1: \begin{abstract}

2: We consider the conformal decomposition of Einstein's constraint

3: equations introduced by Lichnerowicz and York, on a closed manifold.

4: We establish existence of non-CMC weak solutions using a combination of

5: {\em a priori} estimates for the individual Hamiltonian and momentum

6: constraints, barrier constructions and fixed-point techniques for the 

7: Hamiltonian constraint, Riesz-Schauder theory for the momentum constraint,

8: together with a topological fixed-point argument for the coupled system.

9: Although we present general existence results for non-CMC weak solutions 

10: when the rescaled background metric is in any of the three Yamabe classes,

11: an important new feature of the results we present for the positive Yamabe 

12: class is the absence of the near-CMC assumption,

13: if the freely specifiable part of the data given by the

14: traceless-transverse part of the rescaled extrinsic curvature 

15: and the matter fields are sufficiently small, and if

16: the energy density of matter is not identically zero.

17: In this case, the mean extrinsic curvature can be taken to be an 

18: arbitrary smooth function without restrictions on the size of its 

19: spatial derivatives, so that it can be arbitrarily far from constant,

20: giving what is apparently the first existence results for non-CMC 

21: solutions without the near-CMC assumption.

22: Using a coupled topological fixed-point argument that avoids

23: near-CMC conditions, we establish existence 

24: of coupled non-CMC weak solutions with

25: (positive) conformal factor $\phi \in W^{s,p}$,

26: where $p \in (1,\infty)$ and $s(p) \in (1+3/p,\infty)$.

27: In the CMC case, the regularity can be reduced to

28: $p \in (1,\infty)$ and $s(p) \in (3/p, \infty) \cap [1,\infty)$.

29: In the case of $s=2$, we reproduce the CMC existence results of 

30: Choquet-Bruhat~\cite{yCB04}, and

31: in the case $p=2$, we reproduce the CMC existence results of

32: Maxwell~\cite{dM05}, but with a proof that

33: goes through the same analysis framework that we use to 

34: obtain the non-CMC results.

35: The non-CMC results on closed manifolds here extend the 

36: 1996 non-CMC result of Isenberg and Moncrief in three ways:

37: (1) the near-CMC assumption is removed in the case of the

38:     positive Yamabe class;

39: (2) regularity is extended down to the maximum allowed 

40:     by the background metric and the matter;

41: and

42: (3) the result holds for all three Yamabe classes.

43: This last extension was also accomplished recently by 

44: Allen, Clausen and Isenberg, although their result is restricted 

45: to the near-CMC case and to smoother background metrics and data.

46: \end{abstract}

47: 

48: