arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 12 Dec 2018

Transcription

1 Existence of positive solution of the Choquard equation u+a(x)u = (I µ u µ) u µ u in arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 1 Dec 018 Claudianor O. Alves Unidade Acadêmica de Matemática, Universidade Federal de Campina Gre, , Campina Gre - PB, Brazil, address: coalves@mat.ufcg.edu.br Giovany M. Figueiredo Departamento de Matemática, Universidade de Brasilia - UNB CEP: , Brasília-DF, Brazil. address: giovany@unb.br Abstract In this paper we show existence of a positive solution to the problem u+a(x)u = (I µ u µ) u µ u, (P) u > 0 in, u D 1, ( ), where I µ = 1 is the Riesz potential, 0 < µ < min{n,4} x µ µ = (N µ) with N. In order N to prove the main result, we used variational methods combined with a splitting theorem. Key Words. Choquard equation, Variational methods, Critical exponents AMS Classification. 81Q05, 5A15, 5B 1 Introduction In this paper we shall focus our attention on the existence of positive solutions for the following class of Choquard equation (P) u+a(x)u = (I µ u µ ) u µ u in, u > 0 in, u D 1, ( ), where I µ = 1 x is the Riesz potential, 0 < µ < min{n,4}, µ µ = (N µ) N positive function satisfying some technical conditions. with N a(x) is a The existence of solution for problem (P) ensures the existence of sting waves solutions for a nonlinear Schrödinger equation of the kind i t Ψ = Ψ+W(x)Ψ (I µ Ψ µ ) Ψ µ Ψ, in, (1.1) 1

2 where W is the external potential I µ is the response function possesses information on the mutual interaction between the bosons. This type of nonlocal equation appears in a lot of physical applications, for instance in the study of propagation of electromagnetic waves in plasmas [9] in the theory of Bose-Einstein condensation [1]. We recall that a sting wave solution is a solution of the type Ψ(x,t) = u(x)e iet, which solves (1.1) if, only if, u solves the equation ( ) 1 u+a(x)u = x µ u µ u µ u in, (1.) with a(x) = W(x) E, which is a Choquard-Pekar equation. After a bibliography review we have found only a paper related to (1.) that is due to Du Yang [14]. In that interesting paper, Du Yang has considered only the case a(x) = 0, they showed that any positive solution of (1.) with a = 0 must be of the form ( Ψ δ,y (x) = C δ δ + x y )N, x, for some δ > 0,y, C > 0 is a constant that only depends on N. Still related to (1.), we would like to cite the paper due to Du, Gao Yang [15] where the authors has studied existence qualitative properties of solutions of the problem u = 1 x α ( 1 x µ u µ ) u µ u in, (1.) for some values of α µ. In that paper, the authors has proved an interesting version of the Concentration-Compactness principle due to Lions [] that can be used for Choquard equations with critical growth, for more details see [15, Lemma.5]. On the other h, there is a rich literature associated with Choquard-Pekar equation of the type ( ) 1 u+v(x)u = K(x) x µ H(u) h(u) in, (1.4) where H(t) = t 0 h(s)ds with V,K : RN R h : R R being continuous functions verifying some technical conditions, reader can find some interesting results in [1], [], [4], [5], [1], [0], [], [4], [7], [8], [9], [0], [] their references. The motivation of the present comes from of the seminal paper due to Benci Cerami [7], where the authors studied the existence of solution for the following class of local critical problem u+a(x)u = u u in, (1.5) by supposing that function a : R satisfies the conditions below (i) The function a is positive in a set of positive measure. (ii) a L q ( ) for all q [p 1,p ] with 1 < p 1 < N < p, with p < if N =. (iii) a L N/ ( ) < S( /N 1), where S = u inf u D 1, ( ),u 0 u, with = N N, N, ( ) 1 u = u dx, u D 1, ( ).

3 By using variational methods, the authors were able to prove the existence of a positive solution u D 1, ( ) with f(u) (S, /N S) u dx = 1, where f : D 1, ( ) R is the functional given by ( f(u) = u +a(x) u ) dx. The main difficulty to prove the existence of solution comes from the fact that the nonlinearity has a critical growth. To overcome this difficult, the authors used Variational methods, Deformation lemma, the well known Concentration-Compactness principle due to Lions []. After the publication of [7], some authors studied related problem to (1.5), see for example, [], [6], [8], [10], [5], [6], [1] references therein. As in the local case, see [7], in the present paper it was necessary to do a careful study of the energy functional I : D 1, ( ) R given by I (u) = 1 u 1 (I µ u µ ) u µ dx, µ whose the critical points are weak solutions of the limit problem (P ) { u = (Iµ u µ ) u µ u in, u D 1, ( ). Here, we show a nonlocal version of a technical lemma due to Struwe [, Lemma.], see Lemma.1 in Section, which permitted to use the Concentration- Compactness principal for limit case due to Lions [] to establish a splitting theorem that is a key ingredient to deal with problems with critical exponent. We would like point out that to overcome the fact that we are working with a nonlocal problem, it was necessary to do some modifications in the proof of Lemma.1, for example, we developed a Cherrier type inequality that can be used for Choquard equation with critical growth Neumann boundary condition, for more details see Lemma. in Section. The reader will observe that different from [15], we has used the original version of Concentration- Compactness principal due to Lions to show the existence of solution for (1.). We believe that this is the first paper involving Choquard equation (1.) with a 0. Before enunciating our theorem, we need to fix our conditions on function a : [0,+ ) some notations: (a 1 ) The function a is positive in a set of positive measure. (a ) a L q ( ) for all q [p 1,p ] with 1 < p 1 < N+ µ 4N µ < p with p < N µ/ if N =. 4 N µ/ (a ) a L (N µ/)/( µ/) ( ) < S H,L ( (4 µ)/(n µ) 1), where S H,L := inf u D 1, ( ),u 0 u ( ) 1/. (1.6) (I µ u µ ) u µ µ dx We say that u : R is a weak solution of (P), if u D 1, ( ) is a positive function such that for all ϕ D 1, ( ) we have u ϕdx+ a(x)uϕdx = (I µ u µ ) u µ uϕdx.

4 In order to state the main result, we consider the functional of C 1 class I : D 1, ( ) R associated to problem (P) given by I(u) = 1 u + 1 a(x)u dx 1 R (I µ u µ ) u µ dx N µ with I (u)v = uϕdx+ a(x)uϕdx (I µ u µ ) u µ uϕdx, ϕ D 1, ( ). Using the above notations, our main result has the following statement Theorem 1.1. Assume that (a 1 ) (a ) hold. Then, problem (P) has a positive solution u 0 D 1, ( ) with (N + µ) (N + µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L < I(u 0 ) < 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. The paper is organized as follows: In Section, we prove some results involving the limit problem. In Section, we prove a splitting theorem show some compactness results involving the energy functional associated with (P). In Section 4, we make the proof of some technical lemmas that will be used in Section 5 to prove Theorem 1.1. Limit problem In this section, we will show important results involving the limit problem that are crucial in our approach. To begin with, we recall that to apply variational method, we must have ( Iµ u µ) u µ dx < +, u D 1, ( ). (.1) This fact is an immediate consequence of the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality, which will be frequently used in this paper. Proposition.1. [19] [Hardy Littlewood Sobolev inequality]: Let s,r > 1 0 < µ < N with 1/s + µ/n + 1/r =. If g L s ( ) h L r ( ), then there exists a sharp constant C(s,N,µ,r), independent of f,h, such that g(x)h(y) R x y µ C(s,N,µ,r) g s h r. N As a direct consequence of this inequality, we have that ( RN u(x) µ u(y) µ x y µ dxdy ) N N µ C(N,µ) N N µ u, u D 1, ( ). (.) The next result is a key point in our paper its proof can be found in [16, Lemma 1.] Lemma.1. The constant S H,L defined in (1.6) is achieved if, only if, ( ) N / δ u(x) = C δ + x y, x, where C > 0 is a fixed constant, y δ > 0. 4

5 Our next result is a Cherrier type inequality involving the Riesz potential that will be a key point in the proof of Lemma.1, see Section. Lemma.. Let Ω a smooth bounded domain. For each τ > 0, there is M τ > 0 such that [ S N ] µ ( ) τ µ v Ω(I µ ) v µ dx C(N,µ) v L (Ω) +M τ v µ L (Ω), v H 1 (Ω), where C(N,µ) is given in (.). Proof. From (.), [ S N ] µ [ τ (I µ v µ ) v µ S dx (C(N,µ) Ω N ] µ τ v L (Ω)). Now, we apply the Cherrier s inequality [11] to get the desired result. Our first result establishes preliminary properties involving (PS) sequences of I. Lemma.. Let (u n ) be a sequence (PS) c for I. Then (i) The sequence (u n ) is bounded in D 1, ( ). (ii) If u n u in D 1, ( ), then I (u) = 0. (iii) If c (, (N+ µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L subsequence, u n u in D 1, ( ). ), then I satisfies the (PS) c condition, i.e, up to a Proof. By hypothesis I (u n ) c I (u n) 0, then there exists K > 0 such that proving (i). K + u n I (u n ) 1 I (N + µ) (u n )u n = µ 4N µ u n, n N, Since u n u in D 1, ( ), up to a subsequence, we get u n u in L q loc (RN ), q (, ) u n (x) u(x) a.e in. By the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality, the Riesz potential defines a linear continuous map from L N N µ ( ) to L N µ ( ). Hence I µ u n µ Iµ u µ in L N µ ( ). for each φ C 0 (RN ), u n µ u n φ u µ uφ in L N N µ ( ) The above limits implies that (I µ u n µ ) un µ u n φdx (I µ u µ ) u µ uφdx, so, I (u)φ = 0 for all φ C 0 ( ). Now, (ii) follows using the density of C 0 ( ) in D 1, ( ). 5

6 In order to prove (iii), consider v n = u n u note that employing [1, Lemma 4.6], we derive o n (1) = I (u n )u n = u n (I µ u n µ ) un µ dx R N = v n + u (I µ v n µ ) vn µ dx (I µ u R R µ ) u µ dx+on (1) N N = v n (I µ v n µ ) vn µ dx+on (1). (.) Thus, up to a subsequence, we can assume that 0 ρ = lim v n = lim (I µ v n µ ) vn µ dx. n n Suppose, by contradiction, that ρ > 0. From the inequality we obtain [ ] 1/ S H,L (I µ v n µ µ ) vn µ dx vn, ρ S H,L ρ 1/ µ ρ S (N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. (.4) As I (u) = ( 1 1 ) u (N + µ) = µ 4N µ u 0 c = (N + µ) 4N µ v n +I (u)+o n (1), (.5) it follows that c = = (N + µ) 4N µ v n (N + µ) +I (u)+o n (1) 4N µ v n +o n (1) (N + µ) (N + µ) ρ 4N µ 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L, which is a contradiction. Hence ρ = 0 showing the lemma. v n = u n u 0, Before concluding this section, we will prove an important estimate involving the nodal solutions of the limit problem, which will be used later on. Lemma.4. If u D 1, ( ) is a nodal solution of (P), then I (u) 4 µ N+4 µ (N + µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. Proof. Arguing as in the proof of [17, Proposition.], for all t +,t > 0 we see that I (t + u + ) (N+ µ) 4 µ +I (t u ) (N+ µ) 4 µ I (u) (N+ µ) 4 µ. 6

7 Fixing t +,t > 0 such that I (t± u ± )(t ± u ± ) = 0, it follows that I (t ± u ± ) The last two inequalities combine to give (N + µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. finishing the proof. I (u) 4 µ N+4 µ (N + µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L, A splitting theorem We start this section by proving a technical lemma for I that will be useful to prove our splitting theorem. Lemma.1. (Main lemma) Let (u n ) be a (PS) c sequence for the functional I with u n 0 u n 0. Then, there are sequences (R n ) R +, (x n ) v 0 D 1, ( ) nontrivial solution of (P ) such that, up to a subsequence of (u n ), we have where (w n ) is a (PS) c I (v 0) for the I. w n (x) = u n (x) R (N )/ n v 0 (R n (x x n ))+o n (1), Proof. Let (u n ) D 1, ( ) be a (PS) c sequence for the functional I, i.e, I (u n ) c I (u n) 0. (.1) From Lemma.-(i), we know that (u n ) is bounded in D 1, ( ). Since u n 0 u n 0, it follows Lemma.-(iii) that (N + µ) c 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. Note that which leads to c+o n (1) = I (u n ) 1 I (u (N + µ) n )u n = u n dx µ 4N µ lim n u n dx S (N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. (.) Let L be a number such that B (0) is covered by m balls of radius 1, k N, (R n ) R +, (x n ) such that S (N µ)/(n+ µ) sup u n dx = u n H,L dx = y B 1 (y) R B 1 (xn) km n R n Hereafter, we fix k such way that v n (x) = R ( N)/ n u n ( x R n +x n ). S (N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L k ( S < N ) N µ ( ) N N+ µ N+ µ 1. (.) C(N, µ) 7

8 Using a change of variable, we can prove that B 1(0) v n dx = S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L km = sup v n dx. (.4) y B 1(y) Now, for each Φ D 1, ( ), we define the function that satisfies These limits ensure that Φ n (x) = R (N )/ n Φ(R n (x x n )) u n Φ n dx = v n Φdx (.5) (I µ u n µ ) un µ u n Φn dx = (I µ v n µ ) vn µ v n Φdx. (.6) I (v n ) c I (v n) 0. From Lemma., there exists v 0 D 1, ( ) such that, up to a subsequence, v n v 0 in D 1, ( ) I (v 0) = 0. As a consequence of the well known Lions Lemma [], we can assume that v n µ φdx v 0 R R µ φdx+ φ(x j )ν j, φ C0 (RN ) (.7) N N j J v n µ v 0 + j J φ(x j )µ j, φ C 0 ( ), for some {x j } j J, {ν j } j J, {µ j } j J R + with Sν / j µ j, where J is at most a countable set. We are going to show that J is finite. Consider φ C0 ( ) such that 0 φ(x) 1, for all x, φ(x) = 0 for all x B c(0) φ ρ(x) = 1 for all x B 1 (0). Now fix x j, j J define ψ ρ (x) = φ( x xj ρ ), for each ρ >. Then 0 ψ ρ (x) 1, for all x, ψ ρ (x) = 0 for all x Bρ c (x j) ψ(x) = 1 for all x B ρ (x j ). We have that (v n ψ ρ ) is bounded in D 1, ( ) I (v n )v n ψ ρ = o n (1). Hence, v n dx+ v n ψ ρ dx = (I µ v n ) v n ψ ρ dx+o n (1). (.8) Using Proposition.1, seeing that [ we find lim ρ 0 lim sup n Sν / j ] v n ψ ρ dx = 0, µ µ j Cν j. As µ > ν / j < +, we deduce that ν j does not converge to zero, which implies that J is j J finite. From now on, we denote by J = {1,,...,m} Γ the set given by Γ = {x j {x j } j J ; x j > 1}, (x j given by (.7)). 8

9 In the sequel, we are going to show that v 0 0. Suppose, by contradiction that v 0 = 0. Thereby, by (.7), v n φdx 0, φ C0 (RN \{x 1,x,...,x m }). (.9) Using again Proposition.1, we derive the inequality below which leads to ( (I µ v n µ ) vn µ φdx C vn µ ) µ v n φdx = on (1), (.10) v n φ = o n (1). (.11) Consequently, if ρ R is a number that satisfies 0 < ρ < min{dist(γ, B 1 (0),1)}, it follows that v n dx = o n (1). (.1) B 1+ρ/ (0)\B ρ 1+ (0) In the sequel, let us consider the sequence (Φ n ) given by Φ n (x) = Φ(x)v n (x), where Φ C0 (RN ) satisfies 0 Φ(x) 1, Φ(x) = 1 if x B 1+ρ/ (0) Φ(x) = 0 if x B1+ρ/ c (0). Note that, that is, B 1+ρ(0)\B 1+ ρ Since I (v n )Φ n = o n (1), we have B 1+ρ(0)\B 1+ ρ which implies [ ] Φ n dx C v n dx+ v n dx, B 1+ρ/ (0)\B ρ 1+ B 1+ρ(0)\B ρ (0) 1+ B 1+ρ(0)\B 1+ ρ v n Φ n dx+ (0) B 1+ρ(0)\B 1+ ρ (0) (I µ v n B 1+ρ(0)\B ρ 1+ B 1+ρ(0)\B ρ 1+ (0) v n Φ n dx+ (0) Φ n dx = o n (1). (.1) B 1+ ρ (0) v n Φ n dx µ ) vn µ Φdx B ρ 1+ (0) v n dx (I µ v n µ ) vn µ Φdx Note that from Hölder s inequality (.1) B 1+ ρ (0) (I µ v n B ρ 1+ (0) µ ) vn µ Φdx = on (1), (I µ v n µ ) vn µ Φdx = on (1). (.14) B 1+ρ(0)\B 1+ ρ (0) v n Φ n dx 0 when n (.15) that (.9) together with Proposition.1 gives (I µ v n µ ) vn µ Φdx = on (1). (.16) B 1+ρ(0)\B ρ (0) 1+ 9

10 Thereby, from (.14), (.15) (.16), v n dx B ρ 1+ (0) B ρ 1+ (0) (I µ v n µ ) vn µ dx = on (1). (.17) The last equality together with the boundedness of (v n ) (.4) implies that for some subsequence lim v n dx = lim (I µ v n µ ) vn µ dx = A > 0. n B ρ (0) n 1+ B ρ (0) 1+ The last limits combine with Cherrier s inequality ( see Lemma. ) to give ( S A N ) N µ ( ) N N+ µ N+ µ 1. (.18) C(N, µ) Note that Φ n = B 1+ρ(0)\B 1+ ρ = o n (1)+ Φ n dx+ Φ n dx (0) B ρ (0) 1+ B ρ 1+ (0) Φ n dx. Since Φ n = v n in B 1+ ρ (0) that B 1+ ρ (0) B (0), we obtain Φ n o n (1)+ v n dx o n (1)+ o n (1)+ B (0) mk=1 B 1(y k ) m k=1 o n (1)+m sup y B 1(y k ) v n dx v n dx B 1(y) v n dx o n (1)+ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. k Then, B ρ 1+ (0) v n dx o n (1)+ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L, (.19) k implying that Hence, by (.), ( S A which contradicts (.18), so, v 0 0. A S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. k N ) N µ ( ) N N+ µ N+ µ 1, C(N, µ) Now, we are going to show that there is (w n ) D 1, ( ) such that (w n ) is a (PS) c I (v 0) sequence for I satisfying w n (x) = u n (x) R n (N )/ v 0 (R n (x x n ))+o n (1), 10

11 for some subsequence of (u n ) that still denote by (u n ). To this end, we fix ψ C0 (RN ) such that 0 ψ(x) 1 for all x { 1, if x B 1 (0), ψ(x) = 0, if x B(0) c let be a sequence defined by w n (x) = u n (x) R (N )/ n v 0 (R n (x x n ))ψ( R n (x x n )), (.0) where ( R n ) satisfies R n = R n R n. From (.0), R n (s N)/ w n (x) = R n ( N)/ u n (x) v 0 (R n (x x n ))ψ( R n (x x n )). Making change of variable, we arrive in ( ) z R n ( N)/ w n +x n R n ( ) ( z = R n ( N)/ u n +x n v 0 ψ. R n z Rn) Now we define since ( ) z w n = R n ( N)/ w n +x n R n v n (x) = R ( N)/ n u n ( x R n +x n ), we get, ( w n (z) = v n (z) v 0 (z)ψ. (.1) z Rn) If ( ψ n (z) = ψ, (.) z Rn) we have that ψ n (z) = { 1, if z B Rn (0), 0, if z B c R n (0). From (.1) (.), w n (z) = v n (z) v 0 (z)ψ n (z). The result is over if we show that v 0 ψ n v 0 in D 1, ( ) that (w n ) is a (PS) c I (v 0) sequence for I. By a straightforward computation, we get v 0 ψ n v 0 = (v 0 ψ n v 0 ) dx v 0 dx \B Rn + v 0 (ψ n 1) dx = o n (1). (.) Therefore v 0 ψ n v 0 in D 1, ( ), then w n = v n v 0 +o n (1) in D 1, ( ). 11

12 Note that v n dx = v 0 dx+ (v n v 0 ) dx+o n (1) (I µ v n µ ) vn µ dx = (I µ v 0 R R µ ) v0 µ dx+ (I µ v n v 0 R ) v n v 0 dx+o n (1), N N N ensure that I (w n ) = I (v n ) I (v 0 )+o n (1). Hence, Now, recalling that I (w n ) c I (v 0 ) when n. the fact that v 0 is a critical point of I, we can claim that I ( w n ) I (v n )+I (v 0 ) 0, (.4) I ( w n ) = I (v n )+o n (1) = o n (1). As I (w n) I ( w n), it follows that I (w n) 0, the proof of this lemma is over. Theorem.1. (A splitting theorem) Let (u n ) be a (PS) c sequence for I with u n u 0 in D 1, ( ). Then, up to a subsequence, (u n ) satisfies either, (a) u n u 0 in D 1, ( ) or, (b) there exists k N nontrivial solutions z 1 0,z 0,...,z k 0 for the problem (P ), such that u n u 0 + k j=1 z j 0 k I(u n ) I(u 0 )+ I (z j 0 ). j=1 Proof. From the weak convergence, we have that u 0 is a critical point of I. Suppose that u n u 0 in D 1, ( ) let (z 1 n ) D1, ( ) be the sequence given by z 1 n = u n u 0. Then, z 1 n 0 in D1, ( ) z 1 n 0 in D 1, ( ). Arguing as in [, Lemma], we obtain I (z 1 n) = I(u n ) I(u 0 )+o n (1) (.5) I (z1 n ) = I (u n ) I (u 0 )+o n (1). (.6) Then, from (.5) (.6) that (z 1 n ) is a (PS) c 1 sequence for I. Hence, by Lemma.1, there are sequences (R n,1 ) R, (x n,1 ), z 1 0 D1, ( ) nontrivial solution for problem (P ) a (PS) c sequence (z n) D 1, ( ) for I such that If we define z n (x) = z1 n (x) R(N )/ n,1 z 1 0 (R n,1(x x n,1 ))+o n (1). ( ) x vn 1 (x) = R( N)/ n,1 zn 1 +x n,1 R n,1 (.7) 1

13 we obtain z n (x) = R( N)/ n,1 zn ( x +x n,1 R n,1 ), z n (x) = v1 n (x) z1 0 (x)+o n(1) (.8) Hence, vn 1 = z1 n (I µ v 1 n µ ) v 1 n µ dx = (I µ z R R 1 n µ ) z 1 n µ dx. (.9) N N I (v 1 n ) = I (z 1 n ) I (v1 n ) 0 in (D1, ( )) (.0) From (.0) Lemma.-(a), we see that (v 1 n) is a bounded sequence in D 1, ( ), up to a subsequence, Arguing again as in [, Lemma], v 1 n z 1 0 in D 1, ( ). (.1) I ( z n) = I (v 1 n) I (z 1 0)+o n (1) = I(u n ) I(u 0 ) I (z 1 0)+o n (1). (.) I ( z n) = I (v 1 n) I (z 1 0)+o n (1). (.) If z n 0 in D1, ( ), the proof is over for k = 1, because in this case, we have u n u 0 + z 1 0. Moreover, from continuity of I, I(u n ) I(u 0 )+I (z 1 0). If z n 0, using (.8) (.1) that z n 0, by (.) (.), we conclude that ( z n ) is a (PS) c sequence fori. By Lemma.1, there aresequences(r n, ) R, (x n, ), z 0 D1, ( ) nontrivial solution of problem (P ) a (PS) c sequence (z n) D 1, ( ) for I such that z n (x) = z n (x) R(N )/ n, z 0 (R n,(x x n, ))+o n (1). If we have that ( ) vn(x) = R ( N)/ x n, z n +x n, R n, z n (x) = R( N)/ n, zn ( x +x n, R n, ), Arguing of same way as before, we arrive in z n (x) = v n (x) z 0 (x)+o n(1). (.4) z n = u n u 0 z 1 0 z 0 +o n (1), (.5) I ( z n) = I(u n ) I(u 0 ) I (z 1 0) I (z 0)+o n (1). (.6) 1

14 I ( z n ) = I (v n ) I (z 0 )+o n(1). (.7) If z n 0 in D 1, ( ), the proof is over with k =, because z n 0, by (.5), we have u n u 0 + z j 0. Moreover, from continuity of I, we also have that I ( z n) 0. Thereby, by (.6), I(u n ) I(u 0 )+ j=1 I (z j 0 ). If z n 0, we can repeat the same arguments before we will find z1 0,z 0,...,zk 1 0 nontrivial solutions for problem (P ) satisfying From definition of S H,L, j=1 k 1 z n k = u n u 0 z j 0 +o n (1) (.8) j=1 k 1 I ( z n) k = I(u n ) I(u 0 ) I (z j 0 )+o n(1). (.9) j=1 ( ) 1/ (I µ z j µ 0 µ ) z j 0 µ dx SH,L z j 0, j = 1,,...,k 1. (.40) Since z j 0 is nontrivial solution of (P ), for all j = 1,,...,k 1, we have z j 0 = (I µ z j 0 µ ) z j 0 µ dx. Hence, From (.8) (.41), z j 0 (N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L,, j = 1,,...,k 1. (.41) k 1 z n k = u n u 0 z j 0 +o n (1) u n u 0 (k 1)S (N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L +o n (1).(.4) j=1 Since (u n ) is bounded in D 1, ( ), for k sufficient large, we conclude that z n k 0 in D 1, ( ) the proof is over. An immediate consequence of the last theorem are the next two corollaries ( ) (N + µ) Corollary.1. Let (u n ) be a (PS) c sequence for I with c 0, 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. Then, up to a subsequence, (u n ) strong converges in D 1, ( ). 14

15 Proof. We have that (u n ) is bounded in D 1, ( ),u n u 0 in D 1, ( ) I (u 0 ) = 0. Suppose, by contradiction, that u n u 0 in D 1, ( ). From Theorem.1, there are k N nontrivial solutions z 1 0,z 0,...,zk 0 of problem (P ) such that, u n u 0 + I(u n ) I(u 0 )+ k j=1 z j 0 k I (z j 0 ). Note that I(u 0 ) = 1 u a(x)u 0dx 1 R (I µ u 0 µ ) u0 µ dx N µ = 1 u ( ) (I µ u 0 µ ) u0 µ dx u0 1 R (I µ u 0 µ ) u0 µ dx N µ R ( N 1 = 1 ) (I µ u 0 µ ) u0 µ dx 0. µ Then, c = I(u 0 )+ j=1 j=1 j=1 k k I (z j 0 ) I (z j + µ) (N + µ) 0 ) k(n 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L, which is a contradiction with c ( 0, N + µ ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. ( Corollary.. The functional I : D 1, ( ) R satisfies ) the Palais-Smale condition in (N + µ) 4 µ (N + µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L,N+4 µ 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. Proof. Let (u n ) be a sequence in D 1, ( ) that satisfies I(u n ) c I (u n ) 0. Since (u n ) is bounded, up to a subsequence, we have that u n u 0 in D 1, ( ) I(u 0 ) 0. Suppose by contradiction that u n u 0 in D 1, ( ). From Theorem.1, there are k N nontrivial solutions z 1 0,z 0,...,z k 0 of problem (P ) such that u n u 0 + I(u n ) c = I(u 0 )+ k j=1 z j 0 k I (z j 0 ). The above information ensures that u 0 0. Since I(u 0 ) 0, then k = 1 z 1 0 cannot change of sign, because otherwise, by Lemma.4, j=1 I (z j 0 ) 4 µ (N + µ) N+4 µ 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L, 15

16 which leads to a contradiction. On the other h, if z0 1 has definite sign, by [14, Theorem 1.] [, Theorem 1.1], I (z j (N + µ) 0 ) = 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. On the other h, by a direct computation, Hence, I(u 0 ) (N + µ) 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. c = I(u 0 )+I (z0 1 + µ) ) (N 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L > 4 µ (N + µ) N+4 µ 4N µ S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L, obtaining again a contradiction. This proves the result. From now on we consider the functional f : D 1, ( ) R given by ) f(u) = ( u +a(x) u dx the manifold M D 1, ( ) given by { M = u D 1, ( 1 ); (I µ u µ ) u µ dx = 1 }. C(N, µ) A direct computation gives Lemma.. Let (u n ) M be a sequence that satisfies f(u n ) c f M (u n ) 0. Then, the sequence v n = c (N )/(N µ+4) u n satisfies the following limits. I(v n ) (N µ+) (4N µ) c(n µ)/(n+ µ) I (v n ) 0. The next results are direct consequence of the Corollaries above. Lemma.. Suppose that there are a sequence (u n ) M such that Then, up to a subsequence, u n u in D 1, ( ). c (S H,L, (4 µ)(n µ+) (N+4 µ)(n µ) SH,L ) f(u n ) c f M (u n ) 0. Corollary.. Suppose that there is a sequence (u n ) M such that c (S H,L, (4 µ)(n µ+) (N+4 µ)(n µ) SH,L ) f(u n ) c f M (u n ) 0. Then I has a critical point v 0 D 1, ( ) with I(v 0 ) = (N + µ) 4N µ c(n µ)/(n+ µ). 16

17 4 Technical Lemmas From now on, we consider the function Φ δ,y D 1, ( ) given by ( ) (N )/ δ Φ δ,y (x) = C N δ + x y, x,y δ > 0, (4.1) where C N is a positive constant. From [14] [], we know that that every positive solution of (P ) is as (4.1). Moreover, a simply computation ensures that we can fix C N > 0 of a such way that Φ δ,y 1 = S H,L (I µ Φ δ,y µ ) Φδ,y µ = 1. (4.) C(N, µ) In this subsection we prove some properties of the family (Φ δ,y ) given by in (4.1). First of all, we recall { } Φ δ,y Σ = u D 1, ( );u 0 (4.) ( (N µ/) Φ δ,y L q ( ) for q N, µ ], δ > 0 y. (4.4) The proof of the next two lemmas follow as in [] their proofs will be omitted. Lemma 4.1. For each y, we have (i) Φ δ,y H 1, ( ) 0 when δ +, (ii) Φ δ,y H 1, ( ) + when δ 0 ( ] (N µ/) (iii) Φ δ,y q 0 when δ 0, q, µ, N ( (N µ/) (iv) Φ δ,b q + when δ +, q N Lemma 4.. For each ε > 0, we have \B ε(0), µ ). Φ δ,0 dx 0 when δ 0. Next, we are showing to prove some technical lemmas that are crucial in the proof of Theorem 1.1 Lemma 4.. Suppose that a L q ( N µ ), q [p 1,p ], where 1 < p 1 < < p with 4 µ p < N µ/ 4 N µ/ if N =. Then, for each ε > 0, there are δ = δ(ε) > 0 δ = δ(ε) > 0 such that sup f(φ δ,y ) < S H,L +ε, δ (0,δ] [ δ, ). y Proof. Consider y, q ( ] N µ 4 µ,p t (1,+ ) with 1 q + 1 t = 1. By a simple calculus, N µ/ N < t < µ. (4.5) 17

18 ( ) N µ/ Since Φ δ,y L d ( ), d N, µ, we see that Φ δ,y L t ( ). Then, by Hölder s inequality, a(x) Φ δ,y dx a q Φ δ,0 t, y RN. From Lemma 4.1- (iii), given ε > 0, there exists δ = δ(ε) > 0 such that Suppose that q [ p 1, sup f(φ δ,b ) S H,L + ε y R < S H,L +ε, δ (0,δ]. N ) N µ with t (1,+ ) 1 4 µ q + 1 t = 1. Note that t µ > 0 for δ > 1, Φ δ,y L ( ) (4.6) Φ δ,y µ L 1 ( ). Then, Φ δ,y L t ( ). Applying again Hölder s inequality with q t, we get a(x) Φ δ,y dx a q Φ δ,0 (t µ )/t Φ δ,0 µ /t C a µ q δ (( N)/)((t µ )/t), y. Then, given ε > 0, there is δ = δ(ε) > 1 such that δ (( N)/)/)((t µ )/t) < ε, δ [ δ, ), a q C which implies f(φ δ,b ) = Φ δ,y dx+ a(x) Φ δ,y dx R N S H,L + sup a(x) Φ δ,y dx y < S H,L + ε < S H,L +ε, y δ [ δ, ). Lemma 4.4. Suppose that a L (N µ/)/( µ/) ( ) < ( (4 µ)(n µ+4) (N+4 µ)(n µ) 1)SH,L. Then, sup f(φ δ,y ) < (4 µ)(n µ+4) (N+4 µ)(n µ) SH,L. y δ (0,+ ) Proof. Employing Hölder s inequality with (N µ/)/(n ) (N µ/)/(n ), we find sup f(φ δ,y ) < S H,L +S H,L ( (4 µ)(n µ+4) (4 µ)(n µ+4) (N+4 µ)(n µ) 1) = (N+4 µ)(n µ) SH,L. y δ (0, ) In what follows, we set the functions ξ(x) = { 0, if x < 1 1, if x 1 18

19 α : D 1, ( ) +1 by where Lemma 4.5. If y 1, then α(u) = 1 S H,L ( ) x x,ξ(x) u dx = (β(u),γ(u)), β(u) = 1 x S H,L R x u dx N γ(u) = 1 ξ(x) u dx. S H,L β(φ δ,y ) = y y +o δ(1) when δ 0. Proof. The proof follows can in [, Lemma 8]. Now we define the set I = { ( u M;α(u) = 0, 1 )}. It is easy to see that I is not empty, because β(φ δ,0 ) = 0 the limits below hold γ(φ δ,0 ) 0 as δ 0 γ(φ δ,0 ) 1 as δ +. The next lemma establishes a first estimative from below for c 0. Lemma 4.6. The number c 0 = inf u I f(u) satisfies the inequality c 0 > S H,L. Proof. Since I M, we know that S H,L c 0. Suppose, by contradiction, that S H,L = c 0. By Ekel s variational principle [4], there exists (u n ) D 1, ( ) such that ( 1 (I µ u n µ ) un µ = 1, α(un ) 0, 1 ) (4.7) C(N, µ) R N f(u n ) S H,L, f M (u n ) 0. (4.8) Then, (u n ) is bounded in D 1, ( ), up to a subsequence, u n u 0 in D 1, ( ). If v n = c (N )/(N µ+4) u n v 0 = c (N )/(N µ+4) u 0, we have that v n v 0 in D 1, ( ). Moreover, from (4.8) Lemma., I(v n ) (N µ+) (4N µ) S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L I (v n ) 0. We are going to show that v 0 0. First of all, note that u n u 0 in D 1, ( ), (4.9) because otherwise, u 0 0 S H,L = u 0 dx < u 0 dx+ a(x) u 0 dx = S H,L, 19

20 which is absurd. Hence, v n v 0 in D 1, ( ), since (v n ) is a (PS) c sequence for I, by Theorem.1 we obtain that k I(v n ) I(v 0 )+ I (z j (N µ+) 0 ) = (4N µ) S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. j=1 Recalling that I (z j 0 ) = 0, we have that I(v 0 ) = 0, k = 1 I (z0 1 (N µ+) ) = (4N µ) S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L. (4.10) Since v 0 is weak solution to problem (P), we also have (N µ+) I(v 0 ) = (I µ v 0 µ ) v0 µ dx. (4N µ) This fact combined with (4.10) yields v 0 0. Then, (v n ) is a (PS) c sequence for I such that v n 0, v n 0 a(x) v n dx = o n (1). Therefore, (N µ+) (4N µ) S(N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L +o n (1) = I(v n ) = I (v n )+ a(x) v n dx = I (v n )+o n (1) (4.11) I (v n) = o n (1). (4.1) From (4.11) (4.1), (v n ) is a (PS) c sequence for I, by Lemma.1, there are sequences (R n ) R, (x n ), z 1 0 nontrivial solution of (P ) (w n ) a (PS) c sequence for I such that Setting we have v n (x) = w n (x)+r (N )/ n z 1 0 (R n(x x n ))+o n (1). (4.1) z n (x) = R (N )/ n z 1 0(R n (x x n )), I (z n)ϕ = I (z1 0 )ϕ n = 0, ϕ D 1, ( ), n N, i.e, z n a solution of (P ), for all n N. From (4.10), we know that z 0 = Φ δ,y for some δ > 0 y. Hence, there are δ n > 0 y n such that ( ) N / δ n z n (x) = Φ δn,y n (x) = C δn + x y n, x. Thereby, by (4.1), where u n (x) = w n (x)+φ δn,y n (x)+o n (1), w n (x) = 1 S (N µ)/(n+ µ) H,L w n (x). Using (4.10), we derive that w n 0, which implies that w n 0 in D 1, ( ). Thereby, from (4.7), ( 0, 1 ) +o n (1) = α(u n ) = α( w n +Φ δn,y n +o n (1)) = α(φ δn,y n ) implying that (i) β(φ δn,y n ) 0 (ii) γ(φ δn,y n ) 1. Passing to a subsequence, one of these cases below must occur: 0

21 (a) δ n + when n + ; (b) δ n δ 0 when n + ; (c) δ n 0 y n ỹ when n + with ỹ < 1 ; (d) δ n 0 when n + y n 1 for n sufficient large. Suppose that (a) is true. Then, γ(φ δn,y n ) = 1 1 S H,L B 1(0) Φ δn,y n dx, together with Lemma 4.1 gives γ(φ δn,y n ) 1 = 1 S H,L B 1(0) Φ δn,y n dx = o n (1), which contradicts (ii). Suppose that (b) is true. In this case we can suppose that y n +, because if y n ỹ, a direct computation shows that Φ δn,y n Φ δ,ỹ in D 1, ( ). Since w n 0 in D 1, ( ) u n = w n + Φ δn,y n + o n (1), (u n ) converges in D 1, ( ) but this is a contradiction with (4.9). Therefore, 1 γ(φ δn,y n ) = ξ(x) Φ δn,y S n dx = 1 Φ δn,y H,L R S n dx N H,L \B 1(0) = 1 1 Φ δn,0 dx. (4.14) S H,L Applying Lebesgue Theorem we see that then by (4.14) which is impossible by (ii). B 1( y n) B 1( y n) Φ δn,0 dx 0, γ(φ δn,y n ) 1 when n +, Suppose that (c) is true. Note that 1 γ(φ δn,y n ) = ξ(x) Φ δn,y S n dx = 1 Φ δn,y H,L R S n dx N H,L \B 1(0) 1 = Φ δn,y S n dx 1 Φ δn,0 dz H,L R S N H,L B 1( y n) = 1 1 Φ δn,0 dz. (4.15) S H,L B 1( y n) Thereby, employing again Lebesgue Theorem, we find Φ δn,0 dz = S H,L, lim n + B 1( y n) 1

22 then by (4.15) which is a contradiction with (ii). γ(φ δn,y n ) 0, Suppose that (d) is true. Since y n 1 for n large, we have that y n 0 in. From Lemma 4.5, β(φ δn,y n ) = y n y n +o n(1). Hence, β(φ δn,y n ) 0, which contradicts (i). Thus, S H,L < c 0 the proof is over. Lemma 4.7. There is δ 1 (0,1/) such that (a) f(φ δ,y ) < S H,L +c 0, y ; (b) γ(φ δ,y ) < 1, y RN such that y < 1 ; (c) β(φ δ,y) y y < 1 4, y RN such that y 1. Proof. Applying Lemma 4., with ε = c 0 S H,L > 0 δ < min{δ,1/}, we find f(φ δ,y ) sup f(φ δ,y ) < S H,L + c 0 S H,L y R N showing that (i) holds. Now, by definition of ξ, γ(φ δ,y ) = 1 1 S H,L B 1( y) = S H,L +c 0, y, (4.16) Φ δ,0 dz. By Lebesgue Theorem, proving (ii). Finally, note that from Lemma 4.5, the proof is finished. Lemma 4.8. There is δ > 1 such that lim Φ δ,0 dz = S H,L δ 0 B 1( y) β(φ δ,y ) = y y +o δ(1) when δ 0, y ; y 1 (a) f(φ δ,y) < S H,L +c 0, y, (b) γ(φ δ,y) > 1, y RN. Proof. Applying again Lemma 4., with ε = c 0 S H,L > 0 δ > max{ δ,1}, we derive f(φ δ,y ) sup f(φ δ,y) < S H,L + c 0 S H,L y R N = S H,L +c 0, y. (4.17)

23 Moreover, the definition of ξ together with Lemma 4.1 leads to γ(φ δ,y ) 1 when δ +, the proof is over. Lemma 4.9. There is R > 0 such that (a) f(φ δ,y ) < S H,L +c 0, y; y R δ [δ 1,δ ], (b) (β(φ δ,y ) y) > 0 y; y R δ [δ 1,δ ]. Proof. The item (a) follows by employing Lemma 4. with ε = c 0 S H,L done as in [7, Lemma.10]. > 0. The item (b) can be 5 Proof of Theorem 1.1 In this section we will prove Theorem 1.1. Have this in mind, we will fix some notations prove more some technical lemmas. From now on, V denotes the following set V = {(y,δ) (0, ); y < R δ (δ 1,δ )}, where δ 1,δ R are given in Lemmas 4.7, , respectively. Moreover, let us consider the continuous function Q : (0,+ ) D 1, ( ) given by Using the above notations, we also fix the sets Q(y,δ) = Φ δ,y. Θ = {Q(y,δ);(y,δ) V}, { H = h C(Σ M,Σ M);h(u) = u, u (Σ M);f(u) < S } H,L +c 0 Γ = {A (Σ M);A = h(θ),h H}. Note that Θ (Σ M), Θ = Q(V) is compact H, because the identity function is in H. Lemma 5.1. Let F : V +1 be a function given by F(y,δ) = (α Q)(y,δ) = 1 S H,L Then, ( ) x x,ξ(x) Φ δ,y dx. d(f,v,(0,1/)) = 1. (Topological degree) Proof. Let Z : [0,1] V +1 be the homotopy given by Z(t,(y,δ)) = tf(y,δ)+(1 t)i V (y,δ), where I V is the identity. We are going to show that (0,1/) / Z([0,1] ( V)), i.e, tβ(φ δ,y )+(1 t)y 0, t [0,1] (y,δ) V (5.1)

24 or Note that V = Λ 1 Λ Λ Λ 4, where tγ(φ δ,y )+(1 t)δ 1, t [0,1] (y,δ) V. (5.) Λ 1 = {(y,δ 1 ); y < 1/}, Λ = {(y,δ 1 );1/ y R}, Λ = {(y,δ); y R} Λ 4 = {(y,δ); y = R δ [δ 1,δ ]}. If (y,δ) Λ 1, then (y,δ) = (y,δ 1 ). From Lemma 4.7, δ 1 < 1 γ(φ δ,y) < 1. Hence, tγ(φ δ,y )+(1 t)δ = tγ(φ δ1,y)+(1 t)δ 1 showing that (5.) is true (0,1/) / Z([0,1] Λ 1 ). If (y,δ) Λ, then (y,δ) = (y,δ 1 ) y 1. Therefore, < t 1 +(1 t)1 = 1, t [0,1] e (y,δ) Λ 1 tβ(φ δ,y ) (1 t)y ty (1 t)y + y ty y tβ(φ δ 1,y) = (1 t) y +t y t y y y β(φ δ 1,y) = (1 t) y +t t y y β(φ δ 1,y) = (1 t) y +t t y y β(φ δ 1,y). (5.) Thereby, by Lemma 4.7-(c) (5.), tβ(φ δ,y )+(1 t)y (1 t) y +t t y y β(φ δ 1,y) proving that (5.1) is true (0,1/) / Z([0,1] Λ ). > (1 t) y +t t t 4 > 0, t [0,1] (y,δ) Λ If (y,δ) Λ, then (y,δ) = (y,δ ). By Lemma 4.8, δ > 1 γ(φ δ,y) > 1, so, tγ(φ δ,y )+(1 t)δ = tγ(φ δ,y)+(1 t)δ > t 1 +(1 t)1 = 1, t [0,1] (y,δ) Λ, showing that (5.) is true (0,1/) / Z([0,1] Λ ). If (y,δ) Λ 4, we must have y = R. Thus, by Lemma 4.9-(b), (β(φ δ,y ) y) > 0. From this, (tβ(φ δ,y )+(1 t)y y) = t(β(φ δ,y ) y) +(1 t)(y y) > 0, t [0,1]. Therefore (5.1) is true (0,1/) / Z([0,1] Λ 4 ). 4

25 The previous analysis ensures that (0,1/) / Z([0,1] V), then by properties of the Topological degree d(f,v,(0,1/)) = d(i V,V,(0,1/)). Since (0,1/) V, we derive that Lemma 5.. If A Γ, then A I. d(f,v,(0,1/)) = d(i V,V,(0,1/)) = 1. Proof. It is sufficient to prove that for all h H, there exists (y 0,δ 0 ) V such that ( (α H Q)(y 0,δ 0 ) = 0, 1 ). Given h H, let F h : V +1 be the continuous function given by F h (y,δ) = (α h Q)(y,δ). We are going to show that F h = F in V. Note that where V = Π 1 Π Π, (5.4) Π 1 = {(y,δ 1 ); y R}, Π = {(y,δ ); y R} Π = {(y,δ); y = R δ [δ 1,δ ]}. If (y,δ) Π 1, then (y,δ) = (y,δ 1 ), by Lemma 4.7-(a), f(q(y,δ)) = f(q(y,δ 1 )) = f(φ δ1,y) < S H,L +c 0, (y,δ) Π 1. (5.5) If (y,δ) Π, then (y,δ) = (y,δ ), by Lemma 4.8-(a), f(q(y,δ)) = f(q(y,δ )) = f(φ δ,y) < S H,L +c 0, (y,δ) Π. (5.6) If (y,δ) Π, then y = R δ [δ 1,δ ], by Lemma 4.9-(a), From (5.4), (5.5), (5.6) (5.7), f(q(y,δ)) = f(φ δ,y ) < S H,L +c 0, (b,δ) Π. (5.7) Hence, f(q(y,δ)) < S H,L +c 0, (y,δ) V. F h (y,δ) = (α h Q)(y,δ) = (α h)q(y,δ) = α(h(q(y,δ))) = α(q(y,δ)) = (α Q)(y,δ) = F(y,δ), (y,δ) V. 5

26 Since (0,1/) / F( V), we have Then by Lemma 5.1, so, there exists (y 0,δ 0 ) V such that d(f,v,(0,1/)) = d(f h,v,(0,1/)). d(f h,v,(0,1/)) = d(f,v,(0,1/)) = 1, F h (y 0,δ 0 ) = (α h Q)(y 0,δ 0 ) = ( 0, 1 ), finishing the proof. 5.1 Proof of Theorem 1.1 Consider the number c = inf A Γ max u A f(u). Our first step is to show that S H,L < c < (4 µ)(n µ+4) (N+4 µ)(n µ) SH,L. (5.8) To this end, note that c = inf max A Γ u A On the other h, from Lemmas , f(u) maxf(u) sup f(φ δ,b ) < (4 µ)(n µ+4) (N+4 µ)(n µ) SH,L. u Θ y δ (0,+ ) S H,L < c 0 = inf f(u) c, u I from where it follows (5.8). In what follows, λ µ denotes the following real number Hence, λ µ = (4 µ)(n µ+4) (N +4 µ)(n µ). S H,L < c 0 c < λµ S H,L. (5.9) Now, in order to conclude the proof of theorem, we are going to prove the following claim Claim 5.1. K c = {u Σ M; f(u) = c f M (ũ) = 0}. If the claim does not hold, by Deformation Lemma [18], there exists a continuous application η : [0,1] (Σ M) Σ M ε 0 > 0 such that (1) η(0,u) = u; () η(t,u) = u, u f c ε0 {(Σ M)\f c+ε0 }, t [0,1]; () η(1,f c+ε 0 ) f c ε 0, 6

27 where for each q R, f q denotes the set f q = {u Σ M;f(u) q}. Using the above notations, we have the following inclusion Indeed, given u f c+ε0 \f c ε0, we have By (5.8), for ε 0 sufficiently small, we get f c+ε0 \f c ε0 f λµ S H,L \f (SH,L+c0)/. (5.10) c ε 0 < f(u) c+ε 0. On the other h, Lemma 4.6 together with (5.9) gives c ε 0 < f(u) c+ε 0 < λµ S H,L. (5.11) S H,L +c 0 Now, (5.10) follows from (5.11) (5.1). where From definition of c, there exists Ã Γ such that < c 0 ε 0 c ε 0 < f(u). (5.1) c maxf(u) < c+ ε 0 u Ã, Since à Γ, à (Σ M) there exists h H such that From definition of η, we have à f c+ε 0. (5.1) h(θ) = Ã. (5.14) η(1,ã) Σ M. (5.15) In the sequel, we fix the function ĥ : Σ M Σ M given by ĥ(u) = η(1, h(u)) that belongs to C(Σ M,Σ M). Consider u Σ M such that Then, f(u) < S H,L +c 0. (5.16) h(u) = u from (5.16) (5.10), u / f λµ S H,L \f (SH,L+c0)/, so, u / f c+ε0 \f c ε0. Hence, u f c ε0 {(Σ M)\f c+ε0 }. Thereby, by Deformation lemma, so, η(1,u) = u, ĥ(u) = η(1, h(u)) = η(1,u) = u. This shows that ĥ H, so, ĥ(θ) = η(1, h(θ)) = η(1,ã) Γ. (5.17) 7

28 Hence, c = inf max A Γ u A On the other h, from Deformation lemma (5.1), f(u) max u η(1,ã) f(u). (5.18) η(1,ã) η(1,fc+ε 0 ) f c ε 0, that is, or yet, This together with (5.18) leads to f(u) c ε 0, u η(1,ã), max f(u) c ε 0 u η(1,ã). c max u η(1,ã) f(u) c ε 0, which is absurd, showing Claim 5.1. Therefore, there is ũ 0 Σ M, such that f(ũ 0 ) = c f M (ũ 0 ) = 0. The positivity of ũ 0 is a consequence of the maximum principles. Acknowledgment: C.O.Alves is partially supported by CNPq/Brazil 04804/017-7 G. M. Figueiredo is supported by CNPq FAPDF. References [1] C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo M. Yang, Existence of solutions for a nonlinear Choquard equation with potential vanishing at infinity, Advanced in Nonlinear Analysis (015), [] C. O. Alves, A. B. Nóbrega M. Yang, Multi-bump solutions for Choquard equation with deepening potential well, Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Eq. (016) 55: 48. doi.org/ /s [] C. O. Alves, Existence of possitive solutions for a problem with lack of compactness involving the p-laplacian, Nonlinear Anal. 51 (00), [4] C. O. Alves M. Yang, Multiplicity concentration behavior of solutions for a quasilinear Choquard equation via penalization method, Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, to appear. [5] C. O. Alves Y. Jianfu, Existence Regularity of Solutions for a Choquard Equation with Zero Mass, Milan J. Math. 86(018), 9-4. [6] V. Benci, C. R. Grisanti A. M. Micheletti, Existence of solutions for the nonlinear Schrödinger equation with V( ) = 0, Progr. Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl. 66 (005), [7] V. Benci G. Cerami, Existence of positive solutions of the equation u+a(x)u = u N+ N in, J. Funct. Anal. 88( 1990), [8] A. K. Ben-Naoum, A. K. Ben-Naoum M. Willem, Extrema problems with critical Sobolev exponents on unbounded domains, Nonlinear Analysis 6 (1996), 8-8 8

29 [9] L. Bergé A. Couairon, Nonlinear propagation of self-guided ultra-short pulses in ionized gases, Phys. Plasmas, 7(000), [10] J. Chabrowski, Concentration-compactness principle at infinity semilinear elliptic equations involving critical subcritical Sobolev exponents, Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Eq. (199), [11] P. Cherrier, Meilleures constantes dans les inegalites relatives aux espaces de Sobolev, Bull. Sci. Math. 108 (1984) 5-6. [1] S. Cingolani, M. Clapp S. Secchi, Multiple solutions to a magnetic nonlinear Choquard equation, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 6 (01), -48. [1] F. Dalfovo, S. Giorgini, L. P. Pitaevskii S. Stringari, Theory of Bose-Einstein condensation in trapped gases, Rev. Mod. Phys., 71(1999), [14] L. Du M. Yang, Uniqueness nondegeneracy of solutions for a critical nonlocal equation, arxiv: v1 [15] L. Du, F. Gao M. Yang, Existence qualitative analysis for nonlinear weighted Choquard equations, arxiv: v1 [16] F. Gao M. Yang, The Brezis-Nirenberg type critical problem for the nonlinear Choquard equation, Science China Mathematics, 61 (018), [17] M. Ghimenti J. Van Schaftingen, Nodal solutions for the Choquard equation, arxiv: v1. [18] H. Hofer, Variational topological methods in partially ordered Hilbert spaces, Math. Ann. 61 (198), [19] E. Lieb M. Loss, Analysis, Gradute Studies in Mathematics, AMS, Providence, Rhode isl, 001. [0] E. H. Lieb, Existence uniqueness of the minimizing solution of Choquard s nonlinear equation, Studies in Appl. Math. 57 (1976/77), [1] O. Kavian, Introduction à la théorie des points critiques, Springer-Verlag, [] S. Liu. Regularity, symmetry, uniqueness of some integral type quasilinear equations. Nonlinear Anal. 71(009), [] P. L. Lions. The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The limit case. I., Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana, 1(1):145-01, [4] L. Ma L. Zhao, Classification of positive solitary solutions of the nonlinear Choquard equation, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 195(010), [5] C. Mercuri M. Willem. A global compactness result for the p-laplacian involving critical nonlinearities. Discrete & Continuous Dynamical Systems - A, 8 (010 ), [6] O. H. Miyagaki, On a class of semilinear elliptic problems in with critical growth, Nonlinear Analysis 9 (1997), [7] V. Moroz J. Van Schaftingen, Groundstates of nonlinear Choquard equation: Hardy-Littlewood- Sobolev critical exponent, to appear in Commun. Contemp. Math, available at arxiv: v1 [8] V. Moroz J. Van Schaftingen, Groundstates of nonlinear Choquard equations:existence, qualitative properties decay asymptotics, J. Funct. Anal. 65 (01),

30 [9] V. Moroz J. Van Schaftingen, Existence of groundstates for a class of nonlinear Choquard equations. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 67 (015), [0] V. Moroz J. Van Schaftingen, A guide to the Choquard equation, J. Fixed Point Theory Appl. 19 (017), [1] D. Passaseo, Some sufficient conditions for the existence of positive solutions to the equation u+a(x)u = u N+ N in in bounded domains, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré 1 (1996), [] S. Secchi, A note on Schrödinger-Newton systems with decaying electric potential, Nonlinear Anal., 7 (010), [] M. Struwe, A global compactness result for elliptic boundary value problems involving limiting nonliarities, Math. Z. 187, no. 4, (1984), [4] M. Willem, Minimax Theorems, Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations their Applications, 4, Birkhäuser