LOW REGULARITY LOCAL WELL-POSEDNESS FOR THE (N+1)-DIMENSIONAL MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON EQUATIONS IN LORENZ GAUGE arxiv:1705.00599v1 [math.ap] 1 May 017 HARTMUT PECHER FACHBEREICH MATHEMATIK UND NATURWISSENSCHAFTEN BERGISCHE UNIVERSITÄT WUPPERTAL GAUSSSTR. 0 4097 WUPPERTAL GERMANY E-MAIL PECHER@MATH.UNI-WUPPERTAL.DE Abstract. The Cauchy problem for the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equations in Lorenz gauge in n space dimensions (n ) is locally well-posed for low regularity data, in two and three space dimensions even for data without finite energy. The result relies on the null structure for the main bilinear terms which was shown to be not only present in Coulomb gauge but also in Lorenz gauge by Selberg and Tesfahun, who proved global well-posedness for finite energy data in three space dimensions. This null structure is combined with product estimates for wave-sobolev spaces given systematically by d Ancona, Foschi and Selberg. 1. Introduction and main results Consider the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon system where m > 0 is a constant and ν F µν = j µ (1) D (A) µ D(A)µ φ = m φ, () F µν := µ A ν ν A µ (3) D (A) µ φ := µ ia µ φ (4) j µ := Im(φD (A) µ φ) = Im(φ µ φ)+ φ A µ. (5) Here F µν : R n+1 R denotes the electromagnetic field, φ : R n+1 C a scalar field and A ν : R n+1 R the potential. We use the notation µ = x µ, where we write (x 0,x 1,...,x n ) = (t,x 1,...,x n ) and also 0 = t and = ( 1,..., n ). Roman indices run over 1,...,n and greek indices over 0,...,n and repeated upper/lower indices are summed. Indices are raised and lowered using the Minkowski metric diag( 1,1,...,1). The Maxwell-Klein-Gordon system describes the motion of a spin 0 particle with mass m self-interacting with an electromagnetic field. We areinterestedin the Cauchyproblemwith dataφ(x,0) = φ 0 (x), t φ(x,0) = φ 1 (x), F µν (x,0) = F 0 µν(x), A ν (x,0) = a 0ν (x), t A ν (x,0) = ȧ 0ν (x). The 000 Mathematics Subject Classification: 35Q61, 35L70 Key words and phrases: Maxwell-Klein-Gordon, local well-posedness, Fourier restriction norm method 1
HARTMUT PECHER potential A is not uniquely determined but one has gauge freedom. The Maxwell- Klein-Gordon equation is namely invariant under the gauge transformation φ φ = e iχ φ, A µ A µ = A µ + µ χ for any χ : R n+1 R. Most of the results obtained so far were given in Coulomb gauge j A j = 0. Klainerman and Machedon [10] showed global well-posedness in energy space and above, i.e. for data φ 0 H s, φ 1 H s 1, a 0ν H s, ȧ 0ν H s 1 with s 1 in n = 3 dimensions improving earlier results of Eardley and Moncrief [7] for smooth data. They used that the nonlinearities fulfill a null condition in the case of the Coulomb gauge. This global well-posedness result was improved by Keel, Roy and Tao [9], who had only to assume s > 3. Local well-posedness for low regularity data was shown by Cuccagna [5] for s > 3/4 and finally almost down to the critical regularity with respect to scaling by Machedon and Sterbenz [15] for s > 1/, all these results for three space dimensions and in Coulomb gauge. In two space dimensions in Coulomb gauge Czubak and Pikula [6] proved local well-posedness provided that φ 0 H s, φ 1 H s 1, a 0ν H r, ȧ 0ν H r 1, where 1 s = r > 1 or s = 5 8 +ǫ, r = 1 4 +ǫ. In four space dimensions Selberg [19] showed local well-posedness in Coulomb gauge for s > 1. Recently Krieger, Sterbenz and Tataru [14] showed global wellposedness for data with small energy data (s = 1) for n = 4, which is the critical space. For space dimension n 6 and small critical Sobolev norm for the data local well-posedness was shown by Rodnianski and Tao[17]. In general the problem seems to be easier in higher dimensions. In temporal gauge local well-posedness was shown for n = 3 and s > 3/4 for the more general Yang-Mills equations by Tao []. We are interested to consider the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equations in Lorenz gauge µ A µ = 0 which was considered much less in the literature because the nonlinear term Im(φ µ φ) has no null structure. There is a result by Moncrief [16] in two space dimensions for smooth data, i.e. s. In three space dimensions the most important progress was made by Selberg and Tesfahun [0] who were able to circumvent the problem of the missing null condition in the equations for A µ by showing that the decisive nonlinearities in the equations for φ as well as F µν fulfill such a null condition which allows to show that global well-posedness holds for finite energy data, i.e. φ 0 H 1, φ 1 L, Fµν 0 L, a 0ν Ḣ1, ȧ 0ν L, and three space dimensions, where φ C 0 (R,H 1 ) C 1 (R,L ) and F µν C 0 (R,L ). The potential possibly loses some regularity compared to the data but as remarked also by the authors this is not the main point because one is primarily interested in the regularity of φ and F µν. Persistence of higher regularity for the solution also holds. A null structure in Lorenz gauge was first detected for the Maxwell-Dirac system by d Ancona, Foschi and Selberg []. The paper [0] is the basis for our results. We show that in space dimensions n = 3 and n = local well-posedness can also be proven for less regular data without finite energy, namely for s > 3/4 and s > 1 in space dimension n = 3 and n =, respectively (for n = for a slightly different data space). We also consider the case n 4 and prove local well-posedness for s > n 3 4. These results rely on null conditions of most of the nonlinear terms. The necessary bilinear estimates in wave-sobolev spaces were formulated in arbitrary dimension n and proven for n = and n = 3 by d Ancona, Foschi and Selberg in [4] and [3], respectively. We prove a special case in dimension n 4 based mainly on a result by Klainerman and Tataru [13]. We now formulate our main result. We assume the Lorenz condition µ A µ = 0 (6)
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 3 and Cauchy data φ(x,0) = φ 0 (x) H s, t φ(x,0) = φ 1 (x) H s 1, (7) F µν (x,0) = F 0 µν(x)withf 0 µν H s 1 forn = 3andD ǫ F 0 µν H s 1+ǫ forn =, (8) where ǫ is a small positive constant and which fulfill the following conditions A ν (x,0) = a 0ν (x), t A ν (x,0) = ȧ 0ν (x), (9) a 00 = ȧ 00 = 0, (10) a 0j H s 1, ȧ 0j H s 1 forn = 3, (11) D 1 ǫ a 0j H s 1+ǫ, D ǫ ȧ 0j H s 1+ǫ forn =, (1) k a 0k = 0, (13) j a 0k k a 0j = F 0 jk, (14) ȧ 0k = F 0 0k, (15) k F 0 0k = Im(φ 0φ 1 ). (16) (10) can be assumed because otherwise the Lorenz condition does not determine the potential uniquely. (13) follow from the Lorenz condition (6) in connection with (10). (14) follows from (3), similarly (15) from (3) and (10). (1) requires thus (16). By (13) we have k F 0 0k = j 0 (0) = Im(φ 0 φ 1 )+ φ 0 a 00 = Im(φ 0 φ 1 ) a 0j = k k a 0j = k ( j a 0k F 0 jk ) = k F 0 jk, so that a 0j is uniquely determined as a 0j = ( ) 1 k F 0 jk and fulfills (11) and (1). We define the wave-sobolev spaces X s,b as the completion of the Schwarz space S(R n+1 ) with respect to the norm u X s,b = ξ s τ ξ b û(τ,ξ) L τξ and X s,b [0,T] as the space of the restrictions to [0,T] R n. We also define the spaces H s,b as the completion of S(R n+1 ) with respect to the norm u H s,b = ξ s τ ξ b û(τ,ξ) L τξ. Let Λ α, D α, Dα, D α, Dα + and Λα + be the multipliers with symbols ξ α, ξ α, τ ξ α, τ ξ α, ( τ + ξ ) α and τ + ξ α, respectively, where = (1+ ) 1. = t is the d Alembert operator. a+ = a +ǫ for a sufficiently small ǫ > 0. We also use the notation u v, if û v. Our main theorem reads as follows:
4 HARTMUT PECHER Theorem 1.1. If n 3 assume s > n 3 4, r > n 1 and s r s 1, r s > n 3, s r > n 1. If n = assume s > 1, r > 1 4 and s r s 1, r s > 1 4, s r > 3 4. The data are assumed to fulfill (7) - (16). Then the problem (1) - (6) has a unique local solution and φ X s,1 + + [0,T]+X s,1 + [0,T], t φ X s 1,1 + + [0,T]+X s 1,1 + [0,T] in the case n 3 and F µν X s 1,1 + + [0,T]+X s 1,1 + [0,T] D ǫ F µν H s 1+ǫ,1 + [0,T], D ǫ t F µν H s +ǫ,1 + [0,T] in the case n = relative to a potential A = (A 0,A 1,...,A n ), where A = A hom A hom + + +Ainh + +Ainh with DAhom X r 1,1 ǫ0 [0,T] and A inh Xr,1 ǫ0 [0,T] for n = 3 and D 1 ǫ A hom X r 1+ǫ,3 4 + [0,T] and D ǫ A inh X r ǫ,3 4 + [0,T] for n =, where ǫ is a small positive number. Remarks: (1) We immediately obtain φ C 0 ([0,T],H s ) C 1 ([0,T],H s 1 ), and F µν C 0 ([0,T],H s 1 ) C 1 ([0,T],H s ) for n = 3 and D ǫ F µν C 0 ([0,T], H s 1+ǫ ) C 1 ([0,T],H s +ǫ ) for n =. () The case n 3 4 +δ, r = n 1+δ for n 3 and s = 1 +δ, r = 1 4 +δ for n = is admissible, where δ > 0 is an arbitrary number. We can reformulate the system (1),() under the Lorenz condition (6) as follows: A µ = ν ν A µ = ν ( µ A ν F µν ) = ν F µν = j µ, thus (using the notation = ( 0, 1,..., n )): and thus A = Im(φ φ) A φ =: N(A,φ) (17) m φ = D (A) µ D (A)µ φ = µ µ φ ia µ µ φ i µ (A µ φ) A µ A µ φ = φ ia µ µ φ A µ A µ φ ( m )φ = ia µ µ φ+a µ A µ φ =: M(A,φ). (18) Conversely, if A µ = j µ and F µν := µ A ν ν A µ and the Lorenz condition (6) holds then ν F µν = ν ( µ A ν ν A µ ) = µ ν A ν ν ν A µ = A µ = j µ thus (1),() is equivalent to (17),(18), if (3),(4) and (6) are satisfied. The paper is organized as follows: in chapter we prove the null structure of A µ µ φ and in the Maxwell part. In chapter 3 the local well-posedness result for (17),(18) is formulated (Theorem 3.1). This relies on the null structure of A µ µ φ and the bilinear estimates in wave-sobolev spaces by d Ancona, Foschi and Selberg ([4] and [3]), which are given in chapter 4. In chapter 5 we prove Theorem 3.1. In chapter 6 we prove our main theorem (Theorem 1.1). We show that the Maxwell- Klein-Gordon system is satisfied and F µν has the desired regularity properties using the null structure of the Maxwell part and again the bilinear estimates by d Ancona, Foschi and Selberg.
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 5. Null structure Null structure of A µ µ φ. Using the Riesz transform R k := D 1 k and A = (A 1,...,A n ) we use the decomposition A = A df +A cf, where A df j = R k (R j A k R k A j ), A cf j = R j R k A k, so that A µ µ φ = P 1 +P, with P 1 = A 0 t φ+a cf φ = A 0 t φ D j k A k j φ = A 0 t φ D t A 0 φ, where we used the Lorenz gauge k A k = t A 0, and Now define so that Q jk (D 1 (R j A k R k A j ),φ) j,k = j,k P = A df φ. Q jk (φ,ψ) := j φ k ψ k φ j ψ, [ j (D 1 (R j A k R k A j )) k φ k (D 1 (R j A k R k A j )) j φ] = [D ( ja k j k A j ) k φ D ( k j A k ka j ) j φ] j,k = ( A j j φ ) D k j A k j φ+ j,k j = ( R k R j A k j φ R k R k A j j φ ) j,k j,k = P. Thus the symbol p of P fulfills p (η,ξ) = 1 1 η (η kξ j η j ξ k )(η j η k ) j,k j,k where (η,ξ) denotes the angle between η and ξ. Before we consider P 1 we define η k ξ j η j ξ k η ξ (η,ξ), (19) A := 1 (A(iD) 1 A t ), so that A = A + +A and A t = id(a + A ), and φ := 1 (φ(iλ m) 1 φ t ) with Λ m := (m ) 1, so that φ = φ + +φ and φ t = iλ m (φ + φ ). We transform (17),(18) into (i t Λ m )φ = (Λ m ) 1 M(A,φ) (0) (i t D)A = (D) 1 N(A,φ). (1)
6 HARTMUT PECHER Then we obtain where ip 1 = (A 0+ +A 0 )Λ(φ + φ )+D 1 (A 0+ A 0 ) (φ + +φ ) () = 1, A (1, )(A 01,φ ), A (1, )(f,g) := fλ m g +D 1 ( 1 f) ( g). Its symbol a (1, )(η,ξ) is bounded by the elementary estimate ([0], Lemma 3.1): a (1, )(η,ξ) ξ m ( 1η) ( ξ) η m+ ξ ( 1η, ξ), (3) where ξ m = (m + ξ ) 1. We now use the well-known Lemma.1. Assume 0 α 1. For arbitrary signs, 1,, λ,µ R and η,ξ R n the following estimate holds: ( 1 η, ξ) (λ+µ) η +ξ 1 α min( η, ξ ) 1 α + λ 1 1 η + µ ξ 1 min( η, ξ ) 1 (4) In the case of different signs 1 and the following (improved) estimate holds: ( 1 η, ξ) η +ξ 1 ( min( η, ξ ) α (λ+µ) η +ξ 1 η ξ 1 1 α + λ 1 η 1 ) + µ ξ 1 η +ξ 1 η 1 ξ 1 min( η, ξ ) α (λ+µ) η +ξ 1 α (5) + λ 1 η 1 + µ ξ 1 min( η, ξ ) 1. Proof. These results follow from [1], Lemma 7 and the considerations ahead of and after that lemma, where we use that in the case of different signs 1 and we have ( 1 η, ξ) = (η, ξ). Cf. also [0], Lemma 4.3. Using the estimates for the symbols above and (4) we summarize our results as follows: A µ µ φ 1 ( D ǫ (Λ 1 +ǫ A 1 Dφ )+ D 1 ǫ (A 1 D 1 +ǫ φ ) (6) 1, +Λ 1 1 D 1 A 1 Dφ + D 1 1 A 1 D 1 φ ) +Λ 1 1 A1 D Dφ +A 1 D 1 1 D φ + 1, A 1 φ. Null structure in the Maxwell part. We start from Maxwell s equations (1), i.e. 0 F l0 + k F lk = j l and k F 0k = j 0
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 7 and obtain and F k0 = 0 ( 0 F k0 )+ l l F k0 = 0 ( l F kl j k )+ l l F k0 = l 0 ( k A l l A k )+ 0 j k + l l F k0 = l [ k ( 0 A l l A 0 ) l ( 0 A k k A 0 )]+ 0 j k + l l F k0 = l k F 0l + l l F 0k + 0 j k + l l F k0 = l k F 0l + 0 j k = k j 0 + 0 j k (7) F kl = 0 0 F kl + m m F kl = 0 0 ( k A l l A k )+ m m F kl = 0 k ( 0 A l l A 0 )+ 0 l ( 0 A k k A 0 )+ m m F kl = 0 k F 0l + 0 l F 0k + m m F kl = k 0 F l0 l 0 F k0 + m m F kl = k ( m F lm j l ) l ( m F km j k )+ m m F kl = k m F lm l m F km + m m F kl + l j k k j l = k m ( l A m m A l ) l m ( k A m m A k )+ m m F kl + l j k k j l = m m ( l A k k A l )+ m m F kl + l j k k j l = m m F lk + m m F kl + l j k k j l = l j k k j l. (8) By the definition (5) of j µ we obtain and 0 j k k j 0 =Im( 0 φ k φ)+im(φ 0 k φ)+ 0 (A k φ ) Im( k φ 0 φ) Im(φ k 0 φ) k (A 0 φ ) =Im( t φ k φ k φ t φ)+ t (A k φ ) k (A 0 φ ) (9) l j k k j l =Im( l φ k φ)+im(φ l k φ)+ l (A k φ ) Im( k φ l φ) Im(φ k l φ) k (A l φ ) =Im( l φ k φ k φ l φ)+ l (A k φ ) k (A l φ ). (30) After the decomposition φ = φ + +φ we have l φ k φ k φ l φ = where Its symbol fulfills 1, C 1, (φ 1,φ ), (31) C 1, (f,g) := l f k g k f l g. (3) c 1, (η,ξ) = η l ξ k η k ξ l (33) c 1, (η,ξ) = ( 1 η l )( ξ k ) ( 1 η k )( ξ l ) η ξ ( 1 η, ξ). (34) Similarly using t φ = iλ m (φ + φ ) we have t φ φ φ t φ = 1, ( 1 1)( 1)B 1, (φ 1,φ ), (35)
8 HARTMUT PECHER where B 1, (f,g) := i(λ m f ( g) ( 1 f)λ m g). (36) Its symbol b 1, (η,ξ) = η m ( ξ) ξ m ( 1 η) (37) can be estimated elementarily ([0], Lemma 3.): b 1, (η,ξ) m( η + ξ )+ η ξ ( 1 η, ξ). (38) Combining these estimates for the symbols and (4) we obtain Im( t φ k φ k φ t φ)+im( l φ k φ k φ l φ) (39) ) 1 ( D ǫ (D 1 +ǫ φ 1 Dφ )+D 1 1 D 1 φ 1 Dφ +D 1 1 φ1 D φ, 1, + 1, φ 1 Dφ. For different signs 1 and we use (5) and obtain the bound Im( t φ k φ k φ t φ)+im( l φ k φ k φ l φ) (40) 1 ( D ǫ D 1 1 (D +ǫ φ 1 D 1 +ǫ φ )+D 1 1 D 1 φ 1 Dφ, 1, +D 1 φ1 D D 1 φ ) + 1, φ 1 Dφ. 3. Local well-posedness Recallφ = 1 (φ(iλ m) 1 φ t ),sothatφ = φ + +φ and t φ = iλ m (φ + φ ), and A = 1 (A(iD) 1 A t ) so that A = A + +A and t A = id(a + A ), we write (0),(1) as follows: where The initial data are (i t Λ m )φ = (Λ m ) 1 M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) (41) (i t D)A = (D) 1 N(φ +,φ,a +,A ), (4) M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) = A µ µ φ+a µ A µ φ (43) N 0 (φ +,φ,a +,A ) = Im(φiΛ m (φ + φ )) A 0 φ (44) N j (φ +,φ,a +,A ) = Im(φ j φ) A j φ. (45) φ (0) = 1 (φ 0 (iλ m ) 1 φ 1 ) (46) A 0 (0) = 1 (a 00 (id 1 )ȧ 00 ) = 0 (47) A j (0) = 1 (a 0j (id) 1 ȧ 0j ). (48) (47) follows from (10). From (7) we have φ (0) H s, and from (11) we have for r s in the case n = 3: a 0j H r 1, ȧ 0j H r 1, so that A j (0) H r 1, whereas in the case n = we have D 1 ǫ a 0j H r 1+ǫ, D ǫ ȧ 0j H r 1+ǫ, so that D 1 ǫ A j (0) H r 1+ǫ. We split A = A hom +Ainh into its homogeneous and inhomogeneous part, where (i t D)A hom = 0 with data as in (47) and (48) and A inh is the solution of (4) with zero data. By the linear theory we obtain for b > 1/: φ hom X s,b φ (0) H s
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 9 and for β > 1/: DA hom X r 1,β DA (0) H r 1 forn = 3 D 1 ǫ A hom X r 1+ǫ,β D 1 ǫ A (0) H r 1+ǫ forn =. Our aim is to show the following local well-posedness result: Theorem 3.1. 1. If n 3 assume s > n 3 4, r > n n 3 1, s r 1, r s 1, r s >, s r > n 1. Let φ (0) H s and DA (0) H r 1 be given. Then the system (41),(4) has a unique local solution φ X s,1 + [0,T], DA hom X r 1,1 ǫ0 [0,T], A inh X r,1 ǫ0 [0,T], where ǫ 0 > 0 is sufficiently small.. If n = assume s > 1, r > 1 4, s r 1, r s 1, r s > 1 4, s r > 3 4. Let φ (0) H s and D 1 ǫ A (0) H r 1+ǫ be given. Then the system (41),(4) has a unique local solution φ X s,1 + [0,T], D 1 ǫ A hom X r 1+ǫ,3 4 + [0,T], D ǫ A inh X r ǫ,3 4 [0,T], where ǫ > 0 is sufficiently small. 4. Preliminaries Fundamental for the proof of Theorem 3.1 are the following bilinear estimates in wave-sobolev spaces which were proven by d Ancona, Foschi and Selberg in the cases n = in [3] and n = 3 in [4] in a more general form which include many limit cases which we do not need. Theorem 4.1. Let n = or n = 3. The estimates and uv X s 0, b 0 u X s 1,b 1 1 v X s,b uv H s 0, b 0 u H s 1,b 1 v XHs,b hold, provided the following conditions hold: b 0,b 1,b 0 b 0 +b 1 +b > 1 b 0 +b 1 > 0 b 0 +b > 0 b 1 +b > 0 s 0 +s 1 +s > n+1 s 0 +s 1 +s > n (b 0 +b 1 ) s 0 +s 1 +s > n (b 0 +b ) s 0 +s 1 +s > n (b 1 +b ) (b 0 +b 1 +b )
10 HARTMUT PECHER s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1 s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1 s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1 s 0 +s 1 +s > n+1 4 b 0 b 1 b (s 0 +b 0 )+s 1 +s > n (49) s 0 +(s 1 +b 1 )+s > n s 0 +s 1 +(s +b ) > n s 1 +s > 0 s 0 +s > 0 s 0 +s 1 > 0. If n = 3 the condition (49) is only necessary in the case when ξ 0 ξ 1 ξ and also 1 and are different signs. Here ξ 0,ξ 1 and ξ denote the spatial frequencies of ûv,û and v, respectively. Next, we want to prove a special case of these bilinear estimate, which holds in higher dimensions. We start by recalling the Strichartz type estimates for the wave equation. Proposition 4.1. If n and q, r <, then the following estimate holds: u L q t Lr x u H n n r 1 q,1 +. ( 1 q (n 1) 1 ), (50) r Proof. A proof can be found for e.g. in [8], Prop..1, which is combined with the transfer principle. The following proposition was proven by [13]. Proposition 4.. Let n, and let (q,r) satisfy: ( 1 q, r <, q (n 1) 1 ) r Assume that then 0 < σ < n n r 4 q, s 1,s < n n r 1 q, s 1 +s +σ = n n r q. D σ (uv) q/ L u t L r/ x H s 1, 1 v + H s, 1. + The following product estimate for wave-sobolev spaces is a special case of the very convenient much more general atlas formulated by [1] in arbitrary dimension, but proven only in the case 1 n 3. ([1] and []). Therefore we have to give a proof.
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 11 Proposition 4.3. Assume n 3 and s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1, (s 0 +s 1 +s )+s 1 +s > n, s 0+s 1 0, s 0 +s 0, s 1 +s 0. The following estimate holds: uv H s 0,0 u H s 1, 1 + v H s, 1 +. Proof. We only consider the case n 4, because the case n = 3 follows similarly and is contained in Theorem 4.1. We have to prove û 1 (ξ 1,τ 1 ) û (ξ,τ ) û 0 (ξ 0,τ 0 ) I := u ξ 1 s1 ξ 1 τ 1 1 + ξ s ξ τ 1 + 1 ξ 0 L s0 xt u L xt. Here * denotes integration over ξ 0 +ξ 1 +ξ = 0 and τ 0 +τ 1 +τ = 0. Remark, that we may assume that the Fourier transforms are nonnegative. We consider different regions. 1. If ξ 0 ξ 1 ξ and s 0, we obtain I Thus we have to show By Prop. 4.1 we obtain û 1 (ξ 1,τ 1 ) ξ 1 s1+s0 ξ 1 τ 1 1 + û (ξ,τ ) ξ s ξ τ 1 +û0(ξ 0,τ 0 ). uv L xt u H s 1 +s 0, 1 + v H s 1, 1 +. uv L xt u L t L x v L t L x u H 0,1 + v H n 1 +,1 + and also uv L xt u n 1 v H +,1 + H 0, 1. + Bilinear interpolation gives for 0 θ 1 : so that uv L xt u H n 1 (1 θ)+, 1 + v H n 1 θ+,1 +, uv L xt u H s 1 +s 0, 1 + v H s, 1 +, if s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1 and s 1 +s 0 0.. If ξ 0 ξ ξ 1 and s 1 0, we obtain similarly uv L xt u H s +s 0, 1 + v H s 1, 1 +, if s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1 and s +s 0 0. 3. If ξ 1 ξ, s 0 0 and s 0, we have ξ 0 ξ 1, so that ξ 0 s0 ξ 1 s0 and we obviously obtain the same result as in 1. 4. If ξ 1 ξ, s 0 0 and s 1 0, we obtain the same result as in. 5. If ξ 0 ξ 1 ξ and s 0 we obtain I û 1 (ξ 1,τ 1 ) û (ξ,τ ) ξ 1 s0+s1+s ξ 1 τ 1 1 + ξ τ 1+û0(ξ 0,τ 0 ) u 1 L xt u L xt, because under our asumption s 0 +s 1 +s > n 1 we obtain by Prop. 4.1: uv L xt u L t L x v L x L t u H s 0 +s 1 +s,1 + v H 0, 1 +. 6. If ξ 1 ξ, s 0 and s 0 0, or 7. If ξ 0 ξ ξ 1 and s 1 0, or 8. If ξ 1 ξ, s 1 0 and s 0 0, the same argument applies. Thus we are done, if s 0 0, and also, if s 0 0, and ξ 0 ξ ξ 1 or ξ 0 ξ 1 ξ.
1 HARTMUT PECHER It remains to consider the following case: ξ 0 ξ 1 ξ and s 0 > 0. We apply Prop. 4. which gives uv H s 0,0 u H s 1, 1 + v H s, 1 +, under the conditions 0 < s 0 < n 1, s 0 +s 1 +s = n 1 and s 1,s < n 1 4. The last condition is not necessary in our case ξ 1 ξ. Remark that this implies s 1 +s > 1, so that s 0 +s 1 +s +s 1 +s > n., The second condition can now be replaced by s 0 +s 1 +s n 1, because we consider inhomogeneous spaces. Finally we consider the case ξ 0 ξ 1 ξ and s 0 n 1. If s 0 > n and s 1 +s 0 we obtain the claimed estimate by Sobolev uv H s 0,0 u H 0, 1 + v H 0, 1 + u H s 1, 1 + v H s, 1 +. We now interpolate the special case with the following estimate uv H n,0 u H 0,1 + v H 0, 1 + uv H 1 n +,0 u H 1 4 +,1 + v H 1 4 +, 1 +, which follows from Prop. 4.. We obtain uv H s 0,0 u H k+, 1 + v H k+, 1 +, where s 0 = (1 θ) n θ(1 n ) = n θ θ = n s 0, 0 θ 1, k = θ 4 = n 8 s0 4. Using our asumption (s 0 + s 1 + s ) + s 1 + s > n n s 0 < (s 1 + s ), we obtain 0 k < s1+s. Because ξ 1 ξ, we obtain uv H s 0,0 u H s 1, 1 + v H s, 1 + for (s 0 +s 1 +s )+s 1 +s > n and s 1 +s 0. Corollary 4.1. Under the assumptions of Prop. 4.3 uv H s 0,0 u H s 1, 1 v H s, 1. Proof. This follows by bilinear interpolation of the estimate of Prop. 4.3 with the estimate uv H N,0 u H N, 1 4 + v H N, 1 4 +, where,say,n > n, which followsby Sobolevapartfromthe specialcases 1 = s, in which we interpolate with the estimate uv H N,0 u H N, 1 4 + v H N, 1 4 + in order to save the condition s 1 = s. The following multiplication law is well-known: Proposition 4.4. (Sobolev multiplication law) Let n, s 0,s 1,s R. Assume s 0 + s 1 + s > n, s 0 + s 1 0, s 0 + s 0, s 1 + s 0. Then the following product estimate holds: uv H s 0 u H s 1 v H s.
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 13 5. Proof of Theorem 3.1 Proof. It is by now standard that the claimed result follows by the contraction mapping principle in connection with the linear theory, if the following estimates hold: and where Λ 1 m M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) s, 1 R +R 3 (51) X ++ D 1 N(φ +,φ,a +,A ) X r, ǫ 0 + D 1+ǫ N(φ +,φ,a +,A ) X r ǫ, ǫ 0 + R = R = ( φ X s, 1 + ( φ X s, 1 + R +R 3 forn = 3 (5) R +R 3 forn =, (53) + DA r 1,1 ǫ X 0 ) forn = 3, + D 1 ǫ A r 1+ǫ,1 ǫ X 0 ) forn = and similar estimates for the differences, which follow by the same arguments in view of the multilinear character of the terms. In the sequel we estimate the various nonlinear terms, where we use repeatedly the estimate u H l,b u X l,b for b 0 and the reverse estimate for b 0. Claim 1: For n 3 the following estimate holds: A µ µ φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ DA H r 1,1 ǫ 0 φ H s, 1 +ǫ Proof: By Tao [1], Cor. 8. we may replace DA by ΛA. We apply (6) and reduce to the following 7 estimates: uv H s 1,0 u H r+ 1 ǫ,1 ǫ 0 v H s 1,1 +ǫ, (54) uv H s 1,0 u H r,1 ǫ 0 v H s 1 ǫ, 1 +ǫ, (55) uv H s 1, 1 +ǫ u H r+ 1,1 ǫ 0 v H s 1,1 +ǫ, (56) uv H s 1, 1 +ǫ u H r, 1 ǫ 0 v H s 1,1 +ǫ, (57) uv H s 1, 1 u +ǫ H r+ 1 v,1 ǫ 0 Hs 1,0, (58) uv H s 1, 1 +ǫ u H r,1 ǫ 0 v H s 1,0, (59) uv H s 1, 1 +ǫ u H r,1 ǫ 0 v H s, 1 +ǫ. (60) (60) follows immediately from Prop. 4.4, because r +1 > n and r s 1. The other estimates follow from Prop. 4.3 and Cor. 4.1 by choosing the parameters as follows: (54): s 0 = 1 s, s 1 = r+ 1 ǫ, s = s 1, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = r+ 1 n 1 ǫ > for r > n 1, and s 1+s = r+s 1 ǫ > n 9 4 3 4 for r > n 1, s > n 3 4. (55): similarly (56): s 0 = 1 s, s 1 = r+ 1, s = s 1, so that s 1 +s = r +s 1 > 3 4. Here we used that we allow DA H r 1,1 ǫ0 instead of DA H r 1,1 +. (57): s 0 = r, s 1 = s 1, s = 1 s, so that s 1 +s = 1. (58): s 0 = s 1,s 1 = r+ 1, s = 1 s,sothat s 0 +s 1 +s +s 1 +s = r s+ > n by our assumption r s > n 3. (59): s 0 = s 1, s 1 = r, s = 1 s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s +s 1 +s = r s+ 3 > n. Claim : For n = the following estimate holds: A µ µ φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ D 1 ǫ1 A H r 1+ǫ 1, 3 4 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ
14 HARTMUT PECHER Proof: We may replace D 1 ǫ1 A by Λ 1 ǫ1 A by [1], Cor. 8. and argue similarly as for claim 1 using Theorem 4.1. By (6) we reduce to the same estimates, where in (54),(55)(58),(59) and (60) we replace the H l,1 ǫ0 -norms by H l,3 4 +ǫ -norms, which makes no essential difference. According to Theorem 4.1 we have to show s 0 +s 1 + s > 3 4. Using that in all these cases s 0 + s 1 + s = r + 1, this is fulfilled for r > 1 4. Moreover we need s 0 +s 1 +s +s 1 +s > 1. In (54) and (55) we have s 1 +s = r+s 1 > 1 4 by our assumptions r > 1 4, s > 1, so that this condition is satisfied, whereas in (58) we have s 0 +s 1 +s = r s+ > 1 by our assumption r s > 1, and in (59) we obtain s 0+s 1 +s +s 1 +s = r s+ 3 > 1 as well. In (57) we replace H r,1 ǫ0 by H r,1 4 +ǫ, which makes no essential difference, because s 1 + s = 1. In (56) we replace Hr,1 ǫ0 by H r,1 4 +ǫ and use Theorem 4.1 with parameterss 0 = r+ 1, s 1 = s 1, s = 1 s, b 0 = 1 4 +ǫ, b 1 = 1 +ǫ, b = 1 ǫ, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = r+ 1 > 3 4 and s 0+s 1 +s +s 1 +s +b 0 = r+ 3 4 +ǫ > 1, where it is essential to allow D 1 ǫ1 A H r 1+ǫ1,3 4 +ǫ instead of D 1 ǫ1 A H r 1+ǫ1,1 +ǫ. Finally, (60) follows by Prop. 4.4. Claim 3: If n 3 we obtain D 1 (φ φ) H r,0 φ H s,1 +ǫ Proof: We may replace D 1 by Λ 1 and use Prop. 4.3 with s 0 = 1 r, s 1 = s, s = s 1, so that s 0 + s 1 + s = s r > n 1 by assumption, and also s 1 +s = s 1 > 1, if s > 3 4. We also need the assumption s r 1. Claim 3 : For n = we obtain D 1+ǫ1 (φ φ) H r ǫ 1, 1 4 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ Proof: We may replace D 1+ǫ1 by Λ 1+ǫ1. We use Theorem 4.1 with s 0,s 1,s as in claim 3, but now b 0 = 1 4 ǫ, b 1 = b = 1 + ǫ, so that we need our assumption s 0 + s 1 + s = s r > 3 4 and (s 0 + s 1 + s ) + (s 1 + s + b 0 ) = (s r)+(s 1)+ 1 4 ǫ > 1 for s 1. It remains to consider the cubic nonlinearities. Claim 4: In the case n 3 the following estimate holds: A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ DA µ H r 1, 1 +ǫ DA ν H r 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ Proof: 1. Assume that at least one of the A-factors has frequencies 1. We may replace in this case DA µ by ΛA µ and DA ν by ΛA ν by [1], Cor. 8.. a. If s > n 1 we apply Prop. 4.3 twice to obtain A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ A µ A ν H s 1,0 φ H s, 1 +ǫ A µ H r, 1 +ǫ A ν H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ, where we choose for the first step s 0 = s 1, s 1 = 1 s, s = s, so that s 0 + s 1 + s = s > n 1 by assumption and s 1 + s = 1. For the second step the choice s 0 = 1 s, s 1 = s = r gives s 0 +s 1 +s = r s+1 > n 1 by our assumption and also s 1 +s = r > 1. b. If s n 1 we obtain similarly A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ A µ A ν H n 3 +,0 φ H s, 1 +ǫ A µ H r, 1 +ǫ A ν H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ. For the first step we choose s 0 = n 3 +, s 1 = s, s = 1 s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = n 1 + and s 1+s = 1, whereas for the second step s 0 = 3 n, s 1 = s = r, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = r+ 3 n > n 1 for r > n 1, and s 1+s = r > 1.
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 15. If both factors A µ and A ν have frequencies 1 the frequencies of the product and φ are equivalent, so that we may crudely estimate as follows: A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ A µ A ν Λ s 1 φ L x L t A µ L t L x A ν L t L x φ L t Hs x DA µ L t L x DA ν L t L x φ L t Hs x DA µ H r 1, 1 +ǫ DA ν H r 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ. Claim 4 : In the case n = the following estimate holds: A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ D 1 ǫ1 A µ H r 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ D 1 ǫ1 A ν H r 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ Proof: We argue similarly as for claim 4. 1. If at least one A-factor has frequencies 1 we use [1], Cor.8. again and my replace D 1 ǫ1 A µ and D 1 ǫ1 A ν by Λ 1 ǫ1 A µ and Λ 1 ǫ1 A ν, respectively, and use Theorem 4.1 twice. a. If s > 3 4 we obtain A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ A µ A ν H s 1,0 φ H s, 1 +ǫ A µ H r, 1 +ǫ A ν H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ choosing s 0 = s 1, s 1 = s, s = 1 s, so that s 0 + s 1 + s = s > 3 4 and s 1 + s = 1, for the first estimate, and choosing s 0 = 1 s, s 1 = s = r for the second estimate, so that s 0 + s 1 + s = r s + 1 > 3 4, where we used our assumption r s > 1 4, and s 1 +s = r > 1. b. If s 3 4 we obtain A µ A ν φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ A µ A ν H 1 4 +,0 φ H s, 1 +ǫ A µ H r, 1 +ǫ A ν H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ, where we choose s 0 = 1 4 +, s 1 = 1 s, s = s for the first step, so that s 0 +s 1 +s > 3 4 and s 1 +s = 1, whereas s 0 = 1 4, s 1 = s = r for the second step, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = r+ 1 4 > 3 4 and s 1 +s = r > 1.. If both A-factors have frequencies 1, we may argue as in the proof of claim 4. Claim 5: In the case n 3 we obtain D 1 (Aφψ) H r,0 DA H s 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ and in the case n = the following estimate holds: D 1+ǫ1 (Aφψ) H r ǫ 1,0 D 1 ǫ1 A H s 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ. Proof: 1. If the frequencies of the product or A are 1, we use [1], Cor. 8. to replace everywhere D by Λ. a. If r n, we use Prop. 4.4 and Prop. 4.3 and obtain Aφψ H r 1,0 A H r, 1 +ǫ φψ H n 1+,0 A H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ, where for the first step s 0 = 1 r, s 1 = r, s = n 1+, so that s 0+s 1 +s = n +, and for the second step s 0 = 1 n, s 1 = s = s, so that s 0 + s 1 + s = 1 n +s > n 1 by our assumption s > n 3 4 for n 3 and s 0+s 1 +s > 1 by the assumption s > 1 for n =, and s 1 +s = s > 1.. If r > n, we obtain by Prop. 4.4 (or Prop. 4.3) : Aφψ H r 1,0 A H r, 1 +ǫ φψ H r 1+,0 A H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ. The first step holds,because r > n, and forthe secondstep wechooses 0 = 1 r, s 1 = s = s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = s r+1 > n 1, because by assumption
16 HARTMUT PECHER s r > n 1 for n 3 and s r > 3 4 for n =. We also use s r 1.. If the frequencies of the product and A are 1, we obtain in the case n 3 : D 1 (Aφψ) H r,0 D 1 (Aφψ) H,0 Aφ H,0 ψ H s, 1 +ǫ DA H r 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ, where we replaced D 1 by Λ 1 and D by Λ by [1], Cor. 8.., and used Prop. 4.3 for the second inequality with s 0 = 3, s 1 =, s = s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = s + 1 > n, and for the last inequality with s 0 =, s 1 = r, s = s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = +r+s > n. In the case n = we may argue similarly replacing D 1+ǫ1 by Λ 1+ǫ1 and D 1 ǫ1 by Λ 1 ǫ1 by [1], Cor. 8.. 6. Proof of Theorem 1.1 We start with the solution (φ,a ) of(41),(4) givenby Theorem3.1. Defining φ := φ + +φ, A := A + +A we immediately see that t φ = iλ m (φ + φ ), t A = id(a + A ), so that N in (4) is the same as N in (1) and (17). Moreover by (4): A = (i t D)(i t +D)A + +(i t +D)(i t D)A = (i t D)(D) 1 N(A,φ)+(i t +D)(D) 1 N(A,φ) = N(A,φ). Thus A satisfies (17). We also haveφ(0) = φ 0, t φ = φ 1, A(0) = a 0, t A(0) = ȧ 0. Next we prove that the Lorenz condition µ A µ = 0 is satisfied. We define By (1) we obtain u := µ A µ = t A 0 + j A j, u := t A 0 + j A j. (i t D)u = t (i t D)A 0 + j (i t D)A j = (D) 1 ( t (Im( φiλ m (φ + φ )) A 0 φ ) j (Im( φ j φ) A j φ )) = (D) 1 (Im(φΛ m ( i t φ + +i t φ ))+Im(φ φ)+ µ (A µ φ )). Now we have Im(φ φ) = Im(φ(m φ Λ m Λ m φ)) = Im(φΛ m (Λ m φ + +Λ m φ )), so that by (41) we obtain (i t D)u = (D) 1 (Im(φΛ m ( (i t +Λ m )φ + +(i t Λ m )φ ))+ µ (A µ φ )) = (D) 1 (Im(φM(φ +,φ,a +,A ))+A µ µ ( φ )+ φ u) =: ( ) 1 R(A,φ). By (43) and the second equation in () M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) = Now by the definition of P 1, A (1, )(A 01,φ )+ip +A µ A µ φ = ((A 0+ +A 0 )Λ(φ + φ ) +D 1 (A 0+ A 0 ) (φ + +φ ))+ip +A µ A µ φ = i( A 0 t φ ( ) 1 t A 0 φ)+ip +A µ A µ φ. P = R k (R j A k R k A j ) j φ = ( ) 1 k ( j A k k A j ) j φ = ( ) 1 ( k A k ) φ+a j j φ
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 17 and by the definition of u so that we obtain ( ) 1 t A 0 φ = ( ) 1 ( j A j u) φ, M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) = i( A 0 t φ+( ) 1 u φ+a j j φ)+a µ A µ φ which implies R(A, φ) = i(a µ µ φ+( ) 1 u φ)+a µ A µ φ, = Im( φi(a µ µ φ+( ) 1 u φ)+a µ µ ( φ )+ φ u+im(φa µ A µ φ) = Re( φa µ µ φ) Re(φ( ) 1 u φ)+re(a µ φ µ φ)+ φ u = Re(φ φ) ( ) 1 u+ φ u, so that (i t D)u = (D) 1 ( Re(φ φ) ( ) 1 u+ φ u), and thus u fulfills the linear equation The data of u fulfill by (10) and (13): u = Re(φ φ) ( ) 1 u+ φ u. u(0) = t A 0 (0)+ j A j (0) = ȧ 00 + j a 0j = 0 and, using that A is a solution of (17) and also (16): t u(0) = ta 0 (0)+ t j A j (0) = j j A 0 (0) j 0 t=0 + t j A j (0) = j ( j A 0 (0) t A j (0)) j 0 t=0 = j F 0j (0) j 0 t=0 = Im(φ 0 φ 1 ) j 0 t=0 = j 0 t=0 j 0 t=0 = 0. By uniqueness this implies u = 0. Thus the Lorenz condition µ A µ = 0 is satisfied. Under the Lorenz condition however we know that M in (41) is the same as M in (0) and (18). Moreover by (41) we obtain ( m )φ = (i t Λ m )(i t +Λ m )φ + +(i t +Λ m )(i t Λ m )φ = ( (i t Λ m )+(i t +Λ m ))(Λ m ) 1 M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) = M(φ +,φ,a +,A ) = M(φ,A). Thus φ satisfies (18). Because (17),(18) is equivalent to (1),(), where F µν := µ A ν ν A µ, we also have that F k0 satisfies (7) and F kl satisfies (8). What remains to be shown are the following properties of the electromagnetic field F µν : F µν X s 1,1 + + [0,T]+X s 1,1 + [0,T] = F µν H s 1,1 + [0,T], t F µν H s,1 + [0,T] in the casen = 3, D ǫ F µν H s 1+ǫ,1 + [0,T], t D ǫ F µν H s +ǫ,1 + [0,T] in the casen =. By transformation of (7) and (8) into a first order system as before and using well-known results for Bourgain type spaces these properties in the case n = 3 are
18 HARTMUT PECHER reduced to: F µν (0) H s 1 (61) t F µν (0) H s and (6) D 1 F µν X s 1, 1 + + [0,T]+X s 1, 1 + [0,T]. (63) In the case n = we refer to [1] and have to show D ǫ F µν (0) H s 1+ǫ, (64) D ǫ t F µν (0) H s +ǫ and (65) Λ 1 + D ǫ F µν H s 1+ǫ, 1 + [0,T], (66) where in all cases F µν is given by (7) and (8). These properties for n = in fact imply D ǫ F µν H s 1+ǫ,1 + [0,T] and t D ǫ F µν H s +ǫ,1 + [0,T] by [1], Thm. 5.5, Prop. 5.5 and Prop. 5.6 or [18], Thm. 1. We use this approach in the two-dimensional case in order to avoid the unpleasant singularity of D 1. We start to prove (63) and (66): We first estimate the quadratic terms by (39) and (40). Claim 1: In the case n 3 the following estimates hold: D 1 1 D ǫ (D 1 +ǫ φ 1 Dφ ) s 1, 1 φ X +ǫ 1 s, 1 φ X +ǫ s, 1 X +ǫ 1 (67) if 1 =, D 1 D 1 1 D ǫ (D 1 +ǫ φ 1 D 1 +ǫ φ ) s 1, 1 φ X +ǫ 1 s, 1 φ X +ǫ s, 1 X +ǫ 1 (68) if 1, D 1 (D 1 1 D 1 φ 1 Dφ ) s 1, 1 φ X +ǫ 1 s, 1 φ X +ǫ s, 1 X +ǫ 1 (69) D 1 (D 1 φ1 D D 1 φ ) X s 1, 1 +ǫ D 1 (φ 1 Dφ ) X s 1, 1 +ǫ Proof: By [1], Cor. 8. we may replace D 1 by Λ 1. (67): This reduces to uv X s,0 u s 1 X ǫ, 1 v +ǫ s 1, 1. X +ǫ 1 φ 1 X s, 1 +ǫ 1 φ X s, 1 +ǫ (70) φ 1 X s, 1 +ǫ 1 φ X s, 1 +ǫ. We use Prop. 4.3 with s 0 = s, s 1 = s 1 ǫ, s = s 1, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = s+ 1 ǫ > n 1 4 on our assumption s > n 3 4. The condition s 0 + s 1 + s + s 1 + s > n is not needed (and violated for s close to 3 4 ) in the case 1 = for n = 3 according to Thm. 4.1. If n 4 this condition is in fact fulfilled, because s 1 +s = s 3 ǫ > n 3 1 assuming s > n 3 4. (68): This reduces to uv H s 3,0 u H s 1 ǫ,1 +ǫ v H s 1 ǫ,1 +ǫ, (71)
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 19 which holds by Prop. 4.3 with s 0 = 3 s, s 1 = s = s 1 ǫ, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = s+ 1 ǫ > n 1 4 and s 1+s = s 1 ǫ > n 5 1 for n 3 and s > n 3 4. (69): We have to show uv H s, 1 +ǫ u H s 1,0 v H s 1, 1 +ǫ. We use Prop. 4.3 with s 0 = s 1, s 1 = s 1, s = s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = s+ 1 > n 1 4 and s 1 +s = 1. (70): It suffices to prove uv H s 1, 1 +ǫ u H s 1,1 +ǫ v H s 1,0, which is handled similarly. (71): This follows easily by Prop. 4.4 for s > n 1. In the case n = we use the original system (7),(8) and replace the estimates (39) and (40) using the following result for the null forms Q 0i (u,v) and Q ij (u,v), which was given in [11], Prop. 1. Q 0i (u,v)+q ij (u,v) D 1 + D 1 (D 1 + ud 1 + v)+d 1 + (D 1 + D 1 ud 1 + v)+d 1 + (D 1 + ud 1 + D 1 v) Interpolation with the trivial bound D + ud + v gives (for 0 ǫ 1 4 ) : Q 0i (u,v)+q ij (u,v) D 1 ǫ + D 1 ǫ (D 1 +ǫ + ud 1 +ǫ + v) +D 1 ǫ + (D 1 +ǫ + D 1 ǫ ud 1 +ǫ + v)+d 1 ǫ + (D 1 +ǫ + ud 1 +ǫ and by the fractional Leibniz rule for D + we obtain + D 1 ǫ Q 0i (u,v)+q ij (u,v) D 1 ǫ (D 1 +ǫ + ud + v)+d 1 +ǫ + D 1 ǫ ud + v (7) +D 1 +ǫ + ud 1 ǫ D + v +D 1 ǫ (D + ud 1 +ǫ + v) +D + D 1 ǫ ud 1 +ǫ + v +D + ud 1 +ǫ + D 1 ǫ v. One easily checks that φ X s,1 + implies Λ + φ H s 1,1 +, and D 1 ǫ1 A X r 1+ǫ1,1 + implies Λ + D 1 ǫ1 A H r +ǫ1,1 +. In the case n = we now use (7) and may reduce to the estimates for the nonlinearities in claims,4 and 5 below. Claim : For n = the following estimates hold: Λ 1 + D ǫ1 D 1 ǫ (D 1 +ǫ + φd + ψ) H s 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + ψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ, (73) Λ 1 + D ǫ1 (D 1 +ǫ + D 1 ǫ φd + ψ) H s 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + ψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ, (74) Λ 1 + D ǫ1 (D 1 +ǫ + φd 1 ǫ D + ψ) H s 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + ψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ. (75) Proof: The singularity of D ǫ1 is harmless ([1], Cor. 8.) and may be replaced by Λ ǫ1. (73) reduces to φψ H s,0 φ H s 1 ǫ,1 +ǫ ψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ. Use Prop. 4.4 and our assumption s > 1. (74) and (75) can be handled similarly. v),
0 HARTMUT PECHER Claim 3: In the case n 3 the following estimate holds: D 1 l (Aφψ) H s 1, 1 +ǫ DA H r 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ. Proof: We may replace D by Λ on the right hand side and use Prop. 4.3, which gives Aφψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ A H r, 1 +ǫ φψ H s 1,0 A H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ with parameters s 0 = s 1, s 1 = r, s = 1 s for the first estimate, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = r+ 1 > n 1 and s 0 +s 1 +s +s 1 +s = r s+ 3 > n, because we assume r > n n 3 1 and r s >. For the second estimate choose s 0 = 1 s, s 1 = s = s, so that s 0 +s 1 +s = s+ 1 > n 1 and s 1 +s = s > 1. Claim 4: In the case n = the following estimate holds: Λ 1 + D1 ǫ1 (Aφψ) H s 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + D 1 ǫ1 A H r +ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + ψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ. Proof: Arguing as for claim 3 we may replace D 1 ǫ1 by Λ 1 ǫ1. We choose the same parameters and use r+ 1 > 3 4 and r s+ 3 > 1 by assumption for the first estimate and s > 1 for the second estimate. Finally we have to consider the term l (A k φ ). Using t φ = iλ m (φ + φ ) and t A k = id(a k+ A k ) we obtain Now t (A k φ ) = i φ D(A k+ A k )+ia k Λ m (φ + φ )φ+a k φiλ m (φ + φ ). φ DA D( φ A)+AφDφ+AφDφ, so that we only have to consider terms of the type D(A k φ ) and A k φλφ. The first term was considered in claim 3 and claim 4. Thus it remains to prove the following claim. Claim 5: In the case n 3 the following estimate holds: D 1 (AφΛψ) H s 1, 1 +ǫ DA H r 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ and in the case n = : Λ 1 + D ǫ1 (AφΛψ) H s 1+ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + D 1 ǫ1 A H r +ǫ 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + φ H s 1, 1 +ǫ Λ + ψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ. Proof: By [1], Cor. 8. we may replace powers of D by powers of Λ everywhere in the following argument, provided the frequencies of the product or A are 1. By Prop. 4.3 we obtain AφΛψ H s, 1 +ǫ A H r, 1 +ǫ φλψ H s 3,0 A H r, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ, where we choose for the first estimate s 0 = s 3, s 1 = s, s = r, so that s 0 + s 1 + s = r + 1 > n 1 for n 3 using r > n 1, s 0 + s 1 + s > 3 4 for n = using r > 1 4, and s 1 +s = r s+ 1 using r s 1. For the second estimate we choose s 0 = 3 s, s 1 = s, s = s 1, thus for n 3 we have s 0 +s 1 +s = s+ 1 > n 1 and s 1 +s = s 1 > 1 using s > 3 4, whereas for
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 1 n = we obtain s 0 +s 1 +s = s+ 1 > 1. If the frequencies of the product as well as A are 1 we estimate for n 3 (and similarly for n = ) D 1 (AφΛψ) H s 1, 1 +ǫ D 1 (AφΛψ) H 3,0 Aφ H,0 Λψ H s 1, 1 +ǫ DA H r 1, 1 +ǫ φ H s, 1 +ǫ ψ H s, 1 +ǫ, where we used [1], Cor 8., again to replace D 1 by Λ 1 and D by Λ, and Prop. 4.4 (or Prop. 4.3) with s 0 = 4, s 1 =, s = s 1 for the second inequality, so thats 0 +s 1 +s > n,ands 0 =,s 1 = r,s = s,sothats 0 +s 1 +s = r+s+ > n for the last inequality. The proof of (63) and (66) is now complete. It remains to prove (61),(6), (64) and (65). The properties (61) and (64) are given by (8). Next we consider the case n 3 and prove (6). By (1) we have t F 0k t=0 = t F k0 t=0 = l F kl t=0 +j k t=0. By (8) we have l F kl t=0 H s. It remains to prove First we obtain j k t=0 = Im(φ 0 k φ 0 )+ φ 0 a 0k H s. φ 0 k φ 0 H s φ 0 H s k φ 0 H s 1 < by Prop. 4.4, because s > n 1. Concerning the term φ 0 a 0k we prove Claim: Proof: If r n φ 0 a 0k H s φ 0 H s Da 0k H r 1 forn 3 φ 0 a 0k H s φ 0 H s D1 ǫ1 a 0k H r 1+ǫ 1 forn =. we obtain by Prop. 4.4 : φ 0 a 0k H s φ 0 H n +s r+ a 0k H r φ 0 H s a 0k H r, where the first estimate directly follows from Prop. 4.4, and the last estimate requires s n + s r+ and n + s + r + s > n, which hold by the assumptions s,r > n 1. In the case r > n we obtain by Prop. 4.4 φ 0 a 0k H s φ 0 H s a 0k H r φ 0 H s a 0k H r, assuming s > n 1. In the case of high frequencies 1 of a 0k this is enough for our claim to hold. Otherwise we have equivalent frequencies of φ 0 a 0k and φ 0, so that we obtain in the case n 3 : φ 0 a 0k H s Λ s ( φ 0 )a 0k L Λ s ( φ 0 ) L a 0k L φ 0 H s Da 0k H n 1+ φ 0 H s Da 0k H r 1 and similarly for n = with Da 0k H s 1 replaced by D 1 ǫ1 a 0k H r 1+ǫ 1. Moreover t F jk = 0 ( j A k k A j ) = j ( k A 0 +F 0k ) k ( j A 0 +F 0j ) = j F 0k k F 0j, so that by (8) we obtain t F jk t=0 = j F 0k t=0 k F 0j t=0 H s. We are done in the case n 3. Next we consider the case n = and prove (65). By (1) we have D ǫ t F 0k t=0 = D ǫ t F k0 t=0 = D ǫ l F kl t=0 +D ǫ j k t=0.
HARTMUT PECHER By (8) we have D ǫ l F kl t=0 H s +ǫ, so that it remains to prove D ǫ j k t=0 = D ǫ Im(φ 0 k φ 0 )+D ǫ ( φ 0 a 0k ) H s +ǫ. First we show the estimate Claim: D ǫ ( φ 0 a 0k ) H s +ǫ φ 0 H s D1 ǫ a 0k H r 1+ǫ. Proof: For frequencies of the product 1 this immediately follows from the proof of the previous claim. If the frequencies of the product is 1 and the frequencies of a 0k are 1, we estimate assuming s > 1 : D ǫ ( φ 0 )a 0k ) H s +ǫ φ 0 a 0k L 1 φ 0 L a 0k L Finally, if both frequencies are 1 we obtain φ 0 H s a 0k H r φ 0 H s D1 ǫ a 0k H r 1+ǫ. D ǫ ( φ 0 )a 0k ) H s +ǫ φ 0 a 0k L 1 φ 0 L 1 a 0k L It remains to prove for n = and s > 1 : φ 0 L D1 ǫ a 0k L φ 0 H s D1 ǫ a 0k H r 1+ǫ. D ǫ (φ 0 k φ 0 ) H s +ǫ φ 0 H s k φ 0 H s 1. For large frequencies of the product this follows from Prop. 4.4. If the product has frequencies 1 the frequencies of φ 0 and k φ 0 are equivalent, so that D ǫ (φ 0 k φ 0 ) H s +ǫ φ 0 k φ 0 H 1, 1+ǫ Λ 1 φ0 H 1, 1+ǫ Λ 1 φ0 L 1 Λ 1 φ0 L φ 0 H s. Moreover, similarly as in the case n 3 the assumption (8) implies D ǫ t F jk t=0 = D ǫ j F 0k t=0 D ǫ k F 0j t=0 H s +ǫ. Thus we have also shown (65). The proof of Theorem 1.1 is now complete. References [1] P. d Ancona, D. Foschi, and S. Selberg: Null structure and almost optimal local regularity for the Dirac-Klein-Gordon system. Journal of the EMS 9 (007), 877-898 [] P. d Ancona, D. Foschi, and S. Selberg: Null structure and almost optimal local regularity of the Maxwell-Dirac system. American J. Math. 13 (010), 771-839 [3] P. d Ancona, D. Foschi, and S. Selberg: Product estimates for wave-sobolev spaces in +1 and 1+1 dimensions. Contemporary Math. 56 (010), 15-150 [4] P. d Ancona, D. Foschi, and S. Selberg: Atlas of products for wave-sobolev spaces in R 1+3. Transactions AMS 364 (01), 31-63 [5] S. Cuccagna: On the local existence for the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon system in R 3+1. Comm. PDE 4 (1999), 851-867 [6] M. Czubak and N. Pikula: Low regularity well-posedness for the D Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equation in the Coulomb gauge. Comm. Pure Appl. Anal. 13 (014), 1669-1683 [7] D.M. Eardley and V. Moncrief: The global existence of Yang-Mills-Higgs fields in 4- dimensional Minkowski space, I and II. Comm. Math. Phys. 83 (198), 171-191, 193-1 [8] J. Ginibre and G. Velo: Generalized Strichartz inequalities for the wave equation. J. Funct. Analysis 133 (1995), 50-68 [9] M. Keel, T. Roy and T. Tao: Global well-posedness of the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equation below the energy norm. Discrete Cont. Dyn. Syst. 30 (011), 573-61 [10] S. Klainerman and M. Machedon: On the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equation with finite energy. Duke Math. J. 74 (1994), 19-44 [11] S. Klainerman and M. Machedon (Appendices by J. Bourgain and D. Tataru): Remark on Strichartz type inequalities. Int. Math. Res. Not. no. 5 (1996), 01-0 [1] S. Klainerman and S. Selberg: Bilinear estimates and applications to nonlinear problems. Comm. Contemp. Math. 4 (00), 3-95 [13] S. Klainerman and D. Tataru: On the optial local regularity for the Yang-Mills equations in R 4+1. Journal AMS 1 (1999), 93-116
MAXWELL-KLEIN-GORDON IN LORENZ GAUGE 3 [14] J. Krieger, J. Sterbenz and D. Tataru: Global well-posedness for the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equation in 4+1 dimensions. Small energy. Preprint arxiv: 111.57 [15] M. Machedon and J. Sterbenz: Almost optimal local well-posedness for the (3+1)- dimensional Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equations. J. AMS 17 (004), 97-359 [16] V. Moncrief: Global existence of Maxwell-Klein-Gordon fields in (+1)-dimensional spacetime. J. Math. Phys. 1 (1980), 91-96 [17] I. Rodnianski and T. Tao: Global regularity for the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equation with small critical Sobolev norm in high dimensions. Comm. Math. Phys. 51 (004), 377-46 [18] S. Selberg: On an estimate for the wave equation and applications to nonlinear problems. Diff. Int. Equ. (00), 13-36 [19] S. Selberg: Almost optimal local well-posedness of the Maxwell-Klein-Gordon equations in 1+4 dimensions. Comm. PDE 7 (00), 1183-17 [0] S. Selberg and A. Tesfahun: Finite-energy global well-posedness of the Maxwell-Klein- Gordon system in Lorenz gauge. Comm. PDE 35 (010), 109-105 [1] T. Tao: Multilinear weighted convolutions of L -functions, and applications to non-linear dispersive equations. Amer. J. Math. 13 (001), 839-908 [] T. Tao: Local well-posedness of the Yang-Mills equation in the temporal gauge below the energy norm. J. Diff. Equ. 189 (003), 366-38