arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 18 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS WITH INDEFINITE POTENTIAL AND CONCAVE TERMS arxiv: v1 [math.ap] 18 Jan 2019 NIKOLAOS S. PAPAGEORGIOU, VICENŢIU D. RĂDULESCU, AND DUŠAN D. REPOVŠ Abstract. We consider a parametric semilinear Robin problem driven by the Laplacian plus an indefinite and unbounded potential. In the reaction, we have the competing effects of a concave term appearing with a negative sign and of an asymmetric asymptotically linear term which is resonant in the negative direction. Using variational methods together with truncation and perturbation techniques and Morse theory (critical groups) we prove two multiplicity theorems producing four and five respectively nontrivial smooth solutions when the parameter λ > 0 is small. 1. Introduction Let R N be a bounded domain with a C 2 -boundary. In this paper we study the following parametric Robin problem: { u(z)+ξ(z)u(z) = f(z,u(z)) λ u(z) q 2 } u(z) in, (P λ ) u +β(z)u(z) = 0 on. n In this problem, the potential function ξ L s () (s > N) is indefinite (that is, sign changing). In the reaction(right-hand side), the function f(z, x) is Carathéodory (that is, for all x R the function z f(z,x) is measurable and for almost all z the function x f(z,x) is continuous) and f(z, ) has linear growth near ±. However, the asymptotic behaviour of f(z, ) as x ± is asymmetric. More precisely, we assume that the quotient f(z,x) as x + stays the principal x eigenvalue ˆλ 1 of the differential operator u u+ξ(z)u with Robin boundary condition, while as x the quotient f(z,x) stays below x ˆλ 1 with possible interaction (resonance) with respect to ˆλ 1 from the left. So, f(z, ) is a crossing (jumping) nonlinearity. In the term λ u q 2 u, λ > 0 is aparameterand 1 < q < 2. Hence this term is a concave nonlinearity. Therefore in the reaction we have the competing effects of resonant and concave terms. However, note that in our problem the concave nonlinearity enters with a negative sign. Such problems were considered by Perera [12], de Paiva & Massa [6], de Paiva & Presoto [7] for Dirichlet problems with zero potential (that is, ξ 0). Of the aforementioned works, only de Paiva & Presoto [7] have an asymmetric reaction of special form, which is superlinear in the positive direction and linear and nonresonant in the negative direction. Recently, problems with asymmetric reaction were studied by D Agui, Marano & Key words and phrases. Indefinite and unbounded potential, concave term, asymmetric reaction, critical groups, multiple solutions, Harnack inequality AMS Subject Classification: 35J20, 35J60. 1

2 2 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ Papageorgiou [2] (Robin problems), Papageorgiou & Rădulescu [8, 11] (Neumann and Robin problems) and Recova & Rumbos [14] (Dirichlet problems). We prove two multiplicity results in which we show that for all small λ > 0 the problem has four and five nontrivial smooth solutions, respectively. Our approach uses variational tools based in the critical point theory, together with suitable truncation, perturbation and comparison techniques and Morse theory (critical groups). 2. Mathematical background and hypotheses Let X be a Banach space. We denote by X the topological dual of X and by, the duality brackets for the pair (X,X). Given ϕ C 1 (X,R), we say that ϕ satisfies the Cerami condition (the C-condition for short) if the following property holds: Every sequence {u n } n 1 X such that {ϕ(u n )} n 1 R is bounded and (1+ u n )ϕ (u n ) 0 in X as n, admits a strongly convergent subsequence. This compactness-type condition on ϕ( ), is crucial in deriving the minimax theory of the critical values of ϕ. One of the main results in that theory is the so-called mountain pass theorem, which we recall below. Theorem 1. Assume that ϕ C 1 (X,R) satisfies the C-condition, u 0,u 1 X, u 1 u 0 > r, max{ϕ(u 0 ),ϕ(u 1 )} < inf[ϕ(u) : u u 0 = r] = m r and c = inf max ϕ(γ(t)) with Γ = {γ C([0,1],X) : γ(0) = u 0,γ(1) = u 1 }. γ Γ0 t 1 Then c m r and c is a critical value of ϕ (that is, there exists u X such that ϕ(u) = c,ϕ (u) = 0). Recall that a Banach space X has the Kadec-Klee property, if the following holds: u n w u in X, un u u n u in X. It is an easy consequence of the parallelogram law, that every Hilbert space has the Kadec-Klee property (see Gasinski & Papageorgiou [3]). In the study of problem (P λ ), we will use the following three spaces: H 1 (), C 1 (), L r ( ) (1 r ). The Sobolev space H 1 () is a Hilbert space with inner product given by (u,h) = (Du,Dh) R Ndz + uhdz for all u,h H 1 (). We denote by the corresponding norm on H 1 (). So, we have u = [ u Du 2 2] 1/2 for all u H 1 (). The space C 1 () is an ordered Banach space with positive (order) cone C + = {u C 1 () : u(z) 0 for all z }. This cone has a nonempty interior. Note that D + = {u C + : u(z) > 0 for all z } intc +.

3 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 3 In fact, D + is the interior of C + when the latter is furnished with the relative C()-norm topology. On we consider the (N 1)-dimensional Hausdorff (surface) measure σ( ). Using this measure on, we can define in the usual way the boundary Lebesgue spaces L r ( ) (for 1 r ). From the theory of Sobolev spaces, we know that there exists a unique continuous linear map γ 0 : H 1 () L 2 ( ) known as the trace map such that γ 0 (u) = u for all u H 1 () C 1 (). So, the trace map assigns boundary values to every Sobolev function. The trace map is compact into L p 2(N 1) ( ) for all 1 p < if N 3 and into N 2 L p ( ) for all 1 p if N = 1,2. Also we have imγ 0 = H 1 2,2 ( ) and kerγ 0 = H 1 0 (). In what follows, for the sake of notational simplicity, we drop the use of the trace map γ 0. All restrictions of Sobolev functions on are understood in the sense of traces. Next, we consider the following linear eigenvalue problem: (1) u(z)+ξ(z)u(z) = ˆλu(z) in, u +β(z)(u) = 0 on. n This problem was studied by D Agui, Marano& Papageorgiou[2]. We impose the following conditions on the potential function ξ( ) and on the boundary coefficient β( ). H(ξ) : ξ L s () with s > N. Remark 1. The potential function is both unbounded and sign-changing. H(β) : β W 1, ( ) and β(z) 0 for all z. Remark 2. If β 0, then we recover the Neumann problem. Let γ : H 1 () R be the C 2 functional defined by γ(u) = Du ξ(z)u 2 dz + β(z)u 2 dσ for all u H 1 (). Problem (1) admits a smallest eigenvalue ˆλ 1 R given by { } γ(u) (2) ˆλ1 = inf u 2 : u H 1 (), u 0. 2 Moreover, there exists µ > 0 such that (3) γ(u)+µ u 2 2 c 0 u 2 for some c 0 > 0, for all u H 1 (). Using (3) and the special theorem for compact self-adjoint operators on Hilbert spaces, we produce the full spectrum of (2). This consists of a sequence {ˆλ k } k N of distinct eigenvalues such that ˆλ k +. Let E(ˆλ k ) denote the eigenspace corresponding to the eigenvalue ˆλ k. From the regularity theory of Wang [15], we have E(ˆλ k ) C 1 () for all k N.

4 4 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ Each eigenspace has the Unique Continuation Property (UCP for short). This means that if u E(ˆλ k ) vanishes on a set of positive Lebesgue measure, then u 0. m Let H m = E(ˆλ k ) and Ĥm = H m = E(ˆλ k ). We have k=1 k m+1 H 1 () = H m Ĥm. Moreover, for every m 2, we have variational characterizations for the eigenvalues for the eigenvalues ˆλ m analogus to that for ˆλ 1 (see (2)): { } γ(u) ˆλ m = inf u 2 : u Ĥm 1,u 0 2 { } γ(u) (4) = sup u 2 : u H m,u 0,m 2. 2 In (2) the infimum is realized on E(ˆλ 1 ), while in (4) both the infimum and the supremum are realized on E(ˆλ m ). We know that dime(ˆλ 1 ) = 1 (that is, the first eigenvalue ˆλ 1 is simple). Hence the elements of E(ˆλ 1 ) have constant sign. We denote by û 1 C + \{0} the positive L 2 -normalized eigenfunction (that is, û 1 2 = 1) corresponding to ˆλ 1. From the strong maximum principle we have û 1 (z) > 0 for all z and if ξ + L () (that is, the potential function is bounded above), then by the Hopf boundary point theorem we have û 1 D + (see Pucci & Serrin [13, p. 120]). Using (2), (4) and the above properties, we have the following useful inequalities. Proposition 2. (a) If ϑ L (), ϑ(z) ˆλ m for almost all z, ϑ ˆλ m (m N), then there exists c 1 > 0 such that c 1 u 2 γ(u) ϑ(z)u 2 dz for all u Ĥm 1. (b) If ϑ L (), ϑ(z) ˆλ m for almost all z, ϑ ˆλ m (m N), then there exists c 2 > 0 such that γ(u) ϑ(z)u 2 dz c 2 u 2 for all u H m. Note that if ξ 0, β 0, then ˆλ 1 = 0, while if ξ 0 and either ξ 0 or β 0, then ˆλ 1 > 0. Also, the elements of E(ˆλ k ) for k 2 are nodal (that is, sign-changing). In addition to the eigenvalue problem (1), we can consider a weighted version of it. So, let m L (), m(z) 0 for almost all z, m 0 and consider the following linear eigenvalue problem (5) u(z)+ξ(z)u(z) = λm(z)u(z) in, u +β(z)u = 0 on. n This eigenvalue problem exhibits the same properties as (1). So, the spectrum consists of a sequence { λ k (m)} k N of distinct eigenvalues such that λ k (m) + as k +. As for (1), the first eigenvalue λ 1 (m) is simple and the elements of E( λ 1 (m)) C 1 () have fixed sign, while the elements of E( λ k (m)) C 1 () (for

5 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 5 all k 2) are nodal. We have variational characterisations for all the eigenvalues as in (2) and (4) only now the Rayleigh quotient is m(z)u2 dz. γ(u) Moreover, the eigenspaces have the UCP property. These properties lead to the following monotonicity property for the map m λ k (m), k N. Proposition 3. If m 1, m 2 L (), 0 m 1 (z) m 2 (z) for almost all z, m 1 0, m 2 m 1, then λ k (m 2 ) < λ k (m 1 ) for all k N. Let f 0 : R R be a Carathéodory function such that f 0 (z,x) a 0 (z)[1+ x r 1 ] for almost all x R, { 2N with a 0 L () and 1 < r 2 if N 3 = N 2 (the critical Sobolev + if N = 1,2 exponent). Let F 0 (z,x) = H 1 () R defined by x ϕ 0 (u) = 1 2 γ(u) 0 f 0 (z,s)ds and consider the C 1 -functional ϕ 0 : F 0 (z,u)dz for all u H 1 (). As in Papageorgiou & Rădulescu [10, Proposition 8], using the regularity theory of Wang [15], we have the following result. Proposition 4. Assume that u 0 H 1 () is a local C 1 ()-minimizer of ϕ 0 ( ), that is, there exists ρ 1 > 0 such that ϕ 0 (u 0 ) ϕ 0 (u 0 +h) for all h C 1 (), h C 1 () ρ 1. Then u 0 C 1,α () with 0 < α < 1 and u 0 is also a local H 1 ()-minimizer of ϕ 0, that is, there exists ρ 2 > 0 such that ϕ 0 (u 0 ) ϕ 0 (u 0 +h) for all h C 1 (), h ρ 2. Now we will recall some definitions and facts from Morse theory (critical groups). So, let X be a Banach space, ϕ C 1 (X,R) and c R. We introduce the following sets: ϕ c = {u X : ϕ(u) c}, K ϕ = {u X : ϕ (u) = 0}, K c ϕ = {u K ϕ : ϕ(u) = c}. Given a topological pair (Y 1,Y 2 ) such that Y 2 Y 1 X, for every k N 0, we denote by H k (Y 1,Y 2 ) the kth-relative singular homology group for the pair (Y 1,Y 2 ) with integer coefficients. Suppose that u Kϕ c is isolated. The critical groups of ϕ at u are defined by C k (ϕ,u) = H k (ϕ c U,ϕ c U\{u}) for all k N 0, with U being a neighbourhood of u such that K ϕ ϕ c U = {u}. The excision property of singular homology, implies that the above definition of critical groups is independent of the isolating neighbourhood U. If u is a local minimizer of ϕ, then C k (ϕ,u) = δ k,0 Z for all k N 0.

6 6 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ Here, δ k,m denotes the Kronecker symbol defined by { 1 if k = m, δ k,m = 0 if k m. Next, let us fix our notation. If x R, we set x ± = max{±x,0}. Then for u W 1,p (), we define u ± ( ) = u( ) ±. We know that u ± W 1,p (), u = u + u, u = u + +u. Given a measurable function g : R R (for example, a Carathéodory function), we denote by N g ( ) the Nemitsky (superposition) map defined by N g (u)( ) = g(,u( )) for all u W 1,p (). Also, A L(H 1 (),H 1 () ) is defined by A(u),h = (Du,Dh) R Ndz for all u,h H 1 (). The hypotheses on the nonlinearity f(z, x), are the following: H(f) : f : R R is a Carathéodory function such that f(z,0) = 0 for almost all z and (i) for every ρ > 0, there exists a ρ L () such that f(z,x) a ρ (z) for almost all z, all x ρ; (ii) there exist functions η,ˆη L () and m N,m 2 such that ˆλ 1 η(z) ˆη(z) ˆλ m for almost all z, η ˆλ 1, ˆη ˆλ m, f(z,x) f(z,x) ˆη(z) liminf limsup ˆη(z) uniformly for almost all z x + x x + x and there exists η > 0 such that f(z,x) ˆη liminf limsup x x x (iii) if F(z,x) = x 0 f(z,x) x f(z,s)ds, then ˆλ 1 uniformly for almost all z ; f(z,x)x 2F(z,x) + uniformly for almost all z as x, f(z,x)x 2F(z,x) 0 for almost all z, all x M 0 > 0, F(z,x) ˆλ m 2 x2 for almost all z, all x R; (iv) there exist functions ϑ, ˆϑ L () and l N,l m such that ˆλ l ϑ(z) ˆϑ(z) ˆλ l+1 for almost all z, ϑ ˆλ l, ˆϑ ˆλl+1, f(z,x) f(z,x) ϑ(z) liminf limsup x 0 x x 0 x ˆϑ(z) uniformly for almost all z. Remark 3. Hypothesis H(f)(ii) implies that f(z, ) has asymmetric behaviour as x ± (jumping nonlinearity). Moreover, as x we can have resonance with respect to the principal eigenvalue ˆλ 1. Hypothesis H(f)(iii) implies that this resonance is from the left of ˆλ 1 in the sense that ˆλ 1 x 2 2F(z,x) + uniformly for almost all z as x.

7 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 7 Note that hypotheses H(f)(i),(ii),(iv) imply that (6) f(z,x) c 3 x for almost all z, all x R, some c 3 > 0. For every λ > 0, let ϕ λ : H 1 () R be the energy functional for problem (P λ ) defined by ϕ λ (u) = 1 2 γ(u)+ λ q u q q F(z,u)dz for all u H 1 (). Evidently, ϕ λ C 1 (H 1 (),R). Let µ > 0 be as in (3). We introduce the following truncations-perturbations of the reaction in problem (P λ ): (7) k + λ (z,x) = { 0 if x 0 f(z,x) λx q 1 +µx if x > 0 k λ (z,x) = { f(z,x) λ x q 2 x+µx if x < 0 0 if x 0. Both are Carathéodory functions. We set K ± λ (z,x) = x k ± λ (z,s)ds and consider the C 1 -functionals ˆϕ ± λ : H1 () R defined by ˆϕ ± λ (u) = 1 2 γ(u)+ µ 2 u 2 2 K ± λ (z,u)dz for all u H1 (). 3. Compactness conditions for the functionals 0 Weconsiderthefunctionals ˆϕ ± λ,ϕ λ andweshowthattheysatisfythecompactnesstype condition Proposition 5. If hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold, then for every λ > 0 the functional ˆλ + λ satisfies the C-condition. Proof. We consider a sequence {u n } n 1 H 1 () such that (8) (9) (11) From (9) we have (10) A(u n ),h + ˆϕ + λ (u n) M 1 for some M 1 > 0, all n N, (1+ u n )(ˆϕ + λ ) (u n ) 0 in H 1 () as n +. for all h H 1 () with ǫ n 0 +. [ξ(z)+µ]u n hdz + β(z)u n hdσ k + λ (z,u n)hdz ǫ n h 1+ u n In (10) we choose h = u n H 1 (). Then γ(u n )+µ u n 2 2 ǫ n for all n N (see (7)), c 0 u n 2 ǫ n for all n N (see (3)), u n 0 in H 1 () as n. From(10) and (11), we have A(u (12) + n ),h + ξ(z)u + n hdz + β(z)u + n hdσ for all h H 1 (), with ǫ n 0 + (see (7)). [f(z,u + n ) λ(u+ n )q 1 ]hdz ǫ n h

8 8 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ We show that {u + n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded. Arguing by contradiction, suppose that (13) u + n as n. Let y n = u+ n u + n, n N. Then y n = 1, y n 0 for all n N. So, we may assume that (14) y n w y in H 1 () and y n y in L 2 () and in L 2 ( ), y 0. Using (12) we obtain A(y n ),h + ξ(z)y n hdz + (15) ǫ h u + for all n N. n From (6) we see that { Nf (u + n (16) ) } u + n n 1 λ β(z)y n hdσ + u + n 2 q L 2 () is bounded. yn q 1 hdz So, by passing to a subsequence if necessary and using hypothesis H(f)(ii), we have (17) N f (u + n ) u + n w ν(z)y in L 2 (), η(z) ν(z) ˆη(z) for almost all z (see Aizicovici, Papageorgiou & Staicu [1], proof of Proposition 16). If in (15) we choose h = y n y H 1 (), pass to the limit as n and use (13), (14), (16) and the fact that q < 2, then (18) lim A(y n),y n y = 0, n Dy n 2 Dy 2, y n y in H 1 () (by the Kadec-Klee property), hence y = 1. In (15) we pass to the limit as n and use (17). We obtain A(y),h + ξ(z)yhdz + β(z)yhdσ = ν(z)yhdz for all h H 1 (), y(z)+ξ(z)y(z) = ν(z)y(z) for almost all z, (19) y +β(z)y = 0 on (see Papageorgiou & Rădulescu [9]). n From (17) and Proposition 3, we have (20) λ1 (ν) < λ 1 (ˆλ 1 ) = 1. Then (19), (20) and the fact that y = 1 (see (18)) imply that But this contradicts (14). Therefore y( ) must be nodal. {u + n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded, {u n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded (see (11)). N f (u + n) u + hdz n

9 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 9 We may assume that (21) u n w u in H 1 () and u n u in L 2 () and in L 2 ( ). In (10) we choose h = u n u H 1 (), pass to the limit as n and use (21) and (6). Then lim A(u n),u n u = 0, n u n u in H 1 () (again by the Kadec-Klee property), ˆϕ + λ satisfies the C-condition. The proof is now complete. Proposition 6. If hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold, then for every λ > 0 the functional ˆϕ λ is coercive. Proof. According to hypothesis H(f)(iii) given any ρ > 0, we can find M 2 = M 2 (ρ) > 0 such that (22) ρ f(z,x)x 2F(z,x) for almost all z, all x M 2. We have ( ) d F(z,x) dx x 2 (23) F(z,v) v 2 F(z,y) y 2 ρ 2 = f(z,x)x2 2xF(z,x) x 4 = f(z,x)x 2F(z,x) x 2 x ρ x 2 x for almost all z, all x M 2 (see (22)), ] [ 1 y 2 1 v 2 for almost all z, all v y M 2. From hypothesis H(f)(ii) we have (24) 2F(z,x) 2F(z,x) η liminf x x 2 limsup x x 2 ˆλ 1 uniformly for almost all z. If in (23) we let v and use (24), then ˆλ 1 y 2 2F(z,y) ρ for almost all z, all y M 2, (25) ˆλ 1 y 2 2F(z,y) + uniformly for almost all z as y. We proceed by contradiction and assume that ˆλ λ is not coercive. This means that we can find {u n } n 1 H 1 () such that (26) u n as n and ˆϕ λ (u n) M 3 for some M 3 > 0, all n N. Let v n = u n u n, n N. Then v n = 1 for all n N and so we may assume that (27) v n w v in H 1 () and v n v in L 2 () and in L 2 ( ). (28) From (26) we have 1 2 γ(u n)+ µ 2 u n γ(v n)+ µ 2 v n 2 2 K λ (z,u n)dz M 3 for all n N, K λ (z,u n) u n 2 dz M 3 for all n N. u n 2

10 10 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ (29) From (6) we obtain F(z,x) c 3 2 x2 for almost all z, all x R, { K λ (,u } n( )) u n 2 L 1 () is uniformly integrable (see (7) and (27)). n 1 Hence by the Dunford-Pettis theorem and hypothesis H(f)(ii) we have K λ (,u n( )) u n 2 w 1 2 [ẽ(z)+µ](v ) 2 in L 1 () as n with η ẽ(z) ˆλ 1 for almost all z (see [1]). We return to (28), pass to the limit as n in (26), (27), (29). Since γ( ) is sequentially weakly lower semicontinuous on H 1 (), we obtain 1 2 γ(v)+ µ 2 v [ẽ(z)+µ](v ) 2 dz 2 (30) γ(v ) ẽ(z)(v ) 2 dz (see (3)). First we assume that ẽ ˆλ 1 (see (29)). Then from (30) and Proposition 2 we have (31) c 1 v 2 0, v 0. Then on account of (27) and (31), we have (32) v n w 0 in H 1 () and v n 0 in L2 () and in L 2 ( ). In (28) we pass to the limit as n and use (32), (30) and the sequential weak lower semicontinuity of γ( ). We obtain From (28) we obtain γ(v + )+µ v , c 0 v (see (3)), v = 0 (see (31)). Dv n 2 0, v n 0 in H 1 () (see (27)), which contradicts the fact that v n = 1 for all n N. Next we assume that ẽ(z) = ˆλ 1, for almost all z. From (30) and (2), we have (33) γ(v ) = ˆλ 1 v 2 2, v = τû 1 for some τ 0. If τ = 0, then v 0 and arguing as above (see the part of the proof after (31)), we obtain v = 0, contradicting the fact that v n = 1 for all n N. If τ > 0, then from (33) we have v(z) < 0 for all z.

11 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 11 This means that u n(z) for almost all z as n, ˆλ 1 u n (z)2 2F(z,u n (z)) + for almost all z as n (see (25)) [ˆλ 1 (u n) 2 2F(z,u n)]dz + as n (by Fatou s lemma, see (25)), γ(u n) 2 F(z, u n)dz + as n (see (2)), 2ˆϕ λ (u n) + as n (see (7)). But this contradicts (26). We conclude that ˆϕ λ is coercive. This proposition leads to the following corollary (see Marano & Papageorgiou [4, Proposition 2.2]). Corollary 7. If hypotheses H(ξ),H(β),H(f) hold, then for every λ > 0 the functional ˆϕ λ satisfies the C-condition. Now we turn our attention to the energy functional ϕ λ, λ > 0. Proposition 8. If hypotheses H(ξ),H(β),H(f) then for every λ > 0 the functional ϕ λ satisfies the C-condition. Proof. We consider a sequence {u n } n 1 H 1 () such that (34) (35) ϕ λ (u n ) M 4 for some M 4 > 0, all n N, (1+ u n )ϕ λ (u n) 0 in H 1 () as n. From (35) we have (36) A(u n ),h + ξ(z)u n hdz + β(z)u n hdσ +λ u n q 2 u n hdσ f(z,u n )hdz ǫ n h 1+ u n for all h H1 (), with ǫ n 0 +. In (36) we choose h = u n H 1 (). Then (37) γ(u n ) λ u n q q f(z,u n )u n dz ǫ n for all n N. On the other hand, from (34) we have (38) γ(u n )+ 2λ q u n q q 2F(z,u n )dz 2M 4 for all n N. We add (37) and (38). Recalling that q < 2, we obtain [f(z,u n )u n 2F(z,u n )]dz M 5 for all n N. Using hypothesis H(f)(iii), we see that (39) [f(z, u n)( u n) 2F(z, u n)]dz M 5 for all n N. We use (39) to show that {u n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded. Arguing by contradiction, we may assume that (40) u n as n.

12 12 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ Let y n = u n u n, n N. Then y n = 1, y n 0 for all n N. We may assume that (41) y n w y in H 1 () and y n y in L 2 () and in L 2 ( ), y 0. In (36) we choose h = u n H1 (). Then γ(u n )+λ u n q q f(z, u n )( u n )dz ǫ n for all n N, λ γ(y n )+ u n 2 q y n q q N f ( u (42) n ) u y n dz ǫ n n u for all n N. 2 n From (6) we see that {Nf ( u } n) u n n 1 L 2 () is bounded. So, by passing to a subsequence if necessary and using hypothesis H(f)(ii) we have (43) N f ( u n ) u n w ẽ(z)y in L 2 () as n with η ẽ(z) ˆλ 1 for almost all z. Returning to (42), passing to the limit as n and using (40) (recall that q < 2), (41), (43) and the sequential weak lower semicontinuity of γ( ), we obtain (44) γ(y) ẽ(z)y 2 dz. First we assume that ẽ ˆλ 1 (see (43)). Then from (44) and Proposition 2, we have c 1 y 2 0, y = 0. From this and (42), we infer that Dy n 2 0, y n 0 in H 1 (), which contradicts the fact that y n = 1 for all n N. We now assume that ẽ(z) = ˆλ 1 for almost all z. Then from (44) and (2) we have y = τû 1 with τ 0. If τ = 0, then y = 0 and as above we have y n 0 in H 1 (), a contradiction since y n = 1 for all n N. If τ > 0, then y(z) > 0 for all z and so u n (z) + for almost all z, f(z, u n(z))( u n)(z) 2F(z, u n(z)) + for almost all z (see hypothesis H(f)(iii)), [f(z, u n )( u n ) 2F(z, u n )]dz + (by Fatou s lemma).

13 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 13 This contradicts (39). Therefore (45) {u n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded. Next, we show that {u + n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded. From (36) and (45), we have A(u + n ),h + ξ(z)u + n hdz + β(z)u + n hdσ +λ (u + n )q 1 hdz f(z,u + n )hdz M 6 for some M 6 > 0, all n N. Using this bound and a contradiction argument as in the proof of Proposition 5, we show that {u + n} n 1 H 1 () is bounded, {u n } n 1 H 1 () is bounded (see (45)). From this, as before(see the proof of Proposition 5), via the Kadec-Klee property, we conclude that ϕ λ satisfies the C-condition. 4. Multiplicity theorems In this section using variational methods, truncation and perturbation techniques and Morse theory, we prove two multiplicity theorems for problem (P λ ) when λ > 0 is small. In the first result, we produce four nontrivial smooth solutions, while in the second theorem, under stronger conditions on f(z, ), we establish the existence of five nontrivial smooth solutions. We start with a result which allows us to satisfy the mountain-pass geometry (see Theorem 1) and also distinguish the solutions we produce from the trivial one. Proposition 9. If hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold, then for every λ > 0, u = 0 is a local minimizer of ϕ λ and of ˆϕ ± λ. Proof. We do the proof for the functional ϕ λ. The proofs for ˆϕ ± λ are similar. Recall that (46) F(z,x) c 3 2 x 2 for almost all z, all x R (see (6)). Then for u C 1 ()\{0} we have ϕ λ (u) λ q u q q [ c8 2 + ξ ] u 2 2 (see (46) and hypotheses H(ξ), H(β)). λ [ q u q q c 4 u 2 q u q q with c c1 4 = ] 2 + ξ > 0 [ ] λ = q c 4 u 2 q u q q. ( ) 1 λ So, if u u C1 () < 2 q, then ϕλ (u) > 0 = ϕ λ (0). Hence qc 4 u = 0 is a local C 1 () minimizer of ϕ λ ( ), u = 0 is a local H 1 () minimizer of ϕ λ ( ) (see Proposition 4). Similarly for the functionals ˆϕ ± λ. With the next propositionwe guaranteethat for small λ > 0the functional ˆϕ + λ ( ) satisfies the mountain pass geometry (see Theorem 1).

14 14 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ Proposition 10. If hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold, then we can find λ > 0 such that for all λ (0,λ ), there is t 0 = t 0 (λ) > 0 for which we have ˆϕ + λ (t 0û 1 ) < 0. Proof. Let r > 2. From hypothesis H(f)(iv) and (46), we see that given ǫ > 0 we can find c 5 = c 5 (ǫ,r) > 0 such that (47) F(z,x) 1 2 [ϑ(z) ǫ]x2 c 5 x r for almost all z, all x 0. Then for all t > 0, we have ˆϕ + λ (tû 1) = t2 2 γ(û 1)+ λtq q û 1 q q F(z,tû 1 )dz (see (7)) [ t2 γ(û 1 ) ϑ(z)û 2 2 1dz +ǫ ]+ λtq q û 1 q q +c 5 t r û 1 r r (see (47) and recall that û 1 2 = 1) [ (48) = t2 (ˆλ 1 ϑ(z))û 2 2 1dz +ǫ ]+ λtq q û 1 q q +c 5 t r û 1 r r. (49) Note that k = (ϑ(z) ˆλ 1 )û 2 1dz > 0 (see hypothesis H(f)(iv)). Choosing ǫ (0,k ), we see from (48) that ˆϕ + λ (tû 1) c 6 t 2 +λc 7 t q +c 8 t r for some c 6,c 7,c 8 > 0 Consider the function = [ c 6 +λc 7 t q 2 +c 8 t r 2 ]t 2. J λ (t) = λc 7 t q 2 +c 8 t r 2 for all t > 0. Evidently, J λ C 1 (0,+ ) and since 1 < q < 2 < r, we see that J λ (t) + as t 0 + and as t +. So, we can find t 0 (0,+ ) such that Then J λ (t 0 ) = min[j(t) : 0 < t < + ], J λ(t 0 ) = 0, λc 7 (2 q)t q 3 0 = c 8 (r 2)t r 3 [ ] 1 λc7 r q (2 q) t 0 = t 0 (λ) =. c 8 (r 2) J λ (t 0 ) = λc 7 [c 8 (r 2)] 2 q r q Since 2 q < 1, we see that r q So, we can find λ > 0 such that [λc 2 (2 q)] 2 q r q J λ (t 0 ) 0 + as λ , [λc 2 (2 q)] r 2 2 q +c 8. [c 8 (r 2)] r 2 2 q J λ (t 0 ) < c 6 for all λ (0,λ ).

15 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 15 Then from (49) it follows that ˆϕ + λ (t 0û 1 ) < 0 for all λ (0,λ ). This completes the proof of Proposition 10. Remark 4. In fact, a careful reading of the above proof reveals that (50) ˆϕ λ ( t 0û 1 ) < 0 for all λ (0,λ ). Proposition 11. If hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold and λ (0,λ ), then there exists u 0 C 1 () with u 0 (z) < 0 for all z and ˆϕ λ (u 0) = inf [ˆϕ λ (u) : u H1 () ] < 0. Proof. From Proposition 6 we know that ˆϕ λ is coercive. Also, the Sobolev embedding theorem and the compactness of the trace map, imply that ˆϕ λ is sequentially weakly lower semicontinuous. Hence, by the Weierstrass-Tonelli theorem, we can find u 0 H 1 () such that (51) ˆϕ λ (u 0) = inf[ˆϕ λ (u) : u W1,p ()]. (52) From (50) we see that From (51) we have (ˆϕ λ ) (u 0 ) = 0, A(u 0 ),h + for all h H 1 (). ˆϕ λ (u 0) < 0 = ˆλ λ (0), u 0 0. [ξ(z)+µ]u 0 hdz + In (52) we choose h = u + 0 H1 (). Then From (52) and (7) it follows that A(u 0 ),h + ξ(z)u 0 hdz + β(z)u 0 hdσ = γ(u + 0 )+µ u = 0 (see (7)), c 0 u (see (3)), u 0 0, u 0 0. k λ (z,u 0)hdz β(z)u 0 hdσ = [f(z,u 0 ) λ u 0 q 2 u 0 ]hdz for all h H 1 (), u 0 (z)+ξ(z)u 0 (z) = f(z,u 0 (z)) λ u 0 (z) q 2 u 0 (z) for almost all z, u 0 (53) n +β(z)u 0 = 0 on (see Papageorgiou & Rădulescu [9]). Letτ λ (z,x) = f(z,x) λ x q 2 xand ˆk λ (z) = τ λ(z,u 0 (z)), forλ > 0. Hypotheses 1+ u 0 (z) H(f)(i),(ii) imply that τ λ (z,x) c 9 [1+ x ] for almost all z, all x R, with c 9 = c 9 (λ) > 0, ˆk λ (z) = τ λ(z,u 0 (z)) c 9 for almost all z, 1+ u 0 (z) ˆk λ L ().

16 16 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ From (53) we have u 0 (z) = [ξ(z) ˆk λ (z)]u 0 (z)+ ˆk λ (z) for almost all z, u 0 n +β(z)u 0 = 0 on (recall that u 0 0). Since (ξ ˆk λ )( ) L s () (for s > N), we deduce by Lemma 5.1 of Wang [15] that u 0 L (). Then the Calderon-Zygmund estimates (see Wang [15, Lemma 5.2]) imply that u 0 ( C + )\{0}. Moreover, the Harnack inequality (see Theorem in Pucci & Serrin [13, p. 163]), implies that u 0 (z) < 0 for all z. This completes the proof. Remark 5. The negative sign of the concave term does not allow us to conclude that u 0 D + when ξ + L () (by Hopf s boundary point theorem, see Pucci & Serrin [13, p. 120]). Now we can state and prove our first multiplicity theorem. Theorem 12. Assume that hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold. Then there exists ˆλ > 0 such that for all λ (0,ˆλ) problem (P λ ) has at least four nontrivial solutions u 0,û ( C + )\{0}, u 0 (z), û(z) < 0 for all z, v 0 C + \{0}, v 0 (z) > 0 for all z, y 0 C 1 ()\{0}. Proof. From Proposition 11 and its proof (see (53)), we already have one solution u 0 ( C + )\{0}, u 0 (z) < 0 for all z, when λ (0,λ ). This solution is a global minimizer of the functional ˆϕ λ. Claim 1. u 0 is a local minimizer of the energy functional ϕ λ. Wefirstshowthatu 0 isalocalc 1 ()-minimizerofϕ λ. Arguingbycontradiction, suppose that we could find a sequence {u n } n 1 C 1 () such that (54) u n u 0 in C 1 () as n and ϕ λ (u n ) < ϕ λ (u 0 ) for all n N.

17 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 17 (55) Then for all n N, we have 0 > ϕ λ (u n ) ϕ λ (u 0 ) = ϕ λ (u n ) ˆϕ λ (u 0) (since ϕ λ ( C+) = ˆϕ λ ( C +), see (7)) ϕ λ (u n ) ˆϕ λ (u n) (recall that u 0 is a global minimizer of ˆϕ λ ) = 1 2 γ(u n)+ λ q u n q q F(z,u n )dz 1 2 γ(u n) µ 2 u+ n 2 2 λ q u n q q + F(z, u n )dz (see (7)) = λ q u+ n q q µ 2 u+ n 2 2 F(z,u + n )dz λ ( ) q u+ n q q µ+c3 u + n (see (46)) λ q u+ n q q c 10 u + n 2 q u+ n q q with c 10 = µ+c 3 2 = [ λ q c 10 u + n 2 q From (54) we have ] u + n q q. u + n 0 in C1 () (recall that u 0 < 0). Therefore we can find n 0 N such that a contradiction. Hence we have that > 0 λ q > c 10 u + n 2 q for all n n 0, 0 > ϕ λ (u n ) ϕ(u 0 ) > 0 for all n n 0 (see (55)), u 0 is a local C 1 () minimizer of ϕ λ, u 0 is a local H 1 () minimizer of ϕ λ (see Proposition 4). This proves the claim. Using (7) and the regularity theory of Wang [15], we can see that (56) Kˆλ λ ( C + ) and Kˆϕ + λ C + for all λ > 0. On account of (56) we see that we may assume that both critical sets Kˆϕ λ are finite or, otherwise, we already have an infinity of nontrivial smooth and Kˆϕ + λ solutions of constant sign and so we are done. From Proposition 9 we know that for all λ > 0,u = 0 is a local minimizer of ˆϕ λ. Since Kˆϕ is finite, we can find ρ (0, u 0 ) small such that λ (57) ˆϕ λ (u 0) < 0 = ˆϕ λ (0) < inf[ˆϕ λ (u) : u = ρ] = ˆm ρ (see Aizicovici, Papageorgiou & Staicu [1], proof of Proposition 29). From Corollary 7 we know that (58) ˆϕ λ satisfies the C-condition.

18 18 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ Then (57) and (58) permit the use of Theorem 1 (the mountain pass theorem). So, we can find û H 1 () such that û Kˆϕ ( C + ) (see (56)) and ˆϕ λ (u 0) < 0 = ˆϕ λ (0) < ˆm ρ ˆϕ λ (û). λ It follows that û ( C + )\{0,u 0 } is a solution of (P λ ) (see (7)). As before, Harnack s inequality implies that û(z) < 0 for all z. Now we use once more Proposition 9 to find ρ 0 (0,t 0 ) small enough such that (59) 0 = ˆϕ + λ (0) < inf[ˆϕ + λ (u) : u = ρ 0] = ˆm + ρ0,λ > 0. Proposition 10 implies that we can find λ > 0 such that (60) ˆϕ + λ (t 0û 1 ) < 0 for all λ (0,λ ) with t 0 = t 0 (λ) > 0. Moreover, Proposition 5 implies that (61) ˆϕ + λ satisfies the C-condition for all λ > 0. Then on account of (59), (60), (61), we can apply Theorem 1 (the mountain pass theorem) and produce v 0 H 1 () such that v 0 + Kˆϕ C + (see (56)) and 0 = ˆϕ + λ (0) < ˆm+ ρ ˆϕ+ λ (v 0), λ v 0 C + \{0} is a solution of (P λ ), λ (0,λ ) (see (7)). Once again, Harnack s inequality guarantees that v 0 (z) > 0 for all z. Let l N be as in hypothesis H(f)(iv) and set We have H l = l E(ˆλ k ), Ĥ l = H l = E(ˆλ k ). k=1 k l+1 H 1 () = H l Ĥl and dimh l < +. Consider u H l. We have ϕ λ (u) = 1 2 γ(u)+ λ q u q q F(z,u)dz 1 [ γ(u) ϑ(z)u 2 dz +ǫ u ]+c 2 11 [λ u q + u r ] 2 for some c 11 > 0 (see (47) and recall that all norms on H l are equivalent) 1 2 [ c 2 +ǫ] u 2 +c 11 [λ u q + u r ] (see Proposition 2). Choosing ǫ (0,c 2 ) we have ϕ λ (u) [ c 12 +λc 11 u q 2 +c 11 u r 2 ] u 2 for some c 12 > 0. Reasoning as in the proof of Proposition 11, we can find ˆλ (0,λ ] such that for all λ (0,ˆλ] there exists ρ λ > 0 for which we have (62) ϕ λ (u) < 0 for all u H l, u = ρ λ.

19 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 19 For u Ĥl we have (63) ϕ λ (u) 1 2 γ(u)+ λ q u q q ˆλm 2 u 2 2 (see hypothesis H(f)(iii)) 1 2 [γ(u) ˆλ l u 2 2]+ λ q u q q (since l m) 0. Finally, consider the half-space H + = {tû 1 +ũ : t 0, ũ Ĥl}. Exploiting the orthogonality of Ĥl and H l, for every u H +, we have ϕ λ (u) 1 2 [t2 γ(û 1 )+γ(ũ)] ˆλ m 2 [t2 û ũ 2 2] (see hypothesis H(f)(iii)) (64) 0 (since ũ Ĥl, l m). Then (62), (63), (64) permit the use of Theorem 3.1 of Perera [12]. So, we can find y 0 H 1 () such that (65) y 0 K ϕλ C 1 () (by the regularity theory of Wang [15]), ϕ λ (y 0 ) < 0 = ϕ λ (0) and C dl 1(ϕ λ,y 0 ) 0 (d l = dimh l ). From (65) it is clear that y 0 0. Recall that 0 < ϕ λ (û),ϕ λ (v 0 ) (since ϕ λ = ˆϕ λ = ˆϕ+ ( C+) λ C + ). Therefore from (65) it follows that (66) y 0 {û,v 0,0}. Also, from the claim we have that u 0 is a local minimizer of ϕ λ. Hence (67) C k (ϕ λ,u 0 ) = δ k,0 Z for all k N 0. Note that d l 2 (since l m 2). Therefore and so from (65) and (67), we infer that d l 1 1 y 0 u 0. So, we conclude that y 0 C 1 ()\{0} is a fourth nontrivial solution of (P λ ) (for all λ (0,ˆλ)) distinct from u 0,û,v 0. If we strengthen the hypotheses on f(z, ) we can improve the above multiplicity theorem and produce a fifth nontrivial smooth solution. The new conditions on the nonlinearity f(z,x) are the following: H(f) : f : R R is a measurable function such that for almost all z, f(z,0) = 0, f(z, ) C 1 (R), hypotheses H(f) (i),(ii),(iii) are the same as the corresponding hypotheses H(f)(i),(ii),(iii) and

20 20 N.S. PAPAGEORGIOU, V.D. RĂDULESCU, AND D.D. REPOVŠ (iv) there exist l N, l m such that f x f(z,x) (z,0) = lim uniformly for almost all z, x 0 x f x(z,0) [ˆλ l,ˆλ l+1 ] for almost all z, f x (,0) ˆλ l, f x (,0) ˆλ l+1. Theorem 13. If hypotheses H(ξ), H(β), H(f) hold, then there exists ˆλ > 0 such that for all λ (0,ˆλ) problem (P λ ) has at least five nontrivial solutions u 0,û ( C + ), u 0 (z) < 0 for all z, v 0 C +, v 0 (z) > 0 for all z, y 0, ŷ C 1 ()\{0}. Proof. Now we have ϕ λ C 2 (H 1 ()\{0},R). Similarly, ˆϕ ± λ C2 (H 1 ()\{0},R). The solutions u 0,û,v 0,y 0 are a consequence of Theorem 12. From Proposition 9 and (67), we have (68) C k (ϕ λ,u 0 ) = C k (ϕ λ,0) = δ k,0 Z for all k N 0, λ (0,ˆλ). Also, from the proof of Theorem 12, we know that û is a critical point of ˆϕ λ of mountain pass type, v 0 is a critical point of ˆϕ + λ of mountain pass type. Invoking Corollary of Motreanu, Motreanu & Papageorgiou [5], we have (69) C k (ϕ λ,û) = C k(ˆϕ + λ,v 0) = δ k,1 Z for all k N 0. The continuity in the C 1 -norm of the critical groups (see Theorem in Gasinski & Papageorgiou [3, p. 836]), implies that (70) (71) C k (ˆϕ λ,û) = C k(ϕ λ,û) for all k N 0, C k (ˆϕ + λ,v 0) = C k (ϕ λ,v 0 ) for all k N 0. From (69), (70), (71) it follows that (72) C k (ϕ λ,û) = C k (ϕ λ,v 0 ) = δ k,1 Z for all k N 0. The fourth nontrivial solution y 0 C 1 () was produced by using Theorem 3.1 of Perera [12]. According to that theorem, we can also find another function ŷ H 1 (), ŷ y 0 such that (73) ŷ K ϕλ C 1 () and C dl (ϕ λ,ŷ) 0 (d l 2). From (68), (72), (73) we conclude that ŷ C 1 ()\{u 0,û,v 0,y 0,0} is the fifth nontrivial solution of problem (P λ ), for all λ (0,ˆλ). Acknowledgements. This research was supported by the Slovenian Research Agency grants P1-0292, J1-8131, J1-7025, N1-0064, and N V.D. Rădulescu acknowledges the support through a grant of the Romanian Ministry of Research and Innovation, CNCS UEFISCDI, project number PN-III-P4-ID-PCE , within PNCDI III.

21 ASYMMETRIC ROBIN PROBLEMS 21 References [1] S. Aizicovici, N.S. Papageorgiou, V. Staicu, Degree Theory for Operators of Monotone Type and Nonlinear Elliptic Equations with Inequality Constraints, Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc. 196 (2008), No. 915, pp. 70. [2] G. D Agui, S. Marano, N.S. Papageorgiou, Multiple solutions to a Robin problem with indefinite weight and asymmetric reaction, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 433 (2016), [3] L. Gasinski, N.S. Papageorgiou, Exercises in Analysis. Part 2: Nonlinear Analysis, Springer Cham, [4] S. Marano, N.S. Papageorgiou, Multiple solutions to a Dirichlet problem with the p-laplacian and nonlinearity depending on a parameter, Adv. Nonlin. Anal. 1 (2012), [5] D. Motreanu, V. Motreanu, N.S. Papageorgiou, Topological and Variational Methods with Applications to Nonlinear Boundary Value Problems, Springer, New York, [6] F.O. de Paiva, E. Massa, Multiple solutions for some elliptic equations with a nonlinearity concave at the origin, Nonlinear Anal. 66 (2007), [7] F.O. de Paiva, A.E. Presoto, Semilinear elliptic problems with asymmetric nonlinearities, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 409 (2014), [8] N.S. Papageorgiou, V.D. Rădulescu, Semilinear Neumann problems with indefinite and unbounded potential and crossing nonlinearity, in Recent Trends in Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations II. Stationary Problems, Contemp. Math. 595 (2013), [9] N.S. Papageorgiou, V.D. Rădulescu, Multiple solutions with precise sign for parametric Robin problems, J. Differential Equations 256 (2014), [10] N.S. Papageorgiou, V.D. Rădulescu, Nonlinear nonhomogeneous Robin problems with superlinear reaction term, Adv. Nonlin. Studies 16 (2016), [11] N. S. Papageorgiou, V. D. Rădulescu, Robin problems with indefinite and unbounded potential resonant at, superlinear at +, Tohoku Math. Jour. 69 (2017), [12] K. Perera, Multiplicity results for some elliptic problems with concave nonlinearities, J. Differential Equations 140 (1997), [13] P. Pucci, J. Serrin, The Maximum Principle, Birkhäuser, Basel, [14] L. Recova, A. Rumbos, An asymmetric superlinear elliptic problem at resonance, Nonlinear Anal. 112 (2015), [15] X. Wang, Neumann problems of superlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents, J. Differential Equations 93 (1991), (N.S. Papageorgiou) National Technical University, Department of Mathematics, Zografou Campus, Athens 15780, Greece & Institute of Mathematics, Physics and Mechanics, Jadranska 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia address: npapg@math.ntua.gr (V.D. Rădulescu) Institute of Mathematics, Physics and Mechanics, Jadranska 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia & Faculty of Applied Mathematics, AGH University of Science and Technology, Kraków, Poland & Institute of Mathematics Simion Stoilow of the Romanian Academy, P.O. Box 1-764, Bucharest, Romania address: vicentiu.radulescu@imfm.si (D.D. Repovš) Faculty of Education and Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, University of Ljublijiana, SI-1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia & Institute of Mathematics, Physics and Mechanics, Jadranska 19, 1000 Ljubljana, Slovenia address: dusan.repovs@guest.arnes.si