Citation: Diane Denny. Existence of a solution to a semilinear elliptic equation[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(3): 208-211. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.208
[1] | Ruyun Ma, Dongliang Yan, Liping Wei . Global bifurcation of sign-changing radial solutions of elliptic equations of order 2m in annular domains. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 4909-4916. doi: 10.3934/math.2020313 |
[2] | Changmu Chu, Yuxia Xiao, Yanling Xie . Infinitely many sign-changing solutions for a semilinear elliptic equation with variable exponent. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 5720-5736. doi: 10.3934/math.2021337 |
[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] | Changling Xu, Hongbo Chen . A two-grid $ P_0^2 $-$ P_1 $ mixed finite element scheme for semilinear elliptic optimal control problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6153-6172. doi: 10.3934/math.2022342 |
[5] | H. Al Jebawy, H. Ibrahim, Z. Salloum . On oscillating radial solutions for non-autonomous semilinear elliptic equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 15190-15201. doi: 10.3934/math.2024737 |
[6] | Chunjuan Hou, Zuliang Lu, Xuejiao Chen, Xiankui Wu, Fei Cai . Superconvergence for optimal control problems governed by semilinear parabolic equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(5): 9405-9423. doi: 10.3934/math.2022522 |
[7] | Wenguo Shen . Bifurcation and one-sign solutions for semilinear elliptic problems in $ \mathbb{R}^{N} $. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10453-10467. doi: 10.3934/math.2023530 |
[8] | 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 |
[9] | Keqiang Li, Shangjiu Wang, Shaoyong Li . Symmetry of large solutions for semilinear elliptic equations in a symmetric convex domain. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 10860-10866. doi: 10.3934/math.2022607 |
[10] | Xin Liu, Yan Wang . Averaging principle on infinite intervals for stochastic ordinary differential equations with Lévy noise. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(5): 5316-5350. doi: 10.3934/math.2021314 |
In this paper, we consider the following equation for u
−Δu=f(u)−1|Ω|∫Ωf(u)dx | (1.1) |
under periodic boundary conditions. The domain Ω=TN, the N-dimensional torus, with N=2,3. Here f is a given smooth function of u for u(x)∈G⊂R.
We will prove that there exists a solution u to equation (1.1) which is unique if |dfdu(u0)|<1(C0)2, where u0∈G is a given constant and where C0 is the constant from Poincarés inequality. And we will prove that the solution u is not unique if dfdu(u0) is a simple eigenvalue of −Δ.
In previous related work, many researchers have studied the equation −Δu=f(u)+g. Existence of a solution u to the equation −Δu=f(u)+g has been proven for a Dirichlet boundary condition u|∂Ω=0 (see, e.g., [1, 2, 5, 7]) under certain conditions on f and, g. And existence of a solution u to the equation −Δ,,u=f(u)+g has been proven for a Neumann boundary condition ∂u∂n|∂Ω=h (see, e.g., [3, 4, 6]) under certain conditions on f and g. We have not seen any work by other researchers on the existence of a solution u to equation (1.1) under periodic boundary conditions. And we have not seen any work by other researchers which contains the particular condition that |dfdu(u0)|<1(C0)2, where C0 is the constant from Poincarés inequality and where u0 is a given constant in the domain of the function dfdu.
In the proof that follows, we use the standard notation for the L2(Ω) norm of a function g, namely, ‖g‖20=∫Ω|g|2dx. And we denote the inner product as (g,h)=∫Ωghdx. Also, we let Du denote the gradient of a function u. We also use the notation |dfdu|0,¯G1=max{|dfdu(u∗)|:u∗∈¯G1}, where dfdu is a function of u and where ¯G1⊂R is a closed bounded interval.
The purpose of this article is to prove the following theorem.
Theorem 2.1. Consider the following equation for u
−Δu=f(u)−1|Ω|∫Ωf(u)dx | (2.1) |
where the domain Ω=TN, the N-dimensional torus, with N=2 or N=3, and where f is a given smooth function of u for u(x)∈G⊂R. Let u0∈G be a given constant. Then we have the following two cases:
(1) If |dfdu(u0)|<1(C0)2, where C0 is the constant from Poincarés inequality, then there exists a unique classical solution u(x)∈¯G1 to equation (2.1) which satisfies the condition u(x0)=u0, where ¯G1⊂G⊂R and where u0∈¯G1 and where x0∈Ω is a given point. This unique classical solution is u=u0.
(2) If dfdu(u0) is a simple eigenvalue of −Δ then there exists a solution u of equation (2.1) which is not the constant function u0. This solution u may not necessarily satisfy the condition u(x0)=u0. }
Proof.
We will consider separately each of the two cases from the statement of the theorem. First, we will consider Case 1 from the statement of Theorem 2.1
Suppose that |dfdu(u0)|<1(C0)2, where C0 is the constant from Poincarés inequality and where u0∈G is a given constant. It follows that there exists a closed bounded interval ¯G1⊂G such that u0∈¯G1 and such that |dfdu|0,¯G1<1(C0)2, where |dfdu|0,¯G1=max{|dfdu(u∗)|:u∗∈¯G1}. Suppose that u is a classical solution of equation (2.1) such that u(x)∈¯G1 for all x∈Ω and u satisfies the condition u(x0)=u0, where x0∈Ω is a given point. We will now prove that this solution is u=u0.
From equation (2.1), and from using integration by parts and Poincarés inequality, we obtain the following estimate for ‖Du‖20:
‖Du‖20=(−Δu,u−1|Ω|∫Ωudx)=(f(u)−1|Ω|∫Ωf(u)dx,u−1|Ω|∫Ωudx)≤‖f(u)−1|Ω|∫Ωf(u)dx‖0‖u−1|Ω|∫Ωudx‖0≤(C0)2‖Df(u)‖0‖Du‖0 | (2.2) |
where we used Poincarés inequality to obtain ‖u−1|Ω|∫Ωudx‖0≤C0‖Du‖0 and ‖f(u)−1|Ω|∫Ωf(u)dx‖0≤C0‖Df(u)‖0.
From (2.2) we obtain the inequality
‖Du‖20≤(C0)4‖Df(u)‖20≤(C0)4|dfdu|2L∞(Ω)‖Du‖20≤(C0)4|dfdu|20,ˉG1‖Du‖20 | (2.3) |
where we used the assumption that u(x)∈¯G1 for all x∈Ω, and so it follows that |dfdu|L∞(Ω)≤|dfdu|0,¯G1, where |dfdu|0,¯G1=max{|dfdu(u∗)|:u∗∈¯G1}.
Since |dfdu|20,¯G1<1(C0)4, it follows from (2.3) that ‖Du‖0=0 and so the solution u of equation (2.1) is a constant. Therefore the solution u=u0 is the unique classical solution of equation (2.1) in ¯G1 which satisfies the condition u(x0)=u0. This completes the proof of Case 1 in the statement of Theorem 2.1.
Next, we consider Case 2 in the statement of Theorem 2.1. We now prove that if dfdu(u0) is a simple eigenvalue of −Δ then there exists a solution u of equation (2.1) which is not the constant solution u0. We remark that this solution u may not necessarily satisfy the condition that u(x0)=u0, where x0∈Ω is a given point.
We begin by letting v=u−u0 and write equation (2.1) equivalently as
−Δv=−Δu=f(u)−1|Ω|∫Ωf(u)dx=(f(u)−f(u0))−1|Ω|∫Ω(f(u)−f(u0))dx=(dfdu(u0+t1(u−u0)))(u−u0)−1|Ω|∫Ω(dfdu(u0+t1(u−u0)))(u−u0)dx=(dfdu(u0+t1v))v−1|Ω|∫Ω(dfdu(u0+t1v))vdx | (2.4) |
where t1∈(0,1). Here we used the mean value theorem.
We next obtain the identity
dfdu(u0+t1v)=dfdu(u0+t1v)−dfdu(u0)+dfdu(u0)=(d2fdu2(u0+t2(t1v)))t1v+dfdu(u0) | (2.5) |
where t2∈(0,1). And we again used the mean value theorem.
Substituting (2.5) into (2.4) yields
−Δv=dfdu(u0)v+(d2fdu2(u0+t2(t1v)))t1v2−1|Ω|∫Ω(dfdu(u0+t1v))vdx | (2.6) |
where v=u−u0, where t1∈(0,1), and where t2∈(0,1).
We can write equation (2.6) in the form
Δv+λv=g(v) | (2.7) |
where λ=dfdu(u0) and where g(v)=−(d2fdu2(u0+t2(t1v)))t1v2 +1|Ω|∫Ω(dfdu(u0+t1v))vdx.
Let F(v,λ)=Δv+λv−g(v). We will apply the the implicit function theorem to the equation F(v,λ)=0. Note that g(0)=0 and g′(0)=0.
If λ=dfdu(u0) is not an eigenvalue of −Δ, it follows from the implicit function theorem that v=0 is the only small solution to the equation F(v,λ)=0 when F(v,λ)=Δv+λv−g(v) and when g(0)=0 and g′(0)=0 (see, e.g., [7]). Therefore u=u0 is the only solution of equation (2.1) in a neighborhood of u0.
If λ=dfdu(u0) is a simple eigenvalue of −Δ, it follows from the implicit function theorem that there exists a non-trivial solution v to the equation F(v,λ)=0 when F(v,λ)=Δv+λv−g(v) and when g(0)=0 and g′(0)=0 (see, e.g., [7]). Therefore there exists a solution u to equation (2.1) which is not the constant function u0.
This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1.
[1] | Haim Brezis and Walter A. Strauss, Semi-linear second-order elliptic equations in L1, J. Math.Soc. Japan 25 (1973), no. 4, 565-590. |
[2] | L. Evans, Partial Differential Equations, Graduate Studies in Mathematics 19, American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1998. |
[3] | J.P. Gossez and P. Omari, A necessary and su cient condition of nonresonance for a semilinear Neumann problem, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society 114 (1992), no. 2, 433-442. |
[4] | Chaitan P. Gupta, Perturbations of second order linear elliptic problems by unbounded nonlinearities,Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications 6 (1982), no. 9, 919-933. |
[5] | P.L. Lions, On the existence of positive solutions of semilinear elliptic equations, SIAM Review 24(1982), no. 4, 441-467. |
[6] | Jason R. Looker, Semilinear elliptic Neumann problems with rapid growth in the nonlinearity, Bull.Austral. Math. Soc. 74 (2006), 161-175. |
[7] | M. Renardy and R. Rogers, An Introduction to Partial Di erential Equations, Springer-Verlag:New York, 1993. |