Abstract
In this paper, we deal with the second initial boundary value problem for higher order hyperbolic systems in domains with conical points. We establish several results on the well-posedness and the regularity of solutions.
1 Introduction
Boundary value problems in nonsmooth domains have been studied in differential aspects. Up to now, elliptic boundary value problems in domains with point singularities have been thoroughly investigated (see, e.g, [1,2] and the extensive bibliography in this book). We are concerned with initial boundary value problems for hyperbolic equations and systems in domains with conical points. These problems with the Dirichlet boundary conditions were investigated in [3-5] in which the unique existence, the regularity and the asymptotic behaviour near the conical points of the solutions are established. The Neumann boundary problem for general second-order hyperbolic systems with the coefficients independent of time in domains with conical points was studied in [6]. In the present paper we consider the Cauchy-Neumann (the second initial) boundary value problem for higher-order strongly hyperbolic systems in domains with conical points.
Our paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to some notations and the formulation of the problem. In Section 3 we present the results on the unique existence and the regularity in time of the generalized solution. The global regularity of the solution is dealt with in Section 4.
2 Notations and the formulation of the problem
Let Ω be a bounded domain in ℝn, n ≥ 2, with the boundary ∂Ω. We suppose that ∂Ω is an infinitely differentiable surface everywhere except the origin, in a neighborhood of which Ω coincides with the cone K = {x : x/|x| ∈ G}, where G is a smooth domain on the unit sphere Sn-1. For each t, 0 < t ≤ ∞, denote Qt = Ω × (0, t), Ωt = Ω × {t}. Especially, we set Q = Q∞, Γ = ∂Ω\{0}, S = Γ × [0, +∞).
For each multi-index p = (p1,..., pn) ∈ ℕn, we use notations |p| = p1 + ... + pn,
Let us introduce the following functional spaces used in this paper. Let l denote a nonnegative integer.
Hl (Ω) - the usual Sobolev space of vector functions u defined in Ω with the norm
Hl,0 (Q, γ) (γ ∈ ℝ)- the weighted Sobolev space of vector functions u defined in Q with the norm
Especially, we set L2(Q, γ) = H0,0(Q, γ).
Hl,1 (Q, γ) (γ ∈ ℝ)- the weighted Sobolev space of vector functions u defined in Q with the norm
where
If l ≥ 1, then
From the definitions it follows the continuous imbeddings
and
for arbitrary nonnegative integers l, k and real number α. It is also well known (see [[2], Th. 7.1.1]) that if
with the norms being equivalent.
Now we introduce the differential operator
where apq = apq (x, t) are the s × s matrices with the bounded complex-valued components in
for all ηp ∈ℂs, |p| = m, and all
Let v be the unit exterior normal to S. It is well known that (see, e.g., [[7], Th. 9.47]) there are boundary operators Nj = Nj (x, t, D), j = 1, 2,..., m on S such that integration equality
holds for all
In this paper, we consider the following problem:
A complex vector-valued function u ∈ Hm,1(Q, γ) is called a generalized solution of problem (2.6)-(2.8) if and only if u|t = 0 = 0 and the equality
holds for all η(x, t) ∈ Hm,1(Q) satisfying η(x, t) = 0 for all t ≥ T for some positive real number T.
3 The unique solvability and the regularity in time
First, we introduce some notations which will be used in the proof of Theorems 3.3 and 3.4. For each vector function u,v defined in Ω and each nonnegative integer k,
For vector functions u and v defined in Q and τ > 0, we set
Especially, we set
From the formally self-adjointness of the operator L, we see that
Next, we introduce the following Gronwall-Bellman and interpolation inequalities as two fundamental tools to establish the theorems on the unique existence and the regularity in time.
Lemma 3.1 ([8], Lemma 3.1) Assume u, α, β are real-valued continuous on an interval [a, b], β is nonnegative and integrable on [a, b], α is nondecreasing satisfying
Then
From [[9], Th. 4.14], we have the following lemma.
Lemma 3.2. For each positive real number ε and each integer j, 0 < j < m, there exists a positive real number C = C (Ω, m, ε) which is dependent on only Ω, m and ε such that the inequality
holds for all u ∈ Hm(Ω).
Now we state and prove the main theorems of this section.
Theorem 3.3. Let h be a nonnegative integer. Assume that all the coefficients apq together with their derivatives with respect to t are bounded on
where C is a constant independent of u and f.
Proof. The uniqueness is proved by similar way as in [[4], Th. 3.2]. We omit the detail here. Now we prove the existence by Galerkin approximating
method. Suppose
where
with the initial conditions
Let us multiply (3.5) by
Now adding this equality to its complex conjugate, then using (3.1) and the integration by parts, we obtain
With noting that, for some positive real number ρ,
we can rewrite (3.8) as follows
By (2.4), the left-hand side of (3.9) is greater than
We denote by I, II, III, IV the terms from the first, second, third, and forth, respectively, of the right-hand sides of (3.9). We will give estimations for these terms. Firstly, we separate I into two terms
Put
Then, by the Cauchy inequality, we have
By the Cauchy inequality and the interpolation inequality (3.3), for an arbitrary positive number ε1, we have
where C1 = C1(ε1) is a nonnegative constant independent of uN, f and τ. Now using again the Cauchy and interpolation inequalities, for an arbitrary positive number ε2 with ε2 < μ, it holds that
where C2 = C2(ε2) is a nonnegative constant independent of uN, f and τ. For the terms III and IV, by the Cauchy inequality, we have
and
where ε3 > 0, arbitrary. Combining the above estimations we get from (3.9) that
Now fix ε1, ε2 and consider the function
We have
We see that the function g has a unique minimum at
We put
Now we take real numbers γ, γ1 arbitrarily satisfying γ0 < γ1 < γ. Then there are positive real numbers ε1, ε2, (ε2 < μ), ρ (ρ > C2(ε1, ε2)) and ε3 such that
From now to the end of the present proof, we fix such constants ε1, ε2, ε3 and ρ. Let
where
We see that
Hence, it follows from (3.14) that
Now multiplying both sides of this inequality by e-2(γ+σ)τ, then integrating them with respect to τ from 0 to ∞, we arrive at
It is clear that |||.|||Q,γ+σ is a norm in Hm,1(Q, γ + σ) which is equivalent to the norm
From this inequality, by standard weakly convergent arguments (see, e.g., [[10], Ch. 7]), we can conclude that the sequence
Theorem 3.4. Let h be a nonnegative integer. Assume that all the coefficients apq together with their derivatives with respect to t up to the order h are bounded on
(i)
(ii)
Then for an arbitrary real number γ satisfying γ > γ0 the generalized solution u in the space Hm,1(Q, γ + σ) of the problem (3.6)- (3.7) has derivatives with respect to t up to the order h with
where C is a constant independent of u and f.
Proof. From the assumptions on the regularities of the coefficients apq and of the function f it follows that the solution
and for k = 0,..., h, where the constant C is independent of N, f and τ. From (3.15) it follows that (3.19) holds for k = 0 since the norm |||·||| is equivalent to the norm
From these equalities together with the initial (3.6) and the assumption (ii), we can show by induction on h that
Now multiplying both sides of (3.20) by
Adding the equality (3.22) to its complex conjugate, we have
Integrating both sides of this equality with respect to t from 0 to a positive real τ with using the integration by parts and (3.21), we arrive at
This equality has the form (3.8) with uN replaced by
Since the coefficients apq together with their derivatives with respect to t up to the order h are bounded, by the Cauchy and interpolation inequalities and the induction assumption, we see that
and
Thus, repeating the arguments which were used to get (3.15) from (3.8), we can obtain (3.19) for k = h from (3.23).
Now we multiply both sides of (3.19) by e-2((k+1)γ+σ)τ, then integrate them with respect to τ from 0 to ∞ to get
From this inequality, by again standard weakly convergent arguments, we can conclude
that the sequence
4 The global regularity
First, we introduce the operator pencil associated with the problem. See [11] for more detail. For convenience we rewrite the operators L(x, t, D), Nj (x, t, D) in the form
Let L0(x, t, D), N0j (x, t, D), be the principal homogeneous parts of L(x, t, D), Nj (x, t, D). It can be directly verified that the derivative Dα can be written in the form
where Pα, p (ω, ∂ω) are differential operators of order ≤ |α| - p with smooth coefficients on
The operator pencil associated with the problem is defined by
For every fixed λ ∈ ℂ and t ∈ (0, ∞), the operator
For some fixed t ∈ (0, ∞), a complex number λ0 is called an eigenvalue of
Now let us give the main theorem of this section:
Theorem 4.1. Suppose that all the assumptions of Theorem 3.4 hold for a given positive integer h. Assume further that the strip
does not contain any eigenvalue of
where C is a constant independent of u and f.
To prove Theorem 4.1 we need to establish some following lemmas.
Lemma 4.2. Let l be a nonnegative integer, t0 be a fixed number in [0, ∞), and let
where
holds with the constant C independent of u, f, gj and t0.
Proof. Without generality we assume that the domain Ω coincides with the cone K in the unit ball. Set Ω0 = {x ∈ Ω: |x| ≥ 2-1},
and Γk = ∂Ω ∩ ∂Ωk, k = 0, 1 .... According to well known results on the regularity of solutions of elliptic boundary problems in smooth domains (see, e.g., [12]), we have
with the constant C independent of u, f, gj and t0. By making change of variable x = 2-k x' for a positive integer k, we get from (4.3), (4.4) that
Similarly as above, from (4.6), (4.7), we have
with the constant C independent of u, f, gj, t0 and k. Let
Returning to variable x with noting that, in Ωk+2, 2-k-2 ≤ r ≤ 2-k-1, from (4.9) we have
Taking sum both sides of these inequalities with respect to k from 1 to ∞, we have
Here it is noted that
with the constant C independent of u, f, gj and t0. □
Lemma 4.3. Let t0 be a fixed number in [0, ∞),
where
holds with the constant C independent of u, and f, gj, and t0.
Proof. Firstly, since
If
Now consider the case
where
with the following estimates
Here
where C is a constant independent of u and t0. From this we have
Hence, it follows from (4.12) and (4.13) that
Now we can apply Lemma 4.2 to conclude from (4.17) and (4.18) that
Proof of Theorem 4.1: First, we show by induction on h that
According to Theorem 3.4 it holds that
for all η ∈ Hm(Ω) and a.e. t ∈ (0, ∞). Since f (·, t) - utt(·, t) ∈ L2(Ω) for a.e. t ∈ (0, ∞), according to results for elliptic boundary value problem in domains with
smooth boundaries, it follows from (4.20) that
for a.e. (x, t) ∈ Q and
in the trace sense. Thus, the assertion (4.19) holds for h = 1, and by (2.5) we also have
for all
for all η ∈ Hm(Ω), a.e. t ∈ (0, ∞). Since
for all
for all
Similarly as above, it follows from (4.24) that
Now we prove the assertion of the theorem by induction on h. Let us consider first the case h = 1. We rewrite (2.6), (2.7) in the form
Since
where C is a constant independent of u, f1 and t. Since the trip
does not contain any eigenvalue of
where C is a constant independent of u, f1 and t. Now multiplying both sides of (4.27) with e-2(2γ+σ)t, then integrating with respect to t from 0 to ∞ and using estimates from Theorem 3.4, we obtain
where C is a constant independent of u and f. Hence, the theorem is valid for h = 1.
Assume that the theorem is true for some nonnegative h - 2. We will prove it for h - 1. Differentiating (h - 1) times both sides of (4.25), (4.26) with respect to t, we have


