Skip to content

Advertisement

Open Access

Multiplicity of solutions of perturbed Schrödinger equation with electromagnetic fields and critical nonlinearity in R N

Boundary Value Problems20142014:240

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-014-0240-1

Received: 11 June 2014

Accepted: 3 November 2014

Published: 27 November 2014

Abstract

In this paper, we deal with the existence and multiplicity of solutions for perturbed Schrödinger equation with electromagnetic fields and critical nonlinearity in R N : ε 2 Δ A u ( x ) + V ( x ) u ( x ) = | u | 2 2 u + h ( x , | u | 2 ) u for all x R N , where A u ( x ) : = ( + i A ( x ) ) u , V ( x ) is a nonnegative potential. By using Lions’ second concentration compactness principle and concentration compactness principle at infinity to prove that the ( PS ) c condition holds locally and by variational method, we show that this equation has at least one solution provided that ε < E , for any m N , it has m pairs of solutions if ε < E m , where and E m are sufficiently small positive numbers.

MSC: 35J60, 35B33.

Keywords

perturbed Schrödinger equationcritical nonlinearitymagnetic fieldsvariational methods

1 Introduction

In this paper, we are concerned with the existence of nontrivial solutions to the following perturbed Schrödinger equation with electromagnetic fields and critical nonlinearity in R N :
ε 2 Δ A u ( x ) + V ( x ) u ( x ) = | u | 2 2 u + h ( x , | u | 2 ) u for  x R N ,
(1.1)

where A u ( x ) : = ( + i A ( x ) ) u . Here, i is the imaginary unit, 2 : = 2 N / ( N 2 ) denotes the Sobolev critical exponent and N 3 , V ( x ) and h ( x , u ) are functions satisfying some conditions.

This paper is motivated by some works concerning the nonlinear Schrödinger equation
i ħ ψ t = ħ 2 2 m ( + i A ( x ) ) 2 ψ + W ( x ) ψ K ( x ) | ψ | 2 2 ψ h ( x , | ψ | 2 ) ψ for  x R N ,
(1.2)

where ħ is Plank constant, A ( x ) = ( A 1 ( x ) , A 2 ( x ) , , A N ( x ) ) : R N R N is a real vector (magnetic) potential with magnetic field B = curl A and W ( x ) : R N R N is a scalar electric potential.

In physics, we are interested in standing wave solutions, i.e., solutions of type (1.2) when ħ is sufficiently small, when E is a real number and u ( x ) is a complex-value function which satisfies
( + i A ( x ) ) 2 u ( x ) + λ V ( x ) u ( x ) = λ K ( x ) | u | 2 2 u + λ h ( x , | u | 2 ) u , x R N ,
(1.3)

where λ 1 = ħ 2 2 m and V ( x ) = W ( x ) E . The transition from quantum mechanics to classical mechanics can be formally performed by letting ħ 0 . Thus the existence of solutions for ħ small, semi-classical solutions, has important physical interest.

It is well known that the linear Schrödinger equation is a basic tool of quantum mechanics, and it provides a description of the dynamics of a particle in a non-relativistic setting. The nonlinear Schrödinger equation arises in different physical theories, e.g., the description of Bose-Einstein condensates and nonlinear optics, see [1] and the references cited there. Both the linear and the nonlinear Schrödinger equations have been widely considered in the literature. The main purpose of this paper is to study the existence and multiplicity of solutions of perturbed Schrödinger equations with electromagnetic fields and critical nonlinearity (1.1).

Problem (1.3) with A ( x ) 0 has an extensive literature. Different approaches have been taken to attack this problem under various hypotheses on the potential and the nonlinearity. See, for example, [2]–[13] and the references therein. Observe that in all these papers the nonlinearities are assumed to be subcritical. In [11], using a Lyapunov-Schmidt reduction, Floer and Weinstein established the existence of single and multiple spike solutions. Their method and results were later generalized by Oh [12] to the higher-dimensional case. Kang and Wei [14] established the existence of positive solutions with any prescribed number of spikes, clustering around a given local maximum point of the potential function. In accordance with the Sobolev critical nonlinearities, there have been many papers devoted to studying the existence of solutions to elliptic boundary-valued problems on bounded domains after the pioneering work by Brezis and Nirenberg [15]. Ding and Lin [9] first studied the existence of semi-classical solutions to the problem on the whole space with critical nonlinearities and established the existence of positive solutions as well as of those that change sign exactly once. They also obtained multiplicity of solutions when the nonlinearity is odd.

When A ( x ) 0 , there are also many works dealing with the magnetic case. The first one seems to be [16] where the existence of standing waves was obtained for ħ > 0 fixed and for special classes of magnetic fields. If A and W are periodic functions, the existence of various types of solutions for fixed ħ > 0 was proved in [17] by applying minimax arguments. Concerning semi-classical bound states, it was proved in [18] that for ħ > 0 small and admits a least energy solution which concentrates near the global minimum of W. A multiplicity result for solutions was obtained in [4] by using a topological argument. There it was also proved that the magnetic potential A only contributes to the phase factor of the solitary solutions for ħ > 0 sufficiently small. In [19] single-bump bound states were obtained by using perturbation methods. These concentrate near a non-degenerate critical point of W as ħ 0 . For the critical growth case, Wang [20] studied the electromagnetic Schrödinger equations
( + i A ( x ) ) 2 u ( x ) + λ V ( x ) u ( x ) = K ( x ) | u | 2 2 u for  x R N .
(1.4)

By using the linking theorem twice to the corresponding functional, they established the existence results. Chabrowski and Szulkin [21] considered problem (1.4) under assumption that V ( x ) changes sign; by using a min-max type argument based on a topological linking, they obtained a solution in the Sobolev space which was defined in the paper. Assume K ( x ) 1 , Han [22] studied problem (1.4) and established the existence of nontrivial solutions in the critical case by means of variational method. For more results, we refer the reader to [20], [23]–[27] and the references therein.

In the present paper, we consider the existence of solutions for problem (1.1) under the condition inf x R N V ( x ) = 0 and critical nonlinearity. It seems that Byeon and Wang [1] were the first to study energy level and the asymptotic behavior of positive solutions to Schrödinger equations under the condition inf x R N V ( x ) = 0 . In [25], Cao and Tang extended the results of Byeon and Wang [1]. However, to the best knowledge, it seems that there are few works on the existence of solutions to be the problems on R N involving critical nonlinearities with electromagnetic fields. We mainly follow the idea of [9], [10]. Let us point out that although the idea was used before for other problems, the adaptation of the procedure to our problem is not trivial at all. Because of the appearance of electromagnetic potential A ( x ) , we must consider our problem for complex-valued functions, and so we need more delicate estimates. Furthermore, we use Lions’ second concentration compactness principle and concentration compactness principle at infinity to prove that the ( PS ) c condition holds, which is different from methods used in [9], [10].

2 Main results

Let λ = ε 2 . Equation (1.1) reads then as
( + i A ( x ) ) 2 u ( x ) + λ V ( x ) u ( x ) = λ | u | 2 2 u + λ h ( x , | u | 2 ) u for  x R N .
(2.1)
We make the following assumptions on A ( x ) , V ( x ) and h throughout this paper:
  1. (V)

    V ( x ) C ( R N , R ) ; V ( x 0 ) = min x R N V = 0 , and there is b > 0 such that the set V b = { x R N : V ( x ) < b } has finite Lebesgue measure;

     
  2. (A)

    A j ( x ) C ( R N , R ) ( j = 1 , 2 , , N ) and A ( x 0 ) = 0 ;

     
  3. (H)

    (h1): h C ( R N × [ 0 , + ) , R ) and h ( x , t ) = o ( 1 ) uniformly in x as t 0 ;

    (h2): there are C 0 > 0 and q ( 2 , 2 ) such that | h ( x , t ) | C 0 ( 1 + t q 2 2 ) ;

    (h3): there are a 0 > 0 , p > 2 and μ > 2 such that H ( x , t ) a 0 t p 2 and μ 2 H ( x , t ) h ( x , t ) t for all ( x , t ) , where H ( x , t ) = 0 t h ( x , s ) d s .

     
Set
A u = ( + i A ( x ) ) u
and
H A 1 ( R N ) = { u L 2 ( R N ) : A u L 2 ( R N ) } .
Hence H A 1 ( R N ) is the Hilbert space under the scalar product
u , v = Re R N ( ( u + i A ( x ) u ) ( v + i A ( x ) v ) ¯ + u v ¯ ) d x ,
the norm induced by the product ( , ) is
u H A 1 ( R N ) = ( R N ( | A u | 2 + | u | 2 ) d x ) 1 2 = ( R N ( | u + i A ( x ) u | 2 + | u | 2 ) d x ) 1 2 = ( R N ( | u | 2 + ( | i A ( x ) | 2 + 1 ) | u | 2 ) d x 2 Re R N i A ( x ) u ¯ u d x ) 1 2 .
Let
E : = { u H A 1 ( R N ) : R N λ V ( x ) | u | 2 d x < } ,
which is a Hilbert space equipped with the norm
u λ 2 = R N ( | A u | 2 + λ V ( x ) | u | 2 ) d x .

Remark 2.1

We have the following diamagnetic inequality (see [16] for example):
| A u ( x ) | | | u ( x ) | | for  u H A 1 ( R N ) .
Indeed, since A is real-valued,
| | u | ( x ) | = | Re ( u u ¯ | u | ) | = | Re ( u + i A u ) u ¯ | u | | | u + i A u |

(the bar denotes complex conjugation) this fact means that if u H A 1 ( R N ) , then | u | H 1 ( R N ) , and therefore u L p ( R N ) for any p [ 2 , 2 ] .

Remark 2.2

The spaces H A 1 ( R N ) and the spaces H 1 ( R N ) are not comparable; more precisely, in general H A 1 ( R N ) H 1 ( R N ) and H 1 ( R N ) H A 1 ( R N ) . However, it is proved by Arioli and Szulkin [17] that if K is a bounded domain with regular boundary, then H A 1 ( R N ) and H 1 ( R N ) are equivalent, where H A 1 ( K ) = { u L 2 ( K ) : u L 2 ( K ) } with the norm u H A 1 ( K ) = ( K ( | A u | 2 + | u | 2 ) d x ) 1 2 .

Let
E λ : = { u H A 1 ( R N ) : R N V ( x ) | u | 2 d x < }
with the norms
u λ 2 = R N ( | A u | 2 + λ V ( x ) | u | 2 ) d x .
Thus, it is easy to see that the norm E is equivalent to the one λ for each λ > 0 . From Remark 2.2, for each s [ 2 , 2 ] , there is c s > 0 (independent of λ) such that if λ > 1 , then
( R N | u | s ) 1 s c s ( R N | | u | | 2 ) 1 2 c s ( R N | A u | 2 ) 1 2 c s u λ .
(2.2)
Consider the functional
J λ ( u ) : = 1 2 R N ( | A u | 2 + λ V ( x ) | u | 2 ) d x λ 2 R N | u | 2 d x λ 2 R N H ( x , | u | 2 ) d x = 1 2 u λ 2 λ 2 R N | u | 2 d x λ 2 R N H ( x , | u | 2 ) d x .

Under the assumptions [28], J λ C 1 ( E λ , R ) and its critical points are solutions of (2.1).

Theorem 2.1

Let (V), (A) and (H) be satisfied. Thus:
  1. (1)

    For any σ > 0 , there is Λ σ > 0 such that problem (2.1) has at least one solution u λ for each λ Λ σ satisfying 0 < J λ ( u λ ) σ λ 1 N 2 .

     
  2. (2)

    Assume additionally that h ( x , t ) is odd in t; for any m N and σ > 0 , there is Λ m σ > 0 such that problem (2.1) has at least m pairs of solutions u λ with 0 < J λ ( u λ ) σ λ 1 N 2 whenever λ Λ m σ .

     

Remark 2.3

We should point out that Theorem 2.3 is different from the previous results of [9], [10] in three main directions:
  1. (i)

    A ( x ) 0 . There exist many functions h ( x , t ) satisfying condition (H), for example, h ( x , t ) = P ( x ) | t | p 2 t , where P ( x ) is a positive and bounded function.

     
  2. (ii)

    Other potentials V ( x ) guaranteeing compactness of the embedding from E λ L p ( R N ) can also be used in this paper. For example, (1)  V ( x ) C ( R N , R ) and lim inf | x | V ( x ) > V ( x 0 ) = min x R N V = 0 ; (2)  V ( x ) C ( R N , R ) with periodic function (or bounded function) and V ( x 0 ) = min x R N V ( x ) = 0 .

     
  3. (iii)

    We use Lions’ second concentration compactness principle and concentration compactness principle at infinity to prove that the ( PS ) condition holds, which is different from methods used in [9], [10].

     

3 ( PS ) c Condition

Recall that we say that a sequence ( u n ) is a ( PS ) sequence at level c ( ( PS ) c -sequence, for short) if Φ λ ( u n ) c and Φ λ ( u n ) 0 . Φ λ is said to satisfy the ( PS ) c condition if any ( PS ) c -sequence contains a convergent subsequence.

Lemma 3.1

Let (V), (A) and (H) be satisfied. Then there exists constant M ( c ) which is independent of λ 0 such that c 0 and
lim sup n u n λ 2 M ( c ) .

Proof

Let { u n } be a sequence in E such that
c + o ( 1 ) = J ( u n ) = 1 2 u n λ 2 λ 2 R N | u n | 2 d x λ 2 R N H ( x , | u n | 2 ) d x ,
(3.1)
o ( 1 ) u n = J ( u n ) , v o ( 1 ) u n = Re { R N ( A u n A v ¯ + λ V ( x ) u n v ¯ ) d x o ( 1 ) u n = λ R N | u n | 2 2 u n v ¯ d x λ R N h ( x , | u n | 2 ) u n v ¯ d x } .
(3.2)
By (3.1) and (3.2) we have
J λ ( u n ) 1 μ J λ ( u n ) u n = ( 1 2 1 μ ) R N ( | A u n | 2 + λ V ( x ) | u n | 2 ) d x + ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ R N | u n | 2 d x + λ R N ( 1 μ h ( x , | u n | 2 ) | u n | 2 1 2 H ( x , | u n | 2 ) ) d x .
(3.3)
On the other hand, condition (h3) implies that
1 μ h ( x , | u n | 2 ) | u n | 2 1 2 H ( x , | u n | 2 ) 0 .
Thus, it follows from (3.3) that
( 1 2 1 μ ) u n λ 2 c + o ( 1 ) + ε n u n λ ,
hence for n large enough, we have
u n λ 2 2 μ μ 2 c .

Thus u n λ is bounded as n . Taking the limit in (3.3) shows that c 0 . This completes the proof of Lemma 3.1. □

The main result in this section is the following compactness result.

Lemma 3.2

Suppose that (V), (A) and (H) hold. For any λ 1 , J λ satisfies the ( PS ) c condition, for all c ( 0 , α 0 λ 1 N 2 ) , where α 0 = ( 1 μ 1 2 ) S N 2 ; that is, any ( PS ) c -sequence ( u n ) E λ has a strongly convergent subsequence in E λ .

Proof

Let { u n } be a ( PS ) c sequence, by Lemma 3.1, { u n } is bounded in H A 1 ( R N ) . Hence, by diamagnetic inequality, { | u n | } is bounded in H A 1 ( R N ) . Then, for some subsequence, there is u H A 1 ( R N ) such that u n u in H A 1 ( R N ) . We claim that
R N | u n | 2 d x R N | u | 2 d x .
(3.4)
In order to prove this claim, we suppose that
| | u n | | 2 | | u | | 2 + σ and | u n | 2 | u | 2 + ν ( weak  sense of measures ) .
Using the concentration compactness principle due to Lions (cf.[29], Lemma 1.2]), we obtain a countable index set I, sequences { x i } R N , { σ i } , { ν i } ( 0 , ) such that
ν = i I δ x i ν i , σ i I δ x i σ i and σ i S ν i 2 / 2
(3.5)

for all i I , where δ x i are Dirac measures at x i and σ i , ν i are constants.

Now, let x i be a singular point of the measures σ and ν. We define a function ϕ ( x ) C 0 ( R N , [ 0 , 1 ] ) such that ϕ ( x ) = 1 in B ( x i , ε ) , ϕ ( x ) = 0 in R N B ( x i , 2 ε ) and | ϕ | 2 / ε in  R N . Since { u n ϕ } is bounded in H A 1 ( R N ) and ϕ takes values in , a direct calculation shows that
J λ ( u n ) , u n ϕ 0
and
A ( u n ϕ ) ¯ = i u ¯ n ϕ + ϕ A u n ¯ .
Therefore,
R N | A u n | 2 ϕ d x + R N λ V ( x ) | u n | 2 ϕ d x = Re ( R N i u ¯ n A u n ϕ d x ) + λ R N h ( x , | u n | 2 ) | u n | 2 ϕ d x + λ R N | u n | 2 ϕ d x + o n ( 1 ) .
(3.6)
By Hölder’s inequality, it is not difficult to prove that
lim sup n | Re ( R N i u ¯ n A u n ϕ d x ) | = 0 .
In this way, it follows that
R N | A u n | 2 ϕ d x λ R N h ( x , | u n | 2 ) | u n | 2 ϕ d x + λ R N | u n | 2 ϕ d x + o n ( 1 ) .
Consequently, using the fact that u n u in L loc s ( R N ) , 1 s < 2 and ϕ has compact support, we can let n in the last inequality to obtain
R N ϕ d σ λ R N ϕ d ν .
Letting ε 0 , we obtain σ i λ ν i . Combining this with (3.5), we obtain ν i λ 1 S ν i 2 2 . This result implies that
( I ) ν i = 0 or ( II ) ν i ( λ 1 S ) N 2 .
To obtain the possible concentration of mass at infinity, we will use the concentration compactness principle at infinity [30]. Similarly, we define a cut-off function ϕ R C 0 ( R N , [ 0 , 1 ] ) such that ϕ R ( x ) = 0 on | x | < R and ϕ R ( x ) = 1 on | x | > R + 1 . Note that { u n ϕ R } is bounded in H A 1 ( R N ) and ϕ takes values in . A direct calculation shows that J λ ( u n ) , u n ϕ R 0 , this fact implies that
R N | A u n | 2 ϕ R d x + R N λ V ( x ) | u n | 2 ϕ R d x = Re ( R N i u ¯ n A u n ϕ R d x ) + λ R N h ( x , | u n | 2 ) | u n | 2 ϕ R d x + λ R N | u n | 2 ϕ R d x + o n ( 1 ) .
(3.7)
It is easy to prove that
lim R lim n Re ( R N i u ¯ n A u n ϕ R d x ) = 0 .
Letting R , we obtain σ λ ν . Thus ν λ 1 S ν 2 2 . This result implies that
( III ) ν = 0 or ( IV ) ν ( λ 1 S ) N 2 .
Next, we claim that (II) and (IV) cannot occur. If case (IV) holds for some i I , then by condition (H) we have
c = lim n ( J λ ( u n ) 1 μ J λ ( u n ) , u n ) ( 1 2 1 μ ) R N ( | A u n | 2 + λ V ( x ) | u n | 2 ) d x + ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ R N | u n | 2 d x + λ R N ( 1 μ h ( x , | u n | 2 ) | u n | 2 1 2 H ( x , | u n | 2 ) ) d x ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ R N | u n | 2 d x ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ R N | u n | 2 ϕ R d x = ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ ν α 0 λ 1 N 2 as  R ,
where α 0 = ( 1 μ 1 2 ) S N 2 . This is impossible. Consequently, ν i = 0 for all i I . Similarly, if case (II) holds for some i I , then by condition (H) we have
c = lim n ( J λ ( u n ) 1 μ J λ ( u n ) , u n ) ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ R N | u n | 2 d x ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ R N | u n | 2 ϕ d x = ( 1 μ 1 2 ) λ ν α 0 λ 1 N 2 as  ε 0 ,

which leads to a contradiction. Thus, we must have that (II) cannot occur for each i. Thus limit (3.4) holds.

Thus, from the Brezis-Lieb lemma [31], we have
o ( 1 ) u n λ = J λ ( u n ) , u n = u n λ 2 λ R N | u n | 2 d x λ R N H ( x , | u n | 2 ) d x = u n u λ 2 + u λ 2 λ R N | u | 2 d x λ R N H ( x , | u | 2 ) d x = u n u λ 2 + o ( 1 ) u λ ,

here we use J λ ( u ) = 0 . Thus we prove that { u n } strongly converges to u in H A 1 ( R N ) . This completes the proof of Lemma 3.2. □

4 Proof of Theorem 2.1

In the following, we always consider λ 1 . By assumptions (V), (A) and (H), one can see that J λ ( u ) has mountain pass geometry.

Lemma 4.1

Assume that (V), (A) and (H) hold. There exist α λ , ρ λ > 0 such that J λ ( u ) > 0 if u B ρ λ { 0 } and J λ ( u ) α λ if u B ρ λ , where B ρ λ = { u E : u λ ρ λ } .

Proof

By condition (H), for δ ( 4 λ c s ) 1 , there is C δ > 0 such that
1 2 R N | u | 2 d x + 1 2 R N H ( x , | u | 2 ) d x δ | u | 2 2 + C δ | u | 2 2 .
So, from (A) and (V) it follows that
J λ ( u ) 1 2 u λ 2 λ δ | u | 2 2 λ C δ | u | 2 2 1 4 u λ 2 λ C δ | u | 2 2 .

By (2.2) and 2 > 2 , we know that the conclusion of Lemma 4.1 holds. This completes the proof of Lemma 4.1. □

Lemma 4.2

Under the assumption of Lemma  4.1, for any finite-dimensional subspace F E λ ,
J λ ( u ) as  u F , u .

Proof

Using conditions (A), (V) and (H), we can get
J λ ( u ) 1 2 u λ 2 λ a 0 | u | p p

for all u E since all norms in a finite-dimensional space are equivalent and p > 2 . This completes the proof of Lemma 4.2. □

Since J λ ( u ) does not satisfy the ( PS ) c condition for all c > 0 , in the following we will find a special finite-dimensional subspace by which we construct sufficiently small minimax levels.

The assumption (V) implies that there is x 0 R N such that V ( x 0 ) = min x R N V ( x ) = 0 . Without loss of generality we assume from now on that x 0 = 0 .

Observe that by (h3)
λ 2 R N K ( x ) | u | 2 d x + λ 2 R N H ( x , | u | 2 ) d x a 0 λ R N | u | p d x .
Define the function I λ C 1 ( E λ , R ) by
I λ ( u ) : = 1 2 R N ( | A u | 2 + λ V ( x ) | u | 2 ) d x a 0 λ R N | u | p d x .

Then J λ ( u ) I λ ( u ) for all u E , and it suffices to construct small minimax levels for I λ .

Note that
inf { R N | ϕ | 2 d x : ϕ C 0 ( R N ) , | ϕ | 2 = 1 } = 0 .
For any δ > 0 , one can choose ϕ δ C 0 ( R N ) with | ϕ δ | 2 = 1 and supp ϕ δ B r δ ( 0 ) so that | ϕ δ | 2 2 < δ . Set
f λ = ϕ δ ( λ 1 2 x ) ,
(4.1)
then
supp f λ B λ 1 2 r δ ( 0 ) .
Thus, for t 0 , we have
I λ ( t f λ ) = t 2 2 R N ( | A f λ | 2 + λ V ( x ) | f λ | 2 ) d x t p a 0 λ R N | f λ | p d x = λ 1 N 2 ( t 2 2 R N ( | A ϕ δ | 2 + V ( λ 1 2 x ) | ϕ δ | 2 ) d x t p a 0 R N | ϕ δ | p d x ) = λ 1 N 2 Ψ λ ( t ϕ δ ) ,
where Ψ λ C 1 ( E λ , R ) defined by
Ψ λ ( u ) : = 1 2 R N ( | A u | 2 + V ( λ 1 2 x ) | u | 2 ) d x a 0 R N | u | p d x .
Obviously,
max t 0 Ψ λ ( t ϕ δ ) = p 2 2 p ( p a 0 ) 2 p 2 [ R N ( | A ϕ δ | 2 + V ( λ 1 2 x ) | ϕ δ | 2 ) d x ] p p 2 .
On the one hand, since V ( 0 ) = 0 and note that supp ϕ δ B r δ ( 0 ) , there is Λ δ 1 > 0 such that
V ( λ 1 2 x ) δ | ϕ δ | 2 2 for all  | x | r δ  and  λ Λ δ 1 .
On the other hand, by Hölder’s inequality, we have
R N | A ϕ δ | 2 d x R N ( 2 | ϕ δ | 2 + 2 | A ( λ 1 2 x ) ϕ δ | 2 ) d x .
(4.2)
Since A ( x ) is continuous on R N and A ( 0 ) = 0 , there exists Λ δ 2 > 0 such that
| A ( λ 1 2 x ) | δ | ϕ δ | 2 2 for all  | x | r δ  and  λ Λ δ 2 .
(4.3)
Without loss of generality, we take Λ δ : = { Λ δ 1 , Λ δ 2 } . So, by (4.2) and (4.3) we can get
max t 0 Ψ λ ( t ϕ δ ) p 2 2 p ( p a 0 ) 2 p 2 ( 5 δ ) p p 2 .
(4.4)
Therefore, for all λ Λ δ ,
max t 0 J λ ( t ϕ δ ) p 2 2 p ( p a 0 ) 2 p 2 ( 5 δ ) p p 2 λ 1 N 2 .
(4.5)

Thus we have the following lemma.

Lemma 4.3

Under the assumption of Lemma  4.1, for any σ > 0 , there exists Λ σ > 0 such that for each λ Λ σ , there is f ˆ λ E λ with f ˆ λ > ρ λ , J λ ( f ˆ λ ) 0 and
max t [ 0 , 1 ] J λ ( t f ˆ λ ) σ λ 1 N 2 .
(4.6)

Proof

Choose δ > 0 so small that
p 2 2 p ( p a 0 ) 2 p 2 ( 5 δ ) p p 2 σ ,

and let f λ E be the function defined by (4.1). Taking Λ σ = Λ δ . Let t ˆ λ > 0 be such that t ˆ λ f λ λ > ρ λ and J λ ( t f λ ) 0 for all t t ˆ λ . By (4.3), let f ˆ λ = t ˆ λ f λ ; we know that the conclusion of Lemma 4.3 holds. □

For any m N , one can choose m functions ϕ δ i C 0 ( R N ) such that supp ϕ δ i supp ϕ δ k = , i k , | ϕ δ i | p = 1 and | ϕ δ i | 2 2 < δ . Let r δ m > 0 be such that supp ϕ δ i B r δ i ( 0 ) for i = 1 , 2 , , m . Set
f λ i ( x ) = ϕ δ i ( λ 1 2 x ) for  j = 1 , 2 , , m
and
H λ δ m = span { f λ 1 , f λ 2 , , f λ m } .
Observe that for each u = i = 1 m c i f λ i H λ δ m ,
R N | A u | 2 d x = i = 1 m | c i | 2 R N | A f λ i | 2 d x , R N V ( x ) | u | 2 d x = i = 1 m | c i | 2 R N V ( x ) | f λ i | 2 d x , 1 2 R N | u | 2 d x = 1 2 i = 1 m | c i | 2 R N | u | 2 d x
and
1 2 R N H ( x , | u | 2 ) d x = 1 2 i = 1 m R N H ( x , | c i f λ i | 2 ) d x .
Thus
J λ ( u ) = i = 1 m J λ ( c i f λ i ) ,
and as before
J λ ( c i f λ i ) λ 1 N 2 Ψ ( | c i | f λ i ) .
Set
β δ : = max { | ϕ δ i | 2 2 : j = 1 , 2 , , m }
and choose Λ m δ > 0 so that
V ( λ 1 N 2 x ) δ β δ for all  | x | r δ m  and  λ Λ m δ .
As before, we can obtain the following:
max u H λ δ m J λ ( u ) m ( p 2 ) 2 p ( p a 0 ) 2 p 2 ( 5 δ ) p p 2 λ 1 N 2
(4.7)

for all λ Λ m δ .

Using this estimate we have the following.

Lemma 4.4

Under the assumption of Lemma  4.1, for any m N and σ > 0 , there exists Λ m σ > 0 such that for each λ Λ m σ , there exists an m -dimensional subspace F λ m satisfying
max u F λ δ J λ ( u ) σ λ 1 N 2 .

Proof

Choose δ > 0 so small that
m ( p 2 ) 2 p ( p a 0 ) 2 p 2 ( 5 δ ) p p 2 σ

and take F λ δ = H λ δ m . By (4.5), we know that the conclusion of Lemma 4.4 holds. □

We now establish the existence and multiplicity results.

Proof of Theorem 2.1

Using Lemma 4.3, we choose Λ σ > 0 and define for λ Λ σ the minimax value
c λ : = inf γ Γ λ max t [ 0 , 1 ] J λ ( t f ˆ λ ) ,
where
Γ λ : = { γ C ( [ 0 , 1 ] , E ) : γ ( 0 ) = 0  and  γ ( 1 ) = f ˆ λ } .

By Lemma 4.1, we have α λ c λ σ λ 1 N 2 . In virtue of Lemma 3.2, we know that J λ satisfies the ( PS ) c λ condition, there is u λ E such that J λ ( u λ ) = 0 and J λ ( u λ ) = c λ , hence the existence is proved.

Denote the set of all symmetric (in the sense that Z = Z ) and closed subsets of E by Σ for each Z Σ . Let gen ( Z ) be the Krasnoselski genus and
i ( Z ) : = min h Γ m gen ( h ( Z ) B ρ λ ) ,
where Γ m is the set of all odd homeomorphisms h C ( E , E ) and ρ λ is the number from Lemma 4.1. Then i is a version of Benci’s pseudo-index [32]. Let
c λ i : = inf i ( Z ) i sup u Z J λ ( u ) , 1 i m .
Since J λ ( u ) α λ for all u B ρ λ + and since i ( F λ m ) = dim F λ m = m ,
α λ c λ 1 c λ m sup u H λ m J λ ( u ) σ λ 1 N 2 .

It follows from Lemma 3.2 that J λ satisfies the ( PS ) c λ condition at all levels c i . By the usual critical point theory, all c i are critical levels and J λ has at least m pairs of nontrivial critical points. □

Declarations

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to appreciate the referees for their precious comments and suggestions about the original manuscript. The authors are supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11301038), Research Foundation during the 12th Five-Year Plan Period of Department of Education of Jilin Province, China (Grant (2013) No. 252), Youth Foundation for Science and Technology Department of Jilin Province (20130522100JH), the open project program of Key Laboratory of Symbolic Computation and Knowledge Engineering of Ministry of Education, Jilin University (Grant No. 93K172013K03).

Authors’ Affiliations

(1)
College of Mathematics, Changchun Normal University, Changchun, P.R. China
(2)
Key Laboratory of Symbolic Computation and Knowledge Engineering of Ministry of Education, Jilin University, Changchun, P.R. China
(3)
Scientific Research Department, Changchun Normal University, Changchun, P.R. China

References

  1. Byeon J, Wang ZQ: Standing waves with a critical frequency for nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 2002, 165: 295-316. 10.1007/s00205-002-0225-6MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  2. Ambrosetti A, Badiale M, Cingolani S: Semiclassical states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 1997, 140: 285-300. 10.1007/s002050050067MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  3. Ambrosetti A, Malchiodi A, Secchi S: Multiplicity results for some nonlinear Schrödinger equations with potentials. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 2001, 159: 253-271. 10.1007/s002050100152MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  4. Cingolani S: Semiclassical stationary states of nonlinear Schrödinger equation with external magnetic field. J. Differ. Equ. 2003, 188: 52-79. 10.1016/S0022-0396(02)00058-XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  5. Cingolani S, Lazzo M: Multiple positive solutions to nonlinear Schrödinger equations with competing potential functions. J. Differ. Equ. 2000, 160: 118-138. 10.1006/jdeq.1999.3662MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  6. Cingolani S, Nolasco M: Multi-peaks periodic semiclassical states for a class of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. 1998, 128: 1249-1260. 10.1017/S030821050002730XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  7. Del Pino M, Felmer P: Semi-classical states for nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré 1998, 15: 127-149. 10.1016/S0294-1449(97)89296-7MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  8. Del Pino M, Felmer P: Multi-peak bound states for nonlinear Schrödinger equations. J. Funct. Anal. 1997, 149: 245-265. 10.1006/jfan.1996.3085MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  9. Ding YH, Lin FH: Solutions of perturbed Schrödinger equations with critical nonlinearity. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 2007, 30: 231-249. 10.1007/s00526-007-0091-zMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  10. Ding YH, Wei JC: Semiclassical states for nonlinear Schrödinger equations with sign-changing potentials. J. Funct. Anal. 2007, 251: 546-572. 10.1016/j.jfa.2007.07.005MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  11. Floer A, Weinstein A: Nonspreading wave packets for the cubic Schrödinger equation with a bounded potential. J. Funct. Anal. 1986, 69: 397-408. 10.1016/0022-1236(86)90096-0MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  12. Oh Y-G: On positive multi-lump bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations under multiple well potential. Commun. Math. Phys. 1990, 131: 223-253. 10.1007/BF02161413View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  13. Wang X: On concentration of positive bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Commun. Math. Phys. 1993, 153: 229-244. 10.1007/BF02096642View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  14. Kang X, Wei J: On interacting bumps of semi-classical states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2000, 5: 899-928.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. Brezis H, Nirenberg L: Positive solutions of nonlinear elliptic equations involving critical exponents. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1983, 34: 437-477. 10.1002/cpa.3160360405MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  16. Esteban M, Lions PL: Stationary solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with an external magnetic field. Partial Differential Equations and the Calculus of Variations 1989, 369-408. Essays in Honor of Ennio De GiorgiGoogle Scholar
  17. Arioli G, Szulkin A: A semilinear Schrödinger equation in the presence of a magnetic field. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 2003, 170: 277-295. 10.1007/s00205-003-0274-5MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  18. Kurata K: Existence and semi-classical limit of the least energy solution to a nonlinear Schrödinger equation with electromagnetic fields. Nonlinear Anal. 2000, 41: 763-778. 10.1016/S0362-546X(98)00308-3MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  19. Cingolani S, Secchi S: Semiclassical limit for nonlinear Schrödinger equation with electromagnetic fields. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 2002, 275: 108-130. 10.1016/S0022-247X(02)00278-0MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  20. Wang F: On an electromagnetic Schrödinger equation with critical growth. Nonlinear Anal. 2008, 69: 4088-4098. 10.1016/j.na.2007.10.039MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  21. Chabrowski J, Szulkin A: On the Schrödinger equation involving a critical Sobolev exponent and magnetic field. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 2005, 25: 3-21.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. Han P: Solutions for singular critical growth Schrödinger equation with magnetic field. Port. Math. 2006, 63: 37-45.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. Barile S, Cingolani S, Secchi S: Single-peaks for a magnetic Schrödinger equation with critical growth. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2010, 11: 1135-1166.MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  24. Cao D, Noussair ES: Multi-bump standing waves with a critical frequency for nonlinear Schrödinger equations. J. Differ. Equ. 2004, 203: 292-312. 10.1016/j.jde.2004.05.003MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  25. Cao D, Tang Z: Existence and uniqueness of multi-bump bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with electromagnetic fields. J. Differ. Equ. 2006, 222: 381-424. 10.1016/j.jde.2005.06.027MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  26. Tang Z: On the least energy solutions of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with electromagnetic fields. Comput. Math. Appl. 2007, 54: 627-637. 10.1016/j.camwa.2006.12.031MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  27. Tang Z: Multi-bump bound states of nonlinear Schrödinger equations with electromagnetic fields and critical frequency. J. Differ. Equ. 2008, 245: 2723-2748. 10.1016/j.jde.2008.07.035View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  28. Willem M: Minimax Theorems. Birkhäuser Boston, Boston; 1996.View ArticleGoogle Scholar
  29. Lions PL: The concentration compactness principle in the calculus of variations. The locally compact case. Part I. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, Anal. Non Linéaire 1984, 1: 109-145.Google Scholar
  30. Chabrowski J: Concentration-compactness principle at infinity and semilinear elliptic equations involving critical and subcritical Sobolev exponents. Calc. Var. 1995, 3: 493-512. 10.1007/BF01187898MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  31. Brezis H, Lieb E: A relation between pointwise convergence of functions and convergence of functionals. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 1983, 88: 486-490. 10.2307/2044999MathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar
  32. Benci V: On critical point theory of indefinite functionals in the presence of symmetries. Trans. Am. Math. Soc. 1982, 274: 533-572. 10.1090/S0002-9947-1982-0675067-XMathSciNetView ArticleGoogle Scholar

Copyright

© Liang and Song; licensee Springer. 2014

This article is published under license to BioMed Central Ltd.Open Access This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly credited.

Advertisement