arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 12 Sep 2017

Transcription

1 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO STRICTLY CONVEX OBSTACLES arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 12 Sep 217 DAVID LAFONTAINE Abstract. We prove global Strichartz estimates without loss outside two strictly convex obstacles, combining arguments from [Ika88, Ika82] with more recent ones inspired by [BGH1] and [Iva1]. This is to be contrasted with the loss in the smoothing estimate for the Schrödinger equation with Dirichlet boundary conditions in the presence of a trapped geodesic. 1. Introduction The Strichartz estimates are a family of dispersive estimates for the Schrödinger flow on a Riemannian Manifold M: e it u L p (,T )L q (M) C T u L 2, where the exponents (p, q) have to follow the admissibility condition given by the scaling of the equation: p, q 2, 2 p + n q = n, (p, q, n) (2,, 2), 2 and n is the dimension of M. If M is a manifold with boundaries, we understand to be the Dirichlet Laplacian. Locally in time, these estimates describe a regularizing effect, reflected by a gain of integrability. Globally, they describe a decay effect: the L q x norm has to decay, at least in a L p t sense. We say that a loss occurs in the Strichartz estimates, if the estimates do not hold but we are able to show that e it u Lp (,T )L q (M) C T u H s, with s >. The story of Strichartz estimates in the case of the flat Laplacian on M = R n begins with the work of [Str77] for p = q, for the wave equation, then generalized for any admissible couple and the Schrödinger equation by [GV85], and by [KT98] for the endpoint (p = 2) case. In the variable coeficients case, the situation is more difficult. Strichartz estimates without loss for the Schrödinger equation were obtained in several geometrical situations where all the geodesics go to infinity - we say that the manifold is nontrapping - : [BT7], [Bou11], [HTW6], [ST2], in the case of manifold without boundary; and in the case of a manifold with boundary, by [Iva1] who obtained the estimates outside one convex obstacle. david.lafontaine@unice.fr, Université Côte d Azur, CNRS, LJAD, France. 1

2 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 2 Another tool for analyzing the behavior of the Schrödinger flow is the local smoothing effect χe it D u L 2 (R,H 1/2 (M)) C u L 2 where χ is a smooth compactly supported function. The influence of the geometry on the local smoothing effect is now fully understood: [Bur4] showed that a necessary and sufficient condition for this estimate to hold is the non-trapping condition. When trapped geodesics exist, a loss in the smoothing effect has to occur. But in the case of the Strichartz estimates, the situation is not fully understood yet: [BGH1] showed Strichartz estimates without loss for asymptotically euclidian manifolds without boundary for which the trapped set is small enough and exhibit an hyperbolic dynamics. We go in the same direction and show global Strichartz estimates without loss outside two convex obstacles, providing a first example of Strichartz estimates without loss in a trapped setting for the problem with boundaries: Theorem 1.1. Let Θ 1 and Θ 2 be two smooth, compact, strictly convex subsets of R 3, and Ω = R 3 \(Θ 1 Θ 2 ). If (p, q) verifies then, the following estimate holds: p > 2, q 2, 2 p + 3 q = 3 2, (1.1) e it D u L p (R,L q (Ω)) C u L 2. Strictly convex is here understood in the sense of [Iva1], that is with a second fondamental form bounded below. The behavior of the waves equation outside several convex obstacles was first investigated by [Ika88, Ika82], who showed local energy decay. Burq used in [Bur93] some of his results to show a control property on an equation closely related to the Schrödinger equation outside several convex bodies. For data of frequencies h 1, if we are able to prove Strichartz estimates in times h e it D u L p (,h)l q (Ω) C u L 2, then the smoothing estimate provides the Strichartz estimates. But in our framework, a logarithmic loss occur in the estimate, due to the presence of a trapped ray: χe it D u L 2 (R,H 1/2 (M)) C ln h 1 2 u L 2. However, [BGH1] remarked that this logarithmic loss can be compensated if we show Strichartz estimates up to times h log h. Following their idea and arguments of [Iva1], we first show that we can restrict ourselves to prove the estimate on a neighborhood of the periodic ray and in times h log h, for datas of frequencies h 1. Then, we reduce again the problem, to data which micro-locally contain only points of the tangent space which do not escape a given neighborhood of the periodic ray after logarithmic times. Finally, following ideas of [Ika88, Ika82], [Bur93], we construct an approximate solution for such data, and we show that this approximation gives the desired estimate. Remark 1.2. We restrict here ourselves to the three dimensional case because we use results of [Ika88, Ika82] and [Bur93] who are stated in dimension three. The other parts of the proof hold in any dimension without modification. Because

3 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 3 Figure 1.1. Notations the above mentioned results should be extended without difficulty to the arbitrary dimensional case, our proof should work in any dimension. Remark 1.3. We do not obtain the endpoint case (p, q) = (2, 6) because we make use of the Christ-Kiselev lemma. However, this restriction should be avoided with a more careful analysis Notations. We will use the following notations and conventions: Θ 1, Θ 2 will be two smooth, compact, strictly convex subsets of R 3, called the obstacles, X i (x, p) the i th point of intersection of the reflected ray starting at x in the direction p with the obstacles, Ξ i (x, p) the direction of the reflected ray starting at x in the direction p after i reflections, (X t (x, p), Ξ t (x, p)) the point and the direction attained by following the reflected ray starting at x in the direction p during a time t at speed p, Φ t (x, p) the billiard flow, Φ t (x, p) = (X t (x, p), Ξ t (x, p)). Moreover, we refer to the periodic ray or the trapped ray, denoted R, as the segment joining Θ 1 and Θ 2 that is the unique periodic trajectory of R 3 \ (Θ 1 Θ 2 ). Let h > be a fixed small parameter. We fix α, β > and a smooth funtion ψ C supported in [α, β ]. For h > and u L 2, ψ( h 2 )u is the localisation of u in frequencies of sizes [α h 1, β h 1 ]. We refer to [Iva1] for the definition of ψ( h 2 ). Finally, for a C (R n R n ), we will design by Op(a) the microlocal operator with symbol a operating at scale h, defined for u L 2 (R n ) by (Op(a)u)(x) = 1 (2πh) n e i(x y) ξ/h a(x, ξ)u(y)dξdy. We refer to [Zwo12] for classical properties of these operators.

4 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 4 2. Reduction to logarithmic times near the periodic ray The aim of this section is to show that the following proposition implies theorem 1.1: Proposition 2.1 (Semiclassical Strichartz estimates on a logarithmic interval near the periodic ray). There exists ɛ > such that for any χ C vanishing outside a small enough neighborhood of the trapped ray, we have (2.1) χe it D ψ( h 2 )u Lp (,ɛh log h )L q (Ω) C u L 2. In the rest of this section, we will assume that 2.1 holds with ɛ = 1 and prove theorem 1.1. The proof for other values of ɛ > is the same. Let χ obst, χ ray C be such that χ obst = 1 in a neighborhood of Θ 1 Θ 2 R, and χ ray C such that χ ray = 1 in a neighborhood of R, and let ψ such that ψ = 1 on the support of ψ. We decompose ψ( h 2 )e it D u in a sum of three terms (2.2) ψ( h 2 )e it D u = ψ( h 2 )(1 χ obst )ψ( h 2 )e it D u + ψ( h 2 )χ obst (1 χ ray )ψ( h 2 )e it D u + ψ( h 2 )χ obst χ ray ψ( h 2 )e it D u. We can deal with the first two terms like in [Iva1] if we show a smoothing effect without loss for χ equal to near the trapped ray. The third term can be handled with the method of [BGH1]: the smoothing effect with logarithmic loss obtained in [Bur4] combined with Proposition 2.1 and the smoothing effect in the non trapping region is sufficient to show Strichartz estimates without loss. Let us first show Proposition 2.2 (Local smoothing without loss in the non trapping region). For any χ C vanishing in a neighborhood of the periodic ray, we have (2.3) χe it D u L 2 (R,H 1/2 (Ω)) u L 2. Proof. Let K be a smooth, connected, non trapping obstacle, coinciding with Θ 1 Θ 2 outside a neighborhood of the periodic ray on which χ is vanishing (figure 2.1). Note that, in particular, K coincides with Θ 1 Θ 2 on the support of χ. We set Ω = R n \K. In particular, D, Ω and D,Ω coincides on the support of χ. As K is non trapping, we have by the work of [VZ] and [MS78, MS82] for the high frequencies part, [Bur98] for the low frequencies Now, if u L 2 (Ω), we have χ( D, Ω (λ ± ɛ) 2 ) 1 χ L2 ( Ω) L 2 ( Ω) C λ 1. χ( D,Ω (λ ± ɛ) 2 ) 1 χu L 2 (Ω) = χ( D, Ω (λ ± ɛ) 2 ) 1 χu L2 ( Ω) C u L2 ( Ω) λ 1 C u L2 (Ω) λ 1. So, the following resolvent estimate holds χ( D,Ω (λ ± ɛ) 2 ) 1 χ L 2 (Ω) L 2 (Ω) C λ 1. And we can deduce the smoothing estimate (2.3) exactly like in [BGT4].

5 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 5 Figure The first two terms: away from the periodic ray. In this section, we deal with the first two terms of (2.2), following [Iva1] The first term. We set w h (x, t) = (1 χ obst )ψ( h 2 )e it D u, who satisfies { i t w h + D w h = [χ obst, D ]ψ( h 2 )e it D u w h (t = ) = (1 χ obst )ψ( h 2 )u By the arguments of [Iva1], as χ = 1 near Ω, w h solve a problem in the full space, and the Duhamel formula combined with the Strichartz estimates for the usual Laplacian on R n and the Christ-Kiselev lemma gives the estimate w h Lp L q (1 χ obst)ψ( h 2 )e it D u L 2 (R n )+ [χ obst, D ]ψ( h 2 )e it D u L2 H 1/2. Note that [χ, D ] is supported in a compact set and outside some neighborhood of Θ 1 Θ 2 R. So, there exists χ C such that χ = 1 on the support of [χ obst, D ] and vanishing in a neighborhood of R. Then, by the smoothing estimate without loss in the non trapping region (2.3), we get [χ obst, D ]ψ( h 2 )e it D u L2 H 1/2 = [χ obst, D ] χψ( h 2 )e it D u L2 H 1/2 Finally, the estimate χψ( h 2 )e it D u L2 H 1/2 ψ( h 2 )u L 2. ψ( h 2 )w h L r w h L r of [IP] permits as in [Iva1] to conclude that ψ( h 2 )(1 χ obst )ψ( h 2 )e it D u L p L q ψ( h2 )e it D u L The second term. Following again [Iva1], we localise in space in the following way: let ϕ C ( 1, 2) equal to one on [, 1], and for l Z where v h,l = ϕ(t/h l)χ obst (1 χ ray )ψ( h 2 )e it D u ( ) V h,l = ϕ(t/h l)a + i ϕ (t/h l) χ obst (1 χ ray ) ψ( h 2 )e it D u h A = χ obst (1 χ ray ) χ obst χ ray χ ray χ obst +(1 χ ray ) χ obst χ obst χ ray.

6 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 6 Figure 2.2. These quantities verify { i t v h,l + D v h,l = v h,l hl+2h>t>hl h = Note that the support of A is included in that of χ obst (1 χ ray ). Let Q R 3 be a cube sufficiently large to contain Θ 1 Θ 2. We denote by S the punctured torus obtained by removing Θ 1 Θ 2 of Q. Now, let χ C be equal to one on the support of χ obst (1 χ ray ), supported outside a neighborhood of R and in a neighborhood of Ω such that D and S coincides on its support (figure 2.2). Writing v h,l = χv h,l and V h,l = χv h,l, the rest of the proof follow as in [Iva1] considering the problem in S, using our smoothing estimate without loss outside the trapping region (2.3) instead of the smoothing estimate of [Bur4], and we obtain ψ( h 2 )χ obst (1 χ ray )ψ( h 2 )e it D u Lp L q ψ( h2 )e it D u L The third term: near the periodic ray. We recall the smoothing effect with logarithmic loss obtained in [Bur4] in the case of the exterior of many convex obstacles verifying the Ikawa s condition - which is always verified in the present framework of the exterior of two balls: Proposition 2.3. For any χ C (R d ) and any u L 2 (Ω) such that u = ψ( h 2 )u, we have V h,l (2.4) χe it D u L2 (R,L 2 ) (h log h ) 1 2 u L 2 Let us denote, in this subsection, χ = χ osbt χ ray and u = ψ( h 2 )e it D u. We will here assume moreover that Proposition 2.1 holds and follow the method of [BGH1] to control the third term of (2.2).

7 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 7 In the spirit of [BGH1], we will localize in time intervals of length h log h, on which we can apply the semi-classical Strichartz estimates of Proposition 2.1. Consider ϕ C (( 1, 1)) satisfying ϕ, ϕ() = 1 and j Z ϕ(s j) = 1. We decompose χu = t ϕ( h log h j)χu =: u j. j Z j Z The u j satisfy the equation with Let us denote (i t D )u j = F j + G j F j = (h log h ) 1 ϕ t ( h log h j)χu, t G j = 2ϕ( h log h j) ( χ u Dχu). v j (t) = w j (t) = t Clearly, u j = v j + w j. If we define ṽ j (t) = e it D w j (t) = e it D (j 1)h log h t (j 1)h log h (j+1)h log h (j 1)h log h (j+1)h log h (j 1)h log h e i(t s) D F j (s)ds, e i(t s) D G j (s)ds. e is D F j (s)ds, e is D G j (s)ds, the Christ-Kiselev lemma allows us to estimate the L p L q norms of ṽ j and w j instead of v j and w j. We can use the semi-classical Strichartz estimate on logarithmic interval of Proposition 2.1 to estimate ṽ j L p L q: (j+1)h log h ṽ j Lp L q e is D F j (s)ds L 2 (j 1)h log h We take χ C equal to one on the support of χ and use the dual version of (2.4) to get (j+1)h log h ṽ j Lp L q e is D F j (s)ds L 2 so we get (j 1)h log h (j+1)h log h 1 = h log h e is D χϕ t ( (j 1)h log h h log h j)χuds L 2 1 h log h (h log h ) 1 2 ϕ t ( h log h j)χu L 2 L 2, ṽ j Lp L q 1 t (h log h ) 1/2 ϕ ( h log h j)χu L 2 L 2.

8 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 8 Let us now estimate w j L p Lq. Again, because of Proposition 2.1, we have (j+1)h log h w j L p L q e is D G j (s)ds L 2. (j 1)h log h But G j is localized away from the periodic ray. We take χ C equal to one on the support of χ and vanishing near the periodic ray. Then G j = χg j. Hence we can use the dual estimate of the smoothing effect without loss in the non trapping region of Proposition 2.2 to get (j+1)h log h w j Lp L q e is D G j (s)ds L 2 = (j 1)h log h G j L 2 H 1/2 t ϕ( h log h j) χu L 2 H 1/2. (j+1)h log h (j 1)h log h e is D χg j (s)ds L 2 We use the Christ-Kiselev lemma twice, take the square and sum to obtain u j 2 L p L ( ) 1 t q h log h ϕ ( h log h j)χu 2 L 2 L + ϕ( t 2 h log h j) χu 2 L 2 H 1/2 j Z j Z 1 h log h χu 2 L 2 L + 2 χu 2 L 2 H 1/2 the first term is controlled using the smoothing estimate with logarithmic loss (2.4), and the second the smoothing estimate on the non-trapping region (2.3). Hence we get u j 2 L p L q ψ( h2 )u 2 L 2. j Z But, because of the continuous embedding l 2 (Z) l p (Z) for p 2 we know that χu L p L q u j p L p L q j Z 1/p u j 2 L p L q j Z 1/2 and we thus can conclude: ψ( h 2 )χ ray χ obst ψ( h 2 )e it D u L p L q ψ( h2 )u 2 L Conclusion. We conclude from the two previous subsections that Proposition 2.1 implies the estimate e it D ψ( h 2 )u Lp (R,L q (Ω)) ψ( h 2 )u L 2. Like in [Iva1], we can remove the frequency cut-off by to get e it D u Lp (R,L q (Ω)) u L 2. Hence Proposition 2.1 implies theorem 1.1. devoted to prove Proposition 2.1. Thus, the rest of the paper will be

9 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 9 Figure 3.1. The trapped set 3. Reduction to the trapped rays Let D be a neighborhood of the trapped ray. For technical reasons, we suppose that D is an open cylinder with the trapped ray for axis. For T >, we define the trapped set of D in time T : Definition 3.1. We say that (x, ξ) T Ω (Ω { ξ [α, β ]}) belongs to the trapped set of D in time T, denoted T T (D) if and only if there exists a broken bicharacteristic γ starting from D and t < T such that γ(t) = (x, ξ). Moreover, we define ˆT T (D) := T T (D) {D R n }. In other words, T T (D) is composed of the points of Ω { ξ [α, β ]} that lie in D after some time bigger than T, and ˆT T (D) is composed of the points of D { ξ [α, β ]} that still lie in D after a time T (figure 3.1). We will say that u L 2 is micro-locally supported in U T Ω if Op(a)u = u for all a C (T Ω) such that a = 1 in U. The aim of this section is to show that it is sufficent to prove (2.1) for data micro-locally supported in ˆT 2ɛ log h (D) Some properties of the billiard flow. We first need some properties of the billiard flow associated with R n \ (Θ 1 Θ 2 ). More precisely, we are interested in the regularity in (x, ξ) of the flow Φ t (x, ξ). We first show: Lemma 3.2. Let Θ be a smooth, strictly convex compact subset of R n, with no infinite order contact point, and W (Θ) := {(x, ξ), x R n \Θ, ξ R n, s.t. t, x + tξ Θ}. We denote by t the application t : (x, ξ) W (Θ) the smallest t such that x + t ξ Ω, and by W tan (Θ) = {(x, ξ) W s.t. ξ n(x + t(x, ξ)ξ) = }, the tangent rays. Then: (1) on W (Θ)\W tan (Θ), t is C, (2) t is locally Hölder on W (Θ).

10 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 1 Proof. Let g C (R n, R) be such that Θ is given by the implicit relation g(x) =. We denote, for x, ξ R n, t R h(x, ξ, t) = g(x + tξ). Away from the tangent rays: we pick (x 1, ξ 1 ) W \W tan. Let t 1 = t(x 1, ξ 1 ). Then, t h(x 1, ξ 1, t 1 ) = ξ 1 g(x 1 + t 1 ξ 1 ) by definition of W \W tan. Therefore, by the implicit functions theorem, t is a C function of (x, ξ) for (x, ξ) in a neighborhood of (x 1, ξ 1 ). General case: Let (x 1, ξ 1 ) W and t 1 = (x 1, ξ 1 ). Then h(x 1, ξ 1, t 1 ) =. Let k 1 be the smallest integer such that h((x 1, ξ 1 ), t 1 ) =, t h((x 1, ξ 1 ), t 1 ) =,..., k t h((x 1, ξ 1 ), t 1 ). Note that k exists because Θ has no infinite order contact point. By the C preparation theorem due to Malgrange [Mal64], there exists a 1,..., a k 1 C (R n R n ), and c C (R R n R n ) not vanishing on ((x 1, ξ 1 ), t 1 ), such that, on a neighborhood of ((x 1, ξ 1 ), t 1 ), h writes h(x, ξ, t) = c(x, ξ, t)(t k + a k 1 (x, ξ)t k a (x, ξ)). Then, for (x, ξ, t) in a neighborhood of (x 1, ξ 1, t 1 ), t = t(x, ξ) t k + a k 1 (x, ξ)t k a (x, ξ) =. But, by [Bri1], the roots of a monic polynomial are Hölder with respect to the coefficients - of power one over the muliplicity of the root. Because the a i, i k 1 are C with respect to (x, ξ), we conclude that t is Hölder in a neighborhood of (x 1, ξ 1 ). Remark 3.3. The worst power in the Hölder inequality in a neighborhood of a tangent ray is 1 k, where k is the order of contact of the tangent ray. Note that in our framework of strictly geodesically convex obstacles, k = 2. Let η >. We adopt the following notations for the tangents sets to Θ 1 Θ 2 and their η-neighborhood: W tan = (W tan (Θ 1 ) W tan (Θ 2 )) { ξ [α, β ]} W tan,i,η = {(x, ξ) W (Θ i ), ξ [α, β ] s.t. ξ n(x + t(x, ξ)ξ) η}, W tan,η = W tan,1,η W tan,2,η. We show that a ray cannot pass a small enough-neighborhood of the tangent set more than twice, that is Lemma 3.4. There exists η > such that any ray cannot cross W tan,η more than twice. Proof. If it is not the case, for all n, there exists (x n, ξ n ) K S 2, where K is a compact set strictly containing the obstacles, such that Φ t (x n, ξ n ) cross W tan, 1 at n least three times. Extracting from (x n, ξ n ) a converging subsequence, by continuity of the flow, letting n going to infinity we obtain a ray that is tangent to Θ 1 Θ 2 in at least three points. Therefore, it suffises to show that such a ray cannot exists. Remark that, because there is only two obstacles, if (x, ξ) W tan, if we consider the ray starting from (x, ξ) and the ray starting from (x, ξ), one of the two do not cross any obstacle in positive times. But, if there is a ray tangent to the obstacles in at least three points, if we consider the second tangent point (x, ξ ), both rays

11 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 11 starting from (x, ξ ) and (x, ξ ) have to cross an obstacle, therefore, this is not possible. Now, we can control how much two rays starting from different points and directions can diverge: Lemma 3.5. Let V be a bounded open set containing the convex hull of Θ 1 Θ 2. Then, there exists α >, C > and τ > such that, for all x, x V, all ξ, ξ such that ξ, ξ [α, β ], for all t > there exists t verifying t t τ such that (3.1) d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ))) C t d(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) α. Proof. Preliminary notations and remarks. For i = 1, 2, let t i be the application associated to W (Θ i ) by lemma 3.2. According to lemma 3.4, we choose η > small enough so that any ray cannot cross W tan,η more than twice. Note that, by lemma 3.2, because W i is compact, t i is globally Hölder on W i. We denote by µ > the smallest of the two Hölder powers. Moreover, t i is C on W \W tan,i,2η thus in particular globally Lipschitz on W \W tan,i,η. Case A: ( x, ξ), (x, ξ) are far. We pick ɛ > to be choosen later. Note that we always have d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) d(x, x) + 2β t + 2β, therefore, if d(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) ɛ, (3.2) d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) d(x, x) + d(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) 2β ɛ (t + 1), and the estimate holds. Case B: ( x, ξ), (x, ξ) are close. Now, we suppose that d(( x, { ξ), (x, ξ)) < ɛ. Let t, resp. t 1, be the first time where {Φ t (x, ξ), t }, resp. Φ t ( x, ξ), } t, cross an obstacle, with the convention that t = +, resp. t 1 = + if this does not happen. We denote by X and X 1 the eventual points of intersection with the obstacles. We suppose that t t 1. Note that, for t t, Φ t ( x, ξ) = ( x+t ξ, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ) = (x + tξ, ξ) and thus (3.3) d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) (1 + t)d(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)), for t t. Now, we would like to understand what happens for t t. Case B.1: t, t 1 < and X and X 1 belongs to the same obstacle Θ i. We have, because t is µ-hölder on W i (3.4) t t 1 Cd(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) µ Cɛ µ Where C depends only of the geometry of the obstacles. We choose ɛ small enough so that (3.5) Cɛ µ 1 d 4 where d is the distance between the obstacles. Then, at the time t 1, {Φ t (x, ξ), t } has not crossen another obstacle yet. Thus, Φ t1 (x, ξ) = (x, ξ ) and Φ t1+ ( x, ξ) = ( x, ξ ) are given by, after reflection { (x, ξ ) = (x + t ξ + (t 1 t )ξ, ξ 2(n ξ)ξ) ( x, ξ ( ) ) = x + t 1 ξ, ξ 2(ñ ξ) ξ β

12 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 12 Figure 3.2. Case B.1 with { n = n(x + t ξ) ñ = n( x + t 1 ξ). Note that, because X Θ i n(x) is C, moreover, note that n ñ n(x + t ξ) n( x + t ξ) + n( x + t ξ) n( x + t1 ξ) C x + t ξ x t ξ + C t1 t ξ C x x + t ξ ξ + C t 1 t ξ, (3.6) t i diam(v ) α, thus, because of lemma 3.2, we get (3.7) n ñ x x + t ξ ξ + C ξ d(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) µ Cd(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) µ. where { µ = µ if ( x, ξ) W tan,η or (x, ξ) W tan,η, µ = 1 else. Now, to control d((x, ξ ), ( x, ξ )) we only have to write { ξ ξ = ξ ξ 2(ñ ξ)( ξ ξ) + 2(ñ n) ξξ + n ( ξ ξ)ξ x x = x x + (t 1 t ) ξ t (ξ ξ) (t 1 t )ξ and because of (3.7), (3.6), and lemma 3.2 we obtain (3.8) d(φ t1 (x, ξ), Φ t1+ ( x, ξ)) µ Cd((x, ξ), ( x, ξ)) with, because of (3.4) and (3.5) t t 1 1 d. 4 β

13 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 13 Case B.2: t < and t 1 = + ; or t, t 1 < and X and X 1 belongs to different obstacles. Suppose for example that X Θ 1. For the sake of simplicity, we do the proof in dimension 2 and then explain how to adapt it in dimension 3. Suppose that the ray starting from (x, ξ) do not cross Θ 1. We can always take ξ 1 be such that (x, ξ 1 ) W tan,1 with ξ 1 = ξ, and (3.9) ξ ξ 1 ξ ξ, ξ ξ 1 ξ ξ, that is, we choose ξ 1 such that the ray starting from (x, ξ 1 ) is tangent to Θ 1 and between the ray starting from (x, ξ) and the ray starting from (x, ξ) for t t (figure 3.3). Remark that, as a consequence of (3.9) because (x, ξ 1 ) W tan and ξ ξ ɛ, taking ɛ 1 2 η assure that, necessarily, (x, ξ) W tan,η. Let t be the time for which the ray starting from (x, ξ 1 ) is tangent to Θ 1. Note that, because the application t is Hölder, in the same way that (3.4), and because of (3.9), taking again ɛ small enough so that (3.5) is verified, we have Obviously t t 1 d. 4 β (3.1) d(φ t (x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) d(φ t (x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ 1 )) + d(φ t (x, ξ 1 ), Φ t (x, ξ)). But, using the case B.1 (3.11) d(φ t (x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ 1 )) Cd((x, ξ), (x, ξ 1 )) µ and moreover, in the same way than (3.3), because of (3.6), (3.12) d(φ t (x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ 1 )) Cd((x, ξ), (x, ξ 1 )). Combining (3.9), (3.1), (3.11) and (3.12) we obtain d(φ t (x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) C ξ ξ µ. But, in the same way than (3.3) again, because none of the rays starting from ( x, ξ) or (x, ξ) cross obstacles, and we conclude that d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) Cd((x, ξ), (x, ξ 1 )) d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) Cd(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) µ. Now, suppose that the ray starting from (x, ξ) do cross Θ 1. Then, there exists x 1 [x, x] such that the ray starting from (x 1, ξ) is tangent to Θ 1 (figure 3.4). We do the exact same study as in the previous case, now taking the ray starting from (x 1, ξ) as intermediary to obtain again (3.13) d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) Cd(( x, ξ), (x, ξ)) µ, t t 1 d. 4 β Remark that, taking again ɛ 1 2 η, we know in the same way that necessarily,(x, ξ) W tan,η. In dimension 3, we do the same proof with another intermediate point, in order to treat only coplanar rays three by three.

14 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 14 Figure 3.3. Case B.2.a - the ray from (x, ξ) do not cross Θ 1 Figure 3.4. Case B.2.b - the ray from (x, ξ) cross Θ 1 Conclusion: To conclude, we iterate this argument up to time t: As soon as d(φ T (x, ξ), Φ T ( x, ξ)) ɛ, we use (3.2) for times larger than T. Between reflections, we use (3.3) together with (3.6). At reflections, we use (3.8) (case B.1) or (3.13) (case B.2). Note that because the rays cannot cross W tan,η more than twice, we are in the case where µ = µ at most four times. So we get, with N(t) the number of reflections we have encountered in time t: (3.14) d(φ t ( x, ξ), Φ t (x, ξ)) C N(t) (1 + t)d((x, ξ), ( x, ξ)) µ4, for all t except thoses in the intervals [t, t 1 ] when the case B.1. is encountered and thoses in the intervals [t, t ] when the case B.2 is encountered. Note that we

15 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 15 always have t t 1, t t 1 d, 4 β and the time separing the t 1 s (resp t s) from another such forbiden interval - that is, from another reflection of one of the two rays - is at least d β t t 1 d β 1 d 4 β > (resp d β t t ); therefore (3.14) holds for all t except in disjoints intervals of lenght at most τ 2 = d 4β. To conclude, it suffise to note that N(t) 2 β d t. Remark 3.6. Because the directional component of the flow is not continuous with respect to time, we can not have (3.1) for all time. However, we can take τ > as small as we want at the cost to take a bigger constant C in (3.1) - that corresponds to take ɛ smaller. Remark 3.7. In our framework of strictly geodesically convex obstacles, according to Remark 3.3 and of (3.14), we have α = 2 4 = Properties of the trapped set. We now investigate some properties of the trapped set we have defined in the begining of the section. Lemma 3.8. For all bicharacteristic γ starting from D with speed in [α, β ], we have d(γ(t), T T (D) c ) > t [ T 1, T ] Proof. Notice that, because of the continuity of the flow, T T (D) is open. Now, let γ be a bicharacteristic starting from D with speed in [α, β ]. The set {γ(t), t [ T 1, T ]} is compact and T T (D) c is closed, so the distance between them is attained. But by definition of T T (D), these two sets never cross. Therefore, the proposition holds. The following crucial lemma is a consequence of lemma 3.5 Lemma 3.9. For all D, D, there exists T >, c > such that for all T : (3.15) d(t T T (D) c, T T (D)) e ct, and, if D D (3.16) d(t T ( D) c, T T (D)) 1 4 e ct d( D c, D). Proof. Let us show (3.15). Let T >. We argue by contradiction. Suppose that the property is false. Then, for all n 1 there exists T n, (x n, ξ n ) T Tn (D) and ( x n, ξ n ) T Tn T (D)c such that (3.17) d(( x n, ξ n ), (x n, ξ n )) e ntn. By lemma 3.5, there exists T n [T n τ, T n + τ] such that then, because of (3.17), d(φ T n ( x n, ξ n ), Φ T n (x n, ξ n ))) d(( x n, ξ n ), (x n, ξ n )) α C T n, (3.18) d(φ T n ( x n, ξ n ), Φ T n (x n, ξ n ))) e αntn C Tn+τ as n goes to infinity. We would like to know how far Φ T n ( x n, ξ n ) can be from D. Let (y n, η n ) = Φ T n T +τ ( x n, ξ n ).

16 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 16 Figure 3.5. (y n, η n ) in the worst case scenario By definition of the trapped set, Φ t ( x n, ξ n ) / D for all t T n T. In particular, this is true for all t T n T + τ. Thus, the ray starting from (y n, η n ) never cross D. Therefore, because we have chosen D to be a cylinder with the periodic trajectory for axis, (y n, η n ) is in the case where Φ T n ( x n, ξ n ) = Φ T τ (y n, η n ) is the closest to D, such that (figure 3.5): η n is parallel to the periodic trajectory, η n = ξ n = α, y n Θ i in this worst case scenario, after time T τ, Φ Tn ( x n, ξ n ) = Φ T τ (y n, η n ) is at a distance at least c(t ) > of D, with c(t ) depending only of D, the minimal curvature of the obstacles, α, β, and such that c(t ) as T. On the other hand, Φ Tn (x n, ξ n ) D, so, because T n T n τ, Φ T n (x n, ξ n ) is at distance at most β τ of D. We can thus choose T > large enough so that for all n (3.19) d(φ T n ( x n, ξ n ), Φ T n (x n, ξ n )) 1. which contradicts (3.18) and (3.15) holds. Let us now show (3.16). If (x, ξ) T T ( D) c and ( x, ξ) T T (D) we have Φ T (x, ξ) / D and Φ T ( x, ξ) D, therefore (3.2) d(φ T (x, ξ), Φ T ( x, ξ)) > d( D c, D). On the other hand, by lemma 3.8, there exist T such that T T τ verifying (3.21) d(φ T (x, ξ), Φ T ( x, ξ)) C T d((x, ξ), ( x, ξ)). According to Remark 3.6, we can suppose, up to enlarge the constant C, that τ is small enough so that β τ 1 4 d( D c, D). Then (3.2) implies (3.22) d(φ T (x, ξ), Φ T ( x, ξ)) 1 2 d( D c, D). Therefore, by (3.21) and (3.22), if d((x, ξ), ( x, ξ)) 1 4 C T d( D c, D), we cannot have (x, ξ) T T ( D) c and ( x, ξ) T T (D). Thus (3.16) is verified.

17 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX Reduction of the problem. We are now in position to show that we can reduce ourselves to prove the following proposition: Proposition 3.1. There exists ɛ >, a small open neighborhood D of the trapped ray, such that, u L 2 microlocally supported in ˆT 2ɛ log h (D), and away from a small enough neighborhood of (Θ 1 Θ 2 ), we have for all χ C supported in D (3.23) χe it ψ( h 2 )u Lp (,ɛh log h )L q C ψ( h2 )u L 2. Proof of Proposition 3.1 implies theorem 1.1. We suppose that Proposition 3.1 holds and show our main result. By the work of the previous section and the semi-classical change of variable, it suffises to show that there exists ɛ > such that (3.24) χe ith D ψ( h 2 )u L p (,ɛ log h )L q (Ω) Ch 1/p u L 2, for χ supported in a neighborhood of the trapped ray. We are here inspired by [Iva1], Section 2, p As [Iva1] recalls, by the semiclassical finite speed of propagation due to [Leb92], we can restrict ourselves to bicharacteristic travelled at speed in [α, β ]. We refer to [Leb92], [Bur93] Appendix B, and [Iva1] Appendix A for the propagation properties of the Schrödinger flow in the semi-classical regime for the problem with boundaries. Let D 1, D 2, D 3 be open neighborhoods of the trapped ray such that D 3 D 2 D 1 D. Let T = 2ɛ log h. We will show that, for χ supported in D 3 and for some ɛ 3 < ɛ 2 < ɛ 1 < ɛ: (1) if (3.24) holds for all data microlocally supported in D 1 T T +1 (D 1 ) with ɛ = ɛ 1 then it holds for all data supported in D 2 with ɛ = ɛ 2, (2) there exists a small neighborhood of the boundary V such that, if (3.24) holds for all data microlocally supported in D T T (D) V c with ɛ = ɛ then it holds for all data supported in D 1 T T +1 (D 1 ) with ɛ = ɛ 1, (3) if (3.24) holds for all data supported in D 2 with ɛ = ɛ 2 then it holds for all data with ɛ = ɛ 3, and the proposition will follow. (1) Reduction to the trapped sets. Let ψ( h 2 )u be supported in D 2. By the semiclassical finite speed of propagation, there exists τ > small enough such that, modulo O(h ) non contributing terms, e ith ψ( h 2 )u is supported in D 1 for all t [ τ, ]. Let T be given by lemma 3.9. Let a C (R n R n ) be such that a = 1 in T T +1+T (D 1 ) and a = outside T T +1 (D 1 ). For the convenience of the reader, let us denote ˆT := T T. 1 a is supported in T ˆT (D 1 ) c, so, every bicharacteristic γ starting from D 1 at time t = with speed in [α, β ] verifies by lemma 3.8 (3.25) d(γ(t), Supp(1 a)) > t [ ˆT τ, ˆT ]. Let Ψ C (R) such that Ψ(t) = for t τ, Ψ(t) = 1 for t, and Ψ, and set Ψ T (t) = Ψ(t + ˆT ). We define w(t, x) = Ψ T (t)e i(t+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u.

18 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 18 Then w satisfies i t w h w = iψ T (t)e i(t+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u w Ω =, w t ˆT τ = by the Duhamel formula, as w(t) = e i ˆT h u(t) := e i(t+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u for t ˆT and as Ψ T is supported in [ ˆT τ, ˆT ], we have, for t ˆT e i ˆT h u(t, x) = ˆT ˆT τ Denote, for Q {Op(a), Op(1 a)} u Q (t, x) = which is solution of ˆT ˆT τ e i(t s)h iψ T (s)e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u ds. ) e i(t s)h iψ T (s)q (e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u ds. i t u Q h u Q = iψ T (t)q (e i(t+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u ). We will see that the term χu 1 A does not contribute. To this purpose, we use the b-wave front set of u 1 A, W F b (u 1 A ). We refer to [Iva1] for the definition of this notion. By proposition A.8 of [Iva1], if ρ W F b (u 1 A ), then the broken characteristic starting from ρ W F b (u 1 A ) must intersect the wave front set (3.26) W F b (Op(1 a)e i ˆT h u) {t [ ˆT τ, ˆT ]}. We are interested in estimating u only on D 3 so it is enough to consider ρ W F b (χu 1 A ). In particular, if γ is a broken characteristic starting from ρ W F b (χu 1 A ), there exists t [ ˆT τ, ˆT ] such that γ(t) intersect (3.26). Because of (3.25), this is not possible, and (3.27) χu 1 A Hσ (Ω R) = O(h ) ψ( h 2 )u L 2 for all σ, and this term does not contribute. On the other hand, remark that χu A Lp ( ˆT, ˆT τ+t 1)L q = ˆT ˆT τ ˆT ˆT τ ) χe i(t s)h Ψ T (s)a (e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u Lp ( ˆT, ˆT τ+t 1)L ds q ) χe ith Ψ T (s)a (e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u L p ( ˆT s, ˆT τ+t 1 s)l ds q ˆT ˆT τ ) χe ith Ψ T (s)a (e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u Lp (,T 1)L qds. Thus, if Strichartz estimates (3.23) in time T 1 = ɛ 1 log h hold true for any data microlocally supported where a and ( spatially supported in ) D 1, that is in T T +1 (D 1 ) D 1, we have, because Ψ T (s)a e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u is, for s [ ˆT

19 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 19 τ, ˆT ] and modulo non contributing terms, such a data ˆT χu A L p ( ˆT, ˆT τ+t 1)L h 1/p q h 1/p ˆT ˆT τ = h 1/p ˆT ˆT τ ) Ψ T (s)a (e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u L 2ds Ψ T (s) Op(a) L2 L 2 e i(s+ ˆT )h ψ( h 2 )u L 2ds ˆT τ Ψ T (s) Op(a) L 2 L 2 ψ( h2 )u L 2ds = h 1/p Op(a) L2 L 2 ψ( h2 )u L 2. Where we used that ˆT ˆT τ Ψ T (s)ds = 1. And therefore, because of (3.27) χe i ˆT h u L p ( ˆT, ˆT τ+t 1)L q h 1/p Op(a) L 2 L 2 ψ( h2 )u L 2. It remains to estimate Op(a) L 2 L2. We have, according to [Zwo12]: Op(a) L 2 L 2 sup a +h1/2 sup α a 1+h 1/2 sup α a. α 2n+1 By lemma 3.9, a can be chosen in such a way that so, for T = 2ɛ log h : α a 2e c α T α a h 2c α ɛ we take ɛ > small enough so that 2c(2n + 1)ɛ 1 2 and we get α 2n+1 that is and thus χe i ˆT h u L p ( ˆT, ˆT τ+t 1)L q h 1/p ψ( h 2 )u L 2, χe ith ψ( h 2 )u L p (,T 1 τ)l q h 1/p ψ( h 2 )u L 2, χe ith ψ( h 2 )u Lp (,ɛ 2 log h )L q h 1/p ψ( h 2 )u L 2 for ɛ 2 < ɛ 1 small enough. (2) Restriction to data supported away from the boundary. Let η >. We remark that there exists t 1 (η) >, t 2 (η) > such that t 1,2 (η) as η and, if we denote E 1 (η) = {d(x, (Θ 1 Θ 2 ) < η}, E 2 (η) = {d(x, (Θ 1 Θ 2 ) η}, then all bicharacteristic starting from E 1 D with speed in [α, β ] verifies d(γ(t), V D) > t [ 2t 1, t 1 ], and all bicharacteristic starting from E 2 D with speed in [α, β ] verifies d(γ(t), V D) > t [ t 2, ], with V(η) a small neighborhood of the boundary. Let ψ( h 2 )u microlocally supported in T T +1 (D 1 ) {D 1 R n }. Let τ (η) = max(2t 1, t 2 ). We take η > sufficently small depending only of D and D 1 so that τ 1/2 and modulo non contributing terms, e ith ψ( h 2 )u is microlocally

20 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 2 supported in T T +1 2τ (D 1 ) {D R n } for all t [ τ, ], and thus in T T (D) {D R n } for all t [ τ, ]. We define χ b C such that χ b (x) = 1 if x E 1 (η/2) and χ b (x) = if x / E 1 (η). We estimate χχ b u on the one hand with the previous strategy and the translation on [ 2t 1, t 1 ], and χ(1 χ b )u on the other hand with the translation [ t 2, ]. (3) Reduction to data supported in D. We remark that for all bicharacteristic starting from D 3 D 2 with speed in [α, β ], we have for t small enough d(γ(t), D c 2) >, t [, t ], and we follow the previous strategies. 4. Approximation of the solution near the trapped set 4.1. Phase functions. Following the works of Iwaka [Ika88, Ika82] and Burq [Bur93], we define the phase functions and their reflected phases in the following way. We call ϕ : U R a phase function on the open set U R 3 if ϕ is C on U and verifies ϕ = 1. We say that ϕ verifies (P ) on Θ p if (1) The principal curvatures of the level surfaces of ϕ with respect to ϕ are non-negative in every point of U, (2) We have, for j p Θ j {y + τ ϕ(x) s.t. τ, y U Θ p, ϕ(y) n(y) }, (3) For all A R, the set {ϕ A} is empty or convex. Let δ 1 and ϕ be a phase function. We set Γ p (ϕ) = {x Θ p s.t. n(x) ϕ(x) δ 1 }, U p (ϕ) = {X 1 (x, ϕ(x)) + τξ(x, ϕ(x)), τ }. X 1 (x, ϕ(x)) Γ p(ϕ) Then, there exists δ 1 such that, if ϕ is a phase function verifying (P ) on Θ p, we can define the reflected phase ϕ j on the obstacle Θ j on the open set U j (ϕ), verifying (P ) on Θ j, by the following relation, for X 1 (x, ϕ(x)) Γ p (ϕ): ϕ j (X 1 (x, ϕ) + τξ 1 (x, ϕ)) = ϕ(x 1 (x, ϕ)) + τ. Note in particular the following simple but fondamental fact, simply differentiating this relation with respect to τ, for all x such that X 1 (x, ϕ(x)) Γ p (ϕ): ϕ j (X 1 (x, ϕ) + τξ 1 (x, ϕ)) = Ξ 1 (x, ϕ). We call a finite sequence J = (j 1,, j n ), j i {1, 2} with j i j i+1 a story of reflections, and will denote I the set of all the stories of reflection. By induction, we can define the phases ϕ J for any J I, on the sets U J (ϕ). For f C (U) and m N, let f m (U) = max sup (a 1 ) (a m )f. (a i) (S 2 ) m We recall the following estimate due to [Ika88, Ika82, Bur93]: U

21 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 21 Proposition 4.1. For every m we have Moreover, according to [Bur93]: ϕ J m C m ϕ m. Proposition 4.2. There exists M > such that, for each (i, j) {1, 2} 2, there exists open sets containing the trapped ray U i,j such that, if J = {i,, j} verifies J M, and ϕ verifies (P ), ϕ J can be defined in U i,j. We set Û = U 11 U 12 U 21 U 22, and U Û to be an open cylinder having for axis the periodic trajectory and contained in Û. It will be shrinked in the sequel if necessary The microlocal cut-off. According to Section 3, we are reduced to show Proposition 3.1. By lemma 3.9, we can construct a small shrinking of U, Ũ U, and q ɛ,h C (T Ω) such that q ɛ,h = 1 in an open neighborhood of ˆT2ɛ log h (Ũ ), q ɛ,h = outside ˆT 2ɛ log h (U ) in such a way that, for all multi-indice α, (4.1) α q ɛ,h h 2 α cɛ. It suffices to show Strichartz estimates (3.23) in time ɛh log h for L 2 functions microlocally supported in ˆT 2ɛ log h (Ũ ) and spatially supported away from a small neighborhood V of (Θ 1 Θ 2 ). Let χ C such that χ = near (Θ 1 Θ 2 ) and χ = 1 outside V. For functions microlocally supported in ˆT 2ɛ log h (Ũ ) and spatially supported away from V, χ Op( q ɛ,h )u = u, thus it suffices to show (4.2) χe it ψ( h 2 )χ Op( q ɛ,h )u L q (,ɛh log h )L r ψ( h2 )u L 2. for all χ C supported in Ũ. We will show the stronger estimate: (4.3) e it ψ( h 2 )χ Op( q ɛ,h )u L q (,ɛh log h )L r ψ( h2 )u L 2. By the T T method - see for example [KT98] - it suffise to show the dispersive estimate, for t ɛ log h : (4.4) Q ɛ,he ith Q ɛ,h L1 L 1 (ht) 3/2 where Q ɛ,h := ψ( h 2 )χ Op( q ɛ,h ). The symbol associated to Op( q ɛ,h )χ ψ( h 2 ) admits by [Zwo12] the development N (ih) k (4.5) D ξ, D y k ( q ɛ,h (x, ξ)χ (y)ψ(η)) k! η=ξ,y=x + O(h N+1 ). k= Let us define q ɛ,h,n C (T Ω) by N (ih) k (4.6) q ɛ,h,n (x, ξ) = D ξ, D y k ( q ɛ,h (x, ξ)χ (y)ψ(η)) k! η=ξ,y=x. k= Then, to show (4.4), it suffises to show (4.7) Op(q ɛ,h,n ) e ith Op(q ɛ,h,n ) L1 L 1 (ht) 3/2

22 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 22 for N large enough. Note that, in particular, (4.8) Suppq ɛ,h,n ˆT 2ɛ log h (U ) { ξ [α, β ]} and q ɛ,h,n is spatially supported outside a small neighborhood of (Θ 1 Θ 2 ) not depending of ɛ, h, N. Finally, set δ y ɛ,h,n (x) = 1 (2πh) 3 e i(x y) ξ/h q ɛ,t,n (x, ξ)dξ, in order to have, for u L 2 (Op(q ɛ,h,n )u) (x) = Notice that Op(q ɛ,h,n ) e ith Op(q ɛ,h,n )u(x) = δ y ɛ,h,n (x)u(y)dy. Op(q ɛ,h,n ) e ith δ y ɛ,t,n (x)u(y)dy, thus, to show (4.7), it suffises to study δ y ɛ,h,n and to show that, for N large enough Op(q ɛ,h,n ) e ith δ y ɛ,h,n 1, for t ɛ log h. (ht) 3 2 Let V 1 be a small neighborhood of (Θ 1 Θ 2 ) on wich q ɛ,h,n is vanishing and χ + C (R n ) be such that χ + = 1 on U V1. c We choose χ + to be supported on Conv(Θ 1 Θ 2 )\(Θ 1 Θ 2 ) and away from a small enough neighborhood of (Θ 1 Θ 2 ), Conv denoting the convex hull. Note that in particular, Op(q ɛ,h,n ) = Op(q ɛ,h,n ) χ +. The symbol of Op(q ɛ,t,n ) enjoys the development q ɛ,h,n (x, ξ) = e ih Dx,D ξ q ɛ,h,n. Thus, by (4.1), taking ɛ > small enough, we have q (α) ɛ,t,n 1 for all α n + 1 = 4. Moreover, q (α) ɛ,t,n is compactly supported in frequencies. Therefore, by [ANV4], Section 4, Op(q ɛ,t,n ) is bounded on L L independently of h. Therefore, we only have to show, for all T ɛ log h (4.9) χ + e ith δ y ɛ,h,n 1, for t ɛ log h (ht) 3 2 for N large enough. In order to do so, we will construct a parametrix - that is, an approximate solution - in time t ɛ log h for the semi-classical Schrödinger equation with data δ y ɛ,h,n. The first step will be to construct an approximate solution of the semi-classical Schrödinger equation with data e i(x y) ξ/h q ɛ,h,n (x, ξ) where ξ R n, ξ Suppq ɛ,h,n is fixed and considered as a parameter. This is the aim of this section. From now on, we will denote q for q ɛ,h,n.

23 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX Approximate solution. We look for the solution in positives times of the equation (i t w h w) = in Ω w(t = )(x) = e i(x ξ tξ2 )/h q(x, ξ) w Ω = as the Neumann serie w = ( 1) J w J where { (i t w h w ) = in R n w(t = )(x) = e i((x y) ξ tξ2 )/h q(x, ξ) and, for J, J = (j 1,, j n ), J = (j 1,, j n 1 ) (i t w J h w J ) = in R n \Θ jn (4.1) w(t = ) = w Θ J jn = w J Θ jn. We will look for the w J s as power series in h. In the sake of conciseness, these series will be considered at a formal level in this section, and we will introduce their expression as a finite sum plus a reminder later, in the last section Free space solution. We look for u as w = k w (t = ) = q(x, ξ) wk (t = ) = h k w k e i((x y) ξ tξ2 )/h solving the transport equations gives immediately w = q(x 2tξ, ξ) t wk = i w k 1 (x 2(s t)ξ, s)ds k Reflected solutions. We would like to reflect w on the obstacle. To this purpose, starting from the phase ϕ(x) = (x y) ξ ξ, we would like to define the reflected phases as explained in subsection 4.1. We decompose the set of the stories of reflections as I = I 1 I 2 where I 1 are all stories begining with a reflection on Θ 1, that is of the form (1, ), and I 2 begining with a reflection on Θ 2, that is of the form (2, ). Let e be a unit vector with the same direction as R. We take e oriented from Θ 1 to Θ 2. Notice that, for ξ ξ in a small enough neighborhood V of {e, e} if ξ e >, then (x y) ξ ξ verifies (P ) on Θ 1, if ξ e <, then (x y) ξ ξ verifies (P ) on Θ 2.

24 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 24 We remark that the support of w never cross Θ 1 in any time in the first case, and never cross Θ 2 in any time in the second case. Let (i, i 1 ) = (1, 2) if we are in the first situation, and (2, 1) if we are in the second one. We set w J =, J I i. Then, (4.1) is satisfied for all J I i : indeed, because the support of w never cross Θ i, we have for all time = w Θ i = w {i} Θ i, and so on. Thus, we are reduced construct the w J s for J I i1. Denoting by π the projection on the directions space, we take a spatial neighborhood U of R sufficently small so that if ξ π( ˆT 2ɛ ln h (U)), then ξ ξ V, and if necessary, we reduce U so that it is contained in U. For ξ πsuppq π( ˆT 2ɛ ln h (U )), starting with ϕ(x) = (x y) ξ ξ, who verifies (P ) on Θ i, we construct the reflected phases ϕ J, J I i1 defined in U J (ϕ) as we explained in the begining of the section. Reducing again U if necessary, for all ξ πsuppq π( ˆT 2ɛ ln h (U )), a ray starting in U with direction ξ verifies n(x i (x, ξ)) Ξ i (x, ξ) 2δ 1 for all i M. Thus, for J M, U J U, and therefore U J U for all J. We look for w J as w J = k h k w J k e i(ϕ J (x,ξ) ξ tξ 2 )/h, w J k t =, w J k Θ jn = w J k Θ jn. For x U J (ϕ), we have ( t + 2 ξ ϕ J + ξ ϕ J )w J = w Θ J jn = w J w J t = and Θ jn ( t + 2 ξ ϕ J + ξ ϕ J )wk J = i wk 1 J wk Θ J jn = w J k Θ jn wk J t =. We can solve the transport equation along the rays: Lemma 4.3. Let ψ C (D) be such that ψ = 1. Then, when {x+τ ξ ψ(x); τ [, τ ]} D, the solution of the equation is represented as ( t + 2 ξ ψ + ξ ψ)v = h ( ) 1/2 Gψ(x + 2τ ξ ψ(x)) v(x + 2τ ξ ψ(x), t + τ) = v(x, t) Gψ(x) τ ( ) 1/2 Gψ(x + 2τ ξ ψ(x)) + h(x + 2s ξ ψ(x), t + s)ds. Gψ(x + 2s ξ ψ(x)) where Gψ denote the gaussian curvature of the level surfaces of ψ.

25 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 25 Proof. If we take w(τ) = v(x + 2τ ξ ψ, t + τ), w solves the following ordinary differential equation τ w = ξ ψ(x + 2τ ψ(x))w. But - see for example [Lun44]: exp( ξ τ so the formula holds. τ ψ(x + 2s ψ(x))ds) = ( ) 1/2 Gψ(x + 2τ ξ ψ(x)), Gψ(x + 2τ ξ ψ(x)) Now, we can find w J. Indeed, as w Θ J jn = w J Θ jn, because of the previous formula we have ( ) 1/2 w J GϕJ (x + 2τ ξ ϕ J (x)) (x + 2τ ξ ϕ J (x), t + τ) = w J (x, t) Gϕ J (x) for all x Γ jn. So, for all x U J (ϕ) we get ( w J Gϕ J (x) (x, t) = Gϕ J (X 1 (x, ξ ϕ J )) w J ) 1/2 ( X 1 (x, ξ ϕ J ), t ϕ J(x) ϕ J (X 1 (x, ξ ϕ J )) 2 ξ Iterating the process and doing the same for k 1 we get the following expressions of w J k for x U J(ϕ) Proposition 4.4. We denote by ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ) the backward spatial component of the flow starting from (x, ξ ϕ J ), defined in the same way as X 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ), at the difference that we ignore the first obstacle encountered if it s not Θ jn, and we ignore the obstacles after J reflections. Moreover, for J = (j 1 = i 1,..., j n ) I i1, denote by { (j 1,, j k ) if ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ) has been reflected n k times, J(x, t, ξ) = if ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ) has been reflected n times. Then, the w J k s are given by, for t and x U J(ϕ) w J (x, t) = Λϕ J (x, ξ)q( ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ), ξ) where ( ) 1/2 Gϕ J (x) Λϕ J (x, ξ) = Gϕ J (X 1 (x, ξ ϕ J )) and, for k 1, and x U J (ϕ) where w J k (x, t) = i t ). ( Gϕ(X J 1 ) 1/2 (x, ξ ϕ J )), Gϕ(X J (x, ξ ϕ J )) g ϕj (x, t s, ξ) w J(x,ξ,t s) k 1 ( ˆX 2(t s) (x, ξ ϕ J ), s)ds ( ) ( ) 1/2 1/2 Gϕ J (x) GϕJ(x,t,ξ) (X J(x,t,ξ) 1 (x, ξ ϕ J )) g ϕj (x, ξ, t) = Gϕ J (X 1 (x, ξ ϕ J )) Gϕ J(x,t,ξ) ( ˆX. 2t (x, ξ ϕ J )) The following lemma permits to study the support of the w J k s:

26 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 26 Lemma 4.5. For x U J (ϕ) (4.11) w J k (x, t) = ( ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ), ξ) Suppq. And moreover (4.12) Suppw J k {J(x, ξ, t) = }. Proof. We prove both properties by induction. The first, (4.11), is obviously true for k =. Now, suppose that it is true at the rank k 1. If wk J (x, t), there exists s [, t] such that w J(x,ξ,t s) k 1 ( ˆX 2(t s) (x, ξ ϕ J ), s). By the induction hypothesis, we deduce that ( ˆX 2s ( ˆX 2(t s) (x, ξ ϕ J ), ξ ϕ J(x,ξ,t s) ), ξ) Suppq. But ˆX 2s ( ˆX 2(t s) (x, ξ ϕ J ), ξ ϕ J(x,ξ,t s) ) = ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ), thus (4.11) is shown for all k. Let us now prove (4.12). For J I i, wk J = thus it suffises to consider J I i 1. We prove again the formula by induction on k. We have, with X J := X J (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ): w J = Λϕ J (x, ξ)q ( X J ( t (ϕ J (x) ϕ J (X J ) ) ) ξ, ξ. If J(x, ξ, t), then t (ϕ J (x) ϕ J (X J ). Because X J Θ i1, ξ points toward Θ i1, and q is spatially supported in a neighborhood of R and away of the boundary, we deduce that X J ( t (ϕ J (x) ϕ J (X J ) ) ξ does not belong to the spatial support of q, thus w J (x, t) = and the formula holds for k =. Now, let k 1 and suppose that (4.12) is true for all J I for w k 1. Suppose that wk J (x, ξ, t). Then, there exists s [, t] such that w J(x,ξ,t s) k 1 ( ˆX 2(t s) (x, ξ ϕ J ), s). We denote J = (j 1,..., j n ) and J(x, ξ, t s) = (j 1,..., j k ). By the induction hypothesis, J( ˆX 2(t s) (x, ξ ϕ J ), ξ, t s) =. That means that for t s t t, ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ) is reflected k times. But note that by definition of J(x, ξ, t s), for t t s, ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ) is reflected n k times; so, for t t, ˆX 2t (x, ξ ϕ J ) is reflected n times, therefore J(x, ξ, t) = and (4.12) holds. We deduce from the previous lemma that we can extend the explicit expressions of Proposition 4.4 by zero outside U J (ϕ) in logarithmic times: Proposition 4.6. For x / U J (ϕ) and t ɛ log h we have wk J (x, t) =. Proof. It suffices to show that wk J(x, t) = for x U J(ϕ) near the border of U J (ϕ). By (4.11), it thus suffices to prove that for x close to the border of U J (ϕ), ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) / Suppq, or equivalently, that ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) Suppq implies that x is away from the border of U J (ϕ). To this purpose, let us pick x such that ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) Suppq. In time s t ɛ log h, we follow ˆX 2s ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ). Let s be such that ˆX2s ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) belongs to (Θ 1 Θ 2 ) and has been reflected exactly J times. For s s, ˆXs will ignore the obstacles. Because ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) ˆT 2ɛ log h (U ) and s ɛ log h, we know that ˆX 2s ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) U.

27 STRICHARTZ ESTIMATES WITHOUT LOSS OUTSIDE TWO CONVEX 27 But U Θ i is strictly included in Γ i by our construction. Moreover, by the convexity of the obstacles Ξ 2s ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) e ϕ J (y) e for all y Γ i \(U Θ i ). Therefore, for all s s, ˆX2s ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) is away from the border of U J (ϕ), and in particular x = ˆX 2t ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ), so the proposition hold. Thus, Propositions 4.4 and 4.6 together gives the explicit expression for wk J in the full space in logarithmic times. Now, the following two lemmas investigate respectively the temporal and spatial support of χ + wk J: Lemma 4.7. There exists c 1, c 2 > such that for every J I, the support of w J k is included in {c 1 J t} and which of χ + w J k is included in {c 1 J t c 2 ( J + 1)}. Proof. Recall that q is supported away from (Θ 1 Θ 2 ). Let δ = d(suppq, (Θ 1 Θ 2 )) >. In order to be reflected J times and then be in the support of q, a ray with speed d in [α, β ] needs a time a least 2β ( J 1) + δ 2β. Moreover, a ray starting in the support of χ + needs a time a most 2 D α ( J + 1) to be reflected J times, where D is the maximal distance between the obstacles, and then it leaves the support of q in a time at most 2 d α. Therefore, by lemma 4.5, the temporal support of χ + wk J is included in d ( J 1) + δ t 2 D ( J + 1) + 2 d, 2β 2β α α and which of w J k in d 2β ( J 1) + δ 2β t and the lemma holds with (say) c 1 = δ 2β and c 2 = 4 D α. Lemma 4.8. In times t ɛ log h, χ + w J k is supported in U. Proof. Let x Suppχ + and suppose that x / U. By (4.12), we only have to consider ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ) after J reflections. Recall that x Conv(Θ 1 Θ 2 )\(Θ 1 Θ 2 ). Therefore, before X 2t has done a J + 1 th reflection, ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ) coincide with X 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ). Moreover, after J reflections, Ξ 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ) = ξ. But, by definition of the trapped set, as x / U, (X 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) / ˆT 2t (U ). For t ɛ log h, ˆT2t (U ) ˆT 2ɛ log h (U ) Suppq and therefore ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) = (X 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) / Suppq. Moreover, after X 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ) has done a J + 1 th reflection and stop to coincide with ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ) ignore the obstacles and leaves the support of q: in both cases we have ( ˆX 2t (x, ϕ J (x) ξ ), ξ) / Suppq. By (4.11), this implies that w J k (x, t) =. χ +w J k is thus supported in U in times t ɛ log h.