14
$\begingroup$

Let $f\colon\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}^n$ be a smooth, bounded vector field. Further, let $u\colon\mathbb{R}^n\to\mathbb{R}$ satisfy $$-\Delta u=\operatorname{div}(fu).$$ If $u\in L^1(\mathbb{R}^n)$, then $u$ has one sign, i.e., either $u>0$ everywhere, or $u<0$ everywhere, or $u=0$ everywhere.

I have a direct proof of this for $n=1$. For $n>1$, I have a proof using the theory of parabolic equations (see below). My question: Is there a direct proof using only the theory of elliptic PDEs?

(Edited to assume $f$ bounded and fix the case $n=1$ below.)

For $n=1$, my proof goes as follows. The equation is $-u''=(fu)'$, which integrates to $u'+fu=A$ for some constant $A$. If $u$ changes sign then we may without loss of generality take $u(0)=0$. Thus $$u(x)=A\int_0^x e^{F(t)-F(x)}\,dt$$ where $F'=f$. If $|f|\le c$ then $F(t)-F(x)\ge c(t-x)$ for $t<x$, so $u(x)\ge Ac^{-1}(1-e^{-cx})$ when $x>0$, and hence $u\notin L^1$ (unless $A=0$).

For $n>1$, my only proof is much more involved. Here is a brief outline. Assume the conclusion is wrong, so we can write $u=u_+-u_-$ with $u_\pm\ge0$ everywhere and neither identically zero, and $u_+u_-=0$ everywhere.

Now let $v_\pm$ solve $$\frac{\partial v_\pm}{\partial t}=\Delta v_\pm+\operatorname{div}(fv_\pm)$$ for $t>0$, with initial conditions $v_\pm(0,x)=u_\pm(x)$. By uniqueness for this equation (with suitable growth conditions at infinity), $v_+(t,x)-v_-(t,x)=u(x)$ for $t>0$ and $x\in\mathbb{R}^n$. Also, for $t>0$ we find $v_\pm>0$ everywhere, and also $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n} v_\pm(t,x)\,dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n} u_\pm(x)\,dx$$ since the equation is on divergence form. We conclude $$\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}|u(x)|\,dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}(u_+(x)+u_-(x))\,dx=\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}(v_+(t,x)+v_-(t,x))\,dx>\int_{\mathbb{R}^n}|v_+(t,x)-v_-(t,x)|\,dx,$$ which is a contradiction.

$\endgroup$
3
  • $\begingroup$ I might add a bit of intuition for why this is true: The laplacian makes stuff diffuse, while the divergence term transports stuff along the vector field while preserving the total amount of stuff. If a solution has two signs, the diffusion will mix the positive and negative parts together, making them shrink. This intuition is of course formalized in the parabolic proof. $\endgroup$ Feb 9, 2010 at 0:52
  • $\begingroup$ Regarding my edit: It may be that it is sufficient to assume $f$ grows at most linearly. Some such restriction is necessary, though: I can make a counterexample for $n=1$ with $f$ odd, $f(x)=ax^{a-1}$ for $x>0$ where $a>1$. The odd solution $u$ with $A=1$ in the notation of the question will belong to $L^1$. We find $\int_0^\infty u=\int_0^\infty \int_0^x e^{y^a-x^a}\,dy\,dx$. The part where $y<1$ is no problem, and the other part is handled by noting $y^a-x^a<ay^{a-1}(y-x)$ when $y<x$ and integrating. $\endgroup$ Feb 9, 2010 at 3:31
  • $\begingroup$ For a purely radial vector field, there is a purely radial solution, easily found, and with $g=0$ in your notation. For a purely rotational field, I don't know of any solution. You clearly can't get away with $g=0$ in that case. $\endgroup$ Feb 9, 2010 at 21:15

1 Answer 1

1
$\begingroup$

A formal argument is to integrate both sides over the region where u>0. The integral of the right hand side is zero, while the integral of the left hand side yields something strictly positive if there is a boundary. This argument is not rigorous because we do not a priori know if the integrals converge. But you could try to make it rigorous by multiplying with a factor like $\exp(-\epsilon |x|^2)$ and then letting $\epsilon\to 0$.

$\endgroup$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service and acknowledge you have read our privacy policy.

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