ScalingStacks

Proof. [050K]

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.

We just need to establish the following:

  1. (1)

    (General derivatives estimate) For each k∈ℕk\in\mathbb{N} and ϵ>0\epsilon>0, it holds that

    (3.211) |∇k+2T|=O⁡(r−(k+ϵ)).|\nabla^{k+2}T|=O(r^{-(k+\epsilon)}).
  2. (2)

    (Mixed derivatives estimate) For each k∈ℕk\in\mathbb{N}, ℓ∈ℕ\ell\in\mathbb{N} and ϵ>0\epsilon>0, it holds that

    (3.212) |(∇t)k​∇ℓ+2T|=O⁡(r−(ℓ+ϵ)),|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\nabla^{\ell+2}T|=O(r^{-(\ell+\epsilon)}),

    where ∇t\nabla^{t} denotes the tangential derivative.

The above estimates will be proved by induction.

First, we will prove the following order estimate for ∇2T\nabla^{2}T in a smaller neighborhood 𝒰′⊂⊂𝒰\mathcal{U}^{\prime}\subset\subset\mathcal{U}

(3.213) |∇2T|=O⁡(r−ϵ).|\nabla^{2}T|=O(r^{-\epsilon}).

This can be viewed as the base step for carrying out the inductive argument.

To begin with, by definition, for any p>0p>0, we have |v|Lp​(𝒰)≤Cp|v|_{L^{p}(\mathcal{U})}\leq C_{p}. Applying the standard elliptic W2,pW^{2,p}-estimate, for each p>0p>0, there is some constant Cp>0C_{p}>0 such that in a smaller neighborhood 𝒰1⊂⊂𝒰\mathcal{U}_{1}\subset\subset\mathcal{U} such that

(3.214) ‖∇2T‖Lp​(𝒰1)≤Cp.\|\nabla^{2}T\|_{L^{p}(\mathcal{U}_{1})}\leq C_{p}.

Then Sobolev embedding theorem tells us that

(3.215) T∈W2,p​(𝒰1)∩C1,α​(𝒰1)T\in W^{2,p}(\mathcal{U}_{1})\cap C^{1,\alpha}(\mathcal{U}_{1})

for any p>1p>1 and 0<α<10<\alpha<1.

To prove (3.213), we need to differentiate the equation, which schematically yields that

(3.216) Δ​∇2T+Q1∗∇3T+Q2∗∇2T+Q3∗∇T=w,\Delta\nabla^{2}T+Q_{1}*\nabla^{3}T+Q_{2}*\nabla^{2}T+Q_{3}*\nabla T=w,

where |w|=O′​(r−2)|w|=O^{\prime}(r^{-2}) and QiQ_{i}’s are smooth terms arising from differentiating the coefficients of Δ\Delta. The above equation can be viewed as an elliptic system in terms of the Hessian of TT. Let Φ≡∇2T\Phi\equiv\nabla^{2}T, noticing ∇T∈Cα​(𝒰1)\nabla T\in C^{\alpha}(\mathcal{U}_{1}), so the terms involving ∇T\nabla T can be absorbed to the right hand side of the equation. Then Φ\Phi can be treated as vector valued functions, once we fix a local frame. So it follows that

(3.217) Δ​Φ+Q1∗∇Φ+Q2∗Φ=η,\Delta\Phi+Q_{1}*\nabla\Phi+Q_{2}*\Phi=\eta,

where |η|=O′​(r−2)|\eta|=O^{\prime}(r^{-2}). Since η\eta has unbounded LpL^{p}-norm for large pp, the standard W2,pW^{2,p}-estimate for Φ\Phi does not directly apply.

For improving the regularity of ∇2T\nabla^{2}T, we will rescale the metric gg. For each xx in an even smaller neighborhood 𝒰2\mathcal{U}_{2} with r⁡(x)=rxr(x)=r_{x}, we rescale the metric gg in Brx​(x)B_{r_{x}}(x) by letting

(3.218) g~=(rx)−2​g,\tilde{g}=(r_{x})^{-2}g,

then the following equation holds in the rescaled geodesic ball B1g~​(x)B_{1}^{\tilde{g}}(x),

(3.219) Δ~​Φ~+rx​Q~1∗∇~​Φ~+(rx)2​Q~2∗Φ~=η~,|η~|=O′​(1),\widetilde{\Delta}\widetilde{\Phi}+r_{x}\widetilde{Q}_{1}*\widetilde{\nabla}\widetilde{\Phi}+(r_{x})^{2}\widetilde{Q}_{2}*\widetilde{\Phi}=\tilde{\eta},\quad|\tilde{\eta}|=O^{\prime}(1),

where Φ~​(y)=Φ⁡(rx⋅y)\widetilde{\Phi}(y)=\Phi(r_{x}\cdot y) for each y∈B1g~​(x)y\in B_{1}^{\tilde{g}}(x). In the above equation, all the coefficients are uniformly bounded independent of xx. Since we have shown |Φ|Lp≤Cp|\Phi|_{L^{p}}\leq C_{p} in (3.214), so simple rescaling gives rise to the following estimate for any p>0p>0,

(3.220) |Φ~|Lp​(B1g~​(x))≤Cp⋅(rx)−np.|\widetilde{\Phi}|_{L^{p}(B_{1}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{p}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\frac{n}{p}}.

Now applying the W2,pW^{2,p}-estimate for Φ~\widetilde{\Phi}, then for each p>0p>0

(3.221) |Φ~|W2,p​(B1/2g~​(x))≤Cp⋅(rx)−np|\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/2}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{p}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\frac{n}{p}}

with Cp>0C_{p}>0 independent of xx. By the Sobolev embedding

(3.222) |Φ~|C1,α​(B1/4g~​(x))≤Cα,p⋅(rx)−np|\widetilde{\Phi}|_{C^{1,\alpha}(B_{1/4}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{\alpha,p}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\frac{n}{p}}

with Cα,p>0C_{\alpha,p}>0 independent of xx. Scale back to the original metric, for any p>0p>0, there is some Cα,p>0C_{\alpha,p}>0 independent of the base point x∈𝒰2x\in\mathcal{U}_{2} such that

(3.223) |Φ|L∞​(Brx/4​(x))+|rx∇Φ|L∞​(Brx/4​(x))≤Cα,p⋅(rx)−np.|\Phi|_{L^{\infty}(B_{r_{x}/4}(x))}+|r_{x}\nabla\Phi|_{L^{\infty}(B_{r_{x}/4}(x))}\leq C_{\alpha,p}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\frac{n}{p}}.

This completes the proof of (3.213).

Now we will finish the proof of Item (1) by using the induction. Based on (3.223), the key induction step is to prove the following: Given any ℓ∈ℤ+\ell\in\mathbb{Z}_{+}, if for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0 and 0≤k≤ℓ−10\leq k\leq\ell-1,

(3.224) |∇kΦ|=O⁡(r−(k+ϵ)),|∇~k​Φ~|W2,p​(B1/2g~​(x))≤Ck,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ,|\nabla^{k}\Phi|=O(r^{-(k+\epsilon)}),\quad|\widetilde{\nabla}^{k}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/2}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon},

then for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0, we have

(3.225) |∇ℓΦ|=O⁡(r−(ℓ+ϵ)),|∇~ℓ​Φ~|W2,p​(B1/4g~​(x))≤Cℓ,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ.|\nabla^{\ell}\Phi|=O(r^{-(\ell+\epsilon)}),\quad|\widetilde{\nabla}^{\ell}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/4}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{\ell,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon}.

Indeed, then differentiating (3.216) by ∇k\nabla^{k},

(3.226) Δ⁡(∇ℓΦ)+∑j=1ℓ+1Qj∗∇jΦ=wℓ,\Delta(\nabla^{\ell}\Phi)+\sum\limits_{j=1}^{\ell+1}Q_{j}*\nabla^{j}\Phi=w_{\ell},

where |wℓ|=O′​(r−(ℓ+2))|w_{\ell}|=O^{\prime}(r^{-(\ell+2)}). As before, we rescale the metric gg by taking g~=(rx)−2​g\tilde{g}=(r_{x})^{-2}g, then

(3.227) Δ~​(∇~ℓ​Φ~)+∑j=1ℓ+1(rx)ℓ−j+2⋅Qj∗∇jΦ~=w~ℓ,\widetilde{\Delta}(\widetilde{\nabla}^{\ell}\widetilde{\Phi})+\sum\limits_{j=1}^{\ell+1}(r_{x})^{\ell-j+2}\cdot Q_{j}*\nabla^{j}\widetilde{\Phi}=\tilde{w}_{\ell},

where |w~ℓ|=O′​(1)|\tilde{w}_{\ell}|=O^{\prime}(1). Let k=ℓ−1k=\ell-1, applying the induction hypothesis (3.224) and Sobolev embedding, we have

(3.228) |∇~ℓ​Φ~|L∞​(B1/2g~​(x))=O⁡((rx)−ϵ).|\widetilde{\nabla}^{\ell}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{L^{\infty}(B_{1/2}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}=O((r_{x})^{-\epsilon}).

The above enables us to apply the W2,pW^{2,p}-elliptic estimate, so we obtain the following estimate for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0,

(3.229) |∇~ℓ​Φ~|W2,p​(B1/4g~​(x))≤Cℓ,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ,|\widetilde{\nabla}^{\ell}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/4}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{\ell,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon},

where Cℓ,p,ϵ>0C_{\ell,p,\epsilon}>0 is independent of the base point xx. Applying the Sobolev embedding W2,p⊂C1,αW^{2,p}\subset C^{1,\alpha} and scaling back to the original metric gg,

(3.230) |∇ℓΦ|L∞​(Brx/8​(x))≤Cℓ,ϵ⋅(rx)−(ℓ+ϵ)|\nabla^{\ell}\Phi|_{L^{\infty}(B_{r_{x}/8}(x))}\leq C_{\ell,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-(\ell+\epsilon)}

for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0. So we complete the proof of Item (1).

Now we are ready to finish the proof of Item (2). We only focus on the case ℓ=0\ell=0 and the case for ℓ>0\ell>0 can be directly achieved by applying the above rescaling arguments. To this end, we need the following claim for the tangential derivatives estimate.

Claim. Let |Φ~|W2,p​(B1/2g~​(x))≤Cp,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ|\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/2}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon} for any ϵ>0\epsilon>0 and for any x∈𝒰x\in\mathcal{U}. Assume that Φ~\widetilde{\Phi} solves the elliptic equation

(3.231) Δ​Φ~+Q1∗∇Φ~+Q2∗Φ~=ζ,\Delta\widetilde{\Phi}+Q_{1}*\nabla\widetilde{\Phi}+Q_{2}*\widetilde{\Phi}=\zeta,

where QiQ_{i}’s are smooth coefficients, |ζ|∈O′​(1)|\zeta|\in O^{\prime}(1). Then for any x∈𝒰x\in\mathcal{U}, the estimate

(3.232) |(∇t)k​Φ~|W2,p​(B1/8g~​(x))≤Ck,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ,|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/8}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon},

holds for all k≥1k\geq 1, p>1p>1 and ϵ>0\epsilon>0.

Taking the first tangential derivative ∇t\nabla^{t} for Δ​Φ~\Delta\widetilde{\Phi},

(3.233) (∇t)​(Δ​Φ~)=Δ​∇tΦ~+Q1∗∇2Φ~+Q2∗∇Φ~,(\nabla^{t})(\Delta\widetilde{\Phi})=\Delta\nabla^{t}\widetilde{\Phi}+Q_{1}*\nabla^{2}\widetilde{\Phi}+Q_{2}*\nabla\widetilde{\Phi},

where QiQ_{i}’s are smooth functions. Hence differentiating (3.231) once by the tangential derivative ∇t\nabla^{t}, we have

(3.234) Δ⁡(∇tΦ~)+Q1∗∇2Φ~+Q2∗∇Φ~=w1,\Delta(\nabla^{t}\widetilde{\Phi})+Q_{1}*\nabla^{2}\widetilde{\Phi}+Q_{2}*\nabla\widetilde{\Phi}=w_{1},

where QiQ_{i}’s are smooth functions, w1≡∇tζw_{1}\equiv\nabla^{t}\zeta and |w1|∈O′​(1)|w_{1}|\in O^{\prime}(1). Since we have already assumed |∇2Φ~|Lp​(B1/2g~​(x))≤Cp,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ|\nabla^{2}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{L^{p}(B_{1/2}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon} for all ϵ>0\epsilon>0, applying the standard W2,pW^{2,p}-estimate, then for any p>1p>1 and ϵ>0\epsilon>0,

(3.235) |∇tΦ~|W2,p​(B1/3g~​(x))≤Cp,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ.|\nabla^{t}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/3}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon}.

Now we prove the higher order mixed derivatives estimate by induction. Repeat taking the tangential derivatives and let Ψ(k)≡(∇t)k​Φ~\Psi^{(k)}\equiv(\nabla^{t})^{k}\widetilde{\Phi} for all k>1k>1. Assume that |Ψ(j)|W2,p​(B1/4g~​(x))≤Ck,p,ϵ​(rx)−ϵ|\Psi^{(j)}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/4}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,p,\epsilon}(r_{x})^{-\epsilon} holds for all j≤k−1j\leq k-1 and p>1p>1, then

(3.236) Δ⁡(Ψ(k))+∑μ=1,21≤μ+ν≤kQμ​ν∗∇μ(Ψ(ν))=wk,\Delta(\Psi^{(k)})+\sum_{\begin{subarray}{c}\mu=1,2\\ 1\leq\mu+\nu\leq k\end{subarray}}Q_{\mu\nu}*\nabla^{\mu}(\Psi^{(\nu)})=w_{k},

where wk≡(∇t)k​ζw_{k}\equiv(\nabla^{t})^{k}\zeta and |wk|=O′​(1)|w_{k}|=O^{\prime}(1). Applying the induction hypothesis, it follows that for any k≥1k\geq 1,

(3.237) |Δ⁡(Ψ(k))|Lp​(B1/4g~​(x))≤Ck,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ|\Delta(\Psi^{(k)})|_{L^{p}(B_{1/4}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon}

Therefore, for any k≥1k\geq 1, p>1p>1 and ϵ>0\epsilon>0, there is some constant Ck,p,ϵ>0C_{k,p,\epsilon}>0 such that

(3.238) |(∇t)k​Φ~|W2,p​(B1/8g~​(x))=|Ψ(k)|W2,p​(B1/8g~​(x))≤Ck,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ.|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/8}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}=|\Psi^{(k)}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/8}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon}.

This completes the proof of the claim.

Now we are in a position to finish the proof of the lemma by completing the induction arguments for Item (2). As before, for any xx, under the rescaled metric g~=(rx)−2​g\tilde{g}=(r_{x})^{-2}g, we start with the equation for Φ~\widetilde{\Phi} in the rescaled geodesic ball B1g~​(x)B_{1}^{\tilde{g}}(x),

(3.239) Δ~​Φ~+rx​Q~1∗∇~​Φ~+(rx)2​Q~2∗Φ~=η~, 0<rx<1,\widetilde{\Delta}\widetilde{\Phi}+r_{x}\widetilde{Q}_{1}*\widetilde{\nabla}\widetilde{\Phi}+(r_{x})^{2}\widetilde{Q}_{2}*\widetilde{\Phi}=\tilde{\eta},\ 0<r_{x}<1,

where Q~i\widetilde{Q}_{i}’s are smooth functions and |η~|=O′​(1)|\tilde{\eta}|=O^{\prime}(1). The above claim tells us that for any k≥1k\geq 1, p>1p>1 and ϵ>0\epsilon>0,

(3.240) |(∇t)k​Φ~|W2,p​(B1/2g~​(x))≤Ck,p,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ,|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{W^{2,p}(B_{1/2}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,p,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon},

where Ck,p,ϵ>0C_{k,p,\epsilon}>0 is independent of xx. Applying the Sobolev embedding, then for any 0<α<10<\alpha<1,

(3.241) |(∇t)k​Φ~|C1,α​(B1/4g~​(x))≤Ck,α,ϵ⋅(rx)−ϵ.|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\widetilde{\Phi}|_{C^{1,\alpha}(B_{1/4}^{\tilde{g}}(x))}\leq C_{k,\alpha,\epsilon}\cdot(r_{x})^{-\epsilon}.

In particular, |(∇t)k​Φ~|=O⁡(r−ϵ)|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\widetilde{\Phi}|=O(r^{-\epsilon}) for all ϵ>0\epsilon>0. Notice that the above estimate is independent of the choice of xx. Rescaling back to the original metric, then for each ϵ>0\epsilon>0,

(3.242) |(∇t)k​∇2T|=O⁡(r−ϵ).|(\nabla^{t})^{k}\nabla^{2}T|=O(r^{-\epsilon}).

The proof of the lemma is done.

∎

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