Open Access

Infinitely many sign-changing solutions for p-Laplacian equation involving the critical Sobolev exponent

Boundary Value Problems20132013:149

DOI: 10.1186/1687-2770-2013-149

Received: 14 December 2012

Accepted: 28 May 2013

Published: 19 June 2013

Abstract

In this paper, we study the following problem:

{ Δ p u = λ | u | p 2 u + | u | p 2 u in  Ω , u = 0 on  Ω ,

where Ω R N is a smooth bounded domain, 1 < p < N , Δ p u = div ( | u | p 2 u ) is the p-Laplacian, p = p N / ( N p ) is the critical Sobolev exponent and λ > 0 is a parameter. By establishing a new deformation lemma, we show that if N > p 2 + p , then for each λ > 0 , this problem has infinitely many sign-changing solutions, which extends the results obtained in (Cao et al. in J. Funct. Anal. 262: 2861-2902, 2012; Schechter and Zou in Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 197: 337-356, 2010).

1 Introduction

In this paper, we consider the following problem:
{ Δ p u = λ | u | p 2 u + | u | p 2 u in  Ω , u = 0 on  Ω ,
(1.1)

where Ω R N ( N 3 ) is a smooth bounded domain, 1 < p < N , Δ p u = div ( | u | p 2 u ) is the p-Laplacian, p = p N / ( N p ) is the critical Sobolev exponent and λ > 0 is a parameter.

The first existence result of Problem (1.1) with p = 2 was obtained by Brezis and Nirenberg in the celebrated paper [1]. In that paper, the authors proved that Problem (1.1) had a positive solution for N 4 and λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) or N = 3 and λ ( λ 1 / 4 , λ 1 ) , where λ 1 is the first eigenvalue of ( Δ , H 0 1 ( Ω ) ) . After that, many existence results have appeared for (1.1); one can see, for example, [27] and the references therein for case of p = 2 and [811] and the references therein for case of 1 < p < N . In particular, in the case of p = 2 , the authors in [2] proved that the number of solutions of Problem (1.1) is bounded below by the number of eigenvalues of ( Δ , H 0 1 ( Ω ) ) lying in the open interval ( λ , λ + S | Ω | 2 / N ) , where S is the best Sobolev constant and | Ω | is the Lebesgue measure of Ω. In [5], the existence of infinitely many sign-changing solutions of (1.1) with p = 2 has been obtained when N 4 , λ > 0 and Ω is a ball, while it has been shown in [6] that (1.1) with p = 2 has infinitely many sign-changing radial solutions when N 7 , λ > 0 and Ω also is a ball. We remark that the methods used in [5, 6] are strongly dependent on the symmetry of the ball Ω. For a general bounded smooth domain Ω, by the method of invariant sets of the descending flow, the authors in [7] have shown that (1.1) with p = 2 has infinitely many sign-changing solutions when N 7 and λ > 0 , which extends the main result in [4].

The main purpose of this paper is to try to obtain the existence of infinitely many sign-changing solutions of Problem (1.1) for general p ( 1 , N ) . In a very recent work [9], the authors have proved that (1.1) has infinitely many solutions for λ > 0 and N > p 2 + p . However, by using the Picone identity (cf. [12, 13]), we see that every nonzero solution of Problem (1.1) is sign-changing for λ λ 1 , where λ 1 is the first eigenvalue of ( Δ p , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) ) (see Lemma 2.1 for more details). Hence, to achieve our purpose, we mainly consider the situation of λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) .

Our main result in this paper is the following.

Theorem 1.1 Assume that N > p 2 + p and λ > 0 . Then Problem (1.1) has infinitely many sign-changing solutions.

Since p is the critical Sobolev exponent, in order to overcome the lack of compactness of the embedding of W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) in the Lebesgue space L p ( Ω ) , we follow the ideas of [4, 7, 9] to consider the following auxiliary problems:
https://static-content.springer.com/image/art%3A10.1186%2F1687-2770-2013-149/MediaObjects/13661_2012_Article_392_Equb_HTML.gif

where p n < p and p n is increasing to p . It has been shown by [[14], Theorem 1.2] that for every n, Problem ( P n ) has infinitely many sign-changing solutions { u n , k } k N . Hence, to prove Theorem 1.1, we will show that for every k N , { u n , k } converges to some sign-changing solution u k of (1.1) as n , and that { u k } are different. The convergence of { u n , k } can be done with the help of [[9], Theorem 1.2], which we show in Lemma 2.3. To distinguish { u k } , we shall establish a new deformation lemma on special sets in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) ; see Lemma 2.5 for details.

Throughout this paper, we will always respectively denote u and u r by the usual norm in spaces W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) and L r ( Ω ) ( r 1 ). Let C be indiscriminately used to denote various positive constants.

2 Proof of Theorem 1.1

We first consider the case of λ λ 1 . Recall that λ 1 , the first eigenvalue of Δ p in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , given by λ 1 : = inf { Ω | u | p d x , Ω | u | p d x = 1 } , is simple and there exists a positive eigenfunction e 1 W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) corresponding to λ 1 such that Ω | e 1 | p 2 e 1 η d x = λ 1 Ω e 1 p 1 η d x for every η W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) (cf. [15]). Moreover, by [[16], Proposition 2.1], we know that e 1 L ( Ω ) C loc 1 , α ( Ω ) . On the other hand, we have the following proposition which is the so-called Picone identity.

Proposition 2.1 [[13], Lemma A.6]

Let u , v W loc 1 , p ( Ω ) C ( Ω ) be such that u 0 , v > 0 and u v W loc 1 , p ( Ω ) . Then
Ω ( u p v p 1 ) | v | p 2 v d x = Ω ( p ( u v ) p 1 | v | p 2 v u ( p 1 ) ( u v ) p | v | p ) d x .
Moreover,
Ω ( p ( u v ) p 1 | v | p 2 v u ( p 1 ) ( u v ) p | v | p ) d x Ω | u | p d x ,

and the equality holds if and only if u = c v for some constant c > 0 .

Lemma 2.1 Assume that u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) is a nonzero solution of (1.1) for λ λ 1 . Then u is sign-changing.

Proof By a contradiction, we may assume u 0 . By using a standard regularity argument and [[17], Lemmas 3.2 and 3.3], we have u C 1 , α ( Ω ) for some α ( 0 , 1 ) . Thus, it follows from the strong maximum principle (cf. [18]) that u > 0 . Now, for every ε > 0 , by applying the above Picone identity (i.e., Proposition 2.1) to u + ε and e 1 , we see
Ω | e 1 | p d x Ω ( e 1 p ( u + ε ) p 1 ) | u | p 2 u d x .
Noting that u is a solution of (1.1), we have
Ω | e 1 | p d x Ω ( λ u p 1 ( u + ε ) p 1 + u p 1 ( u + ε ) p 1 ) e 1 p d x .
It follows from the Fatou lemma that
Ω | e 1 | p d x lim inf ε 0 Ω ( λ u p 1 ( u + ε ) p 1 + u p 1 ( u + ε ) p 1 ) e 1 p d x Ω ( λ + u p p ) e 1 p d x ,

which is impossible since Ω | e 1 | p d x = λ 1 Ω e 1 p , u > 0 , e 1 > 0 and λ λ 1 . Therefore, we have proved Lemma 2.1. □

Next, we consider the case of λ < λ 1 .

It is clear that the corresponding functional of ( P n ) I n : W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) R , given by
I n ( u ) = 1 p ( u p λ u p p ) 1 p n u p n p n ,
is C 1 Fréchet differentiable. Let X m = span { φ 1 , , φ m } , where { φ i } is a linearly independent sequence of W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) . It is easy to show that there exists R m > 0 such that I n ( u ) 1 for u X m B m , where B m : = { u X m : u R m } (cf. [[14], Lemma 3.9]). We denote
P ( P ) : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : u 0 ( u 0 )  a.e. } , D μ ± : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : dist ( u , ± P ) μ } , D μ : = D μ + D μ , G m : = { h C ( B m , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) ) : h  is odd,  h ( x ) = x  for  x X m B m } .
Recall that the genus of a symmetric set A of W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) is defined by
gen ( A ) : = inf { k 0 : f C ( A , R k { 0 } ) , f  is odd } .

Here, we say that A is symmetric if x A implies x A .

By [[14], Theorem 1.2], we know that, for every n N , I n ( u ) has infinitely many critical points, denoted by { u n , k } k N , in X D μ for μ small enough. Moreover,
I n ( u n , k ) = d n , k : = inf Z Γ k sup u Z I n ( u ) ,
(2.1)

where Γ k : = { h ( B m B ) D μ : h G m  for  m n , B = B B m  open, gen ( B ) m n } .

Lemma 2.2 For every k N , there exists d k > 0 such that u n , k d k for all n N .

Proof Consider the following auxiliary functional:
I ( u ) : = 1 p ( u p u p p ) 1 p u σ σ ,
where σ = ( p + p ) / 2 . Since p n p , we may assume p n > σ for all n N . Then 1 p u σ σ meas ( Ω ) p + 1 p n u p n p n for all n N . This means
I ( u ) = I n ( u ) + ( 1 p n u p n p n 1 p u σ σ ) I n ( u ) meas ( Ω ) p .
(2.2)
Note that I ( u ) is the corresponding functional of the following equation:
{ Δ p u = λ | u | p 2 u + σ p | u | σ 2 u in  Ω , u = 0 on  Ω ,
and the nonlinearity satisfies the assumptions of [[14], Theorem 1.2]. Thus, this equation has a sequence of solutions { v k } W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) ( D μ + D μ ) such that
I ( v k ) = d ¯ k : = inf Z Γ k sup u Z I ( u )

for μ small enough. For every k N , the definitions of d ¯ k and d k , n , together with (2.2), imply d ¯ k + meas ( Ω ) p d k , n for all n N . On the other hand, since for every n, { u n , k } k N is a sequence of solutions for ( P n ) whose energies satisfy (2.1), it follows that d n , k ( 1 p 1 p 1 ) ( 1 λ λ 1 ) u n , k p . We complete the proof by choosing d k = ( ( d ¯ k p + meas ( Ω ) ) p 1 p λ 1 p ( p 1 p ) ( λ 1 λ ) ) 1 / p . □

By Lemma 2.2 and [[9], Theorem 1.2], we know that for each k N , there exists u k W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) such that u n , k u k as n in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) . The next lemma will give more information about u k .

Lemma 2.3 u k is a sign-changing solution of Problem (1.1) for every k N .

Proof We first prove that u k is a solution of Problem (1.1) for every k N . Since u n , k u k as n in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) ,
Ω | u n , k | p 2 u n , k φ d x Ω | u k | p 2 u k φ d x
and
Ω | u n , k | p 2 u n , k φ d x Ω | u k | p 2 u k φ d x
as n for every φ W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) . If we can prove
Ω | u n , k | p n 2 u n , k φ d x Ω | u k | 2 2 u k φ d x
(2.3)
as n for every φ W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , then u k is a solution of (1.1) for u n , k is a solution of ( P n ). Indeed, u n , k u k a.e. in Ω as n since u n , k u k in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) . By the Egoroff theorem, for every δ > 0 , there exists Ω δ such that u n , k u k uniformly in Ω Ω δ and | Ω δ | < δ , where | Ω δ | is the Lebesgue measure of Ω δ . This, together with the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, implies
lim n Ω Ω δ | u n , k | p n 2 u n , k φ d x = Ω Ω δ | u k | p 2 u k φ d x for every  φ W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) .
(2.4)
On the other hand, for every φ W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , we have
Ω δ | | u n , k | p n 2 u n , k | u k | p 2 u k | | φ | d x Ω δ | | u n , k | p n 2 u n , k | u n , k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | | φ | d x + Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u k | p 2 u k | | φ | d x + Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | | φ | d x 2 Ω δ | | u n , k | p 1 + | u n , k | p 1 | | φ | d x + Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u k | p 2 u k | | φ | d x + Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | | φ | d x 2 Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | | φ | d x + Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u k | p 2 u k | | φ | d x + 3 Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | | φ | d x .
For every ε > 0 , by the above inequality and the absolute continuity of the integral, we can take δ small enough such that
2 Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | | φ | d x + Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u k | p 2 u k | | φ | d x < ε / 3 .
For this δ, since u n , k u k in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) ,
3 Ω δ | | u k | p 1 + | u k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | u n , k | p 1 | | φ | d x < ε / 3
for n large enough. By (2.4), for this δ, we have
Ω Ω δ | | u n , k | p n 2 u n , k φ | u k | p 2 u k φ | d x < ε / 3

for n large enough. So (2.3) holds. Moreover, by a similar proof, we can show d k : = lim n d n , k = I n ( u n , k ) = I ( u k ) .

Next, we will show u k is sign-changing for all k N . Since for each n N , u n , k is a sign-changing solution of ( P n ), multiplying ( P n ) by u n , k ± , we obtain u n , k ± p = λ u n , k ± p p + u n , k ± p n p n , where u ± = max { ± u , 0 } . Note that λ < λ 1 , by the Sobolev imbedding theorem, we have 0 < ( 1 λ λ 1 ) C u n , k ± p p n p . It follows that u n , k u k in L p ( Ω ) as n for u n , k u k in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) as n . This gives 0 < ( 1 λ λ 1 ) C u k ± p p p , i.e., u k ± 0 for all k N . □

Let ε > 0 and c R , we denote
K : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : I ( u ) = 0 } , K c : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : I ( u ) = c , I ( u ) = 0 } , K μ : = K ( int ( D μ + ) int ( D μ ) ) , K c , μ : = K c ( int ( D μ + ) int ( D μ ) ) , N c , μ , ε : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : dist ( u , K c ) < ε } .
Thanks to Lemma 2.3, u k K μ k for some μ k > 0 . We claim that { u k } K μ for some μ > 0 . Indeed, if not, then dist ( u k , P ) 0 as k without loss of generality. On the one hand, since u k is a solution of (1.1), I ( u k ) , u k S λ ( u k ) W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) = 0 , where S λ ( u k ) : ( Δ p ) 1 ( λ | u k | p 2 u k + | u k | p 2 u k ) . On the other hand, by [[17], Lemma 3.7], we have
I ( u k ) , u k S λ ( u k ) W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) C u k S λ ( u k ) 2 ( u k + S λ ( u k ) ) p 2
for 1 < p < 2 and
I ( u k ) , u k S λ ( u k ) W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) C u k S λ ( u k ) p
for p 2 . Note that by a similar proof of [[14], Lemma 3.3], we can see that S λ ( D μ ± ) int ( D μ ± ) for μ small enough. Thus, u k S λ ( u k ) > 0 for k large enough. This implies
I ( u k ) , u k S λ ( u k ) W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) C k > 0
for k large enough, which contradicts I ( u k ) , u k S λ ( u k ) W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) , W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) = 0 . For the sake of convenience, we denote K μ , K c , μ , N c , μ , ε by K , K c , N c , ε . Note that for every c R , K c is compact in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) (cf. [[9], Theorem 1.2]). It follows from [[19], Proposition 7.5] that there exists ε > 0 such that
gen ( N c , 2 ε ) = gen ( K c ) < + .
(2.5)

Let J n c : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : I n ( u ) c } and Q n c : = D μ J n c . Let J c : = { u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) : I ( u ) c } . For δ > 0 small enough, we define A n , ε c , δ : = ( Q n c + δ Q n c δ ) N c , ε , then we have the following.

Lemma 2.4 Assume that there exists δ > 0 such that K J c + δ int ( J c δ ) = K c for n large. Then there exists γ > 0 such that I n ( u ) γ for u A n , ε c , δ and large n.

Proof Assume a contradiction. Then, for every n N , there exists { v n , k } A n , ε c , δ such that lim k I n ( v n , k ) = 0 . It is clear that I n satisfies the (PS) condition for every n N . Hence there exists v n W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) such that, up to a subsequence, v n , k v n in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) as k with I n ( v n ) = 0 and I n ( v n ) [ c δ , c + δ ] . This implies
c + δ I n ( v n ) = ( 1 p 1 p n ) ( 1 λ λ 1 ) v n p ( 1 p 1 p 1 ) ( 1 λ λ 1 ) v n p .

Thus, by [[9], Theorem 1.2], up to a subsequence, we see that there exists v 0 W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) such that v n v 0 in W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) as n . Moreover, by using the arguments in the proof of Lemma 2.3, we have I ( v 0 ) = 0 and I ( v 0 ) [ c δ , c + δ ] . On the other hand, for large n, v n ( int ( D μ + ) int ( D μ ) ) N c , ε since v n , k A n , ε c , δ . It follows that v 0 ( int ( D μ + ) int ( D μ ) ) N c , ε . This contradicts the fact that K J n c + δ int ( J n c δ ) = K c . □

Lemma 2.5 Assume that there exists γ > 0 such that I n ( u ) γ for every u A n , ε c , δ and large n. Then there exist δ > 0 and an odd continuous map η n such that η n : A n , 2 ε c , δ Q n c δ Q n c δ and η | Q n c δ = Id for large n.

Proof We first assume 1 < p < 2 . It is clear that there exists L > 0 such that
u + S n , λ ( u ) L for all  u N c , 2 ε ,
(2.6)
where
S n , λ ( u ) , φ : = Ω ( λ | u | p 2 u + | u | p n 2 u ) φ d x for  u W 0 1 , p ( Ω )  and  φ W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) .
Let T n , λ : W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) K W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) be the local Lipschitz continuous operator obtained in [[14], Lemma 2.1] and let ϕ u ( t ) be the solution of the following O.D.E.
{ d ϕ d t = ϕ + T n , λ ( ϕ ) , ϕ = u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) K .

Denote τ ( u ) to be the maximal interval of existence of ϕ u ( t ) .

Claim 1: ϕ u ( t ) cannot enter N c , ε before it enters Q n c δ for small δ, large n and u A n , 2 ε c , δ .

Indeed, if the claim fails, then for every δ > 0 , ϕ u ( t ) will enter N c , ε before it enters Q n c δ . Since u A n , 2 ε c , δ W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) N c , 2 ε , there exist 0 t 1 < t 2 < τ ( u ) such that ϕ u ( t ) N c , 2 ε N c , ε for t ( t 1 , t 2 ] and
dist ( ϕ u ( t 1 ) , K c ) = 2 ε , dist ( ϕ u ( t 2 ) , K c ) = ε .
By [[14], Lemma 2.1], C u S n , λ ( u ) 2 ( u + S n , λ ( u ) ) p 2 I n ( u ) , u T n , λ ( u ) . On the other hand, by the choice of t 1 and t 2 , we know that ϕ u ( t ) A n , ε c , δ for t ( t 1 , t 2 ] . Thanks to [[17], Lemma 3.8], u S n , λ ( u ) ( γ C ) 1 / ( p 1 ) for large n. This, together with (2.6) and [[14], Lemma 2.1], implies
ε ϕ u ( t 2 ) ϕ u ( t 1 ) t 1 t 2 ϕ u ( t ) T n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) d t C t 1 t 2 ϕ u ( t ) S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) d t C t 1 t 2 ϕ u ( t ) S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) 2 ( ϕ u ( t ) + S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) ) p 2 d t C t 1 t 2 I n ( ϕ u ( t ) ) , ϕ u ( t ) T n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) d t = C ( I n ( t 1 ) I n ( t 2 ) ) 4 C δ .

A contradiction with δ < 4 C / ε .

Claim 2: There exists τ 1 ( t ) < τ ( u ) such that ϕ u ( τ 1 ( u ) ) Q n c δ for large n and u A n , 2 ε c , δ .

If the claim is not true, then ϕ u ( t ) Q n c + δ Q n c δ for all t ( 0 , τ ( u ) ) . We first consider the case of τ ( u ) < + . In fact, by Claim 1, ϕ u ( t ) N c , ε , i.e., ϕ u ( t ) A n , ε c , δ for all t ( 0 , τ ( u ) ) . Since I n ( u ) γ > 0 for u A n , ε c , δ and large n, we must have
ϕ u ( t ) as  t τ ( u ) .
(2.7)
On the other hand, by [[14], Lemma 2.1] and [[17], Lemma 5.2], we have
ϕ u ( t ) ϕ u ( 0 ) 0 t ϕ u ( s ) T λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) d s C 0 t ϕ u ( s ) S λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) d s C 0 t ( 1 + ϕ u ( s ) S λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) ) p d s C 0 t ( 1 + ϕ u ( s ) S λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) ) 2 ( ϕ u ( s ) + S λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) ) p 2 d s C 0 t ϕ u ( s ) S λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) 2 ( ϕ u ( s ) + S λ , n ( ϕ u ( s ) ) ) p 2 d s C ( I n ( ϕ u ( 0 ) ) I n ( ϕ u ( t ) ) ) C .
This means ϕ u ( t ) u + C for all t ( 0 , τ ( u ) ) , which contradicts with (2.7). It follows that there must exist τ 1 ( u ) < τ ( u ) such that ϕ u ( τ 1 ( u ) ) Q n c δ for u A n , 2 ε c , δ , large n and τ ( u ) < + . Next, we consider the case of τ ( u ) = + . Since u S n , λ ( u ) ( γ C ) 1 / ( p 1 ) for all u A n , ε c , δ and large n, it follows from [[14], Lemma 2.1] and [[17], Lemma 5.2] that
d I n ( ϕ u ( t ) ) d t = I n ( ϕ u ( t ) ) , ϕ u ( t ) + T n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) C ϕ u ( t ) S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) 2 ( ϕ u ( t ) + S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) ) p 2 C ϕ u ( t ) S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) 2 ( 1 + ϕ u ( t ) S n , λ ( ϕ u ( t ) ) ) p 2 C < 0 .

Thus, there also exists τ 1 ( u ) ( 0 , + ) such that ϕ u ( τ 1 ( u ) ) Q n c δ for u A n , 2 ε c , δ and τ ( u ) = + . Moreover, we must have ϕ u ( t ) Q n c δ for t ( τ 1 ( u ) , τ ( u ) ) since d I n ( ϕ u ( t ) ) d t 0 for all u W 0 1 , p ( Ω ) K .

Let
η n ( u ) = { ϕ u ( τ 1 ( u ) ) , u A n , 2 ε c , u , u Q n c δ .

Then, by the continuity of ϕ u ( t ) , η n ( u ) is continuous. Note that ϕ u ( t ) is odd and τ 1 ( u ) is even, we see that η n ( u ) is odd and it is the desired map. The situation of p 2 can be proved in a similar way. Therefore, we complete the proof of this lemma. □

Proof of Theorem 1.1 We first consider the case λ λ 1 . Thanks to Lemma 2.1 and [[9], Theorem 1.1], (1.1) has infinitely many sign-changing solutions. Next, we consider the case of λ ( 0 , λ 1 ) . Since for every n N , 0 d n , k d n , k + 1 for all k N , d k d k + 1 for all k N . It follows that two cases may occur:

Case 1: There are 1 < k 1 < k 2 < such that d k 1 < d k 2 <  .

In this case, Problem (1.1) has infinitely many sign-changing solutions.

Case 2: There exists k 0 > 0 such that d = d k for all k k 0 .

In this case, if ( K J d + δ J d δ ) K d for every δ > 0 small enough, then Problem (1.1) also has infinitely many sign-changing solutions. Otherwise, there exists δ 0 > 0 such that ( K J d + δ J d δ ) = K d for δ < δ 0 . Thanks to Lemmas 2.4 and 2.5, there exists η n such that η n ( A n , 2 ε d Q n d δ ) Q n d δ for small δ and large n. Fix l N and k k 0 , the definitions of d k and d k + l give that there exists a large n such that d n , k > d δ and d n , k + l < d + δ for small δ ( 0 , 1 ) . By the definition of d n , k + l , there exists Z Γ k + l such that sup Z I n ( u ) < d + δ , where Z = h ( B m B ) D μ , h G m and gen ( B ) m k l . It follows that h ( B m B ) N d , 2 ε A n , 2 ε c , δ Q n c δ . Thus, η n ( h ( B m B ) N d , 2 ε ) Q n d δ . By the choice of δ and B m , we have η n h G m . If gen ( B h 1 ( N d , 2 ε ) ) m k , then we have
d δ < d n , k sup η n h ( B m ( B h 1 ( N d , 2 ε ) ) ) I n ( u ) d δ .
A contradiction. By the properties of gen, we have
m k + 1 gen ( B h 1 ( N d , 2 ε ) ) gen ( B ) + gen ( N d , 2 ε ) m k l + gen ( N d , 2 ε ) .

This implies gen ( N d , 2 ε ) l + 1 . Since l N is arbitrary, we have gen ( N d , 2 ε ) = + , which contradicts with (2.5). □

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The work was supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China (11071180, 11171247) and College Postgraduate Research and Innovation Project of Jiangsu Province (CXZZ110082).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
Department of Mathematics, Soochow University

References

  1. Brezis H, Nirenberg L: Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical Sobolev exponent. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1983, 36: 437–478. 10.1002/cpa.3160360405MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Cerami G, Fortunato D, Struwe M: Bifurcation and multiplicity results for nonlinear elliptic problems involving critical Sobolev exponents. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, Anal. Non Linéaire 1984, 1: 341–350.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. Clapp M, Weth T: Multiple solutions for the Brezis-Nirenberg problem. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2005, 10: 463–480.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Devillanova G, Solimini S: Concentration estimates and multiple solutions to elliptic problems at critical growth. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2002, 7: 1257–1280.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Fortunato D, Jannelli E: Infinitely many solutions for some nonlinear elliptic problems in symmetrical domains. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. A 1987, 105: 205–213. 10.1017/S0308210500022046MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Solimini S: A note on compactness-type properties with respect to Lorenz norms of bounded subsets of a Sobolev spaces. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, Anal. Non Linéaire 1995, 12: 319–337.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Schechter M, Zou W: On the Brézis-Nirenberg problem. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 2010, 197: 337–356. 10.1007/s00205-009-0288-8MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Alves C, Ding Y: Multiplicity of positive solutions to a p -Laplacian equation involving critical nonlinearity. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2003, 279: 508–521. 10.1016/S0022-247X(03)00026-XMathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Cao D, Peng S, Yan S: Infinitely many solutions for p -Laplacian equation involving critical Sobolev growth. J. Funct. Anal. 2012, 262: 2861–2902. 10.1016/j.jfa.2012.01.006MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Cingolani S, Vannella G: Multiple positive solutions for a critical quasilinear equation via Morse theory. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, Anal. Non Linéaire 2009, 26: 397–413. 10.1016/j.anihpc.2007.09.003MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. Degiovanni M, Lancelotti S: Linking solutions for p -Laplace equations with nonlinearity at critical growth. J. Funct. Anal. 2009, 256: 3643–3659. 10.1016/j.jfa.2009.01.016MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Allegretto W, Huang Y: A Picone’s identity for the p -Laplacian and applications. Nonlinear Anal. 1998, 32: 819–830. 10.1016/S0362-546X(97)00530-0MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Iturriaga L, Massa E, Sanchez J, Ubilla P: Positive solutions of the p -Laplacian involving a superlinear nonlinearity with zeros. J. Differ. Equ. 2010, 248: 309–327. 10.1016/j.jde.2009.08.008MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Bartsch T, Liu Z, Weth T: Nodal solutions of p -Laplacian equation. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. 2005, 91: 129–152. 10.1112/S0024611504015187MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Lindqvist P:On the equation div ( | u | p 2 u ) + λ | u | p 2 u = 0 . Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1990, 109: 157–164.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Cuesta M: Eigenvalue problem for the p -Laplacian with indefinite weights. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2001, 2001: 1–9.MathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. Bartsch T, Liu Z: On a superlinear elliptic p -Laplacian equation. J. Differ. Equ. 2004, 198: 149–175. 10.1016/j.jde.2003.08.001MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. Tolksdorf P: Regularity for a more general class of quasilinear elliptic equations. J. Differ. Equ. 1984, 51: 126–150. 10.1016/0022-0396(84)90105-0MathSciNetView ArticleMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. Rabinowitz P CBMS Reg. Conf. Ser. Math. 65. In Minimax Methods in Critical Point Theory with Applications to Differential Equations. Am. Math. Soc., Providence; 1986.View ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Wu and Huang; licensee Springer. 2013

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd. This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/2.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.