On the inclusion of some Lorentz spaces (Q2567325)

The author studies the inclusion \(L_{p_1, q_1}(\mu)\subseteq L_{p_2, q_2}(\nu)\) between Lorentz spaces with respect to two measures \(\mu\) and \(\nu\) over a measurable space \((X,\Sigma)\). Unfortunately, many errors occur in this paper. First, in Lemma 2.1, he concludes that the measures \(\mu\) and \(\nu\) must be equivalent, though the inclusion is clearly true whenever \(\nu \ll \mu\), at least when \(p_1 < p_2\) and \(\mu(X)<+\infty\). He correctly shows that the inclusion implies \(\nu \ll \mu\) (though he uses almost half a page to give a computation involving the null function), and ends with: ``Similarly one can prove that \(\mu \ll \nu\)''! It follows that in Theorem 2.2 and Proposition 2.4, the conclusion \(\mu \approx \nu\) should be deleted (though the author uses this equivalence in the proof of Theorem 2.2, a simple modification allows to conclude that the canonical injection is closed). Note that, though the proof of \((3) \Rightarrow (1)\) in Proposition 2.4 is implied by the others, the author gives a wrong proof, confusing \(L^1(\mu)\) and \(L^1(\nu)\) with \(L^1(\mathbb R_+)\). Proposition 2.5 and Proposition 2.6 assert essentially the same facts, and the property pointed out for the measure implies that it is atomic. Lastly, in Proposition 2.6 (1), the author falsely asserts, as a general fact, that, when \(\mu(X)<+\infty\), \(L_{p_1,q_1}(\mu) \subseteq L_{p_2,q_2}(\mu)\) whenever \(0<p_1<p_2<+\infty\); but this inclusion is actually its hypothesis! Note that its conclusion ``any collection of disjoint measurable sets of positive measure is finite'' means that \(X\) is the union of a finite number of \(\mu\)-atoms, and in Proposition 2.7, the assumption that \(\mu(X)=+\infty\) means that the group is not compact.