Finite time blow-up
of semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations
with positive initial energy
in FLRW spacetimes
Abstract
Blowing-up solutions for semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations are considered in Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker spacetimes. Some sufficient conditions are shown by applying the concavity method for semi-linear wave equations in the Minkowski spacetime to semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations in FLRW spacetimes.
Mathematics Subject Classification (2020): Primary 35L05; Secondary 35L71, 35Q75.
Keywords : semilinear Klein-Gordon equation, blowing-up solution, Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker spacetime
1 Introduction
We consider the Cauchy problem of semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations in Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker spacetimes (FLRW spacetimes for short). FLRW spacetimes are solutions of the Einstein equations with the cosmological constant under the cosmological principle. They describe the spatial expansion or contraction, and yield some important models of the universe. Let be the spatial dimension, be a scale-function defined on an interval for some , be the speed of light. The metrics of FLRW spacetimes are expressed by
(1.1) |
where we have put the spatial curvature as zero, the variable denotes the proper time, is the time-variable (see e.g., [2, 3]). When or for the Hubble constant , the spacetime with (1.1) reduces to the Minkowski spacetime or the de Sitter spacetime, respectively.
We recall the derivation of the Klein-Gordon equation. We denote the first and second derivatives of one variable function by and . The Klein-Gordon equation generated by the above metric is given by for the determinant and the inverse matrix , i.e.,
(1.2) |
where denotes the Laplacian.
In this paper, we consider the Cauchy problem of (1.2) given by
(1.3) |
for with , where , are given initial data. For semi-linear terms, we assume that satisfies that there exists and such that
(1.4) |
for any . We note that if we set , then the condition on (1.4) is described as
for , which has been considered in [8, 14]. The assumption (1.4) includes the power-type non-linearity. If we take for with , then we have to set . If we take for with , then we have to set . For another example, we note that for with , then we have to set .
We denote the Lebesgue space by for an interval and with the norm
We denote by the norm, and by the norm for . We also denote by the -inner product.
We define the energy functional
(1.5) |
the Nehari functional
(1.6) |
and the unstable set
(1.7) |
for the Cauchy problem of (1.3). We note that the Nehari functional depends on time. The set is invariant under our assumptions for initial data. More precisely, if holds, then we have (see, Lemma 2.3 and Lemma 2.4, below).
Under | Progress | ||
---|---|---|---|
Case I | Solved in this paper | ||
Case II | Solved in this paper | ||
Case III | Solved in this paper | ||
Case IV | Still open |
In [9], the existence of global solutions was proved for semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations in de Sitter spacetime with . This result was extended to the case of general FLRW spacetimes in [4, 11]. Galstian and Yagdjian in [4] also proved the local well-posedness with for semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations in FLRW spacetimes for any , with .
The nonexistence of the global solution of the Klein-Gordon equation in the Minkowski spacetime (i.e., ) was shown by Levine in [6] when the initial energy was negative. We also refer to the result [15], which established a sharp condition for blowup of one in the Minkowski spacetime when the initial energy had an upper bound. When the initial energy was arbitrarily high, the first result was a condition which Wang in [12] showed for blowing-up solutions corresponding to the Klein-Gordon equation in the Minkowski spacetime. This result was extended by Yang and Xu in [14].
On the other hand, for FLRW spacetimes, the case of the gauge invariant semi-linear term of the form with , was considered in [11] for by the concavity method for . Moreover, McCollum, Mwamba and Oliver in [8] showed a condition for blowing-up solutions of (1.3) for large initial data with the positive initial energy.
Our work is to solve Case , Case and Case in Table 1 under and defined by (1.16), below. Case is still open.
We show the following theorem and corollary for blowing-up solutions of (1.3) for large initial data. Put and .
Theorem 1.1.
Remark 1.2.
Let satisfy the following conditions
(1.11) |
for any and some constant independent of , and
(1.12) |
Then, we note that the condition (1.8) does not hold for sufficiently small data since is rewritten by
and we have if is sufficiently small.
Theorem 1.3.
When satisfies (1.11) with (1.12), we note that the condition (1.14) does not hold for sufficiently small data (see, Appendix in [8]).
Remark 1.4.
In [8], a sufficient condition for blowing-up solutions of (1.3) was shown under and with . Since we have shown blowing-up solutions of (1.3) under and with in Theorem 1.3, we improve the result in [8] in terms of the upper bounds of and . Moreover, we also have shown the blowing-up solution of (1.3) under and . Blowup of (1.3) in this condition was not shown in [8].
We adapt the concavity method which was first introduced by Levine in [6, 7]. In the Minkowski spacetime, this method was employed for the function in [6, 7, 12, 14]. McCollum, Mwamba and Oliver in [8] also employed this method for in FLRW spacetimes. Instead of the function , we employ the concavity method for a new function given by
for with some , where
By the second and third terms of , we improve the condition on , and we solve Case . Moreover, we can consider the condition on and in Theorem 1.1 and Theorem 1.3. This yields that our results also include blowing-up solutions for semi-linear wave equations in FLRW spacetimes with the negative energy. Setting the third term of is inspired by [5] and [13]. Gazzola and Squassina in [5], and Xu and Ding in [13] showed some conditions for blowing-up solutions of damped wave, and Klein-Gordon equations in the Minkowski spacetime.
Now, we introduce some concrete examples of the scale-function . For and the Hubble constant , we put
(1.17) |
and define by
(1.18) |
for . We note and , where . This scale-function describes the Minkowski spacetime when (namely, is a constant ), the expanding space when with , the blowing-up space when with (the “Big-Rip” in cosmology), the contracting space when with , and the vanishing space when with (the “Big-Crunch” in cosmology). It describes the de Sitter spacetime when (see, e.g., [10]).
We obtain the following corollaries from the above theorems, respectively for the concrete example of given by (1.18).
Corollary 1.5.
Let be a function with (1.4) for some . Assume that , , and , satisfy (1.8) and . Let and be defined by (1.17) and (1.18). Assume one of the following conditions (i) and (ii) holds.
(i) , .
Corollary 1.6.
Let be a function with (1.4) for some . Assume that , and , satisfy (1.14), and . We put
(1.19) |
for . Let and be defined by (1.17) and (1.18). Assume one of the following conditions (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) holds.
(i) , , , .
(ii) , , , .
(iii) , , , .
In Corollaries 1.5 and 1.6, the case reduces to the semi-linear Klein-Gordon equation in the Minkowski spacetime, which was extensively studied (see, e.g., [1, 6, 12, 13, 14, 15] on blowing-up solutions, and the references therein). We included this case to compare it with the case .
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we collect fundamental properties on some ordinary differential equation of second order, the variant space , the energy and the concavity function. In Section 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 and 3.4, we prove Theorem 1.1, Theorem 1.3, Corollary 1.5 and Corollary 1.6.
2 Preliminaries
We prepare several lemmas to prove the results in the previous section. We start with the following fundamental statement for and defined by (1.5) and (1.6), respectively.
Lemma 2.1.
Let , , , and . If is the solutions to the Cauchy problem (1.3), then the following results hold for any .
(1)
(2.1) |
(2)
(2.2) |
and .
(3)
(2.3) |
Proof.
Next, we set a lemma with the fundamental statement for the ordinary differential inequality.
Lemma 2.2.
Let , , and . Assume that and
(2.4) |
for any . Then, for any .
Proof.
Multiplying to the both sides of (2.4), and noting , we have
for any . Integrating its both sides for , we obtain
for any by . This yields for any . ∎
Here, we put
(2.5) |
for . We prove that the set is invariant under our assumptions.
Proof.
Next, we prove for any . When , we obtain by (1.8). Since we have by (2.2) and , we obtain . Since we have by (2.1), we obtain . Next, we consider the case of . If for any does not hold, then there exists a first such that by and the continuity of on . Here, we have
(2.6) |
and
(2.7) |
where has been defined by (2.5). By (2.3), (2.6) and (2.7), we obtain
This yields
(2.8) |
Noting that for , we have
for . Replacing , , in Lemma 2.2 with , , , we obtain for any by in (2.6). Thus, this yields since is continuous on . By and (1.8), we have
(2.9) |
In contrast, we have
by (2.1) and . Since we have by (2) of Lemma 2.1, we have
This leads to a contradiction to (2.9). Thus, we have proved for any . This yields . ∎
Lemma 2.4.
Proof.
When , the proof is similar to Lemma 2.3. We consider the case of in the following. Putting
we have
(2.10) |
for any , by (2.8), (2.1), for any and for any , where we have used by (1.13) and derived from (1.9). Since we have by (1.14), we obtain for any by putting and , in Lemma 2.2. This yields for any . Thus, we have
(2.11) | ||||
(2.12) |
for any by and (1.14). Here, if for any does not hold, then there exists a first such that by and the continuity of on . Then, we have
by for any , (2.1) and . This leads a contradiction to (2.12). Thus, we have proved for any . This yields . ∎
Lemma 2.5.
Proof.
In the following, we show the key lemma in order to use the concavity method.
Lemma 2.6.
Let , and be positive constants. Let satisfy
(2.14) |
We consider the following differential inequality ;
(2.15) |
for any . If and satisfy
(2.16) |
then there exists such that the solution of (2.15) satisfies as .
Proof.
Assume for any . We show a contradiction. We note that we have by and (2.15), and we also have for any by and . Multiplying to the both sides of the first inequality in (2.15), we obtain
This yields
(2.17) |
for by , where we have put
Noting that the right hand side of (2) is positive by , we have
by , where we have put
This yields
(2.18) |
Putting and integrating the both sides of (2.18) on with , we have and
(2.19) |
where is the inverse to for . This yields
by and we have
(2.20) |
by . We have
by (2.19). This yields
by noting (2.20). Putting
(2.21) |
where we note by
(2.22) |
there exists such that as , which yields as . Since we have
3 Proof of theorems and corollaries
3.1 Proof of Theorem 1.1
Let . We remember that we have put , and
We consider the Cauchy problem of (1.3) for . For any , we put
(3.1) |
and
(3.2) |
We note that since we have by (1.9). By (3.2), we have
(3.3) |
and
(3.4) |
by (2.3). Since we have by Lemma 2.3, we obtain , which yields
(3.5) |
for any by (3.1) and the assumption . By (3.1), we have
(3.6) |
where we have put
(3.7) |
We note that we have
(3.8) |
and
(3.9) |
by the Hölder inequality. Using (3.8) and (3.1), we have
(3.10) |
where we have used for any at the last inequality. By (3.1), (3.8), (3.1) and (3.1), we have
(3.11) |
for any . So that, we have
(3.12) |
by , and (3.11). By (3.12) and (3.1), we obtain
(3.13) |
for any , where we have put
(3.14) |
Here, let
By (2.1), , (2.2) and Lemma 2.5, we have
(3.15) |
for any , where and are defined by (1.8) and (2.5), and we have used by the first inequality for any in (2.13). So that, we have
(3.16) |
for any by (3.1), (3.1) and . Putting , we obtain
(3.17) |
by and (3.16). Putting
and , we have
(3.18) |
for any by (3.1). Since we have
by , we obtain
(3.19) |
where we have put and . Since we have
by and , we obtain
(3.20) |
Moreover, we note that we have
(3.21) |
by and (1.10). Since is defined by (1.10), and satisfy (2.14), (2.15) and (2.16) by (3.21), (3.18), (3.19) and (3.20), there exists such that as by Lemma 2.6. From this fact, we obtain the following result as required in this theorem.
Claim 3.1.
as .
3.2 Proof of Theorem 1.3
We remember the definition of by (1.15). We define , by
and
(3.22) |
for any by the similar definition of (3.1) and (3.2). Then, the similar argument holds from (3.1) to (3.12), where we have replaced with . Similarly to the derivation of (3.1), we obtain
(3.23) |
for any , where we have put
Here, let
By (2.1), (2.2), and , we have
(3.24) |
for any . By (3.2), for , (2.11) and (1.14), we have
(3.25) |
for any . By (3.2) and (3.2), we have
(3.26) |
for any . Putting , we obtain
(3.27) |
by and (3.26). Putting
and , we have
(3.28) |
for any by (3.2). We note that we have
by (3.22) and , and
by in (3.5), where we have put . This yields
(3.29) |
where we have put , . Moreover, we note that we have
(3.30) |
by (1.15). Since is defined by (1.15), and satisfy (2.14), (2.15) and (2.16) by (3.30), (3.28) and (3.29), there exists such that as by Lemma 2.6. For as , we use the similar argument for Claim 3.1.
3.3 Proof of Corollary 1.5
We check the assumptions and (1.9). By (1.18), we have
(3.31) |
This yields
So that, we note that the assumption (1.9) holds if and only if under , or under . Under and , we note that holds if and only if by (3.31), and . Under and , we note that holds. So that, the assumptions and (1.9) hold, and the required result follows from Theorem 1.1.
3.4 Proof of Corollary 1.6
In the proof of Corollary 1.5, we have shown the assumptions and (1.9) hold if and only if , , or , hold. So that, we check the assumption (1.13) in the following. Firstly, let . Then, we have
by (3.31). So that, we have
(3.32) |
where is defined by (1.19). By , , or , , and (3.32), we have checked the cases of (i), (ii) and (iii) in Corollary 1.6 satisfy all assumptions of Theorem 1.3.
Next, let . Since the cases of or have been considered when , we consider the case of and . Then, we have
(3.33) |
by (3.31). Noting that the last inequality in (3.33) does not hold when and , we have
under . So that, we have checked the case of (iv) satisfies all assumptions of Theorem 1.3. Since all assumptions of Theorem 1.3 hold in the cases of (i), (ii), (iii) and (iv), the required result follows from Theorem 1.3.
Acknowledgments. This work was supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers 16H03940, 17KK0082, 22K18671, and by JST SPRING Grant Number JPMJSP2138.
References
- [1] J. M. Ball, Finite time blow-up in nonlinear problems, Nonlinear evolution equations, Proc. Symp., Madison/Wis. 1977, 189–205 (1978).
- [2] S. Carroll, Spacetime and geometry. An introduction to general relativity, Addison Wesley, San Francisco, CA, 2004, xiv+513 pp.
- [3] R. d’Inverno, Introducing Einstein’s relativity, The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1992, xii+383 pp.
- [4] A. Galstian, K. Yagdjian, Global solutions for semilinear Klein-Gordon equations in FLRW spacetimes, Nonlinear Anal. 113 (2015), 339–356.
- [5] F. Gazzola, M. Squassina, Global solutions and finite time blow up for damped semilinear wave equations, Ann. I. H. Poincaré, AN 23 (2006), 185-207.
- [6] H. A. Levine, Instability and nonexistence of global solutions of nonlinear wave equations of the form , Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 192 (1974), 1-21.
- [7] H. A. Levine, Some additional remarks on the nonexistence of global solutions to nonlinear wave equations, SIAM J. Math. Anal. 5 (1974), 138-146.
- [8] J. McCollum, G. Mwamba, J. Oliver, A sufficient condition for blowup of the nonlinear Klein-Gordon equation with positive initial energy in FLRW spacetimes, Nonlinear Anal. 246 (2024), Paper No. 113582, 11 pp.
- [9] M. Nakamura, The Cauchy problem for semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations in de Sitter spacetime, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 410 (2014), no. 1, 445–454.
- [10] M. Nakamura, Remarks on the derivation of several second order partial differential equations from a generalization of the Einstein equations, Osaka J. Math., 57 (2020), 305–331.
- [11] M. Nakamura, T. Yoshizumi, The Cauchy problem for semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations in Friedmann-Lemaître-Robertson-Walker spacetimes, J. Differential Equations, 438 113395 (2025).
- [12] Y. Wang, A sufficient condition for finite time blow up of the nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations with arbitrarily positive initial energy, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 136 (10) (2008), 3477-3482.
- [13] R. Xu, Y. Ding, Global solutions and finite time blow up for damped Klein-Gordon equation, Acta Math Scientia 2013, 33B (3), 643-652.
- [14] Y. Yang, R. Xu, Finite time blowup for nonlinear Klein-Gordon equations with arbitrarily positive initial energy, Appl. Math. Lett. 77 (2018), 21-26.
- [15] J. Zhang, Sharp conditions of global existence for nonlinear Schrödinger and Klein-Gordon equations, Nonlinear Anal. 48 (2002), no. 2, 191–207.