• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

174 submissions , 137 unreviewed
4,308 questions , 1,640 unanswered
5,089 answers , 21,602 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
635 active unimported users
More ...

  Uniqueness for solution of a d-dbar system related to Davey-Stewartson Solitons

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

This question concerns a system of equations that arise in the study of one-soliton solutions to the Davey-Stewartson equation.

In what follows, $f(z)$ denotes a function which depends smoothly (but not necessarily analytically!) on $z=x+iy$. Thus $f:\mathbb{C} \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ or equivalently $f:\mathbb{R}^2 \rightarrow \mathbb{R}$. We denote by $\overline{\partial}$ and $\partial$ the usual operators $$ \overline{\partial} = \frac{1}{2} \left( \partial_x + i \partial_y \right) $$ and $$\partial = \frac{1}{2} \left( \partial_x - i \partial_y \right). $$

The system is:

$$\overline{\partial} n_1(z) = (1+|z|^2)^{-1} n_2(z)$$ $$\partial n_2(z) = -(1+|z|^2)^{-1} n_1(z)$$

and the question is as follows. Suppose that

$$\lim_{|z|\rightarrow \infty} |z| n_1(z) = \lim_{\|z| \rightarrow \infty} |z| n_2(z) = 0$$

Can one prove that $n_1(z)=n_2(z)=0$ if one assumes a priori that $n_1$ and $n_2$ belong to $L^p(R^2)$ for all $p>2$ (including $p=\infty$)? For this purpose one can assume that the limits above exist.

Thanks in advance for any help.

Peter Perry, University of Kentucky

This post imported from StackExchange MathOverflow at 2014-09-20 22:30 (UCT), posted by SE-user Peter Perry
asked Oct 12, 2010 in Mathematics by Peter Perry (20 points) [ no revision ]
retagged Jan 14, 2016
Did you try with some Pohozaev-type inequality? e.g. like this: 1) apply $\partial$ to the first equation so it becomes $\Delta n_1+(1+|z|^2)^{-1}n_1=g$ where $g$ decays at infinity faster than $z^{-3}$ 2) multiply by $\overline{z}n_1$ and integrate over an annulus. Typically you obtain quite good information on the behavior of the gradient with this method

This post imported from StackExchange MathOverflow at 2014-09-20 22:30 (UCT), posted by SE-user Piero D'Ancona

Please log in or register to answer this question.

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights