2020
DOI: 10.1002/mma.6817
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Blow‐up for wave equation with the scale‐invariant damping and combined nonlinearities

Abstract: In this article, we study the blow-up of the damped wave equation in the scale-invariant case and in the presence of two nonlinearities. More precisely, we consider the following equation: u tt − Δu + 1 + t u t = |u t | p + |u| q , in R N × [0, ∞), with small initial data. For < N(q−1) 2 and ∈ (0, *), where * > 0 is depending on the nonlinearties' powers and the space dimension (* satisfies (q − 1) ((N + 2 * − 1)p − 2) = 4), we prove that the wave equation, in this case, behaves like the one without dissipatio… Show more

Help me understand this report
View preprint versions

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

4
22
1

Year Published

2021
2021
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

4
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 23 publications
(27 citation statements)
references
References 32 publications
(62 reference statements)
4
22
1
Order By: Relevance
“…Among these approaches we find, on the one hand, comparison arguments based either on the fundamental solution for the operator ∂ 2 t − t 2ℓ ∆ in [16] or on the employment of a special positive solution of the corresponding homogeneous equation involving modified Bessel functions of second kind in [10], and, on the other hand, a modified test function method in [15]. In particular, the result that we are going to show for (5) is consistent with those for (6) in [15,10], although we shall use a different approach to prove this result. Moreover, we will see that the upper bound for the exponent p in the blow-up result for (1) is a shift of the corresponding upper bound for (5).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 79%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Among these approaches we find, on the one hand, comparison arguments based either on the fundamental solution for the operator ∂ 2 t − t 2ℓ ∆ in [16] or on the employment of a special positive solution of the corresponding homogeneous equation involving modified Bessel functions of second kind in [10], and, on the other hand, a modified test function method in [15]. In particular, the result that we are going to show for (5) is consistent with those for (6) in [15,10], although we shall use a different approach to prove this result. Moreover, we will see that the upper bound for the exponent p in the blow-up result for (1) is a shift of the corresponding upper bound for (5).…”
Section: Introductionsupporting
confidence: 79%
“…has a crucial role in determining some properties of the fundamental solution of L k,µ,ν 2 . In the special case k = 0 (the so-called wave operator with scale-invariant damping and mass), it is known in the literature that the value of δ affects not only the fundamental solution of L 0,µ,ν 2 but also the critical exponents in the treatment of semilinear Cauchy problem associated with L 0,µ,ν 2 with power nonlinearity [18,25,21,19,20,26,3,2], nonlinearity of derivative type [27,8], and combined nonlinearity [6,7,9]. We shall see that even in the case k ∈ (0, 1) some properties of the fundamental solution of L k,µ,ν 2 depend strongly on the value of δ.…”
Section: Integral Representation Formulamentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Hence, the solution v(x, τ ) verifies the following equation: 2) . Moreover, thanks to the above transformation, which implies a kind of similarity with the scale-invariant damping case, we can inherit the methods used in some previous works [1,8,9,10,11] to build the proof of our main result.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…Note that the equation (1.10) is somehow related to the Euler-Darboux-Poisson equation. Moreover, thanks to this transformation, which implies a kind of similarity with the scale-invariant damping case, we can inherit the methods used in our previous works [4,5,6] to build the proofs of our main results which are related, as a first target, to the blow-up of the solution of (1.1) and, as a secondary aim, to the blow-up of (1.7).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 98%