Citation: Diane Denny. Existence of a unique solution to an elliptic partial differential equation when the average value is known[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 518-531. doi: 10.3934/math.2021031
[1] | Dan Wang, Yongxiang Li . Existence and uniqueness of radial solution for the elliptic equation system in an annulus. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21929-21942. doi: 10.3934/math.20231118 |
[2] | Diane Denny . Existence of a solution to a semilinear elliptic equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(3): 208-211. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.208 |
[3] | Haohao Jia, Feiyao Ma, Weifeng Wo . Large positive solutions to an elliptic system of competitive type with nonhomogeneous terms. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8191-8204. doi: 10.3934/math.2021474 |
[4] | Andrey Muravnik . Wiener Tauberian theorem and half-space problems for parabolic and elliptic equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 8174-8191. doi: 10.3934/math.2024397 |
[5] | Jiaqi Xu, Chunyan Xue . Uniqueness and existence of positive periodic solutions of functional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 676-690. doi: 10.3934/math.2023032 |
[6] | Andrey Muravnik . Nonclassical dynamical behavior of solutions of partial differential-difference equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 1842-1858. doi: 10.3934/math.2025085 |
[7] | Özge Arıbaş, İsmet Gölgeleyen, Mustafa Yıldız . On the solvability of an initial-boundary value problem for a non-linear fractional diffusion equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 5432-5444. doi: 10.3934/math.2023273 |
[8] | Jeong-Kweon Seo, Byeong-Chun Shin . Reduced-order modeling using the frequency-domain method for parabolic partial differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 15255-15268. doi: 10.3934/math.2023779 |
[9] | Jihahm Yoo, Haesung Lee . Robust error estimates of PINN in one-dimensional boundary value problems for linear elliptic equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27000-27027. doi: 10.3934/math.20241314 |
[10] | Golnaz Pakgalb, Mohammad Jahangiri Rad, Ali Salimi Shamloo, Majid Derafshpour . Existence and uniqueness of a positive solutions for the product of operators. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(10): 18853-18869. doi: 10.3934/math.20221038 |
In this paper, we consider the existence of a unique, classical solution u(x) to the quasilinear elliptic equation
∇⋅(a(u)∇u)=f | (1.1) |
for x∈Ω, which satisfies the condition that the average value
1|Ω|∫Ωudx=u0 | (1.2) |
where u0 is a given constant and 1|Ω|∫Ωfdx=0. Periodic boundary conditions will be used. That is, we choose for our spatial domain the N-dimensional torus TN, where N=2 or N=3.
The purpose of this paper is to prove the existence of a unique classical solution u to (1.1), (1.2). The proof of the existence theorem uses the method of successive approximations in which an iteration scheme, based on solving a linearized version of Eq (1.1), will be defined and then convergence of the sequence of approximating solutions to a unique solution satisfying the quasilinear equation will be proven. The key to the proof lies in obtaining a priori estimates for u. To the best of our knowledge, no other researcher has proven the existence and uniqueness of the solution to this partial differential equation when the given data is the average value of the solution.
The paper is organized as follows. The main result, Theorem 2.1, is presented and proven in the next section. The existence of a solution to the linearized equation used in the iteration scheme is proven in Appendix A. Appendix B presents lemmas supporting the proof of the theorem.
We will be working with the Sobolev space Hs(Ω) (where s≥0 is an integer) of real-valued functions in L2(Ω) whose distribution derivatives up to order s are in L2(Ω). The norm is ‖u‖2s=∑0≤|α|≤s∫Ω|Dαu|2dx. We are using the standard multi-index notation. We define |F|r,¯G0=max{|djFduj(u∗)|:u∗∈¯G0,0≤j≤r}, where F is a function of u and where ¯G0⊂R is a closed, bounded interval. Also, we let both ∇u and Du denote the gradient of u. And Ck(Ω) is the set of real-valued functions having all derivatives of order ≤k continuous in Ω (where k= integer ≥0 or k=∞). The purpose of this paper is to prove the following theorem:
Theorem 2.1. Let a be a smooth, positive function of u. Let f∈H2(Ω) and let 1|Ω|∫Ωfdx=0. Let the domain Ω=TN, the N-dimensional torus, where N=2 or N=3.
There exists a constant C1 which depends only on N, Ω such that if
1(minu∗∈¯G0a(u∗))4|dadu|20,¯G0‖∇f‖20≤C1 |
and if
|d2adu2|0,¯G0≤1(minu∗∈¯G0a(u∗))|dadu|20,¯G0 | (2.1) |
where ¯G0⊂R is a closed, bounded interval, then there exists a unique solution u∈C2(Ω) to the equation
∇⋅(a(u)∇u)=f | (2.2) |
which satisfies the condition that the average value
1|Ω|∫Ωudx=u0 | (2.3) |
where u0 is a given constant.
Proof.
We begin by using the following change of variables:
v=(a0‖∇f‖0)ub(v)=(1a0)a(‖∇f‖0a0v)g=(1‖∇f‖0)f | (2.4) |
where the constant a0=minu∗∈¯G0a(u∗) and ¯G0⊂R is a closed, bounded interval.
Under this change of variables the equation (2.2) becomes
∇⋅(b(v)∇v)=g | (2.5) |
And under this change of variables, (2.3) becomes
1|Ω|∫Ωvdx=v0=a0‖∇f‖0u0 | (2.6) |
We fix closed, bounded intervals ¯G0⊂R and ¯G1⊂R by defining ¯G0={u∗∈R:|u∗−u0|L∞≤R‖∇f‖0a0} and ¯G1={v∗∈R:|v∗−v0|L∞≤R}, where R is a constant to be defined later. We will prove that v(x)∈¯G1 for x∈Ω. It follows that u(x)∈¯G0 for x∈Ω.
We will construct the solution of (2.5), (2.6) through an iteration scheme. To define the iteration scheme, we will let the sequence of approximate solutions be {vk}. Set the initial iterate v0=v0. For k=0,1,2,…, construct vk+1 from the previous iterate vk by solving the linear equation
∇⋅(b(vk)∇vk+1)=g | (2.7) |
which satisfies the condition that the average value
1|Ω|∫Ωvk+1dx=v0 | (2.8) |
and using periodic boundary conditions.
The existence of a unique solution vk+1∈C2(Ω) to the linear equation (2.7) for fixed k which satisfies (2.8) is proven in Appendix A. Lemmas supporting the proof are presented in Appendix B. We proceed now to prove convergence of the iterates as k→∞ to a unique, classical solution v of (2.5), (2.6), which therefore produces a unique, classical solution u=‖∇f‖0a0v of (2.2), (2.3).
We begin by proving the following proposition:
Proposition 1. Assume that the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 hold. Then there exist constants C2, C3, and R such that the following inequalities hold for k=1,2,3…:
‖∇vk‖22≤C2 | (2.9) |
‖vk‖24≤C3 | (2.10) |
|vk−v0|L∞≤R | (2.11) |
‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20≤(12)kC2 | (2.12) |
where the constants C2, R depend on N and Ω, and where the constant C3 depends on R, u0, a0, ‖∇f‖0, ‖∇f‖1, |dadu|2,¯G0, N, and Ω. From (2.11) it follows that vk(x)∈¯G1 for x∈Ω and for k=1,2,3….
Proof. The proof is by induction on k. We prove in Lemma B.2 in Appendix B that if vk satisfies (2.9) and (2.11), then vk+1 satisfies (2.9) and (2.10). See Lemma B.2 in Appendix B for the detailed proof. It only remains to prove inequalities (2.11) for vk+1−v0 and (2.12) for ∇(vk+1−vk).
In the estimates below, we will let C denote a generic constant whose value may change from one relation to the next.
Estimate for |vk+1−v0|L∞:
Lemma B.2 in Appendix B presents the proof that ‖∇vk+1‖22≤C2. Then by using standard Sobolev space inequalities we obtain the inequality:
|vk+1−v0|L∞≤C‖vk+1−v0‖2≤C‖∇(vk+1−v0)‖1=C‖∇vk+1‖1≤C√C2=R |
where the constants C and C2 depend on Ω, N. Here we used the fact that |vk+1−v0|L∞≤C‖vk+1−v0‖2 by Sobolev's Lemma. Since 1|Ω|∫Ωvk+1dx=v0 by (2.8), it follows that vk+1−v0 is a zero-mean function and ‖vk+1−v0‖0≤C‖∇(vk+1−v0)‖0 by Poincaré's inequality. Therefore ‖vk+1−v0‖2≤C‖∇(vk+1−v0)‖1. We define R=C√C2. Then inequality (2.11) of Proposition 1 holds for vk+1−v0.
Estimate for ‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20:
From successive iterates of Eq (2.7) we obtain the following:
∇⋅(b(vk)∇(vk+1−vk))=∇⋅(b(vk)∇vk+1)−∇⋅(b(vk)∇vk)=g−∇⋅((b(vk)−b(vk−1))∇vk)−∇⋅(b(vk−1)∇vk)=−∇⋅((b(vk)−b(vk−1))∇vk) | (2.13) |
In the estimates that follow, we use the notation (h1,h2)=∫Ωh1h2dx for the L2 inner product of functions h1, h2. Note that vk−vk−1 is a zero-mean function because vk−vk−1=(vk−v0)−(vk−1−v0) and vk−v0, vk−1−v0 are zero-mean functions by successive iterates of (2.8).
We define the constant b0=minv∗∈¯G1b(v∗), where ¯G1⊂R is a closed, bounded interval. Note that b0=1 by the definition of the function b in (2.4). Then integration by parts and using Eq (2.13) yields
‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20=(∇(vk+1−vk),∇(vk+1−vk))≤1b0(b(vk)∇(vk+1−vk),∇(vk+1−vk))=−1b0(∇⋅(b(vk)∇(vk+1−vk)),(vk+1−vk))=1b0(∇⋅((b(vk)−b(vk−1))∇vk),(vk+1−vk))=−1b0((b(vk)−b(vk−1))∇vk,∇(vk+1−vk))≤1b0‖(b(vk)−b(vk−1))∇vk‖0‖∇(vk+1−vk))‖0≤1b0|dbdv|0,¯G1‖vk−vk−1‖0|∇vk|L∞‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖0≤C(1b0)2|dbdv|20,¯G1‖∇(vk−vk−1)‖20‖∇vk‖22+12‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20 | (2.14) |
where C is a constant which depends on N, Ω. Here we used the fact that |∇vk|L∞≤C‖∇vk‖2 by Sobolev's Lemma. And we used Poincaré's inequality to obtain ‖vk−vk−1‖0≤C‖∇(vk−vk−1)‖0, since vk−vk−1 is a zero-mean function.
Using the facts that 1b0=1 and that |dbdv|20,¯G1=1a40‖∇f‖20|dadu|20,¯G0≤C1 by the definition of b(v) in (2.4) and by the statement of the theorem, and using the fact that ‖∇vk‖22≤C2 by the induction hypothesis, we obtain from re-arranging terms in (2.14) the inequality
‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20≤C(1b0)2|dbdv|20,¯G1‖∇vk‖22‖∇(vk−vk−1)‖20≤CC1C2‖∇(vk−vk−1)‖20≤12‖∇(vk−vk−1)‖20 | (2.15) |
where we define the constant C1 to be sufficiently small so that CC1C2≤12. And the constants C, C1, C2 depend on N, Ω.
By repeatedly applying inequality (2.15) it follows that
‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20≤(12)k‖∇(v1−v0)‖20=(12)k‖∇v1‖20≤(12)kC2 | (2.16) |
where the initial iterate v0=v0, which is a constant, and where ‖∇v1‖20≤‖∇v1‖22≤C2 by Lemma B.2 in Appendix B. Therefore inequality (2.12) of Proposition 1 holds for ∇(vk+1−vk).
This completes the proof of Proposition 1.
We now complete the proof of Theorem 2.1. By (2.16), ‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖0→0 as k→∞. By Poincaré's inequality, ‖vk+1−vk‖20≤C‖∇(vk+1−vk)‖20. It follows that ‖vk+1−vk‖0→0 as k→∞. We next use the standard interpolation inequality ‖vk+1−vk‖r≤C‖vk+1−vk‖β0‖vk+1−vk‖1−β4, where β=4−r4, and 0<r<4. Then since ‖vk+1−vk‖24≤C(‖vk+1‖24+‖vk‖24)≤CC3 by (2.10) in Proposition 1, it follows that ‖vk+1−vk‖r→0 as k→∞ for 0<r<4.
Therefore there exists v∈Hr(Ω), where r<4, such that ‖vk−v‖r→0 as k→∞. The fact that v∈H4(Ω) can be deduced using boundedness in high norm and a standard compactness argument (see, for example, Embid [2], Majda [6]). Sobolev's Lemma implies that v∈C2(Ω).
From Lemma A.1 in Appendix A, vk+1∈C2(Ω) is a solution of the linear equation ∇⋅(b(vk)∇vk+1)=g for each k≥0, and vk+1 satisfies the condition that 1|Ω|∫Ωvk+1dx=v0. It follows that v is a classical solution of the equation ∇⋅(b(v)∇v)=g, and v satisfies the condition that 1|Ω|∫Ωvdx=v0. The uniqueness of the solution follows by a standard proof using estimates similar to the estimates used in the proof of inequality (2.12). Therefore, there exists a unique classical solution u=(‖∇f‖0a0)v of ∇⋅(a(u)∇u)=f which satisfies the condition that 1|Ω|∫Ωudx=u0. This completes the proof of the theorem.
We have proven that if
1(minu∗∈¯G0a(u∗))4|dadu|20,¯G0‖∇f‖20≤C1 |
and if
|d2adu2|0,¯G0≤1(minu∗∈¯G0a(u∗))|dadu|20,¯G0 |
where ¯G0⊂R is a closed, bounded interval and where the constant C1 depends on N, Ω, then there exists a unique solution u∈C2(Ω) to the equation
∇⋅(a(u)∇u)=f |
which satisfies the condition that the average value
1|Ω|∫Ωudx=u0 |
where u0 is a given constant, under periodic boundary conditions. We remark that in the trivial case in which ∇f=0 (and therefore f=0), it follows that u=u0 is the unique solution.
The author confirms that there is no conflict of interest.
In this appendix, we present the proof of the existence of a unique, classical solution to the linear problem (2.7), (2.8).
Lemma A.1. Let b be a smooth positive function of w. Let w∈C2(Ω), let g∈H2(Ω), and let 1|Ω|∫Ωgdx=0. Let the domain Ω=TN, the N-dimensional torus, where N=2 or N=3. Then there exists a unique solution v∈C2(Ω) of the equation
∇⋅(b(w)∇v)=g | (A.1) |
which satisfies the condition
1|Ω|∫Ωvdx=v0 | (A.2) |
where v0 is a given constant.
Proof.
We define the zero-mean function
¯v=v−1|Ω|∫Ωvdx | (A.3) |
The existence of a unique zero-mean solution ¯v∈C2(Ω) to equation (A.1) under periodic boundary conditions is a well-known result from the standard theory of elliptic equations (see, e.g., Embid [2], Evans [3], Gilbarg and Trudinger [4]).
It follows that the function v defined by
v(x)=¯v(x)+v0 | (A.4) |
is the unique solution to equation (A.1) which satisfies the condition (A.2) that 1|Ω|∫Ωvdx=v0.
This completes the proof of the lemma.
In this appendix, we present lemmas supporting the proof of the theorem.
We begin by listing several standard Sobolev space inequalities.
Lemma B.1. (Standard Sobolev Space Inequalities)
(a) Let b be a smooth function of w, and let w(x) be a continuous function such that w(x)∈¯G1 for x∈Ω where ¯G1⊂R is a closed, bounded interval. And let w∈Hr+1(Ω) where r≥0.
Then
‖D(b(w))‖2r≤C|dbdw|2r,ˉG1(1+|w|L∞)2r‖∇w‖2r | (B.1) |
where |dbdw|r,¯G1=max{|dj+1bdwj+1(w∗)|:w∗∈¯G1,0≤j≤r}. And the constant C depends on r, N, Ω.
(b) If f∈Hn(Ω), where Ω⊂RN, and r=βm+(1−β)n, with 0≤β≤1 and m<n, then
‖f‖r≤C‖f‖βm‖f‖1−βn | (B.2) |
Here C is a constant which depends on m, n, N, Ω.
(c) If f∈Hs0(Ω) where Ω⊂RN, N=2 or N=3, and s0=[N2]+1, then
|f|L∞≤C‖f‖s0 | (B.3) |
Here C is a constant which depends on N, Ω.
(d) If Df∈Hr1(Ω), g∈Hr−1(Ω), where r≥1 and where r1=max{r−1,s0} and s0=[N2]+1, then:
‖Dα(fg)−fDαg‖0≤C‖Df‖r1‖g‖r−1, | (B.4) |
where |α|=r and where the constant C depends on r, N, Ω.
These inequalities are well-known. Proofs may be found, for example, in [5], [7]. These inequalities also appear in [1], [2].
Lemma B.2. Let the function w∈C2(Ω) satisfy (2.9), (2.11) in Proposition 1 and let the hypotheses in the statement of Theorem 2.1 hold. Let b be a smooth, positive function of w. Let g∈H2(Ω) and let 1|Ω|∫Ωgdx=0. Let (2.4) define the functions b, g. Let the domain Ω=TN, the N-dimensional torus, where N=2 or N=3.
Let v be the solution from Lemma A.1 in Appendix A of
∇⋅(b(w)∇v)=g | (B.5) |
which satisfies the condition
1|Ω|∫Ωvdx=v0, | (B.6) |
where v0 is a given constant.
Then ∇v and v satisfy the following inequalities:
‖∇v‖22≤C2‖v‖24≤C3 |
where the constant C2 depends on N and Ω and where the constant C3 depends on R, u0, a0, ‖∇f‖0, ‖∇f‖1, |dadu|2,¯G0, N, and Ω.
Proof.
In the estimates below, we will let C denote a generic constant whose value may change from one relation to the next. We use the notation (h1,h2)=∫Ωh1h2dx for the L2 inner product of two functions h1, h2. And we use the notation hα=Dαh for differentiation with a multi-index α.
Estimate for ‖∇v‖20:
Using integration by parts and then substituting equation (B.5) yields
‖∇v‖20=(∇v,∇v)≤1b0(b(w)∇v,∇v)=−1b0(∇⋅(b(w)∇v),v−1|Ω|∫Ωvdx)=−1b0(g,v−1|Ω|∫Ωvdx)≤1b0‖g‖0‖v−1|Ω|∫Ωvdx‖0≤Cb0‖∇g‖0‖∇v‖0=C‖∇v‖0 | (B.7) |
where b0=minw∗∈¯G1b(w∗)=1 by definition of the function b, and ‖∇g‖0=1 by definition of the function g. Here we used the fact that g and v−1|Ω|∫Ωvdx are zero-mean functions and we used Poincaré's inequality for a zero-mean function h, namely ‖h‖0≤C‖∇h‖0. The constant C depends on N, Ω.
It follows that
‖∇v‖20≤˜C | (B.8) |
where the generic constant ˜C depends on N, Ω.
Estimate for ‖∇v‖21: To begin, let |α|≥1. Using integration by parts and then substituting equation (B.5) yields
‖∇vα‖20=(∇vα,∇vα)≤1b0(b(w)∇vα,∇vα)=1b0((b(w)∇v)α,∇vα)−1b0((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα,∇vα)=−1b0(∇⋅(b(w)∇v)α,vα)−1b0((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα,∇vα)=−1b0(gα,vα)−1b0((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα,∇vα) | (B.9) |
where b0=minw∗∈¯G1b(w∗). If |α|=1 in (B.9) then
‖∇vα‖20≤−1b0(gα,vα)−1b0((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα,∇vα)=−1b0(gα,vα)−1b0(b(w)α∇v,∇vα)≤(1b0)‖gα‖0‖vα‖0+(1b0)‖b(w)α∇v‖0‖∇vα‖0≤12(1b0)2‖gα‖20+12‖vα‖20+(1b0)‖dbdwwα∇v‖0‖∇vα‖0≤12(1b0)2‖gα‖20+12‖vα‖20+12(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖wα∇v‖20+12‖∇vα‖20 | (B.10) |
Re-arranging the terms in (B.10) and adding the resulting inequality over |α|=1 yields
∑|α|=1‖∇vα‖20≤(1b0)2‖∇g‖20+‖∇v‖20+(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1|∇w|2L∞‖∇v‖20≤1+˜C+C|dbdw|20,¯G1‖∇w‖22˜C≤1+˜C+CC1C2˜C | (B.11) |
where the generic constants C, ˜C depend on N, Ω. Here we used the facts that 1b0=1, ‖∇g‖0=1, and ‖∇w‖22≤C2. And ‖∇v‖20≤˜C from (B.8). And we used the fact that |dbdw|20,¯G1=(‖∇f‖20a40)|dadu|20,¯G0≤C1 by definition of the function b in (2.4) and by the statement of Theorem 2.1.
From (B.8), (B.11) it follows that
‖∇v‖21=∑0≤|α|≤1‖∇vα‖20=‖∇v‖20+∑|α|=1‖∇vα‖20≤1+2˜C+CC1C2˜C | (B.12) |
Estimate for ‖∇v‖22:
Letting |α|=2 in inequality (B.9) and then using integration by parts with |γ|=1 produces
‖∇vα‖20≤−1b0(gα,vα)−1b0((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα,∇vα)=(1b0)(gα−γ,vα+γ)−1b0(b(w)α∇v,∇vα)−1b0(b(w)γ∇vα−γ,∇vα)−1b0(b(w)α−γ∇vγ,∇vα)=(1b0)(gα−γ,vα+γ)−1b0((d2bdw2wα−γwγ)∇v,∇vα)−1b0((dbdwwα)∇v,∇vα)−1b0(dbdwwγ∇vα−γ,∇vα)−1b0(dbdwwα−γ∇vγ,∇vα)≤(1b0)‖gα−γ‖0‖vα+γ‖0+(1b0)|d2bdw2|0,¯G1|wα−γ|L∞|wγ|L∞‖∇v‖0‖∇vα‖0+(1b0)|dbdw|0,¯G1‖wα‖0|∇v|L∞‖∇vα‖0+(1b0)|dbdw|0,¯G1|wγ|L∞‖∇vα−γ‖0‖∇vα‖0+(1b0)|dbdw|0,¯G1|wα−γ|L∞‖∇vγ‖0‖∇vα‖0≤Cϵ(1b0)2‖gα−γ‖20+ϵ‖∇vα‖20+14ϵ(1b0)2|d2bdw2|20,¯G1|wα−γ|2L∞|wγ|2L∞‖∇v‖20+ϵ‖∇vα‖20+14ϵ(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖wα‖20|∇v|2L∞+ϵ‖∇vα‖20+14ϵ(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1|wγ|2L∞‖∇vα−γ‖20+ϵ‖∇vα‖20+14ϵ(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1|wα−γ|2L∞‖∇vγ‖20+ϵ‖∇vα‖20≤Cϵ(1b0)2‖gα−γ‖20+Cϵ(1b0)2|d2bdw2|20,¯G1‖wα−γ‖22‖wγ‖22‖∇v‖20+Cϵ(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖Dγwα−γ‖20‖∇v‖22+Cϵ(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖wγ‖22‖∇vα−γ‖20+Cϵ(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖wα−γ‖22‖∇vγ‖20+5ϵ‖∇vα‖20 | (B.13) |
where we used Cauchy's inequality with ϵ and we define ϵ=110. We also used Sobolev's Lemma, i.e., |h|L∞≤C‖h‖2.
Re-arranging terms in (B.13), and then adding the resulting inequality over |α|=2 and |γ|=1, produces
∑|α|=2‖∇vα‖20≤C(1b0)2‖∇g‖20+C(1b0)2|d2bdw2|20,¯G1‖∇w‖42‖∇v‖20+C(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖∇w‖21‖∇v‖22+C(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖∇w‖22‖∇v‖21≤C(1b0)2‖∇g‖20+C(1b0)2|d2bdw2|20,¯G1‖∇w‖42‖∇v‖22+C(1b0)2|dbdw|20,¯G1‖∇w‖22‖∇v‖22≤C+(CC21C22+CC1C2)‖∇v‖22≤C+CC1C22‖∇v‖22 | (B.14) |
where we can assume that C1<1 and that C2>1. Here we used the fact that ‖∇w‖22≤C2. And we used the fact that |dbdw|20,¯G1 = (‖∇f‖20a40)|dadu|20,¯G0≤C1. And we used the fact that |d2bdw2|20,¯G1=(‖∇f‖40a60)|d2adu2|20,¯G0≤(‖∇f‖40a80)|dadu|40,¯G0≤C21 by the definition of b(v) in (2.4) and by the statement of the theorem. And we used the facts that ‖∇g‖0=1 and that 1b0=1.
From (B.14) and from inequality (B.12) for ‖∇v‖21, it follows that
‖∇v‖22=∑0≤|α|≤2‖∇vα‖20=‖∇v‖21+∑|α|=2‖∇vα‖20≤1+2˜C+CC1C2˜C+C+CC1C22‖∇v‖22≤1+2˜C+12+C+12‖∇v‖22 | (B.15) |
where the generic constants C, ˜C depend on N, Ω, and where C1 is sufficiently small so that CC1C2˜C≤12 and so that CC1C22≤12.
Re-arranging terms in (B.15) yields
‖∇v‖22≤4˜C+C=C2 | (B.16) |
where we define C2=4˜C+C, and where the constant C2 depends on N, Ω.
Estimate for ‖∇v‖23:
Letting |α|=3 in inequality (B.9) and then using integration by parts with |γ|=1 produces
‖∇vα‖20≤−1b0(gα,vα)−1b0(((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα),∇vα)=1b0(gα−γ,vα+γ)−1b0(((b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα),∇vα)≤(1b0)‖gα−γ‖0‖vα+γ‖0+(1b0)‖(b(w)∇v)α−b(w)∇vα‖0‖∇vα‖0≤(1b0)‖gα−γ‖0‖vα+γ‖0+C(1b0)‖Db‖2‖∇v‖2‖∇vα‖0≤Cϵ(1b0)2‖gα−γ‖20+ϵ‖∇vα‖20+Cϵ(1b0)2‖Db‖22‖∇v‖22+ϵ‖∇vα‖20 | (B.17) |
where ϵ=14 and where we used the Sobolev space inequality (B.4) from Lemma B.1 with r=|α|=3 and r1=2.
Re-arranging the terms in (B.17) and then adding the resulting inequality over |α|=3 and |γ|=1 yields
∑|α|=3‖∇vα‖20≤C(1b0)2‖g‖22+C(1b0)2‖Db‖22‖∇v‖22≤C(1b0)2‖g‖22+C(1b0)2|dbdw|22,¯G1(1+|w|L∞)4‖∇w‖22‖∇v‖22=C(1b0)2‖g‖22+C(1b0)2|dbdw|22,¯G1(1+|w−v0+v0|L∞)4‖∇w‖22‖∇v‖22≤C(1b0)2‖g‖22+C(1b0)2|dbdw|22,¯G1(1+|w−v0|L∞+|v0|)4‖∇w‖22‖∇v‖22≤C‖∇g‖21+C|dbdw|22,¯G1(1+R+|v0|)4C2‖∇v‖22 | (B.18) |
where we used the Sobolev space inequality (B.1) from Lemma B.1 for ‖Db‖22. We also used the facts that |w-v_{0}|_{L^{\infty}}\leq R , \Vert \nabla w\Vert_{2}^2 \leq C_2 , and b_0 = 1 . And we used the fact that g is a zero-mean function, so that \Vert g\Vert_{0} \leq C \Vert \nabla g\Vert_{0} by Poincaré's inequality.
From (B.18) and from inequality (B.16) for \Vert \nabla v\Vert_{2}^2 , it follows that
\begin{eqnarray} \Vert \nabla v \Vert_{3}^2 & = &\sum\limits_{0\leq |\alpha| \leq 3} \Vert \nabla v_{\alpha}\Vert_{0}^2 \\ & = & \sum\limits_{0\leq |\alpha| \leq 2} \Vert \nabla v_{\alpha}\Vert_{0}^2+ \sum\limits_{|\alpha| = 3} \Vert \nabla v_{\alpha}\Vert_{0}^2 \\ & = & \Vert \nabla v \Vert_{2}^2 + \sum\limits_{|\alpha| = 3} \Vert \nabla v_{\alpha}\Vert_{0}^2 \\ &\leq& C_2+C\Vert \nabla g\Vert_{1}^2 \\ &+& C \Big|\frac{db}{d w} \Big|_{2,\overline{G}_1}^2(1+R+|v_{0}|)^{4} C_2^2 \end{eqnarray} | (B.19) |
Estimate for \Vert v\Vert_{4}^2 :
From (B.19) it follows that
\begin{eqnarray} \Vert v \Vert_{4}^2 & = &\Vert v-v_0+v_0\Vert_{4}^2 \\ &\leq & C\Vert v-v_0\Vert_{4}^2+ C\Vert v_0\Vert_{4}^2 \\ &\leq & C\Vert \nabla(v-v_0)\Vert_{3}^2+C| v_0|^2|\Omega| \\ & = & C\Vert \nabla v\Vert_{3}^2+C| v_0|^2|\Omega| \\ &\leq& C C_2+C\Vert \nabla g\Vert_{1}^2+ C \Big|\frac{db}{d w} \Big|_{2,\overline{G}_1}^2(1+R+|v_{0}|)^{4} C_2^2 \\ &+& C| v_0|^2|\Omega| \\ & = & C C_2+C\frac{\Vert \nabla f\Vert_{1}^2}{\Vert \nabla f\Vert_{0}^2} \\ &+& C\Big(\frac{\Vert\nabla f\Vert_{0}^2 }{a_0^4}\Big) \Big|\frac{da}{d u} \Big|_{2,\overline{G}_0}^2(1+R+\Big(\frac{a_0}{\Vert\nabla f\Vert_{0} }\Big)|u_{0}|)^{4} C_2^2 \\ &+& C\Big(\frac{a_0}{\Vert\nabla f\Vert_{0} }\Big)^2| u_0|^2|\Omega| \\ & = & C_3 \end{eqnarray} | (B.20) |
Here we used Poincaré's inequality for the zero-mean function v-v_0 , where the constant v_0 = \frac{1}{|\Omega|}\int_{\Omega} v d{\bf{x}} . And we used the definition of the functions v , b , g from (2.4). This completes the proof of the lemma.
[1] |
D. Denny, Existence of a unique solution to a quasilinear elliptic equation, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 380 (2011), 653-668. doi: 10.1016/j.jmaa.2011.03.046
![]() |
[2] |
P. Embid, On the Reactive and Non-diffusive Equations for Zero Mach Number Flow, Commun. Part. Differ. Eq., 14 (1989), 1249-1281. doi: 10.1080/03605308908820652
![]() |
[3] | L. Evans, Partial Differential Equations, Graduate Studies in Mathematics 19, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1998. |
[4] | D. Gilbarg, N. S. Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, SpringerVerlag, Berlin, 1983. |
[5] |
S. Klainerman, A. Majda, Singular limits of quasilinear hyperbolic systems with large parameters and the incompressible limit of compressible fluids, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., 34 (1981), 481-524. doi: 10.1002/cpa.3160340405
![]() |
[6] | A. Majda, Compressible Fluid Flow and Systems of Conservation Laws in Several Space Variables, Springer-Verlag: New York, 1984. |
[7] | J. Moser, A rapidly convergent iteration method and non-linear differential equations, Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup., Pisa, 20 (1966), 265-315. |
1. | Sarafatema Peerzade, Dnyaneshwari Wayal, Gauri Kale, Automated Algorithmic Trading for Cryptocurrencies, 2021, 2581-9429, 326, 10.48175/IJARSCT-2194 | |
2. | Lei Chen, Aruna K K, E-Commerce Sorting Equipment and System Based on Cloud Computing, 2022, 2022, 1530-8677, 1, 10.1155/2022/7947598 | |
3. | Jieying Zhou, Zhimin Guo, Xin Liu, Mingyan Li, Chao Liu, 2022, Chapter 151, 978-3-030-97873-0, 1042, 10.1007/978-3-030-97874-7_151 | |
4. | Weiping Deng, 2022, Chapter 141, 978-3-030-97873-0, 967, 10.1007/978-3-030-97874-7_141 |