Home Existence and concentration behavior of solutions for a class of quasilinear elliptic equations with critical growth
Article Open Access

Existence and concentration behavior of solutions for a class of quasilinear elliptic equations with critical growth

  • Kaimin Teng EMAIL logo and Xiaofeng Yang
Published/Copyright: April 19, 2017

Abstract

In this paper, we study a class of quasilinear elliptic equations involving the Sobolev critical exponent

- ε p Δ p u - ε p Δ p ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) | u | p - 2 u = h ( u ) + | u | 2 p * - 2 u in  N ,

where Δ p u = div ( | u | p - 2 u ) is the p-Laplace operator, p * = N p N - p ( N 3 , N > p 2 ) is the usual Sobolev critical exponent, the potential V ( x ) is a continuous function, and the nonlinearity h ( u ) is a nonnegative function of C 1 class. Under some suitable assumptions on V and h, we establish the existence, multiplicity and concentration behavior of solutions by using combing variational methods and the theory of the Ljusternik–Schnirelman category.

MSC 2010: 35J20; 35J62

1 Introduction

In this paper, we are concerned with the existence, multiplicity and concentration behavior of solutions of the following quasilinear elliptic equations involving the Sobolev critical exponent:

(1.1) - ε p Δ p u - ε p Δ p ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) | u | p - 2 u = h ( u ) + | u | 2 p * - 2 u in  N ,

where Δ p u = div ( | u | p - 2 u ) is the p-Laplacian, N 3 , 2 p < N , p * = N p N - p is the Sobolev critical exponent, ε > 0 is a small parameter, the potential V : N is a continuous function, and the nonlinearity h ( u ) : is a nonnegative function of C 1 class. The reduction form of equation (1.1) appears in many branches of mathematical physics and has been studied extensively in recent years. In particular, when p = 2 , the solution of (1.1) is related to the following quasilinear Schrödinger equation:

(1.2) i ε ψ t = - ε 2 ψ + W ( x ) ψ - κ ε 2 ( ρ ( | ψ | 2 ) ) ρ ( | ψ | 2 ) ψ - l ~ ( | ψ | 2 ) ψ ,

where ψ : × N , W : N is a given potential, κ is a real constant, and ρ, l are real functions. Equation (1.2) arises in several models of different physical phenomena corresponding to various types of ρ. The case ρ ( s ) = s is used for the superfluid film equation in plasma physics by Kurihura in [26]. In the case ρ ( s ) = ( 1 + s ) 1 2 , it models the self-channeling of a high-power ultra short laser in matter; see [8, 9, 12, 15]. For more physical motivations, we can refer the interested readers to [6, 23, 25] and the references therein. If the quasilinear term ε p Δ p ( u 2 ) u is not appearing and p > 2 , problem (1.1) arises in a lot of applications when ε = 1 , such as image processing, non-Newtonian fluids and pseudo-plastic fluids; for more details see [5, 13, 19] and the references therein.

When κ=1 and ρ ( s ) = s , considering standing wave solutions of the form ψ ( x , t ) = u ( x ) e - i E t / ε in (1.2), then u ( x ) verifies the following equation:

(1.3) - ε 2 Δ u - ε 2 Δ ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) u = l ( u ) in  N ,

where V ( x ) = W ( x ) - E , l ( u ) = l ~ ( u 2 ) u . It is clear that when ε = 1 , equation (1.3) reduces to the following equation:

(1.4) - Δ u - Δ ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) u = l ( u ) in  N .

When κ = 0 and ρ ( s ) = s , the standing wave solutions of equation (1.2) satisfies the classical Schrödinger equation of the form

- ε 2 Δ u + V ( x ) u = l ( u ) in  N .

The existence and concentration behavior of positive solutions of the above equation have been extensively investigated under various hypotheses on the potential V ( x ) and the nonlinearity l ( u ) ; see, for example, [4, 16, 17, 22, 32, 34] and the references therein.

In recent years, many scholars have been interested in the study of the existence and multiplicity of solutions for equation (1.4). For example: the existence of a positive ground state solution has been obtained in [33] by using a constrained minimization argument which gives a solution of (1.4) with an unknown Lagrange multiplier λ in front of the nonlinear term. In [30], the existence of both one-sign and nodal ground states of soliton type solutions were established by the Nehari manifold method. In [29], Liu, Wang and Wang developed the methods of change of variables such that the quasilinear problem reduces to a semilinear one. They used an Orlicz space framework to prove the existence of positive solutions of (1.4) by the mountain pass theorem. Meanwhile, Colin and Jeanjean [14] developed the dual methods to treat the quasilinear problem (1.5), and the usual Sobolev space H 1 ( N ) was used to prove the existence of positive solutions. The other recently interesting works can be found in [3, 11, 20, 18, 31] and the references therein.

Regarding critical problems, there are also some important results appearing in the literature. For example, in [24], the authors established the existence, multiplicity and concentration behavior of ground states for quasilinear Schrödinger equation with critical growth

(1.5) { - ε 2 Δ u - ε 2 Δ ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) u = h ( u ) + | u | 22 * - 2 u in  N , u H 1 ( N ) , u ( x ) > 0 ,

by using the variational methods and combining them with the theory of the Ljusternik–Schnirelman category which was used by Alves, Figueiredo and Severo [2] to establish the existence and multiplicity of nontrivial weak solutions for quasilinear elliptic equations of the form

- ε p Δ p u - ε p Δ p ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) | u | p - 2 u = h ( u ) in  N .

Yang and Ding [40] applied the perturbed methods to consider the following critical quasilinear Schrödinger equation:

- ε 2 Δ u - ε 2 Δ ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) u = h ( x , u ) u + K ( x ) | u | 22 - 2 u in  N ,

and showed the existence of positive solutions as ε ε 0 and for any m ; it has at least m pairs of solutions if ε ε m , where ε 0 and ε m are sufficient small positive numbers.

Unlike [24, 2, 40], where the minimum of V ( x ) is global, Wang and Zou [38] studied the quasilinear Schrödinger equation with critical exponent

- ε 2 u - ε 2 [ ( u 2 ) ] u + V ( x ) u = g ( u ) + | u | 22 * - 2 u in  N ,

where the potential V ( x ) satisfies the local minimum condition inf Ω V < inf Ω V , Ω is a bounded domain of N , and proved the existence of positive bound states which concentrate around the local minimum point of V.

Motivated by the above-cited papers, the main purpose of this paper is to establish the existence, multiplicity and concentration behavior of the ground states for the quasilinear elliptic equation with critical growth

(Pe) { - ε p Δ p u - ε p Δ p ( u 2 ) u + V ( x ) | u | p - 2 u = h ( u ) + | u | 2 p * - 2 u in  N , u W 1 , p ( N ) , u ( x ) > 0 in  N ,

where V : N is a continuous function satisfying

  1. 0 < V 0 = inf x N V ( x ) < lim | x | inf V ( x ) = V < .

Assume that the nonlinearity h : is of class C 1 and satisfies the following conditions:

  1. h ( s ) = 0 for s 0 , h ( s ) = o ( | s | p - 2 ) as s 0 ;

  2. lim | s | h ( s ) | s | q - 1 = 0 for some q ( 2 p - 1 , 2 p * - 1 ) ;

  3. there exists 2 p < θ < 2 p * such that 0 < θ H ( s ) = θ 0 s h ( τ ) d τ s h ( s ) for all s > 0 ;

  4. the function s h ( s ) / s 2 p - 1 is increasing for s > 0 ;

  5. there exist C > 0 , σ ( max { 2 p N / ( N - p ) - 2 N N - p , 2 p } , 2 p * ) such that h ( s ) C s σ - 1 for s > 0 .

As far as we know, little work has been done for the existence and concentration behavior of positive solutions for the quasilinear problem (Pe) where the nonlinearity has a critical growth. Our main result complements the corresponding conclusion of [2] and extends the main result of [24]. Alves, Figueiredo and Severo [2], He, Qian and Zou [24] and Wang and Zou [38] chose the Sobolev space E which is defined by

E = { v W 1 , p ( N ) : N V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p d x < }

equipped with the norm

v E = v L p + | v | f := v L p + inf ξ > 0 1 ξ [ 1 + N V ( x ) | f ( ξ v ) | p d x ] .

The Orlicz–Sobolev space E may not be reflexible for p = 2 , and so the bounded sequence may have no convergent subsequence in E. Unlike the work of [2, 24, 38], we directly choose the usual Sobolev space W 1 , p ( N ) to deal with the autonomous problem and the usual Sobolev space X which will be defined in Section 2 to treat the nonautonomous problem. On the other hand, we use the mountain pass theorem under ( C ) c condition (see [36]); this is different from [2, 24, 38].

For stating our main result, we set

M = { x N : V ( x ) = V 0 }

and

M δ = { x N : dist ( x , M ) δ } for  δ > 0 .

In view of (V), the set M is compact. We recall that, if Y is a closed subset of a topological space X, the Ljusternik–Schnirelman category cat X ( Y ) is the least number of closed and contractible sets in X which cover Y. By means of the Ljusternik–Schnirelman theory, we arrive at the following result.

Theorem 1.1.

Suppose that conditions (V) and (H 0 )(H 5 ) are satisfied. Given δ > 0 , there exists ε ¯ = ε ¯ ( δ ) > 0 such that for any ε ( 0 , ε ¯ ) , problem (Pe) has at least c a t M δ ( M ) positive weak solutions in C loc 1 , α ( R N ) L ( R N ) . Moreover, each solution decays to zero at infinity, and if u ε denotes one of these positive solutions and η ε R N its global maximum, then

lim ε 0 V ( η ε ) = V 0 .

The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we present the abstract framework of the problem as well as some preliminary results. In Section 3, we show the existence of ground state solution for autonomous problem. Section 4 is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1.1.

2 Variational framework and preliminary results

Formally, the energy functional associated to (Pe) is defined by

(2.1) I ( u ) = ε p p N ( 1 + 2 p - 1 | u | p ) | u | p d x + 1 p N V ( x ) | u | p d x - N H ( u ) d x - 1 2 p * N | u + | 2 p * d x ,

where H ( u ) = 0 u h ( s ) d s , u + = max { u , 0 } . Observe that p ( u 2 ) u is not always in L 1 ( N ) , therefore the functional I ( u ) is not well defined on the whole Sobolev space W 1 , p ( N ) . In fact, let u C 0 1 ( N { 0 } ) and u ( x ) = | x | p - N / 2 p , x B 1 { 0 } ; then u W 1 , p ( N ) , while the function | u | p | u | p L 1 ( N ) . To overcome this difficulty, we use the change of variable methods developed in [29], making the change of variables u = f ( v ) , where f is a C function and defined by

f ( t ) = 1 ( 1 + 2 p - 1 | f ( t ) | p ) 1 p for  t [ 0 , + )

and

f ( - t ) = - f ( t ) for  t ( - , 0 ] .

The following properties were proved in [35].

Lemma 2.1.

The following properties involving f and its derivative hold:

  1. f is a uniquely defined C function and invertible;

  2. 0 < f ( t ) 1 for all t ;

  3. f ( t ) t 1 as t 0 ;

  4. 1 2 f ( t ) t f ( t ) f ( t ) for all t 0 , and 1 2 f 2 ( t ) t f ( t ) f ( t ) f 2 ( t ) for all t ;

  5. the function f ( t ) t is decreasing for t > 0 ;

  6. | f ( t ) | | t | for all t ;

  7. | f ( t ) f ( t ) | 1 / ( 2 p - 1 p ) < 1 for all t ;

  8. f ( t ) / | t | is nondecreasing for t > 0 and lim t + f ( t ) / t = a > 0 ;

  9. there exists a positive constant C such that

    | f ( t ) | { C | t | , | t | 1 , C | t | 1 2 , | t | 1 ;

  10. f ( t ) 2 1 / 2 p t for all t + .

Proposition 2.2.

The following properties involving f and h hold:

  1. ( f ( t ) ) p - 1 f ( t ) t 1 - p is decreasing for t > 0 ;

  2. ( f ( t ) ) 2 r - 1 f ( t ) t 1 - p is increasing for r p and t > 0 ;

  3. h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) t 1 - p is increasing for t > 0 ;

  4. F ( t ) := 1 p ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 1 f ( t ) t - 1 2 p * f 2 p * ( t ) is increasing for t > 0 ;

  5. 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) t - H ( f ( t ) ) is increasing for t > 0 .

Proof.

(1) By computation, we have

d d t ( ( f ( t ) ) p - 1 f ( t ) t p - 1 ) = ( p - 1 ) ( f ( t ) t ) p - 2 d d t ( f ( t ) t ) f ( t ) + ( f ( t ) ) p - 1 t p - 1 f ′′ ( t )
= ( p - 1 ) ( f ( t ) t ) p - 2 d d t ( f ( t ) t ) f ( t ) - 2 p - 1 ( f ( t ) ) 2 p - 2 t p - 1 | f ( t ) | p + 2 .

Since f ( t ) t is a decreasing function, we can obtain d d t ( f ( t ) t ) < 0 . Thus,

d d t ( ( f ( t ) ) p - 1 f ( t ) t p - 1 ) < 0 for  t > 0 .

(2) By Lemma 2.1 (4) and (7), we have that

d d t ( ( f ( t ) ) 2 r - 1 f ( t ) t p - 1 ) = ( 2 r - 1 ) f ( t ) 2 r - 2 ( f ( t ) ) 2 t p - 1 + ( f ( t ) ) 2 r - 1 f ′′ ( t ) t p - 1 - ( p - 1 ) ( f ( t ) ) 2 r - 1 f ( t ) t p - 2 t 2 p - 2
= ( f ( t ) ) 2 r - 2 f ( t ) t p [ ( 2 r - 1 ) f ( t ) t - 2 p - 1 ( f ( t ) ) p | f ( t ) | p + 1 t - ( p - 1 ) f ( t ) ]
( f ( t ) ) 2 r - 2 f ( t ) t p ( 2 r - 2 p ) f ( t ) t 0 .

(3) Since

h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) t p - 1 = h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) 2 p - 1 f ( t ) 2 p - 1 f ( t ) t p - 1 ,

by using conclusion (2) and (H 3 ), property (3) is proved.

(4) By Lemma 2.1 (4) and (7), we have that

F ( t ) = 2 p * - 1 p ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 2 ( f ( t ) ) 2 t + 1 p ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 1 f ′′ ( t ) t + 1 p ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 1 f ( t ) - ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 1 f ( t )
( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 2 f ( t ) [ 2 p * - 1 p f ( t ) t - 2 p - 1 p ( f ( t ) ) p + 1 ( f ( t ) ) p t + ( 1 p - 1 ) f ( t ) ]
p * - p p ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 1 f ( t ) > 0 .

(5) From (H 3 ) we obtain that h ( s ) s > ( 2 p - 1 ) h ( s ) . Setting G ( t ) = 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) t - H ( f ( t ) ) and using Lemma 2.1 (4) and (7), we deduce that

G ( t ) = 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) ( f ( t ) ) 2 t - 2 p - 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) ( f ( t ) ) p - 1 ( f ( t ) ) p + 2 t + ( 1 p - 1 ) h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t )
= 1 f ( t ) [ 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) ( f ( t ) ) 2 t - 2 p - 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) ( f ( t ) ) p ( f ( t ) ) p + 2 t + ( 1 p - 1 ) h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) f ( t ) ]
> 1 f ( t ) [ 2 p - 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) ( f ( t ) ) 2 t - 2 p - 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) ( f ( t ) ) p ( f ( t ) ) p + 2 t + ( 1 p - 1 ) h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) f ( t ) ]
h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) f ( t ) [ 2 p - 1 p f ( t ) t - 1 p f ( t ) t + ( 1 p - 1 ) f ( t ) ]
h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) f ( t ) ( p - 1 p f ( t ) + 1 - p p f ( t ) ) = 0

as desired. ∎

Under the change of variables, we can rewrite the functional I defined by (2.1) in the following form:

J ( v ) := I ( f ( v ) ) = ε p p N | v | p d x + 1 p N V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p d x - N H ( f ( v ) ) d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * d x ,

which is well defined on the Banach space

X = { v W 1 , p ( N ) : N V ( x ) | v | p d x < }

endowed with the norm

v X = ( N ( | v | p + V ( x ) | v | p ) d x ) 1 p .

In view of conditions (H 0 ) and (H 1 ), by the standard arguments, we conclude that J C 1 ( X , ) and

J ( v ) , φ = ε p N | v | p - 2 v φ d x + N V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) φ d x N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) φ d x
- N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 f ( v + ) f ( v + ) φ d x

for all v , φ X . Moreover, the critical points of J are the weak solutions of the Euler–Lagrange equation associated with the functional J given by

- ε p Δ p v + V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) = h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) + | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) .

We observe that if v X L loc ( N ) is a critical point of the functional J, then u = f ( v ) W 1 , p ( N ) L loc ( N ) is a weak solution of problem (1.1), that is,

ε p N [ ( 1 + 2 p - 1 | u | p ) | u | p - 2 u φ + 2 p - 1 | u | p | u | p - 2 u φ ] d x + N V ( x ) | u | p - 2 u φ d x
= N [ h ( u ) + | u | 2 p - 2 u ] φ d x

for all φ C 0 ( N ) .

3 Autonomous problem

In this section, we will study the existence of a positive ground state solution for the following equation:

(Qm) { - Δ p v + μ | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) = h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) + | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) in  N , v W 1 , p ( N ) , v ( x ) > 0 in  N ,

where μ is an arbitrary positive constant and 2 p < N . The functional μ associated to problem (Qm) is given by

μ ( v ) = 1 p N | v | p d x + μ p N | f ( v ) | p d x - N H ( f ( v ) ) d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * d x ,

which is well defined on the Banach space W μ endowed with the norm

v μ = ( N ( | v | p + μ | v | p ) d x ) 1 p .

From the hypotheses (H 0 )–(H 1 ) it is easy to verify that J μ C 1 ( W μ , ) and

μ ( v ) , φ = N | v | p - 2 v φ d x + N μ | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) φ d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) φ d x
- N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 f ( v + ) f ( v + ) φ d x ,

for all v , φ W μ . Moreover, the weak solution v of (Qm) corresponds to the critical point of the functional μ .

Let us denote the Nehari manifold associated to (Qm) by 𝒩 μ , that is,

𝒩 μ = { v W μ : v 0 and μ ( v ) , v = 0 } .

3.1 Mountain pass geometry

Theorem 3.1 ([36]).

Let E be a real Banach space and J : E R a functional of class C 1 . Let S be a closed subset of E which disconnects E into distinct connected components E 1 and E 2 . Suppose further that J ( 0 ) = 0 and that the following conditions hold:

  1. 0 E 1 and there is α > 0 such that J | S α > 0 ;

  2. there is e E 2 such that J ( e ) < 0 .

Then J possesses a ( C ) c sequence with c α > 0 given by

c = inf γ Γ max 0 t 1 J ( γ ( t ) ) ,

where

Γ = { γ C ( [ 0 , 1 ] , E ) : γ ( 0 ) = 0 , J ( γ ( 1 ) ) < 0 } .

Consider the set S μ ( ρ ) = { v W μ : Q μ ( v ) = ρ p } and define

Q μ ( v ) = N ( | v | p + μ | f ( v ) | p ) d x .

Since Q μ ( v ) is continuous, S μ ( ρ ) is a closed subset of W μ and it disconnects this space.

Lemma 3.2.

Suppose that conditions (V) and (H 0 )(H 1 ) are satisfied. Then there exist ρ 0 , δ 0 > 0 such that

μ ( v ) δ 0 for all  v S μ ( ρ 0 ) .

Proof.

By the hypotheses (H 0 )–(H 1 ), we have that

(3.1) N H ( f ( v ) ) d x ε p N | f ( v ) | p d x + C ε N | f ( v ) | 2 p * d x .

By (3.1), Lemma 2.1 (10) and the Sobolev inequality, we have that

μ ( v ) = 1 p N ( | v | p + μ | f ( v ) | p ) d x - N H ( f ( v ) ) d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( v ) | 2 p * d x
1 p N ( | v | p + ( μ - ε ) | f ( v ) | p ) d x - C 0 N | v | p * d x
C 1 N ( | v | p + μ | f ( v ) | p ) d x - C 2 ( N | v | p d x ) p * p
C 1 ρ p - C 2 ρ p * ,

where C 0 , C 1 , C 2 > 0 are positive constants. Thus we choose ρ = ρ 0 sufficiently small and there exists δ 0 > 0 such that μ ( v ) δ 0 > 0 for all v S μ ( ρ 0 ) . ∎

Similar to the proofs of [2, Lemma 3.2 and 3.3], we can deduce the following two Lemmas.

Lemma 3.3.

Suppose that (V), (H 0 )(H 1 ) and (H 4 ) hold. Then for each v W μ { 0 } the following limits hold:

  1. if v + 0 , then μ ( t v ) - as t + ;

  2. if v + = 0 , then μ ( t v ) + as t + .

Lemma 3.4.

For every v W μ { 0 } with v + 0 , there exists a unique t v > 0 such that t v v N μ . Moreover, I μ ( t v v ) = max t 0 I μ ( t v ) .

From Lemmas 3.23.4 it follows that μ possesses the mountain pass geometry with

c μ = inf γ Γ μ max t [ 0 , 1 ] μ ( γ ( t ) ) ,

where

Γ μ = { γ C ( [ 0 , 1 ] , W μ ) : γ ( 0 ) = 0 , μ ( γ ( 1 ) ) < 0 } ,

and c μ can be characterized by the following identity:

(3.2) c μ = inf v 𝒩 μ μ ( v ) = inf v W μ { 0 } max t 0 μ ( t v ) .

Therefore, by Theorem 3.1, there exists a ( C ) c μ sequence { v n } W μ of μ , that is,

(3.3) μ ( v n ) c μ and ( 1 + v n μ ) μ ( v n ) 0    as  n .

Now, we will give the detailed properties of the above ( C ) c μ sequence in the following two Lemmas.

Lemma 3.5.

Let { v n } be a ( C ) c μ sequence of I μ . Then the following holds:

  1. { v n } is bounded in W μ and there exists a v W μ such that v n v in W μ ;

  2. J μ ( v ) = 0 ;

  3. v n 0 for n .

Proof.

(1) By (3.3), (H 2 ) and Lemma 2.1 (4), we have that

c μ + o n ( 1 ) = μ ( v n ) - 2 θ μ ( v n ) , v n
( 1 p - 2 θ ) N | v n | p d x + μ ( 1 p - 2 θ ) N | f ( v n ) | p d x + ( 1 θ N h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) d x - N H ( f ( v n ) ) ) d x
+ ( 1 θ - 1 2 p * ) N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x
( 1 p - 2 θ ) N | v n | p d x + μ ( 1 p - 2 θ ) N | f ( v n ) | p d x ,

which implies that

N | v n | p d x + μ N | f ( v n ) | p d x C 1 .

On the other hand, using Lemma 2.1 (9) and the Sobolev inequality, we have that

N | v n | p d x = { | v n | 1 } | v n | p d x + { | v n | 1 } | v n | p d x
{ | v n | 1 } | f ( v n ) | p d x + { | v n | 1 } | v n | p d x
N | f ( v n ) | p d x + ( N | v n | p d x ) p p .

Therefore, { v n } is bounded in W μ , and there exists a v W μ such that v n v in W μ . Hence, up to a subsequence, there exists v W μ such that

(3.4) { v n v in  W μ , v n v in  L loc s ( N )  for  1 s < p , v n ( x ) v ( x ) a.e.  x N .

Moreover, using [27, Theorem 1.6], we can get

(3.5) v n v a.e. in  N .

Indeed, by translation, equation (Qm) is reduced to

- Δ p v + μ | v | p - 2 v = h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) + | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) - μ | f ( v ) | p - 1 f ( v ) + μ | v | p - 2 v .

Let f ~ ( x , v ) = h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) + | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) - μ | f ( v ) | p - 1 f ( v ) + μ | v | p - 2 v . By hypotheses (H 0 )–(H 1 ) and using Lemma 2.1 (2), (6), (7), and (10), we have that

lim t 0 f ~ ( x , t ) | t | p - 2 t = 0 , lim | t | + f ~ ( x , t ) | t | p * - 2 t = c 0 > 0 ,

where c 0 > 0 is a constant. Thus we have verified all conditions of [27, Theorem 1.6, Step 2], hence (3.5) follows.

(2) Since C 0 ( N ) is dense in W μ , we only need to show J μ ( v n ) , φ = 0 for all φ C 0 ( N ) . We observe that

μ ( v n ) , φ - μ ( v ) , φ
= N ( | v n | p - 2 v n - | v | p - 2 v ) φ d x + μ N [ | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) ] φ d x
    + N ( h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) - h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) ) φ d x + N [ | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) - | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n + ) ] φ d x ,

thus we need to show that the following limits hold:

(3.6) lim n N ( | v n | p - 2 v n - | v | p - 2 v ) φ d x = 0 ,
(3.7) lim n N [ | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) ] φ d x = 0 ,
(3.8) lim n N ( h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) - h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) ) φ d x = 0 ,
(3.9) lim n N [ | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) - | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n + ) ] φ d x = 0

for all φ C 0 ( N ) .

By (3.5), it is easy to show that (3.6) holds by the weak convergence argument.

Let v ~ n = v n - v ; next we show that (3.7)–(3.9) hold. Using Lemma 2.1 (2), (6), (7) and Young’s inequality, we deduce that

| | f ( v n ) | m - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | m - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) |
= | 0 1 d d t [ | f ( v + t v ~ n ) | m - 2 f ( v + t v ~ n ) f ( v + t v ~ n ) ] d t |
0 1 [ ( m - 1 ) | v ~ n | | f ( v + t v ~ n ) | m - 2 ( f ( v + t v ~ n ) ) 2 + | v ~ n | | f ( v + t v ~ n ) | m - 1 | f ′′ ( v + t v ~ n ) | ] d t
0 1 [ ( m - 1 ) | v ~ n | | v + t v ~ n | m - 2 + 2 p - 1 | v ~ n | | f ( v + t v ~ n ) | p + m - 2 | f ( v + t v ~ n ) | p + 2 ] d t
C 3 ( | v ~ n | m - 1 + | v ~ n | | v | m - 2 )
(3.10) C 4 | v ~ n | m - 1 + C 5 | v | m - 1 ,

where p m < 2 p . By (3.4), we obtain

| f ( v n ) | m - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | m - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) - C 4 | v ~ n | m - 1 0 a.e. in  N .

By the Hölder inequality, we have

N [ | f ( v n ) | m - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | m - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) - C 4 | v ~ n | m - 1 ] φ d x C 5 N | v | m - 1 φ d x
C 5 ( N | v | m d x ) m - 1 m ( N | φ | m d x ) 1 m .

From the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem it follows that

lim n N [ | f ( v n ) | m - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | m - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) - C 4 | v ~ n | m - 1 ] φ d x = 0 .

By (3.4), we deduce that

lim n N [ | f ( v n ) | m - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) - | f ( v ) | m - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) ] φ d x = C 5 lim n N | v ~ n | m - 1 φ d x = 0 .

Take m = p and m = q ; then (3.7) and (3.8) follows. In the case m = 2 p , using Lemma 2.1 (10), we can deduce that

| | f ( v n + ) | 2 p - 2 f ( v n + ) f ( v n + ) - | f ( v + ) | 2 p - 2 f ( v + ) f ( v + ) | C 6 ( v ~ n + ) p - 1 + C 7 ( v + ) p - 1 .

Since ( v ~ n + ) p - 1 0 in L p / ( p - 1 ) ( supp φ ) , so we get

lim n N [ | f ( v n + ) | 2 p - 2 f ( v n + ) f ( v n + ) - | f ( v + ) | 2 p - 2 f ( v + ) f ( v + ) ] φ d x = lim n N ( v ~ n + ) p - 1 φ d x = 0 .

Hence (3.9) is proven.

Consequently, we obtain

μ ( v n ) , φ - μ ( v ) , φ 0 as  n .

Meanwhile, if { v n } is a bounded ( C ) c μ sequence of J μ , then

μ ( v n ) ( W μ ) = ( 1 + v n μ ) sup φ W μ μ ( v n ) , φ 1 + v n μ ( 1 + v n μ ) μ ( v n ) ( W μ ) φ μ 0

for any φ W μ . Thus μ ( v n ) , φ = 0 , and as a result μ ( v ) , φ = 0 for any φ C 0 ( N ) .

(3) Since { v n } is bounded in W μ , we get that { v n - } is bounded in W μ , where v n - = max { - v n , 0 } . Using (H 0 ), we have that

o n ( 1 ) = μ ( v n ) , - v n -
N | v n - | p d x + μ N | f ( v n - ) | p - 2 f ( v n - ) f ( v n - ) ( v n - ) d x
N | v n - | p d x + μ 2 N | f ( v n - ) | p d x
1 2 ( N | v n - | p d x + μ N | f ( v n - ) | p d x ) .

Thus Q μ ( v n - ) 0 . Similar to the proof of [37, Proposition 2.4], we can deduce that

N | v n - | p d x + μ N | f ( v n - ) | p d x C 8 v n - μ

for some C 8 > 0 independent of n. Therefore, we get v n - = 0 in W μ . Hence, we get v n = v n + + o n ( 1 ) in W μ . ∎

Lemma 3.6.

Let { v n } be a ( C ) c μ sequence of I μ with c μ < 1 2 N S N / p . Then one of the following conclusions holds:

  1. Q μ ( v n ) 0 ;

  2. there exist { y n } N and positive constants R, ξ such that

    lim n inf B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x ξ .

Proof.

Assume that (2) dose not occur, that is, for all R > 0 there holds

lim n inf B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x = 0 .

By the vanishing Lemma in [28], we can assume v n 0 in L s ( N ) for all s ( p , p * ) . By (H 0 )–(H 1 ) and Lemma 2.1 (6) and (10), we have

N H ( f ( v n ) ) d x = N h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) d x
N ( ε | f ( v n ) | p + C ε | f ( v n ) | q + 1 ) d x
ε N | v n | p + C ε N | v n | q + 1 2 d x = o n ( 1 ) ,

Next, since

f ( v n ) f ( v n ) μ 2 v n μ

and thus

J μ ( v n ) , f ( v n ) f ( v n ) = o n ( 1 ) ,

that is,

N [ 1 + 2 p - 1 f p ( v n ) 1 + 2 p - 1 f p ( v n ) ] | v n | p d x + μ N | f ( v n ) | p d x = N h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) d x + N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x + o n ( 1 )
(3.11) = N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x + o n ( 1 ) .

Denote by l 0 a number such that

N [ 1 + 2 p - 1 f p ( v n ) 1 + 2 p - 1 f p ( v n ) ] | v n | p d x + μ N | f ( v n ) | p d x l and N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x l .

Assume that l > 0 ; by the definition of S = inf { N | u | p d x : u p = 1 } , we have

S N | f 2 ( v n + ) | p d x ( N | f 2 ( v n + ) | p * d x ) p p * = N 2 p | f ( v n + ) | p 1 + 2 p - 1 | f ( v n + ) | p | v n + | p d x ( N | f 2 ( v n + ) | p * d x ) p p *
N ( 1 + 2 p - 1 | f ( v n + ) | p 1 + 2 p - 1 | f ( v n + ) | p ) | v n + | p d x ( N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x ) p p *
l 1 - p p * as  n ,

thus, l S N p . Combining this with (3.11), we obtain that

c μ = lim n { 1 p N [ | v n | p + μ f p ( v n ) ] d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x - N H ( f ( v n ) ) d x }
lim n { 1 2 p N [ ( 1 + 2 p - 1 | f ( v n ) | p 1 + 2 p - 1 | f ( v n ) | p ) | v n | p + μ f p ( v n ) ] d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x }
= ( 1 2 p - 1 2 p * ) l
1 2 N S N p ,

which yields a contradiction because c μ < 1 2 N S N / p . Thus l = 0 . ∎

For the least energy level c μ , we have the following estimate.

Lemma 3.7.

For any μ > 0 , there exists v 0 W μ { 0 } such that

max t 0 μ ( t v 0 ) < 1 2 N S N p 𝑎𝑛𝑑 c μ = inf v 𝒩 μ μ ( v ) < 1 2 N S N p ,

where S denotes the best constant for the embedding D 1 , p ( R N ) L p * ( R N ) .

Proof.

Define a functional I μ : W μ L ( N ) by

I μ ( u ) = 1 p N ( 1 + 2 p - 1 | u | p ) | u | p d x + μ p N | u | p d x - N H ( u ) d x - 1 2 p * N | u + | 2 p * d x .

By the equivalent characteristic of c μ (see (3.2)), we only need to prove that there exists 0 v 0 W μ L ( N ) such that

sup t 0 I μ ( t v 0 ) < 1 2 N S N p .

From Lemma 3.3 we know that I μ ( t v 0 ) - as t + ; then there exists some t * > 0 such that I μ ( t * v 0 ) < 0 . Define γ * ( t ) := f - 1 ( t t * v 0 ) ; by the definition of c μ , we have

c μ := inf γ Γ sup t [ 0 , 1 ] μ ( γ ( t ) ) sup t [ 0 , 1 ] μ ( γ * ( t ) ) sup t 0 I μ ( t v 0 ) < 1 2 N S N p .

Fix ε > 0 and define the function

u ε ( x ) = ψ ( x ) ( ε + | x | p p - 1 ) N - p 2 p , v ε ( x ) = u ε ( x ) u ε 2 L p 1 2 ,

where ψ C 0 ( N , [ 0 , 1 ] ) is such that 0 ψ 1 if | x | < 1 and ψ ( x ) = 0 if | x | 2 . By [21, Lemma 4.1] we know that u ε verifies the following estimates:

N | u ε 2 | p d x = K 1 ε p - N p + O ( 1 ) , ( N | u ε 2 | p d x ) p p = K 2 ε p - N p + O ( 1 ) ,

and

N | u ε 2 | t d x = { K 3 ε N ( p - 1 ) - t ( N - p ) p + O ( 1 ) if  t > N ( p - 1 ) N - p , K 3 | ln ε | + O ( 1 ) if  t = N ( p - 1 ) N - p , O ( 1 ) if  t < N ( p - 1 ) N - p ,

where K 1 , K 2 , K 3 are positive constants independent of ε and S = K 1 K 2 .

By computations, v ε verifies

(3.12) v ε L 2 p = 1 , v ε 2 L p p = S + O ( ε N - p p ) , v ε L p p = O ( ε N - p 2 p )

and

(3.13) N | v ε | q d x = { O ( ε ( N - p ) q 2 p 2 ) if  q < 2 p - 2 N N - p , O ( ε ( N - p ) q 2 p 2 | ln ε | ) if  q = 2 p - 2 N N - p , O ( ε N ( p - 1 ) - q 2 ( N - p ) p + q ( N - p ) 2 p 2 ) if  q > 2 p - 2 N N - p .

Obviously, v ε W μ L ( N ) , and by (H 4 ) we have

I μ ( t v ε ) = t p p N ( | v ε | p + t p 2 | v ε 2 | p ) d x + t p p N μ | v ε | p d x - N H ( t v ε ) d x - t 2 p * 2 p * N | v ε | 2 p * d x
t p p N ( | v ε | p + μ | v ε | p ) d x + t 2 p 2 p N | v ε 2 | p d x - C t σ σ N | v ε | σ d x - t 2 p * 2 p * = : g μ ( t ) .

It is clear that lim t g μ ( t ) = - and g μ ( t ) > 0 when t is small; then sup t 0 g μ ( t ) is attained at some t ε > 0 . It follows that

0 = g μ ( t ε )
= t ε p - 1 N ( | v ε | p + μ | v ε | p ) d x + t ε 2 p - 1 N | v ε 2 | p d x - C t ε σ - 1 N | v ε | σ d x - t ε 2 p * - 1
= t ε p - 1 [ N ( | v ε | p + μ | v ε | p ) d x + t ε p N | v ε 2 | p d x - C t ε σ - p N | v ε | σ d x - t ε 2 p * - p ] .

We have

N ( | v ε | p + μ | v ε | p ) d x + t ε p N | v ε 2 | p d x = C t ε σ - p N | v ε | σ d x + t ε 2 p * - p t ε 2 p * - p ,

so t ε is bounded from above by some T 1 > 0 . On the other hand,

N | v ε 2 | p d x t ε 2 p * - 2 p + C t ε σ - 2 p N | v ε | σ d x .

Since σ > 2 p , combining (3.12) with (3.13) and choosing ε small enough, we have t ε 2 p * - 2 p S / 2 , so t ε is bounded from below by some T 2 > 0 independent of ε. Next, we define

e μ ( t ) := t 2 p 2 p N | v ε 2 | p d x - t 2 p * 2 p * ,

which attains its unique global maximum at

t 0 = ( N | v ε 2 | p d x ) 1 2 p * - 2 p .

Thus, by (3.12) and (3.13), using the fact that σ > 2 p N / ( N - p ) - 2 N N - p , we have that

max t 0 I μ ( t v ε ) g μ ( t ε ) e μ ( t 0 ) + t ε p p N ( | v ε | p + μ | v ε | p ) d x - C t ε σ σ N | v ε | σ d x
( 1 2 p - 1 2 p * ) ( N | v ε 2 | p d x ) 2 p * 2 p * - 2 p + C 1 N ( | v ε | p + μ | v ε | p ) d x - C 2 N | v ε | σ d x
= 1 2 N S N p + O ( ε N - p p ) + O ( ε N - p 2 p ) - O ( ε N ( p - 1 ) - σ 2 ( N - p ) p + σ ( N - p ) 2 p 2 )
< 1 2 N S N p

for ε > 0 small enough. The proof is completed. ∎

3.2 The existence of the ground state solution for (Qm)

Now, we are able to prove the existence of positive ground state solution for problem (Qm).

Theorem 3.8.

Suppose that conditions (H 0 )(H 5 ) are satisfied. Problem (Qm) has a positive ground state solution v C loc 1 , α ( R N ) L ( R N ) satisfying v ( x ) 0 as | x | .

Proof.

From Section 3.1, we know that μ satisfies the mountain pass geometry. There exists a ( C ) c μ sequence { v n } W μ of μ , which satisfies

μ ( v n ) c μ < 1 2 N S N p and ( 1 + v n μ ) μ ( v n ) 0    as  n .

From Lemma 3.5, up to a subsequence, there is a v W μ such that v n v in W μ with μ ( v ) = 0 . Without loss of generality, we can suppose that v 0 ; otherwise, if Q μ ( v n ) 0 , using Lemma 2.1 (4), we have that

N | v n | p d x + μ N | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) v n d x N | v n | p d x + μ N | f ( v n ) | p d x 0 .

From μ ( v n ) , v n 0 we conclude that

N [ h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n + ( f ( v n + ) ) 2 p * - 1 f ( v n + ) v n + ] d x 0 .

Under the assumptions (H 0 ), (H 2 ) and Lemma 2.1 (4), we have

N H ( f ( v n ) ) d x + 1 2 p * N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x 1 θ { v n 0 } h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) d x + 1 2 p * N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x
C 1 N [ h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n + | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n + ) v n + ] d x 0 .

Therefore, we conclude that

μ ( v n ) = 1 p Q μ ( v n ) - N [ H ( f ( v n ) ) + 1 2 p * | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * ] d x 0 ,

which is a contradiction with μ ( v n ) c μ > 0 . Therefore, Q μ ( v n ) 0 . By Lemma 3.6, there exist { y n } N and positive constants R, ξ such that

lim n inf B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x ξ .

Define v ^ n ( x ) = v n ( x + y n ) . Then { v ^ n } is also a ( C ) c μ sequence of μ and satisfies

v ^ n v ^  in  W μ , μ ( v ^ ) = 0 , v ^ n v ^  in  L p ( B R ) .

Then

B R ( x ) | v ^ | p d x = lim n B R ( x ) | v ^ n | p d x
= lim n B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x ξ v ^ 0 ,

so we can assume that v 0 . By Lemma 2.1 (4), we get

(3.14) | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) v n | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f 2 ( v n ) = 0

and

1 p | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n + ) v n + - 1 2 p * | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * ( 1 2 p - 1 2 p * ) | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * > 0 .

From (H 2 ) it follows that

1 p h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n - H ( f ( v n ) ) 1 p h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n - 1 θ h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n )
(3.15) ( 1 2 p - 1 θ ) h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) > 0 .

Combining (3.14)–(3.15) with Fatou’s Lemma, we obtain

c μ = lim n [ μ ( v n ) - 1 p μ ( v n ) , v n ]
= lim n inf μ p N [ | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) v n ] d x + lim n inf N [ 1 p h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x
+ lim n inf N [ 1 p | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n + ) v n + - 1 2 p * | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * ] d x
μ p N [ | f ( v ) | p - | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v ] d x + N [ 1 p h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v - H ( f ( v ) ) ] d x
+ N [ 1 p | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) v + - 1 2 p * | f ( v + ) | 2 p * ] d x
= μ ( v ) - 1 p μ ( v ) , v = μ ( v ) .

Then v 0 is a critical point of μ satisfying μ ( v ) c μ . On the other hand, v 𝒩 μ and c μ = inf 𝒩 μ μ imply that μ ( v ) c μ , therefore μ ( v ) = c μ .

Now we show that v is nonnegative since

N | v | p - 2 v φ d x + N μ | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) φ d x
(3.16) = N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) φ d x + N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 f ( v + ) f ( v + ) φ d x

for all v , φ W μ . Let φ = - v - ; then

0 1 2 Q μ ( v - ) N | v - | p d x + N μ | f ( v - ) | p - 2 f ( v - ) f ( v - ) ( v - ) d x = 0

implies that v - = 0 , and thus v 0 .

Next, we will prove the L -estimate of v and that it decays to zero at infinity.

For any R > 0 , 0 < r R / 2 , set η C ( N ) , 0 η 1 , with η ( x ) = 1 if | x | R and η ( x ) = 0 if | x | R - r and | η | 2 / r . For l > 0 , let

v l ( x ) = { v ( x ) , v l , l , v > l ,

and

z l = η p v l p ( β - 1 ) v and ω l = η v l β - 1 v ,

with β > 1 to be determined later. Taking z l as a test function, we get

N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) | v | p d x = N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x + N | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) v η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x
- p N η p - 1 v l p ( β - 1 ) v | v | p - 2 v η d x - p ( β - 1 ) N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) - 1 v | v | p - 2 v v l d x
- N μ | f ( v ) | p - 1 f ( v ) v η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x .

By (H 0 ) and (H 1 ), we see that for any τ > 0 there exists D τ > 0 such that

h ( f ( t ) ) τ f ( t ) p - 1 + D τ ( f ( t ) ) 2 p * - 1 for all  t 0 .

Choose τ sufficiently small; by Lemma 2.1 (10), we have that

N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) | v | p d x C 2 N | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) v η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x - p N η p - 1 v l p ( β - 1 ) v | v | p - 2 v η d x
C 3 N v p * η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x + p N η p - 1 v l p ( β - 1 ) v | v | p - 1 η d x .

For every ϑ > 0 , by Young’s inequality, we have that

N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) | v | p d x C 3 N v p * η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x + p ϑ N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) | v | p d x + p C ϑ N v p | η | p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x
(3.17) C 3 N v p * η p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x + C 4 N v p | η | p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x ,

where we have chosen ϑ > 0 sufficiently small.

On the other hand, by the Sobolev inequality and the Hölder inequality, we have

ω l p * p C 5 N | ω l | p d x = C 5 N | ( η v l β - 1 v ) | p d x
(3.18) C 5 β p ( N v p | η | p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x + N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) | v | p d x ) .

Combining (3.17) with (3.18), we obtain

(3.19) ω l p * p C 6 β p ( N v p | η | p v l p ( β - 1 ) d x + N η p v l p ( β - 1 ) v p * d x ) .

Let β = p * p ; using the fact that R - r R 2 , we have that

ω l p * p C 6 β p ( N v p | η | p v l p * - p d x + { | x | R - r } η p v l p * - p v p * d x )
C 6 β p N v p | η | p v l p * - p d x + C 6 β p ( N ( v η v l p * - p p ) p * d x ) p p * ( | x | > R / 2 v p * d x ) p * - p p * .

From the definition of ω l it follows that

( N ( v η v l p * - p p ) p * d x ) p p * C 6 β p N v p | η | p v l p * - p d x + C 6 β p ( N ( v η v l p * - p p ) p * d x ) p p * ( | x | > R / 2 v p * d x ) p * - p p * .

Since v L p ( N ) , for R > 0 sufficient large there holds

| x | R / 2 v p * d x ϑ .

Therefore,

( | x | R ( v v l p * - p p ) p * d x ) p p * ( | x | R - r ( η v v l p * - p p ) p * d x ) p p *
C 7 β p N v p | η | p v l p * - p d x
C 7 β p r p N v p * d x C 8 r p .

Using Fatou’s Lemma in the variable l, we get

(3.20) | x | R v ( p * ) 2 p d x < | x | R - r η p * v ( p * ) 2 p d x < C 9 r p * < + .

Next, we note that if

β = p * ( t - 1 ) p t with t = ( p * ) 2 p ( p * - p ) ,

then

β > 1 , t > 1 , p t t - 1 < p * , v L p β t t - 1 ( | x | R - r ) .

By (3.19) and the Hölder inequality, we have that

ω l p * p C 6 β p ( | x | R - r v p β | η | p d x + | x | R - r η p v p * - p | v | p β d x )
C 6 β p [ ( | x | R - r v p β t t - 1 d x ) t - 1 t ( R - r | x | R | η | p t d x ) 1 t + ( | x | R - r ( η p v p * - p ) t d x ) 1 t ( | x | R - r v p β t t - 1 d x ) t - 1 t ]
C 6 β p { [ R N - ( R - r ) N ] 1 t r p ( | x | R - r v p β t t - 1 d x ) t - 1 t + ( | x | R - r ( η p ( p * - p ) p * v p * - p ) t d x ) 1 t ( | x | R - r v p β t t - 1 d x ) t - 1 t } ,

where we have used p p ( p - p ) p . By (3.20), we deduce that

ω l p * p C 10 β p ( 1 r p * t + R N t r p ) ( | x | R - r v p β t t - 1 d x ) t - 1 t .

Using Fatou’s Lemma, we obtain

v p * β , ( | x | R ) p β C 10 β p ( 1 r p * t + R N t r p ) v p β t t - 1 β , ( | x | > R - r ) p β .

If we take ψ = p * ( t - 1 ) / p t , s = p t / ( t - 1 ) , then

(3.21) v β ψ s , ( | x | R ) C 1 p β β 1 β ( 1 r p * t + R N t r p ) 1 p β v β s , ( | x | > R - r ) .

Setting β = ψ m ( m = 1 , 2 , ) , we obtain

(3.22) v ψ m + 1 s , ( | x | R ) C 10 1 p ψ - m ψ m ψ - m ( 1 r p * t + R N t r p ) 1 p ψ m v ψ m s , ( | x | > R - r ) .

Note that p > p * / t , p > N / t . Therefore, if we choose r m := 2 - ( m + 1 ) R , then it follows from inequalities (3.21) and (3.22) that

v ψ m + 1 s , ( | x | R ) v ψ m + 1 s , ( | x | R - r m + 1 ) C 10 1 p ψ - m ψ m ψ - m ( 2 p * ( m + 1 ) t R p * t + 2 p ( m + 1 ) ) 1 p ψ m v ψ m s , ( | x | > R - r m )
C 10 1 p ψ - m ψ m ψ - m ( 2 × 2 p ( m + 1 ) ) 1 p ψ m v ψ m s , ( | x | > R - r m )
C 10 1 p i = 1 m ψ - i ψ i = 1 m i ψ - i exp ( i = 1 m ln ( 2 × 2 p ( i + 1 ) ) p ψ i ) v ψ s , ( | x | > R - r 1 )
C 11 v p * , ( | x | > R / 2 ) .

Letting m in the last inequality, we have

v , ( | x | > R ) C 11 v p * , ( | x | > R / 2 ) .

Therefore, for any ϑ > 0 there exists an R > 0 such that v , ( | x | > R ) ϑ . Consequently, we conclude that lim | x | v ( x ) = 0 . ∎

4 The nonautonomous problem

In this section, we will study the following problem (which is equivalent to (Pe)), which can be obtained under the change of variable ε z = x :

(Pe*) { - Δ p v + V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) = h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) + | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) in  N , v W 1 , p ( N ) , v ( x ) > 0 in  N .

The functional J ε corresponding to problem (Pe*) is given by

J ε ( v ) = 1 p N | v | p d x + 1 p N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p d x - N H ( f ( v ) ) d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * d x ,

which is well defined on the Banach space

X ε = { v W 1 , p ( N ) : N V ( ε x ) | v | p d x < }

endowed with the norm

v X ε = ( N ( | v | p + V ( ε x ) | v | p ) d x ) 1 p .

Obviously, J ε C 1 ( X ε , ) with

J ε ( v ) , φ = N | v | p - 2 v φ d x + N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) φ d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) φ d x
- N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 f ( v + ) f ( v + ) φ d x

for all v , φ X ε . Moreover, the weak solution v of (Pe*) corresponds to the critical point of the functional J ε . We define the Nehari manifold associated to (Pe*) by ε , that is,

ε = { v X ε : v 0 and J ε ( v ) , v = 0 } .

Set

Q ( v ) = N ( | v | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p ) d x .

We first show that the Nehari manifold ε is bounded from below.

Lemma 4.1.

There exists a constant C > 0 such that v X ε C > 0 for all v M ε .

Proof.

By Lemma 2.1 (10), the Hölder inequality and the Sobolev inequality, we have that

N | f ( v ) | q + 1 d x ( N | f ( v ) | p d x ) τ ( q + 1 ) p ( N | f ( v ) | 2 p d x ) ( 1 - τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p
2 ( 1 - τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p ( N | f ( v ) | p d x ) τ ( q + 1 ) p ( N | v | p d x ) ( 1 - τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p
2 ( 1 - τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p V 0 - τ ( q + 1 ) p S ( 1 - τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p ( N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p d x ) τ ( q + 1 ) p ( N | v | p d x ) ( 1 - τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p
(4.1) C Q ( v ) ( 1 + τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p ,

where τ ( 0 , 1 ) verifies

1 q + 1 = τ p + 1 - τ 2 p .

By Lemma 2.1 (7) and the Sobolev inequality, we have

(4.2) N f 2 p ( v + ) d x C ( N | f 2 ( v + ) | p d x ) p p C ( N | v | p d x ) p p C Q ( v ) p p .

Thus, for v ε , by (4.1), (4.2), Lemma 2.1 (4), and hypotheses (H 0 ), (H 1 ) and (H 4 ), we deduce that

0 = N ( | v | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v ) d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v d x - N | f ( v + ) | 2 p - 1 f ( v + ) v + d x
1 2 N ( | v | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p ) d x - N | f ( v + ) | 2 p d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) d x
1 2 N ( | v | p + ( 1 - 2 ε V 0 ) V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p ) d x - N | f ( v + ) | 2 p d x - C ε N | f ( v ) | q + 1 d x
1 4 Q ( v ) - C Q ( v ) p p - C Q ( v ) ( 1 + τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p .

Since ( 1 + τ ) ( q + 1 ) 2 p > 1 , we have Q ( v ) C > 0 for some C > 0 . This implies that

v X ε Q ( v ) 1 p C > 0

for all v ε . ∎

It is easy to check, by arguing as in Section 3, that J ε exhibits the mountain pass geometry (Theorem 3.1) and there exists a ( C ) c ε sequence { v n } X ε , for which we can assume v n 0 , such that v n v in X ε for some v X ε and J ε ( v ) = 0 (similar arguments as in Lemma 3.5, using hypothesis (V)). Moreover, from Lemma 3.7, there exists a v 0 W V { 0 } such that

max t 0 J ε ( t v 0 ) < max t 0 V ( t v 0 ) < 1 2 N S N p ,

and thus

c ε = inf ε J ε = inf v X ε { 0 } max t 0 J ε ( t v ) < 1 2 N S N p .

Similar to the proof Lemma 3.4, there is a unique t v > 0 such that J ε ( t v v ) = max t 0 J ε ( t v ) .

Similar to the proof of Lemma 3.6, we can characterize the ( C ) c ε sequence in the following Lemma.

Lemma 4.2.

Let { v n } be a ( C ) c ε sequence of J ε with c ε < 1 2 N S N / p . Then one of the following conclusions holds:

  1. Q ( v n ) 0 ;

  2. there exist { y n } N and positive constants R, ξ such that

    lim n inf B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x ξ .

Lemma 4.3.

Suppose that { v n } is a ( C ) c ε sequence of J ε in X ε with c ε < 1 2 N S N / p and v n 0 in X ε . If Q ( v n ) 0 , then c ε c V , where c V is the minimax level of J V .

Proof.

Let { t n } ( 0 , ) be a sequence such that { t n v n } 𝒩 V . We claim that lim n sup t n 1 . Assume by contradiction that there exist δ > 0 and a subsequence still denoted by { t n } such that t n 1 + δ for all n . Since { v n } is bounded in X ε , we may assume that v n 0 for all n . From J ε ( v n ) , v n = o n ( 1 ) we get

(4.3) N [ | v n | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n ] d x = N h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n d x + N | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x + o n ( 1 ) .

Also since { t n v n } 𝒩 V , we get

N [ t n p | v n | p + V | f ( t n v n ) | p - 1 f ( t n v n ) t n v n ] d x
(4.4) = N h ( f ( t n v n ) ) f ( t n v n ) t n v n d x + N | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( t n v n ) t n v n d x .

From (4.3) and (4.4) we have

N [ h ( f ( t n v n ) ) | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p - 1 f ( t n v n ) ( t n v n ) p - 1 - h ( f ( v n ) ) | f ( v n ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( v n ) | 2 p - 1 f ( v n ) v n p - 1 ] v n p d x
    + N [ | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( t n v n ) ( t n v n ) p - 1 - | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n p - 1 ] v n p d x
= N ( V - V ( ε x ) ) | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x
    + N V [ | f ( t n v n ) | p - 1 f ( t n v n ) ( t n v n ) p - 1 - | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n p - 1 ] v n p d x + o n ( 1 ) .

Given ξ > 0 , by (V) there exists R = R ( ξ ) > 0 such that V ( ε x ) V - ξ for all | ε x | R . Since v n 0 in X ε , we have v n 0 in L loc s ( N ) for s [ 1 , p ) and v n 0 a.e. in N . Hence, we get

N ( V - V ( ε x ) ) | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x = | ε x | < R ( V - V ( ε x ) ) | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x
+ | ε x | R ( V - V ( ε x ) ) | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x
ξ C + 2 V | ε x | < R | v n | p d x = ξ C + o n ( 1 ) .

This together with Proposition 2.2 (1) and (2) and the boundedness of { v n } in X ε leads to

(4.5) N [ h ( f ( t n v n ) ) | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p - 1 f ( t n v n ) ( t n v n ) p - 1 - h ( f ( v n ) ) | f ( v n ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( v n ) | 2 p - 1 f ( v n ) v n p - 1 ] v n p d x ξ C + o n ( 1 ) .

If Q ( v n ) 0 in , by Lemma 4.2, there exist { y n } N and positive constants R , η such that

(4.6) lim n inf B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x η .

Define v ~ n = v n ( x + y n ) ; then there is a v ~ such that, up to a subsequence, v ~ n v ~ in X ε , v ~ n v ~ in L s ( B R ( 0 ) ) , s [ 1 , p ) , and v ~ n v ~ a.e. in N . By (4.6), there exists a subset Ω B R ( 0 ) with a positive measure such that v ~ > 0 a.e. in Ω. It follows from (4.5), (H 3 ), Proposition 2.2 (2), and t n 1 + δ that

N [ h ( f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ n ) ) | f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ n ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ n ) | 2 p - 1 f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ n ) ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ n ) p - 1 - h ( f ( v ~ n ) ) | f ( v ~ n ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( v ~ n ) | 2 p - 1 f ( v ~ n ) v ~ n p - 1 ] v ~ n p d x
(4.7) ξ C + o n ( 1 ) .

Let n in (4.7); using Fatou’s Lemma, we get

0 < Ω [ h ( f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ ) ) | f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ ) | 2 p - 1 f ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ ) ( ( 1 + δ ) v ~ ) p - 1 - h ( f ( v ~ ) ) | f ( v ~ ) | 2 p - 1 | f ( v ~ ) | 2 p - 1 f ( v ~ ) v ~ p - 1 ] v ~ p d x ξ C

for any ξ > 0 , which leads to a contradiction. Thus, lim n sup t n 1 .

Next, we distinguish the following two cases. Case 1: lim n sup t n = 1 . There exists a subsequence, still denoted by { t n } , such that t n 1 as n . Hence

(4.8) c ε + o n ( 1 ) = J ε ( v n ) c V + J ε ( v n ) - V ( t n v n ) .

By the boundedness of { v n } in X ε and (V), similar to the argument of (4.5), we have

J ε ( v n ) - V ( t n v n ) = 1 - t n p p N | v n | p d x + 1 p N [ V ( ε x ) | f ( v n ) | p - V | f ( t n v n ) | p ] d x
+ N [ H ( f ( t n v n ) ) - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x + 1 2 p * N [ | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * - | f ( v n ) | 2 p * ] d x
o n ( 1 ) + 1 p N V [ | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( t n v n ) | p ] d x + N [ H ( f ( t n v n ) ) - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x
(4.9) + 1 2 p * N [ | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * - | f ( v n ) | 2 p * ] d x - ξ C .

Using the mean value theorem and (H 0 )–(H 1 ), we have

| N [ H ( f ( t n v n ) ) - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x | = | N h ( f ( τ v n ) ) f ( τ v n ) ( t n - 1 ) v n d x |
N ( C 1 | v n | p - 1 + C 2 | v n | q + 1 2 ) | t n - 1 | d x ,

where τ is between 1 and t n . Using the Hölder inequality and lim n ( t n - 1 ) = 0 , we obtain

N [ H ( f ( t n v n ) ) - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x = o n ( 1 ) ,

N V [ | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( t n v n ) | p ] d x = o n ( 1 )

and

N [ | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * - | f ( v n ) | 2 p * ] d x = o n ( 1 ) .

Combining (4.8) with (4.9), we obtain the following inequality:

c ε + o n ( 1 ) c V - C ξ + o n ( 1 ) .

Letting n in the above inequality, we have c ε c V - C ξ for all ξ > 0 , thus c ε c V .

Case 2: lim n sup t n = t 0 < 1 . There exists a subsequence, still denoted by { t n } , such that t n t 0 as n and t n < 1 for all n . By Proposition 2.2 (1), (4) and (5), we see that

| f ( t ) | p - | f ( t ) | p - 1 f ( t ) t , 1 p h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) t - H ( f ( t ) ) , 1 p | f ( t ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( t ) t - 1 2 p * | f ( t ) | 2 p *

for t > 0 are nondecreasing. Then

c V V ( t n v n ) - 1 p V ( t n v n ) , t n v n
= 1 p N V [ | f ( t n v n ) | p - | f ( t n v n ) | p - 1 f ( t n v n ) t n v n ] d x + N [ 1 p h ( f ( t n v n ) ) f ( t n v n ) t n v n - H ( f ( t n v n ) ) ] d x
+ N [ 1 p | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( t n v n ) t n v n - 1 2 p * | f ( t n v n ) | 2 p * ] d x
1 p { | ε x | > R } ( V ( ε x ) + ξ ) [ | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n ] d x + 1 p { | ε x | R } V [ | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n ] d x
+ N [ 1 p h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x + N [ 1 p | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n - 1 2 p * | f ( v n ) | 2 p * ] d x
1 p N V ( ε x ) [ | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n ] d x + N [ 1 p h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x
+ N [ 1 p | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n - 1 2 p * | f ( v n ) | 2 p * ] d x + C ξ + o n ( 1 )
= J ε ( v n ) - 1 p J ε ( v n ) , v n + C ξ + o n ( 1 )
= c ε + C ξ + o n ( 1 ) .

Letting ξ 0 , n 0 , we have c ε c V . ∎

4.1 Compactness condition

Lemma 4.4.

Let { v n } be a ( C ) c ε sequence of J ε in X ε and v n v in X ε for some v X ε . Then

J ε ( v ~ n ) = J ε ( v n ) - J ε ( v ) + o n ( 1 ) , J ε ( v ~ n ) = o n ( 1 ) ,

where v ~ n = v n - v .

Proof.

Firstly, we show that the following equalities hold:

(4.10) N H ( f ( v ~ n ) ) d x = N H ( f ( v n ) ) d x + N H ( f ( v ) ) d x + o n ( 1 ) ,
(4.11) N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ~ n ) | p d x = N V ( ε x ) | f ( v n ) | p d x + N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p d x + o n ( 1 ) ,
(4.12) N V ( ε x ) [ | f ( v ~ n ) | p - 1 f ( v ~ n ) - | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) + | f ( v ) | p - 1 f ( v ) ] φ d x = o n ( 1 ) ,
(4.13) N [ h ( f ( v ~ n ) ) f ( v ~ n ) - h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) + h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) ] φ d x = o n ( 1 ) ,
(4.14) N f 2 p * ( v ~ n + ) d x = N f 2 p * ( v n + ) d x - N f 2 p * ( v + ) d x + o n ( 1 ) ,
(4.15) N ( f 2 p * - 1 ( v ~ n + ) f ( v ~ n + ) - f 2 p * - 1 ( v n + ) f ( v n + ) + f 2 p * - 1 ( v + ) f ( v + ) ) φ d x = o n ( 1 )

for all φ C 0 ( N ) , where α ( p , p * ) .The proof of (4.10)–(4.15) is similar to the proof of Lemma 3.5 (2). Here we only show that (4.14) holds true. Observe that by Lemma 2.1 (6), (7) and (10), we have that

| f 2 p * ( v n + ) - f 2 p * ( v + ) | = | 0 1 d d t f 2 p * ( ( v ~ n + t v ) + ) d t |
= | 0 1 [ 2 p * f 2 p * - 2 ( ( v ~ n + t v ) + ) f ( ( v ~ n + t v ) + ) f ( ( v ~ n + t v ) + ) v ] d t |
C 0 1 ( | v ~ n | + | v | ) p * - 1 | v | d t C ( | v ~ n | p * - 1 | v | + | v | p * ) .

From this and Young’s inequality, for each δ > 0 there exists C δ > 0 such that

| f 2 p * ( v ~ n + ) - f 2 p * ( v n + ) + f 2 p ( v + ) | δ | v ~ n | p * + C δ | v | p * .

Define

G δ , n ( x ) = max { | f 2 p * ( v ~ n + ) - f 2 p * ( v n + ) + f 2 p ( v + ) | - δ | v ~ n | p * , 0 } ,

which verifies that

G δ , n ( x ) 0  a.e. in  N , 0 G δ , n ( x ) C δ | v | p L 1 ( N ) .

Hence, by Lebesgue’s theorem, we have

N G δ , n ( x ) d x 0 as  n .

By the definition of G δ , n , we see that

| f 2 p * ( v ~ n + ) - f 2 p * ( v n + ) + f 2 p ( v + ) | δ | v ~ n | p * + C G δ , n ( x ) .

Thus, we get

lim sup n N | f 2 p * ( v ~ n + ) - f 2 p * ( v n + ) + f 2 p ( v + ) | d x C δ

which implies that

N | f 2 p * ( v ~ n + ) - f 2 p * ( v n + ) + f 2 p ( v + ) | d x = o n ( 1 )

and (4.14) follows.

Secondly, similar to the proof of (3.6) and from [10, Brezis–Lieb Lemma], we can deduce that

(4.16) N | v ~ n | p d x = N | v n | p d x - N | v | p d x + o n ( 1 ) .

Finally, by (4.10)–(4.16) and (3.6)–(3.9), we obtain

J ε ( v ~ n ) = J ε ( v n ) - J ε ( v ) + o n ( 1 )

and

J ε ( v ~ n ) , φ = J ε ( v n ) , φ - J ε ( v ) , φ + o n ( 1 ) = o n ( 1 )

for all φ C 0 ( N ) . ∎

Lemma 4.5.

The functional J ε satisfies the ( C ) c ε condition at any level c ε < c V .

Proof.

Let { v n } be a ( C ) c ε sequence of J ε in X ε ; then

J ε ( v n ) c ε , ( 1 + v n X ε ) J ε ( v n ) 0 .

By the boundedness of { v n } in X ε , we know that there exists v X ε such that v n v in X ε and J ε ( v ) = 0 . Let v ~ n = v n - v ; by Lemma 4.4, we have J ε ( v ~ n ) 0 and

J ε ( v ~ n ) = J ε ( v n ) - J ε ( v ) + o n ( 1 ) = c ε - J ε ( v ) + o n ( 1 ) := d + o n ( 1 ) .

From (H 2 ) and Lemma 2.1 (4), we have

J ε ( v ) = J ε ( v ) - 1 p J ε ( v ) , v
= 1 p N V ( ε x ) [ f p ( v ) - f p - 1 ( v ) f ( v ) v ] d x + N [ 1 p h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v - H ( f ( v ) ) ] d x
+ N [ 1 p | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) v - 1 2 p * | f ( v ) | 2 p * ] d x 0 .

Since V < , we have d c ε < c V . It follows from Lemma 4.3 that Q ( v ~ n ) 0 . By [37, Proposition 2.4], we have v ~ n 0 in X ε , that is, v n v in X ε . ∎

In order to apply the Ljusternik–Schnirelman category theory, we need the functional J ε to satisfy the compactness condition (such as ( P S ) c or ( C ) c condition) on the Nehari manifold. The following two Lemmas will explore this property.

Lemma 4.6.

The Nehari manifold M ε is of C 1 class and ε ( v ) , v < 0 for any v M ε , where ε : X ε R is given by

ε ( v ) = N [ | v | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v ] d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v d x - N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) v d x .

Proof.

Observe that

ε ( v ) , v = p N | v | p d x + ( p - 1 ) N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 d x + N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ′′ ( v ) v 2 d x
+ N V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ′′ ( v ) v 2 d x
- N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v d x - ( 2 p * - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 | f ( v + ) | 2 v 2 d x
- N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ′′ ( v + ) v 2 d x - N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) v d x .

By v ε , we deduce that

ε ( v ) , v = N V ( ε x ) ( ( p - 1 ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 + V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ′′ ( v ) v 2
- ( p - 1 ) V ( ε x ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v ) d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 d x - N h ( f ( v ) ) f ′′ ( v ) v 2 d x
+ ( p - 1 ) N h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v d x - ( 2 p * - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 | f ( v + ) | 2 v 2 d x
- N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ′′ ( v + ) v 2 d x + ( p - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) v d x .

Let

g ~ ( t ) = ( p - 1 ) | f ( t ) | p - 2 | f ( t ) | 2 t 2 - 2 p - 1 | f ( t ) | p - 2 | f ( t ) | p | f ( t ) | p + 2 t 2 - ( p - 1 ) | f ( t ) | p - 2 f ( t ) f ( t ) t

for t ; according to the definition of f, we obtain that g ~ ( t ) = g ~ ( - t ) for t . Note that by Lemma 2.1 (4), we have that g ~ ( t ) 0 for t 0 . Thus g ~ ( t ) 0 for all t . Hence, we get

N V ( ε x ) ( ( p - 1 ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 + | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ′′ ( v ) v 2 - ( p - 1 ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v ) d x
= N V ( ε x ) ( ( p - 1 ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 - 2 p - 1 | f ( v ) | 2 p - 2 | f ( v ) | p + 2 v 2 - ( p - 1 ) | f ( v ) | p - 2 f ( v ) f ( v ) v ) d x
(4.17) = N V ( ε x ) g ~ ( v ) d x 0 .

From Proposition 2.2 (3) and h ( s ) = 0 for s 0 , we have

h ( f ( s ) ) | f ( s ) | 2 v 2 + h ( f ( s ) ) f ′′ ( s ) s 2 - ( p - 1 ) h ( f ( s ) ) f ( s ) s 0 for all  s .

Thus

(4.18) N [ h ( f ( v ) ) | f ( v ) | 2 v 2 + h ( f ( v ) ) f ′′ ( v ) v 2 - ( p - 1 ) h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v ] d x 0 .

Therefore, by (4.17), (4.18) and Lemma 2.1 (4) and (7), we have that

ε ( v ) , v - ( 2 p * - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 | f ( v + ) | 2 v 2 d x - N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ′′ ( v + ) v 2 d x
+ ( p - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v + ) v d x
- ( 2 p * - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 | f ( v + ) | 2 v 2 d x + 2 p - 1 N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 1 | f ( v + ) | p - 1 | f ( v + ) | p + 2 v 2 d x
+ 2 ( p - 1 ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * - 2 | f ( v + ) | 2 v 2 d x
(4.19) 2 ( p - p * ) N | f ( v + ) | 2 p * d x < 0 .

Lemma 4.7.

The functional J ε restricted to M ε satisfies the ( C ) c ε condition at any level c ε < c V .

Proof.

Let J ~ ε = J ε | ε . Let { v n } ε such that J ~ ε ( v n ) c ε , ( 1 + v n X ε ) J ~ ε ( v n ) 0 . Thus, using v n ε and J ~ ε ( v n ) = J ε ( v n ) c , similar to the proof of Lemma 3.5, we conclude that { v n } is bounded in X ε . By Lemma 4.5, the constrained gradient has the form

J ~ ε ( v ) = J ε ( v ) - J ε ( v ) , ε ( v ) ε ( v ) 2 ε ( v ) .

For v n ε being a ( C ) c ε sequence, we denote

λ n = J ε ( v n ) , ε ( v n ) ε ( v n ) 2 ,

and then we have that

( 1 + v n X ε ) J ε ( v n ) = λ n ( 1 + v n X ε ) ε ( v n ) + o n ( 1 ) .

By (4.19), we see that ε ( v n ) , v n γ 0 ; if γ = 0 , we have f ( v n + ) 0 in L 2 p * ( N ) . Therefore, using an interpolation argument, the boundedness of { v n } in X ε and (H 0 )–(H 1 ), we deduce that

1 2 N ( | v n | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v n ) | p ) d x N ( | v n | p + V ( ε x ) | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) v n ) d x
= N h ( f ( v n + ) ) f ( v n + ) v n + d x + N | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x
N h ( f ( v n + ) ) f ( v n + ) d x + N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x
ε N | f ( v n + ) | p d x + C ε N | f ( v n + ) | q + 1 d x + N | f ( v n + ) | 2 p * d x 0

as n , which contradicts Lemma 4.1. Thus γ 0 . This together with v n ε leads to

0 = ( 1 + v n X ε ) J ε ( v n ) , v n = λ n ( 1 + v n X ε ) ε ( v n ) , v n + o n ( 1 ) ( 1 + v n X ε ) ,

and so λ n = o n ( 1 ) . Thus ( 1 + v n X ε ) J ε ( v n ) = o n ( 1 ) . We have proved that { v n } is a ( C ) c ε sequence of J ε in X ε ; the conclusion is obtained by Lemma 4.5. ∎

By a similar argument, or using Lemma 4.6, we get the following corollary.

Corollary 4.8.

The critical points of J ε on M ε are critical points of J ε in X ε .

4.2 The existence of the ground state solution for (Pe*)

Theorem 4.9.

Suppose that conditions (V) and (H 0 )(H 5 ) are satisfied. Then there exists ε ¯ > 0 such that problem (Pe*) has a ground state solution u ε C loc 1 , α ( R N ) L ( R N ) for all 0 < ε < ε ¯ .

Proof.

From the above statement, we know that J ε satisfies the mountain pass geometry. By Theorem 3.1, there exists a ( C ) c ε sequence { v n } X ε of J ε satisfying

J ε ( v n ) c ε and ( 1 + v n X ε ) J ε ( v n ) 0    as  n .

Without loss of generalization, we may assume that V 0 = V ( 0 ) = inf x N V ( x ) . Let μ such that V 0 < μ < V ; we have that c V 0 < c μ < c V . Let ω μ be a nonnegative ground state of problem (Qm) and let ϕ C 0 ( N , [ 0 , 1 ] ) be such that ϕ ( x ) = 1 for | x | 1 and ϕ ( x ) = 0 for | x | 2 . For R > 0 , set ϕ R ( x ) = ϕ ( x / R ) , and let u R = ϕ R ( x ) ω μ . By Lemma 3.4, there exists t R > 0 such that v R = t R u R 𝒩 μ . Then there exists R 0 > 0 such that v R 0 𝒩 μ satisfies μ ( v R 0 ) < c V . If not, μ ( v R ) c V for all R > 0 ; by ω μ 𝒩 μ and u R ω μ in W μ as R , we obtain that t R 1 . Thus

c V lim inf R μ ( t R u R ) = μ ( ω μ ) = c μ < c V .

This achieves a contradiction. Since supp v R 0 is a compact set, we may choose ε ¯ > 0 such that V ( ε x ) μ for any ε ( 0 , ε ¯ ) and x supp v R 0 . Thus

N V ( ε x ) | f ( v R 0 ) | p d x N μ | f ( v R 0 ) | p d x for all  ε ( 0 , ε ¯ ) .

Therefore, for all ε ( 0 , ε ¯ ) and t 0 , we have that

J ε ( t v R 0 ) μ ( t v R 0 ) μ ( v R 0 ) < c V ,

which implies that c ε < c V for all ε ( 0 , ε ¯ ) .

By Lemma 4.5, there exists a v X ε (the limit of { v n } ) such that

J ε ( v ) = c ε and J ε ( v ) = 0 .

That is, v X ε is a solution of problem (Pe*). By a standard argument, we can obtain that v C loc 1 , α ( N ) with 0 < α < 1 and v L ( N ) . ∎

4.3 Multiplicity of solutions to (Pe*)

In this subsection, we will study the multiplicity of solutions and study the behavior of its maximum points concentrating on the set M of global minima of V given in Section 1. The main result of this section is equivalent to Theorem 1.1 and it can be restated as follows.

Theorem 4.10.

Suppose that conditions (V) and (H 0 )(H 5 ) are satisfied. For a given δ > 0 there exists ε δ > 0 such that for any ε ( 0 , ε δ ) problem ( P ε * ) has at least cat M δ ( M ) positive weak solutions in C loc 1 , α ( R N ) L ( R N ) . Moreover, each solution decays to zero at infinity and if u ε denotes one of these positive solutions and z ε R N its global maximum, then

lim ε 0 V ( ε z ε ) = V 0 .

To prove Theorem 4.10, we fix some notation and give some preliminary lemmas. Fix δ > 0 and let ω be a ground state solution of problem ( 𝒬 V 0 ). Let η be a smooth nonincreasing cut-off function defined in [ 0 , ) such that η ( s ) = 1 if 0 s δ 2 and η ( s ) = 0 if s δ . For any ε > 0 and y M , define a function ψ ε , y ( x ) by

ψ ε , y ( x ) = η ( | ε x - y | ) ω ( ε x - y ε ) ,

t ε > 0 satisfying

max t 0 J ε ( t ψ ε , y ) = J ε ( t ε ψ ε , y )

and ϕ ε : M ε by

ϕ ε ( y ) = t ε ψ ε , y .

By construction, ϕ ε ( y ) has compact support for any y M .

For any δ > 0 , let ρ = ρ ( δ ) > 0 be such that M δ B ρ ( 0 ) . Let χ : N N be defined as χ ( x ) = x for | x | ρ and χ ( x ) = ρ x | x | for | x | ρ . Finally, let us consider β : ε N given by

β ( u ) = N χ ( ε x ) | u ( x ) | p d x N | u ( x ) | p d x .

Lemma 4.11.

The function ϕ ε satisfies the following limit:

lim ε 0 J ε ( ϕ ε ( y ) ) = c V 0 uniformly in  y M ,

and

lim ε 0 β ( ϕ ε ( y ) ) = y uniformly in  y M .

Proof.

The proof of this lemma can be found in [2]; we omit its proof. ∎

Lemma 4.12 (A compactness lemma).

Let { v n } N μ be a sequence satisfying I μ ( v n ) c μ . Then one of the following holds:

  1. { v n } has a subsequence strongly convergent in W μ ;

  2. there exists a sequence { y n } N such that, up to a subsequence, v ^ n = v n ( x + y n ) converges strongly in W μ . In particular, there exists a minimizer for c μ .

Proof.

Since { v n } 𝒩 μ and μ ( v n ) c μ , it is easy to check that { v n } is bounded in W μ . Since c μ = inf v 𝒩 μ μ , we can use the Ekeland variational principle (see [39, p. 122, Theorem 8.5]): there exists ω n 𝒩 μ such that ω n = v n + o n ( 1 ) , μ ( ω n ) c μ and

μ ( ω n ) = λ n μ ( ω n ) + o n ( 1 ) .

Using the boundedness of { v n } , we obtain that

( 1 + ω n μ ) μ ( ω n ) = λ n ( 1 + ω n μ ) μ ( ω n ) + o n ( 1 ) ,

where λ n is a real number and μ ( ω ) = μ ( ω ) , ω for any ω W μ . We claim that there exists α 0 > 0 such that | μ ( ω n ) , ω n | α 0 for all n . Indeed, using a similar argument as we have done in Lemmas 4.6 and 4.7, we have λ n = o n ( 1 ) , which yields

ω n = v n + o n ( 1 ) , μ ( ω n ) c μ , ( 1 + ω n μ ) μ ( ω n ) 0 .

So without loss of generality, we may suppose that { v n } is a ( C ) c μ for μ . Hence, up to a subsequence still denoted by { v n } , we may assume that there exists v W μ such that v n v in W μ , v n v in L loc s ( N ) for s [ 1 , p ) , v n ( x ) v ( x ) a.e. in N (see (3.5) in Lemma 3.5), and v n v a.e. in N . Moreover, from Lemma 3.5, we see that μ ( v ) = 0 and v n 0 for all n .

Case 1: v 0 . In this case, from the semi-continuity of the semi-norm, we have

N | v | p d x lim n inf N | v n | p d x .

We claim that equality holds in the last inequality. Otherwise, using the fact that

1 p | f ( t ) | p - 2 θ | f ( t ) | p - 1 f ( t ) t , 2 θ h ( f ( t ) ) f ( t ) t - H ( f ( t ) ) , 2 θ | f ( t ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( t ) t - 1 2 p * | f ( t ) | 2 p *

are nonnegative functions for t 0 , and by Fatou’s Lemma, we have that

c μ μ ( v ) = μ ( v ) - 2 θ μ ( v ) , v
= ( 1 p - 2 θ ) N | v | p d x + N [ μ p | f ( v ) | p - 2 θ μ | f ( v ) | p - 1 f ( v ) v ] d x + N [ 2 θ h ( f ( v ) ) f ( v ) v - H ( f ( v ) ) ] d x
+ N [ 2 θ | f ( v ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v ) v - 1 2 p * | f ( v ) | 2 p * ] d x
< lim n { ( 1 p - 2 θ ) N | v n | p + N [ μ p | f ( v n ) | p - 2 θ μ | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n ] d x
+ N [ 2 θ h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) v n - H ( f ( v n ) ) ] d x + N [ 2 θ | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n - 1 2 p * | f ( v n ) | 2 p * ] d x }
= lim n ( μ ( v n ) - 2 θ μ ( v n ) , v n )
c μ ,

which leads to a contradiction. So we obtain

N | v | p d x = lim n N | v n | p d x .

Combining (4.20) with v n ( x ) v ( x ) a.e. in N and the Brezis–Lieb Lemma [10], we can conclude that

(4.20) N | v n - v | p d x 0 as  n .

By an argument similar to (4.20), we also have that

lim n N [ μ p | f ( v n ) | p - 2 θ μ | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n ] d x = N [ μ p | f ( v ) | p - 2 θ μ | f ( v ) | p - 1 f ( v ) v ] d x .

Hence, up to a subsequence still denoted by { μ p | f ( v n ) | p - 2 θ μ | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n } , there exists k ( x ) L 1 ( N ) such that

θ - 2 p p θ μ | f ( v n ) | p μ p | f ( v n ) | p - 2 θ μ | f ( v n ) | p - 1 f ( v n ) v n k ( x ) a.e. in  N ,

where we have used Lemma 2.1 (4) and the fact that v n 0 . By the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, we have that

lim n N μ | f ( v n ) | p d x = N μ | f ( v ) | p d x ,

which implies that

lim n N μ | f ( v n ) - f ( v ) | p d x = 0 .

Hence, up to a subsequence, there exists k 1 ( x ) L 1 ( N ) such that

μ ( | f ( v n ) | p - | f ( v ) | p ) k 1 ( x ) a.e. in  N .

Using the convexity of | f | p and the evenness of | f | p , we have that

V ( x ) | f ( v n - v ) | p V ( x ) 2 | f ( 2 v n ) | p + V ( x ) 2 | f ( 2 v ) | p
2 p - 1 ( V ( x ) | f ( v n ) | p + V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p )
2 p ( k 1 ( x ) + V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p ) .

Since k 1 ( x ) + V ( x ) | f ( v ) | p L 1 ( N ) , by the condition v n v a.e. in N and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, we get

(4.21) lim n N μ | f ( v n - v ) | p d x = 0 .

Therefore, by Lemma 2.1 (9), the Sobolev inequality, (4.20), and (4.21), we deduce that

N μ | v n - v | p d x = { | v n - v | 1 } μ | v n - v | p d x + { | v n - v | 1 } μ | v n - v | p d x
C { | v n - v | 1 } μ | f ( v n - v ) | p d x + { | v n - v | 1 } μ | v n - v | p d x
C N μ | f ( v n - v ) | p d x + μ S 1 p N | v n - v | p d x
0 as  n .

Consequently, we conclude that v n v in W μ .

Case 2: v 0 . By Lemma 3.6, there exist a sequence R, a > 0 and { y n } N such that

B R ( y n ) | v n | p d x a > 0 .

Let v ^ n = v n ( x + y n ) ; then μ ( v ^ n ) c μ and ( 1 + v ^ n μ ) μ ( v ^ n ) 0 as n . It is clear that there exists v ^ W μ such that v ^ n v ^ in W μ . Then we use the discussion given in Case 1 to obtain the result. ∎

Lemma 4.13.

Let ε n 0 + and ( v n ) M ε n be such that J ε n ( v n ) c V 0 . Then there exists a sequence ( y n ~ ) R N such that v ^ n = v n ( x + y n ~ ) has a convergent subsequence in W V 0 . In particular, up to a subsequence, we have ε n y n ~ y M .

Proof.

In view of J ε n ( v n ) , v n = 0 and J ε n ( v n ) c V 0 , by an argument similar to Lemma 3.5 (1), we conclude that { v n } is bounded in W V 0 . Since c μ > 0 , we have Q V 0 ( v n ) 0 for all n . If not, it is easy to check that c μ 0 , a contradiction. By Lemma 3.6, there exist a sequence { y n ~ } N and positive constants R ~ , ξ such that

lim n inf B R ( y n ~ ) | v n | p d x ξ > 0 .

Let v ~ n = v n ( x + y n ~ ) ; up to a subsequence, there exists v ~ W V 0 such that v ~ n v ~ 0 in W V 0 . Let t n > 0 be such that ω n := t n v ~ n 𝒩 V 0 . Using v n ε n , we deduce that

c V 0 V 0 ( ω n )
1 p N [ | ω n | p + V ( ε n x + y n ~ ) | f ( ω n ) | p ] d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( ω n + ) | 2 p * d x - N H ( f ( ω n ) ) d x
= 1 p N [ | ( t n v ~ n ) | p + V ( ε n x + y n ~ ) | f ( t n v ~ n ) | p ] d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( t n v ~ n + ) | 2 p * d x - N H ( f ( t n v ~ n ) ) d x
= J ε n ( t n v n ) J ε n ( v n )
= c V 0 + o n ( 1 ) .

Hence, lim n V 0 ( ω n ) = c V 0 . From ω n 𝒩 V 0 it follows that { ω n } is bounded in W V 0 . By the boundedness of { v ~ n } , we know that { t n } is bounded. Thus, up to a subsequence still denoted by { t n } , we may assume that t n t 0 . If t 0 = 0 , from the boundedness of v ~ n we have that ω n = t n v n ~ 0 . Hence, V 0 ( ω n ) 0 , which contradicts c V 0 > 0 . Thus t 0 > 0 . From the boundedness of { ω n } and v ~ n v ~ , up to a subsequence, we have that ω n ω = t 0 v ~ in W V 0 . By t 0 > 0 and v ~ 0 , we see that ω 0 . From Lemma 4.12 we have ω n ω in W V 0 , which implies that v ~ n v ~ in W V 0 .

It remains to show that ε n y n ~ is bounded. In fact, suppose by contradiction that | ε n y n ~ | . Since ω n ω in W V 0 and V 0 < V , it follows that

c V 0 = V 0 ( ω ) < V ( ω )
lim inf n [ 1 p N | ω n | p d x + 1 p N V ( ε n x + ε n y n ~ ) | f ( ω n ) | p d x - 1 2 p * N | f ( ω n ) | 2 p * d x - N H ( f ( ω n ) ) d x ]
= lim inf n J ε n ( t n v n ) lim inf n J ε n ( v n ) = c V 0 ,

which gives a contradiction. Thus, ε n y n ~ is bounded in N and, up to a subsequence, ε n y n ~ y in N . If y M , then V ( y ) > V 0 and we can obtain a contradiction by arguing as above. Hence y M . ∎

Let g : + + be a positive function such that g ( ε ) 0 as ε 0 and define the set

ε ~ = { v ε : J ε ( v ) c V 0 + g ( ε ) } .

Lemma 4.14.

Let δ > 0 ; there holds that

lim ε 0 sup v ε ~ inf y M δ | β ( v ) - y | = 0 .

Proof.

Let { ε n } + be such that ε n 0 . For each n , there exists { v n } ε n ~ satisfying

inf y M δ | β ( v n ) - y | = sup v 𝒩 ~ ε n inf y M δ | β ( v ) - y | + o n ( 1 ) .

Thus it suffices to find a sequence { y n } M δ such that

lim n | β ( v n ) - y n | = 0 .

To obtain this sequence, we note that V 0 ( t v n ) J ε ( t v n ) for t 0 and { v n } ε n ~ ε n , and so

c V 0 c ε n J ε n ( v n ) c V 0 + g ( ε n ) .

This implies that J ε ( v n ) c V 0 . By Lemma 4.13, we obtain a sequence { y n ~ } N such that ε n y n ~ M δ for n sufficiently large. Then

β ( v n ) = ε n y n ~ + N [ χ ( ε n z + ε n y n ~ ) - ε n y n ~ ] | v n ( z + y n ~ ) | p d x N | v n ( z + y n ~ ) | p d x .

Recalling that ε n x + ε n y n ~ y M , we have that β ( v n ) = ε n y n ~ + o n ( 1 ) , and therefore the sequence { y n := ε n y n ~ } is required. ∎

The following Lemma plays a fundamental role in the study of the behavior of the maximum points of the solutions.

Lemma 4.15.

Suppose that conditions (V) and (H 0 )(H 5 ) are satisfied. Let v n be a solution of the following problem:

{ - Δ p v n + V n ( x ) | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) = h ( f ( v n ) ) f ( v n ) + | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) in  N , v n W 1 , p ( N ) , v n ( x ) > 0 in  N ,

where V n ( x ) = V ( ε n x + ε n y n ~ ) . If v n v in W 1 , p ( R N ) with v 0 , then v n L ( R N ) and v n L ( R N ) C for all n N . Moreover, lim | x | v n ( x ) = 0 uniformly in n.

Proof.

We only replace v by v n and apply the fact that v n v in W 1 , p ( N ) in Theorem 3.8. ∎

Lemma 4.16.

Under the hypotheses of Lemma 4.15, there exists δ 0 > 0 such that v n L ( R N ) δ 0 for all n N .

Proof.

Suppose by contradiction that v n L ( N ) 0 as n . Given ε 0 = V 0 4 , by (H 1 ) there exists n 0 such that

h ( f ( v n ( x ) ) ) ( f ( v n ( x ) ) ) p - 1 < ε 0 a.e. in  N  for  n n 0 .

Thus, by Lemma 2.1 (4) and (9), for n large enough, we have

N ( | v n | p + V 0 2 | v n | p ) d x N ( | v n | p + V 0 2 | f ( v n ) | p ) d x
N ( | v n | p + V n ( x ) | f ( v n ) | p - 2 f ( v n ) f ( v n ) v n ) d x
= N | f ( v n ) | 2 p * - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x + N h ( f ( v n ( x ) ) ) ( f ( v n ( x ) ) ) p - 1 ( f ( v n ( x ) ) ) p - 1 f ( v n ) v n d x
ε 0 N | f ( v n ) | p d x + N | f ( v n ) | 2 p * d x ,

which implies that v n 0 in W 1 , p ( N ) , which contradicts the hypothesis that v n v with v 0 . Hence, there exists δ 0 > 0 such that v n L ( N ) δ 0 for all n . ∎

4.4 Proof of Theorem 4.10

Proof.

For a fixed δ > 0 , by Lemma 4.11 and Lemma 4.14, there exists ε δ > 0 such that for any ε ( 0 , ε δ ) , β ϕ ε is well defined. Fix ε > 0 small enough, so β ϕ ε is homotopic to the inclusion map id : M M δ and by arguments similar to the ones contained in the proofs of [7, Lemmas 4.2 and 4.3], we obtain that

cat ε ~ ( ε ~ ) cat M δ ( M ) .

Since J ε satisfies the ( C ) c ε condition for c ε ( c V 0 , c V 0 + g ( ε ) ) , using the Ljusternik–Schnirelman theory of critical points in [39] (see [39, Theorem 5.19]; it can be true under the ( C ) c condition), we know that J ε possesses at least cat M δ ( M ) critical points on ε . Consequently, by Corollary 4.8, J ε has at least cat M δ ( M ) critical points in X ε .

The remaining proof of concentration behavior can be deduced by using Lemma 4.15 and Lemma 4.16 and its proof is a standard argument; we refer the interested readers to [1, 2, 24]. We omit its details here. ∎

Award Identifier / Grant number: 11501403

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2013021001-3

Funding statement: This work is supported by the NSFC (No. 11501403) and the Natural Science Foundation of Shanxi Province for Youths (No. 2013021001-3).

References

[1] C. O. Alves and G. M. Figueiredo, Existence and multiplicity of positive solutions to a p-Laplacian equation in N , Differential Integral Equations 19 (2006), 143–162. 10.57262/die/1356050522Search in Google Scholar

[2] C. O. Alves, G. M. Figueiredo and U. B. Severo, Multiplicity of positive solutions for a class of quasilinear problems, Adv. Differential Equations 10 (2009), 911–942. 10.1515/ans-2011-0203Search in Google Scholar

[3] C. O. Alves, Y. J. Wang and Y. T. Shen, Soliton solutions for a class of quasilinear Schrödinger equations with a parameter, Differential Integral Equations 259 (2015), 318–343. 10.1016/j.jde.2015.02.030Search in Google Scholar

[4] A. Ambrosetti, M. Badiale and S. Cingolani, Semiclassical states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 140 (1997), 285–300. 10.1007/s002050050067Search in Google Scholar

[5] S. Antontsev and S. Shmarev, Elliptic equations and systems with nonstandard growth conditions: Existence, uniqueness and localization properties of solutions, Nonlinear Anal. 65 (2006), 722–755. 10.1016/j.na.2005.09.035Search in Google Scholar

[6] F. Bass and N. N. Nasanov, Nonlinear electromagnetic spin waves, Phys. Rep. 189 (1990), 165–223. 10.1016/0370-1573(90)90093-HSearch in Google Scholar

[7] V. Benci and G. Cerami, Multiple positive solutions of some elliptic problems via the Morse theory and the domain topology, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 2 (1994), 29–48. 10.1007/BF01234314Search in Google Scholar

[8] A. Borovskii and A. Galkin, Dynamical modulation of an ultrashort high-intensity laser pulse in matter, J. Exp. Theoret. Phys. 77 (1983), 562–573. Search in Google Scholar

[9] H. Brandi, C. Manus, G. Mainfray, T. Lehner and G. Bonnaud, Relativistic and ponderomotive self-focusing of laser beam in a radially inhomogeneous plasma, Phys. Fluids. B5 (1993), 3539–3550. 10.1063/1.860828Search in Google Scholar

[10] H. Brezis and E. H. Lieb, A relation between pointwise convergence of functions and convergence functionals, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 8 (1983), 486–490. 10.1007/978-3-642-55925-9_42Search in Google Scholar

[11] J. Q. Chen and B. L. Guo, Multiple nodal bound states for quasilinear Schrödinger equation, J. Math. Phys. 46 (2005), Article ID 123502. 10.1063/1.2138045Search in Google Scholar

[12] X. L. Chen and R. N. Sudan, Necessary and sufficient conditions for self-focusing of short ultraintense laser pulse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 70 (1993), 2082–2085. 10.1103/PhysRevLett.70.2082Search in Google Scholar PubMed

[13] Y. M. Chen, S. Levine and M. Rao, Variable exponent, linear growth functionals in image restoration, SIAM J. Appl. Math. 66 (2006), 1383–1406. 10.1137/050624522Search in Google Scholar

[14] M. Colin and L. Jeanjean, Solutions for a quasilinear Schrödinger equation: A dual approach, Nonlinear Anal. 56 (2004), 213–226. 10.1016/j.na.2003.09.008Search in Google Scholar

[15] A. De Bouard, N. Hayashi and J. Saut, Global existence of small solutions to a relativistic nonlinear Schrödinger equation, Comm. Math. Phys. 189 (1997), 73–105. 10.1007/s002200050191Search in Google Scholar

[16] M. del Pino and P. Felmer, Multipeak bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Nonlinéaire. 15 (1998), 127–149. 10.1016/s0294-1449(97)89296-7Search in Google Scholar

[17] M. del Pino and P. Felmer, Semi-classical states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations: A variational reduction method, Math. Ann. 324 (2002), 1–32. 10.1007/s002080200327Search in Google Scholar

[18] Y. B. Deng, S. J. Peng and S. S. Yan, Critical exponents of solitary wave solutions for generalized quasilinear Schrödinger equations, J. Differential Equations 260 (2016), 1228–1262. 10.1016/j.jde.2015.09.021Search in Google Scholar

[19] E. DiBenedetto, C 1 + α local regularity of weak solutions of degenerate elliptic equations, Nonlinear Anal. 7 (1983), 827–850. 10.21236/ADA120990Search in Google Scholar

[20] J. M. Do Ó, O. Miyagaki and S. Soares, Soliton solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations: The critical exponential case, Nonlinear Anal. 67 (2007), 3357–3372. 10.1016/j.na.2006.10.018Search in Google Scholar

[21] P. Drábek and Y. X. Huang, Multiplicity of positive solutions for some quasilinear elliptic equation in N with critical Sobolev exponent, J. Differential Equations 140 (1997), 106–132. 10.1006/jdeq.1997.3306Search in Google Scholar

[22] A. Floer and A. Weinstein, Nonspreading wave packets for the packets for the cubic Schrödinger with a bounded potential, J. Funct. Anal. 69 (1986), 397–408. 10.1016/0022-1236(86)90096-0Search in Google Scholar

[23] R. W. Hasse, A general method for the solution of nonlinear soliton and kink Schrödinger equation, Z. Phys. B. 37 (1980), 83–87. 10.1007/BF01325508Search in Google Scholar

[24] X. M. He, A. X. Qian and W. M. Zou, Existence and concentration of positive solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations with critical growth, Nonlinearity 26 (2013), 3137–3168. 10.1088/0951-7715/26/12/3137Search in Google Scholar

[25] A. M. Kosevich, B. A. Ivanov and A. S. Kovalev, Magnetic solitons in superfluid films, Phys. Rep. 194 (1990), 117–238. 10.1016/0370-1573(90)90130-TSearch in Google Scholar

[26] S. Kurihura, Large-amplitude quasi-solitons in superfiuids films, J. Phys. Soc. Japan. 50 (1981), 3262–3267. 10.1143/JPSJ.50.3262Search in Google Scholar

[27] G. B. Li, The existence of a weak solution of quasilinear elliptic equation with critical Sobolev exponent on unbounded domain, Acta Math. Sci. 14 (1994), 64–74. 10.1016/S0252-9602(18)30091-2Search in Google Scholar

[28] P. L. Lions, The concentration-compactness principle in the calculus of variations, The locally compact case. II, Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire. 1 (1984), 223–283. 10.1016/s0294-1449(16)30422-xSearch in Google Scholar

[29] J. Q. Liu, Y. Q. Wang and Z. Q. Wang, Soliton solutions for quasilinear Schrödinger equations II, J. Differential Equations 187 (2003), 473–493. 10.1016/S0022-0396(02)00064-5Search in Google Scholar

[30] J. Q. Liu, Y. Q. Wang and Z. Q. Wang, Solitons for quasilinear Schrödinger equations via the Nehari method, Comm. Partial Differential Equations 29 (2004), 879–901. 10.1081/PDE-120037335Search in Google Scholar

[31] J. Q. Liu and Z. Q. Wang, Multiple solutions for quasilinear elliptic equations with a finite potential well, J. Differential Equations 257 (2014), 2874–2899. 10.1016/j.jde.2014.06.002Search in Google Scholar

[32] Y. G. Oh, On positive multi-lump bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations under multiple well potential, Comm. Math. Phys. 131 (1990), 223–253. 10.1007/BF02161413Search in Google Scholar

[33] M. Poppenberg, K. Schmitt and Z. Q. Wang, On the existence of soliton solutions to quasilinear Schrödinger equations, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 14 (2002), 329–344. 10.1007/s005260100105Search in Google Scholar

[34] P. Rabinowitz, On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations, Z. Ang. Math. Phys. 43 (1992), 270–291. 10.1007/BF00946631Search in Google Scholar

[35] U. Severo, Existence of weak solutions for quasilinear elliptic equations involving the p-Laplacian, Electron. J. Differential Equations 56 (2008), 1–16. Search in Google Scholar

[36] E. B. Silva and G. F. Vieira, Quasilinear asymptotically periodic Schrödinger equations with critical growth, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 39 (2010), 1–33. 10.1007/s00526-009-0299-1Search in Google Scholar

[37] R. M. Wang, K. Wang and K. M. Teng, Multiple solutions for a class of quasilinear elliptic equations with sign-changing potential, Electron. J. Differential Equations 10 (2016), 1–19.Search in Google Scholar

[38] Y. J. Wang and W. M. Zou, Bound states to critical quasilinear Schrödinger equations, NoDEA Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl. 19 (2012), 19–47. 10.1007/s00030-011-0116-3Search in Google Scholar

[39] M. Willem, Minimax Theorems, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1996. 10.1007/978-1-4612-4146-1Search in Google Scholar

[40] M. B. Yang and Y. H. Ding, Existence of semiclassical states for a quasilinear Schrödinger equation with critical exponent in N , Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. (4) 192 (2013), 783–804. 10.1007/s10231-011-0246-6Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2016-10-10
Revised: 2017-02-07
Accepted: 2017-02-25
Published Online: 2017-04-19

© 2019 Walter de Gruyter GmbH, Berlin/Boston

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 Public License.

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Frontmatter
  2. Asymptotic behavior of evolution systems in arbitrary Banach spaces using general almost periodic splittings
  3. Solvability of a product-type system of difference equations with six parameters
  4. On Dirichlet problem for fractional p-Laplacian with singular non-linearity
  5. Absence of Lavrentiev gap for non-autonomous functionals with (p,q)-growth
  6. On a class of fully nonlinear parabolic equations
  7. On sign-changing solutions for (p,q)-Laplace equations with two parameters
  8. Weighted Caffarelli–Kohn–Nirenberg type inequalities related to Grushin type operators
  9. On the fractional p-Laplacian equations with weight and general datum
  10. An elliptic equation with an indefinite sublinear boundary condition
  11. Liouville-type theorems for elliptic equations in half-space with mixed boundary value conditions
  12. Well/ill-posedness for the dissipative Navier–Stokes system in generalized Carleson measure spaces
  13. Hypercontractivity, supercontractivity, ultraboundedness and stability in semilinear problems
  14. Theoretical analysis of a water wave model with a nonlocal viscous dispersive term using the diffusive approach
  15. A multiplicity result for asymptotically linear Kirchhoff equations
  16. Higher-order anisotropic models in phase separation
  17. Well-posedness and maximum principles for lattice reaction-diffusion equations
  18. Existence of a bound state solution for quasilinear Schrödinger equations
  19. Existence and concentration behavior of solutions for a class of quasilinear elliptic equations with critical growth
  20. Homoclinics for strongly indefinite almost periodic second order Hamiltonian systems
  21. A new method for converting boundary value problems for impulsive fractional differential equations to integral equations and its applications
  22. Diffusive logistic equations with harvesting and heterogeneity under strong growth rate
  23. On viscosity and weak solutions for non-homogeneous p-Laplace equations
  24. Periodic impulsive fractional differential equations
  25. A result of uniqueness of solutions of the Shigesada–Kawasaki–Teramoto equations
  26. Solutions of vectorial Hamilton–Jacobi equations are rank-one absolute minimisers in L
  27. Large solutions to non-divergence structure semilinear elliptic equations with inhomogeneous term
  28. The elliptic sinh-Gordon equation in a semi-strip
  29. The Gelfand problem for the 1-homogeneous p-Laplacian
  30. Boundary layers to a singularly perturbed Klein–Gordon–Maxwell–Proca system on a compact Riemannian manifold with boundary
  31. Subharmonic solutions of Hamiltonian systems displaying some kind of sublinear growth
  32. Multiple solutions for an elliptic system with indefinite Robin boundary conditions
  33. New solutions for critical Neumann problems in ℝ2
  34. A fractional Kirchhoff problem involving a singular term and a critical nonlinearity
  35. Existence and non-existence of solutions to a Hamiltonian strongly degenerate elliptic system
  36. Characterizing the strange term in critical size homogenization: Quasilinear equations with a general microscopic boundary condition
  37. Nonlocal perturbations of the fractional Choquard equation
  38. A pathological example in nonlinear spectral theory
  39. Infinitely many solutions for cubic nonlinear Schrödinger equations in dimension four
  40. On Cauchy–Liouville-type theorems
  41. Maximal Lp -Lq regularity to the Stokes problem with Navier boundary conditions
  42. Besov regularity for solutions of p-harmonic equations
  43. The classical theory of calculus of variations for generalized functions
  44. On the Cauchy problem of a degenerate parabolic-hyperbolic PDE with Lévy noise
  45. Hölder gradient estimates for a class of singular or degenerate parabolic equations
  46. Critical and subcritical fractional Trudinger–Moser-type inequalities on
  47. Multiple nonradial solutions for a nonlinear elliptic problem with singular and decaying radial potential
  48. Quantization of energy and weakly turbulent profiles of solutions to some damped second-order evolution equations
  49. An elliptic system with logarithmic nonlinearity
  50. The Caccioppoli ultrafunctions
  51. Equilibrium of a production economy with non-compact attainable allocations set
  52. Exact behavior around isolated singularity for semilinear elliptic equations with a log-type nonlinearity
  53. The higher integrability of weak solutions of porous medium systems
  54. Classification of stable solutions for boundary value problems with nonlinear boundary conditions on Riemannian manifolds with nonnegative Ricci curvature
  55. Regularity results for p-Laplacians in pre-fractal domains
  56. Carleman estimates and null controllability of a class of singular parabolic equations
  57. Limit profiles and uniqueness of ground states to the nonlinear Choquard equations
  58. On a measure of noncompactness in the space of regulated functions and its applications
  59. p-fractional Hardy–Schrödinger–Kirchhoff systems with critical nonlinearities
  60. On the well-posedness of a multiscale mathematical model for Lithium-ion batteries
  61. Global existence of a radiative Euler system coupled to an electromagnetic field
  62. On the existence of a weak solution for some singular p ( x ) -biharmonic equation with Navier boundary conditions
  63. Choquard-type equations with Hardy–Littlewood–Sobolev upper-critical growth
  64. Clustered solutions for supercritical elliptic equations on Riemannian manifolds
  65. Ground state solutions for the Hénon prescribed mean curvature equation
  66. Quasilinear equations with indefinite nonlinearity
  67. Concentrating solutions for a planar elliptic problem with large nonlinear exponent and Robin boundary condition
  68. Retraction of: Concentrating solutions for a planar elliptic problem with large nonlinear exponent and Robin boundary condition
Downloaded on 24.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/anona-2016-0218/html
Scroll to top button