Citation: Sobajima Motohiro, Wakasugi Yuta. Remarks on an elliptic problem arising in weighted energy estimates for wave equations with space-dependent damping term in an exterior domain[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(1): 1-15. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.1.1
[1] | Xiongmei Fan, Sen Ming, Wei Han, Zikun Liang . Lifespan estimate of solution to the semilinear wave equation with damping term and mass term. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 17860-17889. doi: 10.3934/math.2023910 |
[2] | Keltoum Bouhali, Sulima Ahmed Zubair, Wiem Abedelmonem Salah Ben Khalifa, Najla ELzein AbuKaswi Osman, Khaled Zennir . A new strict decay rate for systems of longitudinal m-nonlinear viscoelastic wave equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 962-976. doi: 10.3934/math.2023046 |
[3] | Abdelkader Moumen, Abderrahmane Beniani, Tariq Alraqad, Hicham Saber, Ekram. E. Ali, Keltoum Bouhali, Khaled Zennir . Energy decay of solution for nonlinear delayed transmission problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 13815-13829. doi: 10.3934/math.2023707 |
[4] | Adel M. Al-Mahdi, Maher Noor, Mohammed M. Al-Gharabli, Baowei Feng, Abdelaziz Soufyane . Stability analysis for a Rao-Nakra sandwich beam equation with time-varying weights and frictional dampings. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 12570-12587. doi: 10.3934/math.2024615 |
[5] | Adel M. Al-Mahdi, Mohammad M. Al-Gharabli, Maher Nour, Mostafa Zahri . Stabilization of a viscoelastic wave equation with boundary damping and variable exponents: Theoretical and numerical study. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 15370-15401. doi: 10.3934/math.2022842 |
[6] | Hatice Taskesen . Qualitative results for a relativistic wave equation with multiplicative noise and damping terms. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 15232-15254. doi: 10.3934/math.2023778 |
[7] | Li-Ming Yeh . Lipschitz estimate for elliptic equations with oscillatory coefficients. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 29135-29166. doi: 10.3934/math.20241413 |
[8] | Farman Ali Shah, Kamran, Zareen A Khan, Fatima Azmi, Nabil Mlaiki . A hybrid collocation method for the approximation of 2D time fractional diffusion-wave equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27122-27149. doi: 10.3934/math.20241319 |
[9] | Mohammad Kafini, Shadi Al-Omari . Local existence and lower bound of blow-up time to a Cauchy problem of a coupled nonlinear wave equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 9059-9074. doi: 10.3934/math.2021526 |
[10] | Waled Al-Khulaifi, Manal Alotibi, Nasser-Eddine Tatar . Exponential decay in a delayed wave equation with variable coefficients. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(10): 27770-27783. doi: 10.3934/math.20241348 |
Let N≥2. We consider the wave equation with space-dependent damping term in an exterior domain Ω⊂RN with a smooth boundary:
{utt−Δu+a(x)ut=0,x∈Ω, t>0,u(x,t)=0,x∈∂Ω, t>0,(u,ut)(x,0)=(u0,u1)(x),x∈Ω, | (1.1) |
where we denote by Δ the usual Laplacian in RN and by ut and utt the first and second derivative of u with respect to the variable t, and u=u(x,t) is a real-valued unknown function. The coefficient of the damping term a(x) satisfies a∈C2(¯Ω), a(x)>0 on ¯Ω and
lim|x|→∞(⟨x⟩αa(x))=a0 | (1.2) |
with some constants α∈[0,1) and a0∈(0,∞), where ⟨y⟩=(1+|y|2)12 for y∈RN. In this moment, the initial data (u0,u1) are assumed to have compact supports in Ω and to satisfy the compatibility condition of order k≥1:
(uℓ−1,uℓ)∈(H2∩H10(Ω))×H10(Ω),for all ℓ=1,…,k | (1.3) |
where uℓ is successively defined by uℓ=Δuℓ−2−a(x)uℓ−1 (ℓ=2,…,k). We note that existence and uniqueness of solution to the problem (1.1) have been discussed (see e.g., Ikawa [2, Theorem 2]).
It is proved in Matsumura [4] that if Ω=RN and a(x)≡1, then the solution u of (1.1) satisfies the energy decay estimate
∫RN(|∇u(x,t)|2+|ut(x,t)|2)dx≤C(1+t)−N2−1‖(u0,u1)‖2H1×L2, |
where the constant C depends on the size of the supprot of initial data. Moreover, it is shown in Nishihara [7] that u has the same asymptotic behavior as the one of the problem
{vt−Δv=0,x∈RN, t>0,v(x,0)=u0(x)+u1(x),x∈RN. | (1.4) |
In particular, we have
‖u(⋅,t)−v(⋅,t)‖L2=o(t−N4) |
as t→∞. Energy decay properties of solutions to (1.1) for general cases with a(x)≥⟨x⟩−α (0≤α≤1) have been dealt with by Matsumura [5]. On the other hand, Mochizuki [6] proved that if 0≤a(x)≤C⟨x⟩−α for some α>1, then the energy of the solution to (1.1) does not vanish as t→∞ for suitable initial data. (The solution has an asymptotic behavior similar to the solution of the usual wave equation without damping). Therefore one can expect that diffusion phenomena occur only when a(x)≥C⟨x⟩−α for α≤1.
In this paper, we discuss precise decay rates of the weighted energy
∫RN(|∇u(x,t)|2+|ut(x,t)|2)Φ(x,t)dx |
with a special weight function
Φ(x,t)=exp(βA(x)1+t) |
(for some A∈C2(RN) and β>0) which is introduced by Todorova and Yordanov [12] based on the ideas in [11] and in [3]. They proved weighted energy estimates
∫RNa(x)|u(x,t)|2Φ(x,t)dx≤C(1+t)−N−α2−α+ε,∫RN(|∇u(x,t)|2+|ut(x,t)|2)Φ(x,t)dx≤C(1+t)−N−α2−α−1+ε |
when a(x) is radially symmetric and satisfies (1.2). After that, Radu, Todorova and Yordanov [8] extended it to higher-order derivatives. In [13], the second author proved diffusion phenomena for (1.1) with Ω=RN and a(x)=⟨x⟩−α (α∈[0,1)) by comparing the solution of the following problem
{a(x)vt−Δv=0,x∈RN, t>0,v(x,0)=u0(x)+1a(x)u1(x),x∈RN. | (1.5) |
In [10], diffusion phenomena for (1.1) with an exterior domain and for general radially symmetric damping term are obtained. However, the weighted energy estimates and diffusion phenomena for (1.1) with non-radially symmetric damping are still remaining open. The difficulty seems to come from the choice of auxiliary function A in the weighted energy, which strongly depends on the existence of positive solution to the Poisson equation ΔA(x)=a(x). In fact, an example of non-existence of positive solution to ΔA=a for non-radial a(x) is shown in [10]. Radu, Todorova and Yordanov [9] considered the case Ω=RN and used a solution A∗(x) of ΔA∗=a1(1+|x|)−α with a1>0 satisfying a1(1+|x|)−α≥a(x) for x∈RN, that is, A∗(x) is a subsolution of the equation ΔA=a. In general one cannot obtain the optimal decay estimate via this choice because of the luck of the precise behavior of a(x) at the spatial infinity which can be expected to determine the precise decay late of weighted energy estimates. Our main idea to overcome this difficulty is to weaken the equality ΔA=a and consider the inequality (1−ε)a≤ΔA≤(1+ε)a, and to construct a solution having appropriate behavior, we employ a cut-off argument.
The aim of this paper is to give a proof of Ikehata-Todorova-Yordanov type weighted energy estimates for (1.1) with non-radially symmetric damping and to obtain diffusion phenomena for (1.1) under the compatibility condition of order 1 and the condition (1.2) (without any restriction).
This paper is originated as follows. In Section 2, we discuss related elliptic and parabolic problems. The weighted energy estimates for (1.1) are established in Section 3 (Proposition 3.5). Section 4 is devoted to show diffusion phenomena (Proposition 4.1).
As we mentioned above, in general, existence of positive solutions to the Poisson equation ΔA(x)=a(x) is false for non-radial a(x). Thus, we weaken this equation and consider the following inequality
(1−ε)a(x)≤ΔA(x)≤(1+ε)a(x),x∈Ω, | (2.1) |
where ε∈(0,1) is a parameter. Here we construct a positive solution A of (2.1) satisfying
A1ε⟨x⟩2−α≤A(x)≤A2ε⟨x⟩2−α, | (2.2) |
|∇A(x)|2a(x)A(x)≤2−αN−α+ε | (2.3) |
for some constants A1ε,A2ε>0.
Lemma 2.1. For every ε∈(0,1), there exists Aε∈C2(¯Ω) such that Aε satisfies (2.1)-(2.3).
Proof. Firstly, we extend a(x) as a positive function in C2(RN); note that this is possible by virtue of the smoothness of ∂Ω. To simplify the notation, we use the same symbol a(x) as a function defined on RN. We construct a solution of approximated equation
ΔAε(x)=aε(x),x∈RN |
for some aε∈C2(RN) satisfying
(1−ε)a(x)≤aε(x)≤(1+ε)a(x),x∈RN. | (2.4) |
Noting (1.2), we divide a(x) as a(x)=b1(x)+b2(x) with
b1(x)=Δ(a0(N−α)(2−α)⟨x⟩2−α)=a0⟨x⟩−α+a0αN−α⟨x⟩−α−2,b2(x)=a(x)−a0⟨x⟩−α−a0αN−α⟨x⟩−α−2. |
Then we have
lim|x|→∞(b2(x)a(x))=lim|x|→∞[1⟨x⟩αa(x)(⟨x⟩αa(x)−a0−a0αN−α⟨x⟩−2)]=0. | (2.5) |
Let ε∈(0,1) be fixed. Then by (2.5) there exists a constant Rε>0 such that |b2(x)|≤εa(x) for x∈RN∖B(0,Rε). Here we introduce a cut-off function ηε∈C∞c(RN,[0,1]) such that ηε≡1 on B(0,Rε). Define
aε(x):=b1(x)+ηε(x)b2(x)=a(x)−(1−ηε(x))b2(x),x∈RN. |
Then aε(x)=a(x) on B(0,Rε) and for x∈RN∖B(0,Rε),
|aε(x)a(x)−1|=(1−ηε(x))|b2(x)|a(x)≤ε |
and therefore (2.4) is verified.
Next we define
B1ε(x):=a0(N−α)(2−α)⟨x⟩2−α,x∈RN,B2ε(x):=−∫RNN(x−y)ηε(y)b2(y)dy,x∈RN, |
where N is the Newton potential given by
N(x)={12πlog1|x|if N=2,Γ(N2+1)N(N−2)πN2|x|2−Nif N≥3. |
Then we easily see that ΔB1ε(x)=b1(x) and ΔB2ε=ηε(x)b2(x). Moreover, noting that supp(ηεb2) is compact, we see from a direct calculation that there exist a constant Mε>0 such that
|B2ε(x)|≤{Mε(1+log⟨x⟩)if N=2,Mε⟨x⟩2−Nif N≥3,|∇B2ε(x)|≤Mε⟨x⟩1−N,x∈RN. |
This yields that Bε:=B1ε+B2ε is bounded from below and positive for x∈RN with sufficiently large |x|. Moreover, we have
lim|x|→∞(⟨x⟩α−2Bε(x))=a0(N−α)(2−α) |
and
lim|x|→∞(|∇Bε(x)|2a(x)Bε(x))=lim|x|→∞(1⟨x⟩αa(x)⋅1⟨x⟩α−2Bε(x)|a0N−α⟨x⟩−1x+⟨x⟩α−1∇B2ε(x)|2)=2−αN−α. |
Using the same argument as in the proof of [10, Lemma 3.1], we can see that there exists a constant λε≥0 such that Aε(x):=λε+Bε(x) satisfies (2.1)-(2.3).
Here we consider Lp-Lq type estimates for solutions to the initial-boundary value problem of the following parabolic equation
{a(x)wt−Δw=0,x∈Ω, t>0,w(x,t)=0,x∈∂Ω, t>0,w(x,0)=f(x),x∈Ω. | (2.6) |
Here we introduce a weighted Lp-spaces
Lpdμ:={f∈Lploc(Ω);‖f‖Lpdμ:=(∫Ω|f(x)|pa(x)dx)1p<∞},1≤p<∞ |
which is quite reasonable because the corresponding elliptic operator a(x)−1Δ can be regarded as a symmetric operator in L2dμ.
The Lp-Lq type estimates for the semigroup associated with the Friedrichs' extension −L∗ (in L2dμ) of −a(x)−1Δ are stated in [10]. The proof is based on Beurling-Deny's criterion and Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality.
Proposition 2.2 ([10, Proposition 2.6]). Let etL∗ be a semigroup generated by L∗. For every f∈L1dμ∩L2dμ, we have
‖etL∗f‖L2dμ≤Ct−N−α2(2−α)‖f‖L1dμ | (2.7) |
and
‖L∗etL∗f‖L2dμ≤Ct−N−α2(2−α)−1‖f‖L1dμ. | (2.8) |
In this section we establish weighted energy estimates for solutions of (1.1) by introducing Ikehata-Todorova-Yordanov type weight function with an auxiliary function A" constructed in Subsection 2.1.
To begin with, let us recall the finite speed propagation property of the wave equation (see [2]).
Lemma 3.1 (Finite speed of propagation). Let u be the solution of (1.1) with the initial data (u0, u1) satisfying supp(u0,u1)⊂¯B(0,R0)={x∈Ω;|x|≤R0}. Then, one has
suppu(⋅,t)⊂{x∈Ω;|x|≤R0+t} |
and therefore |x|/(R0+1+t)≤1 for t≥0 and x∈suppu(⋅,t).
Before introducing a weight function, we also recall two identities for partial energy functionals proved in [10].
Lemma 3.2 ([10, Lemma 3.7]). Let Φ∈C2(¯Ω×[0,∞)) satisfy Φ>0 and ∂tΦ<0 and let u be a solution of (1.1). Then
ddt[∫Ω(|∇u|2+|ut|2)Φdx]=∫Ω(∂tΦ)−1|∂tΦ∇u−ut∇Φ|2dx+∫Ω(−2a(x)Φ+∂tΦ−(∂tΦ)−1|∇Φ|2)|ut|2dx. |
Lemma 3.3 ([10, Lemma 3.9]). Let Φ∈C2(¯Ω×[0,∞)) satisfy Φ>0 and ∂tΦ<0 and let u be a solution to (1.1). Then, we have
ddt[∫Ω(2uut+a(x)|u|2)Φdx]=2∫Ωuut(∂tΦ)dx+2∫Ω|ut|2Φdx−2∫Ω|∇u|2Φdx+∫Ω(a(x)∂tΦ+ΔΦ)|u|2dx. |
Here we introduce a weight function for weighted energy estimates, which is a modification of the one in Todorova-Yordanov [12].
Definition 3.4. Define h:=2−αN−α and for ε∈(0,1),
Φε(x,t)=exp(1h+2εAε(x)1+t), | (3.1) |
where Aε is given in Lemma 2.1. And define for t≥0,
E∂x(t;u):=∫Ω|∇u|2Φεdx,E∂t(t;u):=∫Ω|ut|2Φεdx, | (3.2) |
Ea(t;u):=∫Ωa(x)|u|2Φεdx,E∗(t;u):=2∫ΩuutΦεdx, | (3.3) |
and also define E1(t;u):=E∂x(t;u)+E∂t(t;u) and E2(t;u):=E∗(t;u)+Ea(t;u).
Now we are in a position to state our main result for weighted energy estimates for solutions of (1.1).
Proposition 3.5. Assume that (u0, u1) satisfies supp(u0,u1)⊂¯B(0,R0) and the compatibility condition of order k0≥1. Let u be a solution of the problem (1.1). For every δ>0 and 0≤k≤k0−1, there exist ε>0 and Mδ,k,R0>0 such that for every t≥0,
(1+t)N−α2−α+2k+1−δ(E∂x(t;∂ktu)+E∂t(t;∂ktu))+(1+t)N−α2−α+2k−δEa(t;∂ktu)≤Mδ,k,R0‖(u0,u1)‖2Hk+1×Hk(Ω). |
To prove, this, we prepare the following two lemmas.
Lemma 3.6. For t≥0, we have
1−εh+2ε11+tEa(t;u)≤E∂x(t;u). | (3.4) |
Proof. As in the proof of [10, Lemma 3.6], by integration by parts we have
∫ΩΔ(logΦε)|u|2Φεdx=∫Ω(ΔΦε−|∇Φε|2Φε)|u|2dx≤∫Ω|∇u|2Φεdx. |
Noting that
Δ(logΦε(x))=1h+2εΔAε(x)1+t≥1−εh+2εa(x)1+t, |
we have (3.4).
In order to clarify the effect of the finite propagation property, we now put
a1:=infx∈Ω(⟨x⟩αa(x)). |
Then
Lemma 3.7. For t≥0, we have
E∂t(t;u)≤1a1(R0+1+t)αEa(t;∂tu), | (3.5) |
∫ΩAε(x)a(x)|ut|2Φεdx≤A2εa1(R0+1+t)2E∂t(t;u), | (3.6) |
|E∗(t;u)|≤2√a1(R0+1+t)α2√Ea(t;u)E∂t(t;u). | (3.7) |
Proof. By a(x)−1≤a−11⟨x⟩α≤a−11(1+|x|)α and the finite propagation property we have
∫Ω|ut|2Φεdx=∫Ωa(x)a(x)|ut|2Φεdx≤1a1(R0+1+t)αEa(t;∂tu). |
Using the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and the above inequality yields (3.6):
|∫ΩuutΦεdx|2≤(∫Ω|u|2Φεdx)(∫Ω|ut|2Φεdx)≤(R0+1+t)αa1(∫Ωa(x)|u|2Φεdx)E∂t(t;u)≤(R0+1+t)αa1Ea(t;u)E∂t(t;u). |
We can prove (3.7) in a similar way.
Lemma 3.8. (i) For every t≥0, we have
ddtE1(t;u)≤−Ea(t;∂tu). | (3.8) |
(ii) For every ε∈(0,13) and t≥0,
ddtE2(t;u)≤−1−3ε1−εE∂x(t;u)+(2a1+A2ε(R0+1)2εa21)(R0+1+t)αEa(t;∂tu). | (3.9) |
Proof. Noting (2.3), we have
−2a(x)Φε+∂tΦε−(∂tΦε)−1|∇Φε|2=(−2a(x)−Aε(x)(h+2ε)(1+t)2+1h+2ε|∇Aε(x)|2Aε(x))Φε≤(−2a(x)+h+εh+2εa(x))Φε≤−a(x)Φε. |
This implies (3.8). On the other hand, from (2.3) and (2.1) we see
a(x)∂tΦε+ΔΦε=1h+2ε(−a(x)Aε(x)(1+t)2+|∇Aε(x)|2(h+2ε)(1+t)2+ΔAε(x)1+t)Φε≤1h+2ε(−a(x)Aε(x)(1+t)2+(h+ε)a(x)Aε(x)(h+2ε)(1+t)2+(1+ε)a(x)1+t)Φε≤(−ε(h+2ε)2a(x)Aε(x)(1+t)2+1+εh+2εa(x)1+t)Φε. |
Therefore combining it with Lemma 3.6, we have
∫Ω(a(x)∂tΦε+ΔΦε)|u|2dx≤1+ε1−ε∫Ω|∇u|2Φεdx−ε(h+2ε)21(1+t)2∫Ωa(x)Aε(x)|u|2Φεdx. |
Using (3.6), we have
2∫Ωuut(∂tΦε)dx=−2h+2ε1(1+t)2∫ΩuutAε(x)Φεdx≤2h+2ε1(1+t)2(∫Ωa(x)Aε(x)|u|2Φεdx)12(∫ΩAε(x)a(x)|ut|2Φεdx)12≤2(R0+1)h+2ε11+t(∫Ωa(x)Aε(x)|u|2Φεdx)12(A2εa1E∂t(t;u))12≤ε(h+2ε)21(1+t)2∫Ωa(x)Aε(x)|u|2Φεdx+A2ε(R0+1)2εa1E∂t(t;u). |
Applying (3.5), we obtain (3.9).
Lemma 3.9. The following assertions hold:
(i) Set t∗(R0,α,m):=max{(2ma1)11−α,R0+1}. Then for every t,m≥0 and t1≥t∗(R0,α,m),
ddt((t1+t)mE1(t;u))≤m(t1+t)m−1E∂x(t;u)−12(t1+t)mEa(t;∂tu). | (3.10) |
(ii) for every, t,λ≥0 and t2≥R0+1,
ddt((t2+t)λE2(t;u))≤λ(1+ε)(t2+t)λ−1Ea(t;u)−1−3ε1−ε(t2+t)λE∂x(t;u)+(2a1+A2ε(R0+1)2εa21+λ2εa21t1−α2)(t2+t)λ+αEa(t;∂tu). | (3.11) |
(iii) In particular, setting
ν:=4a1+2A2ε(R0+1)2εa21+14εa1,t∗∗(ε,R0,α,λ):=max{((1−ε)(λ+α)νε)11−α,(2(λ+α)a1)11−α,R0+1}, |
one has that for t,λ≥0 and t3≥t∗∗(ε,R0,α,λ),
ddt(ν(t3+t)λ+αE1(t;u)+(t3+t)λE2(t;u))≤−1−4ε1−ε(t3+t)λE∂x(t;u)+λ(1+ε)(t3+t)λ−1Ea(t;u). | (3.12) |
Proof. (i) Let m≥0 be fixed and let t1≥t∗(R0,α,m). Using (3.8) and (3.5), we have
(t1+t)−mddt((t1+t)mE1(t;u))≤mt1+tE∂x(t;u)+mt1+tE∂t(t;u)+ddtE1(t;u)≤mt1+tE∂x(t;u)+mt1+tE∂t(t;u)−Ea(t;∂tu)≤mt1+tE∂x(t;u)+(m(R0+1+t)αa1(t1+t)−1)Ea(t;∂tu). |
Therefore we obtain (3.10).
(ii) For t≥0, and t≥R0+1,
(t2+t)−λddt((t2+t)λE2(t;u))≤λt2+tE∗(t;u)+λt2+tEa(t;u)+ddtE2(t;u)≤λt2+tE∗(t;u)+λt2+tEa(t;u)−1−3ε1−εE∂x(t;u)+(2a1+A2ε(R0+1)2εa21)(R0+1+t)αEa(t;∂tu). |
Noting that by (3.7) and (3.5),
λt2+tE∗(t;u)≤2λ(R0+1+t)αa1(t2+t)√Ea(t;u)Ea(t;∂tu)≤λεt2+tEa(t;u)+λεa21(R0+1+t)2αt2+tEa(t;∂tu)≤λεt2+tEa(t;u)+λεa21t1−α2(t2+t)αEa(t;∂tu), |
we deduce (3.11).
(iii) Combining (3.10) with m=λ+α and (3.11), we have for t3≥t∗∗(ε,R0,α,λ) and t≥0,
ddt(ν(t3+t)λ+αE1(t;u)+(t3+t)λE2(t;u))≤(ν(λ+α)(t3+t)α−1−1−3ε1−ε)(t3+t)λE∂x(t;u)+λ(1+ε)(t3+t)λ−1Ea(t;u)+(2a1+A2ε(R0+1)2εa21+λ2εa21t1−α3−ν2)(t3+t)λ+αEa(t;∂tu)≤−1−4ε1−ε(t3+t)λE∂x(t;u)+λ(1+ε)(t3+t)λ−1Ea(t;u). |
This proves the assertion.
Proof of Proposition 3.5. Firstly, by (3.7) we observe that
ν(t3+t)αE1(t;u)+E2(t;u)≥4a1(t3+t)αE1(t;u)−|E∗(t;u)|+Ea(t;u)≥4a1(t3+t)αE∂t(t;u)−2√a1(t3+t)α2√Ea(t;u)E∂t(t;u)+Ea(t;u)≥34Ea(t;u). |
By using the above estimate, we prove the assertion via mathematical induction.
Step 1 (k = 0). By (3.12) using Lemma 3.6 implies that
ddt(ν(t3+t)λ+αE1(t;u)+(t3+t)λE2(t;u))≤(−1−4ε1−ε+λ(1+ε)(h+2ε)1−ε)(t3+t)λE∂x(t;u). |
Therefore taking λ0=(1−ε)(1−4ε)(1+ε)(h+2ε), (λ0↑h−1 as ε↓0) we have
ddt(ν(t3+t)λ0+αE1(t;u)+(t3+t)λ0E2(t;u))≤−ε(1−4ε)1−ε(t3+t)λ0E∂x(t;u). |
Integrating over (0, t) with respect to t, we see
34(t3+t)λ0Ea(t;u)+ε(1−4ε)1−ε∫t0(t3+s)λ0E∂x(s;u)ds≤ν(t3+t)λ0+αE1(t;u)+(t3+t)λ0E2(t;u)+ε(1−4ε)1−ε∫t0(t3+s)λ0E∂x(s;u)ds≤νtλ0+α3E1(0;u)+tλ03E2(0;u). |
Using (3.10) with m=λ0+1 and integrating over (0, t), we obtain
(t3+t)λ0+1E1(t;u)+12∫t0(t3+s)λ0+1Ea(s;∂tu)ds≤tλ0+13E1(0;u)+(λ0+1)∫t0(t3+s)λ0E∂x(s;u)ds≤tλ0+13E1(0;u)+(λ0+1)(1−ε)ε(1−4ε)(νtλ0+α3E1(0;u)+tλ03E2(0;u)). |
This proves the desired assertion with k = 0 and also the integrability of (t3+s)λ0+1Ea(s;∂tu).
Step 2 (1<k≤k0−1)). Suppose that for every t≥0,
(1+t)λ0+2k−1E1(t;∂k−1tu)+(1+t)λ0+2k−2Ea(t;∂k−1tu)≤Mε,k−1‖(u0,u1)‖2Hk×Hk−1(Ω) |
and additionally,
∫t0(1+s)λ0+2k−1Ea(s;∂ktu)ds≤M′ε,k−1‖(u0,u1)‖2Hk×Hk−1(Ω). |
Since the initial value (u0,u1) satisfies the compatibility condition of order k, ∂ktu is also a solution of (1.1) with replaced (u0,u1) with (uk−1,uk). Applying (3.12) with λ=λ0+2k, putting t3k=t∗∗(ε,R0,α,λ0+2k) (see Lemma 3.9 (iii)) and integrating over (0, t), we have
34(t3k+t)λ0+2kEa(t;∂ktu)+1−4ε1−ε∫t0(t3k+s)λ0+2kE∂x(s;∂ktu)ds≤ν(t3k+t)λ0+2k+αE1(t;∂ktu)+(t3k+t)λ0+2kE2(t;∂ktu)+1−4ε1−ε∫t0(t3k+s)λ0+2kE∂x(s;∂ktu)ds≤νtλ0+2k+α3kE1(0;∂ktu)+tλ0+2k3kE2(0;∂ktu)+(λ0+2k)(1+ε)∫t0(t3k+s)λ0+2k−1Ea(s;∂ktu)ds≤νtλ0+2k+α3kE1(0;∂ktu)+tλ0+2k−13kE2(0;∂ktu)+(λ0+2k)(1+ε)M′ε,k−1‖(u0,u1)‖2Hk×Hk−1(Ω). |
Moreover, from (3.10) with m=λ0+2k+1 we have
(t3k+t)λ0+2k+1E1(t;∂ktu)+12∫t0(t3k+s)λ0+2k+1Ea(s;∂k+1tu)ds≤tλ0+2k+13kE1(0;∂ktu)+(λ0+2k+1)∫t0(t3k+s)λ0+2kE∂x(s;∂ktu)ds≤M″ε,k(E1(0;∂ktu)+E2(0;∂ktu)+‖(u0,u1)‖2Hk×Hk−1(Ω)) |
with some constant M″ε,k>0. By induction we obtain the desired inequalities for all k≤k0−1.
Proposition 4.1. Assume that (u0,u1)∈(H2∩H10(Ω))×H10(Ω) and suppose that supp(u0,u1)⊂¯B(0,R0). Let u be the solution of (1.1). Then for every ε>0, there exists a constant Cε,R0>0 such that
‖u(⋅,t)−etL∗[u0+a(⋅)−1u1]‖L2dμ≤Cε,R0(1+t)−N−α2(2−α)−1−α2−α+ε‖(u0,u1)‖H2×H1. |
To prove Proposition 4.1 we use the following lemma stated in [10, Section 4].
Lemma 4.2. Assume that (u0,u1)∈(H2∩H10(Ω))×H10(Ω) and suppose that supp(u0,u1)⊂{x∈Ω;|x|≤R0}. Then for every t≥0,
u(x,t)−etL∗[u0+a(⋅)−1u1]=−∫tt/2e(t−s)L∗[a(⋅)−1utt(⋅,s)]ds−et2L∗[a(⋅)−1ut(⋅,t/2)]−∫t/20L∗e(t−s)L∗[a(⋅)−1ut(⋅,s)]ds, | (4.1) |
where L∗ is the (negative) Friedrichs extension of −L=−a(x)−1Δ in L2dμ.
Proof of Proposition 4.1. First we show the assertion for (u0, u1) satisfying the compatibility condition of order 2. Taking L2dμ -norm of both side, we have
‖u(x,⋅)−etL∗[u0+a(⋅)−1u1]‖L2dμ≤J1(t)+J2(t)+J3(t), |
where
J1(t):=∫tt/2‖e(t−s)L∗[a(⋅)−1utt(⋅,s)]‖L2dμds,J2(t):=‖et2L∗[a(⋅)−1ut(⋅,t/2)]‖L2dμ,J3(t):=∫t/20‖L∗e(t−s)L∗[a(⋅)−1ut(⋅,s)]‖L2dμds. |
Noting that for x∈Ω,
a(x)−1Φε(x,t)−1≤1a1⟨x⟩αexp(−A1εh+2ε⟨x⟩2−α1+t)≤1a1(α(h+2ε)(2−α)eA1ε)α2−α(1+t)α2−α, |
we see that for k = 0, 1,
‖a(⋅)−1∂k+1tu(⋅,s)‖2L2dμ=∫Ωa(x)−1|∂k+1tu(⋅,s)|2dx≤‖a(⋅)−1Φε(⋅,t)−1‖L∞(Ω)∫Ω|∂k+1tu(⋅,s)|2Φεdx≤˜C(1+t)α2−αE∂t(t,∂ktu)≤˜CMε,k(1+t)−λ0−2−2α2−α−2k‖(u0,u1)‖2Hk+1×Hk. |
Therefore from Proposition 3.5 with k = 1 and k = 0 we have
J1(t)≤∫tt/2‖a(⋅)−1utt(⋅,s)‖L2dμds≤√˜CM1‖(u0,u1)‖H2×H1∫tt/2(1+s)−λ02−1−α2−α−1ds≤2(2−α)λ0(2−α)+1−α√˜CMε,1(1+t)−λ02−1−α2−α‖(u0,u1)‖H2×H1 |
and
J2(t)≤‖a(⋅)−1ut(⋅,t/2)‖L2dμ≤√˜CMε,0(1+t)−λ02−1−α2−α‖(u0,u1)‖H1×L2. |
Moreover, by Lemma 2.2, we see by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality that for t≥1,
J3(t)≤C∫t/20(t−s)−N−α2(2−α)−1‖a(⋅)−1ut(⋅,s)‖L1dμds≤C(t2)−N−α2(2−α)−1∫t/20√‖Φ−1ε(⋅,s)‖L1(Ω)E∂t(s;u)ds. |
Since
‖Φ−1(⋅,t)‖L1(Ω)≤∫RNexp(−A1εh+2ε|x|2−α1+t)dx=(1+t)N2−α∫RNexp(−A1εh+2ε|y|2−α)dy, |
we deduce
J3(t)≤C′(1+t)−N−α2(2−α)−1‖(u0,u1)‖H1×L2∫t/20(1+s)N−α2(2−α)−λ02−1−α2−αds≤C′(N−α2(2−α)−λ02+12−α)(1+t)−N−α2(2−α)−1(1+t/2)N−α2(2−α)−λ02−1−α2−α+1‖(u0,u1)‖H1×L2≤C″(1+t)−λ02−1−α2−α‖(u0,u1)‖H1×L2. |
Consequently, we obtain
‖u(⋅,t)−etL∗[u0+a(⋅)−1u1]‖L2dμ≤C‴(1+t)−λ02−1−α2−α‖(u0,u1)‖H2×H1. |
Next we show the assertion for (u0,u1) satisfying (u0,u1)∈(H2×H10(Ω))×H10(Ω) (the compatibility condition of order 1) via an approximation argument. Fix ϕ∈C∞c(RN,[0,1]) such that ϕ≡1 on ¯B(0,R0) and ϕ≡0 on RN∖B(0,R0+1) and define for n∈N,
(u0nu1n)=(ϕ˜u0nϕ˜u1n),(˜u0n˜u1n)=(1+1nA)−1(u0u1), |
where A is an m-accretive operator in H=H10(Ω)×L2(Ω) associated with (1.1), that is,
A=(0−1−Δa(x)) |
endowed with domain D(A)=(H2∩H10(Ω))×H10(Ω). Then (u0n,u1n) satisfies supp(u0n,u1n)⊂¯B(0,R0+1) and the compatibility condition of order 2. Let vn be a solution of (1.1) with (u0n,u1n). Observe that
‖(u0n,u1n)‖2H2×H1≤C2‖ϕ‖2W2,∞‖(˜u0,˜u1)‖2H2×H1≤C′2‖ϕ‖2W2,∞(‖(˜u0,˜u1)‖2H+‖A(˜u0,˜u1)‖2H)≤C′2‖ϕ‖2W2,∞(‖(u0,u1)‖2H+‖A(u0,u1)‖2H)≤C″2‖ϕ‖2W2,∞‖(u0,u1)‖2H2×H1 |
with suitable constants C, C′, C″>0, and
(u0nu1n)→(ϕu0ϕu1)=(u0u1)in H |
as n→∞ and also u0n+a−1u1n→u0+a−1u1 in L2dμ as n→∞. Using the result of the previous step, we deduce
‖vn(⋅,t)−etL∗[u0n+a(⋅)−1u1n]‖L2dμ≤˜C(1+t)−λ02−1−α2−α‖(u0,u1)‖H2×H1 |
with some constant ˜C>0. Letting n→∞, by continuity of the C0-semigroup e−tA in H we also obtain diffusion phenomena for initial data in (H2∩H10(Ω))∩H10(Ω).
This work is supported by Grant-in-Aid for JSPS Fellows 15J01600 of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science and also partially supported by Grant-in-Aid for Young Scientists Research (B), No. 16K17619. The authors would like to thank the referee for giving them valuable comments and suggestions.
All authors declare no conflicts of interest in this paper.
[1] | M. Ikawa, Mixed problems for hyperbolic equations of second order, J. Math. Soc. Japan, 20 (1968), 580-608. |
[2] | M. Ikawa, M. Ikawa, Hyperbolic partial differential equations and wave phenomena, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 2000. |
[3] | R. Ikehata, Some remarks on the wave equation with potential type damping coefficients, Int. J. Pure Appl. Math., 21 (2005), 19-24. |
[4] | A. Matsumura, On the asymptotic behavior of solutions of semi-linear wave equations, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 12 (1976), 169-189. |
[5] | A. Matsumura, Energy decay of solutions of dissipative wave equations, Proc. Japan Acad., Ser. A, 53 (1977), 232-236. |
[6] | K. Mochizuki, Scattering theory for wave equations with dissipative terms, Publ. Res. Inst. Math. Sci., 12 (1976), 383-390. |
[7] | K. Nishihara, Lp-Lq estimates of solutions to the damped wave equation in 3-dimensional space and their application, Math. Z., 244 (2003), 631-649. |
[8] | P. Radu, G. Todorova, and B. Yordanov, Higher order energy decay rates for damped wave equations with variable coefficients, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. S, 2 (2009), 609-629. |
[9] | P. Radu, G. Todorova, and B. Yordanov, Decay estimates for wave equations with variable coefficients, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 362 (2010), 2279-2299. |
[10] | M. Sobajima and Y. Wakasugi, Diffusion phenomena for the wave equation with space-dependent damping in an exterior domain, J. Differential Equations, 261 (2016), 5690-5718. |
[11] | G. Todorova, and B. Yordanov, Critical exponent for a nonlinear wave equation with damping, J. Differential Equations, 174 (2001), 464-489. |
[12] | G. Todorova, and B. Yordanov, Weighted L2-estimates for dissipative wave equations with variable coefficients, J. Differential Equations, 246 (2009), 4497-4518. |
[13] | Y.Wakasugi, On diffusion phenomena for the linear wave equation with space-dependent damping, J. Hyp. Diff. Eq., 11 (2014), 795-819. |
1. | Motohiro Sobajima, Yuta Wakasugi, Weighted energy estimates for wave equation with space-dependent damping term for slowly decaying initial data, 2019, 21, 0219-1997, 1850035, 10.1142/S0219199718500359 | |
2. | Kenji Nishihara, Motohiro Sobajima, Yuta Wakasugi, Critical exponent for the semilinear wave equations with a damping increasing in the far field, 2018, 25, 1021-9722, 10.1007/s00030-018-0546-2 | |
3. | Motohiro SOBAJIMA, Yuta WAKASUGI, Supersolutions for parabolic equations with unbounded or degenerate diffusion coefficients and their applications to some classes of parabolic and hyperbolic equations, 2021, -1, 0025-5645, 10.2969/jmsj/83928392 | |
4. | Yuta Wakasugi, Decay property of solutions to the wave equation with space‐dependent damping, absorbing nonlinearity, and polynomially decaying data, 2023, 0170-4214, 10.1002/mma.8957 | |
5. | Motohiro Sobajima, Yuta Wakasugi, Asymptotic expansion of solutions to the wave equation with space-dependent damping, 2023, 18758576, 1, 10.3233/ASY-231834 | |
6. | Xiaoyan Li, Ryo Ikehata, Fast energy decay for wave equation with a monotone potential and an effective damping, 2024, 21, 0219-8916, 255, 10.1142/S0219891624500085 |