1962
DOI: 10.1112/jlms/s1-37.1.354
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

On Discontinuous Riesz Means of Type n

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
14
0

Year Published

1965
1965
1987
1987

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
14
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Much attention has been given in the past to the inclusion C 5 R , K > -2 , that is, to the Orders k of mutual inclusion, and, in case of strict inclusion, to how C^ can be specified within R* . B.Kuttner's proof in [13] for C = R* , -2 < k < 2, and C ^ r* ^ 2 ^ k , wi1i be adapted to I C I C K T K yield H^ , 0 < k < 3 , and = H^ , 3 ^ k . (For the common ränge of strict inclusion, see below.)…”
Section: Basio Notation and Objeotivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Much attention has been given in the past to the inclusion C 5 R , K > -2 , that is, to the Orders k of mutual inclusion, and, in case of strict inclusion, to how C^ can be specified within R* . B.Kuttner's proof in [13] for C = R* , -2 < k < 2, and C ^ r* ^ 2 ^ k , wi1i be adapted to I C I C K T K yield H^ , 0 < k < 3 , and = H^ , 3 ^ k . (For the common ränge of strict inclusion, see below.)…”
Section: Basio Notation and Objeotivesmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…3. According to Kakeya a power series 2, p n z n , Po>Pi>P2> ••-, n=0 p n > 0 (the series is Abel summable for \z\ < 1, z =£ 1), has no roots for |z| ^ 1 [3,4]. If we assume that {p n } is totally monotone, then our theorem shows, with the notation no roots for | z \ ^ 1 if | e | < \.…”
Section: N=0 N=lmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…
In a recent publication B. Kuttner [4] has proven that the functions QO f K (z) which are defined for | z | < l by £ (n-\-l) K z n have the property n=0 f K (z) ^ 0 for | z | < 1, 1 < K < 2. It is the purpose of this paper to give a new proof of this result.
…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…of discontinuous (R, X n , -1) summability is already available. Now it is known [5], that (C, k) and (R, n, k) are equivalent for -1 < k < 2, and Dr Kuttner has shown me a proof, similar to that of [5], that (R, n, -1) implies (C, -1 ) but that the converse implication is false. Thus (C, X n , -1 ) is not equivalent to (R, X n , -1 ) even when X n = n.…”
Section: = -mentioning
confidence: 99%