Proof.
We again divide into different regions and estimate separately.
For , applying Corollary 3.24.1, we have
| (4.307) |
|
|
|
where is independent of .
By (4.20) we have
| (4.308) |
|
|
|
Using (3.316), it is easy to see that
| (4.309) |
|
|
|
Immediately, by the definition of the weighted -norm, we have
| (4.310) |
|
|
|
Now consider the region , then by (3.349) we may write
| (4.311) |
|
|
|
where .
So it follows that
|
|
|
|
| (4.312) |
|
|
|
|
By (4.16), we have
| (4.313) |
|
|
|
So we obtain
| (4.314) |
|
|
|
Since for ,
| (4.315) |
|
|
|
Here we use the following elementary inequality: for any and .
By Proposition 3.31, the asymptotics has the explicit exponential decaying rate
for any . Applying (4.315) and the
the assumption
| (4.316) |
|
|
|
we conclude that, as ,
the growth rate of
is slower than the decaying rate of .
Therefore,
| (4.317) |
|
|
|
By the definition of the weighted norm, we have
| (4.318) |
|
|
|
The weighted -estimate can be obtained in a similar way.
It suffices to analyze the Hölder regularity around the singular set .
Notice that a fixed function in has bounded norm, so
the weighted -estimate is given by
| (4.319) |
|
|
|