Abstract
We extend the main results obtained by Iwaniec and Onninen in Memoirs of the AMS (2012). In this paper, we solve the \((\rho ,n)\)-energy minimization problem for Sobolev homeomorphisms between two concentric annuli in the Euclidean space \(\mathbf {R}^n\). Here \(\rho \) is a radial metric defined in the image annulus. The key element in the proofs is the solution to the Euler–Lagrange equation for a radial harmonic mapping. This is a new contribution on the topic related to the famous J. C. C. Nitsche conjecture on harmonic mappings between annuli on the complex plane. Namely we prove that the minimum of \((\rho ,n)\)-energy of diffeomorphisms between annuli is attained by a certain \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphisms if and only if the original annulus can be mapped onto the image annulus by a radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphisms and the last fact is equivalent with a certain inequality for annuli which we call a generalized J. C. C. Nitsche type inequality.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Let \(0<r<R\), \(0<r_*<R_*\) and let \(\mathbb {A}=A(r,R){\mathop {=\!\!=}\limits ^{\mathrm{def}}}\{x:r<|x|<R\}\) and \(\mathbb {A}_*=A(r_*, R_*){\mathop {=\!\!=}\limits ^{\mathrm{def}}}\{x:r_*<|x|<R_*\}\) be two annuli in the Euclidean space \(\mathbb {R}^n\) equipped with the Euclidean norm \(|\cdot |\). Here \(n\geqslant 2\). Let \(\rho \) be a continuous function on the closure of \(\mathbb {A}_*\). The \((\rho ,n)\)-energy integral of a mapping \(h\in \mathscr {W}^{1,n}(\mathbb {A}, \mathbb {A}_*)\) is defined by
The central aim of this paper is to minimize the \((\rho ,n)\)-energy integral between \(\mathbb {A}\) and \(\mathbb {A}_*\) throughout the class of homomorphisms from the Sobolev class \(\mathscr {W}^{1,n}(\mathbb {A}, \mathbb {A}_*)\). We will assume that \(\rho \) is \(C^1\) radial metric that is \(\rho (y)=\rho (|y|)\) for \(y\in \mathbb {A}_*\). We will also assume that
and refer to such metrics as regular metrics. The modulus of A(r, R) is defined by the formula \({{\,\mathrm{Mod}\,}}A(r,R)=\omega _{n-1}\log \frac{R}{r}\), where \(\omega _{n-1}\) is the area of the unit sphere \(\mathbf {S}^{n-1}\).
For a homomorphism f of Sobolev class class \(\mathscr {W}^{1,1}\) we say that f has finite outer distortion if
where \(1\le K_O[f,x]\) is measurable and the smallest function with the above property. Then \(K_O[f,x]\) is called the outer distortion of f. Here
and \(J_f\) is the determinant of the Jacobian matrix. A concept dual to the outer distortion is the inner distortion defined by the so-called co-factor matrix of Df(x). Namely we define \(\mathbf {adj}(Df(x))=J_f ( D^*f(x))^{-1}.\) Then
for \(J_f(x)\ne 0\) and \(K_I[f,x]=1\) for \(J_f(x)=0\).
An important fact to be noticed in this introduction is that if \(\rho \) is a continuous function on the closure of \(\mathbb {A}_*\) and if \(f\in \mathscr {W}^{1,n-1}(\mathbb {A}_*, \mathbb {A})\) is a homeomorphism, then its inverse mapping h belongs to the Sobolev class \(\mathscr {W}^{1,n}(\mathbb {A}, \mathbb {A}_*)\) and we have the following formula
Concerning the criteria of integrability of inverse mapping and related problems we refer to the papers [2, 3].
In this paper we extend the main result and simplify the proofs in [6]. We made a unified approach to the minimizing problem of \((\rho ,n)\)-energy for the class of all \(C^1\) radial metrics \(\rho \) satisfying the condition \(\rho (s)s^n\) is non-decreasing. This condition is fulfilled by two metrics \(\rho (s)\equiv 1\) and \(\rho (s)\equiv s^{-n}\) considered by Iwaniec and Onninen in [6]. The paper generalizes also the main results by Astala, Iwaniec and Martin in [1], and also by the author in [9] where it is treated the similar problem but only for the case \(n=2\). The case of non-circular annuli and non radial metrics has been treated in the papers [5] and [8] respectively, but also for the case \(n=2\). In this paper we assume that \(n\geqslant 3\). The paper is a continuation of study of the so-called Nitsche phenomenon, invented by J. C. C. Nitsche in [14] where he stated his famous conjecture. Further the conjecture has been proved by Iwaniec, Kovalev and Onninen in [4], after some partial results obtained by Weitsman [15], Lyzzaik [12] and Kalaj [10]. For its counterpart to general annuli on Riemannian surfaces we refer to the recent paper [11]. The Nitsche conjecture in the context of \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic mappings is given in (2.6). We prove in the first result (Theorem 2.2) that we can find a radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic harmonic mapping between two annuli \(\mathbb {A}\) and \(\mathbb {A}_*\) if and only if the generalized Nitsche bound (2.6), is satisfied. This bound said roughly speaking that if we have a \((\rho ,n)\) harmonic diffeomorphism between annuli \(\mathbb {A}\) and \(\mathbb {A}_*\), then the image annulus cannot bee too thin, but can be arbitrary thick. On the other hand this bound is equivalent with the fact that the \((\rho ,n)\)-energy integral is minimized for a certain radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphism if \(n=3\); if \(n\geqslant 4\), then we have some obstruction, and in this case the image annulus cannot be too thick (Theorem 3.1), provided that there exists a radial mapping which is a minimizer. The precise estimate how thick the image annulus could be, remains an open interesting problem.
1.1 \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic equation
Assume that \(\mathbb {X}\) is domain in \(\mathbf {R}^n\) (for example \(\mathbb {X}\) is homeomorphic to an circular annulus \(\{x\in \mathbf {R}^n | 1<|x|<R\}\)). The classical Dirichlet problem concerns the energy minimal mapping \(h :\mathbb {\mathbb {X}} \rightarrow \mathbb {R}^n\) of the Sobolev class \(h\in h_\circ + \mathscr {W}^{1,n}_\circ (\mathbb {\mathbb {X}}, \mathbb {R}^n)\) whose boundary values are explicitly prescribed by means of a given mapping \(h_\circ \in \mathscr {W}^{1,n} (\mathbb {A}, \mathbb {R}^n)\). Let us consider the variation \(h \leadsto h\,+ \,\epsilon \eta \), in which \(\eta \in \mathscr {C}^\infty _\circ (\mathbb {X} , \mathbb {R}^n)\) and \(\epsilon \rightarrow 0\), leads to the integral form of the familiar n-harmonic system of equations
Equivalently
in the sense of distributions.
Similarly to [6], one may derive the general \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic equation which by using a different variation as the following.
The situation is different if we allow h to slip freely along the boundaries. The inner variation come to stage in this case. This is simply a change of the variable; \(h_\epsilon =h \circ \eta _\epsilon \), where \(\eta _\epsilon :\mathbb {X}\xrightarrow []{{}_{\text {onto}}}\mathbb {X}\) is a \(\mathscr {C}^\infty \)-smooth diffeomorphsm of \(\mathbb {X}\) onto itself, depending smoothly on a parameter \(\epsilon \approx 0\) where \(\eta _\circ = id :\mathbb {X}\xrightarrow []{{}_{\text {onto}}}\mathbb {X}\). Let us take on the inner variation of the form
By using the notation \(y=x+\epsilon \, \eta (x) \in \mathbb {X}\), we obtain
Hence
By integrating with respect to \(x\in \mathbb {X}\) we obtain
We now make the substitution \(y=x + \epsilon \, \eta (x)\), which is a diffeomorphism for small \(\epsilon \), for which we have: \(x= y- \epsilon \, \eta (y)+ o(\epsilon )\), \(D\eta (x)= D\eta (y)+o(1)\), when \(\epsilon \rightarrow 0\), and the change of volume element \(\text {d}x = [1-\epsilon \, \text {Tr}\,D \eta (y) ]\, \text {d}y + o(\epsilon ) \). Further
The so called equilibrium equation for the inner variation is obtained from \(\frac{\text {d}}{\text {d}\epsilon } \mathscr {E}_{h_\epsilon }\,=\,0\,\) at \(\epsilon =0\),
or, by using distributions
The name generalized n-harmonic equation is given to (1.8) in [6, Chapter 3] for the Euclidean metric \(\rho \equiv 1\) because of the following:
Lemma 1.1
[6] Assume that \(\rho \) is the Euclidean metric. Every n-harmonic mapping \(h\in \mathscr {W}^{1,n}_{\text {loc}} (\mathbb {X}, \mathbb {R}^n)\) is a solution of the generalized n-harmonic equation (1.8).
We believe that a similar statement related to Lemma 1.1 holds true for the general \(\rho \) metric, but we didn’t consider this question, since we do not need in this paper.
In dimension \(n=2\), the generalized harmonic equation reduces to
This equation is known as the Hopf equation, and the corresponding differential is called the Hopf differential. Since for \(h(z)=(a(z),b(z))\), we have
where
and
then (1.9) in complex notation takes the form
or what is the same
In [5] and [8], it is used the fact that Hopf’s differential of a minimizer has special form namely
for a certain constant c that depends on the ration of modulus of annuli. In this paper, this constant c will be also crucial for proving the minimization result.
If, in addition \(h\in \mathscr {C}^2\) then (1.10) is equivalent with
which is known as the harmonic mapping equation. In particular, if \(\rho (w)=(1-|w|^2)^{-2}\), then the equation leads to hyperbolic harmonic mappings. The class is particularly interesting, due to recent discover that every quasisimmetric map of the unit circle onto itself can be extended to a quasiconformal hyperbolic harmonic mapping of the unit disk onto itself. This problem is known as the Schoen conjecture and it was proved by Marković in [13].
2 Radial solutions to the generalized n-harmonic equation
We assume that \(R>1,\) and \(R_*>1\) and \(\mathbb {A}=A(1,R)\), \(\mathbb {A}_*=A(1,R_*)\). Recall that \(\rho \) is a radial \(C^1\) function in \(\mathbb {A}_*=A(1,R_*)\) so that \(\rho (s)s^n\) attains its minimum for \(s=1\). Let us consider a radial mapping
We find that
Thus (1.9) reduces to
We show that if h is a \(\mathscr {C}^2\)-smooth n-harmonic mapping then \(H=H(t)\) must satisfy the characteristic equation
Assume that \(h=H(t) \frac{x}{|x|}\), \(t=|x|\), is a radial function, where H is a real diffeomorphism between intervals [1, R] and \([1,R_*]\). Then by a direct calculation we obtain
and
Thus
If
then the Euler–Lagrange equation is
Then (2.4) is equivalent to (2.2), because \(H\in C^2\). The Eq. (2.4) further reduces to
Now we gave the following formula, which is the key of our approach
Thus we obtain
Further we look at increasing diffeomorphisms H between two intervals [1, R] and \([1,R_*]\) that are solutions of the previous equation. Then
Since the function
is decreasing, because
we obtain that
and thus
Thus we conclude that if the equation has a solution then
which we call the generalized J. C. C. Nitsche inequality.
Let us demonstrate the connection of (2.6) with the standard Nitsche inequality.
In this special case \(\rho \equiv 1\) and \(n=2\). So the inequality (2.6) is equivalent with the inequality
Assuming that \(\dot{H}\geqslant 0\), \(H(1)=1\) and \(H(R)=R_*\) then the last inequality is equivalent with
or what is the same as
Thus we obtain
which is the standard Nitsche inequality. Recall that the condition (2.7) is sufficient and necessary for the existence of a planar harmonic diffeomorphism between annuli A(1, R) and \(A(1, R_*)\) ([4]).
We will prove that the condition (2.6) is equivalent with the fact that there exists a radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphism between given annuli and conjecture the following
Conjecture 2.1
There is a \((\rho ,n)\) harmonic mappings between annuli A(1, R) and \(A(1,R_*)\) if and only (2.6) holds.
The conjecture will be verified on the class of minimizers of \((\rho ,n)\) energy (Theorem 3.1).
Let
and let
Assume also that the constant c satisfies (2.6). Then the equation \(\mathcal {L}[H]=c\) is equivalent with the equation
or
where
Since
we conclude that \(\Phi :[0,\infty )\rightarrow (-\infty ,1]\) is strictly decreasing and smooth function and thus a diffeomorphism. Moreover \(\Phi (0)=1\), \(\Phi (1)=0\) and \(\Phi (\infty )=-\infty \). Let \(\Psi =\Phi ^{-1}:(-\infty ,1]\rightarrow [0,\infty ) \). Then \(\Psi \) is strictly decreasing as well with \(\Psi (0)=1\) and thus
Then
Further
Now by taking the initial condition \(H(1)=1\), we arrive to the implicit solution
with \(s=H(t)\).
Thus for
the diffeomorphism
is a solution of the equation \(\mathcal {L}[H](t)=c\) with the initial conditions \(H(1)=1\) and \(H'(1)\geqslant 0\). Further \(T_c(R_*)=R\), where
Let us emphasize the following important fact. Every parameter from the set \(\{R, R_*, c\}\) is uniquely determined by two others. More precisely, we have
Since \(H_c(t)\) is increasing, then \(v_c(H_c(t))\) is decreasing for \(c>0\) and increasing for \(c<0\), and thus \(\sqrt{\Psi (v_c(H(t)))}\) increases for \(c\geqslant 0\) and decreases for \(c\le 0\). Thus we obtain that
Let \(n\geqslant 4\) and let \(\kappa _n\) be the solution of the equation
on the interval \([1,\frac{\sqrt{n-1}}{\sqrt{n-3}}]\). Then for \(n\geqslant 4\) we put \(c_\diamond :=-{\rho (1)}\kappa _n^n\). If \(n=3\) we put \(c^\diamond :=-\infty \).
Furthermore, if \(c^\diamond \le c_1<c_2\le c_\diamond \), then \(T_{c_1}(R_*)<T_{c_2}(R_*)\). Now if \(H_{c_1}(R)=R_*\), then we have \(R<T_{c_2}(H_{c_1}(R))\) and thus \(H_{c_2}(R)\le H_{c_1}(R).\) If we use the convention \(H_{c^\diamond }\equiv +\infty \) for \(n=3\), then we infer that for every \(n\geqslant 3\)
We conclude this section by proving the following theorem.
Theorem 2.2
Let \(R>1\) be fixed. Let \(\rho \) be a regular metric on \(\mathbb {A}=A(1,R)\). If \(R_*> 1\), then there is a radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphism \(h=h_c\) between annuli \(\mathbb {A}=A(1, R)\) and \(\mathbb {A}_*=A(1, R_*)\) if and only if
or equivalently if
Proof
Let \(R_*\geqslant H_{ c_\diamond }(R)\). We prove that there is \(c\le c_\diamond \) so that \(H_{c}(R)=R_*\). Then
is a n-harmonic diffeomorphism between A(1, R) and \(A(1, R_*)\). In order to do so define the function
Then \(\Lambda (c)\) is continuous for \(c\in (-\infty , c_\diamond ]\). Moreover the function \(c\rightarrow \Psi (v_c(y))\) is increasing for fixed y and so \(c\rightarrow y\sqrt{\Psi (v_c(y))}\) is strictly decreasing. So \(c\rightarrow \frac{1}{y\sqrt{\Psi (v_c(y))}}\) is increasing and thus \(\Lambda \) is increasing. As \(\Lambda (-\infty )=1\), by Mean value theorem there is a unique c so that \(\Lambda (c)=R_*\).
To prove the converse part, assume that \(h=H(|x|)\frac{x}{|x|}\) is a harmonic diffeomorphism between annuli A(1, R) and \(A(1,R_*)\). Then, because of Lemma 1.1, for a constant c, \(\mathcal {L}[H]=c\). Further, H is a diffeomorphism, and so \(c\le c_\diamond \). It follows that (2.14). \(\square \)
3 The main result
Theorem 3.1
Assume that \(n\geqslant 3\) and \(\rho \) is a regular metric in \(\mathbb {A}_*=A(1,R_*)\), \(R_*>1\).
a) Let \(R>1\) be fixed. We have the sharp inequality
for orientation preserving homeomorphisms h of the class \(\mathscr {W}^{1,n}\) between A(1, R) and \(A(1, R_*)\) mapping the inner boundary onto the inner boundary if
or in its equivalent form if
Here \(h_c\) is defined in (2.16). The equality is attained if and only if \(h=\mathcal {T} h_c\) where \(\mathcal {T}\) is a linear isometry of \(\mathbf {R}^n\).
b) If \(R_*>1\), \(n>3\) and if
then the \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphism \(h_c=H_c(|x|)\frac{x}{|x|}:A(1,R)\rightarrow A(1,R_*)\) is not the minimizer of the functional of energy. Here \(R=R(c,R_*)\) is defined in (2.11).
Remark 3.2
Theorem 3.1 extends the corresponding result by Iwaniec and Onninen in [6], where the authors have considered only the cases \(\rho (x)\equiv 1\) and \(\rho (x)=1/|x|^n\). Moreover the item b) contains a more explicit result even for the case \(\rho (x)\equiv 1\).
By using (1.3) and Theorem 3.1 we obtain
Corollary 3.3
Assume that \(\mathbb {A}_*=A(1,R_*)\) is an annulus and assume that \(\rho \) is a regular metric on \(\mathbb {A}_*\). For \(-{\rho (1)}\kappa _n^n\le c\le \rho (1)\) let \(R=R(c,R_*)\) and let \(f^c=(h_c)^{-1}\). Then we have the following sharp inequality
for every homeomorphism \(f:\mathbb {A}_*\rightarrow \mathbb {A}\) preserving the inner boundary and the orientation and belonging to the Sobolev space \(\mathscr {W}^{1,n-1}\).
Remark 3.4
The question arises how general can be two doubly connected domains, in order to have similar result.
-
Instead of A(1, R) and \(A(1, R_*)\), we could take the annuli A(r, R) and \(A(r_*, R_*)\). The last case reduces to the previous one because the \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic mappings are invariant under homothety of domain and of image domain. Namely if h is \((\rho ,n)\) harmonic mapping between annuli A(r, R) and \(A(r_*, R_*)\), then \(\lambda h(\mu x)\) is harmonic as well w.r.t. the metric \(\rho (\mu |x|)\) between annuli \(A(\mu r, \mu R)\) and \(A(\lambda r_*, \lambda R_*)\).
-
If \(h:A(1,R)\rightarrow A(1, R_*)\) is a harmonic homeomorphism that map the inner boundary onto the outer boundary, then
$$\begin{aligned} h_1(x)=h\left( R\frac{x}{|x|^2}\right) :A(1,R)\rightarrow A(1, R_*) \end{aligned}$$that map the inner boundary onto the inner boundary. This follows from the fact that the class of n-harmonic mappings is invariant under precomposing by conformal mappings of the space, exactly as in the planar case. More precisely, if \(h:D\rightarrow \mathbf {R}^n\) is \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic, then \(h\circ T\) is \((\rho ,n)\)- harmonic in \(D'=T^{-1}(D)\), for every metric \(\rho \) and every Möbius transformation T on the space \(\mathbf {R}^n\). Here \(D\subset \mathbf {R}^n\) is an open subset. This follows from the following formulas
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned} \mathscr {E}_\rho [h]&=\int _D \rho (h(x)) \Vert Dh(x)\Vert ^n dx\\ {}&= \int _D \rho (h(x)) \Vert Dh(x)\Vert ^n dx\\ {}&=\int _{D'} \rho (h(T(y))) \Vert Dh(T(y))\Vert ^n J_T(y)dy\\&= \int _{D'} \rho (h\circ T(y)) \Vert Dh(T(y))\Vert ^n |DT(y)|^n dy\\ {}&=\int _{D'} \rho (h\circ T(y)) \Vert D(h\circ T)(y)\Vert ^n dy=\mathscr {E}_\rho [h\circ T]\end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$Here \(|DT(y)|{\mathop {=\!\!=}\limits ^{\mathrm{def}}}\max _{|h|=1}|DT(y) h|\). Thus if h is a stationary point of energy integral, then so is \(h\circ T\).
-
If f is a n-harmonic mapping between annuli A(r, R) and \(A(r_*, R_*)\) w.r.t. the metric \(\rho (|w|)\), then \(\tilde{f}(x)=\frac{f(x)}{|f(x)|^2}\) is a n-harmonic mapping between annuli A(r, R) and \(A(1/R_*, 1/r_*)\) w.r.t. the metric
$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{\rho }(|\omega |)=|\omega |^n{\rho \left( \frac{1}{|\omega |}\right) }. \end{aligned}$$Namely, if \(g(x)=\frac{x}{|x|^2}\), then g is conformal and thus
$$\begin{aligned} \left<Dg(x)h, Dg(x)k\right> =|Dg(x)|^2\left<h,k\right>, \end{aligned}$$where
$$\begin{aligned} |Dg(x)|=\max _{|h|=1}|Dg(x)h|. \end{aligned}$$Here
$$\begin{aligned} Dg(x)h = \frac{h}{|x|^2}- \frac{x\left<x,h\right>}{|x|^4}, \end{aligned}$$and thus
$$\begin{aligned} \Vert Dg(x)\Vert ^2=n|Dg(x)|^2=\frac{n}{|x|^2}. \end{aligned}$$Further we obtain
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{aligned}\Vert D\tilde{f}\Vert ^2&= \mathrm {Tr}((D\tilde{f})^{*}D\tilde{f} )=\sum _{k=1}^n \left<D\tilde{f} e_k, D\tilde{f} e_k\right>\\&=\sum _{k=1}^n \left<g'(f(x))D f e_k, g'(f(x))D f e_k\right> =\frac{\Vert D f\Vert ^2}{|f|^2},\end{aligned} \end{aligned}$$and so
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {E}_{\tilde{\rho }}[ \tilde{f}]=\mathcal {E}_{\rho }[f]. \end{aligned}$$So if f is the minimizer of \(\mathcal {E}_{\rho }\) then \(\tilde{f}\) is the minimizer of \(\mathcal {E}_{\tilde{\rho }}\).
-
The main result can be formulated in a slightly more general case, namely for two double connected domains whose boundry components are two spheres (which are not concentric). Namely for annuli \(\mathcal {A}=T_1(\mathbb {A})\) and \(\mathcal {A}_*=T_1(\mathbb {A}_*)\), where \(T_1\) and \(T_2\) are certain Möbius transformations of the space \(\mathbf {R}^n\). The class of conformal mappings on the space is very rigid, indeed it coincides with the class of Möbius transformations. The planar case is far more interesting but also more difficult in this context (cf. [5, 8]).
Remark 3.5
If we take the substitution
in (2.5) we obtain
In particular if \(\rho (s)=s^\nu \), we have
By following the approach as in [6], where are considered the special cases \(\nu =0\) and \(\nu =-n\), we can find that the solution \(H=H_c\) can be expressed by mean of the so called elasticity function \(\eta =\eta _H\), and has the similar features as in the case \(\nu =0\) (see [6, p. 35-42]). However we do not need those properties in order to prove our main result. Instead, we use only some general results regarding the modulus of annuli obtained in [6] (Corollary 3.6).
For \(x\in {\mathbb {A}}\) let \(N=\frac{x}{|x|}\). Further let \(T_2\), \(\ldots \), \(T_n\) be \(n-1\) unit vectors mutually orthogonal and orthogonal to N. Denote by \(h_N\), \(h_{T_2}\), \(\ldots \), \(h_{T_{n}}\) the corresponding directional derivatives. Use the notation
Then we have
Corollary 3.6
[6]. Let h be a homeomorphism between spherical rings \({\mathbb {A}}\) and \({\mathbb {A}}^*\) in the Sobolev class \( {\mathscr {W}}^{1,n}({\mathbb {A}}, {\mathbb {A}}^*)\). Then
whenever \(\Phi \) is integrable in \([1, R_*]\). We have the equality in (3.7) if and only if
Furthermore,
Note that we have equalities if h is a radial mapping.
We also need the following simple lemmas.
Lemma 3.7
[6] Let \(u,v \geqslant 0\) and \(0 \le \sigma \le 1\). Then
where
and
Equality holds if and only if \(u = \sigma v\).
Lemma 3.8
[6] Let \(u,v \geqslant 0\) and \(1 \le \sigma < \sigma _n\). Then
and, we have
where
Equality holds if and only if \(u = \sigma v\).
4 Proof of Theorem 3.1
\(\clubsuit \) Proof of a).
Here we assume (3.2). This bound means that there is a radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic homeomorphism
Recall the characterictic equation for \(H=H_c(t)\) is
where \(c=C(R,R_*)\) is a constant determined by \((R,R_*)\).
\(\bullet \) The case \(0\le c\le c^\diamond .\)
Let
Then (4.2) is equivalent with
Here c satisfies the condition \(c\le \rho (1)\) and so
Now, let \(h : {\mathbb {A}} \overset{\text{ onto }}{\longrightarrow } {\mathbb {A}}^{*}\), \(h \in {\mathscr {W}}^{1,n}({\mathbb {A}}, {\mathbb {A}}^{*} )\), be arbitrary orientation preserving homeomorphism of annuli mapping the inner boundary onto the inner boundary. For \(x\in {\mathbb {A}}\), let \(u= \left| h_{_N}(x)\right| \), \(v= \left| h_{_T}(x)\right| \). The equation (4.3) suggests that we should consider the nonnegative solution \(\eta =\eta (t)\) to the equation
There is exactly one such \(\eta \) and it lies in the interval [0, 1] because
Let \(\sigma = \eta \big (t\big )\) be the solution of (4.4), where \(t=|h(x)|\). Then \(0\le \sigma \le 1\). We apply Lemma 3.7 to obtain the point-wise inequality
Now we find
and so
Here
comes from (3.13). An important fact about \(B\big (|h|\big )\) is that we have equality at (4.6) if \(\left| h_N \right| = \eta (|h|)\, \left| h_T \right| \). This is true for the radial \((\rho , n)\)-harmonic map at (4.1), by the definition of the constant c. Let us integrate (4.6) over the annulus \({\mathbb {A}}\). For the last term we apply the lower bound at (3.7). To estimate the first term in the right hand side of (4.6) we use Hölder’s inequality and we have
and then use (3.10). Thus we have
Finally, observe that we have equalities in all estimates for the radial stretchings. Thus
as stated.
\(\bullet \) The case \(c_\diamond \le c\le 0\). Then \({\mathbb {A}}^{*}\) is thinner than \({\mathbb {A}}\). Let \(H=H_c\). Then
Thus
or
Now we consider the general mapping h. There is exactly one solution \(\sigma =\eta (|h(x)|)\) of the equation
Since \(1\le |h(x)|\le R_*\), we conclude that
From Lemma 3.8 we obtain
where
According to Lemma 3.8, equality holds at a given point x if and only if \(\left| h_N (x)\right| = \eta \big (|h(x)|\big )\, \left| h_T(x)\right| \). In particular, it holds almost everywhere for \(h=h_c (x)\), because \(\left| (h_c)_N \right| =\eta _H \left| (h_c)_T \right| \). We now integrate over the annulus \({\mathbb {A}}\). The last term at (4.9) is estimated by using (3.7),
To estimate the first term in the right hand side of (4.9) we make use of the identities
Having in mind the simple inequality \(\left| h\right| _N\le \left| h_N\right| \), by using Hölder’s inequality we obtain
Further, as in the proof of [6, Proposition 12.1], we obtain
Hence
Thus
with equality attained for \(h_c\), as stated. This finishes the proof of the fact that if the condition (3.2) is satisfied, then we have the sharp inequality (3.1). In order to prove the opposite statement, assume that \(R_*>H_{c^\diamond }(R)\). Then by Theorem 2.2 there is \(c=c(R,R_*)<c^\diamond \) and a diffeomorphism \(H=H_c:[1,R]\rightarrow [1,R_*]\), so that \(h(x)=H(|x|)\frac{x}{|x|}\) is a \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphism between \(\mathbb {A}\) and \(\mathbb {A}_*\).
This finishes the proof of Theorem 3.1 a), up to the uniqueness part. The uniqueness part follows by repetition the approach of the similar statement from [6], and we will not write the details here. It is important to emphasize that in some key places where we used the sharp inequalities, the equality statement is attained if and only if
and so the matrix
arises, in order to prove that h is radial.
\(\clubsuit \) Proof of b). Let \({\mathscr {R}}={\mathscr {R}} ({\mathbb {A}}\, , \, {\mathbb {A}}^*)\) be the class of orientation preserving radial \((\rho ,n)\)-harmonic diffeomorphisms mapping the inner boundary onto itself and let \(\mathscr {D}=\mathscr {D}(R,R_*)\) be the class of orientation preserving \(C^2\) diffeomorphisms of [1, R] onto \([1,R_*]\). Now, we find the infimum in the left hand side of (3.1) for \(n>3\) and obtain
Here
is strictly convex in \(K=\dot{H}\) and coercive and thus the minimum is attained for a smooth function \(H_\circ \) satisfying the Euler–Lagrange equation and boundary conditions \(H_\circ (1)=1\) and \(H_\circ (R)=R_*\). Then \(H_\circ =H_c\). In order to prove this fact notice that, in view of (2.8) and (2.11) we obtain \(R_*> R\). Thus
By (2.5) the expression
has a constant sign, and thus \(\mathcal {L}[H_\circ ]=c_1< 0\).
So by (2.5) we infer that \(H'_\circ (t)>0\), and thus \(H_\circ \) is an increasing diffeomirphism. But then it coincides with \(H_c\), because of uniqueness of the solution under this constraint. We obtain that
Let \(\Phi ^\lambda : S^{n-1}\rightarrow S^{n-1}\) be the so called spherical homothety constructed in [6], where \(\lambda > 0\) is a real parameter, so that \(\Phi ^1=\mathbf {Id}\). More precisely, if \((\theta , \varphi _1,\ldots , \varphi _{n-2})\) are spherical coordinates of x, then \((\varphi (\theta ), \varphi _1,\ldots , \varphi _{n-2})\) are spherical coordinates of \(\Phi ^\lambda (x)\), where \(\varphi (\theta )=2\tan ^{-1}(\lambda \tan \frac{\theta }{2})\). Then \(\varphi \) is a diffeomorphism of \([0,\pi ]\) onto itself. Furthermore \(\Phi ^\lambda \) is a conformal self-mapping of the unit sphere. Thus if \(\zeta =\mathcal {S}(\theta , \varphi _1,\ldots , \varphi _{n-2})\) are spherical coordinates, and \(\Phi ^\lambda (\zeta )=\mathcal {S}(\varphi (\theta ), \varphi _1,\ldots , \varphi _{n-2})\), by using conformality of \( \Phi ^\lambda \) and the formula
we obtain that the ratio between Gram determinants of
and of
is equal to \(\varphi '(\theta )^{n-1}\). Thus, having in mind the conformality of \(\Phi ^\lambda \) we define
where \(\theta \in [0,\pi ]\) is the meridian of \(\zeta \).
Notice that \(\varphi \) is the only diffeomorphism that produces a conformal mapping on \(\mathbf {S}^{n-1}\). Indeed it is only solution of the differential equation with respect to \(\varphi \) in (4.17).
By [6, Eq. 14.50] we have
for every parameter \(1< \lambda \sqrt{\frac{n-3}{n-1}}\sigma ,\) where \(\sigma > \sqrt{\frac{n-1}{n-3}}\).
This mean that \(\lambda =1\) is a local maximum of \(\phi \). We prove here more, \(\lambda =1\) is local maximum of \(\phi \) if and only if \(\sigma >\sqrt{\frac{n-1}{n-3}}\).
Then, by direct computation, in view of (4.17) we find that
and
So \(\phi ''(1)<0\) if and only if \(\sigma > \sqrt{\frac{n-1}{n-3}}\).
Then we test the infimum in the right hand side of (3.1) with the mapping
where, as in the previous case, \(\Phi ^\lambda : \mathbf {S}^{n-1} \rightarrow \mathbf {S}^{n-1}\) is the spherical homothety and \(H=H_c\). An important facts concerning \(\Phi ^\lambda \), which follows from (4.17), is the following
From the equation
in view of (2.12) we infer that
From (3.4) we obtain
and thus
From (4.16) and (4.18) we find that
Here we have chosen \(\lambda > 1\) sufficiently close to 1.
References
Astala, K., Iwaniec, T., Martin, G.: Deformations of annuli with smallest mean distortion. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 195, 899–921 (2010)
Csörnyei, M., Hencl, S., Malý, J.: Homeomorphisms in the Sobolev space \(\mathscr {W}^{1, n-1}\). J. Reine Angew. Math. 644, 221–235 (2010)
Hencl, S., Koskela, P.: Regularity of the inverse of a planar Sobolev homeomorphism. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 180, 75–95 (2006)
Iwaniec, T., Kovalev, L.V., Onninen, J.: The Nitsche conjecture. J. Am. Math. Soc. 24(2), 345–373 (2011)
Iwaniec, T., Koh, N.-T., Kovalev, L.V., Onninen, J.: Existence of energy-minimal diffeomorphisms between doubly connected domains. Invent. Math. 186(3), 667–707 (2011)
Iwaniec, T., Onninen, J.: \(n\)-harmonic mappings between annuli: the art of integrating free Lagrangians. Mem. Am. Math. Soc. 218(1023), viii+105 (2012)
Jost, J., Li-Jost, X.: Calculus of Variations. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics, vol. 64. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1998)
Kalaj, D.: Energy-minimal diffeomorphisms between doubly connected Riemann surfaces. Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 51(1–2), 465–494 (2014)
Kalaj, D.: Deformations of annuli on Riemann surfaces and the generalization of Nitsche conjecture. J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 93(3), 683–702 (2016)
Kalaj, D.: On the Nitsche conjecture for harmonic mappings in \(\mathbb{R}^2\) and \(\mathbb{R}^3\). Israel J. Math. 150, 241–251 (2005)
Kalaj, D.: On J. C. C. Nitsche type inequality for annuli on Riemann surfaces. Israel J. Math. 218, 67–281 (2017)
Lyzzaik, A.: The modulus of the image annuli under univalent harmonic mappings and a conjecture of J.C.C. Nitsche. J. Lond. Math. Soc. 64, 369–384 (2001)
Marković, V.: Harmonic maps and the Schoen conjecture. J. Am. Math. Soc. 30, 799–817 (2017)
Nitsche, J.C.C.: On the modulus of doubly connected regions under harmonic mappings. Am. Math. Mon. 69, 781–782 (1962)
Weitsman, A.: Univalent harmonic mappings of annuli and a conjecture of J.C.C. Nitsche. Israel J. Math. 124, 327–331 (2001)
Acknowledgements
I am grateful to the referee for many useful suggestions and corrections.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Communicated by A. Malchiodi.
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
Kalaj, D. \((n,\rho )\)-harmonic mappings and energy minimal deformations between annuli. Calc. Var. 58, 51 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-019-1490-7
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-019-1490-7