Existence of the Solutions for a Class of Quasilinear Schrödinger Equations with Nonlocal Term ()
1. Introduction
In this paper, we consider investigating the existence of a nontrivial solution for the following generalized quasilinear Schrödinger equation with a nonlocal term
(1.1)
where
, the function
may be vanish at infinity,
, g is a
even function with
for all
,
,
,
, when
, (1.1) boils down to the so called nonlinear Choquard or Choquard-Pekar equation
(1.2)
Such like equation has several physical origins. The problem
(1.3)
appeared at least as early as 1954, in a work by Pekar describing the quantum mechanics of a polaron at rest [1]. In 1976, Choquard used (1.3) to describe an electron trapped in its own hole and in a certain approximation to Hartree-Fock theory of one component plasma [2]. In 1996, Penrose proposed (1.3) as a model of self-gravitating matter, in a program in which quantum state reduction is understood as a gravitational phenomenon [3]. In this context, equation of type (1.3) is usually called the nonlinear Schrödinger-Newton equation. The first investigations for existence and symmetry of the solutions (1.3) go back to the works of Lieb [2] and Lions [4]. In [2], by using symmetric decreasing rearrangement inequalities, Lieb proved that the ground state solution of equation (3) is radial and unique up to translations. Lions [4] showed the existence of a sequence of radially symmetric solutions [5]. Wei and Winter consider strongly interacting bumps for the Schröding-Newton equation. Ma and Zhao [6] considered the generalized Choquard equation
(1.4)
and proved that every positive solution of it is radially symmetric and monotone decreasing about some fixed point, under the assumption that a certain set of real numbers, defined in terms of N, q, is nonempty. Under the same assumption, Cingolani, Clapp, and Secchi [7] gave some existence and multiplicity results in the electromagnetic case and established the regularity and some decay asymptotically at infinity of the ground states. In [8], Moroz and Van Schaftingen eliminated this restriction and showed the regularity, positivity, and radial symmetry of the ground states for the optimal range of parameters and derived decay asymptotically at infinity for them as well. Moreover, they [9] also obtained a similar conclusion under the assumption of Berestycki-Lions type nonlinearity. We point out that the existence, multiplicity, and concentration of such equations have been established by many authors. We refer the readers to [10] [11] for the existence of sign-changing solutions, [5] [12] for the existence and concentration behavior of the semiclassical solutions and [13] for the critical nonlocal part with respect to the Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality. For more details associated with the Choquard equation, please refer to [14] [15] [16] and the references therein. Li, Teng, Zhang, and Nie [17] investigate the existence of solutions for the following generalized quasilinear Schrödinger equation with a nonlocal term
(1.5)
and prove that the existence of solution. Li and Wu [18] considered the following generalized quasilinear Schrödinger equations with critical or supercritical growths
(1.6)
and prove the existence of nontrivial solutions. Recently, Chen, Zhang and Tang [19] considered following Kirchhoff-type equation with convolution term and prove the existence of ground state solutions. Li, Li and Ma [20] proved that (1.7) has a positive ground state solution by using a monotonicity trick introduced by Jeanjean [21] and a version of global compactness Lemma.
Inspired by the above in this paper, we will consider the existence of nontrivial solution for the generalized quasilinear Schrödinger equation when
as
. The energy functional associated with (1.1)
where
, However, I is not well defined in
since the term
. To overcome this difficulty, we make a change of variable constructed by Shen and Wang in [22]:
. Then we obtain
(1.7)
We say u is a solution of (1.1) if
(1.8)
for all
. Let
. By [21] we know that (1.8) is equivalent to
(1.9)
for all
. Therefore, in order to find the nontrivial solution of (1.1), it suffices to study the existence of the nontrivial of the following equations
(1.10)
To describe our results, we firstly introduce the assumptions on V and K:
(VK1)
,
,
;
(VK2) If
is a sequence of borel sets with
for all n and some
, then
(VK3)
;
(VK4) there exists
such that
For the nonlinearity f, and g, we have the following assumptions:
(f1)
and
;
(f2)
if (VK3) holds;
if (VK4) holds;
(f3)
;
(f4)
;
(f5)
is strictly increasing as
;
(f6) there exist
such that
, if
.
Then we have the following results.
Theorem 1.1. Suppose that (VK1)-(VK4) (f1)-(f5). Then the problem (1.1) exists a nontrivial solution.
Remark 1.1. In this paper, we consider the potential function V is vanishing at infinity and the nonlocal term f is subcritical. By using mountain pass theorem and dominated theorem, we prove the theorem 1.1. At same time, we say lemma 3.4 [23] play a great role in this article. Moreover, if someone are interested in this case, they can consider nonlocal term f is critical and supercritical.
In this paper, we will make use of the following notations:
· The characters
means to inexactly positive constants respectively;
· “
” denotes strong convergence and “
” denotes weak convergence;
·
, denotes the Lebesgue space with the norm
.
2. Preliminary Results
Throughout the paper, we let
(2.1)
then H is a Hilbert space equipped with the inner product
and the norm
We also define weighted Lebesgue space
To begin with, we give some lemmas.
Lemma 2.1. [24] (Hardy-Littlewood-Sobolev inequality) Let
, and
with
,
and
. There exists a sharp comstant
, independent of
, such that
Lemma 2.2. [25] The function
enjoy the following properties.
(g1) the function
and
are strictly increasing and odd;
(g2)
for all
;
(g3)
is nondecreasing for all
and
,
;
(g4)
for all
.
Lemma 2.3. Assume that (f1)-(f5). Then we have the following conditions:
1) For every
, there exists
satisfies that
and
, if (VK3) holds.
2) For every
and
, there is
satisfies that
and
, if (VK4) holds.
Proof: By the definition and straightforward calculus.
Lemma 2.4. [26] Assume that there are (VK1)-(VK2) hold. Then, H is compactly embedded in
for all
if (VK3) holds. If (VK4) holds, one has H is compactly embedded in
, for all
.
Proof: The proof will be made into two parts, firstly we consider the condition (VK3), and after (VK4). By assuming that (VK3) is true, fixed
and given
, there are
and
such that
(2.2)
Hence,
(2.3)
where
and
If
is a sequence such that
in H, there is
such that
which imply that
is bounded. On the other hand, setting
the last inequality implies that
showing that
. Therefore, from (VK2), there is an
such that
(2.4)
Now, (2.3) and (2.4) lead to
(2.5)
Once that
and K is a continuous function, it follows from Sobolev embedding
(2.6)
Combining (2.5) and (2.6)
(2.7)
which yields
Now, we will suppose that (VK4) holds. First of all, it is important to observe that for each
fixed, the function
has
as its minimum value, where
Hence,
Combining the last inequality with (VK4), given
, there is
large enough, such that
leading to
If
is a sequence such that
in H, there is
such that
and so
(2.8)
Once that
and
is a continuous function, it follows from Sobolev embedding
(2.9)
From (2.9) and (2.10)
implying that
finishing the proof of the proposition.
Lemma 2.5. Suppose that f satisfies (f1)-(f5). Let
be a sequence such that
in H. Then
and
Proof: We will begin the proof by assuming that (VK3) occurs. From Lemma 2.3, fixed
and given
, there is
such that
(2.10)
From Lemma 2.4
then there is
such that
(2.11)
Since
is bounded in H, by lemma 2.2 there is
such that
Combining the last inequalities with (2.10) and (2.11)
(2.12)
Now, if (VK4) holds, repeating the same arguments explored in the proof of Lemma 2.4, given
small enough, there is
large enough such that
Hence
From (f2) and (f3), there are
verifying
where
. Thereby, for any
, we have the follow estimate
with
and
Once that
is bounded in H, there is
such that
Thus
where
Repeating the same arguments used in the proof of Lemma 2.2, it follows that
and so, for n large enough
Using compactness lemma of Strauss [27], Theorem A.I, p. 338, we have
so
Similarly, we can prove
and
Lemma 2.6. Assume the assumptions (VK1)-(VK4) and (f1)-(f5) hold. Then J satisfies the following conditions:
i) There exist
if
.
ii) There exist an
with
such that
.
Proof: (i) If (VK3) hold, by Lemma 2.3 and (f3) and (f4), we have
(2.13)
Since
, we can choose some
such that
If (VK4) holds, by the same way, we also have the same result.
(ii) First we note that
. Furthermore, by Lemma 2.2, for fixed
and
, we have
(2.14)
From Lemma 2.3 and (f6), there exist
such that
By (f1) and (f5), we have
, then
(2.15)
Thus, we take
for some
, and (ii) holds.
By Lemma 2.6 and Ambrosetti-Rabinowitz mountain pass theorem [28], there exists a
sequence
(2.16)
at the minimax level
where
.
Lemma 2.7. The sequence
given in (2.16) is bounded.
Proof: By (2.16) and Lemma 2.3, we have
(2.17)
which implies that
is bounded in H.
Proof of Theorem 1.1: By Lemma 2.7,
is bounded in H. Then, passing to a subsequence,
in H,
in
for
,
a.e in
.
By (1.9) and Fatou’s Lemma, we obtain that
(2.18)
and
(2.19)
Next, we prove that
(2.20)
First we prove the first equality in (2.19),
(2.21)
where
and
Next, we prove
as
, since
(2.22)
It follows from Lemma 2.5 that
Thus
Similarly
Therefore, we have that
(2.23)
Next, we say
is impossible. We know
, then we have
Let n large enough, we have
By (2.19) and Lemma 2.2
which contradict with
. Next, we prove
,
. since
We prove it by two parts
(2.24)
and
(2.25)
By Lemma 2.5 and Lemma 3.4 [23], we have
(2.26)
By the (2.24)-(2.26), Lemma 2.5, and the Lemma 3.4 [28], we have
Then
(2.27)
Hence, v is a nontrivial solution of Equation (1.1).
Acknowledgments
We should like to thank the anonymous referee for his/her careful readings of our manuscript and the useful comments made for its improvement.