1
$\begingroup$

Assume $b, \ell \in C_b^{1,2}(\mathbb R^2)$. We consider parabolic PDE $$(P1)\quad \partial_t v = b \partial_x v + \partial_{xx} v + \ell, \ \forall (t, x) \in \mathbb R^+\times \mathbb R; \quad v(0, x) = 0, \forall x\in \mathbb R.$$ It is standard that there is a classical solution. Assuming $\partial_{xxx} v$ exists, by taking $\partial_x$ to the equation, with $\hat v = \partial_x v$, we obtain $$\partial_t \hat v = b \partial_x \hat v + \partial_{xx} \hat v + \partial_x \ell + \hat v \partial_x b, \ \forall (t, x) \in \mathbb R^+\times \mathbb R; \quad \hat v(0, x) = 0, \forall x\in \mathbb R.$$ Therefore, by uniqueness of the solution, we conclude that

  • The solution $\hat u$ of $$(P2) \quad \partial_t \hat u = b \partial_x \hat u + \partial_{xx} \hat u + \partial_x \ell + \hat u \partial_x b, \ \hbox{ on } \mathbb R^+\times \mathbb R; \quad \hat u(0, x) = 0, \hbox{ on } \mathbb R,$$ satisfies $\hat u = \partial_x v$.

Now, I want to know if the above conclusion satisfies without assuming $v\in C^{1,3}$, that is

  • Let $b, \ell \in C_b^{1,2}(\mathbb R^2)$, do $\hat u$ of (P2) and $v$ of (P1) satisfy $\hat u = \partial_x v$?
$\endgroup$
3
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ This is true since $u$ has 3 derivatives with respect to $x$. For example, if $b=0$, solve first (P2) and call $v$ the solution. Then $u(t,x)=u(t,0)+\int_0^x v(t,y)\, dy$, since both solve (P1). One can also use difference quotients with respect to $x$ to show that $u_{xx}$ is Lipschitz but then needs and argument for the existence of the third derivative at any point. For general $b$ it shoud be the same. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 16, 2020 at 10:18
  • $\begingroup$ Could you make your explanation into more detail? I could not understand. I tried similar way. Due to non-degeneracy, $\hat u\in C^{1,2}$. Set $u(t, x)= u(t, 0) + \int_0^x \hat u(t, y) dy$. Try to verify $u$ satisfies (P1), but the last step did not go through. $\endgroup$
    – kenneth
    Commented Jun 16, 2020 at 11:33
  • $\begingroup$ Sure. Let v be the solution of (P2) with b=0 and set $w(t,x)=u(t,0)+\int_0^x v(t,y)dy$. Then $w(0,x)=0$ and $w_t(0,x)=u_t(t,0)+\int_0^x v_t(t,y) dy$. Using the equation for $v$ this last term equals $u_t(t,0)+w_{xx}+\ell-(v_x(t,0)+\ell (t,0))=w_{xx}+\ell$. This says that $w$ solves (P1) and then coincides with $u$. $\endgroup$ Commented Jun 16, 2020 at 11:50

1 Answer 1

0
$\begingroup$

We define \begin{equation*} u(t, x) = g(t) + \int_{0}^{x} \hat u (t, y) \, d y, \quad \forall (t, x) \in (\mathbb{R}^{+}, \mathbb{R}) \end{equation*} where $g(\cdot)$ is the function we want to find to make $u(t, x)$ is the solution of equation (P1). Suppose $u(t, x)$ is the solution of equation (P1), for the initial condition, we need \begin{equation*} u(0, x) = g(0) + \int_{0}^{x} \hat u (0, y) \, d y = g(0) = 0. \end{equation*} And for $(t, x) \in (\mathbb{R}^{+}, \mathbb{R})$, we have \begin{eqnarray*} \partial_{t} u & = & g^{'} (t) + \int_{0}^{x} \partial_{t} \hat u(t, y) \, d y \\ & = & g^{'} (t) + \int_{0}^{x} (b \partial_{x} \hat u + \partial_{xx} \hat u + \partial_{x} l + \hat u \cdot \partial_{x} b ) (t, y) \, d y \\ & = & g^{'} (t) + (b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l) |_{0}^{x} \\ & = & g^{'} (t) + b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l - (b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l)(t, 0). \end{eqnarray*} By the definition of $u(t, x)$, we can get that \begin{equation*} \partial_{x} u (t, x) = \hat u (t, x), \quad \forall (t, x) \in (\mathbb{R}^{+}, \mathbb{R}), \end{equation*} then we have \begin{equation*} \partial_{t} u - (b \partial_{x} u + \partial_{xx} u + l) = g^{'}(t) - (b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l)(t, 0). \end{equation*} Thus the sufficient condition that $u(t, x)$ is the solution of equation (P1) is \begin{equation} \label{C1} (C1) \quad \begin{cases} g^{'}(t) = (b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l)(t, 0) \\ g(0) = 0 \end{cases} \end{equation} where $\hat u(t, x)$ is the solution of equation (P2). We define \begin{equation} g(t) = \int_{0}^{t} (b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l)(s, 0) \, d s, \quad \forall t \in \mathbb{R}^{+}, \end{equation} which satisfies the condition (C1). Thus \begin{equation*} u(t, x) = \int_{0}^{t} (b \hat u + \partial_{x} \hat u + l)(s, 0) \, d s + \int_{0}^{x} \hat u (t, y) \, d y, \quad \forall (t, x) \in (\mathbb{R}^{+}, \mathbb{R}) \end{equation*} is the solution of (P1) and it satisfies \begin{equation*} \partial_{x} u (t, x) = \hat u (t, x), \quad \forall (t, x) \in (\mathbb{R}^{+}, \mathbb{R}). \end{equation*} What's more, we have $u(t, x) \in C_{b}^{1,3} (\mathbb{R}^{+}, \mathbb{R})$ and it is the unique solution of (P1).

$\endgroup$

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.