Compactness of Hankel operators with symbols continuous on the closure of pseudoconvex domains (Q1727962): Difference between revisions

The authors study the relation between the compactness of a Hankel operator and the boundary behavior of the symbol. Let \(\Omega\) be a domain in \(\mathbb{C}^n\) and let \(A^2(\Omega)\) be its Bergman space. The Bergman projection is the orthogonal projection \(P:L^2(\Omega)\to A^2(\Omega)\). The Hankel operator \(H_{\phi}:A^2(\Omega)\to L^2(\Omega)\) with symbol \(\phi\in L^{\infty}(\Omega)\) is defined as \[ H_{\phi}f=(I-P)(\phi f), \] where \(I\) denotes the identity operator. The main result is that, when \(\Omega\) is bounded pseudoconvex in \(\mathbb{C}^2\) with Lipschitz boundary and \(\phi\in C(\overline{\Omega})\), if \(H_{\phi}\) is compact on \(A^2(\Omega)\), then \(\phi\circ f\) is holomorphic for any holomorphic \(f:\mathbb{D}\to b\Omega\). This improves the previous result by \textit{T. G. Clos} and \textit{S. Şahutoğlu} [Complex Anal. Oper. Theory 12, No. 2, 365--376 (2018; Zbl 1465.47020)] in one direction. Based on the result by \textit{P. Matheos} [A Hartogs domain with no analytic discs in the boundary for which the $\overline{\partial}$-Neumann problem is not compact. PhD Thesis. University of California Los Angeles, CA (1997)] and the result by \textit{S. Şahutoğlu} and \textit{Y. E. Zeytuncu} [J. Geom. Anal. 27, No. 2, 1274--1285 (2017; Zbl 1375.32061)], the converse the main result is not true. The authors also prove a similar result in the setting of convex domains in \(\mathbb{C}^n\). Namely, when \(\Omega\) is bounded convex in \(\mathbb{C}^n\) and \(\phi\in C(\overline{\Omega})\), if \(H_{\phi}\) is compact on \(A^2(\Omega)\), then \(\phi\circ f\) is holomorphic for any holomorphic \(f:\mathbb{D}\to b\Omega\). However, the converse of the second result is still open.