text:
# Some Applications of Collapsing with Bounded Curvature

## 1. Injectivity radius estimates and megafolds

Is it true that positive pinching of the sectional curvatures of a simply connected manifold implies some lower positive bound for the injectivity radius, which does not depend on the manifold? For dimension $`=3`$ this was proved by Burago and Toponogov \[BT\]. More generally, they proved the following:

Theorem A. Given any $`\delta >0`$, there exists a positive constant $`i_0=i_0(\delta )>0`$ such that the injectivity radius of any simply connected compact $`3`$-dimensional Riemannian manifold with Ricc$`\delta `$, $`K1`$, is bounded from below by $`i_0`$.

Moreover they made a conjecture that this result should be also true for higher dimensions. Later on some new examples of manifolds with positively pinched curvature were found by Alloff and Wallach, Eschenburg and Bazaikin (\[AW\], \[E\], \[B\]) which disprove this conjecture in general, but since then closely related conjectures appeared on almost each list of open problems in Riemannian geometry. The theorem which we proved can be formulated as follows:

Theorem B. Given any $`m`$ and any $`\delta >0`$, there exists a positive constant $`i_0=i_0(m,\delta )>0`$ such that the injectivity radius of any simply connected compact $`m`$-dimensional Riemannian manifold with finite second homotopy group and Ricc$`\delta `$, $`K1`$, is bounded from below by $`i_0(m,\delta )`$.

Theorem B generalizes the Burago-Toponogov Theorem A to arbitrary dimensions and is also in even dimensions interesting, since there is no Synge theorem for positive Ricci curvature. For sectional curvature pinching a similar result was obtained independently by Fang and Rong \[FR\].

Now I will turn to one proof of this statement which is described in the appendix of \[PT\] (The main part of paper contains an other proof). This proof makes use of a generalized notion of Riemannian manifold, which was also described by Gromov in the end of section $`8_+`$ of \[G3\], and employs a “tangential” version of Gromov-Hausdorff convergence. Here I will just give an informal analogy which describes this notion. The formal aspects and all further details can be found in \[PT\].

One may think about a manifold as a set of charts and glueing mappings. For a Riemannian manifold, denoting the disjoint union of all charts with the pulled back metrics by $`(U,g)`$, the set of all glueing maps defines an isometric pseudo-group action by a pseudogroup $`G`$ on $`(U,g)`$. Here is the definition of a pseudogroup action:

Definition. A pseudogroup action (or pseudogroup of transformations) on a manifold $`M`$ is given by a set $`G`$ of pairs of the form $`p=(D_p,\overline{p})`$, where $`D_p`$ is an open subset of $`M`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ is a homeomorphism $`D_pM`$, so that the following properties hold:

(1) $`p,qG`$ implies $`pq=(\overline{q}^1(D_p\overline{q}(D_p)),\overline{p}\overline{q})G`$;

(2) $`pG`$ implies $`p^1=(\overline{p}(D_p),\overline{p}^1)G`$;

(3) $`(M,id)G`$;

(4) if $`\overline{p}`$ is a homeomorphism from an open set $`DıM`$ into $`M`$ and $`D=_\alpha D_\alpha `$, where $`D_\alpha `$ are open sets in $`M`$, then the property $`(D,\overline{p})G`$ is equivalent to $`(D_\alpha ,\overline{p}|_{D_\alpha })G`$ for any $`\alpha `$.

We call the pseudo-group action natural if in addition the following is true:

(i) If $`(D,\overline{p})G`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ can be extended as a continuous map to a boundary point $`xD`$, then there is an element $`(D^{},\overline{p}^{})G`$ such that $`xD^{}`$, $`DıD^{}`$ and $`\overline{p}^{}|_D=\overline{p}`$.

To form a manifold this action must be in addition properly discontinuous and free. If it just properly discontinuous then we obtain an orbifold. In the case of a general (isometric!) pseudogroup action we obtain a it Riemannian megafold (cf. \[PT\]). The megafold which is obtained this way will be denoted by $`(,g)=((U,g):G)`$.

Now we come to the main notion of this section:

Definition. A sequence of Riemannian megafolds $`(_n,g_n)`$ is said to Grothendieck-Lipschitz converge (GL-converge) to a Riemannian megafold $`(,g)`$ if there are representations $`(_n,g_n)=((U_n,g_n):G_n)`$ and $`(,g)=((U,g):G)`$ such that

(a) The $`(U_n,g_n)`$ Lipschitz converge to $`(U,g)`$, and

(b) For some sequence $`ϵ_n0`$ there is a sequence of $`e^{\pm ϵ_n}`$-bi-Lipschitz homeomorphisms $`h_n:(U_n,g_n)(U,g)`$ such that the pseudogroup actions on $`\{(U_n,g_n)\}`$ converge (with respect to the homeomorphisms $`h_n`$) to a pseudogroup action on $`\{(U,g)\}`$.

I.e., for any converging sequence of elements $`p_{n_k}G_{n_k}(U_{n_k},_{n_k})`$ there exists a sequence $`p_nG_n`$ which converges to the same local isometry on $`U`$, and the pseudogroup of all such limits, acting on $`U`$, coincides with the pseudogroup action $`G(U,)`$.

Here are two simple examples of GL-convergence:

Consider the sequence of Riemannian manifolds $`S_ϵ^1\times `$, which for $`ϵ0`$ Gromov-Hausdorff converge to $``$. Then this sequence converges in the GL-topology to a Riemannian megafold $``$, which can described as follows: It is covered by one single chart $`U=^2`$, and the pseudogroup $`G`$ simply consists of all vertical shifts of $`^2`$. I.e., $``$ is nothing but $`(^2:)`$ where $``$ acts by parallel translations. (Note that $`(^2:)^2/`$, these megafolds even have different dimensions!)

The Berger spheres, as they Gromov-Hausdorff collapse to $`S^2`$, converge in Grothendieck-Lipschitz topology to the Riemannian megafold $`(S^2\times :)`$. Here $``$ acts by parallel shifts of $`S^2\times `$.

Notice that a Riemannian metric on a megafold $`((U,g):G)`$ defines a pseudometric on the set of $`G`$ orbits. In particular one has that the diameter of a Riemannian megafold is well defined. Now here is the basic result, whose proof is obvious from the definitions:

Theorem C. The set of Riemannian $`m`$-manifolds (megafolds) with bounded sectional curvature $`|K|1`$ and diameter $`D`$ is precompact (compact) in the Grothendieck-Lipschitz topology.

Now let us state some natural questions which arise from this theorem:

1. Which Riemannian megafolds can be approximated by manifolds with bounded curvature and diameter?

Note that the infinitesimal motions of the pseudogroup $`G`$ give rise to a Lie algebra of Killing fields on a megafold $`(U,g)`$ from which one can recover an isometric local action of a connected Lie group on $`(U,g)`$. Let us call this group $`G_o`$. Then $`G_o`$ is obviously an invariant of the megafold, i.e., does not depend on a particular representation $`(U:G)`$. It follows now from \[CFG\] that if $`(,g)`$ is a limit of Riemannian manifolds with bounded curvature, then $`G_o()`$ must be nilpotent. A direct construction moreover shows that this condition is also sufficent.

(Note that since a pure $`N`$-structure on a simply connected manifold is given by a torus action, one also has the following: If a megafold can be approximated by simply connected manifolds with bounded curvature, then $`G_o()=^k`$.)

2. How can one recover the Gromov-Hausdorff limit space from a Grothendieck-Lipschitz limit?

Let $`=((U,g):G)`$ be a GL-limit of Riemannian manifolds. The GH-limit is the space of $`G`$ orbits with the induced metric, in other words: The Gromov-Hausdorff limit is nothing but $`(U,g)/G`$.

Riemannian megafolds are actually not that general objects as they might seem at first sight. Indeed, given a Riemannian megafold $`(,g)`$ we can consider its orthonormal frame bundle $`(F,\stackrel{~}{g})`$, equipped with the induced metric. Now consider some representation of it, say, $`(F,\stackrel{~}{g})=((U,\stackrel{~}{g}):G)`$. Then the $`G`$ pseudogroup action is free on $`U`$, so that its closure $`\overline{G}`$ also acts freely. Therefore the corresponding factor, equipped with the induced metric, is a Riemannian manifold $`Y=(U/\overline{G},\overline{g})`$, and there is a Riemannian submersion $`(F,\stackrel{~}{g})(U/\overline{G},\overline{g})`$ whose fibre is $`G_o/\mathrm{\Gamma }_o`$, where $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_o`$ is a dense subgroup of $`G_o`$ (Roughly speaking, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_o`$ is generated by the intersections of $`G_o`$ and $`G`$). If we assume that $``$ is simply connected, then $`G_o=^k`$ and $`\mathrm{\Gamma }_o`$ is the homotopy sequence image of $`\pi _2(Y)`$. In particular, the dimension of the free part of $`\pi _2(Y)`$ is at least $`k+1`$.

Notice that for Riemannian megafolds one can define the de Rham complex just as well as for manifolds. (In fact I am not aware of a single notion or theorem in Riemannian geometry which does not admit a straightforward generalization to Riemannian megafolds!) From the above characterization of Riemannian megafolds it is not hard to obtain the following:

Theorem D. Let $`M_n`$ be a sequence of compact simply connected Riemannian $`m`$-manifolds with bounded curvatures and diameters and $`H_{dR}^2(M_n)=0`$ which Grothendieck-Lipschitz converges to a Riemannian megafold $`(,g)`$.

Then $``$ is either a Riemannian manifold and the manifolds $`M_n`$ converge to $``$ in the Lipschitz sense, or $`H_{dR}^1()0`$.

It is in particular straightforward to show that if Ricc$`()>0`$, then $`H_{dR}^1()=0`$. Moreover, a Grothendieck-Lipschitz limit of manifolds with uniformly bounded sectional curvatures and Ricc$`\delta >0`$ is a Riemannian megafold with Ricc$`\delta >0`$.

Now we can prove Theorem B: Assume it is wrong. Then we can find a collapsing sequence of simply connected manifolds with finite $`\pi _2`$ and positive Ricci-pinching, and we obtain a megafold with $`H_{dR}^10`$ as a GL-limit. Applying the Bochner formula for $`1`$-forms on this megafold, we obtain a contradiction.

## 2. Finiteness theorems

The following result appeared as a co-product of the theorem above, and it came as a nice surprise. Let me first formulate this finiteness results from \[PT\]:

Theorem E (The $`\pi _2`$-Finiteness Theorem).  For given $`m`$, $`C`$ and $`D`$, there is only a finite number of diffeomorphism types of simply connected closed $`m`$-dimensional manifolds $`M`$ with finite second homotopy groups which admit Riemannian metrics with sectional curvature $`|K(M)|C`$ and diameter diam$`(M)D`$.

Theorem F (A “classification” of simply connected closed manifolds). For given $`m`$, $`C`$ and $`D`$, there exists a finite number of closed smooth simply connected manifolds $`E_i`$ with finite second homotopy groups such that any simply connected closed $`m`$-dimensional manifold $`M`$ admitting a Riemannian metric with sectional curvature $`|K(M)|C`$ and diameter diam$`(M)D`$ is diffeomorphic to a factor space $`M=E_i/T^{k_i}`$, where $`0k_i=b_2(M)=`$ dim $`E_im`$ and $`T^{k_i}`$ acts freely on $`E_i`$.

Here is a short account of other finiteness results which only require volume, curvature, and diameter bounds: For manifolds $`M`$ of a given fixed dimension $`m`$, the conditions

$``$$`vol(M)v>0`$, $`|K(M)|C`$ and diam$`(M)D`$ imply finiteness of diffeomorphism types (Cheeger (\[C\]) 1970); this conclusion continues to hold for $`vol(M)v>0`$, $`_M|R|^{m/2}C`$, $`|\text{Ric}_M|C^{}`$, diam$`(M)D`$ (Anderson and Cheeger (\[AC1\]) 1991);

$``$$`vol(M)v>0`$, $`K(M)C`$ diam$`(M)D`$ imply finiteness of homeomorphism types (Grove-Petersen (\[GP\]) 1988, Grove-Petersen-Wu (\[GPW\]) 1990); Perelman, (\[Pe\]) 1992) (if in addition $`m>4`$, these conditions imply finiteness of diffeomorphism types) and Lipschitz homeomorphism types (Perelman, unpublished);

$``$$`K(M)C`$ and diam$`(M)D`$ imply a uniform bound for the total Betti number (Gromov \[G1\] 1981).

The $`\pi _2`$-Finiteness Theorem requires two-sided bounds on curvature, but no lower uniform volume bound. Thus, in spirit it is somewhere between Cheeger’s Finiteness and Gromov’s Betti number Theorem.

Each of the above results has (at least) two quite different proofs, the original one and one which uses Alexandrov techniques. (For Gromov’s Betti number theorem we made such a proof recently, jointly with V. Kapovich and it turned out that one can even give an upper estimate for the total number of critical points of a Morse function on such a manifold, which due to the Morse inequality is a stronger condition.) Let me now explain roughly this second way of proving of such theorems:

I will take Cheeger’s theorem as an example: Assume it is wrong. Then there is an infinite number of non-diffeomorphic manifolds with bounded curvature, diameter and a lower bound on the volume. Then due to Gromov’s compactness theorem a subsequence of them has a limit. Then, due to the volume bound, this limit space has the same dimension, and is in fact just little worse than Riemannian; it is a manifold with a smooth structure and curvature bounded in the sense of Alexandrov. Then one only has to prove the stability result, i.e. one has to prove that starting from some big number all manifolds are diffeomorphic to the limit space. In the case of two-sided curvature bound it is really simple, and for just lower curvature bound it is already a hard theorem of Perelman, but still it works along this lines.

Now for both of these proofs it is very important to have a uniform lower positive volume bound to prevent collapsing. In fact, if one removes this bound then it is not hard to construct infinite sequence of non-diffeomorphic manifolds. This holds for two-sided bounded as well as for lower curvature bound. And if we would try to prove it the same way as before we would get a limit space of possibly smaller dimension. Therefore the stability result can not hold this way.

This partly explains why Theorem E looks a bit surprising, we add one topological condition and get real finiteness result. The proof can go along the same lines. Take a sequence of nondiffeomorphic Riemannian manifold $`(M_n,g_n)`$, by Gromov’s compactness theorem we have a limit space (for some subsequence) $`X`$. The sequence must collapse, otherwise the same arguments as before would work. Since the $`M_n`$ are simply connected, from \[CFG\] we have that collapsing takes place along some $`T^k`$-orbits of some $`T^k`$-action.

Now assume for simplicity that $`X`$ is a manifold and $`\pi _2(M_n)=0`$. Then all $`M_n`$ are diffeomorphic to $`T^k`$ bundles over $`X`$. Since the $`M_n`$ are simply connected so is $`X`$. Therefore the diffeomorphism type of $`M_n`$ depends only on the Euler class $`e_n`$ which in this case can be interpreted as the following mapping:

$$0=\pi _2(M_n)\pi _2(X)\stackrel{e_n}{}\pi _1(T^k)\pi _1(M_n)=0.$$

Therefore $`e_n`$ isan isomorphism between two groups and up to automorphisms of $`T^k`$ all possible Euler classes $`e_n`$ are the same. In particular, for large $`n`$ all $`M_n`$ are diffeomorphic.

That is not quite a proof since we had made quite strong assumptions on the way. But it turns out that the general case can be ruled out using a few already standard tricks from \[CFG\] and \[GK\], namely, by passing to the frame bundles $`FM_n`$ and by conjugating group actions.

## References


format: text

text:
# Eisenstein integrals and induction of relations

## 1 Introduction

Let $`\mathrm{X}=G/H`$ be a reductive symmetric space, with $`G`$ a real reductive group of Harish-Chandra’s class and $`H`$ an open subgroup of the group $`G^\sigma `$ of fixed points for an involution $`\sigma `$ of $`G.`$ Thus, $`G_e^\sigma HG^\sigma ,`$ with $`G_e^\alpha `$ the identity component of $`G^\sigma .`$

There exists a Cartan involution $`\theta `$ of $`G`$ that commutes with $`\sigma .`$ The associated maximal compact subgroup $`K:=G^\theta `$ is invariant under $`\sigma .`$

There are two important classes of examples of reductive symmetric spaces. The first class, with $`H`$ compact, consists of the Riemannian symmetric spaces. Here we take $`\theta =\sigma `$ and $`K=H.`$ The second consists of the real reductive groups of Harish-Chandra’s class. Given such a group $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G,`$ let $`G={}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G\times {}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G,`$ let $`\sigma :GG,`$ $`(x,y)(y,x),`$ and let $`H=G^\sigma =\mathrm{diag}({}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G).`$ Then $`\mathrm{X}`$ equals $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G,`$ equipped with the left times right action of $`G.`$ We may take $`\theta ={}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\theta \times {}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\theta ,`$ with $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}\theta `$ a Cartan involution of $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G.`$ Accordingly, $`K={}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}K\times {}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}K,`$ with $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}K`$ maximal compact in $`{}_{}{}^{\mathrm{}}G.`$

We are interested in the analysis of $`K`$-finite functions on $`\mathrm{X}.`$ For this it is convenient to fix a finite dimensional unitary representation $`(\tau ,V_\tau )`$ of $`K`$ and to consider the space

$$C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ):=[C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X})V_\tau ]^K$$
(1.1)
of smooth $`\tau `$-spherical functions on $`\mathrm{X}.`$ Alternatively, we view $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ as the space of smooth functions $`f:\mathrm{X}V_\tau `$ transforming according to the rule $`f(kx)=\tau (k)f(x),`$ for $`x\mathrm{X}`$ and $`kK.`$ The subspace of compactly supported functions in (1.1) is denoted by $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

As usual, we denote Lie groups by Roman capitals, and the associated Lie algebras by the corresponding German lowercase letters. The involutions $`\sigma `$ and $`\theta `$ of $`G`$ give rise to involutions of the Lie algebra $`𝔤,`$ which are denoted by the same symbols. Accordingly, we write

$$𝔤=𝔨𝔭=𝔥𝔮$$

for the decompositions of $`𝔤`$ into the $`+1`$ and $`1`$ eigenspaces for $`\theta `$ and $`\sigma ,`$ respectively. Let $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}`$ be a maximal abelian subspace of $`𝔭𝔮.`$ The set $`\mathrm{\Sigma }=\mathrm{\Sigma }(𝔤,𝔞_\mathrm{q})`$ of restricted roots of $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}`$ in $`𝔤`$ is a (possibly non-reduced) root system. Let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ be a positive system, $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^+`$ the associated positive chamber, $`A_\mathrm{q}^+:=\mathrm{exp}𝔞_\mathrm{q}^+,`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ the associated collection of simple roots. The Weyl group $`W`$ of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ is canonically isomorphic with $`N_K(𝔞_\mathrm{q})/Z_K(𝔞_\mathrm{q}).`$ Each subset $`F\mathrm{\Delta }`$ determines a standard parabolic subgroup $`P_F`$ of $`G`$ as follows. Let $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}`$ be the intersection of the root hyperplanes $`\mathrm{ker}\alpha ,`$ for $`\alpha F,`$ and let $`M_{1F}`$ be the centralizer of $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}`$ in $`G.`$ Moreover, let

$$𝔫_F=\underset{\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }^+F}{}𝔤_\alpha ,\text{and}N_F:=\mathrm{exp}𝔫_F.$$

Then $`P_F=M_{1F}N_F.`$ Let $`M_{1F}=M_FA_F`$ according to the Langlands decomposition of $`P_F,`$ then $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}`$ is the intersection of $`𝔞_F,`$ the Lie algebra of $`A_F,`$ with $`𝔮.`$ In particular, $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}`$ is the intersection of $`𝔞:=𝔞_{\mathrm{}}`$ with $`𝔮.`$ The group $`M_F`$ is a reductive group of Harish-Chandra’s class; accordingly, the homogeneous space $`\mathrm{X}_F:=M_F/M_FH`$ belongs to the class of symmetric spaces considered.

Since $`\sigma `$ and $`\theta `$ commute, the composition $`\sigma \theta `$ is an involution of $`G.`$ Its derivative restricts to the identity on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q};`$ therefore, the involution $`\sigma \theta `$ leaves each of the standard parabolic subgroups $`P_F`$ invariant. Let $`𝒫_\sigma `$ denote the collection of $`\sigma \theta `$-stable parabolic subgroups of $`G`$ containing $`A_\mathrm{q}.`$ Then $`W`$ acts on $`𝒫_\sigma `$ in a natural way. Each element of $`𝒫_\sigma `$ is $`W`$-conjugate to a unique standard parabolic subgroup $`P_F.`$ Finally, each minimal element of $`𝒫_\sigma `$ is $`W`$-conjugate to $`P_{\mathrm{}}.`$

In this article we will discuss relations of a certain type between (partial) normalized Eisenstein integrals for $`P_{\mathrm{}}.`$ These Eisenstein integrals, denoted $`E^{}(\lambda :),`$ are essentially sums of matrix coefficients of induced representations of the form $`\mathrm{Ind}_P_{\mathrm{}}^G(\xi \lambda 1),`$ with $`\xi `$ an irreducible finite dimensional unitary representation of $`M_{\mathrm{}}`$ and with $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ These induced representations form the minimal principal series of $`\mathrm{X}.`$ Induction of relations describes how relations of a certain type between the Eisenstein integrals $`E^{}(\lambda )`$ (or more generally between partial Eisenstein integrals) are induced by similar relations between the similar integrals for $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$

In terms of the mentioned Eisenstein integrals we define a Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}.`$ Applied to a function $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ the Fourier transform gives an element of $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}){}_{}{}^{}𝒞,`$ where $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{})`$ denotes the space of meromorphic functions on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ and where $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞={}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )`$ is a certain finite dimensional Hilbert space. It is a main result of  that the Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ is injective on $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ Accordingly, two natural problems arise.

1. To retrieve $`f`$ from its Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}f`$; this is the problem of Fourier inversion.
2. To characterize the image of $`_{\mathrm{}}(C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ))`$ in a way that generalizes the Paley-Wiener theorem of J. Arthur, .

In the answers to these related questions, given in  and , respectively, the principle of induction of relations plays a fundamental role.

## 2 Eisenstein integrals

As said, Eisenstein integrals for $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$ are essentially sums of $`K`$-finite matrix coefficients of principal series representations of the form $`\mathrm{Ind}_P_{\mathrm{}}^G(\xi \lambda 1).`$ We will now give their precise definition. To keep the exposition as light as possible, we make the following

Simplifying assumption  The manifold $`G/H`$ has precisely one open $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$-orbit.

This assumption is only made for purposes of exposition, it is not necessary for the development of the theory. In the general situation, there are finitely many open $`P_{\mathrm{}}`$-orbits, naturally parametrized by $`W/W_{KH},`$ where $`W_{KH}`$ denotes the subgroup of $`W`$ consisting of elements that are contained in the natural image of $`N_K(𝔞_\mathrm{q})H.`$ The simplifying assumption is satisfied in the Riemannian case as well as in case of the group.

We define $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞={}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )`$ by

$${}_{}{}^{}𝒞:=C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_{\mathrm{}}:\tau _{\mathrm{}}),$$

the space of smooth $`\tau _{\mathrm{}}`$-spherical functions $`\mathrm{X}_{\mathrm{}}V_\tau ;`$ here $`\tau _{\mathrm{}}:=\tau |_{KM_{\mathrm{}}}.`$ By compactness of $`\mathrm{X}_{\mathrm{}},`$ it follows that $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞`$ is finite dimensional. Moreover, $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞=L^2(\mathrm{X}_{\mathrm{}}:\tau _{\mathrm{}}).`$

Given $`F\mathrm{\Delta }`$ we define $`\rho _F𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}`$ by $`\rho _F=\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{tr}(\mathrm{ad}()|_{𝔫_F}).`$ In particular, we put $`\rho =\rho _{\mathrm{}}.`$ Let $`\psi {}_{}{}^{}𝒞`$ and $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ We define the function $`\psi _\lambda :GV_\tau `$ by

$`\psi _\lambda (x)`$ $`=`$ $`a^{\lambda +\rho }\psi (m)\text{for}xmanH,(m,a,n)M_{\mathrm{}}\times A_{\mathrm{}}\times N_{\mathrm{}},`$
$`=`$ $`0\text{for}xGP_{\mathrm{}}H.`$
We equip $`𝔤`$ with a non-degenerate $`\mathrm{Ad}(G)`$-invariant bilinear form $`B`$ that is negative definite on $`𝔨`$ and positive definite on $`𝔭`$ and for which $`𝔥`$ and $`𝔮`$ are orthogonal. Then $`B`$ induces a positive definite inner product $`,`$ on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ which is extended to a complex bilinear form on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ For $`R,`$ we define

$$𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},R):=\{\nu 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}\mathrm{Re}\nu ,\alpha <R,\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }^+\}.$$
(2.1)
For $`\lambda \rho +𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},0)`$ we define the Eisenstein integral $`E(\psi :\lambda :),`$ also denoted $`E(P_{\mathrm{}}:\psi :\lambda :),`$ by

$$E(\psi :\lambda :x)=_K\tau (k)\psi _\lambda (k^1x)dk,$$
(2.2)
for $`x\mathrm{X}.`$ The following result is due to , Prop. 10.3.

###### Proposition 2.1.

The integral (2.2) is absolutely convergent for $`\lambda \rho +𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},0)`$ and defines a holomorphic function of $`\lambda `$ with values in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ Moreover, it extends to a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with values in the space $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ The singular locus of this meromorphic extension is a locally finite union of hyperplanes of the form $`\lambda _0+(\alpha ^{})_{},`$ with $`\lambda _0𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }.`$

For generic $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with $`\mathrm{Re}\lambda \rho ,\alpha >0`$ for all $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }^+`$ we have that

$$\underset{\stackrel{a\mathrm{}}{aA_\mathrm{q}^+}}{lim}a^{\lambda +\rho }E(\psi :\lambda :a)=[C(1:\lambda )\psi ](e)$$

with $`C(1:\lambda )=C_{P_{\mathrm{}}|P_{\mathrm{}}}(1:\lambda )\mathrm{End}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞)`$ a meromorphic function of $`\lambda `$ that extends meromorphically to all of $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{};`$ see , Sect. 14. Since the function $`\lambda detC(1:\lambda )`$ is not identically zero, we may define the normalized Eisenstein integral

$$E^{}(\psi :\lambda :x):=E(C(1:\lambda )^1\psi :\lambda :x),$$

see , Sect. 16, and , Sect. 5, for details. The definition generalizes that of Harish-Chandra, , p. 135, in the case of the group.

The normalized Eisenstein integral $`E^{}(\psi :\lambda )`$ is a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with values in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ Its asymptotic behavior is described by the following theorem. Given $`aA_\mathrm{q}`$ we write $`z(a)`$ for the point in $`^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with components $`z(a)_\alpha =a^\alpha ,`$ for $`\alpha \mathrm{\Delta }.`$ Let $`D`$ denote the complex unit disc. Then $`z`$ maps $`A_\mathrm{q}^+`$ into $`D^\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ If $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ is a complex analytic manifold, then by $`𝒪(\mathrm{\Omega })`$ we denote the algebra of holomorphic functions on $`\mathrm{\Omega }.`$ Let $`V_\tau ^{\mathrm{}}`$ denote the space of $`M_{\mathrm{}}KH`$-fixed elements in $`V_\tau .`$

###### Proposition 2.2.

There exists a unique meromorphic function $`\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda `$ with values in $`𝒪(D^\mathrm{\Delta })\mathrm{End}(V_\tau ^{\mathrm{}})`$ and, for $`sW,`$ unique meromorphic $`\mathrm{End}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞)`$-valued meromorphic functions $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}\lambda C^{}(s:\lambda )`$ such that, for all $`\psi {}_{}{}^{}𝒞,`$

$$E^{}(\psi :\lambda :a)=\underset{sW}{}a^{s\lambda \rho }\mathrm{\Phi }_{s\lambda }(z(a))[C^{}(s:\lambda )\psi ](e),$$
(2.3)
for $`aA_\mathrm{q}^+,`$ as a meromorphic identity in the variable $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ The meromorphic functions $`\lambda \mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda `$ and $`\lambda C^{}(s:\lambda ),`$ for $`sW,`$ all have a singular locus that is a locally finite union of hyperplanes of the form $`\lambda _0+(\alpha ^{})_{},`$ with $`\lambda _0𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }.`$

For a proof of this result, we refer the reader to , Sect. 11, and , Sect. 14. From the above result it follows in particular that $`\lambda E^{}(\psi :\lambda )`$ is a meromorphic $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$-valued function with singularities along hyperplanes of the form $`\lambda _0+(\alpha ^{})_{},`$ with $`\lambda _0𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }.`$

We note that it follows from the definition of the normalized Eisenstein integral that

$$C^{}(1:\lambda )=\mathrm{I}_{}_{}{}^{}𝒞,$$

as a meromorphic identity in the variable $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ Besides in the expansion (2.3) the normalized $`c`$-functions $`C^{}(s:)`$ also appear in the following functional equation for the Eisenstein integral

$$E^{}(s\lambda :x)C^{}(s:\lambda )=E^{}(\lambda :x),$$
(2.4)
for every $`x\mathrm{X},`$ as an identity of meromorphic functions in the variable $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$

The following result is crucial for the further development of the theory.

###### Theorem 2.3.

(Maass-Selberg relations)  For each $`sW,`$

$$C^{}(s:\overline{\lambda })^{}C^{}(s:\lambda )=\mathrm{I}_{}_{}{}^{}𝒞,$$

as a meromorphic identity in the variable $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$

In the case of the group, the terminology Maass-Selberg relations was introduced by Harish-Chandra, because of striking analogies with the theory of automorphic forms. In the mentioned setting of the group Harish-Chandra derived the relations for the $`c`$-functions associated with arbitrary parabolic subgroups, see . In the present setting the above result is due to , Thm. 16.3, see also . The result has been generalized to $`c`$-functions associated with arbitrary $`\sigma \theta `$-stable parabolic subgroups by P. Delorme , see also . It plays a crucial role in Delorme’s proof of the Plancherel formula, see , as well in the proof of the Plancherel formula by myself and Schlichtkrull, see  and . Recently the last mentioned authors have been able to obtain the Maass-Selberg relations for arbitrary parabolic subgroups from those for the minimal one, see . The proof in the latter paper is thus independent from the one by Delorme.

From the Maass-Selberg relations, combined with the information that the singular locus of the meromorphic $`c`$-functions is a locally finite union of translates of root hyperplanes, the following result is an easy consequence.

###### Corollary 2.4.

Let $`sW.`$ The normalized $`c`$-function $`C^{}(s:)`$ is regular on $`i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ Moreover, for $`\lambda i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},`$ the endomorphism $`C^{}(s:\lambda )\mathrm{End}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞)`$ is unitary.

From this result and an asymptotic analysis involving induction with respect to the split rank of $`\mathrm{X},`$ i.e., $`dim𝔞_\mathrm{q},`$ it can be shown that the normalized Eisenstein integrals are regular for imaginary values of $`\lambda .`$ This is the main motivation for their definition.

###### Theorem 2.5.

(Regularity theorem)  Let $`\psi {}_{}{}^{}𝒞.`$ The Eisenstein integral $`E^{}(\psi :\lambda )`$ is meromorphic in $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with a singular locus disjoint from $`i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$

The above result is due to , p. 537, Thm. 2. A different proof of the regularity theorem has been given by . The latter approach was generalized to arbitrary $`\sigma \theta `$-stable parabolic subgroups by J. Carmona and P. Delorme, yielding the regularity theorem for Eisenstein integrals as a consequence of the Maass-Selberg relations in that setting; see , Thm. 3 (i).

## 3 Fourier inversion

The regularity theorem allows us to define a Fourier transform that is regular for imaginary values of the spectral parameter $`\lambda .`$ For its definition it is convenient to define $`E^{}(\lambda :x)\mathrm{Hom}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞,V_\tau )`$ by

$$E^{}(\lambda :x)\psi :=E^{}(\psi :\lambda :x).$$

In addition, we define the dualized Eisenstein integral by conjugation,

$$E^{}(\lambda :x):=E^{}(\overline{\lambda }:x)^{}\mathrm{Hom}(V_\tau ,{}_{}{}^{}𝒞),$$
(3.1)
for $`x\mathrm{X},`$ as a meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ We now define the (most-continuous) Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}f`$ of a function $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ to be the meromorphic function in $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}){}_{}{}^{}𝒞`$ given by

$$_{\mathrm{}}f(\lambda ):=_\mathrm{X}E^{}(\lambda :x)f(x)dx,(\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}).$$
(3.2)
It follows from (2.4) combined with the definition of $`E^{}(\lambda :x)`$ and the Maass-Selberg relations that, for each $`sW,`$

$$_{\mathrm{}}f(s\lambda )=C^{}(s:\lambda )_{\mathrm{}}f(\lambda ).$$
(3.3)
It follows from the regularity theorem that the Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}f`$ is a regular function on $`i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ The following theorem is one of the main results of , see loc. cit., Thm. 15.1.

###### Theorem 3.1.

The Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ is injective on $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

There exists a notion of Schwartz space $`𝒞(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ which is the proper generalization of Harish-Chandra’s Schwartz space for the group, see , Sect. 17. It has the property that $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ extends to a continuous linear map from $`𝒞(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ into the Euclidean Schwartz space $`𝒮(i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}){}_{}{}^{}𝒞,`$ see , p. 573, Cor. 4. We emphasize that the extended Fourier transform is in general not injective on the Schwartz space. More precisely, there is a continuous linear wave packet transform $`𝒥_{\mathrm{}}:𝒮(i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}){}_{}{}^{}𝒞𝒞(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ defined by the formula

$$𝒥_{\mathrm{}}\phi (x)=_{i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}}E^{}(\lambda :x)\phi (\lambda )d\lambda ,(x\mathrm{X}),$$
(3.4)
for $`\phi 𝒮(i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}){}_{}{}^{}𝒞,`$ see , Thm. 1. Here $`d\lambda `$ denotes Lebesgue measure on $`i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},`$ suitably normalized. Furthermore, in , Sect. 14, it is shown that there exists an invariant differential operator $`D`$ on $`\mathrm{X},`$ depending on $`\tau ,`$ whose principal symbol is sufficiently generic, such that

$$D𝒥_{\mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{}}=D$$
(3.5)
on the Schwartz space $`𝒞(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ The idea is that $`D`$ annihilates the contributions of the discrete and intermediate series to the Plancherel decomposition of $`L^2(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ Accordingly, $`𝒥_{\mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{}}`$ corresponds to the projection onto the most continuous part of this decomposition at the $`K`$-type $`\tau .`$

By an application of Holmgren’s uniqueness theorem the above mentioned genericity of the principal symbol of the differential operator $`D`$ implies that it is injective on $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ see , Thm. 2. The injectivity of $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ asserted in Theorem 3.1 follows from the injectivity of $`D`$ on $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ combined with (3.5).

In the case of the group Theorem 3.1 is a straightforward consequence of the subrepresentation theorem of . For indeed, if $`f`$ belongs to the kernel of $`_{\mathrm{}},`$ then by the subrepresentation theorem, $`f`$ is annihilated when integrated against any $`K`$-finite matrix coefficient. This is not a valid argument in the general setting. A priori there might be a $`K`$-finite right $`H`$-fixed generalized matrix coefficient that cannot be produced from the Eisenstein integrals of the minimal principal series.

We shall now describe the solution to the problem of Fourier inversion mentioned in the introduction. For this we need the concept of partial Eisenstein integral. It follows from the simplifying assumption made in the beginning of Section 2 that

$$\mathrm{X}_+:=KA_\mathrm{q}^+H.$$
(3.6)
is an open dense subset of $`\mathrm{X}.`$ In the situation without the simplifying assumption the definition of $`\mathrm{X}_+`$ should be adapted by replacing the set on the right-hand side of (3.6) by a finite disjoint union of open sets of the form $`KA_\mathrm{q}^+vH,`$ with $`v`$ running through a set $`𝒲N_K(𝔞_\mathrm{q})`$ of representatives for $`W/W_{KH}.`$

In the obvious manner we define $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau )`$ as the space of $`\tau `$-spherical smooth functions $`\mathrm{X}_+V_\tau .`$ Via restriction, the space (1.1) may naturally be identified with the subspace of functions in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau )`$ that extend smoothly to the full space $`\mathrm{X}.`$

For $`sW`$ and $`\psi {}_{}{}^{}𝒞`$ we define the partial Eisenstein integral $`E_{+,s}(\lambda :)\psi `$ to be the meromorphic function of $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with values in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau ),`$ given by

$$E_{+,s}(\lambda :kaH)\psi =a^{s\lambda \rho }\tau (k)\mathrm{\Phi }_{s\lambda }(a)[C^{}(s:\lambda )\psi ](e),(aA_\mathrm{q}^+,kK),$$

for generic $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{};`$ here $`\mathrm{\Phi }_\lambda `$ is as in Proposition 2.2. We agree to write $`E_+=E_{+,1}.`$ Then, clearly,

$$E_{+,s}(\lambda :x)\psi =E_+(s\lambda :x)C^{}(s:\lambda )\psi ,(\psi {}_{}{}^{}𝒞),$$

for $`sW,`$ $`x\mathrm{X}_+`$ and generic $`\lambda 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ The following result describes the singular set of the functions involved in the formulation of the inversion theorem. We use the notation (2.1).

###### Proposition 3.2.

The functions $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda :)`$ and $`\lambda E_+(\lambda :)`$ are meromorphic functions on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with a singular set consisting of a locally finite union of hyperplanes of the form $`\lambda _0+(\alpha ^{})_{},`$ with $`\lambda _0𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ (real) and with $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ For every $`R`$ the set $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P,R)`$ meets only finitely many of these hyperplanes.

A proof of this proposition can be found in , Sect. 3. Let $``$ be the collection of singular hyperplanes of $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda :).`$ Then in view of (3.2) the Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}f`$ is meromorphic on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ with singular locus contained in $`,`$ for every $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

The solution to the inversion problem is provided by the following theorem. A sketch of proof will be given in Section 5.

###### Theorem 3.3.

(Fourier inversion theorem)  There exists a constant $`R<0`$ such that the functions $`\lambda E_+(\lambda :)`$ and $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda :)`$ are holomorphic in the region $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},R).`$ Moreover, let $`\eta 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},R).`$ Then, for every $`fC^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$

$$f(x)=|W|_{\eta +i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}}E_+(\lambda :x)_{\mathrm{}}f(\lambda )d\lambda ,\mathrm{for}x\mathrm{X}_+.$$
(3.7)
The integral converges absolutely, with local uniformity in $`x,`$ since the partial Eisenstein integral grows at most of order $`(1+\lambda )^N`$ along $`\eta +i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},`$ for some $`N,`$ whereas the Fourier transform decreases faster than $`C_N(1+\lambda )^N,`$ for any $`N.`$ Moreover, by Cauchy’s integral theorem, the integral on the right-hand side of (3.7) is independent of $`\eta `$ in the mentioned region. Details can be found in . The proof of Theorem 3.3, given in the same paper, involves shifting $`\eta `$ to $`0.`$ If no singularities would be encountered during the shift, then in view of (3.3) the integral would become equal to $`𝒥_{\mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{}}f.`$ However, in general singularities are encountered, due to the presence of representations from the discrete and intermediate series for $`\mathrm{X}.`$ This results in residues that can be handled by a calculus that we developed in . These residues can be encoded in terms of the concept of Laurent functional, introduced in the next section. Their contribution to the Fourier inversion can be analyzed by means of the principle of induction of relations, also discussed in the next section.

## 4 Laurent functionals and induction of relations

For the formulation of the principle of induction of relations it is convenient to introduce the following concept of Laurent functional.

Let $`V`$ be a finite dimensional real linear space and let $`X`$ be a finite subset of $`V^{}\{0\}.`$ Given a point $`aV_{}`$ we define the polynomial function $`\pi _a`$ on $`V_{}`$ by

$$\pi _a:=\underset{\xi X}{}(\xi \xi (a)).$$

We denote the ring of germs of meromorphic functions at $`a`$ by $`(V_{},a),`$ and the subring of germs of holomorphic functions by $`𝒪_a.`$ In addition, we define the subring

$$(V_{},a,X):=_N\pi _a^N𝒪_a.$$

We now define an $`X`$-Laurent functional at $`aV_{}`$ to be any linear functional $`(V_{},a,X)^{}`$ such that for every $`N`$ there exists a $`u_N`$ in $`S(V),`$ the symmetric algebra of $`V_{},`$ such that

$$=\mathrm{ev}_au_N\pi _a^N\mathrm{on}\pi _a^N𝒪_a.$$
(4.1)
Here $`S(V)`$ is identified with the algebra of translation invariant holomorphic differential operators on $`V_{}`$ and $`\mathrm{ev}_a`$ denotes evaluation of a function at the point $`a.`$ Finally, the space of all Laurent functionals on $`V_{},`$ relative to $`X,`$ is defined by

$$(V_{},X)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}:=\underset{aV_{}}{}(V_{},X,a)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}.$$
(4.2)
Given a Laurent functional $``$ from the space on the left-hand side of (4.2), the finite set of $`aV_{}`$ for which the component $`_a`$ is non-zero, is called the support of $``$ and denoted by $`\mathrm{supp}.`$ Accordingly,

$$=\underset{a\mathrm{supp}}{}_a.$$

Let now $`(V_{},X)`$ be the space of meromorphic functions $`\phi `$ on $`V_{}`$ with the property that the germ $`\phi _a`$ belongs to $`(V_{},a,X),`$ for every $`aV_{}.`$ Then the natural bilinear map $`(,\phi )\phi ,`$ $`(V_{},X)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}\times (V_{},X),`$ defined by

$$\phi =\underset{a\mathrm{supp}}{}_a\phi _a,$$
(4.3)
induces a linear embedding of $`(V_{},X)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}`$ into the dual space $`(V_{},X)^{}.`$ More details concerning Laurent functionals can be found in , Sect. 10.

We end this section with the formulation of the principle of induction of relations for the partial Eisenstein integrals $`E_{+,s}(\lambda :).`$ In the proof of the Paley-Wiener theorem, the use of this principle replaces the use in  of a lifting principle due to W. Casselman, a proof of which has not appeared in the literature. Our induction principle does not seem to imply Casselman’s lifting principle for the group. However, it does imply a version of the lifting principle for normalized Eisenstein integrals, see , Thm. 16.10.

Let $`F\mathrm{\Delta }`$ be a subset of simple roots, let $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_F:=\mathrm{\Sigma }F`$ be the associated subsystem of $`\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ and $`W_F`$ its Weyl group. Then $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_F`$ and $`W_F`$ are the analogues of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`W`$ for the symmetric space $`\mathrm{X}_F=M_F/M_FH.`$ Let $`W^FW`$ be the set of minimal length coset representatives for $`W/W_F.`$ Then the multiplication map of $`W`$ induces a bijection $`W^F\times W_FW.`$

The group $`W_F`$ equals the centralizer of $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}`$ in $`W.`$ The orthocomplement $`{}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}`$ of $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}`$ in $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}`$ is the analogue of $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}`$ for the space $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$ Let $`K_F=KM_F`$ and $`\tau _F:=\tau |_{K_F}.`$ For $`tW_F`$ we denote by

$$E_{+,t}(\mathrm{X}_F:\mu :m)\mathrm{Hom}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau ),V_\tau ),(\mu {}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},m\mathrm{X}_F),$$

the analogue for the pair $`\mathrm{X}_F,\tau _F`$ of the partial Eisenstein integral $`E_{+,t}(\mathrm{X}:\lambda :x).`$ Here we note that the space $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )`$ for $`\mathrm{X}`$ coincides with the similar space $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau _F)`$ for $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$

###### Theorem 4.1.

(Induction of relations)  Let, for each $`tW_F,`$ a Laurent functional $`_t({}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma }_F)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}𝒞`$ be given and assume that

$$\underset{tW_F}{}_t[E_{+,t}(\mathrm{X}_F::m)]=0,(m\mathrm{X}_{F+}).$$
(4.4)
Then for each $`sW^F`$ the following meromorphic identity in the variable $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}`$ is valid,

$$\underset{tW_F}{}_t[E_{+,st}(\mathrm{X}:+\nu :x)]=0,(x\mathrm{X}_+).$$
(4.5)
Conversely, if (4.5) holds for a fixed $`sW^F`$ and all $`\nu `$ in a non-empty open subset of $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ then (4.4) holds.

This result is proved in our paper , Thm. 16.1. The proof relies on a more general vanishing theorem, see , Thm. 12.10. This vanishing theorem asserts that a suitably restricted meromorphic family $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}\nu f_\nu C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau )`$ of eigenfunctions for $`𝔻(\mathrm{X})`$ is completely determined by the coefficient of $`a^{\nu \rho _F}`$ in its asymptotic expansion towards infinity along $`A_{F\mathrm{q}}^+,`$ the positive chamber determined by $`P_F.`$ In particular, if the mentioned coefficient is zero, then $`f_\nu =0`$ for all $`\nu ;`$ whence the name vanishing theorem. Part of the mentioned restriction on families in the vanishing theorem is a so called asymptotic globality condition. It requires that certain asymptotic coefficients in the expansions of $`f_\nu `$ along certain codimension one walls should have smooth behavior as functions in the variables transversal to these walls. The precise condition is given in , Def. 9.5.

Let $`f_\nu ^s,`$ for $`sW^F,`$ denote the expression on the left-hand side of (4.5). Then the sum $`f_\nu =_{sW^F}f_\nu ^s`$ defines a family for which the vanishing theorem holds; the summation over $`W^F`$ is needed for the family to satisfy the asymptotic globality condition. The expression on the left-hand side of (4.4) is the coefficient of $`a^{\nu \rho _F}`$ of the asymptotic expansion of $`f_\nu `$ along $`A_{F\mathrm{q}}^+.`$ Its vanishing implies that $`f=0.`$ From the fact that the sets of the asymptotic exponents of $`f_\nu ^s`$ along $`A_{F\mathrm{q}}^+`$ are mutually disjoint for distinct $`sW^F`$ and generic $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ it follows that each individual function $`f_\nu ^s`$ vanishes. This implies the validity of (4.5).

For the proof of the converse statement it is first shown that the vanishing of an individual term $`f_\nu ^s`$ implies that of $`f_\nu .`$ Here the condition of asymptotic globality once more plays an essential role. The validity of (4.4) then follows by taking the coefficient of $`a^{\nu \rho _F}`$ in the asymptotic expansion along $`A_{F\mathrm{q}}^+.`$

## 5 Induction of relations and the inversion formula

In this section we shall discuss the role of induction of relations, as formulated in Theorem 4.1, in the proof of the inversion formula. Details can be found in .

Sketch of proof of Theorem 3.3  Let us denote the integral on the right-hand side of (3.7) by $`𝒯_\eta (_{\mathrm{}}f)(x).`$ The main difficulty in the proof is to show that the function $`𝒯_\eta _{\mathrm{}}fC^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau )`$ extends smoothly from $`\mathrm{X}_+`$ to $`\mathrm{X}.`$ By applying a Paley-Wiener shift argument, with $`\eta \mathrm{}`$ in $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^+,`$ it then follows that $`𝒯_\eta _{\mathrm{}}fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ There exists a differential operator $`D`$ as in (3.5), such that $`D𝒯_\eta _{\mathrm{}}f`$ is free of singularities during a shift of the integral with $`\eta `$ moving to $`0.`$ In view of Cauchy’s theorem this leads to $`D𝒯_\eta _{\mathrm{}}f=D𝒯_0_{\mathrm{}}f=D𝒥_{\mathrm{}}_{\mathrm{}}f=Df.`$ From the injectivity of $`D`$ on $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ we then obtain (3.7).

The most difficult part of the proof concerns the smooth extension of $`𝒯_\eta _{\mathrm{}}f.`$ This involves a shift of integration applied to $`𝒯_\eta (_{\mathrm{}}f)(x)`$ with $`\eta `$ moving to $`0.`$ According to the residue calculus developed in , the process of picking up residues is governed by any choice of a so-called residue weight on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }.`$ We fix such a weight, which is by definition a map $`t:𝒫_\sigma [0,1]`$ with the property that, for every $`Q𝒫_\sigma ,`$

$$\underset{\stackrel{P𝒫_\sigma }{𝔞_{P\mathrm{q}}=𝔞_{Q\mathrm{q}}}}{}t(P)=1.$$

Moreover, we choose $`t`$ to be $`W`$-invariant and even. The latter condition means that $`t(P)=t(\overline{P})`$ for all $`P𝒫_\sigma .`$ The encountered residues can be encoded by means of a finite set of Laurent functionals $`_F^t({}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma }_F)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{},`$ for $`F\mathrm{\Delta },`$ depending only on the root system $`\mathrm{\Sigma },`$ the choice of the residue weight $`t`$ and the locally finite union of hyperplanes which forms the union of the singular sets of $`\lambda E_+(\lambda :)`$ and $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda :).`$

The shift results in the formula

$`𝒯_\eta (_{\mathrm{}}f)(x)=`$
$`=`$ $`|W|{\displaystyle \underset{F\mathrm{\Delta }}{}}t(P_F){\displaystyle _{\epsilon _F+i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}}}_F^t\left({\displaystyle \underset{sW^F}{}}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)_{\mathrm{}}f(\nu +)\right)d\mu _F(\nu ).`$
where $`\epsilon _F`$ is any choice of elements sufficiently close to zero in $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^+,`$ the positive chamber associated with $`P_F.`$ Moreover, $`d\mu _F`$ is the translate by $`\epsilon _F`$ of suitably normalized Lebesgue measure on $`i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}.`$

From the fact that the singular set of the integrand is real in the sense of Proposition 3.2, it follows that the Laurent functionals $`_F^t`$ are real in the following sense. Their support is a set of real points $`a{}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}`$ and at each such point the functional is defined by a string $`\{u_N\}S({}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{})`$ as in (4.1) with $`u_N`$ real for all $`N.`$

We now define the kernel functions

$$K_F(\nu :x:y):=_F^t\left(\underset{sW^F}{}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)E^{}(\nu +:y)\right).$$
(5.2)
Then by using the definition (3.2) of $`_{\mathrm{}},`$ we may rewrite the equation (5) as

$$𝒯_\eta (_{\mathrm{}}f)(x)=|W|\underset{F\mathrm{\Delta }}{}t(P_F)_{\epsilon _F+i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}}\left[_XK_F^t(\nu :x:y)f(y)dy\right]d\mu _F(\nu ).$$
(5.3)
For fixed generic $`\nu ,`$ the kernel functions $`K_F^t(\nu ::)C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+\times \mathrm{X}:\tau \tau ^{})`$ are spherical and $`𝔻(\mathrm{X})`$-finite in both variables. It follows that they belong to a tensor product of the form $`^1E_\nu ^2E_\nu ,`$ with $`{}_{}{}^{1}E_{\nu }^{}`$ and $`{}_{}{}^{2}E_{\nu }^{}`$ finite dimensional subspaces of $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau )`$ and $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_+:\tau ^{}),`$ respectively. Let $`{}_{}{}^{j}E_{\nu }^{}`$ be the subspace of functions in $`{}_{}{}^{j}E_{\nu }^{}`$ extending smoothly to $`\mathrm{X},`$ for $`j=1,2.`$ Then by the symmetry formulated in Proposition 5.1 below it follows that the kernel $`K_F^t(\nu ::)`$ belongs to $`{}_{}{}^{1}E_{\nu }^{}^2E_\nu ^{}^1E_\nu ^{}^2E_\nu ={}_{}{}^{1}E_{\nu }^{}^2E_\nu ^{}.`$ This shows that the kernel functions extend smoothly to $`\mathrm{X}\times \mathrm{X}`$ and finishes the proof. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 5.1.

Let $`x,y\mathrm{X}_+.`$ Then

$$K_F^t(\nu :x:y)=K_F^t(\overline{\nu }:y:x)^{}$$
(5.4)
as a meromorphic identity in the variable $`\nu 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$

Before giving a sketch of the proof we observe that, due to the fact that $`_F^t`$ is scalar and real in the sense mentioned in the proof of Theorem 3.3 above, the adjoint of the kernel is given by

$$K_F^t(\overline{\nu }:y:x)^{}=_F^t\left(\underset{sW^F}{}E^{}(\nu :x)E_{+,s}^{}(\nu :y)\right),$$
(5.5)
where the dual partial Eisenstein integrals are defined by

$$E_{+,s}^{}(\lambda :x):=E_{+,s}(\overline{\lambda }:x)^{}.$$

Sketch of proof of Proposition 5.1  The final part of the proof of Theorem 3.3 can be modified in such a way that (5.4) is only needed for $`F\mathrm{\Delta }`$ with $`F\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ The validity of (5.4) for $`F=\mathrm{\Delta }`$ is derived in the course of the modified argument. For details, we refer the reader to , Sect. 9.

Thus, we may restrict ourselves to proving (5.4) for $`F\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ This in turn is achieved by using induction of relations in order to reduce to the lower dimensional space $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$ More precisely, the residue weight $`t`$ naturally induces a residue weight $`{}_{}{}^{}t`$ on $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_F,`$ the analogue of $`\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ for $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$ The set $`F`$ is a simple system for $`\mathrm{\Sigma }_F.`$ Let $`K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F::)`$ be the analogue of $`K_\mathrm{\Delta }^t`$ for the space $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$ Then by induction, $`K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F::)`$ is a smooth function on $`\mathrm{X}_F\times \mathrm{X}_F`$ and satisfies the symmetry condition

$$K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F:m:m^{})=K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F:m^{}:m)^{},$$
(5.6)
for $`m,m^{}\mathrm{X}_F.`$ Here we have suppressed the analogue of the parameter $`\nu ,`$ which is zero dimensional in the present setting.

The residue calculus behaves well with respect to induction. In particular, let $`_F^{}_{}{}^{}t({}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma }_F)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}`$ be the analogue of $`_\mathrm{\Delta }^t`$ for the data $`\mathrm{X}_F,\mathrm{\Sigma }_F,F,{}_{}{}^{}t.`$ Then $`_F^{}_{}{}^{}t=_F^t;`$ for obvious reasons, we have called this result transivity of residues, see , Sect. 3.6. Using (5.2) and (5.5) for $`K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F),`$ taking into account that $`(W_F)^F=\{1\},`$ we thus see that (5.6) is equivalent to

$`_F^t\left(E_+(\mathrm{X}_F::m)E^{}(\mathrm{X}_F::m^{})\right)`$ (5.7)
$`=`$ $`_F^t\left(E^{}(\mathrm{X}_F::m)E_+^{}(\mathrm{X}_F::m^{})\right),`$
where $`E_+^{}:=E_{+,1}^{}.`$ In view of (5.2) and (5.5), the relation (5.4) can now be derived from (5.7), by applying induction of relations, first with respect to the variable $`x`$ and then a second time with respect to the variable $`y.`$ For details we refer the reader to , Sect. 8. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6 Arthur-Campoli relations

In this section we describe the so called Arthur-Campoli relations, needed for the formulation of the Paley-Wiener theorem in the next section. We start with the definition of an Arthur-Campoli functional.

###### Definition 6.1.

An Arthur-Campoli functional for $`\mathrm{X},\tau `$ is a Laurent functional $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma })_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}{}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )`$ with the property that

$$E^{}(:x)=0\text{for all}x\mathrm{X}.$$

The linear space of such functionals is denoted by $`\mathrm{AC}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

From the principle of induction of relations as formulated in Theorem 4.1, the following result follows in a straightforward manner. See  for details.

###### Lemma 6.2.

(Induction of AC relations)  Let $`F\mathrm{\Delta }`$ and $`\mathrm{AC}(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F).`$ Then for generic $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ the Laurent functional

$$_\nu :\phi [\phi (\nu +)]$$

belongs to $`\mathrm{AC}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

In this result, ‘generic’ can be made more precise as follows. There exists a locally finite collection $`_S`$ of hyperplanes in $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ specified explicitly in terms of the support $`S`$ of $`,`$ such that the statement is valid for $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}_S.`$

## 7 The Paley-Wiener theorem

In this section we shall formulate the Paley-Wiener theorem, and indicate how induction of relations enters its proof. Our first objective is to define a space of Paley-Wiener functions. The first step is to define a suitable space of meromorphic functions that takes the singularities of the Fourier transform into account.

Let $`=(X,\tau )`$ be the smallest collection of hyperplanes of the form $`\lambda _0+(\alpha ^{})_{},`$ with $`\lambda _0𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ and $`\alpha \mathrm{\Sigma },`$ such that the $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X})\mathrm{Hom}(V_\tau ,{}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau ))`$-valued meromorphic function $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda :)`$ is regular on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$ By the requirement of minimality, the collection $``$ has the properties of Proposition 3.2.

If $`H`$ we select $`\alpha _H\mathrm{\Sigma }`$ and $`s_H`$ such that $`H`$ is given by the equation $`\lambda ,\alpha _H=s_H.`$ Let $`d(H)`$ denote the order of the singularity of $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda )`$ along $`H.`$ Thus, $`d(H)`$ is the smallest natural number for which $`\lambda (\lambda ,\alpha _Hs_H)^{d(H)}E^{}(\lambda )`$ is regular at the points of $`H`$ that are not contained in any hyperplane from $`\{H\}.`$

If $`\omega 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ is a bounded subset, then in view of the mentioned properties of $``$ we may define a polynomial function $`\pi _\omega :𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ by

$$\pi _\omega (\lambda )=\underset{H,H\omega \mathrm{}}{}(\lambda ,\alpha _Hs_H)^{d(H)}.$$

We define $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d)`$ to be the space of meromorphic functions $`\phi :𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ such that, for every bounded open set $`\omega 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},`$ the function $`\pi _\omega \phi `$ is regular on $`\omega .`$ Taking into account that the $`\alpha _H`$ and $`s_H`$ are real for $`H,`$ we readily see that for each function $`\phi (𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d)`$ and every bounded open subset $`\omega 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},`$ the function $`\pi _\omega \phi `$ is in fact regular on $`\omega +i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}.`$

In view of the definitions just given, the function $`\lambda E^{}(\lambda :x)`$ belongs to the space $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d)\mathrm{Hom}(V_\tau ,{}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )),`$ for every $`x\mathrm{X}.`$ Moreover, $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ maps $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ into $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d){}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau ).`$

It follows from Proposition 3.2 that the set $`_0`$ of $`H`$ having empty intersection with $`\mathrm{cl}𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},0)`$ is finite. We define the polynomial function $`\pi :𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ by

$$\pi (\lambda )=\underset{H_0}{}(\lambda ,\alpha _Hs_H)^{d(H)}.$$

Then there exists a constant $`\epsilon >0`$ such that $`\lambda \pi (\lambda )E^{}(\lambda )`$ is regular on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},\epsilon ).`$ It follows that for every $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ the $`{}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )`$-valued meromorphic function $`\lambda \pi (\lambda )_{\mathrm{}}f(\lambda )`$ is regular on $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},\epsilon ).`$

We now define $`𝒫(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d)`$ as the subspace of $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d)`$ consisting of functions $`\phi `$ which satisfy the following condition of decay in the imaginary directions

$$\underset{\lambda \omega +i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}}{sup}(1+|\lambda |)^n|\pi _\omega (\lambda )\phi (\lambda )|<\mathrm{},$$

for every compact set $`\omega 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ and all $`n.`$ Equipped with the suggested seminorms, the space $`𝒫(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d)`$ is a Fréchet space. Moreover, via (4.3) the space of Laurent functionals $`(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma })_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}`$ naturally embeds into the continuous linear dual of $`𝒫(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d).`$ It follows that the following subspace of $`𝒫(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d){}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )`$ is closed, hence Fréchet,

$$𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ):=\{\phi 𝒫(𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{},,d){}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau )\phi =0,\mathrm{AC}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )\}.$$

Finally, we define the Paley-Wiener space by incorporating a condition of exponential growth along a closed cone.

###### Definition 7.1.

The Paley-Wiener space $`\mathrm{PW}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ is defined to be the space of functions $`\phi 𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ for which there exists a constant $`M>0`$ such that, for all $`n,`$

$$\underset{\lambda \mathrm{cl}𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}(P_{\mathrm{}},0)}{sup}(1+|\lambda |)^ne^{M|\mathrm{Re}\lambda |}\pi (\lambda )\phi (\lambda )<\mathrm{}.$$

The subspace of functions satisfying this estimate with a fixed $`M>0`$ and all $`n`$ is denoted by $`\mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

By using Euclidean Fourier analysis, it can be shown that $`\mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ is a closed subspace of $`𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ for each $`M>0,`$ hence a Fréchet space for the restriction topology. For details we refer the reader to . Accordingly, for $`M<M^{}`$ we have a continuous linear embedding of $`\mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ onto a closed subspace of $`\mathrm{PW}_M^{}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ The space $`\mathrm{PW}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ being the union of the spaces $`\mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ is equipped with the associated direct limit topology. Thus, it becomes a strict LF-space.

For $`M>0`$ we denote by $`B_M`$ the closed ball in $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}`$ of center $`0`$ and radius $`M.`$ Moreover, we denote by $`C_M^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ the space of functions in $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ with compact support contained in $`K\mathrm{exp}B_MH.`$

###### Theorem 7.2.

(Paley-Wiener theorem)  The Fourier transform $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ is a topological linear isomorphism from $`C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ onto $`\mathrm{PW}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ More precisely, for each $`M>0`$ it maps $`C_M^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ homeomorphically onto $`\mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$

In the Riemannian case $`H=K`$ and $`\tau =1,`$ this result is equivalent to the Paley-Wiener theorem of S. Helgason and R. Gangolli, see , Thm. IV, 7.1. In the case of the group our Paley-Wiener theorem can be shown to be equivalent to the one of J. Arthur, , which in turn generalizes the result of O.A. Campoli, , for groups of split rank one. Arthur’s proof relies on Harish-Chandra’s Plancherel theorem and the lifting principle mentioned in Section 5, due to W. Casselman. It also makes use of ideas from the residue calculus appearing in the work of R.P. Langlands, . In , P. Delorme used a different method to obtain a Paley-Wiener theorem for semisimple groups with one conjugacy class of Cartan subgroups, with explicit symmetry conditions instead of the Arthur-Campoli relations. This work in turn generalized work of Zhelobenko, , for the complex groups.

We conjectured the present Paley-Wiener theorem in slightly different but equivalent form in , where we proved it under the assumption that $`dim𝔞_\mathrm{q}=1.`$ The proof of Theorem 7.2 is given in the paper . It relies on the inversion theorem, Theorem 3.3, and on the principle of induction of relations, see Theorem 4.1. In particular, our proof is independent of the theory of the discrete series and the existing proofs of the Plancherel theorem (in ,  and ). The precise relation with the Plancherel decomposition will be described in Section 8.

In the following sketch we will indicate the main ideas of our proof of the Paley-Wiener theorem.

Sketch of proof of Theorem 7.2  As usual, the proof that $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ maps $`C_M^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ continuously into $`\mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ is rather straightforward. For details, see . The injectivity of $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ was already asserted in Theorem 3.1. By the open mapping theorem for Fréchet spaces, it remains to establish the surjectivity of $`_{\mathrm{}}.`$ Let $`\phi \mathrm{PW}_M(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ In view of the inversion theorem the only possible candidate for a function $`fC_M^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$ with Fourier transform equal to $`\phi `$ is given by the formula

$$f(x)=|W|_{\eta +i𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}}E_+(\lambda :x)\phi (\lambda )d\lambda ,$$

for $`x\mathrm{X}_+`$ and for $`\eta 𝔞_\mathrm{q}^{}`$ sufficiently $`\overline{P}_{\mathrm{}}`$-dominant. The problem with this formula is that it only defines a smooth function $`f`$ on the open dense subset $`\mathrm{X}_+`$ of $`\mathrm{X}.`$ By a standard shift argument of Paley-Wiener type, with $`\eta `$ moving to infinity in $`𝔞_\mathrm{q}^+,`$ it follows that the support of $`f`$ is contained in $`K\mathrm{exp}B_MH.`$ Therefore, it suffices to show that the function $`f`$ has a smooth extension to all of $`\mathrm{X}_+.`$ This is the central theme of the proof.

We will actually show that $`f`$ has a smooth extension under the weaker assumption that $`\phi 𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ As in the proof of Theorem 3.3 the idea is to write the integral differently by application of a contour shift, with $`\eta `$ moving to $`0,`$ and by organizing the residual integrals according to the calculus described in the mentioned proof. This leads to the formula

$$f(x)=\underset{F\mathrm{\Delta }}{}𝒯_F^t\phi (x),(x\mathrm{X}_+),$$
(7.1)
with

$$𝒯_F^t\phi (x):=|W|t(P_F)_{\epsilon _F+i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}}_F^t\left(\underset{sW^F}{}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)\phi (\nu +)\right)d\mu _F(\nu ).$$
(7.2)
The problem now is to show that each of the individual terms $`𝒯_F\phi `$ extends smoothly to all of $`\mathrm{X}.`$ This is done by writing $`𝒯_F\phi `$ as a superposition of certain generalized Eisenstein integrals.

These were defined in  by using the symmetry property of the kernels $`K_F^t,`$ as formulated in Proposition 5.1. As in the proof of Theorem 3.3 let $`K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F)C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F\times \mathrm{X}_F)\mathrm{End}(V_\tau )`$ be the analogue for $`\mathrm{X}_F`$ and $`\tau _F`$ of the kernel $`K_\mathrm{\Delta }^t`$ for $`\mathrm{X}`$ and $`\tau .`$ We recall that $`K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F)`$ does not depend on a spectral parameter, since the analogue of $`𝔞_{\mathrm{\Delta }\mathrm{q}}`$ for $`\mathrm{X}_F`$ is the zero space. We define the following subspace of $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F),`$

$$𝒜_F=𝒜^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F):=\mathrm{span}\{K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F::m^{})um^{}\mathrm{X}_{F+},uV_\tau \}.$$

Being annihilated by a cofinite ideal of $`𝔻(\mathrm{X}_F),`$ this space is finite dimensional. It can be shown that $`𝒜_F`$ is the discrete series subspace $`L_d^2(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F)`$ of $`L^2(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F),`$ see , Lemma 12.6 and Thm. 21.2, but this fact is not needed for the proof of the Paley-Wiener theorem.

For $`\psi 𝒜_F`$ we define the generalized Eisenstein integral $`E_F^{}(\psi :\nu )`$ as a meromorphic $`C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )`$-valued function of $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ as follows. If

$$\psi =\underset{i}{}K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F::m_i^{})u_i,$$
(7.3)
with $`m_i^{}\mathrm{X}_{F+}`$ and $`u_iV_\tau ,`$ then

$$E_F^{}(\psi :\nu :x):=\underset{i}{}_F^t[E^{}(\nu :x)E_+^{}(\mathrm{X}_F::m_i^{})u_i].$$
(7.4)
It follows by induction of relations, Theorem 4.1, that the expression (7.4) is independent of the particular representation of $`\psi 𝒜_F`$ given in (7.3). It also follows by induction of relations, combined with the symmetry of the kernel $`K_F^{}_{}{}^{}t,`$ that for $`\psi 𝒜_F`$ given by (7.3),

$$E_F^{}(\psi :\nu :x)=\underset{i}{}_F^t[\underset{sW^F}{}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)E^{}(\mathrm{X}_F::m_i^{})u_i],$$
(7.5)
for generic $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}`$ and all $`x\mathrm{X}_+.`$ Let

$$T_F(\mathrm{X}_F:)=T_F^{}_{}{}^{}t(\mathrm{X}_F:):C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F)𝒜_F$$

be the analogue for $`\mathrm{X}_F`$ of the operator $`T_\mathrm{\Delta }^t`$ occurring in (7.1). Then it follows from (7.4) and (7.5), essentially by integration with respect to the variable $`m^{}`$ that, for all $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F),`$

$$|W_F|^1E_F^{}(T_F(\mathrm{X}_F:f):\nu :x)=_F^t[\underset{sW^F}{}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:f)()].$$
(7.6)
Here $`_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:)`$ denotes the analogue of $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ for $`\mathrm{X}_F.`$

The next step in the proof of the Paley-Wiener theorem consists of the following result, which follows from the Arthur-Campoli relations and their inductive property described in Lemma 6.2, essentially by application of linear algebra.

###### Proposition 7.3.

Let $`F\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ There exists a finite dimensional complex linear subspace $`VC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F)`$ and a Laurent functional $`^{}({}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma }_F)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}\mathrm{Hom}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau ),V)`$ such that, for generic $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ the map $`\phi f_{\nu ,\phi },`$ $`𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )V,`$ defined by

$$f_{\nu ,\phi }=^{}[\phi (\nu +)],$$

has the following property, for all $`x\mathrm{X}_+,`$

$`_F^t\left[{\displaystyle \underset{sW^F}{}}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)\phi (\nu +)\right]`$
$`=`$ $`_F^t\left[{\displaystyle \underset{sW^F}{}}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)_{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}_F:f_{\nu ,\phi })()\right].`$
The final step in the proof is the following result, which follows by combining Proposition 7.3 with (7.6).

###### Proposition 7.4.

There exists a $`_F({}_{}{}^{}𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},\mathrm{\Sigma }_F)_{\mathrm{laur}}^{}\mathrm{Hom}({}_{}{}^{}𝒞(\tau ),𝒜_F)`$ such that

$$_F^t\left[\underset{sW^F}{}E_{+,s}(\nu +:x)\phi (\nu +)\right]=E_F^{}(_F[\phi (\nu +)]:\nu :x),$$

for all $`\phi 𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ $`x\mathrm{X}_+`$ and generic $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}.`$

It follows from combining this proposition with (7.2) that, for $`\phi 𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$

$$𝒯_F\phi (x)=|W|t(P_F)_{\epsilon _F+i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}}E_F^{}(_F[\phi (\nu +)]:\nu :x)d\mu _F(\nu ),$$
(7.7)
for all $`x\mathrm{X}_+.`$ From this expression it is readily seen that $`𝒯_F`$ extends to a continuous linear map $`𝒫_{\mathrm{AC}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau )C^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

## 8 Relation with the Plancherel decomposition

In this section we briefly discuss the relation between the Paley-Wiener theorem and the Plancherel theorem, obtained by P. Delorme  and, independently, by H. Schlichtkrull and myself in  and . Earlier, a Plancherel theorem had been announced by T. Oshima, , p. 32, but the details have not appeared. For the case of the group, the Plancherel theorem is due to Harish-Chandra, , , . For the case of a complex reductive group modulo a real form, the Plancherel theorem has been obtained by P. Harinck, .

The starting point of our proof of the Plancherel theorem is the Fourier inversion formula

$$f(x)=|W|\underset{F\mathrm{\Delta }}{}t(P_F)_{\epsilon _F+i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}}_\mathrm{X}K_F^t(\nu :x:y)f(y)dyd\mu _F(\nu ),(x\mathrm{X}),$$
(8.1)
which follows from Theorem 3.3 and (5.3). The crucial part of the proof of the Plancherel theorem consists of showing that this formula, which is valid for $`\epsilon _F`$ sufficiently close to zero in $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^+,`$ remains valid with $`\epsilon _F=0`$ for all $`F\mathrm{\Delta }.`$ This in turn is achieved by showing that the kernel functions $`K_F^t`$ are regular for $`\nu i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}.`$

The regularity is achieved in a long inductive argument in . It is in this argument that we need the theory of the discrete series for $`\mathrm{X}`$ initiated by M. Flensted-Jensen  and further developed in the fundamental paper  by T. Oshima and T. Matsuki. Of the latter paper two results on the discrete series are indispensable. The crucial results needed are the necessity and sufficiency of the rank condition for the discrete series to be non-empty as well as the fact that representations from the discrete series have real and regular $`𝔻(\mathrm{X})`$-characters; see  for details.

In the course of the inductive argument, it is is shown that $`K_F^t`$ is independent of the choice of the residue weight $`t;`$ moreover, $`𝒜_F=L_d^2(\mathrm{X}_F:\tau _F)`$ and the generalized Eisenstein integral $`E_F^{}`$ is independent of $`t`$ as well. It is then shown that

$$K_F(\nu :x:y)=|W_F|^1E_F^{}(\nu :x)E_F^{}(\nu :y),$$
(8.2)
with $`E_F^{}(\nu :y):=E_F^{}(\overline{\nu }:y)^{}.`$ At this point we note that if we define the Fourier transform $`_F:C_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau _F)(𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{})𝒜_F`$ as $`_{\mathrm{}}`$ in (3.2) with $`E_F^{}`$ in place of $`E^{},`$ then (8.1) becomes

$$f(x)=\underset{F\mathrm{\Delta }}{}[W:W_F]t(P_F)_{\epsilon _F+i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}}E_F^{}(_Ff(\nu ):\nu :x)d\mu _F(\nu ).$$
(8.3)
The relation of this formula with (7.1) and (7.7) for $`\phi =_{\mathrm{}}f`$ is given by

$$E_F^{}(_Ff(\nu ):\nu :x)=|W_F|^1E_F^{}(_F[_{\mathrm{}}f](\nu +):\nu :x),$$

for every $`x\mathrm{X},`$ as an identity of meromorphic functions in the variable $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}.`$ From taking coefficients of $`a^{\nu \rho _F}`$ in the asymptotic expansions of both members along $`M_FA_{F\mathrm{q}}^+`$ it follows that

$$_Ff(\nu )=|W_F|^1_F[_{\mathrm{}}f](\nu +),$$

for every $`fC_c^{\mathrm{}}(\mathrm{X}:\tau ),`$ as an identity of meromorphic functions in the variable $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}.`$ This in turn leads to the meromorphic identity $`E_F^{}(\nu :x)=|W_F|^1_F[E^{}(\nu +:x)],`$ for all $`x\mathrm{X}.`$

In view of (8.2), the regularity result for the kernel is reduced to the similar result for the generalized Eisenstein integral $`E_F^{}(\nu :),`$ namely its regularity for $`\nu i𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{}.`$ This is the analogue of Theorem 2.5. By the work of J. Carmona on the theory of the constant term for $`\mathrm{X},`$ which in turn generalizes Harish-Chandra’s work  for the case of the group, we can define generalized $`c`$-functions, which are the analogues of the $`c`$-functions in Proposition 2.2. A key step in the proof of the regularity theorem is then to prove the Maass-Selberg relations for these generalized $`c`$-functions, see Theorem 2.3. It should be said that at the time of the announcement of our proof of the Plancherel theorem we had to rely on the Maass-Selberg relations proved by Delorme in . Since then we have found a way to derive the generalized Maass-Selberg relations from those associated with a minimal $`\sigma \theta `$-stable parabolic subgroup, as formulated in Theorem 2.3; see , Thm. 18.3.

From the regularity theorem it follows that (8.3) holds with $`\epsilon _F=0.`$ Defining the wave packet transform $`𝒥_F`$ as $`𝒥_{\mathrm{}}`$ in (3.4) with $`E_F^{}`$ instead of $`E^{}`$ we now obtain that

$$f=\underset{F\mathrm{\Delta }}{}[W:W_F]t(P_F)𝒥_F_Ff.$$
(8.4)
In  we establish uniform tempered estimates for the generalized Eisenstein integrals. These allow to show that the formula (8.4) extends continuously to the Schwartz space $`𝒞(\mathrm{X}:\tau ).`$ It can be shown that $`𝒥_F_F`$ depends on $`F`$ through its class for the equivalence relation $``$ on the powerset $`2^\mathrm{\Delta }`$ defined by $`FF^{}wW:w(𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}})=𝔞_{F^{}\mathrm{q}}.`$ By a simple counting argument it then follows that

$$I=\underset{[F]2^\mathrm{\Delta }/}{}[W:W_F^{}]𝒥_F_F\text{on}𝒞(\mathrm{X}:\tau );$$
(8.5)
here $`W_F^{}`$ denotes the normalizer of $`𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}`$ in $`W.`$ In particular, in this Plancherel formula for $`\tau `$-spherical functions the residue weight $`t`$ has disappeared.

In  it is shown that the Eisenstein integrals $`E_F^{}(\nu ),`$ for $`\nu 𝔞_{F\mathrm{q}}^{},`$ are essentially sums of generalized matrix coefficients of parabolically induced representations of the form $`\mathrm{Ind}_{P_F}^G(\sigma \nu 1)`$ with $`\sigma `$ a discrete series representation of $`\mathrm{X}_F=M_F/M_FH.`$ Here a key role is played by the automatic continuity theorem due to W. Casselman and N. Wallach,  and . This allows to conclude that (8.5) is the $`\tau `$-spherical part of the Plancherel formula in the sense of representation theory. Moreover, the Eisenstein integrals $`E_F^{}(\nu )`$ and the associated Fourier and wave packet transforms can be identified with those introduced in  by Carmona and Delorme.

E. P. van den Ban Mathematisch Instituut Universiteit Utrecht PO Box 80 010 3508 TA Utrecht Netherlands E-mail: ban@math.uu.nl