How do you argue that for a sequence of functions $\{f_n\}$, convergence in $L^{p_1}$ and $L^{p_2}$ implies convergence in $L^{p}$ for all $p \in [p_1,p_2]$?
I know that we can pass to a $\mu$-almost everywhere convergent subsequence $\{n_k\}$ so that $f_{n_k} \to f$, and I know that by Fatou's lemma we have that
$$\lVert f \rVert_p^p = \int |f^p| \leq \liminf_{k \to \infty} \int |f_{n_k}^p| \leq \liminf_{k \to \infty} \int |f_{n_k}^{p_1}|+ |f_{n_k}^{p_2}|,$$ where the latter term is finite, but I don't know how to conclude the argument. Is it the more gneeral version of the Dominated Convergence Theorem? I would greatly appreciate any help.
Edit: I don't see how the linked post answers my question, and I would appreciate some more detail as to how this argument can be applied and if the approach I suggested is dead wrong or not.