Printer Friendly

The first nonprincipal eigenvalue for a Steklov problem.

Introduction

In a previous work [1], we investigated the following asymmetric Steklov problem with weights:

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.1)

where v denotes the unit exterior normal, 1 < p < [infinity] and [[DELTA].sub.p]u = div([[absolute value of [nabla]u].sup.p-2] [nabla]u) indicate the p-Laplacian. [OMEGA] [subset] [R.sup.N] be a bounded domain with a Lipschitz continuous boundary, where N [greater than or equal to] 2, m, n [member of] [L.sup.q] ([partial derivative][OMEGA]) with [N - 1/p - 1] < q < [infinity] if p < N and q [greater than or equal to] 1 if p [greater than or equal to] N. We proved the existence of a first nonprincipal positive eigenvalue for (1.1) in case where the weights m and n have meanvalues nonzero. As an application we gave another variational characterization for the second eigenvalue of the problem (1.1) with m = n.

The construction of this distinguished eigenvalue was obtained by applying a version of the mountain pass theorem to the functional [phi](u) := [1/p] [[integral].sub.[OMEGA]] [[absolute value of [nabla]u].sup.p] dx restricted to the manifold [M.sub.m,n] := {u [member of] [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]); [1/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] [m[([u.sup.+]).sup.p] + n[([u.sup.-]).sup.p]]d[sigma] = 1}. In this process the (PS) condition was show to hold at all levels and the geometry of the mountain pass was derived from the observation that [phi](m) and -[phi](n) were strict local minima (where [phi](m) denotes the normalized positive first eigenvalue of the problem (1.1) with m = n). In [2], we are interested in the singular case (in case where one of the weights has meanvalue zero). In this case the Palais Smale condition is not satisfied any more at level 0 and at least one of the two naturals candidates for local minimum fails to belong to the manifold [M.sub.m,n]. To by pass this difficulty we applied a version of the mountain pass theorem for a local [C.sup.1] functional restricted to a [C.sup.1] manifold and which satisfies the Palais Smale condition of Cerami at certain levels.

Our purpose in the present paper is to study the following asymmetric Steklov problem:

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (1.2)

When trying to adapt the approach followed in [1] to the present situation, this relevant functional is A(u) = [1/p] [[parallel]u[parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] restricted to the manifold [M.sub.m,n] where [[parallel]u[parallel].sub.1,p] = [([[integral].sub.[OMEGA]] [[absolute value of [nabla]u].sup.p] dx + [[integral].sub.[OMEGA]] [[absolute value of u].sup.p] dx).sup.1/p] is the [W.sup.1,p] ([OMEGA])-norm. We show the existence of a first nonprincipal positive eigenvalue, as an application we give another variational characterization for the second eigenvalue for (1.2) with m = n.

Preliminaries

throughout this paper [OMEGA] will be bounded domain in [R.sup.N]. We assume that m, n [member of] [L.sup.q]([partial derivative][OMEGA]), [m.sup.+] = max(m,0) [not equal to] 0, [n.sup.+] = max(n, 0) [not equal to] 0, where q > [N - 1/p -1] if 1 < p [less than or equal to] N and q [greater than or equal to] 1 if p > N. We are interested in weak solution of (1.2) i.e., functions u [member of] [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) satisfying

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2.1)

Where d[sigma] is the N - 1 dimensional Hausdorff measure. Let us formulate variationally the problem (1.2). For that purpose we introduce the [C.sup.1] functionals A and [B.sub.m,n]: [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) [right arrow] R, defined by A(u) = [1/p] [[parallel]u[parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] and [B.sub.m,n](u) = [1/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] [m[([u.sup.+]).sup.p] + n[([u.sup.- ]).sup.p]]d[sigma]. At this point let us introduce the set [M.sub.m,n] := {u [member of] [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]); [B.sub.m,n](u) = 1}. The condition [m.sup.+] [not equal to] 0 implies that [M.sub.m,n] [not equal to] [empty set]. Moreover the set [M.sub.m,n] is a [C.sup.1] manifold in [W.sup.1,p] ([OMEGA]); for any u [member of] [M.sub.m,n] the tangent space of [M.sub.m,n] at u, [T.sub.u][M.sub.m,n] is the set [T.sub.u][M.sub.m,n] := {w [member of] [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA): <[B'.sub.m,n](u), w) = 0}. Let us denote by [??] the restriction of A to [M.sub.m,n]. We recall that a value c is a critical value of [??] if A'(u)/[T.sub.u][M.sub.m,n] = 0 and [??](u) = c for some u [member of] [M.sub.m,n]. Let us briefly recall some properties relative to the following Steklov problem

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (2.2)

Each eigenvalue of (2.2) is called a Steklov eigenvalue. In [3] Bonder and Rossi proved by using a general result from the infinitely dimensional Ljuternik- Schnirelman theory (see [5]) that for any k [member of] [N.sup.*], [[lambda].sub.k](m) defined by

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

is a nondecreasing and unbounded sequence of the positive eigenvalue of the problem (2.2), where [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] compact, symmetric and [gamma](C) [greater than or equal to] k} with [gamma](C) denotes the Krasnoselski's genus on [W.sub.1,p]([OMEGA]). He showed the following proposition concerning the first Steklov eigenvalue.

Proposition 2.1. The first eigenvalue [[lambda].sub.1](m) of (2.2) is simple and isolated. Moreover any associated eigenfunction does not change sign in [OMEGA].

We can easily show that [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII], where

[[GAMMA].sub.k] = {C [subset] [M.sub.m,n]: C compact, symmetric and [gamma](C) [greater than or equal to] k}.

Let E be a Banach space and let M = {u [member of] E; g(u) = 1}, where g [member of] [C.sup.1](E, R) and 1 is a regular value of g. Let f [member of] [C.sup.1](E, R) and consider the restriction [??] to f. The differential of [??] at u [member of] M has a norm which will be denoted by [[parallel][??][parallel].sub.*] and which is given by the norm of the restriction [??] to the tangent space [T.sub.u](M) := {v[member of] E;<g'(u), v> = 0}; where <,> denotes the duality pairing between [E.sup.*] and E. We recall that [??] is said to satisfy the Palais-Smale condition on M if, for any sequences [u.sub.k] [member of] M such that [??]([u.sub.k]) is bounded and [[parallel][??]'([u.sub.k])[parallel].sub.*] [right arrow] 0, one has that [u.sup.k] admits a converging subsequences. The following Lemma will be used in the proof of our theorem. It guarantees the existence of a critical point in any component of any sublevel

set.

Lemma 2.2 ([4]): Let E, g, M, f and [??] be as considered previously. Assume [??] is bounded from below on M and satisfy the Palais-Smale condition on M. Let d [member of] R and consider O = {u [member of] M; [??](u) < d}. Then any component (i.e. a nonempty maximal open connected subset) O1 of O contains a critical point of [??].

We now recall a version of the classical mountain pass theorem on a [C.sup.1] manifold.

Proposition 2.3 ([4]): Let u, v [member of] M with u [not equal to] v and suppose that

H = {h [member of] C([0,1],M); h(0) = u and h(1) = v}

is nonempty. Assume that

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

and that [??] satisfies the Palais-Smale condition on M. Then c is a critical point of [??].

We will apply Proposition (2.3) with E = [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA), M = [M.sub.m,n] f = A and g = [B.sub.m,n]

A first nonprincipal eigenvalue

Now consider the family of paths in [M.sub.m,n]:

[GAMMA] = {[gamma] [member of] C([0,1], [M.sub.m,n]): [gamma](0) [less than or equal to] 0 and [gamma](1) [greater than or equal to] 0},

and define the minimax value

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.1)

Since [GAMMA] [not equal to] [empty set] (see [1]), then c(m, n) is finite.

Theorem 3.1. c(m, n) is an eigenvalue of (1.2) which satisfies

max{[[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1](n)} < c(m, n)..

Moreover there is no eigenvalue of (1.2) between max{[[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1](n)} and c(m, n).

As the demonstration is comparatively long, we organize it in several propositions and lemmas.

Proposition 3.2. [??] satisfies the Palais-Smale condition (PS) on [M.sub.m,n].

Proof: Let ([u.sub.k]) [member of] [M.sub.m,n] be a sequence such that [??]([u.sub.k]) [right arrow] c, where c is a positive constant and

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.2)

with [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Since the sequence ([u.sub.k]) is bounded then there exists a subsequence still denoted by ([u.sub.k]) such that [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [u.sub.0] weakly in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) and [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [u.sub.0] strongly in [L.sup.p]([OMEGA]). Let us write for w[member of] [W.sup.1,p] ([OMEGA])

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

Taking [phi] = [a.sub.k] (w) in (3.2), one deduces

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.3)

for some constant C. Indeed: [parallel][a.sub.k](w)[parallel] = [parallel]w - [c.sub.k][u.sub.k][parallel], where [c.sub.k] = [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] (m([u.sup.+.sub.k]) - n[([u.sup.-.sub.k]).sup.p-1])wd[sigma], so [parallel][a.sub.k](w)[parallel] [less than or equal to] [parallel]w[parallel] + [absolute value of [c.sub.k]]. [parallel][u.sub.k][parallel] and [absolute value of [c.sub.k]] [less than or equal to] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m[([u.sup.+]).sup.p- 1] wd[sigma] [absolute value of +] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] n[([u.sup.-.sub.k]).sup.p-1] wd[sigma]]. Using the compacity of the trace mapping [W.sub.1,p]([OMEGA]) [right arrow] [L.sup.q-1] ([partial derivative][OMEGA]), we obtain [absolute value of [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m[([u.sup.+.sub.k]).sup.p-1] wd[sigma]] [less than or equal to] [c.sub.1](m). [parallel]w[parallel]. [[parallel][u.sup.+.sub.k][parallel].sup.p-1], where [c.sub.1](m) is a constant depending of m. Similarly we have [absolute value of [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m[([u.sup.- .sub.k]).sup.p-1] wd[sigma]] [less than or equal to] [c.sub.1](m). [parallel]w[parallel]. [[parallel][u.sup.+.sub.k][parallel].sup.p-1],

Consequently [absolute value of [c.sub.k]] [less than or equal to] C [parallel]w[parallel]. [[parallel][u.sub.k][parallel].sup.p-1], where C [greater than or equal to] max{[c.sub.1](m), [c.sub.1](n)}. Thus

[parallel][a.sub.k](w)[parallel] [less than or equal to] [parallel]w[parallel](1 + C [[parallel][u.sub.k][parallel].sup.p]).

Finally, we have (3.3). Put w = [u.sub.k] = [u.sub.0] in inequality (3.3), one obtains

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

It then follows from the ([S.sup.+]) property that [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [u.sub.0] strongly in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]).

Lemma 3.3. Let [v.sub.k] [member of] [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) with [v.sub.k] [greater than or equal to] 0, [v.sub.k] [not equal to] 0 and [absolute value of [v.sub.k] > 0] [right arrow] 0. Let [n.sub.k] be a bounded in [L.sup.q]([partial derivative][OMEGA]). Then [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] [n.sub.k][v.sup.p.sub.k]d[sigma]/[[parallel][v.sub.k][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] [right arrow] 0..

Proof: Without loss of generality, one can assume that [[parallel][v.sub.k][parallel].sub.1,p] = 1. So for a subsequence, [v.sub.k] [right arrow] v weakly in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) strongly in [L.sup.p]([OMEGA]). In addition [v.sub.k] [right arrow] v strongly in [[L.sup.pq/q-1]] ([partial derivative][OMEGA]) and [v.sub.k](x) [right arrow] v(x) a.e. in [OMEGA]. The assumption [absolute value of [v.sub.k] > 0] [right arrow] 0 implies v(x) = 0 a.e. x [member of] [OMEGA] since [v.sub.k](x) [right arrow] 0 at measure. Consequently [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (since [v.sub.k] [right arrow] 0 strongly in [L.sup.pq/q- 1]([partial derivative][OMEGA])).

We now turn to the geometry of [??]. Let [[phi].sub.m] be the normalized positive eigenfunction associated to the first positive eigenvalue [[lambda].sub.1](m).

Proposition 3.4. If m [member of] [L.sup.q]([partial derivative][OMEGA]) and [m.sup.+] [not equal to] 0, then [[phi].sub.m] [member of] [M.sub.m,n] is a strict local minimum of [??], with in addition for some [[epsilon].sub.0] > 0 and all 0 < [epsilon] < [[epsilon].sub.0],

[??]([[phi].sub.m]) = [[lambda].sub.1](m) < inf{[??](u); u [member of] [M.sub.m,n] [intersection] [partial derivative]B([[phi].sub.m], [epsilon])} (3.4)

where B([[phi].sub.m], [epsilon]) denotes the ball in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) of center [[phi].sub.m] and radius [epsilon]. Similar conclusion for -[[phi].sub.n] if [n.sup.+] [not equal to] 0.

Proof: One first shows for some [[epsilon].sub.0] > 0,,

[??]([[phi].sub.m]) < [??](u) [for all]u [member of] [M.sub.m,n] [intersection] B([[phi].sub.m], [[epsilon].sub.0]}, u [not equal to] [[phi].sub.m]. (3.5)

Assume by contradiction the existence of a sequence [u.sub.k] [member of] [M.sub.m,n] with [u.sub.k] [not equal to] [[phi].sub.m], [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [[phi].sub.m] strongly in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) and [??]([u.sub.k]) [less than or equal to] [[lambda].sub.1](m). We first observe that [u.sub.k] changes sign for k sufficiently large. Indeed, since [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [[phi].sub.m], [u.sub.k] must be > 0 somewhere. If [u.sub.k] [greater than or equal to] 0 in [OMEGA], then

[??]([u.sub.k]) = [1/p] [[parallel][u.sub.k][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] > [[lambda].sub.1](m)/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m [[absolute value of [u.sub.k]].sup.p] d[sigma] = [[lambda].sub.1](m)

since [u.sub.k] [not equal to] [[phi].sub.m], but this conradicts [??]([u.sub.k]) [less than or equal to] [[lambda].sub.1](m). So [u.sub.k] changes sign for k sufficiently large. Now we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (36)

Thus (3.6) implies

[[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] n[([u.sup.- .sub.k]).sup.p]d[sigma]/[[parallel][u.sup.- .sub.k][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] [greater than or equal to] 1/[[lambda].sub.1](m)

Since [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [[phi].sub.m], [absolute value of [u.sup.-.sub.k] > 0] [right arrow] 0. By lemma 3.3, we have [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] n[([u.sup.- .sub.k]).sup.p]d[sigma]/[[parallel][u.sup.- .sub.k][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] [right arrow] 0. It follows that 0 [greater than or equal to] 1/[lambda](m), this is a contradiction. Thus the proposition (3.2) is proved. Now we show (3.4), one assumes by contradiction the existence of 0 < [epsilon] < [[epsilon].sub.0] and of a sequence [u.sub.k] [member of] [M.sub.m,n] such that [[parallel][u.sub.k] - [[phi].sub.m][parallel].sub.1,p] = [epsilon] and [??]([u.sub.k]) [less than or equal to] [??]([[phi].sub.m]) + 1/2[k.sup.2]. Consider

C := {u [member of] [M.sub.m,n]; [epsilon] - [delta] [less than or equal to] [parallel][u.sub.k] - [[phi].sub.m][parallel] [less than or equal to] [epsilon] + [delta]}

where 0 < [delta] < [epsilon] and [delta] + [epsilon] < [[epsilon].sub.0]. Clearly inf{[??](u); u [member of] C} = [??]([[phi].sub.m]). We apply for each k Ekland's variational principle to the functional [??] on C to get the existence of a sequence [v.sub.k] [member of] C such that

[??]{[v.sub.k]) [less than or equal to] [??]([u.sub.k]) [less than or equal to] [??]([[phi].sub.m]) + 1/2[k.sup.2] (3.7)

[[parallel][v.sub.k] - [u.sub.k])).sub.1,p] [less than or equal to] 1/k (3.8)

[??]{[v.sub.k]) [less than or equal to] [??]([u.sub.k]) + [1/k] [[parallel]u - [v.sub.k][parallel].sub.1,p] [for all]u [member of] C. (3.9)

Our purpose is to show that [v.sub.k] is a Palais-Smale sequence for [??], i.e. that [??]([v.sub.k]) is bounded (which is clearly by (3.7)) and that [[parallel][??]([v.sub.k])[parallel].sub.*] [right arrow] 0. We fix k with [1/k] < [delta], take [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] and consider a [C.sup.1] path y:]-[eta],[eta][[right arrow] [M.sub.m,n] such that [gamma](0) = [v.sub.k] and y'(0) = [omega]. For [absolute value of t] sufficiently small, [gamma](t) [member of] C. Indeed

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.10)

and it is easily seen using (3.8), 0 < [1/k] < [delta] and [absolute value of [u.sub.k] - [[phi].sub.m][[parallel].sub.1,p] = [epsilon] that the right-hand side of (3.10) is > [epsilon] - [delta] and < [epsilon] + [delta]. So we can take u = [gamma](t) in (3.9). This gives, for t > 0,

[[??]([v.sub.k]) - [??]([gamma](t))/t] [less than or equal to] [1/k] [parallel][gamma](t) - [v.sub.k]/t[parallel],

and so, going to the limit as t [right arrow] 0, we get

-<[??]([v.sub.k]), [omega]> [less than or equal to] [1/k] [parallel][omega][parallel].

Consequently [[parallel][??]'([v.sub.k])[parallel].sub.*] [less than or equal to] 1/k. Thus [[parallel][??]'([v.sub.k])[parallel].sub.*] [right arrow] 0 and [v.sub.k] is Palais-Smale sequence for [??]. It follows that, for a subsequence, [v.sub.k] [right arrow] v strongly in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]). Clearly v [member of] C and satisfies [[parallel]v - [[phi].sub.m][parallel].sub.1,p] = [epsilon] and [??](v) = [??]([[phi].sub.m]) which contradicts (3.5), similar argument when [n.sup.+] [not equal to] 0.

Lemma 3.5. c(m, n) > max{[[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1](n)}.

Proof: One first shows that [[lambda].sub.1](m) [less than or equal to] c(m, n) and [[lambda].sub.1](n) [less than or equal to] c(m, n). For any y [member of] [GAMMA], [gamma](1) [member of] [M.sub.m,n] is [greater than or equal to] 0 and so satisfies the contraint in

[[lambda].sub.1](m) = inf{[1/p] [[parallel]u[parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p]; u [member of] [W.sup.1,p] (Q[OMEGA]) and [1/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m [[absolute value of u].sup.p] d[sigma] = 1}.

Consequently [[lambda].sub.1](m) [less than or equal to] c(m, n), and a similar argument applies to [[lambda].sub.1](n). Now one shows the strict inequality [[lambda].sub.1](m) < c(m, n). Assume by contradiction that [[lambda].sub.1](m) = c(m, n), so there exists a sequence [[gamma].sub.k] [member of] [GAMMA] such that [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. Put [u.sub.k] = [[gamma].sub.k] (1), since [u.sub.k] [greater than or equal to] 0 one has

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.11)

and consequently [1/p][[parallel][u.sub.k][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] [right arrow] [[lambda].sub.1](m). Thus [parallel][u.sub.k][parallel] remains bounded, for a subsequence and for some [u.sub.0] [member of] [W.sup.1,p] ([OMEGA]), one has [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [u.sub.0] weakly in [W.sup.1,p] ([OMEGA]). Since [u.sub.k] [greater than or equal to] 0 and using the trace mapping, one has [1/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m [[absolute value of [u.sub.0]].sup.p] d[sigma] = 1. Thus [u.sub.0] e[member of] [M.sub.m,n] and so [[lambda].sub.1](m) [less than or equal to] [1/p][[parallel][u.sub.0][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] [less than or equal to] lim inf [1/p][[parallel][u.sub.k][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] = [[lambda].sub.1](m), which implies that [1/p] [[parallel][u.sub.0][parallel].sup.p.sub.1,p] = [[lambda].sub.1](m). Consequently [u.sub.k] [right arrow] [u.sub.0] strongly in [W.sup.1,p]([OMEGA]) and we conclude that [u.sub.0] = [[phi].sub.m]. Let us now choose [epsilon] > 0 such that (3.5) holds and B([[phi].sub.m], [epsilon]) does not contain any function v with v [less than or equal to] 0, which is clearly possible. For k sufficiently large [u.sub.k] = [[gamma].sub.k] (1) [member of] B([[phi].sub.m], [epsilon]), while [[gamma].sub.k] (0) [not member of] B([[phi].sub.m], [epsilon]), since [y.sub.k] (0) [less than or equal to] 0. It follows that the path [[gamma].sub.k] intersects [partial derivative]B([[phi].sub.m], e) and consequently [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. This contradicts (3.11).

Lemma 3.6. If [m.sub.k] [member of] [L.sup.q]([partial derivative][OMEGA]) with [m.sup.+.sub.k] [not equal to] 0 and [m.sup.+.sub.k] [right arrow] 0 in [L.sup.q]([partial derivative][OMEGA]), then [[lambda].sub.1]([m.sub.k]) [right arrow] +[infinity].

Proof: By definition of [[lambda].sub.1]([m.sub.k]) and the trace mapping we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

Lemma 3.7. For any d > 0, the set

O:={u [member of] [M.sub.m,n]; u [greater than or equal to] 0 et [??](u) < d}

is arcwise connected. Similar conclusion if u [greater than or equal to] 0 is replaced by u [less than or equal to] 0.

Proof: Since o is empty if d [less than or equal to] [[lambda].sub.1](m), we can assume from now on d > [[lambda].sub.1](m). Using lemma (3.6), one constructs a weight [??] [member of] [L.sup.q]([partial derivative][OMEGA]) such that [[??].sup.+] [not equal to] 0, [[lambda].sub.1]([??]) > d and [??] [less than or equal to] m. It suffices in this construction to take [??] = [epsilon][m.sup.+] - [m.sup.-] with [epsilon] > 0 to be sufficiently small. We then consider the manifold [M.sub.m,[??]] and the sublevel set

[??]:={u [member of] [M.sub.m,n]; A(u) < d}.

By Proposition (2.3), the restriction [??] of A to [M.sub.m,[??]] satisfies the Palais-Smale condition. Lemma (2.2) implies that any (nonempty) component of [??] contains a critical point of [??] But the first two critical levels [[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1]([??]) of [??] verify [[lambda].sub.1](m) < d < [[lambda].sub.1] ([??]) and consequently [??] admits only one critical point in [??]. We can conclude in this way that [??] is arcwise connected. Let now [u.sub.1], [u.sub.2] [member of] O. Since they are [greater than or equal to] 0, they also belong to [??]. Let [gamma] be a patch in [??] from [u.sub.1], [u.sub.2] and consider the patch

[[gamma].sub.1](t):=[absolute value of [gamma](t)]/[([1/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m[[absolute value of [gamma](t)].sup.p]).sup.1/p]

By the choice of n, we have

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.12)

and consequently [[gamma].sub.1] is well defined patch in [M.sub.m,n], which clearly goes from [u.sub.1] to [u.sub.2] and is made of nonnegative functions. Moreover, by (3.12),

A([[gamma].sub.1](t) = A([gamma](t))/[([1/p] [[integral].sub.[partial derivative][OMEGA]] m[[absolute value of [gamma](t)].sup.p]).sup.p] [less than or equal to] A([gamma](t)) < d.

for all t, and we conclude that the patch [[gamma].sub.1] lies in O. This concludes the proof of Lemma (3.7) for O with u [greater than or equal to] 0. similar argument in the case u [less than or equal to] 0

Lemma 3.8. There exist [u.sub.1] [greater than or equal to] 0 and [u.sub.2] [less than or equal to] 0 in [M.sub.m,n] such that [??]([u.sub.1]) < c(m, n) and [??]([u.sub.2]) < c(m, n). Moreover, for any such choice of u1, u2, one has

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII] (3.13)

where

[bar.[GAMMA]]:= {[gamma] [member of] C([0,1], [M.sub.m,n]); [gamma](0) = [u.sub.2] and [gamma](1) = [u.sub.1]}, and c(m, n) is defined in (3.1).

Proof: Since [m.sup.+] [not equal to] 0, one take [u.sub.1] = [[phi].sub.m] and the inequality [??]([u.sub.1]) < c(m, n) follows from Lemma (3.5). Similarly with [u.sub.2] = -[[phi].sub.n]. It remains to prove (3.13). Call [bar.c] the right-hand side of (3.13). One clearly has c(m, n) [less than or equal to] [bar.c]. To prove the converse inequality, let [epsilon] > 0 and take [[gamma].sub.[epsilon]] [member of] [GAMMA] such that

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

By Lemma (3.7), there exists a patch [e[ta].sub.1] [member of] [M.sub.m,n] joining [[gamma].sub.[epsilon]](1) and [u.sub.1], made of nonnegative functions and such that

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

Similarly there exists a patch [[eta].sub.2] [member of] [M.sub.m,n] joining [[gamma].sub.[epsilon]](0) and [u.sub.2], made of nonpositive functions and such that

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

Gluing together [[eta].sub.2], [[gamma].sub.[epsilon]] and [[eta].sub.1], one gets a path in [M.sub.m,n] joining [u.sub.2] and [u.sub.1] and such that [??] remains < c(m, n) + [epsilon] along this path. This implies [bar.c] [less than or equal to] c(m, n) + [epsilon]. Since [epsilon] > 0 is arbitrary, the conclusion follows.

We are now in a position to give the proof of Theorem (3.1).

Proof of Theorem 3.1. By Lemma (3.5), one has c(m, n) > max{[[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1](n)}. To prove that c(m, n) is an eigenvalue, we pick [u.sub.1], [u.sub.2] as in Lemma (3.8) and we will show that [bar.c], the right-hand side of (3.13), is a critical values of [??]. By Proposition (3.2) Ai satisfies the Palais-Smale condition. Thus the classical mountain pass theorem for a C1 functional manifold (see Proposition (2.1) yields the conclusion.

It remains to show that there is no eigenvalue between max{[[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1](n)} and c(m, n). Assume by contradiction the existence of such an eigenvalue [lambda] and let u be the corresponding eigenfucntion. We know that u change sign (since [lambda] > max{[[lambda].sub.1](m), [[lambda].sub.1](n)}); moreover

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

and we can normalize u so that u [member of] [M.sub.m,n]. The function

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

belong to [M.sub.m,n], with [u.sub.1] [greater than or equal to] 0, [u.sub.2] [less than or equal to] 0. We will construct a path [gamma] in [M.sub.m,n] joining [u.sub.1] and [u.sub.2] and such that [??]([gamma](t)) = [lambda] for all t [member of] [0,1]. This will give a contradiction with [MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]. To construct [gamma] we first go from [u.sub.1] to u by the path [[gamma].sub.1] such that u [member of] [gamma] ([0,1])

[[gamma].sub.1](t) := [[u.sup.+] - t[u.sup.-]]/[([B.sub.m,n]([u.sup.+] - t[u.sup.-])).sup.1/p],

and then from u to [u.sub.2] by the path [[gamma].sub.2] such that

[[gamma].sup.2](t) := t[u.sup.+] - [u.sup.-]/[([B.sub.m,n](t[u.sub.+] - [u.sup.- ])).sup.1/p]

It is easily to verified that the path constructed in this way is well defined and satisfies all the required conditions.

We are now in a position to give an application of Theorem (3.1) concerning the second positive eigenvalue [[lambda].sub.2](m) of problem (2.2). In application, for m = n, we obtain another variational characterization for the [[lambda].sub.2](m):

Corollary 3.9.

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII],

where

[MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

(for example [gamma](1) = [[phi].sub.m] and [gamma](0) = -[[phi].sub.n]).

References

[1] A. Anane, O. Chakrone, B. Karim, A. Zerouali, An assymmetric problem with weights, Nonlinear analysis 71(2009)614-621, doi:10.1016/j.na.2008.10.123.

[2] A. Anane, O. Chakrone, B. Karim and A. Zerouali, An asymmetric Steklov problem with weights (the singular case), Proceedings of Seminario Internacional Sobre Matematica Aplicada y Repercusion en las Sociedad Actual, Universidad Rey Juan Carlos, 2008, pp. 285-290.

[3] J. Fernandez Bonder and J. D. Rossi, Anonlinear eigenvalue problem with indefinite weights related to the Sobolev trace embedding, Publicacions Matematiques, 46:221-235, 2002.

[4] M. Arias, J. Campos. M.Cuesta. J.P. Gossez, Asymmetric elliptic problems with indefinite weights, ann. Inst. H. Poincar'e. Anal. Nonlinear 19(2002).

[5] Szulkin, "Ljusternik-Schnirelmann theory on C1- manifolds", Annales Inst. H. Poincar'e, Analyse non-lin'eaire, 5, pp. 119-139, 1988.

Aomar Anane, Omar Chakrone, Belhadj Karim and Abdellah Zerouali

Universite Mohamed I, Faculte des Sciences, Departement de Mathematiques et Informatique, Oujda, Maroc

E-mail: ananeomar@yahoo.fr, chakrone@yahoo.fr, karembelf@hotmail.com, abdellahzerouali@yahoo.fr
COPYRIGHT 2009 Research India Publications
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2009 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Author:Anane, Aomar; Chakrone, Omar; Karim, Belhadj; Zerouali, Abdellah
Publication:Global Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics
Article Type:Report
Geographic Code:4EUFR
Date:Dec 1, 2009
Words:5104
Previous Article:The semi Orlicz space of [chi] of analytic.
Next Article:Polya theory for orbiquotient sets.
Topics:

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2022 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters |