arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 22 Dec 2018 ZHENAN SUI

Transcription

1 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE AND BOUNDARY IN HYPERBOLIC SPACE arxiv: v1 [math.dg] 22 Dec 2018 ZHENAN SUI Abstract. The existence of a smooth complete strictly locally convex hypersurface with prescribed Gauss curvature and asymptotic boundary at infinity in H 3, or with prescribed curvature and boundary in H n+1 is proved under the assumption of an admissible subsolution. 1. Introduction In this paper, we study the existence of complete strictly locally convex hypersurfacesofprescribedcurvatureinhyperbolicspaceh n+1 with aprescribedasymptotic boundary at infinity. We use the half-space model H n+1 = {x,x n+1 R n+1 x = x 1,...,x n R n, x n+1 > 0} where the hyperbolic metric is given by ds 2 = 1 x 2 n+1 n+1 and the ideal boundary of H n+1 at infinity is naturally identified with i=1 dx 2 i H n+1 := R n = R n {0} R n+1 Given a disjoint collection Γ = {Γ 1,...,Γ m } of smooth closed embedded n 1 dimensionalsubmanifoldsof H n+1, asmoothsymmetricfunction f ofnvariables and a positive function ψ C H n+1 C 0 H n+1 H n+1, we seek a complete hypersurface Σ in H n+1 with the prescribed curvature 1.1 fκ[σ] = ψx and the asymptotic boundary 1.2 Σ = Γ where x is the position vector field on Σ and κ[σ] = κ 1,...,κ n are the hyperbolic principal curvatures of Σ at x. In this paper, all hypersurfaces we are concerned are assumed to be connected and orientable. As in [6], the curvature function f is defined on the open symmetric convex cone Γ + n {λ R n λ i > 0,i = 1,...,n} and satisfies the fundamental structure conditions 1.3 f i λ fλ λ i > 0 in Γ + n, i = 1,...,n 1.4 f is concave in Γ + n 1

2 2 ZHENAN SUI 1.5 f > 0 in Γ + n, f = 0 on Γ+ n In addition, f satisfies the technical conditions 1.6 fi λλ i c 0 on {λ Γ + n ψ 0 fλ ψ 1 } for any ψ 1 ψ 0 > 0, where c 0 = c 0 ψ 0, ψ 1 > 0 is a constant, and for any C > 0 and any compact set E Γ + n, there exists R = RE,C > 0 such that 1.7 fλ 1,...,λ n 1,λ n +R C, λ E The functions f satisfying include a large family see [6]. In particular, f can be σ 1/n n λ 1,...,λ n = λ 1 λ n 1 n However, the pure curvature quotient σ n /σ k 1/n k does not satisfy 1.7 where σ k is the kth elementary symmetric function. In this paper, we focus on finding complete hypersurfaces Σ satisfying with positive hyperbolic principal curvatures everywhere. We call such hypersurfaces strictly locally convex. We will see from Lemma 2.5 that a strictly locally convex hypersurface in H n+1 with compact asymptotic boundary must be a vertical graph over a bounded domain in R n and let its normal vector field points upward. Now we write Σ = {x, ux R n+1 + x Ω} where Ω is the bounded domain on H n+1 = R n enclosed by Γ. Consequently, can be expressed in terms of u, 1.8 fκ[u] = ψx, u u = 0 and we are interested in solutions which belong to in Ω on Γ AΩ = {u C 2 Ω C 0 Ω u > 0 in Ω and κ[u]x Γ + n for any x Ω} As in [15], elements of AΩ are called admissible functions. To solve the Dirichlet problem 1.8, we assume the existence of an admissible subsolution u, i.e, 1.9 fκ[u] ψx, u u = 0 in Ω on Γ When ψ is a positive constant, problem 1.8 was discussed in [9, 7, 8, 10] under slightly different assumptions of f and without the subsolution assumption 1.9. The case for general ψ was studied by Szapiel [15] under a strong assumption on f see 1.11 in [15]. Note that equation 1.8 is singular where u = 0. In all the mentioned papers, the authors consider the approximating Dirichlet problem fκ[u] = ψx, u u = ǫ in Ω on Γ In this paper, we take a different approximating Dirichlet problem by considering the ǫ-level set of u. Define Γ ǫ = {x Ω ux = ǫ} and Ωǫ = {x Ω ux > ǫ}

3 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 3 WemayassumetheHausdorffdimensionofΓ ǫ isn 1bySard stheorem. Consider 1.10 fκ[u] = ψx, u u = ǫ Admissible functions on Ω ǫ are defined as in Ω ǫ on Γ ǫ AΩ ǫ = {u C 2 Ω ǫ u > 0 in Ω ǫ and κ[u]x Γ + n for any x Ω ǫ} For radial graphs, existence results for Dirichlet problem similar to 1.10 are established in [14] by using the spherical model of hyperbolic space, which, motivates the following theorem regarding vertical graphs. Theorem Under assumption and 1.9, there exists an admissible solution u ǫ C Ω ǫ to the Dirichlet problem 1.10 with u ǫ u in Ω ǫ. In order to solve 1.8, we need to provide certain uniform C 2 bound for u ǫ. With a recent work of Guan-Qiu [11], we are able to derive interior C 2 estimates for the case when f = σ 1/2 2 and hence we confine ourselves in H 3, which, together with Evans-Krylov interior estimates see [3, 12] and standard diagonal process, lead to the following existence result. Theorem In H 3 and for f = σ 1/2 2, assuming 1.9, then there exists an admissible solution u C Ω C 0 Ω to 1.8, equivalently, there exists a smooth complete strictly locally convex vertical graph in H 3 solving This paper is organized as follows: in section 2, we provide some basic formula, properties and calculations. The proof for existence of admissible solutions to the Dirichlet problem 1.10 is presented in section 3, and the interior C 2 estimates for f = σ 1/2 2 in H 3 is derived in section Vertical graphs Suppose Σ is locally represented as the graph of a positive C 2 function over a domain Ω R n : Σ = {x, ux R n+1 + x Ω} Since the coordinate vector fields on Σ are i +u i n+1, i = 1,...,n where i = x i thus the upward Euclidean unit normal vector field to Σ, the Euclidean metric, its inverse and the Euclidean second fundamental form of Σ are given respectively by ν = Du w, 1 w, w = 1+ Du 2 g ij = δ ij +u i u j, g ij = δ ij u iu j w 2, hij = u ij w Consequently, the Euclidean principal curvatures κ[σ] are the eigenvalues of the symmetric matrix: ã ij := 1 w γik u kl γ lj

4 4 ZHENAN SUI where γ ik = δ ik u iu k w1+w and its inverse γ ik = δ ik + u iu k 1+w, γ ikγ kj = g ij For geometric quantities in hyperbolic space, we first note that the upward hyperbolic unit normal vector field to Σ is Du n = uν = u w, 1 w and the hyperbolic metric of Σ is g ij = 1 u 2 δ ij +u i u j To compute the hyperbolic second fundamental form h ij of Σ, apply the Christoffel symbols in H n+1, Γ k ij = 1 x n+1 δik δ n+1j δ kj δ n+1i +δ kn+1 δ ij to obtain D i+u i n+1 j +u j n+1 = u j x n+1 i u i x n+1 j + δij +u ij u iu j n+1 x n+1 x n+1 where D denotes the Levi-Civita connection in H n+1. Therefore, h ij = 1 u 2 w δ ij +u i u j +uu ij The hyperbolic principal curvatures κ[σ] are the eigenvalues of the symmetric matrix A[u] = {a ij }: a ij = u 2 γ ik h kl γ lj = 1 w γik δ kl +u k u l +uu kl γ lj = 1 w δ ij +uγ ik u kl γ lj Remark 2.1. The graph of u is strictly locally convex if and only if the symmetric matrix {a ij }, {h ij } or {δ ij +u i u j +uu ij } is positive definite. Remark 2.2. From the above discussion, we can see that 2.3 h ij = 1 u h ij + νn+1 u 2 g ij This formula indeed holds for any local frames and for any hypersurfaces which may not be vertical graphs. The relation between κ[σ] and κ[σ] is 2.4 κ i = u κ i +ν n+1, i = 1,...,n We first notice a simple fact for strictly locally convex hypersurfaces in H n+1. Lemma 2.5. Let Σ be a connected, orientable, strictly locally convex hypersurface in H n+1. Then Σ must be a vertical graph if the orientation is specially chosen. Proof. Suppose Σ is not a vertical graph. Then there exists a vertical line of dimension 1 intersecting Σ at two different points p 1 and p 2. Since Σ is orientable, we may assume that ν n+1 p 1 ν n+1 p 2 0. Since Σ is connected, there exists a 1-dimensional curve γ on Σ connecting p 1 and p 2. Among the tangent hyperplanes of dimension n to Σ along γ, choose a vertical one which is tangent to Σ at a point p 3. At p 3, ν n+1 = 0 and u > 0. By 2.4, κ i > 0 for all i at p 3. On the other

5 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 5 hand, let P be a 2-dimensional plane passing through p 1, p 2 and p 3. If P Σ is 1- dimensional and has nonpositive Euclidean curvature at p 3 with respect to ν, we reach a contradiction; otherwise we take a different orientation of Σ, then Σ is either not strictly locally convex or we reach a contradiction. If P Σ is 2-dimensional, then any line on P Σ passing through p 3 leads to a contradiction. Our concerned equation can be written as 2.6 fκ[u] = fλa[u] = FA[u] = ψx, u We first give a type of maximum principle, which originally appears in [15]. Lemma 2.7. Let Ω Ω be a domain and u, v AΩ. Assume that fκ[v] < fκ[u] in Ω. If u v has a local maximum at x 0 Ω, then ux 0 vx 0. Proof. Prove by contradiction. Suppose that ux 0 = vx 0. We also know that Dux 0 = Dvx 0 and D 2 ux 0 D 2 vx 0. Therefore at x 0, A[u] = 1 w δij +uγ ik u kl γ lj 1 w δij +vγ ik v kl γ lj = A[v] Consequently, fκ[u]x 0 fκ[v]x 0 contradiction. For σ 0, 1, following the notations in [7], let B 0 = B R b be a ball in R n+1 of radius R centered at b = b, σr and S 0 = B 0 H n+1. Then κ i [S 0 ] = σ for all i with respect to its inward normal by 2.4. Using these barriers, we have the following lemma. The proof is slightly different from [7, 15]. Lemma 2.8. Let Σ be a strictly locally convex hypersurface in H n+1 satisfying fκ[σ] > fσ,...,σ with asymptotic boundary Σ Pc := {x n+1 = c} where c 0. Let Ω be the bounded domain in R n {0} such that its vertical lift Ωc to Pc is bounded by Σ. Assume b / Ω and distb, Ω > c σ. If B 0 Ωc =, then B 0 Σ =. Proof. Note that Σ can be representedas the graph ofu. Suppose that B 0 Ωc = and B 0 Σ. Decrease R until B 0 Σ =. Then increase R until B 0 first touches Σ at some point x 0, ux 0 where x 0 Ω. Note that x 0, ux 0 can not lie on the upper half of S 0, neither can x 0, ux 0 lie on the equator of S 0, since otherwise at x 0, ux 0, ν n+1 [Σ] = 0 and by 2.4 κ i [Σ] > 0 for all i, which leads to a contradiction. Then S 0 can be locally represented as a graph of some C 2 function v in a neighborhood Ω x0 Ω of x 0, which is on top of u. However, this can not happen by Lemma Proof of Theorem 1.11 In this section we derive the a priori C 2 estimates for admissible solutions u to the Dirichlet problem 1.10 with u u in Ω ǫ. By Evans-Krylov theory [3, 12], classical continuity method and the degree theory see [13] we prove the existence of an admissible solution to Higher-order regularity then follows by classical Schauder theory.

6 6 ZHENAN SUI 3.1. C 0 estimates. Lemma 3.1. Let u u be an admissible function over Ω ǫ with u = u on Γ ǫ. Then u satisfies 3.2 u u ǫ 2 +diamω 2 in Ω ǫ Proof. In view of Remark 2.1, for any x 0 Ω ǫ, the function u 2 + x x 0 2 is Euclidean strictly locally convex in Ω ǫ, over which, 3.2. C 1 estimates. u 2 u 2 + x x 0 2 max Γ ǫ u 2 + x x 0 2 ǫ 2 +diamω 2 Lemma 3.3. Let u u be an admissible function over Ω ǫ with u = u on Γ ǫ. Then 1 1 max 1+ Du 2 max{ max Ω ǫ Γ ǫ ν n+1, ǫ max u} Ω ǫ Proof. The proof can be found in [8]. For readers convenience, we present it. Consider the test function u ν n+1 = u 1+ Du 2 and assume its maximum is achieved at an interior point x 0 Ω ǫ. Then at x 0, or equivalently, u i 1+ Du 2 +uu k u ki = 0 u k δ ki +u i u k +uu ki = 0 Since the matrix δ ki +u i u k +uu ki is positive definite, thus u k = 0 for all k at x 0. Consequently on Ω ǫ, 3.4 ǫ 1+ Du 2 u 1+ Du 2 u 1+ Du 2 max{ǫ max ν 1 Γ ǫ n+1, max Ω ǫ u} Because of Lemma 3.1, we may assume ψ > fσ,...,σ for some small positive constant σ 0,1. Let r 0 and r0 ǫ be the maximal radii of exterior spheres to Γ and Γ ǫ respectively. Note that lim ǫ 0 ǫ r ǫ 0 = 0 r 0 = 0 We have the following Lemma for the boundary gradient estimates see also [7] for the proof. Lemma 3.5. Assume ǫ is sufficiently small such that 0 < ǫ < r0 ǫ σ. Then any admissible solution u u to 1.10 satisfies 1 ν n+1 < σ 1 σ 2 r ǫ 0 ǫ 1+σ r ǫ 0 2 ǫ2 1 on Γ ǫ Here ǫ is assumed to be sufficiently small such that the right hand side is positive.

7 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 7 Proof. We may assume r0 ǫ <, for otherwise we can choose any positive value for r0. ǫ For any fixed point x 0 Γ ǫ, let e n be the unit interior normal vector to Γ ǫ at x 0. Consider the ball B 0 with center b = x 0 r0 ǫe n, σr and radius R satisfying which yields, 1 R = σǫ+ σr ǫ 2 +r ǫ 0 2 = R 2 ǫ2 +r ǫ 0 2 r ǫ 0 2 σ 2 ǫ 2 +r ǫ 0 2 < σǫ+ǫ+ r ǫ σ 2 r0 ǫ2 Obviously, B 0 Pǫ is an n-ball of radius r0 ǫ externally tangent to the vertical lift of Γ ǫ onto Pǫ at x 0,ǫ. By Lemma 2.8, B 0 Σ =. Hence, ν n+1 > σr ǫ R = σ ǫ R > σ 1 σ 2 r ǫ 0 ǫ 1+σ r ǫ 0 2 ǫ Second order boundary estimates. We consider the transformation u = v. Denote W = 4v + Dv 2. Then the geometric quantities in section 2 can be expressed in terms of v, γ ik v i v k = δ ik W2 v +W, γ v i v k ik = δ ik + 2 v2 v +W h ij = 2 δij + 1 vw 2 v ij, aij = 2 v W γik δ kl v kl γ lj and equation 2.6 can be written as 3.6 GD 2 v, Dv,v = Fa ij = fλa ij = ψx, v We have the following calculations. Lemma 3.7. In addition, G st = G v = v st W Fij γ is γ tj G v = G v = 1 2v 2 F ij W 2 a ij + v iv q W 2 v Fij a qj vγ qs v i G s = G = v s v s W 2Fij a ij Wγis v q +2 F ij a qj vw2 v +W G s C and G v C where C depends on ǫ. Hereafter in this section, without explicit indication, all constants depend on ǫ. Proof. Since 2 v GD 2 v,dv,v = F W γik δ kl v kl γ lj By direct computation, G st = F a ij v = a ij v st W Fij γ is γ tj

8 8 ZHENAN SUI To compute G v, note that and consequently, Hence, Since G v =F ij v we obtain G v. For G s, note that W v = 2 W, γ ik v = v iv k 4v 3/2 W γ ik v = v p v q γip 4v 3/2 W γqk 2 v γ ik δ kl + 1 W 2 v klγ lj + 4 v γ ik W v δ kl v klγ lj = 1 2v 2 W 2 F ij a ij + γip v p v q 2v 3/2 W Fij a qj W v s = v s W, γ ip v p = 2 vv i W γ ik v s = γ ip γ pq v s γ qk γ pq = δ psv q +δ qs v p v s 2 v2 v +W v p v q v s 2 v2 v +W 2 W = δ psv q +v p γ qs 2 v2 v +W It follows that G s =F ij 2 vv s W 3 γik δ kl v klγ lj + 4 v γ ik δ kl + 1 W v s 2 v klγ lj = v s W 2Fij a ij Wγis v q +2 vγ qs v i F ij a qj vw2 v +W For an arbitrary point on Γ ǫ, we may assume it to be the origin of R n. Choose a coordinate system so that the positive x n axis points to the interior normal of Γ ǫ at the origin. There exists a uniform constant r > 0 such that Γ ǫ B r 0 can be represented as a graph x n = ρx = 1 B αβ x α x β +O x 3, x = x 1,...,x n 1 2 Since or equivalently it follows that α,β<n v = ǫ 2 on Γ ǫ vx,ρx = ǫ v α +v n ρ α = 0 and Therefore v αβ +v αn ρ β +v nβ +v nn ρ β ρ α +v n ρ αβ = 0 v αβ 0 = v n 0ρ αβ 0, α,β < n

9 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 9 Consequently, 3.9 v αβ 0 C α,β < n where C is a positive constant depending on Dv0. Hereinafter, C represents a positive constant which may depend on v C1 Ω ǫ. For the mixed tangential-normal derivative v αn 0 with α < n. Note that the graph of u is strictly locally convex, hence we have I D2 v 3c 0 I for some positive constant c 0, where v = u 2. Let dx be the distance from x Ω ǫ to Γ ǫ in R n. Consider the barrier function with Ψ = AV +B x 2 V = v v +τd Nd 2 Define the linear operator L := G st D st + G s D s. By the concavity of G with respect to D 2 v, Note that LV =G st D st v v N d 2 +τ G st D st d+g s D s v v +τ d N d 2 GD 2 v,dv,v G D 2 v +N d 2 2c 0 I,Dv,v +Cτ 2c 0 G ii +C1+τ +Nδ I D2 v +N d 2 c 0 I 2c 0 I +NDd Dd CNδI := H Denote γ = γ ik, G D 2 v +N d 2 2c 0 I,Dv,v 2 v F W γhγ where c is a positive constant. Hence 2 v = F W γ I D2 v +N d 2 c 0 I γ 2 v = F W H1/2 γγh 1/2 F ch LV F ch+cτ 2c 0 G ii +C1+τ +Nδ Note that H = diag 2c 0 CNδ,..., 2c 0 CNδ, 2c 0 CNδ+N. By assumption 1.7 we can choose N sufficiently large and τ, δ sufficiently small δ depends on N such that Cτ c 0, CNδ c 0, F ch+c +2c 0 1, Hence the above inequality becomes 3.10 LV c 0 G ii 1 We then require δ τ N By Lemma 3.7, so that V 0 in Ω ǫ B δ 0 L x 2 C1+ G ii

10 10 ZHENAN SUI This, together with 3.10 yields, 3.11 LΨ A c 0 G ii 1+BC1+ G ii in Ω ǫ B δ 0 Now, we consider the operator T = α + β<nb αβ x β n x n β Note that for δ > 0 sufficiently small, Tv C in Ω ǫ B δ 0 and in view of 3.8, Tv C x 2 on Γ ǫ B δ 0 To compute LTv, we need the following lemma see also [9]. Lemma For 1 i,j n, Proof. For θ R, let Consider the equation L+G v ψ v x i v j x j v i = x i ψ xj x j ψ xi y i =x i cosθ x j sinθ, y j =x i sinθ+x j cosθ, y k =x k, k i,j GD 2 vy,dvy,vy = ψy,vy Differentiate with respect to θ and change the order of differentiation, v L+G v ψ v y θ = ψ y i y i θ +ψ y j y j θ Set θ = 0 in the above equality and notice that at θ = 0, y i y = x, θ = x y j j, θ = x v i, θ = x iv j x j v i We thus proved the lemma. By Lemma 3.12 we immediately have Hence by Lemma 3.7, L+G v Tv = Tψx,v 3.13 LTv C Choose B sufficiently large such that From 3.11 and 3.13 we have Ψ±Tv 0 on Ω ǫ B δ 0 LΨ±Tv A c 0 G ii 1+BC1+ G ii +C Choose A sufficiently large such that By the maximum principle LΨ±Tv 0 in Ω ǫ B δ 0 Ψ±Tv 0 in Ω ǫ B δ 0

11 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 11 which implies 3.14 v αn 0 C We have so far proven v ξη x C, v ξγ x C, x Γ ǫ where ξ and η are any unit tangent vectors and γ the unit interior normal vector to Γ ǫ. By the strict local convexity, we only need to give an upper bound 3.15 v γγ C on Γ ǫ We first prove M := min min 1+ x Γ ǫ ξ T xγ ǫ, ξ =1 2 D ξξv c 1 for some positive constant c 1. We may choose coordinates in R n such that M is achieved at 0 Γ ǫ in the direction ξ = e 1 and e n = γ0. Now we have 3.17 M = v 110 = v v v n0d 11 0 To see this, we can write v v = ω d for some function ω defined in a neighborhood of Γ ǫ in Ω ǫ. Differentiate this identity, Consequently, v v i = ω i d+ωd i, v v γ = ω γ d+ωd γ v v ij = ω ij d+ω i d j +ω j d i +ωd ij v v 11 0 = v v n 0d is proved. We may assume v v n 0d 11 0 < v 11 0, for, otherwise we are done. Let ζ be the unit vector field defined by d n d ζ =, 0,..., 0, 1 d 2 1 +d 2 n d 2 1 +d 2 n Consider the function 2M 1 Φ = Dv Dd d ij ζ i ζ j Since d ij ζ i ζ j is smooth near 0 in Ω ǫ and 0 < v v n 0 C, there exists c 2 > 0 and δ > 0 such that d ij ζ i ζ j x 1 2 d 110 < v v v n 0 c 2 in Ω ǫ B δ 0 Thus Φ is smooth and bounded in Ω ǫ B δ 0. Next, note that ζ is a unit tangent vector field along Γ ǫ. We want to verify that 3.18 D ζζ v = v ij ζ i ζ j = v γ d ij ζ i ζ j = Dv Dd d ij ζ i ζ j on Γ ǫ In fact, write v ǫ 2 = ωd for some function ω defined in a neighborhood of Γ ǫ in Ω ǫ. Then, v ij ζ i ζ j = ω ij ζ i ζ j d+ ω i ζ i d ζ + ω j ζ j d ζ + ωd ij ζ i ζ j On Γ ǫ, since Dd = γ, d ζ = 0 and d γ = 1, we thus have v γ = ω and v ij ζ i ζ j = ωd ij ζ i ζ j. Thus 3.18 is proved. By the definition of M, we know that D ζζv M on Γ ǫ. Combining with 3.18, we have Φ 0 on Γ ǫ B δ 0.

12 12 ZHENAN SUI Next, we claim that 2M LΦ = L LDv Dd C1+ G ii in Ω ǫ B δ 0 d ij ζ i ζ j To see this, we verify that LDv Dd = Dd LDv+Dv LDd+2G st v is d it C1+ G ii W v + 2G st d it γ ki γ sl a kl 2δ is =C1+ G ii + 2γ ki d it γ tj F lj a kl 4G st d st C1+ G ii Inviewof 3.11wemaychooseA >> B >> 1suchthatΨ+Φ 0on Ω ǫ B δ 0 andlψ+φ 0in Ω ǫ B δ 0. Bythe maximumprinciple, Ψ+Φ 0in Ω ǫ B δ 0. Since Ψ +Φ0 = 0 by 3.18 and 3.17, we have Ψ+Φ n 0 0. Therefore, v nn 0 C, which, togetherwith 3.9 and 3.14, givesabound D 2 v0 C, and consequently a bound for all the principal curvatures at 0. By 1.5, the principal curvatures at 0 admit a uniform positive lower bound, which in turn yields a positive lower bound for the eigenvalues of I D2 v0. Hence 3.16 is proved. By 3.16 and Lemma 1.2 of [2] there exists a constant R > 0 depending on the bounds 3.9 and 3.14 such that if v γγ x 0 R and x 0 Γ ǫ, then the eigenvalues λ 1,...,λ n of I D2 vx 0 satisfy c 1 2 λ α C, α = 1,...,n 1, λ n R 2 and consequently, I D2 vx 0 X 1 ΛX where X is an orthogonal matrix and Λ = diag c 1 /2,..., c 1 /2, R/2. Thus at x 0, 2 v GD 2 v,dv,v = F W γ I D2 v γ 2 v =F W Λ1/2 XγγX 1 Λ 1/2 F cλ By 1.7 we can choose R sufficiently large such that GD 2 v,dv,vx 0 > ψx 0,ǫ 2 2 v F W γx 1 ΛXγ contradicts with equation 3.6. Hence v γγ < R on Γ ǫ is proved Global curvature estimates. For a hypersurface Σ H n+1, let g and be the induced hyperbolic metric and Levi-Civita connection on Σ respectively, and let g and be the metric and Levi-Civita connection induced from R n+1 when Σ is viewed as a hypersurface in R n+1. The Christoffel symbols associated with and are related by the formula Γ k ij = Γ k ij 1 u u iδ kj +u j δ ik g kl u l g ij

13 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 13 Consequently, for any v C 2 Σ, 3.20 ij v = v i j Γ k ij v k = ij v + 1 u u iv j +u j v i g kl u l v k g ij Note that 3.20 holds for any local frames. Lemma In R n+1, we have the following identities g kl u k u l = u 2 = 1 ν n ij u = h ij ν n ν n+1 i = h ij g jk u k 3.25 ij ν n+1 = g kl ν n+1 hil hkj +u l k hij Lemma Let Σ be a strictly locally convex hypersurface in H n+1 satisfying equation 2.6. Then in a local orthonormal frame on Σ, F ij ij ν n+1 = ν n+1 F ij h ik h kj + 1+ν n+1 2 F ij h ij ν n+1 f i u 2Fij h jk u i u k + 2νn+1 u 2 F ij u i u j u k u ψ k Proof. By 3.20, 3.25, 3.28 F ij ij ν n+1 = F ij ij ν n u ui ν n+1 j +u j ν n+1 i g kl u l ν n+1 k g ij = νn+1 u 2 Fij hik hkj u k u 2Fij k hij 2 u 3Fij hjk u i u k u k u νn+1 k fi Since Σ can also be viewed as a hypersurface in R n+1, Fg il h lj = F u 2 g il 1 u h lj + νn+1 u 2 g lj = F u g il hlj +ν n+1 δ ij = ψ Differentiate this equation and then multiply by u k u, u 2 k u 3 Fij hij + u k u 2Fij k hij + u k u νn+1 k fi = u k u ψ k Take this identity into 3.28, F ij ij ν n+1 = νn+1 u 2 Fij hik hkj 2 u 3Fij hjk u i u k + u2 k u 3Fij hij u k u ψ k and in view of 2.3 we obtain For global curvature estimates, we use the method in [8]. Assume ν n+1 2a > 0 on Σ for some constant a. Let κ max x be the largest principal curvature of Σ at x. Consider κ max x M 0 = max x Σ ν n+1 a Assume M 0 > 0 is attained at an interior point x 0 Σ. Let τ 1,...,τ n be a local orthonormal frame about x 0 such that h ij x 0 = κ i δ ij, where κ 1,...,κ n are the

14 14 ZHENAN SUI hyperbolic principal curvatures of Σ at x 0. We may assume κ 1 = κ max x 0. Thus, lnh 11 lnν n+1 a has a local maximum at x 0, at which, 3.29 h 11i iν n+1 h 11 ν n+1 a = 0, 3.30 Differentiate equation 2.6 twice, h 11ii h 11 iiν n+1 ν n+1 a F ii h ii11 + F ij,rs h ij1 h rs1 = ψ 11 where ψ 11 Cκ 1 since by 3.20, 3.23, 3.22 and 2.3, ij u = uν n+1 h ij + 2u iu j u uδ ij By Gauss equation, we have the following formula when changing the order of differentiation for the second fundamental form, 3.32 h iijj = h jjii +κ i κ j 1κ i κ j Combining 3.30, 3.31, 3.32 and 3.27 yields, 3.33 κ νn+1 2 ν n+1 a κ 1 +1 fi κ i + aκ 1 F ij,rs h ij1 h rs1 + 2κ 1 ν n+1 a Next, take 3.24, 2.3 into 3.29, h 11i = fi + f i κ 2 i ν n+1 a u 2 i fi κi u 2 ν n+1 Cκ 1 0 κ 1 u i ν n+1 a u νn+1 κ i and recall an inequality of Andrews [1] and Gerhardt [4], F ij,rs h ij1 h rs1 i j Therefore, 3.33 becomes, f i f j h 2 ij1 2 f i f 1 h 2 i11 κ j κ i κ 1 κ i i κ νn+1 2 ν n+1 a κ 1 +1 fi κ i Cκ 1 + aκ 1 fi ν n+1 + f i κ 2 a i 2κ 2 1 f i f 1 u 2 i + ν n+1 a 2 κ 1 κ i u 2νn+1 κ i 2 + 2κ 1 u 2 i fi κi ν n+1 a u 2 ν n+1 i 2 For some fixed θ 0,1 which will be determined later, denote J = {i : f 1 θf i, κ i < ν n+1 }, L = {i : f 1 < θf i, κ i < ν n+1 } The second line of 3.34 can be estimated as follows

15 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 15 2κ 2 1 f i f 1 u 2 i ν n+1 a 2 κ 1 κ i u 2νn+1 κ i 2 + 2κ 1 ν n+1 a i 2 fi u 2 i u 2 κi ν n+1 2κ 2 1 f i f 1 u 2 i ν n+1 a 2 κ 1 κ i u 2νn+1 κ i 2 + 2κ 1 ν n+1 + u 2 i f i κi a u 2 ν n+1 i L i J i L 21 θκ 1 ν n+1 a 2 = 2κ 1 ν n+1 a i L i L f i u 2 i u 2νn+1 κ i 2 + 2κ 1 ν n+1 a u 2 i ν n+1 κ i 2 f i u 2 ν n+1 +κ i ν n+1 a i L i L 2θκ 1 u 2 i ν n+1 a 2 f i u 2νn+1 κ i 2 2 fi κ i θa 2κ 1 ν n+1 a i L 4θκ 1 aν n+1 a f i u 2 i u 2 κi ν n+1 2 θa fi κ i u 2 i f i u 2 νn+1 +a ν n+1 a κ 4θκ 1 i fi 1+κ 2 2 aν n+1 a i fi κ i θa fi 1+κ 2 i 2 θa + 4κ 1 a 2 fi κ i Here we have applied 3.22 in deriving the above inequality. Choosing θ = a2 4 and taking this inequality into 3.34, by assumption 1.6 we obtain an upper bound for κ Existence. In this subsection, we use the geometric quantities in section 2 which are expressed in terms of u and write equation 2.6 as 3.35 GD 2 u, Du,u = Fa ij = fλa ij = ψx, u For convenience, denote G[u] = GD 2 u,du,u, G ij [u] = G ij D 2 u,du,u, etc. Let δ be a small positive constant such that 3.36 G[u] = GD 2 u, Du, u > δu in Ω ǫ For t [0, 1], consider the following two auxiliary equations. GD 2 u,du,u = 1 t G[u]x +tδ u 3.37 u u = ǫ in Ω ǫ on Γ ǫ 3.38 { GD 2 u,du,u = 1 tδu+tψx,u in Ω ǫ u =ǫ on Γ ǫ Lemma Let ψx be a positive function defined on Ω ǫ. For x Ω ǫ and a positive C 2 function u which is strictly locally convex near x, if G[u]x = Fa ij [u]x = fκx = ψxu

16 16 ZHENAN SUI then Proof. By direct calculation, G u [u]x ψx < 0. fi κ i 1 w fi G u = F ij 1 w γik u kl γ lj = 1 u Since f i κ i ψxu by the concavity of f and f0 = 0, G u [u]x ψx 1 fi < 0. wu Lemma For any t [0, 1], the Dirichlet problem 3.37 has at most one strictly locally convex solution u. If U > 0 is any strictly locally convex subsolution of 3.37, then u U. Proof. Let u be a strictly locally convex solution of We only need to prove that u U in Ω ǫ. If not, then U u achieves a positive maximum at x 0 Ω ǫ, at which, 3.41 Ux 0 > ux 0, DUx 0 = Dux 0, D 2 Ux 0 D 2 ux 0 Note that for any s [0,1] the deformation u[s] := su +1 su is strictly locally convex near x 0. This is because at x 0, δ ij + u[s] γ ik[ u[s] ] u[s] kl γ lj[ u[s] ] δ ij + u[s] γ ik [U] U kl γ lj [U] =1 s 1 u δ ij + u[s] δ ij +U γ ik [U] U U U kl γ lj [U] > 0 Define a differentiable function of s [0,1]: [ ] as := G u[s] x 0 1 t G[u]x 0 +tδ u[s]x 0 ux 0 Note that a0 = G[u]x 0 1 t G[u]x 0 +tδ ux 0 = 0 ux 0 and a1 = G[U]x 0 1 t G[u]x 0 +tδ Ux 0 0 ux 0 Thus there exists s 0 [0,1] such that as 0 = 0 and a s 0 0, i.e., 3.42 G [ u[s 0 ] ] x 0 = 1 t G[u]x 0 +tδ u[s 0 ]x 0 ux 0 and 3.43 G ij[ u[s 0 ] ] x 0 D ij U ux 0 +G i[ u[s 0 ] ] x 0 D i U ux 0 [ + G u u[s0 ] ] x 0 1 t G[u]x 0 +tδ U ux 0 0 ux 0 However, the above inequality can not hold by 3.41, 3.42 and Lemma Theorem For any t [0,1], the Dirichlet problem 3.37 has a unique strictly locally convex solution u, which satisfies u u in Ω ǫ.

17 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 17 Proof. Uniqueness is proved in Lemma For existence, we use the standard continuity method. Note that u is a subsolution of 3.37 by We have obtained the C 2 bound for strictly locally convex solutions u satisfying u u by Lemma 3.40 of 3.37 as well as the uniform positive lower bound of the principal curvatures, which imply the uniform ellipticity of equation By Evans-Krylov theory [3, 12], we obtain the C 2,α estimates which is independent of t u C 2,α Ω ǫ C Denote C 2,α 0 Ω ǫ := {w C 2,α Ω ǫ w = 0 on Γ ǫ } { } U := w C 2,α 0 Ω ǫ u+w is stricly locally convex We can see that C 2,α 0 Ω ǫ is a subspace of C 2,α Ω ǫ and U is an open subset of C 2,α 0 Ω ǫ. Consider the map L : U [0,1] C α Ω ǫ, Lw,t = G[u+w] 1 t G[u] u +tδ u+w Set S = {t [0,1] Lw,t = 0 has a solution w in U } Note that S since L0,0 = 0. We claim that S is open in [0,1]. In fact, for any t 0 S, there exists w 0 U such that Lw 0,t 0 = 0. The Fréchet derivative of L with respect to w at w 0,t 0 is a linear elliptic operator from C 2,α 0 Ω ǫ to C α Ω ǫ, L w0,t w h = Gij 0 [u+w 0 ]D ij h+g i [u+w 0 ]D i h + G u [u+w 0 ] 1 t 0 G[u] u +t 0δ h By Lemma 3.39, L w0,t w 0 is invertible. By implicit function theorem, a neighborhood of t 0 is also contained in S. Next, we show that S is closed in [0,1]. Let t i be a sequence in S converging to t 0 [0,1] and w i U be the unique by Lemma 3.40 solution corresponding to t i, i.e. Lw i,t i = 0. By Lemma 3.40, w i 0. By 3.45 u i := u+w i is a bounded sequenceinc 2,α Ω ǫ, whichpossessesasubsequenceconvergingtoastrictlylocally convex solution u 0 of Since w 0 := u 0 u U and Lw 0,t 0 = 0, thus t 0 S. From now on we may assume u is not a solution of 1.10, since otherwise we are done. Lemma If u u is a strictly locally convex solution of 3.38 in Ω ǫ, then u > u in Ω ǫ and u u γ > 0 on Γ ǫ. Proof. To keep the strict local convexity of the variations in our proof, we rewrite 3.38 in terms of v 3.47 { GD 2 v,dv,v = ψ t x,v in Ω ǫ v = ǫ 2 on Γ ǫ

18 18 ZHENAN SUI Since u is a subsolution but not a solution of 3.38, equivalently, v is a subsolution but not a solution of Therefore, 3.48 G[v] G[v] ψ t x,v ψ t x,v Denotev[s] := sv+1 sv,which isstrictlylocallyconvexoverω ǫ foranys [0,1] since δ ij + 1 v[s] 2 ij = s δ ij v ij +1 s δ ij v ij > 0 in Ω ǫ From 3.48 we can deduce that where a ij xd ij v v+b i xd i v v+cxv v 0 a ij x = 1 0 cx = G ij[ v[s] ] xds, b i x = G v [ v[s] ] x ψ t v x,v[s]ds 0 in Ω ǫ G i[ v[s] ] xds, Applying the Maximum Principle and Lemma H see p. 212 of [5] we conclude that v > v in Ω ǫ and v v γ > 0 on Γ ǫ. Hence the lemma is proved. Theorem For any t [0, 1], the Dirichlet problem 3.38 possesses an admissible solution satisfying u u in Ω ǫ. In particular, the Dirichlet problem 1.10 has an admissible solution u ǫ satisfying u ǫ u in Ω ǫ. Proof. WehaveestablishedC 2,α estimatesforstrictlylocallyconvexsolutionsu u of 3.38, which further implies C 4,α estimates by classical Schauder theory 3.50 u C 4,α Ω ǫ < C 4 We also proved that 3.51 C 1 2 I < {δ ij +u i u j +uu ij } < C 2 I in Ω ǫ where C 2 and C 4 are independent of t. Denote and O := C 4,α 0 Ω ǫ := {w C 4,α Ω ǫ w = 0 on Γ ǫ } { w C 4,α w > 0 in Ω ǫ, w γ > 0 on Γ ǫ, w 0 Ω ǫ C 4,α Ω < C } ǫ 4 + u C 4,α Ω ǫ C 1 2 I < {δ ij +u+w i u+w j +u+wu+w ij } < C 2 I in Ω ǫ which isabounded open subset ofc 4,α 0 Ω ǫ. Define M t w : O [0,1] C 2,α Ω ǫ M t w = G[u+w] 1 tδ u+w tψx,u+w Let u 0 be the unique solution of 3.37 at t = 1 the existence and uniqueness are guaranteed by Theorem 3.44 and Lemma Observe that u 0 is also the unique solution of 3.38 when t = 0. By Lemma 3.40, w 0 := u 0 u 0 in Ω ǫ. By Lemma 3.46, w 0 > 0 in Ω ǫ and w 0 γ > 0 on Γ ǫ. Also, u + w 0 satisfies 3.50 and Thus, w 0 O. By Lemma 3.46, 3.50 and 3.51, M t w = 0 has no solution on O for any t [0,1]. Besides, M t is uniformly elliptic on O independent of t. Therefore, we can define the t-independent degree of M t on O at 0: degm t,o,0 To find this degree, we only need to compute degm 0,O,0. By the above discussion, we know that M 0 w = 0 has a unique solution w 0 O. The Fréchet

19 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 19 derivative of M 0 with respect to w at w 0 is a linear elliptic operator from C 4,α 0 Ω ǫ to C 2,α Ω ǫ, 3.52 M 0,w w 0h = G ij [u 0 ]D ij h+g i [u 0 ]D i h +G u [u 0 ] δh By Lemma 3.39, G u [u 0 ] δ < 0 in Ω ǫ and thus M 0,w w 0 is invertible. By the degree theory established in [13], degm 0,O,0 = degm 0,w 0,B 1,0 = ±1 0 where B 1 is the unit ball in C 4,α 0 Ω ǫ. Thus degm t,o,0 0 for all t [0,1], which implies that the Dirichlet problem 3.38 has at least one strictly locally convex solution u u for any t [0,1]. 4. Proof of Theorem 1.12 Let u ǫ u be an admissible solution over Ω ǫ to the Dirichlet problem For any fixed ǫ 0 > 0, we want to give uniform C 2 estimates for u ǫ with 0 < ǫ < ǫ 0 on Ω ǫ0, i.e. 4.1 u ǫ C2 Ω ǫ0 C Hereinafter, C represents a positive constant which is independent of ǫ but may depend on ǫ 0. By 3.2, we immediately obtain uniform C 0 estimates: 4.2 C 1 u ǫ C on Ω ǫ0 For uniform C 1 estimates, by 3.4 we have on Ω ǫ0, u 1+ Du ǫ 2 max Ω ǫ u ǫ 1+ Du ǫ 2 max{ ǫ max Γ ǫ 1+ Duǫ 2, max Ω ǫ u ǫ } It suffices to estimate max Γ ǫ 1+ Duǫ 2. On Γ ǫ, by Lemma 3.5, 1+ Duǫ 2 < 1 σ 2 σ r0 ǫ ǫ 1+σ r0 ǫ ǫ2 1 2 ǫ Since lim ǫ 0 r0 ǫ = 0, when ǫ 0 is sufficiently small, we have max Γ ǫ 1+ Duǫ 2 < 2 σ Hence for any 0 < ǫ < ǫ 0, 4.3 u ǫ C1 Ω ǫ0 C

20 20 ZHENAN SUI 4.1. Interior C 2 estimates. Now we stay in H 3 and consider 4.4 σ 2 D 2 v +2I = ψx,v,dv where ψx,v,dv = 4v + Dv 2 2 ψx,v Here we abuse the notation of ψ without affecting our proof. Differentiate 4.4 twice, 4.5 σ ii 2 v iik = ψ k +ψ v v k +ψ pj v jk 4.6 σij,rs 2 v ij1 v rs1 +σ ii 2 v ii11 = ψ 11 +2ψ 1v v 1 +ψ vv v 2 1 +ψ vv 11 +2ψ 1pj v j1 +2ψ vpj v j1 v 1 +ψ pjp k v j1 v k1 +ψ pj v j11 Note that ψ pjp k = 4 4v + Dv 2 δ jk +2v j v k ψx,v 0 We want to establish the following interior C 2 estimates for admissible solutions to equation 4.4, 4.7 max B r/2 D 2 v C whereb r R n is the open ballofradiusr centeredat 0and C is apositiveconstant depending on r and v C1 B r. The idea is from [11]. Because our equation 4.4 is slightly different and also for the sake of completeness, we shall derive 4.7. For x B r and ξ S n 1, consider the test function Θ = 2lnρx+ α 2 Dv 2 +4v βx Dv v + x 2 +lnlnv ξξ +2 where ρx = r 2 x 2 and α, β are positive constants to be determined later. The maximum value of Θ can be attained in an interior point x 0 = x 1,x 2 B r and assume the direction to be ξ = e 1. It follows that D 2 vx 0 is diagonal and v 11 x 0 v 22 x 0. Since the function 2lnρx+ α 2 Dv 2 +4v βx Dv v+ x 2 +lnlnv also achieves its maximum at x 0, thus at x 0, 4.8 4x i ρ +αv v 11i iv ii +2 βx i v ii +2+ v lnv = Note that 4 ρ σ 1 4α+2βσ 2 +ασ 1 σ 2 +αv k βx k σ ii 2 v iik 8σii 2 x2 i σ2 ii ρ 2 + v 11ii v lnv lnv v lnv σii 2 v2 11i σ ij,rs 2 v ij1 v rs1 = 2v 111 v 122 2v 2 112

21 CONVEX HYPERSURFACES OF PRESCRIBED CURVATURE 21 From 4.5 and Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, v 111 v 122 3σ 2v v Cv Combining , C ρ 4 ρ σ 1 +ασ 1 σ 2 8σii 2 x2 i ρ 2 + Cα+β lnv σ ii 2 v2 11i v lnv v v 11 +2lnv σ 2 v v lnv C v lnv When v is large, this inequality reduces to the following one, 4.12 C ρ σ 1 +ασ 1 σ 2 Cα+β 8σii 2 x 2 i ρ 2 3v v 11 +2lnv v 22 +2v v lnv Case i: If x 2 1 +x2 2 r2 2, we have 1 ρ 2 r 2. Then 4.12 reduces to ασ 2 Cσ 1 Cα+β Choosing α sufficiently large we obtain an upper bound for v Case ii: When x 2 1 +x 2 2 r2 2 and x2 2 r2 4, from 4.8 we have v 112 v lnv = 4x 2 ρ αv 2 βx 2 v In view of 4.4, we have the following inequality as v large, αv2 βx 2 v Cα+β v x 2 ρ It follows that 3v v lnv r2 4ρ 2 v lnv Consequently, 4.12 reduces to 3r 2 4 3r 2 8 lnv C r 4 σ 1 8 lnv σ C ρ 2 Cα+β and we obtain an upper bound for v Case iii: When x x 2 2 r2 2 and x2 1 r2 4, from 4.8 and Cauchy-Schwartz inequality, v111 2 v lnv β2 x 2 1v C ρ 2 +α2 v Hence v 22 +2v v lnv r 2 64 β2 Cα 2 σ 1 C ρ 2 σ 2 lnv 11 +2

22 22 ZHENAN SUI and 4.12 reduces to r 2 64 β2 Cα 2 σ 1 σ 2 ρ 2 lnv Cσ 1 Cα+β We may assume that ρ 2 lnv By choosing β >> α we obtain an upper bound for v References [1] B. Andrews, Contraction of convex hypersurfaces in Euclidean space, Calc. Var. PDE , [2] L. A. Caffarelli, L. Nirenberg and J. Spruck, The Dirichlet problem for nonlinear secondorder elliptic equations, III: Functions of the eigenvalues of the Hessian, Acta Math., 155: , [3] L. C. Evans, Classical solutions of fully nonlinear, convex, second order elliptic equations, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., , [4] C. Gerhardt, Closed Weingarten hypersurfaces in Riemannian manifolds, J. Differential Geom , [5] B. Gidas, W. M. Ni and L. Nirenberg, Symmetry and related properties via the maximum principle, Comm. Math. Phys., , [6] B. Guan and J. Spruck, Locally convex hypersurfaces of constant curvature with boundary, Comm. Pure Appl. Math., , [7] B. Guan and J. Spruck, Hypersurfaces of constant curvature in hyperbolic space II, J. European Math. Soc., , [8] B. Guan and J. Spruck, Convex hypersurfaces of constant curvature in hyperbolic space, Surveys in Geometric Analysis and Relativity ALM, , [9] B. Guan, J. Spruck and M. Szapiel, Hypersurfaces of constant curvature in hyperbolic space I, J. Geom. Anal., , [10] B. Guan, J. Spruck and L. Xiao, Interior curvature estimates and the asymptotic Plateau problem in hyperbolic space, J. Differential Geom., , [11] P. Guan and G. Qiu, Interior C 2 regularity of convex solutions to prescribing scalar curvature equations, arxiv: [12] N. V. Krylov, Boundedly nonhomogeneous elliptic and parabolic equations in a domain, Izvestiya Rossiiskoi Akademii Nauk, Seriya Matematicheskaya , [13] Y. Y. Li, Degree theory for second order nonlinear elliptic operators and its applications, Commun. Part. Diff. Eq., , [14] Z. Sui, Strictly locally convex radial graphs of prescribed curvature and boundary in space forms, arxiv: [15] M. Szapiel, Hypersurfaces of prescribed curvature in hyperbolic space, Phd thesis, 2005.