arxiv: v4 [math.ap] 23 Jan 2019

Transcription

1 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY IN BOUNDED WEAK LIPSCHITZ DOMAINS WITH MIXED BOUNDARY CONDITIONS SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG arxiv: v4 [math.ap] 23 Jan 2019 Abstract. Let Ω R 3 be a bounded wea Lipschitz domain with boundary Γ := Ω divided into two wea Lipschitz submanifolds and Γ ν and let ε denote an L -matrix field inducing an inner product in L 2 Ω). The main result of this contribution is the so called Maxwell compactness property, that is, the Hilbert space { E L 2 Ω) : rote L 2 Ω), divεe L 2 Ω), ν E Γτ = 0, ν εe Γν = 0 } is compactly embedded into L 2 Ω). We will also prove some canonical applications, such as Maxwell estimates, Helmholtz decompositions and a static solution theory. Furthermore, a Fredholm alternative for the underlying time-harmonic Maxwell problem and all corresponding and related results for exterior domains formulated in weighted Sobolev spaces are straightforward. Contents 1. Introduction 2 2. Notation, preliminaries and outline of the proof Lipschitz domains Outline of the proof 6 3. H 1 -potentials H 1 -potentials without boundary conditions H 1 -potentials with boundary conditions Wea equals strong for the half-cube in terms of boundary conditions The compact embedding Compact embedding on the half-cube The compact embedding for wea Lipschitz domains Applications The Maxwell estimate Helmholtz decompositions Static solution theory 20 Appendix A. Proof of Lemma Acnowledgements 24 References 24 Date: January 24, Key words and phrases. Maxwell compactness property, wea Lipschitz domain, Maxwell estimate, Helmholtz decomposition, electro-magneto static, mixed boundary conditions, vector potentials. This contribution has been published in [2]. 1

2 2 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG 1. Introduction One of the main and most important tools in the theory of Maxwell s equations is the compact embedding of vector fields possessing wea divergence and rotation in L 2, subject to appropriate possibly mixed boundary conditions, into L 2. Let Ω R 3 denote a bounded domain with boundary Γ := Ω, where Γ is divided into two relatively open subsets and its complement Γ ν := Γ \. Furthermore, let ε : Ω R 3 3 denote a symmetric and uniformly positive definite L -matrix field, which will throughout the paper be called admissible. The so-called Maxwell compactness property, i.e., the compactness of the embedding 1) R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) L 2 Ω), has been investigated in various settings. Here R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) denotes the space of all E L 2 Ω) with rote L 2 Ω) and divεe L 2 Ω) satisfying the mixed boundary conditions ν E = 0 on and ν εe = 0 on Γ ν in a wea sense. Historically and e.g. for full tangential boundary conditions, 1) has first been proved by a regularity argument, showing that in a sufficiently smooth setting RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) is continuously embedded into H 1 Ω) Gaffney s inequality) and hence contains a L 2 Ω)-converging subsequence by Rellich s selection theorem. A first result for non-smooth, more precisely cone-lie, i.e., more or less strong Lipschitz, domains in R N or even Riemannian manifolds, was obtained by Wec [27] in the case of full homogeneous boundary conditions, i.e., Γ ν = or =, using the general setting provided by the calculus of alternating differential forms. Weber [25] found a new proof for bounded domains in R 3 satisfying the uniform conecondition, which is again more or less strong Lipschitz. This result was improved upon by Witsch [29], who showed that the compact embedding is valid for bounded domains of R 3 satisfying merely the p-cusp condition for 1 < p < 2. An elementary proof for wea Lipschitz domains, which even holds for wea Lipschitz manifolds, was given by Picard [20]. Costabel [5] proved the compact embedding by means of a wea regularity result, i.e., there holds the continuous embedding into H 1 /2 and therefore the compact embedding into H t for t < 1/2 and into H 0 = L 2 in particular. All these results have been obtained for full boundary conditions. Kuhn[10], using the methods developed by Wec[27] and comparable assumptions about the regularity of the boundary and the interface, obtained the compact embedding for mixed boundary conditions in the setting of differential forms. Based on the techniques developed by Weber [25], Jochmann [9] showed the compact embedding to hold for vector fields satisfying mixed boundary conditions, if Ω has a strong) Lipschitz continuous boundary Γ with a strong) Lipschitz continuous interface Γ ν. More precisely, the boundary Γ and the interface can be locally represented as graphs of Lipschitz functions. In this paper it is shown that the assumptions in [9] can be weaened to include domains Ω with wea Lipschitz boundaries and wea Lipschitz interfaces, i.e., the boundary Γ is assumed to be a Lipschitz manifold and the interface a Lipschitz submanifold of Γ. This assumption is weaer than the assumptions in [9]. Moreover, wea Lipschitz domains are relevant in various applications. A prominent example is the so-called two bric domain. Our paper closely follows [9] and hence [25]. Conveniently, the proofs from [9] carry over practically verbatim. However, a modification of [9, Theorem 1] see our Theorem 3.8) allows for a shorter and more straightforward proof of the compact embedding. Moreover, we will use different transformations charts), which reduces the compact embedding to the flat situation of a half-cube. The main result of this contribution is the compact embedding stated in Theorem 4.7. In the last chapter we present applications of the main theorem, i.e. the Maxwell estimate, Helmholtz decompositions and, following the approach developed by Picard in [18] and [19], a solution theory for the static Maxwell problem involving mixed boundary conditions. Another application is the proof of Fredholm s alternative for the time-harmonic Maxwell s equations. This is straightforward but would be beyond the scope of this paper. Other important applications can be mentioned in connection with the treatment of static or timeharmonic Maxwell s equations in exterior domains Ω ext R 3, i.e., domains with compact complement. In this case the compact embedding 1) no longer holds. On the other hand 1) immediately implies the so-called local Maxwell compactness property, i.e., the compactness of the embedding 2) R Γτ Ω ext ) ε 1 D Γν Ω ext ) L 2 locω ext ).

3 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 3 This compact embedding is the main and and most important tool for showing, e.g., polynomially weighted Maxwell inequalities and Helmholtz decompositions or the validity of Eidus principles of limiting absorption and limiting amplitude[6, 7, 8], which are fundamental in the theory of static or time-harmonic Maxwell s equations in exterior domains, see e.g. [12, 18, 19, 21, 22, 23, 11, 13, 14, 16, 15, 17]. 2. Notation, preliminaries and outline of the proof Let Ω R 3 be a domain, i.e., an open and connected set. We introduce the function spaces C 0,1 Ω) := {u : Ω R : u Lipschitz continuous}, C Ω) := {u : Ω R : u is -times continuously partially differentiable}, C Ω) := NC Ω), C 0,1 Ω) := { u C 0,1 Ω) : suppu Ω }, C Ω) := {u C Ω) : suppu Ω}, where Θ Ω means Θ is compact and a subset of Ω. The usual Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces will be denoted by L 2 Ω), L 2 Ω) := L 2 Ω) R, H 1 Ω), H 1 Ω) := H 1 Ω) R, where means orthogonality in L 2 Ω). We also introduce the Sobolev Hilbert) spaces RΩ) := { E L 2 Ω) : rote L 2 Ω) }, DΩ) := { E L 2 Ω) : dive L 2 Ω) } in the distributional sense and define the test functions or vector fields C Ω) := {ϕ Ω : ϕ C R 3 ), distsuppϕ, ) > 0} and C 0,1 Ω) := {ϕ Ω : ϕ C 0,1 R 3 ), distsuppϕ, ) > 0}. Note that C = C Ω) and C 0,1 = C 0,1 Ω). Now define 3) H 1 Ω) := C H 1 Ω) Ω), R Γτ Ω) := C RΩ) Ω), D Γν Ω) := C DΩ) Γ ν Ω) as closures of test functions respectively fields. For = Γ resp. Γ ν = Γ) we set H 1 Ω) := H 1 Ω), Moreover, we define the closed subspaces RΩ) := R Γτ Ω), DΩ) := D Γν Ω). R 0 Ω) := { E RΩ) : rote = 0 }, D 0 Ω) := { E DΩ) : dive = 0 } as well as R Γτ,0Ω) := R Γτ Ω) R 0 Ω) and D Γν,0Ω) := D Γν Ω) D 0 Ω). Furthermore, we introduce the wea spaces 4) H 1 Ω) := { u H 1 Ω) : u,divφ L 2 Ω) = u,φ L 2 Ω) for all Φ C Γ ν Ω) }, R Γτ Ω) := { E RΩ) : E,rotΦ L 2 Ω) = rote,φ L 2 Ω) for all Φ C Γ ν Ω) }, D Γν Ω) := { H DΩ) : H, ϕ L 2 Ω) = divh,ϕ L 2 Ω) for all ϕ C Ω) }, and again for = Γ resp. Γ ν = Γ) we set H 1 Ω) := H 1 Ω), RΩ) := R Γτ Ω), DΩ) := D Γν Ω). In 3) and 4) homogeneous scalar, tangential and normal traces on, respectively Γ ν, are generalized. Remar 2.1. i) In definitions 3) and 4) C Ω) and C Γ ν Ω) can be replaced by mollification) by C 0,1 Ω) and C 0,1 Γ ν Ω), respectively.

4 4 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG ii) In 4) C Ω) and C Γ ν Ω) can be replaced by continuity) by D Γν Ω), R Γν Ω) and H 1 Ω), respectively. In the special case of no boundary conditions, for this continuity argument to hold the density of C Ω) resp. C 0,1 Ω) in DΩ), RΩ) and H 1 Ω), respectively, is needed. This is valid e.g. if Ω has the segment property, which is a rather wea assumption and basically means that Γ is continuous. Moreover we set R Γτ,0Ω) := R Γτ Ω) R 0 Ω), D Γν,0Ω) := D Γν Ω) D 0 Ω). Note that by switching and Γ ν we can define the respective boundary conditions on the other part of the boundary as well. Lemma 2.2. The following inclusions hold: i) H 1 Ω) H 1 Ω), R Γτ Ω) R Γτ Ω), ii) H 1 Ω) R Γτ,0Ω), H 1 Ω) R Γτ,0Ω) iii) rot R Γτ Ω) D Γτ,0Ω), rot R Γτ Ω) D Γτ,0Ω) D Γν Ω) D Γν Ω) Later we will show that in fact for all these spaces the strong and wea definitions of the boundary conditions coincide, i.e., 5) H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω), R Γτ Ω) = R Γτ Ω), D Γν Ω) = D Γν Ω), which is an important feature of these Sobolev spaces. In case of full boundary conditions this can be seen from the following perspective: Define the unbounded linear rotation operator By its closure Rot : Rot : C Ω) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) E rote. RΩ) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) E rot E the differential operator rot is extended to elements of RΩ) and its adjoint Rot : RΩ) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) H rot H further generalizes the operator to the larger space RΩ). We have Rot Rot Rot. Moreover Rot ) : and since Rot = Rot ) we in particular have RΩ) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) E rot E RΩ) = DRot ) ) = DRot) = RΩ), without any assumptions about the regularity or boundedness) of Ω or Ω. Analogously we have Grad, Grad, Grad and Grad = Grad ) for the gradient operator as well as Div, Div, Div and Div = Div ) for the divergence operator div. This way we also get H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω), DΩ) = DΩ). In case of mixed boundary conditions we may consider the operator its closure Rot : Rot : C Ω) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) E rote, R Γτ Ω) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) E rote,

5 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 5 U φ x 3 Γ R 3 \Ω ψ = φ 1 B Γ ν B + U Γ ν x 1 x 2 U Ω B 0,+ B B 0, Figure 1. Mappings φ and ψ between a ball U and the cube B. and its adjoint Rot : R Γν Ω) L 2 Ω) L 2 Ω) H roth. Then the double adjoint is again the rotation rot. Its domain of definition DRot ) ) is the space of all E RΩ), such that Φ R Γν Ω) E,rotΦ L 2 Ω) = rote,φ L 2 Ω), for which it is not clear if it coincides with R Γτ Ω), since the test fields are a priori allowed to be taen not only from R Γν Ω) but also from the possibly larger space R Γν Ω). The same problem occurs for the operators and div. Therefore, the equalities 5) are not obvious consequences of simple functional analysis but need a detailed, technical argument Lipschitz domains. Let Ω R 3 be a bounded domain with boundary Γ := Ω. We introduce the setting we will be woring in. Define cf. Figure 2) B := 1,1) 3 R 3, B ± := {x B : ±x 3 > 0}, B 0 := {x B : x 3 = 0}, B 0,± := {x B 0 : ±x 1 > 0}, B 0,0 := {x B 0 : x 1 = 0}. Definition 2.3. Ω is called wea Lipschitz, if the boundary Γ is a Lipschitz submanifold, i.e., if there is a finite open covering U 1,...,U K R 3 of Γ and vector fields φ : U B, such that for = 1,...,K hold. i) φ C 0,1 U,B) is bijective and ψ := φ 1 C 0,1 B,U ), ii) φ U Ω) = B Remar 2.4. For = 1,...,K we have φ U \Ω) = B + and φ U Γ) = B 0. Definition 2.5. Let Ω be wea Lipschitz. A relatively open subset of Γ is called wea Lipschitz, if is a Lipschitz submanifold of Γ, i.e., there is an open covering U 1,...,U R 3 of Γ and vector fields φ := U B, such that for = 1,...,K and in addition to i), ii) in Definition 2.3 one of iii) U =, iii ) U = U Γ φ U ) = B 0, iii ) U U Γ φ U ) = B 0, holds. We define Γ ν := Γ\ to be the relatively open complement of. Definition 2.6. A pair Ω, ) conforming to Definitions 2.3 and 2.5 will be called wea Lipschitz. Remar 2.7. For the cases iii), iii ) and iii )in Definition 2.5 we further have iii) U = U Γ ν = U Γ φ U Γ ν ) = B 0, iii ) U = U Γ U Γ ν =, iii ) U U Γ = U Γ ν U Γ φ U Γ ν ) = B 0,+ and φ U Γ ν ) = B 0,0.

6 6 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG In the literature a bounded domain Ω R 3 is called strong) Lipschitz, if there is an open covering U 1,...,U K R 3 and rigid body motions R = A +a, A orthogonal, a R 3, = 1,...,K, such that with ξ C 0,1 I 2,I), = 1,...,K, and I = 1,1) R U Ω) = {x B : x 3 < ξ x )}, x = x 1,x 2 ), holds. Then R U Γ) = {x B : x 3 = ξ x )}. A relatively open subset Γ is called strong) Lipschitz, if with ζ C 0,1 I,I) U U Γ R U ) = {x B : x 3 = ξ x ), x 1 < ζ x 2 )} holds.with this R U \Ω) = {x B : x 3 > ξ x )} and for U U Γ It holds R U Γ ν ) = {x B : x 3 = ξ x ), x 1 > ζ x 2 )}, R U Γ ν ) = {x B : x 3 = ξ x ), x 1 = ζ x 2 )}. Ω strong Lipschitz Ω wea Lipschitz, Ω strong Lipschitz and strong Lipschitz Ω, ) wea Lipschitz pair, as by setting ϕ : U B, ϕ x) := x 1 ζx 2 ) x 2 φ := ϕ R, ψ := φ 1 x 3 ξx ) we can define Lipschitz transformations as in Definitions 2.3 and 2.5. For later purposes we introduce special notations for the half-cube domain 6) := B, γ := and its relatively open boundary parts γ τ and γ ν := γ \γ τ. We will only consider the cases 7) and we note that and γ τ are strong Lipschitz. γ ν =, γ ν = B 0, γ ν = B 0, Outline of the proof. Let Ω, ) be a wea Lipschitz pair for a bounded domain Ω R 3. 8) 9) 10) As a first step, we show by elementary arguments H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω), i.e., for the H 1 -spaces the strong and wea definitions of the boundary conditions coincide. In the second and essential step, we construct various H 1 -potentials on simple domains, mainly for the half-cube, see 6), with the special boundary conditions 7), i.e., R γν,0) = R γν,0) = H 1 γ ν ), D γν,0) = D γν,0) = rot H 1 γ ν ), L 2 ) = div H 1 γ ν ). In the third step it is shown that the strong and wea definitions of the boundary conditions also coincide for the divergence and rotation spaces on the half-cube with the special boundary conditions 7), i.e., R γν ) = R γν ), D γν ) = D γν ). The fourth step proves the compact embedding on the half-cube with the special boundary conditions 7), i.e., R γτ ) D γν ) L 2 ) is compact. In the fifth step, 8) is established for wea Lipschitz domains, i.e. R Γτ Ω) = R Γτ Ω), D Γν Ω) = D Γν Ω). In the last step, we finally prove the compact embedding 9) for wea Lipschitz pairs, i.e., is compact. R Γτ Ω) D Γν Ω) L 2 Ω)

7 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 7 3. H 1 -potentials In this section H 1 -potentials for irrotational or solenoidal L 2 -vector fields or L 2 -functions are obtained. For illustrative purposes we will first give the proofs for the half-cube with the special boundary conditions 7) which will also later be used as the image of the coordinate transformation that flattens out the boundary of a wea Lipschitz pair, and then show how to adjust them for more general domains. WestartoutwithadensityresultforH 1 -functions, i.e., the strongandweadefinitionsofthe boundary conditions coincide for H 1 -functions, which is first proved for a flat boundary and then generalized to wea Lipschitz pairs. The proof can be found in [9, Lemma 2, Lemma 3]. For the convenience of the reader we present a simplified proof, using our notation, in the appendix. Lemma 3.1. Let Ω R 3 be a bounded domain and Ω, ) be a wea Lipschitz pair as well as Then H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω). 1 H Ω) := { u H 1 Ω) : u Γτ = 0 } H 1 -potentials without boundary conditions. The next three lemmas ensure the existence of H 1 -potentials without boundary conditions. Suppose Ω R 3 to be a bounded domain. Lemma 3.2. Let Ω be strong Lipschitz and simply connected. Then there exists a continuous linear operator T : R 0 Ω) H 1 R 3 ), such that for all E R 0 Ω) T E) = E in Ω. Especially R 0 Ω) = H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω) and the potential depends continuously on the data. In particular these are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω). Proof. It is classical standard Helmholtz decomposition) that R 0 Ω) = H 1 Ω) holds. Using Poincaré s inequality the potential depends continuously on the data. By Calderon s extension theorem we can extend any potential in H 1 Ω) continuously to H1 R 3 ). Lemma 3.3. Let Ω be strong Lipschitz, such that R 3 \Ω is connected i.e. Γ is connected). Then there exists a continuous linear operator 1 T r : L 2 Ω) H 1 R 3 ) D 0 R 3 ), such that for all H D 0 Ω) rott r H) = H in Ω. Especially D 0 Ω) = roth 1 Ω) = rot H 1 Ω) D 0 Ω) ) and the potential depends continuously on the data. In particular these are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω). A proof can be found in [9, Lemma 1]. For the convenience of the reader we repeat the proof using our notation. Proof. Let Ω be a subset of B ρ 0), the ball with radius ρ > 0 centered at the origin. Define Θ := B ρ 0)\Ω and let E : H 1 Θ) H 1 B ρ 0)) be a continuous linear, e.g. Calderon s, extension operator. Because Θ is connected, L 2 Θ) defines a norm on H 1 Θ), which is equivalent to the H1 Θ)-norm by Poincaré s inequality. Now define for H L 2 Ω) the operator A : L 2 Ω) H 1 Θ) by ψ H 1 Θ) AH), ψ L 2 Θ) = H, Eψ) L 2 Ω), which by the Lax-Milgram lemma is well defined, linear and continuous. Next define for H L 2 Ω) the linear and continuous operator B : L 2 Ω) L 2 R 3 ) L 1 R 3 ) by H in Ω, BH := AH) in Θ, 0 in R 3 \B ρ 0). 1 Let X,Y,Z be normed spaces. We call an operator T : X Y Z continuous, if TY : X Y and T Z : X Z are continuous.

8 8 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG For the Fourier transform F holds and thus Ĥ L2 R 3 ) with Then FBH) L R 3 ) L 2 R 3 ) Ĥ := ξ FBH), ξx) := idx) := x. ξ 2 T r H := if 1 Ĥ H 1 R 3 ), and since ξ Ĥ = 0, divt r H = F 1 ξ Ĥ) = 0 follows, i.e. T r H H 1 R 3 ) D 0 R 3 ), and T r : L 2 Ω) H 1 R 3 ) D 0 R 3 ) is a linear and continuous operator. Now, suppose divh = 0 in Ω. Let ψ C R 3 ), α := Θ 1 Θ ψ and ψ := ψ Θ α H 1 Θ), where Θ denotes the Lebesgue measure of Θ. Then BH, ψ L 2 R 3 ) = H, ψ L 2 Ω) AH), ψ L 2 Θ) = H, ψ E ψ) L 2 Ω) = H, ϕ L 2 Ω), where ϕ := ψ E ψ α H 1 Ω). Since ϕ vanishes on Θ, we have ϕ H 1 Ω). divh = 0 in Ω yields ψ C R 3 ) BH, ψ = 0, i.e., divbh) = 0 on R 3. Thus ξ FBH) = 0. But then rott r H) = BH in R 3 as rott r H) = F 1 ξ Ĥ) = F 1 FBH and in particular rott r H) = H in Ω. Using the same method, a divergence potential for an L 2 function can be obtained. Lemma 3.4. There exists a continuous linear operator such that for all h L 2 Ω) T d : L 2 Ω) H 1 R 3 ) R 0 R 3 ), divt d h) = h in Ω. Especially L 2 Ω) = divh 1 Ω) = div H 1 Ω) R 0 Ω) ) and the potential depends continuously on the data. In particular these are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω). Proof. Let h be the extension of h into R 3 by zero. For the Fourier transform F holds and thus Ĥ L2 R 3 ) with Then F h) L R 3 ) L 2 R 3 ) Ĥ := ξ ξ 2F h). T d h := if 1 Ĥ H 1 R 3 ), and since ξ Ĥ = 0, rott d h = F 1 ξ Ĥ) = 0 follows, i.e. T d h H 1 R 3 ) R 0 R 3 ), and T d is a continuous linear operator from L 2 Ω) to H 1 R 3 ) R 0 R 3 ). Finally, divt d h = h in R 3 as divt d h) = F 1 ξ Ĥ) = F 1 FB h and in particular divt d h = h in Ω. Remar 3.5. Let Θ R 3 be a domain with Ω Θ. Using a cutting technique we can choose continuous linear potential operators T : R 0 Ω) H 1 Θ), T r : L 2 Ω) H 1 Θ) and T d : L 2 Ω) H 1 Θ) with T E) = E, rott r H) = H and divt d h) = h for E R 0 Ω), H D 0 Ω) and h L 2 Ω), respectively.

9 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 9 x 3 ˆ x 3 ˆ B 0 B 0,+ x 1 x 1 x2 x2 Figure 2. The half-cube = B, extended by ˆ to the polygonal domain, and the rectangles γ ν = B 0 and γ ν = B 0, H 1 -potentials with boundary conditions. Now we start constructing H 1 -potentials with boundary conditions. Let us recall our special setting on the half-cube = B and γ ν =, γ ν = B 0 or γ ν = B 0,+. Furthermore, cf. Figure 2, we extend over γ ν by = int ˆ), ˆ := { {x B : x 3 > 0} = B +, if γ ν = B 0, {x B : x 3 > 0, x 1 > 0} = {x B + : x 1 > 0} =: B +,+, if γ ν = B 0,+. Theorem 3.6. There exists a continuous linear operator S : R γν,0) H 1 R 3 ) H 1 γ ν ), such that for all E R γν,0) S E) = E in. Especially R γν,0) = R γν,0) = H 1 γ ν ) and the potential depends continuously on the data. In particular these are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω). Remar 3.7. The latter theorem is also from [9, Lemma 4]. Nevertheless, we will give a modified and simplified proof. Moreover, as the proof will show the result holds for more general domains. Let Ω R 3 be a bounded and simply connected domain and let Ω,Γ ν ) be a wea Lipschitz pair, such that Γ ν is connected. Then a potential operator S : R Γν,0Ω) H 1 Γ ν Ω) exists and R Γν,0Ω) = R Γν,0Ω) = H 1 Γ ν Ω). If Ω is even strong Lipschitz, a continuous potential operator S : R Γν,0Ω) H 1 R 3 ) H 1 Γ ν Ω) can be chosen. Proof. The case γ ν = is well nown, i.e., R 0 ) = R 0 ) = H 1 ) = H 1 ), see Lemma 3.2. The other two cases can be treated together. We have H 1 γ ν ) R γν,0) R γν,0) and need to show R γν,0) H 1 γ ν ). Suppose E R γν,0) and define Ẽ L2 ) by { E in, Ẽ := 0 in ˆ. It follows rotẽ = 0 in, as for any Φ C ), due to γ τ, also Φ C γ τ ) and thus 0 = E,rotΦ L 2 ) = Ẽ,rotΦ L 2 ),

10 10 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG which means Ẽ R 0 ). Because is simply connected, there exists a potential u H 1 ) with Ẽ = u in. In particular u = 0 in ˆ which implies u = c in ˆ for some constant c R. Define ũ := u c H 1 ). Note that ũ = 0 in ˆ, so ũ γν = 0 follows, which means ũ H 1 γ ν ) and with Lemma 3.1 Ω =, = γ ν ) we conclude ũ H 1 Γ ν ). Moreover ũ = u = E in. By Poincaré s inequality the potential ũ depends continuously on the data E. Using Calderon s extension theorem we can extend any potential in H 1 γ ν ) continuously to H 1 R 3 ). Next up is the existence of an H 1 -potential for divergence free fields subject to the special normal boundary condition. This Theorem is a modification of [9, Theorem 1], where the potential is only in R Γν. Theorem 3.8. There exists a continuous linear operator S r : D γν,0) H 1 R 3 ) H 1 γ ν ), such that for all H D γν,0) rots r H) = H in. Especially D γν,0) = D γν,0) = rot H 1 γ ν ) = rot R γν ) = rot R γν ) and the H 1 γ ν )-potential depends continuously on the data. In particular these are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω). Proof. We start with the case γ ν =. By Lemma 3.3 D 0 ) = D 0 ) = roth 1 ) and we can set S r H := T r H H 1 R 3 ) with rots r H) = H in. The other two cases can be treated together. Suppose H D γν,0) and define H L 2 ) by 11) H := { H in, 0 in ˆ. It follows div H = 0 in, as for any ψ C ), due to γ τ, also ψ C γ τ ) and thus 0 = H, ψ L 2 ) = H, ψ L 2 ), which means H D 0 ). Because R 3 \ is connected, Lemma 3.3 yields T r H H 1 R 3 ) D 0 R 3 ) with rott r H) = H in. In particular Tr H H 1 ˆ) and rott r H) = 0 in ˆ. Because ˆ is simply connected, there exists a unique ϕ H 1 ˆ) with T r H = ϕ in ˆ. Since T r H H 1 ˆ) we have ϕ H 2 ˆ). Let E : H 2 ˆ) H 2 R 3 ) be a continuous, linear extension operator, for example Calderon s. Then S r : D γν,0) H 1 R 3 ) H T r H Eϕ) is linear and continuous. Since S r H = 0 in ˆ, we have S r H γν = 0, which means S r H H 1 γ ν ). Hence S r H H 1 γ ν ) R γν ) R γν ) by Lemma 3.1. Moreover rots r H) = H in, as rots r H) = rott r H) = H even in. Recalling Lemma 2.2 we see D γν,0) D γν,0) rot H 1 γ ν ) rot R γν ) D γν,0) and rot R γν ) rot R γν ) D γν,0), completing the proof.

11 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 11 Remar 3.9. Inspection of the above proof shows that the latter theorem holds for more general domains. Let Ω R 3 be a bounded strong Lipschitz domain, such that R 3 \Ω is connected, and let Γ ν = K =1 Γ ν,, K N, with disjoint, relatively open and simply connected strong Lipschitz surface patches Γ ν, Γ, where distγ ν,,γ ν,l ) > 0 for all 1 l K. Now extend Ω over Γ ν, by ˆΩ, let Ω denote the interior of Ω ˆΩ 1 ˆΩ K and define H lie in 11). Then H D 0 Ω). Lemma 3.3 yields T r H H 1 R 3 ) D 0 R 3 ) with rott r H) = H in Ω. Again rottr H) = 0 in ˆΩ for = 1,...,K. Continuing analogously and since the ˆΩ are simply connected, there exist unique potentials ϕ 1,...,ϕ K H 1 ˆΩ ) with T r H = ϕ in ˆΩ. As before ϕ H 2 ˆΩ ). Let E : H 2 ˆΩ ) H 2 R 3 ), = 1,...,K, be extension operators. By cutting off appropriately it can be arranged that suppe ϕ ) ˆΩ l = for all 1 l K. We define S r H := T r H K E ϕ ) H 1 R 3 ). =1 Again from S r H = 0 in ˆΩ, = 1,...,K, S r H Γν = 0 follows, which means S r H H 1 Γ ν Ω) and therefore S r H H 1 Γ ν Ω) R Γν Ω) R Γν Ω). Moreover rots r H) = H in Ω, as rots r H) = rott r H) = H even in Ω. Theorem There exists a continuous linear operator S d : L 2 ) H 1 R 3 ) H 1 γ ν ), such that for all h L 2 ) divs d h) = h in. Especially L 2 ) = div H 1 γ ν ) = div D γν ) = div D γν ) and the H 1 γ ν )-potential depends continuously on the data. In particular these are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω). Proof. The case γ ν = immediately follows from Lemma 3.4, as for h L 2 ) we define S d h := T d h H 1 R 3 ) R 0 R 3 ). The other two cases can again be handled together. Instead of extending over γ ν by a rectangle as before), we extend it by a bubble in a way that ˆ has a C 3 -boundary and ˆ = γ ν, cf. Figure 3. This smoothness of ˆ allows for a later application of a standard Maxwell regularity result [26]. Now let h L 2 ) and define h L 2 ) by { h in, h := 0 in ˆ. Lemma 3.4 yields with T d h H 1 R 3 ) R 0 R 3 ) divt d h) = h in. In particular T d h H 1 ˆ) and divt d h) = 0 in ˆ. Because R 3 \ˆ is connected, by Lemma 3.3 there exists a potential Φ H 1 R 3 ) D 0 R 3 ) with T d h = rotφ in ˆ, sorotφ H 1 ˆ). Letπ be thehelmholtzprojector 2 ontosolenoidalfields D 0 ˆ). With Φ H 1 ˆ) Rˆ) it follows πφ Rˆ) D 0 ˆ) and rotπφ = rotφ H 1 ˆ). Thus πφ H 2 ˆ) by standard Maxwell 2 For F L 2 ˆ) solve by Lax-Milgram ϕ H 1 ˆ) u, ϕ L 2 ˆ) = E, ϕ L 2 ˆ) with u H 1 ˆ). Then the projector π is given by πe := E u H 1 ˆ) ) since H 1 ˆ) ) = H 1 ˆ) ) = D0 ˆ).

12 12 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG x 3 x 3 x 1 x 1 x2 x2 Figure 3. The half-cube = B, extended by a C 3 -domain ˆ to, and the rectangles γ ν = B 0 and γ ν = B 0,+. regularity [26]. Let E : H 2 ˆ) H 2 R 3 ) be a continuous, linear, e.g. Calderon s, extension operator. Define S d h := T d h roteπφ) H 1 R 3 ). Then S d : L 2 ) H 1 R 3 ) is linear and continuous. With S d h = 0 in ˆ we see S d h γν = 0, which means S d h H 1 γ ν ) and with Lemma 3.1 S d h H 1 γ ν ) R γν ) R γν ). Moreover as divs d h) = divt d h) = h even in. divs d h) = h in, Remar Theorem 3.10 again holds for more general domains Ω R 3. For example, Ω can be a bounded strong Lipschitz domain with K Γ ν = Γ ν,, K N, =1 where distγ ν,,γ ν,l ) > 0 for all 1 l K and Γ ν, are C 3 -boundary patches allowing for C 3 -regular extensions ˆΩ ν, having connected complements R 3 \ˆΩ ν,. If Γ ν = Γ, then the right hand side h must have vanishing mean value, i.e., h L 2 Ω). We note that in the case of γ ν = γ resp. Γ ν = Γ Theorem 3.10 resp. Remar 3.11 is a well nown result for bounded Lipschitz domains 3. An elegant proof can be found in [24, Lemma 2.1.1]. See also [1, Lemma 3.2] for more recent results including mixed boundary conditions, where it has been shown that Theorem 3.10 resp. Remar 3.11 even holds for general bounded strong Lipschitz pairs,γ ν ) resp. Ω,Γ ν ) Wea equals strong for the half-cube in terms of boundary conditions. Now the two main density results immediately follow. We note that this has already been proved for the H 1 Ω)-spaces in Lemma 3.1, i.e., H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω). Theorem R γν ) = R γν ) and D γν ) = D γν ). Proof. Suppose E R γν ) and thus rote D γτ,0). By Theorem 3.8 there exists Ê R γν ) with rotê = rote. By Theorem 3.6 we get E Ê R γν,0) = R γν,0) and hence E R γν ). Analogously let H D γν ) and thus divh L 2 ). By Theorem 3.10 there exists Ĥ D γν ) with divĥ = divh. By Theorem 3.8 we get H Ĥ D γν,0) = D γν,0) and hence H D γν ). 3 Again, in this case h must have vanishing mean value.

13 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY The compact embedding 4.1. Compact embedding on the half-cube. First we show the main result on the half-cube = B with the special boundary patch γ ν =, γ ν = B 0 or γ ν = B 0,+ from the latter section. For this let ε L ) be an admissible matrix field. Theorem 4.1. The embedding R γτ ) ε 1 D γν ) L 2 ) is compact. Proof. The cases of full boundary conditions, i.e., γ τ = γ or γ τ =, are well nown, see the introduction. Suppose γ ν = B 0 or γ ν = B 0,+. Let H n ) n N be a bounded sequence in R γτ ) ε 1 D γν ). By Riesz representation theorem 4, for all n N there exists a unique u n H 1 γ τ ) with 12) ε u n, ϕ L 2 ) = εh n, ϕ L 2 ) for all ϕ H 1 γ τ ). Furthermore u n H1 ) c H n L 2 ) and w.l.o.g. by Rellich s selection theorem u n ) converges in L 2 ). By definition, 12) together with Theorem 3.8 implies and u n R γτ,0) by Theorem 3.6, so H n u n ε 1 D γν,0) = ε 1 D γν,0) H n := H n u n R γτ ) ε 1 D γν,0). Now we apply Theorem 3.8 to ε H n and define E n := S r ε H n H 1 γ ν ), which satisfies E n H 1 ) c H n L 2 ) c H n L 2 ). W.l.o.g. by Theorem 3.8 and Rellich s selection theorem E n ) converges in L 2 ). Moreover, we observe rote n = ε H n and thus ε H n H m ) 2 L 2 ) = H n H m,rote n E m ) L 2 ) = rot H n H m ),E n E m L 2 ) c E n E m L 2 ), as rot H n = roth n. Thus H n ) converges in L 2 ). Moreover, 12) yields ε u n u m ) 2 L 2 ) = εh n H m ), u n u m ) L 2 ) = divεh n H m )),u n u m L 2 ) c u n u m L 2 ) and hence also u n ) converges in L 2 ), i.e., u n ) converges in H 1 ). Therefore, H n ) converges in L 2 ) The compact embedding for wea Lipschitz domains. The aim of this section is to transfer Theorem 4.1 to arbitrary wea Lipschitz pairs Ω, ). We need the technical Lemma 4.2, for a proof see [20, Section 3] or [28, Remar 2]. Let us consider the following situation: Let Θ, Θ be two domains in R 3 with boundaries Υ := Θ, Υ := Θ and Υ 0 Υ, let s say, relatively open. Moreover, let φ : Θ Θ, ψ := φ 1 : Θ Θ be Lipschitz diffeomorphisms, this is, φ C 0,1 Θ, Θ) and ψ = φ 1 C 0,1 Θ,Θ). Hence there exists a constant c, such that for all x Θ and x Θ 0 < c detφ x), detψ x) 1/c. Then Θ = φθ), Υ = φυ) and we define Υ 0 := φυ 0 ). To simplify the notations here and throughout this section and the appendix we will use the notation ũ := uψ, ṽ := v φ both for functions and for vector fields. We set, identify and note J := J ψ = ψ L Θ), φ = J φ = J 1 φ = J 1 L Θ). 4 We equip H 1 γτ ) with the scalar product ε, L 2 ).

14 14 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG Lemma 4.2. Let u H 1 Υ 0 Θ), E R Υ0 Θ) resp. E R Υ0 Θ) and H D Υ0 Θ) resp. H D Υ0 Θ). Then ũ H 1 Υ0 Θ) and ũ = J u, J Ẽ R Υ0 Θ) resp. R Υ0 Θ) and rotj Ẽ) = detj)j 1 rote, detj)j 1 H D Υ0 Θ) resp. D Υ0 Θ) and divdetj)j 1 H) = detj divh. For a rigorous proof of the latter lemma see the appendix of our contributions [3, 4]. From now on, we mae the following General Assumption: Let Ω, ) be a wea Lipschitz pair as in Definitions 2.3 and 2.5. WeadjustLemma4.2tooursituation: LetU 1,...,U K beanopencoveringofγaccordingtodefinitions 2.3 and 2.5 and set U 0 := Ω. Therefore U 0,...,U K is an open covering of Ω. Moreover let χ C U ), {0,...,K}, be a partition of unity subordinate to the open covering U 0,...,U K. Now suppose {1,...,K}. We define Ω := U Ω, Γ := U Γ,, := U, Γ ν, := U Γ ν, ˆΓ := Ω, Σ := ˆΓ \Γ, ˆΓτ, := int, Σ ), ˆΓν, := intγ ν, Σ ), Lemma 4.2 will from now on be used with σ := γ \B 0, ˆγ τ := intγ τ σ), ˆγ ν := intγ ν σ). Θ := Ω, Θ :=, and with one of the following cases φ := φ : Ω, ψ := ψ : Ω Υ 0 :=,, Υ 0 := ˆ,, Υ 0 := Γ ν, or Υ 0 := ˆΓ ν,. Then Υ = ˆΓ and Υ = φ ˆΓ ) = γ as well as depending on the respective case) Υ 0 = φ, ) = γ τ, Υ0 = φ ˆ, ) = ˆγ τ, γ τ {,B 0,B 0, }, γ ν = γ \γ τ, Υ 0 = φ Γ ν, ) = γ ν, Υ0 = φ ˆΓ ν, ) = ˆγ ν, γ ν {,B 0,B 0,+ }, γ τ = γ \γ ν. Remar 4.3. Theorems 3.6, 3.8, 3.10 and Remars 3.7, 3.9, 3.11 as well as Theorems 3.12, 4.1 hold for γ ν = B 0, without any substantial) modification as well. Lemma 4.4. Let {1,...,K}. For E R Γτ Ω) and H D Γν Ω) we have E R Γτ, Ω ), χ E RˆΓτ, Ω ), H D Γν, Ω ), χ H DˆΓν, Ω ). Proof. Let Φ C ˆΓν, Ω ). Extending Φ by zero shows Φ C Γ ν Ω) and E,rotΦ L 2 Ω ) = E,rotΦ L 2 Ω) = rote,φ L 2 Ω) = rote,φ L 2 Ω ), hence E R Γτ, Ω ). Let Φ C Γ ν, Ω ). Then, χ Φ C ˆΓν, Ω ) C Γ ν Ω) since suppχ U and χ E,rotΦ L 2 Ω ) = χ E,rotΦ L 2 Ω) = E,rotχ Φ) L 2 Ω) E, χ Φ L 2 Ω) = rote,χ Φ L 2 Ω) + χ E,Φ L 2 Ω) = rotχ E),Φ L 2 Ω ), thus χ E RˆΓτ, Ω ). Analogously we see H D Γν, Ω ) and χ H DˆΓν, Ω ). Theorem 4.5. R Γτ Ω) = R Γτ Ω) and D Γν Ω) = D Γν Ω). Proof. Suppose E R Γτ Ω). Then χ 0 E RΩ) R Γτ Ω) by mollification. Let {1,...,K}. Then E R Γτ, Ω ) by Lemma 4.4. Lemma 4.2, Theorem 3.12 with γ ν := γ τ ) and Remar 4.3 yield with J := J ψ J Ẽ R γτ ) = R γτ ), γ τ = φ, ) {,B 0,B 0, }.

15 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 15 Hence, by definition there exists a sequence Ã,l) C 0,1 γ τ ) with Ã,l χ Ã,l C 0,1 ˆγ τ ). Now define with Lemma 4.2 l J Ẽ in R). Therefore E,l := χ A,l = χ J J Ã,l )φ Ω RˆΓτ, ) R Γτ Ω). Then with Lemma 4.2 E,l χ E 2 = E RΩ),l χ E 2 RΩ ) = E,l χ E 2 + rote,l χ E) 2 ) Ω = detj χ J Ã,l Ẽ) 2 + rot χ A,l E) J ) 2) = detj χ J Ã,l Ẽ) 2 + detj ) 1 J rotj χ J Ã,l Ẽ) 2) c χ Ã,l J Ẽ) 2 + rot χ Ã,l J Ẽ) 2) Ã,l c J Ẽ 2 + rot Ã,l J Ẽ) 2) = c Ã,l J Ẽ 2 l R) 0, i.e., χ E R Γτ Ω) by Remar 2.1 i), and thus E = χ E R Γτ Ω). analogously for H D Γν Ω) by approximating detj )J 1 H D γν ) = D Γτ ), γ ν = φ Γ ν, ) {,B 0,B 0,+ }, D Γν Ω) = D Γν Ω) is proved with a sequence Ã,l) C 0,1 γ ν ) in D). Remar 4.6. By Theorem 4.5, Lemma 4.4 also holds for the spaces R Γτ Ω) and D Γν Ω). More precisely, for E R Γτ Ω) and H D Γν Ω) we have for {1,...,K} E R Γτ, Ω ), χ E RˆΓτ, Ω ), H D Γν, Ω ), χ H DˆΓν, Ω ). Now the compact embedding for wea Lipschitz pairs Ω, ) can be proved. Theorem 4.7. Let ε L Ω) be an admissible matrix field. Then the embedding is compact. R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) L 2 Ω) Proof. Suppose E n ) is a bounded sequence in R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω). Then by mollification E 0,n := χ 0 E n RΩ) ε 1 DΩ), E 0,n evenhascompactsupportinω, andbyclassicalresults, seeourintroduction, E 0,n )containsal 2 Ω)- converging subsequence, again denoted by E 0,n ). Hence E 0,n E 0 in L 2 Ω) with some E 0 L 2 Ω). Let {1,...,K}. By Lemma 4.4 and Remar 4.6 and with E,n := χ E n RˆΓτ, Ω ), εe,n DˆΓν, Ω ) rote,n = χ rote n + χ E n, divεe,n ) = χ divεe n )+ χ εe n the sequence E,n ) is bounded in RˆΓτ, Ω ) ε 1 DˆΓν, Ω ). We define and see by Lemma 4.2 Ê,n := J Ẽ,n Rˆγτ ), rotê,n = detj )J 1 Hence Ê,n 2 R) = Ê,n 2 + rotê,n 2) = detj 1 Ω J c E,n 2 + rote,n 2) = c E,n 2 RΩ ), Ω E,n rote,n. 2 + detj )J 1 rote,n 2)

16 16 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG showing that Ê,n) is bounded in Rˆγτ ). From we observe by Lemma 4.2 Ê,n = J Ẽ,n = detj ) 1 J ε 1 J detj )J 1 εẽ,n ˆε Ê,n = detj )J 1 εẽ,n Dˆγν ), ˆε := detj )J 1 εj, div ˆε Ê,n = detj ) divεe,n ). ˆε is admissible, as ˆε L ) and for all H L 2 ) Then Ê,n 1 2ˆε = D) ˆε H,H L 2 ) = detj )J 1 εj H,H L 2 ) c J H 2 L 2 ) c H 2 L 2 ). Ê,n 2 + divˆε Ê,n 2 ) = detj 1 Ω J c E,n 2 + divεe,n ) 2) = c E,n 2 ε 1 DΩ ) Ω E,n shows that Ê,n) is bounded in ˆε 1 Dˆγν ). Thus Ê,n) is bounded in 2 + detj )divεe,n ) 2) Rˆγτ ) ˆε 1 Dˆγν ) Rˆγτ ) ˆε 1 D γν ), γ ν {,B 0,B 0,+ }, ˆγ τ = γ \γ ν. Therefore, w.l.o.g. Ê,n n Ê in L 2 ) with some Ê L 2 ) by Theorem 4.1. Let and derive E,n := J Ê,n L 2 Ω ), E := J E,n E 2 L 2 Ω ) = detj Ẽ,n Ẽ 2 = c Ê L 2 Ω ) detj J Ê,n Ê 2 = c Ê,n Ê 2 L 2 ). Ê,n J Ê 2 n Hence E,n E in L 2 n Ω ) and E,n E in L 2 Ω) for their extensions by zero to Ω. Finally E n = χ E n = E n,n E in L 2 Ω). By the same but much simpler arguments Rellich s selection theorem holds for wea Lipschitz domains Ω resp. wea Lipschitz pairs Ω, ). Therefore, also Poincaré s estimate holds in this case by a standard indirect argument. Theorem 4.8. Rellich s selection theorem and the Poincaré-Friedrichs estimate hold. More precisely: i) The embedding H 1 Ω) L 2 Ω) is compact. ii) There exists a constant c p > 0, such that u L 2 Ω) c p u L 2 Ω) holds for all u H 1 Ω) or all u H 1 Ω), if =. 5. Applications From now on let Ω R 3 be a bounded domain and let Ω, ) be a wea Lipschitz pair as well as ε L Ω) be admissible The Maxwell estimate. A first consequence of the compact embedding Theorem 4.7, i.e., R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) L 2 Ω) is that the space of so-called Dirichlet-Neumann fields H ε Ω) := R Γτ,0Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) is finite dimensionalbecausethe unit ballin H ε Ω) iscompact. ByastandardindirectargumentTheorem 4.7 immediately implies the so-called Maxwell estimate: Theorem 5.1. There exists a constant c m > 0, such that for all E R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) H ε Ω) ε E L 2 ε Ω) c m rote 2 L 2 Ω) + divεe) 2 L 2 Ω)) 1/2.

17 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 17 Here we introduce L 2 ε Ω) := L2 Ω) equipped with the scalar product, L 2 ε Ω) := ε, L 2 Ω). Proof. Suppose the estimate does not hold. Then there exists a sequence with E n L 2 ε Ω) = 1 and E n ) R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) H ε Ω) ε rote n L 2 Ω) + divεe n ) L 2 Ω) 0. Since E n ) is bounded in RΩ) ε 1 DΩ), by Theorem 4.7 there exists a L 2 Ω)-converging subsequence, again denoted by E n ), with E n E L 2 Ω). But then E n E in RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) and we see E R 0 Ω) ε 1 D 0 Ω). As R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) H ε Ω) ε is a closed subspace of RΩ) ε 1 DΩ), we get E R Γτ,0Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε = H ε Ω) H ε Ω) ε = {0}, a contradiction to 1 = E n L 2 ε Ω) E L 2 ε Ω) = Helmholtz decompositions. Applying the projection theorem to the linear and closed operator τ : H 1 Ω) L 2 Ω) L 2 εω) with adjoint div ν ε = τ : ε 1 D Γν Ω) L 2 εω) L 2 Ω) yields 13) L 2 Ω) = H 1 Ω) ε ε 1 D Γν,0Ω), and D Γν,0Ω) = D Γν,0Ω) follows by Theorem 4.5. Here ε denotes the orthogonal sum in L 2 ε Ω). On the other hand, for the closed linear operator ε 1 rot ν : R Γν Ω) L 2 Ω) L 2 εω) with adjoint rot τ := ε 1 rot ν ) : R Γτ Ω) L 2 ε Ω) L2 Ω) we get 14) L 2 Ω) = R Γτ,0Ω) ε ε 1 rot R Γν Ω), and again R Γτ,0Ω) = R Γτ,0Ω) by Theorem 4.5. Since 13) and 14) yield H 1 Ω) R Γτ,0Ω), rot R Γν Ω) D Γν,0Ω), R Γτ,0Ω) = H 1 Ω) ε H ε Ω), and hence by 13) or 14) the refined decomposition follows. Again from 13) and 14) we obtain and thus the further refinements ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) = H ε Ω) ε ε 1 rot R Γν Ω), L 2 Ω) = H 1 Ω) ε H ε Ω) ε ε 1 rot R Γν Ω) R Γτ Ω) = R Γτ,0Ω) ε RΓτ Ω) ε 1 rot R Γν Ω) ), ε 1 D Γν Ω) = ε 1 D Γν Ω) H 1 Ω) ) ε ε 1 D Γν,0Ω), 15) 16) rot R Γτ Ω) = rot R Γτ Ω) ε 1 rot R Γν Ω) ) = rot R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε), div D Γν Ω) = div D Γν Ω) ε H 1 Ω) ) = div DΓν Ω) ε R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε)). hold. With the help of these representations the closedness of rot R Γτ Ω) and div D Γν Ω) follows immediately by Theorem 5.1. The closedness of H 1 Ω) follows with the standard Poincaré-Friedrichs inequality from Theorem 4.8 ii). Lemma 5.2. The range spaces H 1 Ω), rot R Γτ Ω) and div D Γν Ω) are closed subspaces of L 2 Ω).

18 18 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG Proof. Suppose H n ) rotr Γτ Ω) with H n H in L 2 Ω). By the representation 15) there exists a sequence E n ) R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε with rote n = H n. Theorem 5.1 yields E n L 2 Ω) c m H n L 2 Ω), i.e., E n ) is a Cauchy sequence in R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε and hence converges in RΩ) to some E R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε. ThusH rote n rote rot R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D ) Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε. Analogously we show that divd Γν Ω) is closed. Altogether we obtain Theorem 5.3. The following orthogonal decompositions hold: L 2 Ω) = H 1 Ω) ε ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) = R Γτ,0Ω) ε ε 1 rotr Γν Ω) = H 1 Ω) ε H ε Ω) ε ε 1 rotr Γν Ω). Furthermore rotr Γτ Ω) = rot R Γτ Ω) ε 1 rotr Γν Ω) ) = rot R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε), divd Γν Ω) = div D Γν Ω) ε H 1 Ω) ) DΓν = div Ω) ε R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε)) and H 1 Ω) = R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε, div D Γν Ω) = { L 2 Ω), if Γ ν Γ, L 2 Ω), if Γ ν = Γ, rot R Γν Ω) = D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω). Moreover, the scalar - and vector rot-, div-potentials are uniquely determined in H 1 Ω) or in H 1 Ω), if = ), R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε and D Γν Ω) ε R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε ), respectively, and depend continuously on their respective images by the Poincaré-Friedrichs estimate, see Theorem 4.8 ii), and Theorem 5.1. Remar 5.4. Under more restrictive assumptions on the wea Lipschitz pair Ω, ) there exists H 1 Ω)- potentials as well, see Remars 3.7, 3.9 and More precisely, let Ω R 3 be a bounded domain: i) If Ω is simply connected and Ω, ) a wea Lipschitz pair, such that is connected, then, since the Poincaré-Friedrichs estimate holds by Theorem 4.8 ii), a linear and continuous potential operator S : R Γτ,0Ω) H 1 Ω) exists with S E = E for all E R Γτ,0Ω). Furthermore R Γτ,0Ω) = H 1 Ω), H ε Ω) = {0}. Again, if =, we have to replace H 1 Ω) by H 1 Ω). Moreover, a linear and continuous potential operator S : R Γτ,0Ω) H 1 Ω) H 1 R 3 ) can be chosen, if Ω is even strong Lipschitz. ii) If Ω is a strong Lipschitz domain, such that R 3 \ Ω is connected i.e. Γ is connected), and if Γ ν = K =1 Γ ν,, K N, with disjoint, relatively open and simply connected strong Lipschitz surface patches Γ ν, Γ satisfying distγ ν,,γ ν,l ) > 0 for all 1 l K, then there exists a linear and continuous potential operator S r : D Γν,0Ω) H 1 Γ ν Ω) H 1 R 3 ) with rots r H = H for all H D Γν,0Ω). Furthermore D Γν,0Ω) = rot H 1 Γ ν Ω), H ε Ω) = {0}. iii) If Ω is a strong Lipschitz domain with Γ ν = K =1 Γ ν,, K N, where distγ ν,,γ ν,l ) > 0 for all 1 l K and Γ ν, are C 3 -boundary patches allowing for C 3 -regular extensions ˆΩ ν, having

19 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 19 connected complements R 3 \ ˆΩ ν,, then there exists a linear and continuous potential operator S d : L 2 Ω) H 1 Γ ν Ω) H 1 R 3 ) with divs d u = u for all u L 2 Ω). Furthermore L 2 Ω) = div H 1 Γ ν Ω). If Γ ν = Γ, we have to replace L 2 Ω) by L 2 Ω). iii ) As noted earlier at the end of Section 3.2, the results of iii) are not optimal. Using different techniques from [24, Lemma 2.1.1], it has been shown in [1, Lemma 3.2], that the assertions of iii) hold for any strong Lipschitz pair Ω,Γ ν ). We will point out how the potentials in the latter Helmholtz decompositions can be computed. By Theorem 5.3 any vector field E L 2 Ω) can be written as E = E +E H +ε 1 E r H 1 Ω) ε H ε Ω) ε ε 1 rot R Γν Ω). Interchanging the roles of Γ ν und in the decompositions of Theorem 5.3 yields with ε = id) 17) rot R Γν Ω) = rotxω), XΩ) := R Γν Ω) rot R Γτ Ω) = R Γν Ω) D Γτ,0Ω) HΩ), where HΩ) = R Γν,0Ω) D Γτ,0Ω), which is also finite dimensional. Hence E = u and E r = roth with uniquely determined i.e., E can be written as u H 1 Ω), H XΩ), 18) E = u+e H +ε 1 roth. In order to calculate u we test 18) with ϕ, ϕ H 1 Ω), and due to orthogonality we get 19) ϕ H 1 Ω) ε u, ϕ L 2 Ω) = εe, ϕ L 2 Ω). In case = we set again H 1 Ω) := H 1 Ω). By Poincaré sestimate the Lax-Milgram lemma or simply Riesz representation theorem yields a unique u H 1 Ω) satisfying 19) and u H 1 Ω) c E L 2 Ω). To calculate H XΩ) we test 18) with rotφ, Φ XΩ), and again get by orthogonality 20) Φ XΩ) ε 1 roth,rotφ L 2 Ω) = E,rotΦ L 2 Ω). Due to the Maxwell estimate, i.e., Theorem 5.1, ε 1 rot,rot L 2 Ω) is a coercive bilinear form or even a scalar product on XΩ) and Lax-Milgram s lemma or Riesz representation theorem yields a unique H XΩ), satisfying 20) and 19) shows by definition and Theorem 4.5 H RΩ) c E L 2 Ω). εe u) D Γν,0Ω) = D Γν,0Ω). Furthermore 20) holds for all Φ R Γν Ω) by 17) as well. Hence by definition and Theorem 4.5 we obtain Finally the Dirichlet-Neumann field E H is given by as E ε 1 roth R Γτ,0Ω) = R Γτ,0Ω). E H := E E ε 1 E r = E u ε 1 roth H ε Ω) E u,ε 1 roth ε 1 D Γν,0Ω), E ε 1 roth, u R Γτ,0Ω).

20 20 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG Remar ) is the variational formulation of the classical boundary value problem 21) 22) divε u = divεe in Ω, u = 0 on, n ε u = n εe on Γ ν, because in the smooth case 19) yields for all ϕ H 1 Ω) 0 = ε u E), ϕ L 2 Ω) = divε u E),ϕ L 2 Ω) + n ε u E))ϕ. }{{} Γ ν =0 Here, 21) has a proper meaning not only in H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω) ) but also in H 1 Ω) ), which gives meaning to the Neumann boundary condition 22) in this dual space as well. 20) is the variational formulation of the classical boundary value problem 23) 24) rotε 1 roth = rote in Ω, divh = 0 in Ω, n H = 0 on Γ ν, n H = 0 on, n ε 1 roth = n E on, H HΩ), because in the smooth case 20) yields for all Φ R Γν Ω) 0 = ε 1 roth εe),rotφ L 2 Ω) = rotε 1 roth εe),φ L 2 Ω) + n ε 1 roth εe) Φ. }{{} =0 23) has proper meaning not only in H 1 Ω) = H 1 Ω) ) but also in H 1 Γ ν Ω) ) or even in R Γν Ω) ), which gives meaning to the Neumann boundary condition 24) in this dual space as well Static solution theory. As a further application we turn to the boundary value problem of electroand magnetostatics with mixed boundary values: Let F L 2 Ω), g L 2 Ω), E τ RΩ), ε 1 E ν DΩ) and ε be admissible. Find E RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) with 25) 26) 27) rote = F, divεe = g, E E τ R Γτ Ω), 28) εe E ν ) D Γν Ω). For uniqueness, we require the additional conditions 29) εe,d l L 2 Ω) = α l R, l = 1,...,d, where d is the dimension and {D l } an ε-orthonormal basis of H ε Ω). The boundary values on and Γ ν, respectively, are realized by the given fields E τ and E ν, respectively. Let us solve the problem: Theorem 5.3 yields RΩ) = R Γτ,0Ω) ε RΩ) ε 1 rot R Γν Ω) ) = R Γτ,0Ω) ε RΩ) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε). The decomposition E τ = E τ,r + E τ,d with E τ,r R Γτ,0Ω) and E τ,d RΩ) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε shows Hence E E τ,d = E E τ +E τ E τ,d = E E τ +E τ,r R Γτ Ω). E E τ R Γτ Ω) E E τ,d R Γτ Ω),

21 THE MAXWELL COMPACTNESS PROPERTY 21 which means the field E τ realizingthe boundary values on can w.l.o.g.be chosenfrom the more regular space RΩ) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε. Similarly ε 1 DΩ) = ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) ε ε 1 DΩ) H 1 Ω) ) = ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) ε ε 1 DΩ) R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε) shows for E ν = E ν,d +E ν,r with E ν,d ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) and E ν,r ε 1 DΩ) R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε E E ν,r = E E ν +E ν E ν,r = E E ν +E ν,d ε 1 D Γν Ω). Hence E E ν D Γν Ω) E E ν,r ε 1 D Γν Ω), so the field E ν can w.l.o.g. be chosen from ε 1 DΩ) R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε. Therefore we will wor with the boundary conditions and observe E τ,d RΩ) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε, E ν,r ε 1 DΩ) R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε E τ,d L 2 ε Ω) E τ L 2 ε Ω), rote τ,d = rote τ, E ν,r L 2 ε Ω) E ν L 2 ε Ω), divεe ν,r = divεe ν. We first note that the system admits at most one solution, as for the homogeneous problem E H ε Ω) together with 29) yield E = 0. Turning to existence the conditions rote E τ,d ) = F rote τ,d =: F rot R Γτ Ω), divεe E ν,r ) = g divεe ν,r =: g div D Γν Ω) are necessary and from now on shall be assumed. By setting Ẽ := E E τ,d E ν,r the problem is transformed into a problem with homogenous boundary conditions, i.e., Ẽ must solve 30) rotẽ = F, 31) divεẽ = g, 32) Ẽ R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω). Necessary conditions for the existence of solutions are F rot R Γτ Ω), g div D Γν Ω), which have been assumed above. The conditions are already sufficient, as Theorem 5.3 shows the existence of fields Ẽ r R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε, εẽd D Γν Ω) ε R Γτ,0Ω) H ε Ω) ε) with rotẽr = F and divεẽd = g. Then Ẽ := Ẽr +Ẽd R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) H ε Ω) ε solves the system 30)-32) with Ẽ ε H ε Ω). Therefore E 0 := Ẽ +E τ,d +E ν,r RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) H ε Ω) ε solves 25)-28) with E 0 ε H ε Ω), i.e., 29) with α = 0. Finally E := E 0 + l α l D l RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) solves 25)-29). Furthermore, E depends continuously on the data by Theorem 5.1. More precisely, equipping RΩ) and ε 1 DΩ) with the norms we have 2 RΩ) := 2 L 2 ε Ω) + rot 2 L 2 Ω), 2 ε 1 DΩ) := E 2 L 2 ε Ω) + divε 2 L 2 Ω), E 2 RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) = E 2 L 2 ε Ω) + F 2 L 2 Ω) + g 2 L 2 Ω), E 2 L 2 ε Ω) = E 0 2 L 2 ε Ω) + α 2, E 0 L 2 Ω) Ẽ L 2 ε Ω) + E τ,d +E ν,r L 2 ε Ω),

22 22 SEBASTIAN BAUER, DIRK PAULY, AND MICHAEL SCHOMBURG E τ,d +E ν,r 2 L 2 ε Ω) = E τ,d 2 L 2 ε Ω) + E ν,r 2 L 2 ε Ω) E τ 2 L 2 ε Ω) + E ν 2 L 2 ε Ω) and by the Maxwell estimate Theorem 5.1 Ẽ L 2 ε Ω) c m F L 2 Ω) + g L 2 Ω)) cm F L 2 Ω) + g L 2 Ω) + rote τ L 2 Ω) + divεe ν L 2 Ω)). Thus there exists a constant c m > 0, just depending on c m, such that E RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) c m F L 2 Ω) + g L 2 Ω) + E τ RΩ) + E ν ε 1 DΩ) + α ). Our latter results show that the linear solution operator with F,g,E τ,e ν,α) E maps continuously onto RΩ) ε 1 DΩ). Let us summarize: Theorem )-28) admits a solution, if and only if E τ RΩ), E ν ε 1 DΩ), F rote τ rot R Γτ Ω), g divεe ν div D Γν Ω). The solution E RΩ) ε 1 DΩ) can be chosen in a way, such that condition 29) with α R d is satisfied, which then uniquely determines the solution. Furthermore the solution depends linearly and continuously on the data. We note that with Theorem 5.3 the ranges can be described by rot R Γν Ω) = D Γν,0Ω) H ε Ω), div D Γν Ω) = { L 2 Ω), if Γ ν Γ, L 2 Ω), if Γ ν = Γ. For homogeneous boundary data, i.e., E τ = E ν = 0, we can state a sharper result: The linear static Maxwell-operator M : R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) rotr Γτ Ω) divd Γν Ω) R d E ) rote,divεe, εe,d l L 2 Ω)) d l=1 is a topological isomorphism. Its inverse M 1 maps not only continuously onto R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω), but also compactly into L 2 Ω) by Theorem 4.7. For homogeneous ernel data, i.e., for M 0 : we have M 1 0 c 2 m +1)1/2. R Γτ Ω) ε 1 D Γν Ω) H ε Ω) ε rotr Γτ Ω) divd Γν Ω) E rot E, div εe) Appendix A. Proof of Lemma 3.1 We will show the density result for H 1 -functions, Lemma 3.1, which is first proved for a flat boundary in Lemma A.1 and then generalized to wea Lipschitz pairs in Lemma 3.1. Although both proofs can be found in [9, Lemma 2,3], we repeat them here, using our notation and with some major simplifications. Let us introduce the following notations: R 3 ± := {x R3 : ±x 3 > 0}, R 3 0 := {x R3 : x 3 = 0}, R 3 0, := {x R3 0 : x 1 < 0} Lemma A.1. Suppose u H 1 R 3 ) with compact support and u R 3 0, = 0 in the sense of traces. Then δ > 0 u C R 3 \R 3 0, ) u u H 1 R 3 ) < δ. Proof. Let δ > 0. For t > 0 define u t x) := u x 1 t,x 2,x 3 ) f.a.a. x R 3, the translation of u in the direction of x 1. Then u t H1 R 3 ) and its trace satisfies u t x) = 0 f.a.a. x R3 0 with x 1 t. Since the translation is continuous, there exists t > 0 with u t u H1 R 3 ) < δ/3. The reflection ut + of u t defined by ut + x) := ut x 1,x 2, x 3 ) for x R 3 + defines an element of H1 R 3 + ) with ut + x) = ut x) f.a.a. x R 3 0 and hence u t +x) = u t x) = 0 f.a.a. x R 3 0 with x 1 t.