Multiple Solutions for an Elliptic Equation with Hardy-Sobolev Critical Exponent, Hardy-Sobolev-Maz’ya Potential and Sign-Changing Weights ()
1. Introduction
In this paper, we consider the multiplicity results of nontrivial nonnegative solutions of the following problem (
)


where each point x in
is written as a pair
where m and N are integers such that
and m belongs to
,
with
is the critical Hardy-Sobolev critical exponent,
,
,
is a real parameter and
are continuous functions which change sign in
.
In recent years, many auteurs have paid much attention to the following singular elliptic problem, i.e., the case
in (
),
(1)
where
is a smooth bounded domain in
(
),
,
,
and
is the critical Sobolev exponent, see [1] [2] [3] and references therein. The quasilinear form of (1) is discussed in [4]. Some results are already available for (
). Wang and Zhou [5] proved that there exist at least two solutions for (
) with,
, Bouchekif and Matallah [6] showed the existence of two solutions of (
) under certain conditions on a weighted function h, when
,
with
a positive constant.
Our motivation of this study is the fact that such equations arise in the search for solitary waves of nonlinear evolution equations of the Schrodinger or Klein-Gordon type. Roughly speaking, a solitary wave is a nonsingular solution, which travels as a localized packet in such a way that the physical quantities corresponding to the invariances of the equation are finite and conserved in time. Accordingly, a solitary wave preserves intrinsic properties of particles such as the energy, the angular momentum, and the charge, whose finiteness is strictly related to the finiteness of the norm. Owing to their particle-like behavior, solitary waves can be regarded as a model for extended particles and they arise in many problems of mathematical physics, such as classical and quantum field theory, nonlinear optics, fluid mechanics, and plasma physics.
Concerning existence results in the case
, we cite [7] [8] [9] [10] and the references therein. Musina [10] considered (
) with
, also (
). She established the existence of a ground state solution when
and
for (
) with
. She also showed that (
) with
does not admit ground state solutions. Badiale et al. [11] studied (
) with
. They proved the existence of at least a nonzero nonnegative weak solution u, satisfying
when
and
. Bouchekif and El Mokhtar [12] proved that (
) admits two distinct solutions when
,
with
,
, and
where
is a positive constant. Terracini [5] proved that there is no positive solutions of (
) with
when
. The regular problem corresponding to has been considered on a regular bounded domain
by Tarantello [13]. She proved that, with a nonhomogeneous term
, the dual of
, not identically zero and satisfying a suitable condition, the problem considered admits two distinct solutions.
Before formulating our results, we give some definitions and notations.
We denote by
and
, the closure of
with respect to the norms
![]()
and
![]()
respectively, with
for
.
From the Hardy-Sobolev-Maz’ya inequality, it is easy to see that the norm
is equivalent to
. More explicitly, we have
![]()
with
and
for all
.
We list here a few integral inequalities.
The starting point for studying (
), is the Hardy inequality with cylindrical weights [10]. It states that
(2)
Since our approach is variational, we define the functional J on
by
![]()
A point
is a weak solution of the equation (
) if it satisfies
![]()
here
denotes the product in the duality
,
(
dual of
).
Let
![]()
From [14],
is achieved.
We consider the following assumptions:
(K) k is a continuous function defined in
and satisfies
,
,
(H) h is a continuous function defined in
and there exist
and
positive such that
for all
.
In our work, we research the critical points as the minimizers of the energy functional associated to the problem (
) on the constraint defined by the Nehari manifold, which are solutions of our system.
Let
be positive number such that
![]()
Now we can state our main results.
Theorem 1. Assume that
,
and
verifying
, then the system (
) has at least one positive solution.
Theorem 2. In addition to the assumptions of the Theorem 1, there exists
such that if
satisfying
, then (
) has at least two positive solutions.
Theorem 3. In addition to the assumptions of the Theorem 2, assuming
, there exists a positive real
such that, if
satisfy
, then (
) has at least two positive solutions and at least one pair of sign-changing solutions.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give some preliminaries. Section 3 and 4 are devoted to the proofs of Theorems 1 and 2. In the last Section, we prove the Theorem 3.
2. Preliminaries
Definition 1. Let
, E a Banach space and
.
1)
is a Palais-Smale sequence at level c (in short (PS)c) in E for I if
![]()
where
tends to 0 as n goes at infinity.
2) We say that I satisfies the (PS)c condition if any (PS)c sequence in E for I has a convergent subsequence.
Lemma 1. Let X Banach space, and
verifying the Palais-Smale condition. Suppose that
and that:
1) there exist
,
such that if
, then
;
2) there exist
such that
and
;
let
where
![]()
then c is critical value of J such that
.
Nehari Manifold
It is well known that J is of class
in
and the solutions of (
) are the critical points of J which is not bounded below on
. Consider the following Nehari manifold
![]()
Thus,
if and only if
(3)
Note that
contains every nontrivial solution of the problem (
). Moreover, we have the following results.
Lemma 2. J is coercive and bounded from below on
.
Proof. If
, then by (3) and the Hölder inequality, we deduce that
(4)
Thus, J is coercive and bounded from below on
.
Define
![]()
Then, for ![]()
(5)
Now, we split
in three parts:
![]()
![]()
![]()
We have the following results.
Lemma 3. Suppose that
is a local minimizer for J on
. Then, if
,
is a critical point of J.
Proof. If
is a local minimizer for J on
, then
is a solution of the optimization problem
![]()
Hence, there exists a Lagrange multipliers
such that
![]()
Thus,
![]()
But
, since
. Hence
. This completes the proof.
Lemma 4. There exists a positive number
such that for all
, verifying
![]()
we have
.
Proof. Let us reason by contradiction.
Suppose
such that
. Then, by (5) and for
, we have
![]()
![]()
Moreover, by the Hölder inequality and the Sobolev embedding theorem, we obtain
(6)
and
(7)
From (6) and (7), we obtain
, which contradicts an hypothesis.
Thus
. Define
![]()
For the sequel, we need the following Lemma.
Lemma 5. 1) For all
such that
, one has
;
2) For all
such that
, one has
![]()
Proof. 1) Let
. By (5), we have
![]()
and so
![]()
We conclude that
.
2) Let
. By (5), we get
![]()
Moreover, by Sobolev embedding theorem, we have
![]()
This implies
(8)
By (4), we get
![]()
Thus, for all
such that
![]()
we have
.
Proposition 1. (see [15] ) 1) For all
such that
, there exists a
sequence in
.
2) For all
such that
, there exists a a
sequence in
.
We define:
![]()
and for each
with
, we write
![]()
Lemma 6. Let
real parameters such that
. For each
we have:
1) If
then there exists unique
such that
and
![]()
2) If
then there exist unique
and
such that
,
,
and
![]()
3) If
, then does not exist
such that
.
4) If
, then there exists unique
such that ![]()
and
![]()
Proof. With minor modifications, we refer to [15].
3. Proof of Theorem 1
Now, taking as a starting point the work of Tarantello [16], we establish the existence of a local minimum for J on
.
Proposition 2. For all
such that
, the functional J has a minimizer
and it satisfies:
(i)
;
(ii)
is a nontrivial solution of (
).
Proof. If
, then by Proposition 1, (i) there exists a
-
sequence in
, thus it bounded by Lemma 2. Then, there exists
and we can extract a subsequence.
Which will denoted by
such that
(9)
Thus, by (9),
is a weak nontrivial solution of (
). Now, we show that
converges to
strongly in
. Suppose otherwise. By the lower semi-continuity of the norm, then either
and we obtain
![]()
We get a contradiction. Therefore,
converge to
strongly in
. Moreover, we have
. If not, then by Lemma 6, there are two numbers
and
, uniquely defined so that
and
. In particular, we have
. Since
![]()
there exists
such that
. By Lemma 6, we get
![]()
which contradicts the fact that
. Since
and
, then by Lemma 3, we may assume that
is a nontrivial nonnegative solution of (
). By the Harnack inequality, we conclude that
, see for example [17].
4. Proof of Theorem 2
Next, we establish the existence of a local minimum for J on
. For this, we require the following Lemma.
Lemma 7. For all
such that
, the functional J has a minimizer
in
and it satisfies:
(i)
;
(ii)
is a nontrivial solution of (
) in
.
Proof. If
, then by Proposition 1, (ii) there exists a
,
sequence in
, thus it bounded by Lemma 2. Then, there exists
and we can extract a subsequence which will denoted by
such that
![]()
This implies
![]()
Moreover, by (5) we obtain
(10)
By (6) and (10) there exists a positive number
![]()
such that
(11)
This implies that
![]()
Now, we prove that
converges to
strongly in
. Suppose otherwise. Then, either
. By Lemma 6 there is a unique
such that
. Since
![]()
we have
![]()
and this is a contradiction. Hence,
![]()
Thus,
![]()
Since
and
, then by (11) and Lemma 3, we may assume that
is a nontrivial nonnegative solution of (
). By the maximum principle, we conclude that
.
Now, we complete the proof of Theorem 2. By Propositions 2 and Lemma 7, we obtain that (
) has two positive solutions
and
. Since
, this implies that
and
are distinct.
5. Proof of Theorem 3
In this section, we consider the following Nehari submanifold of ![]()
![]()
Thus,
if and only if
![]()
Firsly, we need the following Lemmas:
Lemma 8. Under the hypothesis of theorem 3, there exist
,
such that
is nonempty for any
and
.
Proof. Fix
and let
![]()
Clearly
and
as
. Moreover, we have
![]()
If
for
, then there exist
![]()
and
such that
. Thus,
and
is nonempty for any
.
Lemma 9. There exist
positive reals such that
, for
and any
verifying
![]()
Proof. Let
, then by (3), (5) and the Holder inequality, allows us to write
![]()
Thus, if
![]()
and choosing
with
defined in Lemma 8, then we obtain that
(12)
Lemma 10. Suppose
and
. Then, there exist
and
positive constants such that
1) we have
![]()
2) there exists
when
, with
, such that
.
Proof. We can suppose that the minima of J are realized by
and
. The geometric conditions of the mountain pass theorem are satisfied. Indeed, we have:
1) By (5), (12) and the fact that
we get
![]()
By the fact that
and
and
, we obtain that
![]()
2) Let
, then we have for all ![]()
![]()
Letting
for t large enough, we obtain
. For t large enough we can ensure
.
Let
and c defined by
![]()
and
![]()
Proof of Theorem 3.
If
![]()
then, by the Lemmas 2 and Proposition 1 2), J verifying the Palais-Smale condition in
. Moreover, from the Lemmas 3, 9 and 10, there exists
such that
![]()
Thus
is the third solution of our system such that
and
. Since (
) is odd with respect u, we obtain that
is also a solution of (
).
6. Conclusion
In our work, we have searched the critical points as the minimizers of the energy functional associated with the problem on the constraint defined by the Nehari manifold
, which are solutions to our problem. Under some sufficient conditions on coefficients of equation of (2), we split
in two disjoint subsets
and
thus we consider the minimization problems on
and
respectively. In Sections 3 and 4, we have proved the existence of at least two nontrivial solutions on
for all
. In the perspectives we will try to find more non-trivial solutions by splitting again the sub-varieties of Nehari.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge Qassim University, represented by the Deanship of Scientific Research, on the material support for this research under the number (1030) during the academic year 1441AH/2019AD.