Abstract
It is well known from the work of Bandle et al. (J Differ Equ 251:2143–2163, 2011) that the Fujita phenomenon for reaction–diffusion evolution equations with power nonlinearities does not occur on the hyperbolic space \({\mathbb {H}}^N\), thus marking a striking difference with the Euclidean situation. We show that, on classes of manifolds in which the bottom \(\Lambda \) of the \(L^2\) spectrum of \(-\Delta \) is strictly positive (the hyperbolic space being thus included), a different version of the Fujita phenomenon occurs for other kinds of nonlinearities, in which the role of the critical Fujita exponent in the Euclidean case is taken by \(\Lambda \). Such nonlinearities are time-independent, in contrast to the ones studied in Bandle et al. (2011). As a consequence of our results we show that, on a class of manifolds much larger than the case \(M={\mathbb {H}}^N\) considered in Bandle et al. (2011), solutions to (1.1) with power nonlinearity \(f(u)=u^p\), \(p>1\), and corresponding to sufficiently small data, are global in time. Though qualitative similarities with similar problems in bounded, Euclidean domains can be seen in the results, the methods are significantly different because of noncompact setting dealt with.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
We investigate existence of global in time solutions, versus blow-up in finite time, to nonlinear reaction–diffusion problems of the following type:
where \(\Delta \) is the Laplace–Beltrami operator on a Riemannian manifold M, \(T\in (0,\infty ]\) and \(f:[0,+\infty )\rightarrow [0,+\infty )\) is e.g., a locally Lipschitz, increasing function. Further specification of the assumptions on the manifold M and on the nonlinearity f will be made later on. A crucial parameter, according to whose value the behaviour of solutions will change, will be the value of \(f'(0)\) when f is differentiable in \(x=0\). It will be usually required that \(u_0\in C(M)\cap L^\infty (M)\) to ensure the existence of classical solutions at least up to a certain time.
The analogue of (1.1) in the Euclidean setting has a long history especially in the particularly important case of power nonlinearities, i.e., for the problem
where it is assumed that \(u_0\in L^\infty ({\mathbb {R}}^n)\). It has been shown by Fujita in [5], and in [12] and [14] for the critical case, that for problem (1.2) the following facts hold:
-
a)
If \(1 < p\le p^*:=\frac{N+2}{N}\), (1.2) does not possess nontrivial global solutions.
-
b)
If \(p > p^*\) solutions corresponding to data that are sufficiently small in a suitable sense are global in time.
It should be noticed that, by a generalization of a result of Kaplan [13], solutions corresponding to sufficiently large data blow up for any \(p>1\). A complete account of results concerning blow-up and global existence of solutions to semilinear parabolic equations posed in \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) can be found, e.g., in [1, 4, 16, 23] and in references therein.
In the case of evolution equation posed on Riemannian manifolds the situation may change completely. In fact, an analogue of (1.2) has been studied in [2] in the important context of the hyperbolic space \({\mathbb {H}}^n\), namely on the simply connected manifold of constant sectional curvature equal to \(-1\). It is shown there that for all \(p>1\) sufficiently small initial data give rise to global in time solutions. A kind of Fujita phenomenon nontheless takes place but when a time dependent modification of (1.2) is taken into account. Namely, if the reaction term \(u^p\) (considering nonnegative data, hence nonnegative solutions) is replaced by \(e^{\alpha t}u^p\), \(\alpha >0\) being a fixed parameter, then a Fujita-type phenomenon then takes place, the threshold value being \(p^\sharp :=1+\frac{\alpha }{\Lambda }\) where \(\Lambda :=(N-1)^2/4\) is the bottom of the \(L^2\) spectrum of \(-\Delta \) on \({\mathbb {H}}^n\). Informally, one might say that for this to hold the nonlinearity must be amplified exponentially as time grows, in fact it is also shown in [2] that if the exponential factor in time is replaced by a power of time the Fujita phenomenon still does not occur. See also [24] for a careful analysis of the critical case \(p=p^\sharp \), in which the authors show, combining their results with the ones of [2], that in such case global in time solutions exist for all values of \(\alpha \), thus marking a further difference with the Euclidean case. Further precise results on the lifespan of solutions that are not global are given in [25].
Recently, a number of results concerning blow-up and global existence for solutions of nonlinear parabolic equations with power-like reaction term and nonlinear, slow diffusion of porous medium type has also been obtained, on some classes of Riemannian manifolds, in [9,10,11, 17, 26]. The results for this class of equations show usually several differences with the case involving a linear diffusion, already in the Euclidean case, see [22].
Our goal here will be to present some result for different type of time independent nonlinearities in which a new kind of Fujita phenomenon takes place, in a wide class of manifolds that includes the hyperbolic space. We shall consider noncompact complete Riemannian manifold M of infinite volume, with dimension \(N\ge 3\), and require that some further conditions on M, to be described below, hold. In our first result, Theorem 3.1, we require the following additional condition on M:
-
M is stochastically complete, and \(\lambda _1(M):= \inf {\text {spec}}(-\Delta )\,\,>0\), where \({\text {spec}}(-\Delta )\) is the \(L^2\) spectrum of the Laplace–Beltrami operator \(-\Delta \).
Under such assumptions, we prove nonexistence of global solutions for problem (1.1) e.g., if f is convex and increasing, \(f'(0)>\lambda _1(M)\), and 1/f is integrable at infinity.
Stochastic completeness is a well-studied property of Riemannian manifolds, and it amounts to requiring that \(T_t1=1\) for all \(t>0\), or equivalently that
where p(x, y, t) is the heat kernel of the manifold M and \(\mu \) the Riemannian measure. See e.g., [6, 7] for a number of conditions on M ensuring that stochastic completeness holds. For example, it suffices that, for some \(o\in M\), the function \( r \mapsto \frac{ r}{\log {\mathcal {V}}(o,r)}\) is not integrable at infinity, where \({\mathcal {V}}(o,r)\) is the volume of the geodesic ball of radius r centered at o. Note that this is true in particular if \({\mathcal {V}}(o,r)\le C e^{ar^2}\) for suitable \(C,a>0\). This allows e.g., sectional curvatures to tend to \(-\infty \) at the infinity of M (namely when \(\varrho (o,x)\rightarrow +\infty \), \(\varrho \) being the Riemannian distance and o being fixed in M), at most quadratically, in a suitable precise sense, see also [8] for relations to nonlinear elliptic and parabolic equations on M. As for the assumption \(\lambda _1(M)\,>0\) we comment that a well-known sufficient condition for this to hold is that \(\mathrm {sec}\, \le c<0\), \(\mathrm {sec}\) denoting sectional curvatures. Thus, the class of manifolds on which the above result works is large, as it includes e.g., all those manifolds whose sectional curvatures are pinched between two strictly negative constants, and in particular the hyperbolic space.
In our second result, Theorem 3.2, the additional assumption we require on M beside the previous ones is the following:
-
the following Faber–Krahn inequality holds: for some \(c>0\), for any non-empty relatively compact open subset \(\Omega \subset M\),
$$\begin{aligned} \lambda _1(\Omega )\ge \frac{c}{[\mu (\Omega )]^{\frac{2}{N}}}, \end{aligned}$$(1.4)where \(\lambda _1(\Omega )\) is the first eingevalue of the Laplace operator on \(\Omega \) completed with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary conditions, and \(\mu \) is the Riemannian measure.
Under such assumptions, we show existence of global solutions for small data e.g., if f is differentiable at \(x=0\) with \(f'(0)< \lambda _1(M)\).
We refer e.g., to [7, Cor. 14.23, Cor. 15.17] for equivalent conditions for the Faber–Krahn inequality to hold. In particular, its validity is implied by on-diagonal bounds for the heat kernel in the form \(p(t,x,x)\le c\,t^{-N/2}\) for all \(x\in M\), \(t>0\), or by the validity of the Sobolev (or the Nash) inequality on M, which is in turn satisfied e.g., when sec\(\,\le 0\) on M, sec denoting sectional curvatures.
Observe that our blow-up result is similar in character to the well-known blow-up result for bounded domains of \({\mathbb {R}}^n\) (see, e.g., [1, Section 3.2]). However, the methods of proof exploited for bounded domains do not work on general Riemannian manifolds, thus our arguments are completely different. Indeed, in bounded domains the blow-up result is usually obtained by means of the Kaplan method (see [1, 13]), which makes use of the first eigenvalue and of the first eigenfunction of the Laplacian. In order to extend that argument to a general Riemannian manifold, it would be necessary to know precisely the behaviour at infinity of the positive solution \(\phi \) to
and in particular its integrability properties w.r.t. the Riemannian measure, which are not known in general, e.g., on the hyperbolic space \({\mathbb {H}}^n\) \(\phi \) belongs just to \(L^{2+\varepsilon }\) for all \(\varepsilon >0\). The Kaplan method yields indeed partial results on the subclass of Cartan–Hadamard manifolds, i.e., simply connected Riemannian manifolds with nonpositive sectional curvatures, with Ricci curvature bounded from below, see [20] when \(f(u)=u^p\), but the method can not be pushed to get the sharp threshold value \(\lambda _1(M)\) provided in Theorem 3.1, 3.2, even in the special case of Cartan–Hadamard manifolds and, in fact, even on the special case \(M={\mathbb {H}}^n\).
Let us mention that some blow-up results in bounded domains have also been established in [18, 19], for more general operators, by means of the method of sub– and supersolutions. Those results seem to be quite implicit in character, and they are based on the asymptotic behaviour for large times of solutions to the associated linear problem.
As a further comment, we mention that it is easy to show that, on a wide class of manifolds, characterized by the validity of the parabolic maximum principle, a sufficient condition for which is e.g., the very general condition (6.2) below, blow-up of solutions corresponding to large data occurs, provided the nonlinearity f is convex and 1/f is integrable at infinity. See the end of this section for some more detail and Sect. 6 for a concise proof.
Let us now give briefly some more precise detail on the conditions on the nonlinearities to be verified in order to prove our results. In the first one, Theorem 3.1, we shall assume that f is continuous. Besides, we assume that \(f\ge h\) where h is increasing and convex in \([0,+\infty )\), that it satisfies \(\int ^{+\infty }\frac{1}{h(s)}\,\mathrm{d}s\,<+\infty \), that \(h(0)=0\) and finally that the condition \(h'(0)>\lambda _1(M)\) holds. Of course, a sufficient condition for this to hold is that the conditions satisfied by h are satisfied by the nonlinearity f itself, as mentioned above. Then we show that all solutions blow up in finite time. In Theorem 3.2 we shall show that, for any locally Lipschitz nonlinearity f such that \(f(x)\le \lambda x\) in a neighbourhood of \(x=0\), with \(\lambda \le \lambda _1(M)\), then sufficiently small data give rise to solutions existing for all times. Of course, if \(f'(0)\) exists, a sufficient condition for the above condition on f to hold for some \(\lambda <\lambda _1(M)\) is \(f'(0)<\lambda _1(M)\), as mentioned above. The combination of the two results thus shows the version of the Fujita phenomenon we aim at.
It is important to mention that the above results provide, as immediate consequences, new results w.r.t. the ones proved in [2] for (1.1) even in the classical case \(f(u)=u^p\). In fact, Theorem 3.2 shows in particular that solutions corresponding to sufficiently small data are global, on a much wider class of manifolds than the hyperbolic space considered in one of the main result of [2], see Corollary 3.3 for a precise statement. In particular the results holds e.g., on all those manifolds whose sectional curvatures are pinched between two strictly negative constants everywhere.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2 we collect some preliminary material on the class of manifolds considered and on the concept of solution. In Sect. 3 we state all our main results. Section 4 contains the proof of Theorem 3.1, whereas Theorem 3.2 is proved in Sect. 5. In Sect. 6 we complement our main results by considering a large class of manifolds, e.g., those ones in which the radial Ricci curvature does not diverge at infinity faster that \(-cr^2\), where r is the Riemannian distance from a given pole \(o\in M\). We give a concise proof of the fact that on such manifolds, if f is a locally Lipschitz, increasing, convex function such that 1/f is integrable at infinity, large data give rise to solutions blowing up in finite time.
2 Preliminaries
2.1 Heat semigroup on M
Let \(\{e^{t\Delta }\}_{t\ge 0}\) be the heat semigroup of M, acting on \(L^p(M)\) for all \(p\in [1,+\infty ]\). It admits a (minimal) heat kernel, namely a function \(p\in C^{\infty }(M\times M\times (0,+\infty ))\), \(p>0\) in \(M\times M\times (0,+\infty )\) such that
for any \(u_0\in L^p(M)\). It is well known that
As recalled in the Introduction, we say that a manifold M is stochastically complete if the following condition holds:
See the considerations and the references after (1.3) for sufficient conditions for this fact to hold.
Furthermore, it is known that if M is a noncompact Riemannian manifold, then (see [3, Corollary 1])
where \(\lambda _1(M)\) is the infimum of the \(L^2\) spectrum of \(-\Delta \). We also recall that from the Faber–Krahn inequality (1.4) it follows that (see [7, Cor. 15.17 (b)]), for some \({\bar{C}}>0\):
2.2 On the concept of solution
We shall always deal with bounded initial data. Solutions will be meant in the classical sense. More precisely, setting \(Q_T=M\times (0,T]\), we require that \(u\in C^{2,1}(Q_T)\cap C(\overline{Q_T})\cap L^\infty (\overline{Q_T})\) and that (1.1) holds in the classical sense.
We shall use in the sequel two different concepts of solution. On the one hand a function \(u\in C(M\times (0,\tau ])\cap L^{\infty }(M\times (0,\tau ])\), for every \(\tau \in (0,T]\) is called a mild solution of problem (1.1) if
for any \(t\in [0,\tau ]\).
We notice that, by adapting the methods of [2, Prop. 2.1, Lemma 2.1], for bounded initial data \(u_0\) and up to a time T such that u(t) is bounded for all \(t\in [0,T)\) (blow-up might occur at some positive time), the two concepts of solutions coincide provided f is locally Lipschitz, as required in our main results. Hence we shall use them indifferently when needed.
3 Statements of main results
In this section, we state our results concerning solutions to problem (1.1). We say that a solution blows up in finite time, whenever there exists \(\tau >0\) such that
Otherwise, if a solution \(u(t)\in L^\infty (M)\) for all \(t>0\), we say that it is global. Our first results involves nonexistence of global solutions. Notice that the assumptions on the auxiliary function h below entail that h is differentiable in \(x=0\).
Theorem 3.1
Let M be a complete, non compact, stochastically complete Riemannian manifold with \(\lambda _1(M)>0\). Let \(u_0\in C(M)\cap L^\infty (M), u_0\ge 0, u_0\not \equiv 0 \text { in } M\). Let f be locally Lipschitz in \([0, +\infty )\). Assume that \(f\ge h\) where h is increasing and convex in \([0,+\infty )\) and \(h(0)=0\). Moreover, suppose that
and finally that \(h'(0)>\lambda _1(M)\). Then any solution to problem (1.1) blows up in finite time.
Notice that in the above Theorem the fact that h is assumed to be increasing and convex implies the existence of \(h'(0)\).
Theorem 3.2
Let M be a complete, non compact, stochastically complete Riemannian manifold with \(\lambda _1(M)>0\) and such that the Faber–Krahn inequality (1.4) holds. Assume also that f is increasing, locally Lipschitz and \(f(0)=0\). Moreover, suppose that, for some \(\delta >0\) and \(0<\alpha \le \lambda _1(M)\),
Furthermore, assume that \(u_0\in C(M)\cap L^\infty (M)\cap L^1(M), u_0\ge 0 \text { in } M\) is small enough. Then there exists a global solution to problem (1.1); in addition, \(u\in L^{\infty }(M\times (0,+\infty ))\).
The smallness condition on \(u_0\) in Theorem 3.2 can be precisely formulated. Indeed, our hypothesis is that
and
where \(C_2={\bar{C}}\,e^{-(\lambda _1-\alpha )}\), \({\bar{C}}\) being defined in (2.3), while \(\alpha \) and \(\delta \) are given by (3.2).
As a consequence, we can generalize one of the main results of [2] (see also [21]) to a class of manifolds much wider than \({\mathbb {H}}^n\).
Corollary 3.3
Let M be a complete, non compact, stochastically complete Riemannian manifold with \(\lambda _1(M)>0\) and such that the Faber–Krahn inequality (1.4) holds. Assume \(f(x)=x^p\) for all \(x\ge 0\) with \(p>1\). Assume also that \(u_0\in C(M)\cap L^\infty (M)\cap L^1(M), u_0\ge 0 \text { in } M\) is small enough. Then there exists a global solution to problem (1.1); in addition, \(u\in L^{\infty }(M\times (0,+\infty ))\).
Remark 3.4
-
For any \(p>1\), let
$$\begin{aligned} f(u)={\left\{ \begin{array}{ll} \alpha u, &{} u\,\in [0, 1],\\ \alpha u^p &{} u\,\in (1, +\infty ). \end{array}\right. } \end{aligned}$$If \(\alpha >\lambda _1(M)\), then by Theorem 3.1, the solution to problem (1.1) blows up in finite time for any nontrivial \(u_0\). On the other hand, if \(\alpha \le \lambda _1(M)\), then the solution exists globally in time, provided that \(u_0\) is sufficiently small.
-
Let \(f(u)=e^{\beta u}-1\) with \(\beta >0\). By Theorem 3.1, if \(\beta >\lambda _1(M)\), then the solution to problem (1.1) blows up in finite time. On the contrary, if \(\beta <\lambda _1(M)\), then condition (3.2) is satisfied with \(\beta <\alpha \le \lambda _1(M)\). Therefore, by Theorem 3.2, the solution exists globally in time, whenever \(u_0\) is sufficiently small.
By standard methods, on suitable manifolds and for a wide class of nonlinearities f, it is possible to show that whenever \(u_0\) is large enough, blow-up of solutions occurs. We defer the discussion of this fact to Sect. 6.
4 Finite time blow-up for any initial datum
4.1 Two key estimates
Let us first prove a preliminary lemma.
Lemma 4.1
Let M be a complete, non-compact Riemannian manifold with \(\lambda _1(M)>0\). Let \(u_0\in C(M)\cap L^\infty (M), u_0\ge 0, u_0\not \equiv 0 \text { in } M\). Let \(\varepsilon \in (0,\lambda _1(M))\). Then there exist \(\Omega \subset M\), \(t_0>0\), \(C_1>0\) such that
Proof
Let \(\Omega \subset M\) be such that \(\mu (\Omega )<+\infty \), \(\int _{\Omega } u_0\, \mathrm{d}\mu >0\). From (2.2), there exists \(t_0>0\) such that, for every \(x,y\in \Omega \),
Hence
Consequently, we obtain (4.1) with \(C_1:= \int _{\Omega }u_0(y) \,\mathrm{d}\mu (y)>0.\) \(\square \)
Let u be a mild solution of equation (1.1), so that it fulfills (2.4). Then, for any \(x\in M\) and for any \(T>0\), we define
Observe that
Suppose that \(u_0\in L^{\infty }(M)\). Choose any
From (4.4) and (2.1) we obtain that, for any \(x\in M\),
We now state the following lemma.
Lemma 4.2
Let \(M, f, h, u_0\) be as in Theorem 3.1. Let \(x\in M\) and \(\Phi _x(t)\) be as in (4.2). Set \(\alpha :=h'(0).\) Then
for suitable \({\bar{t}}>0\) and \(C>0\), depending on x.
Note that \({\bar{t}}\) and C are given by (4.18) and (4.27) below, respectively, with \(\delta \) as in (4.4).
Proof
Let u be a solution to problem (1.1). So (2.4) holds; hence
In the definition of \(\Phi _x^T(t)\equiv \Phi _x(t)\) (see (4.2)) fix any
We multiply (4.7) by \(p(x,z,T-t)\) and integrate over M. Therefore, we get
Now, due to (4.2), for all \(t\in (0, T),\) equality (4.9) reads
By (4.3), for all \(t\in (0, T),\)
Since \(f\ge h\) in \([0, +\infty \)),
Since h is an increasing convex function, due to (1.3), by using Jensen inequality, we get
Combining together (4.10) and (4.11), we obtain
Fix any \(x\in M\). We first observe that (4.12) implies that \(\Phi _x(t)\) is an increasing function w.r.t the time variable t, since
Moreover, due to (4.4) and (4.5), by continuity of \(t\mapsto \Phi _x(t)\), we can infer that there exists \(t_1>0\) such that
Since h is convex, increasing in \([0, +\infty ), h(0)=0, h'(0)=\alpha \), then
Due to (4.15) and to (4.14), we get
Let
We claim that
In order to show (4.16), consider the Cauchy problem
Clearly,
Hence
Furthermore, note that, in view of (4.5) and (4.8),
By comparison,
Thus, we can infer that there exists \({\bar{t}}\in (0, \tau \,]\) such that
In particular, from (4.17) it follows that \({\bar{t}}<T.\)
Due to (4.13) and (4.18), we obtain that
By (4.12), in particular we have
Define
Note that G is well-defined thanks to hypothesis (3.1) and to (4.19). Furthermore,
We now define
Then, due to (4.21) and (4.20),
By integrating (4.23) we get:
We substitute (4.22) into (4.24), so we have
Thus, for any \({\bar{t}}<t<T\),
We now combine (4.25) together with (4.16), hence
Hence
We now take the exponential of both sides of (4.26). Thus we get, for any \({\bar{t}}<t<T\),
where
This is the inequality (4.6). \(\square \)
4.2 Proof of Theorem 3.1
Proof
Take any \(\delta >0\) fulfilling (4.4). We suppose, by contradiction, that u is a global solution of problem (1.1). Since \(\alpha :=h'(0)>\lambda _1(M)\), there exists \(\varepsilon \in (0,\alpha -\lambda _1(M))\) such that
Let \(\Omega \subset M\) be such that
Then
Fix any arbitrary \(x\in M\). By Lemmas 4.1 and 4.2,
where \(t_0>0\), \(C_1>0\) are given in Lemma 4.1, while \({\bar{t}}>0\), \(C>0\) in Lemma 4.2. Hence, if u exists globally in time, we would have
Nonetheless, due to (4.28), the left hand side of (4.29) tends to \(+\infty \) as \(T\rightarrow \infty \). Thus, we have a contradiction. Hence the thesis follows. \(\square \)
5 Global existence
Consider the linear Cauchy problem for the heat equation
with \(u_0\) as in Theorem 3.2. Observe that problem (5.1) admits the classical solution
Hence, since \(u_0\in L^\infty (M)\),
Moreover, since \(u_0\in L^1(M)\), if the Faber–Krahn inequality holds, then, due to (2.3),
where \({\bar{C}}\) has been defined in (2.3).
Let \(\{\Omega _j\}_{j\in {\mathbb {N}}}\subset M\) be a sequence of domains such that
Furthermore, for every \(j\in {\mathbb {N}}\) let \(\zeta _j\in C_c^{\infty }(\Omega _j)\) be such that \(0\le \zeta _j\le 1\), \(\zeta _j\equiv 1\) in \(\Omega _{j/2}\).
Proof of Theorem 3.2
We consider initial data \(u_0\) satisfying (3.3) and (3.4). Define
with v and \(\alpha \) given by (5.2) and (3.2), respectively.
Note that, due to (3.3) and (5.3), for any \(x\in M, t\in (0,1]\),
Moreover, due to (3.4), (5.4), since \(\alpha \le \lambda _1(M)\), for any \(t>1\) we get
Inequalities (5.5) and (5.6) yield
Furthermore, we have
Now, by using the fact that v is a classical solution to problem (5.1), due to (3.2) and (5.7), we get
Hence \({\bar{u}}\) is a weak supersolution to problem (1.1) in \(M\times (0,\infty )\).
For any \(j\in {\mathbb {N}}\) there exists a unique classical solution \(u_j\) to problem
Clearly, \(u_j\not \equiv 0\) because \(u_0\,\zeta _j\not \equiv 0\) in \(\Omega _j\). Moreover, for any \(j\in {\mathbb {N}}\), in view of (5.8), since
\({\bar{u}}\) is a bounded weak supersolution of problem (5.9). Obviously, for any \(j\in {\mathbb {N}}\), \({\underline{u}}\equiv 0\) is a subsolution to problem (5.9). Hence, by the comparison principle, for every \(j\in {\mathbb {N}}\) we obtain
By standard a priori estimates (see, e.g., [15, Chapter 5]), we can infer that there exists a subsequence \(\{u_{j_{k}}\}\) of \(\{u_{j}\}\), which converges in \(C^{2,1}_{x,t}(K\times [\varepsilon , T])\) as \(k\rightarrow +\infty \), for each compact subset \(K\subset M\) and for each \(\varepsilon \in (0,T)\), and in \(C_{loc}(M\times [0,T])\), to some function \(u\in C^{2,1}_{x,t}(M\times (0,T])\cap C(M\times [0,T])\), which is a classical solution to problem (1.1). Moreover, from (5.10) we get
Hence the thesis follows. \(\square \)
6 On blow-up of solutions for large data
In this section we discuss a blow-up result that can be obtained by standard tools. More precisely, we show that the solution to problem (1.1) blows up, provided that \(u_0\) is large enough, and \(f:[0, +\infty )\rightarrow [0, +\infty )\) is a locally Lipschitz, increasing, convex function fulfilling
We need to introduce some preliminary material. Let \(o\in M\) be a reference point and r(x) be the geodesic distance between x and o. For any \(x\in M{\setminus }\{o\}\), denote by \({{\,\mathrm{Ric_o}\,}}\) the Ricci curvature at x in the radial direction \(\frac{\partial }{\partial r}\). We assume that
for some \(\psi \in C^\infty ((0, +\infty ))\cap C^1([0, +\infty ))\) such that \(\psi '(0)=1, \psi (0)=0, \psi >0 \text { in } (0, +\infty )\) and
In view of such hypothesis, for problem (1.1) comparison principle for bounded sub- and supersolutions holds (see, e.g., [7, 21]). Condition (6.1) may be stated informally in a quite simpler way: a sufficient condition for this to hold is that
and a suitable \(c>0\), as can be seen by choosing \(\psi \) to be \(e^{kr^2}\) in a neighborhood of infinity, for a suitable \(k>0\).
Let D be an open precompact subset of M with smooth boundary. By Kaplan’s method (see [13]) it can be proved that, for some \(v_0\in C({\bar{D}}), v_0\ge 0\) large enough, any solution v to problem
blows up in finite time. Now, consider \(u_0\in C(M), u_0\ge 0 \) with compact support. Take any D as above containing the support of \(u_0\) and set \(v_0:=u_{0\lfloor {D}}\). By choosing \(u_0\) big enough, and so \(v_0\), the solution v to (6.3), corresponding to such \(v_0\), blows up in a finite time, say \(\tau >0\). Let
By the maximum principle,
Hence,
n being the outer unit normal vector to \(\partial D\). This easily implies that, for any \(0<T<\tau \), \({\underline{u}}\) is a bounded weak subsolution to problem (1.1). So, by comparison principle, for any solution u to problem (1.1),
Since v blows in finite time, the same holds for \({\bar{u}}\) and so for u.
References
Bandle, C., Brunner, H.: Blowup in diffusion equations: a survey. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 97, 3–22 (1998)
Bandle, C., Pozio, M.A., Tesei, A.: The Fujita exponent for the Cauchy problem in the Hyperbolic Space. J. Differ. Equ. 251, 2143–2163 (2011)
Chavel, I., Karp, L.: Large time behavior of the heat kernel: the parabolic \(\lambda \)-potential alternative. Comment. Math. Helv. 66, 541–556 (1991)
Deng, K., Levine, H.A.: The role of critical exponents in blow-up theorems: the sequel. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 243, 85–126 (2000)
Fujita, H.: On the blowing up of solutions of the Cauchy problem for \(u_t=\Delta u+u^{1+\alpha }\). J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo Sect. I(13), 109–124 (1966)
Grigor’yan, A.: Analytic and geometric background of recurrence and non-explosion of the Brownian motion on Riemannian manifolds. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 36, 135–249 (1999)
Grigor’yan, A.: “Heat Kernel and Analysis on Manifolds’’, AMS/IP Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 47. American Mathematical Society, Providence (2009)
Grillo, G., Ishige, K., Muratori, M.: Nonlinear characterizations of stochastic completeness. J. Math. Pures Appl. 139, 63–82 (2020)
Grillo, G., Meglioli, G., Punzo, F.: Smoothing effects and infinite time blowup for reaction–diffusion equations: an approach via Sobolev and Poincaré inequalities. J. Math. Pures Appl. 151, 99–131 (2021)
Grillo, G., Meglioli, G., Punzo, F.: Global existence of solutions and smoothing effects for classes of reaction–diffusion equations on manifolds. J. Evol. Equ. 21, 2339–2375 (2021)
Gu, Q., Sun, Y., Xiao, J., Xu, F.: Global positive solution to a semi-linear parabolic equation with potential on Riemannian manifold. Calc. Var. PDEs 59, 170 (2020)
Hayakawa, K.: On nonexistence of global solutions of some semilinear parabolic differential equations. Proc. Jpn. Acad. 49, 503–505 (1973)
Kaplan, S.: On the growth of solutions of quasilinear parabolic equations. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 16, 305–330 (1963)
Kobayashi, K., Sirao, T., Tanaka, H.: On the growing up problem for semilinear heat equations. J. Math. Soc. Jpn. 29, 407–424 (1977)
Ladyzhenskaya, O.A., Solonnikov, V.A., Uraltseva, N.A.: Linear and Quasilinear Equations of Parabolic Type, Nauka, Moscow (1967) (English translation: series Transl. Math. Monographs, 23 AMS, Providence, RI, 1968)
Levine, H.: The role of critical exponent in blowup theorems. SIAM Rev. 32, 262–288 (1990)
Mastrolia, P., Monticelli, D.D., Punzo, F.: Nonexistence of solutions to parabolic differential inequalities with a potential on Riemannian manifolds. Math. Ann. 367, 929–963 (2017)
Meier, P.: On the critical exponent for reaction–diffusion equations. ARMA 109, 63–71 (1990)
Meier, P.: Blow-up of solutions of semilinear parabolic differential equations. ZAMP 39, 135–149 (1998)
Punzo, F. Global solutions of semilinear parabolic equations with drift on Riemannian manifolds, DCDS-A (to appear). https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2022030
Punzo, F.: Blow-up of solutions to semilinear parabolic equations on Riemannian manifolds with negative sectional curvature. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 387, 815–827 (2012)
Samarskii, A.A., Galaktionov, V.A., Kurdyumov, S.P., Mikhailov, A.P.: “Blow-up in Quasilinear Parabolic Equations’’, De Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics, vol. 19. de Gruyter, Berlin (1995)
Vázquez, J.L.: The problems of blow-up for nonlinear heat equations. Complete blow-up and avalanche formation. Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Cl. Sci. Fis. Mat. Natur. Rend. Lincei Mat. Appl. 15, 281–300 (2004)
Wang, Z., Yin, J.: A note on semilinear heat equation in hyperbolic space. J. Differ. Equ. 256, 1151–1156 (2014)
Wang, Z., Yin, J.: Asymptotic behaviour of the lifespan of solutions for a semilinear heat equation in hyperbolic space. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. Sect. A 146, 1091–1114 (2016)
Zhang, Q.S.: Blow-up results for nonlinear parabolic equations on manifolds. Duke Math. J. 97, 515–539 (1999)
Acknowledgements
The authors are members of the Gruppo Nazionale per l’Analisi Matematica, la Probabilità e le loro Applicazioni (GNAMPA, Italy) of the Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica (INdAM, Italy) and are partially supported by the PRIN project 201758MTR2: “Direct and Inverse Problems for Partial Differential Equations: Theoretical Aspects and Applications” (Italy).
Funding
Open access funding provided by Politecnico di Milano within the CRUI-CARE Agreement.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
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
Grillo, G., Meglioli, G. & Punzo, F. Blow-up versus global existence of solutions for reaction–diffusion equations on classes of Riemannian manifolds. Annali di Matematica 202, 1255–1270 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-022-01279-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10231-022-01279-7