2
$\begingroup$

I am strugging on problem 3.2 in Gilbarg-Trudinger, which says that

if $L=a^{ij}(x)D_{ij}+b^{i}(x)D_{i}+c(x)$ is an elliptic operator in a bounded domain $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{n}$ with $c<0$, and $u\in C^{2}(\Omega)\cap > C^(\overline\Omega)$ satisfies $Lu=f$ in $\Omega$, then we have $\sup_{\Omega}|u| \le\sup_{\partial \Omega}|u|+\sup_{\Omega}|\frac{f}{c}|$

In previous part of this chapter, we have actually shown that for the case $c\le0$, we have $\sup_{\Omega}|u| \le\sup_{\partial \Omega}|u|+C\sup_{\Omega}|\frac{f}{\lambda}|$, where $\lambda(x)$ is the minimum eigenvalue of $[a^{ij}(x)]$ and $C$ is a constant depending only on $diam(\Omega)$ and $\beta=\sup \frac{|\mathbf{b}|}{\lambda} (<\infty)$.

I have no idea why the bound can be independent of $diam(\Omega)$ and $\beta$, can anybody give me some idea?

$\endgroup$
1
  • $\begingroup$ Is $c$ a constant (as is indicated by its appearance in the estimate), and not a function of $x$ as at the start of the problem? $\endgroup$
    – Jeff
    Sep 3 '16 at 0:42
1
$\begingroup$

There is a version of the maximum principle where you use the zeroth order term instead of uniform ellipticity to get the estimate. I'll sketch the proof below, and I'll take $c<0$ to be a constant (don't have the book in front of me right now). The argument should work just as well if $c(x)$ is negative and bounded away from zero.

If $u$ attains its max at a point $x\in \Omega$, then

$$f(x) = a^{ij}u_{x_ix_j} + b^iu_{x_i} + cu \leq cu(x),$$

due to the ellipticity of $a^{ij}$. Since $c$ is negative we have

$$\sup_\Omega u = u(x) \leq \frac{f(x)}{c} \leq \sup_{\Omega} \left|\frac{f}{c}\right|.$$

If the maximum is attained on the boundary, then $\sup_\Omega u \leq \sup_{\partial \Omega} |u|$, hence

$$\sup_\Omega u \leq \sup_{\partial \Omega} |u| + \sup_{\Omega} \left|\frac{f}{c}\right|.$$

Actually you can put the max of the two terms on the right hand side to get a slightly better estimate, if you like. You can obtain a similar estimate for $-u$ since $L(-u) = -f$.

Basically, when you use the zeroth order term to obtain estimates with the maximum principle, you do not need to play the perturbation trick (adding $\varepsilon e^{\alpha x_1}$ or something similar to $u$), so the size of the domain does not enter into the estimate, and you don't need uniform ellipticity.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.