arXiv:1711.00759v1 [math.

DG] 2 Nov 2017

A REFLECTION PRINCIPLE FOR MINIMAL SURFACES IN

SMOOTH THREE MANIFOLDS

RICARDO SA EARP AND ERIC TOUBIANA

Abstract. We prove a reflection principle for minimal surfaces in smooth three

manifolds.

1. Introduction
In this paper we prove a reflection principle for minimal surfaces in a smooth setting.
A form of the reflection principle says that if a minimal surface in R3 contains a segment
of straight line L, then the minimal surface is invariant by reflection in L see [11]. Such
a form was generalized by Leung [14, Thm. 1] when the ambient manifold is analytic.
We are interested in the knowledge of a reflection principle across a geodesic line in the
boundary of a minimal surface. We assume the surface is contained in a smooth non
necessarily analytic manifold. We assume also that the geodesic line admits a reflection
in the ambient space (Definition 2.1).
Fisrt, we emphasize that the reflection principle in the Euclidean space with only the
usual hypothesis that the minimal surface contains a segment L of a straight line in its
(topological) boundary, is not established. In fact, even with the strongest assumption
that the surface is an embedded disk up to the boundary segment L, as far as we know,
there is no proof of the reflection principle in the Euclidean space.
Of course, when we impose some additional conditions a proof can be done. For
example, when we know that the minimal immersion is conformal in the interior and
continuous up to the boundary segment L or when the surface with its boundary L is
a minimal graph, continuous up to L.
In fact, the reflection principle for conformal minimal immersions in R3 is a gener-
alization of the well-known Schwarz reflection principle for harmonic functions. The
proof uses the fact that the coordinates of a conformal minimal immersion in Euclidean
space are harmonic, then the Schwarz principle for harmonic functions is applied. See
an elegant deduction in [4, Thm. 1, Sec. 4.8] or in [18, Lemma 7.3].

Date: November 3, 2017.

Key words and phrases. Smooth Riemannian manifolds, minimal surfaces, geodesics of reflection,
reflection principle, regularity of solutions of quasilinear elliptic equations up to the boundary.
Mathematics subject classification: 53C42, 49Q05, 35J25, 35J60.
The first and second authors were partially supported by CNPq of Brasil.
1
2 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

When the ambient is the sphere S3 , Lawson produced a proof following the same
idea of the proof in the Euclidean case (which, in fact, holds in the three-dimensional
hyperbolic space). The precise statement is as follows: When the conformal minimal
immersion in the sphere S3 contains an arc of geodesic L of the ambient on its boundary
and has C 2 regularity up to this arc, then the surface can be extended analytically by
reflection in L [13, Prop. 3.1]. The proof makes use of a Lichtenstein theorem, see [10,
Thm. 1].
The reflection principle has been used by several authors (including the present authors)
in the theory of minimal surfaces in homogeneous three-dimensional spaces, see for
example Rosenberg [19], Abresh-Rosenberg [1].
On the other hand, the authors have established the reflection principle for minimal
vertical graphs, when the ambient space is the product space Hn R, where Hn is the
n-dimensional hyperbolic space, see [21, Lemma 3.6]. The proof also works in Rn R.
Furthermore the authors use the reflection principle to construct Scherk type minimal
hypersurface in Hn R [21, Theorem 5.10].

In the statement of our Main Theorem below we use the notion of a reflection I about
a geodesic in a C Riemannian manifold (M, g). We denote by U M the domain
of definition of I , see Definition 2.1.
Theorem 1.1 (Main Theorem). Let (M, g) be a C Riemannian three manifold. Let
M be an open geodesic arc which admits a reflection I .
Let S U be an embedded minimal surface. We assume that that S is a C 1 surface
with boundary.
Then the reflection of S about gives rise to a C continuation of S across . That
is, S I (S) is a smooth immersed minimal surface which is embedded near .

Theorem 1.2 (Main Theorem bis). Let M be a C Riemannian three manifold and
let M be an open geodesic arc which admits a reflection I .
Let S U be an embedded minimal surface such that S is a C 0 surface with
boundary. We assume that S is the graph of a C 0 function x3 = f (x1 , x2 ) for some
local coordinates (x1 , x2 , x3 ) of M.
We assume also that f restricted to the projection of S is a C 2 function with bounded
gradient.
Then the reflection of S about gives rise to a C continuation of S across . That
is, S I (S) is a smooth immersed minimal surface which is a graph near .

We point out that a crucial tool in the proof of the above theorems is a Holder gradient
regularity up to the boundary for solutions of Dirichlet problems for quasilinear elliptic
equations, see Theorems 2.4, 2.7 and Remark 2.8.
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 3

Acknowledgements. The second author wishes to thank the Departamento de Matematica da PUC-
Rio for their kind hospitality.

2. Analytic and geometric background

2.1. Geodesic arc of reflection.
Throughout this paper, M is a connected C manifold of dimension three, equipped
with a C metric g.

Definition 2.1. Let (M, g) be a complete C Riemannian three manifold.

We say that an open geodesic arc M admits a reflection if there exist an oriented
open subset U M containing , and a non trivial isometry I : (U , g) (U , g)
such that
I is orientation preserving,
I (p) = p for any p ,
I I = IdU .

Next we describe some relevant examples.

Example 2.2. (1) We denote by H2 the hyperbolic plane and gH its hyperbolic
metric.
Let M = H2 R provided with the product metric g := gH + dt2 .
The natural reflections about vertical or horizontal geodesic lines in H2 R
satisfy the conditions of Definition 2.1. We observe that there is no other
geodesic lines of reflection.
(2) For any 6 0 we denote by M2 () the complete and simply connected surface
with constant intrinsic curvature .
We set M = M(, ), 6 0, > 0, the simply connected and complete
homogeneous three manifold, see for example [3]. More precisely, M(, ) has
a four dimensional isometry group, it is a fibration over M2 (), the canonical
projection M(, ) M2 () is a Riemannian submersion and the bundle
curvature is .
We treat separately the cases < 0 and = 0.
(a) We suppose < 0, (in particular for = 1 we have M(1, ) =
g 2 (R, )).
PSL
We choose the disk model forM2 (), that is the open disk of radius 1/ .
We denote : M2 () := D(1/ ) provided with the metric
2
ds2 = 2 (x, y)(dx2 + dy 2), where (x, y) = .
1 + (x2 + y 2 )
4 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Then we have M(, ) = D(1/ ) R provided with the metric
 2 2 x 2
2 2 2 y
g = (dx + dy ) + dx + dy + dt


2
2 2 2
= (dx + dy ) + 2 ydx xdy + dt .

The isometries of (M(, ), g) are given by (setting z = x + iy)

2 f
(1) F (z, t) = (f (z), t +arg (z) + c)
z

where f is a positive isometry of (D(1/ , ds2 ), and
2 g
(2) G(z, t) = (g(z), t arg (z) + c),
z

where g is a negative isometry of (D(1/ ), ds2 ), and c R. Observe
that any isometry is orientation preserving.
In particular F (z, t) = (z, t) is an isometry. Set L0 := {(0, t), t R}.
Observe that each point of L0 is a fixed point for F . Therefore L0 is a
geodesic line. Since F F = Id, F is a reflection about L0 .
Now let z0 D(1/ ) be any point. Let h be a positive isometry of
D(1/ ) such that h(z0 ) = 0. We set H(z, t) = (h(z), t + 2 arg h z
(z))
and Lz0 := {(z0 , t), t R}. Note that for any p Lz0 we have H(p) L0 .
Therefore setting Iz0 := H 1 F H we get for any p Lz0



Iz0 (p) = H 1 F H(p) = H 1 H(p) = p.

We conclude as before that Lz0 is a geodesic line and that Iz0 is a reflection
about Lz0 .

Now we set Dy : {(0, y, 0), 1/ < y < 1/ } D(1/ ) {0}.
We consider the isometry G(z) = (z, t). Observe that G(p) = p for any
p Dy . Therefore Dy is a geodesic line and, since G G = Id, we get that
G is a reflection about Dy .
For any [0, ) we set D := {(sei , 0), 1/ < s < 1/ }, thus
Dy = D/2 . Observe that for any R the map R (z, t) := (ei z, t) is
1
an isometry. Since R/2 (D ) = Dy , we get that the map G := R/2
G R/2 fixes any point of D . Thus D is a geodesic line and G is a
reflection about D .
(b) We suppose now = 0, therefore we have that M(0, ) = Nil3 ( ) is the
Heisenberg group and it can be view as R3 with the metric
g = dx2 + dy 2 + ( (ydx xdy) + dt)2 .
The isometries of (R3 , g ) are (setting z = x + iy)
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 5

(3) F (z, t) = (ei z + a + ib, t + Im(a ib)ei z + c)

and
(4) G(z, t) = (ei z + a + ib, t Im(a + ib)ei z + c)
where a, b, c, R are any real numbers. Observe again that any isometry
is orientation preserving.
Arguing as in the case < 0, it can be shown that the Euclidean lines
Lz0 := {(z0 , t), t R} and D := {(sei , 0), s R} are geodesic lines
which admit a reflection, for any z0 = (x0 , y0) R2 and any [0, ).
(3) At last it is easy to construct many smooth and non analytic three manifolds
having geodesic lines of reflection. For example when the ambient manifold
is a Riemannian product M 2 R where M 2 is a Riemannian surface with
symmetries.

2.2. Boundary regularity.

Definition 2.3. Let Rn , n > 2, be a domain and let Q be a second order
quasilinear operator of the following form
n
X
Q(u) := aij (x, u, Du)Dij u + b(x, u, Du),
i,j=1

where x , and the functions aij , b are defined and C 1 on R Rn .

We assume that (aij (x, z, p))16i,j6n is a symmetric matrix for any (x, z, p) RRn .
We denote by (x, z, p), respectively (x, z, p), the minimum eigenvalue, respectively
the maximum eigenvalue, of the symmetric matrix (aij (x, z, p)).
We say that Q is an elliptic operator, if 0 < (x, z, p) for any (x, z, p) R Rn .
Assume now that is a bounded domain. Then, by continuity, for any K > 0, there
exist constant numbers 0 < K 6 K and K > 0 such that
0 < K 6 (x, z, p) 6 (x, z, p) 6 K ,
 
|aij |+|Dpk aij |+|Dz aij |+|Dxk aij |+|b| (x, z, p) 6 K ,

for any x and (z, p) R Rn satisfying |z| + |p| 6 K.

A crucial ingredient in the proof of the Main Theorem is an uniform global Holder
estimates for the gradient for a solution of a general second order elliptic quasilin-
ear equation. This can be seen as an extension of the well-know Ladyzhenskaya and
Uraltseva fundamental global a priori Holder estimates [12, Chapter IV, Theorem 6.3].
6 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Theorem 2.4. Let Rn , n > 2, be a bounded domain with C 2 boundary, and let Q
be a quasilinear operator as above with aij , b C 1 ( R Rn ).
Let u C 0 () C 2 () be a function satisfying
(
Q(u) = 0 on ,
u = on ,

where C 2 ().
Assume there is K > 0 such that |u| + |Du| 6 K on .
Then, there exists a constant (0, 1), such that u C 1, ().
More precisely, u C 1 () and there exist positive numbers C = C(n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () , )
and = (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () ) (0, 1) such that for any x1 , x2 we have
(5) |Du(x1 ) Du(x2 )| 6 C |x1 x2 | ,
b := K + ||C 1 () .
where K
Remark 2.5. We observe that the assumption that u has bounded gradient in Theorem
2.4 is crucial. Indeed, consider in R3 a vertical catenoid C. Assume that the neck of C
stays in the horizontal plane {x3 = 0}. Thus the part of C staying between the planes
{x3 = 0} and {x3 = 1} is the graph of a function u defined on an annulus in the plane
{x3 = 0}. The function u satisfies the minimal equation on this annulus of R2 and the
gradient of u is not bounded near the inner circle of the annulus. Therefore u has not
extension C 1, up to the boundary.

Proof. We present Trudingers proof, omitting the derivation of certain assertions, but
giving further details for the sake of clarity.
We set ub := u . Thus |b u| + |Db
u| 6 K b in , u
b = 0 on and u
b satisfies
n
X
aij (x, u
b b
b, Du)D b + bb(x, u
ij u b, Db
u) = 0
i,j=1

with
aij (x, u
b b := aij (x, u
b, Du) b + , Db
u + D)
n
X
bb(x, u
b, Db
u) := b(x, u
b + , Db
u + D) + aij (x, u
b b
b, Du)Dij .
i,j=1

We consider the linear operator on

X
L() = ij (x)Dij
i,j
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 7

for C 2 (), where ij (x) := b

aij (x, u u(x)). Observe that (ij (x)) is a bounded
b(x), Db
and continuous symmetric matrix on . Furthermore we have 0 < Kb 6 (x) 6 Kb
for any x , where (x) is any eigenvalue of the matrix (ij (x)).
Observe also that ub satisfies L(bu) = f (x), where f (x) := bb(x, u
b(x), Dbu(x)).
Next we state without proofs some structure facts that we use in the sequel.
p
For any vector d = (d1 , . . . , dk ) Rk , k N , we set |d| = d21 + + d2k .
Let p be any boundary point. Since is a compact embedded hypersurface of
Rn with C 2 regularity, we deduce first that there exists a constant A > 0 such that for
any p and for any normal curvature kn (p) of at p, we have |kn (p)|6 A.
We deduce also that there exists a positive constant R < 1, depending only on the
geometry of , and not on p, such that
BR (p) is connected, where BR (p) is the ball centered at p with radius R.
We choose orthonormal coordinates (y1 , , yn ) in Rn such that p = 0 in those
coordinates and ( y 1 ,. . . , yn1

) is a basis of the tangent space of at p.
Then a neighborhood of p in is the graph of a C 2 function h defined in a
neighborhood of 0 in {yn = 0} containing the disk {|y|< R, yn = 0}. Moreover
h satisfies
h(0) = 0 and Dh(0) = 0,
2h
|Dh|< 1/4 and | yi y j
|6 8A on the whole domain where h is defined.
n
The map F : BR (p) R defined by F (y) := y (0, . . . , 0, h(y1, . . . , yn1)) is
a C 2 diffeomorphism onto its image, satisfying F (p) = 0 and
F ( BR (p)) {yn > 0},
F ( BR (p)) {yn = 0},
|DFi |6 2, where F = (F1 , . . . , Fn ),
|Dqs Fi |6 8A, q, s = 1, . . . , n,
for any positive r 6 R, setting Br := {y Rn , |y|< r} and Br+ = Br
+ +
{yn > 0}, we have Br/2 F ( Br (p)) and Br/4 (p) F 1 (Br/2 ).
+
b F 1 is defined on BR/2
Thus, the function w := u and satisfies the linear elliptic
equation
X
(6) e
L(w) := eij (y)Dij w = fe(y) in BR/2
+
,
i,j
+
w = 0 on BR/2 {yn = 0}.
where
P
eij (y) := q,s qs (F 1 (y)) DsFj Dq Fi ,

e P P 
f (y) := i (F (y))Dqs Fi Di w + f (F 1 (y)).
qs
q,s
1
8 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Observe that we have (e ij ) = DF (ij ) t DF . Taking into account the definition of F , a

b
straightforward computation shows that we have K 6 e(y) 6 4Kb for any eigenvalue
2
ij (y)) and that |w|+|Dw|6 (1 + 2 n)K.
e(y) of the matrix (e b
Since u has bounded gradient we observe that the function fe is bounded on BR/2 +
.
w(y) + K
b
We consider the function v(y) := on BR/2 and we set := 48n .
yn b
K

Since u has bounded gradient we deduce from the proof of [9, Theorem 1.2.16] that there
exist real numbers C1 = C1 (n, K, ||C 1 () , Kb , Kb ) > 0 and = (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb )
(0, 1), such that for any positive r 6 4 R2 and for any x, y Br+ we have
C1

(7) |v(x) v(y)| 6 r sup |Dw| + R sup | e| .
f
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

+
Observe that in [9, Theorem 1.2.16] it is assumed that w C 1 (BR/2 R/2 ) where
R/2 := BR/2 {yn = 0}. Nevertheless, what is required in the proof is that |Dw| is
+
bounded on BR/2 .
It follows from Proposition 4.1 in the Appendix that the function v extends to a
+
continuous function on BR/16 R/16 . Moreover we obtain the boundary Holder
estimates of Krylov: for any x , y R/64 we have

C1

(8) |v(x ) v(y )| 6
sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y | .
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Thus the function w admits normal derivative along R/32 . Using Formula (8) it can
+
be shown that v is Holder continuous on BR/256 R/256 , see Proposition 4.2 in the
Appendix.
More precisely there exist positive numbers C2 = C2 (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb , R) and
+
= (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb ) 6 < 1, such that for any x, y BR/256 R/256 we
have
C2

(9) |v(x) v(y)| 6 sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y| .
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

We know from [12, Chapter IV, Theorem 6.1] and [6, Theorem 13.6] that we have
the Ladyzhenskaya and Uraltseva a priori interior estimates for the function u
b on
. Namely, there exist positive constants C3 , < 1 such that for any subdomain

, we have for any x1 , x2
(10) |Db u(x2 )|6 C3 |x1 x2 | dist( , )
u(x1 ) Db
with C3 = C3 (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () , diam() and = (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () ). Note
that the dependence of ||C 2() arises from the definition of bb.
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 9

Now we extend the function w by odd reflection to the whole ball BR/2 setting for any
y = (y , yn ) BR/2 (
w(y) if yn > 0
w(y) =
w(y , yn ) if yn < 0
Observe that w is a continuous function and that w C 2 (BR/2 \R/2 ). Consequently, v
extends also to a continuous function ev on the whole ball BR/16 by setting e v(y , yn ) :=

w(y , yn )
for any y BR/16 \ R/16 and ve(y , 0) := v(y , 0) for any (y , 0) R/16 .
yn
From (9) we get that for any x, y BR/256 we have
C2

(11) |e v (y)| 6 2 sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y| .
v(x) e
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

We set R1 := R/256. Using the a priori interior Holder estimates (10) for the gradient
b and the Holder estimates (11) for e
of u v, Trudinger derived in the proof of [24, Theorem
4] that for any x, y BR1 /4 we have
|w(x + y) + w(x y) 2w(x)|6 C4 |y|1+ ,
where := /(1 + ) and C4 = C4 (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () , ).
Now consider a C function on the whole Rn such that


(y) = 1 if |x|6 R1 /32
0 < (x) < 1 if R1 /32 < |x|< 3R1 /64

(y) = 0 if |x|> 3R /64.
1

Then w is a continuous function defined on Rn . It can be shown that there exists a

constant C5 = C5 (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2() , ) such that for any x, y Rn we have
|w(x + y) + w(x y) 2w(x)|6 C5 |y|1+ .
We deduce from [23, Chapter V, section 4, Propositions 8 and 9] that w C 1, (Rn ).
More precisely, w C 1 (Rn ) and there exists a universal constant > 0 such that for
any x, y Rn we have
|Dw(x) Dw(y)|6 C5 |x y| .
Therefore, w C 1, (BR+1 /32 R1 /32 ) and for any x, y BR+1 /32 R1 /32 we have
|Dw(x) Dw(y)|6 C5 |x y| .
Recall that ub = w F on BR1 /64 (p) and F ( BR1 /64 (p)) BR+1 /32 . Therefore for
any p , the restriction of u b at BR1 /64 belongs to C 1, ( BR1 /64 (p)).
More precisely there exist positive constants C6 = C6 (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () , ), and
= (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2() ) < 1, but which do not depend on p , such that for
any x1 , x2 BR1 /64 (p) we have
(12) |Db u(x2 )| 6 C6 |x1 x2 | .
u(x1 ) Db
10 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Thus ub C 1 ().
Finally, since
Sk is compact, there exist a finite number of points p1 , . . . , pk such
that i=1 BR1 /128 (pi ). S 
Sk k
We set 0 := \ i=1 BR1 /128 (pi ), thus = 0 i=1 BR1 /64 (pi ) .

Considering the interior estimates (10) for = 0 , the boundary Holder estimates (12)
at each subset BR1 /64 (pi ), i = 1, . . . , k, and a ball chain argument, we conclude that
Dbu C () where := min(, ). More precisely u b C 1 () and there exist positive
constants C7 (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 () , ), and (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2() ) < 1, such that for
any x1 , x2 we have
|Db u(x2 )| 6 C7 |x1 x2 | .
u(x1 ) Db
Since C 2 (), there exists a positive constant C8 = C8 (||C 2 () , , ) such that
|D(x1 ) D(x2 )| 6 C8 |x1 x2 | ,
for any x1 , x2 .
Finally, since u = ub + , setting C := C7 + C8 , we have for any x1 , x2
|Du(x1 ) Du(x2 )| 6 C |x1 x2 | ,
where C = C(n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2() , ). Thus we obtain that u C 1, () as desired.


We infer from the proof of Theorem 2.4 the following local version.
Theorem 2.6. Let Rn , n > 2, be a bounded domain with C 2 boundary, and let Q
be a quasilinear operator as in Definition 2.3, with aij , b C 1 ( R Rn ).
Let T be a nontrivial C 2 domain of the boundary of . Let 0 be a
subdomain such that 0 T .
Let u C 0 ( T ) C 2 () be a function satisfying
(
Q(u) = 0 on ,
u = on T,
where C 2 ( T ).
Assume there is K > 0 such that |u| + |Du| 6 K on .
Then, there exists a constant (0, 1), such that u C 1, (0 )
More precisely, u C 1 (0 ) and there exist positive numbers C = C(n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2(0 ) , 0 )
and = (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2 (0 ) ) such that for any x1 , x2 0 we have
|Du(x1 ) Du(x2 )|6 C|x1 x2 | ,
b := K + || 1 .
where K C (0 )

Elliptic regularity leads to the following.

 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 11

Theorem 2.7. Let Rn , n > 2, be a bounded domain with C k+2 boundary, k > 0,
and let Q be a quasilinear operator as above with aij , b C k+1 ( R Rn )
Let u C 0 () C 2 () be a function satisfying
(
Q(u) = 0 on ,
u = on ,

where C k+2 ().

Assume there exists a constant K > 0 such that |u| + |Du| 6 K on .
Then, there exists a constant (0, 1), such that u C k+1, (), where
b := K + || 1 .
= (n, K, Kb , Kb , ||C 2() ) and K C ()

Proof. The proof proceeds by induction on k > 0.

For k = 0 this is Theorem 2.4.
The rest of the proof is a straightforward consequence of Schauder theory, see [6,
Theorem 6.19]. 
Remark 2.8. There is a local version of Theorem 2.7. Namely let T be a
nontrivial domain of the boundary of . Let us assume that C k+2( T ).
Let 0 be a subdomain such that 0 T .
Then we have u C k+1, (0 ).

3. Proof of the Main Theorem

3.1. Minimal equation.
We first give the minimal equation for a graph x3 = u(x1 , x2 ) in some arbitrary local
coordinates (x1 , x2 , x3 ) of M, following Colding-Minicozzi [2, Equation (7.21)] and
Gulliver [7, Section 8].
Let u be a C function defined on a domain contained in the x1 , x2 plane of coor-
dinates. Let S M be the graph of u.
u
We use the the usual convention for the partial derivative of a C 2 function u: ui = x i
,
2u
uij = xi xj , i, j = 1, 2. We denote gij C , 1 6 i, j 6 3, the coefficients of the
Riemannian metric g in the local coordinates (x1 , x2 , x3 ) and we call G the 3 3
matrix (gij ). Up to restrict the local coordinates, we can assume that the matrix G is
bounded.
Let mij C

be the Christoffel symbols of the Riemannian metric g, 1 6 i, j, m 6 3.

We set i := xi , i = 1, 2, 3. Then, Xi := i + ui 3 , i = 1, 2, is the adapted frame field
generating the tangent plane of S.
Let hij be the coefficients of the metric induced on S, that is hij = g(Xi ; Xj ),
1 6 i, j 6 P2.
Let N := i Ni i be the unit normal field on S with N3 > 0. We set W := 1/g(N; 3 ).
We have
ui
g(N; i ) = , i = 1, 2.
W
12 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Note that the coordinates of N are given by

N1 u1
N2 = 1 G1 u2 .
N3 W 1
Since g(N, N) = 1 we obtain
2
X 2
X
W 2 = g 33 2 ui g i3 + ui uj g ij ,
i=1 i,j=1

where G1 = (g ij ) is the inverse matrix of (gij ).

The mean curvature H of S is given by
2
X
2H = hij g(N; Xi Xj ),
i,j=1

where (hij ) is the inverse matrix of (hij ) and is the covariant derivative on (M, g).
We define

2 h
X

F (x, u, u1, u2 , u11 , u12, u22 ) := hij uij + 3ij + ui 33j + uj 33i + ui uj 333
i,j=1
2
X
i
um hij m m m m
ij + ui 3j + uj i3 + ui uj 33 .
m=1

Then by a computation it follows that the minimal equation (H = 0) reads as

(13) F (x, u, u1, u2 , u11 , u12 , u22 ) = 0.
Since hij = g(Xi ; Xj ), (hij ) is a symmetric and positive matrix. This implies that (hij )
is also a symmetric and positive matrix and, therefore, the equation (13) is an elliptic
PDE. Furthermore, if u has bounded gradient then the equation (13) is uniformly
elliptic. This means that there exist two positive constants 6 such that for any
x and for any eigenvalue (x) of the matrix (hij (x)), we have 0 < 6 (x) 6 .
Remark 3.1. Let M be an analytic three manifold, and let S M be a minimal
surface with an analytic open arc on its boundary. We assume that S is a C 1
surface with boundary.
Then for any p there exists a neighborhood U M of p in M such that U S is a
graph x3 = u(x1 , x2 ) in some local coordinates (x1 , x2 , x3 ) at p, of an analytic function
u defined on a domain {x3 = 0}, containing an analytic arc 0 on its boundary.
Furthermore 0 is the projection of and u C 1 ( 0 ).
We infer from Theorem 2.7 that u C k (0 ) for any k N, and then u C 2, (0 )
for any (0, 1). We conclude from [16, Theorem 5.8.6] that u is analytic on 0 and
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 13

extends analytically across 0 . Therefore, S can be extended analytically across as

a minimal surface.

3.2. Proof of Theorem 1.1.

Let p be any point on the geodesic arc . We are going to construct convenient local
coordinates (x1 , x2 , x3 ) of M near p .
First we choose a parametrization by arc lenght, x1 (, ), of a open subarc of :
: (, ) , such that b
b (0) = p.
Recall that by assumption, S is an embedded C 1 surface with boundary.
Let p be the unit inner tangent vector of S at p, orthogonal to . We denote by
the parallel vector field along such that (p) = p . By abuse of notation we denote
(x1 ) = (b (x1 )).
We set 
:= F (x1 , x2 ) := expb(x1 ) x2 (x1 ), x1 , x2 (, ) .
Clearly, if > 0 is small enough, then M is a properly embedded C -surface.
Furthermore, and S share the same tangent plane at p.
Let be a C unit normal vector field along . Thus if > 0 is small enough the map
(, ) (, ) (, ) M
G(x1 , x2 , x3 ) := expF (x1 ,x2 ) x3 ,

is a C proper embedding. Therefore G provides local coordinates of M near p, and
we have G(0, 0, 0) = p. We set

U := (x1 , x2 , x3 ), x1 , x2 , x3 (, ) R3 .
We define
V := G(U ),
thus V is an open neighborhood of p in M.
Observe that by construction we have



I G(x1 , x2 , 0) = G(x1 , x2 , 0) and I G(x1 , 0, x3 ) = G(x1 , 0, x3 )
for any x1 , x2 , x3 (, ). Therefore by a continuity argument we get that


I G(x1 , x2 , x3 ) = G(x1 , x2 , x3 )
for any x1 , x2 , x3 (, ).
Now we establish that S can be locally extended near p by reflection across as a
minimal surface.
By abuse of notations we identify V with U and a point G(x1 , x2 , x3 ) with (x1 , x2 , x3 ).
Therefore is identified with (, ) (, ) {0}. Observe that the reflection I
reads as
I (x1 , x2 , x3 ) = (x1 , x2 , x3 ),
for any (x1 , x2 , x3 ) U .
14 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Note that by construction
we have Tp = Tp (S ). Therefore if > 0 is small enough

then G1 (S ) V is the graph x3 = u(x1 , x2 ) of a C 1 function u defined on
+ := {(x1 , x2 ), x1 (, ), x2 [0, )}, using the identification V U .
Observe that by assumption u is C 2 on (, )(0, ) and satisfies the minimal equation
(13).
Since by assumption u is C 1 on + , we get that u has bounded gradient. Hence from
Remark 2.8 we obtain that u is C k on + for any k N.
We define a function v on := {(x1 , x2 ), x1 (, ), x2 (, 0]} setting
v(x1 , x2 ) := u(x1 , x2 ).
By construction u(x1 , 0) = v(x1 , 0) = 0 for any x1 and ui (0, 0) = 0 = vi (0, 0), i = 1, 2.
Then we define a function w on , identified with {(x1 , x2 ), x1 , x2 (, )}, setting
(
u(x1 , x2 ) if (x1 , x2 ) +
w(x1 , x2 ) :=
v(x1 , x2 ) if (x1 , x2 )
We have that v is C 2 on and w is C 1 on .
In order to check that w is C 2 on it is enough to prove that the partial derivatives up
to the second order of u and v agree along the arc + = {(x1 , 0), x1 (, )}.
For any (x1 , x2 ) we have
v1 (x1 , x2 ) = u1 (x1 , x2 ), v2 (x1 , x2 ) = u2 (x1 , x2 )
and
v11 (x1 , x2 ) = u11 (x1 , x2 ), v12 (x1 , x2 ) = u12 (x1 , x2 ), v22 (x1 , x2 ) = u22 (x1 , x2 ).
Note also that uij (0, 0) = 0, i, j = 1, 2.
Therefore we deduce from the previous identities that along the geodesic line {x2 = 0}
we have
F (x, u, u1, u2 , u11 , u12 , u22 ) F (x, v, v1 , v2 , v11 , v12 , v22 ) = h22 (u22 (x1 , 0) v22 (x1 , 0)).
Since u and v satisfy the minimal equation (13) we infer
u22 (x1 , 0) = v22 (x1 , 0) = 0
for any x1 (, ). Therefore uij = vij along the arc + .
Thus we deduce that the function w is C 2 on the whole domain , satisfying the
minimal equation (13). Thereby, the graph of w, denoted by S, e is a minimal surface.
e
Of course, observe that, by construction, S is invariant by reflection across .
We obtain therefore a minimal continuation, S, e of S across , embedded near . This
accomplishes the proof of the theorem. 

Proof of the Main Theorem bis. By assumption, f is defined on a domain in the

coordinates plane {x3 = 0}. Moreover the boundary contains a C open arc 0
such that is the graph of f over 0 .
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 15

Since, by assumption, f has bounded gradient, the proof follows readily using the
regularity Theorem 2.4 as in the proof of the Main Theorem 1.1. 

At last, we discuss several general remarks about the geometry of minimal surfaces.

Remark 3.2. We use the notations of the Main Theorem 1.2 bis.
Assume that the coordinates system (x1 , x2 , x3 ) containing the minimal surface S has
the following property: For certain (small enough) domain contained in the coor-
dinates plane {x3 = 0}, we can uniquely solve the Dirichlet Problem for the minimal
equation given any (small enough) continuous data on .
Then we can drop the assumption that f has bounded gradient in the Main Theorem
bis 1.2. For example this property occurs in R3 , H2 R (see [21, Lemma 3.6]), and
Nil3 (see [17, Theorem 4.1 and Corollary 4.3]).
Remark 3.3. Let us consider the particular case where the ambient space M is an-
alytic. Let S M be an embedded minimal surface such that S is a C 1 surface
with boundary, where is an open geodesic arc of M which admits a reflection.
Since is an analytic arc, S is analytic and can be extended as an analytic surface
Sb across , see Remark 3.1
Now we can apply either Theorem 1 in [14] or the Theorem 1.1 to infer that in a
neighborhood of any point of , the extended surface Sb is invariant by reflection across
.
Remark 3.4. Let (M, g) be an analytic Riemannian manifold and let be a Jordan
curve. We suppose that contains an open geodesic arc which admits a reflection.
Let S be an area minimizing solution of the Plateau problem, if any.
We set
B := {(x, y) R2 , x2 + y 2 < 1} and B := {(x, y) R2 , x2 + y 2 6 1}.
Let 0 B be an open arc such that X(0 ) = .
By assumption, there exists a continuous map X : B S M such that
X is C 2 on B,
g(Xx ; Xx ) = g(Xy ; Xy ) and g(Xx ; Xy ) = 0.
We know from Gulliver [7, Theorem 8.2 (and the discussion after)] that X : B M
is a conformal immersion. We know also from Lewy [15, Theorem] that X can be
extended across 0 as a minimal immersion possibly with isolated branch points along
0 , see also [5, Theorem 4-(iii), Section 2.3]. Furthermore we conclude with the Remark
following Gulliver-Lesley [8, Corollary] that X has no branch point on 0 . Therefore S
can be extended as an immersed minimal surface Sb in a neighborhood of .
Now by applying either Theorem 1 in [14] or the Theorem 1.1 we get that in a neigh-
borhood of , the extended surface Sb is invariant by reflection across .
16 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

The above remarks has been applied in homogeneous three spaces by many authors to
construct complete minimal surfaces. We write now a typical example in H2 R, see
[20, Corollary 4.1].
Example 3.5. Let T H2 be a geodesic triangle with sides A, B and C. We assign
constant value a, b, c respectively on interior(A), interior(B), interior(C).
We solve the corresponding Dirichlet problem for the vertical minimal equation as in
[20, Corollary 4.1]. We call f the solution and S the graph of f . Thus, S is a minimal
surface of H2 R.
It is a matter of fact that the boundary of S is constituted of the union of three
horizontal segments and three vertical segments. It turns out that S is the unique
minimal surface having as boundary. Therefore S is the solution of the Plateau
problem for the boundary data .
Henceforth, by Remark 3.4, we can extend S as a minimal surface by reflection across
any horizontal or vertical lines of .
We refer to [20, Example 4.4] for a simple construction of a complete minimal surface
of H2 R, by solving a certain Dirichlet problem and using reflections about horizontal
geodesics. The readers are also referred to [22].

4. Appendix
We recall some notations. p
For any vector d = (d1 , . . . , dk ) Rk , k N , we set |d| = d21 + + d2k .
We identify Rn1 with {x Rn , xn = 0}, that is with Rn1 {0}. Therefore we
identify any y Rn1 with (y , 0) Rn .
We note also for any x Rn : x = (x , xn ) where x Rn1 and xn R.
For any R > 0 and for any y Rn1 , we set
BR+ := BR {xn > 0} = {x Rn , |x| < R, xn > 0}
R := BR {xn = 0} = {x Rn , |x| < R, xn = 0}
BR+ (y ) := {x = (x , xn ) Rn , |x y | < R, xn > 0}
R (y ) := BR+ (y ) {xn = 0}.
+ +
We recall that w C 2 (BR/2 ) C 0 (BR/2 R/2 ) satisfies the linear elliptic equation (6).
w(y) +
Furthermore w 0 on R/2 and the function v(y) := defined on BR/2 satisfies
yn
Kb
the estimate (7). We set := 48n b
, see the proof of Theorem 2.4.
K

Proposition 4.1. The function v can be extended to a continuous function on

+
BR/16 R/16 . Moreover, for any x , y R/64 we have
C1

|v(x ) v(y )| 6 sup |Dw| + R sup | e| |x y | ,
f
R B + B+
R/2 R/2
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 17

where C1 > 0 and (0, 1) are the constants given in the inequality (7), that is
C1 := C1 (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb ) and = (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb ).
+
Proof. First observe that for any y = (y , yn ) BR/16 we have

By+n (y ) B +
R (y ) and B + +
R (y ) BR/2 .
4 4 4

Consequently, from the inequality (7) applied to the function w on the half-balls By+n (y )
and BR/4 (y ), we deduce that for any x By+n (y ) we have
C1

(14) |v(x) v(y)| 6 y sup |Dw| + R sup | e| .
f
n
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Let (tk ) be a non increasing sequence of positive real numbers converging to 0. For any
p 6 q N large enough we deduce from (14) (applied to the half-ball Bt+q (y )), that
C1

|v(y , tp ) v(y , tq )| 6
tq sup |Dw| + R sup |fe|
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Therefore (v(y , tk )) is a Cauchy sequence. Consequently the sequence (v(y , tk )) con-

verges to some real number, momentarily denoted by h(y ). Moreover, the above
inequality shows also that the limit h(y ) does not depend on the positive sequence (tk )
converging to 0.
+
Now let (xk ) = (xk , xk,n ) be a sequence in BR/16 converging to (y , 0). We set
+
k := |xk (y , 0)|. Since xk B2 k
(y ), we deduce from (14) that for k large enough
we have
|v(xk ) h(y )| 6 |v(xk ) v(y , 2k )| + |v(y , 2k ) h(y )|
C1

6 (2k ) sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| + |v(y , 2k ) h(y )|.
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Therefore we have that v(xk ) h(y ). Thus we can extend v to a continuous function
+
on BR/16 R/16 .
Consider now x , y R/64 . Observe that
+ + +
B|x y | (y ) B R (y ) and BR/4 (y ) BR/2
+
.
4 4

+
Therefore, we get from the inequality (7) that for any z, z B|x
y | (y ) we have

C1

|v(z) v(z )| 6 |x y
| sup |Dw| + R sup | e| .
f
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Now let (xk ) be any sequence in |x y | (y ) converging to x and let (tk ) be a sequence
+
of positive real numbers converging to 0 such that (xk , tk ), (y , tk ) B|x
y | (y ) for any
18 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

k. Therefore, we deduce from the previous inequality that for any k we have
C1

|v(xk , tk ) v(y , tk )| 6 |x y
| sup |Dw| + R sup | e| .
f
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Letting k going to + we get

C1

|v(x ) v(y )| 6 |x y
| sup |Dw| + R sup | e| ,
f
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

as desired. 

For the next result we recall that , K and K b are defined in Theorem 2.4 and that b
K
and Kb are defined in Definition 2.3.
We note also that, since w satisfies the linear elliptic equation (6), the function v(y) =
w(y) +
satisfies on BR/2 the linear elliptic equation
yn
n
X n
X
(15) e0 (v) := yn
L ij
e (y)Dij v + 2 ein (y)Di v = fe(y)

i,j=1 i=1

Proposition 4.2. There exist positive numbers C2 = C2 (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb , R) and
+
= (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb ) 6 < 1, such that for any x, y BR/256 R/256 we
have
C2

(16) |v(x) v(y)| 6
sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y| .
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Proof. We are going to consider successively the cases x, y R/256 , x R/256 ,

+ +
y BR/256 and x, y BR/256 .

Case x, y R/256 .
We identify x = (x , 0) with x and y = (x , 0) with y .
Thanks to the Proposition 4.1 we have
C1

|v(x ) v(y )| 6
sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y | ,
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

+
Case x R/256 and y BR/256 .
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 19

We identify x = (x , 0) with x . Using inequality (14) and Proposition 4.1 we have

|v(x ) v(y)| 6 |v(x ) v(y )| + |v(y ) v(y)|
C1
C1

6 sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y | + yn sup |Dw| + R sup |fe|
R B+ B+ R B+ B+
R/2 R/2 R/2 R/2

C1

62
sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y|.
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

+
Case x, y BR/256 .
We can assume that xn 6 yn .
We are going to consider separately the cases |x y| < yn /4 and |x y| > yn /4.
Assume first that |x y| < yn /4.
Thus we have
+
B|xy| (y) Byn /2 (y) B3yn /5 (y) BR/2 .
Recall that v satisfies the linear elliptic equation (15).
We are going to apply the extension of the Krylov-Safonov Holder estimate done by
Gilbarg and Trudinger, Corollary 9.24 of [6], to the function v with , BR0 and BR (of
Corollary 9.24) substituted respectively by B3yn /5 (y), Byn /2 (y) and B|xy| (y) (that is
R0 = yn /2 and R = |x y|.
Following the notations of [6, e
ij

Section 9.7], the principal part of L0 is given by the
symmetric matrix zn e (z) , z = B3yn /5 (y). The functions bi , i = 1, . . . , n, are
in
given by bi = 2e (therefore |bi | 6 8Kb , see Equation (6)), and c = 0. For any
b
z = B3yn /5 (y) we set 0 (z) = zn K and 0 (z) = 4zn Kb . Thus, for any eigenvalue
2

0 (z) of the symmetric matrix zn eij (z) , we have 0 (z) 6 0 (z) 6 0 (z), see the

discussion after Equation (6). Therefore we can choose = 8 Kbb to achieve
K

0
6 .
0
For any z = B3yn /5 (y) we have
 2    
|b(z)| Kb 2 Kb 2 402
6 n 16 6n .
0 (z) zn Kb Kb yn2
 2 2
40
Therefore we can choose := n Kbb 2 to achieve
yn
K
 2
|b|
6
0
on B3yn /5 (y).
20 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA
 2
K
Thus, in Corollary 9.24 of [6] we have R02 = 400n b
K
b
, since R0 = yn /2. Therefore,
using Corollary 9.24 of [6] we obtain
!
|x y|
(17) |v(x) v(y)| 6 C1 oscByn /2 (y) v + n yn2 sup |fe|
yn Byn /2 (y)

where n is a constant depending only on n, and C1 > 0 and (0, 1) are constant
 2

real numbers depending only on n, and (yn /2)2 = 400n Kbb , that is depending
K

only on n and Kbb .
K
On the other hand we have


oscByn /2 (y) v = oscByn /2 (y) v v(y )
62 sup |v(z) v(y )|
zByn /2 (y)

62 sup |v(z) v(z )| + 2 sup |v(z ) v(y )|,

zByn /2 (y) zByn /2 (y)

where z = (z , zn ).
+
Observe that since y BR/256 we have

yn /2 (y ) R/64 .
Consequently, for any z Byn /2 (y) we deduce from Proposition 4.1
C1

|v(z ) v(y )| 6 sup |Dw| + R sup | e| |z y |
f
R B + B+
R/2 R/2

C1

6
yn sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| .
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Note that for any z Byn /2 (y) we have

Bz+n (z ) B +
R (z ) and B + +
R (z ) BR/2 .
4 4 4

Moreover, by Proposition 4.1 v extends continuously to z . We deduce from the in-

equality (7) that for any z Byn /2 (y) we have
C1

|v(z) v(z )| 6 z sup |Dw| + R sup | e|
f
n
R +
BR/2 +
BR/2
 
3 C1

6 y sup |Dw| + R sup | e| .
f
n
2 R B+ B+
R/2 R/2
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 21

Therefore we obtain
C1

(18) oscByn /2 (y) v 6 5
yn sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| .
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Now we set = min(, ). Since |x y| 6 yn /4 we have

|x y| |x y| yn yn
6 and 6 .
yn yn R R

Therefore we deduce from (17) and (18) that

|x y| C1

|v(x) v(y)| 6 C1
5 yn sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| + n yn2 sup |fe|
yn R +
BR/2 +
BR/2 Byn /2 (y)

C1

6 C1 |x y| 5 sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| + n yn2 sup |fe|
R B+ +
BR/2 Byn /2 (y)
R/2

C1

6 C1 |x y| 5 sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| + n R2 sup |fe| .
R B+ B+ Byn /2 (y)
R/2 R/2

Consequently, setting C1 = C1 5C1 + n R , we obtain

C1  
e| |x y|
|v(x) v(y)| 6 sup |Dw| + R sup | f
R B + B+
R/2 R/2

where C1 = C1 (n, K, ||C 1 () , Kb , Kb , R) > 0 and = (n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb )

(0, 1), 6 .

Assume now that |x y| > yn /4.

Recall that we are also assuming that xn 6 yn .
Observe that

Bx+n (x ) B + +
R (x ) BR/16 and +
BR/8 (x ) BR/2
+
,
4 8

By+n (y ) B + +
R (y ) BR/16 and +
BR/8 (y ) BR/2
+
.
4 8

+
Since v can be extended to a continuous function on BR/16 R/16 we get from the
+
inequality (7) applied successively on the half balls Bxn (x ) and By+n (y )

22 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

C1

|v(x) v(x )| 6 x sup |Dw| + R sup | e|
f
R n B + B+
R/2 R/2

C1

|v(y) v(y )| 6 yn sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| ,
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

Moreover, since x , y R/64 , Proposition 4.1 gives

C1

|v(x ) v(y )| 6 sup |Dw| + R sup | e| |x y | ,
f
R B + B+
R/2 R/2

Therefore, using the above inequalities, xn 6 yn , yn 6 4|x y| and |x y | 6 |x y|,

we get
|v(x) v(y)| 6 |v(x) v(x )| + |v(x ) v(y )| + |v(y ) v(y)|
C1


6 2yn + |x y | sup |Dw| + R sup |fe|
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

C1

6 9 sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y|
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

C1

69
sup |Dw| + R sup |fe| |x y| ,
R B+ B+
R/2 R/2

|xy| |xy|
since R
6 R
.


Setting C2 := max 9C1 , C1 and considering each case, we conclude that for any
+
x, y BR/256 R/256 we have
C2

|v(x) v(y)| 6 sup |Dw| + R sup | e| |x y| .
f
R B + B+
R/2 R/2

By construction, C2 depends on n, K, ||C 1() , Kb , Kb and R, and depends on n, K,

||C 1 () , Kb and Kb , as desired. 

References
[1] U. Abresh, H. Rosenberg. Generalized Hopf differentials, Mat. Contem. 28 (2005), 128.
[2] T. H. Colding, W. P. Minicozzi. A course in minimal surfaces. Graduate Studies in Math-
ematics, 121. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2011.
[3] B. Daniel. Isometric immersions into 3-dimensional homogeneous manifolds. Comment. Math.
Helv. 82 (2007), 87131.
 REFLECTION PRINCIPLE 23

[4] U. Dierkes, S. Hildebrandt, F. Sauvigny. Minimal surfaces Revised and enlarged second
edition. With assistance and contributions by A. Kuster and R. Jakob. Grundlehren der Math-
ematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], 339. Springer,
Heidelberg, 2010.
[5] U. Dierkes, S. Hildebrandt, A. J. Tromba. Regularity of minimal surfaces. Revised and
enlarged second edition. With assistance and contributions by A. Kuster. Grundlehren der Math-
ematischen Wissenschaften [Fundamental Principles of Mathematical Sciences], 340. Springer,
Heidelberg, 2010.
[6] D. Gilbarg, N. S. Trudinger. Elliptic partial differential equations of second order, Reprint
of the 1998 edition. Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 2001.
[7] R. D. Gulliver. Regularity of minimizing surfaces of prescribed mean curvature, Ann. of
Math. (2) 97 (1973), 275305.
[8] R. D. Gulliver, F. D. Lesley. On boundary branch points of minimizing surfaces. Arch.
Rational Mech. Anal. 52 (1973), 2025.
[9] Q. Han. Nonlinear elliptic equations of the second order. Graduate Studies in Mathematics,
171. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2016.
[10] S. Hildebrandt, H. Mosel. On Lichtensteins theorem about globally conformal mappings,
Calc. Var. 23 (2005), 415-424.
[11] D. Hoffman, H. Karcher. Complete embedded minimal surfaces of finite curvature. In:
Geometry V, R. Osserman, Ed. Springer, 1997.
[12] O. A. Ladyzhenskaya, N. N. Uraltseva. Linear and quasilinear elliptic equations. Trans-
lated from the Russian by Scripta Technica, Inc. Translation editor: Leon Ehrenpreis Academic
Press, New York-London 1968.
[13] B. Lawson. Complete minimal surfaces in S 3 , Annals Math. 92 (3) (1973), 335374.
[14] D. Leung. The reflection principle for minimal submanifolds of Riemannian symmetric spaces,
J. Diff Geom. 8(1973).
[15] H. Lewy. On the boundary behavior of minimal surfaces. Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 37,
(1951), 103110.
[16] C. B. Morrey. Multiple integrals in the calculus of variations. Reprint of the 1966 edition.
Classics in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, (2008).
[17] B. Nelli, R. Sa Earp, E. Toubiana. Minimal graphs in Nil3: existence and non-existence
results. Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations 56 (2017), no. 2, Paper No. 27, 21 pp.
[18] R. Osserman. A survey on minimal surfaces, Dover Publications, New York, 1986.
[19] H. Rosenberg. Minimal surfaces in M 2 R. Illin. J. Math. 46 (4) (2002), 11771195 .
[20] R. Sa Earp, E. Toubiana. An asymptotic theorem for minimal surfaces and existence results
for minimal graphs in H2 R, Mathematische Annalen, 342 (2) (2008), 309331.
[21] R. Sa Earp, E. Toubiana. Minimal graphs in Hn R and Rn+1 , Annales de lInstitut Fourier
60 (7) (2010), 23732402.
[22] R. Sa Earp, E. Toubiana. Concentration of total curvature of minimal surfaces in H2 R.
Mathematische Annalen, 369 (3) (2017), 15991621.
[23] E. Stein. Singular integrals and differentiability properties of functions. Princeton University
Press (1970).
[24] N. Trudinger. Boundary value problems for fully nonlinear elliptic equations. Miniconference
on nonlinear analysis (Canberra, 1984), Proc. Centre Math. Anal. Austral. Nat. Univ., 8, Austral.
Nat. Univ., Canberra, (1984), 6583.
24 R. SA EARP AND E. TOUBIANA

Departamento de Matematica
Pontifcia Universidade Catolica do Rio de Janeiro
Rio de Janeiro
22451-900 RJ
Brazil
E-mail address: rsaearp@gmail.com

Institut de Mathematiques de Jussieu - Paris Rive Gauche

Universite Paris Diderot - Paris 7
Equipe Geometrie et Dynamique, UMR 7586
Batiment Sophie Germain
Case 7012
75205 Paris Cedex 13
France
E-mail address: eric.toubiana@imj-prg.fr