ScalingStacks

Proof. [021T]

Original official author HTML, exact retained edition. Historical TeX conversion verdicts remain unchanged. Cited-edition alignment and mathematical self-containment are not assessed.

Complete original source context · Original author HTML

Proof.

The proof follows the same argument as the uniformly elliptic case. From the inequality we know that for any ζ∈Cc∞​(B1)\zeta\in C_{c}^{\infty}(B_{1}), with ζ≥0\zeta\geq 0, the following holds:

(6.15) ∫B1ai​j​∂ju​∂iζ​𝑑x≤∫B1f​u​ζ+g​ζ​𝑑x.\int_{B_{1}}a^{ij}\partial_{j}u\partial_{i}\zeta dx\leq\int_{B_{1}}fu\zeta+g\zeta dx.

Now let η∈Cc∞​(B1)\eta\in C^{\infty}_{c}(B_{1}), define u¯=u+1\bar{u}=u+1. Take ζ=η2​u¯β\zeta=\eta^{2}\bar{u}^{\beta}, for some β>0\beta>0. We plug in this ζ\zeta and obtain

(6.16) ∫B1βai​j∂iu¯∂ju¯u¯β−1η2≤∫−ai​j∂ju∂iηu¯β2η+|f|u¯β+1η2+|g|u¯βη2≤∫B1β2​ai​j​∂iu¯​∂ju¯​u¯β−1​η2+4β​ai​j​∂iη​∂jη​u¯β+1+(|f|+|g|)​u¯β+1​η2.\begin{split}\int_{B_{1}}&\beta a_{ij}\partial_{i}\bar{u}\partial_{j}\bar{u}\bar{u}^{\beta-1}\eta^{2}\leq\int-a_{ij}\partial_{j}u\partial_{i}\eta\bar{u}^{\beta}2\eta+|f|\bar{u}^{\beta+1}\eta^{2}+|g|\bar{u}^{\beta}\eta^{2}\\ &\leq\int_{B_{1}}\frac{\beta}{2}a_{ij}\partial_{i}\bar{u}\partial_{j}\bar{u}\bar{u}^{\beta-1}\eta^{2}+\frac{4}{\beta}a_{ij}\partial_{i}\eta\partial_{j}\eta\bar{u}^{\beta+1}+(|f|+|g|)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}\eta^{2}.\end{split}

Use the ellipticity condition to get:

(6.17) ∫B1βλ​|∇u¯|2​u¯β−1​η2≤∫B1(4​λβ​|∇η|2+|f|​η2+|g|​η2)​u¯β+1.\int_{B_{1}}\frac{\beta}{\lambda}|\nabla\bar{u}|^{2}\bar{u}^{\beta-1}\eta^{2}\leq\int_{B_{1}}\big(\frac{4\lambda}{\beta}|\nabla\eta|^{2}+|f|\eta^{2}+|g|\eta^{2}\big)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}.

This is equivalent to:

(6.18) ∫B1|∇(u¯β+12)|2​η2​1λ≤(β+1)2β2​∫B1λ​|∇η|2​u¯β+1+(β+1)24​β​∫B1(|f|+|g|)​u¯β+1​η2.\int_{B_{1}}|\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}})|^{2}\eta^{2}\frac{1}{\lambda}\leq\frac{(\beta+1)^{2}}{\beta^{2}}\int_{B_{1}}\lambda|\nabla\eta|^{2}\bar{u}^{\beta+1}+\frac{(\beta+1)^{2}}{4\beta}\int_{B_{1}}(|f|+|g|)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}\eta^{2}.

Next observe

|∇(u¯β+12​η)|2≤2​|∇(u¯β+12)|2​η2+2​u¯β+1​|∇η|2.|\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta)|^{2}\leq 2|\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}})|^{2}\eta^{2}+2\bar{u}^{\beta+1}|\nabla\eta|^{2}.

Hence it follows from (6.18) that if β≥1\beta\geq 1,

(6.19) ∫B1|∇(u¯β+12​η)|2​1λ≤∫B1(2​λ​(β+1)2β2+2λ)​u¯β+1​|∇η|2+(β+1)22​β​∫B1(|f|+|g|)​u¯β+1​η2≤∫B110​λ​u¯β+1​|∇η|2+2​β​∫B1(|f|+|g|)​u¯β+1​η2.\begin{split}\int_{B_{1}}|\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta)|^{2}\frac{1}{\lambda}&\leq\int_{B_{1}}\big(\frac{2\lambda(\beta+1)^{2}}{\beta^{2}}+\frac{2}{\lambda}\big)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}|\nabla\eta|^{2}+\frac{(\beta+1)^{2}}{2\beta}\int_{B_{1}}(|f|+|g|)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}\eta^{2}\\ &\leq\int_{B_{1}}10\lambda\bar{u}^{\beta+1}|\nabla\eta|^{2}+2\beta\int_{B_{1}}(|f|+|g|)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}\eta^{2}.\end{split}

We would like to get rid of the λ\lambda in the above estimate. Let ε>0\varepsilon>0 to be determined, then we have

(6.20) ‖∇(u¯β+12​η)‖L2−ε2≤‖λ‖L2ε−12−ε2​∫B11λ​|∇(u¯β+12​η)|2.||\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta)||_{L^{2-\varepsilon}}^{2}\leq||\lambda||_{L^{\frac{2}{\varepsilon}-1}}^{\frac{2-\varepsilon}{2}}\int_{B_{1}}\frac{1}{\lambda}|\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta)|^{2}.

On the other hand, we estimate the right hand side by Hölder’s inequality:

(6.21) ∫B1λ​u¯β+1​|∇η|2≤‖λ‖L2ε−1​‖u¯β+12​|∇η|‖L2−ε1−ε2,\displaystyle\int_{B_{1}}\lambda\bar{u}^{\beta+1}|\nabla\eta|^{2}\leq||\lambda||_{L^{\frac{2}{\varepsilon}-1}}||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}|\nabla\eta|||_{L^{\frac{2-\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}}}^{2},
(6.22) ∫B1(|f|+|g|)​u¯β+1​η2≤(‖f‖Lp/2+||g||Lp/2)||u¯β+12​η||L2​pp−22.\displaystyle\int_{B_{1}}(|f|+|g|)\bar{u}^{\beta+1}\eta^{2}\leq\big(||f||_{L^{p/2}}+||g||_{L^{p/2}}\big)||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}}^{2}.

Therefore,

(6.23) ‖∇(u¯β+12​η)‖L2−ε2≤||λ||L2ε−12−ε2​(10​||λ||L2ε−1​‖u¯β+12​|∇η|‖L2−ε1−ε2+2​β​(‖f‖Lp/2+||g||Lp/2)|​|u¯β+12​η||L2​pp−22).||\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta)||_{L^{2-\varepsilon}}^{2}\leq||\lambda||_{L^{\frac{2}{\varepsilon}-1}}^{\frac{2-\varepsilon}{2}}\big(10||\lambda||_{L^{\frac{2}{\varepsilon}-1}}||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}|\nabla\eta|||^{2}_{L^{\frac{2-\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}}}+2\beta(||f||_{L^{p/2}}+||g||_{L^{p/2}})||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}}^{2}\big).

Now we choose ε=2p+1\varepsilon=\frac{2}{p+1}, then 2ε−1=p\frac{2}{\varepsilon}-1=p. With this choice, we have 2−ε1−ε<2​pp−2\frac{2-\varepsilon}{1-\varepsilon}<\frac{2p}{p-2} in the above, then we find for some constant C6.1C_{6.1}, depending on ‖λ‖Lp||\lambda||_{L^{p}}, ‖f‖Lp/2||f||_{L^{p/2}}, ‖g‖Lp/2||g||_{L^{p/2}}, such that

(6.24) ‖∇(u¯β+12​η)‖L2​pp+12≤C6.1​(‖u¯β+12​|∇η|‖L2​pp−22+β​‖u¯β+12​η‖L2​pp−22).||\nabla(\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta)||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p+1}}}^{2}\leq C_{6.1}\big(||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}|\nabla\eta|||^{2}_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}}+\beta||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}\eta||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}}^{2}\big).

Fix 12≤r<R≤1\frac{1}{2}\leq r<R\leq 1, Denote ri=r+2−i​(R−r)r_{i}=r+2^{-i}(R-r), for i≥0i\geq 0. Note that r0=Rr_{0}=R, and ri→rr_{i}\rightarrow r as i→∞i\rightarrow\infty. We choose the cut-off function η\eta so that 0≤η≤10\leq\eta\leq 1, η≡1\eta\equiv 1 on Bri+1B_{r_{i+1}}, s​u​p​p​η⊂Brisupp\,\eta\subset B_{r_{i}}, and |∇η|≤2ri−ri+1=2i+2R−r|\nabla\eta|\leq\frac{2}{r_{i}-r_{i+1}}=\frac{2^{i+2}}{R-r}. Denote θ\theta to be such that 1θ=p+12​p−1d\frac{1}{\theta}=\frac{p+1}{2p}-\frac{1}{d}. Since p>3​d2p>\frac{3d}{2}, it follows that θ>2​pp−2\theta>\frac{2p}{p-2}. Then apply the Sobolev inequality to get

(6.25) ‖u¯β+12‖Lθ​(Bri+1)≤C6.2​β​2i+2R−r​‖u¯β+12‖L2​pp−2​(Bri).||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}||_{L^{\theta}(B_{r_{i+1}})}\leq\frac{C_{6.2}\sqrt{\beta}2^{i+2}}{R-r}||\bar{u}^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}}||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}(B_{r_{i}})}.

This is equivalent to:

(6.26) ‖u¯‖Lθ⁡(β+1)2​(Bri+1)≤C6.22β+1​β1β+1​22​(i+2)β+1(R−r)2β+1​‖u¯‖L2​pp−2⋅β+12​(Bri).||\bar{u}||_{L^{\frac{\theta(\beta+1)}{2}}(B_{r_{i+1}})}\leq\frac{C_{6.2}^{\frac{2}{\beta+1}}\beta^{\frac{1}{\beta+1}}2^{\frac{2(i+2)}{\beta+1}}}{(R-r)^{\frac{2}{\beta+1}}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}\cdot\frac{\beta+1}{2}}(B_{r_{i}})}.

Now denote θ=χ⋅2​pp−2\theta=\chi\cdot\frac{2p}{p-2} for some χ>1\chi>1, and choose β\beta to be β+12=χi\frac{\beta+1}{2}=\chi^{i}, then we obtain from (6.26):

(6.27) ‖u¯‖L2​p​χi+1p−2​(Bri+1)≤(2​C6.2R−r)1χi​χiχi​2i+2χi​‖u¯‖L2​p​χip−2​(Bri), for i≥0.||\bar{u}||_{L^{\frac{2p\chi^{i+1}}{p-2}}(B_{r_{i+1}})}\leq\big(\frac{2C_{6.2}}{R-r}\big)^{\frac{1}{\chi^{i}}}\chi^{\frac{i}{\chi^{i}}}2^{\frac{i+2}{\chi^{i}}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{\frac{2p\chi^{i}}{p-2}}(B_{r_{i}})},\textrm{ for $i\geq 0$.}

Iterating this inequality we obtain for any 12≤r<R≤1\frac{1}{2}\leq r<R\leq 1, and for some constant C6.3C_{6.3} independent of rr, RR,

(6.28) ‖u¯‖L∞​(Br)≤C6.3(R−r)∑i≥0χ−i​‖u¯‖L2​pp−2​(BR)=C6.3(R−r)χχ−1||u¯||L2​pp−2​(BR)≤C6.3(R−r)χχ−1​‖u¯‖L1​(BR)p−22​p​‖u¯‖L∞​(BR)p+22​p≤12​‖u¯‖L∞​(BR)+2p+2p−2​C6.32​pp−2(R−r)2​χ​p(χ−1)​(p−2)||u¯||L1​(BR).\begin{split}&||\bar{u}||_{L^{\infty}(B_{r})}\leq\frac{C_{6.3}}{(R-r)^{\sum_{i\geq 0}\chi^{-i}}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}(B_{R})}=\frac{C_{6.3}}{(R-r)^{\frac{\chi}{\chi-1}}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}(B_{R})}\\ &\leq\frac{C_{6.3}}{(R-r)^{\frac{\chi}{\chi-1}}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{1}(B_{R})}^{\frac{p-2}{2p}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{\infty}(B_{R})}^{\frac{p+2}{2p}}\leq\frac{1}{2}||\bar{u}||_{L^{\infty}(B_{R})}+\frac{2^{\frac{p+2}{p-2}}C_{6.3}^{\frac{2p}{p-2}}}{(R-r)^{\frac{2\chi p}{(\chi-1)(p-2)}}}||\bar{u}||_{L^{1}(B_{R})}.\end{split}

The desired conclusion now follows from the following lemma applied to f⁡(r)=‖u¯‖L∞​(Br)f(r)=||\bar{u}||_{L^{\infty}(B_{r})}, which is a special case of Lemma 4.3 in [22]. ∎

Original mathematics by the credited authors. Source-backed reader collection; mathematical self-containment is not assessed.