- Research
- Open access
- Published:
On Glassey’s conjecture for semilinear wave equations in Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetime
Boundary Value Problems volume 2021, Article number: 94 (2021)
Abstract
Consider nonlinear wave equations in the spatially flat Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker (FLRW) spacetimes. We show blow-up in finite time of solutions and upper bounds of the lifespan of blow-up solutions to give the FLRW spacetime version of Glassey’s conjecture for the time derivative nonlinearity. We also show blow-up results for the space derivative nonlinear term.
1 Introduction
The spatially flat FLRW metric is given by
where the speed of light is equal to 1, \(d\sigma ^{2}\) is the line element of an n-dimensional Euclidean space, and \(a(t)\) is the scale factor, which describes expansion or contraction of the spatial metric. As in our earlier work [1–3], we treat the scale factor as
where c is a positive constant, and w is the proportionality constant in the range \(-1< w\le 1\). The constant w appears in the equation of state relating the pressure to the density for the perfect fluid. See [1].
In the preceding papers [1–3], we have shown upper bounds of the lifespan for the equation \(\Box _{g} u=-|u|^{p}\). In this paper we consider the equation \(\Box _{g} u=-|u_{t}|^{p}\) as well as \(\Box _{g} u=-|\nabla _{x} u|^{p}\), where \(\nabla _{x}u = (\partial u/\partial x^{1}, \ldots,\partial u/ \partial x^{n}), (x^{1},\ldots, x^{n})\in \mathbf{R}^{n}\).
For the flat FLRW metric with (1.1), the semilinear wave equation \(\Box _{g} u =|g|^{-1/2}\times \partial _{\alpha }(|g|^{1/2}g^{\alpha \beta }\partial _{\beta })u= -|u_{t}|^{p}\) or \(-|\nabla _{x} u|^{p}\) with \(p>1\) becomes
where \(\Delta =\partial _{1}^{2}+\cdots \partial _{n}^{2}, \partial _{j}= \partial /\partial x^{j}, j=1,\ldots,n\). Our aim of this paper is to show that blow-up in a finite time occurs for the equation above as well as upper bounds of the lifespan of the blow-up solutions.
We first consider the following Cauchy problem in order to compare with the related known results including the case of the Minkowski spacetime:
with the initial data given at \(t=1\),
where α and μ are nonnegative constants and \(\varepsilon >0\) is a small parameter.
Let \(T_{\varepsilon }\) be the lifespan of solutions of (1.3) and (1.4), say, \(T_{\varepsilon }\) is the supremum of T such that (1.3) and (1.4) have a solution for \(x\in \mathbf{R}^{n}\) and \(1\le t< T\).
Let \(\alpha =\mu =0\) and \(p_{G}(n)=1+2/(n-1)\). The so-called Glassey’s conjecture [4] asserts that if \(p>p_{G}(n)\), then there exist global solutions in time for small initial data; on the other hand, if \(1< p\le p_{G}(n)\) with \(n\ge 2\) or if \(p>1\) for \(n=1\), then blow-up in finite time occurs. This conjecture is proved to be almost true. Actually, blow-up results in low dimensions (\(n=2,3\)) or in high dimensions (\(n \ge 4\)) imposing radial symmetry were proved in, e.g., [5–10], and Zhou [11] finally gave a simple proof of the blow-up result for \(1< p\le p_{G}(n)\) and \(n\ge 2\) as well as for \(p > 1\) and \(n=1\). Global existence of solutions in low dimensions (\(n=2,3\)) has been proved in, e.g., [12–14]. For high dimensions (\(n \ge 3\)), it was proved by [15] that there exist global solutions in the radial case for \(p>p_{G}(n)\). They [15] also proved the lifespan of local solutions in time for \(1< p\le p_{G}(n)\).
For the case \(\alpha =0\) and \(\mu \ge 0\), it has been recently shown by Hamouda and Hamza [16] that blow-up in finite time occurs and the lifespan of the blow-up solutions satisfies
These results improve the ones in [17].
The present paper treats the case \(\alpha \ge 0\) and \(\mu \ge 0\). We first show blow-up in a finite time and upper estimates of the lifespan of solutions of (1.3) and (1.4) in the case \(0\le \alpha <1\). If \(\alpha =0\), our upper bounds of the lifespan coincide with the results above by [16]. Similar results are independently shown by [18] where energy solutions are treated. In our results, however, another exponent appears as a blow-up condition in some case. This is different from the results by [18]. We emphasize that the generalized exponent of \(p_{G}(n+\mu )\) cannot always be the critical exponent for the global existence of solutions. Our proofs are based on the test function method with the modified Bessel function of the second kind and on a generalized Kato’s lemma. We next treat the case \(\alpha \ge 1\).
Moreover, we show blow-up results for the problem
Unlike equation (1.3), our blow-up conditions are related to exponents that originate from the Strauss and Fujita ones and to another exponent like in the case of the time derivative nonlinearity. Hence, upper bounds of the lifespan have to do with those exponents.
We then apply our results for (1.3) and (1.7) to the original equation (1.2). Our aim is especially to clarify the difference with the case of the Minkowski spacetime and also how the scale factor affects the lifespan of the solution. Since global existence of solutions has not been obtained yet, critical exponent used in this paper means a candidate of the true critical exponent.
The paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we state our first main result for (1.3) and (1.4) in the case \(0\le \alpha <1\). Theorem 2.1 presents that it is possible in some case to improve the estimate of the lifespan affected by Glassey’s exponent. To prove the theorem, we use the test function method following the way in [19], and also generalized Kato’s lemma for a first-order differential inequality, which is applied to the wave equation with the scale-invariant damping. This is proved by John’s iteration argument [20]. We then show our second result which is for the case \(\alpha \ge 1\). In Sect. 3 we treat (1.7) and divide results into several cases \(0\le \alpha <1\), wavelike and heatlike cases, critical and subcritical cases, and \(\alpha \ge 1\). Finally in Sect. 4, we apply the theorems in Sects. 2 and 3 to the original equation (1.2). We discuss the effect of the scale factor to the solutions.
2 Time derivative nonlinearity
2.1 Case \(0\le \alpha <1\)
We first consider problem (1.3) with (1.4) for \(0\le \alpha <1\). Our first result is the following theorem.
Theorem 2.1
Let \(n\ge 2, 0\le \alpha <1, \mu \ge 0\), and
or
Assume that \(u_{0}\in C^{2}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) and \(u_{1}\in C^{1}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) are nontrivial and satisfy \(u_{1}(x)\ge u_{0}(x)\ge 0\), \(\operatorname{supp}u_{0}, \operatorname{supp}u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with \(R>0\). Suppose that problem (1.3) with (1.4) has a classical solution \(u\in C^{2}([1,T)\times \mathbf{R}^{n})\). Then \(T<\infty \), and there exists a constant \(\varepsilon _{0}>0\) depending on \(p,\alpha,\mu,R,u_{0},u_{1}\) such that \(T_{\varepsilon }\) has to satisfy
for \(0<\varepsilon \le \varepsilon _{0}\), where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε.
Remark
(1) If \(\alpha =0\), then (2.1) and (2.2) are the same with the upper bounds (1.5) and (1.6).
(2) By the theorem, the exponent \(p_{G}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) cannot always be the critical exponent for the global existence of solutions. We discuss more details at the end of this subsection.
(3) If \(p< p_{0}(n,\alpha,\mu )\), then the above assumption \(u_{1}(x)\ge u_{0}(x)\ge 0\) can be replaced just by \(u_{1}(x)\ge 0\).
Proof
Multiplying (1.3) by a test function \(\phi (t,x)\) and \(t^{\mu }\), and integrating over \(\mathbf{R}^{n}\), we have
Integrating over \([1,t]\), we obtain
We remark that the \(C^{2}\)-solution u of (1.3) and (1.4) has the property of finite speed of propagation and satisfies
provided that \(\operatorname{supp} u_{0}\), \(\operatorname{supp}u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\). See [1] for its proof.
We now define a smooth test function by
where \(K_{\nu }(t)\) is the modified Bessel function of the second kind, which is given by
It is well known that the Bessel function \(K_{\nu }\) satisfies the following properties (see, e.g., [21]):
We can verify by (2.8)–(2.10) that there holds
The following estimate is shown in [1]:
See (3.23) in [1]. We also see by [1] that
under assumption on the initial data. Moreover, we have
where we have used (2.10) and \(\nu =(\mu -1)/(2(1-\alpha ))\) for the last equality.
Set
From (2.5), proceeding as in [1], we have
Since \(F_{1}(1)/{K_{\nu } (\frac{1}{1-\alpha } )^{2}}>0\) by assumption, we obtain
We next go back to (2.4), which becomes
Using (2.15) and \(\Delta \phi =\phi \) yields
On the other hand, by (2.5), (2.11), (2.13), and (2.15),
We see that there exists a constant \(M\ge 1\) such that
for \(t\ge 1\) by (2.9). Combining (2.17) and (2.18) multiplied by \(M^{-1}t^{-\alpha }\), we have
We note that
for all \(t\ge 1\) by (2.16). Using (2.19), we obtain
We now set
Then
hence (2.20) becomes
Multiplying the inequality above by \(\exp [(M^{2}+1)t^{1-\alpha }/(M(1-\alpha ))]\) and integrating over \([1,t]\), we obtain
Note that
by (2.15), (2.19), and the assumption on the initial data. It holds from (2.21) that \(G(t)>0\) for \(t\ge 1\). Thus, we see that
We now define
By Hölder’s inequality, (2.12), and (2.22), we have
We also have
by (2.13). By integrating (2.23) multiplied by \(H(t)^{-p}\) over \([1,t]\) and using (2.24), we therefore obtain the desired results (2.1) and (2.2).
It remains to prove (2.3). We use the following lemma, which is generalized Kato’s lemma.
Lemma 2.2
Let \(p>1, a\ge 0, b\ge 0, q\ge 0, r\ge 0, \mu \ge 0, c>0\), and
Let \(T\ge T_{1}>T_{0}\ge 1\). Assume that \(F\in C^{1}([T_{0},T))\) satisfies the following three conditions:
where \(A_{0}, A_{1}\), and R are positive constants. Then T has to satisfy
where C is a constant depending on \(R,A_{1},\mu,p,q\), and c.
Proof
Multiplying assumption (ii) by \(t^{\mu }\), we have
Integrating the above inequality over \([T_{0},t]\) yields
By assumption (iii), we see that \(F(t)>0\) for \(t\ge T_{0}\). Hence, by assumption (i), we have
Based on the fact above, we define the sequences \(a_{j}, b_{j}, c_{j}, D_{j}\) for \(j = 0, 1, 2, \ldots \) by
Solving (2.26) and (2.27), we obtain
and thus
Then
and
where \(B=\{c+(\mu +1)/(p-1)\}^{-1}A_{1}C_{R,q}\). For sufficiently large j, we have
where
Thus, since \(F(t)\ge D_{j}t^{-a_{j}}(\ln t)^{-b_{j}}(t-T_{1})^{c_{j}}\) holds for \(t\ge T_{1}\), we obtain
for \(t\ge T_{1}\). Since
by assumption, choosing t large enough, we can find a positive δ such that
It then follows from (2.29) that \(F(t) \longrightarrow \infty \) as \(j \to \infty \) for sufficiently large t. We therefore see that the lifespan T of \(F(t)\) has to satisfy
where \(M=(p-1)(c-a)-q+1>0\), and C is a constant depending on \(A_{1},R,\mu,p,q\), and c. This completes the proof of the proposition. □
We now prove (2.3) by applying Lemma 2.2. Set
Integrating equation (1.3) and using Hölder’s inequality, we have, by (2.6),
Multiplying (2.32) by \(t^{\mu }\) and integrating imply
We hence see that
by assumption. From (2.33) and (2.34), we have
Therefore, we obtain
Finally, by (2.32) and (2.35), applying Lemma 2.2 with \(q=n(1-\alpha )(p-1)\), \(a=\mu (p+1)+n(1-\alpha )(p-1)\), \(b=r=0, c=\mu +1\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired result (2.3) since
This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1. □
At the end of this subsection, we discuss the blow-up conditions and the estimates of the lifespan in the two subcritical cases in Theorem 2.1. We note that if \(p_{G}'(n,\alpha,\mu )=p_{0}(n,\alpha,\mu )\), then
Figure 1 and Fig. 2 show the regions of blow-up conditions in the cases \(n=3, \alpha =0.2\) and \(n=3, \alpha =0.9\), respectively.
For \(\mu > \max \{0,\mu _{n,\alpha }\}\), the exponent \(p_{G}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) is bigger than \(p_{0}(n,\alpha,\mu )\). See Region (G) in Figs. 1 and 2. On the other hand, if \((n+1)/(n+2)\le \alpha <1\), then for \(0\le \mu \le \mu _{n,\alpha }\), the condition \(1< p< p_{0}(n,\alpha,\mu )\) includes the one \(1< p< p_{G}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\). This means that if α is close to 1, then a better region \(1< p< p_{0}(n,\alpha,\mu )\) than \(1< p< p_{G}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) appears for \(0\le \mu <1\), as shown by Region (O) in Fig. 2. Hence, the exponent \(p_{G}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) cannot always be the critical exponent for the global existence of solutions.
If we compare the two upper bounds (2.1) and (2.3), then in Region (G) in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, (2.1) is better than (2.3), while in Region (O) in Fig. 2, this relation becomes reverse.
2.2 Case \(\alpha \ge 1\)
We next consider the same problem for the case \(\alpha \ge 1\).
Theorem 2.3
Let \(n\ge 2, \alpha \ge 1, \mu \ge 0\), and \(1< p<1+1/\mu \). Assume that \(u_{0}\in C^{2}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) and \(u_{1}\in C^{1}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) are nontrivial and satisfy \(u_{1}(x)\ge 0\), \(\operatorname{supp}u_{0}, \operatorname{supp}u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with \(R>0\). Suppose that problem (1.3) with (1.4) has a classical solution \(u\in C^{2}([1,T)\times \mathbf{R}^{n})\). Then \(T<\infty \), and there exists a constant \(\varepsilon _{0}>0\) depending on \(p,\alpha,\mu,R,u_{0},u_{1}\) such that \(T_{\varepsilon }\) has to satisfy
for \(0<\varepsilon \le \varepsilon _{0}\), where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε.
Proof
We first remark that the \(C^{2}\)-solution u of (1.3) and (1.4) has the property of finite speed of propagation and satisfies
where
provided that \(\operatorname{supp} u_{0}\), \(\operatorname{supp} u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\). See [3] for its proof.
Define \(F(t)\) by (2.30), and let \(\alpha =1\). From (2.31) and (2.38),
Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem 2.1 for the case \(0\le \alpha <1\), we have, by (2.34),
Therefore, we obtain
Finally, by (2.39) and (2.40), applying Lemma 2.2 with \(q=0\), \(a=\mu (p+1)\), \(b=r=n(p-1), c=\mu +1\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired result (2.36) since
On the other hand, if \(\alpha >1\), then from (2.31) and (2.38)
Proceeding as before, by (2.34), we have
Therefore, we obtain
Finally, by (2.42) and (2.43), applying Lemma 2.2 with \(q=0\), \(a=\mu (p+1)\), \(b=r=0, c=\mu +1\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired result (2.37) since (2.41). This completes the proof of Theorem 2.3. □
3 Space derivative nonlinearity
In this section we consider problem (1.7). Let \(u_{0}\) and \(u_{1}\) be nonnegative and satisfy \(\operatorname{supp} u_{0}\), \(\operatorname{supp} u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with \(R>0\).
We prepare several basic inequalities which will be used repeatedly. Let
Then integrating equation (1.7) over \(\mathbf{R}^{n}\) and using Poincaré’s and Hölder’s inequalities imply that
On the other hand, multiplying (3.1) by \(t^{\mu }\) and integrating imply
Since \(F'(1)>0\), by assumption,
Integrating again, we have from \(F(1)>0\) by assumption
3.1 Case \(0\le \alpha <1\)
We call wavelike and heatlike cases if a blow-up condition is concerned with exponents similar to the Strauss and Fujita ones, respectively.
3.1.1 Wavelike and subcritical case
Let \(p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) be the positive root of the equationFootnote 1
and let
Theorem 3.1
Let \(n\ge 2, 0\le \alpha <1, \mu \ge 0\), and \(1< p< p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) or \(1< p< p_{0}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\). Assume that \(u_{0}\in C^{2}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) and \(u_{1}\in C^{1}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) are nonnegative, nontrivial, and \(\operatorname{supp}u_{0}, \operatorname{supp}u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with \(R>0\). Suppose that problem (1.7) has a classical solution \(u\in C^{2}([1,T)\times \mathbf{R}^{n})\). Then \(T<\infty \), and there exists a constant \(\varepsilon _{0}>0\) depending on \(p,\alpha,\mu,R,u_{0},u_{1}\) such that \(T_{\varepsilon }\) has to satisfy
for \(0<\varepsilon \le \varepsilon _{0}\), where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε.
Remark
(1) The upper bound of the lifespan in (3.8) is better than that in (3.7) if \(1< p< 2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )+\mu +\alpha -2\}\) since
Note that in this case, if \(p< p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\), then \(\{1-\mu -(n+1)(1-\alpha )\}(p-1)+1+\alpha >0\).
(2) If \(p< 2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )+\mu +\alpha -2\}\), then the condition \(\mu <1\) is necessary since \(p>1\) and \(n\ge 2\). Hence, the theorem in this case is not applied to the original equation (1.2) for \(|\nabla _{x} u|^{p}\) in the FLRW spacetime since \(\mu =2/(1+w)\ge 1\). This is covered later in Sect. 4 in more detail.
Proof
We have proved in [1], by choosing large \(T_{1}>0\),
for \(t\ge T_{1}\). By (2.6) and (3.2), we obtain
Using (3.5) implies
Therefore,
We also have
by (2.6) and (3.3). The following lemma is proved in [1].
Lemma 3.2
Let \(p>1, a\ge 0, b>0, q>0, \mu \ge 0\), and
Let \(T\ge T_{1}>T_{0}\ge 1\). Assume that \(F\in C^{2}([T_{0},T))\) satisfies the following three conditions:
where \(A_{0}, A_{1}\), and R are positive constants. Then T has to satisfy
where C is a constant depending on \(R,A_{1},\mu,p,q,a\), and b.
From (3.10) and (3.11), applying Lemma 3.2 with \(q=(p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )\), \(a=\mu (1+ p/2)+(1-\alpha )(n-1)p/2+p(1-\alpha )\), \(b=\mu +\alpha p/2+(1-\alpha )(n-1)+2\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired result since
It remains to prove (3.8). From (3.4), we have \(F'(t)\ge t^{-\mu }F'(1)\), hence integrating and using \(F(1) > 0\) by assumption imply
with some \(T'>1\). By (2.6) and (3.3),
From (3.5),
From (3.11) and (3.13), applying Lemma 3.2 with \(q=(p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )\), \(a=(p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )+p\mu \), \(b=p+2\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired result. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.1. □
In Theorem 3.1 the coefficient \(n+1+(\mu -\alpha )/(1-\alpha )\) of \(p^{2}\) in (3.6) is positive since it is assumed that the positive root \(p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) exists. If \(\mu <1\) and \(3/4\le \alpha <1\), then \(n+1+(\mu -\alpha )/(1-\alpha )\le 0\) can happen; hence, \(\gamma '(n,p,\alpha,\mu )>0\) for all \(p>1\) and the following corollary holds.
Corollary 3.3
Let \(n\ge 2, 0\le \alpha <1, \mu \ge 0, n+1+(\mu -\alpha )/(1- \alpha )\le 0\), and \(p>1\). Under the assumptions on the initial data of Theorem 3.1, there holds (3.7).
Remark
One cannot apply Corollary 3.3 to the original equation (1.2) for \(|\nabla _{x} u|^{p}\) in the FLRW spacetime since \(n+1+(\mu -\alpha )/(1-\alpha )>0\). This is covered later in Sect. 4 in more detail.
3.1.2 Wavelike and critical case
We next consider the critical case \(p=p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\).
Theorem 3.4
Let \(0\le \alpha <1\) for \(n\ge 3\) and \(2/7<\alpha <1\) for \(n=2\), and let \(\mu \ge 0\) and
Assume that \(u_{0}\in C^{2}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) and \(u_{1}\in C^{1}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) are nonnegative, nontrivial, and \(\operatorname{supp} u_{0}, \operatorname{supp}u_{1} \subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with some \(0< R\le 1/(2(1-\alpha ))\). Suppose that problem (1.7) has a classical solution \(u\in C^{2}([1,T)\times \mathbf{R}^{n})\). Then \(T<\infty \), and there exists a constant \(\varepsilon _{0}>0\) depending on \(p,\alpha,\mu,R,u_{0},u_{1}\) such that \(T_{\varepsilon }\) has to satisfy
for \(0<\varepsilon \le \varepsilon _{0}\), where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε.
Remark
(1) In case \(n=2\), we note that
(2) When \(n=2\), the condition \(\alpha >2/7\) is necessary for the existence of p satisfying (3.14).
(3) If \(p_{F}'(n,\alpha )=p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\), then
(4) The case \(p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )< p\le p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\) is considered in the next sub-subsection.
Proof
Let
where \(K_{\nu }(t)\) is the modified Bessel function given by (2.7). We now define a test function \(\phi _{q}(t,x)\) by
Let q satisfy
and
It is proved in [1] that the function \(\phi _{q}(t,x)\) satisfies the following properties.
Lemma 3.5
Let \(\phi _{q}(t,x)\) be defined by (3.16). Assume that q satisfies (3.17) and (3.18).
-
(i)
Then there exists \(T_{0}>0\) such that \(\phi _{q}\) satisfies
$$\begin{aligned} \phi _{q}(t,x) \sim \textstyle\begin{cases} t^{(-\mu +\alpha )/2}(t^{1-\alpha }+ \vert x \vert )^{- (q+ \frac{\mu +\alpha }{2} )/(1-\alpha )}\\ \quad (-\frac{\mu +\alpha }{2}< q< \frac{(n-1)(1-\alpha )-(\mu +\alpha )}{2} ), \\ t^{(-\mu +\alpha )/2} (t^{1-\alpha }+ \vert x \vert )^{-(n-1)/2} (t^{1-\alpha }-(1- \alpha ) \vert x \vert )^{(n-1)/2- (q+\frac{\mu +\alpha }{2} )/(1- \alpha )}\\ \quad (q>\frac{(n-1)(1-\alpha )-(\mu +\alpha )}{2} ), \end{cases}\displaystyle \end{aligned}$$for \(t\ge T_{0}\) and \(|x|\le (t^{1-\alpha }-1)/(1-\alpha )+R\) with \(0< R\le 1/(2(1-\alpha ))\).
-
(ii)
Moreover, if \(q+1-\alpha >\{(n-1)(1-\alpha )-(\mu +\alpha )\}/2\), then there exists \(T_{1}>0\) such that \(\phi _{q}\) satisfies
$$\begin{aligned} \partial _{t}\phi _{q}(t,x) \sim t^{-(\mu +\alpha )/2} \bigl(t^{1-\alpha }+ \vert x \vert \bigr)^{-(n-1)/2} \bigl(t^{1-\alpha }-(1-\alpha ) \vert x \vert \bigr)^{(n-1)/2- (q+ \frac{\mu +\alpha }{2} )/(1-\alpha )-1} \end{aligned}$$for \(t\ge T_{1}\) and \(|x|\le (t^{1-\alpha }-1)/(1-\alpha )+R\) with \(0< R\le 1/(2(1-\alpha ))\).
We now prove the following key lemma to prove the theorem.
Lemma 3.6
Assume that \(u,u_{0}\), and \(u_{1}\) satisfy the conditions in Theorem 3.4. Let \(n\ge 2, \nu =(\mu -1)/(2(1-\alpha ))\), and
and let p satisfy (3.14). Define
Then \(G(t)\) satisfies
with some \(T_{2}\) sufficiently large, where C is a constant independent of ε.
Proof
We first verify that q satisfies the required conditions (3.17) and (3.18) to use Lemma 3.5. We claim that there holds
The second inequality is clearly true. To show the first inequality or (3.17), we remark that (3.14) implies after some calculation \(p>2/(n-1)\), which is equivalent to \(q>-(\mu +\alpha )/2\).
We can also show that q satisfies (3.18) with \(\nu =(\mu -1)/(2(1-\alpha ))\), i.e., \(q>-\min \{\mu,1\}\). In fact, (i) the assumption \(p>p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\) is equivalent to \(q>-1\) since
(ii) the critical case \(p=p_{c}'\) satisfies \(\gamma '(n,p,\alpha,\mu )=0\) in (3.6), and this equality yields
which is equivalent to \(q>-\mu \) by (3.20).
In addition, q satisfies the condition of Lemma 3.5(ii) since
Let us now show the inequality of the lemma. Multiplying the equation in (1.7) by a test function \(\phi (t,x)\) and \(t^{\mu }\), and integrating over \(\mathbf{R}^{n}\), we have
As shown in [1], the test function \(\phi _{q}\) given in (3.16) satisfies
Applying (3.22) with \(\phi =\phi _{q}\) and (3.23), we have
Moreover, integrating over \([1,t]\) three times, we obtain
where
We note that \(\partial _{t}\phi _{q}(1,x)\le 0\), which is shown in [1]. Hence, by the positivity assumption on \(u_{0}\) and \(u_{1}\), it holds that \(C_{\mathrm{data}}(t)\ge 0\) for \(t\ge 1\). Thus,
Since
the right-hand side of (3.24) becomes
We now estimate the left-hand side of (3.24). By Poincaré’s and Hölder’s inequalities, the first integral is estimated by
We remark that q satisfies (3.19). Applying Lemma 3.5 to the last integral above, we have
where we have used \(A(\tau )+R=(\tau ^{1-\alpha }-1)/(1-\alpha )+R\), with \(R\le 1/(2(1-\alpha ))\). Note that if \(p=p_{c}'\), then q satisfies by (3.20)
Thus, we obtain
The second integral on the left-hand side of (3.24) can be estimated as before by
Using Lemma 3.5,
Since q satisfies \(n(1-\alpha )-q+1-2p'+p'(1-\alpha )=0\), by (3.26), we obtain
We finally estimate the third integral on the left-hand side of (3.24),
Set \(T_{2}=\max \{T_{0},T_{1}\}\) to apply Lemma 3.5(i) and (ii). Proceeding in a similar way as before, we have
We remark here that q satisfies (3.21). By Lemma 3.5,
Hence,
where we note that since \((n-1)(1-\alpha )/2=q+(\mu +\alpha )/2+(1-\alpha )/p\) and (3.26),
Thus, we obtain
Combining (3.24), (3.25), and (3.27)–(3.29) all together, we obtain the desired inequality. This completes the proof of Lemma 3.6. □
Then the rest of the proof is the same as that of Theorem 2.3 in [1]. □
3.1.3 Heatlike case
Theorem 3.7
Let \(n\ge 2, 0\le \alpha <1, \mu \ge 0\), and \(1< p\le p_{F}'(n,\alpha )=1+(1+\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )\}\). Assume that \(u_{0}\in C^{2}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) and \(u_{1}\in C^{1}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) are nonnegative, nontrivial, and \(\operatorname{supp}u_{0}, \operatorname{supp}u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with \(R>0\). Suppose that problem (1.7) has a classical solution \(u\in C^{2}([1,T)\times \mathbf{R}^{n})\). Then \(T<\infty \), and there exists a constant \(\varepsilon _{0}>0\) depending on \(p,\alpha,\mu,R,u_{0},u_{1}\) such that \(T_{\varepsilon }\) has to satisfy
for \(0<\varepsilon \le \varepsilon _{0}\), where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε.
Remark
In the critical case \(p=p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\), if \(0\le \mu \le 1\), then the estimate above is better than that for the case \(\mu >1\). However, (3.7) and (3.8) are applicable for \(p=p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\) and \(0\le \mu \le 1\). These estimates are much better than \(T_{\varepsilon }\le \exp (C\varepsilon ^{-p(p-1)/(p+1)} )\) above. See Figs. 3, 4, and 5.
Proof
Proceeding as in [2], we have
Let \(p< p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\). From (3.5),
From (3.11) and (3.34), applying Lemma 3.2 with \(q=(p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )\), \(a=\mu +(p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )\), \(b=\mu +2\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired results since
Let next \(p=p'_{F}(n,\alpha )\). Since \((p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )=2\), from (3.33),
Hence, by (3.5),
The following lemma is proved in [2].
Lemma 3.8
Let \(p>1, b>0, \mu \ge 0\), and \(T\ge T_{1}>T_{0}\ge 1\). Assume that \(F\in C^{2}([T_{0},T))\) satisfies the following three conditions:
where \(A_{0}, A_{1}\), and R are positive constants. Then T has to satisfy
where C is a constant depending on \(R,A_{1},\mu,p\), and b.
By (3.11) with \((p+n(p-1))(1-\alpha )=2\) and (3.35), using Lemma 3.8 with \(b=1\) and \(A_{0} = C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired results. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.7. □
At the end of this subsection, we discuss the blow-up conditions and the estimates of the lifespan in the subcritical cases in Theorems 3.1 and 3.7.
We recall that \(p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) is the positive root of the equation \(\gamma '(n,p,\alpha,\mu )=0\) given in (3.6). Figures 3, 4, and 5 show the regions of blow-up conditions in the cases \(\alpha =0, \alpha =0.3\), and \(\alpha =0.7\), respectively, each for \(n=3\). We recall that if \(p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )=p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\), then
Note that if \(p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )=p_{0}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\), then
We easily see that \(\mu ^{\ast }>1\) and \(\mu _{0}<1\). We also note that \(2p(p-1)/\{(1-\alpha )\gamma '(n,p,\alpha,\mu )\}=(p-1)/[2-\{n(p-1)+p \}(1-\alpha )]\) yields \(p= 2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )-\mu +\alpha \}\), and that \(2p(p-1)/\{(1-\alpha )\gamma '(n,p,\alpha,\mu )\}=(p-1)/[\{1-\mu -(n+1)(1- \alpha )\}(p-1)+1+\alpha ]\) yields \(p= 2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )+\mu +\alpha -2\}\).
Among the three upper bounds (3.7), (3.8), and (3.30), if \(1< p< \min \{p_{0}'(n,\alpha,\mu ), 2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1- \alpha )+\mu +\alpha -2\}\}\), then (3.8) is the best. This is Region (O) shown in Figs. 4 and 5.
If \(\max \{2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )+\mu +\alpha -2\}, 2(1- \alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )-\mu +\alpha \}, 1\}< p< p_{c}'(n,\alpha, \mu )\), then (3.7) is the best (Region (C) in Figs. 3, 4, and 5).
On the other hand, if \(1< p\le 2(1-\alpha )/\{(n+1)(1-\alpha )-\mu +\alpha \}\) and \(p< p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\), then (3.30) is the best (Region (F) in Figs. 3, 4, and 5).
After some calculation, we see the following facts. If \((n-3)/(n-2)\le \alpha <1\) for \(n\ge 3\) and \(0\le \alpha <1\) for \(n=2\), Region (O) appears in \(0\le \mu <1\). Moreover, if \(\alpha \ge \max \{0, (n^{2}-2n-1-\sqrt{n^{2}-2n-1})/(n^{2}-2n-2) \}\), then \(p_{0}'(n,\alpha,\mu )>p_{c}'(n,\alpha,\mu )>p_{F}'(n,\alpha )\) for \(0\le \mu < \mu _{0}\), hence the blow-up condition \(1< p\le p_{0}'(n,\alpha,\mu )\) is the best for \(0\le \mu < \mu _{0}\). This is unlike the case of the equation with \(|u|^{p}\)-nonlinearity for which the blow-up condition is related to only \(p_{c}(n,\alpha,\mu )\) and \(p_{F}(n,\alpha )\).
3.2 Case \(\alpha \ge 1\)
Theorem 3.9
Let \(n\ge 2, \alpha \ge 1, \mu \ge 0\), and \(p>1\). Assume that \(u_{0}\in C^{2}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) and \(u_{1}\in C^{1}(\mathbf{R}^{n})\) are nonnegative, nontrivial, and \(\operatorname{supp }u_{0}, \operatorname{supp}u_{1}\subset \{|x|\le R\}\) with \(R>0\). Suppose that problem (1.7) has a classical solution \(u\in C^{2}([1,T)\times \mathbf{R}^{n})\). Then \(T<\infty \), and there exists a constant \(\varepsilon _{0}>0\) depending on \(p,\alpha,\mu,R,u_{0},u_{1}\) such that \(T_{\varepsilon }\) has to satisfy
for \(0<\varepsilon \le \varepsilon _{0}\), where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε.
Proof
We first prove the theorem for the case \(\alpha =1\). By (2.38) and (3.3),
Proceeding as in [3], we have (3.32).
Hence, from (3.5),
We here use another Kato’s lemma which is Lemma 2.3 in [3].
Lemma 3.10
Let \(p>1, a\ge 0, b\ge 0, c>0, q\ge 0, \mu \ge 0\), and
Let \(T\ge T_{1}>T_{0}\ge 1\). Assume that \(F\in C^{2}([T_{0},T))\) satisfies the following three conditions:
where \(A_{0}\) and \(A_{1}\) are positive constants. Then T has to satisfy
where C is a constant depending on \(A_{1},\mu,p\), and c.
By (3.36) and (3.38), applying Lemma 3.10 with \(a=\mu \), \(b=q=p+n(p-1)\), \(c=\mu +2\), and \(A_{0}=C\varepsilon ^{p}\), we obtain the desired result for \(\alpha =1\) since
It remains to prove the theorem for \(\alpha >1\). By (2.38) and (3.3),
As above, we also have
Using Lemma 3.10 again, we obtain the desired results. This completes the proof of Theorem 3.9. □
4 Wave equations in FLRW
We now apply Theorems 2.1, 2.3, 3.1, 3.4, 3.7, and 3.9 to the original equation (1.2), which is equivalent to (1.3) and (1.7) with \(\alpha =2/(n(1+w))\) and \(\mu =2/(1+w)\). We treat the case \(-1< w\le 1\) and \(n\ge 2\) so that \(\alpha \ge 1/n\) and \(\mu \ge 1\) in (1.3) and (1.7). Observe that the cases \(-1< w\le 2/n-1\) and \(2/n-1< w\le 1\) correspond to accelerating and decelerating expanding universes, respectively.
Consider the equation with the time derivative nonlinear term \(|u_{t}|^{p}\). Denote \(p_{G}'(n,2/ (n(1+w)),2/(1+w))\) by \(p_{G}'(n,w)\). Figure 6 shows the range of blow-up conditions in terms of w and p in the case \(n=3\).
For \(2/n-1< w\le 1\) and \(n\ge 2\), applying Theorem 2.1 to (1.2) for \(|u_{t}|^{p}\), we obtain the following upper bounds of the lifespan:
where \(C>0\) is a constant independent of ε. We note that estimate (2.3) in Theorem 2.1 is not applied to (1.2) since \(\mu \ge 1\) in our case. See Region (G) in Fig. 6.
For \(-1< w\le 2/n-1\) and \(n\ge 2\), we obtain from Theorem 2.3
See Region (A) in Fig. 6.
From these results, we see that the blow-up range of p in the flat FLRW spacetime is smaller than that in the Minkowski spacetime because \(p_{G}'(n,w)< p_{G}(n)=1+2/(n-1)\). Moreover, in the subcritical case \(p< p_{G}'(n,w)\), the lifespan of the blow-up solutions in the FLRW spacetime is longer than that in the Minkowski spacetime since \(\varepsilon ^{-(p-1)/\{1-(n-1)(p-1)/2\}}<\varepsilon ^{-(p-1)/\{1-(n-1+4/(n(1+w)))(p-1)/2 \}}\) for sufficiently small ε. Although the critical value has not been established, we can say at the present time that global solutions in the FLRW spacetime exist more easily than in the Minkowski spacetime.
We next consider the equation with the space derivative nonlinear term \(|\nabla _{x} u|^{p}\). We define here \(\gamma _{0}'(n,p,w)\) corresponding to \(\gamma '(n,p,\alpha,\mu )\) in (3.6) by
Then we obtain
Let \(p_{c}'(n,w)\) be the positive root of the equation \(\gamma _{0}'(n,p,w)=0\). We also denote \(p_{F}'(n,2/(n(1+w)))\) by \(p_{F}'(n,w)\).
For \(2/n-1< w\le 1\) and \(n\ge 2\), say a decelerated expanding universe, applying Theorems 3.1, 3.4, and 3.7 to (1.2) for \(|\nabla _{x} u|^{p}\), we obtain the following upper bounds of the lifespan:
We note that estimates (3.8) in Theorem 3.1 and (3.31) in Theorem 3.7 are not applied to (1.2) since \(\mu \ge 1\) in our case, and also that if \(n=2\), then \(p_{F}'(2,w)\ge 2\) and \(\alpha =2/(n(1+w))>2/7\) in Theorem 3.4 since \(w\le 1\).
For \(-1< w\le 2/n-1\) and \(n\ge 2\), say an accelerated expanding universe, we obtain from Theorem 3.9
We see that blow-up in finite time can happen to occur for all \(p>1\). This is in contrast to the case of decelerated expansion above.
Figure 7 shows the range of blow-up conditions in terms of w and p in the case \(n=3\). Note that if \(p_{F}'(n,w)=p_{c}'(n,w)\), then w is the larger root \(w^{\ast }\) of the equation
Region (A) is for the case of the accelerated expanding universe, where the lifespan of blow-up solutions is dominated by (4.3). In contrast, each Region (F) and (C) represents the decelerated expanding one. In Region (F) estimate (4.2) is better than (4.1); on the other hand, this relation becomes reverse in Region (C).
Finally, let us compare the results for the term \(|u_{t}|^{p}\) with those for \(|\nabla _{x}u|^{p}\), especially in the decelerated expanding universe, say (G), (F), and (C). We observe that which has a larger blow-up range depends on the value of w for each n. If \(n=2\), then \(\max \{p_{F}'(2,w),p_{c}'(2,w)\}>p_{G}'(2,w)\) for \(0=2/n-1< w\le 1\). The higher the dimension n becomes, however, the larger the w-interval such that \(p_{G}'(n,w)>\max \{p_{F}'(n,w),p_{c}'(n,w)\}\) becomes.
We will treat the remaining case \(w=-1\) in future papers.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Notes
For the equation \(u_{tt}-\frac{1}{t^{2\alpha }}\Delta u+\frac{\mu }{t}u_{t}=|u|^{p}\), the critical exponents as blow-up conditions are \(p_{c}(n,\alpha,\mu )\) and \(p_{F}(n,\alpha )\), where \(p_{c}(n,\alpha,\mu )\) is the positive root of
$$\begin{aligned} \gamma (n,p,\alpha,\mu ) =-p^{2} \biggl(n-1+ \frac{\mu -\alpha }{1-\alpha } \biggr)+p \biggl(n+1+ \frac{\mu +3\alpha }{1-\alpha } \biggr)+2=0, \end{aligned}$$and \(p_{F}(n,\alpha )=1+2/\{n(1-\alpha )\}\). We remark that if \(\mu =\alpha =0\), then \(p_{c}(n,0,0)\) and \(p_{F}(n,0)\) coincide with the Strauss and Fujita exponents, respectively. See [1, 2].
References
Tsutaya, K., Wakasugi, Y.: Blow up of solutions of semilinear wave equations in Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetime. J. Math. Phys. 61, 091503 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5139301
Tsutaya, K., Wakasugi, Y.: On heatlike lifespan of solutions of semilinear wave equations in Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetime. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 500, 125133 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmaa.2021.125133
Tsutaya, K., Wakasugi, Y.: Blow up of solutions of semilinear wave equations in accelerated expanding Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetime. Rev. Math. Phys. 33, 2250003 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1142/S0129055X22500039
Glassey, R.T.: MathReview to “Global behavior of solutions to nonlinear wave equations in three space dimensions” of Sideris, Comm. Partial Differential Equations (1983). AMS, MR711440 (85e:35081) (1985)
Agemi, R.: Blow-up of solutions to nonlinear wave equations in two space dimensions. Manuscr. Math. 73, 153–162 (1991)
Glassey, R.T.: Blow-up theorems for nonlinear wave equations. Math. Z. 132, 183–203 (1973)
John, F.: Blow-up for quasilinear wave equations in three space dimensions. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 34, 29–51 (1981)
Masuda, K.: Blow-up solutions for quasi-linear wave equations in two space dimensions. Lect. Notes Num. Appl. Anal. 6, 87–91 (1983)
Rammaha, M.A.: Finite-time blow-up for nonlinear wave equations in high dimensions. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 12, 677–700 (1987)
Schaeffer, J.: Finite-time blow up for \(u_{tt}-\Delta u =h(u_{r}, u_{t})\) in two space dimensions. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 11, 513–543 (1986)
Zhou, Y.: Blow-up of solutions to the Cauchy problem for nonlinear wave equations. Chin. Ann. Math. 22B, 275–280 (2001)
Hidano, K., Tsutaya, K.: Global existence and asymptotic behavior of solutions for nonlinear wave equations. Indiana Univ. Math. J. 44, 1273–1305 (1995)
Sideris, T.C.: Global behavior of solutions to nonlinear wave equations in three space dimensions. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 8, 1291–1323 (1983)
Tzvetkov, N.: Existence of global solutions to nonlinear massless Dirac system and wave equation with small data. Tsukuba J. Math. 22, 193–211 (1998)
Hidano, K., Wang, C., Yokoyama, K.: The Glassey conjecture with radially symmetric data. J. Math. Pures Appl. 98, 518–541 (2012)
Hamouda, M., Hamza, M.A.: Improvement on the blow-up of the wave equation with the scale-invariant damping and combined nonlinearities. Nonlinear Anal., Real World Appl. 59, 103275 (2021)
Lai, N.-A., Takamura, H.: Nonexistence of global solutions of nonlinear wave equations with weak time-dependent damping related to Glassey’s conjecture. Differ. Integral Equ. 32, 37–48 (2019)
Hamouda, M., Hamza, M.A., Palmieri, A.: Blow-up and lifespan estimates for a damped wave equation in the Einstein-de Sitter spacetime with nonlinearity of derivative type. 2102.01137
Zhou, Y., Han, W.: Blow-up of solutions to semilinear wave equations with variable coefficients and boundary. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 374, 585–601 (2011)
John, F.: Blow-up of solutions of nonlinear wave equations in three space dimensions. Manuscr. Math. 28, 235–268 (1979)
Abramowitz, M., Stegun, I.A. (eds.): Handbook of Mathematical Functions: With Formulas, Graphs, and Mathematical Tables Dover, New York (1972)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions on the first manuscript of this paper.
Funding
The research was supported by the JSPS KAKENHI (Grant No. JP18K03351).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
All authors contributed equally to this work. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Tsutaya, K., Wakasugi, Y. On Glassey’s conjecture for semilinear wave equations in Friedmann–Lemaître–Robertson–Walker spacetime. Bound Value Probl 2021, 94 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-021-01571-0
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-021-01571-0