Startseite Mathematik Liouville theorems of solutions to mixed order Hénon-Hardy type system with exponential nonlinearity
Artikel Open Access

Liouville theorems of solutions to mixed order Hénon-Hardy type system with exponential nonlinearity

  • Wei Dai ORCID logo EMAIL logo und Shaolong Peng
Veröffentlicht/Copyright: 12. März 2024

Abstract

In this paper, we are concerned with the Hénon-Hardy type systems with exponential nonlinearity on a half space R + 2 : ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) , x R + 2 , ( Δ ) v ( x ) = | x | b u p 2 ( x ) e q 2 v ( x ) , x R + 2 , with Dirichlet boundary conditions, where 0 < α < 2 and p 1, p 2, q 1, q 2 > 0. First, we derived the integral representation formula corresponding to the above system under the assumption p 1 2 a α 1 . Then, we prove Liouville theorem for solutions to the above system via the method of scaling spheres.

1 Introduction

1.1 Background and main results

This paper is devoted to the study of Liouville type results for nonnegative solutions to the mixed order Hénon-Hardy type system with exponential nonlinearity and Dirichlet boundary conditions on a half space R + 2 :

(1.1) ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) , x R + 2 , ( Δ ) v ( x ) = | x | b u p 2 ( x ) e q 2 v ( x ) , x R + 2 , u ( x ) = v ( x ) = 0 , x R 2 \ R + 2 ,

where 0 < α < 2, R + 2 = x = ( x 1 , x 2 ) R 2 | x 2 > 0 is the upper half Euclidean space. Throughout this paper, we always assume that p 1, p 2, q 1, q 2 > 0, a > −α and b > −2.

Recall that the nonlocal fractional Laplacians ( Δ ) α 2 (where 0 < α < 2) in R n is defined by

(1.2) ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = C α , n P . V . R n u ( x ) u ( y ) | x y | n + α d y C α , n lim ϵ 0 | y x | ϵ u ( x ) u ( y ) | x y | n + α d y

for any functions u C loc 1,1 L α ( R n ) , where the constant C α , n = R n 1 cos ( 2 π ζ 1 ) | ζ | n + α d ζ 1 , P.V. stands for the Cauchy principle value and the function spaces

(1.3) L α ( R n ) u : R n R R n | u ( x ) | 1 + | x | n + α d x < .

In this space, the fractional Laplacians can also be defined by the Fourier transform

F ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = | x | α F u ( x ) .

On the other hand, the fractional Laplacians ( Δ ) α 2 can also be defined equivalently (see [1]) by Caffarelli and Silvestre’s extension method (see [2]) for u C loc 1,1 ( R n ) L α ( R n ) .

Throughout this paper, we assume the classical solution

( u , v ) L α ( R 2 ) C loc 1,1 R + 2 C R + 2 ̄ C 2 R + 2 C R + 2 ̄ .

The fractional Laplacian has attracted much attention due to its practical applications in many fields. For example, it has been frequently used to model diverse physical phenomena, such as turbulence, water waves, anomalous diffusion, phase transitions, flame propagation, quasi-geostrophic flows and so on (see [3]–[6] and the references therein). It also has several applications in probability, optimization and finance (please see [7]).

Mathematically, there have been extensive interests in conformal geometry problems and Sobolev inequalities. A well-known example is the following Dirichlet problem:

(1.4) ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = | x | a u p ( x ) , x R + n , u ( x ) = 0 , x R n \ R + n .

PDEs of the form (1.4) are called the fractional order or higher order Hénon, Lane-Emden, Hardy equations for a > 0, a = 0, a < 0, respectively. The equation of (1.4) arises from the conformal problems and has also attracted much attention in the literature. For instance, Fall and Weth [8] established the nonexistence of positive solutions u ∈ to problem (1.4) via extension methods. After then, Quaas and Xia [9] showed that there are no positive viscosity bounded solutions of (1.4) by using the method of moving planes. In the case of a = 0, Chen, Fang and Yang [10] established Liouville theorem for Dirichlet problem (1.4) when 1 < p n + α n α by using the method of moving planes in integral forms. Lu and Zhu [11] derive axial symmetry and regularity of solutions to integral equations with general nonlinearity in half space. Later on, Chen, Li and Zhang [12] reproved the Liouville theorem in [10] via a quite different and much simpler approach-a combination of direct methods of moving spheres and moving planes. Dai and Qin [13] first presented the basic idea of method of scaling spheres, as a preliminary application, they derived Liouville type results for problem (1.4) when 1 p n + α + 2 a n α and a > −α. Subsequently, Dai and Qin [14] applied the method of scaling spheres to establish the Liouville theorem for critical order Hénon-Lane-Emden equation (1.4) (where α = n) with the Navier boundary condition in the cases −n < a < +∞ and 1 ≤ p < +∞. One should notice that, the subcritical condition (on singularities) on nonlinearity f(x, u) introduced in [14] is entirely different from the subcritical condition (on the growth of u) in previous literature, which indicates that the method of scaling spheres is quite suitable for dealing with problems with singularities. The method of scaling spheres takes full advantage of the integral representation formula, and yields the Liouville type results from the scaling spheres procedure (w.r.t. the singularities given by the problems), a bootstrap technique and the a priori lower bound estimates on asymptotic behavior (w.r.t. the singularities). Consequently, it can be applied conveniently to various problems (PDEs, IEs, Systems) without translation invariance or with singularities. For more applications of the method of scaling spheres on R n , R + n , B R and R n \ B R , c.f. [15]–[19] and the references therein. For other related results on Liouville type theorems, we refer to [20]–[29] and the references therein.

One should note that, even for equations involving classical second order Laplace operators, there are barely a few Liouville type results on general domains (such as cone-like domains) except on R n , R + n and bounded star-shaped domains with regular boundary (such that the formula of integration by parts holds). Very recently, in [30], Dai and Qin introduced and applied further the method of scaling spheres as a unified approach to optimal Liouville theorems for fractional, second and higher order problems (without translation invariance or with singularities) on general bounded or unbounded MSS applicable domains including any cone-like domains, while Liouville theorems in previous literatures are mainly focused on the whole space or half space. A domain is MSS applicable if and only if either itself or its complement is radially convex. Besides leading to the boundedness of Palais-Smale sequences and hence existence of solutions on MSS applicable domains via variational methods, these Liouville theorems on general domains, in conjunction with the blowing-up arguments, can yield a priori estimates and hence existence of solutions to non-variational boundary value problems on bounded domains or on Riemannian manifolds with non-C 1 smooth boundaries. Recall that, in previous works, the C 1-smoothness of boundary was required to guarantee that the limiting shape of the scaling domain is the whole space or half space, so that only Liouville theorems in whole space or half space are involved to get a contradiction.

Another problem we are interested in is the Hénon-Hardy type equations with exponential nonlinearity, namely

(1.5) ( Δ ) u ( x ) = | x | a e u ( x ) in R n .

The problem with exponential nonlinearity like (1.5) finds their origin in problems of physics and geometry. For example, it can be used as a model for the expansion of Universe with isothermal gas sphere in gravitational equilibrium (see [31]). Eq. (1.5) can describes the space charge of electricity around a glowing wire (see [32]). From the viewpoint of mathematics, there is a lot of results have also been achieved on problem (1.5). For instance, Dancer and Farina [33] proved that problem (1.5) with a = 0 admits classical stable at infinity solutions if and only if n = 2 or n ≥ 10. Subsequently, Wang and Ye [34] derived (1.5) does not admit any stable solution provided that a > −2 and 2 ≤ n < 10 + 4a. Later on, Guo et al. [35] proved that problem (1.5) does not admit any stable at infinity solution provided that 10 ≤ n < 10 + 4a and a > 0. Recently, Fazly et al. [36] derived the non-existence of finite Morse index solution to the following nonlocal Hénon-Gelfand-Liouville problem:

( Δ ) s u ( x ) = | x | a e u ( x ) in R n .

where s ∈ (0, 1) and a > 0. For more kinds of literature on the quantitative and qualitative properties of solutions to fractional order or higher order problems, please refer to [15]–[17], [20], [37]–[39], [13], [14], [18], [19], [23], [40]–[42], [25], [43], [27], [44]–[46] and the references therein.

A natural question is one may ask what will happen if we combine the above equation (1.4) and (1.5) in half space together? In this paper, our main purpose is to study the properties of the solutions of mixed order Hénon-Hardy type system with exponential nonlinearity (1.1).

Generally speaking, dealing with nonlocal problems is more challenging than local problems due to the nonlocal nature of the fractional operator. There are several methods for dealing with non-local problems as follows. Caffarelli and Silvestre [2] define the nonlocal operators via the extension method and reduce the nonlocal problem into a local problem in higher dimensions. Later on, Chen and Li (see [1], [47]) give another approach, which considers the equivalent IEs instead of PDEs by deriving the integral representation formulas of solutions to the equations involving fractional operators, we refer to [18], [19], [21], [48]–[50] and references therein for a series of fruitful results in elliptic equations and systems. Subsequently, Chen et al. developed a direct method of moving planes [51] and direct sliding method [22]. These two direct methods are also applied to other non-local operators, such as fractional p-Laplacians ( Δ ) p s in [22], [52], [53], pseudo-relativistic Schrödinger operators ( Δ + m 2 ) s (see [54]–[56]), uniformly elliptic Bellman integro-differential operator F s (see [57], [58], c.f. arXiv:2004.02879v3 for corrections to [57]), tempered fractional operator Δ + λ α 2 (see [59]), and so on.

In this paper, we first need to show that the equivalence between PDEs system (1.1) and the following integral system (IEs system):

(1.6) u ( x ) = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y , v ( x ) = R + 2 G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y ,

where the Green’s function G α + ( x , y ) associated with Dirichlet problem for ( Δ ) α 2 (α ∈ (0, 2)) on R + 2 is given by

(1.7) G α + ( x , y ) C 2 , α | x y | 2 α 0 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h ,

and G +(x, y) denotes the Green’s function for (−Δ) on R + 2 , which is

(1.8) G + ( x , y ) 1 2 π ln 1 | x y | ln 1 | x ̄ y | ,

where x ̄ ( x 1 , x 2 ) is the reflection of x with respect to the boundary R + 2 .

Our equivalence results are as follows.

Theorem 1.1.

Assume p 1 > 0, p 2 > 0, q 1 > 0, q 2 > 0, a > −α and b > −2. Suppose that ( u , v ) L α ( R 2 ) C loc 1,1 R + 2 C R + 2 ̄ C 2 R + 2 C R + 2 ̄ is a pair of nonnegative classical solutions to PDEs system (1.1) with p 1 2 a α 1 , then (u, v) also solves the IEs system (1.6), and vice versa.

Remark 1.2.

One should note that, for a single equation, most known results are about the cases p 1 ≥ 1. Here we work on p 1 ∈ (0, +∞) and p 1 2 a α 1 . The assumption “ u ( x ) = O | x | K as |x| → +∞” are much weaker than any other assumption (for example, (u, v) is bounded solution) in previous literature mentioned above.

Next, we can consider the IEs system (1.6) instead of PDEs system (1.1). By applying the method of scaling spheres introduced in [13], we derive the following Liouville result of the solution (u, v) to the equivalent IEs system (1.6). Our main result for the equivalent IEs system (1.6) is the following theorem.

Theorem 1.3.

Assume q 1 ∈ (0, +∞), q 2 ∈ [0, +∞), a > −α, b > −2, p 1 0 , 2 a + α + 2 2 α and p 2 0 , 4 + 2 b 2 α with ( p 1 , p 2 ) 2 a + α + 2 2 α , 4 + 2 b 2 α . Suppose (u, v) is a pair of nonnegative solutions to the IEs system (1.6), then

(1.9) ( u , v ) ( 0,0 ) .

Combining Theorem 1.3 with the equivalence between the PDEs system (1.1) and the IEs system (1.6), we obtain immediately the Liouville result of the classical solutions (u, v) to the mixed order Hénon-Hardy type system with exponential nonlinearity (1.1). Our main result for PDEs system (1.1) is the following theorem.

Theorem 1.4.

Assume q 1 ∈ (0, +∞), q 2 ∈ (0, +∞), a > −α, b > −2, p 1 2 a α 1 , p 1 0 , 2 a + α + 2 2 α and p 2 0 , 4 + 2 b 2 α with ( p 1 , p 2 ) 2 a + α + 2 2 α , 4 + 2 b 2 α . Suppose (u, v) is a pair of nonnegative classical solutions to the mixed order Hénon-Hardy type system (1.1), then

(1.10) ( u , v ) ( 0,0 ) .

1.2 Extensions to general nonlinearities

Consider the following integral system for general mixed order elliptic equations on R + 2 :

(1.11) u ( x ) = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) f ( y , u , v ) d y , v ( x ) = R + 2 G + ( x , y ) g ( y , u , v ) d y ,

where ( u , v ) L α ( R 2 ) C loc 1,1 R + 2 C R + 2 ̄ C 2 R + 2 C R + 2 ̄ and the nonlinear terms f , g : R + 2 × R + ̄ × R R + ̄ .

Definition 1.5.

The nonlinear term f (or g) has subcritical growth, that is

(1.12) μ 2 + α 2 α f μ 2 2 α x , μ 1 u , v ( or μ 4 g ( μ 2 x , μ ( 2 α ) u , v ) ) ,

is strictly increasing with respect to μ ≥ 1 or μ ≤ 1 for all ( x , u , v ) R + 2 × R + × R .

Definition 1.6.

A function g(x, u, v) defined on R + 2 × R + ̄ × R is called locally Lipschitz on u, provided that for any u 0 R + ̄ and ω R + n bounded, there exists a (relatively) open neighborhood U ( u 0 ) R + ̄ such that g is Lipschitz continuous on u in ω × U(u 0).

We also suppose that the nonlinearity f and g satisfies the following assumptions:

  1. f(x, s, t), g(x, s, t) are nondecreasing in (s, t);

  2. There exist σ < α and θ < 2 such that, |x| σ f(x, u, v) are locally Lipschitz on u and v in R + 2 × R + ̄ × R ̄ , |x| θ g(x, u, v) are locally Lipschitz on u and v in R + 2 × R + ̄ × R ̄ ;

  3. There exist a cone C = x R + 2 | x 2 > | x | 2 R + 2 containing the positive x 2-axis with vertex at 0, constants C > 0, −α < a < +∞, −α < b < +∞, 0 < p 1 2 a + α + 2 2 α , 0 < p 2 4 + 2 b 2 α , 0 < q 1 < +∞ and 0 ≤ q 2 < +∞ such that, the nonlinear term

(1.13) f ( x , u , v ) C | x | a u p 1 e q 1 v , g ( x , u , v ) C | x | b u p 2 e q 2 v in C × R + ̄ × R .

Using the same technique (the method of scaling spheres introduced in [13]) to the generalized IEs system (1.11), we can derive the following Liouville type result for the IEs system (1.11).

Theorem 1.7.

Assume 0 < α < 2, f(x, u, v) and g(x, u, v) satisfy assumptions (G1)–(G3). Suppose (u, v) is a pair of nonnegative solutions to IEs system (1.11) on R + 2 , if f(x, u, v) is subcritical and satisfies (G3) with 0 < p 1 < 2 a + α + 2 2 α or g(x, u, v) is subcritical and satisfies (G3) with 0 < p 2 < 4 + 2 b 2 α , then (u, v) ≡ (0, 0) in R + 2 ̄ .

In fact, IEs system (1.11) are closely related to the following PDEs system:

(1.14) ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = f ( x , u , v ) , x R + 2 , ( Δ ) v ( x ) = g ( x , u , v ) , x R + 2 , u ( x ) = v ( x ) = 0 , x R 2 \ R + 2 .

The equivalence between the generalized PDEs system (1.14) and IEs system (1.11) can be proved in entirely similar way as the proof of Theorem 1.1 under the assumptions p 1 2 a α 1 and q 2 > 0. We omit the details here.

As a consequence of Theorem 1.7 and the equivalence, we derive the following Liouville-type result for the generalized PDEs system (1.14).

Theorem 1.8.

Assume 0 < α < 2 and q 2 > 0, f(x, u, v) and g(x, u, v) satisfy assumptions (G1)–(G3). Suppose (u, v) is a pair of nonnegative classical solutions to PDEs system (1.14) on R + 2 , if f(x, u, v) is subcritical and satisfies (G3) with 0 < p 1 < 2 a + α + 2 2 α (and p 1 2 a α 1 ) or g(x, u, v) is subcritical and satisfies (G3) with 0 < p 2 < 4 + 2 b 2 α , then (u, v) ≡ (0, 0) in R + 2 ̄ .

The rest of our paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we will carry out our proof of Theorem 1.1. After we have this important property of the solutions, we will present the proof of Theorem 1.3 via the method of moving spheres in Section 3.

In what follows, we will use the same C to denote a constant of which value may be different from line to line, and only the relevant dependence is specified.

2 The equivalence between PDEs system and IEs system

In this section, by using Green’s formula, we will establish the equivalence between PDE system (1.1) and IE system (1.6), which is Theorem 1.1. We begin with the following maximum-principle and Liouville theorem for α-harmonic functions in half-space.

Lemma 2.1

(Maximum principle, [51], [60]). Let Ω be a bounded domain in R n and 0 < α < 2. Assume that u L α C loc 1,1 ( Ω ) and is l.s.c. on Ω ̄ . If ( Δ ) α 2 u 0 in Ω and u ≥ 0 in R n \ Ω , then u ≥ 0 in R n . Moreover, if u = 0 at some point in Ω, then u = 0 a.e. in R n . These conclusions also hold for unbounded domain Ω if we assume further that

lim inf | x | u ( x ) 0 .

Lemma 2.2

([61]). Assume 0 < α < 2, u L loc R + n ̄ L α ( R n ) satisfies the following equation in the sense of distribution:

(2.1) ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = 0 , u ( x ) 0 , x R + n , u ( x ) 0 , x R + n .

Then, either u ≡ 0 or

(2.2) u ( x ) = C x n α 2 , x R + n , u ( x ) = 0 , x R + n ,

for some positive constant C > 0.

We first prove the integral representation formula for u(x). To this end, we define

(2.3) u ̃ R ( x ) = B R ( P R ) G R α ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y

with the Green’s function G R γ in R 2 for ( Δ ) γ 2 (0 < γ ≤ 2) on B R (P R ) can be expressed as

(2.4) G R γ ( x , y ) 1 2 π | x y | n γ 0 t R s R b γ 2 1 ( 1 + b ) n 2 d b ,

where t R 1 | x P R | 2 R 2 1 | y P R | 2 R 2 and s R | x y | 2 R 2 .

Then, we can derive

(2.5) ( Δ ) α 2 u ̃ R ( x ) = | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) , x B R ( P R ) , u ̃ R ( x ) = 0 , x B R ( P R ) .

Let U R ( x ) = u ( x ) u ̃ R ( x ) , we observe that

(2.6) ( Δ ) α 2 U R ( x ) = 0 , x B R ( P R ) , U R ( x ) 0 , x B R ( P R ) .

It follows from Lemma 2.1 and (2.6) that, for any x ∈ B R (P R ),

(2.7) U R ( x ) 0 .

Letting R → ∞, we have

(2.8) u ( x ) R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y u ̃ ( x ) .

One can observe that u ̃ is a nonnegative solution to

(2.9) ( Δ ) α 2 u ̃ ( x ) = | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) , x R + 2 , u ̃ ( x ) = 0 , x R + 2 .

Define U u u ̃ , we have

(2.10) ( Δ ) α 2 U ( x ) = 0 , U ( x ) 0 , x R + 2 , U ( x ) = 0 , x R + 2 .

Now using Lemma 2.2, we can deduce that either

(2.11) U ( x ) = 0 , x R + 2 ,

or there exist two positive constants C 1 such that

(2.12) U ( x ) = C 1 x 2 α 2 , x R + 2 .

We will obtain a contradiction by deriving a lower bound estimates of the Green’s function G α + (0 < α < 2). In fact, for each fixed x R + 2 , by (1.7), there exists a R x  > 0 sufficiently large, such that, for any |y| ≥ R x , one can derive

(2.13) G α + ( x , y ) = 1 2 π | x y | 2 α 0 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 b α 2 1 ( 1 + b ) d b C | x y | 2 α 0 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 b α 2 1 d b C | x y | 2 α x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 α 2 C ( x 2 y 2 ) α 2 | x y | 2 .

Therefore, for each fixed x = ( 0 , x 2 ) R + 2 , recall the (2.13), there exists a R ≥ R x  > 1 sufficiently large, such that,

(2.14) u ( x ) u ̃ ( x ) = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 \ B R ( 0 ) G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 \ B R ( 0 ) G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) d y C R + 2 \ B R ( 0 ) C ( x 2 y 2 ) α 2 | x y | 2 | y | a u p 1 ( y ) d y C x 2 α 2 R y 2 α ( p 1 + 1 ) 2 y 2 + r 2 + y 2 2 a 2 r 2 + | x 2 y 2 | 2 d r d y 2 C x 2 α 2 R y 2 α ( p 1 + 1 ) 2 + a 1 1 + 1 ( s 2 + 1 ) 2 a 2 d s d y 2 = + ,

where we use the facts that a > −α and

α ( p 1 + 1 ) 2 + a 1 1 .

Eq. (2.14) implies that the second case (2.12) cannot happen. Therefore, u satisfies the first equation of IEs system (1.6).

Next, we prove the integral representation formula for v(x). One can infer from the integral equation of u that, for any |x| ≥ 1,

(2.15) u x = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 | y | 1 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 | y | 1 2 | y | a | x y | 2 α 0 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 h α 2 1 d h u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 | y | 1 2 | y | a | x y | 2 α 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 α 2 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y C x 2 α 2 | x | 2 R + 2 | y | 1 2 y 2 α 2 | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y C x 2 α 2 | x | 2 .

For arbitrary R > 0, let P R  ≔ (0, …, 0, R) and the Green’s function G R + ( x , y ) associated with −Δ for the half disk B R + is given by

(2.16) G R + ( x , y ) 1 2 π ln 1 | x y | ln 1 R 2 x | x | 2 y 1 2 π ln 1 | x ̄ y | ln 1 R 2 x ̄ | x | 2 y .

Next, let us recall some essential properties of the above Green’s functions G R (x, y):

(2.17) G R + ( x , y ) G + ( x , y ) = 1 2 π ln 1 | x y | ln 1 | x ̄ y | , as R + .

Through a direct computation, for each fixed x B R + and any y B R + ,

(2.18) G R + ( x , y ) ν y = 1 2 π R 1 | x | 2 R 2 1 | x y | 2 1 | x ̄ y | 2 < 0 ,

moreover, for each fixed x B R + , any y B R + and R sufficiently large,

(2.19) G + ( x , y ) = 1 2 π ln 1 | x y | ln 1 | x ̄ y | y 2 R 2 , as R + ,

(2.20) G R + ( x , y ) ν y = 1 2 π R 1 | x | 2 R 2 1 | x y | 2 1 | x ̄ y | 2 y 2 R 3 .

With this property, multiplying both sides of the second equation of PDEs system (1.1) by G R + ( x , y ) and integrating on B R + by parts, we have

(2.21) B R + G R + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = v ( x ) + B R + v ( y ) G R + ( x , y ) ν y d σ y .

Combining (2.18) and (2.21), we get

(2.22) B R + G R + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y v ( x ) .

By letting R → ∞ and (2.17), we deduce

(2.23) R + 2 G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y < ,

which implies there exists a sequence R j  → ∞ such that

(2.24) R j B R j + G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d σ y 0 , a s R j ,

again with (2.19), we can easily get

(2.25) 1 R j 1 b B R j + u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) y 2 d σ y 0 , a s R j .

Due to the lower bound (2.15), we have

(2.26) 1 R j 1 b + 2 p 2 B R j + e q 2 v ( y ) y 2 1 + p 2 α 2 d σ y 0 , a s R j .

Since q 2 > 0, by making use of (2.26) and Hölder inequality, we derive

(2.27) 1 R j 3 B R j + v ( y ) y 2 d σ y R j 1 b + 2 p 2 t R j 3 1 R j 1 b + 2 p 2 B R j + v t ( y ) y 2 1 + p 2 α 2 d σ y 1 t B R j + y 2 1 1 + p 2 α 2 1 t 1 1 t d σ y 1 1 t R j 1 b + 2 p 2 t R j 3 1 R j 1 b + 2 p 2 B R j + e q 2 v ( y ) y 2 1 + p 2 α 2 d σ y 1 t R j 2 1 1 t p 2 α 2 t R j 1 1 + b 2 p 2 + p 2 α 2 t o ( 1 ) 0 , a s R j ,

where we have used the facts that 1 + 1 + b 2 p 2 + p 2 α 2 t > 0 for t > 1 large enough and

e x x κ , x 0 , κ 1 .

By (2.27), we finally arrive at

(2.28) v ( x ) = R + 2 G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y .

On the other hand, since u ≥ 0 and G +(x, y) ≥ 0, therefore, we also have v(x) ≥ 0 in R 2 .

Therefore, we can derive that

(2.29) u ( x ) = u ̃ ( x ) = R + n G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y , v ( x ) = R + 2 G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y ,

that is, (u, v) also satisfies the IEs system (1.6).

Conversely, assume that (u, v) is a pair of nonnegative classical solution to IEs system (1.6) on R + 2 , then

(2.30) ( Δ ) α 2 u ( x ) = R + 2 ( Δ ) α 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y = R + 2 δ ( x y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y = | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) , x R + 2 ,

(2.31) ( Δ ) v ( x ) = R + 2 ( Δ ) G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = R + 2 δ ( x y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = | y | b u p 2 ( x ) e q 2 v ( x ) , x R + 2 .

Therefore, (u, v) also solves the PDEs system (1.1). This completes the proof of Theorem 1.1.

3 Proof of Theorem 1.3

In this section, we will carry out the proof of Theorem 1.3 via the method of scaling spheres introduced in [13]. From the assumption and the proof of Theorem 1.1, we know that u, v ≥ 0, but (u, v) is not identically zero, then one can infer from the IEs system (1.6) that (u, v) is actually a pair of positive solution, i.e., u > 0 and v > 0 in R + 2 .

We begin with the following basic properties and estimates of Green’s functions G α + ( x , y ) and G +(x, y).

Lemma 3.1.

Suppose that G α + ( x , y ) be the Green’s functions given in (1.7) and G +(x, y) be the Green’s functions given in (1.8). Then we have

(3.1) G α + ( x , y ) C | x y | 2 α , x , y R + 2 ,

(3.2) G α + ( x λ , y ) = | x | | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) , x , y R + 2 ,

(3.3) G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) > 0 , x , y B λ ( 0 ) R + 2 ,

(3.4) G α + ( x , y ) C | x y | 2 α , x , y R + 2 , x 2 > | x | 2 , y 2 > | y | 2 , | x y | < | x | 4 ,

(3.5) G + ( x , y ) C λ 2 ε 1 | x y | 2 ε , x , y B λ + ( 0 ) , | x y | < λ δ ( ε ) ;

(3.6) G + ( x , y ) C ln 1 + 4 δ ( ε ) 2 , x , y B λ + ( 0 ) , | x y | λ δ ( ε ) ;

(3.7) G + ( x , y ) C 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 , x , y R + 2 , x y ;

(3.8) G + ( x , y ) C 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 , x , y R + 2 , | x | | y | 1 100 or | y | | x | 1 100 .

Lemma 3.1 can be proved through straightforward calculations, so we omit the details here.

Before starting the proof, we also give some useful notations. For arbitrary λ R , we denote

  1. S λ + x R + 2 ̄ : | x | = λ be the scaling half sphere ,

  2. x λ λ 2 x | x | 2 define the reflection of  x  about the half sphere S λ ,

  3. B λ + ( 0 ) B λ ( 0 ) R + 2 , B λ + ̃ ( 0 ) x R + 2 : x λ B λ + ( 0 ) ,

  4. u λ ( x ) = λ | x | 2 α u λ 2 x | x | 2 be the Kelvin transform of  u  centered at 0 ,

  5. v λ ( x ) = v λ 2 x | x | 2 be the Kelvin transform of  v  centered at 0 ,

  6. ω u λ ( x ) u λ ( x ) u ( x ) and ω v λ ( x ) v λ ( x ) v ( x ) .

It’s obvious that the Kelvin transform u λ , v λ may have singularity at 0, lim | x | | x | 2 α u λ ( x ) = λ 2 α u ( 0 ) = 0 and lim | x | | x | 2 v λ ( x ) = λ 2 v ( 0 ) = 0 . One can infer from the regularity assumptions on (u, v) that ( u λ , v λ ) C R + 2 ̄ \ { 0 } × C R + 2 ̄ \ { 0 } .

First of all, we prove the following lower bound estimates for positive solution (u, v).

Theorem 3.2.

Assume 0 < α < 2, 0 < p 1 < 2 + α + 2 a 2 α , 0 < p 2 < 4 + 2 b 2 α , q 1 ∈ (0, +∞) and q 2 ∈ [0, +∞). Suppose (u, v) is a pair of positive solution to IEs system (1.6), then (u, v) satisfies the following lower bound estimates: for all x R + 2 satisfying |x| ≥ 200 and x 2 | x | 2 ,

(3.9) u ( x ) C κ | x | κ , v ( x ) C κ | x | κ , κ < + .

Proof.

We will first show that, for λ > 0 sufficiently small,

(3.10) ω u λ ( x ) 0 and ω v λ ( x ) 0 , x B λ + ( 0 ) .

Then, we start dilating the half sphere S λ + from near the origin 0 outward as long as (3.10) holds, until its limiting position λ = +∞ and derive lower bound estimates on (u, v) in the cone C = x R + 2 | x 2 > | x | 2 . Therefore, the scaling sphere process can be divided into two steps.

Step 1. Start dilating the half sphere S λ + from near λ = 0. Define

(3.11) B λ + u x B λ + ( 0 ) | ω u λ ( x ) < 0 and B λ + v x B λ + ( 0 ) | ω v λ ( x ) < 0 .

We will show through contradiction arguments that, for λ > 0 sufficiently small,

(3.12) B λ + u = and B λ + v = .

Since (u, v) satisfies the IEs system (1.6), we have

(3.13) u ( x ) = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y = B λ + G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + R + 2 \ B λ + G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y = B λ + G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | 4 G α + ( x , y λ ) | y λ | a u p 1 ( y λ ) e q 1 v ( y λ ) d y = B λ + G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | 4 + 2 a G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u p 1 ( y λ ) e q 1 v ( y λ ) d y = B λ + G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | τ 1 G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) d y

with τ 1 = 4 + 2a − p 1(2 − α), and

(3.14) v ( x ) = R + n G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = B λ + G + ( x , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | ς 1 G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b u λ p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v λ ( y ) d y

with ς 1 = 4 + 2b − p 2(2 − α).

Similarly, from IEs system (1.6) and (3.2) in Lemma 3.1, we obtain

(3.15) u λ ( x ) = R + 2 λ | x | 2 α G α + ( x λ , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y = R + 2 λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y = B λ + λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | 2 + α G α + ( x , y ) | y λ | a u p 1 ( y λ ) e q 1 v ( y λ ) d y = B λ + λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | 2 a + α + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y λ ) e q 1 v ( y λ ) d y = B λ + λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y + B λ + λ | y | τ 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) d y

with τ 2 = 2a + α + 2 − p 1(2 − α) = τ 1 − (2 − α), and

(3.16) v λ ( x ) = R + n G + ( x λ , y ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = R + n G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = B λ + G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y + B λ + G + ( x , y ) | y λ | b u p 2 ( y λ ) e q 2 v ( y λ ) λ | y | 4 d y = B λ + G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y + B λ + G + ( x , y ) | y | b u λ p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v λ ( y ) λ | y | ς 1 d y .

Then, by (3.13), (3.14), (3.15) and (3.16), we arrive at

(3.17) ω u λ ( x ) = u λ ( x ) u ( x ) = B λ + λ | y | τ 2 G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) d y B λ + G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y B λ + G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y ,

(3.18) ω v λ ( x ) = v λ ( x ) v ( x ) = B λ + G + ( x , y ) G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b λ | y | ς 1 u λ p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v λ ( y ) u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y

for every x B λ + ( 0 ) ̄ \ { 0 } .

Next, we need the following lemma.

Lemma 3.3.

For any y B λ + ( 0 ) , we have the following inequalities:

u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) p 1 e q 1 v ( y ) ϕ ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) + q 1 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) ,

where ω u λ ( y ) u B λ + ( 0 ) ω u λ ( y ) 0 , ω v λ ( y ) v B λ + ( 0 ) ω v λ ( y ) 0 and

ϕ ( y ) = max u p 1 1 ( y ) , u λ p 1 1 ( y ) = u p 1 1 ( y ) , p 1 1 , u λ p 1 1 ( y ) , p 1 < 1 .

Proof.

The proof of Lemma (3.3) divided into the following four cases.

  1. If u λ (y) ≥ u(y), v λ (y) ≥ v(y), then

u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) 0 .

  1. If u λ (y) ≥ u(y), v λ (y) < v(y), then

u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) q 1 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) w v λ ( y ) = q 1 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ( w v λ ( y ) ) .

  1. If u λ (y) < u(y), v λ (y) ≥ v(y), then

u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) p 1 e q 1 v ( y ) ϕ ( y ) ( w u λ ( y ) ) = p 1 e q 1 v ( y ) ϕ ( y ) ( w u λ ( y ) ) .

  1. If u λ (y) < u(y), v λ (y) < v(y), then

u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) = u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) + u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) p 1 e q 1 v λ ( y ) ϕ ( y ) w u λ ( y ) + q 1 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) w v λ ( y ) p 1 e q 1 v ( y ) ϕ ( y ) ( w u λ ( y ) ) + q 1 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ( w v λ ( y ) ) .

This conclude the proof of Lemma 3.3. □

Recalling (3.17), (3.1) and (3.3) in Lemma 3.1, and combining with Lemma 3.3, we have, for any x B λ + u ,

(3.19) 0 > ω u λ ( x ) B λ + G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) | y | a u λ p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y B λ + u G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) p 1 | y | a ϕ ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y + B λ + v G α + ( x , y ) λ | y | 2 α G α + ( x , y λ ) × q 1 | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y B λ + u G α + ( x , y ) p 1 | y | a ϕ ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y + B λ + v G α + ( x , y ) q 1 | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y C B λ + u 1 | x y | 2 α · | y | a ϕ ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y + C B λ + v 1 | x y | 2 α · | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y .

Similarly, recalling (3.18), (3.1) and (3.3) in Lemma 3.1, we have, for any x B λ + v ,

(3.20) 0 > ω v λ ( x ) = B λ + G + ( x , y ) G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b λ | y | ς 1 u λ p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v λ ( y ) u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y B λ + G + ( x , y ) G + ( x , y λ ) | y | b u λ p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v λ ( y ) u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y B λ + u G + ( x , y ) p 2 | y | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y + B λ + v G + ( x , y ) q 2 | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y C λ 2 ε B λ + u B λ + v B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) 1 | x y | 2 ε | y | b ψ ( y ) ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y + C λ 2 ε B λ + u B λ + v B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) 1 | x y | 2 ε | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y + C ( δ ( ε ) ) B λ + u B λ + v \ B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) | y | b ψ ( y ) ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y + C ( δ ( ε ) ) B λ + u B λ + v \ B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y ,

where ψ ( y ) = max u p 2 1 ( y ) , u λ p 2 1 ( y ) . By (3.19), (3.20), Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality and Hölder inequality, we obtain, for arbitrary max { 2 2 α , 1 ϵ } < r < ,

ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) C B λ + u 1 | x y | 2 α | y | a ϕ ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y L r ( B λ + u ) + C B λ + v 1 | x y | 2 α | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω v λ ( y ) d y L r ( B λ + u ) C | x | a ϕ ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) ω u λ ( x ) L 2 r 2 + α r ( B λ + u ) + C | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) ω v λ ( x ) L 2 r 2 + α r ( B λ + v ) C | x | a ϕ ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + u ) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) + C | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + v ) ω v λ L r ( B λ + v ) ,

and

(3.21) ω v λ L r ( B λ + v ) C λ 2 ε B λ + u B λ + v B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) 1 | x y | 2 ε | y | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y L r ( B λ + v ) + C λ 2 ε B λ + u B λ + v B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) 1 | x y | 2 ε | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y L r ( B λ + v ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r B λ + u B λ + v \ B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) | y | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) | ω u λ ( y ) | d y + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r B λ + u B λ + v \ B λ δ ( ε ) ( x ) | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) | ω v λ ( y ) | d y C λ 2 ε B λ + u 1 | x y | 2 ε | y | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y L r ( B λ + v ) + C λ 2 ε B λ + v 1 | x y | 2 ε | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ω u λ ( y ) d y L r ( B λ + v ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r B λ + v | y | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) | ω v λ ( y ) | d y + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r B λ + v | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) | ω v λ ( y ) | d y C λ 2 ε | x | b ψ e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + u ) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) + C λ 2 ε | x | b u p 2 e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + v ) ω v λ L r ( B λ + v ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + u ) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + v ) ω u λ L r ( B λ + v ) .

Therefore, we have

(3.22) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) + ω v λ L r ( B λ + u ) C | x | a ϕ ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + u ) + C λ 2 ε | x | b ψ e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + u ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + u ) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) + C | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + v ) + C λ 2 ε | x | b u p 2 e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + v ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + v ) ω v λ L r ( B λ + v ) .

Utilizing the continuity of u and v, there exists a δ 0 > 0 sufficiently small such that

(3.23) C | x | a ϕ ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + u ) + λ 2 ε | x | b ψ e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + u ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + u ) < 1 2 ,

and

(3.24) C | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + v ) + λ 2 ε | x | b u p 2 e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + v ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + v ) < 1 2

for any 0 < λ < δ 0. Thus, by (3.21) and (3.22), we must have, for any 0 < λ < δ 0,

(3.25) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) = 0 , ω v λ L r ( B λ + v ) = 0 ,

which immediately implies that B λ + u = B λ + v = . Therefore, (3.10) holds true for any 0 < λ < δ 0. This completes Step 1.

Step 2. Dilate the half sphere S λ + outward until λ = +∞ to derive lower bound estimates on u. Step 1 provides us a start point to dilate the half sphere S λ + from near λ = 0. Now we dilate the half sphere S λ + outward as long as (3.10) holds. Let

(3.26) λ 0 sup λ > 0 | ω u μ 0 and ω v μ 0 in B μ + ( 0 ) , 0 < μ λ ( 0 , + ] ,

and hence, one has

(3.27) ω u λ 0 ( x ) 0 and ω v λ 0 ( x ) 0 , x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) .

In what follows, we will prove λ 0 = +∞ by contradiction arguments.

Suppose on the contrary that 0 < λ 0 < +∞, then we must have

(3.28) ω u λ 0 ( x ) = ω v λ 0 ( x ) 0 , x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) .

Suppose on the contrary that (3.28) does not hold, that is, there exists an x 0 B λ 0 + ( 0 ) such that ω u λ 0 ( x 0 ) > 0 or ω v λ 0 ( x 0 ) > 0 (without loss of generality, here we assume that ω u λ 0 ( x 0 ) > 0 ). Using the continuity of u, there exists a small δ > 0 and a constant c 0 > 0 such that

B δ ( x 0 ) B δ 0 + ( 0 ) and ω u λ 0 ( x ) > 0 , x B δ ( x 0 ) .

One can derive from (3.3) in Lemma 3.1, (3.17) and (3.27) that, for any x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) ,

(3.29) ω v λ 0 ( x ) = v λ 0 ( x ) v ( x ) = B λ 0 + G + ( x , y ) G + x , y λ 0 | y | b λ 0 | y | ς 1 u λ 0 p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v λ 0 ( y ) u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y B δ ( x 0 ) G + ( x , y ) G + x , y λ 0 | y | b u λ 0 p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y > 0 ,

and hence

(3.30) ω u λ 0 ( x ) = u λ 0 ( x ) u ( x ) = B λ 0 + G α + ( x , y ) λ 0 | y | 2 α G α + x , y λ 0 | y | a u λ 0 p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v λ 0 ( y ) u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y 1 B λ 0 + G α + ( x , y ) λ 0 | y | 2 α G α + x , y λ 0 | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ω v λ 0 ( y ) d y > 0 .

This implies

(3.31) ω u λ 0 ( x ) > 0 and ω v λ 0 ( x ) > 0 , x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) .

To this end, let δ 1 > 0 be sufficiently small, which will be determined later. Define the narrow region

(3.32) A δ 1 x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) | d i s t x , ( B λ 0 + ( 0 ) ) < δ 1 .

Note that A δ 1 = x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) | x 2 < δ 1 or λ 0 δ 1 < | x | < λ 0 .

Since ω u λ 0 and ω v λ 0 are continuous in R + 2 ̄ \ { 0 } and A δ 1 c ( B λ 0 + ( 0 ) ) \ A δ 1 is a compact subset, (3.31) implies that there exists a positive constant m 0 > 0 such that

(3.33) ω u λ 0 ( x ) > m 0 and ω v λ 0 ( x ) > m 0 , x A δ 1 c .

By continuity, we can choose δ 2 > 0 (depending on δ 1) sufficiently small, such that, for any λ ∈ [λ 0, λ 0 + δ 2],

(3.34) ω u λ ( x ) > m 0 2 and ω v λ ( x ) > m 0 2 , x A δ 1 c .

Hence B λ + u and B λ + v must be contained in the narrow region A δ 1 ( ( B λ \ B λ 0 ) R + 2 ) . Consequently, we can choose δ 1 sufficiently small (and δ 2 more smaller if necessary) such that, for any λ ∈ [λ 0, λ 0 + δ 2],

(3.35) C | x | a ϕ ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + u ) + λ 2 ε | x | b ψ e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + u ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b ψ ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + u ) < 1 2 ,

and

(3.36) C | x | a u p 1 ( x ) e q 1 v ( x ) L 2 α ( B λ + v ) + λ 2 ε | x | b u p 2 e q 2 v L 2 2 2 ε ( B λ + v ) + C ( δ ( ε ) ) | B λ + v | 1 r | x | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) L r r 1 ( B λ + v ) < 1 2 ,

where C is the constant in the last inequality of (3.22). Then by (3.21), (3.22) and the same arguments as in step 1, we obtain that for any λ ∈ [λ 0, λ 0 + δ 2],

(3.37) ω u λ L r ( B λ + u ) = ω v λ L r ( B λ + v ) = 0 , max 2 2 α , 1 ϵ < r < ,

and hence,

(3.38) ω u λ ( x ) 0 and ω v λ ( x ) 0 , x B λ + ( 0 ) .

This contradicts the definition of λ 0. Hence, (3.28) must hold true.

On the other hand, since p 2 < 4 + 2 b 2 α , (3.3) in Lemma 3.1, (3.18) and (3.30) yield that, for any x B λ 0 + ( 0 ) ,

(3.39) ω v λ 0 ( x ) = v λ 0 ( x ) v ( x ) = B λ 0 + G + ( x , y ) G + x , y λ 0 | y | b λ 0 | y | ς 1 1 u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y > 0 ,

which is absurd. Thus we must have λ 0 = +∞. Then it follows immediately that

(3.40) u ( x ) λ | x | 2 α u λ 2 x | x | 2 , | x | λ , 0 < λ < + ; v ( x ) v λ 2 x | x | 2 , | x | λ , 0 < λ < + .

For arbitrary |x| ≥ 1, x R + 2 , let λ | x | , then (3.40) yields that

(3.41) u ( x ) 1 | x | 2 α 2 u x | x | , v ( x ) v x | x | .

As a consequence, we arrive at the following lower bound estimates: there exist C 0 > 0 and C 0 ̃ > 0 such that

(3.42) u ( x ) min | x | = 1 , x 2 1 2 u ( x ) 1 | x | 2 α 2 C 0 | x | 2 α 2 , | x | 1 , x 2 | x | 2 ; v ( x ) min | x | = 1 , x 2 1 2 v ( x ) C 0 ̃ , | x | 1 , x 2 | x | 2 .

The lower bound estimate (3.42) can be improved remarkably via using the “Bootstrap” iteration technique and the IEs system (1.6).

In fact, let μ u , 0 2 α 2 and μ v,0 ≔ 0, we can infer from IEs system (1.6), (3.4) in Lemma 3.1 and (3.42) that, for any x satisfying |x| ≥ 200 and x 2 | x | 2 ,

(3.43) u ( x ) = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) v q 1 ( y ) d y C 2 | x | | y | 4 | x | , y 2 | y | 2 1 | x y | 2 α 0 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h | y | a | y | p 1 μ u , 0 + q 1 μ v , 0 d y C | x | 2 α 2 | x | | y | 4 | x | , y 2 | y | 2 0 1 4 h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h | y | a + p 1 μ u , 0 + q 1 μ v , 0 d y C | x | 2 α 2 | x | 4 | x | r 2 1 + a + p 1 μ u , 0 + q 1 μ v , 0 d y C 1 ̃ | x | a + α + p 1 μ u , 0 + q 1 μ v , 0 .

where we have used the fact that x lies in the cone x R 2 | x 2 | x | 2 . Let μ u,1p 1 μ u,0 + q 1 μ v,0 + (a + α) = p 1 μ u,0 + a + α, then (3.43) gives us a better lower bound on u:

(3.44) u ( x ) C 1 | x | μ u , 1 , | x | 200 , x 2 | x | 2 .

Similarly, for any |x| ≥ 200 and x 2 | x | 2 ,

(3.45) v ( x ) 1 | y | 1 100 | x | , y 2 | y | 2 G + ( x , y ) | y | b | y | p 2 μ u , 0 + q 2 μ v , 0 d y C 1 | y | 1 100 | x | , y 2 | y | 2 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 | y | p 2 μ u , 0 + q 2 μ v , 0 + b d y C | x | 1 | x | 100 r 2 + b + p 2 μ u , 0 + q 2 μ v , 0 d r C 1 | x | ( 2 + b ) + p 2 μ u , 0 + q 2 μ v , 0 .

Let μ v,1 = (2 + b) + p 2 μ u,0 + q 2 μ v,0 (μ v,1 > 0 since p 2 < 4 + 2 b 2 α ), then we also have a better lower bound on v (choose C 1 smaller if necessary):

(3.46) v ( x ) C 1 ̃ | x | μ v , 1 , | x | 200 , x 2 | x | 2 .

Recalling (3.43) and (3.46), for any |x| ≥ 200 and x 2 | x | 2 , we have

(3.47) u ( x ) = R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y R + 2 G α + ( x , y ) | y | a u p 1 ( y ) v χ ( y ) d y C 2 | x | | y | 4 | x | , y 2 | y | 2 1 | x y | 2 α 0 4 x 2 y 2 | x y | 2 h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h | y | a | y | p 1 μ u , 1 + χ μ v , 1 d y C | x | 2 α 2 | x | | y | 4 | x | , y 2 | y | 2 0 1 4 h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h | y | a + p 1 μ u , 1 + χ μ v , 1 d y C | x | 2 α 2 | x | 4 | x | r 2 1 + a + p 1 μ u , 1 + χ μ v , 1 d y C 2 ̃ | x | a + α + p 1 μ u , 1 + χ μ v , 1 C 2 ̃ | x | μ u , 2 .

Similarly, if q 2 > 0, we also have

(3.48) v ( x ) | x | b + 2 + p 2 μ u , 1 + χ μ v , 1 | x | μ v , 2 , | x | 200 , x 2 | x | 2 .

If q 2 = 0, we substitute (3.47) into the integral expression of v, then we have

(3.49) v ( x ) | x | b + 2 + p 2 μ u , 2 | x | μ v , 2 , | x | 200 , x 2 | x | 2 .

Continuing in this way, if we choose χ sufficiently large, one can verify that μ u,j  → +∞, μ v,j  → +∞ as j → +∞. Consequently, we have proved Theorem 3.2. □

The lower bound estimates in Theorem 3.2 obviously contradicts the finiteness of the integral on the right hand side of system (1.6). In fact, using Theorem 3.2, we have

+ > u e 2 = R + 2 G e 2 , y | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) d y | y | 200 , y 2 | y | 2 C | e 2 y | 2 α 0 4 y 2 | e 2 y | 2 h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h | y | a × u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ( y ) d y | y | 200 , y 2 | y | 2 C | y | 2 α 0 1 2 | y | h α 2 1 ( 1 + h ) d h | y | a u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) ( y ) d y C | y | 200 , y 2 | y | 2 u p 1 ( y ) e q 1 v ( y ) | y | 2 α 2 a d y = + ,

and

(3.50) + > v e 2 100 = R + 2 G e 2 100 , y | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y | y | 200 , y 2 | y | 2 G e 2 100 , y | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) ( y ) d y C | y | 200 , y 2 | y | 2 y 2 | y | 2 | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y C | y | 200 , y 2 | y | 2 | y | b u p 2 ( y ) e q 2 v ( y ) d y = + ,

where the unit vector e 2 ( 0,1 ) R + 2 . This is a contradiction! Thus we must have u = v ≡ 0 in R + 2 ̄ .


Corresponding author: Wei Dai, School of Mathematical Sciences, Beihang University (BUAA), Beijing 100191, P.R. China, E-mail:

Funding source: National Natural Science Foundation of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: 12222102

Award Identifier / Grant number: 11971049

Funding source: National Key R&D Program of China

Award Identifier / Grant number: 2022ZD0116401

Funding source: Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

Acknowledgments

The research of W. Dai was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12222102 and 11971049) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities. The research of S. Peng was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 11971049). The authors are grateful to the anonymous referees for their careful reading and valuable comments and suggestions that improved the presentation of the paper.

  1. Research ethics: Not applicable.

  2. Author contributions: The authors have accepted responsibility for the entire content of this manuscript and approved its submission.

  3. Competing interests: The authors state no conflict of interest.

  4. Research funding: National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12222102 and 11971049), the National Key R&D Program of China (2022ZD0116401) and the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities.

  5. Data availability: Not applicable.

References

[1] W. Chen, Y. Li, and P. Ma, The Fractional Laplacian, Hackensack, NJ, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., 2019, p. 350.Suche in Google Scholar

[2] L. Caffarelli and L. Silvestre, “An extension problem related to the fractional Laplacian,” Comm. PDEs, vol. 32, no. 7–9, pp. 1245–1260, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1080/03605300600987306.Suche in Google Scholar

[3] L. Caffarelli and L. Vasseur, “Drift diffusion equations with fractional diffusion and the quasi-geostrophic equation,” Ann. of Math., vol. 171, no. 3, pp. 1903–1930, 2010.10.4007/annals.2010.171.1903Suche in Google Scholar

[4] S.-Y. A. Chang and M. González, “Fractional Laplacian in conformal geometry,” Adv. Math., vol. 226, no. 2, pp. 1410–1432, 2011, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2010.07.016.Suche in Google Scholar

[5] B. Chow, “Aleksandrov reflection for extrinsic geometric flows of Euclidean hypersurfaces. (English summary),” Adv. Nonlinear Stud., vol. 23, no. 1, p. 20220034, 2023. https://doi.org/10.1515/ans-2022-0034.Suche in Google Scholar

[6] S. Cingolani and T. Weth, “On the planar Schrödinger-Poisson system,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 169–197, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anihpc.2014.09.008.Suche in Google Scholar

[7] X. Cabré and J. Tan, “Positive solutions of nonlinear problems involving the square root of the Laplacian,” Adv. Math., vol. 224, no. 5, pp. 2052–2093, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2010.01.025.Suche in Google Scholar

[8] M. M. Fall and T. Weth, “Nonexistence results for a class of fractional elliptic boundary value problems,” J. Funct. Anal., vol. 263, no. 8, pp. 2205–2227, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2012.06.018.Suche in Google Scholar

[9] A. Quaas and A. Xia, “Liouville type theorems for nonlinear elliptic equations and systems involving fractional Laplacian in the half-space,” Calc. Var. Partial Diff. Equ., vol. 52, nos. 3–4, pp. 641–659, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-014-0727-8.Suche in Google Scholar

[10] W. Chen, Y. Fang, and R. Yang, “Liouville theorems involving the fractional Laplacian on a half space,” Adv. Math., vol. 274, pp. 167–198, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2014.12.013.Suche in Google Scholar

[11] G. Lu and J. Zhu, “Axial symmetry and regularity of solutions to an integral equation in a half-space,” Pacific J. Math., vol. 253, no. 2, pp. 455–473, 2011, https://doi.org/10.2140/pjm.2011.253.455.Suche in Google Scholar

[12] W. Chen, Y. Li, and R. Zhang, “A direct method of moving spheres on fractional order equations,” J. Funct. Anal., vol. 272, no. 10, pp. 4131–4157, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2017.02.022.Suche in Google Scholar

[13] W. Dai and G. Qin, “Liouville type theorems for fractional and higher order Hénon-Hardy type equations via the method of scaling spheres,” Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN, vol. 2023, no. 11, pp. 9001–9070, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1093/imrn/rnac079.Suche in Google Scholar

[14] W. Dai and G. Qin, “Liouville type theorem for critical order Hénon-Lane-Emden type equations on a half space and its applications,” J. Funct. Anal., vol. 281, no. 10, p. 37, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2021.109227.Suche in Google Scholar

[15] D. Cao, W. Dai, and G. Qin, “Super poly-harmonic properties, Liouville theorems and classification of nonnegative solutions to equations involving higher-order fractional Laplacians,” Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 374, no. 7, pp. 4781–4813, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1090/tran/8389.Suche in Google Scholar

[16] W. Dai, “Nonexistence of positive solutions to n-th order equations in Rn${\mathbb{R}}^{n}$,” Bull. Sci. Math., vol. 174, p. 14, 2021.Suche in Google Scholar

[17] W. Dai, “Liouville type theorems for poly-harmonic Dirichlet problems of Hénon-Hardy type equations on a half space or a ball,” Collect. Math., vol. 74, no. 3, pp. 729–751, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1007/s13348-022-00371-8.Suche in Google Scholar

[18] W. Dai and S. Peng, “Liouville theorems for nonnegative solutions to static weighted Schrödinger-Hartree-Maxwell type equations with combined nonlinearities,” Anal. Math. Phys., vol. 11, no. 2, p. 21, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13324-021-00479-3.Suche in Google Scholar

[19] W. Dai and S. Peng, “Liouville theorems for nonnegative solutions to Hardy-Hénon type system on a half space,” Ann. Funct. Anal., vol. 13, no. 1, p. 21, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s43034-021-00158-1.Suche in Google Scholar

[20] W. Chen, W. Dai, and G. Qin, “Liouville type theorems, a priori estimates and existence of solutions for critical and super-critical order Hardy-Hénon type equations in Rn${\mathbb{R}}^{n}$,” Math. Z., vol. 303, no. 4, p. 36, 2023.10.1007/s00209-023-03265-ySuche in Google Scholar

[21] W. Chen and Y. Fang, “A Liouville type theorem for poly-harmonic Dirichlet problems in a half space,” Adv. Math., vol. 229, no. 5, pp. 2835–2867, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2012.01.018.Suche in Google Scholar

[22] W. Chen and L. Wu, “The sliding methods for the fractional p-Laplacian,” Adv. Math., vol. 361, p. 106933, 2020, 26 pp, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2019.106933.Suche in Google Scholar

[23] W. Dai, Z. Liu, and G. Lu, “Liouville type theorems for PDE and IE systems involving fractional Laplacian on a half space,” Potential Anal., vol. 46, no. 3, pp. 569–588, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11118-016-9594-6.Suche in Google Scholar

[24] M. M. Fall and T. Weth, “Monotonicity and nonexistence results for some fractional elliptic problems in the half space,” Comm. Contemp. Math., vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 55–79, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1142/s0219199715500121.Suche in Google Scholar

[25] Y. Giga and Q. A. Ngô, “Exhaustive existence and non-existence results for Hardy-Hénon equations in Rn${\mathbb{R}}^{n}$,” Partial Differ. Equ. Appl., vol. 3, no. 6, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1007/s42985-022-00190-3.Suche in Google Scholar

[26] Y. Li and L. Zhang, “Liouville type theorems and Harnack type inequalities for semilinear elliptic equations,” J. Anal. Math, vol. 90, pp. 27–87, 2003, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02786551.Suche in Google Scholar

[27] G. Lu, P. Wang, and J. Zhu, “Liouville-type theorems and decay estimates for solutions to higher order elliptic equations,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré C Anal. Non Linéaire, vol. 29, no. 5, pp. 653–665, 2012, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.anihpc.2012.02.004.Suche in Google Scholar

[28] G. Lu and J. Zhu, “Liouville-type theorems for fully nonlinear elliptic equations and systems in half spaces,” Adv. Nonlinear Stud., vol. 13, no. 4, pp. 979–1001, 2013, https://doi.org/10.1515/ans-2013-0413.Suche in Google Scholar

[29] W. Reichel and T. Weth, “A priori bounds and a Liouville theorem on a half-space for higher-order elliptic Dirichlet problems,” Math. Z., vol. 261, no. 4, pp. 805–827, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-008-0352-3.Suche in Google Scholar

[30] W. Dai and G. Qin, Method of scaling spheres: Liouville theorems in general bounded or unbounded domains, blowing-up analysis on not necessarily C1-smooth domains and other applications, preprint, 2023, p. 78, arXiv: 2302.13988.Suche in Google Scholar

[31] S. Chandrasekhar, An Introduction to the Study of Stellar Structure, 1957, New York, Dover.Suche in Google Scholar

[32] O. W. Richardson, The Emission of Electricity from Hot Bodies, London, Longmans Green, 1921.Suche in Google Scholar

[33] E. Dancer and A. Farina, “On the classification of solutions of −Δu = eu on RN${\mathbb{R}}^{N}$: stability outside a compact set and applications,” Proc. Am. Math. Soc., vol. 137, no. 4, pp. 1333–1338, 2009, https://doi.org/10.1090/s0002-9939-08-09772-4.Suche in Google Scholar

[34] C. Wamg and D. Ye, “Some Liouville theorems for Hénon type elliptic equations, (English summary),” J. Funct. Anal., vol. 262, no. 4, pp. 1705–1727, 2012.10.1016/j.jfa.2011.11.017Suche in Google Scholar

[35] Z. Guo, X. Huang, D. Ye, and F. Zhou, “Qualitative properties of Hénon type equations with exponential nonlinearity,” Nonlinearity, vol. 35, no. 1, pp. 492–512, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6544/ac3925.Suche in Google Scholar

[36] M. Fazly, Y. Hu, and W. Yang, “On stable and finite Morse index solutions of the nonlocal Hénon-Gelfand-Liouville equation,” Calc. Var. Partial Diff. Equ., vol. 60, no. 1, p. 11, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-020-01874-7.Suche in Google Scholar

[37] M. F. Bidaut-Véron and S. Pohozaev, “Nonexistence results and estimates for some nonlinear elliptic problems,” J. Anal. Math., vol. 84, pp. 1–49, 2001, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02788105.Suche in Google Scholar

[38] D. Cao, “Nontrivial solution of semilinear elliptic equation with critical exponent in R2${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$,” Comm. Partial Diff. Equ., vol. 17, nos. 3–4, pp. 407–435, 1992, https://doi.org/10.1080/03605309208820848.Suche in Google Scholar

[39] L. Chen, G. Lu, and C. Tao, “Reverse Stein-Weiss inequalities on the upper half space and the existence of their extremals,” Adv. Nonlinear Stud., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 475–494, 2019, https://doi.org/10.1515/ans-2018-2038.Suche in Google Scholar

[40] W. Dai, Z. Liu, and G. Qin, “Classification of nonnegative solutions to static Schrödinger-Hartree-Maxwell type equations,” SIAM J. Math. Anal., vol. 53, no. 2, pp. 1379–1410, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1137/20m1341908.Suche in Google Scholar

[41] W. Dai, S. Peng, and G. Qin, “Liouville type theorems, a priori estimates and existence of solutions for sub-critical order Lane-Emden-Hardy equations,” J. d’Analyse Math., vol. 146, no. 2, pp. 673–718, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11854-022-0207-6.Suche in Google Scholar

[42] W. Dai and G. Qin, “Classification of nonnegative classical solutions to third-order equations,” Adv. Math., vol. 328, pp. 822–857, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2018.02.016.Suche in Google Scholar

[43] W. Dai and G. Qin, “Classification of solutions to conformally invariant systems with mixed order and exponentially increasing or nonlocal nonlinearity,” SIAM J. Math. Anal., vol. 55, no. 3, pp. 2111–2149, 2023, https://doi.org/10.1137/22m1499650.Suche in Google Scholar

[44] G. Lu and Y. Shen, “Existence of solutions to fractional-p Laplacian systems with homogeneous nonlinearities of critical Sobolev growth,” Adv. Nonlinear Stud., vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 579–597, 2020, https://doi.org/10.1515/ans-2020-2098.Suche in Google Scholar

[45] G. Lu, J. Wei and X. Xu, “On conformally invariant equation (−Δ)pu−K(x)uN+2pN−2p=0${\left(-{\Delta}\right)}^{p}u-K\left(x\right){u}^{\frac{N+2p}{N-2p}}=0$ and its generalizations,” Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., vol. 179, no. 4, pp. 309–329, 2001, https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02505961.Suche in Google Scholar

[46] G. Lu and J. Zhu, “The maximum principles and symmetry results for viscosity solutions of fully nonlinear equations,” J. Diff. Equ., vol. 258, no. 6, pp. 2054–2079, 2015, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2014.11.022.Suche in Google Scholar

[47] W. Chen, C. Li, and B. Ou, “Classification of solutions for an integral equation,” Comm. Pure Appl. Math., vol. 59, no. 3, pp. 330–343, 2006. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.20116.Suche in Google Scholar

[48] Y. Guo and S. Peng, “Classification of solutions to mixed order conformally invariant systems in R2${\mathbb{R}}^{2}$,” J. Geom. Anal., vol. 32, no. 6, 2022, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12220-022-00916-0.Suche in Google Scholar

[49] Y. Guo and S. Peng, “Liouville-type theorems for higher-order Lane-Emden system in exterior domains,” Commun. Contemp. Math., vol. 25, no. 5, p. Paper No. 32, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219199722500067.Suche in Google Scholar

[50] S. Peng, “Existence and Liouville theorems for coupled fractional elliptic system with Stein-Weiss type convolution parts,” Math. Z., vol. 302, no. 3, pp. 1593–1626, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-022-03130-4.Suche in Google Scholar

[51] W. Chen, C. Li, and Y. Li, “A direct method of moving planes for the fractional Laplacian,” Adv. Math., vol. 308, pp. 404–437, 2017, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aim.2016.11.038.Suche in Google Scholar

[52] W. Chen and Y. Hu, “Monotonicity of positive solutions for nonlocal problems in unbounded domains,” J. Funct. Anal., vol. 281, no. 9, p. 32, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfa.2021.109187.Suche in Google Scholar

[53] Z. Liu, “Maximum principles and monotonicity of solutions for fractional p-equations in unbounded domains,” J. Differ. Equ., vol. 270, pp. 1043–1078, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jde.2020.09.001.Suche in Google Scholar

[54] W. Dai, G. Qin, and D. Wu, “Direct methods for pseudo-relativistic Schrödinger operators,” J. Geom. Anal., vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 5555–5618, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12220-020-00492-1.Suche in Google Scholar

[55] Y. Guo and S. Peng, “Symmetry and monotonicity of nonnegative solutions to pseudo-relativistic Choquard equations,” Z. Angew. Math. Phys., vol. 72, no. 3, p. 120, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00033-021-01551-5.Suche in Google Scholar

[56] Y. Guo and S. Peng, “Liouville-type results for positive solutions of pseudo-relativistic Schrödinger system,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A, vol. 153, no. 1, pp. 196–228, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1017/prm.2021.81.Suche in Google Scholar

[57] W. Dai and G. Qin, “Maximum principles and the method of moving planes for the uniformly elliptic nonlocal Bellman operator and applications,” Ann. Mat. Pura Appl., vol. 200, no. 3, pp. 1085–1134, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-020-01027-9.Suche in Google Scholar

[58] S. Peng, “Maximum principles and Liouville results for uniformly elliptic nonlocal Bellman System,” Nonlinear Anal., vol. 226, p. 113141, 2022. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2022.113141.Suche in Google Scholar

[59] Y. Guo and S. Peng, “Maximum principles and Direct methods for tempered fractional operators,” Israel J. Math., 2022.Suche in Google Scholar

[60] L. Silvestre, “Regularity of the obstacle problem for a fractional power of the Laplace operator,” Comm. Pure Appl. Math., vol. 60, no. 1, pp. 67–112, 2007. https://doi.org/10.1002/cpa.20153.Suche in Google Scholar

[61] W. Chen, C. Li, L. Zhang, and T. Cheng, “A Liouville theorem for α-harmonic functions in R+n${\mathbb{R}}_{+}^{n}$,” Disc. Contin. Dyn. Syst. – A, vol. 36, no. 3, pp. 1721–1736, 2015, https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2016.36.1721.Suche in Google Scholar

Received: 2023-01-16
Accepted: 2023-08-21
Published Online: 2024-03-12

© 2024 the author(s), published by De Gruyter, Berlin/Boston

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

Heruntergeladen am 6.3.2026 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/ans-2023-0109/html
Button zum nach oben scrollen