Unique continuation properties for abstract Schroedinger equations and applications

TL;DR

This paper establishes unique continuation properties and Hardy's uncertainty principle for abstract Schrödinger equations with operator potentials in Hilbert spaces, applicable to various physical systems.

Contribution

It generalizes unique continuation results to Schrödinger equations with operator potentials in Hilbert spaces, covering a wide range of physical models.

Findings

Hardy's uncertainty principle is extended to abstract Schrödinger equations.

Unique continuation properties are proven for equations with operator potentials.

Applicable to numerous physical systems through appropriate space and operator choices.

Abstract

In this paper, Hardy's uncertainty principle and unique continuation properties of Schrodinger equations with operator potentials in Hilbert space-valued classes are obtained. Since the Hilbert space H and linear operators are arbitrary, by choosing the appropriate spaces and operators we obtain numerous classes of Schrodinger type equations and its finite and infinite many systems which occur in a wide variety of physical systems.

Equations

$$i{\partial }_{t}u+\Delta u+A\left(x\right)u+V\left(x,t\right)u=0,x\in R^n,t\in \left[0,T\right],$$

$$i{\partial }_{t}u+\Delta u+A\left(\left(x\right)\right)u=F\left(u,\bar{u}\right),x\in R^n,t\in \left[0,T\right]$$

$${\partial }_{t}u=i\left(\Delta u+Lu\right)+V\left(x,t\right)u,x\in R^n,y\in \Omega ,t\in \left[0,T\right].$$

$$D\left(A\right)=\left\{u\in W^{2,2}\left(0,1\right),Au\left(j\right)=0,j=0,1\right\},$$

$$A\left(x\right)u=a\left(x,y\right)u^{\left(2\right)}+b\left(x,y\right)u^{\left(1\right)},$$

$$V\left(x,t\right)u=\underset{0}{\overset{1}{\int }}K\left(x,\tau ,t\right)u\left(x,y,\tau ,t\right)d\tau ,$$

$${\partial }_{t}u=i\left(\Delta u+a\frac{{\partial }^{2}u}{\partial y^2}+b\frac{\partial u}{\partial y}\right)+\underset{0}{\overset{1}{\int }}K\left(x,\tau ,t\right)u\left(x,y,\tau ,t\right)d\tau ,$$

$$x\in R^n,y\in \left(0,1\right),t\in \left[0,T\right],$$

$$a{\partial }_y^{2}u\left(x,j,t\right)+b{\partial }_{y}u\left(x,j,t\right)=0\text{, }j=0,1.$$

$${\partial }_t{u}_m=i\left[\Delta u_m+\sum _{j=1}^{\infty }\left(a_{mj}\left(x\right)+b_{mj}\left(x,t\right)\right)u_j\right],x\in R^n,t\in \left(0,T\right),$$

$${\Vert f\Vert }_{L^p}={\Vert f\Vert }_{L^p\left(\Omega ;E\right)}={\left(\underset{\Omega }{\int }{\Vert f\left(x\right)\Vert }_E^{p}dx\right)}^{\frac{1}{p}},1\le p<\infty .$$

$$\Vert u\Vert ={\Vert u\Vert }_H={\left(u,u\right)}_H^{\frac{1}{2}}={\left(u,u\right)}^{\frac{1}{2}}\text{ for }u\in H.$$

$${\left(f,g\right)}_{L^2\left(\Omega ;H\right)}=\underset{\Omega }{\int }{\left(f\left(x\right),g\left(x\right)\right)}_{H}dx,f,g\in L^2\left(\Omega ;H\right).$$

$$W^{s,2}=W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H\right)={\left(I-\Delta \right)}^{-\frac{s}{2}}{L}^2\left(R^n;H\right)$$

$${\Vert u\Vert }_{W^{s,2}}={\Vert {\left(I-\Delta \right)}^{\frac{s}{2}}u\Vert }_{L^2\left(R^n;H\right)}<\infty .$$

$$W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H_0,H\right)=\{u\in W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H\right)\cap L^2\left(R^n;H_0\right),$$

$${\Vert u\Vert }_{W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H_0,H\right)}={\Vert u\Vert }_{L^2\left(R^n;H_0\right)}+{\Vert u\Vert }_{W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H\right)}<\infty \}.$$

$${\Vert u\Vert }_{C\left(\Omega ;E\right)}=\underset{x\in \Omega }{\sup }{\Vert u\left(x\right)\Vert }_E.$$

$${\Vert u\Vert }_{C^m\left(\Omega ;E\right)}=\underset{0\le |\alpha |\le m}{\max }\underset{x\in \Omega }{\sup }{\Vert D^{\alpha }u\left(x\right)\Vert }_E.$$

$$\hat{A}\left(\xi \right)u\left(\phi \right)=A\left(x\right)u\left(\hat{\phi }\right)\text{ for }u\in S^{\prime }\left(R^n;E\right),\phi \in S\left(R^n\right).$$

$$\left[A,B\right]=AB-BA$$

$$H\left(A\right)=\left\{u\in D\left(A\right),{\Vert u\Vert }_{H\left(A\right)}={\Vert Au\Vert }_H+{\Vert u\Vert }_H<\infty \right\},$$

$$X=L^2\left(R^n;H\right)\text{, }X\left(A\right)=L^2\left(R^n;H\left(A\right)\right),Y^s=W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H\right)\text{, }$$

$$Y^s\left(A\right)=W^{s,2}\left(R^n;H\left(A\right)\right),B=L^{\infty }\left(R^n;B\left(H\right)\right)\text{ and }\mu \left(t\right)=\alpha t+\beta \left(1-t\right).$$

$$\sum _{k=1}^n{\left(x_k\left[A\frac{\partial f}{\partial x_k}-\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_k}f\right],f\right)}_X\ge 0\text{ for }f\in L^{\infty }\left(0,T;Y^1\left(A\right)\right);$$

$$\mathrm{Im}\left(\left(A+V\right)\upsilon ,\upsilon \right)\ge C_0\eta \left(x,t\right){\Vert \upsilon \left(x,t\right)\Vert }^2$$

$$M_1=\underset{x\in R^n}{\sup }{\Vert V_1\left(x\right)\Vert }_{B\left(H\right)}<\infty ,\underset{t\in \left[0,1\right]}{\sup }{\Vert e^{{|x|}^2{\mu }^{-2}\left(t\right)}{V}_2\left(.,t\right)\Vert }_B<\infty$$

$$\underset{r\to \infty }{\lim }{\Vert V\Vert }_{L^1\left(0,1;L^{\infty }\left(R^n/O_r\right);B\left(H\right)\right)}=0.$$

$$\alpha ,\beta >0,\alpha \beta <2;$$

$${\Vert e^{{\beta }^{-2}{|x|}^2}u\left(.,0\right)\Vert }_X<\infty ,{\Vert e^{{\alpha }^{-2}{|x|}^2}u\left(.,1\right)\Vert }_X<\infty .$$

Full text

Unique continuation properties for abstract Schrodinger equations and applications

Veli Shakhmurov

Department of Mechanical Engineering, Okan University, Akfirat, Tuzla 34959 Istanbul, Turkey,

E-mail: veli.sahmurov@okan.edu.tr

Institute of Mathematics and Mechanics, Azerbaijan National Academy of Sciences, Azerbaijan, AZ1141, Baku, F. Agaev, 9,

E-mail: veli.sahmurov@gmail.com

Abstract

In this paper, Hardy’s uncertainty principle and unique continuation properties of Schrodinger equations with operator potentials in Hilbert space-valued $L^{2}$ classes are obtained. Since the Hilbert space $H$ and linear operators are arbitrary, by choosing the appropriate spaces and operators we obtain numerous classes of Schrodinger type equations and its finite and infinite many systems which occur in a wide variety of physical systems.

**Key Word:    Schrödinger equations, Positive operators, **groups of operators, Unique continuation, Hardy’s uncertainty principle

**AMS 2010: 35Q41, 35K15, 47B25, 47Dxx, 46E40 **

1. Introduction, definitions

In this paper, the unique continuation properties of the following abstract Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

are studied, where $A=A\left(x\right)$ is a linear and $V\left(x,t\right)$ is a given potential operator functions in a Hilbert space $H;$ $\Delta$ denotes the Laplace operator in $R^{n}$ and $u=$ $u(x,t)$ is the $H$-valued unknown function. This linear result was then applied to show that two regular solutions $u_{1}$, $u_{2}$ of non-linear Schrödinger equations

[TABLE]

for general non-linearities $F$ must agree in $R^{n}\times[0,T]$, when $u_{1}-u_{2}$ and its gradient decay faster than any quadratic exponential at times [math] and $T$.

Hardy’s uncertainty principle and unique continuation properties for Schrödinger equations studied e.g in $\left[\text{4-7}\right]$ and the referances therein. Abstract differential equations studied e.g. in $\left[\text{2, 9-19, 22, 24}\right].$ However, there seems to be no such abstract setting for nonlinear Schrödinger equations except the local existence of weak solution (cf. $\left[\text{15}\right].$ In contrast to these results we will study the unique continuation properties of abstract Schrödinger equations with the operator potentials. Since the Hilbert space $H$ is arbitrary and $A$ is a possible linear operator, by choosing $H$ and $A$ we can obtain numerous classes of Schrödinger type equations and its systems which occur in the different processes. Our main goal is to obtain sufficient conditions on a solution $u$, the operator $A,$ potential $V$ and the behavior of the solution at two different times $t_{0}$ and $t_{1}$ which guarantee that $u\left(x,t\right)\equiv 0$ for $x\in R^{n},$ $t\in\left[0,T\right]$. If we choose $H$ to be a concrete Hilbert space, for example $H=L^{2}\left(\Omega\right)$, $A=L,$ where $\Omega$ is a domin in $R^{m}$ with sufficientli smooth boundary and $L$ is an elliptic operator then, we obtain the unique continuation properties of the followinng Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

Moreover, let we choose $H=L^{2}\left(0,1\right)$ and $A$ to be differential operator with Wentzell-Robin boundary condition defined by

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where $a,$ $b$ are sufficiently smooth functions on $R^{n}\times\left(0,1\right)$ and $V\left(x,t\right)$ is a integral operator so that

[TABLE]

where, $K=K\left(x,\tau,t\right)$ is a complex valued bounded function. From our general results we obtain the unique continuation properties of the Wentzell-Robin type boundary value problem (BVP) for the following Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Note that, the regularity properties of Wentzell-Robin type BVP for elliptic equations were studied e.g. in $\left[\text{11, 12 }\right]$ and the references therein. Moreover, if put $H=l_{2}$ and choose $A$ to be a infinite matrix $\left[a_{mj}\right]$, $m,j=1,2,...,\infty,$ then we derive the unique continuation properties of the following system of Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

where $a_{mj}$ are continuous and $b_{mj}$ are bounded functions.

Let $E$ be a Banach space. $L^{p}\left(\Omega;E\right)$ denotes the space of strongly measurable $E$-valued functions that are defined on the measurable subset $\Omega\subset R^{n}$ with the norm

[TABLE]

Let $H$ be a Hilbert space and

[TABLE]

For $p=2$ and $E=H$, $L^{p}\left(\Omega;E\right)$ becomes a $H$-valued function space with inner product:

[TABLE]

Here, $W^{s,2}\left(R^{n};H\right)$, $-\infty<s<\infty$ denotes the $H-$valued Sobolev space of order $s$ which is defined as:

[TABLE]

with the norm

[TABLE]

It clear that $W^{0,2}\left(R^{n};E\right)=L^{2}\left(R^{n};H\right).$ Let $H_{0}$ and $H$ be two Hilbert spaces and $H_{0}$ is continuously and densely embedded into $H$. Let $W^{s,2}\left(R^{n};H_{0},H\right)$ denote the Sobolev-Lions type space, i.e.,

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Let $C\left(\Omega;E\right)$ denote the space of $E-$valued uniformly bounded continious functions on $\Omega$ with norm

[TABLE]

$C^{m}\left(\Omega;E\right)$ will denote the spaces of $E$-valued uniformly bounded strongly continuous and $m$-times continuously differentiable functions on $\Omega$ with norm

[TABLE]

Here, $O_{r}=\left\{x\in R^{n},\text{ }\left|x\right|<r\right\}$ for $r>0$. Let $\mathbb{N}$ denote the set of all natural numbers, $\mathbb{C}$ denote the set of all complex numbers. Let $E_{1}$ and $E_{2}$ be two Banach spaces. $B\left(E_{1},E_{2}\right)$ will denote the space of all bounded linear operators from $E_{1}$ to $E_{2}.$ For $E_{1}=E_{2}=E$ it will be denoted by $B\left(E\right).$

Here, $S=S(R^{n};E)$ denotes the $E-$valued Schwartz class, i.e. the space of $E-$valued rapidly decreasing smooth functions on $R^{n},$ equipped with its usual topology generated by seminorms. $S(R^{n};\mathbb{C})$ will be denoted by just $S$. Let $S^{\prime}(R^{n};E)$ denote the space of all continuous linear operators, $L:S\rightarrow E$, equipped with topology of bounded convergence.

Let $A=A\left(x\right),$ $x\in R^{n}$ be closed linear operator in $E$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $E.$ The Fourier transformation of $A\left(x\right),$ i.e. $\hat{A}=FA=\hat{A}\left(\xi\right)$ is a linear operator defined as

[TABLE]

(For details see e.g $\left[\text{1, Section 3}\right]$).

Let $\left[A,B\right]$ be a commutator operator, i.e.

[TABLE]

for linear operators $A$ and $B.$

Sometimes we use one and the same symbol $C$ without distinction in order to denote positive constants which may differ from each other even in a single context. When we want to specify the dependence of such a constant on a parameter, say $\alpha$, we write $C_{\alpha}$.

2. Main results

Let $A=A\left(x\right),$ $x\in R^{n}$ be closed linear operator in a Hilbert space $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $H.$ Let

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Definition 2.1. A function $u\in L^{\infty}\left(0,T;H\left(A\right)\right)$ is called a local weak solution to $\left(1.1\right)$ on $\left(0,T\right)$ if $u$ belongs to $L^{\infty}\left(0,T;H\left(A\right)\right)\cap W^{1,2}\left(0,T;H\right)$ and satisfies $\left(1.1\right)$ in the sense of $L^{\infty}\left(0,T;H\left(A\right)\right).$ In particular, if $\left(0,T\right)$ coincides with $\mathbb{R}$, then $u$ is called a global weak solution to $\left(1.1\right).$

If the solution of $\left(1.1\right)$ belongs to $C\left(\left[0,T\right];H\left(A\right)\right)\cap W^{2,2}\left(0,T;H\right),$ then its called a stronge solution.

Our main results in this paper is the following:

**Theorem 1. **Assume that the following condition are satisfied:

(1) $A=A\left(x\right)$ and $\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_{k}}$ are symmetric operators in a Hilbert space $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_{k}}\right)=$ $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $H.$ Moreover,

[TABLE]

(2) $A\left(x\right)A^{-1}\left(x_{0}\right)\in L^{1}\left(R^{n};B\left(H\right)\right)$ for some $x_{0}\in R^{n}$ and $V\left(x,t\right)\in B\left(H\right)$ for $\left(x,t\right)\in R^{n}\times\left[0,1\right].$ Moreover, there is a constant $C_{0}>0$ so that

[TABLE]

for $x\in R^{n},$ $t\in\left[0,T\right]$ and $\upsilon\in H$, where $\eta$ is a positive function in $L^{1}\left(0,T;L^{\infty}\left(R^{n}\right)\right);$

(3) either, $V\left(x,t\right)=V_{1}\left(x\right)+V_{2}\left(x,t\right)$, where $V_{1}\left(x\right)\in B\left(H\right)$ for $x\in R^{n}$ and

[TABLE]

or

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

(4) $u\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];X\left(A\right)\right)$ is a solution of the equation $\left(1.1\right)$ and

[TABLE]

Then $u\left(x,t\right)\equiv 0.$

As a direct consequence of Theorem 1 we get the following Hardy’s uncertainty principle result for the non-linear equations $(1.2)$.

**Theorem 2. **Assume that the assumptions (1)-(2) of Theorem 1 are satisfied. Let $u_{1},u_{2}\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];Y^{k}\left(A\right)\right)$, $k\in Z^{+}$ be stronge solutions of the equation $\left(1.2\right)$ with $k>\frac{n}{2}.$ Moreover, assume $F\in C^{k}\left(\mathbb{C}^{2},\mathbb{C}\right)$ and $F\left(0\right)=\partial_{u}F\left(0\right)=\partial_{\bar{u}}F\left(0\right)=0.$ If there are $\alpha$, $\beta>0$ with $\alpha\beta<2$ such that

[TABLE]

then $u_{1}\equiv u_{2}.$

One of the results we get is the following one.

**Theorem 3. **Assume that the all conditions of Theorem 1 are satisfied. Suppose $\Delta+A+V_{1}$ generates a bounded continious group. Let $u\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];X\left(A\right)\right)$ be a solution of $\left(1.1\right).$ Then $\left\|e^{\left|x\right|^{2}\mu^{-2}\left(t\right)}u\left(.,t\right)\right\|_{X}^{\frac{1}{\mu\left(t\right)}}$ is logarithmically convex in $[0,1]$ and there is $N=N\left(\alpha,\beta\right)$ such that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

when

[TABLE]

Moreover,

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Here, we prove the following result for abstract parabolic equations with variable coefficientes.

Consider the Cauchy problem for abstract parabolic equations with variable operator coefficients

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where $A\left(x\right)$ is a linear and $V\left(x,t\right)$ is the given potential operator functions in $H.$ By employing Theorem 1 we obtain

**Theorem 4. **Assume the assumptions (1)-(3) of Theorem 1 are satisfied. Suppose $u\in L^{\infty}\left(0,1;X\left(A\right)\right)\cap L^{2}\left(0,1;Y^{1}\right)$ is a solution of $\left(2.1\right)$ and

[TABLE]

for some $\delta<1$. Then, $f\left(x\right)\equiv 0$ for $x\in R^{n}.$

First of all, we generalize the result G. H. Hardy (see e.g $\left[20\right]$, p.131) about uncertainty principle for Fourier transform:

**Lemma 2.1. Let ** $f\left(x\right)$ be $H$-valued function for $x\in R^{n}$ and

[TABLE]

Then $f\left(x\right)\equiv 0.$ Also, if $\alpha\beta=4$ then$\left\|f\left(x\right)\right\|$ is a constant multiple of $e^{-\frac{\left|x\right|^{2}}{\beta^{2}}}.$

**Proof. **Indeed, by employing Phragmen–Lindelöf theorem to the classes of Hilbert-valued analytic functions and by reasoning as in $\left[8\right]$ we obtain the assertion.

Consider the Cauchy problem for free abstract Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where $A=A\left(x\right)$ is a linear operator in a Hilbert space $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right).$

The above result can be rewritten for solution of the $\left(2.2\right)$ on $R^{n}\times\left(0,\infty\right)$. Indeed, assume

[TABLE]

Then $u\left(x,t\right)\equiv 0.$ Also, if $\alpha\beta=4T$, then $u$ has as a initial data a constant multiple of $e^{-\left(\frac{1}{\beta^{2}}+\frac{i}{4T}\right)\left|y\right|^{2}}.$

**Lemma 2.2. **Assume that $A$ is a symmetric operator in $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $H.$ Moreover, $A\left(x\right)A^{-1}\left(x_{0}\right)\in L^{1}\left(R^{n};B\left(H\right)\right)$ for some $x_{0}\in R^{n}$. Then for $f\in W^{s,2}\left(R^{n};H\right),$ $s\geq 0$ there is a generalized solution of $\left(2.2\right)$ expressing as

[TABLE]

where $F^{-1}$ is the inverse Fourier transform and $\hat{A}\left(\xi\right)$ denotes the Fourier transform of $A\left(x\right).$

**Proof. **By applying the Fourier trasform to the problem $\left(2.2\right)$ we get

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

It is clear to see that the solution of the problem $\left(2.4\right)$ can be exspressed as

[TABLE]

Hence, we obtain $\left(2.3\right).$

3. Estimates for solutions

We need the following lemmas for proving the main results. Consider the abstract Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

where $a$, $b$ are real numbers, $A=A\left(x\right)$ is a linear operator, $V\left(x,t\right)$ is a given potential operator function in $H$ and $F\left(x,t\right)$ is a given $H$-valued function.

Let

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

**Condition 3.1. **Assume that:

(1) $A=A\left(x\right)$ is a symmetric operator in Hilbert space $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $H;$

(2) $\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_{k}}$ are symmetric operators in $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(\frac{\partial A}{\partial x_{k}}\right)=$ $D\left(A\right).$ Moreover,

[TABLE]

(3) there exists $d>0$ such that

[TABLE]

(4) $a>0,$ $b\in\mathbb{R};$ $V=V\left(x,t\right)\in B\left(H\right)$ and there is a constant $C_{0}>0$ so that

[TABLE]

for $x\in R^{n},$ $t\in\left[0,T\right],$ $T\in\left[0,1\right]$, $\upsilon\in D\left(A\right)$, where $\eta$ is a positive function in $L^{1}\left(0,T;L^{\infty}\left(R^{n}\right)\right)$.

Let

[TABLE]

**Lemma 3.1. **Assume that the Condition 3.1 holds. Then the solution $u$ of $\left(3.1\right)$ belonging to $L^{\infty}\left(0,1;X\left(A\right)\right)\cap L^{2}\left(0,1;Y^{1}\right)$ satisfies the following estimate

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

**Proof. **Let $\upsilon=e^{\varphi}u,$ where $\varphi$ is a real-valued function to be chosen later. The function $\upsilon$ verifies

[TABLE]

where $S$, $K$ are symmetric and skew-symmetric operators respectively given by

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

here

[TABLE]

By differentating inner product in $X$, we get

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

A formal integration by parts gives that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

By using the Cauchy-Schwarz’s inequality, by assumptions $\left(3.1\right),$ $\left(3.2\right)$, in view of $\left(3.4\right)$ and $\left(3.5\right)$ we obtain

[TABLE]

where $a,$ $b$ and $\varphi$ are such that

[TABLE]

The remainig part of the proof is obtained by reasoning as in $\left[\text{7, Lemma 1}\right].$

When $\varphi\left(x,t\right)=q\left(t\right)\psi\left(x\right)$, it suffices that

[TABLE]

If we put $\psi\left(x\right)=\left|x\right|^{2}$ then $\left(3.7\right)$ holds, when

[TABLE]

Let

[TABLE]

Regularize $\psi_{r}$ with a radial mollifier $\theta_{\rho}$ and set

[TABLE]

where $q\left(t\right)=\gamma a\left[a+4\gamma\left(a^{2}+b^{2}\right)t\right]^{-1}$ is the solution to $\left(3.5\right)$. Because the right hand side of $(3.5)$ only involves the first derivatives of $\varphi$, $\psi_{r}$ is Lipschitz and bounded at infinity,

[TABLE]

and $(3.6)$ holds uniformly in $\rho$ and $r$, when $\varphi$ is replaced by $\varphi_{\rho,r}$. Hence, it follows that the estimate

[TABLE]

holds uniformly in $\rho$ and $r.$ The assertion is obtained after letting $\rho$ tend to zero and $r$ to infinity.

**Remark 3.1. **It should be noted that if $H=\mathbb{C}$, $A=0$ and $V\left(x,t\right)$ is a complex valued function, then the abstract condition $\left(3.3\right)$ can be replaced by

[TABLE]

Moreover, if $A\left(x\right)$ and $V\left(x,t\right)$ for $x\in R^{n},$ $t\in\left[0,T\right]$ are bounded operators in $H$, then by using Cauchy-Schwarz’s inequality, the assumption $\left(3.3\right)$ becames as:

[TABLE]

Let

[TABLE]

**Lemma 3.2. **Assume that $S=S\left(t\right)$ is a symmetric, $K=K\left(t\right)$ is a skew-symmetric operators in $H$, $G\left(x,t\right)$ is a positive funtion and $f(x,t)$ is a reasonable function. Then,

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

Moreover, if

[TABLE]

for $x\in R^{n}$, $t\in\left[0,1\right]$ and

[TABLE]

Then $Q\left(t\right)$ is logarithmically convex in $[0,1]$ and there is a constant $M$ such that

[TABLE]

Proof. The lemma is verifying in a similar way as in $\left[\text{7, Lemma 2}\right]$ by replacing the inner product and norm of $L^{2}\left(R^{n}\right)$ with inner product and norm of the space $L^{2}\left(R^{n};H\right).$

**Lemma 3.3. **Assume that the Condition 3.1 holds. Moreover, suppose

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Then, for solution $u\in L^{\infty}\left(0,1;X\left(A\right)\right)\cap L^{2}\left(0,1;Y^{1}\right)$ of $\left(3.1\right)$, $e^{\gamma\left|x\right|^{2}}u\left(.,t\right)$ is logarithmically convex in $[0,1]$ and there is a constant $N$ such that

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

when $0\leq t\leq 1.$

**Proof. **Let $f=e^{\gamma\varphi}u,$ where $\varphi$ is a real-valued function to be chosen. The function $f\left(x\right)$ verifies

[TABLE]

where $S$, $K$ are symmetric and skew-symmetric operator, respectively given by

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

here

[TABLE]

A calculation shows that,

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

If we put $\varphi=\left|x\right|^{2}$, then $\left(3.13\right)$ reduce the following

[TABLE]

Moreover by assumtion (2),

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

This identity, the condition on $V$ and $\left(3.14\right)$ imply that

[TABLE]

If we knew that the quantities and calculations involved in the proof of Lemma 3.2 (similar as in $\left[\text{7, Lemma 2}\right]$) were finite and correct, when $f=e^{\gamma\left|x\right|^{2}}u$ we would have the logarithmic convexity of $Q\left(t\right)=\left\|e^{\gamma\left|x\right|^{2}}u\left(.,t\right)\right\|_{X}$  and the estimate $\left(3.10\right)$ from Lemma 3.2. But this fact is verifying by reasonong as in $\left[\text{7, Lemma 3}\right].$

Let

[TABLE]

**Lemma 3.4. **Assume that $a$, $b$, $u$, $A$ and $V$ are as in Lemma 3.3 and $\gamma>0$. Then,

[TABLE]

where $N$ is bounded number, when \gamma\and $\varkappa$ are bounded below.

**Proof. **The integration by parts shows that

[TABLE]

when $f=e^{\gamma\left|x\right|^{2}}u$, while integration by parts, the Cauchy-Schwarz’s inequality and the identity, $n=\nabla$·$x$, give that

[TABLE]

The sum of the last two formulae gives the inequality

[TABLE]

Integration over $[0,1]$ of $t(1-t)$ times the formula (3.6) for $Q^{{}^{\prime\prime}}\left(t\right)$ and integration by parts, shows that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Assuming again that the last two calculations are justified for $f=e^{\gamma\left|x\right|^{2}}.$ Then $\left(3.14\right)-\left(3.17\right)$ implay the assertion.

4. Appell transformation in abstract functon spaces

Let

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

**Lemma 4.1. **Assume $A$ and $V$ are as in Lemma 3.3 and $u=u\left(x,s\right)$ is a solution of the equation

[TABLE]

Let $a+ib\neq 0$, $\gamma\in\mathbb{R}$ and $\alpha$, $\beta\in\mathbb{R}_{+}$. Set

[TABLE]

Then, $\tilde{u}\left(x,t\right)$ verifies the equation

[TABLE]

with

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Moreover,

[TABLE]

when $s=\mu\left(t\right)$ and $\gamma\in\mathbb{R}$.

**Proof. **If $u$ is a solution of the equation

[TABLE]

then, the function $u_{1}\left(x,t\right)=u\left(\sqrt{r}x,rt+\tau\right)$ verifies

[TABLE]

and $u_{2}\left(x,t\right)=t^{-\frac{n}{2}}u\left(\frac{x}{t},\frac{1}{t}\right)e^{\frac{\left|x\right|^{2}}{4\left(a+ib\right)t}}$ is a  solution to

[TABLE]

These two facts and the sequel of changes of variables below verifies the Lemma, when $\alpha>\beta,$ i.e.

[TABLE]

is a solution to the same non-homogeneous equation but with right-hand side

[TABLE]

The function,

[TABLE]

verifies $(4.2)$ with right-hand side

[TABLE]

Replacing $\left(x,t\right)$ by $\left(\sqrt{\alpha-\beta}x,\left(\alpha-\beta\right)t\right)$ we get that

[TABLE]

is a solution of $\left(4.2\right)$ but with right-hand

[TABLE]

Finally, observe that

[TABLE]

and multiply $\left(4.3\right)$ and $\left(4.4\right)$ we obtain the assertion for $\alpha>\beta.$ The case $\beta>\alpha$ follows by reversing by changes of variables, $s^{\prime}=1-s$ and $t^{\prime}=1-t.$

5. Variable coefficients. Proof of Theorem 3

We are ready to prove Theorem 3.** **Let

[TABLE]

**Proof of Theorem 3. **We may assume that $\alpha\neq\beta$. The case $\alpha=\beta$ follows from the latter by replacing $\beta$ by $\beta+\delta,$ $\delta>0$, and letting $\delta$ tend to zero. We may also assume that $\alpha<\beta$. Otherwise, replace $u$ by $\bar{u}(1-t)$. Assume $a>0.$ Set $W=\Delta+A+V_{1}.$ By Lemma 2.2 the problem

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

has a solution $u=U\left(t\right)u_{0}=e^{t\left(a+ib\right)W}u_{0}\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];X\left(A\right)\right)$,  where

[TABLE]

here, $F^{-1}$ is the inverse Fourier transform, $\hat{A}\left(\xi\right),$ $\hat{V}_{1}\left(\xi\right)$ respectively denote the Fourier transforms of $A\left(x\right),$ $V_{1}\left(x\right).$ By reasoning as  the Duhamel principle we get that the problem

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

has a solution expressing as

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

For $0\leq\varepsilon\leq 1$ set

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

Then, $u_{\varepsilon}\left(x,t\right)\in L^{\infty}\left(0,1;X\left(A\right)\right)\cap L^{2}\left(R^{n};Y^{1}\right)$ and satisfies

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

The identities

[TABLE]

and $\left(5.2\right)-\left(5.4\right)$ show that

[TABLE]

In particular, the equality $u_{\varepsilon}\left(x,1\right)=e^{\varepsilon W}u\left(x,1\right)$, Lemma 3.1 with $a+ib=\varepsilon,$ $\gamma=\frac{1}{\beta}$, $F\equiv 0$ and the fact that $u_{\varepsilon}(0)=u\left(0\right)$ imply that

[TABLE]

A second application of Lemma 3.1 with $a+ib$ $=$ $\varepsilon$, $F\equiv 0$, the value of $\gamma=\mu^{-2}\left(t\right)$ and $\left(5.2\right)$ show that

[TABLE]

Setting, $\alpha_{\varepsilon}=\alpha+2\varepsilon$ and $\beta_{\varepsilon}=\beta+2\varepsilon$, the last three inequalities give that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

A third application of Lemma 3.1 with $a+ib=b,$ $F\equiv 0,$ $\gamma=0$, and $(5.2),(5.5)$ implies that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Set $\gamma_{\varepsilon}=\frac{1}{\alpha_{\varepsilon}\beta_{\varepsilon}}$ and let

[TABLE]

be the function associated to $u_{\varepsilon}$ in Lemma 4.1, where $a+ib=\varepsilon+i$ and $\alpha,$ $\beta$ are replaced respectively by $\alpha_{\varepsilon}$, $\beta_{\varepsilon}$ when

[TABLE]

Because $\alpha<\beta$, $\tilde{u}_{\varepsilon}\in L^{\infty}\left(0,1;X\right)\cap L^{2}\left(0,1;Y^{1}\right)$ and satisfies the equation

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

when $s=\beta_{\varepsilon}\rho_{\varepsilon}^{-1}\left(t\right).$ The above identity when $t$ is zero or one and $(5.6)$ shows that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

On the other hand,

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

The energy method imply that

[TABLE]

Let $0=t_{0}<t_{1}<....t_{m}=1$ be a uniformly distributed partition of $[0,1]$, where $m$ will be chosen later. The inequalities $\left(5.8\right)-\left(5.10\right),$ $\left(5.13\right)$ and $(5.14$) imply that there is $N_{2}$, which depends on $\frac{\beta}{\alpha}$, $\left\|V_{1}\right\|_{B}$ and $B\left(V_{2}\right)$ such that

[TABLE]

for $t\in\left[t_{i-1},t_{i}\right]$ and $i=1,2,...m.$ Choose now $m$ so that

[TABLE]

Because, $\lim\limits_{\varepsilon\rightarrow 0}\left\|\tilde{u}_{\varepsilon}\left(.,t\right)\right\|_{X}=\left\|u\left(.,s\right)\right\|_{X}$ when $s=\beta t\rho\left(t\right)$ and $(5.13)$, there is $\varepsilon_{0}$ such that

[TABLE]

and now, $(5.15)-(5.17)$ show that

[TABLE]

It is now simple to verify that $(5.18)$, the first inequality in $(5.7),$ $(5.10)$ and $(5.13)$ imply that

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

By using Lemma $3$.$3,$ $(5.12),$ $(5.9)$ and $(5.19)$ to show that $\left\|e^{\gamma_{\varepsilon}\left|x\right|^{2}}\tilde{u}_{\varepsilon}\left(.,t\right)\right\|_{X}$ is logarithmically convex in $[0,1]$ and that

[TABLE]

when $0<\varepsilon\leq\varepsilon_{0},$ $t\in\left[0,1\right]$ and $N=N\left(\alpha,\beta\right).$ Then, Lemma 3.4 gives that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

when $0<\varepsilon\leq\varepsilon_{0}$, the logarithmic convexity and regularity of $u$ follow from the limit of the identity in $(5.11)$, the final limit relation between the variables $s$ and $t$, $s=$ $\beta t\rho\left(t\right)$ and letting $\varepsilon$ tend to zero in $(5.20)$ and the above inequality.

By reasoning as in $\left[\text{4, Lemma 6}\right]$ we obtain:

Lemma 5.1. Let $A=A\left(x\right)$ be a symmetric operator in Hilbert space $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $H$ and

[TABLE]

Let $u\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];X\left(A\right)\right)$ be a solution of the equation

[TABLE]

Then,

[TABLE]

where $\lambda\in R^{n}$ and $N>0$ is a constant.

Theorem 5.1. Assume that $A=A\left(x\right)$ is a symmetric operator in Hilbert space $H$ with independent on $x\in R^{n}$ domain $D\left(A\right)$ that is dense on $H$ and

[TABLE]

Suppose that $\alpha,$ $\beta$ are positive numbers and

[TABLE]

Let $u\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];X\left(A\right)\right)$ be a solution of the equation

[TABLE]

Then, there is a $N=N(\alpha,\beta)$ such that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where,

[TABLE]

**Proof. **Assume that $u(y,s)$ verifies the equation

[TABLE]

Set $\gamma=\left(\alpha\beta\right)^{-1}$ and let

[TABLE]

The function $\left(5.21\right)$ is a solution of

[TABLE]

with

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Choose $r>0$ such that $\left\|\tilde{V}\left(.,t\right)\right\|_{O\left(r\right)}\leq\varepsilon_{0}$ we get

[TABLE]

with

[TABLE]

Then using the Lemma 5.1 we obtain

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Replace $\lambda$ by $\lambda\sqrt{\gamma}$ in the above inequality, square both sides, multiply all by $e^{-\frac{\left|\lambda^{2}\right|}{2}}$ and integrate both sides with respect to $\lambda$ in $R^{n}$. This and the identity

[TABLE]

imply the inequality

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

This inequality and $(5.22)$ imply that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

for some new constant $N$.

To prove the regularity of $u$ we proceed as in $(5.2)-$ $(5.4)$. The Duhamel formula shows that

[TABLE]

For $0\leq\varepsilon\leq 1$, set

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

The identities

[TABLE]

and $\left(5.24\right)-\left(5.26\right)$ show that

[TABLE]

From Lemma 3.1 with $a+ib=\varepsilon$, $\left(5.27\right)$ and $\left(5.25\right)$ we get that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

Then, Lemma 3.4, $(5.28)$ and $(5.23)$ show that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

The Theorem 5.1 follows from this inequality, from $(5.21)-(5.23)$ and letting $\varepsilon$ tend to zero.

6. A Hardy type abstract uncertainty principle. Proof of Theorem 1.

The assertion about the Carleman inequality in Lemma 6.1 below is the following monotonicity or frequency function argument related to Lemma 3. 2. When $u\in C([0,1];X)$ is a solution to the free abstract Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

satisfies

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

Then, $\log Q\left(t\right)$ is logaritmicaly convex in $[0,1],$ when $0<\mu<\gamma.$

The formal application of the above argument to a $C([0,1];X)$ solution of the equation

[TABLE]

implies a similar result, when $V$ is a bounded potential, though the justification of the correctness of the assertions involved in the corresponding formal application of Lemma 3.2 were formal. In fact, we can only justify these assertions, when the potential $V$ verifies the first condition in Theorem 1 or when we can obtain the additional regularity of the gradient of $u$ in the strip, as in Theorem 5.1. Here, we choose to prove Theorem 1 using the Carleman inequality in Lemma 6.1 in place of the above convexity argument. The reason for our choice is that it is simpler to justify the correctness of the application of the Carleman inequality to a $C([0,1];X)$ solution to $(6.1)$ than the corresponding monotonicity or logarithmic convexity of the solution.

**Lemma 6.1. **Let the assumptions (1)-(2) of Conditon 3.1 hold. Moreover,

[TABLE]

Then the estimate

[TABLE]

holds, when $\varepsilon>0$, $\mu>0$, $r>0$ and $\upsilon\in C_{0}^{\infty}\left(R^{n+1};H\left(A\right)\right)$.

Proof. Let** $f=e^{\varkappa-\sigma}\upsilon$**. Then,

[TABLE]

From $(3.8)-(3.10)$ with $\gamma=1$, $a+ib=i$ and $\varphi\left(x,t\right)=\varkappa\left(x,t\right)-\sigma\left(\varepsilon,t\right)$ we have

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Following the standard method to handle $L_{2}$-Carleman inequalities, the symmetric and skew-symmetric parts of $\partial_{t}-S-K$, as a space-time operator, are respectively $-S$ and $\partial_{t}-K$, and $[-S,\partial_{t}-K]=S_{t}+[S,K]$. Thus,

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and the Lemma 6.1 follows from $(5.2)$ and $(5.3)$.

**Proof of Theorem 1. **Let $u$ be as in Theorem 1, $\tilde{u}$ and $\tilde{V}$ be corresponding functions defined in Lemma 4.1, when $a+ib=i$. Then, $\tilde{u}\in$ $C([0,1];X\left(A\right))$ is a solution of the equation

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

The proof of Theorem 3 show that in either case

[TABLE]

For given $r>0$, choose $\mu$ and $\varepsilon$ such that

[TABLE]

and let $\eta_{M}$ and $\theta_{r}$ be smooth functions verifying, $\theta_{M}\left(x\right)$ $=1$, when $|x|\leq M$, $\theta_{M}\left(x\right)$ $=0$, when $|x|>2M$, $M\geq 2r$, $\eta_{r}\in C_{0}^{\infty}(0,1),$ $0\leq\eta_{r}\left(t\right)\leq 1$, $\eta_{r}\left(t\right)=1$ for $t\in\left[\frac{1}{r},1-\frac{1}{r}\right]$ and $\eta_{r}\left(t\right)=0$ for $t\in\left[0,\frac{1}{2r}\right]\cup\left[1-\frac{1}{2r},1\right].$ Then, $\upsilon\left(x,t\right)=\eta_{r}\left(t\right)\theta_{M}\left(x\right)\tilde{u}\left(x,t\right)$ is compactly supported in $R^{n}\times(0,1)$ and

[TABLE]

The terms on the right hand side of $(6.6)$ are supported, where

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Apply now Lemma 6.1 to $\upsilon$ with the values of $\mu$ and $\varepsilon$ chosen in $(6.5)$. This, the bounds for $\mu|x+rt(1-t)e_{1}|^{2}$ in each of the parts of the support of

[TABLE]

and the natural bounds for $\nabla\theta_{M}$, $\triangle\theta_{M}$ and $\eta_{r}^{\prime}$ show that there is a constant $N_{\varepsilon}$ such that

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

The first term on the right hand side of $(6.7)$ can be hidden in the left hand side, when $r\geq 2N_{\varepsilon}\left\|\tilde{V}\right\|_{B}$, while the last tends to zero, when $M$ tends to infinity by $(6.4)$. This and the fact that $\upsilon=\tilde{u}$ in $O_{r_{\varepsilon}}\times\left[\frac{1-\varepsilon}{2},\frac{1+\varepsilon}{2}\right],$ where

[TABLE]

and $\left(6.5\right)$ show that

[TABLE]

when $r\geq 2N_{\varepsilon}\left\|\tilde{V}\right\|_{B}.$ At the same time

[TABLE]

for $0\leq t\leq 1$ and $B\left(\tilde{V}\right)=\sup\limits_{t\in\left[0,1\right]}\left\|\tilde{V}\right\|_{B}.$ Moreover, from $\left(6.4\right)$ we get

[TABLE]

Then, $(6.8)-(6.10)$ show that there is a constant $N_{\gamma,\varepsilon,V}$, which such that

[TABLE]

For $r\rightarrow\infty$ we obtain $u\equiv 0.$

**Proof of Theorem 4. **Fırst all of, we show the following:

**Lemma 6.2. **Let the assumptions (1)-(2) of Conditon 3.1 hold. Moreover, let

[TABLE]

Then the estimate

[TABLE]

holds, when $\varepsilon>0$, $\mu>0$, $r>0$ and $\upsilon\in C_{0}^{\infty}\left(R^{n+1};H\left(A\right)\right)$, where

[TABLE]

Proof. Let** $f=e^{\varkappa+\chi-\sigma}\upsilon$**. Then,

[TABLE]

From $(3.8)-(3.10)$ with $\gamma=1$, $a+ib=1$ and $\varphi\left(x,t\right)=\varkappa\left(x,t\right)+\chi\left(t\right)-\sigma\left(\varepsilon,t\right)$ we have

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Then from $\left(6.12\right)$ a similar way as Lemma 6.1 we obtain the estimate $\left(6.11\right).$

**Proof. **Assume that $u$ verifies the conditions in Theorem 4 and let $\tilde{u}$ be the Appel transformation of $u$ defined in Lemma 4.1 with $a+ib=1$, $\alpha=1$ and $\beta=1+\frac{2}{\beta}$. $\tilde{u}\in L^{\infty}\left(0,1;X\left(A\right)\right)\cap L^{2}\left(0,1;Y^{1}\right)$ is a solution of the equation

[TABLE]

with $\tilde{V}$ a bounded potential in $R^{n}\times[0,1]$ and $\gamma=\frac{1}{2\delta}.$ Then, we have

[TABLE]

From Lemma 3.3 and Lemma 3. 4 with $a+ib=1$, we have

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where

[TABLE]

The proof is finished by setting $\upsilon(x,t)=\theta_{M}(x)\eta_{R}(t)\tilde{u}(x,t)$, by using Carleman inequality $\left(6.11\right)$ and in similar argument that we used to prove Theorem 1.

**7. Unique continuation properties for the system of Schrödinger equations **

Consider the system of Schrödinger equation

[TABLE]

where $u=\left(u_{1},u_{2},...,u_{N}\right),$ $u_{j}=u_{j}\left(x,t\right),$ $a_{mj}$  are real-valued and $b_{mj}=b_{mj}\left(x,t\right)$ are complex valued functions. Let $l_{2}=l_{2}\left(N\right)$ and $l_{2}^{s}=l_{2}^{s}\left(N\right)$ (see $\left[\text{23, \S\ 1.18}\right]$). Let $A$ be the operator in $l_{2}\left(N\right)$ defined by

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

and

[TABLE]

Let

[TABLE]

From Theorem 1 we obtain the following result

**Theorem 7.1. **Assume:

(1) $a_{mj}=a_{jm},$ $a_{mj}\in C^{\left(1\right)}\left(R^{n}\right),$ $\sum\limits_{m,j=1}^{N}a_{mj}>0,$ Moreover,

[TABLE]

$\mathop{\mathrm{I}m}\sum\limits_{m,j=1}^{N}b_{mj}\left(x,t\right)>0$ for $x\in R^{n},$ $t\in\left[0,T\right]$ and $\mathop{\mathrm{I}m}\sum\limits_{m,j=1}^{N}b_{mj}\left(x,t\right)\in L^{1}\left(0,T;L^{\infty}\left(R^{n}\right)\right);$

(2)$\sup\limits_{t\in\left[0,1\right]}\left\|e^{\left|x\right|^{2}\mu^{-2}\left(t\right)}b_{mj}\left(.,t\right)\right\|_{L^{\infty}\left(R^{n};B\left(l_{2}\right)\right)}<\infty,$ where

[TABLE]

(3) $u\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];l_{2}\right)$ be a solution of the equation $\left(7.1\right)$ and

[TABLE]

Then $u\left(x,t\right)\equiv 0.$

Proof. Consider the operators $A$ and $V\left(x,t\right)$ in $H=l^{2}$ defined by $\left(7.2\right)$. Then the problem $\left(8.1\right)-\left(8.2\right)$ can be rewritten as the problem $\left(1.1\right)$, where $u\left(x\right)=\left\{u_{j}\left(x\right)\right\},$ $f\left(x\right)=\left\{f_{j}\left(x\right)\right\}$, $j=1,2,...,N,$ $x\in R^{n}$ are the functions with values in $H=l^{2}$. It is easy to see that $A$ is a symmetric operator in $l_{2}$ and other conditions of Theorem 1 are satisfied. Hence, from Teorem1 we obtain the conculision.

**8. Unique continuation properties for anisotropic Schrödinger equation **

Let us consider the following problem

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

where $a_{\alpha}$ are real valued function on $G\subset$ $R^{d},$ $d\geq 2,$ $b_{j\beta}$ are the complex valued functions on $\partial G$, $\alpha=\left(\alpha_{1},\alpha_{2},...,\alpha_{n}\right)$, $\beta=\left(\beta_{1},\beta_{2},...,\beta_{n}\right),$ $\mu_{i}<2m,$ $K=K\left(x,y,\tau,t\right)$ is a complex valued bounded function in $\Omega\times G\times\left[0,T\right],$ here $\Omega=R^{n}\times G$, $G$ is a bounded domain with sufficiently smooth $\left(d-1\right)$-dimensional boundary $\partial G$ and

[TABLE]

Let

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Theorem 8.1. Let the following conditions be satisfied:

(1) $\Omega\in C^{2}$, $a_{\alpha}\in C^{\left(1\right)}\left(\bar{\Omega}\right)$ for $\left|\alpha\right|=2m,$ $a_{\alpha}\in L^{\infty}\left(\Omega\right)$ for $\left|\alpha\right|<2m,$ Moreover,

[TABLE]

$b_{j\beta}\in C\left(\partial\Omega\right),$ $\sum\limits_{j=1}^{m}b_{j\beta}\sigma_{j}\neq 0,$ for $\left|\beta\right|=m_{j},$ where $\sigma=\left(\sigma_{1},\sigma_{2},...,\sigma_{d}\right)\in R^{d}$ is a normal to $\partial G$ ;

(2) for $\xi\in R^{n}$, $\lambda\in S\left(\varphi\right)=\left\{\lambda\in\mathbb{C}\text{, }\left|\arg\lambda\right|\leq\varphi,\text{ }0\leq\varphi<\pi\right\}$ and $\left|\xi\right|+\left|\lambda\right|\neq 0$ let $\lambda+$ $\sum\limits_{\left|\alpha\right|=2m}a_{\alpha}\xi^{\alpha}\neq 0$;

(3) the problem

[TABLE]

has a unique solution $\vartheta\in C_{0}\left(\mathbb{R}_{+}\right)$ for all $h=\left(h_{1},h_{2},...,h_{d}\right)\in\mathbb{C}^{d}$ and for $\xi^{\prime}\in R^{d-1};$

(4) $\mathop{\mathrm{I}m}\mathop{\displaystyle\int}\limits_{R^{n}}\mathop{\displaystyle\int}\limits_{G}K\left(x,y,\tau,t\right)d\tau dy>0$ for $x\in R^{n}$ and $t\in\left[0,T\right],$ $T\in\left[0,1\right];$ moreover,

[TABLE]

(5)

[TABLE]

where, $\mu\left(t\right)=\alpha t+\beta\left(1-t\right)$, $\alpha,\beta>0,\alpha\beta<2;$

(5) Assume $u\in C\left(\left[0,1\right];L^{p}\left(\Omega\right)\right)$ be a solution of the equation $\left(8.1\right)-\left(8.2\right)$ and

[TABLE]

Then $u\left(x,y,t\right)\equiv 0.$

**Proof. **Let us consider operators $A$ and $V\left(x,t\right)$ in $H=L^{2}\left(G\right)$ that are defined by the equalities

[TABLE]

[TABLE]

Then the problem $\left(8.1\right)-\left(8.2\right)$ can be rewritten as the problem $\left(1.1\right)$, where $u\left(x\right)=u\left(x,.\right),$ $f\left(x\right)=f\left(x,.\right)$, $x\in\sigma$ are the functions with values in $H=L^{2}\left(G\right)$. By virtue of $\left[\text{1}\right]$ operator $A+\mu$ is positive in $L^{2}\left(G\right)$ for sufficiently large $\mu>0$. Moreover, in view of (1)-(5) all conditons of Theorem 1 are hold. Then Theorem1 implies the assertion.

9. The Wentzell-Robin type mixed problem for Schrödinger equations

Consider the problem $\left(1.5\right)-\left(1.6\right)$.  Let

[TABLE]

In this section, we present the following result:

**Theorem 9.1. ** Suppose the the following conditions are satisfied:

(1) let $a\left(x,.\right)$ be positive, $b\left(x,.\right)$ be a real-valued function on $\left(0,1\right),$ $a\in C^{\left(1\right)}\left(\left[0,1\right]\times R^{n}\right)$, Moreover,

[TABLE]

$b\left(.,y\right)\in C\left(R^{n}\right)$ for a.e. $y\in\left[0,1\right],$ $b\left(x,.\right)\in L_{\infty}\left(0,1\right)$ for a.e. $x\in R^{n}$ and

[TABLE]

(2) $\mathop{\mathrm{I}m}\mathop{\displaystyle\int}\limits_{R^{n}}\mathop{\displaystyle\int}\limits_{0}^{1}K\left(x,\tau,t\right)d\tau dy>0$ for $x\in R^{n}$ and $t\in\left[0,T\right]$; moreover,

[TABLE]

(3)

[TABLE]

where, $\mu\left(t\right)=\alpha t+\beta\left(1-t\right)$, $\alpha,\beta>0,\alpha\beta<2;$

(4) $\ u\in C\left(\left[0,T\right];L^{2}\left(\sigma\right)\right)$ be a solution of the equation $\left(1.5\right)-\left(1.6\right)$ and

[TABLE]

Then $u\left(x,y,t\right)\equiv 0.$

Proof. Let us consider the operator $A$ in $H=L^{2}\left(0,1\right)$ defined by $\left(1.4\right).$ Then $\left(8.1\right)-\left(8.2\right)$ can be rewritten as the problem $\left(1.1\right)$, where $u\left(x\right)=u\left(x,.\right),$ $f\left(x\right)=f\left(x,.\right)$, $x\in\sigma$ are the functions with values in $H=L^{2}\left(0,1\right)$. By virtue of $\left[\text{10, 11}\right]$ the operator $A$ generates analytic semigroup in $L^{2}\left(0,1\right)$. Hence, by virtue of (1)-(3), all conditons of Theorem 1 are satisfied. Then Theorem1 implies the assertion.

References

H. Amann, Operator-valued Fourier multipliers, vector-valued Besov spaces, and applications, Math. Nachr. 186 (1997), 5-56. 2. 2.

H. Amann, Linear and quasi-linear equations,1, Birkhauser, Basel 1995. 3. 3.

A. Bonami, B. Demange, A survey on uncertainty principles related to quadratic forms. Collect. Math. 2006, Vol. Extra, 1–36. 4. 4.

C. E. Kenig, G. Ponce, L. Vega, On unique continuation for nonlinear Schrödinger equations, Comm. Pure Appl. Math. 60 (2002) 1247–1262. 5. 5.

L. Escauriaza, C. E. Kenig, G. Ponce, L. Vega, On uniqueness properties of solutions of Schrödinger Equations, Comm. PDE. 31, 12 (2006) 1811–1823. 6. 6.

L. Escauriaza, C. E. Kenig, G. Ponce, L. Vega, On uniqueness properties of solutions of the k-generalized KdV, J. of Funct. Anal. 244, 2 (2007) 504–535. 7. 7.

L. Escauriaza, C. E. Kenig, G. Ponce, and L. Vega, Hardy’s uncertainty principle, convexity and Schrödinger Evolutions, J. European Math. Soc. 10 (4) (2008) 883–907. 8. 8.

L. Hörmander, A uniqueness theorem of Beurling for Fourier transform pairs, Ark. Mat. 29, 2 (1991) 237–240. 9. 9.

J. A. Goldstain, Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications, Oxford University Press, Oxfard, 1985. 10. 10.

A. Favini, G. R. Goldstein, J. A. Goldstein and S. Romanelli, Degenerate Second Order Differential Operators Generating Analytic Semigroups in $L_{p}$ and $W^{1,p}$, Math. Nachr. 238 (2002), 78 –102. 11. 11.

V. Keyantuo, M. Warma, The wave equation with Wentzell–Robin boundary conditions on Lp-spaces, J. Differential Equations 229 (2006) 680–697. 12. 12.

P. Guidotti,  Optimal regularity for a class of singular abstract parabolic equations, J. Differential Equations, v. 232, 2007, 468–486. 13. 13.

Lunardi A., Analytic Semigroups and Optimal Regularity in Parabolic Problems, Birkhauser, 2003. 14. 14.

Lions, J-L., Magenes, E., Nonhomogenous Boundary Value Broblems, Mir, Moscow, 1971. 15. 15.

N. Okazawa, T. Suzuki, T. Yokota, Energy methods for abstract nonlinear Schredinger equations, Evol. Equ. Control Theory 1(2)(2012), 337-354. 16. 16.

V. B. Shakhmurov, Nonlinear abstract boundary value problems in vector-valued function spaces and applications, Nonlinear Anal-Theor., v. 67(3) 2006, 745-762. 17. 17.

V. B. Shakhmurov, Coercive boundary value problems for regular degenerate differential-operator equations, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 292 ( 2), (2004), 605-620. 18. 18.

R. Shahmurov, On strong solutions of a Robin problem modeling heat conduction in materials with corroded boundary, Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl., v.13, (1), 2011, 441-451. 19. 19.

R. Shahmurov, Solution of the Dirichlet and Neumann problems for a modified Helmholtz equation in Besov spaces on an annuals, J. Differential equations, v. 249(3), 2010, 526-550. 20. 20.

E. M. Stein, R. Shakarchi, Princeton, Lecture in Analysis II. Complex Analysis, Princeton, University Press (2003). 21. 21.

A. Sitaram, M. Sundari, S. Thangavelu, Uncertainty principles on certain Lie groups, Proc. Indian Acad. Sci. Math. Sci. 105 (1995), 135-151. 22. 22.

L. Weis, Operator-valued Fourier multiplier theorems and maximal $L_{p}$ regularity, Math. Ann. 319, (2001), 735-758. 23. 23.

H. Triebel, Interpolation theory, Function spaces, Differential operators, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1978. 24. 24.

S. Yakubov and Ya. Yakubov, ”Differential-operator Equations. Ordinary and Partial  Differential Equations ”, Chapman and Hall /CRC, Boca Raton, 2000.