Anisotropic singularities to semilienar elliptic equations in a measure framework
Huyuan Chen

TL;DR
This paper investigates very weak solutions to a semilinear elliptic equation with anisotropic singularities in a measure framework, establishing existence, uniqueness, and asymptotic behavior under subcritical growth conditions.
Contribution
It introduces a novel approach to analyze very weak solutions with measure data involving anisotropic singularities, extending the scope to broader nonlinearities.
Findings
Existence and uniqueness of solutions under subcritical growth
Solutions exhibit anisotropic singularity at the origin
Limit behavior of solutions as parameters tend to infinity
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to study very weak solutions of elliptic equation where , , denotes the unit ball centered at the origin in with , is an odd, nondecreasing and function, is the Dirac mass concentrated at the origin and is defined in the distribution sense that We obtain that the above problem admits a unique very weak solution under the integral subcritical assumption Furthermore, we prove…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsNonlinear Partial Differential Equations · Advanced Mathematical Modeling in Engineering · Differential Equations and Boundary Problems
Anisotropic singularities to semi-linear elliptic equations in a measure framework
Huyuan [email protected]
Department of Mathematics, Jiangxi Normal University,
Nanchang, Jiangxi 330022, PR China
Abstract. The purpose of this article is to study very weak solutions of elliptic equation
[TABLE]
where , , denotes the unit ball centered at the origin in with , is an odd, nondecreasing and function, is the Dirac mass concentrated at the origin and is defined in the distribution sense that
[TABLE]
We obtain that problem (1) admits a unique very weak solution under the integral subcritical assumption
[TABLE]
Furthermore, we prove that has anisotropic singularity at the origin and we consider the odd property and limit of as .
We pose the constraint on nonlienarity that we only require integrability in the principle value sense, due to the singularities only at the origin. This makes us able to search the very weak solutions in a larger scope of the nonlinearity.
††AMS Subject Classifications: 35R06, 35B40, 35Q60. ††Key words: Anisotropic singularity; Very weak solution; Uniqueness.
1. Introduction
As early as in 1977, Lieb-Simon in [10] studied the very weak solutions to equation
[TABLE]
in the description of the Thomas-Fermi theory of electric field potential determined by the nuclear charge and distribution of electrons in an atom, where , , , and is the Dirac mass at for . In fact, the solution of (1.1) turns out to be a classical singular solution of
[TABLE]
As a fundamental PDE’s model, the isolated singular problem
[TABLE]
has been studied extensively, where is a domain in with . Brezis-Véron in [3] showed that problem (1.2) admits no isolated singular solution when . A complete classification of the isolated singularities at the origin for (1.2) was given by Véron in [18] when as follows:
(i) either converges to a constant which can take only two values as ,
(ii) or converges to a constant , and the couple is related to the weak solution of
[TABLE]
where is the normalized constant of the fundamental solution of in , that is,
[TABLE]
For , the above classification holds under the restriction of nonnegative solutions of (1.2) and all above singular solutions are isotropic. A conjucture states that there is a rich structure of the singularities for (1.2) without the restriction of nonnegativity for . Véron in [18] partially answered this conjucture and showed that the anisotropic singular solutions could be constructed by considering the following nonlinear eigenvalue problem on
[TABLE]
where is the sphere of unit ball in and is the Laplace-Beltrami operator. Later on, Chen-Matano-Véron in [5] provideds the anisotropic singular solutions of (1.2) by analyzing the corresponding Laplace-Beltrami equations in the sphere. More singularities analysis see the references [12, 16, 17, 20].
In contrast with the absorption nonlinearity, the isolated singular solutions of elliptic problem with source nonlinearity
[TABLE]
was classified by Lions in [11], by using Schwartz’s Theorem to build that
[TABLE]
and then by choosing suitable test functions in to kill all with multiple index and , finally building the connections with the weak solutions of
[TABLE]
Lions in [11] proved that when with , any solution of (1.4) is a weak solution of (1.6) for some , and when , the parameter . Essentially, with is killed in (1.5) because it is anisotropic singular source, that is, this source makes the solutions anisotropic singular. For instance, the fundamental solution of with is
[TABLE]
where are the normalized constants, see [4]. Obviously, has anisotropic singularities.
Inspired by (1.5), we observe that with could provide anisotropic source and our motivation in this article is to make use of this kind of sources to construct anisotropic singular solutions for (1.2) and to find the criteria for more general nonlinearity. Let be the unit ball centered at the origin in with , denote by the Dirac mass concentrated at the origin, to be convenient, with and then
[TABLE]
So our concern is to study the isolated singular solutions of semilinear elliptic problem
[TABLE]
where parameters and .
Before we state our main results, we introduce the definition of weak solution to (1.8) as follows.
Definition 1.1**.**
A function is called a very weak solution of (1.8), if be integrable in the principle value sense near the origin, and
[TABLE]
We note that and are both visible in the distributional identity (1.9). When , the definition of very weak solution of (1.8) requires , see the references [19]. Since both sources have the support at the origin, so in this article we pose the constraint for the very weak solution that is integrable in the principle value sense near the origin means, i.e. exists, that provides higher possibility for searching the sign-changing singular solutions of (1.8).
Now we are ready to state our first theorem on the existence and asymptotic behavior of very weak solutions to problem (1.8).
Theorem 1.1**.**
Assume that , , is given in (1.3), (1.7) respectively, and the nonlinearity is an odd, nondecreasing and Lipschitz function satisfying
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
for some .
Then (1.8) admits a very weak solution such that
* in ;*
* has the following singularity at the origin*
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
* is a classical solution of*
[TABLE]
In the particular case that , denoting the solution of (1.8) with , is -odd, that is,
[TABLE]
Furthermore, the -odd very weak solution is unique.
We note that with verifies (1.10) and (1.11). It follows by (1.12) that , but for and , . We can’t able to obtain the uniqueness of the very weak solution to (1.8), due to the failure of application the Kato’s inequality, which requires that the nonlinearity term .
For the existence of very weak solutions, the normal method is to approximate the Radon measure by functions and consider the limit of the corresponding classical solutions. When , we use a sequence of Dirac measures to approach the source and in this approximation, the biggest challenge is to find a uniform estimate. To overcome this difficulty, our strategy is to to consider -odd property of solutions when to derive the uniform bound in this approaching process.
We next state the nonexistence of very weak solution of (1.8).
Theorem 1.2**.**
Assume that , , with , then there is no -odd weak solution for problem (1.8).
Our strategy here is to make use of odd property to deduce (1.8) into boundary data problem
[TABLE]
in the distributional sense that
[TABLE]
It is interesting but still open to derive the nonexistence when .
Finally, we analyze the limit of the weak solutions as . From the monotonicity of in and respectively, the limit of as exists in , denote
[TABLE]
Theorem 1.3**.**
Assume that , , with , is the unique -odd very weak solution of (1.8) and is given by (1.16). Then is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
and satisfies that
[TABLE]
where is a continuous -odd function such that for unit vector
[TABLE]
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we analyze the -odd property. Section 3 is devoted to study the -odd very weak solution in subcritical case when and the nonexistence the -odd very weak solution in the subcritical case. In Section 4, we consider the limit of the unique -odd weak solutions of (1.8) with as . Finally, we prove the existence of non -odd very weak solution when in Section 5.
2. Preliminary
We start this section from the -odd property. Notice that an -odd function defined in a -symmetric domain satisfies
[TABLE]
In what follows, we denote by a generic positive constant.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Assume that is an -odd function, is an odd and nondecreasing function.
Then
[TABLE]
admits a unique classical solution . Moreover,
* is -odd in ;*
* assume more that in and in , then in .*
Proof. Since is an odd and nondecreasing function, then it is standard to obtain the existence of solution by the method of super and sub solutions.
Uniqueness. Let be two solutions of (2.1), in and . We claim that . In fact, if , we observe that is a solution of
[TABLE]
By applying Maximum Principle, we have that
[TABLE]
which contradicts the definition of . Then . Similarly, is empty. Therefore, in and the uniqueness holds.
* * Let , and by direct computation, we derive that
[TABLE]
then is a solution of (2.1). It follows from the uniqueness of solution of (2.1) that
[TABLE]
* * We observe that on and then is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
We now claim that in . Indeed, if not, we have that . Let , then satisfies
[TABLE]
By Maximum Principle, we have that
[TABLE]
which contradicts the definition of .
We next prove that in . Problem (2.2) could be seen as
[TABLE]
where if and if . It follows by that is continuous and in . Since in , it follows by strong maximum principle that or in , then we exclude in by the fact that in .
Corollary 2.1**.**
Assume that is an -odd function such that in and is an odd and nondecreasing function. Let be the solution of (2.1) and be the unique solution of
[TABLE]
Then is -odd and
[TABLE]
Proof. By applying Lemma 2.1 with , we have that is -odd and
[TABLE]
Denote , then on and , by Maximum Principle, we have that in , which ends the proof.
Corollary 2.2**.**
Assume that is an -odd function such that in and are odd and nondecreasing functions satisfying
[TABLE]
Let be the solutions of (2.1) replaced by by with respectively.
Then
[TABLE]
Proof. By applying Lemma 2.1 and Corollary 2.1, we have that are -odd and are nonnegative in . We denote , then satisfies that
[TABLE]
We first claim that in . If not, we have that . Let us define
[TABLE]
then satisfies that
[TABLE]
By Maximum Principle, we have that
[TABLE]
which contradicts the definition of .
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let and be -odd functions in satisfying in , then the problem
[TABLE]
admits a unique -odd weak solution with in the sense that ,
[TABLE]
Moreover, is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof. Uniqueness. Let satisfy that
[TABLE]
for any such that . Since , then the test function could be improved into without the restriction that . Denote by the solution of
[TABLE]
Then and then
[TABLE]
This implies in .
Existence. Let , where , in and in , then is an -odd function in such that in , then
[TABLE]
admits a unique solution satisfying
[TABLE]
Moreover, from Lemma 2.1 with , we have that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and for any ,
[TABLE]
where . We observe that , where is a harmonic function in with the boundary value for . Therefore, for , we have that and then
[TABLE]
Moreover, we see that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
Therefore, we obtain a uniform bound for , together with monotonicity, then passing to the limit as in (2.10), we deduces that is a weak solution of (2.3) and it follows from standard stability theorem that is a classical solution of (2.5) for .
By direct extension, we have the following corollary.
Corollary 2.3**.**
Let be an -odd function in with satisfying in , then the problem
[TABLE]
admits a unique -odd weak solution with , in the sense that ,
[TABLE]
for any s. t. for any and some . Moreover,
[TABLE]
and is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
Remark 2.1**.**
The arguments in Proposition 2.1 and Corollary 2.3 hold when is replaced by and the boundary condition is done by
[TABLE]
In order to study the convergence of weak solutions, we recall the definition and basic properties of the Marcinkiewicz spaces.
Definition 2.1**.**
Let be a domain and be a positive Borel measure in . For , and , we set
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
is called the Marcinkiewicz space with exponent or weak space and is a quasi-norm. The following property holds.
Proposition 2.2**.**
[1]** Assume that and . Then there exists such that
[TABLE]
for any Borel set of .
3. -odd very weak solution with
3.1. Existence of very weak solution
In this subsection, we prove the existence and uniqueness of very weak solution to problem (1.8) when .
Theorem 3.1**.**
Assume that , the nonlinearity is an odd, nondecreasing and Lipchitz continuous function satisfying (1.10).
Then (1.8) admits a unique -odd very weak solution such that
* in for ;*
* satisfies (1.12);*
* is a classical solution of (1.14).*
Before proving Theorem 3.1, we need following preliminaries.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Assume that , the nonlinearity is an odd, nondecreasing and Lipchitz continuous function and is a very weak solution of (1.8), locally bounded in . Then is a classical solution of (1.14).
Proof. Since have the support in , so for any open sets in such that is a very weak solution of
[TABLE]
where and . By standard regularity results, we have that satisfies (3.1) in in the classical sense.
For , we consider of , odd, nondecreasing functions defined in satisfying
[TABLE]
Proposition 3.1**.**
Let be defined by (3.2) and
[TABLE]
Then for any , problem
[TABLE]
admits a unique very weak solution , which is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
Moreover, is -odd in ,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof. We observe that is a bounded Radon measure and is bounded, Lipschitz continuous and nondecreasing, then it follows from [19, Theorem 3.7] under the integral subcritical assumption (1.10) replaced by for and the Kato’s inequality, problem (3.3) admits a unique weak solution . Moreover, could be approximated by the classical solutions to problem
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and is a sequence of radially symmetric, nondecreasing smooth functions converging to in the distribution sense. Furthermore,
[TABLE]
Since is -odd and nonnegative in , so is by Lemma 2.1. We observe that , it follows from Lemma 2.1 that
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
then it follows from Corollary 2.2 that
[TABLE]
From the proof of Theorem 2.9 in [19], we know that
[TABLE]
where . By regularity results, any compact set and open set in such that , , there exist independent of such that
[TABLE]
Therefore, up to some subsequence, there exists a measurable function such that
[TABLE]
where . Then is -odd, nonnegative in and
[TABLE]
Passing to the limit in (3.6) as , we deduce that is a weak solution of (3.3). By the uniqueness of weak solution of (3.3), we obtain that . Therefore, is -odd, nonnegative in and it follows from (3.7) and (3.4) that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
This ends the proof.
We next passing to the limit of weak solutions as .
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let be defined by (3.2). Then for any , problem
[TABLE]
*admits a unique very weak solution . Moreover,
is -odd for any in and*
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
* is a classical solution of*
[TABLE]
Proof. It follows from Proposition 3.1 that problem (3.3) admits a unique very weak solution , that is,
[TABLE]
On the one hand, we have that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by Proposition 3.1, we have that
[TABLE]
By regularity results, for and any compact set and open set in such that , , there exist independent of such that
[TABLE]
Moreover, by [4, Proposition 3.3], is uniformly bounded in if and is uniformly bounded in for any if . Therefore, is relatively compact in for any . There exists such that
[TABLE]
which implies that
[TABLE]
Therefore, up to some subsequence, passing to the limit as in the identity (3.9), it follows that is a very weak solution of (3.8). Moreover, is -odd and nonnegative in .
Uniqueness. Let be a weak solution of (3.8) and then is a very weak solution to
[TABLE]
By Kato’s inequality [19, Theorem 2.4] (see also [8, 9, 17]),
[TABLE]
Taking , we have that
[TABLE]
then a.e. in . Then the uniqueness is obtained.
The next estimate plays an important role in in with .
Lemma 3.2**.**
There exists such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Proof. We observe that
[TABLE]
and for , ,
[TABLE]
where is a harmonic function in . Then
[TABLE]
Therefore, we have that
[TABLE]
*Proof of (3.10). * Let be a Borel set of with , then there exists such that
[TABLE]
We deduce that
[TABLE]
By the definition of Marcinkiewicz space, we have that
[TABLE]
*Proof of (3.11). * Let be a Borel set of with , then there exists such that
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
we deduce that
[TABLE]
This ends the proof.
Lemma 3.3**.**
Assume that is continuous, nondecreasing and verifies (1.10). Then for ,
[TABLE]
Proof. Since
[TABLE]
and by (1.7),
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
The proof is complete.
Now we are ready to prove Theorem 3.1.
Proof Of Theorem 3.1. Existence. Let be a sequence of nondecreasing functions defined by (3.2). It follows that is a sequence of odd, bounded and nondecreasing Lipschiz continuous functions.
By Proposition 3.2, problem (3.8) admits a unique -odd weak solution such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For , any compact set and open set in satisfying , , we have that
[TABLE]
where . Therefore, up to some subsequence, there exists such that
[TABLE]
Then converges to a.e. in . By Lemma 3.2, we have that
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
by Proposition 2.2 and , we have that
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
For any Borel set , we have that
[TABLE]
On the other hand,
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
where . By assumption (1.10) and Lemma 3.3, we have that as , therefore,
[TABLE]
Notice that the quantity on the right-hand side tends to [math] when . The conclusion follows: for any , there exists such that
[TABLE]
For fixed, there exists such that
[TABLE]
which implies that is uniformly integrable in . Then in by Vitali convergence theorem, see [7].
Furthermore, for any , we know that
[TABLE]
and it follows the odd prosperity of , and , that
[TABLE]
then
[TABLE]
Then passing to the limit as in the identity (3.13), it implies that
[TABLE]
Thus, is a very weak solution of (1.8). The regularity results follows by Lemma 3.1.
Proof of . Since is -odd in and in , then it implies that is -odd in . By the fact that in , it follows that
[TABLE]
Proof of . We observe that
[TABLE]
then for and let be the unique solution of (2.3) with , we have that
[TABLE]
Then satisfies (3.17). From Proposition 2.1, it infers that for with with ,
[TABLE]
For , we have that and , then
[TABLE]
where .
For , we have that and
[TABLE]
where we have used (1.10).
For , we have that and
[TABLE]
where . Then for any and , we have that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
By (3.17),
[TABLE]
and -odd property of , we derive that for any ,
[TABLE]
Finally, we prove the uniqueness. Let be two odd solutions of (1.8), from Lemma 3.4, are two solutions of
[TABLE]
Form the uniqueness of the very weak solution to (3.19), see [14, Theorem 2.1], we obtain in and combine the odd property we obtain the uniqueness of the very weak solution of (1.8) with . This ends the proof.
3.2. Nonexistence
This subsection is devoted to obtain the nonexistence of very weak solutions of (1.8) in the supercritical case.
Lemma 3.4**.**
Assume that , the nonlinearity is an odd, nondecreasing and Lipchitz continuous function. Let be an -odd very weak solution of (1.8).
Then is a very weak solution of (3.19).
Proof. From Lemma 3.1 and the -odd property, we have that
[TABLE]
For any -odd function , we deduce that
[TABLE]
where . Since , then for -odd function , we have that and the weak solution satisfies that
[TABLE]
for odd function . By -odd property, we have that
[TABLE]
which, combined with (3.20), implies that
[TABLE]
So we have that is a weak solution of (3.19).
Proof of Theorem 1.2. When with and , [14, Theorem 3.1] shows that the nonnegative solution of
[TABLE]
has removable singularity at origin, so problem (3.19) has no very weak solution, which contradicts Lemma 3.4. Then (1.8) has no -odd weak solution when with .
4. Strongly anisotropic singularity for
In this section, we consider the limit of weak solutions as to
[TABLE]
where . By Theorem 1.1, we observe that the mapping is nondecreasing in , then exists for any , denoting
[TABLE]
For , we have the following result.
Proposition 4.1**.**
Let , then is -odd,
[TABLE]
for some and is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
Proof. In order to obtain the asymptotic behavior of near the origin, we construct the function
[TABLE]
For , there exists such that is a super solution of (4.3) and is a sub solution of (4.3).
It follows by Theorem 1.1 that is a classical solution of (4.3) satisfying (1.12), hence by Comparison Principle, for any , there exists small enough such that
[TABLE]
By Comparison Principle, we have that
[TABLE]
Since is arbitrary, we deduce that
[TABLE]
Therefore, from standard Stability Theorem, we derive that is a classical solution of (4.3).
We next do a precise bound for to prove (1.18).
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let and be defined by (4.2), then satisfies (1.18).
Proof. We claim that
[TABLE]
We have that
[TABLE]
where , and is a -odd solution of
[TABLE]
Indeed, is odd and
[TABLE]
where .
We observe that satisfies
[TABLE]
and then it follows by Hopf’s Lemma (see [6]) that
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
Proof of lower bound in (4.4). It follows by (4.5) that
[TABLE]
Set , then
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where independent of . Thus, for
[TABLE]
Now we can choose a sequence such that
[TABLE]
and for any , there exists such that and
[TABLE]
Together with in , we have that
[TABLE]
Proof of the upper bound in (4.4). Let , then
[TABLE]
where for . By Comparison Principle, there exists independent of such that
[TABLE]
which implies that
[TABLE]
Proof of (1.18). We observe there exists such that
[TABLE]
Therefore,
[TABLE]
admits a unique solution and by scaling property, we have that
[TABLE]
By Comparison Principle, we have that
[TABLE]
which implies (1.18) with .
Proof of Theorem 1.3. From Proposition 4.1 and Lemma 4.1, one has that is a classical solution of (1.17) satisfying (1.18).
5. Non -odd solutions
5.1. Existence
Under the assumptions on in Theorem 1.1, it shows from [19] that the problem
[TABLE]
admits a unique weak solution, denoting by . In the approaching the weak solution of problem (1.8) with , a barrier will be constructed by and , where is the unique odd weak solution of (1.8) with .
**Proof of Theorem 1.1 with . ** Step 1. We observe that is bounded, Lipschitz continuous and nondecreasing, where is defined by (3.2), then it follows from [19, Theorem 3.7] and the Kato’s inequality that
[TABLE]
admits a unique weak solution , which is a classical solution of
[TABLE]
Moreover, could be approximated by the classical solutions to
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and is a sequence of radially symmetric, nondecreasing smooth functions converging to in the distribution sense. Furthermore,
[TABLE]
Since , it implies by Comparison Prinsiple that
[TABLE]
where is the weak solution of (3.5) and is the unique solution of the equation
[TABLE]
Therefore, satisfies
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Step 2. From Step 1, problem (5.2) admits a unique weak solution , that is,
[TABLE]
On the one hand, by Lemma 2.1, we have that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, by the fact that
[TABLE]
we have that
[TABLE]
By interior regularity results, see [15], for and any compact set and open set in such that , , there exist independent of such that
[TABLE]
Moreover, by [4, Lemma 3.6] is uniformly bounded in if and in for any if , is uniformly bounded in if and , is uniformly bounded in for any . Therefore, is relatively compact in for any . Then there exists such that
[TABLE]
which implies that
[TABLE]
Therefore, up to some subsequence, passing to the limit as in the identity (5.3), it infers that is the unique very weak solution of
[TABLE]
Here the uniqueness follows by the Kato’s inequality. It follows by (5.4), (3.12) and -odd property of that
[TABLE]
where is the unique -odd solution of (3.8). From the proof of Theorem 3.1, we known that for any ,
[TABLE]
*Step 3. * It follows by (5.7) that
[TABLE]
For , any compact set and open set in satisfying , , we have that
[TABLE]
Therefore, up to some subsequence, there exists such that
[TABLE]
Then converges to a.e. in .
We observe that is the very weak solution of
[TABLE]
Note that and by (1.11), it follows that
[TABLE]
Thus, converges to a.e. in , where .
Let , we see that and function is nondecreasing and verifies (1.10). Then it follows by Theorem 3.7 in [19] that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Thus, it follows by (1.11) that
[TABLE]
Let , then
[TABLE]
For any Borel set , we have that
[TABLE]
Since the critical index in (1.10) is , we have that
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
by the assumption (1.10) and Lemma 3.3.
Therefore,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Notice that the quantities on the right-hand side tends to [math] when . The conclusion follows: for any , there exists such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For fixed, there exists such that
[TABLE]
which implies that is uniformly integrable in . Then
[TABLE]
by Vitali convergence theorem.
Then passing to the limit as in the identity (3.13), it implies that for any ,
[TABLE]
Thus, is a very weak solution of (1.8). The regularity results follows by Lemma 3.1.
*Proof of . * It follows from (1.11) and (5.7) that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where is the unique solution of (2.3) and
[TABLE]
We see that for any with ,
[TABLE]
which, together with (3.18), implies that
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
Thus,
[TABLE]
and by -odd property of , we derive that
[TABLE]
This ends the proof.
Acknowledgements: H. Chen is supported by NSFC, No: 11401270, 11661045 and by the Jiangxi Provincial Natural Science Foundation, No: 20161ACB20007 and the Project-sponsored by SRF for ROCS, SEM.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] Ph. Bénilan, H. Brezis and M. Crandall, A semilinear elliptic equation in L 1 ( ℝ N ) superscript 𝐿 1 superscript ℝ 𝑁 L^{1}(\mathbb{R}^{N}) , Ann. Sc. Norm. Sup. Pisa Cl. Sci. 2 (1975), 523-555.
- 2[2] Ph. Bénilan and H. Brezis, Nonlinear problems related to the Thomas-Fermi equation, J. Evolution Eq. 3 (2003), 673-770.
- 3[3] H. Brezis and L. Véron, Removable singularities for some nonlinear elliptic equations, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 75 (1980), 1-6.
- 4[4] H. Chen, W. Wang and J. Wang, Anisotropic singularity of solutions to elliptic equations in a measure framework, Elec. J. Diff. Eq., 2015, (2015), 1-12.
- 5[5] X. Chen, H. Matano and L. Véron, Anisotropic singularities of solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations in ℝ N superscript ℝ 𝑁 \mathbb{R}^{N} , J. Funct. Anal. 83 (1989), 50-97.
- 6[6] L. Evans, Partial Differential Equations, American Mathematical Society , 2000.
- 7[7] G. Folland, Real analysis, Pure and Applied Mathematics (New York) , 1999.
- 8[8] K. Kato, Schrödinger operators with singular potentials, Israel J. Math 13 , (1972) 135-148.
