Abstract
We show that the components of finite energy solutions to general nonlinear Schrödinger systems have exponential decay at infinity. Our results apply to positive or sign-changing components, and to cooperative, competitive, or mixed-interaction systems. As an application, we use the exponential decay to derive an upper bound for the least possible energy of a solution with a prescribed number of positive and nonradial sign-changing components.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Consider the nonlinear Schrödinger system
where \(N\ge 1\), \(V_i\in L^\infty (\mathbb {R}^N)\), \(\beta _{ij}\in \mathbb {R}\) and \(1<p<\frac{2^*}{2}\). Here \(2^*\) is the usual critical Sobolev exponent, namely, \(2^{*}:=\frac{2N}{N-2}\) if \(N\ge 3\) and \(2^*:=\infty \) for \(N=1,2\).
Systems of this type occur as models for various natural phenomena. In physics, for example, they describe the behavior of standing waves for a mixture of Bose-Einstein condensates of different hyperfine states which overlap in space [13]. The coefficients \(\beta _{ij}\) determine the type of interaction between the states; if \(\beta _{ij}>0\), then there is an attractive force between \(u_i\) and \(u_j\), similarly, if \(\beta _{ij}<0\), then the force is repulsive, and if \(\beta _{ij}=0\), then there is no direct interaction between these components. Whenever all the interaction coefficients are positive, we say that the system is cooperative. If \(\beta _{ii}>0\) and \(\beta _{ij}<0\) for all \(i\ne j\), then the system is called competitive. And if some \(\beta _{ij}\) are positive and others are negative for \(i\ne j\), then we say that the system has mixed couplings. All these regimes exhibit very different qualitative behaviors and have been studied extensively in recent years, see for instance [5, 6, 8,9,10,11,12, 17, 19,20,21,22,23,24, 26] and the references therein.
System (1.1) has a variational structure, and therefore a natural strategy is to find weak solutions by minimizing an associated energy functional on a suitable set, under additional assumptions on the matrix \((\beta _{ij})\) and on the potentials \(V_i\). Using this approach, several kinds of solutions have been found in terms of their signs and their symmetries. However, there seems to be no information available about the decay of these solutions at infinity. In this paper, we show that finite energy solutions must decay exponentially at infinity, and a rate can be found in terms of the potentials \(V_i\). Our main result is the following one.
Theorem 1.1
Assume that, for every \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \),
- \((V_1)\):
-
\(V_i:\mathbb {R}^N\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) is Hölder continuous and bounded,
- \((V_2)\):
-
there exists \(\rho \ge 0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \sigma _i:=\inf _{\mathbb R^N\smallsetminus B_\rho (0)} V_i>0. \end{aligned}$$
Let \((u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\in \left( H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\right) ^{\ell }\) be a solution of (1.1) and let \(\mu _i\in (0,\sqrt{\sigma _i})\). Then, there is \(C>0\) such that
Furthermore, if \(V_i\equiv 1\) for every \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \), then (1.2) holds true with \(\mu _i=1\).
We emphasize that each component may have a different decay depending on each potential \(V_i\). The main obstacle to showing (1.2) is to handle the possibly sublinear term \(|u_i|^{p-2}u_i\) for \(p\in (1,2)\) (which is always the case for \(N\ge 4\)). To explain this point in more detail, assume that \((u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) is a solution of (1.1) and write the i-th equation of the system as
Since every \(u_j\in H^1(\mathbb R^N)\cap \mathcal {C}^0(\mathbb {R}^N)\), we know that \(a_i\) and \(c_i\) are bounded in \(\mathbb {R}^N\), but \(|u_i|^{p-2}\rightarrow \infty \) as \(|x|\rightarrow \infty \) and it is also singular at the nodal set of a sign-changing solution. As a consequence, one cannot use directly previously known results about exponential decay for scalar equations, such as those in [1, 3, 18]. In fact, one can easily construct a one-dimensional solution of a similar scalar equation that has a power-type decay. For instance, let \(w\in \mathcal {C}^2(\mathbb R)\) be a positive function such that \(w(x)=|x|^{-2/3}\) for \(|x|>1\) and let
Then, \(w\in H^1(\mathbb R)\) is a solution of \(-w''+w=c\,w^\frac{1}{2}\) in \(\mathbb R\), \(c(x)\rightarrow 0\) as \(|x|\rightarrow \infty \), and w decays as a power at infinity.
This shows that the proof of the exponential estimate in Theorem 1.1 must rely on a careful study of the system structure. In other words, although the sublinear nonlinearity \(|u_i|^{p-2}u_i\) appears in (1.1), the system is not sublinear. As a whole, it is always superlinear.
With this in mind, we adapt some of the arguments in [1, 18] preserving at each step the system structure of the problem. These arguments rely basically on elliptic regularity and comparison principles.
The exponential decay of solutions is a powerful tool in their qualitative study. As an application of Theorem 1.1, we derive energy bounds of solutions having prescribed positive and nonradial sign-changing components. For this, power type decay would not be enough.
To be more precise, we consider the autonomous system
where the \(\beta _{ij}\)’s satisfy the following condition:
- \((B_1)\):
-
The matrix \((\beta _{ij})\) is symmetric and admits a block decomposition as follows: For some \(1 \le q \le \ell \) there exist \(0=\ell _0<\ell _1<\dots<\ell _{q-1}<\ell _q=\ell \) such that, if we set
$$\begin{aligned} I_h:= \{i \in \{1,\dots ,\ell \}: \ell _{h-1} < i \le \ell _h \},\qquad h\in \{1,\ldots ,q\}, \end{aligned}$$then \(\beta _{ii}>0, \ \beta _{ij}\ge 0 \text { if } i,j\in I_h\), and \(\beta _{ij}<0 \text { if } i\in I_h, \ j\in I_k\text { and }h\ne k\).
According to this decomposition, a solution \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) to (1.1) may be written in block-form as
We say that \(\varvec{u}\) is fully nontrivial if every component \(u_i\) is different from zero.
Set \(Q:=\{1,\ldots ,q\}\). Given a partition \(Q=Q^+\cup Q^-\) with \(Q^+\cap Q^-=\emptyset \) we look for solutions such that every component of \(\overline{u}_h\) is positive if \(h\in Q^+\) and every component of \(\overline{u}_h\) is nonradial and changes sign if \(h\in Q^-\). To this end, we use variational methods in a space having suitable symmetries. As shown in [11, Section 3], to guarantee that the solutions obtained are fully nontrivial we need to assume the following two conditions:
- \((B_2)\):
-
For each \(h\in Q\), the graph whose set of vertices is \(I_h\) and whose set of edges is \(E_h:=\{\{i,j\}:i,j\in I_h, \ i\ne j, \ \beta _{ij}>0\}\) is connected.
- \((B_3)\):
-
If \(q\ge 2\) then, for every \(h\in \{1,\ldots ,q\}\) such that \(\ell _{h}-\ell _{h-1}\ge 2\), the inequality
$$\begin{aligned} \Big (\min _{\{i,j\}\in E_h}\beta _{ij}\Big )\left[ \frac{\min \limits _{h=1,\ldots ,q} \ \max \limits _{i\in I_h}\beta _{ii}}{\displaystyle \sum _{i,j\in I_h}\beta _{ij}}\right] ^\frac{p}{p-1}>\,C_*\displaystyle \sum _{\begin{array}{c} k=1 \\ k\ne h \end{array}}^q \ \displaystyle \sum _{\begin{array}{c} i\in I_h \\ j\in I_k \end{array}}|\beta _{ij}| \end{aligned}$$holds true, where \(C_*=C_*(N,p,q,Q^+)>0\) is the explicit constant given in (3.7) below.
In [11] it is shown that, for any q, the system (1.1) has a fully nontrivial solution satisfying the sign requirements described above. Furthermore, an upper bound for its energy is exhibited, but only for systems with at most two blocks, i.e., for \(q=1,2\). Here we use Theorem 1.1 to obtain an energy bound for any number of blocks.
For each \(h=1,\ldots ,q\), let \(\mathbb {R}^{I_h}:=\{\overline{s}=(s_{\ell _{h-1}+1},\ldots ,s_{\ell _h}):s_i\in \mathbb {R}\text { for all} \ i\in I_h\}\) and define
For any \(\ell \in \mathbb {N}\), we write \(\Vert \varvec{u}\Vert \) for the usual norm of \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) in \((H^1(\mathbb {R}^N))^\ell \), i.e.,
We prove the following result.
Theorem 1.2
Let \(N=4\) or \(N\ge 6\), and let \(Q=Q^+\cup Q^-\) with \(Q^+\cap Q^-=\emptyset \). Assume \((B_1)\), \((B_2)\), and \((B_3)\). Then, there exists a fully nontrivial solution \(\varvec{u}=(\overline{u}_1,\ldots ,\overline{u}_q)\) to the system (1.4) with the following properties:
- (a):
-
Every component of \(\overline{u}_h\) is positive if \(h\in Q^+\) and every component of \(\overline{u}_h\) is nonradial and changes sign if \(h\in Q^-\).
- (b):
-
If \(q=1\), then
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert u\Vert ^2=\mu _1\Vert \omega \Vert ^2 \ \text {if} \ Q=Q^+\qquad \text {and}\qquad \Vert u\Vert ^2<10\,\mu _1\Vert \omega \Vert ^2 \ \text {if}\ Q=Q^-. \end{aligned}$$ - (c):
-
If \(q\ge 2\) the following estimate holds true
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2< \left( \min _{k\in Q}\Big (a_k\mu _k+\sum _{h\in Q\smallsetminus \{k\}}b_h\mu _h\Big )\right) \Vert \omega \Vert ^2, \end{aligned}$$(1.6)
where \(a_k:=1\) if \(k\in Q^+\), \(a_k:=12\) if \(k\in Q^-\), \(b_h:=6\) if \(h\in Q^+\), \(b_h:=12\) if \(h\in Q^-\), and \(\omega \) is the unique positive radial solution to the equation
To prove Theorem 1.2, we follow the approach in [11] and impose on the variational setting some carefully constructed symmetries which admit finite orbits. This approach immediately gives energy estimates but it requires showing a quantitative compactness condition which needs precise knowledge about the asymptotic decay of the components of the system. Here is where we use Theorem 1.1.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 is devoted to the proof of the exponential decay stated in Theorem 1.1. The application of this result to derive energy bounds is contained in Section 3, where we also give some concrete examples.
2 Exponential decay
This section is devoted to the proof of Theorem 1.1. As a first step, we extend the argument in [2, Lemma 5.3] to systems. Let \(B_r\) denote the ball of radius r in \(\mathbb {R}^N\) centered at zero. Let \(\sigma _i\) and \(\beta _{ij}\) as in \((V_2)\) and (1.1), then we let \(\varvec{\sigma }:=(\sigma _1,\ldots ,\sigma _\ell )\) and \(\varvec{\beta }:=(\beta _{ij})_{i,j=1}^\ell \).
Lemma 2.1
Let \(V_i\in L^\infty (\mathbb R^N)\) satisfy \((V_2)\) and let \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) be a solution of (1.1). Set
Then, there are positive constants \(C=C(\varvec{u}, \varvec{\sigma },\varvec{\beta },N,\rho ,p)\) and \(\vartheta =\vartheta (\varvec{\sigma })\), with \(\rho \) and \(\sigma _i\) as in \((V_2)\), such that
Proof
Let \(\chi :\mathbb R^N\rightarrow \mathbb R\) be given by \(\chi (r):=0\) if \(r\le 0\), \(\chi (r):=r\) if \(r\in (0,1)\) and \(\chi (r):=1\) if \(r\ge 1\). Let \(u_{i}^{r}(x):=\chi (|x|-r)u_{i}(x)\) for \(r\ge 0\), \(x\in \mathbb R^N\), and \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \). Then \(u_{i}^{r}\in H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) and
Set \(\delta :=\min \{\sigma _1,\ldots ,\sigma _\ell ,1\}\). Using that \(|u_{i}\tfrac{x}{|x|}\cdot \nabla u_{i}|\le \tfrac{1}{2}(|\nabla u_{i}|^{2}+|u_{i}|^{2})\) we obtain
As \(\varvec{u}\) solves (1.1) we have that
and since \(|u_{m}|^{p}\le \left( \sum _{k=1}^{\ell }|u_{k}|^{2p}\right) ^{1/2}\) for every \(m=1,\ldots ,\ell \), we obtain
Given that \(u_{k}\in H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) for all \(k=1,\ldots ,\ell \), Lemma A.1 implies the existence of a constant \(C_1=C_1(N,p)>0\) such that
for every \(r\ge 1\) and \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \). Set \(C_2:=C_1\sum _{i,j=1}^{\ell }|\beta _{ij}|.\) From (2.1) and (2.2), assuming without loss of generality that \(\rho \ge 2\) and adding over i, we get
Therefore,
Since \(|\varvec{\xi }(r)|_{1}\rightarrow 0\) as \(r\rightarrow \infty ,\) there is \(r_{0}=r_0(\varvec{u},p,\varvec{\beta },\rho )\in \mathbb {N}\) such that \(r_0\ge \rho \) and \(\gamma (r)\le \gamma _0^{-1}\) for all \(r\ge r_{0}\) with \(\gamma _0:=\frac{2\delta +1}{\delta +1}>1\). Then, for \(r>r_0+1\),
where \(\lfloor r \rfloor \) denotes the floor of r. Since \(|\varvec{\xi }(r)|_1\le \Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2\le \Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2\gamma _0^{r_0-r+1}\) for \(r\le r_0+1\) we have that
as claimed. \(\square \)
Lemma 2.2
Assume \((V_1)\) and let \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) be a solution of (1.1). Then \(u_i\in W^{2,s}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\cap \mathcal {C}^{2}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) for every \(s\ge 2\) and \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \).
Proof
Let \(N\ge 3\). The argument for \(N=1,2\) is similar and easier. For each \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \) set
Since \(|u_{k}|\le |\varvec{u}|:=\sqrt{u_1^2+\cdots +u_\ell ^2}\) for every \(k=1,\ldots \ell \), we have that
Therefore, \(f_{i}\in L^{s_{1}}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) for \(s_{1}:=\frac{2^{*}}{2p-1}>1\) and, by the standard \(L^{p}\)-elliptic regularity theory, \(u_{i}\in W^{2,s_{1}}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) for all \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \) (see, e.g., [14, Chapter 9] or [25, Section 3.2]). Using a bootstrapping argument, we conclude the existence of \(s>\max \{\frac{N}{2},2\}\) such that \(u_i\in W^{2,s}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) for all \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \) and thus, by the Sobolev embedding theorem, \(u_i\in \mathcal {C}^{1,\alpha }(\mathbb {R}^N)\). Since \(V_i\) is Hölder continuous and bounded, applying the Schauder estimates repeatedly, we deduce that \(u_i\) is of class \(\mathcal {C}^{2}\) (see [15, Section 1.3]). \(\square \)
In the rest of the paper, we write \(|\cdot |_t\) for the norm in \(L^t(\mathbb {R}^N)\), \(1\le t\le \infty \). If \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\in [L^\infty (\mathbb R^N)]^\ell \), then \(|\varvec{u}|_\infty :=\sum _{i=1}^\ell \sup _{\mathbb R^N}|u_i|\). Moreover, for a proper open subset \(\Omega \) of \(\mathbb {R}^N\) we denote the usual Sobolev norm in \(H^1(\Omega )\) by \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{H^1(\Omega )}\), i.e.,
Lemma 2.3
Assume \((V_1)\). Let \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) be a solution of (1.1), \(s>\max \{2,\frac{N}{2}\}\) and \(\Lambda >0\) be such that \(|V_i|_\infty \le \Lambda \) for \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \). Then there is a constant \(C=C(\varvec{\beta }, N, p, \Lambda ,s)>0\) such that, for any \(x\in \mathbb {R}^N\),
where \(B_R(x)\) is the ball of radius R centered at x.
Proof
Since \(u_i\in W^{2,s}(\mathbb {R}^N)\subset L^{\infty }(\mathbb {R}^{N})\), we have that
Set \(f_i\) as in (2.4). By (2.5), there is a constant \(C_2=C_2(\varvec{\beta })\) such that
where \(|\varvec{u}|:= \sqrt{u_1^2+\cdots +u_\ell ^2}\) and \((p-1)s+p(s-2)>0\). Then, by [14, Theorem 9.11], there is a positive constant \(C_1=C_1(s,N,\Lambda )\) such that
From the previous inequalities we derive
where \(C_3=C_3(N,p)\) is the constant given by the Sobolev embedding \(H^1(B_1)\subset L^{2p}(B_1)\). \(\square \)
Lemma 2.4
Assume \((V_1)-(V_2)\), let \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) be a solution of (1.1) and let \(f_i\) be as in (2.4). Then, there are constants \(\eta >0\), \(C_1>0\), and \(C_2>0\) such that
Proof
For \(x\in \mathbb {R}^N\) with \(|x|\ge 2\), set \(r:=\frac{1}{2}|x|\). Then, \(B_1(x)\subset \mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r\) and, by Lemma 2.1, there are positive constants \(K_1=K_1(\varvec{u},\varvec{\sigma },\varvec{\beta },N,\rho ,p)\) and \(\vartheta =\vartheta (\varvec{\sigma })\), with \(\rho \) and \(\sigma _i\) as in \((V_2)\), such that
Fix \(s>\max \{\frac{N}{2},2\}\). By Lemma 2.3 there are positive constants \(K_2=K_2(\varvec{u}, \varvec{\beta }, N, p, \Lambda ,s)\) and \(K_3=K_3(\varvec{u},\varvec{\sigma },\varvec{\beta },\rho ,N,p,s)\) such that
Therefore,
where \(K_4\) is the positive constant given by the embedding \(W^{2,s}(B_\frac{1}{2})\subset L^\infty (B_\frac{1}{2})\). Since \(u_i\) is continuous, we may choose \(C_1\ge K_2K_3K_4\) such that \(|u_i(x)|\le C_1\textrm{e}^{-\frac{\vartheta }{s}}\) for every \(x\in B_2\). So, setting \(\eta :=\frac{\vartheta }{2s}\), we obtain
The estimate for \(f_i\) follows immediately from (2.5). \(\square \)
The following result is a particular case of [18, Theorem 2.1]. We include a simplified proof for completeness.
Lemma 2.5
Assume that \(V:\mathbb R^N\rightarrow \mathbb R\) satisfies \(\sigma :=\inf _{\mathbb R^N\smallsetminus B_{\rho }(0)} V>0\) for some \(\rho \ge 0\). Let w be a classical solution of \(-\Delta w + V w = f\) in \(\mathbb R^N\) such that
and for some constants \(C>0\), \(\eta \in (0,\sqrt{\sigma })\) and \(\delta \in (\eta ,\sqrt{\sigma }]\). Then, for any \(\mu \in (\eta ,\delta )\), there is \(M=M(\mu ,\delta ,\rho ,\sigma ,C)>0\) such that
Proof
Let \(\rho ,\sigma ,\eta ,\delta ,\mu ,\) and C be as in the statement. Set \(v(x):=\textrm{e}^{-\mu |x|}\) for \(x\in \mathbb R^N\). Then,
In particular, \(V(x)-h(|x|)\ge \sigma -\mu ^2=:\varepsilon >0\) for \(|x|>\rho \). Fix \(t\in \mathbb {R}\) satisfying
We claim that \(w(x)\le tv(x)\) for all \(|x|>\rho \). Indeed, let \(z:=w-tv\) and assume, by contradiction, that \(m:=\sup _{|x|\ge \rho }z(x)>0\). Since \(\lim _{|x|\rightarrow \infty }z(x)=0\), there is \(R>\rho \) such that \(z(x)\le \frac{m}{2}\) for \(|x|\ge R\). Let \(\Omega :=\{x\in \mathbb R^N\,:\, \rho<|x|<R\text { and }z(x)>0\}\). Then \(z\le \frac{m}{2}\) on \(\partial \Omega \) and, by (2.6),
Then, by the maximum principle, \(m=\max _{\Omega }z = \max _{\partial \Omega }z\le \frac{m}{2}\). This is a contradiction. Therefore \(m\le 0\), namely, \(w(x)\le t \textrm{e}^{-\mu |x|}\) for all \(|x|\ge \rho \). Arguing similarly for \(-w\) and using that \(w\in L^\infty (\mathbb R^N)\) we obtain that \(|w(x)|\le M\textrm{e}^{-\mu |x|}\) for all \(x\in \mathbb {R}^N\), as claimed. \(\square \)
We are ready to prove Theorem 1.1.
Proof of Theorem 1.1
Iterating Lemmas 2.4 and 2.5, using that \(2p-1>1\), one shows that, for any \(\mu _i\in (0,\sqrt{\sigma _i})\), there is \(C>0\) such that \(|u_{i}(x)|\le C e^{-\mu _i|x|}\) for all \(x\in \mathbb R^N\) and for all \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \).
Now, assume that \(V_i\equiv 1\) for every \(i=1,\ldots ,\ell \) and let \(\mu \in (0,1)\) be such that \((2p-1)\mu >1\). By Lemma 2.4, we have that \(|f_{i}(x)|\le C_2 \textrm{e}^{-(2p-1)\mu |x|}\) for all \(x\in \mathbb {R}^{N}\). The claim now follows from [1, Theorem 2.3(c)]. \(\square \)
3 Energy estimates for seminodal solutions
In this section we prove Theorem 1.2. Consider the autonomous system (1.4) where \(N\ge 4\), \(1<p<\frac{N}{N-2}\) and \(\beta _{ij}\) satisfy the assumption \((B_1)\) stated in the Introduction. According to the decomposition given by \((B_1)\), a solution \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\) to (1.4) may be written in block-form as
\(\varvec{u}\) is called fully nontrivial if every component \(u_i\) is different from zero. We say that \(\varvec{u}\) is block-wise nontrivial if at least one component in each block \(\overline{u}_h\) is nontrivial.
Following [11], we introduce suitable symmetries to produce a change of sign in some components. Let G be a finite subgroup of the group O(N) of linear isometries of \(\mathbb {R}^N\) and denote by \(Gx:=\{gx:g\in G\}\) the G-orbit of \(x\in \mathbb {R}^N\). Let \(\phi :G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2:=\{-1,1\}\) be a homomorphism of groups. A function \(u:\mathbb {R}^N\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) is called G-invariant if it is constant on Gx for every \(x\in \mathbb {R}^N\) and it is called \(\phi \)-equivariant if
Note that, if \(\phi \equiv 1\) is the trivial homomorphism and u satisfies (3.1), then u is G-invariant. On the other hand, if \(\phi \) is surjective every nontrivial function satisfying (3.1) is nonradial and changes sign. Define
For each \(h=1,\ldots ,q\), fix a homomorphism \(\phi _h:G\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2\). Take \(\phi _i := \phi _h\) for all \(i\in I_h\) and set \(\varvec{\phi }=(\phi _1,\ldots ,\phi _\ell )\). Denote by
and let \(\mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}:\mathcal {H}^{\varvec{\phi }}\rightarrow \mathbb {R}\) be the functional given by
This functional is of class \(\mathcal {C}^1\) and its critical points are the solutions to the system (1.4) satisfying (3.1). The block-wise nontrivial solutions belong to the Nehari set
Note that
and that \(\mathcal {J}^\phi (\varvec{u})=\frac{p-1}{2p}\Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2\) if \(u\in \mathcal {N}^\phi \). Let
If \(\varvec{s}=(s_1,\ldots ,s_q)\in \mathbb {R}^q\) and \(\varvec{u}=(\overline{u}_{1},\ldots ,\overline{u}_{q})\in \mathcal {H}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) we write \(\varvec{s}\varvec{u}:=(s_1\overline{u}_{1},\ldots ,s_q\overline{u}_{q})\). The following facts were proved in [8].
Lemma 3.1
-
(i)
\(c^{\varvec{\phi }} >0\).
-
(ii)
If the coordinates of \(\varvec{u}\in \mathcal {H}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) satisfy
$$\begin{aligned} \sum _{k=1}^q\,\sum _{(i,j)\in I_h\times I_k}\displaystyle \int _{\mathbb {R}^N}\beta _{ij}|u_i|^p|u_j|^p>0\qquad \text {for every} \ h=1,\ldots ,q, \end{aligned}$$(3.2)then there exists a unique \(\varvec{s}_{\varvec{u}} \in (0,\infty )^{q}\) such that \(\varvec{s}_{\varvec{u}}\varvec{u} \in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}\). Furthermore,
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}(\varvec{s}_{\varvec{u}} \varvec{u}) = \max _{{\varvec{s}} \in (0,\infty )^q}\mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}(\varvec{s} \varvec{u}). \end{aligned}$$
Proof
See [8, Lemma 2.2] or [11, Lemma 2.2]. \(\square \)
Lemma 3.2
If \(c^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is attained, then the system (1.4) has a block-wise nontrivial solution \(\varvec{u}=(u_1,\ldots ,u_\ell )\in \mathcal {H}^{\varvec{\phi }}\). Furthermore, if \(u_i\) is nontrivial, then \(u_i\) is positive if \(\phi _i\equiv 1\) and \(u_i\) is nonradial and changes sign if \(\phi _i\) is surjective.
Proof
It is shown in [8, Lemma 2.4] that any minimizer of \(\mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) on \(\mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is a block-wise nontrivial solution to (1.4). If \(u_i\ne 0\) and \(\phi _i\) is surjective, then \(u_i\) is nonradial and changes sign. If \(\phi _i\equiv 1\) then \(|u_i|\) is G-invariant and replacing \(u_i\) with \(|u_i|\) we obtain a solution with the required properties. \(\square \)
Set \(Q:=\{1,\ldots ,q\}\) and fix a decomposition \(Q=Q^+\cup Q^-\) with \(Q^+\cap Q^-=\emptyset \). From now on, we consider the following symmetries. We write \(\mathbb {R}^N\equiv \mathbb {C}\times \mathbb {C}\times \mathbb {R}^{N-4}\) and a point in \(\mathbb {R}^N\) as \((z_1,z_2,y)\in \mathbb {C}\times \mathbb {C}\times \mathbb {R}^{N-4}\).
Definitions 3.3
Let \(\textrm{i}\) denote the imaginary unit. For each \(m\in \mathbb {N}\), let
\(G_m\) be the group generated by \(K_m\cup \{\tau \}\cup O(N-4)\), acting on each point \((z_1,z_2,y)\in \mathbb {C}\times \mathbb {C}\times \mathbb {R}^{N-4}\) as
and \(\theta :G_m\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2\) be the homomorphism satisfying
Define \(\phi _h:G_m\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2\) by
Due to the lack of compactness, \(c^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is not always attained; see e.g. [11, Corollary 2.8(i)]. A sufficient condition for this to happen is given by the next lemma. We use the following notation. If \(Q'\subset Q:=\{1,\ldots ,q\}\) we consider the subsystem of (1.4) obtained by deleting all components of \(\overline{u}_h\) for every \(h\notin Q'\), and we denote by \(\mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q'}\) and \(\mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q'}\) the functional and the Nehari set associated to this subsystem. We write
If \(Q'=\{h\}\) we omit the curly brackets and write, for instance, \(c_{h}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) or \(\mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{h}.\)
Lemma 3.4
(Compactness) Let \(N\ne 5\), \(m\ge 5\) and \(\phi _h:G_m\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2\) be as in (3.3). If, for each \(h\in Q:=\{1,\ldots ,q\}\), the strict inequality
holds true, then \(c^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is attained, where \(\omega \) is the positive radial solution to (1.7) and \(\mu _h\) is given by (1.5).
Proof
This statement follows by combining [11, Corollary 2.8(ii)] with [11, Equation (5.1)]. \(\square \)
To verify condition (3.4) we introduce a suitable test function. Fix \(m\ge 5\) and let \(K_m\) be as in Definitions 3.3. If \(h\in Q^+\), we take \(\zeta _h:=(\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}},\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}},0)\) and, for each \(R>1\), we define
If \(h\in Q^-\) we take \(\zeta _h:=(1,0,0)\) and we define
where \(\omega \) is the positive radial solution to (1.7) and \(G'_m\) is the subgroup of \(G_m\) generated by \(K_m\cup \{\tau \}\). Note that \(\widehat{\sigma }_{hR}(gx)=\phi _h(g)\widehat{\sigma }_{hR}(x)\) for every \(g\in G_m\), \(x\in \mathbb {R}^N\). Let
where \(t_{hR}>0\) is chosen so that \(\Vert \sigma _{hR}\Vert ^2=\displaystyle \int _{\mathbb {R}^N}|\sigma _{hR}|^{2p}\).
Lemma 3.5
If \(m\ge 5\), then, for each \(h\in \{1,\ldots ,q\}\), there exist \(\overline{t}_{h}=(t_{\ell _{h-1}+1},\ldots ,t_{\ell _h})\in (0,\infty )^{\ell _h-\ell _{h-1}}\) and \(C_0,R_0>0\) such that \(\overline{t}_{h}\sigma _{hR}:=(t_{\ell _{h-1}+1}\sigma _{hR},\ldots ,t_{\ell _h}\sigma _{hR})\in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}_h\) and
where \(|G_m\zeta _h|\) is the cardinality of the \(G_m\)-orbit of \(\zeta _h\), i.e., \(|G_m\zeta _h|=m\) if \(h\in Q^+\) and \(|G_m\zeta _h|=2m\) if \(h\in Q^-\), and
Proof
Take \(\overline{t}_h=(t_{\ell _{h-1}+1},\ldots ,t_{\ell _h})\in (0,\infty )^{\ell _h-\ell _{h-1}}\) such that
and apply [11, Proposition 4.1(i) and Lemma 4.4]. \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1.2
Assume \((B_1)\) and let \(\phi _h:G_m\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2\) be given by (3.3). For \(q=1\) and \(m\ge 5\) it is proved in [11, Corollary 4.2 and Proposition 4.5] that \(c^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is attained at \(\varvec{u}\in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) satisfying
Taking \(m=5\) gives statement (b).
Fix \(m=6\). We claim that \(c^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is attained and that the estimate (c) holds true for every \(q\ge 2\). To prove this claim, we proceed by induction. Assume it is true for \(q-1\) with \(q\ge 2\).
We will show that the compactness condition (3.4) holds true. Using a change of coordinates, it suffices to argue for \(h=q\). By induction hypothesis there exists \(\varvec{w}=(\overline{w}_1,\ldots ,\overline{w}_{q-1})\in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q\smallsetminus \{q\}}\) such that \(\mathcal {J}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q\smallsetminus \{q\}}(\varvec{w})=c^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q\smallsetminus \{q\}}\). For each \(R>1\) let \(\sigma _{qR}\) be as in (3.5) and take \(\overline{t}_q\in (0,\infty )^{\ell -\ell _{q-1}}\) as in Lemma 3.5. Set \(\overline{w}_{hR}=\overline{w}_h\) for \(h=1,\ldots ,q-1\) and \(\overline{w}_{qR}=\overline{t}_q\sigma _{qR}\), and define \(\varvec{w}_R=(w_{1R},\ldots ,w_{\ell R}):=(\overline{w}_{1R},\ldots ,\overline{w}_{qR})\). Then, as \(\varvec{w}\in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q\smallsetminus \{q\}}\) and the interaction between the components of \(\varvec{w}\) and \(\sigma _{qR}\) tends to 0 as \(R\rightarrow \infty \), we have that \(\varvec{w}_R\) satisfies (3.2) for large enough R and, as a consequence, there exist \(R_1>0\) and \((s_{1R},\ldots ,s_{qR})\in [{1}/{2},2]^q\) such that \((s_{1R}\overline{w}_{1R},\ldots ,s_{qR}\overline{w}_{qR})\in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}\) if \(R\ge R_1\). Set \(\varvec{u}_R=(u_{1R},\ldots ,u_{\ell R}):=(s_{1R}\overline{w}_{1R},\ldots ,s_{qR}\overline{w}_{qR})\). Using that \(\varvec{w}\in \mathcal {N}^{\varvec{\phi }}_{Q\smallsetminus \{q\}}\) and \(\overline{t}_q\sigma _{qR}\in \mathcal {N}_q^{\varvec{\phi }}\), from the last statement in Lemma 3.1(ii) and Lemma 3.5 we derive
if \(R\ge \max \{R_0,R_1\}\), where \(C_0\) and \(C_1\) are positive constants and \(d_m\) is given in (3.6).
It is well known that \(|\omega (x)|\le C\textrm{e}^{-|x|}\) and, as \(\varvec{w}\) solves a subsystem of (1.4), Theorem 1.1 asserts that
Therefore, for every \(g\in G_m\),
So, if \(p>d_m\), we conclude that
and, by Lemmas 3.4 and 3.2, \(c^{\varvec{\phi }}\) is attained at a block-wise nontrivial solution \(\varvec{u}\) of (1.4) such that every component of \(\overline{u}_h\) is positive if \(h\in Q^+\) and every component of \(\overline{u}_h\) is nonradial and changes sign if \(h\in Q^-\). Furthermore, since we are assuming \((B_2)\) and \((B_3)\) with \(C_*\) as in (3.7) below, [11, Theorem 3.3] asserts that \(\varvec{u}\) is fully nontrivial.
Finally, note that \(p>1=d_m\) because \(m=6\). As \(|G_m\zeta _h|=6\) if \(h\in Q^+\) and \(|G_m\zeta _h|=12\) if \(h\in Q^-\), the estimate in statement (c) follows by induction. \(\square \)
Remark 3.6
If \(m=5\) and \(p>d_m\) we arrive to a similar conclusion, where, in this case, the constant \(b_h\) in statement (b) is 5 if \(h\in Q^+\) and it is 10 if \(h\in Q^-\). Note, however, that numbers p satisfying \(d_5=2\sin \frac{\pi }{5}<p<\frac{N}{N-2}\) exist only for \(N\le 13\).
Remark 3.7
For \(\phi _h\) as in (3.3), the constant \(C_*>0\) appearing in \((B_3)\) depends on N, p, q, and \(Q^+\). It is explicitly defined in [11, Equation (3.1)] as
where
with \(\mathcal {U}^{\varvec{\phi }}:=\{(v_1,\ldots ,v_q)\,:\, v_h\in H^1(\mathbb R^N)^{\phi _h}\smallsetminus \{0\},\ \Vert v_h\Vert ^2=|v_h|_{2p}^{2p},\ v_hv_k=0\ \text { if }h\ne k\}\), and
Remark 3.8
In the proof of Theorem 1.2 we use [1, Theorem 2.3], which also characterizes the sharp decay rate for positive components by providing a bound from below. This kind of information can be useful to show uniqueness of positive solutions for some problems, see [4, Section 8.2].
To conclude, we discuss some special cases.
Examples 3.9
Assume \((B_1)\) and let \(p\in (1,\frac{2^*}{2})\).
- (a):
-
If \(q=1\) the system (1.4) is cooperative and more can be said. Indeed, it is shown in [11, Corollary 4.2 and Proposition 4.5] that, if \((B_2)\) is satisfied, then (1.4) has a synchronized solution \(\varvec{u}=(t_1u,\ldots ,t_\ell u)\), where \((t_1,\ldots ,t_\ell )\in (0,\infty )^\ell \) is a minimizer for (1.5) and u is a nontrivial \(\phi \)-equivariant least energy solution of the equation
$$\begin{aligned} -\Delta u+u=|u|^{2p-2}u,\qquad u\in H^1(\mathbb {R}^N)^\phi . \end{aligned}$$(3.8)Here, if \(Q^+=\{1\}\), then \(\phi \equiv 1\) (and therefore \(u=\omega \)) and \(\Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2\le \mu _1\Vert \omega \Vert ^2\). On the other hand, if \(Q^-=\{1\}\), then \(\phi :G_m\rightarrow \mathbb {Z}_2\) is the homomorphism \(\theta \) given in Definitions 3.3 and \(\Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2\le 10\mu _1\Vert \omega \Vert ^2\).
- (b):
-
If \(q=\ell \ge 2\) the system (1.4) is competitive, i.e., \(\beta _{ii}>0\) and \(\beta _{ij}<0\) if \(i\ne j\). Assumptions \((B_2)\) and \((B_3)\) are automatically satisfied and, as \(\mu _i=\beta _{ii}^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}\), the estimate in Theorem1.2(c) becomes
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2&< \left( \min _{j\in Q}\Big (a_j\beta _{jj}^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}+\sum _{i\in Q\smallsetminus \{i\}}b_i\beta _{ii}^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}\Big )\right) \Vert \omega \Vert ^2\\&\le {\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \left( 6\,|Q^+|+12\,|Q^-|-5\right) \beta _0^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}\Vert \omega \Vert ^2 &{}\text {if} \ Q^+\ne \emptyset ,\\ 12\,|Q^-|\beta _0^{-\frac{1}{p-1}}\Vert \omega \Vert ^2 &{}\text {if} \ Q^+=\emptyset , \end{array}\right. } \end{aligned}$$where \(|Q^\pm |\) denotes the cardinality of \(Q^\pm \) and \(\beta _0:=\min \{\beta _{11},\ldots ,\beta _{\ell \ell }\}\).
- (c):
-
Similarly, for any \(q\ge 2\), the estimate in Theorem 1.2(c) yields
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert \varvec{u}\Vert ^2\le {\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \left( 6\,|Q^+|+12\,|Q^-|-5\right) \,\mu _*\Vert \omega \Vert ^2 &{}\text {if} \ Q^+\ne \emptyset ,\\ 12\,|Q^-|\,\mu _*\Vert \omega \Vert ^2 &{}\text {if} \ Q^+=\emptyset . \end{array}\right. } \end{aligned}$$where \(\mu _*=\max \{\mu _1,\ldots ,\mu _q\}\). Assumptions \((B_2)\) and \((B_3)\) guarantee that \(\varvec{u}\) is fully nontrivial. Note that the left-hand side of the inequality in \((B_3)\) depends only on the entries of the submatrices \((\beta _{ij})_{i,j\in I_h}\), \(h=1,\ldots ,q\), whereas the right-hand side only depends on the other entries. So, if the former are large enough with respect to the absolute values of the latter, \((B_3)\) is satisfied. For example, if we take \(\ell =2q\) and the matrix is
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{pmatrix} \lambda &{} \lambda &{} \beta _{13} &{} \beta _{14} &{}\beta _{15} &{} \ldots &{} \beta _{1\ell }\\ \lambda &{} \lambda &{} \beta _{23} &{} \beta _{24} &{}\beta _{25} &{} \ldots &{} \beta _{2\ell }\\ \beta _{31} &{} \beta _{32} &{} \lambda &{} \lambda &{} \beta _{35} &{} \ldots &{} \beta _{3\ell }\\ \beta _{41} &{} \beta _{42} &{} \lambda &{} \lambda &{} \beta _{45} &{} \ldots &{} \beta _{4\ell }\\ \vdots &{} \vdots &{} &{} &{} \ddots &{} &{} \vdots \\ \beta _{\ell -1\,1} &{} &{} &{} \ldots &{} \beta _{\ell -1\,\ell -2} &{} \lambda &{} \lambda \\ \beta _{\ell 1} &{} &{} &{} \ldots &{} \beta _{\ell \, \ell -2} &{} \lambda &{} \lambda \\ \end{pmatrix}. \end{aligned}$$with \(\lambda >0\) and \(\beta _{ji}=\beta _{ij}<0\), then \((B_1)\) and \((B_2)\) are satisfied. If, additionally,
$$\begin{aligned} \lambda > 4^{\frac{2p-1}{p-1}}(q-1)C_*\qquad \text {and}\qquad |\beta _{ij}|\le 1, \end{aligned}$$then, for any \(h=1,\ldots ,q\),
$$\begin{aligned} \Big (\min _{\{i,j\}\in E_h}\beta _{ij}\Big )\left[ \frac{\min \limits _{h=1,\ldots ,q} \ \max \limits _{i\in I_h}\beta _{ii}}{\displaystyle \sum _{i,j\in I_h}\beta _{ij}}\right] ^\frac{p}{p-1}=\lambda \left[ \frac{\lambda }{4\lambda }\right] ^\frac{p}{p-1} >\,C_*4(q-1)\ge \,C_*\displaystyle \sum _{\begin{array}{c} k=1 \\ k\ne h \end{array}}^q \ \displaystyle \sum _{\begin{array}{c} i\in I_h \\ j\in I_k \end{array}}|\beta _{ij}| \end{aligned}$$so \((B_3)\) is satisfied.
References
Ackermann, N., Dancer, N.: Precise exponential decay for solutions of semilinear elliptic equations and its effect on the structure of the solution set for a real analytic nonlinearity. Differ. Integr. Equ. 29(7–8), 757–774 (2016)
Ackermann, N., Weth, T.: Multibump solutions of nonlinear periodic Schrödinger equations in a degenerate setting. Commun. Contemp. Math. 7(3), 269–298 (2005)
Berezin, F.A., Shubin, M.A.: The Schrödinger Equation. Mathematics and its Applications. Kluwer Academic Publishers Group, Dordrecht (1991)
Bonheure, D., Földes, J., dos Santos, E., Saldana, A., Tavares, H.: Paths to uniqueness of critical points and applications to partial differential equations. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 370(10), 7081–7127 (2018)
Byeon, J., Sato, Y., Wang, Z.-Q.: Pattern formation via mixed attractive and repulsive interactions for nonlinear Schrödinger systems. J. Math. Pures Appl. 106(3), 477–511 (2016)
Chen, H., Pistoia, A., Vaira, G.: Segregated solutions for some non-linear Schrödinger systems with critical growth. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 43(1), 482–506 (2023)
Cherrier, P., Milani, A.: Linear and quasi-linear evolution equations in Hilbert spaces. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 135. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI (2012)
Clapp, M., Pistoia, A.: Fully nontrivial solutions to elliptic systems with mixed couplings. Nonlinear Anal. 216, 19 (2022)
Clapp, M., Pistoia, A.: Pinwheel solutions to Schrödinger systems. Preprint arXiv:2301.07000
Clapp, M., Soares, M.: Coupled and uncoupled sign-changing spikes of singularly perturbed elliptic systems, Commun. Contemp. Math. Paper No. 2250048, 24 pp (2022)
Clapp, M., Soares, M.: Energy estimates for seminodal solutions to an elliptic system with mixed couplings. NoDEA Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl. 30(1), 11 (2023)
Dovetta, S., Pistoia, A.: Solutions to a cubic Schrödinger system with mixed attractive and repulsive forces in a critical regime. Math. Eng. 4(4), 21 (2022)
Esry, B.D., Greene, C.H., Burke, J., James, P., Bohn, J.L.: Hartree-Fock theory for double condensates. Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 3594–3597 (1997)
Gilbarg, D., Trudinger, N.S.: Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order. Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften. Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1977)
Han, Q.: Nonlinear elliptic equations of the second order. Graduate Studies in Mathematics, 171. American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, (2016)
Kesavan, S.: Topics in Functional Analysis and Applications. John Wiley & Sons Inc, New York (1989)
Peng, S., Wang, Z.-Q.: Segregated and synchronized vector solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger systems. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 208(1), 305–339 (2013)
Rabier, P.J., Stuart, C.A.: Exponential decay of the solutions of quasilinear second-order equations and Pohozaev identities. J. Differ. Equ. 165(1), 199–234 (2000)
Sato, Y., Wang, Z.-Q.: Least energy solutions for nonlinear Schrödinger systems with mixed attractive and repulsive couplings. Adv. Nonlinear Stud. 15(1), 1–22 (2015)
Sato, Y., Wang, Z.-Q.: Multiple positive solutions for Schrödinger systems with mixed couplings. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 54(2), 1373–1392 (2015)
Soave, N.: On existence and phase separation of solitary waves for nonlinear Schrödinger systems modelling simultaneous cooperation and competition. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 53(3–4), 689–718 (2015)
Soave, N., Tavares, H.: New existence and symmetry results for least energy positive solutions of Schrödinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms. J. Differ. Equ. 261(1), 505–537 (2016)
Tavares, H., You, S.: Existence of least energy positive solutions to Schrödinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms: the critical case. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 59(1), 35 (2020)
Tavares, H., You, S., Zou, W.: Least energy positive solutions of critical Schrödinger systems with mixed competition and cooperation terms: the higher dimensional case. J. Funct. Anal. 283(2), 50 (2022)
Villavert, J.: Elementary Theory and Methods for Elliptic Partial Differential Equations. University of Texas, Lecture Notes (2015)
Wei, J., Wu, Y.: Ground states of nonlinear Schrödinger systems with mixed couplings. J. Math. Pures Appl. 141, 50–88 (2020)
Acknowledgements
We thank Nils Ackermann for helpful comments and suggestions. F. Angeles and A. Saldaña thank the Instituto de Matemáticas - Campus Juriquilla for the kind hospitality. F. Angeles is supported by CONACYT (Mexico) through a postdoctoral fellowship under grant A1-S-10457. M. Clapp is supported by CONACYT (Mexico) through the research grant A1-S-10457. A. Saldaña is supported by UNAM-DGAPA-PAPIIT (Mexico) grant IA100923 and by CONACYT (Mexico) grant A1-S-10457.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. The manuscript has no associated data.
Additional information
Communicated by Manuel del Pino.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
A An auxiliary result
A An auxiliary result
Lemma A.1
For every \(r\ge 1\) there is a linear operator \(E_r: H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N}\smallsetminus B_{r})\rightarrow H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) such that, for every \(u\in H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N}\smallsetminus B_{r})\),
- (i):
-
\(E_ru=u\) a.e. in \(\mathbb {R}^{N}\smallsetminus B_{r}\),
- (ii):
-
\(|E_ru|_2^2\le C_1|u|_{L^2(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r)}^2\),
- (iii):
-
\(\Vert E_ru\Vert ^2\le C_1\Vert u\Vert _{H^1(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r)}^2\),
for some positive constant \(C_1\) depending only on N and not on r. As a consequence, given \(p\in (1,\frac{2^*}{2})\) there is a positive constant C depending only on N and p such that
Proof
Fix a linear (extension) operator \(E_1: H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N}\smallsetminus B_{1})\rightarrow H^{1}(\mathbb {R}^{N})\) and a positive constant \(C_1\) satisfying (i), (ii) and (iii) for \(r=1\); see e.g. [16, Theorem 2.3.2]. For \(r>1\), set \(\widehat{u}(x):=u(rx)\) and, for \(u\in H^1(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r)\), define
Then, \(\widehat{E_ru}=E_1\widehat{u}\). Clearly, \(E_r\) satisfies (i). Note that \(|\widehat{u}|_{L^2(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_1)}^2=r^{-N}|u|_{L^2(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r)}^2\) and that
Similar identities hold true when we replace \(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_1\) and \(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r\) with \(\mathbb {R}^N\). Therefore,
which yields (ii). Furthermore,
This inequality, combined with (ii), yields
which gives (iii).
For \(p\in (1,\frac{N}{N-2})\) let \(C_2=C_2(N,p)\) be the constant for the Sobolev embedding \(H^1(\mathbb {R}^N)\subset L^{2p}(\mathbb {R}^N)\). Then, for any \(u\in H^1(\mathbb {R}^N\smallsetminus B_r)\), using statements (i) and (iii) we obtain
as claimed. \(\square \)
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Angeles, F., Clapp, M. & Saldaña, A. Exponential decay of the solutions to nonlinear Schrödinger systems. Calc. Var. 62, 160 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-023-02503-9
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-023-02503-9