Some Theorems on the Relation between Riesz and Abel Typical Means

B. Kuttner

doi:10.1017/S0305004100034861

Some Theorems on the Relation between Riesz and Abel Typical Means

Published online by Cambridge University Press: 24 October 2008

B. Kuttner

Show author details

B. Kuttner: Affiliation:
The UniversityBirmingham

Article contents

Extract
References

Get access

Rights & Permissions

Extract

Let {λn} be a sequence of non-negative numbers increasing to infinity. Let be any series. Following the usual terminology, we say that the series is summable (R, λn, k) to s if as u → ∞, where . If, further, u−kA(k)(u) is of bounded variation in (0, ∞), we say that the series is summable s. We say that the series is summable (A, λn) to s if converges for all σ > 0, and tends to s as σ →0+. If A, B are two summability methods, we write A → B (‘A implies B’) if they have the property that any series summable A is necessarily summable B to the same sum.

Type: Research Article
Information: Mathematical Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society , Volume 57 , Issue 1 , January 1961 , pp. 61 - 75

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0305004100034861 [Opens in a new window]
Copyright: Copyright © Cambridge Philosophical Society 1961

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

* Garabedian, H. L., Theorems associated with the Riesz and Dirichlet's series methods of summability, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc. 45 (1939), 891–5.CrossRef Google Scholar

† I am indebted to the referee for pointing this out.

‡ I use CM to denote Chandrasekharan, K. and Minakshisundaram, S., Typical means (Bombay, 1952).Google Scholar

* Widder, D. V., The Laplace transform (Princeton, 1941), 89 (Theorem 11·6b). In the theorem as stated by Widder, we put .Google Scholar

* To avoid repeated suffixes, we write λ(n) for λ_n whenever n is replaced by an expression which itself involves suffixes. We use a similar notation with other letters in place of λ.

† The notation given by (16) will be used throughout the paper.

* It is to ensure this that we have to take and not .

† Here we appeal to Theorem 1·61 of CM rather than to the modification given by Lemma 2.

‡ Here and elsewhere a ‘turning point’ of a function is to be taken to mean a point at which its derivative vanishes.

* These equations determine uniquely the ratio of the b's.

* This is possible since (except in the trivial case in which all the relevant a's vanish) is not identically zero for . For if it were, we would have and any one of equations (49) shows that we would then also have .