Laplace s Equation. Chapter Mean Value Formulas
|
|
- Dina Floyd
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Chapter 1 Laplace s Equation Let be an open set in R n. A function u C 2 () is called harmonic in if it satisfies Laplace s equation n (1.1) u := D ii u = 0 in. i=1 A function u C 2 () is called subharmonic (superharmonic) in if u 0 ( u 0) in. In this chapter, we discuss some basic properties of harmonic functions, such as mean value theorems, maximum principles, Harnack inequalities, etc. Note that Laplace s equation (1.1) is a special case of Poisson s equation (1.2) u = f in Mean Value Formulas Let u C 2 (). From the divergence theorem it follows (1.3) u dx = div (Du) dx = Du ν ds =: u ν ds for any bounded open subset 0 0 with smooth boundary 0. Here ds is the (n 1)-dimensional surface area element in 0, and ν is the unit outward normal to 0. Fix y and r > 0, such that B r := B r (y) B r. For 0 < ρ r, consider the integral mean value of u over the surface B ρ (y): (1.4) m(ρ) := 1 u(x) ds x = 1 u(y + ρz) ds z, B ρ B ρ(y) σ n B 1 (0) 1
2 2 1. Laplace s Equation where B ρ = ρ n 1 B 1 = ρ n 1 σ n the (n 1)-dimensional surface area of B ρ. Since u(x) is continuous, m(ρ) u(y) as ρ 0 +. Further, z = (x y)/ρ =: ν x the unit outward normal to B ρ (y) at the point x = y+ρz. Applying the identity (1.3) to the ball B ρ (y), we have m (ρ) = 1 Du(y + ρz) z ds z and (1.5) σ n B 1 (0) = ρ1 n σ n B ρ(y) m(r) u(y) = r 0 Du(x) ν x ds x = ρ1 n σ n m (ρ) dρ = 1 r σ n = 1 0 ρ 1 n σ n x y <ρ<r B ρ(y) B ρ (y) u(x) dx, u(x) dx dρ ρ 1 n u(x) dx dρ. As a byproduct, here we get the following mean value properties. Theorem 1.1 (Mean value formulas). Let u be a function in C 2 () satisfying u = (, ) = 0 in. Than for any ball B r (y) B r (y), we have (1.6) u(y) = (, ) m(r) := 1 u(x) ds x, B r (1.7) u(y) = (, ) 1 B r B r(y) B r (y) u(x) dx. Proof. The relation (1.6) follows immediately from (1.4) (1.5). In order to get (1.7), one can integrate the relation u(y) B ρ = (, ) u(x) ds x with respect to ρ from 0 to r. B ρ (y)
3 1.2. The Maximum Principle The Maximum Principle From the mean value formula (1.7), it is easy to derive the following strong maximum principle for subharmonic functions. Theorem 1.2 (Strong maximum principle). Let be an open connected set in R n, and let u C 2 () satisfy u 0 in. Suppose there is a point x 0 such that u(x 0 ) = sup u. Then u = const in. Proof. Denote M := sup u, and := {x : u(x) = M}. The set is not empty, because it contains the point x 0. For an arbitrary point y, one can choose r > 0 such that B r (y) B r (y). By virtue of (1.7), we have M = u(y) 1 u(x) dx M, B r B r (y) hence u M in B r (y), i.e. B r (y). Therefore, the set is both open and closed relative to. Since is connected, we must have =. In turn, from the strong maximum principle it follows immediately the following weak maximum principle, which is usually referred to as the maximum principle. Theorem 1.3 (Weak maximum principle). Let be a bounded open set in R n, and let u C 2 () C() satisfy u 0 in. Then (1.8) sup u = sup u. Remark 1.4. The minimum principles for superharmonic functions are formulated similarly to Theorems 1.2 and 1.3, one only needs to replace the assumption u 0 with u 0, and the sup with the inf. The proof follows from the above theorems applied to the function u. As easy consequences of the maximum principle, we obtain the following two theorems. Theorem 1.5 (Comparison principle). Let be a bounded open set in R n, and let functions u 1, u 2 C 2 () C() satisfy u 1 u 2 in, and u 1 u 2 on. Then u 1 u 2 in. Proof. This assertion follows from Theorem 1.3 applied to the function u := u 1 u 2.
4 4 1. Laplace s Equation Theorem 1.6 (Uniqueness). Let f C() and f C( ) be given functions, where is a bounded open set in R n. Then there exists at most one classical solution, i.e. solution u C 2 () C() of the boundary value problem (1.9) u = f in, u = g on. Proof. If u 1 and u 2 both satisfy (1.9), then Theorem 1.3 applied to u = ±(u 1 u 2 ) guarantees u 1 u 2 in The Harnack Inequality The following Harnack inequality is another consequence of the mean value formula (1.7) for harmonic functions. Theorem 1.7 (Harnack inequality). Let be a bounded open set in R n, and a constant δ > 0 be such that the set δ := {x : dist(x, ) > δ} is connected. Then for any non-negative harmonic function u in, (1.10) sup u N inf u, δ δ where the constant N depends only on n and δ/diam. Proof. Let r := δ/2. Then for any two points x 0, x 1 in δ, such that x 0 x 1 r, we have B r (x 0 ) B 2r (x 1 ). Since u 0 in, this implies u(x) dx u(x) dx. B r (x 0 ) B 2r (x 1 ) In turn, by the equality (1.7), this yields B r u(x 0 ) B 2r u(x 1 ), so that u(x 0 ) 2 n u(x 1 ). Note that for any x, y δ, one can choose a finite sequence x = x 0, x 1,..., x m = y in δ, such that x j x j 1 r for all j = 1,..., m, and m does not exceed a constant M = M(n, δ/diam ). By the previous argument, u(x) = u(x 0 ) 2 n u(x 1 ) 2 2n u(x 2 )... 2 mn u(x m ) = 2 mn u(y) 2 Mn u(y), and the desired estimate (1.10) follows with N := 2 Mn. Corollary 1.8 (Liouville theorem). Any harmonic function defined over R n and bounded below (or above) is constant
5 1.4. Regularity of harmonic functions 5 Proof. Replacing u by ±u+const, we may assume that inf u = 0. Applying the Harnack inequality with = B 2r (0), δ = r, we obtain 0 sup u N inf u 0 as r. B r (0) B r (0) Since the left side is a non-decreasing function of r, we get u Regularity of harmonic functions In this section, we show that the mean value formula implies the interior smoothness, and even analyticity, of harmonic functions. We will use socalled mollifiers η δ (x), δ = const > 0, satisfying the properties (1.11) η δ C (R n ), η δ 0 on R n \ B δ (0), and η δ (x) dx = 1. R n We also assume that η δ are radially symmetric, i.e. η δ (x) η0 δ ( x ), where the functions η0 δ are defined on [0, ). For example, one can take ηδ (x) := δ n η(δ 1 x), where { ( ) c exp 1 if x < 1, x (1.12) η(x) := if x 1, and the constant c > 0 is chosen so that R n η(x) dx = 1. Lemma 1.9. Let u C 2 () be a harmonic function in an open set R n, and let η δ be a radially symmetric function satisfying the properties (1.11). Then (1.13) u(x) (u η δ )(x) := u(x y)η δ (y) dy B δ (0) on the set δ := {x : dist(x, ) > δ}. Proof. Fix a point x δ. Then B δ (x). Using polar coordinates in B δ (0), we can write δ [ (u η δ )(x) = u(x y)η δ (y) dy = u(x y)η δ (y) ds y ]dr. B δ (0) 0 B r (0) Note that η δ (y) η0 δ(r) on B r(0), and by virtue of (1.6), u(x y) ds y = u(z) ds z = u(x) B r. B r (0) B r (x)
6 6 1. Laplace s Equation Therefore, δ (u η δ )(x) = u(x) = u(x) 0 δ η0(r) δ B r dr = u(x) η δ (y) dy = u(x) 0 [ B r (0) η δ (y) ds y ]dr on the set δ. B r (0) Theorem 1.10 (Smoothness). Let u C 2 () be a harmonic function in an open set R n. Then u C (). Proof. For x δ, one can rewrite the equality (1.13) in the form (1.14) u(x) = u(y)η δ (x y) dy = u(y)η δ (x y) dy. B δ (x) R n The integrals here are well defined, because B δ (x), and η δ (x y) 0 on R n \ B δ (x). Since η δ C, we have u C ( δ ) for each δ > 0, so that u C (). Theorem 1.11 (Convergence theorem). Let {u m } C 2 () be a sequence of harmonic functions in an open set R n, which converges in L 1 (B r ) to a function u L 1 loc () for each ball B r B r. Then the limit function u (possibly after redefining on a set of zero measure) belongs to C () and is harmonic in. Proof. Fix a ball B r := B r (x 0 ) B r. By virtue of (1.14), we have (1.15) u m (x) = (u m η δ )(x) := u m (y)η δ (x y) dy B δ (x) for all m = 1, 2,... ; x B r/2 (x 0 ), and 0 < δ r/2. Therefore, (u i u j )(x) (u i u j )(y) η r/2 (x y) dy, and B r/2 (x) sup u i u j sup(η r/2 ) B r/2 (x 0 ) B r (x 0 ) u i u j dy 0 as i, j. This means that {u m } is a Cauchy sequence in C(B r/2 (x 0 )). Since this is true for all x 0 and 0 < r < dist(x 0, ), the sequence {u m } converges in C( ) for any bounded open set, and the limit function
7 1.4. Regularity of harmonic functions 7 u belongs to C(). Then from (1.15) it follows that for all x and 0 < δ < dist(x, ), we have u(x) = lim m u m(x) = lim m (u m η δ )(x) = (u η δ )(x), which implies u C (), and also u(x) = (u η δ )(x) = (u ( η δ ))(x) Theorem is proved. lim (u m ( η δ ))(x) = lim (( u m) η δ )(x) = 0. m m If we take η δ (x) := δ n η(δ 1 x) with η(x) defined in (1.12), then by virtue of (1.14), D l u(x) = δ n l u(y)d l η(δ 1 (x y)) dy, x δ, B δ (0) for any derivative D l u := D l 1 1 Dn ln u(x) of order l := l 1 + +l n. In turn, this implies the estimate (1.16) max sup l =k δ D l u N k δ k sup u for δ > 0, k = 1, 2,..., where N k := max l =k sup Dl η. The following theorem contains an improved version of this estimate. Theorem 1.12 (Estimates of derivatives). Let u C () be a bounded harmonic function in an open set R n. Then the estimate (1.16) holds true with N k := (nk) k. Proof. We first consider the case k = 1. Note that if u is harmonic, then (D i u) = D i ( u) = 0, i.e. D i u is harmonic for each i = 1,..., n. Moreover, we can write D i u = div (ue i ), where e i is the i-th coordinate vector in R n. For x δ, we have B δ (x) B δ (x). The mean value formula (1.7), together with the divergence theorem, yield D i u(x) = 1 D i u(y) dy = 1 u(y)e i ν ds y, B δ B δ B δ (x) B δ (x) where ν is the unit outward vector to B δ (x). Hence D i u(x) B δ B δ sup u n B δ (x) δ sup u for all x δ and i = 1,..., n, i.e. we have (1.16) for k = 1 with N 1 = n.
8 8 1. Laplace s Equation In the case k 2, we set r := δ/k and apply the above estimate to higher order derivatives of u: max sup l =k δ D l u = max ( n r Theorem is proved. D l u n kr r max l =k 1 ) k 1 ( n max sup D l u l =1 r r l =k sup sup D l u... (k 1)r ) k ( nk sup u = δ ) k sup u. Theorem 1.13 (Analyticity). Let u be a harmonic function in. Then u is analytic in. Proof. Fix an arbitrary point y. We need to show that u(x) = l D l u(y) (x y) l l! in a neighborhood of y, or equivalently, u(x) = l k 1 D l u(y) (x y) l + R k (x), l! where R k (x) 0 as k. Note that by the Taylor formula R k (x) = l =k D l u(z) (x y) l, l! where z belongs to the segment [y, x]. Fix a constant r 0 (0, 1 2dist(y, ). By Theorem 1.12 applied to the ball B 2r0 (y) B 2r0 (y), we have max l =k sup D l u B r0 (y) This estimate implies R k (x) ( nk ) km0, where M 0 := sup u. r 0 B 2r0 (y) ( nk r 0 ) km0 Note that by the multinomial theorem, we also have l =k (a a n ) k = l =k l =k 1 l! = nk k!. (x y) l. l! k! l! al,
9 1.4. Regularity of harmonic functions 9 Therefore, for x B r (y), 0 < r r 0, we get ( n 2 kr ) k M0 R k (x) M k := k!, k 1. We see that M k+1 M k r 0 = n2 r (1 + 1 ) k en 2 r θ :=. r 0 k r 0 Finally, we choose 0 < r < r 0 en 2. Then 0 < θ < 1, and by iteration, we obtain M k M 0 θ k. This means that R k (x) 0 uniformly on the ball B r (y) as k, i.e. u is analytic at the point y. Since y is an arbitrary point in, the harmonic function u is analytic in. As a standard property of harmonic functions, the following statement hold true. Corollary 1.14 (Uniqueness of continuation). Let u 1 and u 2 be harmonic functions in an open connected set R n, such that u 1 u 2 in an ball B r (y). Then u 1 u 2 in. At the beginning of Section 1.1, we already used the classical divergence theorem in a special case of the vector field F = Du. For our reference, we formulate this theorem under general assumptions on F and. Theorem Let be a bounded domain in R n with the boundary of class C 1, and let ν be the unit outward normal to. Then for any vector field F = (F 1,..., F n ) C 1 () C(), such that div F := D 1 F D n F n L 1 (), we have (1.17) div F dx = F ν ds. Note that C 1 if there exists a function Ψ C 1 () such that (1.18) = {x R n : Ψ(x) > 0}, and DΨ 0 on. Since = {Ψ = 0} - a level set of the function Ψ, the unit outward normal ν = DΨ/ DΨ C( ), so that F ν C( ). Lemma 1.16 (Green s formula). Let be as in the previous theorem, and let functions u, v C 2 () C 1 () be such that u v v u L 1 (). Then ( (1.19) (u v v u) dx = u v ν v u ) ds. ν Proof. It suffices to apply the divergence theorem to the vector field F = udv vdu.
10 10 1. Laplace s Equation Corollary Let u be a harmonic function in an arbitrary domain R n. Then (1.20) u v dx = 0 v C0 (). Proof. By definition, each function v C0 () belongs to C (), and v 0 on \ for some bounded subdomain. Since dist(, ) > 0, one can always replace by another subdomain with smooth boundary, such that. Then u, v C 2 ( ), v = Dv = 0 on, and the desired equality (1.20) follows from Green s formula applied to the domain. By our previous considerations, from u C 2 () and u = 0 in it follows that u C () and u satisfies (1.20). Note that the integral in (1.20) is well-defined for functions u L 1 loc (). It turns out that if u L 1 loc () satisfies (1.20), then u C () and u = 0 in. This is the statement of Weyl s lemma below. For its proof, we need some of the following properties of the operation of convolution. Proposition Let u be a function in L 1 loc (), and let ηδ, δ > 0 be non-negative functions satisfying (1.11). Then the functions (1.21) u (δ) (x) := (u η δ )(x) := u(x y)η δ (y) dy B δ (y) belong to C ( δ, where δ := {x : dist(x, ) > δ}, and satisfies the following properties: (i) For each x δ, u (δ) (x) u(x) ω x (δ) := sup u(x + h) u(x). h δ In particular, if u C(), then for any bounded subdomain, u (δ) u in C( ) as δ 0 + : sup u (δ) u sup ω x (δ) 0 as δ 0 +. x (ii) The operation of convolution does not increase the L 1 -norm: u (δ) 1, δ u 1, := u(x) dx. (iii) For any bounded subdomain, u (δ) u in L 1 ( ) as δ 0 + : u (δ) u 1, 0 as δ 0 +.
11 1.5. Growth lemma and its application 11 Lemma 1.19 (Weyl s lemma). Let u L 1 loc () satisfy the property (1.20). Then u C (), and u is harmonic in. Proof. Fix y and r > 0 such that the ball B := B r (y) B 2r (y). For 0 < δ < r, the functions u (δ) C (B), and u (δ) (x) = (u η (δ) )(x) = u(y) x η (δ) (x y) dy. B δ (0) Here x denotes the Laplacian with respect to the variables x = (x 1,..., x n ). It is easy to see that x η (δ) (x y) y η (δ) (x y). For fixed x B and 0 < δ < r, the function v(y) := η (δ) (x y) C0 (), so that by virtue of (1.20) we have u (δ) (x) = 0. Hence u (δ), 0 < δ < r, are harmonic functions on B. By Proposition 1.18 (iii), u (δ) u in L 1 (B) as δ 0 +. Now it remains to apply the convergence Theorem Growth lemma and its application Lemma 1.20 (Growth lemma). Let be an open set in R n, and let x 0 and r > 0 be such that the measure (1.22) B r (x 0 ) µ B r, µ = const (0, 1). Let v be a function in C 2 () C(), such that (1.23) v > 0, v 0 in B r (x 0 ); v = 0 on ( ) B r (x 0 ). Then (1.24) v(x 0 ) µ M, where M := sup v, B r(x 0 ) and µ is the constant in (1.22). Proof. Fix ε > 0 and choose a function Φ ε C (R 1 ) (depending on ε) such that Φ ε, Φ ε, Φ ε 0 on R 1, Φ ε 0 on (, ε], and Φ ε 1 on [2ε, ). It is easy to check that the convolution Φ ε (x) := (Φ 0 η ε )(x 2ε), where Φ 0 (x) := x + := max(x, 0), satisfies all these properties, if we take η ε (x) := ε n η(ε 1 x), where the function η is defined in (1.12). Further, define (1.25) v ε := Φ ε (v) in B r (x 0 ), v ε 0 on B r (x 0 ) \. From the above properties of the function Φ ε it follows (1.26) (v 2ε) + v ε (v ε) + < M in B r (x 0 ).
12 12 1. Laplace s Equation Since v = 0 on the set ( ) B r (x 0 ), the function v ε vanishes near this set. Hence we have v ε C 2 (B r (x 0 ))) and v ε 0 in B r (x 0 ). Moreover, Dv ε = Φ ε(v) Dv, and (1.27) v ε = Φ ε(v) v + Φ ε(v) Dv 2 0 in B r (x 0 ). Now we can use the mean value formula (1.7), which gives us v ε (x 0 ) 1 v ε (x) dx B r (1.28) 1 B r B r (x 0 ) B r(x 0 ) M dx B r(x 0 ) B r M µ M. Since v ε (x 0 ) v(x 0 ) as ε 0 +, the desired estimate (1.24) follows. Definition An open set R n satisfies the condition (A) with a constant µ 0 (0, 1) if the measure (1.29) B r (y) µ 0 B r for all y and r > 0. Theorem Let be a bounded open set in R n satisfying the condition (A) with a constant µ 0 > 0. Let an open subset and a function u C 2 ( ) C( ) be such that u > 0 in and u = 0 on. Then there are constants γ > 0 and N > 0, which depend only on n and µ 0, such that (1.30) M := sup d γ u N F, where F := sup d 2 γ ( u), d = d(x) := dist(x, ), ( u) := max( u, 0). Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that dist(, ) > 0. Indeed, for δ > 0, the function u δ and the domain δ := {u > δ} satisfy these assumptions. Therefore, if we first prove the estimate (1.30) for u δ in δ, then this estimate for the original function u in follows by taking δ 0 +. This additional assumption guarantees that d γ is bounded in for γ > 0 (the constant γ (0, 1) will be specified later). Hence the function d γ u attains its maximum on at some point x 0, i.e. (1.31) M = r γ u(x 0 ), where r := d(x 0 ) := dist(x 0, ) > 0. We will take into consideration the auxiliary function which satisfies w(x) := 1 2n (4r2 x x 0 2 ) (1.32) w > 0, w = 1 in B 2r (x 0 ).
13 1.5. Growth lemma and its application 13 For fixed constants γ, ε (0, 1), consider the function (1.33) v(x) := u(x) (εr) γ M (εr) γ 2 F w(x). First we assume that v(x 0 ) > 0. Then x 0 belongs to the set (1.34) V := B 2r (x 0 ) {x : d(x) > εr} {x : v(x) > 0}, so that V is not empty. We are going to apply the Growth lemma to the function v in the domain V, with the ball B 2r (x 0 ) in place of B r (x 0 ). Note that r := dist(x 0, ) = x 0 y 0 for some point y 0. Then B r (y 0 ) B 2r (x 0 ), and also V. Since satisfies the condition (A), i.e. inequality (1.29), at the point y = y 0, we get B 2r (x 0 ) \ V B r (x 0 ) \ = B r B r (y 0 ) (1 µ 0 ) B r = (1 µ 0 )2 n B 2r, V B 2r (x 0 ) = B 2r B 2r (x 0 ) \ V µ B 2r, where µ := 1 (1 µ 0 )2 n (0, 1). This means the condition (1.22) is satisfied with this constant µ = µ(n, µ 0 ) (0, 1). Further, we claim that (1.35) v = 0 on ( V ) B 2r (x 0 ). Suppose otherwise, i.e. v(y) > 0 at some point y ( V ) B 2r (x 0 ). Since y is an interior point of B 2r (x 0 ), we have w(y) > 0. Moreover, since 0 < v(y) < u(y) and u = 0 on, the point y must be an interior point of. By definition of M, we have u d γ M, hence 0 < v(y) < u(y) (εr) γ M [d γ (y) (εr) γ ] M, which implies d(y) > εr, i.e. y is an interior point of the set {x : d(x) > εr}. Summarizing these arguments, we see that y is an interior point of V, in contradiction with our assumption y V. This contradiction proves the property (1.35). Finally, since d > εr in V and γ 2 < 0, we have which in turn implies u ( u) d γ 2 F (εr) γ 2 F in V, v = u (εr) γ 2 F w = u + (εr) γ 2 F 0 in V. Therefore, we can apply the Growth lemma (Lemma 1.20) to the function v < u in the domain V B 2r (x 0 ), which yields (1.36) v(x 0 ) µ sup V v µ sup B 2r (x 0 ) u.
14 14 1. Laplace s Equation Since d(x 0 ) = r, we also have d = d(x) x x 0 + d(x 0 ) < 3r, u d γ M (3r) γ M on the set B 2r (x 0 ). From the previous estimate we now obtain (1.37) v(x 0 ) µ (3r) γ M. In the proof of this estimate, we assumed v(x 0 ) > 0, which guarantees that x 0 belongs to the set V in (1.34). In the case v(x 0 ) 0, the estimate (1.37) is obvious, so that it is true without any additional assumptions (for fixed γ, ε (0, 1)). Having in mind that u(x 0 ) = r γ M and w(x 0 ) = 2r 2 /n, by virtue of (1.33) and (1.37), we conclude v(x 0 ) = r γ M (3r) γ M (3r) γ 2 F 2 n r2 µ (3r) γ M or equivalently, (1.38) (1 ε γ 3 γ µ) M 2 n εγ 2 F. Since µ = µ(n, µ 0 ) < 1, now it remains to choose a small constant γ = γ(n, µ 0 ) > 0, and then a small constant ε = ε(n, µ 0 ) > 0 in such a way that the constant c 0 = c 0 (n, µ 0 ) := 1 ε γ 3 γ µ is strictly positive. Then the desired estimate (1.30) follows immediately with the constant N = N(n, µ 0 ) := 2 nc 0 ε γ Model problems for the Laplace operator In this section, we consider three boundary value problems for Laplace s equation. They are called model problems here because they serve as a foundation for more general theory of elliptic equations with Hölder coefficients. The corresponding Theorems assert the existence of harmonic functions, satisfying specific boundary conditions for each problem, and having certain regularity properties. First we consider the Dirichlet problem in a ball: (1.39) u = f in B r := B r (x 0 ), u = g on B r, with polynomials f and g. For k = 0, 1, 2,..., denote P k the collection of all polynomials p(x) = p(x 1,..., x n ) of degree at most k: P k := {p = p(x) = } c l x l, c l constants. l k Lemma Let polynomials f P k and g P k+2 be given. Then for arbitrary x 0 R n and r > 0, the Dirichlet problem (1.39) has a unique solution in C 2 (B r ) C(B r ). This solution belongs to P k+2 and is represented in the form u = g + (r 2 x x 0 2 )h, where h P k.
15 1.6. Model problems for the Laplace operator 15 Proof. Replacing x by r 1 (x x 0 ), we may assume without loss of generality x 0 = 0, r = 1. The uniqueness of solution is contained in Theorem 1.6. In order to prove the existence, we set v := u g, so that (1.39) is reduced to the equivalent problem (1.40) v = f 0 in B 1, v = 0 on B 1, with f 0 = f g P k. Next, consider the linear mapping T p := ((1 x 2 )p) : P k P k. If T p = 0, then v := (1 x 2 )p is a solution of the problem (1.40) with f 0 0. By uniqueness, we have v 0 and p 0. Hence T has the trivial null space: T 1 (0) = {0}. Since the dimension of P k is finite, we must have T (P k ) = P k. Then T h = f 0 for some h P k, and v = (1 x 2 )h is a solution of (1.40). Finally, u = g + v = g + (1 x 2 )h is a solution of the problem (1.39). Theorem For any continuous function g on B r := B r (x 0 ), the Dirichlet problem (1.41) u = 0 in B r := B r (x 0 ), u = g on B r, has a unique classical solution (i.e. solution in C 2 (B r ) C(B r )). This solution belongs to C (B r ) and satisfies the estimate (1.42) max l =k sup D l u N k δ k sup u for 0 < δ < r, k = 1, 2,..., B r δ B r with the constant N k := (nk) k. Proof. Based on the Weierstrass approximation theorem, we can choose a sequence of polynomials {g m } such that g g m 1/m on B r for m = 1, 2,.... By Lemma 1.23, there exists a sequence of polynomials {u m } satisfying u m = 0 in B r, u m = g m on B r. From the comparison principle (Theorem 1.5) it follows sup u i u j = sup g i g j sup g i g + sup g j g B r B r B r B r 1 i + 1 j 0 as i, j. Therefore, {u m } is a Cauchy sequence in C(B r ), so it converges uniformly to a function u C(B r ), which implies the convergence in L 1 (B r ). By Convergence theorem (Theorem 1.11), the limit function u C (B r ) C(B r ) and satisfies (1.41). The uniqueness of solution is guaranteed by Theorem 1.6.
16 16 1. Laplace s Equation In the remaining part of this section, we consider two problems in a half ball B + r := B + r (x 0 ) := {x = (x 1,..., x n ) B r (x 0 ) : x n > 0}, where x 0 R n 0 := {x Rn : x n = 0}. Note that B + r = Γ S, where (1.43) Γ := B r {x n = 0}, S := ( B + r ) \ Γ = ( B r ) {x n 0}. In other words, Γ and S are correspondingly the flat and the spherical portions of B + r, and Γ is open relative to B + r. Theorem For any continuous function g on B + r, such that g 0 on Γ, the Dirichlet problem (1.44) u = 0 in B + r, u = g on B + r, has a unique classical solution. This solution belongs to C (B r Γ) and satisfies the estimate (1.45) max l =k sup B + r δ with N k := (nk) k. D l u N k δ k sup u for 0 < δ < r, k = 1, 2,..., B r + Proof. One can extend the function g from S to B r as an odd function of x n. Then g(x) = g(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) = g(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) on B r. The extended function g is continuous on B r, so that by the previous theorem, the problem (1.41) has a unique solution u C (B r ) C(B r ). Then the function v(x) = v(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) := u(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) satisfies both the equation v = u = 0 in B r and the boundary condition v = g on B r. By uniqueness, we must have u v in B r, which implies u 0 on Γ. This means that u is also a solution of the problem (1.44), and the estimate (1.45) follows from (1.42). The next theorem deals with different kinds of conditions on different parts on B + r. These are the mixed boundary conditions (1.46) D n u = 0 on Γ, u = g on S, where Γ and S are defined in (1.43). Theorem For any continuous function g on S, the equation u = 0 in B + r, with the boundary conditions (1.46), has a unique solution u C (B r Γ) C(B + r ). This solution satisfies the estimate (1.45).
17 1.7. Removable singularities for harmonic functions 17 Proof. Now we extend the function g from S to B r as an even function of x n : g(x) = g(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) = g(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) on B r. As in the previous proof, the problem (1.41) has a unique solution u C (B r ) C(B r ). By uniqueness, From this equality it follows u(x) v(x) := u(x 1,..., x n 1, x n ) in B r. D n u = D n v = D n u on Γ := B r {x n = 0}, so that D n u = 0 on Γ. Therefore, the function u satisfies all the desired properties in this theorem. Now it remains to show that the solution is unique. If u 1 and u 2 are two harmonic functions in B r +, both satisfying (1.46), then u := u 1 u 2 satisfies (1.46) with g = 0. Hence we need to show that from D n u = 0 on Γ and u = 0 on S it follows u = 0 in B r +. Note that for any ε > 0, the function u ε := u + εx n is harmonic in B r + and belongs to C (B r ) C(B r ). By the maximum principle (Theorem 1.3) it attains its maximum on B r + at some point y B r + = Γ S. However, since D n u ε = D n u + ε = ε > 0 on Γ, the point y cannot belong to Γ. Then y S, and sup B + r u ε = sup S u ε = sup(εx n ) = εr. S This implies that u = lim ε 0 uε 0 in B + + r. Quite similarly (or replacing u by u), we also get u 0 in B r +. Therefore, u 0, and the uniqueness follows Removable singularities for harmonic functions For radially symmetric functions v(x) := v 0 (r), r := x, the Laplace s operator has the form (1.47) v(x) = v 0(r) + n 1 v r 0(r) = r 1 n(. r n 1 v 0(r)) Solving a simple ODE, one can describe all harmonic functions h(x) := h 0 (r) on R n \ {0} as follows { c 1 + c 2 ln x, if n = 2; (1.48) h(x) = c 1 + c 2 x 2 n, if n 2, where c 1 and c 2 are arbitrary constants.
18 18 1. Laplace s Equation Theorem 1.27 (Removable singularity). Let be an open set in R n, and let u be a harmonic function in \ {x 0 } for some point x 0, such that { ln x, if n = 2; (1.49) lim x x 0 u(x) = 0, where h(x) := h(x x 0 ) x 2 n, if n 2, Then u can be extended as a harmonic function to the whole set. Proof. Without loss of generality, we can assume x 0 = 0. Choose r (0, 1) small enough, so that B r := B r (0) B r. By Theorem 1.24, there exists a solution ũ C 2 (B r ) C(B r ) of the problem ũ = 0 in B r, ũ = u on B r. Next, for 0 < δ < r, we compare u(x) with the functions where w δ 1,2(x) := ũ(x) ± β(δ) h(x) on δ := B r \ B δ, u(x) ũ(x) 0 β(δ) := sup 0 as δ 0 + B δ h(x) by the assumption (1.49). All three functions u, w1 δ, wδ 2 are harmonic in δ, and w1 δ u wδ 2 on δ. By the comparison principle, we have w1 δ u wδ 2 in δ. Then for arbitrary x B r \ {0}, u(x) ũ(x) β(δ) h(x) 0 as δ 0 +. Therefore, u ũ on B r \ {0}, and the function u, extended as u(0) := ũ(0), is harmonic in. Remark It follows from this theorem that the Dirichlet problem (1.50) u = 0 in := B 1 \ {0}; u = 0 on B 1, u(0) = 1; does not have solutions in C 2 () C(). One can use similar arguments in order to fix boundary singularities. Namely, the maximum principle (Theorem 1.3) and the comparison principle (Theorem 1.5) are applied to functions in C 2 () C(), where is a bounded open set in R n. These statements mat fail if we allow discontinuity even at a single point x 0. Example Note that any derivative of a harmonic function is harmonic. Differentiating the function h(x) in (1.48), we get: (1.51) h 0 (x) := x n x n = const D nh(x) is harmonic in R n \ {0}.
19 1.7. Removable singularities for harmonic functions 19 If we take := B + 1 (0) := {x Rn : x < 1, x n > 0}, and x 0 := 0, then h 0 is harmonic in, belongs to C 2 () C(\{0}), and does not satisfy the maximin principle: = sup h 0 > sup h 0 = 1. ( )\{0} In this example, the harmonic function h 0 has singularity of order x 1 n at the point x 0 = 0. The following theorem states that the maximum principle, and hence the comparison principle, are applicable for weaker singularities. Theorem Let be a bounded open set in R n, n 2, such that B r (0) = B + r := {x R n : x < r, x n > 0} for some r > 0. Let u C 2 () C( \ {0}) be a harmonic function in satisfying the property (1.52) u(x) x n 1 0 as x, x 0. Then (1.53) M := sup u = M 0 := sup u. ( )\{0} Proof. Denote (1.54) m r := sup S r u, where S r := {x R n : x = r, x n > 0} B + r. First we reduce the proof to the case = B + r, i.e. (1.55) sup u = sup u. B r + ( B r + )\{0} Indeed, the set ( B + r ) \ {0} is contained in the union of two sets: ( ) \ {0} and S r, so that from (1.55) it follows sup u max(m 0, m r ). B r + Moreover, the boundary of \ B r + is also contained in the union of these two sets, hence by the maximum principle, sup \B + r u = ( sup ) u max(m 0, m r ). \B + r Since we always have M 0 M and m r M, these inequalities imply M := sup u = max(m 0, m r ). It is easy to see that the case M > M 0 is impossible: in this case we must have M = m r, and the maximum of u would be attained at some point
20 20 1. Laplace s Equation x 0 S r, which contradicts to the strong maximum principle. We have proved that from (1.55) it follows (1.53). Now it remains to prove (1.55), i.e. (1.53) in the case := B + r. Replacing u by u const is necessary, we may assume M 0 = 0. Since the function h 0 in (1.51) is harmonic in R n \ {0}, the functions h δ (x) = h δ (x, x n ) := h 0 (x, x n + δ) = x n + δ [ x 2 + (x n + δ) 2] n/2, 0 < δ r, belong to C (B + r ) and satisfy h δ > 0, h δ = 0 in B + r ; 2 n δ 1 n h δ 2 δ 1 n in B + δ. By virtue of (1.52), β(δ) := sup S δ For each δ (0, r], the function u(x) 0 as δ 0+ h δ (x) u δ (x) := u(x) β(δ) h δ (x) is harmonic in δ := B + r \ B + ρ. By definition of β(δ), u δ 0 on S δ. On the remaining part of δ, which is a subset of ( B + r ) \ {0}, we have u δ u M 0 = 0. By the maximum principle, For arbitrary x B + r, we obtain u δ sup δ u 0 in δ = B + r \ B + ρ. u(x) = lim δ 0 + u δ(x) 0. This means M 0 = M 0. Since the opposite inequality is always true, the estimate (1.53) is proved. Corollary In addition to the assumptions of the previous theorem, suppose that u = g on ( )\{0}, where g C( ). Then u can be extended as a continuous function from \ {0} to by setting u(0) := g(0). Proof. By defining g := u on S r := { x = r, x n > 0} = ( B + r ) \ ( ), we extend g as a continuous function on B + r. Consider the Dirichlet problem (1.56) ũ = 0 in B + r, ũ = g on B + r.
21 1.8. Dirichlet problem for Laplace s equation in general domain 21 In the next section, we prove that this problem has a classical solution ũ C 2 (B r + ) C(B r + ). By the previous theorem, the functions v := ±(ũ u) satisfy sup v = sup v = 0. B r + ( B r + )\{0} Therefore, u ũ on (B r + ) \ {0}, and the extended function u coincides with ũ C(B r + ) on B r +. Remark A bit longer argument helps to bypass the existence result for the problem (1.56) (which is not proved yet), when g is an arbitrary continuous function on B + r. We do have the existence theorem (Theorem 1.25) in the case g 0 on Γ r := { x r, x n = 0} - the flat portion of B + r. Replacing u, g by u c, g c, we easily extend this theorem to the case g c = const on Γ r. For 0 < ρ r, we can now define ũ ρ C 2 (B + ρ ) C(B + ρ ) as a solution to the problem where ũ ρ = 0 in B + ρ, ũ ρ = g ρ on B + r, r ρ := c ρ := sup g on Γ ρ, g ρ := max(u, c ρ ) on S ρ. Γ ρ By Theorem 1.30, sup B + ρ ( u ũρ ) = sup ( B + ρ )\{0} ( u ũρ ) 0, 0 < ρ r. Then lim sup u(x) lim ũ ρ = c ρ, 0 < ρ r. x 0 x 0 Here c ρ g(0) as ρ 0 +. Therefore, lim sup u(x) g(0). x 0 Similarly (or replacing u by u and g by g), we also get lim inf x 0 u(x) g(0). From here the desired property follows: u(x) g(0) as x Dirichlet problem for Laplace s equation in general domain Let be a bounded domain in R n satisfying the condition (A) in Definition 1.21 with a constant µ 0 (0, 1). In this section, we prove the existence of a classical solution, i.e. solution in the class C 2 () C(), to the Dirichlet problem (1.57) u = 0 in, u = g on,
22 22 1. Laplace s Equation where g is a continuous function on. By results in Section A.1, we can extend u as a continuous function to the whole space R n, so that we can assume g C(R n ) Existence of a weak solution. First we assume g C 1 (R n ). Consider the energy functional (1.58) E[v] := 1 Dv 2 dx 2 on the class of admissible functions A := {v C 1 () : v = g on }. This class is not empty, because it contains the function g. Denote (1.59) m := inf E[v] 0, v A and choose a sequence u 1, u 2,..., such that m k := E[u k ] m as k. For each pair i, j, the function 1 2 (u i + u j ) belongs to A, which implies 1 ] m E[ 2 (u i + u j ) = 1 D(u i + u j ) 2 dx. 8 Using the parallelogram identity D(u i + u j ) 2 + D(u i u j ) 2 = 2 Du i Du j 2, we can write (1.60) 1 ] D(u i u j ) 2 dx = 4 E[u i ] + 4 E[u j ] 8 E[ 2 (u i + u j ) 4m i + 4m j 8m 0 as i, j. Since u i u j = 0 on, by Poincaré inequality, u i u j 2 dx 0 as i, j. Therefore, there is a function u L 2 () L 1 () such that u k u in L 2 () as k 0, which implies the convergence in L 1 (): (1.61) u k u 1 := u k u dx 0 as k.
23 1.8. Dirichlet problem for Laplace s equation in general domain 23 Further, for arbitrary function v C0 () and τ R1, the functions u k + τv belong to A, hence m E[u k + τv] = m k + 2τ Du k Dv dx + τ 2 E[v] = m k 2τ u k v dx + τ 2 E[v]. Taking the limit as k, we obtain 0 2τ u v dx + τ 2 E[v] for all τ R 1, which is only possible if u v dx = 0, v C 0 (). By Weyl s lemma (Lemma 1.19) we conclude that u C (), and u = 0 in Comparison principle. We still need to show that under appropriate assumptions on, the function u belongs to C(), and u = g on. Suppose this is the case. Then by the comparison principle, from (1.62) w C 2 (), w < 0 on, and w g on, it follows u w in. It turns out that the function u in (1.61) satisfies this property, without any additional assumptions on. Lemma Let w be a function satisfying (1.62). Then u w in. Proof. Fix ε > 0, and let Φ ε C (R 1 ) be a function in the proof of Growth lemma (Lemma 1.20). Since u k C 1 () and u k = g w on, the functions v k := Φ ε (u k w) belong to C0 1 (). By the chain rule, Dv k = Φ ε(u k w) D(u k w). Since 0 Φ ε 1, we have 0 Dv k 2 dx = (Φ ε) 2 D(u k w) 2 dx Φ ε D(u k w) 2 dx = = A k + B k, Dv k D(u k w) dx
24 24 1. Laplace s Equation where A k := Dv k D(u k u) dx, B k := Dv k D(u w) dx. From the convergence in (1.60) it follows that Du L 2 (), and D(u k u) 2 dx 0 as k. By the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, we obtain A 2 k Dv k 2 dx D(u k u) 2 dx const D(u k u) 2 dx 0 as k. Further, since v k C0 1 (), we have B k = v k (u w) dx = From (1.61) it follows This implies v k w dx. v k v 1 0 as k, where v := Φ ε (u w) 0. 0 lim(a k + B k ) = k 0 v w dx. Since v 0, w < 0 in, and v C(), we must have v = Φ ε (u w) 0 in. This inequality is true for arbitrary ε > 0. Hence i.e. u w in. (u w) + = lim ε 0 + Φ ε(u w) 0 in, Existence in the case C 2, g C 2. Now we assume that the domain has boundary of class C 2. Then it satisfies the following exterior sphere condition with a constant r 0 > 0: (S) For each point x 0, there is a ball B := B r0 (y 0 ) such that B =, x 0 B.
25 1.8. Dirichlet problem for Laplace s equation in general domain 25 Lemma Let satisfy the above condition (S), and let g C 2 (R n ). Then the weak solution u satisfies (1.63) lim x x x 0 u(x) = g(x) for each x 0. Therefore, the function u, extended as u := g on, belongs to C () C(), and solves the problem (1.57) in a classical sense. Proof. Fix constants γ > n 2 0 and R > diam () + r 0, where r 0 > 0 is a constant in the condition (S). By virtue of this condition, for each x 0, there exists y 0 R n such that Note that {x R n : r 0 < x y 0 < R}, and x 0 B r0 (y 0 ). For fixed x 0, set ( x γ) = γ(γ n + 2) x γ 2 > 0 for x 0. w(x) := g(x) + N We have w C (), w g on, and [r γ 0 x y 0 γ], where N = const > 0. w(x) = g(x) Nγ(γ n + 2) x y 0 γ 2 sup( g) Nγ(γ n + 2) R γ 2 < 0 on, provided the constant N > 0 is large enough. Then from Lemma 1.33 it follows u w in, therefore, lim sup x x x 0 u(x) lim x x x 0 w(x) = g(x 0 ). Replacing u by u and g by g, one can also get a similar estimate lim inf u(x) g(x 0 ) as x x 0. From these estimates, the equality (1.63) follows Existence in the general case. Theorem Let be a bounded domain in R n satisfying the condition (A). Then for any function g C(R n ), the Dirichlet problem (1.57) has a unique solution u C () C(). Proof. We first assume g C 2 (R n ). For small ε > 0, choose open sets ε satisfying the properties (1.64) ε C 2, and ( {d > ε} ) ε ε, where d = d(x) := dist(x, ). By Lemma 1.34, the problems (1.65) u ε = 0 in ε, u ε = g on ε,
26 26 1. Laplace s Equation have classical solutions u ε C 2 ( ε ) C( ε ). Since we assume g C 2 (R n ), the functions v ε := u ε g satisfy (1.66) v ε = f := g in ε, u ε = 0 on ε. From Theorem 1.22, applied to the functions ±v ε on := ε, it follows the estimate sup d γ v ε N sup d 2 γ g =: N 0, ε where the constants γ > 0 and N > 0 depend only on n and µ 0 in (1.29). Set v ε := 0 on \ ε. Then v ε C(), and (1.67) v ε (x) N 0 d γ (x) in, uniformly with respect to ε > 0. Fix ε 0 > 0. Then for 0 < ε 1, ε 2 < ε 0, we have (v ε1 v ε2 ) = (u ε1 u ε2 ) in {d > ε 0 }. The maximum principle together with (1.67) imply sup v ε1 v ε2 = sup v ε1 v ε2 2N 0 d γ (x) for 0 < ε 1, ε 2 < ε 0. {d ε 0 } Therefore, lim sup sup v ε1 v ε2 2N 0 d γ (x). ε 1,ε Here the left side does not depend on ε 0 > 0, which can be made arbitrary small. This means v ε converge in C() to a function v C() as ε 0 +. Equivalently, u ε extended as u ε := g on \ ε, converge in C() to u := v + g C(), By the convergence theorem (Theorem 1.11), from u ε = 0 in {d ε 0 }, 0 < ε < ε 0, it follows that the limit function u is harmonic in {d ε 0 }. Since ε 0 > 0 is arbitrary, the function u is harmonic in and belongs to C () C(). This completes the proof in the case g C 2 (R n ). In the general case, when the function g belongs to C(R n ), we can assume u C 0 (R n ), and then approximate it uniformly on R n by standard convolutions g (δ) C (R n ): sup g g (δ) 0 as δ 0 +. R n For each δ > 0, there exists a solution u δ C () C() to the problem u (δ) = 0 in, u = g (δ) on. By the comparison principle, u δ converges in C() to a function u C() as δ 0 +. By Theorem 1.11, the limit function u C C() is harmonic in.
27 1.9. Fundamental solution Fundamental solution Properties of fundamental solution. Changing the order of integration in (1.5) yields m(r) u(y) = 1 [ r ] ρ 1 n dρ u(x) dx (1.68) where = σ n B r (y) B r (y) (1.69) Γ 0 (r) = x y [Γ 0 (r) Γ 0 ( x y )] u(x) dx, { 1 (2 n)σ n r 2 n, n 2; ln r, n = π Definition The function Γ(x) := Γ 0 ( x ), x 0, is called the fundamental solution of Poisson s equation u = f. (1.70) (1.71) Note that for x 0, D i Γ(x) = Γ(x) = x i σ n x n, D ijγ(x) = 1 n D ii u(x) = 0. i=1 σ n x n ( δ ij nx ) ix j x 2 ; The choice of constants in (1.69) is motivated by the following property. Theorem If u C0 2(Rn ), then (1.72) u(y) = (Γ u)(y) := Γ(y x) u(x) dx for all y R n. R n Proof. For fixed y R n, choose r > 0 large enough, such that u 0 on R n \ B r (y). Then in (1.68) we have m(r) = 0, and also by virtue of (1.3), u Γ 0 (r) u(x) dx = Γ 0 (r) ds = 0. ν B r(y) B r(y) Therefore, the equality (1.68) is reduced to (1.72). Corollary Assume f C 2 0 (Rn )). Then the function u := Γ f belongs to C 2 (R n ), and u = f in R n.
28 28 1. Laplace s Equation Proof. Since f(x) has compact support and Γ(x) is locally integrable in R n, one can differentiate the equality u(y) := Γ f(y) := Γ(x)f(y x) dy twice, which implies D ij u(y) = Γ(x)D ij f(y x) dy =: Γ D ij f(y) C(R n ), R n i.e. u C 2 (R n ). By the previous theorem, u = Γ f = f in R n. R n Green s function. Let be a bounded domain in R n with boundary of class C 1. Then the unit outward normal ν = ν y is well defined at each point y. In this section, we derive a general formula for solutions to the Dirichlet problem (1.73) u = f in, u = g on, where f and g are given functions. For arbitrary u, v C 2 (), by virtue of the divergence theorem, div (udv vdu) dx = (udv vdu) ν ds. We can rewrite this equality in the following form, which is known as the Green s identity: ( (1.74) (u v v u) dx = u v ν v u ) ds. ν In particular, if u = v = 0 on, then (1.75) u v dx = v u dx. Definition Suppose that for each x, there is a function h x = h x (y) C 2 () satisfying y h x (y) = 0 in, h x (y) = Γ(y x) for all y. Then the function (1.76) G(x, y) := Γ(y x) h x (y), x, y. x y, is called the Green s function for the domain. Note that the Green s function G(x, y) satisfies (1.77) y G(x, y) = 0 in \{x}; G(x, y) = 0 for all x, y.
29 1.9. Fundamental solution 29 Theorem If u C 2 (), then (1.78) u(x) = G(x, y) u(y) dy + for all x. G(x, y) u(y) ds y ν y Proof. Fix x and choose a function ζ C0 () such that ζ 1 on B ε (x) for some ε > 0. Then the function u is represented in the form u = u 1 + u 2, where u 1 := ζu C 2 0(), u 1 u on B ε (x); u 2 := (1 ζ)u u near, u 2 0 on B ε (x). By Theorem 1.37, u(x) = u 1 (x) = Γ u 1 (x) := Γ(y x) u 1 (y) dy. Moreover, since u 1 vanishes near, and the function h x is harmonic in, from the Green s identity (1.74) it follows ( h x u 1 dy = u 1 h x dy + h x u 1 ν u h x ) 1 ds = 0. ν This gives us where I 1 := u(x) = G(x, y) u(y), ε G(x, y) u 1 (y) dy = I 1 + I 2, I 2 := G(x, y) u 2 (y). Since u 2 0 on B ε (x) and y G(x, y) = 0 on \ B ε (x), we have I 2 = [u 2 (y) y G(x, y) G(x, y) u 2 (y)] dy ε [ G(x, y) = u 2 (y) G(x, y) u ] 2(y) ds y. ν y ν y The boundary ε consists of the exterior part and the interior part B ε (x). In the last surface integral, the integral function vanishes on B ε (x) together with u 2, and G = 0 on. Therefore, I 2 = G(x, y) u 2 (y) ds y = ν y G(x, y) u(y) ds y, ν y and the representation (1.78) for u(x) = I 1 + I 2 follows.
30 30 1. Laplace s Equation The following theorem states that the Green s function G(x, y) is symmetric in x and y. In particular, this implies that one can interchange x and y in the relations (1.77). Theorem The Green s function G(x, y) satisfies (1.79) G(x, y) = G(y, x) for all x, y, x y. Proof. Fix x, y, x y, and a constant ε (0, x y /2). Let u ε, v ε be functions in C 2 (), such that u ε = G(x, z) on \ B ε (x), v ε = G(y, z) on \ B ε (y). By virtue of (1.78), G(x, y) = u ε (y) = G(y, z) u ε (z) dz. Note that u ε (z) = z G(x, z) = 0 on the set \ B ε (x), which contains the ball B ε (y). Therefore, G(x, y) = v ε (z) u ε (z) dz, and quite similarly, G(y, x) = v ε (x) = G(x, z) v ε (z) dz = u ε (z) v ε (z) dz. Since u ε = v ε = 0 on, the desired equality G(x, y) = G(y, x) now follows from (1.75).
CHAPTER 2. Laplace s equation
18 CHAPTER 2 Laplace s equation There can be but one option as to the beauty and utility of this analysis by Laplace; but the manner in which it has hitherto been presented has seemed repulsive to the
More informationu( x) = g( y) ds y ( 1 ) U solves u = 0 in U; u = 0 on U. ( 3)
M ath 5 2 7 Fall 2 0 0 9 L ecture 4 ( S ep. 6, 2 0 0 9 ) Properties and Estimates of Laplace s and Poisson s Equations In our last lecture we derived the formulas for the solutions of Poisson s equation
More informationSobolev Spaces. Chapter 10
Chapter 1 Sobolev Spaces We now define spaces H 1,p (R n ), known as Sobolev spaces. For u to belong to H 1,p (R n ), we require that u L p (R n ) and that u have weak derivatives of first order in L p
More informationMath The Laplacian. 1 Green s Identities, Fundamental Solution
Math. 209 The Laplacian Green s Identities, Fundamental Solution Let be a bounded open set in R n, n 2, with smooth boundary. The fact that the boundary is smooth means that at each point x the external
More informationSome lecture notes for Math 6050E: PDEs, Fall 2016
Some lecture notes for Math 65E: PDEs, Fall 216 Tianling Jin December 1, 216 1 Variational methods We discuss an example of the use of variational methods in obtaining existence of solutions. Theorem 1.1.
More informationSOLUTION OF POISSON S EQUATION. Contents
SOLUTION OF POISSON S EQUATION CRISTIAN E. GUTIÉRREZ OCTOBER 5, 2013 Contents 1. Differentiation under the integral sign 1 2. The Newtonian potential is C 1 2 3. The Newtonian potential from the 3rd Green
More informationGreen s Functions and Distributions
CHAPTER 9 Green s Functions and Distributions 9.1. Boundary Value Problems We would like to study, and solve if possible, boundary value problems such as the following: (1.1) u = f in U u = g on U, where
More informationPerron method for the Dirichlet problem.
Introduzione alle equazioni alle derivate parziali, Laurea Magistrale in Matematica Perron method for the Dirichlet problem. We approach the question of existence of solution u C (Ω) C(Ω) of the Dirichlet
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.ap] 25 Jul 2012
THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM FOR THE FRACTIONAL LAPLACIAN: REGULARITY UP TO THE BOUNDARY XAVIER ROS-OTON AND JOAQUIM SERRA arxiv:1207.5985v1 [math.ap] 25 Jul 2012 Abstract. We study the regularity up to the boundary
More informationTHE GREEN FUNCTION. Contents
THE GREEN FUNCTION CRISTIAN E. GUTIÉRREZ NOVEMBER 5, 203 Contents. Third Green s formula 2. The Green function 2.. Estimates of the Green function near the pole 2 2.2. Symmetry of the Green function 3
More informationNOTES ON SCHAUDER ESTIMATES. r 2 x y 2
NOTES ON SCHAUDER ESTIMATES CRISTIAN E GUTIÉRREZ JULY 26, 2005 Lemma 1 If u f in B r y), then ux) u + r2 x y 2 B r y) B r y) f, x B r y) Proof Let gx) = ux) Br y) u r2 x y 2 Br y) f We have g = u + Br
More informationPartial Differential Equations
Part II Partial Differential Equations Year 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2015 Paper 4, Section II 29E Partial Differential Equations 72 (a) Show that the Cauchy problem for u(x,
More informationELLIPTIC PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS EXERCISES I (HARMONIC FUNCTIONS)
ELLIPTIC PARTIAL DIFFERENTIAL EQUATIONS EXERCISES I (HARMONIC FUNCTIONS) MATANIA BEN-ARTZI. BOOKS [CH] R. Courant and D. Hilbert, Methods of Mathematical Physics, Vol. Interscience Publ. 962. II, [E] L.
More informationElementary Theory and Methods for Elliptic Partial Differential Equations. John Villavert
Elementary Theory and Methods for Elliptic Partial Differential Equations John Villavert Contents 1 Introduction and Basic Theory 4 1.1 Harmonic Functions............................... 5 1.1.1 Mean Value
More informationHarmonic Functions and Brownian motion
Harmonic Functions and Brownian motion Steven P. Lalley April 25, 211 1 Dynkin s Formula Denote by W t = (W 1 t, W 2 t,..., W d t ) a standard d dimensional Wiener process on (Ω, F, P ), and let F = (F
More informationu xx + u yy = 0. (5.1)
Chapter 5 Laplace Equation The following equation is called Laplace equation in two independent variables x, y: The non-homogeneous problem u xx + u yy =. (5.1) u xx + u yy = F, (5.) where F is a function
More information4 Divergence theorem and its consequences
Tel Aviv University, 205/6 Analysis-IV 65 4 Divergence theorem and its consequences 4a Divergence and flux................. 65 4b Piecewise smooth case............... 67 4c Divergence of gradient: Laplacian........
More informationNotes on Partial Differential Equations. John K. Hunter. Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis
Notes on Partial Differential Equations John K. Hunter Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis Contents Chapter 1. Preliminaries 1 1.1. Euclidean space 1 1.2. Spaces of continuous
More informationElliptic PDEs of 2nd Order, Gilbarg and Trudinger
Elliptic PDEs of 2nd Order, Gilbarg and Trudinger Chapter 2 Laplace Equation Yung-Hsiang Huang 207.07.07. Mimic the proof for Theorem 3.. 2. Proof. I think we should assume u C 2 (Ω Γ). Let W be an open
More informationThe Dirichlet problem for non-divergence parabolic equations with discontinuous in time coefficients in a wedge
The Dirichlet problem for non-divergence parabolic equations with discontinuous in time coefficients in a wedge Vladimir Kozlov (Linköping University, Sweden) 2010 joint work with A.Nazarov Lu t u a ij
More informationv( x) u( y) dy for any r > 0, B r ( x) Ω, or equivalently u( w) ds for any r > 0, B r ( x) Ω, or ( not really) equivalently if v exists, v 0.
Sep. 26 The Perron Method In this lecture we show that one can show existence of solutions using maximum principle alone.. The Perron method. Recall in the last lecture we have shown the existence of solutions
More information2. Function spaces and approximation
2.1 2. Function spaces and approximation 2.1. The space of test functions. Notation and prerequisites are collected in Appendix A. Let Ω be an open subset of R n. The space C0 (Ω), consisting of the C
More informationHARMONIC FUNCTIONS TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR
HARMONIC FUNCTIONS TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR Abstract. In these notes, we explore the fundamental properties of harmonic functions, by using relatively elementary methods. Contents. Introduction 2. Green s identities
More informationGrowth Theorems and Harnack Inequality for Second Order Parabolic Equations
This is an updated version of the paper published in: Contemporary Mathematics, Volume 277, 2001, pp. 87-112. Growth Theorems and Harnack Inequality for Second Order Parabolic Equations E. Ferretti and
More informationSHARP BOUNDARY TRACE INEQUALITIES. 1. Introduction
SHARP BOUNDARY TRACE INEQUALITIES GILES AUCHMUTY Abstract. This paper describes sharp inequalities for the trace of Sobolev functions on the boundary of a bounded region R N. The inequalities bound (semi-)norms
More informationIn this chapter we study elliptical PDEs. That is, PDEs of the form. 2 u = lots,
Chapter 8 Elliptic PDEs In this chapter we study elliptical PDEs. That is, PDEs of the form 2 u = lots, where lots means lower-order terms (u x, u y,..., u, f). Here are some ways to think about the physical
More informationSmall energy regularity for a fractional Ginzburg-Landau system
Small energy regularity for a fractional Ginzburg-Landau system Yannick Sire University Aix-Marseille Work in progress with Vincent Millot (Univ. Paris 7) The fractional Ginzburg-Landau system We are interest
More informationSobolev Spaces. Chapter Hölder spaces
Chapter 2 Sobolev Spaces Sobolev spaces turn out often to be the proper setting in which to apply ideas of functional analysis to get information concerning partial differential equations. Here, we collect
More informationξ,i = x nx i x 3 + δ ni + x n x = 0. x Dξ = x i ξ,i = x nx i x i x 3 Du = λ x λ 2 xh + x λ h Dξ,
1 PDE, HW 3 solutions Problem 1. No. If a sequence of harmonic polynomials on [ 1,1] n converges uniformly to a limit f then f is harmonic. Problem 2. By definition U r U for every r >. Suppose w is a
More informationA CONVEX-CONCAVE ELLIPTIC PROBLEM WITH A PARAMETER ON THE BOUNDARY CONDITION
A CONVEX-CONCAVE ELLIPTIC PROBLEM WITH A PARAMETER ON THE BOUNDARY CONDITION JORGE GARCÍA-MELIÁN, JULIO D. ROSSI AND JOSÉ C. SABINA DE LIS Abstract. In this paper we study existence and multiplicity of
More informationCourse 212: Academic Year Section 1: Metric Spaces
Course 212: Academic Year 1991-2 Section 1: Metric Spaces D. R. Wilkins Contents 1 Metric Spaces 3 1.1 Distance Functions and Metric Spaces............. 3 1.2 Convergence and Continuity in Metric Spaces.........
More informationOblique derivative problems for elliptic and parabolic equations, Lecture II
of the for elliptic and parabolic equations, Lecture II Iowa State University July 22, 2011 of the 1 2 of the of the As a preliminary step in our further we now look at a special situation for elliptic.
More informationTHE DIRICHLET PROBLEM FOR THE LAPLACE OPERATOR
THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM FOR THE LAPLACE OPERATOR Stefano Meda Università di Milano-Bicocca c Stefano Meda 2013 ii A Francesco Contents I The Dirichlet problem via Perron s method 1 1 The classical Dirichlet
More informationTHE DIRICHLET PROBLEM
THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR Abstract. We present here two approaches to the Dirichlet problem: The classical method of subharmonic functions that culminated in the works of Perron and Wiener,
More informationTD M1 EDP 2018 no 2 Elliptic equations: regularity, maximum principle
TD M EDP 08 no Elliptic equations: regularity, maximum principle Estimates in the sup-norm I Let be an open bounded subset of R d of class C. Let A = (a ij ) be a symmetric matrix of functions of class
More informationPHASE TRANSITIONS: REGULARITY OF FLAT LEVEL SETS
PHASE TRANSITIONS: REGULARITY OF FLAT LEVEL SETS OVIDIU SAVIN Abstract. We consider local minimizers of the Ginzburg-Landau energy functional 2 u 2 + 4 ( u2 ) 2 dx and prove that, if the level set is included
More informationis a weak solution with the a ij,b i,c2 C 1 ( )
Thus @u @x i PDE 69 is a weak solution with the RHS @f @x i L. Thus u W 3, loc (). Iterating further, and using a generalized Sobolev imbedding gives that u is smooth. Theorem 3.33 (Local smoothness).
More informationTraces, extensions and co-normal derivatives for elliptic systems on Lipschitz domains
Traces, extensions and co-normal derivatives for elliptic systems on Lipschitz domains Sergey E. Mikhailov Brunel University West London, Department of Mathematics, Uxbridge, UB8 3PH, UK J. Math. Analysis
More informationTHE TWO-PHASE MEMBRANE PROBLEM REGULARITY OF THE FREE BOUNDARIES IN HIGHER DIMENSIONS. 1. Introduction
THE TWO-PHASE MEMBRANE PROBLEM REGULARITY OF THE FREE BOUNDARIES IN HIGHER DIMENSIONS HENRIK SHAHGHOLIAN, NINA URALTSEVA, AND GEORG S. WEISS Abstract. For the two-phase membrane problem u = λ + χ {u>0}
More information1. Introduction Boundary estimates for the second derivatives of the solution to the Dirichlet problem for the Monge-Ampere equation
POINTWISE C 2,α ESTIMATES AT THE BOUNDARY FOR THE MONGE-AMPERE EQUATION O. SAVIN Abstract. We prove a localization property of boundary sections for solutions to the Monge-Ampere equation. As a consequence
More informationPOTENTIAL THEORY OF QUASIMINIMIZERS
Annales Academiæ Scientiarum Fennicæ Mathematica Volumen 28, 2003, 459 490 POTENTIAL THEORY OF QUASIMINIMIZERS Juha Kinnunen and Olli Martio Institute of Mathematics, P.O. Box 1100 FI-02015 Helsinki University
More informationNotes on Partial Differential Equations. John K. Hunter. Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis
Notes on Partial Differential Equations John K. Hunter Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis Abstract. These are notes from a two-quarter class on PDEs that are heavily based on
More informationIntegral Representation Formula, Boundary Integral Operators and Calderón projection
Integral Representation Formula, Boundary Integral Operators and Calderón projection Seminar BEM on Wave Scattering Franziska Weber ETH Zürich October 22, 2010 Outline Integral Representation Formula Newton
More informationRegularity for Poisson Equation
Regularity for Poisson Equation OcMountain Daylight Time. 4, 20 Intuitively, the solution u to the Poisson equation u= f () should have better regularity than the right hand side f. In particular one expects
More information2) Let X be a compact space. Prove that the space C(X) of continuous real-valued functions is a complete metric space.
University of Bergen General Functional Analysis Problems with solutions 6 ) Prove that is unique in any normed space. Solution of ) Let us suppose that there are 2 zeros and 2. Then = + 2 = 2 + = 2. 2)
More informationConvex solutions to the mean curvature flow
Annals of Mathematics 173 (2011), 1185 1239 doi: 10.4007/annals.2011.173.3.1 Convex solutions to the mean curvature flow By Xu-Jia Wang Abstract In this paper we study the classification of ancient convex
More informationVISCOSITY SOLUTIONS. We follow Han and Lin, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations, 5.
VISCOSITY SOLUTIONS PETER HINTZ We follow Han and Lin, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations, 5. 1. Motivation Throughout, we will assume that Ω R n is a bounded and connected domain and that a ij C(Ω)
More informationQuantitative Homogenization of Elliptic Operators with Periodic Coefficients
Quantitative Homogenization of Elliptic Operators with Periodic Coefficients Zhongwei Shen Abstract. These lecture notes introduce the quantitative homogenization theory for elliptic partial differential
More informationREGULARITY FOR INFINITY HARMONIC FUNCTIONS IN TWO DIMENSIONS
C,α REGULARITY FOR INFINITY HARMONIC FUNCTIONS IN TWO DIMENSIONS LAWRENCE C. EVANS AND OVIDIU SAVIN Abstract. We propose a new method for showing C,α regularity for solutions of the infinity Laplacian
More informationHESSIAN MEASURES III. Centre for Mathematics and Its Applications Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia
HESSIAN MEASURES III Neil S. Trudinger Xu-Jia Wang Centre for Mathematics and Its Applications Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia 1 HESSIAN MEASURES III Neil S. Trudinger Xu-Jia
More informationMATH COURSE NOTES - CLASS MEETING # Introduction to PDEs, Spring 2018 Professor: Jared Speck
MATH 8.52 COURSE NOTES - CLASS MEETING # 6 8.52 Introduction to PDEs, Spring 208 Professor: Jared Speck Class Meeting # 6: Laplace s and Poisson s Equations We will now study the Laplace and Poisson equations
More informationRegularity of flat level sets in phase transitions
Annals of Mathematics, 69 (2009), 4 78 Regularity of flat level sets in phase transitions By Ovidiu Savin Abstract We consider local minimizers of the Ginzburg-Landau energy functional 2 u 2 + 4 ( u2 )
More informationThe infinity-laplacian and its properties
U.U.D.M. Project Report 2017:40 Julia Landström Examensarbete i matematik, 15 hp Handledare: Kaj Nyström Examinator: Martin Herschend December 2017 Department of Mathematics Uppsala University Department
More informationRegularity of the obstacle problem for a fractional power of the laplace operator
Regularity of the obstacle problem for a fractional power of the laplace operator Luis E. Silvestre February 24, 2005 Abstract Given a function ϕ and s (0, 1), we will stu the solutions of the following
More informationRegularity estimates for the solution and the free boundary of the obstacle problem for the fractional Laplacian
Regularity estimates for the solution and the free boundary of the obstacle problem for the fractional Laplacian Luis Caffarelli, Sandro Salsa and Luis Silvestre October 15, 2007 Abstract We use a characterization
More information1/12/05: sec 3.1 and my article: How good is the Lebesgue measure?, Math. Intelligencer 11(2) (1989),
Real Analysis 2, Math 651, Spring 2005 April 26, 2005 1 Real Analysis 2, Math 651, Spring 2005 Krzysztof Chris Ciesielski 1/12/05: sec 3.1 and my article: How good is the Lebesgue measure?, Math. Intelligencer
More informationarxiv: v3 [math.ap] 20 Jun 2017
ON A LONG RANGE SEGREGATION MODEL L. CAFFARELLI, S. PATRIZI, AND V. QUITALO arxiv:1505.05433v3 [math.ap] 20 Jun 2017 Abstract. In this work we study the properties of segregation processes modeled by a
More informationTHE DIRICHLET PROBLEM WITH BM O BOUNDARY DATA AND ALMOST-REAL COEFFICIENTS
THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM WITH BM O BOUNDARY DATA AND ALMOST-REAL COEFFICIENTS ARIEL BARTON Abstract. It is known that a function, harmonic in a Lipschitz domain, is the Poisson extension of a BMO function
More informationSOLUTION OF THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM WITH A VARIATIONAL METHOD. 1. Dirichlet integral
SOLUTION OF THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM WITH A VARIATIONAL METHOD CRISTIAN E. GUTIÉRREZ FEBRUARY 3, 29. Dirichlet integral Let f C( ) with open and bounded. Let H = {u C ( ) : u = f on } and D(u) = Du(x) 2 dx.
More informationHarmonic Functions and Brownian Motion in Several Dimensions
Harmonic Functions and Brownian Motion in Several Dimensions Steven P. Lalley October 11, 2016 1 d -Dimensional Brownian Motion Definition 1. A standard d dimensional Brownian motion is an R d valued continuous-time
More information2 A Model, Harmonic Map, Problem
ELLIPTIC SYSTEMS JOHN E. HUTCHINSON Department of Mathematics School of Mathematical Sciences, A.N.U. 1 Introduction Elliptic equations model the behaviour of scalar quantities u, such as temperature or
More informationBoot camp - Problem set
Boot camp - Problem set Luis Silvestre September 29, 2017 In the summer of 2017, I led an intensive study group with four undergraduate students at the University of Chicago (Matthew Correia, David Lind,
More informationANALYSIS QUALIFYING EXAM FALL 2017: SOLUTIONS. 1 cos(nx) lim. n 2 x 2. g n (x) = 1 cos(nx) n 2 x 2. x 2.
ANALYSIS QUALIFYING EXAM FALL 27: SOLUTIONS Problem. Determine, with justification, the it cos(nx) n 2 x 2 dx. Solution. For an integer n >, define g n : (, ) R by Also define g : (, ) R by g(x) = g n
More informationHartogs Theorem: separate analyticity implies joint Paul Garrett garrett/
(February 9, 25) Hartogs Theorem: separate analyticity implies joint Paul Garrett garrett@math.umn.edu http://www.math.umn.edu/ garrett/ (The present proof of this old result roughly follows the proof
More informationWe denote the space of distributions on Ω by D ( Ω) 2.
Sep. 1 0, 008 Distributions Distributions are generalized functions. Some familiarity with the theory of distributions helps understanding of various function spaces which play important roles in the study
More informationThe Helmholtz Equation
The Helmholtz Equation Seminar BEM on Wave Scattering Rene Rühr ETH Zürich October 28, 2010 Outline Steklov-Poincare Operator Helmholtz Equation: From the Wave equation to Radiation condition Uniqueness
More informationNonlinear aspects of Calderón-Zygmund theory
Ancona, June 7 2011 Overture: The standard CZ theory Consider the model case u = f in R n Overture: The standard CZ theory Consider the model case u = f in R n Then f L q implies D 2 u L q 1 < q < with
More informationTHE L 2 -HODGE THEORY AND REPRESENTATION ON R n
THE L 2 -HODGE THEORY AND REPRESENTATION ON R n BAISHENG YAN Abstract. We present an elementary L 2 -Hodge theory on whole R n based on the minimization principle of the calculus of variations and some
More informationImmerse Metric Space Homework
Immerse Metric Space Homework (Exercises -2). In R n, define d(x, y) = x y +... + x n y n. Show that d is a metric that induces the usual topology. Sketch the basis elements when n = 2. Solution: Steps
More informationThe Mollifier Theorem
The Mollifier Theorem Definition of the Mollifier The function Tx Kexp 1 if x 1 2 1 x 0 if x 1, x R n where the constant K is chosen such that R n Txdx 1, is a test function on Rn. Note that Tx vanishes,
More informationVISCOSITY SOLUTIONS OF ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS
VISCOSITY SOLUTIONS OF ELLIPTIC EQUATIONS LUIS SILVESTRE These are the notes from the summer course given in the Second Chicago Summer School In Analysis, in June 2015. We introduce the notion of viscosity
More informationThe continuity method
The continuity method The method of continuity is used in conjunction with a priori estimates to prove the existence of suitably regular solutions to elliptic partial differential equations. One crucial
More informationThe uniformization theorem
1 The uniformization theorem Thurston s basic insight in all four of the theorems discussed in this book is that either the topology of the problem induces an appropriate geometry or there is an understandable
More informationMATH COURSE NOTES - CLASS MEETING # Introduction to PDEs, Fall 2011 Professor: Jared Speck
MATH 8.52 COURSE NOTES - CLASS MEETING # 6 8.52 Introduction to PDEs, Fall 20 Professor: Jared Speck Class Meeting # 6: Laplace s and Poisson s Equations We will now study the Laplace and Poisson equations
More informationHARMONIC FUNCTIONS TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR
HARMONIC FUNCTIONS TSOGTGEREL GANTUMUR Abstract. In these notes, we explore the fundamental properties of harmonic functions, by using relatively elementary methods. Contents. Introduction 2. Green s identities
More informationMINIMAL GRAPHS PART I: EXISTENCE OF LIPSCHITZ WEAK SOLUTIONS TO THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM WITH C 2 BOUNDARY DATA
MINIMAL GRAPHS PART I: EXISTENCE OF LIPSCHITZ WEAK SOLUTIONS TO THE DIRICHLET PROBLEM WITH C 2 BOUNDARY DATA SPENCER HUGHES In these notes we prove that for any given smooth function on the boundary of
More informationPartial Differential Equations. William G. Faris
Partial Differential Equations William G. Faris May 17, 1999 Contents 1 The Laplace equation 5 1.1 Gradient and divergence....................... 5 1.2 Equilibrium conservation laws....................
More informationGLOBAL LIPSCHITZ CONTINUITY FOR MINIMA OF DEGENERATE PROBLEMS
GLOBAL LIPSCHITZ CONTINUITY FOR MINIMA OF DEGENERATE PROBLEMS PIERRE BOUSQUET AND LORENZO BRASCO Abstract. We consider the problem of minimizing the Lagrangian [F ( u+f u among functions on R N with given
More informationPERTURBATION THEORY FOR NONLINEAR DIRICHLET PROBLEMS
Annales Academiæ Scientiarum Fennicæ Mathematica Volumen 28, 2003, 207 222 PERTURBATION THEORY FOR NONLINEAR DIRICHLET PROBLEMS Fumi-Yuki Maeda and Takayori Ono Hiroshima Institute of Technology, Miyake,
More informationComm. Nonlin. Sci. and Numer. Simul., 12, (2007),
Comm. Nonlin. Sci. and Numer. Simul., 12, (2007), 1390-1394. 1 A Schrödinger singular perturbation problem A.G. Ramm Mathematics Department, Kansas State University, Manhattan, KS 66506-2602, USA ramm@math.ksu.edu
More informationCentre for Mathematics and Its Applications The Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia. 1. Introduction
ON LOCALLY CONVEX HYPERSURFACES WITH BOUNDARY Neil S. Trudinger Xu-Jia Wang Centre for Mathematics and Its Applications The Australian National University Canberra, ACT 0200 Australia Abstract. In this
More informationObstacle Problems Involving The Fractional Laplacian
Obstacle Problems Involving The Fractional Laplacian Donatella Danielli and Sandro Salsa January 27, 2017 1 Introduction Obstacle problems involving a fractional power of the Laplace operator appear in
More informationHOW TO APPROXIMATE THE HEAT EQUATION WITH NEUMANN BOUNDARY CONDITIONS BY NONLOCAL DIFFUSION PROBLEMS. 1. Introduction
HOW TO APPROXIMATE THE HEAT EQUATION WITH NEUMANN BOUNDARY CONDITIONS BY NONLOCAL DIFFUSION PROBLEMS CARMEN CORTAZAR, MANUEL ELGUETA, ULIO D. ROSSI, AND NOEMI WOLANSKI Abstract. We present a model for
More informationAnalysis Finite and Infinite Sets The Real Numbers The Cantor Set
Analysis Finite and Infinite Sets Definition. An initial segment is {n N n n 0 }. Definition. A finite set can be put into one-to-one correspondence with an initial segment. The empty set is also considered
More informationMoscow, Russia; National Research University Higher School of Economics, Moscow, Russia
Differentiability of solutions of stationary Fokker Planck Kolmogorov equations with respect to a parameter Vladimir I. Bogachev 1, Stanislav V. Shaposhnikov 2, and Alexander Yu. Veretennikov 3 1,2 Department
More informationReal Analysis Math 131AH Rudin, Chapter #1. Dominique Abdi
Real Analysis Math 3AH Rudin, Chapter # Dominique Abdi.. If r is rational (r 0) and x is irrational, prove that r + x and rx are irrational. Solution. Assume the contrary, that r+x and rx are rational.
More informationS chauder Theory. x 2. = log( x 1 + x 2 ) + 1 ( x 1 + x 2 ) 2. ( 5) x 1 + x 2 x 1 + x 2. 2 = 2 x 1. x 1 x 2. 1 x 1.
Sep. 1 9 Intuitively, the solution u to the Poisson equation S chauder Theory u = f 1 should have better regularity than the right hand side f. In particular one expects u to be twice more differentiable
More informationBehavior of space periodic laminar flames near the extinction point
Behavior of space periodic laminar flames near the extinction point Sunhi Choi Abstract In this paper we study a free boundary problem, arising from a model for the propagation of laminar flames. Consider
More informationBOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEMS ON A HALF SIERPINSKI GASKET
BOUNDARY VALUE PROBLEMS ON A HALF SIERPINSKI GASKET WEILIN LI AND ROBERT S. STRICHARTZ Abstract. We study boundary value problems for the Laplacian on a domain Ω consisting of the left half of the Sierpinski
More informationEXPOSITORY NOTES ON DISTRIBUTION THEORY, FALL 2018
EXPOSITORY NOTES ON DISTRIBUTION THEORY, FALL 2018 While these notes are under construction, I expect there will be many typos. The main reference for this is volume 1 of Hörmander, The analysis of liner
More informationAPPLICATIONS OF DIFFERENTIABILITY IN R n.
APPLICATIONS OF DIFFERENTIABILITY IN R n. MATANIA BEN-ARTZI April 2015 Functions here are defined on a subset T R n and take values in R m, where m can be smaller, equal or greater than n. The (open) ball
More informationExistence of minimizers for the Newton s problem of the body of minimal resistance under a single impact assumption
Existence of minimizers for the Newton s problem of the body of minimal resistance under a single impact assumption M. Comte T. Lachand-Robert 30th September 999 Abstract We prove that the infimum of the
More information1 Directional Derivatives and Differentiability
Wednesday, January 18, 2012 1 Directional Derivatives and Differentiability Let E R N, let f : E R and let x 0 E. Given a direction v R N, let L be the line through x 0 in the direction v, that is, L :=
More informationEverywhere differentiability of infinity harmonic functions
Everywhere differentiability of infinity harmonic functions Lawrence C. Evans and Charles K. Smart Department of Mathematics University of California, Berkeley Abstract We show that an infinity harmonic
More informationNon-divergence Elliptic Equations of Second Order with Unbounded Drift
Unspecified Boo Proceedings Series Dedicated to Nina N. Ural tseva Non-divergence Elliptic Equations of Second Order with Unbounded Drift M. V. Safonov Abstract. We consider uniformly elliptic equations
More information= 2 x x 2 n It was introduced by P.-S.Laplace in a 1784 paper in connection with gravitational
Lecture 1, 9/8/2010 The Laplace operator in R n is = 2 x 2 + + 2 1 x 2 n It was introduced by P.-S.Laplace in a 1784 paper in connection with gravitational potentials. Recall that if we have masses M 1,...,
More informationRemarks on the Gauss-Green Theorem. Michael Taylor
Remarks on the Gauss-Green Theorem Michael Taylor Abstract. These notes cover material related to the Gauss-Green theorem that was developed for work with S. Hofmann and M. Mitrea, which appeared in [HMT].
More informationSubharmonic functions
Subharmonic functions N.A. 07 Upper semicontinuous functions. Let (X, d) be a metric space. A function f : X R { } is upper semicontinuous (u.s.c.) if lim inf f(y) f(x) x X. y x A function g is lower semicontinuous
More informationPerturbation of the Laplace operator
Perturbation of the Laplace operator WOLFHARD HANSEN Prague, November 2009 Contents 1 Introduction 1 2 Kato measures, potential kernels, and ( µ)-harmonic functions 3 3 Dominant functions and resolvents
More informationMath 4263 Homework Set 1
Homework Set 1 1. Solve the following PDE/BVP 2. Solve the following PDE/BVP 2u t + 3u x = 0 u (x, 0) = sin (x) u x + e x u y = 0 u (0, y) = y 2 3. (a) Find the curves γ : t (x (t), y (t)) such that that
More information