On wave equation: review and recent results
On wave equation: review and recent results
Salim A. Messaoudi 0
Ala A. Talahmeh 0
0 S. A. Messaoudi (
The aim of this paper is to give an overview of results related to nonlinear wave equations during the last half century. In this regard, we present results concerning existence, decay and blow up for classical nonlinear equations. After that, we discuss briefly some important results of the variableexponent Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces. Results related to nonexistence and blow up for wave equations with nonstandard nonlinearities (nonlinearities involving variable exponents) are given in more detail. Finally, we present some recent decay and blow up results together with their proofs. Mathematics Subject Classification 35L05 · 35L70 · 35B44 · 35B35 1 Literature review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.1 Decay in the case of constant exponents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.2 Blowup in the case of constant exponents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.3 Blowup in the case of variableexponent nonlinearities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Preliminaries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.1 History of variableexponent Lebesgue spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.2 Variableexponent Lebesgue Spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2.3 Variableexponent Sobolev spaces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Existence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Contents
4 Decay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5 Numerical study . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1 Numerical method . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2 Numerical results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6 Blowup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1 Literature review
A considerable and great effort has been devoted to the study of linear and nonlinear wave equations in the case
of constant and variableexponent nonlinearities. Our aim here is to give an overview of the existing results
and introduce some other ones.
1.1 Decay in the case of constant exponents
There is an extensive literature on the stabilization of the wave equation by internal or boundary feedbacks.
Zuazua [95] proved the exponential stability of the energy for the wave equation by a locally distributed internal
feedback depending linearly on the velocity. Komornik [37] and Nakoa [72] extended the result of Zuazua
[95] by considering the case of a nonlinear damping term with a polynomial growth near the origin. Martinez
[53,54] studied a damped wave equation and used the piecewise multiplier technique combined with some
nonlinear integral inequalities to establish explicit decay rate estimates. These decay estimates are not optimal
for some cases including the case of the polynomial growth. The following initialboundary value problem of
the Kirchhoff equation with a general dissipation of the form
⎧ utt − φ
⎪⎨
u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
∇u2
u + σ (t )g(ut ) = 0,
in
where is a bounded domain Rn (n ≥ 1), with a smooth boundary ∂ and φ, σ and g are given functions and
the functions (u0, u1) are the given initial data, was considered by many authors in the literature. For instance,
in the case when g = σ = 0, the onedimensional equation of (1.1) was first introduced by Kirchhoff [35] in
1876, and then was called the Kirchhoff string after his name. When σ = 1, φ (r ) = r α (α ≥ 1) and g(x ) = τ x
(τ > 0), problem (1.1) was treated by Nishihara and Yamada [73]. They proved the existence and uniqueness
of a global solution and the polynomial decay for small data (u0, u1) ∈ (H01( ) ∩ H 2( )) × H 1( ) with
0
u0 = 0 . In [76], Ono extended the work of [73] to the case where φ (r ) = r and σ (t ) ≡ (1 + t )−δ, δ < 13
using the decay lemma of Nakao [69]. Benaissa and Guesmia [
18
] extended the results obtained by Ono [76]
and proved an existence and uniqueness theorem of a global solution in Sobolev spaces to the problem (1.1)
when φ (r ) = r, g(v) = v and general functions σ. Also, they obtained an explicit and general decay rate,
depending on σ, g and φ, for the energy of solutions of (1.1) without any growth assumption on g and φ at the
origin, and on σ at infinity. Also, the following problem
⎧ utt − u + g(ut ) + f (u) = 0,
⎪
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
For instanicsea, binouthnedecdasreegwihoenninf R(un) (=n ≥u1p)−,2wu,itgh(auts)m=ootuht bmo−u2nudta,rmy,∂ p ,>w2a,sNcoanksaiode[7re0d] sbhyomwaendythaautth(1o.r2s).
where
has a unique global weak solution if 0 ≤ p − 2 ≤ 2/(n − 2), n ≥ 3 and a global unique strong solution if
p −2 > 2/(n −2), n ≥ 3. In addition to global existence, the issue of the decay rate was also addressed. In both
cases it has been shown that the energy of the solution decays algebraically if m > 2 and decays exponentially
if m = 2. This improved an earlier result in [68], where Nakao studied the problem in an abstract setting and
established a theorem concerning decay of the solution energy only for the case m − 2 ≤ 2/(n − 2), n ≥ 3.
Also in a joint work, Nakao and Ono [71] extended this result to the Cauchy problem
utt −
u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
u + λ2(x )u + ρ(ut ) + f (u) = 0,
in Rn,
in Rn × (0, +∞)
(1.1)
(1.2)
(1.3)
where ρ(ut ) behaves like ut β ut and f (u) behaves like −buuα. In this case the authors required that the
initial data be small enough in the H 1 × L2 norm and with compact supports. In [56] Messaoudi considered
problem (1.2) in the case f (u) = buu p−2, g(ut ) = a(1 + ut m−2)ut , a, b > 0, p, m > 2, and showed
that, for any initial data (u0, u1) ∈ H 1( ) × L2( ), the problem has a unique global solution with energy
0
decaying exponentially. Benaissa and Messaoudi [
16
] studied (1.2), for f (u) = −buu p−2, and g(ut ) =
a(1 + ut m−2)ut , and showed that, for suitably chosen initial data, the problem possesses a global weak
solution which decays exponentially even if m ≥ 2. In [
28
], Guesmia looked into the following problem
⎧ utt − u + h(∇u) + g(ut ) + f (u) = 0,
⎪
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
in
where is a bounded open domain in Rn (n ≥ 1), with a smooth boundary ∂ and f, g : R → R and
h : Rn → R are continuous nonlinear functions satisfying some general properties. He obtained uniform
decay of strong and weak solutions under weak growth assumptions on the feedback function and without
any control of the sign of the derivative of the energy related to the above equation. Guesmia and Messaoudi
[
29
], considered (1.4) with h(∇u) = −∇φ · ∇u, where φ ∈ W 1,∞( ), and proved local and global existence
results and showed that weak solutions decay either algebraically or exponentially depending on the rate of
growth of g. Pucci and Serrin [78] discussed the stability of the following problem
⎧ utt − u + Q(x , t, u, ut ) + f (x , u) = 0,
⎪
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
in
and proved that the energy of the solution is a Lyapunov function. Although they did not discuss the issue of the
decay rate, they did show that in general the energy goes to zero as t approaches infinity. They also considered
an important special case of (1.5), when Q(x , t, u, ut ) = a(t )t αut and f (x , u) = V (x )u, and showed that the
behavior of the solution depends crucially on the parameter α. Precisely, they showed if α ≤ 1 then the rest
field is asymptotically stable. On the other hand, when α > 1 there are solutions that do not approach zero
or approach nonzero function φ (x ) as t → ∞. In [
27
], Guesmia studied the following elasticity system
⎧⎪ ∂tt ui − σi j, j + i (x , ∂t ui ) = 0,
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ ui (0) = ui0, ∂t ui (0) = ui1,
in
where i (x , ∂t ui ) = bi (x )gi (∂t ui ), bi ’s ∈ L∞( ), are bounded nonnegative functions and gi ’s are
nondecreasing continuous realvalued functions satisfying certain conditions. He proved precise decay estimates
of the energy for the system (1.6) with some localized dissipations. Zuazua [96] considered the following
damped semilinear wave equation
utt −
u + αu + f (u) + a(x )ut = 0 in Rn × (0, ∞),
with α > 0. He proved the exponential decay of the energy of the solution under suitable conditions on the
functions f and a. In [
17
], Benaissa and Mokeddem looked into the following equation
utt − div ∇u p−2∇u − σ (t )div ∇ut m−2∇ut = 0,
where σ is a positive function, p, m ≥ 2 and is a bounded domain in Rn (n ≥ 1) with a regular boundary.
They gave an energydecay estimate for the solutions and extended the results of Yang [92] and Messaoudi
[59]. Cavalcanti and Guesmia [
19
] looked into the following problem
⎧ utt − u + F (x , t, u, ∇u) = 0,
⎪
⎪⎪⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
t
u + 0 g(t − s) ∂∂uν (s)ds = 0,
⎪
⎪⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
in × (0, +∞)
on ∂ 0 × (0, +∞)
on ∂ 1 × (0, +∞)
in ,
(1.7)
where is a bounded region in Rn whose boundary is partitioned into disjoint sets 0, 1, g is the relaxation
function which satisfies some assumptions. They proved that the dissipation given by the memory term is strong
enough to assure exponential (or polynomial) decay provided the relaxation function also decays exponentially
(or polynomially). In both cases the solution decays with the same rate of the relaxation function. This result
was later generalized by Messaoudi and Soufyane [60], where relaxation functions of general decay type
were considered. AlabauBoussouira [
1
] used some weighted integral inequalities and convexity arguments
and proved a semiexplicit formula which leads to decay rates of the energy in terms of the behavior of the
nonlinear feedback near the origin, for which the optimal exponential and polynomial decay rate estimates are
only special cases. The following problem has been widely studied in the literature:
utt −
u(x , t ) = 0,
u + α(t )g(ut ) = 0,
in
on ∂
and g, α are specific functions. For instance,
where is a bounded domain of Rn with a smooth boundary ∂
when α ≡ 1 and g satisfies
where c1, c2 > 0 are constants and q > 1, it was proved that
c1 min{s, sq } ≤ g(s) ≤ c2 max{s, s1/q },
E (t ) ≤ C E (0) t −2/(q−1), ∀t > 0,
and for q = 1, the decay rate is exponential (see [36,43]). In the presence of a weak frictional damping,
Benaissa and Messaoudi [
15
] treated problem (1.8) for g having a polynomial growth near the origin, and
established energy decay results depending on α and h. Decay results for arbitrary growth of the damping term
have been considered for the first time in the work of Lasiecka and Tataru [44]. They showed that the energy
decays as fast as the solution of an associated differential equation whose coefficients depend on the damping
term. Mustafa and Messaoudi [65] considered (1.8) and established an explicit and general decay rate result,
using some properties of convex functions. Their result was obtained without imposing any restrictive growth
assumption on the frictional damping term. Wu and Xue [91] studied the following quasilinear hyperbolic
equation
utt − ψ (t ) div(∇ut  p−2∇ut ) −
σi (uxi ) + μut αut = 0,
n
i=1
∂
∂ xi
where μ, α ≥ 0, and p ≥ 2 are constants, the functions σi (i = 1, 2, . . . , n) and ψ are nonlinear, the domain
is bounded in Rn (n ≥ 1), with a regular boundary. They investigated, using the multiplier methods, the
stability of weak solutions and obtained an explicit estimation for the rate of the decay. In 2015, Mokeddem
and Mansour [64] revisited the problem considered in [
17
] with some modifications. Precisely they treated the
equation
utt − div(∇u p−2∇u) − σ (t )(ut − div(∇ut m−2∇ut )) = 0,
and gave the same decay result. Recently, Cavalcanti et al. [
20
] treated the following damped wave problem
⎧ utt − u + a(x )ut − div(b(x )∇ut ) = 0,
⎪
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
in
where is a bounded open domain in Rn (n ≥ 1), with a smooth boundary ∂ and a, b : → R+ are
nonnegative functions satisfying specific conditions. Under appropriate assumptions on the coefficients and the
initial data (u0, u1), they proved stabilization results for problem (1.9). Taniguchi [83] studied the following
problem with nonlinear boundary condition:
⎧ utt (t ) − ρ(t ) u(t ) + b(x )ut (t ) = f (u(t )),
⎪
⎪⎪⎨ u(t ) = 0,
⎪ ∂u∂(νt) + γ (ut (t )) = 0,
⎪⎪⎩ u(0) = u0, ut (0) = u1,
on
on
on
in
× (0, T ),
0 × (0, T ),
1 × (0, T )
,
(1.9)
(1.10)
where is a bounded domain of Rn with a smooth boundary ∂ = 0 ∪ 1 and 0 ∩ 1 = φ. Under some
conditions on u0 and E(0), the global existence and exponential decay of the energy E(t) of weak solution
to (1.10) were established.
1.2 Blowup in the case of constant exponents
The first study of finitetime blowup of solutions of hyperbolic PDEs of the form
utt −
u = f (u)
utt −
u + aut = f (u).
goes back to early 70s in the work of Levine [46] and Ball [
10
]. The interaction between the damping and the
source terms was considered by Levine for an equation of the form
He introduced the concavity method and showed that solutions with negative initial energy blow up at finite
time. This method was later improved by Kalantarov and Ladyzhenskaya [
34
] to accommodate more general
cases. After 20 years, Georgiev and Todorova [
26
] extended Levine’s result to the nonlinearly damped equation
utt −
u + aut m ut = bupu, in
× (0, ∞),
for a, b, m, p > 0. In their work, Georgiev and Todorova introduced a different method and determined
appropriate relations between the nonlinearities in the damping and the source, for which there is either global
existence or alternatively finitetime blowup. Precisely, they showed that solutions with negative energy exist
globally ’in time’ if m ≥ p and blow up in finite time if p > m and initial energy is ’sufficiently’ negative.
This result was later generalized to an abstract setting and to unbounded domains by Levine et al. [47], Levine
and Serrin [48], Levine and Park [49], and Messaoudi [55,57]. In all these papers, the authors showed that no
solution with negative or sufficiently negative energy can be extended on [0, ∞), if the nonlinearity dominates
the damping effect ( p > m). Vitillaro [87] combined the arguments in [45] and [
26
] to extend these results
to situations where the damping is nonlinear and the solution has positive initial energy. For more results
concerning blowup and nonexistence, we mention here the work of Vitillaro [88], Todorova [84], Todorova
and Vitillaro [85], Wang [89], Liu [51], Wu [90], and the very recent book of Al’shin et al. [
2
]. For the nonlinear
Kirchhofftype problem of the form
⎧ utt − (
⎪
⎨ u(x, t) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x, 0) = u0(x), ut (x, 0) = u1(x),
Dm u2dx)q u + ut ut r = upu,
in
where p, q, r ≥ 0, is a bounded domain of Rn, with a smooth boundary ∂ and a unit outer normal ν,
several results concerning global existence and blowup have been established; see in this regard [
11–13,74,75
],
and the references therein. Messaoudi and SaidHouari [58] considered the nonlinear wave equation
utt −
ut − div ∇uα−2∇u − div ∇ut β−2∇ut + aut m−2ut = bup−2u,
where a, b > 0, α, β, m, p > 2 and is a bounded domain in Rn (n ≥ 1), with a regular boundary. They
proved, under appropriate conditions on α, β, p, m > 2, a global nonexistence result for solutions associated
with negative initial energy. Chen et al. [
21
] considered the following nonlinear pLaplacianwave equation
utt − div(∇up−2∇u) −
ut + q(x, u) = f (x)
in a bounded domain ⊂ Rn, where 2 ≤ p < n and f, q are given functions. They established global existence
and uniqueness under appropriate conditions on the initial data and the functions f, q. They also discussed the
longtime behavior of the solution. Ibrahim and Lyaghfouri [
32
] considered the following equation
utt − div(∇up−2∇u) = up∗−2u
in Rn, n ≥ 3, and 2 < p < n, p∗ = np−np is the critical Sobolev exponent. Under appropriate assumptions on
the initial data, they proved the finitetime blow up of solutions and, hence, extended a result by Galaktionov
and Pohozaev [
23
]. Ye [93] investigated the blowup property of solutions of a quasilinear hyperbolic system of
equations and proved that certain solutions with positive initial energy explode in finite time and he also gave
estimation for the solution lifespan. Recently, Kafini and Messaoudi [
33
] studied a nonlinear wave equation
with damping and delay terms and showed, under suitable hypotheses on the initial data, that the solution
energy explodes in a finite time. For more results, we refer the reader to [
14,24,31,81
].
1.3 Blowup in the case of variableexponent nonlinearities
In recent years, a great deal of attention has been given to the investigation of nonlinear models of
hyperbolic, parabolic and elliptic equations with variable exponents of nonlinearity. For instance, some models from
physical phenomena like flows of electrorheological fluids or fluids with temperaturedependent viscosity,
filtration processes in a porous media, nonlinear viscoelasticity, and image processing, give rise to such problems.
More details on the subject can be found in [
3
] and [
4
]. Regarding hyperbolic problems with nonlinearities of
variableexponent type, only few works have appeared. For instance, Antontsev [
6
] considered the equation
utt − div(a(x , t )∇u p(x,t)−2∇u) − α ut = b(x , t )uuσ (x,t)−2
in a bounded domain ⊂ Rn , where α > 0 is a constant and a, b, p, σ are given functions. For specific
conditions on a, b, p, σ, he proved some blowup results, for certain solutions with nonpositive initial energy.
He also discussed the case when α = 0 and established a blowup result. Subsequently, Antontsev [
5
] discussed
the same equation and proved a local and a global existence of some weak solutions under certain hypotheses
on the functions a, b, p, σ. He also established some blowup results for certain solutions having nonpositive
initial energy. Guo and Gao [
30
] looked into the same problem of [
6
] and established several blowup results
for certain solutions associated with negative initial energy. Precisely, they took σ (x , t ) = σ > 2, a constant,
and established a result of blowup in finite time. For the case σ (x , t ) = σ (x ), they claimed the same blowup
result but no proof has been given. This work is considered to be an improvement for that of [
6
]. In [82], Sun
et al. looked into the following equation
utt − div(a(x , t )∇u) + c(x , t )ut ut q(x,t)−1 = b(x , t )uu p(x,t)−1
in a bounded domain, with Dirichletboundary conditions, and established a blowup result for solutions with
positive initial energy. They also gave lower and upper bounds for the blowup time and provided a numerical
illustrations for their result. Recently, Messaoudi and Talahmeh [61] studied
utt − div(∇um(x)−2∇u) + μut = u p(x)−2u,
(1.12)
with Dirichletboundary conditions and for μ ≥ 0. They proved a blowup result for certain solutions with
arbitrary positive initial energy. This result generalized that of Korpusov [39] established for (1.12), with m
and p constants. This latter result was later extended by the same authors in [62] to an equation of the form
utt − div(∇ur(·)−2∇u) + aut m(·)−2ut = bu p(·)−2u,
where a, b > 0 are constants and the exponents of nonlinearity m, p and r are given functions. They proved
a finitetime blowup result for the solutions with negative initial energy and for certain solutions with positive
energy. Very recently, Messaoudi et al. [63] studied
utt −
u + aut ut m(·)−2 = buu p(·)−2,
(1.13)
where a, b are positive constants. They established the existence of a unique weak solution using the Faedo–
Galerkin method under suitable assumptions on the variable exponents m and p and they also proved the
finitetime blow up of solutions and gave a twodimension numerical example to illustrate the blowup result.
Yunzhu Gao and Wenjie Gao [
25
] studied a nonlinear viscoelastic equation with variable exponents and proved
the existence of weak solutions using the Faedo–Galerkin method under suitable assumptions. Autuori et al.
[
9
] looked into a nonlinear Kirchhoff system in the presence of the −→p (x , t )Laplace operator, a nonlinear
force f (t, x , u) and a nonlinear damping term Q = Q(t, x , u, ut ). They established a global nonexistence
result under suitable conditions on f, Q, p. For more results concerning the blowup of hyperbolic problems,
we refer the reader to Antontsev and Ferreira [
7
] and the book by Antontsev and Shmarev [
8
].
2 Preliminaries
2.1 History of variableexponent Lebesgue spaces
Variable Lebesgue spaces were first introduced by Orlicz in 1931 in his article [77]. He started by looking for
necessary and sufficient conditions on a real sequence (yi ) under which xi yi converges, for any other real
sequence (xi ) such that xipi converges, where ( pi ) is a sequence of real numbers with pi > 1. Furthermore,
he also considered the variableexponent function space L p(·) on the real line. Orlicz later concentrated much
on the theory of the function spaces that were named after him. In the theory of Orlicz spaces, the space Lϕ is
defined as follows:
Lϕ :=
u :
→ R such that (λu) =
ϕ(λu(x))dx < +∞ ,
for some λ > 0, where ϕ is a realvalued function which may depend on x and satisfies some additional
conditions. Putting certain properties of in an abstract setting, a more general class of function spaces,
called modular spaces, was first studied by Nakano [66,67]. Following the work of Nakano, modular spaces
were investigated by several people, most importantly by groups at Sapporo (Japan), Voronezh (U.S.S.R.),
and Leiden (the Netherlands). An explicit version of modular function spaces was investigated by Polish
Mathematicians, like Hudzik and Kaminska.
The variableexponent Lebesgue space L p(·)( ) is defined as the Orlicz space Lϕp(·) ( ), where
t p(·)
ϕp(·)(t) = t p(·) or ϕp(·)(t) = p(·) ,
with p(·) : → [1, ∞] as a measurable function.
Variableexponent Lebesgue spaces on the real line have been independently developed by Russian
researchers. Their results originated in 1961 in a paper by Tsenov [86]. The Luxemburg norm was
introduced by Sharapudinov for the Lebesgue space. He showed that this space is Banach if the exponent p(·)
satisfies 1 < essinf p ≤ esssup p < +∞. In the mid80s, Zhikov [94] started a new line of investigation of
variableexponent spaces, by considering variational integrals with nonstandard growth conditions. The next
major step in the study of variableexponent spaces was by Kovacik and Rakosnik [40] in the early 90s. In
their paper, they established many of the basic properties of Lebesgue and Sobolev spaces in Rn.
2.2 Variableexponent Lebesgue Spaces
In this section, we present some preliminary facts about the Lebesgue spaces with variable exponents.
Definition 2.1 Let X be a K−vector space. A function : X −→ [0, ∞] is said to be leftcontinuous if the
mapping λ −→ (λx) is leftcontinuous on [0, ∞), for every x ∈ X ; that is,
lim
λ→1−
(λx) = (x), ∀ x ∈ X.
Definition 2.2 Let X be a K−vector space. A function : X −→ [0, ∞] is called a semimodular on X if the
following properties hold:
(a) (0) = 0.
(b) (λx) = (x), for all x ∈ X and λ ∈ K, with λ = 1.
(c) is convex.
(d) is leftcontinuous.
(e) (λx) = 0, for all λ > 0 implies x = 0.
A semimodular is called modular if
(f) (x) = 0 implies x = 0
A semimodular is called continuous if
(g) the mapping λ −→
(λx) is continuous on [0, ∞) for all x ∈ X
Examples 2.3 Let L0( ) be the set of all Lebesguemeasurable functions defined on . If 1 ≤ p < +∞,
then
p( f ) :=
 f (x)pdx
defines a continuous modular on L0( ).
Theorem 2.4 Let be a semimodular on X . Then, the mapping λ →
every x ∈ X . Moreover,
(λx) is nondecreasing on [0, ∞) for
(λx) = (λx) ≤ λ (x) for all λ ≤ 1,
(λx) = (λx) ≥ λ (x) for all λ ≥ 1.
(2.1)
Proof • Assume that 0 ≤ λ < μ, then 0 ≤ μλ < 1. So for a fixed x ∈ X we have, by convexity and
nonnegativeness of and the fact that (0) = 0,
(λx) =
λ
μ
(μx) +
λ
1 − μ
· 0
λ
≤ μ (μx) +
λ
1 − μ
λ
(0) = μ (μx) ≤ (μx).
Hence, for any fixed x ∈ X , we have
•
•
•
For λ = 0 we have
For λ ≤ 1, we have
Therefore,
For λ ≥ 1, we have
Thus,
(λx) ≤ (μx),
for
0 ≤ λ < μ.
λ
λ λx
 
(λx) =
= (λx)
since
Definition 2.5 Let ( A, , μ) be a σ finite, complete measure space. We define P( A, μ) to be the set of all
μmeasurable functions p : → [1, ∞]. The functions p ∈ P( A, μ) are called variable exponents on A. We
set
p1 := essinfy∈A p(y) and p2 := esssupy∈A p(y).
If p2 < +∞, then we call p a bounded variable exponent. If p ∈ P( A, μ), then we define p ∈ P( A, μ) by
1 1
p(y) + p (y) = 1, where
1
∞
:= 0.
The function p is called the dual variable exponent of p. In the special case when μ is the ndimensional
Lebesgue measure and is an open subset of Rn, we abbreviate P( ) := P( , μ).
where
Definition 2.6 We define the Lebesgue space with a variableexponent p(·) by
L p(·)( ) := {u :
→ R; measurable in
: p(·)(λu) < ∞, for some λ > 0},
is a modular. We equip L p(·)( ) with the following Luxembourgtype norm
p(·)(u) =
u(x)p(x)dx
u p(·) := inf λ > 0 :
u(x) p(x)dx ≤ 1 .
λ
Examples 2.7 Let p(x) = x on
= (1, 2). Then 1 p(·) = 1. Indeed,
p(·)(1/λ) =
1
2
λ − 1
λ−x dx = λ2 ln λ .
Since p(·)(1) = 1, then, by definition of 1 p(·), we have 1 p(·) ≤ 1. On the other hand, it is easy to
check that p(·)(1/λ) > 1, for 0 < λ < 1. This gives 1 p(·) ≥ 1. Hence, we conclude that 1 p(·) = 1.
Lemma 2.8 If p(x) ≡ p, where p is constant. Then,
= x − x0x + x0
4 log δ
≤ log δ
A
≤ − log (x, y) − (x0, y0)
Lemma 2.11 (Unit ball property) Let p ∈ P( A, μ) and f ∈ L p(·)( A, μ). Then
(i) f p(·) ≤ 1 if and only if p(·)( f ) ≤ 1
Proof Since p(·)(u/λ0) = 1, then
1
Since, p(·)(u/λk ) = (λk)p
u p
  ≤ 1, then we have
Combining (2.3) and (2.4) gives (2.2).
Definition 2.9 We say that a function q :
0 < δ < 1 such that
u p(·) = λ0 =
Next, using property of Inf, there exists a sequence {λk }k∞=1 such that λk ≥ u p(·), with
→ R is logHölder continuous on , if there exist A > 0 and
A
q(x) − q(y) ≤ − log x − y , for all x, y ∈
, with x − y < δ.
Examples 2.10 Let p(x) = x2 + 1 be defined on = B(0, 1). Then p : → R is logHölder continuous on
. Indeed, Let (x, y), (x0, y0) ∈ , with (x, y) − (x0, y0) < δ and 0 < δ < 1. Then,
 p(x, y) − p(x0, y0) = x2 − x02
(2.2)
(2.3)
(2.4)
(2.5)
(ii) If f p(·) ≤ 1, then p(·)( f ) ≤ f p(·)
(iii) Iff fp(·p)(≤·) ≥1 +1, thpe(·n)( f )
f p(·) ≤ p(·)( f )
(iv)
Proof (i) If p(·)( f ) ≤ 1, then f p(·) ≤ 1 by definition of · p(·). On the other hand, if f p(·) ≤ 1, then
p(·) λf ≤ 1 for all λ > 1. Since p(·) is leftcontinuous it follows that p(·)( f ) ≤ 1.
(ii) The claim is obvious for f = 0, so assume that 0 < f p(·) ≤ 1. By (i) and f/ f p(·) = 1, it follows
that p(·) f/ f p(·) ≤ 1. Since f p(·) ≤ 1, it follows from (2.1) that p(·)( f )/ f p(·) ≤ 1. This
implies p(·)( f ) ≤ f p(·).
(iii) Assumethat f p(·) > 1.Then p(·) λf > 1for1 < λ < f p(·) andby(2.1)itfollowsthat1 < p(·λ)(f).
which implies λ < p(·)( f ), for 1 < λ < f p(·). Since λ is arbitrary, we have f p(·) ≤ p(·)( f ).
(iv) This follows immediately from (ii) and (iii).
We also state, without proof, some useful results from [41].
Lemma 2.12 If 1 < p1 ≤ p(x) ≤ p2 < +∞ holds, then
min{ u pp1(·), u pp2(·)} ≤ p(·)(u) ≤ max{ u pp1(·), u pp2(·)},
for any u ∈ Lp(·)( ).
Theorem 2.13 If p ∈ P(A,μ), then Lp(·)(A,μ) is a Banach space.
Lemma 2.14 If p : → [1,∞) is a measurable function with p2 < +∞, then C0∞( ) is dense in Lp(·)( ).
Lemma 2.15 (Young’s inequality) Let p,q,s ∈ P( ) such that
(2.6)
Then for all a,b ≥ 0,
By taking s = 1, and 1 < p,q < +∞, then we have for any ε > 0,
where Cε =
1
q . For p = q = 2, we have
q(εp) p
Lemma 2.16 (Hölder’s Inequality) Let p,q,s ∈ P( ) such that
If f ∈ Lp(·)( ) and g ∈ Lq(·)( ), then fg ∈ Ls(·)( ) and
By taking p = q = 2, we have the Cauchy–Schwarz inequality.
1 1 1
, for a.e y ∈ .
s(y) = p(y) + q(y)
2
ab ≤ εa2 + 4bε.
1 1 1
, for a.e y ∈ .
s(y) = p(y) + q(y)
fg s(·) ≤ 2 f p(·) g q(·).
2.3 Variableexponent Sobolev spaces
In this section we study some functional analysistype properties of Sobolev spaces with variable exponents.
We start by recalling the definition of weak derivative.
Definition 2.17 (Weak derivative) Let ⊂ Rn be a domain. Assume that u ∈ Ll1oc( ). Let α :=
(α1, . . . , αn) ∈ Nn be a multiindex and let α = α1 + · · · + αn. If there exists g ∈ Ll1oc( ) such that
u
∂αψ
∂α1 x1 · · · ∂αn xn
dx = (−1)α
ψg dx,
∂αu or ∂α1 x∂1·α··∂uαn xn .
Definition 2.18 Let k ∈ N. We define the space W k,p(·)( ) by
for all ψ ∈ C0∞( ), then g is called a weak partial derivative of u of order α. The function g is denoted by
W k,p(·)( ) := {u ∈ L p(·)( ) such that ∂αu ∈ L p(·)( ), ∀ α ≤ k}.
We define a semimodular on W k,p(·)( ) by
W k,p(·)( )(u) =
L p(·)( )(∂αu).
This induces a norm given by
For k ∈ N, the space W k,p(·)( ) is called Sobolev space and its elements are called Sobolev functions. Clearly
W 0,p(·)( ) = L p(·)( ) and
W 1,p(·)( ) = {u ∈ L p(·)( ) such that ∇u exists and ∇u ∈ L p(·)( )},
equipped with the norm
u W 1,p(·)( ) = u p(·) + ∇u p(·).
Theorem 2.19 Let p ∈ P( ). The space W k,p(·)( ) is a Banach space, which is separable if p is bounded,
and reflexive if 1 < p1 ≤ p2 < +∞.
Definition 2.20 Let p ∈ P( ) and k ∈ N. The Sobolev space W k,p(·)( ) “with zero boundary trace” is the
0
closure in W k,p(·)( ) of the set of W k,p(·)( )−functions with compact support, i.e.,
W0k,p(·)( ) = {u ∈ W k,p(·)( ) : u = uχK for a compact K ⊂ }.
Remark 2.21 [41] Let p ∈ P( ) and k ∈ N. Then
(i) The space H k,p(·)( ) is defined as the closure of C0∞( ) in W k,p(·)( ).
0
(ii) H k,p(·)( ) ⊂ W k,p(·)( ).
0 0
(iii) If p is logHölder continuous on , then W k,p(·)( ) = H k,p(·)( ).
0 0
(iv) The dual of W 1,p(·)( ) is defined as W −1,p (·)( ), in the same way as the usual Sobolev spaces, where
0
1 1
p(·) + p (·) = 1.
Theorem 2.22 Let p ∈ P( ). The space W k,p(·)( ) is a Banach space, which is separable if p is bounded,
0
and reflexive if 1 < p1 ≤ p2 < +∞.
Theorem 2.23 (Poincaré’s inequality) Let
continuity property, then
be a bounded domain of Rn and p(·) satisfies the LogHölder
u p(·) ≤ C ∇u p(·), for all u ∈ W 1,p(·)( ),
0
norm given by u W 1,p(·)( ) = ∇u p(·).
0
If p = 2, then we set H01( ) = W01,2( ).
where the positive constant C depends on p(·) and only. In particular, the space W 1,p(·)( ) has an equivalent
0
Remark 2.24 Contrary to the constantexponent case, there is no Poincaré inequality version for modular. The
following example shows that the Poincaré inequality does not, in general, hold in a modular form.
Examples 2.25 [41] Let p : (−2, 2) −→ [
2, 3
] be a Lipschitz continuous exponent defined by
Let uμ be a Lipschitz function defined by
Then
as μ → 0+.
p(x) =
⎧ 3, if x ∈ (−2, −1) ∪ (1, 2)
⎪⎪⎪⎨ 2, if x ∈ − 21 , 21
⎪⎪⎪⎩ 2−x2+x+1,1, if x ∈ − 1, − 21
if x ∈ 21 , 1 .
⎧ μx + 2μ,
uμ(x) = ⎨⎪ μ,
We end this section with some essential embedding results. See [41].
Lemma 2.26 Let be a bounded domain in Rn with a smooth boundary ∂ . Assume that p :
is a measurable function such that
→ (1, ∞)
1 < p1 ≤ p(x) ≤ p2 < +∞, for a.e. x ∈
.
If p(x), q(x) ∈ C( ) and q(x) < p∗(x) in
with p∗(x) =
∞,
Then the embedding W 1,p(·)( ) → Lq(·)( ) is continuous and compact.
nn−pp(x(x)) ,
if p2 < n
if p2 ≥ n.
As a special case we have
Corollary 2.27 Let be a bounded domain in Rn with a smooth boundary ∂ . Assume that p :
is a continuous function such that
2 ≤ p1 ≤ p(x) ≤ p2 <
, n ≥ 3.
2n
n − 2
Then the embedding H 1( ) → L p(·)( ) is continuous and compact.
→ (1, ∞)
(2.7)
3 Existence
In this section we discuss a wave problem in the presence of a nonlinear damping, where the nonlinearity is
of variableexponent type. We establish the well posedness, using the Galerkin method and adopting the steps
of the book [50] used for standard linearities.
Let be a bounded domain in Rn with a smooth boundary ∂ . We consider the following initialboundary
value problem:
where m(·) is a given continuous function on
and the logHölder continuity condition:
⎧ utt −
⎪
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
u + ut m(·)−2ut = 0,
,
m1 := ess infx∈
m(x ),
Integrate over (0, t ), to get
Using the inequality
for all a,b ∈ R and a.e. x ∈
, we have
which implies that w = C = 0, since w = 0 on ∂ . Hence, the uniqueness.
A
m(x ) − m(y) ≤ − log x − y , for a.e. x , y ∈
Theorem 3.1 Let u0 ∈ H01( ), u1 ∈ L2( ). Assume that the exponent m(·) satisfies conditions (3.1) and
(3.2). Then problem (P) has a unique weak solution such that
u ∈ L∞((0, T ), H01( )), ut ∈ L∞((0, T ), L2( )) ∩ Lm(·)(
× (0, T )),
utt ∈ L2((0, T ), H −1( )), ∀ T > 0.
Proof Uniqueness
Suppose that ( P) has two solutions u and v. Then, w = u − v satisfies
⎪⎩ w(x , 0) = wt (x , 0) = 0,
⎧ wtt −
⎪
⎨ w(x , t ) = 0,
w + ut ut m(·)−2 − vt vt m(·)−2 = 0, in
on ∂
in
Multiply the equation by wt and integrate over , to obtain
wt2 +
∇w2 +
(ut ut m(x)−2 − vt vt m(x)−2)(ut − vt )dx = 0.
0
t
(wt2 + ∇w2) + 2
(ut ut m(x)−2 − vt vt m(x)−2)(ut − vt )dx ds = 0.
(am(x)−2a − bm(x)−2b)(a − b) ≥ 0,
wt2 + ∇w2
= 0;
(P)
(3.1)
(3.2)
Existence
Let {v j } ∞j=1 be an orthonormal basis of H 1( ), with
0
− v j = λ j v j , in
, v j = 0, on ∂ .
look for functions
We define the finitedimensional subspace Vk = span{v1, . . . , vk }. By normalization, we have v j 2 = 1. We
uk (x, t) =
a j (t)v j
k
j=1
which satisfy the following approximate problems
utkt (x, t)v j (x)dx +
∇uk (x, t)∇v j (x)dx +
utk (x, t)m(x)−2utk (x, t)v j (x)dx = 0,
k k
⎩⎪ uk (x, 0) = u0, utk (x, 0) = u1, ∀ j = 1, 2, . . . , k,
k
i=1(u0, vi )vi and uk1 =
k
i=1(u1, vi )vi are two sequences in H 1( ) and L2( ), respectively,
0
This generates the system of k ordinary differential equations
uk0 → u0 in H01( ) and uk1 → u1 in L2( ).
a j (t) + λ j a j (t) = G j (a1(t), . . . , ak (t)),
a j (0) = (u0, v j ), a j (0) = (u1, v j ), ∀ j = 1, 2, . . . , k,

k
i=1
G j (a1(t), . . . , ak (t)) = −
ai (t)vi (x)m(x)−2
ai (t)vi (x)v j (x)dx.
This system can be solved by standard ODE theory. Hence, we obtain functions
a j : [0, tk ) → R, 0 < tk < T .
Next, we have to show that tk = T , ∀k ≥ 1. We multiply the equation in (3.3) by a j (t) and sum over j to get
⎧
⎪⎨
where uk
0 =
such that
where
0
t
k
i=1
(3.3)
(3.4)
(3.5)
(3.6)
1 d
2 dt
1
2
=
≤
1
2
1
2
Integration over (0, t) gives
So, we have
(utk (x, t)2dx + ∇uk (x, t)2)dx +
utk (x, t)m(x)dx = 0.
(utk (x, t)2dx + ∇uk (x, t)2)dx +
utk (x, s)m(x)dxds
(u1 + ∇uk02)dx
k 2
(u12 + ∇u02)dx = C.
sup(0,tk)
utk (x, t)2dx + sup(0,tk)
∇uk (x, t)2dx + 0tk
utk (x, s)m(x)dxds ≤ C.
Thus, the solution can be extended to [0, T ) and, in addition, we have
(uk ) is a bounded sequence in L∞((0, T ), H01( ))
(utk ) is a bounded sequence in L∞((0, T ), L2( )) ∩ Lm(·)(
Therefore, we can extract a subsequence (u ) such that
u → u weakly ∗ in L∞((0, T ), H01( ))
ut → ut weakly ∗ in L∞((0, T ), L2( )) and weakly in Lm(·)( × (0, T )).
We can conclude by Lion’s Lemma [50] that u ∈ C [0, T ], L2( ) so that u(x , 0) has a meaning. Since
(ut ) is bounded in Lm(·)( × (0, T )) then (ut m(x)−2ut ) is bounded in L mm(·()·−) 1 ( × (0, T )); hence, up to a
subsequence,
ut m(·)−2ut → ψ weakly in L mm(·()·−) 1
utt −
u + ψ = 0, in D
( A(ut ) − A(v))(ut − v)dt ≥ 0, ∀v ∈ Lm(·)((0, T )H01( )).
ut (x , T )2
A(ut )v −
0
T
ψ v −
ψ − A(λw + ut ) w ≥ 0, ∀λ = 0, ∀w ∈ Lm(·)
0 ≤ lim sup X ≤ 0
ψ v −
(3.12)
(3.13)
(3.14)
(ψ − A(λw + ut ))w ≤ 0, ∀w ∈ Lm(·)(
(ψ − A(ut ))w ≥ 0, ∀w ∈ Lm(·)(
which gives
u + ut m(x)−2ut = 0, in D (
utt − × (0, T )).
To handle the initial conditions, we note that
ul u weakly ∗ in L∞((0, T ), H01( ))
ult ut weakly ∗ in L∞((0, T ), L2( )).
Thus, using Lions’ Lemma [50], we obtain, up to a subsequence,
ul → u in C ([0, T ], L2( )).
Therefore, ul (x , 0) makes sense and ul (x , 0) → u(x , 0) in L2( ). Also we have that
ul (x , 0) = ul0(x ) → u0(x ) in H01( ).
u(x , 0) = u0(x ).
As in [52], let φ ∈ C0∞(0, T ) and replacing (uk ) by (ul ), we obtain, from (3.3) and for any j ≤ l,
0
T
0
T
∇u (x , t )∇v j (x )φ (t )dx dt −
ut (x , t )m(x)−2ut (x , t )v j (x )φ (t )dx dt. (3.15)
∇u(x , t )∇v j (x )φ (t )dx dt −
ut (x , t )m(x)−2ut (x , t )v j (x )φ (t )dx dt, (3.16)
−
=
0
T
0
T
ut (x , t )v(x )φ (t )dx dt
u − ut (x , t )m(x)−2ut (x , t ) v(x )φ (t )dx dt,
As l → +∞, we obtain that for all j ≥ 1. This implies
−
0
T
= −
−
0
ult (x , t )v j (x )φ (t )dx dt
ut (x , t )v j (x )φ (t )dx dt
m(·)
for all v ∈ H 1( ). This means utt ∈ L m(·)−1 ([0, T ), H −1( )) and u solves the equation
0
m(·)
Thus, ut ∈ L∞([0, T ), L2( )), utt ∈ L m(·)−1 ([0, T ), H −1( )). Consequently,
So, ult (x , 0) makes sense (see [52, p.116]). It follows that
utt −
u + ut m(·)−2ut = 0.
ut ∈ C ([0, T ), H −1( )).
ult (x , 0) → ut (x , 0) in H −1( ).
ult (x , 0) = ul1(x ) → u1(x ) in L2( ).
ut (x , 0) = u1(x ).
But
4 Decay
where
(3.17)
(3.18)
(3.19)
(3.20)
This ends the proof of Theorem (3.1).
For the best of our knowledge, there are not many stability results for hyperbolic problem involving
nonstandard nonlinearities. The only works, we are aware of, are that by Ferreira and Messaoudi [
22
], where
they studied a nonlinear viscoelastic plate equation with a lower order perturbation of a −→p (x , t )−Laplacian
operator of the form
0
t
utt +
2
u −
−→p (x,t)u +
h(t − s) u(s)ds −
ut + f (u) = 0,
−→p (x,t)u =
n
i=1
∂
∂ xi
∂u pi (x,t)−2 ∂u
∂ xi
∂ xi
, −→p = ( p1, p2, . . . , pn)T
and
where
and h ≥ 0 is a memory kernel that decays at a general rate and f is a nonlinear function. They proved a
general decay result under appropriate assumptions on h, f, and the variableexponent −→p (x , t )−Laplacian
operator. Also, the work of Yunzhu Gao and Wenjie Gao [
25
], where they considered the following nonlinear
viscoelastic hyperbolic problem:
⎪⎧ utt − u −
⎨ u(x , t ) = 0,
⎪⎩ u(x , 0) = u0(x ), ut (x , 0) = u1(x ),
utt + 0t g(t − τ ) u(τ )dτ + ut m(x)−2ut = u p(x)−2u, in
on ∂
in
× (0, T ),
× [0, T )
,
(4.1)
where m(x ), p(x ) are continuous functions in
such that
1 < inf m(x ) ≤ m(x ) ≤ sup m(x ) < +∞, 1 < inf p(x ) ≤ p(x ) ≤ sup p(x ) < +∞
x∈ x∈ x∈ x∈
∀z, ξ ∈
, z − ξ  < 1, m(z) − m(ξ ) +  p(z) − p(ξ ) ≤ ω z − ξ  ,
They also assumed that
(i) g : R+ →
R+ is a C 1 function satisfying
(ii) There exists η > 0 such that
lim sup ω(τ ) ln
t→0+
1
τ
= C < +∞.
g(0) > 0, 1 −
g(s)ds =
> 0;
0
+∞
g (t ) ≤ −ηg(t ), t ≥ 0
and proved the existence of the weak solution to problem (4.1).
To establish our decay result, we need the following wellknown lemma.
Lemma 4.1 [38] Let E : R+ →
that
R+ be a nonincreasing function. Assume that there exist σ > 0, ω > 0 such
s
∞
1
E 1+σ (t )dt ≤ ω E σ (0)E (s) = c E (s), ∀s > 0.
which satisfies
We define the energy of the solution by
This means that E (t ) is a nonincreasing function.
where
which implies that
It follows that
Using the definition of E (t ) and the relation
s
T
T
T
Equation (4.2) becomes
Estimates
· −
s
dt
Theorem 4.2 Suppose the conditions of Theorem 3.1 hold. Then there exist two constants c, α > 0 such that
the energy satisfies, ∀t ≥ 0,
Proof Multiplying (P) by u E q (t ), for q > 0 to be specified later, and integrating over
obtain that
× (s, T ), T > s, we
s
T
(uutt − u u + ut m(x)−2ut u) = 0,
s
T
s
T
d
dt
= E q (s)
≤ E q (s)
≤ E q (s)
+ E q (T )
(ut u)t − ut2 + ∇u2 + ut m(x)−2ut u
= 0.
uut dx +
dt
T
s
s
T
(4.2)
(4.3)
where c∗ is the embedding constant. Since E (t ) is nonincreasing, then we have
dt
For the third term of the righthand side of (4.3), we set, as in [38],
and exploit Hölder’s and Young’s inequalities and (3.1) as follows
(4.4)
(4.5)
ut2 +
+
+
ut m1
ut m(x)
ut2
−
2/m1
2/m1
+
+
−E (t ) 2/m1 + −E (t ) 2/m2
−
ut m2
ut m(x)
2/m2 !
2/m2 !
s
T
E q (t ) −E (t ) 2/m2 dt + c
E q (t ) −E (t ) 2/m1 dt
E q+1(t )dt + cε
(−E (t ))2(q+1)/m2 dt
+ cε
(E (t ))qm1/(m1−2)dt + cε
(−E (t ))dt.
≤ c
≤ c
≤ c
≤ c
≤ cε
s
s
T
T
s
s
s
s
s
T
T
T
T
s
T
T
s
T
ut m(x)−1u ≤ εum(x) + cε(x )ut m(x),
cε(x ) = ε1−m(x)(m(x ))−m(x)(m(x ) − 1)m(x)−1.
s
T
2
The case m1 = 2 is similar.
m(x) , p (x ) = m(x ); so for a.e.
For the last term of (4.3), we use Young’s inequality with p(x ) = m(x)−1
, we have
at
x ∈
where
We choose q such that q = m22 − 1 and notice that mq1m−12 = q + 1 + mm21−−m21 , if m1 > 2. Hence, we arrive
Therefore,
s
T
T
T
T
≤ ε s
+ s
T
≤ ε s T
+ s
+ s E q (t ) cε(x )ut m(x)dx .
Therefore, a combination of (4.3)–(4.7) leads to
2 T E q+1(t )dt ≤ cε(1 + (E (0)) m21 −1 + (E (0)) m22 −1
T
s s
+ cε E (s) + s E q (t ) cε(x )ut m(x)dx .
We then pick ε > 0 so small that
cε 1 + ( E (0) m21 −1 + E (0) m22 −1 < 1.
Once ε is fixed, then cε(x ) ≤ M, where M is constant since m(x ) is bounded.
Thus, we arrive at
s
T
E q+1(t )dt ≤ c E (s) + M
≤ c E (s) + q M+s1 E q+1(s) − E q+1(T )
≤ c E (s) + E q+1(s)
≤ c 1 + E q (0) E (s) = c E (s), ∀ T > s > 0.
By taking T → ∞, we get
s
Hence, Komornik’s Lemma (with σ = m22 − 1) implies the desired result.
∞ E m22 (t )dt ≤ c E (s).
Using the definition of E (t ), we get
T
s
5 Numerical study
In this section, we present two numerical applications to illustrate the decay results in Theorem 4.2. We consider
the initialboundary value problem ( P) on the domain B(0, 1) × (0, T ), where B(0, 1) is the unit disk in R2.
We take the initial data u0(x1, x2) = 1 − x1 − x22 and u1(x1, x2) = 0. We consider the following applications:
2
1. Polynomial decay Here we take the variableexponent m(x1, x2) =
numerically verify that
x1 2 + 4, where m2 = 5, and
for some c > 0.
2. Exponential decay We take m(x1, x2) = 2 and we numerically verify that
E (t ) ≤ c E (0)(1 + t )−2/3, ∀t ≥ 0,
E (t ) ≤ ce−αt ,
∀t ≥ 0,
for some c > 0 and α > 0.
In the above applications, the exponent function m(·) satisfies conditions (3.1) and (3.2). Below we
introduce a numerical scheme of ( P) using finiteelement and finitedifference methods for the space and time
discretization, respectively. Extensive details about these methods can be found in [42,79,80].
5.1 Numerical method
We discretize the wave equation
utt −
u + ut m(·)−2ut = 0, in B(0, 1) × (0, T ),
(5.1)
using finite differences for the time variable and a finiteelement method for the space variable x = (x1, x2) ∈
B(0, 1).
We first discretize the wave equation in time. The time interval [0, T ] is divided into N equal subintervals
[t j , t j+1], j = 0, 1, . . . , N − 1, where t j = j τ and τ = T /N is the time step. Denoting
we approximate the time derivatives of u(x , t ) at t = t j , for j = 1, 2, . . . , N − 1, using the following
finitedifference formulas:
U ( j) := u(x , y, t j ),
U ( j)
t
Ut(tj) =
U ( j) − U ( j−1)
τ
U ( j+1) − 2U ( j) + U ( j−1)
τ 2
,
.
Then, a semidiscrete formulation of (5.1) at t = t j+1 reads
Ut(tj+1)
U ( j+1) + Ut( j)m−2Ut( j+1) = 0,
(5.2)
for j = 1, 2, ..., N − 1. Note that we have used the history data U ( j) and U ( j) to make the formulation linear
t
in U ( j+1), which will be essential for the space discretization. The above formulation is defined for j = 0 by
taking U (0) = u0(0) and Ut(0) = u1(0).
Now, we discretize the space variable. Let Bh be a triangulation of B(0, 1), with a maximal diameter size
h. Let Ph := P1(Bh ) ∩ H0(Bh ), where H0(Bh ) denotes the linear Lagrangian finitedimensional space.
Multiplying (5.2) by a test function wh ∈ Ph , integrating by parts and using the boundary condition
Uh( j+1) = 0 on ∂ Bh , we obtain the full discrete, weak formulation problem: given initial data Uh(0) := uh (0)
and Uh(0,t) := u1,h (0), find Uh( j+1) ∈ Ph that satisfies
(Uh(,jt+t1) + Uh(,jt)m−2Uh(,jt+1), wh ) + (∇Uh( j+1), ∇wh ) = 0, j = 0, 1, . . . , N − 1,
(5.3)
for all wh ∈ Ph . Here, (·, ·) denotes the L2 inner product.
The above numerical problem is advanced, and at this stage we assume that the discrete solution of (5.3)
is unique and converges to the exact solution of ( P), in the H 1norm, as (h, τ ) → (0, 0).
Fig. 1
h
Fig. 2 Initial data: u(h0)
5.2 Numerical results
In this section, we present the decay results of the full discrete model (5.3). The numerical results are obtained
using Matlab.
Figure 1 shows the triangulation h , which consists of 7808 degrees of freedom and 3024 elements. We
take a small enough time step τ = 0.01, large enough time span T = 100 and α = 0.1.
Figure 2 shows the initial data u(h0) = 1 − x12 − x22 projected in the finiteelement space Ph .
Now, we present the numerical results corresponding to the polynomial and exponential decay applications.
1. Polynomial decay Figure 3 lists the solutions u(n) corresponding to tn = 5, 20, 50, 100.
h
Figure 4 shows that energy function satisfies
E (tn )(1 + tn )2/3 ≤ 4 for tn ∈ {0, 1, . . . , 100}.
This implies that the numerical solution u(n) has a polynomial decay, which agrees with Theorem 4.2.
h
Fig. 4 Polynomial decay: y = E (t )(1 + t )2/3
2. Exponential decay In this case, the numerical solutions u(n) make the energy function E (tn ) satisfy
h
E (tn )e0.1t ≤ 4 for tn ∈ {0, 1, . . . , 100}.
This implies that the numerical solution u(n) has an exponential decay, which verifies Theorem 4.2.
h
In Figs. 4 and 5, the corresponding curves are plotted using τ = 0.1 (the dashed curve) and using τ = 0.01
(the solid curve). In both applications the two curves are coinciding, which indicates that the corresponding
numerical solutions are promising.
6 Blowup
Let be a bounded domain in Rn with a smooth boundary ∂ . We consider the following initialboundary
value problem:
where a > 0 and p is a given continuous function on
satisfying
⎧ utt −
⎪
⎨ u(x, t) = 0,
u = aup(·)−2u,
in
,
p1 := ess infx∈ p(x), p2 := ess supx∈ p(x),
with
and the logHölder continuity condition:
A
 p(x) − p(y) ≤ − log x − y , for a.e. x, y ∈
Therefore, (Q) can be rewritten as an initialvalue problem:
= (u, v)T ,
(0) =
0 = (u0, u1)T and J ( ) = 0, aup(·)−2u T .
where the linear operator A : D(A) → H is defined by
A
The state space of is the Hilbert space
equipped with the inner product
t + A
(0) =
= J ( )
0,
= (−υ, − u)T .
H = H01( ) × L2( ),
,
H =
(∇u · ∇u + υυ)dx,
for all
= (u, v)T and
= (u, v)T in H. The domain of A is
Then, we have the following local existence result.
D(A) = {
∈ H : u ∈ H 2( ) ∩ H01( ), υ ∈ H01( )}.
(Q)
(6.1)
(6.2)
(Q1)
Theorem 6.1 Assume that the exponent p satisfies conditions (6.1) and (6.2). Then for any
(Q) has a unique local weak solution ∈ C ( ; H). That is,
u ∈ L∞((0, T ), H01( )), ut ∈ L∞((0, T ), L2( )), utt ∈ L2((0, T ), H −1( )).
Proof First, for all
∈ D(A), we have
A ,
H = −
∇υ · ∇u dx −
υ u = −
∇υ · ∇u dx +
∇υ · ∇u dx = 0.
Therefore, A is a monotone operator.
To show that A is maximal, we prove that for each
there exists V = (u, υ)T ∈ D(A) such that (I + A)V = F. That is,
We deduce from (6.5) that
where
Now we define, over H 1( ), the bilinear and linear forms
0
F = ( f, g)T ∈ H,
u − υ = f
υ − u = g.
u −
u = G,
G = f + g ∈ L2( ).
0 ∈ H, problem
(6.3)
(6.4)
(6.5)
(6.6)
(6.7)
(6.8)
B(u, w) =
uw +
∇u · ∇w, L(w) =
Gw.
It is easy to verify that B is continuous and coercive and L is continuous on H 1( ). Then, Lax–Milgram
0
theorem implies that the equation
B(u, w) = L(w),
∀w ∈ H01( ),
has a unique solution u ∈ H 1( ). Hence, υ = u − f ∈ H 1( ). Thus, V ∈ H.
0 0
Using (6.6), we get
uw +
∇u · ∇w =
Gw,
∀ w ∈ H01( ).
The elliptic regularity theory, then, implies that u ∈ H 2( ). Therefore,
Consequently, I + A is surjective and then A is maximal.
Finally, we show that J : H → H is locally Lipchitz. So, if we set
V = (u, υ)T ∈ D(A).
J ( ) − J ( ) 2H =
=
=
(0, au p(·)−2u − au p(·)−2u) 2
H
au p(·)−2u − au p(·)−2u) 2L2
f (u) − f (u) 2L2 .
As a consequence of the mean value theorem, we have, for 0 ≤ θ ≤ 1,
2n
As u, u ∈ H 1( ), we then use the Sobolev embedding H 1( ) → L n−2 ( ), Hölder’s inequality and (6.1),
0 0
to obtain
θ u + (1 − θ )u2( p(x)−2)u − u2dx ≤
+
u Ln(p1−2) +
u Ln(p1−2)
≤ C u − u 2H01( )
+
u H01( ) +
u H01( )
2( p1−2)
u H01( ) +
u H01( )
2( p1−2)
2
n
(6.9)
(6.10)
Therefore, J is locally Lipchitz. The proof of Theorem 6.1 is completed. See [38].
Next, we show that the solution (6.3) blows up in finite time if (6.1) holds and E (0) < 0, where
2
H
J ( ) − J ( )
≤ C (u, u)
−
1
E (t ) := 2
ut2 + ∇u2 dx − a
2
H
.
u p(x)
 
p(x )
dx .
We also denote by (u) =
blowup result.
u(x ) p(x)dx . First, we establish several lemmas needed for the proof of our
Lemma 6.2 Suppose the conditions of Corollary 2.27 hold. Then there exists a positive C > 1, depending on
only, such that
s
p1 (u) ≤ C
∇u 22 + (u) ,
(u) ,
and use C to denote a generic positive constant depending on
only. As a result of (6.9) and (6.10), we have
Corollary 6.4 Let the assumptions of Lemma 6.2 hold. Then we have
As a special case, we have
Corollary 6.5 Let the assumptions of Lemma 6.2 hold. Then we have
u sp1 ≤ C H (t ) +
2
ut 2 +
for any u ∈ H 1( ) and 2 ≤ s ≤ p1.
0
Lemma 6.6 Let the assumptions of Lemma 6.2 hold and let u be the solution of problem (Q), with E (0) < 0.
Then,
(u) ≥ C u pp11 .
Therefore, (6.10) follows.
As a special case, we have
Corollary 6.3 Let the assumptions of Lemma 6.2 hold. Then we have
where
so we get
This implies that
This yields
u p(x)dx =
 
u p(x)dx +
 
+
−
u p(x)dx ,
 
+
u p1 +
 
−
u p2 ≥
 
+
u p1 + c1
 
−
u p1
 
p2
p1
.
p1
c2 (u) p2 ≥
−
u p1 and
 
(u) ≥
+
u p1 .
p1
c2 (u) p2 +
(u) ≥
u pp11 .
(6.11)
(6.12)
(6.13)
(6.14)
(6.15)
Since
then (6.15) leads to
Hence, (6.14) follows.
Theorem 6.7 Let the conditions of Theorem 6.1 be fulfilled. Assume further that (6.1) holds and
0 < H (0) ≤ H (t ) ≤
(u),
(u) 1 + c2
H (0)
p1
u p1 .
a
Our main blowup result reads as follows:
Then the solution (6.3) blows up in finite time.
Proof We multiply Eq. (Q) by ut and integrate over
to get
hence H (t ) = 0 and
E (0) < 0.
E (t ) = 0,
for every t in [0, T ), by virtue of (6.16). We then define
for ε small to be chosen later and
0 < H (0) = H (t ) ≤
(u),
L(t ) := H 1−α(t ) + ε
uut (x , t )dx ,
0 < α ≤
min 1,
p1 − 2
2 p1
.
By taking the derivative of (6.19) and using equation (Q), we obtain
L (t ) = (1 − α)H −α(t )H (t ) + ε
ut − ∇u2
2
+ εa
u p(x).
 
Add and subtract ε(1 − η) p1 H (t ), for 0 < η < 1, from the righthand side of (6.21), to arrive at
L (t ) ≥ ε(1 − η) p1 H (t ) + εaη
u p(x)
 
+ ε
+ ε
(1 − η) p1
2
− 1
2
∇u 2.
(1 − η) p1
2
+ 1
2
ut 2
For η small enough, we see that
where
Therefore, using (6.14), we arrive at
L (t ) ≥ εβ H (t ) +
2 2
ut 2 + ∇u 2 +
(u) ,
β = min (1 − η) p1, aη,
(1 − η) p1
2
+ 1,
(1 − η) p1
2
− 1
> 0.
L (t ) ≥ γ ε H (t ) +
2
ut 2 +
(u) ≥ γ ε H (t ) +
2
ut 2 +
(6.16)
(6.17)
(6.18)
(6.19)
(6.20)
(6.21)
(6.22)
(6.23)
(6.24)
Consequently, we have
Next, we would like to show that
L (t ) ≥ L (0) > 0, for all t ≥ 0.
L (t ) ≥
where is a positive constant depending on εγ and C (the constant of Corollary 6.3). Once (6.25) is established,
we obtain in a standard way the finitetime blowup of L (t ). To prove (6.25), we first note that
L α/(1−α)(t ) ≥
1
L −α/(1−α)(0) −
t α/(1 − α)
T ∗ ≤
1 − α
α[L (0)]α/(1−α)
,
Therefore, (6.28) shows that L (t ) blows up in finite time
where
and α are positive constant with α < 1 and L is given by (6.19) above. This completes the proof.
Remark 6.8 The estimate (6.29) shows that the larger L (0) is, the quicker the blow up takes place.
Acknowledgements The authors thank King Fahd University of Petroleum and Minerals for its support. This work is supported
by KFUPM under Project no. FT 161004.
Open Access This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://
creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided
you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate
if changes were made.
which implies
Again Young’s inequality gives
uut (x , t )dx ≤
u 2 ut 2 ≤ C u p1 ut 2,
uut (x , t )dx
1
1−α
θ/(1−α)
ut 2
],
Therefore, (6.26) becomes
for μ1 + θ = 1. We take θ = 2(1 − α), to get μ/(1 − α) = 2/(1 − 2α) ≤ p1 by (6.20).
1
where s = 2/(1 − 2α) ≤ p1. Using Corollary 6.5, we obtain
Finally, by noting that
uut (x , t )dx
1/(1−α)
1/(1−α)
≤ C [ u sp1 +
ut 22],
uut (x , t )dx
≤ C [ H (t ) +
p1
u p1 +
ut 22], for all t ≥ 0.
L 1/(1−α)(t ) =
H (1−α)(t ) + ε
uut (x , t )dx
≤ 21/(1−α)
H (t ) +
uut
1/(1−α)
1/(1−α)!
and combining it with (6.24) and (6.27), the inequality (6.25) is established. A simple integration of (6.25)
over (0, t ) then yields
(6.25)
(6.26)
(6.27)
(6.28)
(6.29)
75. Ono, K.: On global solutions and blowup solutions of nonlinear Kirchhoff string with nonlinear dissipation. J. Math. Anal.
Appl. 216, 321–342 (1997)
76. Ono, K.: Global solvability for degenerate Kirchhoff equations with weak dissipation. Math. Jpn. 50(3), 409–413 (1999)
77. Orlicz, W.: Uber konjugierte Exponentenfolgen. Stud. Math. 3(1), 200–212 (1931)
78. Pucci, P.; Serrin, J.: Asymptotic stability for nonautonomous dissipative wave system. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 49,
177–216 (1996)
79. Quarteroni, A.; Sacco, R.; Saleri, F.: Numerical Mathematics. Springer, NewYork, 2000, TAM Series n., vol. 37, 2 edn
(2007)
80. Quarteroni, A.; Valli, A.: Numerical Approximation of Partial Differential Equations. Springer, Heidelberg (1994). SCM
Series n. 23
81. Rammaha, M.A.; Toundykov, D.: Weak solutions and blowup for wave equations of pLaplacian type with supercritical
sources. J. Math. Phys. 56(8), 081503 (2015)
82. Sun, L.; Ren, Y.; Gao, W.: Lower and upper bounds for the blowup time for nonlinear wave equation with variable sources.
Comput. Math. Appl. 71(1), 267–277 (2016)
83. Taniguchi, T.: Exponential boundary stabilization for nonlinear wave equations with localized damping and nonlinear
boundary condition. Commun. Pure Appl. Anal. 16(5), 1571–1585 (2017)
84. Todorova, G.: Stable and unstable sets for the Cauchy problem for a nonlinear wave with nonlinear damping and source
terms. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 239(2), 213–226 (1999)
85. Todorova, G.; Vitillaro, E.: Blowup for nonlinear dissipative wave equations in Rn . J. Math. Anal. Appl. 303(1), 242–257
(2005)
86. Tsenov, I.V.: Generalization of the problem of best approximation of a function in the space Ls , (Russian) Uch. Zap. Dagest.
Gos. Univ. 7, 25–37 (1961)
87. Vitillaro, E.: Global nonexistence theorems for a class of evolution equations with dissipation. Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal.
149(2), 155–182 (1999)
88. Vitillaro, E.: Global existence for the wave equation with nonlinear boundary damping and source terms. J. Differ. Equ.
186(1), 259–298 (2002)
89. Wang, Y.: A global nonexistence theorem for viscoelastic equations with arbitrary positive initial energy. Appl. Math. Lett.
22(9), 1394–1400 (2009)
90. Wu, S.T.: Blowup of solutions for an integrodifferential equation with a nonlinear source. Electron. J. Differ. Equ. 2006(45),
1–9 (2006)
91. Wu, Y.; Xue, X.: Decay rate estimates for a class of quasilinear hyperbolic equations with damping terms involving
p
Laplacian. J. Math. Phys. 55(12), 121504 (2014)
92. Yang, Z.: Existence and asymptotic behaviour of solutions for a class of quasilinear evolution equations with nonlinear
damping and source terms. Math. Methods Appl. Sci. 25(10), 795–814 (2002)
93. Ye, Y.: Global nonexistence of solutions for systems of quasilinear hyperbolic equations with damping and source terms.
Bound. Value Probl. 2014(1), 251 (2014)
94. Zhikov, V.V.: Averaging of functionals of the calculus of variations and elasticity theory. Math. USSR Izv. 29(1), 33–66
(1987)
95. Zuazua, E.: Exponential decay for the semilinear wave equation with locally distributed damping. Comm. P.D.E no. 15,
205–235 (1990)
96. Zuazua, E.: Exponential decay for the semilinear wave equation with localized damping in unbounded domains. J. Math.
Pures Appl. 70(4), 513–529 (1991)
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
1. AlabauBoussouira , F. : Convexity and weighted integral inequalities for energy decay rates of nonlinear dissipative hyperbolic systems . Appl. Math. Optim . 51 ( 1 ), 61  105 ( 2005 )
2. Al'shin , A.B.; Korpusov , M.O. ; Sveshnikov , A.G. : Blowup in nonlinear Sobolev type equations . In: Series in Nonlinear Analysis and Applications , vol. 15 , 660 p. Walter de Gruyter ( 2011 )
3. Antontsev , S. ; Zhikov , V. : Higher integrability for parabolic equations of p(x , t )Laplacian type . Adv. Differ. Equ . 10 ( 9 ), 1053  1080 ( 2005 )
4. Antontsev , S. ; Shmarev , S. : Blowup of solutions to parabolic equations with nonstandard growth conditions . J. Comput. Appl . Math. 234 ( 9 ), 2633  2645 ( 2010 )
5. Antontsev , S. : Wave equation with p(x , t )Laplacian and damping term: existence and blowup . Differ. Equ. Appl . 3 ( 4 ), 503  525 ( 2011 )
6. Antontsev , S. : Wave equation with p(x , t )Laplacian and damping term: blowup of solutions . C. R. Mec. 339 ( 12 ), 751  755 ( 2011 )
7. Antontsev , S. ; Ferreira , J. : Existence, uniqueness and blowup for hyperbolic equations with nonstandard growth conditions . Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl . 93 , 62  77 ( 2013 )
8. Antontsev , S. ; Shmarev , S. : Evolution PDEs with nonstandard growth conditions: existence, uniqueness, localization, blowup . In: Atlantis Studies in Differential Equations , vol. 4 . Atlantis Press ( 2015 )
9. Autuori , G.; Pucci, P. ; Salvatori , M. : Global nonexistence for nonlinear Kirchhoff systems . Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal . 196 ( 2 ), 489  516 ( 2010 )
10. Ball , J.: Remarks on blowup and nonexistence theorems for nonlinear evolution equations . Q. J. Math . 28 ( 4 ), 473  486 ( 1977 )
11. Benaissa , A. ; Messaoudi , S.A. : Blow up of solutions of a nonlinear wave equation . J. Appl. Math. 2 ( 2 ), 105  108 ( 2002 )
12. Benaissa , A. ; Messaoudi , S.A. : Blowup of solutions for Kirchhoff equation of qLaplacian type with nonlinear dissipation . Colloq . Math. 94 ( 1 ), 103  109 ( 2002 )
13. Benaissa , A. ; Messaoudi , S.A. : Blowup of solutions of a quasilinear wave equation with nonlinear dissipation . J. Partial Differ. Equ . 15 ( 3 ), 61  67 ( 2002 )
14. Benaissa , A. ; Mimouni , S. : Energy decay of solutions of a wave equation of pLaplacian type with a weakly nonlinear dissipation . J. Inequal. Pure Appl . Math. 7 ( 1 ), 1  8 ( 2006 )
15. Benaissa , A. ; Mimouni , S. : Energy decay of solutions of a wave equation of pLaplacian type with a weakly nonlinear dissipation . JIPM. J. Inequal. Pure Appl . Math. 7 ( 1 ), 8 ( 2006 ). Article 15
16. Benaissa , A. ; Messaoudi , S.A. : Exponential decay of solutions of a nonlinearly damped wave equation . NoDEA Nonlinear Differ. Equ. Appl . 12 ( 4 ), 391  399 ( 2006 )
17. Benaissa , A. ; Mokeddem , S. : Decay estimates for the wave equation of pLaplacian type with dissipation of mLaplacian type . Math. Methods Appl. Sci . 30 ( 2 ), 237  247 ( 2007 )
18. Benaissa , A. ; Guesmia , A. : Global existence and general decay estimates of solutions for degenerate or nondegenerate Kirchhoff equation with general dissipation . Diff. Inte. Equ . 11 ( 1 ), 1  35 ( 2011 )
19. Cavalcanti , M. ; Guesmia , A .: General decay rates of solutions to a nonlinear wave equation with boundary condition of memory type . Differ. Integral Equ . 18 ( 5 ), 583  600 ( 2005 )
20. Cavalcanti , M. ; Cavalcanti , V.D.; Tebou , L. : Stabilization of the wave equation with localized compensating frictional and KelvinVoigt dissipating mechanisms . Electron. J. Differ. Equ . 2017 ( 83 ), 1  18 ( 2017 )
21. Chen , C. ; Yao , H. ; Shao , L. : Global existence, uniqueness, and asymptotic behavior of solution for pLaplacian type wave equation . J. Inequal. Appl . 2010 ( 1 ), 216760 ( 2010 )
22. Ferreira , J.; Messaoudi, S.A. : On the general decay of a nonlinear viscoelastic plate equation with a strong damping and −→p (x , t )Laplacian . Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl . 104 , 40  49 ( 2014 )
23. Galaktionov , V.A. ; Pohozaev , S.I. : Blowup and critical exponents for nonlinear hyperbolic equations . Nonlinear Anal. Theory Methods Appl . 53 ( 3 ), 453  466 ( 2003 )
24. Gao , H.; Ma, T.F.: Global solutions for a nonlinear wave equation with the pLaplacian operator . Electron. J. Qual. Theory of Differ. Equ . 11 , 1  13 ( 1999 )
25. Gao , Y. ; Gao , W. : Existence of weak solutions for viscoelastic hyperbolic equations with variable exponents . Bound. Value Probl . 2013(1) , 1  8 ( 2013 )
26. Georgiev , V.; Todorova , G. : Existence of solutions of the wave equation with nonlinear damping and source terms . J. Differ. Equ . 109 ( 2 ), 295  308 ( 1994 )
27. Guesmia , A. : On the decay estimates for elasticity systems with some localized dissipations . Asymptot. Anal . 22 ( 1 ), 1  13 ( 2000 )
28. Guesmia , A.: A new approach of stabilization of nondissipative distributed systems . SIAM J. Control Optim . 42 ( 1 ), 24  52 ( 2003 )
29. Guesmia , A. ; Messaoudi , S.A. : Decay estimates of solutions of a nonlinearly damped semilinear wave equation . In: Annales Polonici Mathematici , vol. 85 , pp. 25  36 . Instytut Matematyczny Polskiej Akademii Nauk ( 2005 )
30. Guo , B. ; Gao , W. : Blowup of solutions to quasilinear hyperbolic equations with p(x , t )Laplacian and positive initial energy . C. R. Mec. 342 ( 9 ), 513  519 ( 2014 )
31. Hamidi , A.E. ; Vetois , J. : Sharp Sobolev asymptotics for critical anisotropic equations . Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal . 192 ( 1 ), 1  36 ( 2009 )
32. Ibrahim , S. ; Lyaghfouri , A. : Blowup solutions of quasilinear hyperbolic equations with critical Sobolev exponent . Math. Modell. Nat. Phenom . 7 ( 2 ), 66  76 ( 2012 )
33. Kafini , M. ; Messaoudi , S.A. : A blowup result in a nonlinear wave equation with delay . Mediterr. J. Math . 13 ( 1 ), 237  247 ( 2016 )
34. Kalantarov , V.K. ; Ladyzhenskaya , O.A. : The occurrence of collapse for quasilinear equations of parabolic and hyperbolic type . J. Soviet Math . 10 ( 1 ), 53  70 ( 1978 )