Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Asnsp 1960 3 14 1 1 0
Asnsp 1960 3 14 1 1 0
C HARLES B. J R M ORREY
Multiple integral problems in the calculus of variations
and related topics
Annali della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Classe di Scienze 3e série, tome 14,
no 1 (1960), p. 1-61
<http://www.numdam.org/item?id=ASNSP_1960_3_14_1_1_0>
Introduction. ,
.
kind of convergence (ii) that I (2’)~.~ for the z considered and (iii) that
there is a « minimizing sequence » zn such that jT()- and in the
sense required.
In the case of single integral problems, where
Tonelli(see, for instance [76]) was ableto carry through this program for
the that only absolutely continuous functions are admitted,
case the con-
vergence is uniform, and (essentially) f (x ~ z , p) is convex
p) _> fo ( p) where it is seen from the proof of Theorem 2..4
below, . that the functions io any minimizing sequence would be uniformly
absolutely continuous so that a subsequence would converge uniformly to
an absolutely continuos fuiietioii zo which would thus minimize I(z)). To-
nelli was also able to carry through the entire program for certain double
integral problems usiag functions absolutely continuous,in his sense (ACT)
and uniform convergence [77], [78]. However, in general 1e had to a,ssume’
that the integrand f (x , y ~ -, 7 p I q) satisfied a condition like
If f satisfies this condition, Tonellii showed that the functions in any mi-
nimizing sequence are equicontinuous, and uniformly bounded on interior
domains at least (see Lemma 4.1) and so a’ subsequence converges uniformly
on such domains to a function still in his class. He was also able to handle
the case where
e ,
These more general functions have been defined in various ways and
studied by various authors in various connections. Beppo Levi [32] was
probably the first to use functions of this type in the special case that the
function and its first derivatives are iu any function equivalent to such
a function has been called strongly differentiable by Friedrichs and these
above and by Aronszajn and Smith who showed that any function in the,
space Bmo (see Professor Niremberg’s lectures) can be represented as a Riesz
potential of order m [1]. The writer is sure that many others have also di-
scussed these functions and certainly does not claim that the bibliography
is complete.
In Chapter I, the writer presents some of the known results concer-
ning these more general functions., In Chapter II, these are applied to ob-
tain theorems concerning the lower-semicontinuity and existence of minima
4
dimensional integrals
appear in which case they have their obvious significance. We say that a
I for x1 and x2 on S ;
z is said to satisfy a uniform Holder condition on 8 with exponent 0
p 1, if and only if there is an M such that
5
CHAPTER I
Function of class 93)., 93¡ , 931 (2 ~ 1) and functions which are ACT.
(iii) the partial derivatives z,a, which exist almost every-where and
are measurable on account of (ii), are pf class 2). on G.
ho ?b -~- k] ,
7 where
7
since
Then for each h, we see that znh;a = (Zn,ä)h and we Inay obtain (1.2) by
*
pa
’
(x) dx .
’
’
°
and pah is that of its partial- derivative 8z/8xa, then Zh is of class 0’ and
(1.2) holds. Moi-eover z is o f class cf3). and its cor/responding partial and ge-
neralized deriroatives coincide almost everywhere. ,
êJz/8xa «
pa is summable in xa over [aa ho, ba -f - ho]
-
and
By integrating (1.3), we seethat it holds for all z§ on [aa , ba] and all
on [aa , ba] if z and pa are replaced bytheir h-averages. Then (1.2)
and the last statement follow.
8
function zo of class on G.
b) z is ACT on G if and only if z is of class there.
Proof : To prove (a), let R [a, b] be any=rational cell in G and ap- , ,
for all x’ not in a set ZRa of (p - 1) -dimeusional measure zero, a =1,... ,v.
From (1.4), we see that the ZIl (xa , x~} are equicoutinuos in xa and converge
uniformly on (aa , ba] to a function ZOR (xa ,,x) which is AG’ in xa if xa is
not in =
1 ~... ,v. Ubviously zoR = z almost everywhere on R. Since
the union of the ZRa for a fixed and U running over all rational cells is
still of measure zero; we see that the ZOR join up to form a function zo of
class 03¿ on (~.
To prove (b), we note first that if z is ACT on G, it is of class 93~
on G. Conversely, if z is of class 93?, we may repeat the first part of the
proof taking zn as the hn -average of z and conclude that we may take zoR
always = z since then zn converges uniformly to z on R.’
The following theorems are easily proved by approximations :
.. THEOREM 1.5 : The
,
If ~, =
2, c)3, is a real Hilbert 81Jace 2ue define
9
Y2
.
THEOREM 1.7 : If of class Cf3¡ (~~’) on the bounded demain G, x=x(y)
u is
is a regular of class 0’ froin the bounded domain G onto G
(y) u [x (y)],
= is of class Cf3¡ (Cf3¡’) on G. Moreover, if xo=x(yo)
and all the generalized derivatives u,a (xo) exist, then all the generalized deri-
-
u,a (yo)
,
Proof : That ~ is of class (cl3") A and that we may choose the right
sides of (1.5) as the ( derivative functions » pp of the definition is easily
proved by approximating u on interior domains by functions of class C~.
Since regular families of sets correspond under regular transformations, the
last statement follows easily.
REMARKS : It is proved in [40] and [47], for instance, thatif u is of
class CJ3ï. on G, it is equivalent. to a function (namely the Lebesgue de-
rivetive of
ud x)
which is of class
e
and is such that any transform as in
Theorem 1.7 rdtaius this property. But the last statement of Theorems 1.7
does not hold for the partial derivatives since tliis would inply that z had
a total differential almost everywhere contrary to an example of Sake
[55].
It is clear how to define the generalized derivative in a given direction
and that (Theorem 1.7) if all the u,a (xo) exist, then a all the generalized di-
rectional derivatives exist at xo and are given by their usual formulas the-
re, It is now easy to prove Rademacher’s famous theorem [52] that a Lip-
schitz function has a total differential almost everywhere : For using the
result just mentioned together with Theorem 1.2 we see that if z is Lip-
schitz and ~o is not in a set of measure zero, then. the partial and genera-
lized derivatives all exist at xo and the ordinary directional derivatives in
a denumerable everywhere dense set of directions (independent of
xo) all
exist and are given by their usual formulas ; at any such point z is seen
to have a total differential. Thus in Theorem 1.6, lJ; may be Lipschitz and
in Theorem 1.7, the transformation and its inverse may be Lipschitz;i in
this case (1.5) holds whenever all the gene1’alized derivatives involved exist.
10
the form
where the Aa (a 2: 0) E Ep.’ with ~,~1-~- ~"~ ==1 > 1 or are bounded and
on G 1. ==
Proof : Let A be the space of all vectors cP = ..., gw) with compo-
nents in E)., and - -’- ..-
From Theorem 1.5 it follows that the snbspace of all vectors (z, z,1,7... ~ Z,,)
for which z E 93 on G is a closed linear manifold 1M in Hence if
F(z, z,,) = f (z) ~ then F can be extended to the whole space B to
have same norm as f. Then F is given by (1.6).
-From Theorem 1.8 we immediately obtain : ,
THEOREM 1.9: (a) A necessary and sufficient condition that z,, converges
wea,kly fo z (z,, ? x) in on G is tha,t z,~ ? Z and the z",a ? z,a in on G.
’
on
if it is of class there and there existe a seqnence lu..), each of class G’’
and vanishing on and near the boundary a G such that z,a -~ z (strong con-
vergence) in on G. The subsyace of Cf3¡ is defined correspondingly.
If z and z* E 93¡ on G, we say thatli z = z* on a G in the sense if and ,
only if z
-
z. E CBAO on G’ ,
Thus
des with z on aL1 in the sense. Then the function Z such that Z(x) = z*(x)
on d and Z (x) = z (x) on G - L1 is of class 03). on G and z,a (x) = al-
’1nost everywhere on L1 and Z,a (x) =
z,a’ (x) (tve1’ywhere on G - L1 .
Proo f : For defi ne Z1 (x) = z* (x) z (x) on A and 0 elsewhere. Then
-
Z (x) = z (x) + Z, (x) on G and the result follows from Theoreni 1.10.
LEMMA 1.2 : Suppose z E on the cell [a - b + ho]. Then
Then
Proof: The first statement follows from the second. For, let fzpl be any
subsequence of (x~~. A subsequence (zq) converges strongly in Zi to some
function z which must be (equivalent to) zo. Hence the whole, sequence
in ..
bounded 03). norm., For each h with 0 h 1, we see that the znh are
uniformly bounded and equicontinuous on [a, b]. So there is a subsequence,
called such that zph converges uniformly to some function zh for each
h of a sequence - 0. From lemma 1.2, it is easy to see first that the limi-
ting zh form a Cauchy sequence in 12). having some limit z and then that
strongly in .e,.
In order to treat variational problems with fixed boundary values, one
can, of course, practically always reduce the problem to one where the gi-
ven boundary values are zero. Although one can formulate theorems about
variational problems having variable boundary values on the boundary of
an arbitrary bounded domain (see Chapter II), such problems become more
13
for x on
then define -
14
so that the seqnence (hi , ... , hN) satisfies the desired conditions..
THEOREM 1.14 : Suppose G is bounded and of class C’. and z E C)3;. on
G. Then
(i) there is a sequence (zn) of functiolls of class 0’ on G U a G which
. converges strongly in C)3). to z on G ;
(ii) there is a boundary value fttnction (p in on a G (with respect to
’
to which every sequance ~z~2~
in (1) converges stt-oitgly in -P, on aG;
sired properties.
To prove (ii) we choose, in all cases, wio equivalent to U’i and on
It is clear that all the theorems and lemmas of this section except
Theorem 1.11 and lelnma 1.2 generalize immediately to vector functions.
Those two can be generalized with the help of the following well known
lemma :
. LEMMA 1.4 : Suppose f, , ... , f~ are sum1uable over the set 8 with respect
to the maesui-e ft- Then is also and
CHAPTERII
for all
I
19
~2.2) and suppose that (~) -~ ~ (~) for each ~ . Suppose at , ..., ap are any
numbers and b,a and b are chosen so that ap $P -f - 6n and ap $P + b are sup-
porting to q;n and g , respectively. Then bn b.Likewise, if anp - ap for each
-
p and bn and b are chosen so that anp ~p + bn and ap ~p + b are all suppor-
ting to f, then b~, -~ b .
In order to consider variational problems on arbitrary bounded domains,
it is convenient to introduce the following type of weaker than weak con-
vergence in 93t on such a domain.
DEFINITION : We say that zo in 931 on the bounded domain G
if and only if zn and zo all E 931 on ’(1, Zo in ~1 on each cell interior
to G and each zn,a --I ZO,a in £1 on the whole of G .
THEOREM 2.1 : If G is bounded and of class 0’ or if all the zn E on
G and if Zn -L, zo in cB, on G, then Zn ., zo in ~1 on G .
Proof: -The second case can be reduced to the first by extending each
z,, to be zero outside (~ and choosing a domain r of class 0’ such that
1’ ~ G . Thus we suppose C~ of class C’. If we use the notation in the proof
of Theorem 1.14, we see that (1.7) holde uniformly for the so that an
arguiiieiit similar to those in the proofs of Theorems - 1.14 and 1.15 and
1.13 shows that wnaz converge strongly in Et on Q or Q+ to something
for each i. Thus Zn converges strongly in Et on C~ to something which
must be Zo ..
,
are uniformly bounded, then a subsequence (p) of {~} exists such that the
~ something in £1 on the whole of C ..
then I (zo ~G) and I (zn , G) are each finite or -~- oo and
Hence
with a similar inequality for I (z~) . Thus the first statement follows.
If D C G, we see as above that ,
(almost everywhere). On the other hand, suppose all the generalized deriva-
tives exist at some xo which is not on a R for any bypercnbe R as above
for any q. Let R denote the hypercube containing xo . Then as q - o0
zil
(xo) so that qq (xo) -+ f [VZ since the a; remain bounded (Lem-
ma 2.5). Hence
The lemma follows easily from Theorem 2.2 and the inequalities above.
THEOREM 2.3 : defined continuous for all
(u , q , p), is convex in p each (a? ~ z) and f (x ~ z ~ p) > % ( p), for all
where convex and as p-oo. Then
I (z , G) is lower semicoutinuous with respect to the convergence? .
Proof : In order to prove this, it is sufficient to show that f (x , z ~ ~)
is the limit of a non-decreasing sequence fu (x , x , ~) each of which has the
properties required in Lemma 2.6. In order to do this, z ; a)
(a = (a") be chosen so that the function cp (x , z ; p ; a) == a.f pi + b (x x ; a) is
the unique supporting plane (in p) to f determined by a ; By Lemmas 2.4
and 2.5 b (x ~ z ; a) is continuous in (x ,z ; a) and b (x , z ; (a), the
corresponding function for 10’ For each a, choose a non-decreasing sequen-
ce bn (x , z ; a) of functions, each > bo (a) -1 each satisfyng a uniform
Lipschitz condition for all (x , z), which converges to b (x ~ z ; a). We then
define ~(~~~~)=~~-)-~(~~~) and we see that rpn is a non
decreasing sequence tending to cp for each a, each rpn satisfying a uniform
Lipschitz condition everywhere.
For each n, we define for all a for
which all the ay are rational numbers having numerator and denominator
23
both Then it is clear that thc f,, are non-decreasing and each satisfies
a uniform Lipschitz condition. Now, let (xo, zo,Po) and 8> 0 be given. Using
Lemma 2.5 and the continuity of b, we see that there is a rational a sucli
that a) Ulearly .-:.
(xo , zo ~ a)
sl2 fpr all sufficiently large n, so that In (xo , zo ,
We now turn to existence theorems on arbitrary domains. We begin
with the following theorem (cf. [48] and [40], theorem 8.8 and [41]:
THEOREM 2.4 : Suppose ,~o ( p) i8 convex in p and fo (~)l ~ p ~ -~ -~- oo as
p -. oo. Then there is ~c function 99 (~O) -. 0 as ~O -~ 0 which depends only on ,~’
and M such that if I (z, G) M, then
Proof : For each integer I- > 1, let lilr be the set ofx in G where
and exists and let
where Z is the set of measure 0 where D z (x) does not exist. Clearly Co = G~
and if r > 1 and then Let ar be the inf. of fo (1))/
1"-+-00. Also
IplI for Then as
and both - 0 as r - oo. So, let e be any subset of G. Let r be the smal-
lestinteger such that Mlr %,+,:!~ in (e). Then
Now, let be an open set Tij. For a given z, let w’o be of class
03Â of Q or Q+ and be equivalent to the transform under cpj of the restri-
ction of z to Rj . Thus there is a cell or Q+ such that
case (i) holds with z replaced by WjO and P by Pjo (independently of z in F).
By using an equation like (1.7), we see in turn that case (i) holds with R~o
replaced I~~2 , ... ~ =
Q or Q+ with P replaced by Pji , ... ,Pjv Pj =
where y
etc. Thus case (i) holds with r replaced by Rj and P by Py. Since any Rk
can be joined to the first Ri by a sequence each two adjacent members
of which have an open set in common, the lemma follows.
We can now prove our second principal existence theorem :
THEOREM 2.6: Suppose the domain G and the family F satisfy the - con-
ditions of 2.7 for some ~, > 1 and hence ~, = ,1 and suppose F
contains some which I (z ~
G) isfinite and suppose F is closed
with respect to weak convergence in cl3, . Suppose that f (x, z, p) satisfies the
conditions of Theorem 2.3 Then I (zG) talces on its minimum in F.
Proof : Let[ zn ) be a minimizing sequence for which I (zn, I Cz, G).
Then the set
fanctions zn,a dx
e
are uniformly absolutely continuous on ac-
count of Theorem 2.4. Combining this with Theorem 1.15 ; we see that a
subsequence ( zp) can be selected which converges weakly on G in 031 to
some zo in ~1. Since F is closed with respect to weak convergence in
arc Cl which has only its end points on a surface S and a variable arc C2
among all vectors z of class 932 oli G, where G is the unit circular disc,
such that the restrictions of z to 8G carry the upper semicircle of a G in
a 1-1 continuous way onto the fixed arc °1. with (0,1) corresponding to
some fixed point on 01 and carry the lower part of 8G in a 1-1 conti-
nuous way onto the variable arc C2. In order to apply Theorem 2.7, we
let r consist of all strong limits in £2 on 8G of the restrictions of such
z to aG. Any vector 99 in r is equivalent along the upper part of aG to
which arcs of 01 may correspond to points on aG; for almost all x on the
lower part of at any rate. Since any minimizing vector zo cer-
tainly minimizes I (z, G) among all z in 932 which coincide with Zo on aG
in the sense, we see that zo is harmonic (see Professor Nirenberg’s
lectures). By arguments like those in [7] and [43], we conclude that zo is
continuous on the upper half of aG and yields a conformal map of G onto
the surface represented by zo . However, an example of Courant [8] (p. 220,
221), shows that zo need not be continuous along the. lower half and
that the limiting « curve » C2 need not be an arc even if the surface 8 is
regular and of class C°° ; Lewy [33] has shown that if 8 is analytic, the
curve C2 is analytic.
27
CHAPTER III
for all (
be satisfied, f being assumed of class C". But (3.1) holds if and only if f
is convex in (~1, ... ,,Pv) for each (xi , ... ,,xvx).
The condition (3.1 ) is arrived at as follows: Suppose a function zo (x)
of class C’ minimizes 1 (z, G) among all functions of z of class C’ which
have the same boundary values and which are near zo in the sense that
the maximum of I + I Vz(x) for some b > 0.
Then it can be shown that (3.1) holds for x on G,z (x) ~ and p =
if
However, this procedure is applied in the case where N> 1, we obtain
.
for all the solution z = zo (x) , etc.) and all (~1 ~ .,. !
(x , z , p) (along and
($~ , ... , 8N) (see
Theorem 3.3 below). This does not imply is
convex in p. Moreover, it is known that integrals 2 (z, G) which arise in
where
It turns out to be rather easy to derive (see also [44]) a certain neces-
sary and sufficient condition on f as a function of p for the lower semicon-
tinuity of 1 (zG) with respect to a certain type of convergence. This que-
stion was considered for v = N = 1 by Tonelli ([72], [73], [74], [75)) and by
Cesari and others for the parametric case. We begin by deriving this condi-
tion and then discuss the relation of that condition to the condition (3.2).
In order not to get involved with the behavior of ,f at infinity we shall use
the following couvergence which obviously implies weak convergence in each
CJ3¡ but does not necessarily imply strong convergence in any CJ3¡:
DEFINI’I’ION : We say that z" - z on (?~2013~~(~) converges uniformly to
z (x) on G and z each satisfy a uniform Lipschitz condition on G
’
which is independent of n .
THEOREM 3.1 : Suppose I (z, G) is lower-semicontinuous with ’respect to
this type of convergence at any z on any G and f is continuous.
Then.
for any constant (xo ,Zo ,Po), any bounded doiiiain G, and any .Lipschitz vec-
which vanishes on a G .
Proof : Let xo be any point, B be the cell xg + h, ZZobe any
vector of class C’ ou Q be the and C be any vec-
tor which satisfies a uniform Lipschitz condition over the whole space and
is periodic of period 1 in each xa.
For each n, define Cn (x) on R by
where
29
G =
Q and e periodic of period 1 in each xa. But if G is any bounded
domain and evanishes on we may choose a hypercube Q’ containing
G and extend ( (x) to be zero in Q’ -
G. Then a simple change of variable
obtains the result in general.
DEFINITION : If f is continuous in (x,z ,p) for all (x,z ,p) and satisfies
(3.3) for all (xo , xo ,po), we say that f is if f depends only
on p and satisfies (3.3), we say simply is quasi convex.
We now prove that the condition (3.3) is sufficient for lower-semicon-
tinuity. ,
Proof : Since all the arguments IXzn (x) , J7 Zn (x)] and [x ~7 go (x) ~J7 go (x)J
remain in bounded part 9 of
a and since G is the uniou of
9~o disjoint hypercubes, it is sufficient to prove this for the case of a by- I
Then
where
We see that
a fixed k such that aud .L~ are both e/2. From (3.4), (3.5), (3.6), and
’
since xk (x), xk (x) ~y and pk (x) are each constant on each Rki’ Thus
Some of the theory of Chapter 2 can be carried over for the more ge-
neral functions f (x , z ~ p) which are quasi-convex in p bnt more has to be
assumed about how f behaves a~s p ~ oo . These theorems are not of great
interest and they can be found in [44].
We now investigate the concept of quasi-convexity in more detail.
LEMMA 3.2 [79], [45]: Suppose
art
at-e constants and
where
,
THEOREM 3.3 : Suppose f(x, z, p) is class e" for all (x , z, p) nea,r
the locus S of all points Ix, z, (x) , ~ Zo (x)] x in G and suppose
zo (x) is
of class 0’ on G U aC~ and I (z , G) all Lipschitz z
coincide with Zo on a G and are such thatz (x) zo (x)I +P z (x) v zo (x) b
-
separately. pi
Hence, if I ~ 111 on some hypercube, any difference quotient of the
form :
Next, lith is still weakly quasi-convex and of class C" so that (3.2)
holds. Then, from the convexity for each £, for instance, (3.8) holds
with Ahh
= fhhpi a (~) . Since f satisfies a uuiform Lipschitz condition near
p, we see that the are uniformly bounded as h - 0 so a sequence of
h - 0 can be chosen so that all the tend to limits. Clearly (3.8) holds
Âhhi
in the limit. Since the unit vector in the pt direction is of we
see that if/ is of class 0’. The last statement follows from theo-
J a
(in which the coefficients are 0 unless all the at a, are distinct and all
...
the j1 ...j, are distinct and all interchange of two a’s or two j’s changes
the sigu) such that all a we hltve °
we see that
where F is continuous
CHAPTER IV
for
where
for every paii- of point8 X2) in G such that every point on ’the segment
joining them is at a distance > a ,front a G .
Proof : We note first that if ~ is on the segment and s a ,
36
where
Proo f : Let q (r) = D [z, B (xo ,7 r)]. Then T is absolutely continuous. For
almost all r , z (r , 6) is AG’ in 0 with lre (r 0)1 in -P2. For such r-, define
from which (4.4) follows ’easily. In order to see that the right side of (4.4)
tends to zero with r, we note that
such that ’
for all p . Suppose I (zo ~G) is finite, G is a bounded domain, and zo mini-
mizes I (z, G) among all z irc coinciding wittc zo on a G . Then zo satisfies
(4.1) and (4.2) on G with ,
(ii) there are functions m1 (B), M, (R), and (R) with 0 Uti (R)
S M1 (R) for all R > 0 such that
~’, ~ x ~2 +xo (x) ~2 R2, for some R, for all x on F. Then, for almost all x on F,
for all
From this result and the Poincare inequality (Theorem 1.11)j we see that
the space is a. Hilbert space if we take 10 (u , v ;G) as an inner product
and that the resulting norm is topologically equivalent to the original 032
norm on 9320.
LEMMA 4.3: If 8 ig any set of finite measure, then
40
Hence
Next, defined,
Accordingly
Proof: For
where III U III is the ~20 -- D-nol’ln and II u II is the £2 norin. Since (4.24)
holds for all R aJ the result follows.
LEMMA 4.6 : I f u E 932 on B (xo, R), the1’e is a 1£1 E CJ320 o~L B (xo , 2.R)
such that ul (x) = u (x) on B, (xo , R) and
Then~ define
0
the condition ,
replaced = a
- ~ x1- xo ~ , ~ replaced by y
anil L
by °5, whe’re °5 depends only on 1ni’ M1, lVl2 , Z/~ ~~ ft J a, where
From our hypotheses on the b’s,7 c’s , e’s, and f’s and from Lemmas 4.4,
4.5, and 4.6, we see that
where Z2 depends only on the quantities indicated. The results follow from
Lemmas 4.2 and 4.1. ,
1"ior to G .
Proof : Since (p (0) = 0, we see that the right side of (4.11) holds for
each Lipschitz C with compact support in G. So, suppose B a) C G.
Choose A > a so that from Theorem 4.1 ~ we have
I Zo (x) for some R, on Let b (2a + A)~3 , =
c, = (a + 2A/3),ho =
(A - a~)~3 ~ be the unit vector in direction
for y = 1,2, let v be an arbitrary Lipschitz function having support in
B (xo c) and define
for almost all x. From the general assumptions on f and from the formulas
(4.26) for the coefficients, we see that the bounds (4.14) and (4.15) hold uni-
formly for 0 I h ho with
(B) ~Mi = Ml (R) ,M2 =
(R) , 21 =
m/M, G = B (xo, c),
where K is a constant depending on A and the distance‘ of from
Clearly each Uh E on B (xo , c) and its L2 norm is uniformly boun-
ded there, and we also have
Accordingly, we see first from Theorem 4.5 that the 932 norms of the ul,
are uniformly bounded on B (xo, b) and then from Theorem 4.6 that the Uh
CHAPTER V
A variational method in the theory
of harmonic integral. ,
follows, :
DEFI:NI1.’ION: Let CJ1 = ( ~T1 ~ ... , be a fiiiite open covering of M by
coordinate patches Uq =
Qq (Gq), where each Gq is a Lipschitz domain in
C’? . If w and 27 are in CB2 on M we define
is the expression for the norm in 932 on M corresponding to the inner pro-
duct (5.8). It is char that convergence of to co according to one of the
. norms (5.9) is equivalent to the atrong convergence in 932 of the compenents
in any coordinate system to those of w. Thus we obtain the theorem :
THEOREM 5.2: For each coordinate cover c2Z and each r 0 ~ ..., n the =
Proof. The first statement in clear form (5.8) since the gij are at least
Lipschitz and have bounded first derivatives. New if cok tends weakly in
932 to OJ, dcojk and 3mk tend weakly in £2 to and 3w , whence the last
statement about D (co) follws from the lower-semicoutinúity .of the norm in
with respect to weak convergence. The last statement is an application
of Theorem 1.13. ~
where i1 ... i1. aiid ii ... ...2013 is a permutation. From the form (5.12),
we see that
where q is a«y s-form (and co is an r-form) in ~2. From the rules of ex-
teriormultiplication and (5.5), it is easy to see that
If My (J), and ~ are all smooth and m and ( are of the same kind
and degrees i- and t--17 respectively, we obtains
since the first integral vanishes by Stoke’s theorem for (n -1)-forms, the
bracket being just d [* w v C] (see (5.15)). We emphasize ,the result :
4
In the case of smooth manifolds and forms, we see from (5.10) and (5.14)
that
and each term may be evaluated using one coordinate patch ; in that patcll.
the gij and the forms may be approximated by smooth forms.
In the case of a coordinate system of the type in (5.7) where we also
assume that all the agij/axk = 0 at xo, we see from (5.10) and (5.13) that
the components of dw at x. are
We now prove the following important lemma, first proved for forms
by Gaffney ,
and satisfyng gij (0) = bij. From our formulas for dco and we see that
are bounded and measurable at least. Since the a’s are Lipschitz and since
say. Let G1,... GQ be the domain lIl .E" such that Uk = Qk (Gk) for all
lc. There exists a finite sequence ~1 ? ... ,7 0, of Lipschitz functions on M,
each of which has support interior to some Uq,2 and such that
for all x E M.
Now if (5.25) were false for the CJ1 just described, there would exist a
sequence (mp) of r-forms in ~2 such that D(mp) and were uniformly
bounded but 11 mplilT - ooThen, for some s, q, and some subsequence, still
called y we
would have
and
We can now present the variational method. We begin with the follo-
wing lemma :
LEMMA 5.2 : :Let be any closed linear manifold in the space ~2 of
on M (of one kiud). Then either thete is no form W of which
or there is a form coo in ~~2 with (roo,coo) =1 which minimizes
since (co ?7 coo) is a bounded linear functional on cl3’~; here Iro Ilk
= ((,60,0))) gf -.
Hence is bounded below and is lower-semicontinuous with respect to,
weak convergence in 03~ if m is orthogonal (E2-sense) to Accordingly
there is a minimizing form If ~ is any form in 93; orthogonal to
’
which shows that (5.28) holds for all such ~ and Do is unique. But then
(5.28) holds all ~ in 93; since any such ~ is uniquely representable in the
where and ~’~ is in orthogonal to
Finally, if we set C Qo in (5.28) and use Theorem 5.7, we see that
=
(ii) If M is of class el 1 and co E £2Å’ then Q, dQ, and ~S~ E C)32Å and
hence in eo if A=
,
(iii) If 1i1 is of class Ci and w E C132, then dQ and 60 are the potentials
of dw and bw, respectively.
(iv) If M is of class 0k and dJ
’
k > 2 ~ 0 ,u 1’ then
and 60 E k 3 and then
(;y1.
It If >
-
. co E
(;k-3
IA,
E
IA
..
(v) If lJ1 and co are of class C°° or analytic, then so is Q. In all case,
’
Using (5.24) and (5.22) we see that equations (5.32) are equivalent to equa-
tions of the form (4.13), i f ~ has snpport on some one coordinate patch7
where the a’s are Liptschitz, the b’s and c’s are bounded and measurable
56
respectively.
The
following theorem complements the well-known orthogonal decom-
position of Kodaira [29].
THEOREM 5.10: If co is any £2’ then there exists a harmonic
field H and forms afl, aud Q in 932 such that
If M E G~1 and w E -P2, or ~2~ , 0 _ ~, n/2, then 6a and dfl have the
properties.
If and co E C~ with k ? 2, 0 ,~ 1, 0 a l., and either l k -1
or l = k - I and then 6a and dfJ have the same differentiability pro-
’
perties as cu .
Proof: The first statement and the differentiability resnlts follow im-
mediately from Theorems 5.8 and 5.9 If -H oc, aiid fl all E CB2 have
properly related degrees), formulas (5.18) and (5.20) and the definition of
.
harmonic field imply that and dfl are orthogonal in -P2. To see that
the sets ~’r and If)1’ are closed we see, by following the coustruction iu the
first paragraph of the theorem with co = ba and in turn, that if a and
fl E I there are forms a1 and fll in and orthogonal to 9~ such that
BIBLIOGRAPHY
[1] N. ARONSZAJN and K. T. SMITH, Functional spaces and functional completion, Ann. Inst.
Fourier Grenoble 6 (1956), 125-185.
[2] F. E. BROWDER, Strongly elliptic systems of differential equations, Contributions to the
theory of partial differential equations, 15-51. Ann. of Math. Studies, No 33.Princeton
University Press (1954).
[3] 2014
, On differential forms
on Riemannian manifolds, Comm. Pure Appl.
[22] M. P. CAFFNEY, The harmonic operator for exterior differential forms, Proc. Nat. Acad.
Sci. U.S.A. 37 (1951), 48-50.
[23] 2014
, Zur Theorie
der Konforme Abbildutig. Konforme Abbildung nichtana-
lyticher singularitatenfreier FLachenstiiche auf ebene Gebiete, Bull. Int. Acad. Sci. Cracovia,
Mat. Nat. Cl. (A) (1916), 192-217.
[36] E. J. MCSHANE, Integrals ovsr surfaces in parametric form, Ann. of Math. 34 (1933),
815-838.
[37] 2014 , Parametrizations of saddle surfaces with application to the problem of
(1940), 187-215.
[41] , A eorrection to a previous paper, Duke Math. J. 9 (1942), 120-124.
2014
[42] 2014
(1948), 807-851.
[44] 2014
, Quasi-convexity and
the lower-semicontinuity of multiple integrate, Pac. J.
Math. 2 (1952), 25-53.
[45] , Seoond order elliptic systems of differential equations, Ann. of Math. Studies
-
, A variatioval method
in the theory of harmonic integrals, II Amer. J.
Math. 78 (1956), 137-170.
60
[47] C. B. MORREY and J. EELLS Jr., A variational method in the theory of harmonic inte-
grals I, Ann. of Math. 63 (1956), 91-128.
[48] M. NAGUMO, Uber die gleichmässige Sumierbarkeit und ihre Anwendung auf ein Varia-
tionsproblem, Jap. J. Math. 6 (1929), 173-182.
[49] J. NASH, Continuity of solutions of parabolic and elliptic equations, Amer. J. Math. 80
(1958), 931-954.
[50] O. NIKODYM, Sur une classe de fonctions considerées dans l’etude du problème du Dirichlet,
Fund. Math. 21 (1933), 129-150.
[51] G. NÖBELING, Uber die erste Randwertaufgabe bei regularen Variationsproblemen I. Math.
Zeit. 51 (1949), 712-7.51.
[52] H. RADEMACHEU, Uber partielle und totale Differenzierbarkeit von Funktionen mehrerer
Variabeha, und uber die Transformation der Doppelintegrale, Math. Ann. 79 (1918),
340-359.
[53] F. RELLICH, Ein Satz Uber mittlere Konvergence, Gottingen Nach. (Math.-Phys. Kl.)
(1930), 30-35,
[54] H. SAKS, Theory of the Integral, See. Ed., Warsw-Lwow, 1937 ; English translation by
L. C. Young.
[55] 2014
form, transformed into parametric form, Mat. Sbornik NS 94 (76) (1954), 385-406.
[61] 2014 , On conditions of differentiability and analiticity of solutions of two dimen-
sional problems of variations, Doklady Akad. Nauk SSSR (NS) 85 (1952), 273-275.
[62] G. I. SILOVA, Existence of an absolute minimum of multiple integrals in the ealeulus of
variations, Doklady Akad. Nank SSSR (N.S.) 102 (1955), 699-702.
[63] -
, Sistemi di equazioni
di tipo ellittico a derivate parziali del primo ordine
e proprietà degli estremi degli integrali multipli, Ricerche Mat. 1 (1952), 200-226.
[70] -
[71] L. TONELLI, Sulla quadratura delle superficie, Atti Accad. Naz. Lincei Rend. Cl. Sci. Fis.
Mat. Nat. (6) 3 (1926), 633-638.
[72] -
, Sui massimi e minimi assoluti del calcolo della variazione, Rend. Circ.
Mat. Palermo 32 (1911), 297-337.
[73] -
, Sul caso regolare nel calcolo delle variazioni, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo
35 (1913), 49-73.
[74] 2014
, Sur une méthode directe du catcul des variations, Rend. Ciro. Mat. Pa-
lermo 39 233-264.
(1915),
[75] 2014
, L’estremo assoluto degli integrali doppi, Ann. Sc. Norm. Pisa (2) 3
(1933), 89-130.
[79] L. VAN HOVE, Sur l’extension de la condition de Legendre du calcul des variations aux
integrals multiples a plusieurs fonctions inconnues, Nederl. Akad. Wetensch. 50 (1947),
18-23.