Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 3

# Math 565, Fall 2017

## Assignment 7, due Friday, December 8 (Last day of class)

Hand in solutions to the following problems:

1. (Weak Interpolation) Suppose 0 < q0 < q1 ≤ ∞ and that f is in weak-Lqj for both j = 0, 1.
Prove that f ∈ Lq (Rn ) for every q0 < q < q1 with
1 1 1
q − q1

q q q
kf kq ≤ + [f ]λq0 [f ]1−λ
q1 , λ= 1 1 .
q − q0 q1 − q q0 − q1

q
In the special case q1 = ∞, consider [f ]q1 = kf k∞ and q1 −q = 0.
Hint: When q1 < ∞, write
Z ∞ Z B Z ∞
kf kqq =q df (α)α q−1
dα = q df (α)α q−1
dα + q df (α)αq−1 dα,
0 0 B

compute the right hand side, then optimize the choice of B. When q1 = ∞, simply take
B = kf k∞ .

2. (Conservation laws for linear and semilinear equations) Suppose u(t, x), v(t, x) : R × Rn → C
are solutions to the semilinear wave and Schrödinger equations with κ > 1

## ∂t2 u − ∆u = µ|u|κ−1 u, i∂t v + ∆v = µ|v|κ−1 v,

where µ ∈ R (typical choices here are µ = 0, ±1, and the µ = 0 case corresponds to the linear
homogeneous equation considered before). Let
Z
1 1 µ
Ew [u](t) = |∂t u(t, x)|2 + |∇x u(t, x)|2 − |u(t, x)|κ+1 dx,
n 2 2 κ + 1
ZR
1 µ
Es [v](t) = |∇x v(t, x)|2 + |v(t, x)|κ+1 dx,
n
RZ 2 κ + 1
1
Ms [v](t) = |v(t, x)|2 dx,
2 Rn

(naturally the subscripts here denote quantities for the nonlinear wave and Schrödinger equa-
tions respectively). Show that formally, Ew [u](t), Es [v](t), Ms [v](t) are all conserved quanti-
ties, that is, their derivative in t vanishes for all t ∈ R. Your solution can be formal in that
you may take for granted any needed differentiability and decay at infinity of the derivatives.
Note: Even though you accomplished something similar using the Fourier transform in an
earlier assignment, it is inadvisable to use it here. One word of caution is that u is complex
valued so ∂t |u|2 = 2Re(∂t uu) = 2Re(u∂t u). To differentiate expressions such as |u(t, x)|κ+1 ,
κ+1
it is advisable to view this as (|u(t, x)|2 ) 2 and then apply the chain rule

3. (The wave group on R × Rn ). Recall that we define functions of the Laplacian f (−∆) via the
formula f (−∆)u = F−1 (f (|ξ|2 )u). In class we saw that the solution v to the homogeneous
Schrödinger equation (i∂t +∆)v = 0 with initial data v(0, ·) = h takes the form v(t, ·) = eit∆ h.
It is not hard to check using the Fourier transform that eit∆ ◦ eis∆ = ei(t+s)∆ .
For wave equations the analogous idea is to instead consider a matrix of operators
" √ √ #
sin(t −∆)
cos(t −∆) √
U(t) := √ √ √
−∆
− −∆ sin(t −∆) cos(t −∆)

On your own, use trigonometric identities to check that U(t) ◦ U(s) = U(t + s). Alternatively,
it follows by uniqueness of solutions to the wave equation, given the exercises below.
In what follows, suppose f, g ∈ S(Rn ) and that ∂tk F (t, ·) ∈ S(Rn ) for all k ≥ 0, t ∈ R and
that u(t, x) : R × Rn → C is the unique solution to

(u(0, ·), ∂t u(0, ·)) = (f, g), (∂t2 − ∆)u(t, x) = F (t, x).

## (a) Show that formally  

0 1
U̇(t) = U(t).
∆ 0
Then give some indication of how the Fourier transform makes this rigorous.
(b) (Duhamel’s principle for the wave equation) Prove that u satisfies
Z t
(u(t, ·), ∂t u(t, ·)) = U(t)(f, g) + U(t − s) (0, F (s, ·)) ds.

(0.1)
0

## (c) Prove the energy inequality for u: Let

Z 1
2
2 2
E[u](t) = |∂t u(t, x)| + |∇x u(t, x)| dx
Rn

(the result of taking square root of 2Ew [u](t) with µ = 0 as defined above). Prove that
Z t
E[u](t) ≤ E[u](0) + kF (s, ·)k2 ds.
0

Hint: There are a couple of ways to do this. One is to compute an inequality for
d 2
dt (E[u](t)) . Another is to view energy conservation for the wave equation as in Assign-
ment 3, Exercise 3b, as the statement
∇x U1 (t)(f, g), U2 (t)(f, g) = k(∇x f, g)k2 ,

2

then apply Duhamel’s principle. Here Uj (t)(f, g), j = 1, 2 denotes the first and second
components of U(t)(f, g).
(d) Suppose s > 1 − n2 . Show that
 1
2
k∂t u(t, ·)k2Ḣ s−1 (Rn ) + ku(t, ·)k2Ḣ s (Rn )
 1 Z t
2 2 2
≤ kgkḢ s−1 (Rn ) + kf kḢ s (Rn ) + kF (s, ·)kḢ s−1 ds
0

## with equality when F is the zero function.

Hint: Begin by observing that the s = 1 case follows from 3c or Exercise 3b in As-
signment 3 when F ≡ 0. Then use the trick from class, applying this case to ũ(t, ·) =
s−1
(−∆) 2 u(t, ·), where this function of the Laplacian acts in the x variables only.

2
4. (Contractions for nonlinear Schrödinger equations) Let I = (−T, T ) ⊂ R be an interval, with
0 < T ≤ ∞. Suppose X, Y are Banach spaces of functions defined on (t, x) ∈ I × Rn and let
Br denote the closed ball {v ∈ X : kvkX ≤ r}. Let Z be a Banach space such that eit∆ h ∈ X
for all h ∈ Z. Define the Duhamel operator D by
Z t
ei(t−s)∆ H(s, ·) (x) ds.

(DH)(t, x) =
0
Suppose that D is well defined as a linear operator Y → X satisfying kDHkX ≤ C0 kHkY .
Suppose further that G : X → Y is a nonlinear mapping such that G(0) = 0 and
1
kG(v1 ) − G(v2 )kY ≤ kv1 − v2 kX .
2C0
for every v1 , v2 ∈ Br . Finally, suppose h ∈ Z satisfies keit∆ hkX ≤ r/2, that is eit∆ h ∈ Br/2 .
Use the contraction mapping fixed point theorem on Br to show that there exists a unique
solution to the integral equation
Z t
it∆
ei(t−s)∆ G(v)(s, ·) (x) ds.

v(t, x) = (e h)(x) − i (0.2)
0
Conclude that there exists a solution to the nonlinear Schrödinger equation
(i∂t + ∆)v(t, x) = G(v)(t, x), v(0, ·) = h ∈ Z .
Show that moreover if vj , j = 1, 2 solve (0.2) with initial data satisfying eit∆ hj ∈ Br/2 ,
j = 1, 2, then kv1 − v2 kX ≤ 2keit∆ h1 − eit∆ h2 kX .
Note: As suggested in Exercise 2, common choices of interest for G are G(v) = ±|v|κ−1 v, and
in particular the case κ = 2 is of significant physical interest (the cubic nonlinear Schrödinger
equation). For the cubic equation in [0, T ) × R2 , we are building up to consider cases such as
X = L4 ([0, T ) × R2 ), Y = L4/3 ([0, T ) × R2 ), and Z = L2 (R3 ).
1. State and prove a contraction principle for the nonlinear wave equation (∂t2 − ∆)u = G(u)
similar to the one for the Schrödinger equation in Exercise 4. In particular, if you replace
eit∆ by U(t) there, and use Duhamel’s principle (0.1) with F = G(u), then the result holds
mutatis mutandis.
1 1
2. (Young’s inequality in weak spaces) Let 1 ≤ p < ∞ and 1 < q, r < ∞ satisfy q +1= p + 1r .
Prove that there exist a constant C depending only on p, q, r such that
[f ∗ g]q ≤ C[g]r kf kp .
Note: Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev Theorem of fractional integration can be considered as a
special case of Young’s inequality in weak spaces since the condition 1q = p1 − αn there means
that Tα is convolution against the weak-Lr function g(x) = |x|−n/r .
3. (Elementary Marcinkiewicz Interpolation) Suppose 1 ≤ p ≤ ∞ and 1 ≤ q0 < q1 ≤ ∞.
Suppose T is a linear operator which maps Lp functions to weak-Lqj for j = 0, 1 with
[T f ]qj ≤ Mj kf kp j = 0, 1,
where we treat [T f ]q1 = kT f k∞ when q1 = ∞. Use Exercise 1 above to show that for any
q0 < q < q1 , there exist a constant M such that kT f kq ≤ M kf kp , that is, T is bounded from
Lp to Lq .