1: %\documentclass{edpa}

2: \documentclass[11pt]{article}

3: %\usepackage{srcltx}

4: %\SRCOKfalse

5: \usepackage{a4}

6: %\usepackage{ltugcomn}

7: %\usepackage{hyperref}

8: \usepackage{santheorem}

9: \usepackage{amssymb,latexsym}

10: \usepackage[mathscr]{eucal}

11: \usepackage{citesort}

12: \usepackage{url}

13: \usepackage{deleq}

14: %\usepackage[none,bottom,light]{draftcopy}

15: %\usepackage[notcite]{showkeys}

16: \ifx\macrosloaded\relax\endinput\else\let\macrosloaded\relax\fi

17: 

18: 

19: 

20: 

21: \newcommand{\U}{{\mcU}}

22: \newcommand{\mcU}{{\cal U}}

23: \newcommand{\mcS}{{\mycal I}}

24: \newcommand{\mcA}{{\mycal A}}

25: \newcommand{\mcO}{{\mycal O}}

26: \newcommand{\thm}[1]{{Theorem~\ref{#1}}}

27: \newcommand{\lem}[1]{{Lemma~\ref{#1}}}

28: \newcommand{\mca}{{\mcA_\infty^\delta}}

29: 

30: 

31: \newcommand{\Remarkn}[1]{{\bf Remark #1:}}

32: \newcommand{\zthe}{\mathring{\theta}}

33: \newcommand{\zD}{\mathring{D}}%

34: \newcommand{\zA}{\mathring{A}}%

35: \newcommand{\zE}{\mathring{E}}%

36: \newcommand{\zB}{\mathring{B}}%

37: %\newcommand{\ze}{\mathring{e}}%

38: \newcommand{\zK}{\mathring{K}}%

39: \newcommand{\zomega}{\mathring{\omega}}%

40: \newcommand{\cosm}{\alpha}%

41: \newcommand{\I}{\sqrt{-1}}%

42: \newcommand{\cosmi}{\frac{\cosm \I}{2}}%

43: %\newcommand{\mcA}{{\mycal A}}%

44: 

45: \newcommand{\divE}{\textrm{div}(E)}%

46: \newcommand{\divB}{\textrm{div}(B)}%

47: \newcommand{\HHKm}{{\mathbb{H}_{\cK_-}}}%

48: 

49: 

50: \newcommand{\inside}{\Omega_{x_1,x_2,T}}

51: \newcommand{\xabb}{x^{-2\alpha-1+2\beta_1}}

52: 

53: \newcommand{\bel}[1]{\begin{equation}\label{#1}}

54: \newcommand{\beal}[1]{\begin{eqnarray}\label{#1}}

55: \newcommand{\mcF}{{\mycal F}}

56: \newcommand{\MMxxt}{\M_{x_2,x_1,t}}

57: \newcommand{\MMxxti}{\MMxxt^i}

58: \newcommand{\MMxxtau}{\M_{x_2,x_1,\tau}}

59: \newcommand{\MMxxT}{\M_{x_2,x_1,T_0}}

60: \newcommand{\Mxxtau}{M_{x_2,x_1-3\tau}}

61: \newcommand{\Mxxtaui}{\Mxxtau^i}

62: \newcommand{\nN}{{\cal N}}

63: \newcommand{\ebar}{\overline{e}}

64: \newcommand{\notrevol}{\;d^{n+1}\,\mu_g\,}

65: \newcommand{\notrevoltau}{d^n \,\mu_\tau}

66: \newcommand{\Cee}{C_{\mathring{e}}}

67: \newcommand{\mxxtau}{\Mxxtau \times \{\tau\}}

68: \newcommand{\mxxini}{M_{x_1}\times \{0\} }

69: \newcommand{\Dcal}{{\cal D}}

70: \newcommand{\xdb}{x^{2\beta_1}}

71: \newcommand{\xdab}{x^{-2\alpha+2\beta_1-1}}

72: \newcommand{\xdbDB}{x^{2\beta_1} \Dcal^{\beta}}

73: \newcommand{\DDB}{\Dcal^\beta}

74: \newcommand{\hchit}{{}^t{}\hchi}

75: \newcommand{\hchibt}{{}^t{}\hchib}

76: 

77: \newcommand{\bcM}{\,\,\,\,\widetilde{\!\!\!\!\cM}}

78: \newcommand{\tg}{{\tilde g}}

79: \newcommand{\hJ}{{\hat J}}

80: \newcommand{\sthd}{{}^{\star_g}}

81: \newcommand{\ts}{{\cal S}} %pseudo-tangent space

82: \newcommand{\hG}{\widehat \Gamma}

83: \newcommand{\hD}{\widehat D}

84: \newcommand{\hxi}{\hat \xi}

85: \newcommand{\hxib}{\hat{\xib}}

86: \newcommand{\heta}{\hat \eta}

87: \newcommand{\hetab}{\hat{\etab}}

88: \newcommand{\home}{\hat{\omega}}

89: \newcommand{\homb}{\hat{\underline\omega}}

90: 

91: \newcommand{\obe}{\mathring{\beta}}

92: \newcommand{\obeta}{\obe}

93: \newcommand{\obetab}{\oubeta}

94: \newcommand{\oube}{\mathring{\ubeta}}

95: \newcommand{\oubeta}{\oube}

96: \newcommand{\osi}{\mathring{\sigma}}

97: \newcommand{\osigma}{\osi}

98: \newcommand{\orho}{\mathring{\rho}}

99: \newcommand{\oro}{\orho}

100: \newcommand{\ups}{\upsilon}

101: \newcommand{\upsb}{\underline{\upsilon}}

102: \newcommand{\hups}{\hat{\ups}}

103: \newcommand{\hupsb}{\hat{\upsb}}

104: 

105: \newcommand{\KlNhat}[1]{\overline{#1}}

106: \newcommand{\KlNwidehat}[1]{\overline{#1}}

107: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

108: \newtheorem{Def}{Definition}[section]

109: \newtheorem{Disc}{Discussion}[section]

110: \newtheorem{Stat}{}[section]

111: \newtheorem{prop}[theorem]{Proposition}

112: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

113: \newtheorem{cor}[theorem]{Corollary}

114: \newcommand{\Rtensor}{R_{\alpha \beta}^{\;\;\gamma\delta}}

115: %  Cause equations to be numbered within sections.

116: {\catcode `\@=11 \global\let\AddToReset=\@addtoreset}

117: \AddToReset{equation}{section}

118: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

119: 

120: %\newtoks\id

121: %\newcommand{\eqlabel}[1]{\label{#1}\global\id={(#1)}}

122: %\newcommand{\eql}{\eqlabel}

123: \newcommand{\medn}{\medskip\noindent}

124: \newcommand{\tr}{\mbox{tr}}

125: \newcommand{\WX}{^{(X)} \mkern -1mu [W]}

126: \newcommand{\Gam}[1]{^{(#1)}\mkern -1.5mu \Gamma}

127: \newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}

128: \newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

129: \newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

130: \newcommand{\beaa}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

131: \newcommand{\eeaa}{\end{eqnarray*}}

132: \newcommand{\bseq}{\begin{subeq}}

133: \newcommand{\eseq}{\end{subeq}}

134: \newcommand{\eql}[1]{\arrlabel{#1}}

135: \newcommand{\alp}{\alpha}

136: 

137: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%proviamo a mettere qui tutte le macros che stanno in Nicolo.tex

138: \newcommand{\cnabb}{\up{\nabb}}

139: \newcommand{\otch}{\overline{\tr \chi}}

140: \newcommand{\otchb}{\overline{\tr \chib}}

141: \def \rectangle#1#2{\hbox{\vrule\vbox to #2

142: {\hrule\hbox to

143: #1{\hfil}\vfil\hrule}\vrule}}\def\square{\,\,\rectangle{7pt}{7

144: pt}\,\,}

145: \newcommand{\edd}{\end{document}}

146: \newcommand{\lot}{\mbox{l.o.t.}}

147: %\renewcommand{\c}{\cdot}

148: \newcommand{\NI}{\noindent}

149: \newcommand{\ug}{\up{\ga}}

150: \newcommand{\Ubs}{\mbox{${\underline{U}} \mkern-13mu /$\,}}

151: \newcommand{\PP}{{\bf \Pi}}

152: \newcommand{\Lb}{\underline{L}}

153: \newcommand{\lb}{\underline{l}}

154: \newcommand{\Kb}{\underline{K}}

155: \newcommand{\kb}{\underline{k}}

156: \newcommand{\taub}{\underline{\tau}}

157: \newcommand{\Si}{\Sigma}

158: \newcommand{\ga}{\gamma}

159: \newcommand{\Ga}{\Gamma}

160: \newcommand{\Gab}{\underline{\Gamma}}

161: \newcommand{\GGa}{{\bf \Gamma}}

162: \newcommand{\EEb}{\mbox{${\cal E}_1$}}

163: \newcommand{\EEbb}{\mbox{${\cal E}_2$}}

164: \newcommand{\rr}{\mbox{${\bf R}$}}

165: \newcommand{\ww}{{\bf W}}

166: \newcommand{\Gg}{\mbox{${\bf G}$}}

167: \newcommand{\rrr}{\sla{R}}

168: %\newcommand{\ggg}{\mbox{${\bf g}$}}

169: \newcommand{\dd}{\mbox{${\hD}$}}

170: \newcommand{\omm}{\mbox{${\bf \om}$}}

171: \newcommand{\oomm}{\mbox{${\bf \oom}$}}

172: \newcommand{\lap}{\mbox{$\bigtriangleup$}}

173: \newcommand{\lapp}{\mbox{$\bigtriangleup  \mkern-13mu / \,$}}

174: \newcommand{\nab}{\mbox{$\nabla$}}

175: \newcommand{\hnab}{\widehat \nabla}

176: \newcommand{\nabb}{\mbox{$\nabla \mkern-13mu /$\,}}

177: \newcommand{\hnabb}{\mbox{$\hnabla \mkern-13mu /$\,}}

178: \newcommand{\Us}{\mbox{$U\mkern-13mu /$\,}}

179: \newcommand{\Fs}{\mbox{$F\mkern-13mu /$\,}}

180: \newcommand{\Fbs}{\mbox{${\underline F}\mkern-13mu /$\,}}

181: \newcommand{\ddb}{\mbox{$\dd \mkern-13mu /$\,}}

182: \newcommand{\sla}[1]{#1 \mkern -10mu /}

183: \newcommand{\pr}{\partial}

184: \newcommand{\hot}{\KlNwidehat{\otimes}_{\mathit{s}}}

185: \newcommand{\mmm}{{\bf M}}

186: \newcommand{\mm}{{\bf m}}

187: \newcommand{\mmmm}{\mbox{}}

188: %\renewcommand{\ll}{\underline{l}}

189: \newtheorem{Prop}{Proposition}[section]

190: \newtheorem{Corr}{Corollary}[section]

191: %\renewcommand{\theProp}{\thesection.\arabic{Prop}}

192: %\renewcommand{\theCorr}{\theProp.\arabic{Corr}}

193: \newtheorem{Le}{Lemma}[section]

194: %\renewcommand{\theLe}{\thesection.\arabic{Le}}

195: \newcommand{\Lie}{\mbox{$\cal L$}}

196: \newcommand{\lie}{\KlNhat{\Lie}}

197: \newcommand{\nn}{\nonumber}

198: \newcommand{\nnn}{}

199: %\newcommand{\beaa}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

200: %\newcommand{\eeaa}{\end{eqnarray*}}

201: %\newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}

202: %\newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}

203: %\newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}

204: %\newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}

205: %\newcommand{\bseq}{\begin{subeq}}

206: %\newcommand{\eseq}{\end{subeq}}

207: %\newcommand{\ba}{\begin{array}}

208: %\newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}}

209: %\newcommand{\eql}{\eqlabel}

210: %\newcommand{\medn}{\medskip\noindent}

211: \newcommand{\wdd}{d} % macro for a candidate weyl tensor

212: %\renewcommand{\tt}{{\bf T}}

213: \newcommand{\inn}{{\bf \in}}

214: \newcommand{\chib}{\underline{\chi}{}}

215: \newcommand{\hchi}{\hat{{\chi}}}

216: \newcommand{\hchib}{\hat{\underline{\chi}}{}}

217: \newcommand{\Psib}{\underline{\Psi}{}}

218: \newcommand{\tch}{\tr \chi}

219: \newcommand{\tchb}{\tr \chib}

220: \newcommand{\zetab}{\underline{\zeta}{}}

221: \newcommand{\hzeb}{\hat{\zetab}}

222: \newcommand{\zeb}{\zetab}

223: \newcommand{\de}{\delta}

224: \newcommand{\De}{\Delta}

225: \newcommand{\ep}{\epsilon}

226: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

227: \newcommand{\NatNum}{{\mathbb N}}   %the natural numbers

228: %\newcommand{\langle}{\langle}  %left angle bracket

229: \newcommand{\ra}{\rangle}   %right angle bracket

230: \newcommand{\half}{\frac{1}{2}} %half

231: \newcommand{\third}{\frac{1}{3}}    %third

232: \newcommand{\sixth}{\frac{1}{6}}    %sixth

233: %\newcommand{\nth}{\frac{1}{n}} %nth

234: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

235: \newcommand{\hme}{\KlNhat g}    %background metric

236: \newcommand{\hnabla}{\widehat {\nabla}} %background covariant derivative

237: \newcommand{\hGamma}{\widehat \Gamma}   %background Christoffel

238: \newcommand{\Shift}{X}  %Shift Vectorfield

239: \newcommand{\Orbit}{\mathcal O} %Orbit

240: \newcommand{\Defo}[1]{{^{(#1)}\pi}} %deformation tensor

241: \newcommand{\hDef}[1]{{^{(#1)}\KlNhat\pi}} %tracefree part of deformation tensor \newcommand{\Proj}{\Pi}

242: %Projection to hypersurface

243: \newcommand{\Smallset}{\mathcal B}%smallness condition

244: \newcommand{\Frob}{\mbox{Frob}} %Frobenius

245: \newcommand{\Ide}{\mathrm{Id}}  %identity map

246: \newcommand{\del}{\delta}   %gauge quantity

247: \newcommand{\aM}{{\bar M}}  %ambient manifold

248: %\newcommand{\bar}{{\overline}} %overline

249: \newcommand{\anabla}{{\bar \nabla}} %ambient covariant derivative

250: \newcommand{\langlembda}{<}

251: \newcommand{\ame}{{\overline g}}    %ambient metric tensor

252: \newcommand{\aGamma}{{\bar \Gamma}}  %ambient Christoffel

253: \newcommand{\ah}{{\bar h}}  %ambient perturbation

254: \newcommand{\aR}{{\bar R}}  %ambient Riemann tensor

255: \newcommand{\avol}{\mu(\ame)}   %ambient volume element

256: %\newcommand{\vol}{\mu(g)}  %volume element w.r.t.  g

257: \newcommand{\hvol}{\mu(\hme)}   %volume element w.r.t. \KlNhat g

258: \newcommand{\he}{\KlNhat e} %background frame element

259: \newcommand{\supp}{\mbox{\rm supp}} %support

260: \newcommand{\norm}{\mathbf n}   %normal

261: \newcommand{\bm}{\mbox{\bf \rm m}}  %null vector

262: \newcommand{\bl}{\mbox{\bf \rm l}}  %null vector

263: \newcommand{\CCC}{{\mathcal C}} %constraint set

264: \newcommand{\TT}{\mbox{\sc TT}} %transverse traceless!la

265: \newcommand{\Vol}{{\mathrm{Vol}}_g} %volume

266: \newcommand{\Volum}{{\mathrm{Vol}}_g}   %volume

267: \newcommand{\inj}{\mbox{\rm inj}}   %injectivity radius

268: \newcommand{\diam}{\mbox{\rm diam}} %diameter

269: \newcommand{\ii}{ii}    %double contraction

270: \newcommand{\Eps}{\epsilon} %alternating tensor

271: \newcommand{\eps}{\epsilon} %epsilon or sign

272: \newcommand{\Liee}{{\cal L}}    %Lie derivative

273: \newcommand{\modLie}{\KlNhat{\Liee}}    %modified Lie derivative

274: \newcommand{\trr}{{\mbox{\rm tr}}}  %trace

275: \newcommand{\diag}{{\mbox{\rm diag}}}   %diag

276: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

277: \newcommand{\xib}{\underline{\xi}}

278: \newcommand{\hchih}{\overline{\hchi}}

279: \newcommand{\hchibh}{\overline{\hchib}}

280: \newcommand{\chih}{\KlNhat{\chi}}

281: \newcommand{\etah}{\KlNhat{\eta}}

282: \newcommand{\chibh}{\underline{\KlNhat{\chi}}}

283: \newcommand{\nub}{\underline{\nu}}

284: \newcommand{\mub}{\underline{\mu}}

285: \newcommand{\mubt}{\tilde{\underline{\mu}}}

286: \newcommand{\Lbb}{\und{L}}

287: \newcommand{\Fb}{\und{F}}

288: \newcommand{\Fbt}{\widetilde{\und{F}}}

289: \newcommand{\Gb}{\und{G}}

290: \newcommand{\Hb}{\und{H}}

291: %\newcommand{\S}{${\cal S}\ $}

292: \newcommand{\Ricci}{$R_{\mu\nu}\ $}

293: \newcommand{\Rmn}{R_{\mu\nu}\ }

294: \newcommand{\Gmn}{G_{\mu\nu}\ }

295: \newcommand{\G}{$G_{\mu\nu}\ $}

296: \newcommand {\Gt}{\widetilde{G}}

297: \newcommand {\Gbt}{\widetilde{\Gb}}

298: \newcommand{\hb}{\und{h}}

299: \newcommand{\fb}{\und{f}}

300: \newcommand{\ppa}{o \mkern -9mu /\mkern -7mu/}

301: \newcommand{\ppn}{\varphi\mkern -2mu _N}

302: \newcommand{\vth}{\vartheta}

303: \newcommand{\Intir}{\mbox{Int}}

304: \newcommand{\Om}[1]{\mbox{}^{(#1)}\mkern -1.5mu \Omega}

305: \newcommand{\Of}[1]{^{#1}\mkern -1.5mu F}

306: \newcommand{\opi}[1]{^{#1}\mkern -1.5mu \pi}

307: \newcommand{\Omin}[1]{^{#1}\mkern -1.5mu \Omega_{(\infty)}}

308: \newcommand{\und}[1]{\underline{#1}}

309: \newcommand{\ov}[1]{\overline{#1}}

310: %\newcommand{\ee}{{\bf E}}

311: %\renewcommand{\sb}{\underline{s}}

312: 

313: \newcommand{\tD}{\tilde{\nabla}}

314: \newcommand{\ds}{\dot{s}}

315: \newcommand{\tdualg}{\tilde{g}{}^\sharp{}}

316: 

317: 

318: \newcommand{\CC}{{\bf C}}

319: \newcommand{\s}{\mbox{$\mkern 7mu$}}

320: \newcommand {\mut}{\tilde{\mu}}

321: \newcommand{\Nu}{{\cal N}}

322: \newcommand{\Nub}{{\cal \Nb}}

323: \newcommand{\Nb}{\und{N}}

324: \newcommand{\Mb}{\und {M}}

325: \newcommand{\vb}{\und{v}}

326: \newcommand{\wb}{\und{w}}

327: \newcommand{\Nbh}{\und{\KlNhat{N}}}

328: \newcommand{\Nh}{\KlNhat{N}}

329: \newcommand{\Cb}{\und{C}}

330: \newcommand{\n}{n}

331: \newcommand{\ubar}{{\und{u}}}

332: \newcommand{\D}{{\cal D}}

333: \newcommand{\M}{{\mycal M}}

334: \newcommand{\Db}{\und{{\cal D}}{}}

335: \newcommand{\ua}{{\underline{\alpha}}{}}

336: \newcommand{\ualpha}{{\ua}}

337: \newcommand{\ualp}{{\ua}}

338: \newcommand{\bb}{{\underline{\beta}}{}}

339: \newcommand{\ub}{{\bb}}

340: \newcommand{\ubeta}{{\bb}}

341: %\renewcommand{\a}{\alpha}

342: %\renewcommand{\b}{\beta}

343: \newcommand{\dual}{\mbox{}^{\star}\!}

344: \newcommand{\rdual}{^{\star}}

345: \newcommand{\sign}{\mbox{sign}}

346: \newcommand{\si}{\sigma}

347: \newcommand{\sii}{\bar{\sigma}}

348: \newcommand{\ro}{\rho}

349: \newcommand{\roo}{\bar{\ro}}

350: \newcommand{\ze}{\zeta}

351: \newcommand{\hze}{\hat\zeta}

352: %\newcommand{\mu}{\miu}

353: %\newcommand{\nu}{\niu}

354: \newcommand{\divv}{\mbox{div}\mkern-19mu /\,\,\,\,}

355: \newcommand{\hdivv}{\widehat{\mathrm{div}}\mkern-19mu /\,\,\,\,}

356: \newcommand{\curll}{\mbox{curl}\mkern-19mu /\,\,\,\,}

357: \newcommand{\curl}{\mbox{curl}}

358: \newcommand{\Ric}{\mbox{Ric}}

359: \newcommand{\barr}{{\bf b}}

360: \newcommand{\thh}{\KlNhat{\th}}

361: \newcommand{\pih}{\KlNhat{\pi}}

362: \newcommand{\thbh}{\und{\KlNhat{\th}}}

363: \newcommand{\Thetab}{\und{\Theta}}

364: \newcommand{\Xib}{\und{\Xi}}

365: \newcommand{\Ib}{\und{I}}

366: \newcommand{\Thh}{{\bf \theta}}

367: \newcommand{\Thhh}{\KlNhat{\thh}}

368: \newcommand{\ioo}{{\bf \iota}}

369: \newcommand{\ioob}{\und{\ioo}}

370: \newcommand{\epp}{{\bf \ep}}

371: \newcommand{\eppb}{\und{\epp}}

372: \newcommand{\dee}{{\bf \de}}

373: \newcommand{\om}{\omega}

374: \newcommand{\oom}{\omega}

375: \newcommand{\oomb}{\underline{\oom}}

376: \newcommand{\omb}{\underline{\oom}}

377: \newcommand{\mb}{\underline{m}}

378: \newcommand{\nb}{\underline{n}}

379: \newcommand{\uu}{\underline{u}}

380: \newcommand{\etab}{\underline{\eta}}

381: \newcommand{\la}{\lambda}

382: \newcommand{\Lam}{\Lambda}

383: \newcommand{\Lamm}{\und{\Lambda}}

384: \newcommand{\vphi}{\varphi}

385: \newcommand{\vp}{\varphi}

386: \newcommand{\et}{\KlNhat{\eta}}

387: %\renewcommand{\th}{\mbox{$\theta$}}

388: \newcommand{\ddd}{\nabb}

389: \newcommand{\hddd}{\hnabb}

390: \newcommand{\hdddd}{{\bf \hat D} \mkern-13mu /\,}

391: \newcommand{\dddd}{{\bf D} \mkern-13mu /\,}

392: \newcommand{\St}{\Sigma_t}

393: \newcommand{\chk}{\KlNhat{\chi}}

394: \newcommand{\uchi}{\underline{\chi}}

395: \newcommand{\uch}{\underline{\chk}}

396: \newcommand{\trch}{\tr \chi}

397: \newcommand{\trchb}{\tr \chib}

398: \def\frac#1#2{{{#1}\over{#2}}}

399: %in math mode si scrive:\frac{}{},altrimenti $\frac{}{}$

400: %\renewcommand{\O}[5]{\mmmm^{#3}\mkern -1mu {\cal O}^{#1#5#4}_{#2}}

401: %\renewcommand{\OE}[2]{\O{#1}{#2}{}{}{}}

402: \newcommand{\Ob}[5]{\mmmm^{#3}\mkern -1mu {\underline{\cal O}}^{#1#5#4}_{#2}}

403: \newcommand{\Obb}[5]{\mmmm^{#3}\mkern -1mu {\underline{\underline{\cal O}}}^{#1#5#4}_{#2}}

404: \newcommand{\OEb}[2]{\Ob{#1}{#2}{}{}{}}

405: \newcommand{\OEbb}[2]{\Obb{#1}{#2}{}{}{}}

406: \newcommand{\OOE}[1]{^{}{\cal O}_{#1}}

407: \newcommand{\OOEb}[1]{^{}{\underline{\cal O}}_{#1}}

408: \newcommand{\curv}[5]{\mmmm^{#3}\mkern -1mu {\cal R}^{#1#5#4}_{#2}}

409: \newcommand{\RS}[2]{\curv{#1}{#2}{}{S}{,}}

410: \newcommand{\OS}[2]{\O{#1}{#2}{}{S}{,}}

411: \newcommand{\OSb}[2]{\Ob{#1}{#2}{}{S}{,}}

412: \newcommand{\NNC}[1]{\Norm{#1}{2}{C}{,}}

413: \newcommand{\NNCb}[1]{\Norm{#1}{2}{\Cb}{,}}

414: \newcommand{\NNCu}[1]{\Norm{#1}{2}{C(u)}{,}}

415: \newcommand{\NNCbub}[1]{\Norm{#1}{2}{\Cb(\ub)}{,}}

416: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%4/4/96 Le macros qui in mezzo sono usate per il capitolo

417: %%%%%"Error estimate" e sono prese da Lara TeX occorre controllare che non confliggano.

418: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

419: %\newcommand{\curv}[5]{\mmmm^{#3}\mkern -1mu {\cal R}^{#1#5#4}_{#2}}

420: \newcommand{\RE}[2]{\curv{#1}{#2}{}{}{}}

421: \newcommand{\RRE}[1]{\curv{}{#1}{}{}{}}

422: \newcommand{\RREb}[1]{\underline{\curv{}{#1}{}{}{}}}

423: \newcommand{\FR}[2]{\curv{#1}{#2}{{}}{}{}}

424: \newcommand{\FRR}[1]{\curv{}{#1}{}{}{}}

425: %\newcommand{\RS}[2]{\curv{#1}{#2}{}{S}{,}}

426: \newcommand{\RI}[2]{\curv{#1}{#2}{i}{}{}}

427: \newcommand{\RRI}[1]{\curv{}{#1}{i}{}{}}

428: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%

429: \newcommand{\QQ}{{\cal Q}}

430: \newcommand{\QQb}{\underline{\cal Q}}

431: \newcommand{\QQQ}{\tilde{{\cal Q}}}

432: \newcommand{\qr}[2]{\mbox{Qr}\left[#1\,;\,#2\right]}

433: \newcommand{\fqr}[2]{\mbox{\framebox[1.5in]{Qr$ \left[#1\,;\,#2\right]$}

434: }}

435: \newcommand{\ffqr}[2]{\mbox{\framebox[2in]{Qr$ \left[#1\,;\,#2\right]$}

436: }}

437: \newcommand{\varep}{\varepsilon_0}

438: \newcommand{\ttau}{\tau_{-}}

439: \newcommand{\tttau}{\tau_{+}}

440: \newcommand{\pii}[1]{^{(#1)}\mkern -1.5mu \pi}

441: \newcommand{\piih}[1]{^{(#1)}\mkern -1.5mu \pih}

442: \newcommand{\lu}[2]{^{(#2)}\mkern -1.5mu #1}

443: \newcommand{\hdiv}{\mbox{$\widehat{\mathrm{div}}\mkern 1mu$}}

444: \newcommand{\Div}{\mbox{{\bf Div}}}

445: \newcommand{\intSt}{\int_{\Sigma_t}}

446: \newcommand{\intSe}{\int_{\Sigma_t^{e}}}

447: \newcommand{\ints}{\int_{S}}

448: \newcommand{\intsu}{\int_{S_u}}

449: \newcommand{\intstu}{\int_{S_{t,u}}}

450: \newcommand{\acc}{\bar{K}}

451: \newcommand{\Norm}[4]{\|#1\|_{#2#4#3}}

452: %\newcommand{\N}[2]{\Norm{#1}{#2}{e}{,}}

453: \newcommand{\NN}[1]{\Norm{#1}{2}{e}{,}}

454: \newcommand{\NNN}[1]{\Norm{#1}{2}{}{}}

455: \newcommand{\FN}[2]{\Norm{#1}{#2}{}{}}

456: \newcommand{\Ni}[2]{\|#1\|_{#2,i}}

457: \newcommand{\Nlo}[1]{^{\mbox{(loc)}}\|#1\|}

458: \newcommand{\Nloc}[1]{^{\mbox{(loc)}}\|#1\|_{2,e}}

459: \newcommand{\NNi}[1]{\|#1\|_{2,i}}

460: \newcommand{\LLie}{\mbox{$\cal L$ }  \mkern -16mu /}

461: \newcommand{\lLie}{\KlNhat{\LLie}}

462: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% 4/4/96

463: \newcommand{\lup}[1]{\lu{p}{#1}}

464: \newcommand{\luq}[1]{\lu{q}{#1}}

465: \newcommand{\Th}{\Theta}

466: \newcommand{\Thb}{\und{\Theta}}

467: \newcommand{\li}[1]{\lu{{\bf i}}{#1}}

468: \newcommand{\lj}[1]{\lu{{\bf j}}{#1}}

469: \newcommand{\lm}[1]{\lu{{\bf m}}{#1}}

470: \newcommand{\lmm}[1]{\lu{\und{{\bf m}}}{#1}}

471: \newcommand{\lnn}[1]{\lu{{\bf n}}{#1}}

472: \newcommand{\lnnn}[1]{\lu{\und{{\bf n}}}{#1}}

473: \newcommand{\slup}[1]{\lu{\sla{p}}{#1}}

474: \newcommand{\aX}{\lu{\alpha}{X}}

475: \newcommand{\aaX}{\lu{\ua}{X}}

476: \newcommand{\bbX}{\lu{\bb}{X}}

477: \newcommand{\bX}{\lu{\beta}{X}}

478: \newcommand{\roX}{\lu{\ro}{X}}

479: \newcommand{\siX}{\lu{\si}{X}}

480: \newcommand{\ab}{\underline{\alpha}}

481: \newcommand{\aooo}{\lu{\alpha}{\ooo}}

482: \newcommand{\aaooo}{\lu{\ua}{\ooo}}

483: \newcommand{\bbooo}{\lu{\bb}{\ooo}}

484: \newcommand{\booo}{\lu{\beta}{\ooo}}

485: \newcommand{\roooo}{\lu{\ro}{\ooo}}

486: \newcommand{\siooo}{\lu{\si}{\ooo}}

487: \newcommand{\intVt}{\int_{V_t}}

488: \newcommand{\intVte}{\int_{V_t^e}}

489: \newcommand{\up}{^o}

490: \newcommand{\kkkk}{\mbox{$k_m$}}

491: \newcommand{\KKKK}{\mbox{$k_M$}}

492: \newcommand{\f}{\mbox{$f_{\ast}$}}

493: \newcommand{\cdd}{{\cal D} \mkern -11mu  /}

494: \newcommand{\cddd}{{\cal D} \mkern -11mu  /\rdual}

495: \newcommand{\tnabb}{\up{\nabb}}

496: \newcommand{\nor}[2]{|#1|_{L^{#2}}}

497: \newcommand{\dk}{\dot{k}}

498: \newcommand{\pdd}[2]{\frac{\partial{#1}}{\partial{#2}}}

499: 

500: 

501: \newcommand{\mxtauz }{(M_{x_1})}

502: \newcommand{\mxtau }{(M_{x_1-2\tau})}

503: 

504: \newcommand{\Mxonexzerot}{} % was (M_{{x_1},{x_0}-2t}), reset to nothing

505: \newcommand{\nMxonexzerot}{} % was (M_{{x_1},{x_0}-2t}), reset to nothing

506: \newcommand{\Mxonexzeros}{} % was (M_{{x_1},{x_0}-2s}), reset to

507:                             % nothing

508: \newcommand{\OmxT}{\Omega_{x_1,T}}

509: \newcommand{\BB}{{\mycal B}}

510: \newcommand{\cO}{{\cal O}}

511: \newcommand{\UU}{{\cal U}}

512: \newcommand{\cUxx}{\UU_{x_2,x_1}}

513: \newcommand{\hyp}{{\mycal S}}

514: \newcommand{\bhyp}{\,\,\overline{\!\!\hyp}}

515: \newcommand{\phyp}{\partial\hyp}

516: 

517: 

518: \newcommand{\mxt}{(M_{x_1-2t})}

519: \newcommand{\mxs}{(M_{x_1-2s})}

520: 

521:      \newcommand{\setZ}{{\mathord{\mathbb Z}}}

522:      \newcommand{\lsemantics}{\mathopen{\lbrack\mkern-3mu\lbrack}}

523:      \newcommand{\rsemantics}{\mathclose{\rbrack\mkern-3mu\rbrack}}

524: \newcommand{\mcCzk}{{\mcC}^0_k}

525: \newcommand{\mcCaz}{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}

526: \newcommand{\Z}{\setZ}

527: %\newcommand{\s}{{\cal S}_{x_2}}

528: \newcommand{\uui}{{\cal O}_i}

529: 

530: \newcommand{\qed}{\hfill $\Box$\bigskip}

531: \newcommand{\proof}{\noindent {\sc Proof:\ }}

532: \newcommand{\remark}{\noindent {\bf Remark:\ }}

533: \newcommand{\remarks}{\noindent {\bf Remarks:\ }}

534: \newcommand{\eeq}{\end{equation}}

535: \newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}

536: \newcommand{\beqa}{\begin{eqnarray}}

537: \newcommand{\beqar}{\begin{deqarr}}

538: \newcommand{\eeqa}{\end{eqnarray}}

539: \newcommand{\eeqar}{\end{deqarr}}

540: \newcommand{\beqan}{\begin{eqnarray*}}

541: \newcommand{\eeqan}{\end{eqnarray*}}

542: \newcommand{\ba}{\begin{array}}

543: \newcommand{\ea}{\end{array}}

544: 

545: \newcommand{\decal}{{\mycal D}}

546: \newcommand{\mcC}{{\mycal C}}

547: \newcommand{\cH}{{\mycal H}}

548: \newcommand{\cB}{{\mycal B}}

549: \newcommand{\cG}{{\mycal G}}

550: \newcommand{\mcCak}{{\mcC}^\alpha_k}

551: \newcommand{\cU}{{\cal U}}

552: \newcommand{\backmg}{h} %background Riemannian metric

553: \newcommand{\Id}{\mbox{\rm Id}} %identity matrix

554: \newcommand{\const}{\mbox{\rm const}} %constants

555: 

556: \newcommand{\hide}[1]{}

557: \newcommand{\ovlocO}{\,\,\overline{\!\!\locO}}

558: 

559: \newcommand{\HH}{{\mycal H}}

560: \newcommand{\Hk}[1]{{\mycal H}_k^{#1}}

561: \newcommand{\Hak}{{\mycal H}_{k} ^{\alpha}}

562: \newcommand{\Haok}{{\mycal H}_{k} ^{-1/2}}

563: \newcommand{\Sigx}{\hyp_{x_2,x_1}}

564: \newcommand{\sigxx}[1]{\Sigma_{x_2,x_1,#1}}

565: \newcommand{\sigx}[1]{\Sigma_{x_1,#1}}

566: \newcommand{\demi}{{1\over 2}}

567: \newcommand{\emoins}{E_{-}^{\mu}}

568: \newcommand{\eplus}{E_{+}^\mu}

569: \newcommand{\nmu}{\nabla_\mu}

570: \newcommand{\pmu}{\partial_\mu}

571: \newcommand{\px}{\partial_x}

572: \newcommand{\db}{D^\beta}

573: \newcommand{\pb}{\partial^\beta}

574: \newcommand{\xadu}{x^{-2\alpha-1+2\beta_1}}

575: \newcommand{\spacetime}{({\mycal M} , g)}

576: \newcommand{\unphyspace}{{ \tilde \mycal M}}

577: \newcommand{\err}{\zeta} % error function, determines how fast things go to zero

578: \newcommand{\prho}{p}

579: \newcommand{\dx}{\,dx}

580: \newcommand{\here}{\mnote{checked up to here}}

581: % \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}[section]

582: % \newtheorem{lemma}[thm]{Lemma}

583: % \newtheorem{prop}[thm]{Proposition}

584: % \newtheorem{cor}[thm]{Corollary}

585: % \newtheorem{definition}[thm]{Definition}

586: % %\theoremstyle{remark}

587: % \newtheorem{remark}{Remark}

588: % \newtheorem{remarks}[thm]{Remarks}

589: % \newtheorem{example}[thm]{Example}

590: 

591: % \newtheorem{Theorem} [thm]{Theorem}

592: % \newtheorem{Corollary} [thm] {Corollary}

593: % \newtheorem{Lemma} [thm] {Lemma}

594: % \newtheorem{Proposition} [thm] {Proposition}

595: % \newtheorem{Conjecture}[thm]{Conjecture}

596: % \newtheorem{Problem}[thm]{Problem}

597: % \newtheorem{Definition}[thm]{Definition}

598: % %\newtheorem{example}[thm]{Example}

599: 

600: \newtheorem{Theorem} {Theorem} [section]

601: \newtheorem{Corollary} [Theorem] {Corollary}

602: \newtheorem{Lemma} [Theorem] {Lemma}

603: \newtheorem{Proposition} [Theorem] {Proposition}

604: \newtheorem{Conjecture}[Theorem]{Conjecture}

605: \newtheorem{Problem}[Theorem]{Problem}

606: \newtheorem{Definition}[Theorem]{Definition}

607: \newtheorem{example}[Theorem]{Example}

608: 

609: \DeclareFontFamily{OT1}{rsfs}{}

610: \DeclareFontShape{OT1}{rsfs}{m}{n}{ <-7> rsfs5 <7-10> rsfs7 <10->

611: rsfs10}{} \DeclareMathAlphabet{\mycal}{OT1}{rsfs}{m}{n}

612: \def\scri{{\mycal I}}%

613: \def\scrip{\scri^{+}}%

614: \def\scrp{{\mycal I}^{+}}%

615: \def\Scri{\scri}

616: %\renewcommand{\cal}{\mycal}

617: 

618: \newcommand{\tDD}{{\tilde{\DD}}}

619: %\newcommand{\ds}{\dot{s}}

620: \newcommand{\DD}{D} % connection of the metric

621: 

622: 

623: \newcommand{\proofend}{\qed}

624: \newcounter{mnotecount}[section]

625: 

626: \renewcommand{\themnotecount}{\thesection.\arabic{mnotecount}}

627: 

628: \newcommand{\mnotex}[1]

629: {\protect{\stepcounter{mnotecount}}$^{\mbox{\footnotesize

630: $%\!\!\!\!\!\!\,

631: \bullet$\themnotecount}}$ \marginpar{%\color{red}%

632: \raggedright\tiny\em $\!\!\!\!\!\!\,\bullet$\themnotecount: #1} }

633: 

634: \newcommand{\mnote}[1]

635: {\protect{\stepcounter{mnotecount}}$^{\mbox{\footnotesize

636: $%\!\!\!\!\!\!\,

637: \bullet$\themnotecount}}$ \marginpar{%\color{red}%

638: \raggedright\tiny\em $\!\!\!\!\!\!\,\bullet$\themnotecount: #1} }

639: 

640: %\newcommand{\mnote}[1]{}

641: 

642: % this is for important mnotes which should be visible by other people

643: 

644: %\newcommand{\xmnote}[1]

645: %{\protect{\stepcounter{mnotecount}}$^{\mbox{\footnotesize

646: %$%\!\!\!\!\!\!\,

647: %\bullet$\themnotecount}}$ \marginpar{%\color{red}%

648: %\raggedright\tiny\em

649: %$\!\!\!\!\!\!\,\bullet$\themnotecount: {\bf xmn:} #1} }

650: 

651: \newcommand{\comment}{\ptc{ remark added}}

652: \newcommand{\rewrite}{\ptc{rewrites}}

653: \newcommand{\reword}{\ptc{ rewordings}}

654: \newcommand{\garde}{\ptc{ a garder dans la these, mais pas dans

655: l'article}}

656: \newcommand{\checked}{\mnote{{\bf PTC}: checked}}

657: \newcommand{\ptc}[1]{\mnote{{\bf PTC}: #1}}

658: \newcommand{\Omnote}[1]{\mnote{{\bf OL:} #1}}

659: \newcommand{\Pmnote}[1]{{\bf PTC:} #1}

660: 

661: 

662: \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}

663: \newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}

664: \newcommand{\bM}{\overline{\! M}}

665: \newcommand{\tp}{\tilde{\! \partial}}

666: \newcommand{\backg}{b}

667: \newcommand{\pM}{\partial M}

668: \newcommand{\eq}[1]{(\ref{#1})}

669: 

670: \newcommand{\rspone}{\rangle_{\!{}_{1}}}

671: \newcommand{\rsptwo}{\rangle_{\!{}_{2}}}

672: 

673: \newcommand{\dv}{\;dv}

674: \newcommand{\Eqsone}[1]{Equations~\eq{#1}}

675: \newcommand{\Eq}[1]{Equation~\eq{#1}}

676: \newcommand{\Eqs}[2]{Equations~\eq{#1}-\eq{#2}}

677: \newcommand{\dea}{{D}_{e_{A}}}

678: \newcommand{\loc}{{\mbox{{\rm\scriptsize loc}}}}

679: \newcommand{\xa}{x^ \alpha}

680: \newcommand{\coa}{\mcC _0 ^\alpha}

681: \newcommand{\boa}{{\mycal B} _0 ^\alpha}

682: \newcommand{\cob}{\mcC _0 ^\beta}

683: \newcommand{\Hbk}{\Hk \beta}

684: \newcommand{\GG}{{\mycal G}}

685: \newcommand{\Gk}[1]{\GG_k ^{#1}}

686: \newcommand{\Gak}{\Gk \alpha}

687: \newcommand{\gok}{\Gk 0}

688: \newcommand{\Gbk}{\Gk \beta}

689: \newcommand{\tM}{\,\,\,\,\,\widetilde{\!\!\!\!\!\mycal M}}

690: \newcommand{\dmu}{d\mu} %measure on M

691: \newcommand{\volu}{\,d \nu} %measure on the boundary of M

692: \newcommand{\dnu}{\volu} %measure on the boundary of M

693: 

694: \newcommand{\zg}{{\mathring{g}}}

695: \newcommand{\zh}{{\mathring{h}}}

696: \newcommand{\zOmega}{{\mathring{\Omega}}}

697: \newcommand{\ooi}{\Omega_i} % product coordinate neighborhoods near

698: % the boundary

699: \newcommand{\volume}{\,d^{n}\mu}

700: \newcommand{\HHH}{\HH}

701: 

702: \newcommand{\hL}{{\hat L}{}}

703: 

704: 

705: \newcommand{\ch}{\,\mathring{\!h}}

706: 

707: \newcommand{\cM}{\mycal M}

708: \newcommand{\cN}{\mycal N}

709: \newcommand{\cE}{\mycal E}

710: 

711: \newcommand{\cAp}{{\mycal A}_{\mbox{\scriptsize phg}}}

712: \newcommand{\cApd}{{\mycal A}^\delta_{\mbox{\scriptsize phg}}}

713: \newcommand{\cphg}{{\mycal A}_{\mbox{\scriptsize c-phg}}}

714: \newcommand{\cphgd}{{\mycal A}^\delta_{\mbox{\scriptsize c-phg}}}

715: \newcommand{\cApM}{\cAp(M)}

716: \newcommand{\stsg}{{\mathfrak g}}

717: \newcommand{\tf}{\widetilde f}

718: \newcommand{\hf}{\widehat f}

719: \newcommand{\hphi}{\widehat \phi}

720: \newcommand{\hpsi}{\widehat \psi}

721: \newcommand{\complementaire}{\complement}

722: 

723: \newcommand{\locO} {{\mycal O}}

724: 

725: \newcommand{\beqd}{\begin{deqarr}}

726: \newcommand{\eeqd}{\end{deqarr}}

727: 

728: \begin{document}

729: \title{Solutions of wave equations in the radiation regime}

730: \author{Piotr T.\ Chru\'sciel\thanks{ Supported in part by the Polish

731:     Research Council grant KBN 2 P03B 130 16, and by an

732:     A.~von~Humboldt fellowship. E-mail:

733:     \texttt{chrusciel@univ-tours.fr}; URL

734:     {\protect\url{http://www.phys.univ-tours.fr/}$\sim$\protect\url{piotr}}.}

735:     \\ O. Lengard\thanks{E-mail:

736:     \texttt{olengard@infonie.fr}} \\ D\'epartement de

737:     Math\'ematiques \\ Facult\'e des Sciences\\ Parc de Grandmont\\

738:     F-37200 Tours, France}

739: 

740: \maketitle

741: 

742: \vfill\begin{abstract}

743: %\ptc{version with new corrections; the

744: %version sent to Lengard is printed, and is on gargan in any case,

745: %at least as of 30.I.2002; please have a looK AT THE TODO FILE}

746:   We study the ``hyperboloidal Cauchy problem'' for linear and

747:   semi-linear wave equations on Minkowski space-time, with initial

748:   data in weighted Sobolev spaces allowing singular behaviour at

749:   the boundary, or with polyhomogeneous initial data. Specifically,

750:   we consider nonlinear symmetric hyperbolic systems of a form which

751:   includes scalar fields with a $\lambda\phi^p$ nonlinearity, as well

752:   as wave maps, with initial data given on a hyperboloid; several of the results proved

753:   apply to general space-times admitting conformal completions at null infinity, as well to

754:   a large class of equations with a similar non-linearity structure.

755:   We prove existence of solutions with controlled

756:   asymptotic behaviour, and asymptotic expansions for solutions when the initial data

757:   have such expansions. In particular we prove that polyhomogeneous

758:   initial data (satisfying compatibility conditions) lead to solutions

759:   which are polyhomogeneous at the conformal boundary $\scrip$ of the

760:   Minkowski space-time.

761: \end{abstract}

762: %\include{phg}\end{document}

763: \eject

764: \tableofcontents

765: 

766: %\include{todo}

767: \section{Introduction}

768: Bondi \emph{et al.} \cite{BBM} together with Sachs \cite{Sachs}

769: and Penrose \cite{penrose:scri}, building upon the pioneering work

770: of Trautman \cite{T,Tlectures}, have proposed in the sixties a set

771: of boundary conditions appropriate for the gravitational field in

772: the radiation regime. A somewhat simplified way of introducing the

773: Bondi-Penrose (BP) conditions is to assume existence of

774: ``asymptotically Minkowskian coordinates'' $(x^\mu)=(t,x,y,z)$ in

775: which the space-time metric $\stsg  $ takes the form

776: \begin{equation}

777:   \label{eq:1}

778:   {\stsg }_{\mu\nu}-\eta_{\mu\nu}=

779:   \frac{\stackrel{\phantom{x}_1}{h}_{\mu\nu}(t-r,\theta,\varphi)}{r} +

780:   \frac{\stackrel{\phantom{x}_2}{h}_{\mu\nu}(t-r,\theta,\varphi)}{r^2} + \ldots\;,

781: \end{equation}

782: where $\eta_{\mu\nu}$ is the Minkowski metric diag$(-1,1,1,1)$,

783: $u$ stands for $t-r$, with $r,\theta,\varphi$ being the standard

784: spherical coordinates on $\R^3$. The expansion above has to hold

785: at, say, fixed $u$, with $r$ tending to infinity. Existence of

786: classes of solutions of the vacuum Einstein equations satisfying

787: the asymptotic conditions \eq{eq:1} follows from the work in

788: \cite{friedrich:cauchy} together with

789: \cite{AndChDiss,CorvinoSchoen,Corvino,ACF}.  As of today it

790: remains an open problem how general, within the class of radiating

791: solutions of vacuum Einstein equations, are those solutions which

792: display the behaviour \eq{eq:1}.  Indeed, the results in

793: \cite{AndChDiss,AC,ChMS,PRLetter,ACF,ChMS} suggest

794: strongly\footnote{\emph{Cf.}  \cite{Kroon1} and references therein

795: for

796:   some further related results.} that a more appropriate setup for such

797: gravitational fields is that of \emph{polyhomogeneous} asymptotic

798: expansions:

799: \begin{equation}

800:   \label{eq:2}

801:   {\stsg }_{\mu\nu}-\eta_{\mu\nu}\in \cAp\;.

802: \end{equation}

803: In the context of expansions in terms of a radial coordinate $r$

804: tending to infinity, the space of polyhomogeneous functions is

805: defined as the set of smooth functions which have an asymptotic

806: expansion of the form

807: \begin{equation}

808:   \label{eq:3}

809:   f \sim \sum_{i=0}^\infty \sum_{j=0}^{N_i} f_{ij}(u,\theta,\varphi) \frac{\ln

810:   ^j r}{r^{n_i}}\;,

811: \end{equation}

812: for some sequences $n_i,N_i$, with $n_i\nearrow\infty$. Here the

813: symbol $\sim$ stands for ``being asymptotic to'': if the

814: right-hand-side is truncated at some finite $i$, the remainder

815: term falls off appropriately faster. Further, the functions

816: $f_{ij}$ are supposed to be smooth, and the asymptotic expansions

817: should be preserved under differentiation.\footnote{ The choice of

818: the sequences $n_i,N_i$ is not arbitrary, and is dictated by the

819: equations at hand. For example, the analysis of $3+1$ dimensional

820: Einstein equations in \cite{ChMS} suggests that consistent

821: expansions can be obtained with $n_i=i$. On the other hand,

822: Theorem~\ref{Twavemap} below gives actually $n_i=i/2$ for

823: wave-maps on $2+1$ dimensional Minkowski space-time.  We note that

824: the $2+1$ dimensional wave map equation is related to the vacuum

825: Einstein equations with cylindrical symmetry (\emph{cf., e.g.},

826: \cite{BChM,CT93,CT293}).}

827: 

828: 

829: The suggestion, that the expansions \eq{eq:2} are better suited

830: for describing the gravitational field in the radiation regime

831: than \eq{eq:1}, arises from the fact that {\em generic} -- in a

832: well defined sense -- initial data constructed in

833: \cite{AndChDiss,AC,ChMS,PRLetter,ACF,ChMS} are polyhomogeneous.

834: This leads naturally to the question, whether polyhomogeneity of

835: initial data is preserved under evolution dictated by wave

836: equations. In this paper we answer in the affirmative this

837: question for semi-linear wave equations, and for the wave map

838: equation, on Minkowski space-time. We develop a functional

839: framework appropriate for the analysis of such questions.

840: %We prove

841: %preservation of polyhomogeneity for a class of linear symmetric

842: %hyperbolic systems.

843: We prove local in time existence of solutions for classes of

844: equations that include the semi-linear wave equations and the wave

845: map equation on Minkowski space-time, with conormal and with

846: polyhomogeneous initial data. We show that polyhomogeneity is

847: preserved under evolution when appropriate (necessary) corner

848: conditions are satisfied by the initial data. We note that the

849: initial data considered here are  more singular than allowed in

850: the existing related results \cite{Bony,MelroseRitter,Joshi}. We

851: are planning to analyse the corresponding problems for the vacuum

852: Einstein equation in a forthcoming publication, see also

853: \cite{OLthese}.

854: 

855: Our main results are the existence and polyhomogeneity of

856: solutions with appropriate polyhomogeneous initial data for the

857: nonlinear scalar wave equation, and for the wave map equation. We

858: achieve this in a few steps. First, we prove local existence of

859: solutions of these equations in weighted Sobolev spaces, {\em

860: cf.}\/ Theorems~\ref{T2} and \ref{T2w}. The next step is to obtain

861: estimates on the time derivatives, {\em cf.}\/ Theorems~\ref{T2t},

862: \ref{T2wt} and \ref{2dT2wt}. Those estimates are uniform in time

863: in a neighbourhood of the initial data surface if the initial data

864: satisfy compatibility conditions. Somewhat surprisingly, we show

865: that all initial data in weighted Sobolev spaces, not necessarily

866: satisfying the compatibility conditions, evolve in such a way that

867: the compatibility conditions will hold on all later time slices;

868: see Corollary~\ref{C1t} and Theorems~\ref{T2wt} and \ref{2dT2wt}.

869: Finally, in Theorems~\ref{T2phg} and \ref{Twavemap} we prove

870: polyhomogeneity of the solutions with polyhomogeneous initial

871: data; this requires a hierarchy of compatibility conditions. We

872: hope to be able to show in a near future that polyhomogeneity of

873: solutions can be established, for polyhomogeneous initial data,

874: with a finite number of compatibility conditions.

875: 

876: The restriction to Minkowski space-time in Theorem~\ref{Twavemap}

877: is not necessary, and is only made for simplicity of presentation

878: of the results; the same remark applies to Theorem~\ref{T2}.

879: Similarly the choice of the initial data hypersurface as the

880: standard unit hyperboloid is not necessary.

881: 

882: This work is organised as follows: First, the reader is referred

883: to  Appendix~\ref{S2} for definitions, notations, and the

884: functional spaces involved; we also develop  calculus in those

885: spaces there. In Section~\ref{ss1} we briefly recall Penrose's

886: conformal completions, as they provide the link between the

887: asymptotic behavior of fields and the local analysis carried on in

888: this work. In Section~\ref{S3} we consider linear equations. There

889: the key elements of our analysis are: a) Proposition~\ref{PL.1}

890: and its variations, which give {\em a priori} estimates in

891: weighted Sobolev spaces; b) the mechanism for proving

892: polyhomogeneity, provided in the proof of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1}.

893: The transition from the linear weighted Sobolev estimates to their

894: nonlinear counterparts is done in Sections~\ref{sslwe} and

895: \ref{Swave}. This has already been outlined above, and requires a

896: considerable amount of work. In Appendix~\ref{SODEsws} we prove

897: several auxiliary results on ODE's, some of which are fairly

898: straightforward; as those results are  used in the body of the

899: paper in various, sometimes involved, iterative arguments, it

900: seemed convenient to have precise statements at hand.

901: 

902: Some of the results proved here have been announced in

903: \cite{ChLNantes}.

904: 

905: %\usepackage{srcltx}

906: \newcommand{\phg}{\mbox{\scriptsize \rm phg}}

907: \section{Conformal completions}\label{ss1}

908: The aim of this section is to set-up the framework necessary for

909: our considerations; the results here are well known to

910: relativists, but perhaps less so to the PDE community. In any case

911: they are needed to establish notation. Consider, thus, an $n+1$

912: dimensional space-time $({\mycal M},\stsg)$ and let

913: \begin{equation}

914:   \label{C.1}

915: \tilde{\stsg} = \Omega^{2}\stsg \;.

916: \end{equation}

917: Let $\Box _h$ denote the wave operator associated with a

918: Lorentzian metric $h$,

919: $$\Box_h f= {1\over\sqrt{|\det h_{\rho\sigma}|}} \pmu (\sqrt{|\det

920:   h_{\alpha\beta}|}h^{\mu\nu} \partial_\nu f).$$

921: We recall that the scalar curvature $R =R(\stsg)$ of $\stsg $ is

922: related to the corresponding scalar curvature $\tilde{R} =

923: \tilde{R}(\tilde{\stsg })$ of $\tilde{\stsg }$ by the formula

924: \begin{equation}

925: \tilde{R}\Omega^2 = R -2n \left\{ {1\over

926: \Omega}\Box_{\stsg}\Omega +{n-3 \over

927:   2} {|\nabla\Omega|^2_\stsg  \over \Omega^2}\right\}\;.

928: \label{C.2}

929: \end{equation}

930: It then follows from (\ref{C.2}) that we have the identity

931: \begin{equation}

932: \Box_{\tilde{\stsg }} (\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f)=

933: \Omega^{-{n+3\over 2}}\left( \Box_\stsg  f +{n-1 \over

934: 4n}(\tilde{R}\Omega^2 -R)f\right)\;. \label{C.3}

935: \end{equation}

936: It has been observed by Penrose~\cite{penrose:scri} that the

937: Minkowski space-time $({\mycal M},\eta)$ can be conformally

938: completed to a space-time with boundary $(\tM,\tilde{\eta})$,

939: $\tilde{\eta}=\Omega^{-2} \eta$ on ${\mycal M}$, by adding to

940: ${\mycal M}$ two null hypersurfaces, usually denoted by $\scrip$

941: and $\scri^-$, which can be thought of as end points ($\scrip$)

942: and initial points ($\scri^-$) of inextendible null geodesics

943: \cite{NewmanAF,WaldBook,penrose:scri}. We will only be interested

944: in ``the future null infinity'' $\scrip$; an explicit construction

945: (of a subset of $\scrip$) which is convenient for our purposes

946: proceeds as follows: for $(x^0) ^2 <\displaystyle \sum_{i}(x^i

947: )^2$ we define \be y^\mu = {x^\mu\over x^\alpha x_\alpha} \;

948: ;\label{C.4} \ee in the coordinate system $\{ y^\mu\} $ the

949: Minkowski metric $\eta \equiv -(dx^0)^2 +(dx^1)^2 +(dx^2)^2

950: +(dx^3)^2

951: %dr^2 +r^2(d\theta^2+\sin^2\theta d\varphi^2)

952: = \eta_{\alpha\beta}dx^\alpha dx^\beta$ takes the form \beqa &\eta

953: = \displaystyle{1\over \Omega^2} \eta_{\alpha\beta} dy^\alpha

954: dy^\beta \;,\label{C.5}\qquad

955: \Omega =  \eta_{\alpha\beta}y^\alpha y^\beta \;.&%\nonumber

956: \eeqa We note that under (\ref{C.4}) the exterior of the light

957: cone $C_0^{x^\mu} \equiv\{ \eta_{\alpha\beta} x^\alpha x^\beta

958: =0\} $ emanating from the origin of the $x^\mu$-coordinates is

959: mapped to the exterior of the light cone $C_0^{y^\mu} = \{

960: \eta_{\alpha\beta}y^\alpha y^\beta =0 \} $ emanating from the

961: origin of the $y^\mu$-coordinates. The conformal completion is

962: obtained by adding $C_0^{y^\mu}$ to ${\mycal M}$,

963: $$\tM = {\mycal M} \cup (C_0^{y^\mu}\setminus \{0\} )\;,$$

964: with the obvious differential structure arising from the

965: coordinate system $y^\mu$.  We shall use the symbol $\scri$ to

966: denote $C_0^{y^\mu}\setminus \{0\}$, and $\scrip$ to denote

967: $C_0^{y^\mu}\setminus \{0\}\cap \{ y^0>0\} $. As already

968: mentioned, $\scri$ so defined is actually a subset of the usual

969: $\scri$, but this will be irrelevant for our purposes.

970: 

971: We note that (\ref{C.4}) is singular at the light cone

972: $C_0^{x^\mu}$. This is again irrelevant from our point of view

973: because we are only interested in the behaviour of the solutions

974: near $\scrip$, and finite speed of propagation allows us, for that

975: purpose, to disregard what happens near $C_0^{x^\mu}$.

976: 

977: The above procedure can be adapted for several metrics of

978: interest, such as the Schwarzschild, Kerr, or Robinson-Trautman

979: metrics, to similarly yield conformal completions of space-time by

980: the addition of null hypersurfaces $\scrip$. This observation was

981: at the origin of Penrose's proposal to describe systems which are

982: asymptotically flat in lightlike directions through the use of

983: conformal completions.

984: 

985: It is noteworthy that the conformal technique allows one to reduce

986: global-in-time existence problems to local ones; this has been

987: exploited by various authors

988: \cite{ChBPisa,ChristodoulouCPAM,ChBGu,ChBdeSitter,ChBglwa,ChBNou}

989: for wave equations on a fixed background space-time. Further,

990: Friedrich \cite{Friedrich,FriedrichSchmidt,HelmutJDG} has used

991: this approach to obtain a global existence result for Einstein

992: equations to the future of a ``hyperboloidal'' Cauchy surface,

993: with ``small'' smoothly conformally compactifiable initial data,

994: \emph{cf.} also \cite{FriedrichdS,Friedrich:aDS,Friedrich:Pune}.

995: 

996: On a more modest level, the identity \eq{C.3} can be used as a

997: starting point for the analysis of the asymptotic behaviour of

998: solutions of the scalar wave equation near $\scrip$, as it reduces

999: the problem to a study of solutions near a null hypersurface. This

1000: is the approach used in this paper.  There are associated

1001: identities for fields of any spin \cite{penrose:scri}, which

1002: provide a convenient framework for similar questions for those

1003: fields.

1004: 

1005: \section{A  class of linear symmetric   hyperbolic systems} \label{S3}

1006: 

1007: In this section we  define a

1008:   class of linear symmetric hyperbolic first order systems on a set of

1009:   the form $ M_{x_0}\times I$, where $I$ is an interval corresponding

1010:   to the time variable, which will be denoted by $\tau$, and

1011:   we derive our key energy inequality

1012:   in \emph{weighted}

1013:  Sobolev spaces. (We note that

1014:   in some of our further applications the vector $\partial/\partial

1015:   \tau$ will be lightlike, and not timelike as is usually the case.

1016:   It should be pointed out that in our conventions the time variable

1017:   is  the last coordinate, allowing $x$ to be the first variable,

1018:   consistently with  the conventions of the preceding sections.)

1019:  We start by introducing some notation for the sets within the

1020:  ``space-time'' $M_{x_0}\times I$, which will be relevant in what

1021:  follows\footnote{The motivation for the factors of $2$, and the general form

1022:   of the sets   considered, arises as follows: The set $\partial

1023:   M\times I$ should be thought of as a smooth null hypersurface in

1024:   space-time; \emph{e.g.}, in Minkowski

1025:   space-time with Minkowskian coordinates $y^\mu$, it can be the

1026:   intersection of the half-space $\{y^0\geq\frac{1}2\} $ with the   light cone

1027:   emanating from   the origin $y^{\mu}=0$ . Then $\tau$ is the

1028:   Minkowski time, perhaps shifted by a constant, say

1029:   $\tau=y^0-\frac{1}{2}$. The coordinate $x$ is  a coordinate

1030:   which vanishes on $\partial M\times I$, in the current example \emph{e.g.}

1031:   $x=\sqrt{\sum (y^i)^2}-y^0$. Finally, in such a Minkowskian setup,

1032:   the hypersurfaces $x=x_1-2\tau$,

1033:   which determine  one of the boundaries of the $\Sigma$'s and

1034:   $\Omega$'s defined in \eq{L.7al}, correspond to the

1035:   converging light cones $y^0+\sqrt{\sum

1036:     (y^i)^2}=\const$. The restrictions $2(x_2+t)<x_1\leq x_0$  (in the

1037:   definition of $\Sigma_{x_2,x_1,t}$)  and $2(x_2+T)<x_1$ (in the

1038:   definition of $\Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}$) are not   necessary, and are

1039:   only made    for simplicity of discussion.}:

1040:  \begin{deqarr} \label{L.7.0}& t\geq 0,

1041: \quad 2(x_2+t)<x_1\leq x_0,\qquad \Sigma_{x_2,x_1,t} = \{

1042: \tau=t, \ x_2< x < x_1 -2t\}, &\nn \\ &&\\

1043: & T>0,\quad 2(x_2+T)<x_1\leq x_0,\qquad \Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}

1044: =\bigcup_{0<

1045:   \tau< T} \Sigma_{x_2,x_1,\tau},  & \\

1046: &  0\leq 2t<x_1\leq x_0\;,\qquad \sigx t = \{ \tau=t, 0< x<

1047: x_1-2t\}, &\\

1048: & 0<2T<x_1, \qquad \Omega_{x_1,T} = \bigcup_{0< t< T} \sigx t \;.&

1049: \label{L.7}\arrlabel{L.7al}\end{deqarr} There is a natural

1050: identification between $\Sigma_{x_2,x_1,t}$ and $M_{x_2,x_1-2t}$,

1051: similarly between $\sigx t$ and $M_{x_1-2t}$,

1052: %\emph{etc.},

1053: and we shall freely make use of such identifications throughout.

1054: We shall write $\|f(t)\|_{\Hak}$ for $ \|f|_{\sigxx t}\|_{\Hak

1055: (\sigxx t

1056:   )}$, or for $ \|f|_{\sigx t}\|_{\Hak (\sigx t )}$, \emph{etc.}; the

1057: distinction should be clear from the context.

1058: 

1059: We shall be interested in symmetric hyperbolic first order systems

1060: which in local coordinates take the form

1061: \begin{equation} \left[A^\mu (z^\nu)\partial_\mu + A(z)\right]

1062: f=F,\label{L.1}

1063: \end{equation}

1064: where $z^\nu = (y^i,\tau)$, with the following properties:

1065: 

1066: $\mcC 1$) %$f$ and $F$ take values in $\R^{N_1} \times \R^{N_2}$; we will

1067: %write

1068: $f$ and $F$ are sections of a bundle which is a direct sum of two

1069: $N_1$ and $N_2$ dimensional Riemannian bundles; we will write

1070: \begin{equation}

1071: f=\left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi \\ \psi \end{array}\right)

1072: \;,\qquad F=\left(\begin{array}{c} a \\ b \end{array}\right) \; .

1073: \label{L.2} \end{equation} In local coordinates $\varphi$ and $a $

1074: are thus $\R^{N_1}$ valued, while $\psi$ and $b $ are $\R^{N_2}$

1075: valued. The respective scalar products will be denoted by

1076: $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rspone$ and $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rsptwo$. We

1077: shall use the generic symbol $\nabla$ to denote\footnote{In some

1078: situations

1079:   \eq{eq:covder} might fail to hold, and some undifferentiated

1080:   supplementary terms will occur at the right-hand-side of

1081:   \eq{eq:covder}. We note that our results will not be affected by the

1082:   occurrence of such terms, provided those terms satisfy bounds as in

1083:   \eq{L.6.2}.} a covariant derivative compatible with those scalar

1084: products, \emph{e.g.}, if $X$ is a vector field on

1085: $\Omega_{x_0,T}$, then

1086: \begin{equation}

1087:   \label{eq:covder}

1088:   X(\langle\phi,\psi\rspone)=\langle\nabla_X\phi,\psi\rspone +

1089: \langle\phi,\nabla_X\psi\rspone\;,

1090: \end{equation}

1091: similarly for $\langle\cdot,\cdot\rsptwo$. $\nabla$ will also be

1092: assumed to be compatible with every other structure at hand

1093: whenever useful in the context, \emph{e.g.} a Riemannian metric on

1094: $M$, \emph{etc.}

1095: 

1096: $\mcC2$) The left hand side of (\ref{L.1}) can be written as

1097: \begin{equation}

1098: \left(\begin{array}{ll} E^\mu_- \nabla _\mu \varphi& + L\psi \\ -

1099: L^\dagger \varphi &+ E^\mu_+ \nabla_\mu \psi \end{array}\right)+

1100: \left(\begin{array}{cc}B_{11} & B_{12} \\ B_{21} &B_{22}

1101: \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c}\varphi\\\ \psi

1102: \end{array}\right)\;,

1103: \label{L.3} \end{equation} where $L$ is a first order differential

1104: operator. Here $L^\dagger$ denotes the formal adjoint of $L$, in

1105: the sense that if $\Omega = M$, or $M_{x_1}$, or $M_{x_2,x_1}$,

1106: and if $\varphi,\psi$ are in $C_1 ({\overline{\Omega}})$, then

1107: \begin{equation}\int_{\Omega} \langle \varphi, L \psi \rspone \;\dmu=

1108: \int_{\Omega} \langle L^\dagger \varphi,\psi

1109: \rsptwo\;\dmu\;,\label{L.4}

1110: \end{equation} where $\dmu$ is a measure on $M$ which will, we hope,

1111: be obvious from the context. By density Equation (\ref{L.4}) will

1112: still hold with $\Omega=M_{x_2,x_1}$ for all $\alpha,\beta\in\R$,

1113: all $\varphi \in {{\HH }^\alpha_1}(M_{x_2,x_1})$ and all $ \psi

1114: \in {{\HH }^\beta_1}(M_{x_2,x_1})$. Equation (\ref{L.4}) forces

1115: $L$ not to contain any $\tau$- or $x$- derivatives, where the

1116: letter $x$ denotes a coordinate as defined in Section~\ref{S2},

1117: thus

1118: \begin{equation}

1119: \label{eq:L.4.1} L=\ell^A(x,v,\tau)\partial_A + \ell(x,v,\tau)\;.

1120: \end{equation}

1121:  It follows that the principal part of the system \eq{L.3} is of

1122: the form \be \label{sheq}\left(\begin{array}{ll} E^\mu_-

1123: \partial_\mu & \ell^A\partial_A \\ (\ell^A)^t\partial_A & E^\mu_+

1124: \partial_\mu

1125: \end{array}\right)\;, \ee where $A^t$ denotes the transpose of a matrix

1126: $A$. \Eq{sheq} explicitly shows that \eq{L.3} is symmetric

1127: hyperbolic when the $E^\mu_{\pm}$'s are symmetric with

1128: $E^\tau_{\pm}$ positive definite; the notions of ``symmetric

1129: hyperbolic'' and ``symmetrizable hyperbolic'' are identified

1130: throughout this work.

1131: 

1132: The hypotheses above will be assumed throughout this section.

1133: \subsection{Estimates on the space derivatives of the solutions, $\alpha<-1/2$}

1134:  Let us

1135: pass now to the description of the hypotheses needed to derive

1136: weighted energy estimates for space derivatives of $f$. To obtain

1137: such estimates, we shall require the existence of a constant $C_1$

1138: such that the (matrix-valued) coefficients $\ell^A$ and $\ell$

1139: satisfy, in the relevant range of $\tau$'s,

1140: \begin{equation}

1141: \label{eq:L.4.2}

1142: \|\ell(\tau)\|_{\gok\mxtau } +\sum_A\|\ell^A(\tau)\|_{\gok\mxtau } \leq C_1 %\in {\cG}^0_k

1143: \;.

1144: \end{equation}

1145: Similarly writing

1146: \begin{equation}

1147: \label{eq:L.4.3} L^\dagger=\ell^{\dagger A}(x,v,\tau)\partial_A +

1148: \ell^\dagger(x,v,\tau)\;,

1149: \end{equation}

1150: we require

1151: \begin{equation}

1152: \label{eq:L.4.4}

1153: \|\ell^{\dagger}(\tau)\|_{\gok\mxtau } +\sum_A\|\ell^{\dagger A}(\tau)\|_{\gok\mxtau } \leq C_1 %\in {\cG}^0_k

1154: \;.

1155: \end{equation}

1156: 

1157: $\mcC3$) The matrices $E^\mu_{\pm}$ are symmetric and  satisfy

1158: %\begin{equation}

1159: %E^\mu_+ \partial_mu t \geq \varepsilon Id, E^\mu_+ \partial_mu x

1160: %< - \varepsilon Id,|E^\mu_- \partial_mu x| \geq \varepsilon

1161: %Id,Cx, \label{L.5} \end{equation}

1162: \begin{equation}

1163: E^\mu_\pm n_\mu \geq \varepsilon \Id\;,\qquad E^\mu_+ \partial_\mu

1164: x \leq - \varepsilon \Id\;,\qquad |E^\mu_- \partial_\mu x| \leq

1165: C_1x\;, \label{L.5} \end{equation} for some $\varepsilon > 0$.

1166: Here $n_\mu$ denotes the field of future directed (\emph{i.e.},

1167: $\backg(d\tau,n)>0$) $\backg$-unit normals to the surfaces

1168: $\{\tau=\const\}$, where $\backg$ is an auxiliary Riemannian

1169: metric $\backmg$ on $M$. (Later on we will mainly be interested in

1170: the case of $E^\mu_+$s of the form $E^\mu_\pm = e^\mu_\pm \otimes

1171: \Id$, for some vector fields $e^\mu_\pm$.) For simplicity we shall

1172: also assume

1173: \begin{equation}

1174:   \label{eq:simpl}

1175:   \partial_i E^{\tau}_\pm = 0\;;

1176: \end{equation}

1177: this is by no means necessary, but is sufficient for the purposes

1178: of this paper. We will further assume\footnote{\label{densfoot}We

1179: use a convention in which the covariant derivatives $\nmu

1180: E^\mu_{\pm}$ include terms associated with the vector density

1181: character of $X^\mu$ defined by \eq{L.11}; in particular this

1182: should be taken into account when verifying that the estimates

1183: \eq{L.6.0}-\eq{L.8.n} hold.} that the $E^\mu_ -$'s satisfy a bound

1184: of the form:

1185: \begin{eqnarray}

1186: \| E^A_- (\tau)\|_{{\cG}^0_k\mxtau }+ \| E^x_-

1187: (\tau)\|_{{\cG}^1_{k}\mxtau }+\|\nabla_\mu  E^\mu_ -(\tau)

1188: \|_{L^\infty\mxtau } & \leq & C_1\;. \nn\\

1189: &&\label{L.6.0}\end{eqnarray}

1190: %While \eq{L.6.0} does allow for blow--up for

1191: As far as the $ E^\mu_+$'s are concerned, we allow singular

1192: behaviour which should, however, be somewhat less singular than

1193: $1/x$; to control that, we require existence of a function

1194: $\err:\R^+\to\R^+$, satisfying $\lim_{x\to0}\err(x)=0 $, such that

1195: for $0<x\leq x_1-2\tau$ we have

1196: \begin{equation}

1197: \| E^A_ + (\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{-1}_k(M_{x})}+\|  E^x_ +

1198: (\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{0}_{k}(M_{x})}+ \|x\nabla_\mu E^\mu_+(\tau)

1199: \|_{L^\infty(M_{x})}\leq  \err(x)\;.\label{L.8.n}\end{equation}

1200: When the operators $E^\mu_\pm \nabla_\mu$ are written out

1201: explicitly as

1202: \begin{equation}

1203:   \label{L.6.1}

1204:   E^\mu_\pm \nabla_\mu = E^\mu_\pm \partial_\mu + B_\pm\;,

1205: \end{equation}

1206: we require that

1207: \newcommand{\mx}{(M_x)}

1208: \begin{equation}

1209:   \label{L.6.2}

1210:   \|B_-(\tau)\|_{\gok\mxtau } \leq C_1\;, \quad

1211: \|B_+(\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{-1}_{k}\mx}\leq  \err(x)\;, \quad

1212: 0<x<x_1-2\tau\;.

1213: \end{equation}

1214: 

1215: 

1216: $\mcC4$) The matrices $B_{ab}$, $a,b=1,2$, satisfy the bounds

1217: \begin{eqnarray}

1218: & \|B_{12}(\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{-1/2}_k\mxtau}

1219: +\|B_{21}(\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{-1/2}_k\mxtau}+\|B_{11}(\tau)\|_{{\cG}^0_k\mxtau

1220: }

1221:  \leq

1222: C_1\;, & \nonumber \\ & \|B_{22}(\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{-1}_k\mx}\leq

1223: \err(x)\;, & \label{L.6}\end{eqnarray} this last equation holding

1224: again for $0<x<x_1-2\tau$.

1225: % Similarly to \eq{L.8.n}, we require that

1226: %%It follows\mnote{new footnote; to be completed}\footnote{The conditions

1227: %%  $B_{12},B_{21}\in {\HH }^{-1/2}_k$, and $B_{22}\in{{\cal

1228: %%      H}^{-1}_k} $ can be weakened to  $B_{12},B_{21}\in {\cal

1229: % %      G}^{-1/2}_k$, and $B_{22}\in{{\cal

1230: %%      G}^{-1}_k}$ provided that condition \eq{L.8} is added by hand.}

1231: %%from \eq{L.6} and  \eq{S2.4} that  for $k>n/2$ there exists a function

1232: %%$\err:\R^+\to\R^+$, satisfying

1233: %%$\lim_{x\to0}\err(x)=0 $, such that

1234: %\begin{eqnarray}

1235: %|B_{12}|+ |B_{21}|\leq x^{-1/2} \err(x) \;, \qquad |B_{22}|

1236: %\leq x^{-1} \err(x)\;.\label{L.8}\end{eqnarray}

1237: 

1238: 

1239: Our final hypothesis concerns the ``acausal'' nature of the

1240: boundary of $\Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}$:

1241: 

1242: $\mcC5$) $\partial \Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}$ is ``non-timelike'', in the

1243: sense that for any covector $n_\mu$,

1244: %outwards-directed and normal to

1245: %the differentiable part of $\partial \Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}\cap \{\tau >

1246: %0\}$,

1247: which is positive on outwards-pointing vectors and vanishes on

1248: vectors tangent to $\partial \Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}$  we have, on

1249: $\partial \Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}\cap \{\tau

1250: > 0\} $,

1251: \begin{equation}

1252:   \label{eq:L.5.1}

1253:   E^\mu_\pm n_\mu \geq 0\;.\end{equation}

1254: (We note that \eq{L.5} already guarantees that \eq{eq:L.5.1} holds

1255: on $\partial \Omega_{x_2,x_1,T}\cap \{\tau =T \mbox{\ or\ }

1256: x=0\}$.)

1257: 

1258:  The essential point of the above hypotheses is

1259: that the boundary $\{x=0\}$ is characteristic for \Eq{L.1}, with

1260: the dimension of the relevant kernel being constant over the

1261: boundary.\footnote{We are grateful to H.~Friedrich for useful

1262: discussions concerning this point.} Weighted estimates,  in the

1263: spirit of Proposition~\ref{PL.1} below, near such characteristic

1264: boundaries hold for general symmetric hyperbolic systems, this

1265: will be discussed elsewhere.

1266: 

1267: Weighted energy inequalities in $\Hak$ spaces with arbitrary

1268: values of $k$ may be proved under various hypotheses on the

1269: coefficients which appear in \eq{L.1}.  We note one such result

1270: for systems satisfying $\mcC1)$-$\mcC5)$, which lies in line with

1271: our remaining investigations. The restriction $\alpha\le-1/2$

1272: seems to be inherent to the problem at hand. We consider first the

1273: case $\alpha<-1/2$; the case $\alpha=-1/2$ is handled by the same

1274: methods, under somewhat more restrictive conditions on the

1275: coefficients, in Section~\ref{Sonehalf}.

1276: 

1277: \begin{Proposition} \label{PL.1}Suppose that

1278:   $\alpha<-\demi$, $k>{n\over 2}+1$, $ k\in \N$, and set either

1279:   $f(t)=f|_{\sigx t}$, $0<x_1\leq x_0$, $0\leq t \leq t_{\max}\equiv

1280:   x_1/2$, or $f(t)=f|_{\sigxx t}$, $0<2x_2< x_1\leq x_0$, $0\leq t <

1281:   t_{\max} \equiv x_1-2x_2$.  Under

1282:   the  hypotheses $\mcC1)$-$\mcC5)$,

1283:   there exists a constant $C_2$ depending upon $x_1$, $C_1$, $n$, $N$,

1284:   $k$ and $\alpha$, as well as upon the ``error function''

1285:   $\err$ and the boundary manifold $\partial M$, such that for all

1286: $f$ satisfying~\eq{L.1} for which $f(0)\in

1287: H_{k}^{loc} $ and for all $%\forall

1288: 0<t\leq t_{\max}$ we have

1289: \begin{eqnarray}

1290: \|f(t)\|^2_{\Hak\mxt} & \leq &

1291: C_2e^{C_2t}\left(\|f(0)\|^2_{\Hak(M_{x_1})} +

1292:   \int_0^t

1293:   e^{C_2(t-s)}\left(\|a(s)\|^2_{\Hak\mxs}\right. \right.

1294: \nonumber \\ & &  %\left.

1295: +\left.\|b(s)\|^2_{\Hk {\alpha-1/2}\mxs}\Big)

1296:   ds\right)\;,

1297:  \label{L.10}\end{eqnarray}

1298: with an identical estimate with $M_{x_1-*}$ replaced by

1299: $M_{x_2,x_1-*}$.

1300: %\end{enumerate}

1301: \end{Proposition}

1302: 

1303: \remark The condition $k>n/2+1$ is needed to obtain

1304: $C_1$--weighted control of the solution; there are no restrictions

1305: on $k$ if we have at our disposal an  \emph{a  priori\/} $C_1$

1306: weighted bound for $f$, and if the coefficients in the equation

1307: are suitably regular. In such a case, for $k\leq n/2+1$, the

1308: inequality \eq{L.10} should be modified by adding a term

1309: $\|f(s)\|^2_{{{\cB}^\alpha_{1}(M_{x_1-2s})}}$ under the integral

1310: appearing in  \eq{L.10}.

1311: 

1312: \medskip

1313: 

1314: \proof We start by proving \eq{L.10} on sets $M_{x_2,x_1-t}$; in

1315: that case we are mainly interested to obtain uniform control for

1316: small values of $x_2$, with eventually $x_2$ tending to zero;

1317: without the uniformity in $x_2$ the estimate would of course be

1318: standard. Keeping this in mind, let $X^\mu$ be the

1319: ``energy-momentum vector density'', \be X^\mu = \sum_{0\leq

1320:   |\beta|\leq k}\xadu\{ \langle \decal^\beta\varphi,\emoins

1321: \decal^\beta\varphi\rspone +\langle \decal^\beta\psi,\eplus

1322: \decal^\beta\psi\rsptwo\}. \label{L.11} \ee Suppose, first, that

1323: $f(0)\in H_{k+1}^{loc} $; standard results \cite[Vol.~III]{Taylor}

1324: show that  $f(t)\in H_{k+1}^{loc} $, and we then

1325: have$^{\mbox{\scriptsize \ref{densfoot}}}$ \be \nmu X^\mu = N_1

1326: +D_1 + D_2 + E_1 + E_2 + E_3\;, \quad \label{L.12} \ee where

1327: \begin{eqnarray}

1328: N_1&=& \sum_{0\leq|\beta|\leq k}  {(2\beta_1-2\alpha-1)}x^{-2\alpha-2+2\beta_1} \langle \decal^\beta \psi,(\eplus\pmu x)\decal^\beta \psi\rsptwo\;,\nonumber\\

1329: D_1&=& 2\sum_{0\leq|\beta|\leq k}\xadu \langle \decal^\beta \varphi,\emoins\nmu\decal^\beta \varphi\rspone\;,\nonumber\\

1330: D_2&=& 2\sum_{0\leq|\beta|\leq k}\xadu \langle \decal^\beta \psi,\eplus\nmu\decal^\beta \psi\rsptwo\;,\nonumber\\

1331: E_1&=& \sum_{0\leq|\beta|\leq k} (2\beta_1-2\alpha-1)\xadu

1332: \langle\decal^\beta \varphi\;,{(\emoins\pmu x)\over x} \decal^\beta \varphi\rspone\;,\nonumber\\

1333: E_2&=& \sum_{0\leq|\beta|\leq k}\xadu \langle\decal^\beta \varphi,(\nmu\emoins)\decal^\beta \varphi\rspone\;,\nonumber\\

1334: E_3&=& \sum_{0\leq|\beta|\leq k} \xadu \langle\decal^\beta

1335: \psi,(\nmu\eplus)\decal^\beta \psi\rsptwo\; .  \label{L.13}

1336: \end{eqnarray}

1337: %Suppose, first, that

1338: Since $2\alpha+1 <0$, from (\ref{L.5}) one %then

1339: finds that

1340: \be

1341: \int_{\sigxx s}N_1 \dx\volu \leq -|2\alpha+1|\varepsilon

1342: \|\psi\|^2_{\Hk {\alpha+\demi}} \label{L.14} \ee which is strictly

1343: negative except if $\psi$ is identically zero, and can be used to

1344: control some of the error terms which occur at the right hand side

1345: of (\ref{L.12}). (Here we have used the form \eq{S2.0x} of

1346: $\|\psi\|^2_{\Hk

1347:   {\alpha+\demi}}$.) For example, to control $E_3$ we take any $x_3$

1348: satisfying $2x_2\leq x_3\leq x_1-2s$ (we will make a more precise

1349: choice of $x_3$ later), and we write

1350: \begin{eqnarray*}

1351: \int_{\sigxx s}E_3 \dx\volu & = & E_{3,1} +E_{3,2}\;,\\

1352: E_{3,1} &\equiv& \int_{\sigxx s \bigcap \{ x\geq x_3\}} E_3 \dx\volu \;,\\

1353: E_{3,2} &\equiv& \int_{\sigxx s \bigcap \{ x\leq x_3\}} E_3

1354: \dx\volu\;.

1355: \end{eqnarray*}

1356: By (\ref{L.8.n}), $E_{3,2}$ can be estimated as follows:

1357: \begin{eqnarray*}

1358: |E_{3,2}|&\leq& \sum_{0\leq \beta\leq k} \int_{\sigxx s \bigcap \{ x\leq x_3\}} \err(x)x^{-2\alpha-2+2\beta_1} |\decal^\beta \psi|^2 \dx\volu\\

1359: &\leq& {(2\alpha+1)\varepsilon \over 10} \|\psi\|^2_{\Hk

1360: {\alpha+\demi}}\;,

1361: \end{eqnarray*}

1362: if $x_3$ is chosen small enough.  Once this choice has been done,

1363: we can clearly estimate $E_{3,1}$ as

1364: $$E_{3,1}\leq C\|\psi\|^2_{\Hak} \;,$$

1365: with some constant which is determined by $x_3$.  The integrals of

1366: the error terms $E_1$ and $E_2$ are estimated in the obvious way,

1367: {\em cf.\/} (\ref{L.5}) and (\ref{L.6.0}):

1368: $$\int_{\sigxx s} (E_1+E_2) \dx\volu \leq C\|\varphi(s)\|^2_{\Hak}\;.$$  To

1369: control the terms $D_1$ and $D_2$ we use the evolution equations

1370: (\ref{L.3}): \begin{eqnarray}

1371: \emoins\nmu\decal^\beta \varphi &=& \decal^\beta  (\emoins\nmu\varphi )+ [\emoins \nmu, \decal^\beta  ]\varphi \nonumber \\

1372:  &=& -\decal^\beta (L\psi+B_{11}\varphi+B_{12}\psi -a) + [\emoins\nmu, \decal^\beta ]\varphi \nonumber \\

1373: &=& -L\decal^\beta  \psi +\decal^\beta  a +E_4^\beta\;,

1374: \label{L.15}

1375: \\

1376: E_4^\beta&=& -[\decal^\beta , L]\psi + [\emoins\nmu, \decal^\beta

1377: ]\varphi - \decal^\beta (B_{11}\varphi+B_{12}\psi)\;,\nonumber

1378: \\

1379: \eplus\nmu\decal^\beta \psi & = & L^\dagger \decal^\beta \varphi + \decal^\beta  b +E_5^\beta, \label{L.16} \\

1380: E_5^\beta & = & [\decal^\beta , L^\dagger]\varphi +[\eplus \nmu,

1381: \decal^\beta ]\psi -\decal^\beta

1382: (B_{21}\varphi+B_{22}\psi)\;.\nonumber

1383: \end{eqnarray}

1384: Integrating $D_1+D_2$ over $\sigxx s$, one finds that the terms

1385: containing $L\decal^\beta \psi$ and $-L^\dagger\decal^\beta

1386: \varphi$ in (\ref{L.15}) and (\ref{L.16}) cancel out; the terms

1387: containing $\decal^\beta  a$ and $\decal^\beta  b$ are estimated

1388: as (here the somewhat arbitrarily chosen factor $10$ can be

1389: replaced by any other larger number if desired)

1390: \begin{eqnarray*}

1391: \lefteqn{2\sum_{0\leq |\beta|\leq k}\displaystyle\int_{\sigxx s}

1392: \xadu \left(\langle \decal^\beta  \varphi, \decal^\beta  a\rspone

1393: +\langle \decal^\beta  \psi,\decal^\beta  b\rsptwo \right)\dx\volu

1394: } &&

1395: \\

1396: &&\leq \|\varphi\|^2_{\Hak} +\|a\|^2_{\Hak} +

1397: {(2\alpha+1)\varepsilon

1398:   \over 10} \|\psi\|^2_{\Hk {\alpha+\demi}}

1399: + {10 \over (2\alpha+1)\varepsilon} \|b\|^2_{\Hk

1400: {\alpha-\demi}}\;.

1401: \end{eqnarray*}

1402:  The  terms containing the commutators $[\decal^\beta , L]\psi$ and $[\decal^\beta ,

1403:  L^\dagger]\varphi$,

1404: can be estimated\footnote{This step requires  weighted $L^\infty$

1405: control of $\phi$ and $\psi$, and weighted $W^{1,\infty}$ control

1406: of the coefficients in the equation. The hypothesis $k>n/2+1$ is

1407: not needed if such {\em a priori\/} bounds are known.} using the

1408: weighted commutator inequality (\ref{Mo2}), while the $B_{11}$,

1409: $B_{12}$, \emph{etc.}, terms can be estimated using (\ref{Mo1}),

1410: by an expression of the form

1411: \begin{equation}

1412:   \label{eq:gest}

1413:   CC_1\left(\|\psi\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k} + \|\varphi\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k }+

1414: {(2\alpha+1)\varepsilon \over 10} \|\psi\|^2_{\Hk

1415:   {\alpha+\demi}}\right)\;.

1416: \end{equation}   To estimate the commutator terms

1417: arising from $E_{\pm }^\mu $, we calculate, {\em e.g.}

1418: \begin{eqnarray*}

1419: x^k [E_{\pm}^\mu \pmu, \partial_x^k]\chi &=& \sum_{i=1}^k ({}^i_k)

1420: x^i

1421: (\partial_ x ^i E_{\pm}^\mu)x^{k-i} \px^{k-i}\pmu \chi \\

1422:  &=& E_6 + E_7\;,\\

1423: E_6 &=& \sum_{i=1, \mu \neq x}^k  ({}^i _k )x^i (\px^i

1424: E_{\pm}^\mu) x^{k-i}\px^{k-i} \pmu \chi\;. \end{eqnarray*} The

1425: terms arising from $E_6$ are estimated in a straightforward way as

1426: in \eq{eq:gest} using \eq{Mo1.1}.  The dangerous term $E_7$ can be

1427: written as

1428: \begin{eqnarray*}

1429:  E_7 \equiv \sum_{i=1}^k  ({}^i _k )x^i (\px^i E_{\pm}^x)

1430: x^{k-i} \partial_x^{k-i+1} \chi= \sum_{i=1}^k  ({}^i _k )x^{i-1}

1431: (\px^{i-1} \px E_{\pm}^x) x^{k-i+1} \partial_x^{k-i+1} \chi\;,

1432: \end{eqnarray*} and can thus again be estimated as in \eq{eq:gest}

1433: provided that $\partial_x E^x_-\in{\cG}^0_{k-1}$, that

1434: $\partial_xE^x_+\in{\cG}^{-1}_{k-1}$, and that \eq{L.8.n}  holds.

1435: Other terms in the $E^\mu_\pm$ commutators are handled in a

1436: similar way.

1437: 

1438: Summarizing, we have derived

1439: \begin{equation}

1440:   \label{eq:gest2}

1441:   \left| \int_{\Sigma_{x_2,x_1,s}} \nmu X^\mu d^{n}\mu\right| \leq

1442:   CC_1\left(\|a(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k} +

1443: \|b(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^{\alpha-\demi}_k} +\|\psi(s)\|^2_{{\HH

1444: }^\alpha_k} + \|\varphi(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k }\right)\;,

1445: \end{equation}

1446: where $d^n\mu$ stands for $dx d\nu$, or for any measure uniformly

1447: equivalent to $dx d\nu$. Stokes theorem,

1448: \begin{eqnarray*}

1449: \int_{\Omega_{x_2,x_1,t}} \nmu X^\mu \,d^{n}\mu \,d\tau&=&

1450: \int_{\partial\Omega_{x_1,x_2,t}} X^\mu dS_\mu

1451: %\nonumber \\

1452: %&=& \|f(t)\|^2_{\Hak} - \|f(0)\|^2_{\Hak}

1453: \;, \label{L.18}

1454: \end{eqnarray*}

1455: and our hypotheses on the geometry of the problem lead to

1456: \begin{eqnarray*}

1457:   \|f(t)\|^2_{\Hak} \leq C\left( \|f(0)\|^2_{\Hak} + C_1\int_0^t

1458:     \left(\|a(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k} +

1459: \|b(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^{\alpha-1/2}_k} +\|f(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k}

1460: \right)ds \right)\;.

1461: \end{eqnarray*}

1462: %(\ref{L.17})-(\ref{L.18}) and

1463: Gronwall's lemma establishes (\ref{L.10}) on the family of

1464: hypersurfaces $\displaystyle \sigxx t$ for $f(t)\in H_{k+1}^{loc}

1465: $. If $f(t)\in H_{k}^{loc} $, we  approximate $f(0)$ by a sequence

1466: of functions $f_n(0)$, with $f_n(0)\in H_{k+1}^{loc} $ converging

1467: to $f(0)$ in ${\HH }^\alpha_{k}(\sigxx t)$, and we solve

1468: Equation~\eq{L.1} with initial data $f_n(0)$. The inequality

1469: (\ref{L.10}) applied to the functions $f_n(t)-f_m(t)$ shows that

1470: $f_n(t)$ is Cauchy in $\Hak$; passing to the limit $n\to\infty$

1471: the desired result for $f$'s such that $f(0)\in {\HH

1472: }^\alpha_{k}(\sigxx t) $ easily follows.

1473: 

1474: Since all the constants above are $x_2$ independent,  an

1475: elementary argument using the monotone convergence theorem shows

1476: that the inequality (\ref{L.10}) for the $\displaystyle \sigx t$'s

1477: follows from the one for the $\displaystyle \sigxx t$'s by passing

1478: to the limit $x_2\to0$.  \qed

1479: 

1480: \subsection{Estimates on the space derivatives of the solutions, $\alpha=-1/2$}

1481: \label{Sonehalf}  When $\alpha=-1/2$ we do not have the

1482: $\beta_1=0$ negative terms in $N_1$ at our disposal in \Eq{L.13},

1483: so that we cannot allow coefficients as singular as in the

1484: previous section. To handle that case we keep all the structure

1485: and regularity conditions already made, with the following

1486: supplementary restrictions: \Eq{L.8.n} is replaced by

1487: \begin{equation}

1488: \| E^A_ + (\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{0}_k(M_{x})}+\|  E^x_ +

1489: (\tau)\|_{{\cG}^{1}_{k}(M_{x})}+ \|\nabla_\mu E^\mu_+(\tau)

1490: \|_{L^\infty(M_{x})}\leq  C_1\;.\label{L.8.n1}\end{equation}

1491: Instead of \eq{L.6.2} we require that

1492: \begin{equation}

1493:   \label{L.6.2n}

1494:   \|B_\pm(\tau)\|_{\gok\mxtau }  \leq C_1\;,

1495: \end{equation}

1496: while condition \eq{L.6} becomes

1497: \begin{eqnarray}&\|B_{ab}(\tau)\|_{{\cG}^0_k\mxtau }

1498:  \leq

1499: C_1\;. & \label{L.6n}\end{eqnarray}  We then obtain:

1500: \begin{Proposition} \label{PL.1n}Suppose that

1501:  % $\alpha<-\demi$,

1502:  $k>{n\over 2}+1$, $ k\in \N$, and set either

1503:   $f(t)=f|_{\sigx t}$, $0<x_1\leq x_0$, $0\leq t \leq t_{\max}\equiv

1504:   x_1/2$, or $f(t)=f|_{\sigxx t}$, $0<2x_2< x_1\leq x_0$, $0\leq t <

1505:   t_{\max} \equiv x_1-2x_2$.  Under

1506:   the  hypotheses $\mcC1)$-$\mcC5)$ together with \eq{L.8.n1}-\eq{L.6n}

1507:   there exists a constant $C_2$ depending upon $x_1$, $C_1$, $n$, $N$,

1508:   $k$ and the boundary manifold $\partial M$, such that for all

1509:   %solutions

1510: $f$ satisfying $f(0)\in

1511: H_{k}^{loc} $ and for all $%\forall

1512: 0<t\leq t_{\max}$ we have

1513: \begin{eqnarray}

1514: \|f(t)\|^2_{\Haok\mxt} & \leq &

1515: C_2e^{C_2t}\left(\|f(0)\|^2_{\Haok(M_{x_1})} +

1516:   \int_0^t

1517:   e^{C_2(t-s)}%\left

1518:   \Big(\|a(s)\|^2_{\Haok\mxs}\right.% \right.

1519: \nonumber \\ & &  %\left.

1520: +\left.\|b(s)\|^2_{\Hk {-1/2}\mxs}\Big)

1521:   ds\right)\;,

1522:  \label{L.10n}\end{eqnarray}

1523: %\end{enumerate}

1524: with an identical estimate with $M_{x_1-*}$ replaced by

1525: $M_{x_2,x_1-*}$.

1526: \end{Proposition}

1527: 

1528: \proof The proof is essentially identical, but simpler, to that of

1529: Proposition~\ref{PL.1}. We simply note that the key inequality

1530: \eq{eq:gest2} gets replaced by

1531: \begin{equation}

1532:   \label{eq:gest2n}

1533:   \left| \int_{\Sigma_{x_2,x_1,s}} \nmu X^\mu d^{n}\mu\right| \leq

1534:   CC_1\left(\|a(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^{-1/2}_k} +

1535: \|b(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^{{-1/2}}_k} +\|\psi(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^{-1/2}_k} +

1536: \|\varphi(s)\|^2_{{\HH }^{-1/2}_k }\right)\;.

1537: \end{equation}\qed

1538: 

1539: 

1540: \subsection{Estimates on the time derivatives of the solutions}

1541: \label{ssltest}

1542: 

1543: The hypotheses assumed in the previous section ensure that we can

1544: algebraically solve Equation \eq{L.1} for $\partial_\tau f$, and

1545: then recursively obtain formulae for $\partial^i_\tau f$. Under

1546: the hypotheses of Proposition~\ref{PL.1}, it is then

1547: straightforward to obtain estimates on the norms

1548: \newcommand{\hki}{{\HH}^\alpha_{k-i}(\Sigma_{x_1-2\tau})}

1549: \newcommand{\hkiz}{{\HH}^\alpha_{k-i}(\Sigma_{x_1})}

1550: $$ \|((x\partial_\tau)^i f)(\tau)\|_{\hki}\;, \qquad 0

1551: \leq i\leq k\;,$$ provided suitable weighted conditions are

1552: imposed on the $\tau$ derivatives of the coefficients of

1553: Equation~\eq{L.1}. However, we would like to obtain derivative

1554: estimates without the $x$ factors, uniformly in $\tau$. Clearly a

1555: necessary condition for the existence of such  estimates is that

1556: \begin{equation}

1557:   \label{eq:t1}

1558:   \|(\partial_\tau^i f)(0)\|_{\hkiz}< \infty\;, \qquad 0

1559: \leq i\leq k\;.

1560: \end{equation}

1561: It turns out that \eq{eq:t1} does not need to hold  for arbitrary

1562: initial

1563:  data $f(0)\in \HH ^\alpha_k$, and the requirement that it does lead to the

1564:  \emph{$j$-th order compatibility

1565:    conditions}:

1566:  by definition, these are the conditions on $f(0)$ which ensure that

1567:  Equation~\eq{eq:t1} holds for $0\leq i \leq j$. Since, for sufficiently differentiable

1568:  solutions of Equation~\eq{L.1}, all the

1569:  derivatives $\partial^i_\tau f(0)$ can be explicitly written as an

1570:  $i$-th order differential operator acting on $f(0)$, the compatibility

1571:  conditions are conditions on the behaviour of the initial data $f(0)$

1572:  near the ``corner'' $x=0$; we shall therefore sometimes refer to them

1573:  as ``{\em corner conditions}''. We note that there can be corner conditions

1574:  in weighted Sobolev spaces, or in weighted H{\"o}lder spaces; in this

1575:  section we will be mainly interested in the latter, defined by

1576:  Equation~\eq{s2} below.

1577: 

1578: The following example is instructive in this context: For $0\leq t

1579: < y$ let $g$ be a solution of the $1+1$ dimensional wave equation

1580: \begin{equation}

1581:   \label{eq:2dwe}

1582:   \left({\partial^2 \over \partial t ^2 } - {\partial^2 \over \partial

1583:       y ^2 }\right) g = 0\;,

1584: \end{equation}

1585: with initial condition

1586: $$g\Big|_{t=0} = 2C y^{\alpha +1}\;, \qquad {\partial  g\over \partial t

1587:   }\Big|_{t=0} = 2(\alpha+1) y^{\alpha } \;,$$

1588: for some constants $C,\alpha \in \R$. From Equation~\eq{eq:2dwe}

1589: we can obtain a system of the form \eq{L.3} by introducing $\tau

1590: =t$, $x=y-t$, $\varphi= (g, (\partial_\tau-2\partial_x)g)$, $\psi=

1591: \partial_\tau g$, and setting $L=0$, $E^\mu_-\partial_\mu =

1592: \partial_\tau \otimes \mathrm{id}$, $E^\mu_+\partial_\mu =

1593: (\partial_\tau -2\partial_x)$, so that we have

1594: \begin{eqnarray*}

1595:   \partial_\tau \left(\begin{array}{c} g \\

1596:       (\partial_\tau-2\partial_x)g \end{array} \right)  -

1597:       \left(\begin{array}{c} \psi \\

1598:       0 \end{array} \right) & = &

1599:   \left(\begin{array}{c}

1600: 0 \\ 0

1601:   \end{array}\right)\;,

1602: \\

1603: (\partial_\tau-2\partial_x) \psi  & = & 0\;.

1604: \end{eqnarray*}

1605: The solution is

1606: \begin{eqnarray*}

1607:  g & =&  (C+1) (y+t)^{\alpha+1} +

1608: (C-1)(y-t)^{\alpha+1}

1609: \\  & = & (C+1) (2\tau+x)^{\alpha+1} +

1610: (C-1) x^{\alpha+1}\;.

1611: \end{eqnarray*}

1612: It follows that for each $0\leq \tau\leq 1$, $k\in\N$, and

1613: $\beta<\min\{0,\alpha+1\}$, we have $g(\tau,\cdot)\in

1614: \HH^\beta_k((0,10]) $, consistently with Proposition~\ref{PL.1}.

1615: Somewhat surprisingly, for $\tau>0$ and for all $i\in\N$ the

1616: functions $\partial^i_\tau g(\tau,\cdot)$ are smooth in $x$ up to

1617: $x=0$. However, the $L^\infty$ bound for $\partial^i_\tau

1618: g(\tau,\cdot)$ blows up as $\tau$ tends to zero except in the case

1619: \begin{equation}

1620:   \label{eq:2dwe1}

1621:   C= -1\;.

1622: \end{equation}

1623: Condition \eq{eq:2dwe1} is precisely the corner condition needed

1624: for $\partial_\tau g(0,\cdot)$ to be better behaved than

1625: $\partial_x g(0,\cdot)$ at $x=0$. In the example under

1626: consideration the fulfillment of the first order corner condition

1627: guarantees already that all the $\tau$ derivatives of $g$ will be

1628: well behaved, but we do not expect this to be true in general.

1629: 

1630: Let us pass to a derivation of the desired estimates. We shall use

1631: a method which works directly in weighted H\"older spaces,

1632: avoiding the use of weighted Sobolev spaces; the price one pays is

1633: the need to consider systems somewhat less general than \eq{L.3},

1634: but still general enough for our purposes. More precisely, in this

1635: section we restrict our attention to systems of the form

1636: \begin{deqarr}

1637:   \partial_\tau\varphi + B_{11}\varphi + B_{12}\psi&=& L_{11}\varphi +

1638:   L_{12}\psi + a

1639:   \label{s1a}\;,\\ e_+\psi+

1640:   B_{21}\varphi + B_{22}\psi &=&   L_{21}\varphi +

1641:   L_{22}\psi + b \label{s1b}\;,\arrlabel{s1}

1642: \end{deqarr}

1643: with

1644: $$e_+\psi\equiv (\partial_\tau-2\partial_x)\psi\;.$$

1645: We assume that the $L_{ab}$'s, $a,b=1,2$ are first order

1646: differential operators of the form

1647: \begin{equation}

1648:   \label{s2}

1649:   L_{ab} = L_{ab}^A\partial_A + x L_{ab}^\tau \partial _\tau + x L_{ab}^x

1650:   \partial _x\;,

1651: \end{equation}

1652: with bounded coefficients $L_{ab}^\mu$; no symmetry hypotheses are

1653: made. Clearly the intersection of systems of equations satisfying

1654: \eq{s1} with those of the form \eq{L.3} is non-empty. (As we will

1655: see in Sections~\ref{sslwe} and \ref{Swave} below, non-linear wave

1656: equations on Minkowski space-time can be written in the form

1657: \eq{s1}.) In particular Proposition~\ref{PL.1} provides a large

1658: class of solutions of \eq{s1} such that

1659: $$(\varphi,\psi)(\tau)\in \Hak\mxtau\subset{\mcC}_{\ell} ^  \alpha

1660: \mxtau $$ for $\ell<k-n/2$. We shall therefore assume that a

1661: solution $f=(\varphi,\psi)$ satisfying $f(\tau)\in {\mcC}_{\ell} ^

1662: \alpha \mxtau$ is given, and study its $\tau$-differentiability

1663: properties. For the purposes of the proof below it is convenient

1664: to introduce auxiliary spaces ${\mcC}_{\ell|p} ^ \alpha

1665:    (\Omega)$ defined, for $p\leq \ell$, as the space of functions $f$

1666:    in $C_\ell (\Omega)$ such that the norm

1667: $$\|f\|_{{\mcC}_{\ell|p} ^  \alpha

1668:    (\Omega)}\equiv \sup_{\Omega}\sum _{\begin{array}{c} 0\leq

1669:      i+j+k+|\gamma|\leq \ell

1670: \cr 0\leq k \leq p\end{array}} x^{-\alpha}|(x\partial_x)^i

1671: (x\partial_\tau)^j \decal _v^\gamma \partial_\tau^k f| $$ is

1672: finite. Obviously, ${\mcC}_{\ell|\ell} ^ \alpha={\mcC}_{\ell} ^

1673: \alpha$. Similarly one defines ${\mcC}_{\ell|p} ^ {\alpha,\beta}

1674:    (\Omega)$ using the norm $$\|f\|_{{\mcC}_{\ell|p} ^  {\alpha,\beta}

1675:    (\Omega)}\equiv \sup_{\Omega}\sum _{\begin{array}{c} 0\leq

1676:      i+j+k+|\gamma|\leq \ell

1677: \cr 0\leq k \leq p\end{array}} (1+|\ln

1678: x|)^{-\beta}x^{-\alpha}|(x\partial_x)^i (x\partial_\tau)^j \decal

1679: _v^\gamma \partial_\tau^k f| \;.$$ Clearly ${\mcC}_{\ell|p} ^

1680: {\alpha}   (\Omega)={\mcC}_{\ell|p} ^ {\alpha,0}    (\Omega)$. We

1681: shall write ${\mycal C}^{\alpha,\beta}_\ell$ for ${\mycal

1682: C}^{\alpha,\beta}_{\ell|\ell}$.

1683: \begin{Proposition}

1684:   \label{Ptd} Let $ \alpha\leq 0$, $\ell \in \N$, write $\Omega$ for

1685:   $\OmxT$ (with $\OmxT$ as in \eq{L.7}), and suppose that $L_{ab}^\mu, B_{ab}\in

1686:   \mcC^0_{\ell}(\Omega)$, $a\in \mcC^\alpha_{\ell-1}(\Omega)$, $b\in

1687:   \mcC^{\alpha-1}_{\ell-1}(\Omega)$. Consider $f\equiv (\varphi,\psi)$

1688:   --- a solution of \eq{s1} satisfying $$\forall

1689:   \tau\in[0,T]\qquad f(\tau)\in {\mcC}_{\ell} ^ \alpha \mxtau\;.$$  Then:

1690: \begin{enumerate}

1691: \item For all $\epsilon>0$ we have

1692:   $$ (\varphi,\psi)\in {\mcC}_{\lfloor\ell/2\rfloor} ^ {\alpha,\beta}

1693:   \left(\Omega\cap\{x+2\tau > \epsilon\}\right)\;.$$ Further,

1694:   for any $\tau>0$ the compatibility conditions of order

1695:   $p=\lfloor\ell/2\rfloor$ (the integer part of $\ell/2$) are satisfied by

1696:   $(\varphi(\tau),\psi(\tau))$:

1697:   \begin{equation}

1698:     \label{s2.}

1699:     \forall \;1\leq i\leq p  \qquad \partial^i_\tau \varphi(\tau),

1700:     \partial^i_\tau \psi(\tau) \in {\mcC}_{\ell-i} ^ {\alpha,\beta}

1701:                                 %{\alpha,\beta}

1702: \mxtauz\;,

1703:   \end{equation}

1704:  Here $\beta=\lfloor\ell/2\rfloor$ if

1705:   $\alpha =0$, and $\beta=0$ otherwise.

1706: \item If there exists $1\leq p\leq \ell/2$, $p\in\N$, such that \Eq{s2.}

1707: holds with $\beta=0$ at $\tau=0$, then

1708: \begin{equation}

1709:     \label{s3}

1710: %    \varphi \in \cap_{1\leq k\leq p}{\mcC}_{\ell+1-k|k} ^  \alpha

1711: %   (\Omega)\subset{\mcC}_{p} ^  \alpha (\Omega)\;,\qquad  \psi \in \cap_{1\leq k\leq p}{\mcC}_{\ell-k|k} ^  \alpha

1712: %   (\Omega)\subset{\mcC}_{p} ^  \alpha (\Omega)\;.

1713:     (\varphi, \psi) \in{\mcC}_{\ell-p|p} ^{\alpha,\beta}

1714:    (\Omega) \subset {\mcC}_{p} ^{\alpha,\beta}    (\Omega)\;,

1715: \end{equation}

1716: with $\beta =p $  if

1717:   $\alpha =0$, and $\beta=0$ otherwise.

1718:  \end{enumerate}

1719: \end{Proposition}

1720: \remark The method of proof here gives a  number of well

1721: controlled time derivatives smaller by a factor 2 than the number

1722: of space ones. This is, however, irrelevant, when $\ell=\infty$,

1723: which is the main point of interest in this work. We note that

1724: energy estimates as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2t} below

1725: provide an alternative, more complicated way of establishing a

1726: stronger statement, with more controlled time derivatives for

1727: large $\ell$'s. In the linear case considered here the function

1728: $F$ occuring there vanishes, so that all the complications arising

1729: from the non-linearities disappear, and somewhat stronger results

1730: can be obtained using the methods there.

1731: 

1732: \medskip

1733: 

1734: \proof By rearranging terms and redefining the $L_{ab}$'s, the

1735: $B_{ab}$'s, and the source functions $a$ and $b$  we may without

1736: loss of generality assume that

1737: $$L^\tau_{ab}\equiv 0\;.$$

1738: One can  rewrite Equations~\eq{s1} as $x\partial_\tau

1739: (\varphi,\psi)=$ a partial differential operator linear in

1740: $x\partial_x$ and $\partial_v$; by iteration this immediately

1741: yields $(\varphi,\psi)\in \mcC^\alpha_{\ell|0}$. \Eq{s1a} shows

1742: then that $\partial_\tau\varphi\in \mcC^\alpha_{\ell-1|0}$, hence

1743: $\varphi\in \mcC^\alpha_{\ell|1}$. On the other hand, \Eq{s1b}

1744: gives

1745:  $e_+(\psi)\in \mcC^\alpha_{\ell-1|0}+ \mcC^{\alpha-1}_{\ell-1}$,

1746: hence   $\partial_\tau e_+(\psi)\in \mcC^{\alpha-1}_{\ell-2|0}$.

1747: In order to extract further information out of \Eq{s1b} we use the

1748: straightforward identity

1749: \begin{equation}

1750:   \label{s6}

1751:  \psi(x,v^A,\tau)=\psi(x+2\tau,v^A,0) + \int_{x/2}^{\tau+x/2}

1752: e_+(\psi)(2v,v^A,\tau-v+x/2) \dv\;.

1753: \end{equation}

1754: (We note that for each $\epsilon>0$ the first term above is

1755: uniformly $C_\ell$ on the set $\Omega\cap\{x+2\tau\geq

1756: \epsilon\}\cap \{x\leq x_0\}$.) Differentiating \Eq{s6} one

1757: obtains

1758: %\begin{equation}

1759: %  \label{s7}

1760: $$ \partial_\tau\psi(x,v^A,\tau)=\partial_\tau\psi(x+2\tau,v^A,0) +

1761:  \int_{x/2}^{\tau+x/2} \partial_\tau e_+(\psi)(2v,v^A,\tau-v+x/2) \dv\;;

1762: $$%\end{equation}

1763: since  $\alpha\leq0$ and $\partial_\tau e_+(\psi)\in

1764: \mcC^{\alpha-1}_{\ell-2|0}$, straightforward estimations show that

1765: $\partial_\tau \psi\in\mcC^\alpha_{\ell-2|0}$, hence $

1766: \psi\in\mcC^\alpha_{\ell-1|1}$ if $\alpha\neq 0$, while

1767: $\psi\in\mcC^{0,1}_{\ell-1|1}$ when $\alpha= 0$.

1768: 

1769: Let $\beta_r=0$ if $\alpha\neq 0$ and $\beta_r=r$ when $\alpha=0$,

1770: and suppose that $\varphi\in\mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell+1-r|r}$

1771: and $ \psi\in\mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell-r|r} $ for some $1\leq r

1772: \leq (\ell-1)/2$; we have already shown this to hold for $r=1$.

1773: Equation~\eq{s1a} gives $$\partial_\tau\varphi\in

1774: \mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell-r-1|r}\quad \Longrightarrow \quad

1775: \varphi\in\mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell-r|r+1}\;.$$ It then follows

1776: from \Eq{s1b} that

1777: $$e_+(\psi)\in \mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell-r-1|r}\quad \Longrightarrow \quad

1778: \partial_\tau^{r+1}e_+(\psi)\in\mcC^{\alpha-1,\beta_r}_{\ell-2r-2|0}\;.$$

1779: Differentiating $r+1$ times \Eq{s6} with respect to $\tau$ we

1780: obtain

1781: $$ \partial_\tau^{r+1}\psi(x,v^A,\tau)=\partial^{r+1}_\tau\psi(x+2\tau,v^A,0) +

1782:  \int_{x/2}^{\tau+x/2} \partial_\tau^{r+1} e_+(\psi)(2v,v^A,\tau-v+x/2) \dv\;,

1783: $$

1784: which gives $\partial_\tau^{r+1}

1785: \psi\in\mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell-2r-2|0}$, hence $\psi\in

1786: \mcC^{\alpha,\beta_r}_{\ell-r-1|r+1}$, and the induction is

1787: completed. \qed

1788: 

1789: \subsection{Polyhomogeneous  solutions }

1790: \label{sslphg}

1791: 

1792: We now wish to show that solutions with polyhomogeneous initial

1793: data will be polyhomogeneous.

1794:  Let $\Omega_{x_0,T}$ be defined by \Eq{L.7}; we shall denote by

1795: $\mcA_k^{\delta}(\Omega_{x_0,T})$ the space of functions $f$

1796: defined on $\Omega_{x_0,T}$ which can be written in the form

1797: $$\sum_{i=0}^k \sum_{j=0}^{N_i}

1798: x^{i\delta}\ln^j x \, f_{ij} + f_{\alpha+k\delta+\epsilon}\;,$$

1799: for some $\epsilon>0$, some functions $f_{ij}\in

1800: C_{\infty}(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})$, and some   sequence

1801: $(N_i)$ of non-negative integers. We also require that

1802: $f_{\alpha+k\delta+\epsilon}\in

1803: \mcC_{\infty}^{\alpha+k\delta+\epsilon}(\Omega_{x_0,T})$. We set

1804: $$ \mcA_\infty^{\delta}:=\cap_{k\in\N}\mcA_k^{\delta}\;.$$

1805: The following properties are useful in what follows:

1806: \begin{itemize}

1807: \item If $0<x_1<x_0 -T/2$, then a function $f\in

1808: C_\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})$ is in $\mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0T})$ if

1809: and only if for any coordinate patch $\mcO$ of $\pM$ we have $f\in

1810: \mcA_k^\delta({\mcU}_{x_1})$, where ${\mcU}_{x_1} = ]0,x_1[\times

1811: \mcO \times [0,T]$, and if $f\in

1812: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{\textrm{\scriptsize int}}})$, where

1813: $\Omega_{\textrm{\scriptsize int}} = \Omega_{x_0,T} \cap \{x\geq

1814: x_1\} $.

1815: 

1816: 

1817: \item For all $\epsilon >0$ we have $ \mcC_\infty^{\beta+p

1818: \delta+\epsilon}\subset  x^{\beta}\mcA_p^\delta $; in particular $

1819: \mcC_\infty^\epsilon \subset \mcA_0^\delta$;

1820: \item

1821: It  does not hold that $\mcA_k^\delta \subset \mcC_\infty^0$,

1822: however, for all $\epsilon

1823: >0$ we have  $ \mcA_k^\delta \subset

1824: \mcC_\infty^{-\epsilon}$. More precisely, if  $f\in

1825: \mcA_k^{\delta}$,

1826:  then there exists $p\in\N$ such that  $(1+|\ln x|^2)^{-p/2}f \in

1827: \mcC_\infty^0$.

1828: \item As before we assume that $1/\delta \in \N$, which implies $x

1829: \mcA_k^\delta \subset \mcA_{k+1/\delta}^\delta\subset

1830: \mcA_{k+1}^\delta\;. $

1831: \item $\mcA_k^{\delta}$ is stable under multiplication: if $f,g\in

1832: \mcA_k^{\delta} $, then $fg \in \mcA_k^{\delta} $.

1833: \item $\mcA_k^{\delta}$ is stable under differentiation with respect

1834: to $\tau$ and to $v$, as well as under $x\partial_x$: if $f\in

1835: \mcA_k^{\delta} $, then $\partial_\tau f \;, X_i \cdot f $ ($i\geq

1836: 2$), $x\partial_xf \in \mcA_k^{\delta} $, with the vector fields

1837: $X_i$ defined in Section~\ref{S2}, {\em cf.\/}~\Eq{champscoord}.

1838: 

1839: \end{itemize}

1840: 

1841: In this section we will consider  systems of the  form

1842: \begin{deqarr}

1843:   \partial_\tau\varphi + B_{11}\varphi + B_{12}\psi&=& L_{11}\varphi +

1844:   L_{12}\psi + a

1845:   \label{equa1}\;,\\ \partial_x\psi+ B_{21}\varphi + B_{22}\psi &=&

1846:   L_{21}\varphi +

1847:   L_{22}\psi + b \label{equa2}\;,\arrlabel{equa}

1848: \end{deqarr}

1849: with the $L_{ij}$'s, $i,j=1,2$ of the form

1850:  \be L_{ij}=

1851: L_{ij}^{A}\partial_A + L_{ij}^\tau

1852: \partial_\tau + xL_{ij}^x\partial_x\,,

1853: \label{equa1+}\ee with

1854: % \be

1855: %\begin{array}{lcl}

1856: %  L_{11}^{\tau}\in x\mcA_k^{\delta}\;, & L_{11}^x\in x^{2}\mcA_k^\delta\;,&

1857: %  L_{11}^A\in x\mcA_k^\delta\;,\\ L_{12}^\tau\in \mcA_k^\delta\;, &

1858: %  L_{12}^x\in

1859: %  x\mcA_k^\delta\;,& L_{12}^A\in \mcA_k^\delta\;,\\ L_{21}^\tau\in

1860: %  \mcA_k^\delta\;, & L_{21}^x\in x\mcA_k^\delta\;,& L_{21}^A\in

1861: %  \mcA_k^\delta\;,\\

1862: %  L_{22}^\tau\in \mcA_k^\delta\;, & L_{22}^x\in x\mcA_k^\delta\;,&

1863: %  L_{22}^A\in   \mcA_k^\delta\;.

1864: %\end{array}\label{HLdelta}

1865: %\ee

1866:  \be

1867:   L_{11}^{\mu}\in x^\delta\mcA_{k-1}^{\delta}\;, \quad L_{21}^{\mu}\;,

1868:   L_{12}^{\mu}\;, L_{22}^{\mu}\in \mcA_k^\delta \;.

1869: %\end{array}

1870: \label{HLdelta} \ee No symmetry hypotheses  are made on the

1871: matrices $L^\mu_{ij}$. Conditions~\eq{equa1}-\eq{HLdelta} are

1872: easily seen to be compatible with those made elsewhere in this

1873: paper, {\em cf.,

1874:   e.g.,\/} the proof of Corollary~\ref{Cpolylineaire} below. The reader

1875: is warned, however, that the operators $L_{ij}$ here do {\em

1876: not\/} coincide with those in \eq{s1}: to bring \eq{s1} into the

1877: form \eq{equa} one needs to multiply \Eq{s1b} by $-1/2$, transfer

1878: the operator $\partial_\tau$ from the left- to the right-hand-side

1879: of \eq{s1}, and appropriately redefine the $L_{2j}$'s.

1880: 

1881: We start with the following result, which assumes that the

1882: solutions have both space and time derivatives controlled, in the

1883: sense of  weighted Sobolev spaces; recall that this hypothesis can

1884: be justified for equations satisfying moreover the hypotheses of

1885: the previous sections:

1886: \begin{Theorem}\label{Tlemme1}

1887:   Let $\beta,\, \beta'\in \R$,

1888: $k\in \N\cup\{\infty\}$, %with $\beta-1< \beta'$ and $\beta\leq  0$.  L

1889: and let $(\varphi,\psi)$ be  a solution of

1890:   (\ref{equa}) in $

1891:   \mcC_{\infty}^{\beta'}(\Omega_{x_0,T}) $. Suppose that \eq{HLdelta}

1892:   holds, and that

1893:   \begin{deqarr}&

1894:     B_{11}\in \left(\mcA_k^\delta \cap L^\infty\right)

1895:     (\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\qquad

1896: B_{12}, B_{22}, B_{21}\in \mcA_k^\delta (\Omega_{x_0,T}) \;,&

1897: \label{H3first}

1898: \\ &a,b \in x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta (\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,

1899: \qquad\varphi(0)\in x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta(M_{x_0})\;.&

1900: \label{H4first}

1901:   \end{deqarr}

1902:  Then $$\varphi\in

1903: \left(x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta+\mcA_k^\delta\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad

1904: \psi\in  \left(x^{\beta+1}\mcA_{k}^\delta

1905: +x\mcA_{k}^\delta\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})+

1906: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})\;.$$ If one further assumes

1907: $$L_{12}^\mu,B_{12},a,\varphi(0)\in L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,$$

1908: then it also holds that

1909: $$\varphi\in

1910: \left(x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta+\mcA_k^\delta\cap

1911: L^\infty\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;.$$

1912: \end{Theorem}

1913: \proof It is convenient to decompose $B_{11}$ in the obvious way

1914: as

1915:  $$B_{11} = B_{11}^0+ B_{11}^\delta\;,$$ with $B_{11}^\delta\in

1916: x^\delta\mcA_{k-1}^\delta$ and $B_{11}^0\in C_\infty$. We rewrite

1917: (\ref{equa}) as

1918: \begin{deqarr}

1919: \partial_\tau \varphi + B_{11}^0 \varphi & = & c_1\;, \label{equa1.1}

1920: \\

1921: \partial_x \psi  & = & c_2\;, \label{equa1.2}

1922: \end{deqarr}

1923: where

1924: \begin{deqarr}

1925: c_1&:=& L_{11}\varphi + L_{12}\psi + a -B_{12}\psi -

1926: B_{11}^\delta\varphi \;, \label{equa2.1}

1927: \\c_2 &:=&

1928: L_{21}\varphi + L_{22}\psi + b-B_{21}\varphi -B_{22}\psi\;,

1929: \label{equa2.2}

1930: \end{deqarr}

1931: In what follows we let $\epsilon>0$ be a positive constant, which

1932: can be made as small as desired, and which may change from line to

1933: line. We note that $c_2$ is in $ \mcC_\infty

1934: ^{\beta'-\epsilon}+x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta$, and integration in $x$

1935: of \eq{equa1.2}, together with Propositions~\ref{propositionx1}

1936: and \ref{propositionx}, gives

1937:  $$\psi=\psi_{0}+\psi_{\beta'+1-\epsilon}+\psi_{\mbox{\rm\scriptsize phg}}\;,$$

1938: where

1939: $$\psi_{0}(\cdot) =\cases{

1940:          \lim_{x\to 0}\psi(x,\cdot)\;, & {if} $

1941:                         \beta'+1-\epsilon >0$,

1942: \cr  0 \;,& otherwise,}\qquad $$ with $$\psi_{0} \in

1943: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})\;,\quad

1944: \psi_{\beta'+1-\epsilon}\in

1945: \mcC_\infty^{\beta'+1-\epsilon}(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad\psi_{\mbox{\rm\scriptsize

1946: phg}}\in x^{\beta+1}\mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,$$ hence

1947: $$\psi\in C_\infty +

1948: \mcC_\infty^{\beta'+1-\epsilon}+x^{\beta+1}\mcA_k^\delta\;.$$

1949: Since $L_{11}\varphi \in \mcC_\infty ^{\beta'+\delta-\epsilon}$

1950: ($\partial_x\varphi \in \mcC_{\infty}^{\beta'-1}$ and

1951: $xL_{11}^x\in x\mcA_k^\delta\cap \mcC^\delta_0\subset

1952: \mcC^\delta_\infty $; similarly for the other derivatives), we

1953: find that $$c_1 \in \mcA_k^\delta+x^\beta \mcA_k^\delta+

1954: \mcC_\infty ^{\beta'+\delta-\epsilon}\;.$$ We can then apply

1955: Proposition~\ref{proprietetau} to (\ref{equa1.1}) to conclude that

1956: \be\label{indp}\varphi \in \mcA_k^\delta+x^\beta

1957: \mcA_k^\delta+\mcC_\infty ^{\beta'+p\delta-\epsilon}\;,\ee with

1958: $p=1$. Coming back to $c_2$ we find now that  $c_2\in

1959: \mcA_k^\delta+x^\beta \mcA_k^\delta+\mcC_\infty

1960: ^{\beta'+p\delta-\epsilon}$, and by

1961:  Proposition

1962: \ref{propositionx} we obtain  \be\label{indp+1}\psi \in C_\infty+

1963: x\mcA_k^\delta+x^{\beta+1}\mcA_k^\delta+

1964: \mcC_\infty^{\beta'+p\delta+1-\epsilon}\;,\ee still with $p=1$. To

1965: conclude, we proceed by induction; let  $\beta'+p\delta\leq

1966: \beta+k$ and suppose that \Eqs{indp}{indp+1} hold; it follows that

1967: $c_1\in \mcA_k^\delta+ x^{\beta}\mcA_k^\delta+

1968: \mcC_\infty^{\beta'+(p+1)\delta-\epsilon}\;.$  Applying

1969: Proposition~\ref{proprietetau} to (\ref{equa1.1}) gives \eq{indp}

1970: with $p$ replaced by $p+1$. It follows that $c_2\in \mcA_k^\delta+

1971: x^{\beta}\mcA_k^\delta+

1972: \mcC_\infty^{\beta'+(p+1)\delta-\epsilon}$;

1973: Proposition~\ref{propositionx} applied to (\ref{equa2}) gives

1974: \eq{indp+1} with $p$ replaced by ${p+1}$, and the result is

1975: established.  \qed

1976: 

1977: As a straightforward consequence of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1} we

1978: obtain:

1979: 

1980: \begin{Corollary}\label{Cpolylineaire} Let $\beta'\in\R$, let

1981: $(\varphi,\psi)\in \mcC_\infty^{\beta'}(\Omega_{x_0,T})$ be a

1982: solution of the system (\ref{L.3}), and suppose that

1983: \begin{deqarr}&B_{ij}, E_{\pm}^\mu, B_\pm ,\ell,

1984:   \ell^\dagger,\ell^A,(\ell^A)^\dagger\in

1985:   \mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;, &

1986: \label{HP1} \\&

1987:  E_-^\tau \ \mbox{and }\

1988:   E_+^x \ \mbox{ --- invertible,  with  }\  (E_-^\tau)^{-1},

1989: (E_+^x)^{-1}\in   \mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T}) \;,

1990: &\label{HP2}\\&

1991:   {(E_-^\tau)^{-1}E_-^x}   \in

1992:   x\left(\mcA_k^\delta\cap\mcC^\delta_0\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad

1993:   (E_-^\tau)^{-1}E_-^A\in

1994:   %\left(

1995:   x^\delta\mcA_{k-1}^\delta

1996:   %\cap\mcC^\delta_0\right)

1997:   (\Omega_{x_0,T})

1998: %  x\mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})

1999: \;, \nonumber & \\ && \label{HP3}\\ &(E_-^\tau)^{-1}(B_{11}+

2000: B_-)\in L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;.& \label{HP4}\arrlabel{HP}

2001: \end{deqarr}

2002:   If $$a,b \in x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad \varphi(0)\in

2003:   x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta(M_{x_0})\;,$$

2004:   with $\beta\in \R$,

2005:   then $$\varphi\in

2006: \left(x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta+\mcA_k^\delta\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad

2007: \psi\in

2008: \left(x^{\beta+1}\mcA_{k}^\delta+x\mcA_k^\delta\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})+

2009: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})\;.$$

2010:   In particular, if $k=\infty$ then the solution is polyhomogeneous.

2011: \end{Corollary}

2012: \proof: We write Equation~(\ref{L.3}) as

2013:   \begin{eqnarray} \partial_\tau\varphi + (E_-^\tau)^{-1}\left\{ (B_{11}+

2014:   B_-)\varphi +\ell \psi\right\}&=& (E_-^\tau)^{-1}

2015: (E_-^i\partial_i\varphi - \ell^A\partial_A\psi + a

2016:   )\label{equa1'}\nn\\ \partial_x\psi-(E_+^x)^{-1}\left\{\ell^\dagger

2017: \varphi- ( B_{22}+B_+)\psi\right\}  &=&

2018:   (E_-^\tau)^{-1}( (\ell^A)^\dagger\partial_A\varphi +

2019: E_+^\tau\partial_\tau \psi +

2020:   E_+^A\partial_A\psi+ b)\;,

2021: \nn\\ &&\label{equa2'} \end{eqnarray} which is of

2022:   the form  (\ref{equa}), and we note that the hypotheses made on

2023:   the coefficients of \Eq{equa2'} imply those of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1}.

2024:   \proofend.

2025: 

2026:   An unsatisfactory feature of results such as Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1}

2027:   is that uniform estimates both on space and time derivatives of the

2028:   solutions are assumed.

2029:   Recall that uniform control of time derivatives can be

2030:   obtained only if corner conditions are satisfied, and the hypotheses

2031:   of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1} require an infinite number of those to be

2032:   fulfilled. The same techniques can be used to obtain various

2033:   expansions of solutions when a finite number of time derivatives

2034:   are controlled only, but the statements turn to be out somewhat less

2035:   elegant. We give an example of such results when $\delta=1$:

2036: \begin{Theorem}\label{Tlemme2}

2037:   Let $\beta\in \R$,

2038: $k\in \N\cup\{\infty\}$, %with $\beta-1< \beta'$ and $\beta\leq  0$.  L

2039: and let $(\varphi,\psi)$ be  a solution of

2040:   (\ref{equa}) in $

2041:   \mcC_{\ell}^{\beta}(\Omega_{x_0,T}) $ for some $\ell \geq 1$.

2042:   If \Eqs{HLdelta}{HP}   hold with $\delta=1$, then for any

2043:   $\lambda<1$ we have

2044:   \begin{eqnarray}

2045:     &

2046: \displaystyle\varphi\in \left(x^\beta\mcA_k^1+\mcA_k^1

2047: +\cap_{\ell-2j-2\geq0} \mcC^{\beta+j+\lambda} _{\ell-2j-2}

2048: \right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,& \nn \\& \displaystyle \psi\in

2049: \left(x^{\beta+1}\mcA_{k}^1+x\mcA_{k}^1+\cap_{\ell-2j-1\geq0}

2050: \mcC^{\beta+j+1+\lambda} _{\ell-2j-1}\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})+

2051: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})\;. & \label{partexphg}

2052: \end{eqnarray} If one further assumes

2053: $$L_{12}^\mu,B_{12},a,\varphi(0)\in L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,$$

2054: then it also holds that

2055: $$\varphi\in

2056: \left(x^\beta\mcA_k^1+\mcA_k^1\cap L^\infty +\cap_{\ell-2j-2\geq0}

2057: \mcC^{\beta+j+\lambda} _{\ell-2j-2}\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;.$$

2058: \end{Theorem}

2059: 

2060: \proof The result is obtained through a repetition of the proof of

2061: Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1}, keeping track of the differentiability of

2062: the remainder terms. \qed

2063: 

2064:   We are ready now to prove polyhomogeneity of solutions of the Cauchy

2065:   problem for \Eq{L.3}. We consider only the simplest case of

2066:   equations satisfying the conditions \eq{HP+} below, considerably

2067:   more general statements can be proved using similar methods. The

2068:   differentiability hypotheses below are clearly satisfied by

2069:   equations with smooth bounded coefficients; however, they also allow

2070:   for a wide class of equations with polyhomogeneous coefficients.

2071: We restrict ourselves to the case in which the corner conditions

2072: are

2073:   satisfied to arbitrary order; if not, one obtains expansions as in

2074: \eq{partexphg}, with a remainder in which a finite number only of

2075: time

2076:   derivative are controlled; such results can be proved by identical

2077:   arguments, compare the proof of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme2}. We hope

2078:   to be able to show in a near future that the corner conditions

2079:   are not needed, in which case one should obtain polyhomogeneous

2080:   expansions in which uniformity is lost when the corner

2081:   $\tau=x=0$ is approached; this will be discussed elsewhere.

2082: \begin{Theorem}

2083:   \label{Tphglin}

2084: Consider a solution $(\varphi,\psi)\in C_\infty\times C_\infty$ of

2085: the system (\ref{L.3}), suppose that in addition to \eq{L.5},

2086: \eq{eq:simpl}, \eq{eq:L.5.1},

2087:  and \eq{HP1} we have

2088: \begin{deqarr}&B_{11}, B_-,E_{\pm}^\mu, \ell,

2089:   \ell^\dagger\in L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;, &

2090: \label{hp2}\\

2091: &E^\mu_-\Big|_{x=0}=\partial_\tau \otimes \mathrm{id}\;, \qquad

2092: E^\mu_+\Big|_{x=0}=(\partial_\tau-2\partial_x) \otimes

2093: \mathrm{id}\;,\label{hp3} & \\ &E^x_\pm-E^x_\pm\Big|_{x=0}\;,

2094: E^\tau_\pm-E^\tau_\pm\Big|_{x=0} \in

2095: x^{1+\delta}%\%left(

2096: \mcA_\infty^\delta

2097: %\cap\mcC^\delta_0 \right)

2098: (\Omega_{x_0,T}) \;,& \label{hp1} \\ & \quad E_-^A\in

2099: x\mcA_\infty^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;.& \label{hp4}\arrlabel{HP+}

2100: \end{deqarr}

2101:   If $$a,b \in x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad \varphi(0)\in

2102:   x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta(M_{x_0})\;,$$

2103:   with $\beta\in \R$, and if the initial data satisfy {\em corner

2104:   conditions to arbitrary order}, in the sense that

2105: \begin{equation}

2106:   \label{eq:cptphg}

2107:   \forall \; i\in \N \qquad \partial_\tau^i \varphi(0),

2108:   \;\partial_\tau^i \psi(0)\in

2109:   \mcC^\lambda_\infty(M_{x_0})\;,

2110: \end{equation}

2111: for some ($i$-independent) $\lambda\in\R$,  then

2112: $$\varphi\in

2113: \left(x^\beta\mcA_k^\delta+\mcA_k^\delta\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\quad

2114: \psi\in

2115: \left(x^{\beta+1}\mcA_{k}^\delta+x\mcA_k^\delta\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})+

2116: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})\;.$$

2117:   In particular, if $k=\infty$ then the solution is polyhomogeneous.

2118: \end{Theorem}

2119: 

2120: \remark The class of initial data satisfying corner conditions to

2121: arbitrary order is rather large; for example, if an initial data

2122: set $(\varphi(0),\psi(0))$  satisfies them, and if $f,g$ are

2123: arbitrary functions smooth up to boundary on the initial data

2124: hypersurface, then $(\varphi(0)+f,\psi(0)+g)$ will also satisfy

2125: those conditions. More generally, large classes of such initial

2126: data can be constructed using a polyhomogeneous generalization of

2127: the Borel summation lemma.

2128: 

2129: \medskip

2130: 

2131:  \proof The hypothesis \eq{eq:cptphg} with $i=0$ and

2132: Proposition~\ref{PL.1} show that for all $\tau \in [0,T ]$ we have

2133: \begin{eqnarray*} \varphi(\tau),

2134:   \; \psi(\tau)\in

2135:   \mcC^\lambda_\infty(M_{x_0/2})\;.

2136: \end{eqnarray*}

2137: Proposition~\ref{Ptd} shows then that the hypotheses of

2138: Corollary~\ref{Cpolylineaire} are satisfied, and the result

2139: follows. \qed

2140: 

2141: \section{The semi-linear scalar wave equation}

2142: \label{sslwe} Let $f$ be a solution of the semi-linear wave

2143: equation

2144: \be

2145: \Box_\stsg  f = H(x^\mu,f)\;,\label{SE.1} \ee here $\Box_\stsg $

2146: is the d' Alembertian associated with $\stsg $. Set

2147: \be

2148: \tilde{f} = \Omega^{-{(n-1)\over 2}}f \;; \label{SE.2} \ee Letting

2149: $\tilde{\stsg } = \Omega^{2} \stsg $ as in (\ref{C.1}), from

2150: (\ref{C.3}) we obtain \be \Box_{\tilde{\stsg }}\tilde{f} =

2151: {n-1\over 4n} (\tilde{R} - {R\over \Omega^2})\tilde{f} +

2152: \Omega^{-{n+3\over 2}} H(x^\mu, \Omega^{n-1\over 2}\tilde{f})\;.

2153: \label{SE.3} \ee Let $\stsg =\eta$ be the Minkowski metric; under

2154: the conformal transformation (\ref{C.4}) one obtains from

2155: (\ref{C.5}) that $\tilde{\stsg }$ is again the Minkowski metric,

2156: and (\ref{SE.3}) becomes

2157: \be \Box_\eta \tilde{f} = \Omega^{-{n+3\over 2}} H(x^\mu,\Omega^{n-1\over

2158:   2} \tilde{f})\;.

2159: \label{SE.4} \ee We shall assume that  the initial data for $f$

2160: are given on a hypersurface $\Sigma\subset {\mycal M}$, which, in

2161: a neighbourhood ${\mycal O}$ of $\scrip$ is given by the equation

2162: \be \Sigma\cap {\mycal O} = \{ y^0 = \demi\} \;. \label{SE.5} \ee

2163: This corresponds to a hyperboloid in ${\mycal M}$ given by the

2164: equation $x^0 + 1 = \sqrt{1+\vec{x}^2}\;.  $ It is convenient to

2165: introduce the following coordinate system $(x,v,\tau)$ in a

2166: $\tM$-neighbourhood of $\scrip$: \beqa

2167: \tau &=& y^0 -1/2\geq 0\;,\nonumber \\

2168: x &=& (\sum (y^i)^2)^{\demi} -y^0 \geq 0  \;,\nonumber \\

2169: y^i& = & (\sum (y^i)^2)^{\demi}n^i(v)\;, \label{SE.6} \eeqa

2170: $n^i(v)\in S^{n-1}$, with $v=(v^A)$ denoting spherical coordinates

2171: on $S^{n-1}$.  Equation~\eq{C.5} gives

2172: \begin{equation}

2173:   \label{SE.6.1}

2174:    \Omega = x(2\tau +x+1) \approx x\;.

2175: \end{equation}

2176:  If we let $h$ denote the unit round metric

2177: on $S^{n-1}$, we then have \be \eta = 2 dx d\tau + dx^2 +

2178: (x+\tau+1/2)^2 h \;, \label{SE.7} \ee and  \beqa \Box_\eta

2179: \tilde{f} &=& \frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)^{n-1}\sqrt{\det h}} \pmu

2180: \left( (x+\tau+1/2)^{n-1}\sqrt{\det h}\;

2181: \eta^{\mu\nu}\partial_\nu\tilde{f}\right)

2182: \nonumber\\

2183: &=& \{-\partial_\tau(\partial_\tau-2\partial_x) + {{n-1}\over

2184:   x+\tau+1/2}\partial_x + {\triangle_h \over (x+\tau+1/2)^2}\} \tilde{f}\;,

2185: \label{SE.8} \eeqa where $\triangle_h$ is the Laplace-Beltrami

2186: operator of the metric $h$. We set \beqa & e_- = \partial_\tau \;,

2187: \quad e_+ =

2188: \partial_\tau - 2\partial_x\;,\quad e_A=\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)

2189:   }h_A\;,&\label{SE.9}

2190: \\

2191: &\phi_-=e_-(\tilde{f})\;, \quad \phi_+ = e_+ (\tilde{f})\;, &

2192: \label{SE.10}\\ &\phi_{A}= \psi_A

2193: =\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)}h_A(\tilde{f})\;,&\label{SE.11} \eeqa where

2194: $h_A$ denotes an $h$-orthonormal frame on $S^{n-1}$. We use the

2195: symbol $D$ to denote the covariant derivative operator associated

2196: to the metric $h$. (The usefulness of introducing two different

2197: objects for ${h_A(\tilde{f})}/{(x+\tau+1/2)}$ will become clear

2198: shortly.) Equation (\ref{SE.4}) implies the following set of

2199: equations:

2200: \begin{eqnarray} &

2201:   \begin{array}{rrrcr}

2202:  e_-(\phi_+) &  - \dea

2203: \psi_A & - {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}

2204: \phi_+ &=& - {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_- +a_+\;,\label{SE.12.1}\\

2205: -e_A(\phi_+)   & + e_+ (\psi_A) & -\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2) }\psi_A

2206: &=& b_A\;,\label{SE.13.1}\end{array} & \\ &  \begin{array}{rrrcr}

2207:  e_- (\phi_A) &- e_A (\phi_-) &  + \frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)} \phi_A &=& a_A\;,

2208: \label{SE.15.1}

2209: \\

2210: - \dea \phi_A & + e_+(\phi_-) &  + {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_-

2211: &=& {n-1\over2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_++ b_-\;,

2212: \label{SE.14.1}\end{array}

2213: %

2214: & \\& e_-(\tilde{f}) = \phi_- \;, & \label{SE.17.1.0}\\&\quad e_+

2215: (\tilde{f}) = \phi_+ \;,

2216:  \label{SE.17.1} &

2217: %\\ &\phi_{A}= \psi_A=\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)}h_A(\tilde{f})\;,&

2218:  %\label{SE.17.0.1}

2219: \eeqa with $a_A=b_A=0$ and

2220: \begin{eqnarray}

2221: %&

2222: %  \begin{array}{rrrcr}

2223: % e_-(\phi_+) &  - \dea

2224: %\psi_A & - {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}

2225: %\phi_+ &=& - {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_- -G\;,\label{SE.12}\\

2226: %-e_A(\phi_+)   & + e_+ (\psi_A) & -\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2) }\psi_A &=& 0\;,\label{SE.13}\end{array}

2227: %& \\ &  \begin{array}{rrrcr}

2228: % e_- (\phi_A) &- e_A (\phi_-) &  + \frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)} \phi_A &=& 0\;,

2229: %\label{SE.15}

2230: %\\

2231: %- \dea \phi_A & + e_+(\phi_-) &  + {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_-

2232: %&=& {n-1\over2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_+ -G\;,

2233: %\label{SE.14}\end{array}

2234: %& \\

2235: %&e_-(\tilde{f}) = \phi_- \;,&\label{SE.16}\\

2236: %&e_+ (\tilde{f}) = \phi_+ \;,& \label{SE.17}\\

2237: &a_+\equiv b_-\equiv -G \equiv -\Omega^{-{n+3\over 2}}

2238: H(x^\mu,\Omega^{n-1\over 2} \tilde{f}) \;.&\label{SE.18} \eeqa

2239: 

2240: \subsection{Existence of solutions, space derivatives estimates}

2241: We note that the partial differential operator standing on the

2242: left-hand-side of \eq{SE.12.1} is symmetric hyperbolic; the same

2243: holds true for \eq{SE.15.1}, or for the joint system

2244: \eq{SE.12.1}-\eq{SE.17.1}. Now, part of our technique consists in

2245: deriving weighted energy estimates for symmetric hyperbolic

2246: systems having the structure above, \emph{cf.\/} Section~\ref{S3}.

2247: Each such system comes with his own estimates, so that for the

2248: systems \eq{SE.12.1} and \eq{SE.15.1} we can obtain estimates with

2249: different weights. This allows us to handle a reasonably wide

2250: range of non-linearities, giving existence and blow-up control for

2251: initial data in weighted Sobolev spaces (with conormal-type

2252: blow-up at $\scrip$):

2253: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2} Consider Equation (\ref{SE.1}) on

2254:   ${\R}^{n,1}$ with initial data given on a hyperboloid $\hyp\supset

2255:   \Sigma_{x_0,0}$ in Minkowski space-time, and satisfying

2256:   \beqa\label{cpt1.0} \tf |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

2257:   \equiv\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in&

2258:   \HH_{k+1}^{\alpha} (\Sigma_{x_0,0})

2259: %  \cap L^{\infty}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})

2260: \;,\\

2261:   \partial_x (\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f) |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

2262:   \mcC_0^{\alpha}( \Sigma_{x_0,0})\cap

2263:   \HH_k^{\alpha-1/2}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;,\label{cpt1.1}\\

2264:   \partial_\tau(\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f) |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in&

2265:   \HH^\alpha_k

2266:   (\Sigma_{x_0,0}) %\cap L^\infty(\Sigma_{x_0,0})

2267: \label{cpt1} \;,  \eeqa  with some $k > {n\over2} +1$, $ -1<

2268: \alpha <-1/2$. Suppose further that $H$ has a uniform zero of

2269: order $\ell$ at $f=0,$ in the sense of (\ref{S2.71}), with \be

2270: \ell\geq \cases{ 4\; , & $n=2$ , \cr

2271:   3\; , & $n=3$ , \cr 2\; , & $n\geq 4$ .}

2272: \label{condH} \ee Then:

2273: \begin{enumerate}

2274: \item There exists $0<\tau_+ \leq T \; (<x_0/2)$, depending only upon $x_0$ and

2275: a bound on the norms of the initial data in the

2276:   spaces appearing in \Eqs{cpt1.0}{cpt1}, and a solution $ f$ of

2277:   Equation~\eq{SE.1}, defined on a set containing $\Omega_{x_{0},

2278:   \tau_+}$, satisfying the given initial conditions, and satisfying

2279:    $$\|\widetilde f\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}<\infty\;.$$

2280: \item Further,  if $\tau_*$ is such that $f$

2281:   exists on $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ and satisfies

2282:   $\|\widetilde f\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty$, then for

2283: $0 \leq \tau < \tau_*$

2284:   we have $$\widetilde f |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in L^\infty

2285:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap \HH_{k+1}^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\; ,$$

2286: $$\partial_\tau \widetilde f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \HH{^\alpha_k}

2287:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) %\cap L^{\infty}(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2288: \;,\qquad \partial_x \widetilde f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

2289:   \HH^{\alpha-{1\over 2}}_k (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \cap

2290:   \mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;,$$

2291:   with a $\tau$-independent bound on all the norms.

2292: \end{enumerate}\end{Theorem}

2293: 

2294: \remarks

2295: 

2296:  1. Integration in $x$ of condition \eq{cpt1.1} implies  that

2297: $\tf  \in L^\infty(\Sigma_{x_0,0})$.

2298: 

2299:  2. Some further information can be found in

2300: Theorem~\ref{T2g} below.

2301: 

2302: 3. If the inequality in \eq{condH} is not an equality for $n=2,3$

2303: (no further restrictions for $n\ge 4$), then a proof similar, but

2304: simpler, basing on Proposition~\ref{PL.1n} instead of \ref{PL.1},

2305: leads to the same result with $\alpha=-1/2$.

2306: 

2307: 

2308: \medskip

2309: 

2310: \proof As before, we write $\|f(\tau)\|_{\HH{^\alpha_k}}$ for

2311: $\|f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}}\|_{\HH{^\alpha_k}(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})}$,

2312: \emph{etc.\/} Recall that the standard theory of hyperbolic

2313: systems ({\em cf., e.g.,\/}~\cite[Chapter~16,

2314: Vol.~III]{Taylor}$^{\mathit{\ref{Taylorref}}}$) shows that for any

2315: $0<x_1\leq x_0$ there exists $T(x_1)>0$, satisfying $2x_1+T \leq

2316: x_0$, and a solution $\tf $ of (\ref{SE.4}), defined on

2317: $\Omega_{x_1,x_0,T}$, with initial data on $\Sigma_{x_1,x_0}$

2318: obtained from those on $\Sigma_{x_0}$ by restriction. The idea of

2319: the proof is to derive $x_1$-independent, weighted \emph{a priori}

2320: estimates for the solution. These estimates will guarantee that

2321: the existence time $T(x_1)$ does not shrink to zero as $x_1$ goes

2322: to zero; they will also guarantee that the weighted Sobolev

2323: regularity is preserved by evolution.  We start with the

2324: following:

2325: \begin{Lemma}

2326:   \label{LT2} Under the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{T2},

2327:   consider on $\Omega_{x_1,x_0,T}$ the system \eq{SE.11}-\eq{SE.17.1},

2328:   set

2329: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

2330:   E_\alpha(t)&=&\|\widetilde f(t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}}+ \|\phi_-(t)\|^2

2331: _{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzerot} %

2332: \\&&

2333: + \|\phi_+(t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-\demi}_{k}\Mxonexzerot}

2334: +\sum_{A}\|\phi_A (t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzerot}\;.

2335:   \label{eq:LT2}

2336: \end{eqnarray}

2337:  Then there exists a $x_1$-independent constant $C$ such that

2338: \beqa E_{\alpha}(t) & \leq & C\left\{ E_{\alpha}(0)e^{Ct}  +

2339: \int_{0}^{t}e^{C(t-s)}S(s)ds\right\}\;, \label{N1.3.1.1}\;\eeqa

2340: where

2341: \beqa S(s)&\equiv& \left.\sum_A\|a_A(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}\right.%\right.

2342: +\|a_+(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}  \nonumber \\

2343: & & + \|b_-(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}

2344: %\nonumber \\ & &

2345: \left.

2346: %\left.%\phantom{\int_0^t}

2347: + \sum_A\|b_A(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-1}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}

2348: \right.%ds%\phantom{\int_0^t}

2349: %  \right\}

2350: \;.

2351:  \label{N1.3.1}

2352: \eeqa

2353: \end{Lemma}

2354: \proof We wish, first, to apply Proposition~\ref{PL.1} to the

2355: system consisting of Equation~(\ref{SE.14.1}) together with

2356: $e_-(\tilde{f}) = \phi_- $; in order to do this we set

2357: \[

2358: %\begin{equation}

2359: \varphi=\left(\begin {array}{c}

2360: \widetilde f \\

2361: \phi_A\end {array}\right)

2362:   \;,

2363: \qquad \psi=\phi_-\;.

2364: \]%\end{equation}

2365: We choose $E^\mu_\pm \pmu = e_\pm \otimes \Id$, we set \be

2366: L\psi =\left(\begin{array} {c} 0 \\

2367:     - e_A (\psi)\end{array}\right) \;,  \ee and we define

2368: $$\widetilde E_\alpha(t) = \|\widetilde

2369: f(t)\|^2_{\HH^\alpha_k}+ \|e_-(\widetilde f)(t)\|^2_{\HH^\alpha_k}

2370: + \sum_{A}\|e_A(\widetilde f)(t)\|^2_{\HH^\alpha_k}\;.

2371: $$

2372: The hypotheses ${\mcC}1-{\mcC}5$ of Proposition~\ref{PL.1} are

2373: readily verified, and for any $\alpha < - \demi$ the

2374: inequality~(\ref{L.10}) gives \beqa \widetilde E_\alpha(t) &\leq&

2375: C \left\{\widetilde E_\alpha(0)e^{Ct} + \int_{0}^{t}e^{C(t-s)}

2376:   \left(\sum_A\|a_A(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha }} \right.\right.\nonumber\\

2377: & & \left.+ \|\phi_+(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha -1/2}} +

2378:   \left.\|b_-(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}}\right)

2379:   ds

2380: %\phantom{\int_{0}^{t}}

2381: \right\} \;.

2382:  \label{N1.1}

2383: \eeqa Next, we apply Proposition~\ref{PL.1} directly to

2384: (\ref{SE.12.1}):

2385: % -(\ref{SE.17.1.0}) as a whole; to apply we take

2386: %\begin{equation}

2387: %\label{N1.2}

2388: %\varphi=\left(\begin {array}{c}

2389: %\widetilde f \\

2390: %\phi_+ \\

2391: %\phi_A\end {array}\right)

2392: %  \;,

2393: %\qquad

2394: %\psi=\left(\begin {array}{c}

2395: %\widetilde f \\

2396: %\psi_A \\

2397: %\phi_-\end {array}\right)

2398: %  \;.

2399: %\end{equation}

2400: %We set again $E^\mu_\pm \partial_\mu = e_\pm\otimes\Id$ and

2401: %\begin{eqnarray*}

2402: %L\psi =\left(\begin {array} {c} 0 \\

2403: %-D_{e_A} \psi_A\\

2404: %-e_A(\phi_-)\end{array}\right) \;,

2405: %\end{eqnarray*}

2406: %hence \[

2407: % L^+\varphi =\left(\begin{array} {c} 0 \\

2408: %e_A(\phi_+)\\

2409: %D_{e_A}\phi_A\end{array}\right) \;.

2410: %\]

2411: setting

2412: \beqan

2413: \hat E_{\alpha'}(t)&=&%\|\widetilde

2414: %f(t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'}_{k}\Mxonexzerot}+ \|e_-(\widetilde

2415: %f)(t)\|^2

2416: %_{\HH^{\alpha'}_{k}\Mxonexzerot} \\

2417: %&&+

2418: \|e_+(\widetilde f)(t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'}_{k}\Mxonexzerot}

2419: +\sum_{A}\|e_A (\widetilde f)

2420: (t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'}_{k}\Mxonexzerot}\;, \eeqan for any $\alpha'

2421: < -1/2$ it follows from (\ref{L.10}) that

2422: \beqa \hat E_{\alpha'}(t) &\leq&

2423: C \left\{\hat E_{\alpha'}(0)e^{Ct} + \int_{0}^{t}e^{C(t-s)}

2424:   \left(\|a_+(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha' }} \right.\right.\nonumber\\

2425: & & \left.+ \|\phi_-(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha' -1/2}} +

2426:   \sum_A\left.\|b_A(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'-1/2}}\right)

2427:   ds

2428: %\phantom{\int_{0}^{t}}

2429: \right\} \;.

2430:  \label{N1.3}

2431: \eeqa

2432: %

2433: %and write \eq{SE.12.1}-\eq{SE.17.1.0} in the form \eq{L.3}, with all the

2434: %terms linear in $\phi_-$ and $\phi_+$ in \eq{SE.12.1}-\eq{SE.14.1}

2435: %transferred to the left-hand-side. The hypotheses of

2436: %Proposition~\ref{PL.1} hold again, and for any $\alpha' < -1/2$ it

2437: %follows from (\ref{L.10}) that

2438: %\beqa

2439: %\hat E_{\alpha'}(t) & \leq & C\left \{ \hat E_{\alpha'}(0) e^{Ct} +

2440: %\int_{0}^{t}e^{C(t-s)}\left(\sum_A\|a_A(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'}_{k}

2441: %\Mxonexzeros}\right.\right.+

2442: %\|b_-(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}\nonumber \\ & & +

2443: %\|a_+(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}

2444: %%\nonumber \\ & &

2445: %\left. \left.

2446: %%\phantom{\int_0^t}

2447: %+ \sum_A\|b_A(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha'-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros}

2448: %\right)ds%\phantom{\int_0^t}

2449: %  \right\} \;.

2450: %\label{N1.3}

2451: %\eeqa

2452: We set $$E(t) = \widetilde E_\alpha(t)+ \hat

2453: E_{\alpha-1/2}(t)\;.$$ It follows from (\ref{N1.1}) and

2454: (\ref{N1.3}) with $\alpha'=\alpha -1/2$ that we have

2455: \be

2456: E(t)\leq C \left(E({0})e^{Ct} + \int_{0}^{t} e^{C(t-s)}(E(s) +

2457: S(s))ds\right)\;, \label{N1.4.0} \ee with $S(s)$ as in

2458: \eq{N1.3.1}. Equation~\eq{N1.3.1.1} with $E_\alpha$

2459: replaced\footnote{The constant $C$ in Equation~\eq{N1.3.1.1} does

2460: not

2461:   necessarily coincide with that in \eq{N1.4.0}.} by $E$ follows now

2462: from  Gronwall's Lemma. Since $E_\alpha$ is equivalent to $E$, our

2463: claims follow. \qed

2464: 

2465: Returning to the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2}, Lemma~\ref{LT2}

2466: applied to \eq{SE.12.1}-\eq{SE.17.1.0} gives (recall that $G$ was

2467: defined in \eq{SE.18}) \be E_\alpha(t)\leq C

2468: \left(E_\alpha({0})e^{Ct} + \int_{0}^{t}

2469: e^{C(t-s)}\|G(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}_{k}}ds\right)\;.

2470: \label{N1.4} \ee By hypothesis  the function $H$ appearing in

2471: (\ref{SE.1}) has a uniform zero of order $\ell \geq 2,$ in the

2472: sense of (\ref{S2.71}); we wish to use (\ref{S2.7.2}) to control

2473: the term containing $G(s)$ in (\ref{N1.4}). This requires an

2474: $L^\infty$ bound on $\widetilde f$, which will be obtained next.

2475: As $k > n/2+1$, the Sobolev embedding (\ref{S2.4}) gives \be

2476: \|e_-(\widetilde f)(s)\|^2_{\mcC^{\alpha}_{1}\Mxonexzeros}+ \|e_+

2477: (\widetilde f) (s)\|^2_{\mcC^{\alpha-1/2}_{1}\Mxonexzeros} +

2478: \|e_A(\widetilde f)(s)\|^2_{\mcC^\alpha_1\Mxonexzeros} \leq C

2479: E_\alpha(s). \ee Now the conditions (\ref{condH}) on $n$ and

2480: $\ell$ give

2481: $$

2482: |G(\tau)| \leq C \|\widetilde f(\tau)\|_{L^{\infty}%(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2483: }^\ell\;

2484: x^{\ell{n-1\over 2} -{n+3\over 2}}  \leq C \|\widetilde f(\tau)\|_{L^{\infty}%(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2485: }^\ell\; x^{-1/2}  \;,$$

2486: %Without loss of generality we may assume

2487: %$$\alpha<-\frac 12\;,$$

2488: so that (recall that $\alpha<-\frac 12$)

2489: \begin{equation}

2490:   \label{eq:gd}

2491:   \|G(\tau)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha%(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2492: } \leq

2493: C\;\|\widetilde f(\tau)\|^\ell_{L^{\infty}%(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2494: }\;.

2495: \end{equation}

2496: {}From (\ref{SE.12.1}) we have

2497: \be

2498: \partial_\tau\phi_+ - {n-1 \over 2(x+\tau+1/2)} \phi_+ = \dea \psi_A - {n-1\over 2(x+\tau+1/2)}\phi_- -G\;,

2499: \label{equatauphi} \ee and \eq{eq:gd} together with

2500: Proposition~\ref{Plemme} yield \beqa

2501: \|\phi_+(t)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot}& \leq& C e^{Ct}\|\phi_

2502: +(0)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot}\nn\\ &&

2503: +C\int_0^te^{C(t-s)}(\|\dea

2504: \psi_A (s)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot} %\\ & & \quad \quad

2505: + \|\phi_- (s)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot} +

2506: \|G(s)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot}) \;ds \nn\\

2507: & \leq& C

2508: e^{Ct}\|\phi_+(0)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot}+\int_0^te^{C(t-s)}

2509: C(E_\alpha(s), \|\widetilde f(s)\|_{L^\infty}) ds \;,

2510: \label{eq:gd1}\eeqa for some continuous function

2511: $C(E_\alpha(\cdot), \|f(\cdot)\|_{L^\infty})$. Integration of

2512: $\partial_x \widetilde f = {1\over

2513:    2}(\phi_--\phi_+)$ over $[x,x_0-2\tau]$ gives

2514: \beqa\nonumber & |\widetilde f(\tau,x)|\leq |\widetilde

2515: f(\tau,x_0-2\tau)| + \displaystyle\frac 12

2516: \|(\phi_--\phi_+)(\tau)\|_{\mcC^\alpha_0}\int_x^{x_0-2\tau}

2517:  s^{\alpha} ds \;.&

2518: \eeqa For any $0\leq \tau\leq \tau_*<x_0/2$ the

2519: $f(\tau,x_0-2\tau)$ term is estimated by a multiple of the initial

2520: energy in a standard way, which leads to the estimate (recall that

2521: $\alpha>-1$) \beqa \|\widetilde f(\tau)\|_{L^\infty\Mxonexzerot}

2522: &\leq & CE_\alpha(\tau)+ C

2523: e^{C\tau}\|\phi_+(0)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha\Mxonexzerot} \nonumber \\ &&

2524: + \displaystyle\int_0^\tau e^{C(\tau-s)}C(E_\alpha(s),

2525: \|\widetilde f(s)\|_{L^\infty}) ds \;. \label{N1.5} \eeqa Next,

2526: $$\|G(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros} \leq C

2527: \|H(s,\cdot,x^{{n-1\over 2}} \widetilde f)\|_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2+

2528: {n+3\over 2}} \Mxonexzeros}\;,$$ and our hypothesis that $H$ has a

2529: uniform zero of order $\ell$ together with (\ref{S2.7.2}) gives

2530: $$\|G(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros} \leq C\left(\|\widetilde

2531: f(s)\|_{L^\infty\Mxonexzeros}\right) \|\widetilde

2532: f\|_{\HH_k^{\alpha+

2533:   {n+2\over 2}  - l {n-1\over 2}}\Mxonexzeros}\;.$$

2534: In view of (\ref{N1.5}) this can be estimated by a function of

2535: $E_\alpha(s)$ and of $\|\widetilde f(s)\|_{L^\infty}$,

2536:  \beqa

2537: \|G(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha-1/2}_{k}\Mxonexzeros} &\leq&

2538: C\left(\|\widetilde f(s)\|_{L^\infty\Mxonexzeros}\right)

2539: \|\widetilde f(s)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzeros} \nn

2540: \\ &\leq & C\left(\|\widetilde

2541: f(s)\|_{L^\infty\Mxonexzeros}\right) E_\alpha(s)\;, \label{N1.5.1}

2542: \eeqa provided that \be l \geq  {n+2\over n-1} \label{N1.6} \ee

2543: (which coincides again with \eq{condH}).

2544:  If (\ref{N1.6})

2545: holds, from (\ref{N1.4}) and \eq{N1.5} we obtain

2546: \begin{eqnarray}

2547:   \|\widetilde f(\tau)\|_{L^\infty}+ E_\alpha(\tau) &\leq&

2548:   Ce^{C\tau}\left(E_\alpha({0}) + \|\partial_x\widetilde

2549: f(0)\|_{\mcC^\alpha_0} + \|\partial_\tau\widetilde f (0)\|_{\HH

2550: ^\alpha_{k}}\right) \nonumber \\ &&

2551:  + \int_{0}^{\tau}

2552: \Phi\left(\tau,s,\|\widetilde f(s)\|_{L^\infty},

2553: E_\alpha(s)\right) ds\;,

2554:   \label{eq:glbd}\end{eqnarray} for some constant $C$, and for a

2555:   function $\Phi$ which is bounded on bounded sets. It then easily

2556:   follows that there exists a time $\tau_+$ and a constant

2557: $M$,

2558:   depending only upon $x_0$ and a bound on the norms of the initial data in the

2559:   spaces appearing in \Eqs{cpt1.0}{cpt1}, such

2560:   that $\|\widetilde f(\tau)\|_{L^\infty}$ and $E_\alpha(\tau)$ remain

2561:   bounded by $M$ for $0\leq \tau\leq\tau_+$. Since all the objects above

2562:   were $x_1$-independent, so is $\tau_+$. By the usual continuation

2563:   criterion ({\em cf., e.g.,\/}~\cite[Proposition~1.5, Chapter~16,

2564:   Vol.~III]{Taylor}\footnote{\label{Taylorref}In that reference

2565:   symmetric hyperbolic systems on a torus are considered; however

2566:   simple domain of dependence considerations show that the results

2567:   there apply to the setup here.})  the solution exists on

2568:   $\Omega_{x_1,x_0,\tau_+}$ for all $x_1$; it thus follows that the

2569:   maximally extended solution of the initial value problem considered

2570:   here exists on a set which includes $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+}$.

2571: 

2572: To establish point 2, suppose that  a global a-priori $L^\infty$

2573: bound on $\tf$ is known. Then \eq{N1.4} and \eq{N1.5.1} give a

2574: linear integral inequality on $E_\alpha$, and Gronwall's Lemma

2575: gives a global bound on $E_\alpha$. Arguments of the last part of

2576: the proof of point 1 yield the result. \qed

2577: 

2578: For the purpose of estimating time derivatives of the solutions we

2579: will need a generalization of Theorem~\ref{T2}, which covers the

2580: equations contained by time-differentiating

2581: \Eqs{SE.12.1}{SE.17.1}. There are lots of ways to relax those

2582: hypotheses; for simplicity we shall only make those

2583: generalizations which are strictly necessary for the arguments in

2584: the next section to go through. First, the fact that $f$ is scalar

2585: valued plays no role in our considerations above; henceforth we

2586: assume that $f$ has values in $\R^N$ for some $N\geq 1$.  Next,

2587: the definitions \eq{SE.9} of $e_{\pm}$ and $e_A$ will be kept.

2588: %\ptc{" as well as those of $\phi_A$ and $\psi_A$ given in

2589: %\eq{SE.11}" removed; this does not iterate under differentiation!}

2590: We will consider systems of the form

2591: \begin{deqarr}

2592: &P\left(\begin{array}{c} \varphi \\ \psi \end{array}\right) +

2593: \left(\begin{array}{cc} B_{11} & B_{12} \\ B_{21} & B_{22}

2594: \end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} \varphi \\ \psi

2595: \end{array}\right) = \left(\begin{array}{c} a \\ b

2596: \end{array}\right) + G\;, & \label{td1a}

2597: \\

2598: &\varphi=\left(\begin{array}{c} \phi_+ \\ \phi_A

2599: \end{array}\right)

2600: \;,\quad \psi=\left(\begin{array}{c} \phi_- \\ \psi_A

2601: \end{array}\right)

2602: &\label{td1b} \arrlabel{td1}

2603: \end{deqarr}

2604: together with

2605: \begin{deqarr}&\phi_{A}

2606: =\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)}h_A(\tilde{f}) + B_{A,\phi} \tilde f\;,&\label{SE.11a} \\

2607: &\psi_A =\frac{1}{(x+\tau+1/2)}h_A(\tilde{f})+ B_{A,\psi} \tilde

2608: f\;,&\label{SE.11b}

2609: \\ &e_-(\tilde{f}) = B_{0}\phi_- + B_{1}\tf\;, & \label{td2}\\

2610: &e_+ (\tilde{f}) = \phi_+

2611:  \;, & \label{td3}

2612: \arrlabel{td4}

2613: \end{deqarr}

2614: for some matrix valued functions $B_{A,\phi}$, $B_{A,\psi}$,

2615: $B_0$, $B_1$, with $B_0$ --- invertible. Here \be

2616: \label{td4P} P = \left(\begin{array}{cc} e_- & \ell^A D_A \\

2617: (\ell^A)^tD_A & e_+ \end{array}\right) \ee is the (geometric)

2618: principal part of \Eqs{SE.12.1}{SE.14.1}. The nonlinear term

2619: $G=G(x^\mu,\tf)$ will be labeled as \be

2620: \label{td4G}G=\left(G_{e_+(\phi_-)},

2621: G_{e_+(\psi_A)},G_{e_-(\phi_A)}, G_{e_+(\phi_-)}\right)\;,\ee with

2622: the order of the components following that of

2623: \Eqs{SE.12.1}{SE.14.1}. The $B_{ab}$'s will be labeled as

2624: $B_{\phi_-,\phi_+}$, $B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}$, {\em etc.}; for example,

2625: in this notation,

2626: %$G_{e_+(\psi_A)}=G_{e_-(\phi_A)}=0$, while

2627: the second of \Eqsone{SE.14.1} takes the form

2628: \begin{eqnarray}

2629: \lefteqn{ e_+(\phi_-)

2630:   =  \dea \phi_A  -B_{\phi_-,\phi_-}\phi_- }&& \nn\\

2631: &&

2632: -B_{\phi_-,\phi_+}\phi_+-B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}\phi_A-B_{\phi_-,\psi_A}\psi_A+

2633: b_-+G_{e_+{(\phi_-)}}\;, \label{td8.0}

2634: \end{eqnarray}

2635: with actually $B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}=B_{\phi_-,\psi_A}=0$.

2636: %In particular no

2637: %terms linear in $(\phi_-,\psi_A)=\psi$ arise in that equation;

2638: %similarly in the equation for $e_+(\psi_A)$. This shows that for the

2639: %purposes of \Eqs{SE.12.1}{SE.14.1} we are free to assume that

2640: %$x^{-1/2}B_{22}$ is bounded.

2641: 

2642: Some effort will be needed to prove the information of point 3 of

2643: the theorem that follows; this is needed to be able to iteratively

2644: apply that theorem in the next section:

2645: 

2646: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2g} Consider the system \eq{td1}-\eq{td4} with

2647: \begin{eqnarray}

2648: \!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\lefteqn{\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\! \|a(\tau)\|_{\HH

2649: ^\alpha_k} +\|b(\tau)\|_{\HH ^\alpha_k}+

2650: \sup_{a,b=1,2}\|B_{ab}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_k} +

2651: \sup_{A=1,2;\;\lambda=\phi,\psi}\|

2652: B_{A,\lambda}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_{k}}} && \nn \\

2653: &&\phantom{xxxxxxxxxx} +\|B_{0}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_k}

2654: +\|B_{0}^{-1}(\tau)\|_{L^\infty} +\|B_{1}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_k}

2655:  \leq \tilde C\;,

2656: \label{td5}\end{eqnarray} for some constant $\tilde C$, and

2657: suppose that

2658: \begin{equation}

2659: G(x^\mu,\tf)=\Omega^{-(n+3)/2}H(x^\mu,\Omega^{(n-1)/2}\tf)\;,

2660: \label{td6}

2661: \end{equation}

2662: with $G_{e_-(\phi_A)}=0$, and with $H$ having a uniform zero of

2663: order $\ell$ in the sense of (\ref{S2.71}), with $\ell$ satisfying

2664: \eq{condH}. If the initial data satisfy \eq{cpt1.0}-\eq{cpt1} with

2665: some $k > {n\over2} +1$, $ -1< \alpha <-1/2$, then:

2666: \begin{enumerate}

2667: \item The

2668: conclusions of point 1. of Theorem~\ref{T2} hold with a time

2669: $\tau_+$ depending only upon the constant $\tilde C $ in \eq{td5}

2670: and a bound on the norms of the initial data in the spaces

2671: appearing in \Eqs{cpt1.0}{cpt1}.

2672: \item The

2673: conclusions of point 2. of Theorem~\ref{T2} hold.

2674: \item Under the

2675: hypotheses of point 2. of  Theorem~\ref{T2} %, for  $0\leq \tau <\tau_*$

2676: we also have

2677: \begin{equation}

2678: %\forall \ 0\leq \tau <\tau_*\qquad

2679: \|(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\widetilde

2680: f\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty\;. \label{td7}

2681: \end{equation}

2682: 

2683: \end{enumerate}

2684: \end{Theorem}

2685: 

2686: \remarks 1. The condition $G_{e_-(\phi_A)}=0$ can be weakened to

2687: \begin{equation}

2688: G_{e_-(\phi_A)}(x^\mu,\tf)=\Omega^{-(n+2)/2}H_{e_-(\phi_A)}

2689: (x^\mu,\Omega^{(n-1)/2}\tf)\;, \label{td6.1}

2690: \end{equation}

2691: for some function $H_{e_-(\phi_A)}$ with a uniform zero of order

2692: $\ell$. Similarly it suffices to assume that

2693: \begin{equation}

2694: G_{e_+(\psi_A)}(x^\mu,\tf)=\Omega^{-(n+4)/2}H_{e_+(\psi_A)}

2695: (x^\mu,\Omega^{(n-1)/2}\tf)\;, \label{td6.2}

2696: \end{equation}for some function $H_{e_+(\psi_A)}$ with a uniform zero of order

2697: $\ell$.

2698: 

2699: 2. If the inequality in \eq{condH} is not an equality for $n=2,3$

2700: (no further restrictions for $n\ge 4$), then the result remains

2701: true with $\alpha=-1/2$, see Remark 3. after Theorem~\ref{T2}.

2702: 

2703: 

2704: \medskip

2705: 

2706: \proof Let us start by remarking that, because $\psi_A=\phi_A$, in

2707: equations such as \eq{td8.0} we can replace $B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}$ by

2708: $B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}+B_{\phi_-,\psi_A}$ obtaining a system in which

2709: $B_{\phi_-,\psi_A}=0$. Proceeding similarly with the other

2710: equations we may thus without loss of generality assume that

2711: \begin{equation}

2712: B_{*,\psi_A}=0\;.

2713: \end{equation}

2714: The proof of points 1 and 2 is then identical to that of

2715: Theorem~\ref{T2}, with the following minor changes:

2716: \Eq{equatauphi} is replaced by the equation

2717: \begin{eqnarray}

2718: \lefteqn{ e_-(\phi_+) +B_{\phi_+,\phi_+}\phi_+

2719:   =

2720: }&& \nn\\

2721: &&  \dea \phi_A -B_{\phi+-,\phi_-}\phi_- -B_{\phi_+,\phi_A}\phi_A

2722: +a_++G_{e_-{(\phi_+)}} %\;,

2723: \label{td8.01}

2724: \end{eqnarray}

2725: %$$ e_-{(\varphi)} + B_{11}\varphi = -B_{12}\psi

2726: %-\ell^A\partial_A\psi + a +G_{\varphi}\;,$$

2727: %where $G_{\varphi}$ is the obvious component of $G$,

2728: to which Proposition~\ref{Plemme} still applies, recovering

2729: \eq{eq:gd1}. Further, the equation $\partial_x \tf=

2730: (\phi_--\phi_+)/2$ has to be replaced by

2731: $$\partial_x \tf+\frac {B_1} 2\tf= \frac{B_0\phi_--\phi_+}{2}\;,$$

2732: and the desired conclusion is obtained by

2733: Proposition~\ref{propositionx1}. The remaining arguments do not

2734: require any modifications.

2735: 

2736: To prove point 3, from \eq{td8.0} we obtain

2737: \begin{eqnarray}

2738: \lefteqn{ e_+[(x+2\tau)\phi_{-}] =}&& \nonumber\\ &&

2739: (x+2\tau)\left(\dea \phi_A  - B_{\phi_-,\phi_-}\phi_- \right.

2740: \nn\\ &&\left.- B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}\phi_A-B_{\phi_-,\phi_+}\phi_++

2741: b_-+ G_{e_+{(\phi_-)}}\right)\;, \label{td8}

2742: \end{eqnarray}

2743: {}From \Eqsone{eq:gd}, \eq{eq:gd1}, and \eq{td2} together with $$

2744: \phi_-,\phi_A\in \HH ^\alpha_k\subset \mcC^\alpha_0\;, \qquad \dea

2745: \phi_A\in \HH ^\alpha_{k-1}\subset \mcC^\alpha_0\;,

2746: $$ we obtain

2747: \begin{eqnarray*}

2748:  e_+[(x+2\tau)\phi_{-}]

2749: &\leq& \hat C x^{-\alpha}\;,

2750: \end{eqnarray*}

2751: for some constant $\hat C$ depending only upon the initial data

2752: and $\|\tf\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}$. Integrating as in

2753: the identity \eq{s6}  we arrive at

2754: \begin{eqnarray*}

2755: \lefteqn{|B_0^{-1}\left\{(x+2\tau)(\partial_\tau\tf-B_1\tf)(x,v,\tau)\right\}|

2756: }& & \\ &&\leq

2757: |B_0^{-1}\left\{(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf(x+2\tau,v,0)\right\}|

2758: %\\ &&

2759: + C\left( \|\tf\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})} + \hat C\right)

2760: \\ && \leq C\left(

2761: \|\partial_\tau\tf\|_{\mcC^{-1}_0} +

2762: \|\tf(0)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})} + \hat C\right)

2763: %\\ &< &C(\tau_*)

2764: \;,

2765: \end{eqnarray*}

2766: and \Eq{td7} follows. \qed

2767: 

2768: 

2769: \subsection{Estimates on the time derivatives of the solutions}

2770: \label{Stdphi} So far we have established existence of solutions

2771: with initial data in weighted Sobolev spaces, as well as weighted

2772: estimates on the space-derivatives of the solutions. The next step

2773: in proving polyhomogeneity is to establish estimates on

2774: time-derivatives. Similarly to the linear case, the question of

2775: corner conditions arises. In order to handle that, we introduce an

2776: index $m$, which corresponds to the number --- perhaps zero --- of

2777: corner conditions which are satisfied by the initial data.  Next,

2778: the definition (\ref{S2.71}) of a uniform zero of order $l$ has to

2779: be strengthened by adding conditions on time-derivatives: we shall

2780: require that for all $M\in\R$,  $|\prho|\le M$, $0\leq i\leq

2781: \min(k,l)$ and for all $0\leq j\leq m$ there exists a constant

2782: $\hat{C}=\hat C(M,m,k)$ such that we have \be\label{S2.71t}

2783: \left\|\frac{\partial^{i+j} F(\tau,\cdot,\prho)}{\partial

2784:     \prho^i\partial \tau^j}\right\|_{{\mcC}_{k+m-i-j}^0} \leq \hat{C}

2785: |\prho|^{l-i}\;.\ee We start with the following:

2786: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2t} Let $\N\ni m\geq 0$, consider  a solution

2787: $f:\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}\to \R$ of Equation (\ref{SE.1}) satisfying

2788: $$\|\widetilde f\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty\;,$$ and

2789: suppose that $ $

2790: \beqa\label{cpt1.0t} 0\leq i \leq m+1\qquad

2791: \partial^i_\tau\widetilde f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in&

2792: \HH_{k+m+1-i}^{\alpha} (\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;,\\ 0\leq i \leq m \qquad

2793: \partial_x \partial^i_\tau\widetilde f |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

2794: \mcC_0^{\alpha}( \Sigma_{x_0,0})\cap

2795: \HH_{k+m-i}^{\alpha-1/2}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\label{cpt1.1t} \;,  \eeqa

2796:   with  some $k > {n\over2} +1$

2797: and $ -1< \alpha <-1/2$. Suppose, further, that $H$ is smooth in

2798: $f$ and has a uniform zero of order $\ell$ at $f=0,$ in the sense

2799: of (\ref{S2.71t}), with $\ell$ as in \Eq{condH}.  Then for $0 \leq

2800: \tau < \tau_*$ and for $0\leq i \leq m$, $0\leq j+i < k+m-n/2$  we

2801: have

2802: \begin{deqarr}

2803: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^j\partial_\tau^i\widetilde f

2804: |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in L^\infty

2805:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap \HH_{k+m+1-i-j}^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;

2806: ,

2807: \\

2808:  \partial_x

2809: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^j\partial_\tau^{i}\widetilde

2810: f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

2811:   \HH^{\alpha-{1\over 2}}_{k+m-i-j} (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \cap

2812:   \mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;,

2813: \arrlabel{td11}\end{deqarr} and

2814: \begin{equation}0\leq p < k-n/2 \qquad

2815: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^p\partial_\tau^{m+1} \widetilde

2816: f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \HH{^\alpha_{k-p}}

2817:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) %\cap L^{\infty}(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2818: \;, \label{td12}\end{equation} with $\tau$-independent bounds on

2819: the norms.

2820: \end{Theorem}

2821: 

2822: \remark As before, in dimensions $n\ge 4$ the result remains valid

2823: for $\alpha=-1/2$; in dimensions $n=2,3$ the value $-1/2$ for

2824: $\alpha$ is allowed if the inequality in \eq{condH} is not an

2825: equality.

2826: 

2827: The proof below actually proves the analogous result for the

2828: systems considered in Theorem~\ref{T2g}, provided that obvious

2829: time-derivative conditions on the coefficients are added to

2830: \eq{td5}, the simplest possibility being

2831: \begin{eqnarray}

2832: %\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!

2833: \lefteqn{%\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!\!

2834: \|\partial_\tau^i a(\tau)\|_{\HH ^\alpha_{k+m-i}}

2835: +\|\partial_\tau^i b(\tau)\|_{\HH ^\alpha_{k+m-i}}+

2836: \sup_{a,b=1,2}\|\partial_\tau^i B_{ab}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_{k+m-i}} }&& \nn \\

2837: &&%\phantom{xxxxxxxxxx}

2838: + \sup_{A=1,2;\;\lambda=\phi,\psi}\|

2839: \partial_\tau^i B_{A,\lambda}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_{k+m-i}}+\|\partial_\tau^i

2840: B_{0}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_{k+m-i}}

2841: % +\|\partial_\tau^i B_{0}^{-1}(\tau)\|_{L^\infty}

2842: +\|\partial_\tau^i B_{1}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_{k+m-i}}

2843:  \leq \tilde C\;,\nonumber \\ &&

2844: \label{td5t}\end{eqnarray} with $0\le i \le m+k$; the same remark

2845: applies to Corollary~\ref{C1t} below. Before passing to that

2846: proof, we note that an important consequence of Theorem~\ref{T2t}

2847: is that corner conditions will hold at any time $\tau>0$,

2848: regardless of whether or not they hold at $\tau=0$:

2849: 

2850: \begin{Corollary}

2851: \label{C1t} Under the conditions of point 2 of Theorem~\ref{T2},

2852: for any $0<\tau<\tau_*$ and for $0\leq i< k-1-n/2 $ we have

2853: $$ \qquad \partial_\tau^i\widetilde f |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in L^\infty

2854:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap \HH_{k+1-i}^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\; ,$$

2855: $$\partial_\tau^{i+1} \widetilde

2856: f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \HH{^\alpha_{k-i}}

2857:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) %\cap L^{\infty}(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

2858: \;,$$

2859: $$ \partial_x \partial_\tau^{i}\widetilde

2860: f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

2861:   \HH^{\alpha-{1\over 2}}_{k-i} (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \cap

2862:   \mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;.$$

2863: \end{Corollary}

2864: 

2865: %For polyhomogeneous initial data we thus obtain:

2866: %\begin{Corollary}

2867: %\label{C2t}

2868: %If $f$ satisfy for $i\in \N$ and $-1<\alpha<0$,

2869: %\beqa\label{cptphg}

2870: %f(0)&\in& {\cal A}_{phg}^\delta

2871: %\partial^i_\tau\widetilde f|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in&

2872: %\mcC_\infty^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;,\\

2873: %\partial_x \partial^i_\tau\widetilde f |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

2874: %\mcC_0^{\alpha}( \Sigma_{x_0,0})\cap

2875: %\mcC^{\alpha-1/2}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})

2876: %\;,  \eeqa

2877: %\end{Corollary}

2878: 

2879: We shall need the following simple Lemma:

2880: \begin{Lemma}

2881: \label{L1t} Let  $F(x^\mu,p)$ be a function which is smooth in $p$

2882: at fixed $x^\mu$ and suppose that it has a uniform zero of order

2883: $\ell\geq 1$ in $p$. Then

2884: \begin{enumerate}

2885: \item For all $i\in \N$ the function $\partial_\tau^i

2886: \left(F(x^\mu,u(x^\mu)\right)$ has a uniform zero of order $\ell$,

2887: when viewed as a function of $(u,\partial_\tau u,\ldots,

2888: \partial^i_\tau u)$.

2889: \item

2890: Let $H=\partial_p F$, then $H$ has a uniform zero of order

2891: $\ell-1$.

2892: \end{enumerate}

2893: \end{Lemma}

2894: 

2895: \proof Let $u=(u^i)$; smoothness of $F$ in $p$ allows us to write

2896: \be\label{td9}F(\vec x,\tau,u)= A_{i_1\ldots i_\ell}u^{i_1} \ldots

2897: u^{i_\ell}\;, \ee with some coefficients $A_{i_1\ldots

2898: i_\ell}=A_{i_1\ldots i_\ell}(\vec x,\tau,u)$ which are smooth in

2899: $u$, and totally symmetric in $i_1,\ldots,i_\ell$; recall that the

2900: summation convention is used throughout. Point 2 immediately

2901: follows from \eq{td9}. From that equation we also obtain

2902: \beqan\partial_\tau F(\tau,\vec x,u) &=& \left(\partial_\tau

2903: A_{i_1\ldots i_\ell}+ \partial_{u^i}A_{i_1\ldots

2904: i_\ell}\partial_\tau u^i\right) u^{i_1} \ldots u^{i_\ell}

2905: \\ && + \ell A_{i_1\ldots i_\ell}u^{i_1} \ldots u^{i_{\ell-1}}

2906: \partial_\tau u^{i_\ell}\;,

2907: \eeqan which proves point 1 for $i=1$. The result then follows by

2908: straightforward induction. \qed

2909: 

2910: We can pass now to the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2t}:

2911: 

2912: \medskip

2913: 

2914: \proof We assume that \Eqs{td1}{td4} are satisfied;

2915: Theorem~\ref{T2g} shows that \eq{td11}-\eq{td12} hold with

2916: $i=j=p=0$. Consider the vector-valued function

2917: $$ (\tf,(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf,\varphi,

2918: (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\varphi,\psi,

2919: (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\psi)\;,$$ so that the new function $\tf$ in

2920: \eq{td4} is $(\tf,(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf)$, while the new

2921: functions $\varphi$, respectively $\psi$, in \eq{td1b} are $

2922: (\varphi, (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\varphi)$, respectively $ (\psi,

2923: (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\psi)$.

2924: %$$

2925: %(\tf,X_i(\tf),(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf,\varphi,

2926: %X_i(\varphi),(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\varphi,\psi,X_i(\psi),

2927: %(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\psi)\;,$$ where the index $i$ on the vector

2928: %fields $X_i$  runs from $2$ to $r$;

2929: We claim that   a set of equations of the form \eq{td1}-\eq{td4}

2930: holds for those new functions. Consider, for instance, \Eq{td2};

2931: set

2932: $$\hf:= (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf\;,\quad

2933: \hphi_-:=(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\phi_-\;,$$ {\em etc.}, we have

2934: \begin{eqnarray*}

2935: e_-(\hf) & = &

2936: \partial_\tau\left((x+2\tau)(B_0\phi_-+B_1\tf)\right)

2937: \\ &= & B_0\hphi_- + (2B_0+(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau B_0)\phi_-

2938: \\ & & +B_1\hf + (2B_1+(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau B_1)\tf\;,

2939: \end{eqnarray*}

2940: %\\ &= & B_0\hphi_- + (2+(x+2\tau) B_1)\tf\;,

2941: %\end{eqnarray*}

2942: which is linear in $(\tf,\hf,\phi_-,\hphi_-)$. In fact

2943: \begin{eqnarray*}

2944: e_-\left(\begin{array}{c} \tf \\ \hf \end{array}\right) &=&

2945: \left(\begin{array}{cc} B_0 & 0 \\ 2B_0+(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau B_0

2946: & B_0\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} \phi_-\\ \hphi_-

2947: \end{array}\right)

2948: \\ && +

2949: \left(\begin{array}{cc} B_1 & 0 \\ 2B_1+(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau B_1

2950: & B_1\end{array}\right) \left(\begin{array}{c} \tf\\ \hf

2951: \end{array}\right) \;,

2952: \end{eqnarray*}

2953: and the new matrix $B_0$ is again invertible, as desired. Next,

2954: \begin{eqnarray*}

2955: e_-(\hphi_+) & = &

2956: \partial_\tau\left((x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\phi_+\right)

2957: \\ &= & \partial_\tau\left((x+2\tau)\left(

2958: - D_A\phi_A - B_{\phi_+\phi_-}\phi_- \right.\right.\\ && \left.

2959: \left.- B_{\phi_+\phi_A}\phi_A - B_{\phi_+\phi_+}\phi_+ +a_+ +

2960: G_{e_-(\phi_+)} \right)\right)

2961: \\ &= &

2962: -D_A\hphi_A - B_{\phi_+\phi_-}\hphi_-- B_{\phi_+\phi_A}\hphi_A -

2963: B_{\phi_+\phi_+}\hphi_+

2964: %\right.\right.

2965: \\ && %\left. \left.

2966: +\; \mathrm{linear}(\varphi,\psi) +\widehat a_+ +

2967: G_{e_-(\hphi_+)}

2968: %\right)

2969: \;,

2970: \\

2971: \widehat a_+ & = & -2D_A\phi_A + \partial_\tau a_+ \ \in\HH

2972: ^{\alpha}_{k+m-1}\;,

2973: \\

2974:  G_{e_-(\hphi_+)} & = & \partial_\tau \left(G_{e_-(\phi_+)}\right)(x+2\tau) \;,

2975: \end{eqnarray*}

2976: where ``$\mathrm{linear}$'' denotes terms which are linear in the

2977: relevant variables. The equation for $e_-(\hphi_A)$ is handled in

2978: a similar way. The equations involving only $e_+$ or $\partial_A$

2979: are straightforward, since those operators commute with

2980: multiplication by $(x+2\tau)$.  By Lemma~\ref{L1t} the new

2981: non-linearity has again a zero of order $\ell$, when considered as

2982: a function of $(\tf,{(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau}\tf)$. In order to

2983: apply Theorem~\ref{T2g} we need to check that the initial data are

2984: in the right spaces. Clearly

2985: $$((x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf)(0) = x\partial_\tau\tf(0) \in

2986: \HH ^{\alpha+1}_{k+m}\subset \HH ^{\alpha}_{k+m}\cap L^\infty\;,$$

2987: $$\left(\partial_x((x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf)\right)(0) =

2988: \left(\partial_\tau \tf+ x\partial_x\partial_\tau\tf\right)(0) \in

2989: \HH ^\alpha_{k+m-1}\subset \mcC^\alpha_{0}\cap\HH

2990: ^{\alpha-1/2}_{k+m-1}\;.$$ Condition \eq{cpt1} requires some more

2991: work: \beqan

2992: \left(\partial_\tau((x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\tf)\right)(0) &=&

2993: \left(2 \partial_\tau \tf+ x\partial_\tau^2\tf\right)(0)

2994: \\ &=&

2995: \left(2 \partial_\tau \tf+

2996: x(2\partial_x+e_+)\partial_\tau\tf\right)(0)

2997: \\ &=&

2998: \left(2 \partial_\tau \tf+2x\partial_x\partial_\tau\tf+

2999: xe_+\left(B_0\phi_-+B_1\tf \right)\right)(0)\;. \eeqan The first

3000: two terms are obviously in $\HH ^\alpha_{k+m-1}$, and so is

3001: $xe_+(B_1\tf)= x(\partial_\tau-2\partial_x)(B_-\tf)$. \Eq{td8.0}

3002: gives

3003: \begin{eqnarray*}

3004:  \left(xe_+(\phi_-)\right)(0)

3005: &=&  x\left(\dea \phi_A  -B_{\phi_-,\phi_-}\phi_--B_{\phi_-,\phi_+}\phi_+\right.  \nn\\

3006: &&\left. -B_{\phi_-,\phi_A}\phi_A-B_{\phi_-,\psi_A}\psi_A+

3007: b_-+G_{e_+{(\phi_-)}}

3008: %\dea \phi_A  - B_{--}\phi_--B_{-+}\phi_++ b_-+

3009: %G_{-}

3010: \right)(0)\;.

3011: %\label{td10}

3012: \end{eqnarray*} The desired

3013: property $\left(xe_+(B_0\phi_-)\right)(0)\in \HH ^\alpha_{k+m-1}$

3014: follows immediately; the only non-trivial term is

3015: $xG_{e_+{(\phi_-)}}$, the $\HH^{\alpha}_{k+m+1}$ norm of which can

3016: be estimated by a function of $\|\tf(0)\|_{L^\infty}$ and

3017: $\|\widetilde f(0)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k+m+1}\Mxonexzeros}$, {\em

3018: cf.\/} \Eq{N1.5.1}.

3019: Now, ${(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau}\tf $ %and $X_i(\tf)$

3020: is uniformly bounded on $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ by point 3 of

3021: Theorem~\ref{T2g}, so that we can apply point 2 of

3022: Theorem~\ref{T2g} to conclude that \Eqs{td11}{td12} hold with

3023: $j=p=1$ and $m=0$; straightforward induction establishes

3024: Theorem~\ref{T2t} for the remaining $j$'s and $p$'s.

3025: 

3026: Consider, now, $m=1$; the result already established with $m=0$

3027: shows that $\partial_\tau\tf(\tau)$ exists and satisfies \eq{td11}

3028: with $i=1$ for any $\tau >0$; similarly \eq{td12} holds with $m=1$

3029: for any $\tau>0$. Now, a calculation similar (but simpler) to the

3030: one done above shows that $(\tf,\partial_\tau\tf)$ satisfies a

3031: system of equations of the form \eq{td1}-\eq{td4} with initial

3032: data satisfying the conditions of Theorem~\ref{T2g} by hypothesis;

3033: the uniform bounds on some interval $[0,\tau_+)$ follow by point 1

3034: of that theorem. We therefore have

3035: $$

3036: \|(\tf,\partial_\tau\tf)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty\;.

3037: $$ We can then apply the result already established for $m=0$ to

3038: the system of equations satisfied by $(\tf,\partial_\tau\tf)$ to

3039: obtain the conclusion of Theorem~\ref{T2t} with $m=1$. An

3040: induction upon $m$ finishes the proof. \qed

3041: 

3042: \subsection{Polyhomogeneous solutions}

3043: \label{Spsnl}

3044: 

3045: The aim of this section is to establish polyhomogeneity of

3046: solutions of a large class of semi-linear systems of the form

3047: \begin{deqarr}

3048:   \partial_\tau\varphi + B_{11}\varphi + B_{12}\psi&=& L_{11}\varphi +

3049:   L_{12}\psi + a +G_\varphi

3050:   \label{nequa1}\;,\\ \partial_x\psi+ B_{21}\varphi + B_{22}\psi &=&

3051:   L_{21}\varphi +

3052:   L_{22}\psi + b +G_\psi\label{nequa2}\;,\arrlabel{nequa}

3053: \end{deqarr}

3054: with a nonlinearity $$G= (G_\varphi,G_\psi)$$ of the form

3055: \begin{equation}

3056:   \label{m0}

3057:   G= x^{-p\delta} H(x^\mu,x^{q\delta} \psi_1, x^{q\delta+1} \psi_2, x^{q\delta+1} \varphi)\;.

3058: \end{equation}

3059: Here we have decomposed $\psi$ as

3060: \be\label{psidecomp}\psi=\left(\begin{array}{c} \psi_1\\ \psi_2

3061: \end{array}\right)\;; \ee this is motivated by different {\em a

3062: priori\/} estimates we have at our disposal for the appropriately

3063: defined components $\psi_1$ and $\psi_2$ of $\psi$ in the

3064: applications we have in mind. Polyhomogeneity of solutions of

3065: \eq{SE.1} will follow as a special case, see \thm{T2phg} below. We

3066: will need to impose various restrictions on the function $H$, in

3067: order to do that some terminology will be needed. We shall say

3068: that a function $H(x^\mu,u)$ is {\em $\delta$-polyhomogeneous in

3069: $x$ with a uniform zero of order $l$ in $u$} if $H$ is smooth in

3070: $u\in\R^N$ at fixed $x^\mu$, if $H$ satisfies (\ref{S2.71}) for

3071: any $0\le i\leq \min\{ l,k\} $ and any $k\in \N$, if

3072: \begin{equation}

3073:   \label{eq:m1}

3074: \forall i\in\N \quad \partial^i_uH(\cdot, u)\in\mca

3075: \end{equation}

3076: at fixed constant $u$, and if we have the uniform estimate for

3077: constant $u$'s

3078: \begin{equation}

3079:   \label{m1}

3080:   \forall \epsilon >0,  M \geq 0 , i,k\in \N \ \; \exists\;

3081: C(\epsilon,M,i,k) \ \forall |u|\leq M \quad \| \partial^i_u

3082: H(\cdot, u)\|_{\mcC^{-\epsilon}_k} \leq C(\epsilon,M,i,k)\;.

3083: \end{equation}

3084: The qualification ``in $u$'' in ``uniform zero of order $l$ in

3085: $u$'' will often be omitted. The small parameter $\epsilon$ has

3086: been introduced above to take into account the possible

3087: logarithmic blow-up of functions in $\mca$ at $x=0$; for the

3088: applications to the nonlinear scalar wave equation or to the wave

3089: map equation on Minkowski space-time, the alternative simpler

3090: requirement would actually suffice:

3091: \begin{equation}

3092:   \label{m2}

3093:   \forall  \; M \geq 0 , i,k\in \N \ \; \exists\;

3094: C(M,i,k) \ \forall |u|\leq M \quad \| \partial^i_u H(\cdot,

3095: u)\|_{\mcC^{0}_k} \leq C(M,i,k)\;,

3096: \end{equation}

3097: again for constant $u$'s. Clearly functions which are jointly

3098: smooth in $u$ and in $x^\mu$ satisfy the above conditions;

3099: Lemma~\ref{lemmapol} below provides another class of such

3100: functions. The following simple facts about functions in the above

3101: class will be useful:

3102: 

3103: \begin{Lemma} \label{lemmapol} Let $m_1,m_2,k\in\N$, $m_1\leq m_2$, and

3104:   let  $P(x^\mu,u)$ be a

3105:   polynomial in $u= (u^1,\ldots u^N)$ of the form

3106: $$ P(x^\mu,u) = \sum_{m_1\leq j \leq m_2}P_{i_1\ldots i_j}(x^\mu)u^{i_1}

3107: \ldots u^{i_j} \;, $$ with coefficients  $P_{i_1\ldots i_j}(x^\mu)

3108: \in\mcA_\infty^\delta$. Then:

3109: \begin{enumerate}

3110: \item $P$ is $\delta$-polyhomogeneous in $x$ with a

3111: uniform zero of order $m_1$.

3112: \item If

3113:  $$f\in \mcA_k^\delta %\cap L^\infty

3114: + \mcC^\lambda_\infty $$ for some

3115:  $\lambda>0$, then for any $\epsilon >0$ we have

3116: $$P(\cdot,x^{q\delta} f)\in x^{m_1q\delta}(

3117:  \mcA_{k}^\delta%\cap L^\infty

3118: + \mcC^{\lambda-\epsilon }_\infty)\;.$$

3119: \end{enumerate}

3120: \end{Lemma}

3121: 

3122: The proof of Lemma~\ref{lemmapol} is elementary and will be left

3123: to the reader.

3124: 

3125: 

3126: \begin{Lemma}\label{lemmaGpol} Let $k,q\in\N$ and let $H(x^\mu,u)$ be

3127:   $\delta$-polyhomogeneous with respect to $x$ with a zero of order

3128:   $m$ in $u$. If

3129:  $$f\in \cases{

3130:  \mcA_k^\delta\cap L^\infty

3131: + \mcC^\lambda_\infty\;, & $q=0\;,$ \cr

3132:  \mcA_k^\delta%\cap L^\infty

3133: + \mcC^\lambda_\infty\;, & otherwise, %$m>0\;,$

3134: } $$ for some

3135:  $\lambda>0$, then  for any $\epsilon>0$

3136: $$H(\cdot,x^{q\delta} f)\in x^{mq\delta}(

3137:  \mcA_{k}^\delta%\cap L^\infty

3138: + \mcC^{\lambda-\epsilon }_\infty)\;.$$

3139: \end{Lemma} \proof We Taylor-expand $H$ in $u$ to order $r$, where $r$

3140: is any number satisfying

3141: $$rq\delta > m q \delta + \lambda\;.$$

3142: We then have

3143: $$H(x^\mu,x^{q\delta}f) = P(x^\mu,x^{q\delta}f) +R\;,$$

3144: where $P$ is a polynomial and $R$ is a remainder. We note that the

3145: coefficients of the expansion of $P$ can be obtained by

3146: differentiating with respect to $u$ and setting $u=0$, and are

3147: therefore in $\mca$ by \eq{eq:m1}. Further, the usual integral

3148: formula for the remainder in a Taylor expansion together with

3149: \eq{m1} shows that $R$ has a uniform zero of order $r$, in the

3150: sense of \Eq{S2.71}. The result follows from Lemma~\ref{lemmapol}

3151: and from \lem{lemmaG1}. \qed

3152: 

3153: We are ready now to pass to the proof of the non-linear analogue

3154: of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1}:

3155: 

3156: \begin{Theorem}

3157:   \label{Tlemme1n}

3158:   Let $p\in \Z, q, 1/\delta\in \N, -1<\beta'\in \R$,

3159: $k\in \N\cup\{\infty\}$, and let $$(\varphi,\psi)\in

3160: \mcC_{\infty}^{\beta'}(\Omega_{x_0,T}) \times

3161:   \mcC_{\infty}^{\beta'}(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;, \quad \psi_1\in L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})%\;,

3162:   $$

3163:   ($\psi_1$ as in \Eq{psidecomp}), be  a solution of

3164:   (\ref{nequa}) with $G$ of the form

3165:   \eq{m0}, where $H$ is $\delta$-polyhomogeneous in $x$ with a

3166:   uniform zero of order

3167:   \begin{equation}

3168:     \label{eq:ord}

3169:     m > \frac{p- \frac 1 \delta}{q}\;.

3170:   \end{equation}

3171:  Suppose that Equations~\eq{equa1+}-\eq{HLdelta} hold, and that

3172:   \begin{deqarr}&

3173:     B_{11}\in \left(\mcA_k^\delta \cap L^\infty\right)

3174:     (\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,\qquad

3175: B_{12}, B_{22}, B_{21}\in \mcA_k^\delta (\Omega_{x_0,T}) \;,&

3176: \label{H3second}

3177: \\ &a,b \in \mcA_k^\delta (\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,

3178: \qquad\varphi(0)\in \mcA_k^\delta(M_{x_0})\;.& \label{H4second}

3179:   \end{deqarr}

3180:  Then $$\varphi\in

3181: \left(x^{(mq-p)\delta}\mcA_k^\delta+\mcA_k^\delta\right)

3182: (\Omega_{x_0,T}) =

3183: x^{\min((mp-q)\delta, 0)}{\mycal A}_k^{\delta}(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;, $$ %\quad

3184: $$

3185: \psi\in x^{\min\{(mq-p)\delta+1,1\}} \mcA_{k

3186: }^\delta(\Omega_{x_0,T})+

3187: C_\infty(\overline{\Omega_{x_0,T}})\subset \left(\mcA_k^\delta\cap

3188:   L^\infty\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;.$$

3189: If one further assumes

3190: $$L_{12}^\mu,B_{12},a,\varphi(0), G_\varphi(\cdot,0)\in L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;,$$

3191: then it also holds that

3192: $$\varphi\in

3193: \left(x^{(mq-p)\delta}\mcA_k^\delta+\mcA_k^\delta\cap

3194: L^\infty\right)(\Omega_{x_0,T})\;.$$

3195: \end{Theorem}

3196: 

3197:  \remark Obviously the theorem remains true if we replace $G$ by

3198: a finite sum of nonlinearities satisfying the above hypotheses,

3199: with different $p$'s and $q$'s for each term of the sum.

3200: 

3201: \medskip

3202: 

3203: \proof The result is established by a repetition of the proof of

3204: Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1}, using Lemma~\ref{lemmaG1} and

3205: \lem{lemmaGpol} to obtain the necessary estimates on the

3206: non-linear terms. We simply note that the condition on the order

3207: $m$ of the non-linearity guarantees, using \lem{lemmaG1}, that

3208: $$\partial_x\psi =c_2\in \mcC^{\lambda-\epsilon}_\infty\;,$$ with $$\lambda=

3209: \min\{\beta',mq\delta-p\delta\} >-1\;,$$ hence $\psi\in L^\infty$

3210: by integration.  Decreasing $\beta'$  if necessary we may without

3211: loss of generality assume that $\beta'=\lambda$. When applying

3212: Lemma~\ref{lemmaGpol} it is convenient to view the function $H$ as

3213: a function of the variable $f:=(\psi_1,x\psi_2,x\varphi)\in

3214: L^\infty$. The remaining details are left to the reader. \qed

3215: 

3216: As a straightforward corollary of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1n} one

3217: obtains:

3218: 

3219: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2phg}  Let $\delta =1$ in odd space dimensions,

3220:   and let $\delta =1/2$ in even space dimensions. Consider Equation

3221:   \eq{SE.1} on

3222:   ${\R}^{n,1}$, $n\geq 2$, with %$2$-\emph{compatible} polyhomogeneous

3223:   initial data $$\widetilde f|_{\{\tau={0}\}}\;,\quad \partial

3224:   \widetilde f/\partial \tau|_{\{\tau={0}\}}\in \left(\mca\cap

3225:   L^\infty\right)(M_{x_0}) \;.$$ Suppose further that

3226:   $H(x^\mu,f)$ is smooth in $f$ at fixed $x^\mu$, bounded and

3227:   $\delta$-polyhomogeneous in $x^\mu$ at constant $f$, and has a zero of order

3228:   $\ell$ at $f=0$, with $\ell$ as in \eq{condH}.

3229: Then:

3230: \begin{enumerate}

3231: \item There exists $\tau_+ > {0}$ such that $ f$ exists

3232:   $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+}$, with

3233:   \begin{equation}

3234:     \label{eq:w17}

3235:     \|\tf\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}\;.

3236:   \end{equation}

3237: \item If the initial data are \emph{compatible} polyhomogeneous in the

3238:   sense that there exists $\lambda < 1$ such that

3239: $$ \forall i \in \N \qquad %\partial^i_\tau \tf (0)\in

3240: %L^{\infty}(M_{x_0})\;, \quad

3241: \partial_x \partial^i_\tau \tf (0)\in

3242: \mcC^{-\lambda}_{\infty}(M_{x_0})\;, $$

3243:   then the solution is polyhomogeneous on each neighbourhood

3244:   $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ of

3245:   $\scrip$ on which $f$ exists and satisfies \eq{eq:w17} with $\tau_+$

3246:   replaced by $\tau_*$.

3247: \end{enumerate}

3248: \end{Theorem}

3249: 

3250: \proof  Point 1 is  Theorem~\ref{T2} specialized to

3251: polyhomogeneous initial data. To prove point 2 we  set \be \psi =

3252: \left(\begin{array}{c}

3253:   \psi_1=\widetilde{f}\\

3254:   \psi_2=\left(\begin{array}{c}

3255:   \phi_-\\

3256:   \phi_A

3257:   \end{array}\right)

3258:   \end{array}\right)\;,

3259: \ee and \be \varphi= \phi_+\;. \ee Then Equation~(\ref{SE.3})

3260: takes the form (\ref{nequa}) with \beqa &G= -\Omega^{-{n+3\over

3261: 2}} H(x^\mu, \Omega^{n-1\over 2}\widetilde{f})

3262: \equiv  -\Omega^{-{n+3\over 2}} H(x^\mu, \Omega^{n-1\over 2}\psi_1)\;,&\\

3263: &G_\varphi= -G\;,%&\\&

3264: \quad G_{\psi_1}=0\;, \quad G_{\psi_2}= \left(\begin{array}{c}

3265:     -G\\

3266:     0\end{array} \right)\;.&

3267: \eeqa For $n$ even we take

3268:   $\delta=1/2$,

3269:   $p=n+3$, $q= n-1$; the condition  (\ref{eq:ord}) then reads $m> {n+1\over

3270:     n-1}$, which coincides with (\ref{condH}).

3271: For $n$ odd we take $\delta=1$,

3272:    $p = {n+3 \over 2}$, $q= {n-1\over 2}$, and

3273:   (\ref{condH}) guarantees again that \eq{eq:ord} holds.

3274: \qed

3275: 

3276: %\mnote{this belongs to the wave map section, or has to be dumped}  Secondly, th%e right part of the wave map equation (\ref{W.3}), can

3277: %  be written with $\Omega=x$,

3278: %  \beqa G^a&=& {G_1^a}_b(x^\mu,x^{n-1\over

3279: %    2}(f^c,\phi_-^c,\phi_A^c))\ ( \phi_+^b , \phi_A^b) \\ & & + x^{-{n+1\over

3280: %      2}} {G_2^a}_b(x^\mu,x^{n-1\over 2}(f^c,\phi_-^c,\phi_A^c)) \phi_+^b\\ & & +

3281: %  x^{-{n+1\over 2}} G_3^a(x^\mu , x^{-{n-1\over 2}}

3282: %  (f^c,\phi^c_-,\phi^c_A))\;, \eeqa with ${G_1^a}_b = -\Gamma_{bc}^a

3283: %  (x^{n-1\over2} \tilde f) \left(

3284: %    \begin{array}{c} -x^{n-1\over 2} \phi_-^c \\  x^{n-1\over2} \phi_A^c

3285: %    \end{array} \right)$, $G_2^a = -(n-1) (x^{n-1\over 2} \tilde f^c) $,

3286: %  $G_3^a = (n-1) (x^{n-1\over 2}\tilde f^c)((1+x+2\tau)(x^{n-1\over2}

3287: %  \phi_-^b)+ (n-1) (x^{n-1\over 2} \tilde f^b))$.

3288: 

3289:  \section{Wave maps}

3290: \label{Swave} Let $(\cN,h)$ be a smooth Riemannian manifold, and

3291: let $f:(\cM,\stsg)\to(\cN,h)$ solve the wave map equation. We will

3292: be interested in maps $f$ which have the property that $f$

3293: approaches a constant map $f_0$ as $r$ tends to infinity along

3294: lightlike directions, $f_0(x)=p_0\in\cN$ for all $x\in\cM$.

3295: Introducing normal coordinates around $p_0$ we can write

3296: $f=(f^a)$, $a=1,\ldots,N=\dim \cN$, with the functions $f^a$

3297: satisfying the set of equations

3298: \begin{equation}

3299:   \label{W.1}

3300: \Box_\stsg f^a + \stsg^{\mu\nu}\Gamma^{a}_{bc}(f) \frac{\partial

3301:   f^b}{\partial x^\mu} \frac{\partial f^c}{\partial x^\nu} = 0\;,

3302: \end{equation}

3303: where the $\Gamma^{a}_{bc}$'s are the Christoffel symbols of the

3304: metric $h$. Setting as before $\tf^a=\Omega^{-{n-1 \over 2}}f^a$,

3305: $\tilde\stsg=\Omega^2\stsg$, we then have from \eq{C.3},

3306: \begin{equation}

3307:   \label{W.2}

3308: \Box_{\tilde\stsg} \tf^a =- \Omega^{-{n-1 \over 2}}

3309: \tilde\stsg^{\mu\nu}\Gamma^{a}_{bc}(\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf)

3310: \frac{\partial   (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^b)}{\partial x^\mu}

3311: \frac{\partial (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^c)}{\partial x^\nu} + {n-1

3312: \over 4n}(\tilde{R} -R\Omega^{-2})\tf^a\;.

3313: \end{equation}

3314: In particular if $(\cM,\stsg)$ is the Minkowski space-time (and if

3315: we use the same conformal transformation as in Section~\ref{ss1})

3316: we obtain a system of Equations \eq{SE.12.1}-\eq{SE.18} with

3317: $a_A=b_A=0$, with the obvious replacements associated with

3318: $\tf\to\tf^a$, and with $G$ in \eq{SE.18} replaced by

3319:  \begin{eqnarray}

3320: \lefteqn{G^a:= - \Gamma^{a}_{bc} (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf)

3321: \left\{\Omega^{{n-1 \over 2}} (-\phi^b_+\phi^c_- +

3322: \phi_A^b\phi_A^c) \right.} & & \nonumber \\&& -\left.

3323:   (n-1)\Omega^{{n-3 \over 2}}\tf^c

3324: \left[\left(x\phi^b_+ - (1+x+2\tau)\phi^b_-\right)  -

3325:   (n-1) %\Omega^{{n-5 \over 2}}x(1+x+2\tau)

3326: \tf^b\right]\right\}\;.

3327:   \label{W.3}\end{eqnarray}

3328: 

3329: \subsection{Existence of solutions, space derivatives estimates}

3330: As before, for even space-dimensions $n$ the occurrence of

3331: non-integer powers of $\Omega$ above does not allow the use of the

3332: standard conformal method except for special target manifolds

3333: $(\cN,h)$, \emph{cf.\/}~\cite{ChBGu}. This can be handled  in our

3334: approach, and  we show:

3335: 

3336: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2w}

3337: Consider Equation

3338:   (\ref{W.1}) on ${\R}^{n,1}$ with initial data given on a hyperboloid

3339:   $\hyp\supset \Sigma_{x_0,0}$ in Minkowski space-time, and satisfying

3340:   \beqa\label{cpt1.0w} \tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

3341:   \equiv\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in& \cases{

3342:   \left(\HH_{k+1}^{\alpha}\cap L^\infty\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;, &

3343:   $n\geq 3\;,$\cr \left(\HH_{k+1}^{\alpha}\cap

3344:   {{\mcC}}^0_1\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;, & $n=2\;,$} \\ \partial_x

3345:   (\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f^a) |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

3346:   %\mcC_0^{\alpha}( \Sigma_{x_0,0})\cap

3347:   \HH_k^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;, \label{cpt1.1w}\\

3348:   \partial_\tau(\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f^a) |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in&

3349:   \cases{ \HH_{k}^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;, & $n\geq 3\;,$\cr

3350:   \left(\HH_{k}^{\alpha}\cap L^\infty\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;, &

3351:   $n=2\;.$}

3352: \label{cpt1w}

3353:  \eeqa  for some $k > {n\over2} +1$, $ -1< \alpha

3354: \le -1/2$. Then:

3355: \begin{enumerate}

3356: \item There exists $\tau_+>0$ and a solution $ f^a$

3357:   of Equation~\eq{W.1}, defined on a set containing $\Omega_{x_{0},

3358:     \tau_+}$,  satisfying the given initial conditions, such that

3359: \begin{deqarr}\label{wmca}

3360: \lefteqn{\|\widetilde f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3361: %+\|\widetilde

3362: %  xe_+(f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}+\|\widetilde

3363: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}+\|\widetilde

3364: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3365: <\infty \;, \qquad n=2 }&&

3366: \\

3367: \lefteqn{\|xe_+(\widetilde

3368:   f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3369: +\sum_{i=1}^r\|x X_i\widetilde

3370:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3371: } && \nn\\ && +\|\widetilde f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3372: +\|x \partial_\tau \widetilde

3373:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3374: <\infty \;, \quad n\geq 3 \;. \arrlabel{wmc}

3375: \end{deqarr}

3376: Here the $X_i$'s are the vector fields defined in

3377: Section~\ref{S2}, {\em cf.\/}~\Eq{champscoord}.

3378: \item Further,  if  %$0<\tau_*\leq x_0/2$

3379: $\tau_*$ is  such that $f^a$

3380:   exists on $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ with \eq{wmc} holding with $\tau_+=\tau_*$,

3381: %with $\|\widetilde  f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty$,

3382: then for all $0 \leq

3383:   \tau < \tau_*$  we

3384:   have $$\widetilde f^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in L^\infty

3385:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap \HH_{k+1}^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\; ,$$

3386:   $$\partial_\tau \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

3387:   \HH{^\alpha_k} (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

3388: \;,\qquad \partial_x \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

3389:   \HH^{\alpha}_k (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \;,$$

3390: uniformly in $\tau$. If $n=2$ we also have uniform bounds in the

3391: following spaces

3392: $$ \widetilde f^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \left({\mcC}^0_1

3393:   \cap \HH_{k+1}^\alpha\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;,

3394:   \qquad \partial_\tau

3395:   \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \left(\HH{^\alpha_k}

3396:    \cap L^{\infty}\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;.$$

3397: \end{enumerate}\end{Theorem}

3398: 

3399: \remark Integration of condition \eq{cpt1.1w} implies of course

3400: that $\tf  \in L^\infty(\Sigma_{x_0,0})$.

3401: 

3402: \medskip

3403: 

3404: \proof The proof is similar to that of Theorem~\ref{T2}, but

3405: simpler, because we do not need to gain a $1/2$ in the decay rate,

3406: as done in Lemma~\ref{LT2}. We write Equation~\eq{W.1} in the form

3407: \eq{SE.11}-\eq{SE.17.1}, with $a_A=b_A=0$ and with $G$ in

3408: \eq{SE.18} replaced by $G^a$ defined in \eq{W.3}. We write $G^a$

3409: as

3410: \begin{equation}

3411:   \label{eq:W4}

3412:   G^a= A^a + B^a + C^a + D^a + E^a\;,

3413: \end{equation}

3414: with the order of terms in \eq{eq:W4} corresponding to that in

3415: \eq{W.3}. Since we are working in normal coordinates,

3416: $\Gamma^a_{bc}$ has a uniform zero of order one in the sense of

3417: \eq{S2.71} at $f^a=0$. We want to use Equation~\eq{L.10} to get an

3418: a-priori estimate for the solutions of \eq{W.1}; for this we shall

3419: need to estimate the $\HH^{\alpha}_k$ norms of all the terms which

3420: occur in \eq{eq:W4}. The simplest such term is $E^a$:

3421: \begin{eqnarray*}

3422:   \|E^a\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \equiv & (n-1)^2\| \Gamma^{a}_{bc} (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf)

3423: (\Omega^{{n-1 \over 2}}\tf^c)(\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^b)

3424: \Omega^{-1-{n-1 \over 2}}\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}

3425: \\ & \approx & (n-1)^2 \| \Gamma^{a}_{bc} (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf)

3426: (\Omega^{{n-1 \over 2}}\tf^c)(\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^b)

3427: \|_{\HH^{\alpha+(n+1)/2}_k}\;, \end{eqnarray*} where we have used

3428: the fact that $\Omega/x$ is a smooth, and therefore bounded,

3429: function. The function $\Gamma^{a}_{bc} (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf)

3430: (\Omega^{{n-1 \over 2}}\tf^c)(\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^b)$ can be

3431: viewed as a smooth function $F$ of $x^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^a$ with a

3432: uniform zero of order three. We can thus apply \eq{S2.7.2} with

3433: $l=3$ to obtain

3434: \begin{eqnarray}

3435:   \|E(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty}) \|

3436:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha+2-n}_k} \nonumber

3437: \\ & \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty}) \|

3438:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\;, \label{W5} \end{eqnarray}

3439: since $n\geq 2$. We note that in dimensions larger than or equal

3440: to three we have at least one  power of $x$ ``left unused'' above,

3441: which will be made use of in estimating the remaining

3442: contributions to $G^a$. We proceed in a similar way with the other

3443: terms; in space dimension $n=2$ we view $\Omega^{(n+1)/2}D^a\equiv

3444: \Omega^{(n+1)/2}(n-1)(1+x+2\tau)\Omega^{{n-3

3445:     \over 2}}\Gamma^{a}_{bc} (\Omega^{n-1 \over 2}\tf)\tf^c\phi^b_- $

3446: as a smooth function $F$ with a uniform zero of order three of

3447: $(x^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^a,x^{n-1 \over 2}\phi^a_- )$, which  leads to

3448: the estimate

3449: \begin{eqnarray}

3450:   \|D(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3451:   \|\phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \left(\|

3452:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|\phi_- (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)\;.

3453:   \label{W6} \end{eqnarray}

3454: On the other hand, in dimension $3$ or higher  we can view

3455: $\Omega^{(n+1)/2}D^a$ as a function $F$ with a uniform  zero of

3456: order three of $(x^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^a,x^{n-1 \over 2}x\phi^a_- )$,

3457: which implies

3458: \begin{eqnarray}

3459:   \|D(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3460:   \|x\phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \left(\|

3461:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|x\phi_- (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)\;.

3462:   \label{W6.3} \end{eqnarray}

3463: Regardless of dimension we view

3464: $\Omega^{(n+1)/2}C^a\equiv\Omega^{(n+1)/2} (n-1)x\Omega^{{n-3

3465: \over 2}}\Gamma^{a}_{bc} (\Omega^{n-1 \over

3466:   2}\tf)\tf^c\phi^b_+ $ as a smooth function  with a uniform zero

3467:   of

3468: order three of $(x^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^a,x^{n-1 \over 2}x\phi^a_+ )$,

3469: obtaining thus

3470: \begin{eqnarray}

3471:   \|C(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3472:   \|x \phi_+ (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \left(\|

3473:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|x\phi_+ (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)\;.

3474:   \label{W7} \end{eqnarray}

3475: Viewing $B^a$ as a function of $(x^{n-1 \over 2}\tf^a,x^{n-1 \over

3476:   2}x \phi^a_A )$, and viewing $A^a$ as a function of $(x^{n-1 \over

3477:   2}\tf^a,x^{n-1 \over 2}x\phi^a_- ,x^{n-1 \over 2}x\phi^a_+ )$, one

3478: similarly obtains for $n\geq 3$

3479: \begin{eqnarray}

3480:   \nonumber \|A(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3481:   \| x\phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty}, \|x \phi_+ (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \times

3482: \\ && \left(\|

3483:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|x\phi_- (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}+ \|x\phi_+

3484:   (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)

3485: \;,

3486:   \label{W9.3}

3487: \\

3488:   \|B(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3489:   \| x\phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \left(\|

3490:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|x\phi_A (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)\;,

3491: \label{W8.3}

3492:                              \end{eqnarray}

3493: while in dimension $2$ it holds that

3494: \begin{eqnarray} \nonumber \|A(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3495:   \| \phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty}, \|x \phi_+ (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \times

3496: \\ && \left(\|

3497:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|\phi_- (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}+ \|x\phi_+

3498:   (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)

3499: \;.

3500:   \label{W9}

3501: \\

3502:   \|B(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3503:   \| \phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \left(\|

3504:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|\phi_A (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)\;,

3505: \label{W8}

3506: \end{eqnarray}

3507: Summarizing, in space dimension two we have obtained

3508: \begin{eqnarray}

3509:   \nonumber \|G(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3510:   \| \phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty},

3511:   \| \phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty}, \|x \phi_+ (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \times

3512: \\ && \left(\|

3513:   \tf\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} + \|\phi_- (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}+ \|x\phi_+

3514:   (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}+ \|\phi_A (s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k}\right)

3515:  \nonumber\\ &\leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3516:   \| \phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty},

3517:   \| \phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty},\|x \phi_+ (s)\|_{L^\infty}) \times

3518: \nonumber \\ &&\phantom{xxx}\sqrt{E_\alpha(s)}\;,

3519:   \label{W10} \end{eqnarray}

3520: where

3521: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

3522:   E_\alpha(t)&=&\|\widetilde f(t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}}+ \|\phi_-(t)\|^2

3523: _{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzerot} %

3524: \\&&

3525: + \|\phi_+(t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzerot} +\sum_{A}\|\phi_A

3526: (t)\|^2_{\HH^{\alpha}_{k}\Mxonexzerot}\;.

3527:   \label{eq:LT2w}

3528: \end{eqnarray}

3529: On the other hand in higher dimensions we can write

3530: \begin{eqnarray}

3531:    \|G(s)\|_{\HH^{\alpha}_k} &\leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3532:    \| x\phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty},\|x\phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty},\|x \phi_+

3533: (s)\|_{L^\infty})

3534: \times \nn \\

3535: && \phantom{xxx}\sqrt{E_\alpha(s)}\;.

3536:   \label{W10.3} \end{eqnarray}

3537: To obtain a closed inequality from Equations~\eq{L.10} and

3538: \eq{W10} or \eq{W10.3}, we need to control all the $L_\infty$

3539: norms occurring there. Since $k>n/2+1$, from Equation~\eq{W10} and

3540: the weighted Sobolev embeddings we obtain

3541: \begin{eqnarray}

3542:   %\nonumber

3543: \|G(s)\|_{{\mcC}^{\alpha}_1}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3544:   \| \phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty},

3545:   \| \phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty}, E_\alpha(s)) %E_\alpha(s)

3546: \;,

3547:   \label{W11}

3548: \end{eqnarray}

3549: in $n=2$, or --- from \eq{W10.3} ---

3550: \begin{eqnarray}

3551:   %\nonumber

3552: \|G(s)\|_{{\mcC}^{\alpha}_1}& \leq  & C(\| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty},

3553:    E_\alpha(s)) %E_\alpha(s)

3554: \;,

3555:   \label{W11.3}

3556: \end{eqnarray}

3557: for $n\geq 3$. The identity

3558: \begin{equation}

3559: \label{xint} \tf^a(\tau,x)=\tf^a(\tau,x_0-2\tau) - \frac 12

3560: \int_{x}^{x_0-2\tau} (\phi^a_--\phi^a_+)(\tau,s)\;ds\end{equation}

3561: yields

3562: \begin{eqnarray}

3563: \nonumber \|\tf(s)\|_{L^\infty}  &\leq & C\left(\sqrt{E_\alpha(0)}

3564: + \|\phi_-(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0} +

3565: \|\phi_+(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}\right)

3566: \\ & \leq &C\left(\sqrt{E_\alpha(0)} +  \sqrt{E_\alpha(s)}\right)

3567: \;.

3568:   \label{W13.3}

3569: \end{eqnarray}

3570: for $n\geq 3$, while if $n= 2$ we use the estimate

3571: \begin{eqnarray}

3572: \nonumber \|\tf(s)\|_{L^\infty} + \|\phi_A(s)\|_{L^\infty} &\leq &

3573: C\left(\sqrt{E_\alpha(0)} + \|\phi_-(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_1} +

3574: \|\phi_+(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_1}\right)

3575: \\ & \leq &C\left(\sqrt{E_\alpha(0)} +  \sqrt{E_\alpha(s)}\right)

3576: \;.

3577:   \label{W13}

3578: \end{eqnarray}

3579: In \Eqs{W13.3}{W13}, for notational simplicity  we have estimated

3580: $\tf^a(\tau,x_0-2\tau)$ and its angular derivatives by a multiple

3581: of the initial energy $E_\alpha(0)$; strictly speaking, this

3582: should be some functional of $(E_\alpha(0),\tau^*)$ for $\tau^*$

3583: small enough; then such an estimate holds by standard methods  for

3584: $0\le \tau\leq \tau_*<x_0/2$. Further, such an inequality is

3585: correct if we already have a weighted $L^\infty$ bound as assumed

3586: in point 2. of the theorem. If $n\geq 3$ Equations \eq{L.10}  for

3587: $\alpha<-1/2$ or \eq{L.10n} if $\alpha=-1/2$, \eq{W11.3} and

3588: \eq{W13.3} give

3589: \begin{equation}

3590:   \label{eq:glbd3}

3591:   E_\alpha(\tau) \leq

3592:   CE_\alpha({0}) + \int_{0}^{\tau}

3593: \Phi\left( E_\alpha(s)\right) \;ds\;,

3594: \end{equation}

3595: for some constant $C$, and for a  function $\Phi$ which is bounded

3596: on bounded sets, and we conclude as in the proof of

3597: Theorem~\ref{T2}.

3598: 

3599: If $n=2$, we note the identity

3600: \begin{equation}

3601:   \label{W14}

3602:   \phi_-(\tau,x)=\phi_-(0,x+2\tau) + \int_0^\tau

3603:   e_+(\phi_-)(\sigma,2(\tau-\sigma)+x) \;d\sigma\;.

3604: \end{equation}

3605: {}From the second of Equations~\eq{SE.14.1} we obtain

3606: $$ |e_+(\phi_-)(s,x)|\leq C\left(\|\phi_-(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0} +

3607: \|\phi_A(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_1} + \|\phi_+(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}

3608: +\|G(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}\right) x^\alpha\;,$$ so that

3609: \begin{eqnarray}\nonumber

3610:   |\phi_-(\tau,x)|&\leq& \|\phi_-(0)\|_{L^\infty} + C \int_0^\tau

3611:   \left(\|\phi_-(\sigma)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0} +

3612: \|\phi_A(\sigma)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_1} +

3613: \|\phi_+(\sigma)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0} \right.

3614: \\

3615: &&\left.+\|G(\sigma)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}\right)\left(2(\tau-\sigma)+x\right)^\alpha

3616: \;d\sigma\;.

3617:   \label{W15}\end{eqnarray}

3618: It follows that

3619: \begin{eqnarray}

3620:   \|\phi_-(\tau)\|_{L^\infty}&\leq& \|\phi_-(0)\|_{L^\infty} + C \int_0^\tau

3621:   \left(\sqrt{E_\alpha(\sigma)}

3622: +\|G(\sigma)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}\right)(\tau-\sigma)^\alpha

3623: \;d\sigma\;.

3624:   \label{W16}\end{eqnarray}

3625: Let

3626: \begin{eqnarray}F(s)\equiv

3627: \| \tf(s)\|_{L^\infty}+

3628:   \| \phi_- (s)\|_{L^\infty}+

3629:   \| \phi_A (s)\|_{L^\infty} + \sqrt{E_\alpha(s)}\;.

3630:  \label{W17}\end{eqnarray}

3631: It follows from \eq{L.10}, \eq{W13} and \eq{W16} that we have

3632: \begin{equation}

3633:   \label{Fineq}

3634:   F(\tau)\leq CF(0)+\int_0^\tau \Phi(F(\sigma))\left(1+

3635:     (\tau-\sigma)^\alpha\right) \;d\sigma\;,

3636: \end{equation}

3637: where $\Phi$ is a function bounded on bounded sets. We have the

3638: following:

3639: \begin{Lemma}\label{Ll}

3640:   There exists a time $\tau_*$, depending only upon $C$, $F(0)$, and

3641:   the function $\Phi$, such that any positive continuous function $

3642:   F:[0,\tau_+)\to\R$ satisfying the inequality \eq{Fineq} with $\alpha

3643:   > -1$ is bounded from above by $CF(0) + 1$ on

3644:   $[0,\max(\tau_+,\tau_*))$.

3645: \end{Lemma}

3646: \proof Let $$M=\sup_{0\leq x\leq CF(0) + 1}|\Phi(x)|\;; $$ if

3647: $M=0$ the result is obviously true, so assume that $M\neq 0$.

3648: {}From Equation~\eq{Fineq} we obtain that on any interval

3649: $[0,\tau)$ on which $F\leq CF(0) + 1$ we have

3650: $$ F(\tau)\leq CF(0)+\int_0^\tau M \left(1+

3651:     (\tau-\sigma)^\alpha\right) \;d\sigma = CF(0)+ M

3652: \left(\tau + {

3653:     \tau^{\alpha+1}\over \alpha + 1}\right)\;.$$

3654: (Equation~\eq{Fineq} with $\tau=0$ shows that $CF(0)\geq F(0)$,

3655: and continuity of $F$ implies that the set of such intervals is

3656: non-empty.) The result is established by choosing

3657: $$\tau_*=\min\left( {

3658:   1\over 2M },\left[{\alpha+1\over 2M }\right]^{1/(\alpha+1)}\right)\;.$$

3659: \qed

3660: 

3661: Because the existence time $\tau_*$ in Theorem~\ref{T2w} does not

3662: depend upon $x_1$, Theorem~\ref{T2w} with $n=2$ follows again by

3663: an argument identical to the one given at the end of

3664: Theorem~\ref{T2}. \qed

3665: 

3666: As in the case of the nonlinear wave equation~\eq{SE.1}, in order

3667: to obtain time derivative estimates  we shall need a more general

3668: version of Theorem~\ref{T2w}. Thus, we consider systems of the

3669: form \eq{td1}-\eq{td4P} with a rather more general form of the

3670: non-linearity $G$ appearing there. It should be clear from the

3671: proof of Theorem~\ref{T2w} that it is convenient to treat the case

3672: $n=2$ separately, this will be considered in Section~\ref{S2dtd}

3673: below.  We thus start with a result which holds in dimensions

3674: $n\geq 3$; the same proof gives similar results in dimension $n=2$

3675: for equations with a nonlinearity of higher order:

3676: 

3677: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2wg} Let  $n\geq 3$ and consider

3678: the system \eq{td1}-\eq{td4} with

3679: \begin{eqnarray}

3680: \lefteqn{ \|a(\tau)\|_{\HH ^\alpha_k} +\|b(\tau)\|_{\HH

3681: ^\alpha_k}+ \sup_{a,b=1,2}\|B_{ab}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_k} } && \nn \\

3682: && +\|B_{0}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_k} +\|B_{0}^{-1}(\tau)\|_{L^\infty}

3683: +\|B_{1}(\tau)\|_{\mcC^0_k}

3684:  \leq \tilde C\;,

3685: \label{gtd5}\end{eqnarray} for some constant $\tilde C$, with the

3686: nonlinearity $G$ in \Eq{td1a}  of the form

3687: \begin{equation}

3688: \label{gwtd1} G = x^{-(n+3)/2} H(x^\mu,x^{(n-1)/2}\tf,

3689: x^{(n-1)/2}x\phi_A,x^{(n-1)/2}x\phi_+,x^{(n-1)/2}x\phi_-)\;,

3690: \end{equation}

3691: with $G_{e_-(\phi_A)}=0$ ({\em cf.\/} \Eq{td4G}), and with $H$

3692: having a uniform zero of order $\ell\geq 3$ in the sense of

3693: (\ref{S2.71}).  Suppose that the initial data satisfy

3694: \beqa\label{gcpt1.0wg} \tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

3695:   \equiv\Omega^{-{n-1\over 2}}f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in&

3696:   \left(\HH_{k+1}^{\alpha}\cap L^\infty\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;,  \\

3697: \partial_x \tf^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

3698:   %\mcC_0^{\alpha}( \Sigma_{x_0,0})\cap

3699:   \HH_k^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;, \label{gcpt1.1w}\\

3700:   \partial_\tau\tf^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in& \HH_{k}^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;,

3701: \label{gcpt1w}

3702:  \eeqa with

3703: some $k > {n\over2} +1$, $ -1< \alpha \le -1/2$, then:

3704: \begin{enumerate}

3705: \item There exists $\tau_+>0$, depending only upon the constant

3706: $\tilde C $ in \eq{gtd5} and a bound on the norms of the initial

3707: data in the spaces appearing in \Eqs{gcpt1.0wg}{gcpt1w}, and a

3708: solution $ f^a$

3709:   of Equations~\eq{td1}-\eq{td4}, defined on a set containing $\Omega_{x_{0},

3710:     \tau_+}$,  satisfying the given initial conditions, such that

3711: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3712: \lefteqn{\|xe_+(\widetilde

3713:   f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3714: +\sum_{i=1}^r\|x X_i\widetilde

3715:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3716: } && \nn\\ && +\|\widetilde f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3717: +\|x \partial_\tau \widetilde

3718:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3719: <\infty \;.

3720: %\heqno\arr

3721: \label{gwmc}

3722: \end{eqnarray}

3723: %\end{deqarr}

3724: \item Further,  if  %$0<\tau_*\leq x_0/2$

3725: $\tau_*$ is  such that $f^a$

3726:   exists on $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ with \eq{gwmc} holding with $\tau_+=\tau_*$,

3727: %with $\|\widetilde  f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty$,

3728: then for all $0 \leq

3729:   \tau < \tau_*$  we

3730:   have \begin{deqarr}

3731: &\widetilde f^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in L^\infty

3732:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap \HH_{k+1}^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\; ,

3733: &\\ &

3734: \partial_\tau \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

3735:   \HH{^\alpha_k} (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

3736: \;, & \\ &

3737: \partial_x \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

3738:   \HH^{\alpha}_k (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \;,

3739: \arrlabel{7.37}

3740:        \end{deqarr}

3741: with uniform bounds in $\tau$; this implies

3742: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3743: %\lefteqn

3744: {\|x\partial_\tau \phi_+\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3745: +%\sum_{i=1}^r\|x(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau  X_i\widetilde

3746:   \|x\partial_\tau \phi_A\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3747: +\| (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau \widetilde

3748: f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})} <\infty }

3749: \;.\nn\\

3750: \label{gwmc2}

3751: \end{eqnarray}

3752: If $k>n/2+2$ then we also have

3753: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3754: \|x (x+2\tau)\partial_{\tau}

3755: \phi_-\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})} <\infty \;.

3756: \label{gwmc2a}

3757: \end{eqnarray}

3758: \end{enumerate}

3759: \end{Theorem}

3760: 

3761: \proof The transition from Theorem~\ref{T2w} to Theorem~\ref{T2wg}

3762: is rather similar to that from Theorem~\ref{T2} to

3763: Theorem~\ref{T2g}. We note that the estimates done in the course

3764: of the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2w}, with $n\geq 3$ there, can be

3765: summed up in the inequality \be\| x^{-(n+1)/2}

3766: H(x^\mu,x^{(n-1)/2}\hat f)\|_{\HH ^\alpha_k} \leq C(\|\hat

3767: f\|_{L^\infty}) \|\hat f\|_{\HH ^\alpha_k}\;, \label{gw4}\ee where

3768: $$ \hat f:= (\tf, x\phi_A,x\phi_+,x\phi_-)\;.$$ The minor

3769: modifications of the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2w} needed to obtain

3770: \eq{7.37} and the estimate \eq{gwmc2} on $(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau

3771: \widetilde f$ are identical to the ones described in the proof of

3772: Theorem~\ref{T2g}.  The estimate on $\|x\partial_\tau

3773: \phi_+\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}$ is obtained directly

3774: from \Eq{td8.01} and from \eq{gw4}. The estimate on

3775: $\|x\partial_\tau \phi_A\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}$ is

3776: obtained from the \eq{td1a}--equivalent of the first of

3777: Equations~\eq{SE.15.1}. Next, for $k> n/2 +2$ \Eqsone{td8.0} and

3778: \eq{gw4} give \be e_+(\phi_-) \in \HH ^{\alpha}_{k-1} \subset

3779: \mcC^\alpha_1\;,\label{tdw6}\ee Differentiating \Eq{W14} with

3780: respect to $x$ gives

3781: \begin{equation}

3782:   \label{W14m}

3783:   \partial_x\phi_-(\tau,x)=\partial_x\phi_-(0,x+2\tau) + \int_0^\tau

3784:   \left(\partial_xe_+(\phi_-)\right)(\sigma,2(\tau-\sigma)+x) \;d\sigma\;,

3785: \end{equation}

3786: which together with \eq{tdw6} implies, by straightforward

3787: integration,

3788: \begin{equation}

3789:    \label{W14n}

3790:   x(x+2\tau)|\partial_x\phi_-(\tau,x)| \leq C

3791: \end{equation}

3792: This,  \eq{tdw6}, and the identity

3793: $$\partial_\tau \phi_- = (\partial_\tau-2\partial_x+2\partial_x)

3794: \phi_-= e_+(\phi_-) + 2\partial_x\phi_-$$ establish \eq{gwmc2a}.

3795: \qed

3796: 

3797: \subsection{Estimates on the time derivatives of the solutions, $n \ge 3$}

3798: \label{Stdwave}

3799: 

3800: To control the time derivatives of the solutions, as in

3801: Section~\ref{Stdphi} we introduce an index $m$ which counts the

3802: number of corner conditions which are eventually satisfied by the

3803: initial data at the ``corner'' $\tau=x=0$. As before we make a

3804: formal statement only for solutions of the wave-map equation

3805: \eq{W.1}, it should be clear from the proof that an analogous

3806: statement holds for solutions of \eq{td1}-\eq{td4} under

3807: appropriate conditions on the coefficients there.

3808: 

3809: \begin{Theorem}\label{T2wt} In dimension $n\ge 3$ let $\N\ni m\geq 0$.  Consider  a solution

3810: $f:\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}\to \R$ of Equation (\ref{W.1}) satisfying

3811: \begin{eqnarray}

3812: \lefteqn{\|xe_+(\widetilde

3813:   f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3814: +\sum_{i=1}^r\|x X_i\widetilde

3815:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3816: } && \nn\\ && +\|\widetilde f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3817: +\|x \partial_\tau \widetilde

3818:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3819: <\infty \;, \label{gwtmc}

3820: \end{eqnarray}

3821: and suppose that \beqa\label{gcpt1.0wgt} 0\leq i \leq m+1\qquad

3822: \partial^i_\tau\tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

3823:    & \in& \HH_{k+m+1-i}^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;,  \\

3824: 0\leq i \leq m \qquad

3825: \partial_x \partial^i_\tau\tf^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

3826:   \HH_{k+m-i}^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;, \label{gcpt1.1wt}

3827:  \eeqa with

3828: some $k > {n\over2} +2$, $ -1< \alpha \le-1/2$.   Then for $0 \leq

3829: \tau < \tau_*$ and for $0\leq i \leq m$, we have

3830: \begin{deqarr}

3831: \lefteqn{ 0\leq j+i < k+m-n/2} &&\nn\\&&

3832: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^j\partial_\tau^i\widetilde f^a

3833: |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in L^\infty

3834:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap \HH_{k+m+1-i-j}^\alpha(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;

3835: ,

3836: \\

3837: \lefteqn{ 0\leq j+i < k+m-n/2-1}  &&\nn\\&& \partial_x

3838: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^j\partial_\tau^{i}\widetilde

3839: f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

3840:   \HH^{\alpha}_{k+m-i-j} (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \;,

3841: \arrlabel{td11wt}\end{deqarr} and

3842: \begin{equation}0\leq p < k-n/2 \qquad

3843: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^p\partial_\tau^{m+1} \widetilde

3844: f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \HH{^\alpha_{k-p}}

3845:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) %\cap L^{\infty}(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

3846: \;, \label{td12wt}\end{equation} with $\tau$-independent bounds on

3847: the norms.

3848: \end{Theorem}

3849: 

3850: \proof The proof is an inductive application of

3851: Theorem~\ref{T2wg}, as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{T2t}, and will

3852: be omitted. \qed

3853: 

3854: \subsection{Estimates on the time derivatives, $n=2$}

3855: \label{S2dtd}

3856: 

3857: In space-dimension two the following equivalent of

3858: Theorem~\ref{T2wg} holds:

3859: \begin{Theorem}\label{2dT2wg} Let  $n=2 $, consider

3860: the system \eq{td1}-\eq{td4}, suppose that \eq{gtd5} holds for

3861: some constant $\tilde C$, with the nonlinearity $G$ in \Eq{td1a}

3862: of the form

3863: \begin{equation}

3864: \label{2dgwtd1} G = x^{-3/2} H(x^\mu,x^{1/2}\tf,

3865: x^{1/2}\phi_A,x^{1/2}\phi_-,x^{3/2}\phi_+)\;,

3866: \end{equation}

3867: with $G_{e_-(\phi_A)}=0$ ({\em cf.\/} \Eq{td4G}), and with $H$

3868: having a uniform zero of order $\ell\geq 3$ in the sense of

3869: (\ref{S2.71}).  Suppose that the initial data satisfy

3870: 

3871:   \beqa\label{2dcpt1.0w} \tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

3872:   \equiv\Omega^{-{1\over 2}}f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in& \left(\HH_{k+1}^{\alpha}\cap

3873:   {{\mcC}}^0_1\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;, \\ \partial_x

3874:   (\Omega^{-{1\over 2}}f^a) |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

3875:   %\mcC_0^{\alpha}( \Sigma_{x_0,0})\cap

3876:   \HH_k^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;, \label{2dcpt1.1w}\\

3877:   \partial_\tau(\Omega^{-{1\over 2}}f^a) |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in&

3878:   \left(\HH_{k}^{\alpha}\cap L^\infty\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;.

3879: \label{2dcpt1w}

3880:  \eeqa  for some $k > 2$, $ -1< \alpha

3881: \le -1/2$.

3882: %

3883: %\beqa\label{2dgcpt1.0wg} \tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

3884: %  \equiv\Omega^{-{1\over 2}}f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} & \in&

3885: %  \left(\HH_{k+1}^{\alpha}\cap L^\infty\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;,  \\

3886: %\partial_x \tf^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

3887: %  \HH_k^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;, \label{2dgcpt1.1w}\\

3888: %  \partial_\tau\tf^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in& \HH_{k}^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;,

3889: %\label{2dgcpt1w}

3890: % \eeqa with

3891: %some $k > {n\over2} +1$, $ -1< \alpha \le -1/2$, t

3892: Then:

3893: \begin{enumerate}

3894: \item There exists $\tau_+>0$, depending only upon the constant

3895: $\tilde C $ in \eq{gtd5} and a bound on the norms of the initial

3896: data in the spaces appearing in \Eqs{2dcpt1.0w}{2dcpt1w}, and a

3897: solution $ f^a$

3898:   of Equations~\eq{td1}-\eq{td4}, defined on a set containing $\Omega_{x_{0},

3899:     \tau_+}$,  satisfying the given initial conditions, such that

3900: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3901: \|\widetilde f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3902: %+\|\widetilde

3903: %  xe_+(f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}+\|\widetilde

3904: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}+\|\widetilde

3905: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

3906: <\infty \;.

3907: %\heqno\arr

3908: \label{2dgwmc}

3909: \end{eqnarray}

3910: %\end{deqarr}

3911: \item Further,  for any

3912: $\tau_*$  such that $f^a$

3913:   exists on $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ with \eq{gwmc} holding with $\tau_+=\tau_*$,

3914: %with $\|\widetilde  f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}<\infty$,

3915:  we

3916:   have for all $0 \leq

3917:   \tau < \tau_*$

3918: $$ \widetilde f^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \left({\mcC}^0_1

3919:   \cap \HH_{k+1}^\alpha\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;,

3920:   \qquad \partial_\tau

3921:   \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \left(\HH{^\alpha_k}

3922:    \cap L^{\infty}\right)(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\;,$$

3923:    $$\partial_x \widetilde f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

3924:   \HH^{\alpha}_k (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \;,$$

3925: with bounds  uniform in $\tau$. This implies

3926: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3927: %\lefteqn

3928: {\|x\partial_\tau \phi_+\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})} +\|

3929: \partial_\tau \widetilde f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3930: <\infty } \;. \label{2dgwmc2}

3931: \end{eqnarray}

3932:  If $k>4$ then we also have

3933: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3934: %\|(x+2\tau)\partial_{\tau}

3935: %\phi_-\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}+

3936:   \|(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau \phi_A\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})} <\infty \;.

3937: \label{2dgwmc2a1}

3938: \end{eqnarray}

3939: If $k>4$ and if $\partial_\tau^2\tf|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}}\in

3940: \HH^{-1}_{k-1}$ then it further holds that

3941: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

3942: \|(x+2\tau)\partial_{\tau}

3943: \phi_-\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3944: %+  \|(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau \phi_A\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}

3945: <\infty \;. \label{2dgwmc2a2}

3946: \end{eqnarray}

3947: \end{enumerate}

3948: \end{Theorem}

3949: 

3950: \proof The proof of point 1. is essentially the same as that of

3951: Theorem~\ref{T2w}, with the modifications discussed in the proof

3952: of  Theorem~\ref{T2g}. We note that the key estimates \eq{W10} and

3953: \eq{W11} hold in exactly the same form here, similarly for

3954: \Eqs{W17}{Fineq}. The estimate on $\partial_\tau \tf$ in

3955: \eq{2dgwmc2} follows from the definition of the norm in

3956: \eq{2dgwmc}. The estimate on $\|x\partial_\tau

3957: \phi_+\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*})}$ is obtained directly

3958: from \Eq{td8.01} and from \eq{W10}.  To obtain \eq{2dgwmc2a1} one

3959: needs to prove a bound on $\partial_A\phi_-$. This is obtained by

3960: differentiating \eq{W14} with respect to $v^A$ and using the

3961: already known uniform bound for $G$ in $\cH^{\alpha}_{k}$, so that

3962: $\partial_A G\in

3963: \cH^{\alpha}_{k-1}\subset \mcC^\alpha_0$. %; recall that we have assumed $k\ge 3$.

3964: Finally,

3965: $$e_+((x+2\tau)\partial_\tau \phi_-) = (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau \left(e_+(\phi_-)\right)\;,$$

3966: and integrating as in \eq{W14} one finds

3967: \begin{eqnarray}

3968:  \lefteqn{

3969: (x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\phi_-(\tau,x)=(x+2\tau)\partial_\tau\phi_-(0,x+2\tau)}

3970: && \nn \\ && + \int_0^\tau \left\{

3971:   (2(\tau-\sigma)+x)\partial_\tau\left(e_+(\phi_-)\right)(\sigma,2(\tau-\sigma)+x)  \right\}\;d\sigma\;.

3972: %\nn\\ &&

3973:  \label{W14nn}\end{eqnarray}

3974:  The term at the right-hand-side of the first line of \eq{W14nn}

3975:  is bounded because of the hypothesis on $\partial_\tau^2\tf$.

3976:  Expressing $e_+(\phi_-)$ by the right-hand-side of \eq{td8.0},

3977:  one immediately finds that all the linear terms that arise after

3978:  differentiation with respect to $\tau$ are in

3979:  $\HH^{\alpha-1}_{k-1}$ or better, and therefore

3980: %a tedious but straightforward analysis of the linear terms that

3981: %ensue in the integrand of \eq{W14n} shows that they are all in $

3982: %\cH^{\alpha}_{k-1} \subset \mcC^\alpha_0$, giving

3983: give a finite contribution when integrated upon.

3984: % (even if the overall multiplicative factor $(x+2\tau)$ is not present).

3985: The contribution from the non--linearity $G$ can be rewritten as

3986: $$x^{-1}\left\{H_{\tf}\partial_\tau \tf+

3987: { H}_{\phi^A}\partial_\tau \phi^A+ { H}_{\phi_-}\partial_\tau

3988: \phi_- +{ H}_{\phi_+}x\partial_\tau \phi_+\right\}\;,$$ with

3989: appropriate functions $H_{*}$ which, by Lemma~\ref{L1t}, all have

3990: a uniform zero of order $l-1\ge 2$ in their arguments. This easily

3991: implies that the coefficients (including the $x^{-1}$ factor) in

3992: front of the $\tau$ derivatives are in $L^\infty$, and since each

3993: of the $\tau$-derivative terms is in  $ \cH^{\alpha-1}_{k-1}$ or

3994: better, the whole  term is in $ \cH^{\alpha-1}_{k-1} \subset

3995: C^{\alpha-1}_0$. This is sufficient to lead to a finite

3996: contribution in \eq{W14nn}, and \eq{2dgwmc2a2} follows. \qed

3997: 

3998: 

3999: 

4000: 

4001: We finally arrive at the two-dimensional  equivalent of

4002: Theorem~\ref{T2wt}; comments identical  to those made in

4003: Section~\ref{Stdwave} apply here. The main difference  is that in

4004: dimension $2$ we need the $L^\infty$ bound on $\partial _\tau\tf$

4005: to obtain existence, which leads to the compatibility condition

4006: \eq{2dgcpt1.3wgt} on the second $\tau$ derivatives of $\tf$ when

4007: one attempts to iteratively apply Theorem~\ref{2dT2wg}. The proof

4008: is again identical to that of Theorem~\ref{T2t} and will be

4009: omitted. Let us just mention that one easily checks that the

4010: conditions spelled out below guarantee that the initial data for

4011: the inductive system of equations are in the right spaces for the

4012: iterative application of Theorem~\ref{2dT2wg}. Further,

4013: \Eqs{2dgwmc2}{2dgwmc2a2} provide the \emph{a-priori} bounds which

4014: guarantee that the existence time of the solution will not shrink

4015: at each iteration step.

4016: 

4017: \begin{Theorem}\label{2dT2wt} In space-dimension two let $\N\ni m\geq 0$. Consider  a solution

4018: $f:\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}\to \R$ of Equation (\ref{W.1}) satisfying

4019: \begin{eqnarray}%{deqarr}

4020: \|\widetilde f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4021: %+\|\widetilde

4022: %  xe_+(f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4023: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4024: <\infty \;.

4025: %\heqno\arr

4026: \label{2dgwmct}

4027: \end{eqnarray}

4028: and suppose that \beqa\label{2dgcpt1.0wgt} 0\leq i \leq m\qquad

4029: \partial^i_\tau\tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

4030:    & \in& (\HH_{k+m+1-i}^{\alpha}\cap \mcC^0_1)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;,  \\

4031: 0\leq i \leq m \qquad

4032: \partial_x \partial^i_\tau\tf^a |_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}} &\in &

4033:   \HH_{k+m-i}^{\alpha}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;,

4034:   \\

4035: \partial^{m+1}_\tau\tf ^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}

4036:    & \in& (\HH_{k}^{\alpha}\cap L^\infty)(\Sigma_{x_0,0}) \;, \label{2dgcpt1.1wt2}

4037:    \\ \partial_\tau^{m+2}\widetilde

4038:   f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,0}}&\in& \HH^{-1}_{k-1}(\Sigma_{x_0,0})\;,\label{2dgcpt1.3wgt}

4039:  \eeqa with

4040: some $k > 4$, $ -1< \alpha \le-1/2$.   Then for $0 \leq \tau <

4041: \tau_*$ and for $0\leq i \leq m$, we have

4042: \begin{deqarr}

4043: \lefteqn{ 0\leq j+i < k+m-3} &&\nn\\&&

4044: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^j\partial_\tau^i\widetilde f^a

4045: |_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

4046: %L^\infty  (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\cap

4047: (\HH_{k+m+1-i-j}^\alpha\cap \mcC^0_1)(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})\; ,

4048: \\

4049: \lefteqn{ 0\leq j+i < k+m-3}  &&\nn\\&& \partial_x

4050: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^j\partial_\tau^{i}\widetilde

4051: f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in

4052:   \HH^{\alpha}_{k+m-i-j} (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) \;,

4053: \arrlabel{td11wtn}\end{deqarr} and

4054: \begin{equation}0\leq p < k-3 \qquad

4055: [(\tau+2x)\partial_\tau]^p\partial_\tau^{m+1} \widetilde

4056: f^a|_{\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}} \in \HH{^\alpha_{k-p}}

4057:   (\Sigma_{x_0,\tau}) %\cap L^{\infty}(\Sigma_{x_0,\tau})

4058: \;, \label{2dtd12wt}\end{equation} with $\tau$-independent bounds

4059: on the norms.

4060: \end{Theorem}

4061: \qed

4062: 

4063: 

4064: \subsection{Polyhomogeneous solutions}

4065: \label{Sphgwave}

4066: 

4067: We are finally ready to prove polyhomogeneity at $\scri$ of

4068: solutions of the wave map equation:

4069: 

4070: \begin{Theorem}\label{Twavemap}  Let $\delta =1$ in odd space dimensions,

4071:   and let $\delta =1/2$ in even space dimensions. Consider Equation

4072:   \eq{W.1} on

4073:   ${\R}^{n,1}$, $n\geq 2$, with %$2$-\emph{compatible} polyhomogeneous

4074:   initial data \begin{eqnarray} \partial^i_\tau \widetilde f^a|_{\{\tau={0}\}}

4075:   %\;, \partial \widetilde f^a/\partial \tau|_{\{\tau={0}\}}

4076:   \in (\mca\cap

4077: L^\infty)(M_{x_0})\;,\quad i=0,1, & n=

4078:   2\;,

4079:   \\

4080:   \widetilde f^a|_{\{\tau={0}\}}\in (\mca\cap L^\infty)(M_{x_0})\;,\quad

4081:   \partial_\tau

4082:   \widetilde f^a|_{\{\tau={0}\}}\in \mca(M_{x_0})\;, & n\ge

4083:   3\;.

4084:   \end{eqnarray}

4085: Then:

4086: \begin{enumerate}

4087: \item There exists $\tau_+ > {0}$ such that $ f^a$ exists

4088:  on $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+}$, with

4089:  \begin{deqarr}\label{wmcap}

4090: \lefteqn{\|\widetilde f^a\|_{\mcC^0_1(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4091: %+\|\widetilde

4092: %  xe_+(f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}+\|\widetilde

4093: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}+\|\widetilde

4094: %  f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4095: <\infty \;, \qquad n=2\;, }&&

4096: \\

4097: \lefteqn{\|xe_+(\widetilde

4098:   f^a)\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4099: +\sum_{i=1}^r\|x X_i\widetilde

4100:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4101: } && \nn\\ && +\|\widetilde f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4102: +\|x \partial_\tau \widetilde

4103:   f^a\|_{L^\infty(\Omega_{x_0,\tau_+})}

4104: <\infty \;, \quad n\geq 3 \;. \arrlabel{wmcp}

4105: \end{deqarr}

4106: \item If the initial data are \emph{compatible} polyhomogeneous in the

4107:   sense that %there exists $\lambda >-1$ such that\ptc{it seems to

4108:   %me that the second condition which was here in the previous

4109:   %version is not needed, cause implied by the former, commented out}

4110: $$ \forall i \in \N \qquad \partial^i_\tau \tf^a (0)\in

4111: L^{\infty}(M_{x_0})\;,

4112: %\quad \partial_x \partial^i_\tau \tf^a

4113: %(0)\in \mcC^{-\lambda}_{\infty}(M_{x_0})\;,

4114: $$

4115:   then the solution is polyhomogeneous on each neighbourhood

4116:   $\Omega_{x_0,\tau_*}$ of

4117:   $\scrip$ on which $f$ exists and satisfies \eq{wmcp} with $\tau_+$

4118:   replaced with $\tau\ast $.

4119: \end{enumerate}

4120: \end{Theorem}

4121: 

4122: 

4123: 

4124: 

4125: %\begin{Theorem}

4126: %  \label{Twavemap} The conclusions of Theorem \ref{T2phg} remain true for

4127: %  Equation \eq{W.1} on ${\R}^{n,1}$, $n\geq 2$, with arbitrary

4128: %  polyhomogeneous  bounded  initial data  $\tf ^a|_{\{\tau={0}\}}$,

4129: %$\partial  \tf ^a/\partial

4130: %  \tau|_{\{\tau={0}\}}$ if $n\geq 3$, and with

4131: %  $2$-compatible  polyhomogeneous initial data if $n=2$.

4132: %\end{Theorem}

4133: 

4134: %Similarly to the semi-linear case,  when $f|_M$ and

4135: % $(\partial f/\partial \tau)|_M$ are polyhomogeneous without being

4136: % \emph{compatible polyhomogeneous} we  obtain existence of

4137: % solutions with $f(\cdot, \tau)$ in a weighted Sobolev space

4138: % ${\mycal    H}^{\frac{n-1}2 -\epsilon}_\infty(M)$ for any

4139: % $\epsilon >0$, when $n\geq 3$. If $n=2$ the same holds provided  one single compatibility condition involving

4140: % $\partial^2 f/\partial^2 \tau$ holds at

4141: % $\partial M$.

4142: 

4143: \proof Existence of solutions follows from Theorem~\ref{T2w}.

4144: Theorems~\ref{T2wt} and \ref{2dT2wt} give the time-derivative

4145: estimates which are necessary in Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1n}. In order

4146: to apply that last theorem, we set \be \varphi =

4147: \left(\begin{array}{c}

4148:   \phi_+^c\\

4149:   \phi_A^c

4150:   \end{array}\right)\;,

4151: \ee and \be \psi_1=(\widetilde f^c)\;, \quad \psi_2= (\phi_-^c)\;.

4152: \ee Equation~(\ref{W.2}) takes then the form (\ref{nequa}). As in

4153: Theorem~\ref{T2phg}, for $n\ge 4$ even we take

4154:   $\delta=1/2$,

4155:   $p=n+3$, $q= n-1$;  while for $n\ge 3$ odd we take $\delta=1$,

4156:    $p = {n+3 \over 2}$, $q= {n-1\over 2}$. For $n=2$ we set

4157:   $\delta=1/2$,

4158:   $p=3$, $q= 1$. The non-linearity here has a uniform zero of order $3$,

4159:    which is compatible with the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{Tlemme1n}, and the result follows

4160:    by that last theorem. \qed

4161: 

4162: 

4163: 

4164: 

4165: %We set

4166: %\be

4167: %\varphi = \left(\begin{array}{c}

4168: %  \phi_-^c\\

4169: %  \phi_A^c\\

4170: %  \widetilde{f}^c

4171: %  \end{array}\right)\;,

4172: %\ee

4173: %and

4174: %\be

4175: %\psi= (\phi_+^c)\;.

4176: %\ee

4177: %Then Equation~(\ref{W.2}) takes the form (\ref{nequa}) with

4178: %\beqa

4179: %G_\psi&=& G_1 +G_2\;,\\

4180: %G_\phi&=& \left(\begin{array}{c}

4181: %    G_1+G_2\\

4182: %    0\\

4183: %    0 \end{array} \right)\;,\\

4184: %G_1 &=& -\Omega^{-{n+1\over 2}} \Gamma^a_{bc}(\Omega^{n-1\over 2}) \left\{- \Omega^{{n-1\over 2} +1}

4185: %  \phi_+^b \Omega^{n-1\over 2}\phi_-^c  \right.\nonumber\\

4186: %&& + (n-1)\Omega^{n-1\over 2}\widetilde{f}^c \left[ ({x\over\Omega} \Omega^{{n-1\over 2} +1}\phi_+^b

4187: %-(1+x+2\tau)\Omega^{n-1\over 2}\phi_-^b\right.

4188: %\\

4189: %&&

4190: %\left.\left.-(n-1)\Omega^{n-1\over 2} \widetilde{f}^b)\right]\right\} \;,\nonumber\\

4191: %G_2 &=&  -\Omega^{-{n+1\over 2}} \Gamma^a_{bc}(\Omega^{n-1\over 2})\left[\Omega^{n+1\over 2}\phi_A^b

4192: %  \Omega^{n+1\over 2}\phi_A^c\right] \;.

4193: % \eeqa

4194: % Let us note that $G_1$ and $G_2$ can be written as (\ref{m0}) and satisfy

4195: % (\ref{eq:ord}) for any $n\geq 2$,  since ${x\over \Omega}$ and ${\Omega\over x}$ are smooth.

4196: 

4197: 

4198: {\bf Acknowledgements:} We are grateful to Helmut Friedrich for

4199: many useful comments on a previous version of this paper.

4200: 

4201: 

4202: \appendix

4203: 

4204: 

4205: 

4206: \section {Function spaces, embeddings, inequalities} \label{S2}

4207: 

4208: %\subsection{Definitions and Properties of some weighted spaces.}

4209: Throughout this paper the letter $C$ denotes a constant the exact

4210: value of which is irrelevant for the problem at hand, and which

4211: may vary from line to line.

4212: 

4213: Let $M$ be a smooth manifold such that

4214: $$\overline{\! M} \equiv M \cup \partial M$$

4215: is a compact manifold\footnote{We use the convention in which

4216: manifolds are always open sets. Thus, a manifold with boundary

4217: does \emph{not} contain its boundary as a point set.} with smooth

4218: boundary $\partial M$.

4219: %Unless

4220: %explicitly stated otherwise we use the notations and conventions of \cite{AndChDiss}.

4221: Throughout this work the symbol $x$ stands for a smooth defining

4222: function for $\partial M$, \emph{i.e.}, a smooth function on

4223: $\overline{\! M}$ such that $\{x=0\}=

4224: \partial M$, with $dx$ nowhere vanishing on $\partial M$. It follows

4225: that there exists $x_0 > 0$ and a compact neighborhood $K$ of

4226: $\partial M$ on which $x$ can be used as a coordinate, with $K$

4227: being diffeomorphic to $[0,x_0] \times \partial M$. For $0 \leq

4228: x_1 < x_2 \leq x_0$ we set

4229: \begin{deqarr}

4230: &M_{x_1}=\{p \in M \;|\;0< x(p) < x_1\}\;,& \label{tpM1}\\

4231: &M_{x_1,x_2}=\{p \in M \;|\; x_1 < x(p) < x_2\}\;,&\\

4232: &\tilde{\! \partial} M_{x_1}=\{p \in M \;|\; x(p)=x_1\} \approx

4233: \partial M\;.\arrlabel{tpM}

4234: \end{deqarr}

4235: In  what follows the symbol $\Omega$ will generally denote one of

4236: the sets $M, M_{x_1}$, or $M_{x_1,x_2}$. Any subset of $

4237: \bM_{x_0}$ can be locally coordinatized by coordinates

4238: $y^i=(x,v^A)$, where the $v^A$'s can be thought of as local

4239: coordinates on $\partial M$. We cover $\pM$ by a finite number of

4240: coordinate charts ${\cO}_i$ so that the sets

4241: $\overline{\Omega}{}_i$, where

4242:  $$\Omega_i:=(0,x_0)\times{\cO}_i\;,$$ cover

4243: $M_{x_0}$. We use the usual multi-index notation for partial

4244: derivatives: for $\beta = (\beta_1,\ldots,\beta_n) \in \N^n$ we

4245: set $\partial^\beta =

4246: \partial^{\beta_1}_1\ldots \partial^{\beta_n}_n$. We will write

4247: $\partial_v^\beta$ for derivatives of the form $

4248: \partial^{\beta_2}_2\ldots \partial^{\beta_n}_n$, which do not involve

4249: the $x^1\equiv x$ variable.

4250: 

4251: If $\locO $ is an open set, for $k\in \N\cup\infty$ we let

4252: $C_k(\locO )$ denote the usual space of $k$-times differentiable

4253: functions on $\locO $; the symbol $C_k(\ovlocO )$ is used to

4254: denote the set of those functions in $C_k(\locO )$ the derivatives

4255: of which, up to order $k$, extend by continuity to $\ovlocO$. We

4256: emphasize that no uniformity is assumed in $C_k(\locO )$, so that

4257: functions there could grow without bound when approaching the

4258: boundary of $\locO$. Nevertheless, the symbol $\|\cdot\|_{C_k}$

4259: will denote the usual supremum norm of $f$ and its derivatives up

4260: to order $k$.

4261:  The symbol $C_{k+\lambda}(\locO)$ denotes the space of

4262: $k$-times continuously differentiable functions on $\locO$, with

4263: $\lambda$-H{\"o}lder continuous $k$'th derivatives.

4264: 

4265: %we shall sometimes write

4266: %$C_k^{\loc}(\locO )$ for $C_k(\locO )$ when we feel the need to emphasize the

4267: %fact that no uniform bounds are assumed.

4268: %If $\locO $ is the union of an open set

4269: %with stratified boundary, such as a manifold with boundary or a product

4270: %of manifolds with or without boundaries, then $C_k(\locO )$ denotes the space of functions

4271: %which extend by continuity to $C_k$ functions on the boundaries and corners,

4272: %and which are one-sided differentiable at boundaries and corners.\ptc{comments added, to be thought over

4273: %and perhaps made more precise? I guess they should be removed}

4274: 

4275: For $\alpha \in \R$, $k \in \N$ and $\lambda \in (0, 1]$, we

4276: define ${\mcC}_0 ^ \alpha (\Omega_i)$ (respectively $

4277: {\mcC}^\alpha_{0+\lambda} (\Omega_i)$ , ${\mcC}^\alpha_k

4278: (\Omega_i)$ , ${\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (\Omega_i)$) as the

4279: spaces of appropriately differentiable functions such that the

4280: respective norms \beqa \|f\|_{{\mcC}_0 ^ \alpha (\Omega_i)}

4281: &\equiv&

4282: \sup_{p\in \Omega_i} |x^{-\alpha} f(p)|%\;\leq +\infty

4283: \,,

4284: \nonumber\\

4285: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{0+\lambda} (\Omega_i)} &\equiv&

4286: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0 (\Omega_i)} + \displaystyle \sup_{y \in

4287: \Omega_i} \,\sup_{y\neq y' \in B(y,{x(y)\over 2}) \cap

4288:   \Omega_i}\,{x(y)^{-\alpha-\lambda}|f(y)-f(y')|\over

4289:   |y-y'|^\lambda}\,,\nonumber\\

4290: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k (\Omega_i)} &\equiv& \displaystyle \sum_{0

4291:   \leq|\beta|\leq k} \ \ \ \|x^{\beta_1}\partial^\beta f\| _{{\mcC}_{0} ^

4292:   {\alpha}(\Omega_i)}\,,

4293: \nonumber\\

4294: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (\Omega_i)} &\equiv&

4295: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{k-1}(\Omega_i)} + \displaystyle

4296: \sum_{|\beta|=k} \|x^{\beta_1}\partial^\beta

4297: f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{0+\lambda} (\Omega_i)}\,, \eeqa are finite.

4298: Let $\locO$ be an open subset of $M$, or a submanifold with

4299: boundary in $M$; for such sets we define: \beqa \|f\|_{{\mcC}_k ^

4300:   \alpha (\locO)} & \equiv & \sup_i \| f\|_{{\mcC}_k ^\alpha

4301:   (\Omega_i\cap \locO)} + \|f\|_{C_k

4302:   (\complement M_{x_0/2} \cap\locO)}\;,\nonumber \\

4303: \|f\|_{ {\mcC}_{k+\lambda} ^ \alpha (\locO)} & \equiv & \sup_i

4304: \|f\|_{{\mcC}_{k+\lambda}^\alpha (\Omega_i\cap \locO)} +

4305: \|f\|_{C_{k+\lambda} (\complement M_{x_0/2}\cap \locO)}\;.  \eeqa

4306: %and for

4307: %$\Omega$'s which can be covered by a single coordinate chart

4308: %$[0,x_0]\times{\cO}_i$ we define\mnote{rewordings; this is not very

4309: %  logical now with the complements and so on}

4310: %$$\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0 (\Omega)}= \displaystyle \sup_{p \in

4311: %\Omega} |(x(p)^{-\alpha}f) (p)|\;,$$

4312: %$$\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{0+\lambda} (\Omega)}=\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0

4313: %(\Omega)} + \displaystyle \sup_{y \in M_{x_0} \cap \Omega}

4314: %\ \sup_{y\neq y' \in

4315: %B(y,{x(y)\over 2}) \cap \Omega}\ {x(y)^{-\alpha-\lambda}|f(y)-f(y')|\over

4316: %|y-y'|^\lambda}$$

4317: %$$\phantom{xxxxxxx}+\|f\|_{{ C}_{0+\lambda}(\Omega\cap \complement

4318: %M_{x_0 /2})}\;,$$

4319: %$$\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k (\Omega)}= \displaystyle \sum_{0 \leq

4320: %|\beta|\leq k} \ \ \ \|D^\beta f\| _{{\mcC}^\alpha_0 (\Omega \cap

4321: %M_{x_0})}+ \|f\|_{C_k(\Omega \cap \complement M_{x_0/2})}\;,$$

4322: %$$\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (\Omega)}= \|f\|_{{\cal

4323: %    C}^\alpha_{k-1}(\Omega)} + \displaystyle \sum_{|\beta|=k}

4324: %\|D^\beta f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{0+\lambda} (\Omega)}\;.$$

4325: %For an

4326: %$\Omega$ which can be covered by a finite number of

4327: %$[0,x_0]\times{\cO}_i$'s -- such as $M_{x_1}$, or $M_{x_1,x_2}$

4328: %--- we use the norms indicated on $\Omega\cap([0,x_0]\times{\cal

4329: %  O}_i)$, and sum over the ${\cO}_i$'s. A similar covering

4330: %procedure will be used when defining weighted Sobolev spaces below

4331: %without further comments.

4332:  %

4333: %The Banach spaces ${\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (\Omega)$ are defined as

4334: %the collections of those functions $f\in C_{k+\lambda}(\Omega)$ for

4335: %which the norms ${\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (\Omega)$ are

4336: %finite.

4337: We note that $f \in {\mcC}^{\alpha+\sigma}_{k+\lambda} (\Omega)$

4338: if and only if $x^{-\sigma} f \in {\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda}

4339: (\Omega)$.

4340: 

4341: We define the spaces ${\HH }^\alpha_k (\ooi)$ as the spaces of

4342: those functions in $H_k^{\loc}(\ooi)$ for which the norms

4343:  $\| \cdot \|_{{\HH }^\alpha_k(\ooi)}$ are finite, where

4344: %$^{\mbox{\scriptsize\ref{coordwarn}}}$

4345: \begin{equation}

4346: \|f\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k (\ooi)} = \displaystyle \sum_{0\leq

4347: |\beta|\leq k} \displaystyle \int_{\ooi} (x^{-\alpha

4348:   +\beta_1}

4349:  \partial^{\beta} f)^2 {dx\over x}\volu\;. \label{S2.0x}

4350: \end{equation}

4351: Here $\dnu$ is a measure on $\partial M$ arising from some smooth

4352: Riemannian metric on $\partial M$.

4353:  This is equivalent to

4354: \begin{equation} \displaystyle

4355: \sum_{0\leq \beta_1+|\beta|\leq k} \displaystyle \int_{\ooi}

4356: (x^{-\alpha} (x\partial_x)^{\beta_1}\partial_v^{\beta} f)^2

4357: {dx\over x}\volu \;,\label{S2.0x.1}\end{equation} and it will

4358: sometimes be convenient to use \eq{S2.0x.1} as the definition of

4359: $\|f\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k (\ooi)}$.  For $\locO $'s such that

4360: $\ooi\subset \locO $ the spaces ${{\HH }^\alpha_k(\locO )}$ are

4361: defined as the spaces of those functions in $H_k^{\loc}(\locO )$

4362: for which the norm squared \be \|f\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k (\locO )}

4363: = \sum_i \|f\|^2 _{\Hak (\ooi)}

4364: \; + \|f\|^2 _{H_k (\locO \cap \complementaire M_{x_0/2})}%;.

4365: \ee is finite.  We note the equivalence of norms,

4366: $$\|f\|_{H_0(\locO )} \approx \|f\|_{{\HH }^{-1/2}_0(\locO )}

4367: \;,$$ and that ${\HH }^{\alpha}_k(M_{x_1,x_2})=H _k(M_{x_1,x_2})$

4368: for all $\alpha$ and $k$ whenever $x_1>0$, the norms being

4369: equivalent, with the constants involved depending upon $x_1$ and

4370: $x_2$, and degenerating in general when $x_1$ tends to zero.

4371: 

4372: It is often awkward to work with coordinate charts, in order to

4373: avoid that one can proceed as follows: Choose a fixed smooth

4374: complete Riemannian metric $\backg$ on $\bM$. Let $x$ be any

4375: smooth defining function for $\partial M$, we let $X_1$ be the

4376: gradient of $x$ with respect to the metric $\backg$; rescaling

4377: $\backg$ by a smooth function if necessary we may without loss of

4378: generality assume that $X_1$ has length one in the metric $\backg$

4379: in a neighbourhood of $\partial M$.  As before we cover $\pM$ by a

4380: finite number of coordinate charts ${\cO}_i$ with associated

4381: coordinates $v^A$; the $v^A$'s are then propagated to a

4382: neighbourhood of $\partial M$ by requiring $$X_1(v^A)=0\;.$$ This

4383: leads to a covering of $M_{x_0}$ of the kind already used, and one

4384: easily checks that $$X_1=\partial_x$$ in the resulting local

4385: coordinates. This gives then a globally defined vector

4386: $\partial_x$ on $M_{x_0}$. For $i=2,\ldots,r$ we let $X_i$ be any

4387: smooth vector fields on $\partial M$ satisfying the condition that

4388: at any $p\in\partial M$ the linear combinations of the $X_i$

4389: exhaust the tangent space $T_p\partial M$. (If $\partial M$ is a

4390: sphere $S^{n-1}$, a convenient choice is the collection of all

4391: Killing vectors of $(S^{n-1},\mathring h)$, where $\mathring h$ is

4392: the unit round metric on $S^{n-1}$.) Over the domain of a chart

4393: $(v^A)$ of $\partial M$, one thus has

4394: \begin{deqarr} \partial_A &=& \sum_{i=2}^r f_A^i(v^B) X_i\;,\\ X_i&=&

4395: \sum_{A=2}^{n} X_i^A(v^B)\partial_A \arrlabel{champscoord}\;,

4396: \end{deqarr} for some locally defined smooth functions $f_A^i,

4397: X_i^A$; clearly things can be arranged so that those functions are

4398: bounded, together with all their partial derivatives. We propagate

4399: the $X_i$'s to $M_{x_0 }$ by requiring $$[X_1,X_i]=0\;,$$

4400: equivalently \be

4401: \partial_x X_i^A = 0\;. \label{champscoord2}\ee It follows that

4402: \eq{champscoord} still holds with $x$-independent functions. For

4403: any multi-index $\beta=(\beta_1,\beta_2,\ldots,\beta_{r})\in \N^r$

4404: we set,  on $M_{x_0}$, \be\label{decaldef} \decal^\beta f =

4405: X_1^{\beta_1} X_2^{\beta_2}\cdots X_r^{\beta_r}f =

4406: \partial_x^{\beta_1} X_2^{\beta_2}\cdots X_r^{\beta_r}f\;.\ee

4407: It follows that we have \beqan& \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k (M_{x_0})}

4408: \approx \displaystyle \sum_{0

4409:   \leq|\beta|\leq k}  \|x^{\beta_1}\decal^\beta f\| _{{\mcC}_{0} ^

4410:   {\alpha}(M_{x_0})}\,,&

4411: \\ &\|f\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k (M_{x_0})} \approx \displaystyle

4412: \sum_{0\leq |\beta|\leq k} \displaystyle \int_{M_{x_0}}

4413: (x^{-\alpha

4414:   +\beta_1}

4415:  \decal^{\beta} f)^2 {dx\over x}\volu&

4416: \eeqan (where $\approx$ denotes the fact that the norms are

4417: equivalent), {\em etc.} Here, $|\beta|=\beta_1+\ldots+\beta_r$.

4418: 

4419: There is a useful way of rewriting $\|\cdot\|_{{\HH }^\alpha_k

4420:   (M_{x_0})}$ which proceeds as follows: for $f\in{\HH }^\alpha_k

4421: (M_{x_0})$, $s \in (1,2)$, and $n \in \N$ we set

4422: \begin{equation}f_n(s,v) = f(x=x_0{s\over 2^n},

4423: v)\;;\label{S2.1}\end{equation} letting $\approx$ denote again

4424: equivalence of norms one then has, after a change of variables,

4425: \begin{eqnarray}\|f\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k(M_{x_0})} &=&\displaystyle

4426: \sum_{n\geq 1} \displaystyle \sum_{0 \leq |\beta| \leq k}

4427: \int_{[2^{-n}{x_0},2^{1-n}{x_0}]\times \partial M}

4428: |x^{-\alpha+\beta_1} \decal^\beta f (x,v)|^2 {dx\over x}  \dnu

4429: \nonumber \\ & \approx &x{^{-2\alpha}_0}\displaystyle \sum_{n\geq

4430: 1} \displaystyle \sum_{0\leq |\beta| \leq k}2^{2 n \alpha}

4431: \int_{[1,2]\times \partial M}|\decal^\beta f_n(s,v)|^2 ds\,

4432: \dnu\nonumber \\ &= &x{^{-2\alpha}_0} \displaystyle \sum_{n\geq 1}

4433: 2^{2n\alpha} \|f_n\|^2_{H{_k}([1,2]\times \partial

4434: M)}\;.\label{S2.2}\end{eqnarray} More precisely, we write

4435: $A\approx B$ if there exist constants $C_1,C_2 > 0$ such that $C_1

4436: A \leq B \leq C_2 A$. In $(\ref{S2.2})$ the relevant constants

4437: depend only upon $\alpha$ and $k$.

4438: 

4439:  It turns out to be useful to

4440: have a formula similar to \eq{S2.2} for functions in ${\HH

4441: }^\alpha_k

4442:   (M_{x_2,x_1})$; this can be done for any $x_1$ and $x_2$, but in

4443: order to obtain uniform control of certain constants it is

4444: convenient to require $2 x_2\leq x_1 $. For such values of $x_1$

4445: and $x_2$ we let $n_0(x_1,x_2)\in \N$ be such that ${x_1 \over

4446:   2^{n_0+1}}\leq x_2 \leq {x_1\over 2^{n_0}}$. For $n\in\N$, $n\geq 1$, and for any $f:

4447: M_{x_2,x_1} \to \R^N$ we then define $f_n: (1,2)\times\partial M

4448: \to \R^N $ by \begin{eqnarray} \nonumber

4449:   n\leq n_0\,, &&f_n(s,v)=f(x_1{s\over 2^n},v)\;,\\

4450:   n= n_0+1\,, && f_n(s,v)= f(x_2\, s , v)\;,\nonumber\\

4451:   n>n_0+1\,, && f_n = 0 \;.

4452: \label{coco25}\end{eqnarray} (This coincides with the definition

4453: already given for $M_{x_1}$, when this set is thought of as being

4454: an ``$M_{x_2,x_1}$ with $ x_2=0$'', if we set $n_0 = +\infty$.)  A

4455: calculation as in \eq{S2.2} shows that for any $2 x_2\leq x_1\leq

4456: x_0$, there exist constants $C_1$ and $c_1$, independent of $x_0$,

4457: $x_1$ and $x_2$, such that for all $ f \in \Hak (M_{x_2,x_1}) ,$

4458: \beqa\nonumber

4459: \lefteqn{c_1 x_1^{-2\alpha}\sum_n \{2^{n\alpha} \|f_n\| _{H_k

4460: ([1,2]\times \partial

4461:   M)}\}^2 } & \\ &\leq \|f\|^2_{\Hak(M_{x_2,x_1})}\leq C_1

4462:   x_1^{-2\alpha}\sum_n \{2^{n\alpha} \|f_n\| _{H_k ([1,2]\times

4463:   \partial M)}\}^2\;. \label{gequiv} \eeqa Equation~\eq{S2.2} leads

4464:   one to introduce\footnote{The symbol $\cB$ might suggest to the reader

4465:   that we specifically have Besov spaces in mind; this is not the case,

4466:   and we hope that the notation will not lead to confusion.} spaces ${\cB}^\alpha_{k+\lambda}$, that arise

4467:   naturally from weighted Sobolev embeddings, \emph{cf.\/} Equation

4468:   (\ref{S2.5.1}) below: we define

4469: \begin{eqnarray}\|f\|^2_{{\cB}^\alpha_{k+\lambda}(M_{x_0})}  &= &x{^{-2\alpha}_0} \displaystyle

4470: \sum_{n\geq 1} 2^{2n\alpha} \|f_n\|^2_{C{_{k+\lambda}}([1,2]\times

4471: \partial M)}\;,\label{S2.2.1}\end{eqnarray} $f_n$ as in \eq{S2.1},

4472: and we set $${\cB}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (M_{x_0}) = \{f \in {

4473: C}_{k+\lambda}(M_{x_0}) \;| \; \|f\|_{{\mycal

4474: B}^\alpha_{k+\lambda}(M_{x_0})} < \infty\}\;.$$ Clearly $$ {\mycal

4475: B}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (M_{x_0})\subset {\mycal

4476: C}^\alpha_{k+\lambda}(M_{x_0})\;.$$ Since the general term $f_N$,

4477: as well as sums of the form $\Sigma_{n\geq N}f_n$, of a convergent

4478: series tend to zero as $N$ tends to infinity, for $f\in {\cal

4479: B}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} (M_{x_0})$ we actually have \begin{equation}

4480: \label{S2.2.2} \displaystyle \lim_{x_1 \to 0}

4481: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{k+\lambda} ( M_{x_1})}=0\;.

4482:   \end{equation}

4483:   We have the trivial inclusion,

4484: \begin{eqnarray}

4485: \label{S2.3} &\alpha' > \alpha \quad \Longrightarrow \quad

4486: {\mcC}^{\alpha'}_{k+\lambda}(M_{x_1}) \subset {\HH

4487: }^\alpha_k(M_{x_1}) \;. &

4488: \end{eqnarray}

4489:  The fact that the inequality $\alpha^\prime > \alpha$

4490: in \eq{S2.3} is strict has various annoying consequences, which

4491: are best avoided by introducing yet another space --- the space

4492: $\Gak$ of functions in $H^k_{\loc}(M_{x_0})$ for which the norm

4493: squared \be \|f\|^2_{\Gak (M_{x_0})} = \sup_{n\geq 1} \;\left\{

4494: \sum_{0\leq

4495:     \beta\leq k} \int_{[2^{-n}x_0,2^{1-n}x_0]\times\partial M}

4496:   |x^{-\alpha+\beta_1}\decal^{\beta} f(x,v)|^2

4497: {\dx\over x}\volu\,\right\} %\,;

4498: \ee is finite. We note that $\|f\|_{\Gak (M_{x_0})}$ is equivalent

4499: to

4500: \be x_0^{-\alpha}\sup_{n\geq 1}\;\left\{ 2^{n\alpha}\| f_n\| _{H_k

4501:     ([1,2]\times \pM)}\right\} \;, \ee with $f_n(s,v) = f({x_0s\over

4502:   2^n},v)$, as in \eq{S2.1}.  To define the $\Gak(M_{x_2,x_1})$'s,

4503: assuming again that $x_2\leq x_1/2$, we let $I_n(x_1,x_2)$ be

4504: defined as \beqa \nonumber n\leq n_0\;,&& I_n = (2^{-n}x_1,

4505: 2^{1-n}x_1)\;,\\\nonumber n=n_0+1\;,&& I_{n_0+1} = (x_2, 2x_2)

4506: \;,\\\label{coco26} n>n_0+1 \;,&& I_n =\emptyset\;, \eeqa where

4507: $n_0$ is as in \eq{coco25}.  For all $f\in H_k^{\loc}

4508: (M_{x_2,x_1})$ we set \be \|f\|^2_{\Gak(M_{x_2,x_1})} = \sup_n

4509: \{\sum_i \sum_{0\leq |\beta|\leq

4510:   k}\int_{\ooi \cap\{ I_n\times \partial M\}} (x^{-\alpha +\beta_1}

4511: \decal^{\beta} f)^2 {dx\over x}\volu\;\} \ee (we identify

4512: $(a,b)\times\partial M$ and $M_{a,b}$). Similarly to \eq{gequiv},

4513: there exist constants $c_2$ and $C_2$, which do \emph{not} depend

4514: upon $x_0$, $x_1,$ and $x_2$, such that for all $2 x_2 \leq

4515: x_1\leq x_0$, \be \label{Gequiv} c_2 x_1^{-\alpha}\sup_n

4516: \|f_n\|_{H_k ([1,2]\times\partial M)} \leq

4517: \|f\|_{\Gak(M_{x_2,x_1})} \leq C_2 x_1^{-\alpha}\sup_n

4518: \|f_n\|_{H_k

4519:   ([1,2]\times\partial M)} \;.\ee

4520: We have the obvious inequality \be \|f\|_{\Gak (\Omega)} \leq

4521: \|f\|_{\Hak (\Omega)}\;, \ee together with the modified version of

4522: \eq{S2.3},

4523: \begin{eqnarray}

4524: \label{S2.3.1} &\alpha' \geq \alpha \quad \Longrightarrow \quad

4525: {\mcC}^{\alpha'}_{k+\lambda} \subset {\cG}^\alpha_k \;; &

4526: \end{eqnarray}

4527: in particular the function $(x,v)\to x^\alpha$ is in

4528: $\Gak(M_{x_0})$.

4529: 

4530: If $S_k$ denotes a space of functions, where $k \in \N$ is a

4531: differentiability index, we set

4532: $$S_\infty \equiv \cap _{k\in\N}S_k\;,$$

4533: \emph{e.g.}, ${\cG}^\alpha_\infty\equiv \cap_{k\in\N}\Gak$,

4534: \emph{etc}.

4535: 

4536:  We note the following:

4537: \begin{Proposition} \label{PS1.1} Let \,$\Omega = M$, or \,$\Omega =

4538: M_{x_1}$, $0<x_1\leq x_0$, or \,$\Omega =M_{ x_2,x_1}$, $2x_2 <

4539: x_1 \leq x_0$, and let $ {\HH }^\alpha_k= {\HH

4540: }^\alpha_k(\Omega)$, \emph{etc}. For $k'\in\N$, $\lambda\in

4541: [0,1]$, $0 \le k'+\lambda\le k - n/2 \not\in \N $ or $0 \le

4542: k'+\lambda< k  - n/2 \in \N $ we have the continuous embeddings

4543: \begin{eqnarray}

4544:   {\HH }^\alpha_{k}

4545: \subset {\cB}^\alpha_{k'+\lambda} \subset

4546: {\mcC}^\alpha_{k'+\lambda} \;,

4547: %\nonumber \\ & &

4548: \label{S2.4}%\;,

4549: \qquad

4550:   {\HH }^\alpha_{k}

4551: \subset{\cG}^\alpha_k \subset {\mcC}^\alpha_{k'+\lambda } \;,

4552: \end{eqnarray}

4553: and there exists an $x_2$-independent constant $C$ such that we

4554: have

4555: \begin{eqnarray}

4556: \label{S2.5.1} &\forall f \in {\HH }^\alpha_k \qquad

4557: \|f\|_{{\cB}^\alpha_{k'+\lambda}(\Omega)}\leq C \|f\|_{{\HH

4558: }^\alpha_k(\Omega)}\;,& \\ \label{S2.5.2.1} &\forall f \in

4559: {\cG}^\alpha_k \qquad

4560: \|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_{k'+\lambda}(\Omega)}\leq C \|f\|_{{\cal

4561: G}^\alpha_k(\Omega)}\;.&

4562: \end{eqnarray}

4563: %The constant $C$ in (\ref{S2.5.1})--(\ref{S2.5.2.1}) can be chosen to be

4564: %$x_2$-independent when \,$\Omega = M_{x_2,x_1}$ and $x_2 \leq

4565: %x_{1}/2$.

4566: \end{Proposition}

4567: 

4568: \proof (\ref{S2.5.1})-(\ref{S2.5.2.1}) follow immediately from

4569: (\ref{S2.2}) and \eq{gequiv}, together with the standard Sobolev

4570: embedding; the remaining inclusions in \eq{S2.4} are trivial. \qed

4571: 

4572: \medskip

4573: 

4574: All other inequalities involving Sobolev spaces have their

4575: counterpart in the weighted setting; we shall in particular need

4576: various  weighted versions of the Moser inequalities. The reader

4577: should note the different weights for the members of \Eq{S2.7.2}

4578: below --- this shift of weights in this inequality is the key to

4579: our handling of nonlinear equations.

4580: 

4581: \begin{Proposition} \label{PS1.2} Let \,$\Omega = M$, or \,$\Omega =

4582: M_{x_1}$, $0 < x_1 \leq x_0$, or \,$\Omega = M_{x_2,x_1}$, $2 x_2

4583: < x_1 \leq x_0$, and let ${\HH }^\alpha_k = {\HH }^\alpha_k

4584: (\Omega)$, \emph{etc.}

4585: \begin{enumerate}

4586: \item There exists a constant $C = C (\alpha,\alpha',\beta,k,x_1)$ such that,

4587: for all $f \in {\HH }^{\alpha'}_k \cap {\mcC}^\alpha_0$ and $g \in

4588: {\HH }^\beta_k \cap {\mcC}^{\alpha+\beta-\alpha'}_0$, we have

4589: \be\label{S2.5.2}\|fg\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha+\beta}_k} \leq

4590: C\left(\|f\|_{{\mcC}^{\alpha\phantom{'}}_0} \|g\|_{{\HH }^\beta_k}

4591: + \|f\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha'}_k} \|g\|_{{\mcC}^{\alpha +

4592: \beta-{\alpha'}}_0}\right)\;.\ee

4593: %\noindent%\hspace{-0.5cm}

4594: Further, $\forall \ |\gamma| \leq k$,

4595: \begin{eqnarray}\label{S2.6}\hspace{-0.5cm}

4596: \lefteqn{\|x^{\gamma_1}\decal^\gamma (fg) -

4597: (x^{\gamma_1}\decal^\gamma f) g\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha+\beta}_0} \leq C

4598: \left(\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0}

4599: \|g\|_{{\HH }^\beta_k}+\phantom{\sum_{i=2}^r}\right. } \nn \\

4600: &&\left.\|f\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha'}_{k-1}} \left(\|

4601: x\partial_xg\|_{{\mcC}^{\alpha+\beta-{\alpha'}}_0}+\sum_{i=2}^r\|

4602: X_ig\|_{{\mcC}^{\alpha+\beta-{\alpha'}}_0}\right)\right)\;,\end{eqnarray}

4603: where the vector fields $X$ are defined in \Eq{champscoord}.

4604: %\be\label{S2.6.1}\forall \ |\gamma| \leq k\qquad \|x^{\gamma_1}\partial^\gamma (fg) -

4605: %(x^{\gamma_1}\partial^\gamma f)

4606: %g\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha+\beta}_0} \leq

4607: %C \left(\|f\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0} \|g\|_{{\HH }^\beta_k} +

4608: %\|f\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha'}_{k-1}} \|Dg\|_{{\cal

4609: %C}^{\alpha+\beta-{\alpha'}}_0}\right)\;.\ee

4610: \item Let $F \in C_k (M \times \R^N)$ be a function such that

4611: for all $B\in \R^+$ there exists a constant $C_1=C_1(B)$ so that,

4612: for all $p \in \R^N$, $|p| \leq B$, we have

4613: $$\left\|F(\cdot,p)\right\|_{{\mcC}^0_k(M_{x_0})} \leq C_1\;.$$ Then

4614: for all $\alpha < 0$, $\beta\in\R$, and $ B \in \R^+$ there exists

4615: a constant $C_2 (B,k,\alpha,\beta,x_1)$ such that for all

4616: $\R^N$-valued functions $f \in {\HH }^{\alpha-\beta}_k(\Omega)$

4617: with $\|x^\beta f\|_{L^ \infty (\Omega)} \leq B$ we have

4618: \be\label{S2.7}\left\|F(\cdot,x^\beta f)\right\|_{{\HH

4619: }^\alpha_k}\leq C_2 (1+\|f\| _{{\HH }^{\alpha-\beta}_k})\;.\ee

4620: \end{enumerate}

4621: Further, if $F$ has a {\em uniform} zero of order $l>0$ at $p=0$,

4622: in the sense that  for all $B\in \R$ there exists a constant

4623: $\hat{C}(B)$ such that for all $|\prho|\le B$ and $0\leq i\leq

4624: \min(k,l)$, \be\label{S2.71}

4625: \left\|\frac{\partial^iF(\cdot,\prho)}{\partial

4626:     \prho^i}\right\|_{{\mcC}_{k-i}^0(M_{x_0})} \leq \hat{C}(B)

4627: |\prho|^{l-i}\;,\ee then for all $\alpha \in \R$, $\beta \geq0$,

4628: there exists a constant $C_3 (\hat{C},l,k,\alpha,\beta,B)$ such

4629: that, for all $f\in {\HH }^{\alpha-l\beta}_k (\Omega)$ with

4630: $\|f\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} \leq B$, we have \be\label{S2.7.2}

4631: \left\|F(\cdot,x^\beta f)\right\|_{{\HH }^\alpha_k} \leq C_3

4632: \|f\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha-l\beta}_k} \;. \ee

4633: \end{Proposition}

4634: 

4635: 

4636: \noindent\textbf{Remark:} The hypothesis \eq{S2.71} will hold if

4637: $F$ is \emph{e.g.\/} a polynomial in $p$ with coefficients of

4638: $p^j$ vanishing for $j<l$, and being functions belonging to

4639: ${\mcC}^{0}_k$ for $j\geq l$.

4640: 

4641: \medskip

4642: 

4643: \proof We shall give a detailed proof of (\ref{S2.7}) and

4644: \eq{S2.7.2}, the inequalities (\ref{S2.5.2})-(\ref{S2.6}) follow

4645: by an analogous argument using \cite[Volume III, p.~10,

4646: Equations~(3.21)-(3.22)]{Taylor}, \emph{cf.\/} the calculation of

4647: Proposition~\ref{PS1.2.1} below. Let, similarly to (\ref{S2.1}),

4648: $$F_n(s,v)=F \left((x={x_0s\over 2^n},v); ({x_0s\over 2^n})^\beta

4649: f(x={x_0s\over 2^n},v)\right)\;;$$ from Equation (\ref{S2.2}) we

4650: have \be\label{S2.8}\|F(\cdot,x^\beta f)\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k

4651: (M_{x_0})} \approx x^{2\alpha}_0 \displaystyle\sum_{n\geq1} 2^{2 n

4652: \alpha}\|F_n\|^2_{H_{k}([1,2]\times \partial M)}\;.\ee We have the

4653: obvious bound $$\displaystyle \sup_{[1,2]\times \partial M}

4654: \left|\left({x{_0}s\over 2^n}\right)^\beta f\left({x_0s\over

4655: 2^n},v\right)\right| \leq \|x^\beta f\|_{L^\infty (M_{x_0})}\leq

4656: M\;.$$ Further the partial derivatives of $(s,v) \to F_n (s,v,p)$

4657: with respect to $s$ and $v$ at $p \in \R^N$ fixed, $|p| \leq M$,

4658: can be bounded by a constant depending only upon $$\displaystyle

4659: \sup_{|p|\leq M} \|F(\cdot,p)\|_{{\mcC}^0_k(M_{x_0})}\;.$$ The

4660: usual Moser inequalities \cite{Taylor}[Volume III, p.~11,

4661: Equation~(3.30)] give

4662: $$\|F_n\|^2_{H{_k}([1,2]\times \partial M)} \leq

4663: C\left(1+2^{-2n\beta}\|f_n\|^2 _{H{_k}([1,2]\times \partial

4664: M)}\right)\;,$$ with $f_n$ as in (\ref{S2.1}), and with a constant

4665: $C$ depending upon $k$ and $M$. Inserting this in (\ref{S2.8}) one

4666: obtains (recall that $\alpha<0$)

4667: \begin{eqnarray}

4668: \|F(\cdot,x^\beta f)\|^2_{{\HH }^\alpha_k (M_{x_0})}&\leq& C

4669: \displaystyle \sum_{n\geq 1} 2 ^{2 n \alpha} (1+2^{-2 n \beta}

4670: \|f_n\|^2_{H{_k}([1,2]\times \partial M)})\nonumber \\

4671: &\leq& C \left(1+ \|f\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha-\beta}_k

4672: (M_{x_0})}\right)\;.\label{S2.9}\end{eqnarray} This establishes

4673: (\ref{S2.7}) for \,$\Omega =M_{x_0}$, and (\ref{S2.7}) with

4674: \,$\Omega =M$ readily follows. The remaining \,$\Omega$'s are

4675: handled in a similar way.

4676: 

4677: To establish (\ref{S2.7.2}), we note the inequality

4678: $$

4679: \left|{\partial^{|\gamma|+i} F_n (\cdot,\prho) \over \partial

4680:     y^\gamma \partial\prho^i} \right| \leq C|\prho|^{\max

4681:   (l-i,0)}\;,$$

4682: which follows from \eq{S2.71} when ${|\gamma|+i}\leq k$.  Letting

4683: $y$ stand for $(s,v)\in [1,2]\times \partial M$, it then follows

4684: that for $|\sigma|\leq k$ we have \beqan |\partial^\sigma F_n|

4685: &=&\left|\sum_{|\gamma|+|\sigma_1|+\cdots +|\sigma_i|=|\sigma|}

4686:   C(\sigma_1,\ldots, \sigma_i,\beta)\left({x_0\over

4687:       2^n}\right)^{\beta(|\sigma_1|+\cdots +|\sigma_i|)} \right.

4688: \\

4689: &&\left. \qquad\qquad\times{\partial^{|\gamma|+i} F_n \over

4690: \partial

4691:     y^\gamma \partial\prho^i} \partial^{\sigma_1}(s^\beta f_n)

4692:   \cdots\partial^{\sigma_i}(s^\beta f_n)\right|\\

4693: &\leq& 2^{-l\beta n}C \sum_{|\sigma_1|+\cdots+|\sigma_i|\leq

4694: |\sigma|} | \partial^{\sigma_1} (s^\beta

4695: f_n)|\cdots|\partial^{\sigma_i}(s^\beta f_n)|\; .  \eeqan The

4696: usual inequalities \cite[Volume~III, Chapter~13,

4697: Section~3]{Taylor} give

4698: $$

4699: \|F_n\|_{ H_k ([1,2]\times\partial M)}\leq C(k,M)2^{-l\beta n}

4700: \|f_n\|_{H_k([1,2]\times\partial M)}\;,$$ for some constant

4701: $C(k,M)$, and one concludes from \eq{S2.8}, as in (\ref{S2.9}).

4702: \qed

4703: 

4704: 

4705: We have the following sharper version of \eq{S2.5.2}-\eq{S2.6}:

4706: \begin{Proposition}\label{PS1.2.1}

4707:   Let \,$\Omega = M$, or \,$\Omega = M_{x_1}$, $0<x_1\leq x_0$, or

4708:   \,$\Omega =M_{ x_2,x_1}$, $2x_2 \leq x_1 \leq x_0$, and let $\Hak = \Hak

4709:   (\Omega)$, {\rm etc}. There exists a constant $C_s =

4710:   C_s(\alpha,\beta,k)$ such that, for all $f\in \Hak \cap

4711:   \boa$ and $g\in \Gbk\cap \cob$ % and $h\in\HH_{k-1} ^\beta \cap \cob$,

4712: we  have

4713: \be \|fg\|_{\HH_k^{\alpha+\beta}}\leq

4714:   C_s(\|f\|_{\boa}\|g\|_{\Gbk} + \|f\|_{\Hak}\|g\|_{\cob})\,,

4715: \label{Mo1}\ee

4716: %\be

4717: %\forall |\gamma|\leq k\ , \ \|x^{\gamma_1}\decal^{\gamma}(fg)

4718: %  -(x^{\gamma_1}\decal^{\gamma}f)g\|_{\HH_0^{\alpha+\beta}} \leq C_s

4719: %    (\|f\|_{\boa}\|g\|_{\GG_{k}^\beta} +

4720: %\|f\|_{\HH_{k-1}^\alpha}\| g\|_{\mcC_1^\beta})\,.

4721: %\label{Mo25}\ee

4722: Moreover it also holds that

4723: \begin{eqnarray}\label{Mo2}\hspace{-0.5cm}

4724: \lefteqn{\forall |\gamma|\leq k\ , \ \|x^{\gamma_1}\decal^\gamma

4725: (fg) - (x^{\gamma_1}\decal^\gamma f) g\|_{{\HH }^{\alpha+\beta}_0}

4726: } \nn \\ &&\leq C \left(\|f\|_{\boa}

4727: \|g\|_{{\GG}^\beta_k}+\|f\|_{{\HH}^{\alpha}_{k-1}} \left(\|

4728: x\partial_xg\|_{{\mcC}^{\beta}_0}+\sum_{i=2}^r\|

4729: X_ig\|_{{\mcC}^{\beta}_0}\right)\right)\;,\end{eqnarray} where the

4730: vector fields $X$ are defined in \Eq{champscoord}.

4731: \end{Proposition}

4732: \remark A useful, though less elegant, inequality related to

4733: \eq{Mo1} is

4734: \be \forall \ |\gamma +\sigma| \leq k \qquad \|x^{\gamma_1}

4735: (\decal^\gamma f) x^{\sigma_1}(\decal^\sigma

4736: g)\|_{\HH_0^{\alpha+\beta}}\leq

4737:   C_s(\|f\|_{\boa}\|g\|_{\Gbk} + \|f\|_{\Hak}\|g\|_{\cob})\,.

4738: \label{Mo1.1}\ee

4739: 

4740: \proof We will prove (\ref{Mo2}), the proof of (\ref{Mo1}) is

4741: essentially identical.  When $\Omega=M_{x_0}$ we do the rescaling

4742: $f_n(s,v) = f({x_0s\over 2^n},v)$, $g_n(s,v)=g({x_0 s\over

4743: 2^n},v)$, we then have, for all $|\gamma|\leq k$,

4744: \beqa\nonumber

4745: \lefteqn{ \|x^{\gamma_1}\decal ^{\gamma}(fg)

4746:   -(x^{\gamma_1}\decal ^{\gamma}f)g\|^2_{\HH_0^{\alpha+\beta}}}&&

4747: \\ & \approx & x_0^{-2(\alpha+\beta)}\sum_{n} 2^{2n(\alpha+\beta)}

4748: \|\decal ^{\gamma}(f_ng_n)

4749:   -(\decal ^{\gamma}f_n)g_n\|^2_{H_0([1,2]\times\partial M)}\nonumber

4750: \\

4751: &\leq&

4752:  Cx_0^{-2(\alpha+\beta)}\sum_n 2^{2n(\alpha+\beta)}

4753: \left(\| f_n\|^2_{L^\infty}\|g_n\|^2_{H_{k}} +

4754: \|f_n\|^2_{H_{k-1}}\|\decal  g_n\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\nonumber

4755: \\

4756: &\leq& C x_0^{-2(\alpha+\beta)} \left( \left(\sum_n 2^{2n\alpha}\|

4757:     f_n\|^2_{L^\infty} \right) \sup_n  \left(2^{2n\beta}\|

4758:     g_n\|^2_{H_{k}}\right) \right.

4759: \nonumber \\ & & +\left.

4760:  \left(\sum_n 2^{2n\alpha}\|f_n\|^2_{H_{k-1}} \right) \sup_n  \left(

4761:    2^{2n\beta}\|\decal  g_n\|^2_{L^\infty}\right)\right)\nonumber

4762: \\

4763: &\approx& C\left(\|f\|^2_{\boa} \|g\|^2_{\GG_{k}^{\beta}} +

4764:   \|f\|^2_{\HH^\alpha_{k-1}} \|g\|^2_{\mcC^\beta_1}\right)

4765: \nonumber\\

4766: & \leq & C_s\left(\|f\|_{\boa} \|g\|_{\GG_{k}^{\beta}} +

4767:   \|f\|_{\HH^\alpha_{k-1}} \|g\|_{\mcC^\beta_1}\right)^2\,.

4768: \label{Moser}\eeqa (In the third line above we have used the

4769: inequality \cite[Volume III, p.~10, Equation~(3.22)]{Taylor}.) The

4770: case $\Omega=M$ follows immediately from the above; the case

4771: $\Omega=M_{x_2 x_1}$ is treated similarly using

4772: \eq{coco25}-\eq{gequiv} and \eq{coco26}-\eq{Gequiv}.

4773: %with the relations for

4774: %all $n\geq 1$, \beqa

4775: %x_0^{-\alpha}2^{n\alpha}|\partial f_n|_\infty &\leq&  \|Df\|_{\coa}\\

4776: %x_0^{-\alpha}2^{n\alpha}\|f_n\|_{H_k} &\leq& \|f\|_{\Gak}\, , \eeqa

4777: \qed

4778: 

4779: Similar results can be proved in weighted H{\"o}lder spaces:

4780: 

4781: \begin{Lemma}\label{interpolation}  Let \,$\Omega = M$, or \,$\Omega =

4782:   M_{x_1}$, $0<x_1\leq

4783:   x_0$, or \,$\Omega =M_{ x_2,x_1}$, $2x_2 \leq x_1 \leq x_0$, and let

4784:   $\mcCak = \mcCak (\Omega)$. Let $f\in \mcC_k^\alpha\cap \mcC_0^\beta$

4785:   and $g\in \mcC_k^\gamma\cap \mcC_0^\delta$ with

4786:   $\alpha+\delta=\gamma+\beta=\sigma$. Then we have $fg\in

4787:   \mcC_k^\sigma$ and \be \|fg\|_{\mcC_k^\sigma}\leq C_i (

4788:   \|f\|_{\mcC_0^\beta} \|g\|_{\mcC_k^\gamma} + \|g\|_{\mcC_0^\delta}

4789:   \|f\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha})\;,\label{ineqinterpol} \ee

4790: \end{Lemma}

4791: \proof The proof is very similar to that of Propositions

4792: \ref{PS1.2} and \ref{PS1.2.1}.  We use the same conventions as in

4793: (\ref{coco25}), (\ref{coco26}).  We have $ \|fg\|_{\mcC_k^\sigma}

4794: \approx\sup_n 2^{n\sigma}\|f_ng_n\|_{C_k(\omega)}$, where

4795: \begin{equation}\label{defomegan}\omega\equiv[1,2]\times\partial M\;, \ee

4796: similarly for $f$ and $g$.  The interpolation inequality

4797: \cite[Appendix A]{Hormander}  $$\|f_n g_n\|_{C_k(\omega)} \leq

4798: C(\|f_n\|_\infty \|g_n\|_{C_k(\omega)} +

4799: \|g_n\|_\infty\|f_n\|_{C_k(\omega)})$$ leads to the conclusion.

4800: \proofend

4801: 

4802: We have the following $\mcC_k^\beta$ equivalent of the second part

4803: of Proposition~\ref{PS1.2}, with a similar proof, based on

4804: Lemma~\ref{interpolation}:

4805: 

4806: \begin{Lemma}\label{lemmaG1}

4807:   Let $F$ be a function satisfying the hypotheses of point 2 of

4808:   Proposition~\ref{PS1.2}, with a uniform zero of order $l$ in $p$ in the

4809:   sense of \Eq{S2.71}.  Then, for any $\epsilon>0$, $\beta\in\R$

4810: %  satisfying $\epsilon +\beta>0$, and for any

4811: and $f\in {\mycal C}_k^{\beta}   \cap L^\infty $ we have

4812: $F(.,x^\epsilon f)\in {\mcC}_k^{\beta+l     \epsilon} $, and there

4813: exists a constant $C$ depending upon $\|f\|_{L^\infty}$ such that

4814: \be

4815:   \|F(.,x^\epsilon f)\|_{\mcC_k^{\beta+l\epsilon}} \leq

4816:   C(\|f\|_{\infty}) \|f\|_{\mcC_k^\beta}\;.  \ee

4817: \end{Lemma}

4818: 

4819: The space of polyhomogeneous functions $\cAp=\cApM$ is defined as

4820: the set of smooth functions on $\bM$ which have an asymptotic

4821: expansion of the form

4822: \begin{equation}

4823:   \label{eq:3new}

4824:   f \sim \sum_{i=0}^\infty \sum_{j=0}^{N_i} f_{ij} {x^{n_i}} \ln

4825:   ^j x\;,

4826: \end{equation}

4827: for some sequences $n_i,N_i$, with $n_i\nearrow\infty$. The

4828: polyhomogeneous expansions of the introduction are of this form if

4829: $r$ there is replaced by $1/x$; this corresponds to the conformal

4830: transformation of Section~\ref{ss1}, which brings ``null infinity"

4831: to a finite distance. We emphasize that we allow non-integer

4832: values of the $n_i$'s; however, we shall mostly be interested in

4833: rational ones, as those arise naturally in the problem at hand.

4834: Here the symbol $\sim$ stands for ``being asymptotic to'': if the

4835: right-hand-side is truncated at some finite $i$, the remainder

4836: term falls off appropriately faster. Further, the functions

4837: $f_{ij}$ are supposed to be smooth on $\bM$, and the asymptotic

4838: expansions should be preserved under differentiation. It is easily

4839: checked that the space $\cAp$ is independent of the choice of the

4840: function $x$, within the class of defining functions for $\pM$.

4841: 

4842: \section{ODE's in  weighted spaces}\label{SODEsws}

4843: In our handling of PDE's below we will need ODE estimates to

4844: obtain information about solutions, we thus begin with some

4845: \emph{a priori\/} estimates in weighted spaces for ODE's. While

4846: the results are well-known in principle, and easy to prove, we

4847: present them in detail here because their precise form is

4848: necessary for our arguments later in this work. For a vector $w$

4849: we denote by $\|w\|$ or by $|w|$ the usual Euclidean norm, while

4850: for a matrix $b$ the symbol $\|b\|$ denotes its matrix norm.

4851: 

4852: 

4853: \subsection{Solutions of $\partial_\tau\varphi +b \varphi = c$ in

4854: weighted spaces} \label{SODEwc}

4855: 

4856: Let $\cO$ be an open subset of $\pM$, which might be the whole of

4857: $\pM$, or a coordinate patch of $\pM$ with coordinates $v^A$,

4858: whichever appropriate in the context; we set

4859: \begin{equation}\label{defcu}\cUxx\equiv(x_2,x_1)\times

4860: \cO\times [0,T]\;, \ee

4861: \begin{equation}\label{defSigma}%\Sigma\equiv

4862: \Sigx\equiv(x_2,x_1)\times\cO\;,\ee with  $0\leq x_2< x_1$. The

4863: time variable $\tau$ will usually be the last variable, so $\tau$

4864: will run from $[0,T]$ whenever $\cUxx$ is involved. Strictly

4865: speaking, $\cUxx$ should carry an extra $T$ index, but we have not

4866: done that in order not to overburden notation. To avoid

4867: ambiguities we emphasize that the spaces $\mcC_{k}^0

4868:   (\cUxx)$ in the Proposition below are defined as in the previous

4869:   section, with the $v^A$ variables there corresponding here to some

4870:   local coordinates on $\cO$ \emph{together with} the time variable

4871:   $\tau$; the time derivative $\partial_\tau$ should be

4872:   understood as a one-sided one at $\tau=0$ and at $\tau=T$.

4873: \begin{Proposition}\label{Plemme}Let $\alpha\in\R$,  $b\in \mcC_{k}^0

4874:   (\cUxx,\textrm{End}(\R^N))$,

4875:   $c\in \mcC_k^\alpha (\cUxx,\R^N)$, then the unique solution $\varphi$

4876:   of the equation \be \partial_\tau\varphi + b \varphi  = c \;,

4877: \label{ode1} \ee with initial data $\tilde{\varphi} \equiv

4878: \varphi|_{\tau=0}$ $\in \mcC_k^\alpha (\Sigx,\R^N)$ is in $

4879: \mcC_k^\alpha (\cUxx,\R^N)$ with \be

4880: \|\varphi\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\cUxx)} \leq C\left(n,N,k,T,x_1,

4881:   \|b\|_{\mcC_k^0(\cUxx)}\right)\left(

4882:   \|\tilde{\varphi}\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\Sigx)}+

4883:   \|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\cUxx)}\right)

4884: .\label{ineqtauCk} \ee We also have the estimates \be \|\varphi

4885: (\tau)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigx)} \leq C e^{\|b\|_\infty \tau }

4886: \left(\|\varphi (0)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigx)} + \int_0^\tau e^{-

4887:     \|b\|_{\infty} s} \|c(s)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigx)} \; ds\right)\;.

4888: \label{ineqtauC0}\ee

4889: \beqa

4890: \nonumber

4891:  \|\varphi(\tau)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)} &\leq& Ce^{C \|b\|_\infty \tau} \times

4892: \left( \|\varphi(0)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)} +  \int_0^\tau

4893: e^{-C

4894: |b|_\infty s}\| c(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)} \; ds \right.\\

4895: && +\left. \int_0^\tau e^{(1-C)|b|_\infty

4896: \;s}\|b(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)}\left(

4897: \|\varphi(0)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0(\Sigx)}

4898: \phantom{\int_0^\tau}\right. \right.\nonumber \\ & &\left.\left.

4899: \phantom{xxxxxxxxx}+ \int_0^se^{-|b|_{\infty}\;t}

4900: \|c(t)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0(\Sigx)} \;dt\;\right) \; ds \;\right)\;.

4901: \label{estimateC1} \eeqa

4902: \end{Proposition}

4903: 

4904: \remarks

4905: 

4906: 1. Analogous results in $\BB_k^\alpha$ spaces can be proved by

4907: similar arguments.

4908: 

4909: 2. An {\em a-priori\/} estimate in weighted Sobolev spaces for

4910: \eq{ode1} follows from Proposition~\ref{PL.1} below by setting

4911: $E^\mu_-\partial_\mu=\partial_\tau\otimes \textrm{id}$  and

4912: $L\equiv\psi\equiv b\equiv 0$ there.

4913: 

4914: \medskip

4915: 

4916: \proof Let $k\in \N^\ast $, and let

4917: $\beta=(\beta_1,\beta_2,\ldots\beta_n)$ be a multi-index with

4918: $|\beta|\leq k$; $\partial^\beta \varphi$ verifies the equation

4919: \beqa

4920:  \partial_\tau \partial^\beta \varphi  &=& - \partial^\beta (b\varphi)

4921: + \partial^\beta c\;. \label{commutation} \eeqa Let $\epsilon >0$

4922: and set

4923: $$e(.,t,\epsilon) = \left( \epsilon+

4924: \sum_{|\beta|\leq k} x^{2(\beta_1-\alpha)}\langle \partial^\beta

4925: \varphi ,\; \partial^\beta \varphi\rangle \right)^{1/2}\;,$$

4926: $$E(t,\epsilon) = \|e(.,t,\epsilon)\|_{L^\infty(\Sigx)}\;.$$ When

4927: $k=0$ one easily finds $$\partial_\tau  e \leq \|b\|e + |c|\;,$$

4928: and \eq{ineqtauC0} readily follows. For $k>0$ we  have \beqan

4929: \partial_\tau  e &=& {1\over e}  \sum_{|\beta|\leq k}

4930: x^{2(\beta_1-\alpha)}\langle \partial_\tau \partial^\beta

4931: \varphi,\;\partial^\beta \varphi \rangle \;,\\

4932:  & \leq & {1\over e}  \sum_{|\beta|\leq k}

4933:  x^{2(\beta_1-\alpha)}|\partial^\beta(-b\varphi+c)|

4934:  \; |\partial^\beta \varphi| \;,

4935: %\\ &

4936: %\leq & {1\over e} (\|bu\|_{C_k(\Sigx)} + \|c\|_{C_k(\Sigx)})  \sum_\beta

4937: % \|\partial^\beta u\| \;,

4938: \\ & \leq & { C(k,n)\over e} (\|b\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)}

4939:  + \|c\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)}) e\;,\\ & \leq & C(k,n)

4940:  (\|b\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)} + \|c\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)})\;,

4941: \eeqan where $C(k,n)$ is a constant depending upon $k$ and the

4942: space dimension $n$, and which arises from the inequality $

4943: \sum_{i=1}^p |a_i|\leq\sqrt{p}\sqrt{\sum_i |a_i|^2}$ for any real

4944: sequence $(a_i)$.

4945:   The weighted interpolation inequalities, Lemma~\ref{interpolation},

4946:   imply $$\|b\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)} \leq

4947: C(\|b\|_{L^\infty(\Sigx)}\|\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_k(\Sigx)} +

4948: \|b\|_{{\mcC}^0_k(\Sigx)}

4949: \|\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0(\Sigx)})\;,$$ where  $C$  is a

4950: constant which depends upon $k$, $N$ and $n$. It follows that

4951: \beqan

4952: \partial_\tau  e & \leq & C \left(\|b\|_{L^\infty(\Sigx)} \|\varphi\|_{\mcCak(\Sigx)} +

4953:  \|b\|_{{\mcC}^0_k(\Sigx)} \|\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0(\Sigx)} +

4954: \|c\|_{\mcCak(\Sigx)}\right)\\

4955: & \leq &C \left(\|b\|_\infty E(\epsilon,t) +

4956: \|b\|_{{\mcC}^0_k(\Sigx)} \|\varphi\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0(\Sigx)} +

4957: \|c\|_{\mcCak(\Sigx)}\right)\;, \eeqan with perhaps a different

4958: constant $C$. By integration we obtain \beqan e(t) &\leq& e(0) + C

4959: \int_0^t\left(\|b\|_\infty E(s,\epsilon) +\|b(s)\|_{\mcCzk(\Sigx)}

4960: \|\varphi(s)\|_{\mcCaz(\Sigx)} + \|c(s)\|_{\mcCak(\Sigx)}\right)ds

4961: \;, \eeqan from which we deduce \beqan E( t,\epsilon) \leq

4962: E(0,\epsilon)+  C\int_0^t\left( \|b\|_\infty E(s,\epsilon) +

4963: \|b(s)\|_{{\mcC}^0_k(\Sigx)}

4964: \|\varphi(s)\|_{{\mcC}^\alpha_0(\Sigx)} +

4965: \|c(s)\|_{\mcCak(\Sigx)}\right) ds \;. \eeqan Using Gronwall's

4966: Lemma and  letting $\epsilon\to 0$ one obtains \beqan E(t,0)&\leq&

4967: e^{C\|b\|_{\infty}t}  E(0,0)

4968: \\ & & + C\int_0^t

4969: e^{C\|b\|_{\infty}(t-s)} \Big(\|b(s)\|_{\mcCzk(\Sigx)}

4970: \|\varphi(s)\|_{\mcCaz(\Sigx)} + \|c(s)\|_{\mcCak(\Sigx)}\Big)ds

4971: \;. \eeqan The estimate~\eq{ineqtauC0} for

4972: $\|\varphi\|_{\mcCaz(\Sigx)}$ inserted in the last inequality

4973: leads to Equation~\eq{estimateC1}. The time-derivative estimates

4974: follow immediately from the above and from the equation satisfied

4975: by $\varphi$. \proofend

4976: 

4977: 

4978: \subsection{Solutions of $\partial_x \phi + b \phi =c$ in weighted spaces}

4979: \label{Sodex} All the results in this section, as well as in

4980: Section~\ref{Sphgx} below, remain valid if we replace the set

4981: $\cUxx $ defined in \Eq{defcu} with $\Sigx $ defined in

4982: \eq{defSigma}

4983: --- the time dimension does not play a preferred role in the

4984: current problem. We start with the following elementary result;

4985: the point is to ensure that the relevant constants are $x_2$

4986: independent:

4987: \begin{Lemma} \label{integrationx}

4988: Let $g\in \mcC_k^\alpha(\cUxx ,\R^N)$, $0\le x_2< x_1$, then $f$

4989: defined for $\alpha> -1$ by

4990: $$f(x,v^A,\tau)= \int_{x_2}^x g(s,v^A,\tau) \; ds$$ is in

4991: $\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx , \R^N)$, with $$

4992: \|f\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx )} \leq\max\left\{1 , {1\over

4993: \alpha+1}\right\} \|g\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\cUxx )}\;.$$ Similarly

4994: $f_2$ defined by $$f_2(x,v,\tau) =- \int_{x}^{x_1} g(s,v,\tau) \;

4995: ds$$ satisfies $$(1+ (\ln x)^2 )^{-1/2} f_2 \in\mcC_k^{0 }(\cUxx

4996: )\mbox{ for $\alpha=-1$}\;,

4997: $$

4998: $$f_2\in\mcC_k^{\min \{ \alpha+1,0\} }(\cUxx )\mbox{  for $\alpha<0$ and $\alpha\neq -1$}\;,$$ with

4999: $$\|f_2\|_{\mcC_k^{\min\{ \alpha+1,0\}}  (\cUxx )}\leq

5000: \max\left\{1,\left|{1\over

5001: 1+\alpha}\right|,\left|{x_1^{\alpha+1}\over

5002: 1+\alpha}\right|\right\} \|g\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\cUxx )}\;. $$

5003: \end{Lemma}

5004: \proof We have the trivial relations \beqan

5005:  \int_{x_2}^x s^\alpha \;ds & \leq & {1\over \alpha+1} x^{\alpha+1} \ \mbox{ for $\alpha> -1$}\; , \\

5006: \int_{x}^{x_1} s^{-1} \; ds & = & \ln x_1 - \ln x \;,

5007:  \eeqan

5008: as well as the commutation rules: \beqan

5009:  \partial_x \int_a^x g \;dx \: &= & g(x) \;,\\

5010: \partial_{v^A}\int_a^x \;g dx &=& \int_a^x \partial_{v^A}g \; dx \;,\\ \partial_\tau \int_a^x

5011: g \; dx &=& \int_a^x \partial_\tau g \;dx \;. \eeqan Note that \be

5012:  \|f\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx )} =

5013: \|\partial_xf\|_{\mcC_{k-1}^{\alpha}(\cUxx )} + \sum_{0\le

5014: i+|\delta|\leq k} \|\partial_\tau^i \partial_{v^A}^\delta

5015: f\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx )}\;, \ee

5016:  with

5017: $ \|\partial_xf\|_{\mcC_{k-1}^{\alpha}(\cUxx )} =

5018: \|g\|_{\mcC_{k-1}^\alpha(\cUxx )}$. To estimate

5019: $\partial_\tau^i\partial_{v^A}^\delta f$ one writes \beqan

5020: |\partial_\tau^i \partial_v^\delta f| &\leq&  \int_{x_2}^{x} |\partial_\tau^i\partial_v^\delta g|\;ds \;,\\

5021: &\leq& \int_{x_2}^x \|\partial_\tau^i\partial_v^\delta g\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} s^{\alpha} \; ds \;,\\

5022: &\leq& {1\over \alpha+1} x^{\alpha+1}

5023: \|\partial_\tau\partial_v^\delta g\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha}\;. \eeqan

5024:  The results for $f_2$ are established in a similar way.  \proofend

5025: 

5026: We shall use the following notation \be\label{scridef}

5027: \mcS_{x_2}=\{x=x_2\}\;, \ee with the range of the other variables

5028: being in principle clear from the context; this is the equivalent

5029: of  the set $\,\tilde {\!

5030: \partial} M_{x_2}$ of \Eq{tpM} when the set-up described there is assumed.

5031: 

5032: \begin{Proposition} \label{propositionx1}

5033:   Let $0\le x_2 <x_1$, suppose that $b\in \mcC_{k}^{-\epsilon} (\cUxx

5034:   ,End(\R^N))$, $0\leq \epsilon <1$, $c\in \mcC_k^\alpha

5035:   (\cUxx ,\R^N)$, and let $\phi $ be a solution in $C_k^{\loc}(\cUxx

5036:   )$ of the

5037:   equation \be \partial_x \phi + b \phi = c \;.

5038:   \label{ode2}

5039:   \ee Then the following hold:

5040: \begin{enumerate}

5041: \item If $\alpha <-1$ , then $\phi \in \mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx )$

5042:   and we have, for $\alpha+2-\epsilon \neq 0$ and for $x_2\le x_3\le x_1

5043:   $ small enough so that $C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3) <1$,

5044:   $x_3\ne 0$,

5045:   \be

5046:   \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} \leq {1\over 1-

5047:     C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3)}

5048: (x^{-\alpha-1}_3\|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} + {1\over |1+\alpha|}

5049:   \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})})

5050:   \;,

5051:   \ee

5052:   where

5053:   \be\label{constant}

5054:   C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3) = {x_3^{1-\epsilon}\over

5055:     |2+\alpha-\epsilon|}\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})}\;.\ee

5056:   Moreover, if $x_2\le x_3\le x_1$ is small enough so that

5057:   $C_i \,C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3) <1$,

5058:   where $C_i$ is the constant in the interpolation inequality

5059: (\ref{ineqinterpol}),

5060:   then

5061:   \beqa

5062:   \|\phi\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} &\leq&

5063: C_\alpha(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},C_i,x_3)

5064:   \left(\|\phi(x_3)\|_{C_k(\mcS_{x_3})}+

5065: \|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})}

5066:   \right.\nonumber \\

5067:   && \left. + \|b\|_{\mcC_k^{-\epsilon}({\mcU} _{x_2,x_3})}(

5068: \|\phi(x_3)\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} +

5069:     \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} )\right)\;,

5070: \nn \\ &&

5071:   \label{ineqx}\eeqa

5072:   with  $C_\alpha(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},C_i,x_3)$ an increasing function in

5073:   the first and third variable.

5074: 

5075: \item If $\alpha=1$, then $(1+(\ln x)^2)^{-1/2}\phi \in \mcC_k^0(\cUxx )$.

5076: 

5077: \item If $\alpha>-1$, then $\phi_{x_2} \equiv \lim_{x\to x_2} \phi$ is in

5078: $C_k(\mcS_{x_2})$, with

5079:  \be

5080: \label{diffest}\phi-\phi_{x_2} \in \mcC_k^{1-\epsilon}(\cUxx

5081: )+\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx )\;,\ee $\phi \in\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx

5082: )$ if $\phi_{x_2}=0$, and

5083:   \be

5084:   \|\phi\|_{L^\infty({\mcU}_ {x_2,x_3})} \leq {1\over 1- C'(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3)} \left(

5085:   \|\phi\|_{L^\infty(\mcS_{x_3})} + {x_3^{1+\alpha}\over 1+\alpha}

5086: \|c\|_{\mcC_{0}^\alpha(\mcU_{x_2,x_3})} \right) \label{ineqx1}

5087:  \ee

5088:    for $x_2\le x_3\le x_1$ small enough so that

5089:    $$C'(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3):= {x^{1-\epsilon}_3 \over

5090:    1-\epsilon} \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}(\mcU_{x_2,x_3})}<1\;.$$

5091:    Moreover

5092:   for $x_3$ small enough  so that $C_i C'(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3)

5093:   <1$ we also have

5094:   \beqa

5095:   \|\phi\|_{\mcC_k^{0}({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} &\leq&

5096: C_\alpha'(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},C_i,x_3)

5097:   \left(\|\phi(x_3)\|_{C_k(\mcS_{x_3})}+

5098: \|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})}

5099:   \right.\nonumber \\

5100:   && \left. + \|b\|_{\mcC_k^{-\epsilon}({\mcU} _{x_2,x_3})}(

5101: \|\phi(x_3)\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} +

5102:     \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} )\right)\;,

5103: \nn\\&&

5104:   \label{ineqx2}\eeqa

5105:   with  $C_\alpha'$ an increasing function in its first and third

5106:   argument.

5107: \end{enumerate}

5108:   \end{Proposition}

5109: 

5110: \remarks  1. The inequalities above are standard when $x_2>0$ and

5111: when the constants are allowed to depend upon $x_2$, regardless of

5112: whether or not $x_3$ can be made small. As already mentioned, the

5113: point here is to make sure that the constants do not blow up as

5114: $x_2$ gets small.

5115: 

5116: 2. In case 2. log-weighted estimates are easily derived; they

5117: will, however, not be needed in what follows.

5118: 

5119:  \proof 1. For simplicity, we will write $\mcC_k^\delta$ for

5120: $\mcC_k^\delta({\mcU}_{x_3,x_2})$. Let $\phi$ be a (local)

5121: solution of (\ref{ode2}), corresponding to  initial data at

5122: $\{x=x_1\} $ in

5123: $C_k(\mcS _{x_1})$. For $a>0$ set%

5124: \newcommand{\betaone}{\beta_1}

5125: $$e_a(x,v^A, \tau):= (a+ \sum_{|\beta|\leq k}

5126: x^{2\betaone }\langle\partial^\beta \phi |

5127: \partial^\beta \phi\rangle)^{1/2}\;,$$

5128:  and $e:= e_0$.  Let $x_3 \in ]x_2,x_1[\cap ]0,1]$ be such that

5129: ${x_3^{1-\epsilon} \over |2+\alpha-\epsilon|}

5130: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}} <1$. We have for all $x_2<x\leq x_3$,

5131: \beqa - \partial_x e_a &=& -{1\over e_a}\sum \betaone x^{2\betaone

5132: -1}\langle\partial^\beta\phi | \partial^\beta \phi\rangle

5133: \ \ \mbox{ I } \nn \\ %\label{negative} \\

5134:  && - {1\over  e_a}\sum_{|\beta|\leq k}

5135: x^{2\betaone }\langle\partial^\beta\partial_x\phi|\partial^\beta

5136: \phi\rangle \ \ \mbox{ II }, \label{main} \eeqa Since $\betaone $

5137: is non-negative we have $-\partial_xe_a (x, v^A, \tau) \leq \mbox{

5138: II }$; further \beqa \mbox{II}&=&{1\over e_a}\sum_{|\beta|\leq k}

5139: x^{2\betaone }

5140: \langle\partial^\beta(b \phi- c) |\partial^\beta \phi \rangle\nonumber\\

5141:  &\leq&{1\over e_a}\sum_{|\beta|\leq k}(

5142: |x^{\betaone }\partial^\beta c |+ |x^{\betaone }\partial^\beta

5143: (b\phi)|)\, | x^{\betaone }\partial^\beta \phi | \nonumber \\

5144: &\leq& \sum_{|\beta|\leq k} |x^{\betaone }\partial^\beta c |+

5145: |x^{\betaone }\partial^\beta (b\phi)| \;. \label{preineq} \eeqa

5146: Clearly \beqan

5147: \sum |x^{\betaone }\partial^\beta c|&=&x^{\alpha} \sum |x^{-\alpha+\betaone }\partial^\beta c |\\

5148: &\leq&  x^{\alpha} \|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha}\;,\\

5149: \sum_{|\beta|\leq k} |x^{\betaone } \partial^\beta(b\phi)| &=&

5150: x^{\alpha+1-\epsilon}\sum_{|\beta|\leq k}

5151:  |x^{-\alpha-1+\epsilon+\betaone } \partial^\beta (b\phi)|\\

5152: &\leq& x^{\alpha+1-\epsilon}

5153: \|b\phi\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1-\epsilon}}\;, \eeqan

5154:  which gives

5155: \beqa -\partial_xe_a &\leq & x^{\alpha}\|c\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha}}

5156: +x^{\alpha+1- \epsilon} \|b\phi\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1-\epsilon}}

5157: \;.\label{ineqbase}

5158:  \eeqa

5159: Consider, first, the case $k=0$;  in this case \eq{ineqbase} reads

5160: $$-\partial_xe_a \leq x^\alpha \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} + x^{\alpha+1-\epsilon} \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}

5161: \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}}\;,$$ which, after integrating over

5162: $[x_3,x]$ and passing to the limit $a\to 0$, gives (recall that

5163: $\alpha<-1$) \beqa

5164:  e(x,v^A,\tau)&\leq& e(x_3,v^A,\tau) + \left(-{x^{\alpha+1} \over

5165: (1+\alpha)} + {x^{\alpha+1}_3 \over (1+\alpha)}\right)

5166: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} \nonumber\\

5167: &&+\left({x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon}_3 \over (2+\alpha-\epsilon)} -

5168: {x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon} \over (2+\alpha-\epsilon)}\right)

5169: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}} \nonumber \\

5170: &\leq& \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} +{x^{\alpha+1}

5171: \over |1+\alpha|} \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} \nonumber\\

5172: && + \left({x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon}_3 \over (2+\alpha-\epsilon)} -

5173: {x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon} \over (2+\alpha-\epsilon)}\right)

5174: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}}\;.\label{lasteq}

5175: \eeqa Suppose for the moment that $\alpha+2-\epsilon<0$;

5176: Equation~(\ref{lasteq}) yields \be e(x,v^A,\tau) \leq

5177: \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} +{x^{\alpha+1} \over |1+\alpha|}

5178: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} + {x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon} \over

5179: |2+\alpha-\epsilon|}

5180: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1} }\;, \ee and

5181: since $x^{-1-\alpha} \leq x_3^{-1-\alpha} \leq 1$ we obtain \beqan

5182:  x^{-\alpha-1} e(x,v^A,\tau) &\leq &

5183: x_3^{-1-\alpha} \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} + {1\over |1+\alpha|}

5184: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} + {x^{1-\epsilon}_3 \over

5185: |2+\alpha-\epsilon|} \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}

5186: \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}}\;. \eeqan On the other hand, if

5187: $\alpha+2-\epsilon>0$ then \beqan e(x,v^A,\tau)&\leq&

5188: %e(x_3,v^A,\tau) + {x^{\alpha+1} \over |1+\alpha|}

5189: %\|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} + {x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon}_3 \over (2+\alpha-\epsilon)}

5190: %\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}} \;,\\

5191: %&\leq &

5192: \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} +{x^{\alpha+1} \over |1+\alpha|}

5193: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} + {x^{\alpha+2-\epsilon}_3 \over

5194: (2+\alpha-\epsilon)})

5195: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1} }\;, \eeqan

5196: which gives \beqan x^{-\alpha-1} e(x,v^A,\tau) &\leq &

5197: %x_3^{-1-\alpha}

5198: %\|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} + {1\over |1+\alpha|}

5199: %\|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha}

5200: %\\

5201: %&&+

5202: %x^{-1-\alpha}{x_3^{2+\alpha-\epsilon} \over |2+\alpha-\epsilon|}

5203: %\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1} }\;, \\

5204: % &\leq &

5205: x_3^{-1-\alpha} \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} + {1\over |1+\alpha|} \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha}\\

5206: && + {x^{1-\epsilon}_3 \over |2+\alpha-\epsilon|}

5207: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}} \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}}\;. \eeqan

5208: The inequality $\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}({\mcU} _{x_2,x_3})}

5209: \leq \sup_{[x_2,x_3]} x^{-1-\alpha}e$ shows  that in all cases we

5210: have

5211: $$% \be

5212: \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} \leq {1\over

5213: 1-C(\|b\|_{\mcC_{0}^{-\epsilon}},x_3)} ( x_3^{-1-\alpha}

5214: \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} + {1\over |1+\alpha|}

5215: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha}) \;, $$%\ee

5216: with the constant as in \Eq{constant}. Consider, now, any $0< k\in

5217: \N$; Equation~(\ref{ineqbase}) and the  interpolation inequality

5218: (\ref{ineqinterpol}) give

5219: $$ %\be

5220:  -\partial_xe_a \leq x^\alpha\|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha} +

5221: x^{\alpha+1-\epsilon} C_i ( \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}

5222: \|\phi\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}} + \|b\|_{\mcC_k^{-\epsilon}}

5223: \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}})\;.

5224: $$%\ee

5225: An argument identical to the one before, considering separately

5226: the cases $\alpha+2-\epsilon

5227: >0$ or $<0$, leads to \beqan \|\phi\|_{\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}} &\leq&

5228: {1\over 1- C_i\,

5229: C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3)}\left(x_3^{-1-\alpha}

5230: \|\phi\|_{C_k(\mcS_{x_3})}

5231: + {1\over |1+\alpha| } \|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha}\right)\\

5232: & &+ {C_i\over 1- C_i\, C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3) }

5233: {x_3^{1-\epsilon}\over |2+ \alpha -\epsilon|}

5234: \|b\|_{\mcC_k^{-\epsilon}}

5235: \|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha+1}}\\

5236: &\leq &  {C(x_3)\over 1- C_i\, C(\|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}},x_3)}

5237: \left(\|\phi\|_{C_k(\mcS_{x_3})} + \|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha}\right. \\

5238: &&\left. + {C_i\over 1-C\|b\|_{\mcC_{0}^{-\epsilon}},x_3)} \,

5239: \|b\|_{\mcC_k^{-\epsilon}}\left( x^{-\alpha-1}_3

5240: \|\phi\|_{C_0(\mcS_{x_3})} + {1\over

5241:   |1+\alpha|} \|c\|_{\mcC_0^{\alpha}}\right)\right)\;,

5242: \eeqan which gives (\ref{ineqx}). We have thus shown that

5243: $\phi\in\mcC_k^{\alpha+1}({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})$; the property that

5244: $\phi \in \mcC_k^{\alpha+1}(\cUxx )$ immediately follows.

5245: 

5246: 2. The proof is identical, except for a few obvious modifications

5247: in the calculations.

5248: 

5249: 3.  To obtain the $L^\infty$ estimate, we start from

5250: \eq{main}-(\ref{preineq}) with $k=0$, which upon integration and

5251: passing to the limit $a\to 0$ gives \beqan e(x,v^A,\tau)&\leq&

5252: e(x_3,v^A,\tau) + {x^{\alpha+1}_3 \over 1+\alpha}

5253: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} +{x^{1-\epsilon}_3 \over 1-\epsilon}

5254: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}\|\phi\|_{\mcC_0^{0}}\;, \eeqan from

5255: which we deduce

5256: $$%\be

5257:  \|\phi\|_{L^\infty({\mcU}_{x_2,x_3})} \leq

5258: \|\phi\|_{L^\infty(\mcS_{x_3})} + {x_3^{\alpha+1}\over \alpha+1}

5259: \|c\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha} +{x^{1-\epsilon}_3 \over 1-\epsilon}

5260: \|b\|_{\mcC_0^{-\epsilon}}

5261: %C(\|b\|_{\mcC_{0}^{-\epsilon}},x_3)'x^{1-\epsilon}_3

5262: \|\phi\|_{L^\infty({\mcU}_  {x_2,x_3})}\;,

5263: $$%\ee

5264: and (\ref{ineqx1}) follows. The proof of (\ref{ineqx2}) is similar

5265: to that of the analogous statement in point 1. From what has been

5266: said it can be seen that $\phi_{x_2} \equiv \lim_{x\to x_2} \phi$

5267: exists and is in $C_k(\mcS_{x_2})$. It remains to show that

5268:   $\phi-\phi_{x_2}$ satisfies \eq{diffest}. When $b$ is a multiple

5269:   of the identity, we can integrate (\ref{ode2}) to obtain \be \label{intrep} \phi(x,\cdot)

5270: = \phi_{x_2}(\cdot) e^{-\int_{x_2}^x b(s,\cdot)ds} + \int_{x_2}^x

5271: e^{\int_{x}^y b(s,\cdot)ds} c(y,\cdot)dy\;, \ee from which the

5272: result easily follows. The general case can be established by

5273: manipulations similar to the previous ones. \qed

5274: 

5275: \subsection{Polyhomogeneous solutions of $\partial_\tau\varphi + b

5276: \varphi = c$} \label{Sphgtau}

5277: 

5278: We pass now to an analysis of ODE's with polyhomogeneous sources.

5279: The results here have an auxiliary character, and several of them

5280: are rather elementary; they will be needed to  handle the real

5281: problem at hand, with partial differential operators.

5282:  Let

5283: $\cO$ be an open subset of $\partial M$, we set

5284: \be\label{defcunotwo} {\mcU}_{x_1} = ]0,x_1]\times \cO\times

5285: [0,T]\;.\ee It will be seen in Sections~\ref{sslwe} and

5286: \ref{Swave} that\footnote{This is due to occurrence of the factor

5287: $\Omega^{(n-1)/2}$ in equations such as \eq{SE.2}.} integer

5288: space-dimensions force us to consider polyhomogeneous expansions

5289: with half-integer power of $x$; in order to account for that, we

5290: introduce an index

5291: $$\delta = {1\over d}\;,$$ where  $d$ is a non-zero integer, $d\in

5292: \N^\ast $. We will mostly be interested in the case $d=1/2$ or

5293: $d=1$, however other values are also possible in the formalism

5294: here. Results analogous to the ones below hold for the general

5295: polyhomogeneous expansions of \Eq{eq:3new}, which can be

5296: established by similar methods. We find it of interest that a

5297: consistent framework can be obtained in the setting considered

5298: below:

5299: \begin{Proposition} \label{proprietetau}

5300:   Let $\beta\in\R$ and consider the system

5301:   \begin{deqarr}& \label{systemtau.0}\partial_\tau\varphi + b \varphi = c \;,&\\ &

5302: \displaystyle  \varphi|_{\{\tau=0\}}(x,v)\equiv

5303: \tilde{\varphi}(x,v) =x^{\beta} \sum_{i=0}^p \sum_{j=0}^{N_i} x^{i

5304: \delta} \ln ^j x \;\tilde{\varphi}_{ij}(x,v) \;+ \;

5305:   \tilde{\varphi}_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(x,v) \;,

5306:  & \nn \\ &\label{systemtau2} &

5307: \\ &\tilde{\varphi}_{ij}\in C_\infty(\overline{

5308: \{\tau=0\}})\;,\qquad

5309:   \tilde{\varphi}_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}

5310: \in\mcC_{\infty}^{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(\{\tau=0\})\;, &

5311: \label{systemtau}

5312:   \arrlabel{tode}\end{deqarr}

5313:   with

5314:   \begin{deqarr} &

5315: \displaystyle  b (x,v,\tau)= \sum_{i=0}^{p}\sum_{j=0}^{N_i'}

5316: x^{i\delta} \ln^j x \;b_{ij}(x,v,\tau) \: + \:

5317: b_{p\delta+\epsilon}(x,v,\tau)\;, &\\ &

5318:   b_{p\delta+\epsilon} \in \mcC_\infty^{p\delta+\epsilon}(\U_{x_1})\;,\qquad

5319:   b_{ij} \in C_\infty(\overline{\U_{x_1}})%\cap L^\infty{(\U_{x_1})}

5320: \;, &\\& \displaystyle  c(x,v,\tau) = x^{\beta}\sum_{i=0}^{p}

5321: \sum_{j=0}^{N_i''} x^{i\delta} \ln^j x \;c_{ij}(x,v,\tau) \: + \:

5322: c_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(x,v,\tau)\;, & \\ &

5323:   c_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon} \in

5324: \mcC_\infty^{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(\U_{x_1})\;,\qquad c_{ij} \in

5325: C_\infty(\overline{\U_{x_1}})%\cap L^\infty{(\U_{x_1})}

5326: \;, & \arrlabel{todep}\end{deqarr}

5327:   where $0<\epsilon<\delta$, and $(N_i),(N'_i),(N''_i)$ are sequences with integer

5328:   values, and with

5329: $$b\in  L^\infty{(\U_{x_1})}\;.$$

5330:   Then the solution $\varphi$ takes the form

5331:   \be \varphi(x,v,\tau) = x^{\beta}\sum_{i=0}^{p}

5332:   \sum_{j=0}^{M_i} x^{i \delta} \ln^j x \;\varphi_{ij}(x,v,\tau) \: + \: \varphi_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(x,v,\tau)\;,

5333:  \ee

5334:   with $\varphi_{ij}\in C_\infty(\overline{\U_{x_1}})$,

5335: %\cap  L^\infty(\U_{x_1})$,

5336:   $M_k$ is an integer sequence and  $\varphi_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}\in

5337:   \mcC_\infty^{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(\U_{x_1})$.

5338: \end{Proposition}

5339: 

5340: To prove the proposition we shall need the following lemma:

5341: \begin{Lemma}

5342:   Under the hypotheses of Proposition~\ref{proprietetau}, suppose that

5343:   in addition  we have

5344: $$ \tilde{\varphi}_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}= b_{p\delta+\epsilon} =

5345: c_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}=0\;.$$ Then for any

5346:  $\epsilon\in ]0,\delta[$ we have

5347:  \be

5348:  \varphi =x^{\beta} \sum_{i=0}^{p} \sum_{j=0}^{M_i} x^{ i \delta}

5349:  \ln^j x \;\varphi_{ij} \: + \varphi_{p\delta+

5350: \beta+\epsilon}\;,\label{formephi} \ee  with $\varphi_{ij}\in

5351: C_\infty

5352: (\overline {\U_{x_1}})$, % \cap L^\infty{(\U_{x_1})}$,

5353:  $\varphi_{p\delta + \beta+\epsilon}\in\mcC_{\infty}^{p \delta +\beta+\epsilon}

5354:  (\U_{x_1})$,

5355: for some integer-valued sequence $M_k$.

5356: \end{Lemma}

5357: \proof Inserting (\ref{formephi}) in the equation

5358: (\ref{systemtau.0}) and tracking  the coefficients in front of

5359: $x^{i \delta}\ln^j x$ one finds the following set of equations:

5360: \beqan M_0 =\max \{N_0,N_0''\}\;, & & M_{i+1} = \max \{

5361: \max_{0\leq k\leq i} M_k+

5362:  N'_{i-k} , \; N''_{i+1},\; N_{i+1}\} \;,\\

5363: i \in \lsemantics0,p\rsemantics \;,\; j\in \lsemantics

5364:  0,M_i\rsemantics \;,&&\partial_\tau \varphi_{ij} + \sum_{k=0}^i

5365:  \sum_{l=0}^{\min\{N_k', j\}}

5366:  b_{kl}\varphi_{i-k\;j-l} = c_{ij} \;,\\

5367: %i\in \lsemantics 0,p\rsemantics \;,\; j>M_i\;, &&

5368: % \partial_\tau \varphi_{ij} = 0 \;,\\

5369: \partial_\tau\varphi_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon} + b

5370:  \varphi_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon} &=&-\sum_{i=p+1}^{2p}

5371:  \;x^{\beta}\sum_{j=0}^{M_i} x^{i\delta}\ln^j x \;\{ \sum_{k=0}^i

5372:  \sum_{l=0}^{\min\{N_k', j\}}

5373: b_{kl}\varphi_{i-k\;j-l} \} \;. \eeqan Here $\lsemantics a,b

5374: \rsemantics:= [a,b]\cap \N$. This system is easily solved: one

5375: begins with $i=0$ and solves the equations for $j$  running  from

5376: $0$ to $M_0$. This can then be repeated for $i=1$, {\em etc},

5377: until $i=p$ is reached. This provides the functions

5378: $\varphi_{ij}$.  Finally, one solves the last equation for the

5379: remainder term $\varphi_{p\delta + \beta +\epsilon}$, with initial

5380: value zero, noting that the right hand side  of the resulting

5381: equation is in $\mcC_\infty^{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(\U_{x_1})$,

5382: and one concludes using Proposition~\ref{Plemme}. \proofend.

5383: \medskip

5384: 

5385: \noindent{\sc Proof of Proposition \ref{proprietetau}}: With the

5386: notation of the proposition, we set $b_{\phg} = b -

5387: b_{p\delta+\epsilon}$, $c_{\phg}= c-c_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}$,

5388: $\tilde \varphi_{\phg} = \tilde \varphi - \tilde

5389: \varphi_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon} $.  We use the Lemma above to

5390: obtain a solution $\varphi_{\phg}$  of the problem  \beqa

5391:   \partial_\tau\varphi + b_{\phg} \varphi &=&

5392:   c_{\phg}\;,\label{equalemmetau}\\

5393:   \varphi|_{\Sigma}= \tilde{\varphi} &=& x^{\beta}\sum_{i=0}^p

5394:   \sum_{j=0}^{N_i} x^{i\delta} \ln ^j x \;\tilde{\varphi}_{ij}(x,v) \;.

5395:   \eeqa  Then we

5396: solve $$\partial_{\tau}\varphi'+  b\varphi' =

5397:   c_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}- b_{p\delta+\epsilon}\varphi_{\phg}$$ with

5398: $\varphi'|_{\tau=0} = \tilde \varphi_{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}$.

5399: According to

5400:   Proposition~\ref{Plemme} we have $\varphi'\in

5401:   \mcC_{\infty}^{p\delta+\beta+\epsilon}(\U_{x_1})$.

5402: To conclude we set $\varphi = \varphi_{\phg} + \varphi'$ which is

5403: of

5404:   the required form,  and solves (\ref{systemtau.0}). \qed

5405: 

5406: \subsection{Polyhomogeneous solutions of $\partial_x\varphi + b

5407: \varphi = c$} \label{Sphgx}

5408: 

5409: \begin{Proposition}\label{propositionx}

5410: Let $\varphi $ be a solution in $C_\infty ^{\loc} (\U_{x_1})$ of

5411: \be

5412: \partial_x\varphi + \frac bx \varphi =

5413: c\;,\label{systemx} \ee and suppose that \eq{todep} holds with

5414: some $\epsilon\in ]0,\delta[$, $\beta\in \R $,

5415: %\setminus -\delta\N^{\ast}$,

5416: and with some integer-valued sequences $(N'_i),(N''_i)$. If

5417: $$ b=o(x)$$

5418: (equivalently, $b_{0j}(0,v,\tau)=0$), then \be \varphi =

5419: \sum_{i=0}^{p} \sum_{j=0}^{M_i} x^{i\delta} \ln^j x

5420: \;\widehat\varphi_{ij} \: + x^{\beta+1} \sum_{i=0}^{p}

5421: \sum_{j=0}^{M_i} x^{i\delta} \ln^j x \;\varphi_{ij} \: + \:

5422: \varphi_{p\delta+1+\beta+\epsilon}\;, \label{formephix} \ee with

5423: $$\widehat\varphi_{ij} \:,\varphi_{ij}\in

5424: C_\infty(\overline{\U_{x_1}})\;, \qquad

5425: \varphi_{p\delta+1+\beta+\epsilon}\in

5426: \mcC_\infty^{p\delta+1+\beta+\epsilon}({\U_{x_1})}\;,$$ for some

5427: integer sequence $(M_i)$.

5428: \end{Proposition}

5429: \proof Proposition~\ref{propositionx1} shows that for $\beta > -1$

5430: the limit $$\varphi_0(\cdot):=\lim_{x\to 0} \varphi(x,\cdot)$$

5431: exists and is a smooth function on $\cO\times[0,T]$. When $b$ is a

5432: multiple of the identity matrix the result is obtained by a

5433: straightforward analysis of the formula \be \label{intrep1}

5434: \varphi(x,\cdot) = \varphi_0(\cdot) e^{-\int_{0}^x b(s,\cdot)ds} +

5435: \int_{0}^x e^{\int_{x}^y b(s,\cdot)ds} c(y,\cdot)dy\;, \ee using

5436: the estimates of Lemma~\ref{integrationx}. For $\beta < -1 $, and

5437: again for $b$ --- a multiple of the identity matrix --- we use

5438: instead \be \label{intrep1+} \varphi(x,\cdot) =

5439: \varphi(x_1/2,\cdot) e^{-\int_{x_1/2}^x b(s,\cdot)ds} +

5440: \int_{x_1/2}^x e^{\int_{x}^y b(s,\cdot)ds} c(y,\cdot)dy\;. \ee In

5441: the general case, we first note that it follows from

5442: Proposition~\ref{propositionx1} that there exists $\lambda\in\R$

5443: such that $\psi\in \mcC^\lambda_\infty$. We then write

5444: \be\label{insback}\partial_x \psi - c= - \frac bx \psi \in

5445: \mcC^{\lambda+\delta-1}_\infty\;;\ee integrating gives

5446: $$\psi - \int_0^xc  \in \mcC^{\lambda+\delta}_\infty\;.$$

5447: Inserting this equation   in the right-hand-side of \eq{insback}

5448: and integrating again one obtains a similar equation with a

5449: remainder term falling-off one power of $\delta$ faster. The

5450: result is proved by repeating this procedure a finite number of

5451: times.

5452:  \qed

5453: 

5454: 

5455: 

5456: 

5457: 

5458: 

5459: 

5460: 

5461: 

5462: 

5463: %%% Local Variables:

5464: %%% mode: latex

5465: %%% TeX-master: "a.tex<default>"

5466: %%% End:

5467: 

5468: %\begin{remark}

5469: %%We note that the proof is still valid if $\partial^\beta$ includes

5470: %%time derivatives, replacing $C_k(\sigma)$ with $C_k(\omega)$ in the

5471: %%right member and $\|u(t)\|_{C_k(\sigma)}$ by $\|u\|_{C_k(\sigma\times

5472: %%[0,t])}$. Il remains to estimate

5473: %%$\sum_i\|\partial_\tau ^iu|_{t=0}\|_{C_{k-i}(\sigma)}$, which can be done

5474: %%with a recurrence using the equation $\partial_\tau ^{i+1} \partial^\beta

5475: %%u + \partial_\tau ^i\partial^\beta(bu) = \partial_\tau ^i\partial^\beta c$ to

5476: %%express the time derivatives of $u$ at $t=0$.  One obtains roughly (a

5477: %%sharper result is no use for us).

5478: %\mnote{perhaps one should give an explicit formula here}

5479: %From~\eq{estimateC1} and from~\eq{eq:edo0} one immediately obtains

5480: %\beqa

5481: %\|u\|_{C_k(\omega)}& \leq &

5482: %C(k,n,N,\|u(0)\|_{C_k(\sigma)}, T\|c\|_{C_k(\omega)},T\|b\|_{C_k(\omega)})

5483: %\;,\label{estimeeCk}

5484: %\eeqa

5485: %for some continuous\ function $C$.

5486: 

5487: %This estimate

5488: %would be still valid for a nonlinear equation (such as $\partial_\tau u=

5489: %c(x,v^A,t,u)$), eventually restricting $\omega$ to $]x_2, x_1] \times

5490: %\uui \times [0, T^\ast]$, with $T^\ast$ being the time of existence

5491: %for the solution.\mnote{je ne sais pas tres bien ce que vous voulez dire}

5492: %\end{remark}

5493: 

5494: %%For Sobolev spaces,

5495: %%the first inequality is straightforward using (\ref{odet}).

5496: 

5497: %%For the second one, we have

5498: %%$$\partial_\beta u +b \partial_\beta u  = \partial_\beta c - (\partial_\beta(b u) - b \partial_\beta u)\;,$$

5499: %%with the Moser-type inequality $$  \|(\partial_\beta(b u) - b \partial_\beta

5500: %%u)\|_{L^2(\sigma)}\leq C_s(|u|_{\infty} \|b\|_{H_k(\sigma)} + |\partial b|_\infty

5501: %%\|u\|_{H_{k-1}(\sigma)})\;.$$

5502: 

5503: 

5504: %\ptc{checked up to here on 14.9.2000; I have jumped to section

5505: %  \ref{S3} with the proofreading; this follows anyway from our main estimate?}

5506: 

5507: %Let us now pass  to an analysis of ODEs in weighted spaces.  In this

5508: %section, as well as in the following ones, we will derive {\em a

5509: %priori} estimates for solutions of ODEs defined on\mnote{J'ai enleve

5510: %le i; ou bien mettre i partout, ou nulle part; je n'aime pas l'idee

5511: %d'enlever les indices sur $\Sigma$ et $\cU$}

5512: %\begin{equation}\label{defcu}\cUxx\equiv]x_2,x_1]\times

5513: %\cO\times [0,T]\;, \ee with constants which not depend upon $x_2$

5514: %-- this will be critical for the results that follow. Here, as before,

5515: %$\cO$ is a coordinate patch on $\partial M$. We set\ptc{cette

5516: %  definition n'est pas consistente avec celle qu'on a deja utilisee}

5517: %\begin{equation}\label{defSigma}\Sigma\equiv\Sigma_{x_2,x_1}

5518: %\equiv]x_2,x_1]\times\uui\;,\ee

5519: %with  $0\leq x_2< x_1$.

5520: %\begin{Proposition}\label{proprietetauC}

5521: %Let  $b\in \mcC_{k}^0 (\UU,End(\R^N))$, $c\in \mcC_k^\alpha (\UU,\R^N)$,

5522: %then the equation

5523: %\be

5524: %\partial_\tau\varphi  + b \varphi   = c \;,

5525: %\label{ode1}

5526: %\ee

5527: %with initial data $\tilde{\varphi } \equiv \varphi |_{\tau=0}$ $\in

5528: %\mcC_k^\alpha (\Sigma)$ has a unique solution $\varphi  \in \mcC_k^\alpha

5529: %(\UU)$ with

5530: %\be

5531: %\|\varphi \|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\UU)} \leq C(x_1, \|b\|_{C_k^0(\UU)},

5532: %\|c\|_{C_k^\alpha(\UU)},\|u_0\|_{C_k^\alpha(\Sigma)})

5533: %.\label{ineqtauCk}

5534: %\ee

5535: %For $k=0$, $\varphi $ satisfies the estimate

5536: %\be

5537: %\|\varphi (t)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigma)} \leq C e^{|b|_\infty t } \left(\|\varphi (0)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigma)} + \int_0^t e^{-

5538: %  |b|_{\infty} s} \|c(s)\|_{\mcC_0^\alpha(\Sigma)} \; ds\right)\;.

5539: %\label{ineqtauC0}\ee

5540: %\noindent Further, if $c\in\BB_k^\alpha (\UU)$ and $\tilde{\varphi }\in

5541: %\BB_k^\alpha (\Sigma)$, then $\varphi \in \BB_k^\alpha (\UU)$ with

5542: %\be

5543: %\|\varphi \|_{\BB_k^\alpha(\UU)} \leq C(x_1, \|b\|_{\mcC_k^0(\UU)},

5544: %\|c\|_{\BB_k^\alpha(\UU)},\|u_0\|_{\BB_k^\alpha(\Sigma)})\;.

5545: %\label{ineqtauB}

5546: %\ee

5547: %\end{Proposition}

5548: 

5549: %\proof

5550: %As previously, for any function $f$ over $\UU$, we define an

5551: %associated sequence $f_n: [1,2]\times\ooi \times [0,T] \to \R^N$ and

5552: %intervals $I_n$ (cf. \ref{coco25} and \ref{coco26}).  Let $n\in

5553: %\N^\ast $ and $\varphi _n$ the solution over $\omega$ of the equation

5554: %\beqa

5555: %\partial_\tau\varphi _n + b_n \varphi _n &=& c_n\;,\\

5556: %\varphi _n|_\sigma & =& \tilde{\varphi } _n\;.

5557: %\eeqa

5558: %We can define in $\UU\cap \{x>0\} $ the function $\varphi $ by $\forall n\in \N^\ast $,

5559: %$\forall x\in [2^{-n}x_1,2^{-n+1}x_1]$,

5560: % $\varphi (x,v^A,\tau)\equiv \varphi _n(x {2^n\over x_1},v^A,\tau)$.

5561: %\ptc{wording to be corrected; justify  $\varphi $ well defined and regular?}(Such that the sequence is associated to $\varphi $ as previously set).

5562: %Let $\overline{\varphi }_n = ({x_1\over 2^n})^{-\alpha}\varphi _n$, $\overline{c}_n=({x_1\over 2^n})^{-\alpha} c_n$

5563: %Then we have

5564: %\be

5565: % \partial_\tau \overline{\varphi }_n + b_n \overline{\varphi }_n = \overline{c}_n\;,

5566: %\ee

5567: %with

5568: %\beqan

5569: % \|\overline{\varphi }_n|_\sigma\|_{C_k(\sigma)} &\leq& C\|\tilde{\varphi }\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha (\Sigma)}\;,\\

5570: % \|\overline{c}_n\|_{C_k(\omega)} &\leq& C\|c\|_{\mcC_k^\alpha (\UU)}\;,\\

5571: % \|b_n\|_{C_k(\omega)} &=& \|b\|_{\mcC_k^0(\UU)} \;,

5572: %\eeqan

5573: %with $C$ depending upon $\alpha$.\ptc{in the last equation = should be

5574: %  $\leq$}

5575: 

5576: %Since $\|\varphi \|_{\mcC_k^\alpha(\UU)}\leq C\sup_{n\geq 1}\|\overline{\varphi }_n\|_{C_k(\omega)}$ we obtain

5577: %$\varphi \in \mcC_k^\alpha(\UU)$. The inequality (\ref{ineqtauC}) is straightforward.

5578: %Uniqueness comes from standard results.

5579: 

5580: %For the spaces $\BB_k^\alpha$, the results come from

5581: %\be

5582: %\|\varphi \|_{\BB_k^\alpha(\UU)}\simeq\sum_n \|\overline{\varphi }_n\|_{C_k(\omega)}\;.

5583: %\ee\proofend.

5584: 

5585: %\begin{remark}

5586: %The proposition is still valid for $k=+ \infty$, without the estimates in

5587: %$\mcC_k^\alpha$ and $\BB_k^\alpha$. This remark will be useful for the

5588: %polyhomogeneity with $x_2=0$.

5589: %\end{remark}

5590: %%We have the integral version:

5591: 

5592: %%\begin{Proposition}

5593: %%Let  $b\in \GG_{k}^0 (\UU,End(\R^N))$, $c\in \GG_k^\alpha (\UU,\R^N)$, then the equation

5594: %%\be

5595: %%\partial_\tau\varphi  + b \varphi   = c \;.

5596: %%\ee

5597: %%with initial data $\tilde{\varphi } \equiv  \varphi |_{\tau=0}$ $\in \GG_k^\alpha (\Sigma)$ has a unique solution

5598: %% $\varphi  \in \GG_k^\alpha (\UU)$.

5599: 

5600: %%\noindent Further, if $c\in\HH_k^\alpha (\UU)$ and $\tilde{\varphi }\in \HH_k^\alpha (\Sigma)$, then $\varphi \in \HH_k^\alpha (\UU)$.

5601: %%\end{Proposition}

5602: %%\proof

5603: %%As previously we define the sequence $\varphi _n$ by  the equation

5604: %%\beqa

5605: %%\partial_\tau\varphi _n + b_n \varphi _n &=& c_n\;\\

5606: %%\varphi _n|_\sigma & =& \tilde{\varphi } _n\;.

5607: %%\eeqa

5608: %%which admits a solution in $H_k(\omega)$, which can be prove by direct energy estimates for smooth coefficients and initial data, followed by a standard argument of density.

5609: 

5610: %%Therefore we obtain a solution $\varphi \in H^{\loc}_k(\UU)$.

5611: 

5612: %%Next we set $\overline{\varphi }_n = ({x_1\over 2^n})^{-\alpha} \varphi _n$ and we

5613: %%proceeds as in the previous proposition. We have

5614: %%\beqan

5615: %% \|\overline{\varphi }_n|_\sigma\|_{H_k(\sigma)} &\leq& \|\tilde{\varphi }\|_{\GG_k^\alpha (\Sigma)}\;,\\

5616: %% \|\overline{c}_n\|_{H_k(\omega)} &\leq& \|c\|_{\GG_k^\alpha (\UU)}\;,\\

5617: %% \|b_n\|_{H_k(\omega)} &\leq& \|b\|_{\GG_k^0(\UU)} \;,

5618: %%\eeqan

5619: %% and $ \|\overline{\varphi }_n\|_{H_k(\sigma)}$

5620: %%\proofend .

5621: 

5622: 

5623: 

5624: \bibliographystyle{amsplain}

5625: 

5626: \addcontentsline{toc}{1}{\bigskip \noindent  {\bf References \hfill}}

5627: 

5628: % \bibliography{$HOME/prace/references/hip_bib,%

5629: % $HOME/prace/references/reffile,%

5630: % $HOME/prace/references/vienna,%

5631: % $HOME/prace/references/newbiblio,%

5632: % $HOME/prace/references/newbiblio2,%

5633: % $HOME/prace/references/netbiblio,%

5634: % $HOME/prace/references/bibl%

5635: % $HOME/prace/references/marot}

5636: \bibliography{../../references/hip_bib,%

5637: ../../references/reffile,%

5638: ../../references/vienna,%

5639: ../../references/newbiblio,%

5640: ../../references/newbiblio2,%

5641: ../../references/netbiblio,%

5642: ../../references/bibl,%

5643: ../../references/marot}

5644: \end{document}

5645: