2
$\begingroup$

The current post comes from my previous post at stackexchange. However, I have not get any comment yet.

In a celebrated paper written by Guan, Trudinger, and Wang, authors proved the existence and uniqueness of convex $C^{1,1}$-solution to the Dirichlet problem for degenerate Monge-Ampere equations, and they also provided a global $C^{1,1}$-control to the solution. They first reduced the global $C^2$-estimates to the boundary estimates for the second-order derivatives, and then did the estimates on the boundary. To this end, a "simple" inequality was used for several times, which can be stated precisely as follows.

Let $n\geq2$ be an integer and $\Omega\subset\mathbf R^n$ be a bounded domain with smooth boundary. Assume $\Omega$ is uniformly convex if necessary. Given $f\in C^{1,1}(\bar\Omega)$ such that $$f>0\quad\hbox{in $\Omega$.}$$ Does there exist a constant $C>0,$ which is at most dependent on $n,~\Omega,$ and $\|f\|_{C^{1,1}(\bar\Omega)},$ such that \begin{equation}|\nabla f(x)\cdot\tau(x)|^2\leq Cf(x)\quad\hbox{for all $x\in\partial\Omega$},\label{1}\tag{1}\end{equation} where $\tau(x)$ is a unit tangent vector of $\partial\Omega$ at $x.$

Or equivalently, does the tangential derivative $\partial_{\tau}\sqrt f$ have a uniform upper bound?

Actually, authors used in above reference an incorrect inequality as $$ |\nabla f|^2\leq Cf\quad\hbox{in $\Omega$.} $$ Near the boundary, it is clear that the distance function $d(x):=\mathrm{dist}(x,\partial\Omega)$ is a counterexample since $|\nabla d|=1$. Fortunately, it seems that all consequences still hold if \eqref{1} is true. If $f(x_0)=0$ for some boundary point $x_0,$ then obviously we can take above $C=1$ at $x_0.$ The remaining difficulty is to control the tangential derivative of $\sqrt f$ if $f(x)>0$ but it is very small. Probably above inequality is reasonable in the following sense. For $x_0\in\partial\Omega.$ Roughly, if $f$ behaves like some positive power of $d_{x_0}:=d(x,x_0)$ near $x_0,$ for example we say it as $d_{x_0}^\alpha.$ Then, $|\nabla_\tau f|$ might behave as $d_{x_0}^{\alpha-1}$ near $x_0.$ If \eqref{1} is not true, then $\alpha-1<\alpha/2,$ and thus $\alpha<2.$ However, this is impossible as $f$ is of $C^{1,1}.$ I hope someone could give me some comment on this topic.

$\endgroup$

1 Answer 1

3
$\begingroup$

This inequality comes from scaling. Assume that $f$ satisfies $|D^2f| \leq 1$ on $\mathbb{R}^n$ and $f \geq 0$. It suffices to prove that $$|\nabla f(0)|^2 \leq 2f(0).$$ Equality holds if $f(0) = 0$, so assume that $f(0) > 0$. We may assume that $f(0) = 1$ after taking the rescaling $\tilde{f}(x) = \lambda^{-2}f(\lambda x)$, with $\lambda^2 = f(0)$, since this rescaling preserves the Hessian of $f$, the sign of $f$, and the ratio of interest: $$|\nabla \tilde{f}(0)|^2 = |\nabla f(0)|^2/f(0).$$ In the situation $f(0) = 1$ it is clear that $|\nabla f(0)|^2 \leq 2$, otherwise the Hessian bound would imply that $f < 0$ somewhere (follow a ray in the direction $-\nabla f(0)$).

The situation when $f$ is a nonnegative $C^{1,\,1}$ function on a compact manifold ($\partial \Omega$) is similar. One can e.g. make a nonnegative extension of $f$ to $\mathbb{R}^n$ with comparable $C^{1,1}$ norm and apply the previous reasoning.

$\endgroup$

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.