Abstract
The existence of nontrivial solutions for the following kind of Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system
is investigated, where \(\omega >0\) is a constant, \(V\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3},{{\mathbb {R}}})\) is either periodic or coercive and is allowed to be sign-changing, \(f\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}},{{\mathbb {R}}})\) and f is subcritical and local super-linear. Using local super-quadratic conditions and other suitable assumptions on the nonlinearity f(x, u) and the potential V(x), the existence of nontrivial solutions for the above system is established. The obtained results in this paper improve the related ones in the literature.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Consider the following kind of Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system:
where \(\omega >0\) is a constant, \(V:{{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}}\), \(\phi , u:{{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}}\), \(f:{{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}\rightarrow {{\mathbb {R}}}\). We assume that the following basic conditions hold:
-
(A1)
\(f\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}},{{\mathbb {R}}})\), and there are constants \(p\in (2,6)\) and \(c_{0}>0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} |f(x,t)| \le c_{0}(1+|t|^{p-1}),\quad \forall \ (x,t)\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}; \end{aligned}$$ -
(A2)
\(f(x,t)/|t|\rightarrow 0\) as \(|t|\rightarrow 0\) uniformly in \(x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\), and \(F(x,t)\ge 0\) for all \((x,t)\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}\), where \(F(x,t):=\int _{0}^{t}f(x,s)ds\).
Benci and Fortunato [1] first introduced the Klein–Gordon–Maxwell (we use KGM for short from now on) equations to simulate the Klein–Gordon equation interacting with the electromagnetic field. Specifically speaking, the model represents standing waves \(\psi =u(x)e^{iwt}\) in equilibrium with a purely electrostatic field E\(=-\nabla \phi (x)\), where \(\phi \) is the gauge potential. By applying a well known equivariant version of mountain pass theorem, Benci and Fortunato [1, 2] first studied the following special KGM system with constant potential \(m_{0}^{2}-\omega ^{2}\),
where \(q\in (4,6)\), \(m_{0}>0\) and \(\omega >0\) are constants. When \(|\omega |<|m_{0}|\) and \(q\in (4,6)\), Benci and Fortunato acquired the existence and multiplicity of solitary wave solutions for system (1.2).
In [3], D’Aprile and Mugnai also obtained multiplicity of solitary wave solutions for system (1.2) if one of the following assumptions is satisfied:
-
(i)
\(0<\omega <\sqrt{(q-2)/2}m_{0}\) and \(q \in (2, 4)\);
-
(ii)
\(q \in (4, 6)\) and \(0<\omega <m_{0}\).
The results obtained by D’Aprile and Mugnai filled the gap for \(q\in (2, 4)\). In [4], by a Pohozaev-type argument, nonexistence of nontrivial solution of system (1.2) for \(0<q\le 2\) or \(q\ge 6\) is established by D’Aprile and Mugnai. Afterwards, by minimizing the functional of system (1.2), a least energy solution of system (1.2) was obtained by Azzollini and Pomponio [5] if one of the following assumptions is satisfied:
-
(iii)
\(q \in (4, 6)\) and \(0<\omega <m_{0}\);
-
(iv)
\(q \in (2, 4)\) and \(0<\omega <a_{1}(q)m_{0}\), where \(a_{1}(q)=\sqrt{(q-2)/(6-q)}\).
Later, the existence range of \((m_{0},\omega )\) for \(q\in (2, 4)\) was improved by Azzollini, Pisani and Pomponio [6] as follows:
In [7], Wang also obtained similar existence result by relaxing the range of \((m_{0},\omega )\) for \(q\in (2, 4)\) as follows:
It is easy to see that \(a_{2}(q)\) is larger than \(a_{3}(q)\), so the range of \(\omega \) in (1.3) is wider than that in (1.4). If system (1.2) is added by a lower order perturbation, in the year 2004, Cassani [8] studied this kind of KGM system:
where \(m_{0}, \mu >0\) and \(q\in [4, 6)\). The author proved that : (1) system (1.5) has trivial solution when \(q=6\); (2) system (1.5) has at least a radial symmetric solution when \(q\in (4,6)\) and \(0<\omega <m_{0}\); (3) system (1.5) admits a nontrivial solution when \(q=4\) and \(\mu \) is large enough. Soon, in [9], Wang considered a kind of nonlinear KGM system:
where \(m_{0}, e, \omega , \mu >0\) and \(q\in (2, 6)\). By studying system (1.6) on the constraint space \(H^{1}_{r}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})=\{u\in H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}):u(x)=u(|x|)\}\) and by applying the reduction method, Wang proved that system (1.6) has at least a radially symmetric nontrivial solution.
In [10], Carriao et al. investigated the following KGM system:
where \(\omega , \mu >0\), \(q\in (2, 6)\) and V(x) is periodic potential. By minimizing the corresponding functional associated with problem (1.7) on some Nehari manifold with the so called Brézis-Nirenberg technique, Carriao, Cunha and Miyagaki obtained that problem (1.7) possesses positive ground state solutions. Later, Chen et al. [11] improved the results in [8, 10] under weaker conditions.
In [12], Colin and Watanabe investigated the following type of KGM system:
where \(m_{0}>0\), \(e\in {{\mathbb {R}}}\), \(\omega \in {{\mathbb {R}}}\), and \(q\in (2, 6)\). Unlike the results aforementioned, Colin and Watanabe did not reduce the functional associated with (1.8) to a single variable action and did not consider the minimization problem on the Nehari manifold, so the result obtained by them requires no restriction on q and \(\omega \).
Replacing the nonlinear term \(|u|^{q-2}u\) by a more general function f(u), Benci and Fortunato [13] studied system (1.2) with nonlinear term f(u) and established the existence of three dimensional vortex solutions under suitable conditions. If a solitary wave \(\psi \) satisfies a non-vanishing angular momentum, it is called a vortex. Later, Mugnai and Rinaldi [14] studied the existence of cylindrically symmetric electro-magneto-static solitary waves for (1.2) with a positive mass and a nonnegative nonlinear potential. They also obtained nonexistence results. The results obtained in [14] improve the results in [13]. As point out in [13], the nonlinear KGM equations are the models for the interaction between the matter and the electromagnetic field. For more physical background, please see [13, 14]. For more related results of KGM equations, we refer the readers to [15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24] and the references therein.
Using symmetric mountain pass theorem and variant fountain theorem in critical point theory, the multiplicity of solutions for (1.1) were first obtained by He [25] if (A1) and the following conditions hold:
-
(V1’)
\(V\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3},{{\mathbb {R}}})\), \(\inf _{{{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}}V(x)>0\) and there exists a constant \(r>0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{|y|\rightarrow \infty }\text{ meas }\{x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}:|x-y|\le r, V(x)\le M\}=0, \ \forall \ M>0; \end{aligned}$$ -
(A0)
\(f(x,t)=-f(x,-t),\ \forall \ (x,t)\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}\);
-
(AR)
there exists \(\mu >4\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \mu F(x,t)\le f(x,t)t,\ \forall \ (x,t)\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}; \end{aligned}$$or
-
(AR’)
\(\lim _{|t|\rightarrow \infty }\frac{f(x,t)}{|t|^{3}}=+\infty \) uniformly in \(x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\), and
$$\begin{aligned} f(x,t)t-4F(x,t)\rightarrow \infty \ \ \text{ as } \ |t|\rightarrow \infty \ \ \text{ uniformly } \text{ in } \ x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}. \end{aligned}$$
Condition (AR) or (AR’) is very important since it plays a role both in achieving the mountain pass geometry of the functional associated with system (1.1) and in obtaining the boundedness of Palais-Smale (PS) sequence or Cerami sequence. In the recent years, many authors devoted to replacing (AR) (or (AR’)) and (V1’) by weaker conditions. For example, Ding and Li [26] and Li and Tang [27] used the following weaker conditions instead of (V1’), (AR) and (AR’) to investigate system (1.1):
-
(V1)
\(V\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3},{{\mathbb {R}}})\), \(\inf _{{{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}}V(x)>-\infty \) and there exists a constant \(r>0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{|y|\rightarrow \infty }\text{ meas }\{x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}:|x-y|\le r, V(x)\le M\}=0, \ \forall \ M>0; \end{aligned}$$ -
(SQ)
\(\lim _{|t|\rightarrow \infty }\frac{F(x,t)}{|t|^{4}}=+\infty \) uniformly in \(x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\);
-
(SQ’)
there is \(\theta _{1}\ge 0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} f(x,t)t-4F(x,t)+\theta _{1}t^{2}\ge 0,\ \ \text{ uniformly } \text{ in } \ (x,t)\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}. \end{aligned}$$
Recently, Chen and Tang [28] used the following weaker conditions to relax (AR), (AR’), (SQ) and (SQ’):
-
(A3’)
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{|t|\rightarrow \infty }\frac{F(x,t)}{|t|^{2}}=+\infty \ \ \text{ uniformly } \text{ in }\ x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}, \end{aligned}$$(1.9)
and there is \(r_{1}>0\) such that \(F(x,t)\ge 0\), \(\forall \ x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}, \ |t|\ge r_{1}\);
-
(A3”)
there exists \(\mu >2\) and \(\theta >0\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} f(x,t)t-\mu F(x,t)+\theta t^{2}\ge 0, \ \ \forall \ (x,t)\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\times {{\mathbb {R}}}. \end{aligned}$$(1.10)
It is well known that (1.9) was first introduce by Liu and Wang [29]. Subsequently, it has been commonly used in obtaining nontrivial solutions for system (1.2) in all literature. Recently, Tang, Lin and Yu [30] used the following local super-quadratic condition to study Schrödinger equation.
-
(A3)
there exists a domain \(A\subset {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{|t|\rightarrow \infty }\frac{F(x,t)}{|t|^{2}}=+\infty \ \ \text{ a.e. }\ x\in A. \end{aligned}$$(1.11)
(1.11) is also used in the very recent paper [31] for seeking the existence of ground state solutions and infinitely many geometrically distinct solutions for a kind of Schrödinger equations. For more new works about Schrödinger equation, please see [32, 33] and references therein.
As is known, KGM system is different from the Schrödinger equation because of the presence of the solitary wave \(\psi =u(x)e^{iwt}\) in equilibrium which linked with a purely electrostatic field E\(=-\nabla \phi (x)\), that is the term \((2\omega +\phi )\phi u\) presented in KGM system. The appearance of \((2\omega +\phi )\phi u\) brings some difficulties not only in showing the link geometry of the functional of system (1.1) but also in verifying the boundedness of Cerami sequences. A natural question is whether the local super-quadratic condition is applicable for system (1.1). The purpose of this paper is to solve this problem. We will generalize and improve the results which obtained in [25,26,27,28] in another direction under (A3) and other conditions. To state our conclusions, in addition to (A1)-(A3) and (V1), we also need the following conditions:
-
(V)
\(V\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}, {{\mathbb {R}}})\), V(x) is 1-periodic in each of \(x_{1}\), \(x_{2}\), \(x_{3}\) and
$$\begin{aligned} \sup [\sigma (-\Delta +V)\cap (-\infty ,0)]<0<\Theta :=\inf [\sigma (-\Delta +V)\cap (0,\infty )]; \end{aligned}$$ -
(A4)
there exists a constant \(c_{1}>0\) such that \({\mathscr {F}}(x,t):=\frac{1}{2}f(x,t)t-F(x,t)\ge \left( \frac{\omega ^{2}}{8}+c_{1}\right) t^{2}\ge 0\), and there are \(c_{2}>0\), \(\delta _{0}\in (0,\Theta )\) and \(\varrho \in (0,1)\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{f(x,t)}{t}\ge \Theta -\delta _{0}\ \ \text{ implies } \ \left[ \frac{|f(x,t)|}{|t|^{\varrho }}\right] ^{\frac{6}{5-\varrho }}\le c_{2}{\mathscr {F}}(x,t); \end{aligned}$$ -
(A5)
\({\mathscr {F}}(x,t)\ge \left( \frac{\omega ^{2}}{8}+c_{1}\right) t^{2}\ge 0\), and there are \(c_{3}>0\), \(R_{0}>0\) and \(\varrho \in (0,1)\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} \left[ \frac{|f(x,t)|}{|t|^{\varrho }}\right] ^{\frac{6}{5-\varrho }}\le c_{3}{\mathscr {F}}(x,t),\ \ |t|\ge R_{0}; \end{aligned}$$
We state the following two main theorems.
Theorem 1.1
Suppose that (V), (A1)–(A4) hold. Assume that f(x, t) is 1-periodic in \(x_{1}\), \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\). Then problem (1.1) has at least one nontrivial solution.
Theorem 1.2
Suppose that (V1), (A1)–(A3) and (A5) hold. Then problem (1.1) has at least one nontrivial solution.
Remark 1.3
We must point out that (A3), (A4) and (A5) are used to obtain nontrivial solutions for Schrödinger equation in [30, 31]. In this paper, the periodic case and non-periodic case for KGM systems are investigated, respectively. As far as we known, there are only three papers [10, 18, 28] considering the periodic case for KGM systems. Besides, the potential V(x) is allowed to be sign-changing. From this point, the results in this paper seem new. When V is periodic and \(f(x,t)\equiv f(t)\) satisfies some other super-linear conditions, Cunha [18] obtained the existence of a least energy solution for system (1.1).
Remark 1.4
It is pointed out that (A3) and (A4) (or (A5)) are much weaker than (AR), (AR’), (SQ), (SQ’), (A3’) and (A3”). (A3) is said to be local super-quadratic condition. As far as we known, it is first used by Tang et. al. [30] to obtain nontrivial solutions for Schrödinger equation. Tang et. al used new skills to conquer the difficulties arose in proving the existence of solutions for the functional of Schrödinger equation under the local super-quadratic condition. Following the strategy of [30], in the present paper, we use (A3) and other suitable conditions to obtain nontrivial solutions for KGM systems.
Now, we give two examples which satisfy (A3), (A4) and (A5), but not (AR), (AR’), (SQ), (SQ’), (A3’) and (A3”).
Example 1.5
Let \(F(x,t)=\frac{\omega ^{2}+1}{2}[|\cos (2\pi x_{1})|+\cos (2\pi x_{1})]t^{2}\ln (e+t^{2})\). Then
It is not difficult to see that f satisfies (A1)-(A5) with \(0<\varrho <1\) and \(A=(-1/6,1/6)\times {{\mathbb {R}}}^{2}\), but f does not satisfy any of (AR), (AR’), (SQ), (SQ’), (A3’) and (A3”).
Example 1.6
Let \({\mathcal {B}}\) be a closed set of \({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\), and \(F(x,t)=\frac{\omega ^{2}+a}{2}\left[ 2-\frac{1}{\ln (e+t^{2})}\right] |t|^{2+b(x)}\), where \(a>0\) is a constant, \(b\in C({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}, {{\mathbb {R}}})\), \(b(x)=0\) for \(x\in {\mathcal {B}}\) and \(0<b(x)<2\) for \(x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\setminus {\mathcal {B}}\). Then,
It is not difficult to see that f satisfies (A1)-(A5) with \(0<\varrho <1\) and \(A\subset {\bar{A}}\subset {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\backslash {\mathcal {B}}\), but neither of (AR), (AR’), (SQ), (SQ’), (A3’) and (A3”). Moreover, f(x, t) is allowed to be asymptotically linear when \(x\in {\mathcal {B}}\) and to be super-linear when \(x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\backslash {\mathcal {B}}\)
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. We present the variational setting for system (1.1) and give some preliminaries in the next section. The proof of Theorem 1.1 is given in Sect. 3 and the proof of Theorem 1.2 is given in Sect. 4. In the following, for convenient, \(C_{i}(i=1,2,\ldots )\) are different positive constants in different places.
2 The Variational Setting and Preliminary Results
Let \({\mathcal {A}}=-\Delta +V\). Then \({\mathcal {A}}\) is self-adjoint in \(L^{2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) with domain \({\mathcal {D}}=H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) (see [34], Theorem 4.26). Let \(\{\xi (\lambda ):-\infty \le \lambda \le +\infty \}\) be the spectral family of \({\mathcal {A}}\), and \(|{\mathcal {A}}|\) is the absolute value of \({\mathcal {A}}\). \(|{\mathcal {A}}|^{1/2}\) denotes the square root of \(|{\mathcal {A}}|\). Set \({\mathcal {U}}=id-\xi (0)-\xi (0_{-})\). Then, \({\mathcal {U}}\) commutes with \({\mathcal {A}}\), \(|{\mathcal {A}}|\) and \(|{\mathcal {A}}|^{1/2}\), and \({\mathcal {A}}={\mathcal {U}}|{\mathcal {A}}|\) is the polar decomposition of \({\mathcal {A}}\) (see [35], Theorem IV 3.3). Let
For any \(u\in E\), one has \(u=u^{-}+u^{0}+u^{+}\), where
and
Define an inner product
and the corresponding norm is
where \((\cdot ,\cdot )_{L^{2}}\) is the inner product of \(L^{2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\), \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{s}\) denote the norm of \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\), \(2\le s\le 6\). Since \(E=H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) with equivalent norms under (V) and \(E\subset H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) under (V1), E embeds continuously in \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) for all \(s\in [2, 6]\), hence there is a constant \(\gamma _{s}>0\) such that
We have the orthogonal decomposition \(E=E^{-}\oplus E^{0}\oplus E^{+}\) with respect to both \((\cdot ,\cdot )_{L^{2}}\) and \((\cdot ,\cdot )\), and E is a Hilbert space with the inner product and the norm given by (2.4) and (2.5), respectively. From (2.3) and (2.5), one has
If (V) (or (V1)) and (A1) hold, then the weak solutions of problem (1.1), named \((u,\phi _{u})\in E\times {\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) are critical points of the functional given by
where \({\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}):=\{u\in L^{6}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}):|\nabla u|\in L^{2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\}\). The functional \(\Upsilon \) is strongly indefinite, that is both unbounded from below and from above on infinitely dimensional spaces. To overcome this difficulty, we borrowed the idea from [2, 3] to reduce the study of (2.8) to the study of \(\Upsilon \) with only one variable u, which has been used by most authors. The following technical results obtained in [3,4,5] will be used in our proofs.
Lemma 2.1
[3, 4] For any \(u\in H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\), there is a unique \(\phi =\phi _{u}\in {\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) which solves equation
Moreover, the map \(J:u\in H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\mapsto \phi _{u}\in {\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) is continuously differentiable, and \(-\omega \le \phi _{u}\le 0\) on the set \(\{x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}|u(x)\ne 0\}\).
Lemma 2.2
[5] If \(u_{n}\rightharpoonup u\in H^{1}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\), then up to subsequences, \(\phi _{u_{n}}\rightharpoonup \phi _{u}\) in \({\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\). Moreover, \(J'(u_{n})\rightarrow J'(u)\) in the sense of distributions, where J is the same as that in Lemma 2.1.
Multiplying (2.9) by \(\phi _{u}\) and integrating by parts, one has
Using (2.7), (2.8) and (2.10), the functional \(\Phi (u):=\Upsilon (u,\phi )\) reduces to the following form
By Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, if (V) (or (V1)) and (A1) hold, then one has \(\Phi \in C^{1}(E,{{\mathbb {R}}})\), and
moreover,
Furthermore, as in [6], the pair \((u,\phi _{u})\in E\times {\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) is a solution of system (1.1) if and only if u is a critical point of \(\Phi \) and \(\phi =\phi _{u}\) which is unique. For simplicity, in the following, we just say that \(u\in E\) is a weak solution of system (1.1) instead of \((u,\phi _{u})\in E\times {\mathfrak {D}}^{1,2}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\). The following two lemmas are very useful in our proofs.
Lemma 2.3
[36, 37] Let \((X,\Vert \cdot \Vert )\) be a real Hilbert space with \(X=X^{-}\oplus X^{+}\) and \(X^{-}\bot X^{+}\), and let \(I\in C^{1}(X,{{\mathbb {R}}})\) of the form
Suppose that the following conditions are satisfied:
-
(S1)
\(\psi \in C^{1}(X,{{\mathbb {R}}})\) is bounded from below and weakly sequentially lower semi-continuous;
-
(S2)
\(\psi '\) is weakly sequentially continuous;
-
(S3)
there exists \(r>\rho >0\) and \(e\in X^{+}\) with \(\Vert e\Vert =1\) such that
$$\begin{aligned} k:=\inf I(S^{+}_{\rho })>\sup I(\partial Q), \end{aligned}$$where
$$\begin{aligned} S^{+}_{\rho }=\{u\in X^{+}:\Vert u\Vert =\rho \},\ \ Q=\{v+se:v\in X^{-}, s\ge 0,\ \Vert v+se\Vert \le r\}. \end{aligned}$$Then there exist a constant \(c\in [k,\sup I(Q)]\) and a sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset X\) satisfying
$$\begin{aligned} I(u_{n})\rightarrow c, \ \ \Vert I'(u_{n})\Vert (1+\Vert u_{n}\Vert )\rightarrow 0,\ \ \text{ as }\ n\rightarrow \infty . \end{aligned}$$
As is known, a functional \(I\in C^{1}(X,{{\mathbb {R}}})\) is said to be weakly sequentially lower semi-continuous if \(I(u)\le \liminf _{n\rightarrow \infty }I(u_{n})\) for any \(u_{n}\rightharpoonup u\) in X, and \(I'\) is said to be weakly sequentially continuous if \(\lim _{n\rightarrow \infty }\langle I'(u_{n}),v\rangle =\langle I(u),v\rangle \) for each \(v\in X\).
Lemma 2.4
[38] If assumption (V1) holds, then the embedding from E into \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) is compact for \(s\in [2, 6)\).
Let
By Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2, we can easily obtain and prove the following lemma by employing a standard argument.
Lemma 2.5
Assume that (V) (or (V1)), (A1), (A2) and (A3) are satisfied. Then \(\Psi \) is bounded from below, weakly sequentially lower semi-continuous, and \(\Psi '\) is weakly sequentially continuous.
3 Proof of Theorem 1.1
The periodic case for KGM system is considered and the proof of Theorem 1.1 is given in this section. To do this, assume that (V) holds and V(x) and f(x, t) are both 1-periodic in each of \(x_{1}\), \(x_{2}\) and \(x_{3}\). Hence, \(E^{0}=\{0\}\), and then \(E=E^{-}\oplus E^{+}\).
Lemma 3.1
Assume that (V), (A1) and (A2) are satisfied. Then there exists \(\rho >0\) such that
Proof
From (A1) and (A2), for \(\varepsilon =\frac{1}{3\gamma _{2}^{2}}\), there exists a constant \(C_{1}>0\) such that
From (3.2), we have
From Lemma 2.1, we know that \(-\omega \le \phi _{u}\le 0\) on the set \(\{x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}|u(x)\ne 0\}\), then we have \(0\le -\omega \phi _{u}\le \omega ^{2}\) on the set \(\{x\in {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}|u(x)\ne 0\}\). Hence, for all \(\omega >0\) and \(u\in E\), from (2.6), (2.11) and (3.3), one has
Set
Since \(p\in (2,6)\), one can easily obtain that
where \(\rho =\left( \frac{p}{3C_{1}(p-1)\gamma _{p}^{p}}\right) ^{1/(p-2)}\). Hence, there exists \(\alpha =\rho h(\rho )>0\) such that
The proof Lemma 3.1 is complete. \(\square \)
From (A3), one can assume that \(A\subset {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\) is a bounded domain without loss of generality. Choose \(w\in C_{0}^{\infty }(A,{{\mathbb {R}}}^{+})\cap C_{0}^{\infty }({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3},{{\mathbb {R}}}^{+})\) such that
which shows that \(w^{+}\ne 0\).
We need Lemma 3.2 to show the mountain pass geometry of \(\Phi \).
Lemma 3.2
Assume that (V), (A1), (A2) and (A3) hold. Then \(\sup \Phi (E^{-}\oplus {{\mathbb {R}}}^{+}w^{+})<\infty \) and there exists \(R_{w}>0\) such that
Proof
Arguing by contradiction, one can assume that there is a sequence \(\{a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+}\}\subset E^{-}\oplus {{\mathbb {R}}}^{+}w^{+}\) with \(\Vert a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+}\Vert \rightarrow +\infty \) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), \(\Phi (a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+})>0\) for all \(n\in {{\mathbb {N}}}\). Let \(z_{n}=(a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+})/\Vert a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+}\Vert =z_{n}^{-}+t_{n}w^{+}\). Then \(\Vert z_{n}^{-}+t_{n}w^{+}\Vert =1\). Without loss of generality, one may assume that \(t_{n}\rightarrow t\), \(z_{n}^{-}\rightharpoonup z^{-}\), \(z_{n}^{-}\rightarrow z^{-}\) in \(L^{s}(A)\) for \(s\in [2, 6)\) and \(z_{n}^{-}\rightarrow z^{-}\) a.e. on \({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\) passing to a subsequence. From (2.11), one gets
From (A2) and (A3), there are constants \(C_{2}\ge \frac{\omega ^{2}}{2}\) and \(C_{3}\) such that
If \(t=0\), then from \(w^{+}\ne 0\), (3.6), (3.7) and Lemma 2.1, as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), one gets
which implies that \(\Vert z_{n}^{-}\Vert \rightarrow 0\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), and we have \(1=\Vert z_{n}^{-}+t_{n}w^{+}\Vert \rightarrow 0\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), a contradiction. Therefore, \(t\ne 0\).
Now, we prove that
The proof of (3.9) is similar to that of [30], for the reader’s convenience, the details are given here. Suppose that (3.9) is not true, then we have
It follows from supp \(w\subset A\), (2.7), (2.11), (3.6), (3.7) and (3.10) that
which is a contradiction and implies that (3.9) holds. From (2.6), (3.6), (3.9), (A2), (A3), Lemma 2.1 and Fatou’s Lemma, we have
which is a contradiction. We now complete the proof of Lemma 3.2. \(\square \)
Corollary 3.3
Assume that (V), (A1), (A2) and (A3) hold. Then there is \(r>\rho \) such that \(\sup \Phi (\partial Q)\le 0\), where \(\rho \) is the same as that in Lemma 3.1 and
From Lemmas 2.3, 2.5, 3.1 and Corollary 3.3, one can obtain Lemma 3.4.
Lemma 3.4
Assume that (V), (A1), (A2) and (A3) hold. Then there are a constant \(c>0\) and a sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset E\) satisfying
Lemma 3.5
Assume that (V), (A1), (A2), (A3) and (A4) hold. Then any sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset E\) satisfying
is bounded in E.
Proof
From (2.11), (2.12), (3.15), Lemma 2.1 and (A4), there exists a constant \(C_{4}>0\) such that
It follows from (3.16) that there is a positive constant \(C_{5}\) such that
From (3.17) and Lemma 2.1, we have
where \(C'_{5}\) is a positive constant. To prove the boundedness of \(\{u_{n}\}\), arguing by contradiction, we assume that \(\Vert u_{n}\Vert \rightarrow \infty \) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \). Let \(z_{n}=u_{n}/\Vert u_{n}\Vert \). Therefore, \(\Vert z_{n}\Vert ^{2}=1\). Set
Since \(\Theta \Vert z_{n}^{+}\Vert _{2}^{2}\le \Vert z_{n}^{+}\Vert ^{2}\), from (3.19), we get
From (A4), (3.18) and Hölder inequality, one has
Let \(m(s)=2\omega s+s^{2}\), \(-\omega \le s\le 0\). By a direct calculation, we see that
From (3.17), (3.22), Lemma 2.1 and Hölder inequality, one obtains
From (A4), we have \(uf(x,u)\ge 0\). Therefore, from (2.11), (3.15), (3.20), (3.21) and (3.23), one obtains
This is a contradiction which implies that \(\{u_{n}\}\) is bounded. The proof is complete. \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1.1
From Lemmas 3.4 and 3.5, we know that there is a bounded sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset E\) satisfying (3.15). Passing to a subsequence if necessary, one has \(u_{n}\rightharpoonup u\) in E, \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) in \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) for \(s\in [2, 6)\) and \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) a.e. on \({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\). Together with Lemma 2.2, up to a subsequence, one can show that \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) by a standard argument (see [26], Lemma 3.1). Jointly with Lemmas 3.1, 3.2 and Corollary 3.3, one can obtain that system (1.1) possesses at least one nontrivial solution. We complete the proof of Theorem 1.1 now. \(\square \)
4 Proof of Theorem 1.2
The non-periodic case for system (1.1) is considered now, that is V(x) is coercive. One supposes that (V1) holds. Hence \(E=E^{-}\oplus E^{0}\oplus {E^{+}}\), and one has that the embedding from E into \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) is compact for \(s\in [2, 6)\).
Lemma 4.1
Assume that (V1), (A1) and (A2) hold. Then there is \(\rho >0\) such that
The proof of the above lemma is very similar to that of Lemma 3.1, so we do not give the detail here. From unique continuation theorem [39], the following lemma holds which comes from [30].
Lemma 4.2
[30] Assume that (V1) hold. If \({\mathcal {A}}z=-\Delta z+V(x)z=0\) and \(z|_{A}=0\), then \(z=0\).
We have \(\dim (E^{-}\oplus E^{0}):=m<\infty \) under (V1). Let \(w_{1}, w_{2}, \cdots , w_{m}\) be an orthogonal basis. We can assume that \(A\subset {{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\) is a bounded domain without loss of generality. Choose \(w\in C_{0}^{\infty }({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3},{{\mathbb {R}}}^{+})\cap C_{0}^{\infty }(A,{{\mathbb {R}}}^{+})\) such that \(w|_{A}, w_{1}|_{A}, \cdots , w_{m}|_{A}\) are linearly independent and
which shows that \(w^{+}\ne 0\).
Lemma 4.3
Assume that (V1), (A1), (A2) and (A3) hold. Then \(\sup \Phi (E^{-}\oplus E^{0}\oplus {{\mathbb {R}}}^{+}w^{+})<\infty \) and there is \(R_{w}>0\) such that
Proof
Arguing by contradiction, one can assume that there is a sequence \(\{a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+}\}\subset E^{-}\oplus E^{0}\oplus {{\mathbb {R}}}^{+}w^{+}\) with \(\Vert a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+}\Vert \rightarrow \infty \) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), \(\Phi (a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+})>0\) for all \(n\in {{\mathbb {N}}}\). Let \(z_{n}=(a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+})/\Vert a_{n}+b_{n}w^{+}\Vert =z_{n}^{-}+z_{n}^{0}+t_{n}w^{+}\), then \(\Vert z_{n}^{-}+z_{n}^{0}+t_{n}w^{+}\Vert =1\). Since the dimension of \(E^{-}\oplus E^{0}\) is finite, passing to a subsequence if neccessary, one may assume that \(z_{n}^{-}\rightarrow z^{-}\), \(z_{n}^{0}\rightarrow z^{0}\) in \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) for \(2\le s<6\), \(t_{n}\rightarrow t\). Thus, it follows from (2.11) that
We need to consider three cases:
Case 1\(t=0\) and \(z^{0}=0\). From (3.7), (4.3) and Lemma 2.1, as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), we have
which implies that \(\Vert z_{n}^{-}\Vert \rightarrow 0\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \). Hence, \(1=\Vert z_{n}^{-}+z_{n}^{0}+t_{n}w^{+}\Vert \rightarrow 0\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), this is a contradiction.
Case 2\(t=0\) and \(z^{0}\ne 0\). We have \(z^{-}=0\) and \({\mathcal {A}}z^{0}=0\) in this case. It follows from Lemma 4.2 that \(z^{0}|_{A}\ne 0\). From Lemma 2.1, (2.6), (4.3) and (A3), we obtain
which is a contradiction.
Case 3\(t\ne 0\). We should prove that
Arguing by indirection, one may suppose that
Since \(z^{-}+z^{0}-t(w^{-}+w^{0})\in E^{-}\oplus E^{0}\), there exist \(y_{1}, y_{2},\ldots , y_{m}\) such that
which together with (4.6) implies that
It follows from (4.7) that \(w|_{A}, w_{1}|_{A},\cdots , w_{m}|_{A}\) are linearly dependent, a contradiction, which shows that (4.5) holds. From (2.6), (4.3), (4.5), (A3), Lemma 2.1 and Fatou’s lemma, one obtains
a contradiction. We now finish the proof of Lemma 4.3. \(\square \)
Corollary 4.4
Assume that (V1), (A1), (A2) and (A3) hold. Then there is \(r>\rho \) such that \(\sup \Phi (\partial Q)\le 0\), where \(\rho \) is the same as that in Lemma 4.1 and
From Lemmas 2.3, 2.5, 4.1 and Corollary 4.4, we obtain Lemma 4.5.
Lemma 4.5
Assume that (V1), (A1), (A2) and (A3) hold. Then there exists a constant \(c>0\) and a sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset E\) satisfying
Lemma 4.6
Under assupmtions (V1), (A1)–(A3) and (A5), any sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset E\) satisfying (4.9) is bounded in E
Proof
In order to obtain the boundedness of \(\{u_{n}\}\), we argue by indirection, assume that \(\Vert u_{n}\Vert \rightarrow \infty \) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \). Let \(z_{n}=u_{n}/\Vert u_{n}\Vert \). Then \(\Vert z_{n}\Vert =1\). Up to a subsequence, one may assume that \(z_{n}\rightharpoonup z\) in E. Then by Lemma 2.4, \(z_{n}\rightarrow z\) in \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) for \(s\in [2, 6)\), and \(z_{n}\rightarrow z\) a.e. on \({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \). From (4.9), we obtain
Similar to (3.17) and (3.18), there exists positive constants \(C_{8}\) and \(C'_{8}\) such that
and
From (2.6), (3.22), (4.11), Lemma 2.1 and Hölder inequality, we get
In the following, we consider two possible cases.
Case 1\(z=0\). In this case, \(\Vert z_{n}^{-}\Vert +\Vert z_{n}^{0}\Vert \rightarrow 0\), \(z_{n}\rightarrow 0\) in \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) for \(s\in [2, 6)\), \(z_{n}\rightarrow 0\) a.e on \({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \). Hence, from (A1) and (A2), we get
From (2.6), (4.12), (A5) and Hölder inequality, we obtain
From (2.6), (4.13), (4.14) and (4.15), we get
this is a contradiction.
Case 2. \(z\ne 0\). For any \(v\in C_{0}^{\infty }({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\), from (2.12) and (4.9), we get
which implies that
From Lemma 2.1, (3.22), (4.11) and Hölder inequality, we get
From (A1), (A2), (A5), (2.6), (4.12) and Hölder inequality, one obtains
From (4.18), (4.19) and (4.20), we have
Since \(z_{n}\rightharpoonup z\) as \(n\rightarrow \infty \), from (4.21), one obtains
which shows that \({\mathcal {A}}z=-\triangle z+V(x)z=0\). It follows from Lemma 4.2 that \(z|_{A}\ne 0\). From (2.6), (2.11), (A3), Lemma 2.1 and Fatou’s Lemma, one has
this is a contradiction. Hence \(\{u_{n}\}\) is bounded in E. We complete the proof Lemma 4.6 now. \(\square \)
Proof of Theorem 1.2
From Lemmas 4.5 and 4.6, there is a bounded sequence \(\{u_{n}\}\subset E\) satisfying (4.9). Passing to a subsequence if necessary, one has \(u_{n}\rightharpoonup u\) in E, \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) in \(L^{s}({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3})\) for \(s\in [2, 6)\) and \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) a.e. on \({{\mathbb {R}}}^{3}\). Together with Lemma 2.2, up to a subsequence, we can show that \(u_{n}\rightarrow u\) in E by a standard argument (see [26], Lemma 3.1). Thus, jointly with Lemmas 4.1, 4.3 and Corollary 4.4, we can obtain that system (1.1) possesses at least one nontrivial solution. The proof of Theorem 1.2 is complete.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
References
Benci, V., Fortunato, D.: The nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation coupled with the Maxwell equations. Nonlinear Anal. 47, 6065–6072 (2001)
Benci, V., Fortunato, D.: Solitary waves of the nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation coupled with the Maxwell equations. Rev. Math. Phys. 14, 409–420 (2002)
D’Aprile, T., Mugnai, D.: Solitary waves for nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell and Schrödinger–Maxwell equations. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. Sect. A 134, 893–906 (2004)
D’Aprile, T., Mugnai, D.: Non-existence results for the coupled Klein–Gordon–Maxwell equations. Adv. Nonlinear Stud. 4, 307–322 (2004)
Azzollini, A., Pomponio, A.: Ground state solutions for the nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell equations. Topol. Methods Nonlinear Anal. 35, 33–42 (2010)
Azzollini, A., Pisani, L., Pomponio, A.: Improved estimates and a limit case for the electrostatic Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb. Sect. A 141, 449–463 (2011)
Wang, F.: Ground-state solutions for the electrostatic nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system. Nonlinear Anal. 74, 4796–4803 (2011)
Cassani, D.: Existence and non-existence of solitary waves for the critical Klein–Gordon equation coupled with Maxwell’s equations. Nonlinear Anal. 58, 733–747 (2004)
Wang, F.: Solitary waves for the Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system with critical exponent. Nonlinear Anal. 74, 827–835 (2011)
Carriao, P., Cunha, P., Miyagaki, O.: Positive ground state solutions for the critical Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system with potentials. Nonlinear Anal. 75, 4068–4078 (2012)
Chen, Z., Tang, X., Qin, L., Qin, D.: Improved results for Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with critical growth. Appl. Math. Lett. 91, 158–164 (2019)
Colin, M., Watanabe, T.: On the existence of ground states for a nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell type system. Funkcialaj Ekvacioj 61, 1–14 (2018)
Benci, V., Fortunato, D.: Spinning Q-Balls for the Klein–Gordon–Maxwell Equations. Commun. Math. Phys. 295, 639–668 (2010)
Mugnai, D., Rinaldi, M.: Spinning \(Q\)-balls in Abelian Gauge Theories with positive potentials: existence and non existence. Calc. Var. 53, 1–27 (2015)
Makita, P.: Nonradial solutions for the Klein–Gordon–Maxwell equations. Discret. Contin. Dyn. Syst. 32, 2271–2283 (2012)
Chen, S., Tang, X.: Improved results for Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with general nonlinearity. Discret. Contin. Dyn. Syst. A 38, 2333–2348 (2018)
Krämer, P., Schratz, K.: Efficient time integration of the Maxwell–Klein–Gordon eqution in the non-relativistic limit regime. J. Comput. Appl. Math. 316, 247–259 (2017)
Cunha, P.: Subcritical and supercritical Klein–Gordon—Maxwell equations without Ambrosetti–Rabinowitz condition. Differ. Integr. Equ. 27, 387–399 (2014)
Zhang, J.: Solutions to the critical Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system with external potential. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 455, 1152–1177 (2017)
Jeong, W., Seok, J.: On perturbation of a functional with the mountain pass geometry. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 49, 649–668 (2014)
Chen, S., Tang, X.: Geometrically distinct solutions for Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with super-linear nonlinearities. Appl. Math. Lett. 90, 188–193 (2019)
Wen, L., Tang, X., Chen, S.: Infinitely many solutions and least energy solutions for Klein–Gordon equation coupled with Born-Infeld theory. Complex Variables Elliptic Equ. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1080/17476933.2019.1572124
Tang, X., Wen, L., Chen, S.: On critical Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with super-linear nonlinearities. Nonlinear Anal. 196, 111771 (2020)
Zhang, Q.F., Gan, C.L., Xiao, T., Jia, Z.: An improved result for Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with steep potential well. Math Meth Appl Sci. (2020). https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.6514
He, X.: Multiplicity of solutions for a nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system. Acta Appl. Math. 130, 237–250 (2014)
Ding, L., Li, L.: Infinitely many standing wave solutions for the nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system with sign-changing potential. Comput. Math. Appl. 68, 589–595 (2014)
Li, L., Tang, C.: Infinitely many solutions for a nonlinear Klein–Gordon–Maxwell system. Nonlinear Anal. 110, 157–169 (2014)
Chen, S., Tang, X.: Infinitely many solutions and least energy solutions for Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with general superlinear nonlinearity. Comput. Math. Appl. 75, 3358–3366 (2018)
Liu, Z., Wang, Z.: On the Ambrosetti–Rabinowitz superlinear condition. Adv. Nonlinear Stud. 4, 563–574 (2004)
Tang, X., Lin, X., Yu, J.: Nontrivial solutions for Schrödinger equation with local super-quadratic conditions. J. Dyn. Differ. Equ. 31, 369–383 (2019)
Tang, X., Chen, S., Lin, X., Yu, J.: Ground state solutions of Nehari–Pankov type for Schrödinger equations with local super-quadratic conditions. J. Differ. Equ. 268, 4663–4690 (2020)
Chen, S., Tang, X.: On the planar Schrödinger–Poisson system with the axially symmetric potentials. J. Differ. Equ. 268, 945–976 (2020)
Chen, S., Fiscella, A., Pucci, P., Tang, X.: Semiclassical ground state solutions for critical Schrödinger–Poisson systems with lower perturbations. J. Differ. Equ. 268, 2672–2716 (2020)
Egorov, Y., Kondratiev, V.: On Spectral Theory of Elliptic Operators. Birkhäuser, Basel (1996)
Edmunds, D., Evans, W.: Spectral Theory and Differential Operators. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1987)
Kryszewski, W., Szulkin, A.: Generalized linking theorem with an application to a semilinear Schrödinger equation. Adv. Differ. Equ. 3, 441–472 (1998)
Li, G., Szulkin, A.: An asymptotically periodic Schrödinger equation with indefinite linear part. Commun. Contemp. Math. 4, 763–776 (2002)
Bartsch, T., Wang, Z., Willem, M.: The Dirichlet problem for superlinear elliptic equations. In: Chipot, M., Quittner, P. (eds.) Handbook of Differential Equations: Stationary Partial Differential Equations, vol. 2, pp. 1–5. Elsevier, Amsterdam (2005). (Chapter 1)
Schechter, M., Simon, B.: Unique continuation for Schrödinger operators with unbounded potentials. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 77, 482–492 (1980)
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the referees for their useful suggestions which have significantly improved the paper.
Funding
This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11961014, 61563013) and Guangxi Natural Science Foundation (2016GXNSFAA380082, 2018GXNSFAA281021).
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The authors declare that the study was realized in collaboration with the same responsibility. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflicts of interest
authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Zhang, Q., Gan, C., Xiao, T. et al. Some results of nontrivial solutions for Klein–Gordon–Maxwell systems with local super-quadratic conditions. J Geom Anal 31, 5372–5394 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12220-020-00483-2
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12220-020-00483-2