.
If S is a set then \(K(S,r)=\left\{ \eta \in {\mathbb {C}}^{d}:\inf _{\xi \in S}\left\| \xi -\eta \right\| <r\right\} \)
References
Carleson, L.: Representations of continuous functions. Math. Z. 66, 447–451 (1957)
Danielyan, A.A.: Fatou’s interpolation theorem implies the Rudin–Carleson theorem. J. Fourier Anal. Appl. 23, 656–659 (2017)
Federer, H.: Geometric Measure Theory. Springer, Berlin (1969)
Fornaess, J.E., Henriksen, B.S.: Lectures on Counterexamples in Several Complex Variables. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2007)
Henriksen, B.S.: A peak set of Hausdorff dimension 2n–1 for the algebra \(A(D)\) in the boundary of a domain \(D\) with \(C^{\infty }\)-boundary in \({\mathbb{C} }^{n}\). Math. Ann. 259, 271 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01457313
Kot, P.: A holomorphic function with given almost all boundary values 0on a domain with holomorphic support function. J. Convex Anal. 14(4), 693–704 (2007)
Kot, P.: Homogeneous polynomials on strictly convex domains. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 135, 3895–3903 (2007)
Kot, P.: Peak set crossing all the circles. J. Convex Anal. 16, 515–521 (2009)
Krantz, S.: Complex Analysis, Seminar. University Park PA, Pennsylvania (1986)
Krantz, S.: Function Theory of Several Complex Variables, 2nd edn. Wadsworth, Belmont, CA (1992)
Noell, A.: Peak points for pseudoconvex domains: a survey. J. Geom. Anal. 18, 1058–1087 (2008)
Davie, A.M., Oksendal, B.K.: Peak interpolation sets for some algebras of analytic functions. Pac. J. Math. 41, 81–87 (1972)
Rudin, W.: Function Theory in the Unit Ball. Springer, Berlin (2008)
Rudin, W.: Peak-interpolation sets of class \(C^{1}\). Pac. J. Math. 75, 267–279 (1978)
Rudin, W.: Boundary values of continuous analytic functions. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 7, 808–811 (1956)
Stout, E.L.: The dimension of peak interpolation sets. Proc. Am Math. Soc. 86(3), 413–416 (1982)
Stout, E.L.: The Theory of Uniform Algebras. Tarrytown-on-Hudson, New York (1971)
Tumanov, A.E.: A peak set for the disc algebra of metric dimension 2.5 in the three-diemnsional unit sphere. Math. USSR-Izv. 11(2), 353 (1977)
Weinstock, B.M.: Zero-sets of continuous holomorphic functions on the boundary of a strongly pseudoconvex domain. J. Lond. Math. Soc. s2–18, 484–488 (1978). https://doi.org/10.1112/jlms/s2-18.3.484
Wegmann, H.: Die Hausdorff-dimension von kartesischen Produktmengen in metrischen Raumen. J. Reine Angew. Math. 234, 163–171 (1969)
Ryll, J., Wojtaszczyk, P.: On homogeneous polynomials on a complex ball. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 276, 107–116 (1983)
Wojtaszczyk, P.: On values of homogeneous polynomials in discrete sets of points. Stud. Math. 84, 97–104 (1986)
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors reviewed the manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no competing interests.
Additional information
Communicated by Filippo Bracci.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Kot, P. A Peak Set with a Maximal Hausdorff Dimension on Each Slice. Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 17, 101 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11785-023-01405-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11785-023-01405-0