Abstract
We study the large-time behavior of solutions to the nonlinear exterior problem under the nonhomegeneous Neumann boundary condition where is the Schrödinger operator, is the open unit ball in , , , , , , is a nontrivial complex valued function, and is the outward unit normal vector on , relative to . Namely, under a certain condition imposed on , we show that if and , where then the considered problem admits no global weak solutions. However, if , then for all , the problem admits no global weak solutions. The proof is based on the test function method introduced by Mitidieri and Pohozaev, and an adequate choice of the test function.
Keywords:
nonlinear Schrödinger equation; exterior domain; nonhomegeneous Neumann boundary condition; global weak solution MSC:
35B44; 35B33
1. Introduction
We investigate the nonlinear exterior problem
where is the Schrödinger operator, is the open unit ball in , , , , and , . Problem (1) is studied under the nonhomegeneous Neumann boundary condition
where is a nontrivial complex valued function and is the outward unit normal vector on , relative to . Namely, we derive sufficient conditions so that Equations (1) and (2) admit no global weak solutions.
We mention below some motivations for studying the considered problem. Let us first fix some notations. Given a complex number z, the real part of z is denoted by , the imaginary part of z is denoted by , the conjugate of z is denoyted by , and the modulus of z is denoted by .
In the literature, there are many results related to the blow-up of solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger equations in the whole space . Glassey [1] studied the Cauchy problem
Under the assumptions
- (i)
- ,
- (ii)
- , ,
- (iii)
- ,
it was shown that and blow up in finite time. In [2], Ogawa and Tsutsumi proved that, if and
then, if the initial data is radially symmetric and has negative energy, the solution to (3) in blows up in finite time. For other related woks, see, for example [3,4,5,6] and the references therein. Ikeda and Wakasugi [7] investigated the problem
where , and . Under certain assumptions on , they proved that the -norm of the solution u of (4) blows up in finite time. In [8], Ikeda and Inui extended the results obtained in [7] to the case . For other related results, see, for example [9,10].
We mention that the nonlinearity works differently from the nonlinearity . Indeed, Ikeda and Wakasugi in [7] showed that does not act as a long range effect such as (note that the -norm of solutions for the equation in (3) conserves for all , see [7]).
On the other hand, it is well known that for many problems, the large-time behavior of solutions depends on the geometry of the domain, as well as the considered boundary conditions. As an example, let us consider the semilinear heat equation
It is well known from a famous result of Fujita [11] that the critical exponent of (5) is
i.e., if and , problem (5) possesses no global positive solutions; if and is smaller than a small Gaussian, then (5) has global positive solutions. Consider now the same problem posed in the exterior domain with a Neumann boundary condition on , i.e.,
In the case , it was shown by Levine and Zhang [12] that the critical exponent of problem (7) is equal to the Fujita critical exponent defined by (6). However, if and , it was proven by Bandle, Levine, and Zhang [13] that the critical exponent of problem (7) jumps from (the critical exponent of (5)) to a bigger number . This shows the influence of the geometry of the domain and the considered boundary conditions on the critical behavior of solutions to (5).
In [14], Jleli and Samet studied the exterior problem (1) under the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition
and the initial condition
It was shown that, if () and
or
where H is a harmonic function, then Equations (1), (8) and (9) admit no global weak solutions. A natural question is to ask whether the above result still holds if, instead of the nonhomogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition (8), we consider the nonhomogeneous Neumann boundary condition (2).
In this paper, motivated by the above mentioned facts, we study the exterior problem (1) under the nonhomogeneous Neumann boundary condition (2). The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we give the definition of the global weak solutions of (1) and (2), and we prove some preliminary results. In Section 3, we present and proof our main result.
2. Global Weak Solutions
First, we fix some notations. Let
and
Let
where is the space of nonnegative functions compactly supported in . Recall that is closed and .
Let
From (10), one observes that
Lemma 1.
If , then
and
for any .
Let be a function satisfying
Let be a function satisfying
For , let
and
where and are constants. Let
It can be easily seen that
Lemma 2.
For all ,
It follows from Lemmas 1 and 2 that
Lemma 3.
If , then
and
for any .
3. Main Result
In this section, we obtain sufficient conditions for which . As in [14], the used technique is based on the test function method introduced by Mitidieri and Pohozaev (see, e.g., [15]). However, due to the boundary condition (2), the considered test function in our case is different to that used in [14].
For , let
Define the sets , , by
and
Our main result is the following.
Theorem 1.
Let .
- (i)
- If , then
- (ii)
- If , then
Proof.
Let , and suppose that . Using (12), for sufficiently large , one has
where . On the other hand, using (11), one obtains
which yields
where
Since , one has . It follows from (14) and (15) that
where
Further, by Hölder’s inequality, one obtains
Similarly, one has
Using (16)–(18), one obtains
where
and
Further, we shall estimate the terms and for sufficiently large T.
• Estimate of : using (11), one has
On the other hand,
Furthermore, one has
Hence, using (21), (22), and (23), one deduces that
where
Next, using (19), (20), and (24), it holds
where
Taking in (25), one obtains
Using Young’s inequality, it holds
where
Hence, by (26), one deduces that
where
Suppose now that and . In this case, one has
Hence, letting in (27), we obtain , that is a contradiction. This proves part (i) of Theorem 1. Similarly, if , for all , one has
Letting in (27), we obtain the same contradiction as in the above case, which proves part (ii) of Theorem 1.
Consider now the case , and suppose that . Using (13), for sufficiently large , one has
where . Next, using similar techniques as above, a contradiction follows. □
Remark 1.
Note that no assumptions on the initial condition are required in Theorem 1.
Remark 2.
Note that the condition in the assertion (i) of Theorem 1 is optimal, in the sense that, if , then there exists , such that . Indeed, for (), let
where
Note that since , one has . On the other hand, using (28), one obtains
which yields
Moreover,
which yields
Next, taking
using (29) and (30), one deduces that u is a stationary solution to Equations (1) and (2) with and . Observe that and .
4. Conclusions
Nonlinear Schrödinger equations attracted the attention of many mathematicians, due to their significant applications in physics. Many efforts were made to identify the blow-up of the solution of different boundary value problems involving such a type of nonlinear equations. Hence, there is a variety of approaches in the literature to studying the dynamical properties of the blow-up of the solution and prove the existence/nonexistence of global weak solutions. Here, Theorem 1 complements the results with power-type nonlinearities, in the nonhomogeneous Neumann boundary case. As pointed out above, we do not impose any assumption on the initial condition. We establish the result using the approach originally developed by Mitidieri and Pohozaev [15], together with an adequate choice of the test function. We recall that the approach methodology is indirect, starting on the assumption of the existence of a global weak solution to (1) and (2). The test function in our case is different from that used in recent analogous papers (see, for example, the one in [14]).
Author Contributions
All authors contributed equally to this work. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
The third author is supported by the Researchers Supporting Project number (RSP-2019/4), King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
- Glassey, R.T. On the blowing-up of solutions to the Cauchy problem for the nonlinear Schrödinger equation. J. Math. Phys. 1977, 18, 1794–1797. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ogawa, T.; Tsutsumi, Y. Blow-up of H1 solution for the nonlinear Schrödinger equation. J. Differ. Equ. 1991, 92, 317–330. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bourgain, J.; Wang, W. Construction of blowup solutions for the nonlinear Schrödinger equation with critical nonlinearity. Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. IV Ser. 1997, 25, 197–215. [Google Scholar]
- Ginibre, J.; Velo, G. On a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. I. The Cauchy problem, general case. J. Funct. Anal. 1979, 32, 1–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Merle, F. Limit of the solution of the nonlinear Schrödinger equation at the blow-up time. J. Func. Anal. 1989, 84, 201–214. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef][Green Version]
- Tsutsumi, M. Nonexistence of global solutions to the Cauchy problem for the damped nonlinear Schrödinger equation. SIAM J. Math. Anal. 1984, 15, 357–366. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ikeda, M.; Wakasugi, Y. Small data blow-up of L2-solution for the nonlinear Schrödinger equation without gauge invariance. Differ. Integral Equ. 2013, 26, 1275–1285. [Google Scholar]
- Ikeda, M.; Inui, T. Small data blow-up of L2 or H1-solution for the semilinear Schrödinger equation without gauge invariance. J. Evol. Equ. 2015, 15, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fino, A.Z.; Dannawi, I.; Kirane, M. Blow-up of solutions for semilinear fractional Schrödinger equations. J. Integral Equ. Appl. 2018, 30, 67–80. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kirane, M.; Nabti, A. Life span of solutions to a nonlocal in time nonlinear fractional Schrödinger equation. Z. Angew. Math. Phys. 2015, 66, 1473–1482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fujita, H. On the blowing up of solutions of the Cauchy problem for ut = Δu + u1+α. J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo. 1966, 13, 109–124. [Google Scholar]
- Levine, H.A.; Zhang, Q.S. The critical Fujita number for a semilinear heat equation in exterior domains with homogeneous Neumann boundary values. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A 2000, 130, 591–602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Bandle, C.; Levine, H.A.; Zhang, Q.S. Critical exponents of Fujita type for inhomogeneous parabolic equations and systems. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2000, 251, 624–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Jleli, M.; Samet, B. On the critical exponent for nonlinear Schrödinger equations without gauge invariance in exterior domains. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2019, 469, 188–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mitidieri, E.; Pohozaev, S.I. The absence of global positive solutions to quasilinear elliptic inequalities. Doklady Math. 1998, 57, 250–253. [Google Scholar]
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).