Home Sobolev regularity solutions for a class of singular quasilinear ODEs
Article Open Access

Sobolev regularity solutions for a class of singular quasilinear ODEs

  • Xiaofeng Zhao , Hengyan Li and Weiping Yan EMAIL logo
Published/Copyright: November 23, 2021

Abstract

This paper considers an initial-boundary value problem for a class of singular quasilinear second-order ordinary differential equations with the constraint condition stemming from fluid mechanics. We prove that the existence of positive Sobolev regular solutions for this kind of singular quasilinear ODEs by means of a suitable Nash-Moser iteration scheme Meanwhile, asymptotic expansion of those positive solutions is shown.

MSC 2010: 35J25; 35B65

1 Introduction and main results

In this paper, we consider the following singular second-order ordinary differential equations

ur+2ru+C1[(2μ+λ)r2urr+(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur2(2μ+λ)u]u2+uf(r)=0,r(0,1], (1.1)

with the initial-boundary condition

0<u(0)=u0<ε,u(1)=0, (1.2)

and the constraint condition

01u1(r)dr=C¯M,withafixedconstantC¯, (1.3)

where positive constants 0 < ε < 1 and μ, λ, C > 0, f(r) denotes an external force. Obviously, there is a singular coefficient 2r in equation (1.1), and it is a class of dissipative-type ODEs with the dissipative term 2r u.

We state the main result of this paper.

Theorem 1.1

Let Ω: = (0, 1]. Assume fHs(Ω) andfHs ≤ 1 for any fixed integer s > 1. The singular quasilinear ODEs (1.1) with (1.2)-(1.3) admits a positive Hs(Ω)-solution.

Above singular quasilinear second-order ordinary differential equations with the constraint condition comes from the the three dimensional Navier-Stokes system for compressible fluids in the steady isothermal case in a bounded domain Ω ⊂ ℝ3:

μU(λ+μ)divU+div(ρUU)+P(ρ)=ρf,div(ρU)=0, (1.4)

where U : Ω ⊂ ℝ3 → ℝ3 is the fluid velocity and ρ:Ω ⊂ ℝ3 → ℝ is its density, meanwhile, it satisfies ρ ≥ 0. Moreover, the total mass is described by

Ωρdx=M>0. (1.5)

The constant viscosity coefficients μ and λ are assumed to satisfy μ > 0 and μ+λ > 0. P(ρ) denotes the pressure, it satisfies P(ρ) = ρ for the isothermal case. f : Ω → ℝ3 is a given function which models an outer force density. For simplicity we assume that the domain Ω is an unit ball with a radius 1 and smooth boundary Ω, namely,

Ω={xR3;|x|1}.

We treat the case of Dirichlet boundary conditions

U=0onΩ. (1.6)

The spherically symmetric solution (ρ, U) of the problem (1.4) enjoys the form

ρ(x)=ρ(r),U(x)=u(r)xr,withr=|x|. (1.7)

On one hand, in the spherical coordinates, the original system (1.4) under the assumption (1.7) takes the form

(ρu)r+2ρur=0,(2μ+λ)(ur+2ru)r+(ρu2+ρ)r+2rρu2=ρf, (1.8)

then mutiplying the first equation of (1.8) by u, we derive

2rρu2=(ρu2)r+ρuur,

by which, we reduce the second equation of (1.8) into

(2μ+λ)(ur+2ru)r+ρr+ρuur=ρf. (1.9)

On the other hand, we multiply the first equation of (1.8) by ρ u to get

ddr(ρu)2+4(ρu)2r=0,

which gives that

ρu=Cr2,withr(0,1],

where C is an arbitrary constant (We will set it to be a big positive constant). Assume that u(r) > 0, then we have

ρ=Cr2u. (1.10)

We substitute (1.10) into the second equation of (1.9), then we obtain the singular quasi-linear ODEs (1.1). Meanwhile, the total mass (1.5) in spherically symmetric case is equivalent to the constraint condition (1.3). Let the pressure law be P(ρ) = ργ in (1.4), when the adiabatic exponent γ > 53 , the first existence of weak solution for the system (1.4) was given by Lions [11]. Novotný-Strašcraba employed the concept of oscillation defect measure developed in [4] to prove the existence result for all γ > 32 . Frehse-Steinhauer-Weigant [7] got the existence of weak renormalized solutions to problem (1.4) for all γ > 43 . After that, Plotnikov-Weigant [16] extended the exstence of weak solution of problem (1.4) to the case of γ > 1. Feireisl-Novotný [5] studied the existence of weak solutions with arbitrarily large boundary data for stationary compressible Navier-Stokes system with general inhomogeneous boundary conditions. Meanwhile, they required the pressure to be given by the standard hard sphere EOS.

When the adiabatic exponent γ = 1, in two dimensional case, Lions [11] proved the existence of weak solution for this stationary system by means of a slightly modified equation of mass conservation + div (ρ u) = 0. After that, Frehse-Steinhauer-Weigant [6] improved this result. In the three dimension case, Lions [11] pointed out that it is an open problem. To our knowledge, there is no result for the three dimensional viscous compressible isothermal stationary Navier-Stokes equations. In this paper, we are devoted to solving this problem by construction of Sobolev regularity solutions for problem (1.4) with the spherically symmetric case.

Notations.

Thoughout this paper, let Ω = (0, 1]. we denote the usual norm of 𝕃2(Ω) and Sobolev space Hs(Ω) by ∥⋅∥𝕃2 and ∥⋅∥Hs, respectively. The symbol ab means that there exists a positive constant C such that aCb. The letter C with subscripts to denote dependencies stands for a positive constant that might change its value at each occurrence.

2 Proof of Theorem 1.1

In order to solve the dissipative quasi-linear ODE (1.1) with the boundary condition (1.2), we should overcome two difficulties:

  1. There is the loss of derivative phenomenon. It means that the classical fixed point theorem can not be used.

  2. A positive solution u(r) should be constructed to satisfy the condition (1.3).

Hence, we have to construct a Hs(Ω)-solution for the dissipative quasi-linear ODE (1.1) with the boundary condition (1.2) by using a suitable Nash-Moser iteration scheme. This method has been used in [18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23]. For general Nash-Moser implict function theorem, one can see the celebrated work of Nash [13], Moser [12] and Hörmander [9], and Rabinowitz [17].

We now introduce a family of smooth operators possessing the following properties.

Lemma 2.1

[2, 8] Let Ω ⊂ ℝn with dimension n ≥ 1. There is a family {Πθ}θ≥1 of smoothing operators in the space Hs(Ω) acting on the class of functions such that

ΠθuHk1Cθ(k1k2)+uHk2,k1,k20,ΠθuuHk1Cθk1k2uHk2,0k1k2,ddθΠθuHk1Cθ(k1k2)+1uHk2,k1,k20, (2.1)

where C is a positive constant and (s1s2)+ := max(0, s1s2).

In our iteration scheme, we set

θ=Nm=2m,m=0,1,2,.

Then, by (2.1), it holds

ΠNmuHk1Nmk1k2uHk2,k1k2. (2.2)

We consider the approximation problem of dissipative quasi-linear ODE (1.10) as follows

L(u):=ur+2ru+C1ΠNm[(2μ+λ)r2urr+(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur2(2μ+λ)u]u2+ΠNmuf. (2.3)

We first show how to construct positive smooth solution for the dissipative quasi-linear ODE (1.1) with the zero boundary condition, then by means of some transformation, the non-zero boundary condition case can be transformed into the zero boundary case (see page 15). One can see [1, 3, 10, 14] for more related results on elliptic-type equations.

2.1 The first approximation step m = 1

Let constants s ≥ 1 and 0 < ε < 1. For any rΩ, we choose the initial approximation function u(0)(r) ∈ Hs+5(Ω). Meanwhile, for a fixed small constant c ( < ε), it satisfies

u(0)(r)>c>0,u(0)(1)=0,r(0,1),01(u(0)(r))1dr=C~M,u(0)Hs+5ε,E(0)Hs+5ε2, (2.4)

where is a postive constant, and E(0) denotes the error term taking the form

E(0):=L(u(0)).

We now find the first approximation solution denoted by u(1) of (2.3). The error step between the initial approximation function and first approximation solution is denoted by

h(1):=u(1)u(0),

then linearizing nonlinear system (2.3) around u(0) to get the linearized operators as follows

J[u0]h(1):=C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2hrr(1)+[1+C1(2r(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2]hr(1)+[2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))]h(1). (2.5)

We consider the linear system

J[u0]h(1)=E(0),h(1)(0)=h(1)(1)=0,hr(1)(0)=hr(1)(1)=0, (2.6)

from which, the solution of it gives the first approximation solution of dissipative quasi-linear ODE (1.1). Thus some priori estimates are needed. We first give 𝕃2-estimate of solution for (2.6).

Lemma 2.2

Let the initial approximation function u(0) satisfy (2.4). Assume that fH1(Ω) andfH1 ≤ 1. The solution h(1) of the linear system (2.6) satisfies

01((hr(1))2+(h(1))2)dr01(E(0))2dr.

Proof

Multiplying both sides of the first equation (2.6) by h(1) and hr(1) , respectively, it holds

ddr[(12+1r2C1(2μ+λ)ΠN1ru(0)(u(0)+rur(0))+12C1(2r(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2)(h(1))2+C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2hr(1)h(1)]C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2(hr(1))2+[2r+ΠN1f+C1ΠN1u(0)(2(2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)ur(0)7(2μ+λ)u(0))](h(1))2=E(0)h(1), (2.7)

and

ddr[12C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2(hr(1))2+(1r+ΠN1f)(h(1))2+C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))(h(1))2]+[1+C1(2r(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))212C1(2μ+λ)ΠN1((ru(0))2)r](hr(1))2+[1r212ΠN1frC1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2ur(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)r](h(1))2=E(0)hr(1), (2.8)

where we use

r2(u(0))2hrr(1)h(1)=ddr(r2(u(0))2hr(1)h(1)r(u(0))2(h(1))2r2u(0)ur(0)(h(1))2)+(h(1))2(r(u(0))2+r2u(0)ur(0))rr2(u(0))2(hr(1))2.

We sum up (2.7) and (2.8) to get

ddrG(h(1))+(hr(1))2+(2r+1r2)(h(1))2=I1(hr(1))2+I2(h(1))2+E(0)(h(1)+hr(1)), (2.9)

where

G(h(1)):=[12+1r+1r2+ΠN1fC1(2μ+λ)ΠN1ru(0)(u(0)+rur(0))+(C1r(2μ+λ)12)ΠN1(u(0))2+C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))](h(1))2+C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2hr(1)h(1)+12C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2(hr(1))2, (2.10)
I1:=C1(2r(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2+C1(2μ+λ)ΠN1(12((ru(0))2)r+(u(0))2), (2.11)
I2:=12ΠN1frΠN1fC1ΠN1u(0)(2(2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)ur(0)7(2μ+λ)u(0))+C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2ur(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)r. (2.12)

Note that the boundary condition given in (2.6). We integrate equality (2.9) over Ω, it holds

01((hr(1))2+(2r+1r2)(h(1))2)dr=01(I1(hr(1))2+I2(h(1))2)dr+01E(0)(h(1)+hr(1))dr. (2.13)

On one hand, we notice that the first approximation funciton u(0) satisfy (2.4). So by (2.1), Young's inequality and ∥f∥H1 ≤ 1, there exists a sufficient big positive constant C such that

I1LCε,C,I2LΠN1fL+12ΠN1frL+Cε,CCε,C, (2.14)

where Cε,C is a positive constant depending on ε and C, it will be small as ε small.

On the other hand, by Young's inequality, it holds

|01E(0)(hr(1)+h(1))dr|01(E(0))2dr+12(hr(1)L22+h(1)L22). (2.15)

Thus, by (2.14)-(2.15), it follows from (2.13) that

01[(12Cε,C)(hr(1))2+(2r+1r22Cε,C)(h(1))2]dr01(E(0))2dr. (2.16)

Note that r ∈ (0, 1] and constant Cε,C being small as ε small. Thus there exists a positive constant C1 such that

12Cε,CC1>0,2r+1r22Cε,CC1>0.

Hence, it follows from (2.16) that

01((hr(1))2+(h(1))2)dr01(E(0))2dr.

Furthermore, we derive higher order derivatives estimates. For a fixed integer s ≥ 1, we apply Ds:=dsdrs to both sides of (2.6), it holds

C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2Ds+2h(1)+[1+C1ΠN1(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2]Ds+1h(1)+[2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))]Dsh(1)+F=DsE(0), (2.17)

with the boundary condition

Dkh(1)(0)=Dkh(1)(1)=0,Dk+1h(1)(0)=Dk+1h(1)(1)=0, (2.18)

where the integer 0 ≤ ks, and

F:=C1(2μ+λ)i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)Di2+2h(1)+i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1[1+C1ΠN1(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2]Di2+1h(1)+i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1[2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))]Di2h(1).

Here we notice this term i1+i2=s,0i2s1s(Di1(2r))Di2h(1) can cause some troubles when we carry out energy estimates due to

i1+i2=s,0i2s1s(Di1(2r))Di2h(1)=(1)ss!r(s+1)h(1)+k=1s1(1)sk1(s1)!k!r(sk)(h(1))(k).

Next we derive higher derivative estimate of solution for (2.6).

Lemma 2.3

Let the initial approximation function u(0) satisfy (2.4). Assume that fHs(Ω) andfHs ≤ 1 for any fixed s ≥ 1. The solution h(1) of the linear system (2.6) satisfies

01(Dsh(1))2drk=1s01(DkE(0))2dr.

Proof

This proof is based on the induction. Let s = 1, by (2.17)-(2.18), it holds

C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2hrrr(1)+[1+C1(2r(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2+C1(2μ+λ)ΠN1((u(0))2)r]hrr(1)+[2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+2(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)u(0)2(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)]hr(1)+[2r2+ΠN1fr+2C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)r]h(1)=Er(0), (2.19)

with the boundary condition

Dkh(1)(0)=Dkh(1)(1)=0,Dk+1h(1)(0)=Dk+1h(1)(1)=0,fork=0,1. (2.20)

Multiplying both sides of equation (2.19) by hr(1)+12hrr(1), it holds

ddrG(h(1))+12(hrr(1))2+(2r+12r2)(hr(1))2+(3r42r3)(h(1))2=A0(r)(hrr(1))2+A1(r)(hr(1))2+A2(r)(h(1))2+Er(0)(hr(1)+12hrr(1)), (2.21)

where

G(h(1)):=a0(r)hrr(1)hr(1)+a1(r)(hrr(1))2+a2(r)(hr(1))2+a3(r)hr(1)h(1)+a4(r)(h(1))2,

with the coefficients

a0(r):=C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2,a1(r):=14C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2,a2(r):=12+12r+14ΠN1f12ΠN1(u(0))2+12C1(2μ+λ)(1r2)ΠN1((u(0))2)r+12C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+2(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)u(0)2(2μ+λ)(u(0))2),a3(r):=1r2+12ΠN1fr+C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)r,a4(r):=1r2+12ΠN1fr+C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)r1r314ΠN1frr+12C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)rr,

and

A0(r):=12C1(r(r2)(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2+12C1(2μ+λ)(1r22)ΠN1((u(0))2)r,A1(r):=ΠN1f14ΠN1fr+12C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)rr12C1(2r(2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2+2C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+2(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)u(0)2(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)12C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+2(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)r,A2(r):=14ΠN1frrr12ΠN1frrC1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)rr+12C1ΠN1((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)u(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)u(0)3(2μ+λ)(u(0))2)rrr.

Note that the boundary condition (2.20). We integrate equality (2.21) over Ω, it holds

01[12(hrr(1))2+(2r+12r2)(hr(1))2+(3r42r3)(h(1))2]dr=01[A0(r)(hrr(1))2+A1(r)(hr(1))2+A2(r)(h(1))2]dr+01Er(0)(hr(1)+12hrr(1))dr. (2.22)

We now estimate each term in the right hand side of (2.22). Let constant 0 < ε ≪ 1. Since we have chosen the first approximation funciton u(0) satisfying (2.4), by Young's inequality and (2.1), ∥f∥H1 ≤ 1 and r ∈ (0, 1], for a sufficient big C, it holds

A0(r)LC¯ε,C,A1(r)L54+C¯ε,C,A2(r)L34+C¯ε,C, (2.23)

where Cε,C is a positive constant depending on ε and C, which can be small as ε small.

Thus by (2.23), we derive

01[A0(r)(hrr(1))2+A1(r)(hr(1))2+A2(r)(h(1))2]dr01[C¯ε,C(hrr(1))2+(54+C¯ε,C)(hr(1))2+(34+C¯ε,C)(h(1))2]dr. (2.24)

On the other hand, by Young's inequality, we integrate by part to get

|01Er(0)(hr(1)+hrr(1))dr|9201(Er(0))2dr+1201((hr(1))2+12(hrr(1))2)dr. (2.25)

Hence, by (2.24)-(2.25), we can reduce (2.22) into

01[(14C¯ε,C)(hrr(1))2+(2r+12r274C¯ε,C)(hr(1))2+(3r42r334C¯ε,C)(h(1))2]dr1201(Er(0))2dr. (2.26)

Note that r ∈ (0, 1] and constant Cε,C being small as ε small. Thus there exists a positive constant C1 such that

14C¯ε,CC¯1>0,2r+12r274C¯ε,CC¯1>0,3r42r334C¯ε,CC¯1>0,

which combining with (2.26) gives that

01(hr(1))2dr01((hrr(1))2+(hr(1))2+(h(1))2)dr01(Er(0))2dr.

Assume that the (s − 1)th derivative case holds, i.e.,

01(Ds1h(1))2drk=1s101(DkE(0))2dr. (2.27)

We now prove the sth derivative case holds. Obviously, equation (2.17) can be written as

C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2Ds+2h(1)+[1+C1ΠN1(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2+C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)r]Ds+1h(1)+[2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))+C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)rr4C1((2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2]Dsh(1)+i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1(2r)Di2h(1)+F¯=DsE(0), (2.28)

with

F¯:=C1(2μ+λ)i1+i2=s,0i2s3sDi1(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)Di2+2h(1)+i1+i2=s,0i2s2sDi1[1+C1ΠN1(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2]Di2+1h(1)+i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1[ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)+(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))]Di2h(1). (2.29)

Multiplying both sides of equation (2.28) by Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1), it holds

ddrG¯(h(1))+12(Ds+1h(1))2+(2r+12r2)(Dsh(1))2+A¯0(r)(Ds+1h(1))2+A¯1(r)(Dsh(1))2+(i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1(2r)Di2h(1))(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))+F¯(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))=DsE(0)(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1)), (2.30)

where

G¯(h(1)):=C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2Dsh(1)Dsh(1)+14C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)r(Ds+1h(1))2+12[1+C1ΠN1(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2+C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)r](Dsh(1))2+14[2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))+C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)rr4C1((2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))2](Dsh(1))2,
A¯0(r):=C1(2μ+λ)ΠN1(r2(u(0))214(r2(u(0))2)r)+12C1ΠN1(2r(2μ+λ)C)(u(0))2,
A¯1(r):=12C1(2μ+λ)ΠN1((ru(0))2)rr12C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)rr+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)32(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))+C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)rr5C1((2μ+λ)C)ΠN1(u(0))214[ΠN1fr+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)(2r(2μ+λ)C)ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0))r+C1(2μ+λ)(r2ΠN1(u(0))2)rrr4C1((2μ+λ)C)ΠN1((u(0))2)r].

By noticing the boundary condition (2.18), we integrate ((2.30) over (0, 1] to get

01[12(Ds+1h(1))2+(2r+12r2)(Dsh(1))2]dr=01[A¯0(r)(Ds+1h(1))2A¯1(r)(Dsh(1))2(i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1(2r)Di2h(1))(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))F¯(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))+DsE(0)(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))]dr. (2.31)

We now estimate each of term in the right hand side of (2.31). We notice that the first approximation funciton u(0) satisfy (2.4). So by (2.1), Young's inequality and ∥f∥Hs ≤ 1, for a sufficient big C, it holds

A¯0(r)LCε,C,A¯1(r)L54+Cε,C, (2.32)

where Cε,C is a positive constant depending on ε and C, it will be small as ε small.

Thus we derive

01(A¯0(r)(Ds+1h(1))2+A¯1(r)(Dsh(1))2)dr01(Cε,C(Ds+1h(1))2+(54+Cε,C)(Dsh(1))2)dr. (2.33)

On one hand, we use (2.35) and Young's inequality to derive

01(i1+i2=s,0i2s1sDi1(2r)Di2h(1))(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))dr11601((Dsh(1))2+(Ds+1h(1))2)dr+Csk=1s101(Dkh(1))2dr, (2.34)

where we should divide (0, 1] into (0, 1s! ) and [ 1s! , 1], then if r ∈ (0, 1s! ), by the boundary condition Dkh(1)(0) = 0 (0 ≤ ks), we can apply de l'Hôpital's rule to get

limr0+h(1)(r)rs+1=limr0+Ds+1h(1)(r)=0,

which means that for a fixed integer s > 1, it holds

Ds+1h(1)(r)O(1s!),r(0,1s!). (2.35)

Thus we use (2.35) and Young's inequality to get (2.34). If r ∈ [ 1s! , 1], (2.34) can be obtained by Young's inequality directly. Here Cs is a postive constant depending on the fixed integer s.

On the other hand, note that (2.29) and ∥fHs+5 ≤ 1, we again use Young's inequality to derive

01F¯(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))drCεk=1s101(Dkh(1))2dr+11601((Dsh(1))2+(Ds+1h(1))2)dr,01DsE(0)(Dsh(1)+12Ds+1h(1))dr01(12(Dsh(1))2+14(Ds+1h(1))2+92(DsE(0))2)dr. (2.36)

Hence, by (2.33)-(2.36), it follows from (2.31) that

01[(18Cε,C)(Ds+1h(1))2+(2r+12r258Cε,C)(Dsh(1))2]dr9201(DsE(0))2dr+Csk=1s101(Dkh(1))2dr. (2.37)

Note that r ∈ (0, 1] and constant Cε,C being small as ε small. Thus there exists a positive constant C2 such that

18Cε,CC2>0,2r+12r258Cε,CC2>0.

Therefore, by (2.37), we obtain

01((Ds+1h(1))2+(Dsh(1))2)drk=1s01(DkE(0))2dr.

Proposition 2.1

Let the initial approximation function u(0) satisfy (2.4). Assume that fHs(Ω) andfHs ≤ 1 for any fixed integer s ≥ 1. The linear problem (2.6) admits a solution h(1)(r) ∈ Hs(Ω). Moreover, it holds

h(1)HsE(0)Hs. (2.38)

Proof

We use the standard fixed point iteration process to solve the linear problem (2.6). Let v(1) = (h(1), h(1)r). Then linearized equation (2.4) can be rewritten as

ddrv(1)+A1(r)B(r)v(1)=A1(r)G0(r),

where G0(r) = (0, E(0))T and the matrix 𝓐(r) is

A(r):=100C1(2μ+λ)r2ΠN1(u(0))2,B(r):=01a0(r)a1(r),

where the matrix 𝓐−1(r) is the inverse of matrix 𝓐(r) due to r2(u(0))2 > 0 by (2.4), and the coefficients

a0(r):=2r+ΠN1f+2C1ΠN1u(0)((2μ+λ)r2urr(0)2(1r(2μ+λ))ur(0)3(2μ+λ)u(0)),a1(r)=12C1ΠN1(1r(2μ+λ))(u(0))2.

Following [24], by the standard fixed point iteration and a priori estimate in Lemma 2.3, we obtain the approximation problem

vj(1)(r)=0rA1(y)(B(y)vj(1)+G0(y))dy

has a Cauchy sequence {vj(1)(r)}jZ+ in Hs(Ω) for s ≥ 1, whose limit is v(1)(r), and it solves the linear problem (2.6) in (0, 1]. Furhermore, summing up both estimates given in Lemma 2.2-2.3, one can derive the estimate (2.38).

2.2 The mth approximation step

Let R ∈ (0, 1) be a fixed constant. We define

BR:={u(k):u(k)HsR<1} (2.39)

with the integers 1 ≤ km − 1 and s ≥ 1.

Assume that the m-th approximation solutions of (2.3) is denoted by h(m) with m = 2, 3, …. Let

h(m):=u(m)u(m1),

then it holds

u(m)=u(0)+i=1mh(i).

Our target is to prove that u(∞) is a local solution of nonlinear equations (1.1). It is equivalent to show the series i=1mh(i) is convergence.

We linearize nonlinear system (1.1) around u(m−1) to get the linearized system as follows

J[um1]h(m)=E(m1),rΩ, (2.40)

with the boundary conditions

h(m)(0)=h(m)(1)=0,hr(m)(0)=hr(m)(1)=0, (2.41)

where the error term

E(m1):=L[um1]=R(h(m)), (2.42)

and

R(h(m)):=L(u(m1)+h(m))L(u(m1))ΠNmL[(u(m1)]h(m), (2.43)

which is also the nonlinear term in approximation problem (2.3) at u(m−1). The following result is to show how to construct the m-th approximation solution.

Proposition 2.2

Let u(m−1) ∈ 𝓑R. Assume that fHs(Ω) andfHs ≤ 1 for any fixed integer s ≥ 1. Then the linearized problem (2.40) with the boundary condition (2.41) admits a solution h(m)Hs(Ω), which satisfies

h(m)HsE(m1)Hs, (2.44)

where the error term satisfies

E(m1)Hs=R(h(m))HsNm2h(m)Hs2. (2.45)

Proof

Assume that u(0) satisfies (2.4). The m − 1-th approximation solution is

u(m1)=u(0)+i=1m1h(i).

Then we will find the m-th approximation solution u(m), which is equivalent to find h(m) such that

u(m)=u(m1)+h(m). (2.46)

Substituting (2.46) into (2.3), it holds

L(u(m))=L(u(m1))+ΠNmL[(u(m1))]h(m)+R(h(m)).

Set

L(u(m1))+ΠNmL[u(m1)]h(m)=0,

we supplement it with the boundary conditions (2.41).

Since we assume u(m−1) ∈ 𝓑R, there is the same structure between the linear system (2.6) and the linear system of mth approximation solutions. Thus by means of the same proof process in Proposition 2.1, we can show above problem admits a solution h(m)Hs(Ω). Here we should use (2.2). Furthermore, it holds

h(m)HsE(m1)Hs,

where one can see the m − 1-th error term E(m−1) such that

E(m1):=L(u(m1))=R(h(m)).

2.3 Convergence of approximation scheme

For a fixed integer s > 1, let 1 ≤ < k0ks and

km:=k¯+kk¯2m,αm+1:=kmkm+1=kk¯2m+1,

which gives that

k0>k1>>km>km+1>. (2.47)

Proposition 2.3

Assume that fHs(Ω) andfHs ≤ 1 for any fixed integer s > 1. The dissipative quasi-linear ODE

ur+2ru+C1[(2μ+λ)r2urr2(1r(2μ+λ))ur2(2μ+λ)u]u2+uf=0, (2.48)

with the boundary condition

u(0)=u0>0,u(1)=0,

admits a positive Hs-solution

u()(r)=u(0)(r)+m=1h(m)(r)+(1r)u0,r(0,1].

Moreover, it holds

01u1(r)dr=C¯M>1,withafixedconstantC¯.

Proof

The proof is based on the induction. For convenience, we first deal with the case of zero boundary condition, i.e. u(0) = u(1) = 0. After that, we discuss the case u(0) = u0 > 0 and u(1) = u1 > 0. Note that Nm = N0m with N0 > 1. ∀ m = 1, 2, …, we claim that there exists a sufficient small positive constant ε such that

h(m)Hkm<ε2m,E(m1)Hkm<ε2m+1,u(m)Bε. (2.49)

For the case of m = 1, we recall that the assumption (2.4) on the initial approximation smooth function u(0), i.e.

u(0)(r)>c>0,forafixedsmallconstantc(<ε),01(u(0)(r))1dr=C~M,u(0)Hs+5ε,E(0)Hs+5ε2. (2.50)

By (2.44), let 0<ε0<N08ε2<ε21, it derives

h(1)Hk1E(0)Hk02ε0<ε.

Moreover, by (2.45) and above estimate, it holds

E(1)Hk1R(h1))Hk1N12h(1)Hk122ε0N12<ε2,

and

u(1)Hk1u(0)Hk1+h(1)Hk1u(0)Hk0+E1(0)Hk0ε,

which means that u(1) ∈ 𝓑ε.

Assume that the case of m − 1 holds, i.e.

h(m1)Hkm1<ε2m1,E(m1)Hkm1<ε2m,u(m1)Bε, (2.51)

then we prove the case of m holds. Using (2.44), we have

h(m)HkmE(m1)Hkm<E(m1)Hkm1<ε2m, (2.52)

which combining with (2.45)-(2.47), it holds

E(m)Hkm=R(hm)HkmNm12E(m1)Hkm12N02(m1)+4(m2)(E(m2)Hkm2)22,[N04E(0)Hk0]2m. (2.53)

So by the last condition in (2.50), there is a sufficient small positive constant ε0 such that

0<N04E(0)Hk0<2N04ε0<ε2,

which combining with (2.53) gives that

E(m)Hkm<ε2m+1.

On the other hand, note that Nm = N0m , by (2.51)-(2.52), it holds

u(m)Hkm+3u(m1)Hkm1+h(m)Hkm+3ε+Nm3ε2mε.

This means that u(m) ∈ 𝓑ε. Hence we conclude that (2.49) holds.

Furthermore, it follows from (2.49) that the error term goes to 0 as m → ∞, i.e.

limmE(m)Hkm=0.

Therefore, equation (2.47) with the zero boundary condition u(0) = u(1) = 0 admit a solution

u()(r)=u(0)(r)+m=1h(m)(r)Hk0(Ω),=u(0)(r)+O(ε)>0.

Next we discuss the case of non-zero boundary condition

0<u(0)=u0<ε,u(1)=0. (2.54)

We introduce an auxiliary function

u¯(r)=u(r)(1r)u0,

then the bounary condition (2.54) is reduced into

u¯(0)=u¯(1)=0,

and equations (2.47) is transformed into equations of C(r). Here we use u(r) to denote χ(0,1) u(r) for convenience, χ(0,1) is the character function of the interval (0, 1).

Thus we can follow above iteration scheme to obtain the local existence of C(r) for r ∈ (0, 1]. Furthermore, Sobolev regularity solution of equations (2.47) with the boundary condition (2.54) takes the form C(r)+(1-r)u0.

Moreover, since there is

u(r)=u(0)(r)+O(ε)+(1r)u0>ε>0,r(0,1],

we have

u1(r)=(u(0)(r))1[1+(u(0)(r))1(O(ε)+(1r)u0)]1,

furthermore, we derive

01u1(r)dr=01(u(0)(r))1[1+(u(0)(r))1(O(ε)+(1r)u0)]1dr=[1+(u(0)(r))1(O(ε)+(1r)u0)]1L01(u(0)(r))1dr=C¯M.

For the density ρ, by (1.10), we know

ρ(r)=Cr2u(r)=Cr2(u(0)(r))1[1+(u(0)(r))1(O(ε)+(1r)u0)]1,

from which, one can see ρ(r) is a Sobolev regularity function due to u(0)(r) being positive smooth function in (0, 1). This completes the proof. □

Acknowledgments

This work is supported by the special foundation for Guangxi Ba Gui Scholars. The third author is supported by Guangxi Natural Science Foundation No 2021JJG110002.

  1. Conflict of interest: Authors state no conflict of interest.

References

[1] C. Annamaria, S. Berardino and T. Alessandro, On the moving plane method for boundary blow-up solutions to semilinear elliptic equations. Advances in Nonlinear Analysis. 9 (2020) 1-6.Search in Google Scholar

[2] S. Alinhac, Existence d'ondes de raréfaction pour des systèmes quasi-linéaires hyperboliques multidimensionnels. Comm. Partial Differential Equations 14 (1989), no. 2, 173-230.10.1080/03605308908820595Search in Google Scholar

[3] S.T. Chen, Sitong, X.H. Tang, Berestycki-Lions conditions on ground state solutions for a Nonlinear Schrödinger equation with variable potentials. Advances in Nonlinear Analysis. 9 (2020) 496-515.10.1515/anona-2020-0011Search in Google Scholar

[4] E. Feireisl, Dynamics of Viscous Compressible Fluids, Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford, 2004.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198528388.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

[5] E. Feireisl, A. Novotný, Stationary solutions to the compressible Navier-Stokes system with general boundary conditions. Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire. 35 (2018) 1457-1475.10.1016/j.anihpc.2018.01.001Search in Google Scholar

[6] J. Frehse, M. Steinhauer, W. Weigant, The Dirichlet problem for viscous compressible Isothermal Navier-Stokes equations in two dimensions. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 198 (2010) 1-12.10.1007/s00205-010-0338-2Search in Google Scholar

[7] J. Frehse, M. Steinhauer, W. Weigant, The Dirichlet problem for steady viscous compressible flow in three dimensions. J. Math. Pure Appl. 97 (2012) 85-97.10.1016/j.matpur.2009.06.005Search in Google Scholar

[8] L. Hörmander, The boundary problems of physical geodesy. Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 62 (1976) 1-52.10.1007/BF00251855Search in Google Scholar

[9] L. Hörmander, Implicit Function Theorems, Stanford Lecture Notes, University, Stanford, 1977.Search in Google Scholar

[10] S. Liang, S.Z. Zheng, Gradient estimate of a variable power for nonlinear elliptic equations with Orlicz growth. Advances in Nonlinear Analysis. 10 ( 2021) 172-193.10.1515/anona-2020-0121Search in Google Scholar

[11] P.-L. Lions, Mathematical Topics in Fluid Mechanics. Compressible Models, Vol. 2. Oxford Science Publications, Clarendon Press, New York, 1998Search in Google Scholar

[12] J. Moser, A rapidly converging iteration method and nonlinear partial differential equations I-II. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa. 20, (1966) 265-313, 499-535.Search in Google Scholar

[13] J. Nash, The embedding for Riemannian manifolds. Amer. Math. 63, (1956) 20-63.10.2307/1969989Search in Google Scholar

[14] A. Nour Eddine, A. Fatima, T. Laila. On singular quasilinear elliptic equations with data measures. Advances in Nonlinear Analysis. 10 (2021) 1284-1300.10.1515/anona-2020-0132Search in Google Scholar

[15] A. Novotný, I. Strašcraba, Introduction to the Mathematical Theory of Compressible Flow, Oxford Lecture Series in Mathematics and Its Applications, vol. 27, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2004.10.1093/oso/9780198530848.001.0001Search in Google Scholar

[16] P.-I. Plotnikov, W. Weigant, Steady 3D viscous compressible flows with adiabatic exponent γ ∈ (1, ∞). J. Math. Pure Appl. 104 (2015) 58-82.10.1016/j.matpur.2015.02.001Search in Google Scholar

[17] P.H. Rabinowitz, A rapid convergence method for a singular perturbation problem. Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Anal. Non Lineaire. 1 (1984) 1-17.10.1016/s0294-1449(16)30431-0Search in Google Scholar

[18] W.P. Yan, The motion of closed hypersurfaces in the central force field. J. Diff. Eqns. 261 (2016), 1973-2005.10.1016/j.jde.2016.04.020Search in Google Scholar

[19] W.P. Yan, Dynamical behavior near explicit self-similar blow up solutions for the Born-Infeld equation. Nonlinearity. 32 (2019) 4682-4712.10.1088/1361-6544/ab34a2Search in Google Scholar

[20] W.P. Yan, Nonlinear stablility of explicit self-similar solutions for the timelike extremal hypersurfaces in ℝ3. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations. 59 (2020) no. 4, 124.10.1007/s00526-020-01798-2Search in Google Scholar

[21] W.P. Yan, V.D. Radulescu, Global small finite energy solutions for the incompressible magnetohydrodynamics equations in ℝ+ × ℝ2. J. Diff. Eqns. 277 (2021), 114-152.10.1016/j.jde.2020.12.031Search in Google Scholar

[22] W.P. Yan, V.D. Radulescu, The inviscid limit for the incompressible stationary magnetohydrodynamics equations in three dimensions, Bulletin of Mathematical Sciences. (Online) 10.1142/S1664360721500065.Search in Google Scholar

[23] W.P. Yan, Asymptotic Stability of Explicit Blowup Solutions for Three-Dimensional Incompressible Magnetohydrodynamics Equations. J. Geometric Anal. (Online) 10.1007/s12220-021-00711-3.10.1007/s12220-021-00711-3Search in Google Scholar

[24] C.D. Sogge, Lectures on Nonlinear Wave Equations, Monographs in Analysis, vol. II, International Press, Boston.Search in Google Scholar

Received: 2021-07-23
Accepted: 2021-10-05
Published Online: 2021-11-23

© 2021 Xiaofeng Zhao et al., published by De Gruyter

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

Articles in the same Issue

  1. Regular Articles
  2. Sharp conditions on global existence and blow-up in a degenerate two-species and cross-attraction system
  3. Positive solutions for (p, q)-equations with convection and a sign-changing reaction
  4. Blow-up solutions with minimal mass for nonlinear Schrödinger equation with variable potential
  5. Variation inequalities for rough singular integrals and their commutators on Morrey spaces and Besov spaces
  6. Ground state solutions to a class of critical Schrödinger problem
  7. Lane-Emden equations perturbed by nonhomogeneous potential in the super critical case
  8. Groundstates for Choquard type equations with weighted potentials and Hardy–Littlewood–Sobolev lower critical exponent
  9. Shape and topology optimization involving the eigenvalues of an elastic structure: A multi-phase-field approach
  10. On the existence of multiple solutions for a partial discrete Dirichlet boundary value problem with mean curvature operator
  11. Existence and uniqueness of periodic orbits in a discrete model on Wolbachia infection frequency
  12. Distortion inequality for a Markov operator generated by a randomly perturbed family of Markov Maps in ℝd
  13. Existence and concentration of positive solutions for a critical p&q equation
  14. Approximate nonradial solutions for the Lane-Emden problem in the ball
  15. A variant of Clark’s theorem and its applications for nonsmooth functionals without the global symmetric condition
  16. Existence results for double phase problems depending on Robin and Steklov eigenvalues for the p-Laplacian
  17. Refined second boundary behavior of the unique strictly convex solution to a singular Monge-Ampère equation
  18. Multiplicity of positive solutions for a degenerate nonlocal problem with p-Laplacian
  19. Nonuniform dichotomy spectrum and reducibility for nonautonomous difference equations
  20. Qualitative analysis for the nonlinear fractional Hartree type system with nonlocal interaction
  21. Existence of single peak solutions for a nonlinear Schrödinger system with coupled quadratic nonlinearity
  22. Compact Sobolev-Slobodeckij embeddings and positive solutions to fractional Laplacian equations
  23. On the uniqueness for weak solutions of steady double-phase fluids
  24. New asymptotically quadratic conditions for Hamiltonian elliptic systems
  25. Critical nonlocal Schrödinger-Poisson system on the Heisenberg group
  26. Anomalous pseudo-parabolic Kirchhoff-type dynamical model
  27. Weighted W1, p (·)-Regularity for Degenerate Elliptic Equations in Reifenberg Domains
  28. On well-posedness of semilinear Rayleigh-Stokes problem with fractional derivative on ℝN
  29. Multiple positive solutions for a class of Kirchhoff type equations with indefinite nonlinearities
  30. Sobolev regularity solutions for a class of singular quasilinear ODEs
  31. Existence of multiple nontrivial solutions of the nonlinear Schrödinger-Korteweg-de Vries type system
  32. Maximum principle for higher order operators in general domains
  33. Butterfly support for off diagonal coefficients and boundedness of solutions to quasilinear elliptic systems
  34. Bifurcation analysis for a modified quasilinear equation with negative exponent
  35. On non-resistive limit of 1D MHD equations with no vacuum at infinity
  36. Absolute Stability of Neutral Systems with Lurie Type Nonlinearity
  37. Singular quasilinear convective elliptic systems in ℝN
  38. Lower and upper estimates of semi-global and global solutions to mixed-type functional differential equations
  39. Entire solutions of certain fourth order elliptic problems and related inequalities
  40. Optimal decay rate for higher–order derivatives of solution to the 3D compressible quantum magnetohydrodynamic model
  41. Application of Capacities to Space-Time Fractional Dissipative Equations II: Carleson Measure Characterization for Lq(+n+1,μ) −Extension
  42. Centered Hardy-Littlewood maximal function on product manifolds
  43. Infinitely many radial and non-radial sign-changing solutions for Schrödinger equations
  44. Continuous flows driving branching processes and their nonlinear evolution equations
  45. Vortex formation for a non-local interaction model with Newtonian repulsion and superlinear mobility
  46. Thresholds for the existence of solutions to inhomogeneous elliptic equations with general exponential nonlinearity
  47. Global attractors of the degenerate fractional Kirchhoff wave equation with structural damping or strong damping
  48. Multiple nodal solutions of the Kirchhoff-type problem with a cubic term
  49. Properties of generalized degenerate parabolic systems
  50. Infinitely many non-radial solutions for a Choquard equation
  51. On the singularly perturbation fractional Kirchhoff equations: Critical case
  52. On the nonlinear perturbations of self-adjoint operators
  53. Standing waves to upper critical Choquard equation with a local perturbation: Multiplicity, qualitative properties and stability
  54. On a comparison theorem for parabolic equations with nonlinear boundary conditions
  55. Lipschitz estimates for partial trace operators with extremal Hessian eigenvalues
  56. Positive solutions for a nonhomogeneous Schrödinger-Poisson system
  57. Brake orbits for Hamiltonian systems of the classical type via geodesics in singular Finsler metrics
  58. Constrained optimization problems governed by PDE models of grain boundary motions
  59. A class of hyperbolic variational–hemivariational inequalities without damping terms
  60. Regularity estimates for fractional orthotropic p-Laplacians of mixed order
  61. Solutions for nonhomogeneous fractional (p, q)-Laplacian systems with critical nonlinearities
  62. Nontrivial solutions of discrete Kirchhoff-type problems via Morse theory
  63. Analysis of positive solutions to one-dimensional generalized double phase problems
  64. A regularized gradient flow for the p-elastic energy
  65. On the planar Kirchhoff-type problem involving supercritical exponential growth
  66. Spectral discretization of the time-dependent Navier-Stokes problem with mixed boundary conditions
  67. Nondiffusive variational problems with distributional and weak gradient constraints
  68. Global gradient estimates for Dirichlet problems of elliptic operators with a BMO antisymmetric part
  69. The existence and multiplicity of the normalized solutions for fractional Schrödinger equations involving Sobolev critical exponent in the L2-subcritical and L2-supercritical cases
  70. Existence and concentration of ground-states for fractional Choquard equation with indefinite potential
  71. Well-posedness and blow-up results for a class of nonlinear fractional Rayleigh-Stokes problem
  72. Asymptotic proximity to higher order nonlinear differential equations
  73. Bounded solutions to systems of fractional discrete equations
  74. On the solutions to p-Poisson equation with Robin boundary conditions when p goes to +∞
Downloaded on 18.9.2025 from https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/anona-2021-0212/html
Scroll to top button