1,002,275 research outputs found

    On the sharp stability of critical points of the Sobolev inequality

    Full text link
    Given n≥3n\geq 3, consider the critical elliptic equation Δu+u2∗−1=0\Delta u + u^{2^*-1}=0 in Rn\mathbb R^n with u>0u > 0. This equation corresponds to the Euler-Lagrange equation induced by the Sobolev embedding H1(Rn)↪L2∗(Rn)H^1(\mathbb R^n)\hookrightarrow L^{2^*}(\mathbb R^n), and it is well-known that the solutions are uniquely characterized and are given by the so-called ``Talenti bubbles''. In addition, thanks to a fundamental result by Struwe, this statement is ``stable up to bubbling'': if u:Rn→(0,∞)u:\mathbb R^n\to(0,\infty) almost solves Δu+u2∗−1=0\Delta u + u^{2^*-1}=0 then uu is (nonquantitatively) close in the H1(Rn)H^1(\mathbb R^n)-norm to a sum of weakly-interacting Talenti bubbles. More precisely, if δ(u)\delta(u) denotes the H1(Rn)H^1(\mathbb R^n)-distance of uu from the manifold of sums of Talenti bubbles, Struwe proved that δ(u)→0\delta(u)\to 0 as ∥Δu+u2∗−1∥H−1→0\lVert\Delta u + u^{2^*-1}\rVert_{H^{-1}}\to 0. In this paper we investigate the validity of a sharp quantitative version of the stability for critical points: more precisely, we ask whether under a bound on the energy ∥∇u∥L2\lVert\nabla u\rVert_{L^2} (that controls the number of bubbles) it holds δ(u)≲∥Δu+u2∗−1∥H−1\delta(u) \lesssim \lVert\Delta u + u^{2^*-1}\rVert_{H^{-1}}. A recent paper by the first author together with Ciraolo and Maggi shows that the above result is true if uu is close to only one bubble. Here we prove, to our surprise, that whenever there are at least two bubbles then the estimate above is true for 3≤n≤53\le n\le 5 while it is false for n≥6n\ge 6. To our knowledge, this is the first situation where quantitative stability estimates depend so strikingly on the dimension of the space, changing completely behavior for some particular value of the dimension nn.Comment: 42 page

    On the number of unique expansions in non-integer bases

    Get PDF
    Let q>1q > 1 be a real number and let m=m(q)m=m(q) be the largest integer smaller than qq. It is well known that each number x∈Jq:=[0,∑i=1∞mq−i]x \in J_q:=[0, \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} m q^{-i}] can be written as x=∑i=1∞ciq−ix=\sum_{i=1}^{\infty}{c_i}q^{-i} with integer coefficients 0≤ci<q0 \le c_i < q. If qq is a non-integer, then almost every x∈Jqx \in J_q has continuum many expansions of this form. In this note we consider some properties of the set Uq\mathcal{U}_q consisting of numbers x∈Jqx \in J_q having a unique representation of this form. More specifically, we compare the size of the sets Uq\mathcal{U}_q and Ur\mathcal{U}_r for values qq and rr satisfying 1<q<r1< q < r and m(q)=m(r)m(q)=m(r).Comment: typo corrected in Theorem 1.

    On the expansions of real numbers in two integer bases

    Get PDF
    Let rr and ss be multiplicatively independent positive integers. We establish that the rr-ary expansion and the ss-ary expansion of an irrational real number, viewed as infinite words on {0,1,…,r−1}\{0, 1, \ldots , r-1\} and {0,1,…,s−1}\{0, 1, \ldots , s-1\}, respectively, cannot have simultaneously a low block complexity. In particular, they cannot be both Sturmian words.Comment: 11 pages, to appear at Annales de l'Institut Fourie
    • …
    corecore