Advanced Partial Differential Equations Prof. Dr. Thomas

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Advanced Partial Differential Equations Prof. Dr. Thomas Advanced Partial Differential Equations Prof. Dr. Thomas Sørensen summer term 2015 Marcel Schaub July 2, 2015 1 Contents 0 Recall PDE 1 & Motivation 3 0.1 Recall PDE 1 . .3 1 Weak derivatives and Sobolev spaces 7 1.1 Sobolev spaces . .8 1.2 Approximation by smooth functions . 11 1.3 Extension of Sobolev functions . 13 1.4 Traces . 15 1.5 Sobolev inequalities . 17 2 Linear 2nd order elliptic PDE 25 2.1 Linear 2nd order elliptic partial differential operators . 25 2.2 Weak solutions . 26 2.3 Existence via Lax-Milgram . 28 2.4 Inhomogeneous bounday value problems . 35 2.5 The space H−1(U) ................................ 36 2.6 Regularity of weak solutions . 39 A Tutorials 58 A.1 Tutorial 1: Review of Integration . 58 A.2 Tutorial 2 . 59 A.3 Tutorial 3: Norms . 61 A.4 Tutorial 4 . 62 A.5 Tutorial 6 (Sheet 7) . 65 A.6 Tutorial 7 . 65 A.7 Tutorial 9 . 67 A.8 Tutorium 11 . 67 B Solutions of the problem sheets 70 B.1 Solution to Sheet 1 . 70 B.2 Solution to Sheet 2 . 71 B.3 Solution to Problem Sheet 3 . 73 B.4 Solution to Problem Sheet 4 . 76 B.5 Solution to Exercise Sheet 5 . 77 B.6 Solution to Exercise Sheet 7 . 81 B.7 Solution to problem sheet 8 . 84 B.8 Solution to Exercise Sheet 9 . 87 2 0 Recall PDE 1 & Motivation 0.1 Recall PDE 1 We mainly studied linear 2nd order equations – specifically, elliptic, parabolic and hyper- bolic equations. Concretely: • The Laplace equation ∆u = 0 (elliptic) • The Poisson equation −∆u = f (elliptic) • The Heat equation ut − ∆u = 0, ut − ∆u = f (parabolic) • The Wave equation utt − ∆u = 0, utt − ∆u = f (hyperbolic) We studied (“main motivation; goal”) well-posedness (à la Hadamard) 1. Existence of solutions 2. Uniqueness of solutions 3. Continuous dependence on the data. Also “properties of solutions” were important (regularity, estimates, mean value formulae, infinite/finite propagation speed and “techniques”). Recall that on existence, two types of results exist (1) Write down explicit solution formula (i.e. derive it – somehow – then prove that it does produce a solution). We did this “several times”, but in very specific cases and n 2 n very limited! For example for the Laplace equation −∆u = f in R , for f 2 Cc (R ). n We studied harmonic polynomials, i.e. ∆u = 0 in R with u a polynomial. Then we studied the problem in the half-space ( n ∆u = 0 in R+ n u = g on @R+ n−1 1 n−1 for g 2 C(R ) \ L (R ). The same for a Ball and g 2 C(@B(0; r)). Or the heat equation ( n ut − ∆u = 0 in R × (0; 1) n u = g on R × ft = 0g n 1 n for g 2 C(R ) \ L (R ). Or ( n ut − ∆u = f in R × (0; 1) n u = 0 on R × ft = 0g and combinations. Also the wave equation was studied ( utt − uxx = 0 in R × (0; 1) u = g; ut = h on R × ft = 0g and on R+ × (0; 1) 8 >utt − uxx = 0 in + × (0; 1) <> R u = g; ut = h on R+ × ft = 0g > :>u = 0 on fx = 0g × (0; 1) and for dimensions n > 2 odd/even. I.e. 3 (a) Equations are very specific (not general elliptic/parabolic/hyperbolic) n (b) The geometry is very specific (all of space (R ), half-space, ball). (2) One exception: Perron’s Method for ( ∆u = 0 in U u = g on @U for g 2 C(@U) guaranteed existence for every g 2 C(@U) provided some (complicated) condition on @U is satisfied (certain simple geometric conditions (on @U) can assure that this holds). More general geometry – but still a very specific equation. Recall that in fact we are interested in (homogeneous/inhomogeneous) Lu = 0, Lu = f (elliptic) n in U ⊆ R or ut − Lu = 0, ut − Lu = f (parabolic) in U × [0;T ] or utt − Lu = 0, utt − Lu = f (hyperbolic) in U × [0;T ] with n n X X Lu = aij(x)uxixj + bi(x)uxi + c(x)u(x) i;j=1 i=1 and (maybe) conditions on aij; bj; c. Hence, in PDE 2, we shall concentrate on methods to existence of solutions – mostly (only...) illustrated on elliptic linear 2nd order equations Lu = f. Possibly we also discuss parabolic/hyperbolic equations. Learning techniques, methods, and ideas that can often be applied also for other equations – different order, and more or less nonlinear. Two main ideas (1) Extend the concept of a “solution” (from “classical solutions”, as in PDE 1) (2) Use some Functional Analysis. Today (and next times), we will start by saying something (more or less vague) about these two ideas: “why & how”. Depending on where/with whom you did PDE 1, you might know some of this. There is no hope to solve “every” PDE by finding a solution. Therefore, we need something more systematic/general, which enters Functional Analysis. Functional Analysis (linear!) is the study of (1) linear (infinite dimensional) spaces, with a topology (i.e. notion of convergence/approxi- mation): Banach spaces, Hilbert spaces, Fréchet-spaces, locally convex topological vector spaces. (a) In general (i.e. all Banach spaces) (b) Specific examples (i.e. Lp(Ω); `p). (2) Linear maps (mostly continuous linear maps) between such spaces: T : X −! Y . The idea of using Functional Analysis is to reformulate the question “Does a solution to F (:::) = 0 (PDE) exist?” as “Does the map F : X −! Y vanish somewhere?” m n m n Note that the study of f : R −! R, f : R −! R (1) (nonlinear) and A: R −! R (2) (linear) in (1) is Analysis I-III and (2) is Linear Algebra. This is also motivated by questions about solutions to equations (so is “all” of abstract algebra). Hence, the “goal” is to reformulate questions in PDE via FA. Nevertheless, this is not an FA-course! We will need 4 certain tools which should be known from FA 1. If need be, we can do some in the Tutorials. We need to fix appropriate vector spaces of functions (“function spaces”). A natural choice is Ck(U) or Ck(U) with supremum-norm (sup-norm). kfk = P kDαfk . Ck(U) jαj6k L1(U) We get a Banach space (i.e. complete). However, the relevant operators (relevant for PDE) T : X −! Y turn out not to be “well-behaved” in this setup (maybe more precise later). One possible replacement is Hölder-spaces. n Definition 0.1. Let U ⊆ R open, 0 < γ 6 1. γ (i) If u: U −! R and there is a constant C > 0 such that ju(x) − u(y)j 6 Cjx − yj for every x; y 2 U then u is Hölder-continuous with exponent γ. (ii) If u: U −! R is bounded and continuous, we let kukC(U) := supx2U ju(x)j and if u is also Hölder-continuous with exponent γ, we let ju(x) − u(y)j [u]C0,γ (U) := sup γ x;y2U jx − yj x6=y (the γ’th Hölder semi-norm) and kukC0,γ (U) := kukC(U) + [u]C0,γ (U) (the γ’th Hölder- norm of u). k,γ (iii) The Hölder-space C (U), k 2 N0; γ 2 (0; 1] is defined as k,γ k C (U) := fu: U −! R j u 2 C (U); kukCk,γ (U) < 1g where the norm k · kCk,γ (U) is X α X α kukCk,γ (U) := kD ukC(U) + [D u]C0,γ (U jαj6k jαj=k k,γ Theorem 0.2. (C (U); k · kCk,γ (U)) is a Banach space. Furthermore, for many problems in PDE (especially elliptic), these spaces are “good” for studying PDE’s (i.e. the operators T : X −! Y one needs to study have “good” properties). For example one can prove “Elliptic Schauder-estimates”. However, this is often very, very hard work – this is not easy to explain, but basically, the reason is the sup-norm is hard to deal/work with – norms given by integrals are much, much “better”. So the idea is to take Ck(U) – or Ck,γ(U) – and use an integral norm – say, Lp-norm (p 2 [1; 1)): P α P α kD uk p instead of kD uk . The problem is: With these norms, we jαj6k L (Ω) jαj6k C(U) do not get a complete space (i.e. Ck(U), or Ck,γ(U) with these norms are not Banach spaces). The solution could be to abstractly “complete” the space (always possible!) but this is not a good solution if we have no concrete representation (of added objects). It turns out that one does have one. Q is not complete – R is – and “added” objects are still numbers. Riemann integrable functions on [0; 1] – R[0; 1] – with L1-norm – are not complete. But L1[0; 1] is complete – the “added” objects are still “functions”. This leads to the definition of “weak derivatives” and “Sobolev spaces” (next chapter). Note that this leads to proofs of existence of solutions to PDE’s which might be one of the “new added functions” – called “weak solutions” – and not a “true” classical solution. Secondly (often relatively independent) is afterwards to study regularity: Prove that this weak solution is in fact a true Ck-function (and that solves equation as a classical solution). I.e. Sobolev spaces are a tool to prove existence of some kind of solutions (“generalised solutions”), but the real interest is in classical solutions (always) regularity studies.
Recommended publications
  • Sobolev Spaces, Theory and Applications
    Sobolev spaces, theory and applications Piotr Haj lasz1 Introduction These are the notes that I prepared for the participants of the Summer School in Mathematics in Jyv¨askyl¨a,August, 1998. I thank Pekka Koskela for his kind invitation. This is the second summer course that I delivere in Finland. Last August I delivered a similar course entitled Sobolev spaces and calculus of variations in Helsinki. The subject was similar, so it was not posible to avoid overlapping. However, the overlapping is little. I estimate it as 25%. While preparing the notes I used partially the notes that I prepared for the previous course. Moreover Lectures 9 and 10 are based on the text of my joint work with Pekka Koskela [33]. The notes probably will not cover all the material presented during the course and at the some time not all the material written here will be presented during the School. This is however, not so bad: if some of the results presented on lectures will go beyond the notes, then there will be some reasons to listen the course and at the same time if some of the results will be explained in more details in notes, then it might be worth to look at them. The notes were prepared in hurry and so there are many bugs and they are not complete. Some of the sections and theorems are unfinished. At the end of the notes I enclosed some references together with comments. This section was also prepared in hurry and so probably many of the authors who contributed to the subject were not mentioned.
    [Show full text]
  • Notes on Partial Differential Equations John K. Hunter
    Notes on Partial Differential Equations John K. Hunter Department of Mathematics, University of California at Davis Contents Chapter 1. Preliminaries 1 1.1. Euclidean space 1 1.2. Spaces of continuous functions 1 1.3. H¨olderspaces 2 1.4. Lp spaces 3 1.5. Compactness 6 1.6. Averages 7 1.7. Convolutions 7 1.8. Derivatives and multi-index notation 8 1.9. Mollifiers 10 1.10. Boundaries of open sets 12 1.11. Change of variables 16 1.12. Divergence theorem 16 Chapter 2. Laplace's equation 19 2.1. Mean value theorem 20 2.2. Derivative estimates and analyticity 23 2.3. Maximum principle 26 2.4. Harnack's inequality 31 2.5. Green's identities 32 2.6. Fundamental solution 33 2.7. The Newtonian potential 34 2.8. Singular integral operators 43 Chapter 3. Sobolev spaces 47 3.1. Weak derivatives 47 3.2. Examples 47 3.3. Distributions 50 3.4. Properties of weak derivatives 53 3.5. Sobolev spaces 56 3.6. Approximation of Sobolev functions 57 3.7. Sobolev embedding: p < n 57 3.8. Sobolev embedding: p > n 66 3.9. Boundary values of Sobolev functions 69 3.10. Compactness results 71 3.11. Sobolev functions on Ω ⊂ Rn 73 3.A. Lipschitz functions 75 3.B. Absolutely continuous functions 76 3.C. Functions of bounded variation 78 3.D. Borel measures on R 80 v vi CONTENTS 3.E. Radon measures on R 82 3.F. Lebesgue-Stieltjes measures 83 3.G. Integration 84 3.H. Summary 86 Chapter 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Elliptic Pdes
    viii CHAPTER 4 Elliptic PDEs One of the main advantages of extending the class of solutions of a PDE from classical solutions with continuous derivatives to weak solutions with weak deriva- tives is that it is easier to prove the existence of weak solutions. Having estab- lished the existence of weak solutions, one may then study their properties, such as uniqueness and regularity, and perhaps prove under appropriate assumptions that the weak solutions are, in fact, classical solutions. There is often considerable freedom in how one defines a weak solution of a PDE; for example, the function space to which a solution is required to belong is not given a priori by the PDE itself. Typically, we look for a weak formulation that reduces to the classical formulation under appropriate smoothness assumptions and which is amenable to a mathematical analysis; the notion of solution and the spaces to which solutions belong are dictated by the available estimates and analysis. 4.1. Weak formulation of the Dirichlet problem Let us consider the Dirichlet problem for the Laplacian with homogeneous boundary conditions on a bounded domain Ω in Rn, (4.1) −∆u = f in Ω, (4.2) u =0 on ∂Ω. First, suppose that the boundary of Ω is smooth and u,f : Ω → R are smooth functions. Multiplying (4.1) by a test function φ, integrating the result over Ω, and using the divergence theorem, we get ∞ (4.3) Du · Dφ dx = fφ dx for all φ ∈ Cc (Ω). ZΩ ZΩ The boundary terms vanish because φ = 0 on the boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • Elliptic Pdes
    CHAPTER 4 Elliptic PDEs One of the main advantages of extending the class of solutions of a PDE from classical solutions with continuous derivatives to weak solutions with weak deriva- tives is that it is easier to prove the existence of weak solutions. Having estab- lished the existence of weak solutions, one may then study their properties, such as uniqueness and regularity, and perhaps prove under appropriate assumptions that the weak solutions are, in fact, classical solutions. There is often considerable freedom in how one defines a weak solution of a PDE; for example, the function space to which a solution is required to belong is not given a priori by the PDE itself. Typically, we look for a weak formulation that reduces to the classical formulation under appropriate smoothness assumptions and which is amenable to a mathematical analysis; the notion of solution and the spaces to which solutions belong are dictated by the available estimates and analysis. 4.1. Weak formulation of the Dirichlet problem Let us consider the Dirichlet problem for the Laplacian with homogeneous boundary conditions on a bounded domain Ω in Rn, (4.1) −∆u = f in Ω; (4.2) u = 0 on @Ω: First, suppose that the boundary of Ω is smooth and u; f : Ω ! R are smooth functions. Multiplying (4.1) by a test function φ, integrating the result over Ω, and using the divergence theorem, we get Z Z 1 (4.3) Du · Dφ dx = fφ dx for all φ 2 Cc (Ω): Ω Ω The boundary terms vanish because φ = 0 on the boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture Notes for MATH 592A
    Lecture Notes for MATH 592A Vladislav Panferov February 25, 2008 1. Introduction As a motivation for developing the theory let’s consider the following boundary-value problem, u′′ + u = f(x) x Ω=(0, 1) − ∈ u(0) = 0, u(1) = 0, where f is a given (smooth) function. We know that the solution is unique, sat- isfies the stability estimate following from the maximum principle, and it can be expressed explicitly through Green’s function. However, there is another way “to say something about the solution”, quite independent of what we’ve done before. Let’s multuply the differential equation by u and integrate by parts. We get x=1 1 1 u′ u + (u′ 2 + u2) dx = f u dx. − x=0 0 0 h i Z Z The boundary terms vanish because of the boundary conditions. We introduce the following notations 1 1 u 2 = u2 dx (thenorm), and (f,u)= f udx (the inner product). k k Z0 Z0 Then the integral identity above can be written in the short form as u′ 2 + u 2 =(f,u). k k k k Now we notice the following inequality (f,u) 6 f u . (Cauchy-Schwarz) | | k kk k This may be familiar from linear algebra. For a quick proof notice that f + λu 2 = f 2 +2λ(f,u)+ λ2 u 2 0 k k k k k k ≥ 1 for any λ. This expression is a quadratic function in λ which has a minimum for λ = (f,u)/ u 2. Using this value of λ and rearranging the terms we get − k k (f,u)2 6 f 2 u 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to Sobolev Spaces
    Introduction to Sobolev Spaces Lecture Notes MM692 2018-2 Joa Weber UNICAMP December 23, 2018 Contents 1 Introduction1 1.1 Notation and conventions......................2 2 Lp-spaces5 2.1 Borel and Lebesgue measure space on Rn .............5 2.2 Definition...............................8 2.3 Basic properties............................ 11 3 Convolution 13 3.1 Convolution of functions....................... 13 3.2 Convolution of equivalence classes................. 15 3.3 Local Mollification.......................... 16 3.3.1 Locally integrable functions................. 16 3.3.2 Continuous functions..................... 17 3.4 Applications.............................. 18 4 Sobolev spaces 19 4.1 Weak derivatives of locally integrable functions.......... 19 1 4.1.1 The mother of all Sobolev spaces Lloc ........... 19 4.1.2 Examples........................... 20 4.1.3 ACL characterization.................... 21 4.1.4 Weak and partial derivatives................ 22 4.1.5 Approximation characterization............... 23 4.1.6 Bounded weakly differentiable means Lipschitz...... 24 4.1.7 Leibniz or product rule................... 24 4.1.8 Chain rule and change of coordinates............ 25 4.1.9 Equivalence classes of locally integrable functions..... 27 4.2 Definition and basic properties................... 27 4.2.1 The Sobolev spaces W k;p .................. 27 4.2.2 Difference quotient characterization of W 1;p ........ 29 k;p 4.2.3 The compact support Sobolev spaces W0 ........ 30 k;p 4.2.4 The local Sobolev spaces Wloc ............... 30 4.2.5 How the spaces relate.................... 31 4.2.6 Basic properties { products and coordinate change.... 31 i ii CONTENTS 5 Approximation and extension 33 5.1 Approximation............................ 33 5.1.1 Local approximation { any domain............. 33 5.1.2 Global approximation on bounded domains.......
    [Show full text]
  • Delta Functions and Distributions
    When functions have no value(s): Delta functions and distributions Steven G. Johnson, MIT course 18.303 notes Created October 2010, updated March 8, 2017. Abstract x = 0. That is, one would like the function δ(x) = 0 for all x 6= 0, but with R δ(x)dx = 1 for any in- These notes give a brief introduction to the mo- tegration region that includes x = 0; this concept tivations, concepts, and properties of distributions, is called a “Dirac delta function” or simply a “delta which generalize the notion of functions f(x) to al- function.” δ(x) is usually the simplest right-hand- low derivatives of discontinuities, “delta” functions, side for which to solve differential equations, yielding and other nice things. This generalization is in- a Green’s function. It is also the simplest way to creasingly important the more you work with linear consider physical effects that are concentrated within PDEs, as we do in 18.303. For example, Green’s func- very small volumes or times, for which you don’t ac- tions are extremely cumbersome if one does not al- tually want to worry about the microscopic details low delta functions. Moreover, solving PDEs with in this volume—for example, think of the concepts of functions that are not classically differentiable is of a “point charge,” a “point mass,” a force plucking a great practical importance (e.g. a plucked string with string at “one point,” a “kick” that “suddenly” imparts a triangle shape is not twice differentiable, making some momentum to an object, and so on.
    [Show full text]
  • BELTRAMI FLOWS a Thesis Submitted to the Kent State University Honors
    BELTRAMI FLOWS Athesissubmittedtothe Kent State University Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for Departmental Honors by Alexander Margetis May, 2018 Thesis written by Alexander Margetis Approved by , Advisor , Chair, Department of Mathematics Accepted by , Dean, Honors College ii Table of Contents Acknowledgments.................................. iv 1 Introduction .................................. 1 2 Sobolev-Spaces & the Lax-Milgram theorem ............. 2 2.0.1 HilbertspaceandtheLax-Milgramtheorem . 3 2.0.2 Dirichlet Problem . 5 2.0.3 NeumannProblem ........................ 8 3 Constructing a solution of (1.1) ...................... 11 3.1 The bilinear form . 12 3.2 A solution of (3.3) results in a solution of (3.1) . 16 References . 19 iii Acknowledgments I would like to thank my research advisor, Dr. Benjamin Jaye for everything he has done. His support and advice in this thesis and everything else has been invaluable. I would also like to thank everyone on my defense committee. I know you did not have to take that time out of your busy schedule. iv Chapter 1 Introduction ABeltramiflowinthree-dimensionalspaceisanincompressible(divergencefree) vector field that is everywhere parallel to its curl. That is, B = curl(B)= r⇥ λB for some function λ.Theseflowsarisenaturallyinmanyphysicalproblems. In astrophysics and in plasma fusion Beltrami fields are known as force-free fields. They describe the equilibrium of perfectly conducting pressure-less plasma in the presence of a strong magnetic field. In fluid mechanics, Beltrami flows arise as steady states of the 3D Euler equations. Numerical evidence suggests that in certain regimes turbulent flows organize into a coherent hierarchy of weakly interacting superimposed approximate Beltrami flows [PYOSL]. Given the importance of Beltrami fields, there are several approaches to proving existence of solutions, for instance use the calculus of variations [LA], and use fixed point arguments [BA].
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture Notes on Mathematical Theory of Finite Elements
    Leszek F. Demkowicz MATHEMATICAL THEORY OF FINITE ELEMENTS Oden Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences The University of Texas at Austin Austin, TX. May 2020 Preface This monograph is based on my personal lecture notes for the graduate course on Mathematical Theory of Finite Elements (EM394H) that I have been teaching at ICES (now the Oden Institute), at the University of Texas at Austin, in the years 2005-2019. The class has been offered in two versions. The first version is devoted to a study of the energy spaces corresponding to the exact grad-curl-div sequence. The class is rather involved mathematically, and I taught it only every 3-4 years, see [27] for the corresponding lecture notes. The second, more popular version is covered in the presented notes. The primal focus of my lectures has been on the concept of discrete stability and variational problems set up in the energy spaces forming the exact sequence: H1-, H(curl)-, H(div)-, and L2-spaces. From the ap- plication point of view, discussions are wrapped around the classical model problems: diffusion-convection- reaction, elasticity (static and dynamic), linear acoustics, and Maxwell equations. I do not cover transient problems, i.e., all discussed wave propagation problems are formulated in the frequency domain. In the exposition, I follow the historical path and my own personal path of learning the theory. We start with coer- cive problems for which the stability can be taken for granted, and the convergence analysis reduces to the interpolation error estimation. I cover H1−;H(curl)−;H(div)−, and L2-conforming finite elements and construct commuting interpolation operators.
    [Show full text]
  • A Information Can Be Either Provided by a Measurement Or Derived from Theory
    Advanced numerical methods for Inverse problems in evolutionary PDEs Michal Galba supervisor: Marián Slodi£ka Thesis submitted to Ghent University in candidature for the academic degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Mathematics Ghent University Faculty of Engineering and Architecture Academic year Department of Mathematical Analysis 2016-2017 Research Group for Numerical Analysis and Mathematical Modelling (NaM 2) Mathematics knows no races or geographic boundaries; for mathematics, the cultural world is one country. David Hilbert Acknowledgements This dissertation is the result of my research activities that I have concluded within the past four years under the supervision of Professor Marián Slodička, to whom I would like to express my immense gratitude. He has always shared his knowledge with me and oered his helping hand even if the problems I struggled with were of non-mathematical nature. At the same time, I would like to thank my previous teachers, especially to Professor Jozef Kačur and Mgr. Dagmar Krajčiová, whose passion for numbers taught me to love the beauty of mathematics. My research has been supported by Belgian Science Policy project IAP P7/02. I intend to express my appreciation for the essential nancial support. I am also very grateful for the exceptional people I have met. Among them Jaroslav Chovan and Katarína Šišková, who have always been the best friends and colleagues, Karel Van Bockstal who thoroughly read my dissertation and friendly suggested some modications, and Vladimír Vrábeľ who helped me to nd a way when I was lost, especially during my rst year at Ghent University. I am obliged to my family for all that they have done for me.
    [Show full text]
  • Maximum Principles for Weak Solutions of Degenerate Elliptic Equations with a Uniformly Elliptic Direction ∗ Dario D
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector J. Differential Equations 247 (2009) 1993–2026 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Differential Equations www.elsevier.com/locate/jde Maximum principles for weak solutions of degenerate elliptic equations with a uniformly elliptic direction ∗ Dario D. Monticelli 1, Kevin R. Payne ,2 Dipartimento di Matematica “F. Enriques”, Università degli Studi di Milano, Italy article info abstract Article history: For second order linear equations and inequalities which are de- Received 28 May 2008 generate elliptic but which possess a uniformly elliptic direction, Revised 27 June 2009 we formulate and prove weak maximum principles which are com- Availableonline25July2009 patible with a solvability theory in suitably weighted versions of L2-based Sobolev spaces. The operators are not necessarily in di- MSC: 35J10 vergence form, have terms of lower order, and have low regular- 35B30 ity assumptions on the coefficients. The needed weighted Sobolev 35D05 spaces are, in general, anisotropic spaces defined by a non-negative 35P05 continuous matrix weight. As preparation, we prove a Poincaré 46E35 inequality with respect to such matrix weights and analyze the ele- mentary properties of the weighted spaces. Comparisons to known Keywords: results and examples of operators which are elliptic away from a Degenerate elliptic operators hyperplane of arbitrary codimension are given. Finally, in the im- Weak solutions portant special case of operators whose principal part is of Grushin Maximum principles type, we apply these results to obtain some spectral theory results Principal eigenvalue such as the existence of a principal eigenvalue.
    [Show full text]
  • Part I, Chapter 2 Weak Derivatives and Sobolev Spaces 2.1 Differentiation
    Part I, Chapter 2 Weak derivatives and Sobolev spaces We investigate in this chapter the notion of differentiation for Lebesgue inte- grable functions. We introduce an extension of the classical concept of deriva- tive and partial derivative which is called weak derivative. This notion will be used throughout the book. It is particularly useful when one tries to differen- tiate finite element functions that are continuous and piecewise polynomial. In that case one does not need to bother about the points where the classical derivative is multivalued to define the weak derivative. We also introduce the concept of Sobolev spaces. These spaces are useful to study the well-posedness of partial differential equations and their approximation using finite elements. 2.1 Differentiation We study here the concept of differentiation for Lebesgue integrable functions. 2.1.1 Lebesgue Points Theorem 2.1 (Lebesgue points). Let f L1(D). Let B(x,h) be the ball of radius h> 0 centered at x D. The following∈ holds true for a.e. x D: ∈ ∈ 1 lim f(y) f(x) dy =0. (2.1) h 0 B(x,h) | − | ↓ | | ZB(x,h) Points x D where (2.1) holds true are called Lebesgue points of f. ∈ Proof. See, e.g., Rudin [162, Thm. 7.6]. This result says that for a.e. x D, the averages of f( ) f(x) are small over small balls centered at x∈, i.e., f does not oscillate| · too− much| in the neighborhood of x. Notice that if the function f is continuous at x, then x is a Lebesgue point of f (recall that a continuous function is uniformly continuous over compact sets).
    [Show full text]