Preprint
Article

Brezis-Nirenberg type critical problems on H-type groups

Altmetrics

Downloads

99

Views

29

Comments

0

This version is not peer-reviewed

Submitted:

04 June 2024

Posted:

05 June 2024

You are already at the latest version

Alerts
Abstract
On the H-type group G⊂Rm×Rn, we study the existence of solutions for the Brezis-Nirenberg problem
Keywords: 
Subject: Computer Science and Mathematics  -   Mathematics

1. Introduction and Main Results

In this paper, we study the Brezis-Nirenberg problem on H-type groups G R m × R n
Δ G u = λ u + | u | Q * 2 u in Ω , u = 0 on Ω ,
where Ω G is a smooth bounded subset with C 2 boundary and Δ G is the Kohn Laplacian. Here m 2 is an even number and Q = m + 2 n is the homogeneous dimension of G, Q * = 2 Q Q 2 is the critical exponent in the sense of the L 2 Folland-Stein inequality.
The classical Brezis-Nirenberg problem set on Entire space R n is a model-based problems of the classical Yamabe problem (prescribed curvature problem) related to the Riemann manifolds, see Yamabe [30]. It says that for a Riemannian manifold ( M , g ) , finding a conformal metric g ˜ such that the scalar curvature R g ˜ is a constant. If g ˜ = u 4 m 1 g is a new metric conformal to g, the scalar curvature R g ˜ of g ˜ is given by
R g ˜ = u m + 2 m 2 4 ( m 1 ) m 2 Δ g u + R g u ,
If R g ˜ = μ is a constant, then the problem is equivalent to finding a positive C solution u to the Yamabe equation:
4 ( n 1 ) n 2 Δ g u + R g u = μ u m + 2 m 2 .
This problem has the following nice variational formulation. Consider the constrained variational problem
μ ( M ) = inf M 4 ( m 1 ) m 2 | g u | 2 + R g u 2 d V g : M | u | 2 m m 2 d V g = 1 .
Then the Yamabe problem becomes the following problems:
(a) μ ( M ) depends only on the conformal class of g.
(b) μ ( M ) μ ( S m ) , in which the sphere S m has the standard metric.
(c) If μ ( M ) < μ ( S m ) , then the infimum is attained by a positive solution. Thus the metric g ˜ = u 4 n 1 g has constant scalar curvature μ ( M ) .
Thanks to the contributions of Aubin [1] and Schoen [25], these issues have been completely resolved. The proof of (a) consists of the fundamental observation that problem (3) is conformally invariant. The proof of (b) begins with a thorough understanding of the special case of the sphere S m in R m + 1 :
μ ( S m ) = inf S m 4 ( n 1 ) n 2 | S u | 2 + R g u 2 d V g : S m | u | 2 m m 2 d V g = 1 .
The conformal change of variables given by stereographic projection converts the variational problem on S m to the more familiar problem on R m + 1 :
μ ( R m + 1 ) = inf R m + 1 4 ( n 1 ) n 2 | u | 2 d x : R m + 1 | u | 2 m m 2 d x = 1 .
In other words, by a stereographic projection, μ ( S m ) = μ ( R m ) . While μ ( R m ) is the sharp constant of the Sobolev inequality on R m + 1 :
μ ( R m ) R m | u | 2 m m 2 d x m 2 m R m | u | 2 d x ,
and it is attained by a Talenti bubble.
u ( x ) = ( a + b | x x 0 | 2 ) m 2 2 .
Therefore, (c) can be easily proved by transplanting an approximate extremal function from R m + 1 to a small neighborhood on M.
Actually, when further examining the apparent solution, Trudinger [27] pointed out the problem of lacking compactness. Therefore, Briezs and Nirenberg [4] proposed a detection of the Yamabe equation from an analytical perspective involves constructing model-based problems:
Δ u = λ u + | u | 2 * 2 u in Ω , u = 0 on Ω ,
where Ω R m is a bounded domain and 2 * = 2 m m 2 is the Sobolev critical exponent. This problem has been solved in different domains, see [6,7,13].
As we are aware, similarly to how Riemann manifolds function in Classical Mechanics, the Heisenberg group plays a significant role in Quantum Mechanics due to its noncommutative structure, see [5]. Additionally, the Heisenberg group is considered as a Cauchy-Riemann (call CR short) manifold, intersecting complex analysis, differential geometry, and the theory of partial differential equations, see [10]. On the other hand, since Wells [29] established the CR structure on complex manifold, Chern, Moser [8], Webster [28] and Tanaka[26] found a complete system of analytic invariant for two real analytic real hypersurfaces in complex manifold to be locally equivalent under biholomorphic transformation, one then can define the unique connect form θ of any CR manifold, and hence, the Webster scalar curvature R θ . Therefore, there are far-reaching analogies between conformal and CR geometries, see [20]. The CR-Yamabe problem says that for a CR manifold ( N , θ ) , finding a contact form θ ˜ such that the Webster scalar curvature R θ ˜ is a constant. If θ ˜ = u 4 n 1 θ is a new contact form conformal to θ , the Webster scalar curvature R θ ˜ of θ ˜ is given by
R θ ˜ = u n + 2 n 2 4 ( n 1 ) n 2 Δ θ u + R θ u ,
If R θ ˜ = λ is a constant, then the problem is equivalent to finding a positive C solution u to the CR-Yamabe equation:
4 ( n 1 ) n 2 Δ θ u + R θ u = λ u n + 2 n 2 .
Consider the constrained variational functional
λ ( N ) = inf N ( 4 ( n 1 ) n 2 | θ u | 2 + R θ u 2 ) θ d θ n : N | u | 2 n n 2 θ d θ n = 1 .
Then the CR-Yamabe problem becomes the following problems:
(d) λ ( N ) depends only on the conformal class of θ .
(e) λ ( N ) λ ( S 2 n + 1 ) , in which the sphere S 2 n + 1 has the standard CR structure.
(f) If λ ( N ) < λ ( S 2 n + 1 ) , then the infimum is attained by a positive solution. Thus the metric θ ˜ = u 4 n 1 θ has constant Webster scalar curvature λ ( N ) .
The proof of (d-f) is quite similar to the classical case. By the Cayley transform, the variational problem on S 2 n + 1
λ ( S 2 n + 1 ) = inf S 2 n + 1 4 ( n 1 ) n 2 | θ u | 2 + R θ u 2 θ d θ n : S 2 n + 1 | u | 2 n n 2 θ d θ n = 1
can be transformed into the variational problem on H n
λ ( H n ) = inf H n 4 ( n 1 ) n 2 | H u | 2 θ d θ n : H n | u | 2 n n 2 θ d θ n = 1 .
This relates to the Folland-Stein inequality on H n
λ ( H n ) H n | u | 2 n n 2 θ d θ n n 2 n H n | H u | 2 θ d θ n .
Building on Obata’s proof [24], Jerison and Lee [21] demonstrated the uniqueness of positive optimizers by deriving a Bianchi identity for the CR function that undergoes a conformal transformation. As a model-based problems, Citti [9] also consider the Brezis-Nirenber problem on H n
Δ H u = λ u + | u | Q * 2 u in Ω , u = 0 on Ω ,
where Ω H n is a bounded domain, Q = 2 n + 2 is the homogeneous dimension of H n and Q * = 2 Q Q 2 is the critical exponent of Folland-Stein inequality. Readers can refer [16,18] to the nonlocal case.
In the 1980s, Kaplan [22] introduced an H-type group in connection with hypoellipticity questions, showing similarities with the Heisenberg group but with more intricate properties, see Section 2. Particularly, in paper [22], Kaplan also established the similar Folland-Stein inequality on H-type group G
C G | u | 2 Q Q 2 d g Q 2 2 Q G | G u | 2 d g 1 2 , u W 1 , 2 ( G ) ,
where d g is the Haar measure on G. Following this result, Han and Niu [19] established the corresponding Hardy-Sobolev type inequalities on H-type group. Interested readers can refer to [33] for the Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg inequality, and to [23] for the Stein–Tomas type inequality on H-type group.
For further insights on the H-type group, Garofalo and Vassilev [14,15] presented the Yamabe-type problem concerning this group. Strangely, since Kaplan [22] determined the explicit form of the optimizers for (13), the uniqueness of the optimizers has been a longstanding question. Nearly 20 years later, Garofalo and Vassilev [14,15] provided a definitive answer when the H-type group is an Iwasawa-type group. Recently, Yang [31] eventually proved the uniqueness of the optimizer using a sub-critical approximate methods. However, due to the absence of Cayley transform on the general H-type, proving the the non-degeneracy of the optimizer become challenging. As a result, extending the perturbation result of the Yamabe equation from Iwasawa-type groups (see [32]) to H-type Groups remains unfeasible. This situation prompts us to examine the linear perturbation problem of the critical equation on the bounded domain, that is the Brezis-Nirenberg problem (1) on the H-type group. As we can see, the solution to the Brezis-Nirenberg problem greatly depends on the dimension and topological properties of the domain, as highlighted in [6,7]. Therefore, researching the Brezis-Nirenberg problem on an H-type group with non-homogeneous dimension holds considerable significance. By carefully analyzing and utilizing the variational method, especially the Linking argument, the primary outcome is as follows:
Theorem 1. 
Let Ω be a bounded domain of G, assume that { λ j } are the sequence of eigenvalues of Δ G on Ω with zero Dirichlet boundary data. Then
(i) for all λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) , (1) has a nontrivial solution.
(ii) for all λ ( λ j , λ j + 1 ) , j N , (1) has a nontrivial solution.
Remark 1. 
Let Ω be a star shaped domain, and λ = 0 , then u is a non-negative solution of (1) implies u 0 . This result stems from establishing a significant Pohozaev identity, as shown by Han and Niu [[17], Theorem 3.6]. In the case where Ω is a half-space of H-type groups, Bonfiglioli and Uguzzoni [2] have also derived similar Nonlinear Liouville theorems.
Turing to layout of the paper, in Section 2, we give some preliminaries knowledge on H-type group. For the sake of clarity, we establish the variational frame and make some compactness analysis in Section 3. The total proof has been divided into two cases, one is 0 < λ < λ 1 and another is λ > λ 1 . All of these process are completed in Section 4. Particularly, we prove the first case by a mountain-pass theorem and we prove the second case by a Linking argument.

2. Preliminaries on H-Type Groups

Let’s begin with some basics of Carnot group. Carnot group (in a short C G ) is a stratified, simply connected nilpotent Lie group of step r. Denote by G be Lie algebre of C G . It is known that G = i = 1 r V i satisfying (see e.e. [12])
[ V i , V j ] = V j + 1 , 1 < j < r 1 ; [ V 1 , V r ] = { 0 } .
As a simply connected nipotent group, C G is differential with R N , N = i = 1 r dim V i , via the exponential map exp : G C G . There is a natural family of nonisotropic dilations δ λ : G G for λ > 0 and we define it as follow:
δ λ ( X 1 + X 2 + · · · + X r ) = λ X 1 + λ 2 X 2 + · · · + λ r X r , X j V j , 1 < j < r .
The homogeneous dimension of C G , associated with δ λ , is Q = j = 1 r j dim V j .
An H-type group G is a Carnot group with the following properties (see Kaplan [22]): the Lie algebra G of G is endowed with an inner product · , · such that, if Z is the center of G , then [ Z , Z ] = Z and moreover, for every fixed z Z , the map J z : = Z Z defined by
J z ( v ) , ω = z , [ v , ω ] , ω Z
is an orthogonal map whenever z , z = 1 . Set m = dim Z and n = dim Z . Since G has step two, we can fix on G a system of coordinates ( x , t ) such that the group law on G has the form (see [2])
( x , t ) ( x , t ) = x i + x i , i = 1 , 2 , · · · , m t j + t j + 1 2 x , U ( j ) x , j = 1 , 2 , · · · , n
for suitable skew-symmetric matrices U ( j ) ’s. Note that U ( j ) is also a orthogonal matrix, hence m has to be an even number, see [2]. The vector field in the Lie algebra G that agrees at the origin with x j ( j = 1 , · · · , m ) is given by
X j = x j + 1 2 k = 1 n i = 1 m U i , j ( k ) x i t k
and G is spanned by the left-invariant vector fields X 1 , · · · , X m , T 1 = t 1 , · · · , T n = t n . Furthermore (see [2], Page 200, (A.4)),
[ X i , X j ] = r = 1 n U i , j ( r ) T r , i , j { 1 , 2 , · · · , n } .
The horizontal gradient on G is G = ( X 1 , · · · , X m ) . The sub-Laplacian on G is given by (see [2], Remark A.6.)
Δ G = j = 1 m X j 2 = j = 1 m x j + 1 2 k = 1 n i = 1 m U i , j ( k ) x i t k 2 = Δ x + 1 4 | x | 2 Δ t + k = 1 n x , U k x t k ,
where
Δ x = j = 1 m x j 2 , Δ t = k = 1 n t k 2 .
The Sobolev space W 0 1 , 2 ( G ) is the closure of C 0 ( G ) with respect to the norm
| | u | | W 0 1 , 2 ( G ) = G | G u | 2 d g 1 2 ,
where d g is the Haar measure on G. We remark that the Haar measure on G, induced by the exponential mapping from the Lebesgue measure on G = R N , coincides the Lebesgue measure on R N . Correspondingly, in a bounded domain Ω G , we define the Sobolev space as W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) .
The Folland-Stein inequality on G reads that there exist some constant C such that for each u W 0 1 , p ( G ) (see [11,20,21])
C G | u | p Q Q 2 d g Q 2 2 Q G | G u | 2 d g 1 2 , 1 < p < Q .
More precisely, Yang [31] obtained the sharp constant S m , n = C and obtained the uniqueness of the extremal unction U ( ξ ) . Namely, set
U ( ξ ) = 1 + | x | 2 4 2 + | t | 2 Q 2 4 , ξ = ( x , t ) G ,
U λ , η ( ξ ) = λ Q 2 2 U ( δ λ ( η 1 ξ ) ) , η G ,
it has been shown that [ m ( Q 2 ) 4 ] Q 2 4 U λ , η ( ξ ) satisfies the Yamabe-type equation (see [14,15])
Δ G [ m ( Q 2 ) 4 ] Q 2 4 U λ , η + { [ m ( Q 2 ) 4 ] Q 2 4 U λ , η } Q + 2 Q 2 = 0 ,
or equivalently,
Δ G U λ , η + m ( Q 2 ) 4 U λ , η Q + 2 Q 2 = 0 .
Based on the group law (14), the nonisotropic dilations δ λ on G is
δ λ ( x , t ) = ( λ x , λ 2 x ) .
For ( x , t ) G , the homogeneous norm of ( x , t ) is
ρ ( x , t ) = | x | 4 16 + | t | 2 1 4 .
With this norm ρ , we can define the ball centered at origin with radius R
B R ( 0 ) = { ( x , t ) G : ρ ( x , t ) < R } .

3. Variational Framework

In order to study the problem by variational methods, we introduce the energy functional associated to (1) by
J λ ( u ) = 1 2 Ω | G u | 2 d g λ 2 Ω | u | 2 d g 1 Q * Ω | u | Q * d g , u W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) .
Firstly, we check that the energy functional J λ ( u ) has a mountain structure as λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) .
Lemma 1. 
If λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) , then J λ satisfies the following properties:
(i) There exists α , ρ > 0 such that J λ ( u ) α for | | u | | = ρ .
(ii) There exists e W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) with | | e | | ρ such that J λ ( e ) < 0 .
Proof. (i) By the Poincare inequality and Sobolev embedding inequality, we have
J λ ( u ) 1 2 Ω | G u | 2 d g λ 2 λ 1 Ω | G u | 2 d g 1 Q * | u | Q * Q * 1 2 ( 1 λ λ 1 ) | | u | | 2 1 Q * C 1 | | u | | 2 .
Since λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) , we can chose some α , ρ > 0 such that J λ ( u ) α for | | u | | = ρ .
(ii) For some u 1 W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) { 0 } , we have
J λ 1 ( t u 1 ) = t 2 2 Ω | H u 1 | 2 d g λ t 2 2 Ω | u 1 | 2 d g t Q * Q * Ω | u 1 | Q * d g < 0
for t > 0 large enough. Hence we can take an e : = t 1 u 1 for some t 1 > 0 and (ii) follows. □
Proposition 1. 
If λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) , there exits a ( P S ) sequence { u n } such that J λ ( u n ) c * and J λ ( u n ) 0 in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) at the the minimax level
c * = inf γ Γ inf t [ 0 , 1 ] J λ ( γ ( t ) ) > 0 ,
where
Γ : = { γ C ( [ 0 , 1 ] , W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) ) : γ ( 0 ) = 0 , J λ ( γ ( 1 ) ) < 0 } .
Proof. 
The proposition is a direct conclusion of Lemma 1 and the mountain pass theorem without ( P S ) condition. □
As λ [ λ j , λ j + 1 ) for some j N , we then easily check that J λ satisfies a Link structure. Set { e j } j N L ( Ω ) be the sequence of eigenfunctions corresponding to λ j . We know that this sequence is an orthonormal basis of L 2 ( Ω ) and the orthogonal basis of W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) . We denote
E j + 1 : = { u W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) : u , e i W 0 1 , 2 = 0 , i = 1 , 2 , · · · , j } ,
and denote Y j : = span { e 1 , · · · , e j } by the linear subspace generated by the first j eigenfunctions of Δ G for any j N . Note that Y j is finite dimensional and Y j E j + 1 = W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) , then J λ satisfies the following properties:
Lemma 2. 
If λ [ λ j , λ j + 1 ) for some j N , then
(i) There exists α , ρ > 0 such that for any u E j + 1 with | | u | | = ρ such that J λ ( u ) α .
(ii) J λ ( u ) < 0 for any u Y j .
(iii) Let F be a finite dimensional subspace of W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) . There exists R > ρ such that for any u F with | | u | | R such that J λ ( u ) 0 .
Proof. (i) By the Poincare inequality and Sobolev embedding inequality, for any u E j + 1 { 0 } , we have
J λ ( u ) 1 2 Ω | G u | 2 d g λ 2 λ j + 1 Ω | G u | 2 d g 1 Q * | u | Q * Q * 1 2 ( 1 λ λ j + 1 ) | | u | | 2 1 Q * C 1 | | u | | 2 .
Since λ ( λ j , λ j + 1 ) , we can chose some α , ρ > 0 such that J λ ( u ) α for all u E j + 1 { 0 } with | | u | | = ρ .
(ii) Let u Y j , i.e., u = i = 1 j l i e i , where l i R , i = 1 , · · · , j . Since { e i } i N is an orthonormal basis of L 2 ( Ω ) and W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) , we have
Ω u 2 d g = i = 1 j l i 2 and Ω | G u | 2 d g = i = 1 j | e i | 2 2 .
Then, we get
J λ ( u ) = 1 2 i = 1 j l i 2 ( | e i | 2 2 λ ) 1 Q * Ω | u | Q * d g < 1 2 i = 1 j l i 2 ( λ i λ ) 0 .
(iii) Since all norms on finite dimensional space are equivalent, the non-negativity of λ gives
J λ ( u ) = 1 2 | | u | | 2 λ 2 | u | 2 2 1 Q * | u | Q * Q * 1 2 | | u | | 2 1 Q * | u | Q * Q * 1 2 | | u | | 2 C 1 Q * | | u | | Q *
for some positive constant C 1 . So, J λ as | | u | | + . Hence, there exists R > ρ such that for any u F with | | u | | R it results that J λ ( u ) 0 . □
Similar to Proposition 1, we have the next proposition for λ [ λ j , λ j + 1 ] .
Proposition 2. 
If λ [ λ j , λ j + 1 ] , there exists a ( P S ) sequence { u n } such that J λ ( u n ) c and J λ ( u n ) 0 in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) 1 at the minimax level
c = inf γ Γ max u V J λ ( γ ( u ) ) > 0 ,
where
Γ : = { γ C ( V ¯ , W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) ) : γ = id on V }
and
V = ( B R ¯ Y j ) { r u : r ( 0 , R ) , u E j } .
Now, we are discuss the boundedness of these ( P S ) sequence.
Lemma 3. 
For any λ > 0 but λ λ k , if { u n } is a ( P S ) c * or ( P S ) c sequence of J λ , then { u n } is bounded in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) . Let u 0 W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) be the weak limit of { u n } , then u 0 is a weak solution of (1)
Proof. 
It is easy to see that there exists C 1 > 0 such that
| | J λ ( u n ) | | C 1 , | J λ ( u n ) , u n | | u n | | | C 1 .
We firstly prove the case λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) . For n large enough, then by (19) we have
C 1 ( 1 + | | u n | | ) J λ ( u n ) 1 Q * J λ ( u n , u n ) = ( 1 2 1 Q * ) ( | | u n | | 2 λ | u n | 2 2 ) ( 1 2 1 Q * ) δ 1 | | u n | | 2
for some δ 1 > 0 . Thus { u n } is bounded in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) .
We Secondly prove the case λ ( λ j , λ j + 1 ) . Let β ( 1 Q * , 1 2 ) , then for n large enough we have
C 1 ( 1 + | | u n | | ) J λ ( u n ) β J ( λ ) ( u n ) , u n = ( 1 2 β ) ( | | u n | | 2 λ | u n | 2 2 ) + ( β 1 Q * ) | u | Q * Q * = ( 1 2 β ) ( | | z n | | 2 + | | y n | | 2 λ | z n | 2 2 λ | y n | 2 2 ) + ( β 1 Q * ) | u n | Q * Q * ( 1 2 β ) ( δ 2 | | z n | | 2 + ( λ 1 λ ) | y n | 2 2 ) + ( β 1 Q * ) | u n | Q * Q * .
for some δ 2 > 0 , where u n = z n + y n , z n E j + 1 , y n Y j , where E j + 1 is defined in (17). It is then easy to verify that { u n } is bounded in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) using the fact that Y j is finite dimension.
Next, we are going to prove that u 0 is a weak solution. Since W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) is reflexive, up to a subsequence, still denoted by u n , there exists u 0 i n W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) such that u n u 0 in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) as u n u 0 in L G Q * ( Ω ) as n + . Then
| u n | Q * 2 u u n | u 0 | Q * 2 u 0 in L 2 Q Q + 2
as n + . Since φ W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) , we have
J λ ( u n ) , φ = Ω u n φ d g λ Ω u n φ d g Ω | u | Q * 2 u n φ d g 0 ,
passing to the limit as n + , we obtain
Ω u 0 φ d g λ Ω u 0 φ d g Ω | u 0 | Q * 2 u 0 φ d g = 0
for any φ W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) , this means that u 0 is a weak solution of (1). □
To make sure the weak solution u 0 W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) , we shall prove the ( P S ) sequence has a strong convergence subsequence by controlling the energy of the functionals. Before this, we need a Brezis-Lieb lemma to describe the properties of the ( P S ) sequence.
Lemma 4. 
Let u m L G p ( Ω ) , 1 p < + be such that | u m | p constant , and u m u a.e. in Ω. Then
lim m + | u m u | p p = lim m + | u n | p p | u | p p .
If replace L G p ( Ω ) with any Hilbert space W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) , on has that
lim m + | | u m u | | 2 = lim m + | | u n | | 2 | | u | | 2 + 2 ( u m | u ) .
Hence if u m converges weakly to u then (20) holds.
Proof. 
The proof is similar to the classical case, we refer readers to Brezis-Lieb [3]. □
Based on this Lemma, we have the following claim.
Lemma 5. 
For any λ > 0 and λ λ k , if { u n } is a ( P S ) c sequence of J λ with
c < 1 Q S Q 2 ,
then { u n } has a convergent subsequence.
Proof. 
Let u 0 be the weak limit of { u n } obtained in Lemma 3 and define v n : = u n u 0 . Then we know v n 0 in W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) and v n 0 a.e. in Ω . By the Brezis-Lieb lemma 4, we know
Ω | u n | 2 d g = Ω | v n | 2 d g + Ω | u 0 | 2 d g + o n ( 1 ) ,
and
Ω | u n | Q * d g = Ω | v n | Q * d g + Ω | u 0 | Q * d g + 0 n ( 1 ) .
Then, since J λ ( u 0 ) 0 and Ω | u n | 2 d g Ω | u 0 | 2 d g , we have
c J λ ( u n ) = 1 2 Ω | u n | 2 d g λ 2 Ω | u n | 2 d g 1 Q * Ω | u n | Q * d g = 1 2 Ω | v n | 2 d g + 1 2 Ω | v 0 | 2 d g λ 2 Ω | u 0 | 2 d g 1 Q * Ω | v n | Q * d g 1 Q * Ω | v 0 | Q * d g + o n ( 1 ) = J λ ( u 0 ) + 1 2 Ω | v n | 2 d g 1 Q * Ω | v 0 | Q * d g + o n ( 1 ) 1 2 Ω | v n | 2 d g 1 Q * Ω | v 0 | Q * d g + o n ( 1 ) .
Similarly, since J λ ( u 0 ) , u 0 = 0 , we have
J λ ( u n ) , u n = Ω | u n | 2 d g λ Ω | u n | 2 d g Ω | u | Q * d g = Ω | v n | 2 d g + Ω | v 0 | 2 d g λ Ω | u 0 | 2 d g Ω | v n | Q * d g Ω | v 0 | Q * d g + o n ( 1 ) = J λ ( u 0 ) , u 0 + Ω | v n | 2 d g Ω | v 0 | Q * d g + o n ( 1 ) Ω | v n | 2 d g Ω | v 0 | Q * d g + o n ( 1 ) .
From (23), we know there exits a non-negative constant b such that
Ω | v n | 2 d g b ,
and
Ω | u | Q * d g b ,
as n + . From (22) and (23), we obtain
c ( 1 2 1 Q * ) b .
On the other hand, By the definition of the best constant S m , n in (15), we have
S m , n Ω | u | Q * d g 2 Q * Ω | v n | 2 d g ,
which deduce that b S m , n b 2 Q * .
Thus we have either b = 0 or b S m , n Q 2 . If b = 0 , the proof is completed. Otherwise b S m , n Q 2 , then we obtain from (24) that
c ( 1 2 1 Q * ) b ( 1 2 1 Q * ) S m , n Q 2 ,
which contradicts with the fact that c < 1 Q S m , n Q 2 . Therefore, b = 0 and | | u n u 0 | | 0 as n 0 .
To control c * < 1 Q S m , n Q 2 and c < 1 Q S m , n Q 2 by some λ , we recall some invariant properties of extremal function for the sharp constant S m , n . Since the functional associated the Sobolev inequality is invariant under dilation, define
U ε ( ξ ) : = ε Q 2 2 U ( ξ ε ) = ε Q 2 2 ( 1 + ε 2 | x | 2 4 ) 2 + ε 4 | t | 2 Q 2 4 ,
we then have
| | U ε | | 2 2 = | U ε | Q * Q * = S m , n Q 2 .
Observe that the critical point of c * or c is vary closed to the extermal function, we take a cut-off method to estimate every term of J λ ( u ) . Without loss of generality, we may assume that 0 Ω and B R Ω B 2 R for some positive R. Let ψ C 0 such that
ψ ( x ) = 1 , if x B 0 ( R ) , 0 , if x G B 0 ( 2 R ) ,
and 0 ψ ( x ) 1 , | G ψ ( x ) | C for all x G . Define
u ε ( x ) : = ψ ( x ) U ε ( x ) ,
we then have the following estimate:
Lemma 6. 
Ω | u ε | Q * d g = S m , n Q 2 + O ( ε Q ) ,
Ω | G u ε | 2 d g = S m , n Q 2 + O ( ε Q + 2 ) ,
Ω | u ε | 2 d g c 1 ε 2 | log ε | + O ( ε 2 ) , Q = 4 , c 1 ε 2 + O ( ε Q + 2 ) , Q 6 ,
where c 1 is a positive constant.
Proof. (i) By the define of u ε , we have
Ω | u ε | Q * d g = G | U ε | Q * d g G B 0 ( R ) | U ε | Q * d g + B 0 ( 2 R ) B 0 ( R ) | ψ U ε | Q * d g = S m , n Q 2 G B 0 ( R ) | U ε | Q * d g + B 0 ( 2 R ) B 0 ( R ) | ψ U ε | Q * d g .
For the second term, we have
G B 0 ( R ) | U ε | Q * d g = G B 0 ( R ) ε Q ( 1 + ε 2 | x | 2 4 ) 2 + ε 4 t 2 Q 2 d g C G B 0 ( R ) ε Q | x | 2 4 + t 2 Q 2 d g = C G B 0 ( R ) ε Q | ξ | 2 Q d g = O ( ε Q )
For the third term, we have
B 0 ( 2 R ) B 0 ( R ) | ψ U ε | Q * d g C B 0 ( 2 R ) B 0 ( R ) ε Q d g O ( ε Q ) .
Hence, (25) holds.
(ii) Since U ϵ satisfies the Yamabe equation (16), we have
Ω | G u ε | 2 dg G | G u ε | 2 d g = G | G U ϵ | 2 ψ 2 d g + G | G ψ | 2 U ε 2 d g + 2 G G ψ · G U ε U ε ψ d g = G G U ε · G ( U ε ψ 2 ) d g + G | G ψ | 2 U ε 2 d g = G | U ε | Q * ψ 2 d g + G | G ψ | 2 U ε 2 d g = G | U ε | Q * d g G | U ε | Q * ( 1 ψ 2 ) d g + G | G ψ | 2 U ε 2 d g S m , n Q 2 + G | U ε | Q * ( 1 ψ 2 ) d g + G | G ψ | 2 U ε 2 d g .
For the second term in the last inequality, we have
G | U ε | Q * ( 1 ψ 2 ) d g C G B 0 ( R ) | U ε | Q * d g O ( ε Q ) .
For the third term in the last inequality, we have
G | G ψ | 2 U ε 2 d g C B 0 ( 2 R ) B 0 ( R ) | U ε | 2 dg O ( ε Q + 2 ) .
Hence, (26) holds.
(iii) A direct calculation shows that
Ω | u ε | 2 d g = C B 0 ( 2 R ) ε Q 2 | ψ | 2 ( 1 + ε 2 | x | 2 4 ) 2 + ε 4 | t | 2 Q 2 2 d g C B 0 ( R ) ε Q 2 ( 1 + ε 2 | x | 2 4 ) 2 + ε 4 | t | 2 Q 2 2 d g = C B 0 ( ε R ) ε 2 ( 1 + | x | 2 4 ) 2 + | t | 2 Q 2 2 d g C ε 2 B 0 ( 1 ) 1 d g + B ε ( R ) B 0 ( 1 ) 1 | ξ | 2 ( Q 2 ) d g C ε 2 C 1 + 1 ε R ρ Q + 3 d ρ .
If Q > 4 , then
Ω | u ε | 2 d g C ε 2 C 1 + 1 ε R ρ Q + 3 d ρ = C ε 2 + O ( ε Q + 2 ) ,
if Q = 4 , then
Ω | u ε | 2 d g C ε 2 C 1 + 1 ε R ρ 1 d ρ = C ε 2 + C ε 2 | log ε | .
This implies that (27) holds. □
Based on the above estimate, we have the following inequality holds.
Lemma 7. 
For any λ > 0 , there exists u ε W 0 , G 1 , 2 ( Ω ) { 0 } such that
| | u ε | | 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u | Q * 2 < S m , n .
Proof. 
For the case Q > 4 and ε large enough, we have
| | u ε | | 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u | Q * 2 S m , n Q 2 + O ( ε Q + 2 ) λ ( ε 2 + O ( ε Q + 2 ) ) S m , n Q 2 + O ( ε Q ) Q 2 Q < S m , n .
For the case Q = 4 and ε large enough, we have
| | u ε | | 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u | Q * 2 S m , n 2 + O ( ε 2 ) λ ( ε 2 | log ε | + O ( ε 2 ) ) S m , n 2 + O ( ε 4 ) 1 2 < S m , n .

4. Proof of the Main Theorem

4.1. Case λ ( 0 , λ 1 )

Proof of Theorem 1 (i). 
Follow the Mountain-Pass Theorem, it suffices to proof that the c * defined in Proposition 1 satisfies that c * < 1 Q S m , n Q 2 for any λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) , since we has checked the mountain pass structure and ( P S ) c * condition in Lemma 1 and Lemma 5 respectively. Indeed, taking the half-line { t u ε : t 0 } as a test curve for the MP level, we have that
c * max t 0 J λ ( t u ε ) .
On the other hand, since max t 0 J λ ( t u ε ) is achieved at
τ = | | u ε | | 2 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u ε | Q * Q * 1 Q * 2 ,
then
J λ ( τ u ε ) = 1 Q | | u ε | | 2 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u ε | Q * 2 Q 2 .
Using the fact showed in Lemma 7, we have
c * max t 0 J λ ( t u ε ) = J λ ( τ u ε ) = 1 Q | | u ε | | 2 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u ε | Q * 2 Q 2 = 1 Q S m , n Q 2 ,
this completes the proof. □

4.2. Case λ ( λ j , λ j + 1 )

In this case, J λ ( u ) perform a strong indefiniteness structure. To prove the existence of the critical for J λ ( u ) , we need to use the Link argument. Define
G j , ε : = span { e 1 . e 2 , · · · , u ε }
and set
m j , ε : = max u G j , ε , | u | Q * = 1 Ω | G u | 2 d g λ Ω | u | 2 d g .
Lemma 8. 
Let λ [ λ j , λ j + 1 ) for some j N , then
(i) m j , ε is achieved at some u m G j , ε and u m can be written as u m = v + t u ε with v Y j and t 0 .
(ii) The following estimate holds true:
m j , ε ( λ j λ ) | v | 2 2 if t = 0 , ( λ j λ ) | v | 2 2 + A ε ( 1 + | z | O ( ε Q 2 2 ) ) + O ( ε Q 2 2 ) | z | if t > 0 ,
as ε + , where A ε = | | u ε | | 2 λ | u ε | 2 2 | u ε | Q * 2 .
(iii) m j , ε < S .
Proof. (1) ince G j , ε is a finite dimensional space, there exists 0 u m G j , ε such that
m j , ε = | | u m | | 2 λ | u m | 2 2 , and | u | Q * = 1 .
From the definition of G j , ε it is clear that u m = z + t u ε where z Y j and t R . We can suppose that t 0 otherwise we can replace u m with u m .
(ii) If t = 0 , then u m = v Y j and
m j , ε = | | u m | | 2 λ | u m | 2 2 = | v | 2 2 λ | v | 2 2 ( λ j λ ) | z | 2 2 .
If t > 0 , then for any u m = z + t u ε , we have
m j , ε = | | z + t u ε | | 2 λ | z + t u ε | 2 2 ( λ j λ ) | z | 2 2 + A ε Ω | t u ε | Q * d g 2 + C | z | | u ε | 2 .
On the other hand, since | u m | Q * = 1 , we have
1 = Ω | u m | Q * d g = Ω | z + t u ε | Q * d g Ω | z | Q * d g + C Ω | t u ε | Q * 1 z d g + Ω | t u ε | Q * d g Ω | t u ε | Q * d g Ω | t u ε | Q * 1 z d g .
That is
Ω | t u ε | Q * d g 1 + | z | Ω | t u ε | Q * 1 d g 1 + t Q * 1 O ( ε Q 2 2 ) .
Connected (37), we have
m j , ε ( λ j λ ) | z | 2 2 + A ε ( 1 + | z | O ( ε Q 2 2 ) + C | z | O ( ε Q 2 2 ) .
(iii) If t = 0 , we have m j , ε = ( λ j λ ) | v | 2 2 < S m , n . If t > 0 , then by the estimate of A ε in Lemma 8, we also have m j , ε < S m , n . □
Proof of Theorem 1 (ii). 
By the Link argument, we also just to show that c defined in Proposition 2 satisfies that c < 1 Q S m , n Q 2 for every λ [ λ j , λ j + 1 ) , since we have verified that J λ ( u ) satisfying the the link structure and ( P S ) c condition in Lemma 2 and Lemma 5. Actually, by the definition of c , see (18), for any γ Γ we have c max u V J λ ( γ ( u ) ) . In particular, if we take γ = i d on V ¯ then c max u V J λ ( u ) max u G j , ε J λ ( u ) . Since G j , ε is a linear space, we have
max u G j , ε J λ ( u ) = max u G j , ε , t 0 J λ ( | t | u | t | ) = max u G j , ε , t > 0 J λ ( t u ) max u G j , ε , t 0 J λ ( u ) .
On the other hand, by a direct calculation, we have
max u G j , ε , t 0 J λ ( u ) = 1 Q | | u | | 2 λ | u | 2 2 | u | Q * Q 2
Then by Lemma 8 we know that c max u G j , ε , t 0 J λ ( u ) < 1 Q S m , n Q 2 . This completes the proof. □

Author Contributions

The authors declare that they contribute to the paper equally, they all joined in the work of analysis, calculation and organizing the paper.

Funding

The research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 12061010), Science and Technology Planning Project of Jiangxi Province (No. GJJ2201204).

Data Availability Statement

All of the data for the research is included in the manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest between each other.

References

  1. Aubin, T. Equations differentielles non lineaires et probleme de Yamabe concernant la courbure scalaire. J. Math. Pures Appl. 1976, 55, 269–296. [Google Scholar]
  2. Bonfiglioli, A.; Uguzzoni, F. Nonlinear Liouville theorems for some critical problems on H-type groups. J. Funct. Anal. 2004, 207, 161–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Brezis, H.; Lieb, E. A relation between pointwise convergence of functions and convergence of functionals. Proc Amer Math Soc. 1983, 207, 486–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Brezis, H.; Nirenberg, L. Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponents. Commun Pure Appl Math. 1983, 36, 437–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Calin, O.; Chang, D.C.; Greiner, P. Geometric analysis on the Heisenberg group and its generalizations. AMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathematics, 40. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI; International Press, Somerville, MA. 2007, ,x+244pp.
  6. Capozzi, A.; Fortunato, D.; Palmieri, G. An existence result for nonlinear elliptic problems involving critical Sobolev exponent. An Inst H Poincar´e Anal Non Lineaire. 1985, 2, 463–470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Cerami, G.; Solimini, S.; Struwe, M. Some existence results for superlinear elliptic boundary value problems involving critical exponents. J Funct Anal. 1986, 69, 289–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chern, S.S.; Moser, J. Real hypersurfaces in complex manifolds. Acta Math. 1974, 133, 219–271. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Citti, J. Semilinear Dirichlet problem involving critical exponent for the Kohn Laplacian. Ann. Mat. Pura Appl. 1995, 169, 375–392. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Dragomir, S.; Tomassini, G. Differential geometry and analysis on CR manifolds Progress in Mathematics, 246. Birkhauser Boston, Inc., Boston, MA, 2006, 1 pp. ISBN:978-0-8176-4388-1;0-8176-4388-5.
  11. Folland, G.B.; Stein, E.M. Estimates for the b complex and analysis on the Heisenberg group. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1974, 27, 429–522. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Folland, G.B.; Stein, E.M. Hardy Spaces on Homogeneous Groups. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ. 1982. [Google Scholar]
  13. Gao, F.S.; M. B. Yang.The Brezis-Nirenberg type critical problem for the nonlinear Choquard equation. Sci. China Math. 2018, 7, 1219–1242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Garofalo, N.; Vassilev, D. Symmetry properties of positive entire solutions of Yamabe type equations on groups of Heisenberg type. Duke Math. J. 2001, 3, 411–449. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Garofalo, N.; Vassilev, D. Regularity near the characteristic set in the non-linear Dirichlet problem and conformal geometry of sub-Laplacians on Carnot groups. Math. Ann. 2000, 3, 453–516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Goel, D.; Goel2020, K. Existence and nonexistence results for Kohn Laplacian with Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev critical exponents. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2000, 2, 123915,29pp. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Han, J.Q.; Niu, P.C. A nonexistence theorem on groups of Heisenberg type. (Chinese) Math. Appl. (Wuhan) 2004, 2, 179–185. [Google Scholar]
  18. Han, Y.Z. An integral type Brezis-Nirenberg problem on the Heisenberg group. J. Differential Equations. 2020, 5, 4544–4565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Han, Y.Z.; Niu. P.C. Hardy-Sobolev type inequalities in the H-type group. Manuscripta Math. 2005, 118, 235–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Jerison, D.; Lee, J.M. The Yamabe problem on CR manifolds. J. Differential Geometry. 1987, 25, 167–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Jerison, D.; Lee, J.M. Extremals for the Sobolev inequality on the Heisenberg group and the CR Yamabe problem. Journal of the American mathematical society. 1988, 1, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Kaplan, A. Fundamental solutions for a class of hypoelliptic PDE generated by composition of quadratic forms. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1980, 1, 147–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Liu, H. P; Song, L.M. A functional calculus and restriction theorem on H-type groups. Pacific J. Math. 2017, 2, 291–305. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Obata, M. The conjectures on conformal transformations of Riemannian manifolds. J. Differential Geom. 1971, 6, 247–258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Schoen, R. Conformal deformation of a Riemannian metric to constant scalar curvature. J. Differential Geom. 1984, 20, 479–495. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Tanaka, N. A differential geometric study on strongly pseudo-convex manifolds. Lectures in Mathematics, Department of Mathematics, Kyoto University. 1975, 9. [Google Scholar]
  27. Trudinger, N. Remarks concerning the conformal deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifolds. Ann. Scuola Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 1968, 22, 265–274. [Google Scholar]
  28. Webster, S.M. Pseudo-Hermitian structures on a real hypersurface. J. Differential Geom. 1978, 13, 25–41. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Wells, R.O. Function theory on differentiable submanifolds. Contributions to Analysis. Academic Press. 1974, 13, 407–441. [Google Scholar]
  30. Yamabe, H. On a deformation of Riemannian structures on compact manifolds. Osaka Math. J. 1960, 12, 21–37. [Google Scholar]
  31. Yang, Q.H. The optimal constant in the L2 Folland-Stein inequality on the H-type group. J. Funct. Anal. 2024, 286. Paper No. 110209, 22pp. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Yang, Q.H. Perturbation of Yamabe equation on Iwasawa N groups in presence of symmetry. Acta Math. Sin. 2010, 26, 1575–1590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Zhang, S.T.; Han, Y.Z.; Dou, J.B. A class of Caffarelli-Kohn-Nirenberg type inequalities on the H-type group. Rend. Semin. Mat. Univ. Padova. 2014, 132, 249–266. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.
Copyright: This open access article is published under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 license, which permit the free download, distribution, and reuse, provided that the author and preprint are cited in any reuse.
Prerpints.org logo

Preprints.org is a free preprint server supported by MDPI in Basel, Switzerland.

Subscribe

© 2024 MDPI (Basel, Switzerland) unless otherwise stated