
\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{amssymb}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
{\em Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2003(2003), No. 124, pp. 1--22.\newline
ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu
\newline ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu  (login: ftp)}
\thanks{\copyright 2003 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}

\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2003/124\hfil Resonance and Strong Resonance]
{Resonance and strong resonance for semilinear elliptic equations
in $\mathbb{R}^N$}

\author[Gabriel L\'{o}pez G. \& Adolfo J. Rumbos\hfil EJDE-2003/124\hfilneg]
{Gabriel L\'{o}pez Garza \& Adolfo J. Rumbos} % in alphabetical order


\address{Gabriel L\'{o}pez Garza \hfill\break
Dept. of Math., Claremont Graduate University\\
Claremont California 91711, USA}
\email{Gabriel.Lopez@cgu.edu}

\address{Adolfo J. Rumbos \hfill\break
Department of Mathematics, Pomona College\\
Claremont, California 91711, USA}
\email{arumbos@pomona.edu}

\date{}
\thanks{Submitted June 3, 2003. Published December 16, 2003.}
\thanks{G. L\'{o}pez was supported by CONACYT M\'{e}xico}
\subjclass[2000]{35J20}
\keywords{Resonance, strong resonance, concentration-compactness}

\begin{abstract}
 We prove the existence of weak solutions for the semilinear 
 elliptic problem
 $$
 -\Delta u=\lambda hu+ag(u)+f,\quad u\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}({\mathbb{R}^N}),
 $$
 where $\lambda \in \mathbb{R}$, $f\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$,
 $g:\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ is a continuous bounded function,
 and $h \in L^{N/2}\cap L^{\alpha}$, $\alpha>N/2$.
 We assume that $a \in L^{2N/(N+2)}\cap L^{\infty}$ in the case of
 resonance  and that $a \in L^1 \cap L^{\infty}$ and $f\equiv 0$
 for the case of  strong resonance. We prove first that the Palais-Smale
 condition  holds for the functional associated with the semilinear problem
 using the concentration-compactness lemma of Lions. Then we prove the
 existence of weak solutions by applying the saddle point theorem of
 Rabinowitz for the cases of non-resonance and resonance, and a linking
 theorem of Silva in the case of strong resonance. The main theorems in
 this paper constitute an extension to $\mathbb{R}^N$ of previous results
 in bounded domains by Ahmad, Lazer, and Paul \cite{ALP}, for the case
 of resonance,  and by Silva \cite{EL} in the strong resonance case.
\end{abstract}

\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lema}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{prop}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{coro}[theorem]{Corollary}

\section{Introduction}

Let $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ be the completion of
$C^{\infty}_{c}({\mathbb{R}^N})$ with respect to the norm
$$  
\|u\|=\Big(\int |\nabla u|^2\Big)^{1/2}.
$$
It is known that $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ is a Hilbert space with inner product
$\langle u,v\rangle =\int \nabla u\cdot \nabla v$.
It is also known that $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ is
embedded in $L^{2^*}(\mathbb{R}^N)$ (cf. \cite{B}). In fact,
\begin{equation}
|u|_{L^{2^*}}^{2^*}\leqslant C^*\|u\|^2 ,
\label{embed}
\end{equation}
where $2^*=2N/(N-2)$ and $C^*$ is a constant depending on $N$.

In this paper we study the existence of solutions to the
boundary--value problem 
\begin{equation} \label{Plf}
\begin{gathered}
        -\Delta u = \lambda h(x) u + a(x)g(u)+f(x),\quad x\in{\mathbb{R}^N},\\
         u\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda \in {\mathbb{R}}$, $f\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$,
$g:\mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$ is a continuous, bounded function,
$h \in L^{N/2}\cap L^{\alpha}$, for $\alpha>N/2$, and $a \in L^{\infty}$.

\subsection*{Definition}
For a bounded nonlinearity $g$, problem \eqref{Plf} is said to be at resonance
if $\lambda$ is an eigenvalue of the boundary-value problem
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
 -\Delta u=\lambda h(x)u,\quad x\in{\mathbb{R}^N},\\
u\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}.
\end{gathered}\label{a1}
\end{equation}
If, in addition, $g(s)\to 0$ as $|s|\to\infty$, problem \eqref{Plf} is said
to be strongly  resonant.
If $\lambda$ is not an eigenvalue of (\ref{a1}),
then \eqref{Plf} is said to be a non-resonance problem.
\smallskip

It is well known that, for
$h\in L^{N/2}({\mathbb{R}^N})\cap L^{\alpha}({\mathbb{R}^N})$,
$\alpha>N/2$, and $h>0$ a.e., problem (\ref{a1}) possesses a sequence
$\{\lambda_{j}\}$ of eigenvalues satisfying
$0<\lambda_1<\lambda_2\leqslant\lambda_3\dots$, with
$\lambda_{j}\to\infty$ as $j\to\infty$, and
the corresponding family of eigenfunctions, $\{\varphi_n\}$,
forms a complete orthonormal system for $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.
Furthermore, $\varphi_1$ can be chosen to be positive a.e. in
$\mathbb{R}^N$.

The  goal of this paper is to extend the solvability of a family of elliptic problems on
bounded domains to the whole space ${\mathbb{R}^N}$, $N\geqslant3$. In particular,
we study the existence of weak solutions for
problem  \eqref{Plf} with $a \in L^{2N/(N+2)}\cap L^{\infty}$,
for the case of resonance, and with $a \in L^1\cap L^{\infty}$ and $f=0$, for the
case of strong resonance.

We prove the existence of weak solutions of \eqref{Plf} using variational methods;
i.e., solutions of \eqref{Plf} are realized as critical points of the functional
$$
J_{\lambda}(u)=\frac{1}{2}\int |\nabla u|^2-\frac{\lambda}{2}\int hu^2
-\int aG(u)-\int fu,
$$
where
$G(s)=\int ^{s}_{0}g(t)dt$, $s\in{\mathbb{R}}$.

Our results are obtained using the saddle point theorem by
Rabinowitz \cite{R} and a linking theorem in \cite{EL}, in conjunction with
the concentration-compactness lemma of Lions \cite{L1}.
The solvability of \eqref{Plf} in the resonance case can be
obtained by imposing conditions on either $g$ or $G(s)$.
We prove the following existence results:

\begin{theorem} \label{Thm1}
Let $g\in C({\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}})$ be bounded and
$a$ be an element of $L^{2N/(N+2)}\cap L^{\infty}$.
If $\lambda\in (\lambda_1,\lambda_2)$, where $\lambda_1$ and $\lambda_2$ are
the first two eigenvalues of (\ref{a1}), then
problem \eqref{Plf} has at least one solution for any $f\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$.
\end{theorem}


\begin{theorem} \label{Thm2}
Let $g\in C({\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R}})$ be bounded and
$a \in L^{2N/(N+2)}\cap L^{\infty}$. If
\begin{equation}
\lim_{|t|\to\infty}\Big\{\int a(x)G(t\varphi_1)+t\int f(x)\varphi_1\Big\}=+\infty,
\label{alp}
\end{equation}
then Problem \eqref{Plf} with $\lambda=\lambda_1$ has a weak solution.
\end{theorem}


\begin{theorem} \label{Thm3}
 Suppose that $g:{\mathbb{R}}\to {\mathbb{R}}$ is  continuous and
satisfies $\lim_{|s|\to\infty}g(s)=0$, and that $a\in L^{1}\cap L^{\infty}$.  Let
 \begin{equation}
\Lambda :=\liminf_{\|u\|\to\infty,\,u\in L_n} \int a(x)G(u)dx,
\label{MyStrongRes}
\end{equation}
where  $L_n:=\mathop{\rm span}\{\varphi_i:\lambda_{i}=\lambda_{n}\}$. Then, if
$\Lambda\in{\mathbb{R}}$ and
\begin{equation}
a(x)G(s)\leqslant a(x)|a|^{-1}_{L^{1}}\Lambda\quad
\mbox{for every $s\in \mathbb{R}$ and a.e. $x\in\mathbb{R}^N$},
\label{StrongRes2}
\end{equation}
problem \eqref{Plf} with $\lambda=\lambda_{n}$ possesses at least one solution.
\end{theorem}

The non-resonance result of Theorem \ref{Thm1} can be proved
in the more general case in which $\lambda$ lies between two
consecutive eigenvalues $\lambda_k<\lambda_{k+1}$ of problem
(\ref{a1}). Similarly, the resonance result of Theorem \ref{Thm2}
also holds for higher eigenvalues $\lambda_k<\lambda_{k+1},\;k>1$.
In this case the solvability condition \eqref{alp} has to be
modified appropriately. Problems at resonance have been of
interest to researchers ever since the pioneering work of
Landesman and Lazer \cite{LL} in 1970 for second order elliptic
operators in bounded domains. The literature on resonance problems
in bounded domains is quite vast; of particular interest to this
paper are the works of Ahmad, Lazer and Paul \cite{ALP} in 1976
and of Rabinowitz in 1978, in which critical point methods are
applied. Theorem \ref{Thm2} is an extension to $\mathbb{R}^N$ of
the Ahmad, Lazer and Paul result. There is also an extensive
literature on strongly resonant problems in bounded domains.
Theorem \ref{Thm3} is an extension to $\mathbb{R}^N$ of a result
of Silva in \cite{EL}.

Resonance problems on unbounded domains, and in particular in
$\mathbb{R}^N$, have been studied recently by Costa and Tehrani
\cite{CO-T1} and by Jeanjean \cite{J} for the operator
$-\Delta+K$ for $K$ positive, and by Stuart and Zhou
\cite{SZ} for radially symmetric solutions for asymptotically
linear problems in $\mathbb{R}^N$. In all these references
variational methods were used. Previously, Metzen \cite{M} had
used the method of approximated domains to obtain existence for
non-resonant problems in unbounded domains, and Hetzer and
Landesman \cite{HL} for resonant problems for a class of operators
which includes the Schr\"{o}dinger operator.


The main difficulty in proving Theorems \ref{Thm1}, \ref{Thm2}
and \ref{Thm3} arises in showing that some kind of compactness
occurs, the so called Palais-Smale condition $(PS)_c$, when using
the variational approach. Even in bounded domains, to prove that
the $(PS)_c$ condition holds is a very delicate issue. As an
example, in bounded domains $\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^ N$, it has
been proved  \cite{W} that for certain
functionals the $(PS)_c$ condition does not hold at the constant
$c=(1/N) S^{N/2}$, where
$$
S=\inf_{\phi\in H^{1}_{0}(\Omega),\,|\phi|_{L^{2^*}}=1}
\int |\nabla\phi|^2.
$$

The lack of compactness for problems in unbounded domains has been overcome
by different approaches; for instance, approximation by bounded domains
mentioned above, the use of Sobolev spaces of symmetric functions which possess
compact embedding properties, or the use of weighted Sobolev spaces
(see \cite{CO-T} and references therein).

 From an heuristic point of view it seems that for each problem the $(PS)_c$
condition requires a specific and particular approach. In this paper we apply
the concentration-compactness method of Lions \cite{L1}, which basically
consists of proving the existence of a set where compactness is available
by using the restrictions imposed on the $(PS)_c$ sequences by the energy
functional associated with the problem \eqref{Plf}.

\section{Variational Setting for Non-Resonance Problems}

We study the existence of solutions for semilinear  elliptic equations in
$\mathbb{R}^N$ ($N\geqslant 3$) of the form
$$ -\Delta u = \lambda h(x) u + a(x)g(u)+f(x),
$$
where $\lambda \in {\mathbb{R}}$, $f\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$,
$g:{\mathbb{R}} \to {\mathbb{R}}$ is a continuous function,
$|g(s)|\leqslant M$ for all $s\in{\mathbb{R}}$,
$h \in L^{N/2}\cap L^{\alpha}$, $\alpha>N/2$ and
$a \in L^{2N/(N+2)}\cap L^{\infty}$. In particular, we consider the
boundary-value problem \eqref{Plf} which is
is a non-linear perturbation of the linear eigenvalue problem (\ref{a1}).

It can be shown that if $h\in L^{N/2}(\mathbb{R}^N)\cap L^\alpha (\mathbb{R}^N)$,
for $\alpha>\frac{N}{2}$, and $h> 0$ a.e., then Problem (\ref{a1}) has an
increasing sequence of eigenvalues
$0<\lambda_1\leqslant\lambda_2,\dots$ with $\lambda_j\to \infty$
as $j\to\infty$ and a corresponding
sequence of eigenfunctions, $\{\varphi_j\}$, which forms a
complete orthonormal system for $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. This is a
consequence of the following result which is easily derived from
 \cite[Lemma 2.1]{CI-G}.

\begin{lema} \label{Proposition 2.2}
 If $h \in L^{N/2}(\mathbf R \it^N)\cap L^\alpha (\mathbb{R}^N)$ for
$\alpha>\frac{N}{2}$, then
$$
-\Delta w=hu \quad \mbox{in }\mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^N)
$$
has a weak solution in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ for every
$u\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R} \it^N)$. Moreover the
operator $T_h:\mathcal{D}^{1,2} ({\mathbb{R}^N})\to
\mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^N)$, defined by $T_h(u)=T(u)=w$,
is compact.
\end{lema}

\begin{coro} \label{Corollary 2.3}
 Let $h\in L^{N/2}\cap L^\alpha$ for $\alpha>N/2$ and define
$F:\mathcal{D}^{1,2}\to {\mathbb{R}}$ by $F(u):=\int hu^2$, then $F$
is weakly continuous; that is, if $u_n\to u$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$,
then $F(u_n)\to F(u)$.
\end{coro}

Moreover,  the condition $h\in L^{\alpha}$ for $\alpha >N/2$ can also be
used to show, as a consequence of the weak Harnack inequality
\cite[Theorem 8.20]{G-T} that $\varphi_1>0$ a.e. in
$\mathbb{R}^N$, $\lambda_1$ is simple, and the zero-set of the eigenfunctions
$\varphi_j$, $j\geqslant 1$, has Lebesgue measure zero.
This last property is known as {\it unique continuation\/} \cite{AR}.

 Solutions of \eqref{Plf} happen to be critical points of the functional
\begin{equation}
J_{\lambda}(u)=\frac{1}{2}\int|\nabla u|^2-\frac{\lambda}{2}\int h(x)u^2
-\int a(x) G(u)-\int f(x)u
\label{J}
\end{equation}
for $u\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$, where
$J_{\lambda}\in\mathcal{C}^1(\mathcal{D}^{1,2},{\mathbb{R}^N})$ has
Fr\'{e}chet derivative
$$
 J'_{\lambda}(u)v= \int \nabla u \nabla v-\lambda \int h(x)uv- \int a(x)g(u)v
 -\int f(x)v
$$
for all $u,v\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. This is a straightforward
consequence of the definition of Fr\'{e}chet derivative and the
conditions on $a$, $f$, $g$, and $h$.

We will use the following version of the concentration-compactness lemma of
Lions \cite{L1}.

\begin{lema}[Lions Concentration-Compactness Lemma] \label{lions}
 Let $(\rho _{n})_{n\geqslant 1}$ be a sequence in $L^1(\mathbb{R}^N)$ satisfying:
$\rho_n\geqslant 0$ in $\mathbb{R}^N$ and $\int \rho_n dx =\sigma$,
where $\sigma>0$ is fixed.
Then there exists a subsequence $(\rho_{n_{k}})_{k\geqslant 1}$ satisfying one
of the three possibilities:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] (Compactness) There exists $y_k\in \mathbb{R}^N$ such that
$\rho_{n_{k}}(\cdot+y_k)$ is tight; that is,
for all $\varepsilon >0$ there exists $R<\infty$ such that
$\int_{y_{k}+B_{R}}\rho_{n_{k}}(x)\geqslant \sigma - \varepsilon$
for all $k$.

\item[(ii)] (Vanishing)
$\lim_{k\to \infty} \sup_{y \in \mathbb{R}^N}\int_{y+B_{R}}\rho_{n_{k}}(x)dx=0$
for all $R<\infty$.

\item[(iii)] (Dichotomy) There exists $\alpha \in (0,\sigma)$
such that, for all $\varepsilon>0$, there exist $k_o \geqslant 1$,
a sequence $\{y_n\}\subset {\mathbb{R}^N}$, a number $R>0$ and a
sequence $\{R_n\}\subset {\mathbb{R}}_{+}$, with
$R<R_1$, $R_n<R_{n+1}\to +\infty$, such that, if we set
$\rho^{1}_{n}=\rho_n\chi_{\{|x-y_n|\leqslant R\}}$ and
$\rho^{2}_{n}=\rho_n\chi_{\{|x-y_n|\geqslant R_n\}}$, then
\begin{equation} \label{D}
 \begin{gathered}
 \|\rho_{n_{k}}-(\rho^{1}_{k}+ \rho^{2}_{k})\|_{L^{1}}\leqslant \varepsilon,
 \quad \big| \int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\rho^{1}_{k}dx- \alpha\big|\leqslant \varepsilon,\\
 \big|\int_{\mathbb{R}^N}\rho^{2}_{k}dx-(\sigma-\alpha)\big|\leqslant \varepsilon,
 \quad \mbox{for all } k\geqslant k_o ,\\
 \mathop{\rm dist}(\mathop{\rm supp}\rho^{1}_{k},
 \mathop{\rm supp}\rho^{2}_{k})\stackrel{k}{\to} +\infty.
 \end{gathered}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
\end{lema}
Next, we establish a compactness statement that will be used throughout
this paper.  First, we recall the Palais-Smale condition.

\subsection*{Palais-Smale condition} Suppose that $E$ is a real Banach space,
and let $\mathcal{C}^{1}(E,{\mathbb{R}})$ denote the set of functionals
whose Fr\'{e}chet derivative is continuous on $E$.
A functional $I\in \mathcal{C}^{1}(E,{\mathbb{R}})$ satisfies the Palais-Smale
condition  at the level $c\in {\mathbb{R}}$, denoted $(PS)_c$, if any
sequence $(u_n)\subset E$ for which
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $I(u_n)\to c$ as $n\to\infty$, and
\item[(ii)] $\|I'(u_n)\|\to 0$ as $n\to\infty$,
\end{itemize}
possesses a convergent subsequence. If $I\in \mathcal{C}^{1}(E,{\mathbb{R}})$
satisfies $(PS)_c$ for every $c\in {\mathbb{R}}$, we say that $I$ satisfies
the $(PS)$ condition. Any sequence $(u_n)$ for which (i) and (ii) hold is called
a $(PS)_c$ sequence for $I$.


\begin{prop} \label{Proposition 3.2}
 Let $J_{\lambda}:\mathcal{D}^{1,2}\to {\mathbb{R}}$ be as defined by \eqref{J},
where $\lambda \in {\mathbb{R}}$, $g$ is a continuous function with
$|g(s)|\leqslant M$ for all $s\in{\mathbb{R}}$, $f\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$,
$h \in L^{N/2}\cap L^{\alpha}$ for $\alpha>N/2$, and
$a \in L^{2N/(N+2)}\cap L^{\infty}$. Then, if every $(PS)_c$ sequence for
 $J_{\lambda}$ is bounded, $J_{\lambda}$ satisfies the $(PS)_c$ condition.
\end{prop}

\begin{proof}
Let $(u_n)$ be a $(PS)_c$ sequence for $J_{\lambda}$. Thus, by assumption,
$(u_n )$ is bounded.  Without loss of generality, we may assume that
$\|u_n\|^2=\int|\nabla u_n|^{2}>0$ for all $n$. Define
$$
\rho_n:=|\nabla u_n|^2\quad\mbox{for all } n.
$$
Thus $(\rho_n)$ is a sequence in $L^1(\mathbb{R}^N)$ satisfying
(passing to a subsequence if necessary) $\int \rho_n \to \tau >0$ as $n\to\infty$.
Defining
$$
\rho'_n=\frac{\rho_n}{\int \rho_n} \quad\mbox{for all } n,
$$
we have
$\int\rho'_n=1>0$ for all $n$.
Hence, using $(\rho'_n )$ for $(\rho_n )$, we may assume that $(\rho_n )$
satisfies the hypotheses of the Lions Concentration-Compactness
Lemma \ref{lions} with $\sigma=1$.
\smallskip

\noindent \textbf{(A)} Claim: Vanishing does not hold.
Let $B_R(y)=\{x\in {\mathbb{R}^N}:|x-y|<R\}$. Assume by contradiction that
vanishing in Lemma \ref{lions} does hold.
 Then there exists $\{n_{k}\}_{k\geqslant 1}$ such that $(u_{n_{k}})$ converges
 weakly to $0$ in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. To see why this is the case, let
$\phi$ be any function in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. Then,  given $\varepsilon>0$,
there exists $R'>0$ such that
$$
\Big(\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}|\nabla\phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}
<\frac{\varepsilon}{2\sup_{k}\|u_{n_{k}}\|} .
$$
On the other hand, by the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality,
\[
\Big|\int \nabla u_{n_{k}}\cdot\nabla\phi\Big|
\leqslant \|u_{n_{k}}\|\Big(\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}|\nabla\phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}
+\|\phi\|\Big(\int_{B_{R'}(0)}|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2\Big)^{1/2}.
\]
Moreover, since vanishing in Lemma \ref{lions} implies the existence of a subsequence $(u_{n_k} )$
and $k_0$ such that
$$
\int _{B_{R'}(0)}|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^{2}
<\big(\frac{\varepsilon}{2\|\phi\|}\big)^2\quad\mbox{if } k\geqslant k_0,
$$
it follows that
$\int \nabla u_{n_{k}}\cdot\nabla\phi<\varepsilon$
for all $k\geqslant k_o $.
Since $\varphi\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ was arbitrary,
$u_{n_{k}}\to 0$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.

Now, using the assumption that $\|J'_{\lambda}(u_{n_{k}})\|\to
0\;\mbox{as}\;k\to\infty$, we have
\begin{equation}
\int |\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2 -\int ag(u_{n_{k}})u_{n_{k}} =o(1)
\quad\mbox{as } k\to\infty,
\label{myeq1}
\end{equation}
since the map $u\mapsto\int hu^2$ is weakly continuous by
Corollary \ref{Corollary 2.3}, and $u\mapsto \int fu$
is in $(\mathcal{D}^{1,2})^*$. On the other hand, since $a\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$,
 given $\varepsilon>0$, there exists $R_*$ such that
\begin{equation}
\Big(\int_{[B_{R_{*}}(0)]^{c}}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)^\frac{N+2}{2N}
<\frac{\varepsilon}{2M\sup_{k}\|u_{n_{k}}\|}.
\label{myeq2}
\end{equation}
Moreover, vanishing implies that there exists $k_1$ such that for
$k>k_1$,
\begin{equation}
\int_{B_{R_{*}}(0)}|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2<
\Big(\frac{\varepsilon}{2M|a|_{L^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}}}\Big)^{2\cdot2^*}. \label{myeq3}
\end{equation}
Thus, applying  H\"{o}lder's inequality and the estimates in (\ref{myeq2}) and
(\ref{myeq3}), we conclude
$$
\Big|\int a(x)g(u_{n_{k}})u_{n_{k}}\Big| <\varepsilon \quad\mbox{for all }
 k\geqslant k_1 .
$$
Hence, since $\varepsilon$ was arbitrary, it follows from (\ref{myeq1}) that
$\lim_{k\to\infty}\int|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2=0$,
which contradicts $\int |\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^{2}=\sigma>0$ for all $k$.
\smallskip

\noindent \textbf{(B)}  Claim: Dichotomy does not hold.
 If dichotomy occurs, then there exists $\alpha\in (0,\sigma)$ such that,
given $\varepsilon>0$, we can chose $R>0$ with
$$
\lim_{k\to\infty} \sup_{y\in{\mathbb{R}}^{\rm N}}
\int_{B_{\frac{R}{2}}(y)}|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2>\alpha-\varepsilon.
$$
Moreover, there exists $k_o\geqslant 1$ such that, for $k\geqslant k_o$,
$$
\alpha -\varepsilon<\sup_{y\in{\mathbb{R}^N}}\int_{B_{\frac{R}{2}}(y)}
|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2<\alpha+\varepsilon;
$$
thus, for each $k\geqslant k_o$, there exists $y_k\in {\mathbb{R}^N}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\alpha -\varepsilon<\int_{B_{\frac{R}{2}}(y_k)}|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2
<\alpha+\varepsilon.
\label{1}
\end{equation}
Furthermore, from Property \eqref{D} in Lemma \ref{lions},
there exists an increasing sequence $(R_k )$, with $R_1\geqslant R$ 
and $R_k \to \infty$ as $k\to\infty$, such that
\begin{equation}
\sigma-\alpha-\epsilon\leqslant\int_{\{ B_{3R_{k}}(y_k)\}^c}
|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2\leqslant\sigma-\alpha+\epsilon
\quad\mbox{for all } k\geqslant k_o.
\label{2}
\end{equation}
Consequently,
\begin{equation}
  \int_{\frac{R}{2}<|x-y_{k}|<3R_{k}}|\nabla u_{n_{k}}|^2<2\varepsilon
\quad\mbox{for all } k\geqslant k_o .
\label{3}
\end{equation}
Note that (\ref{3}) implies
\begin{equation}
  \int_{R<|x-y_{k}|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|u_{n_{k}}|^{2^*}\leqslant \theta(\varepsilon)
\quad\mbox{for all }\ k\geqslant k_o,
\label{4}
\end{equation}
where $\theta\to 0$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$. To see
why (\ref{4}) holds, take $\eta_k\in C^{\infty}_{0}(\mathbb{R}^N)$
such that $\eta_k(x)=0$ if $|x|\leqslant R/2$ or $|x|\geqslant
3R_k$, and $\eta_k (x)=1$ if $R\leqslant|x|\leqslant 2R_k$. By
Sobolev's inequality (\ref{embed}) we have that
\begin{align*}
\Big(\int |\eta_k u_k|^{2^*}\Big)^{1/2^*}
&\leqslant C\Big(\int|\nabla (\eta_k u_k)|^2\Big)^{1/2} \\
&\leqslant C\Big(\int |\nabla\eta_k|^2 u^{2}_{k}
+2\int u_k \eta_k\nabla\eta_k\cdot\nabla u_k+\int \eta^{2}_{k}
|\nabla u_{k}|^2\Big)^{1/2}\\
&\leqslant C\Big(C_1\int_{\Omega}|u_{k}|^2+C_2\int_{\Omega}|u_k|
+C_3\int_{\frac{R}{2}\leqslant |x-y_k|\leqslant 3R_k}|\nabla u_k|^2\Big)^{1/2}.
\end{align*}
Where we have written $u_k$ for $u_{n_{k}}$, and
$\Omega=\{x:\nabla\eta_k\not=0\}=\{R/2\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant R\}\cup\{2R_k
\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 3R_k\}$. Clearly,
$\Omega\subset\{R/2\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 3R_k\}$. By (\ref{3}) in conjunction
with Sobolev's inequality, we also obtain that
$\int_{\Omega}|u_{k}|^2 < C\varepsilon $ and $\int_{\Omega}|u_k|<C\varepsilon$.
Consequently, it follows from (\ref{4}) and the previous estimate that
$\int_{R\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_k}|u_k|^{2^*}
\leqslant\int|\eta_k u_k|^{2^*}\leqslant \theta(\varepsilon)$
as required.

 Now take $\zeta\in C^{\infty}_{0}({\mathbb{R}^N})$ such that
$0\leqslant\zeta\leqslant 1$ and
\[
  \zeta(x)=\begin{cases}
                   1&\mbox{for }|x|\leqslant 1,\\
                   0&\mbox{for }|x|\geqslant 2,
                  \end{cases}
\]
and let $\phi(x)=1-\zeta(x)$.
Put $\zeta_{k}(x)=\zeta\left(\frac{x-y_k}{R}\right)$ and
$\phi_{k}(x)=\phi\big(\frac{x-y_k}{R_{k}}\big)$ for all $x\in {\mathbb{R}^N}$,
and define $u^{\dag}_{k}(x):=(\zeta_k\cdot u_{n_{k}})(x)$ and
$u^{\ddag}_{k}(x):=(\phi_k\cdot u_{n_{k}})(x)$. Then  for each $k$,
\begin{equation}
  u^{\dag}_{k}(x)=\begin{cases}
  u_{n_{k}}&\mbox{if } |x-y_k|\leqslant R,\\
0&\mbox{if }|x-y_k|\geqslant 2R,
\end{cases} \label{7}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
  u^{\ddag}_{k}(x)=\begin{cases}
                   0&\mbox{if } |x-y_k|\leqslant R_{k},\\
                   u_{n_{k}}&\mbox{if } |x-y_k|\geqslant 2 R_{k}.
\end{cases} \label{8}
\end{equation}
We have two cases: $(y_k)$ is bounded and $(y_k)$ is unbounded.\\
(i) Assume $(y_k)$ is bounded.
Note that
\begin{align*}
\Big|\int h u^{\ddag}_k(u^{\ddag}_k-u_k)\Big|
&\leqslant \int |h||u^{\ddag}_k||u^{\ddag}_k-u_k|\\
&\leqslant \int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_{k}|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|h||\phi_{k}|
|\phi_{k}-1||u_k|^2\\
&\leqslant \int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_{k}|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|h||u_k|^2 .
\end{align*}
Thus, by H\"{o}lder's inequality,
\begin{align*}
\Big|\int h u^{\ddag}_k(u^{\ddag}_k-u_k)\Big|
&\leqslant C|h|_{\frac{N}{2}}
\Big(\int_{R_{k}\leqslant |x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|u_k|^{2^*}\Big)^{2/2^*}\\
& \leqslant C_{1}\theta (\epsilon)^{2/2^*}:=\theta_1(\epsilon)\stackrel{\epsilon}{\to}0
\quad\mbox{for } k\geqslant k_o ,
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows from (\ref{4}).
Thus $\int hu^{\ddag}_k u_k=\int h|u^{\ddag}_k|^2+\theta_1(\epsilon)$
for $k\geqslant k_o$. We claim that $u^{\ddag}_k\to 0$ weakly in
$\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.  It will then follow, using
Corollary (\ref{Corollary 2.3}), that
\begin{equation}
\int hu^{\ddag}_k u_k\to 0\quad\mbox{as }k\to \infty.
\label{*}
\end{equation}
Take any $\phi\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. For each $\varepsilon>0$, there exists $R'>0$
 such that
\begin{equation}
\Big(\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}|\nabla\phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}
<\frac{\varepsilon}{\sup_{k}\|u_{k}\|}.
\label{my47}
\end{equation}
Since $\{y_k\}$ is bounded in $\mathbb{R}^N$, there exists $y^*$
such that $y_k\to y^*$ (taking a subsequence if
necessary). Choose $n_0 \geqslant k_o$ such that $B_{R'}(0)\subset
B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)$; this is possible since
$R_k\to\infty$. Then, for $k>n_0$, by  (\ref{8}),
\begin{align*}
\int \nabla u^{\ddag}_k \cdot\nabla\phi
&=\int_{[B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)]^{c}}\nabla u^{\ddag}_k\cdot \nabla\phi\\
&\leqslant \|u^{\ddag}_{k}\|\Big(\int_{[B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)]^{c}}|\nabla\phi|^2
\Big)^{1/2}\\
&\leqslant \|u^{\ddag}_{k}\|\Big(\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}|\nabla
\phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}<\varepsilon,
\end{align*}
by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, the fact that
$[B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)]^{c}\subset [B_{R'}(0)]^{c}$
and (\ref{my47}).  Therefore, since  $\phi\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ and
$\varepsilon >0$ were arbitrary, it follows that
$u^{\ddag}_k\to0$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.
Thus, $\int hu^{\ddag}_k u_k\to 0$ as $k\to \infty$ as stated in (\ref{*}).

On the other hand, since $a\in L^{2N/(N+2)}$,  given
$\varepsilon>0$,  there exists $R''$ such that
$$
\Big(\int_{[B_{R''}(0)]^{c}}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)^\frac{N+2}{2N}
<\frac{\varepsilon}{M\sup_{k}\|u_k\|}.
$$
Thus, by (\ref{8}) and similar arguments to those used above, there exist
$n_0 \geqslant k_o$ such that $B_{R''}(0)\subset B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)$ and
\begin{align*}
   \big|\int a(x)g(u_k)u^{\ddag}_k\big|
&\leqslant M \int a(x)|u^{\ddag}_k|\\
&\leqslant M\int_{[B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)]^{c}}a|u^{\ddag}_k|\\
&\leqslant M\|u^{\ddag}_{k}\|
\Big(\int_{[B_{R_{n_{0}}}(y^*)]^{c}}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)^{(N+2)/(2N)}\\
&\leqslant \varepsilon,\quad \mbox{if } k>n_0.
\end{align*}
Consequently,
\begin{equation}
\int ag(u_k)u^{\ddag}_{k}=o(1)\quad\mbox{as } k\to\infty .
\label{**}
\end{equation}
Now,
\begin{align*}
&\Big| \int\nabla u_k \cdot\nabla u^{\ddag}_k-\int|\nabla u^{\ddag}_k|^2\Big|\\
&=\Big|\int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_{k}}\nabla(\phi_k u_k)\cdot
\nabla u_k\Big|\\
&\leqslant \int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|u_k||\nabla u_k\cdot
\nabla\phi_k|+\int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|\phi_k||\nabla u_k|^2 \\
&\leqslant C_1\int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|u_k|+
C_2\int_{R_{k}\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_{k}}|\nabla u_k|^2.
\end{align*}
Hence, by (\ref{4}) and a similar argument used to obtain (\ref{4}) applied to the first integral, as well as the Sobolev embedding Theorem,
\begin{equation}
\int\nabla u_k\cdot\nabla u^{\ddag}_k=\int|\nabla u^{\ddag}_k|^2+\theta_2(\varepsilon)
\quad\mbox{for } k\geqslant k_o ,
\label{***}
\end{equation}
where $ \theta_2\to 0$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$. Since $(u_k)$
is a $(PS)_c$ sequence, as $k\to\infty$,
$$
\langle J'_{\lambda}(u_k),u^{\ddag}_k\rangle=\int \nabla u_k\cdot\nabla
u^{\ddag}_k-\lambda\int h u_k u^{\ddag}_k-\int ag(u_k)u^{\ddag}_k
-\int f u^{\ddag}_k=o(1)\,.
$$
It then follows from (\ref{*}), (\ref{**}) and (\ref{***})
together with the fact that $\int fu^{\ddag}_{k}\to 0$
as $k\to\infty$, that
$$
\int|\nabla u^{\ddag}_k|^2=o(1)\quad \mbox{as } k\to\infty .
$$
Therefore, from (\ref{2}),
$$
\sigma-\alpha-\varepsilon\leqslant\int_{|x-y_k|
\geqslant 3R_k}|\nabla u^{\ddag}_k|^2
\leqslant\int |\nabla u^{\ddag}_k|^2=o(1)\quad\mbox{as }k\to\infty ,
$$
with $\sigma-\alpha-\varepsilon>0$ for $\varepsilon$ small, which is a contradiction.
Consequently, $(y_k)$ cannot be bounded and dichotomy does not hold in this case.
\smallskip

\noindent (ii) Assume now that $(y_k)$ is unbounded.
For this case we use $u^{\dag}_k$ to get a contradiction. First, we show that
$u^{\dag}_k\stackrel{k}{\to}0$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.
Let $\phi$ be any function in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. Given $\varepsilon>0$,
there exists $R'>0$ such that
$\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}\nabla \phi<\varepsilon/\sup_k \|u_k\|$.
Since $\{y_k\}$ is not bounded, there exists $n_0$ such
that $|y_{n_{0}}|>R'+2R$, where $R$ is as in (\ref{7}). We then
have that $B_{2R}(y_{n_{0}})\subset [B_{R'}(0)]^{c}$, so in view
of (\ref{7}),
\begin{align*}
\int \nabla u^{\dag}_{k}\cdot\nabla\phi&= \int_{[B_{2R}(y_{n_{0}})]} \nabla u^{\dag}_{k}\cdot\nabla\phi\\
&\leqslant \|u^{\dag}_{k}\|\int_{[B_{2R}(y_{n_{0}})]}\nabla\phi\\
&\leqslant \|u^{\dag}_{k}\|\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}\nabla\phi\\
&\leqslant \varepsilon,\quad\mbox{if } k>n_0.
\end{align*}
Since  $\phi\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ and $\varepsilon>0$ are
arbitrary, we conclude that $u^{\dag}_k\stackrel{k}{\to}0$
weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.


 From the assumption that $(u_m )$ is a bounded $(PS)_c$ sequence, we have
\begin{equation}
\int \nabla u_k\cdot\nabla u^{\dag}_k-\lambda\int h u_k u^{\dag}_k
-\int ag(u_k)u^{\dag}_k-\int fu^{\dag}_k=o(1)\quad
\mbox{as } k\to\infty.
\label{rev1}
\end{equation}
 Observe that
\begin{align*}
   \Big|\int h u^{\dag}_k(u^{\dag}_k-u_k)\Big|
&\leqslant \int |h||u^{\dag}_k||u^{\dag}_k-u_k|\\
&\leqslant \int_{R\leqslant|x-y_{k}|\leqslant 2R}|h||\zeta_{k}||\zeta_{k}-1||u_k|^2\\
&\leqslant C|h|_{\frac{N}{2}}
\Big(\int_{R\leqslant |x-y_k|\leqslant 2R}|u_k|^{2^*}\Big)^{2/2^*},
\end{align*}
by H\"{o}lder's inequality. So, by (\ref{4}), since $R<R_k$ for all $k$,
\[
\left|\int h u^{\dag}_k(u^{\dag}_k-u_k)\right|\leqslant
 C_{1}\theta (\epsilon)^{2/2^*}:=\theta_3(\epsilon)\stackrel{\epsilon}{\to}0
\quad\mbox{for } k\geqslant k_o.
\]
Observe that $\int h|u^{\dag}|^2\to 0$ by Corollary \ref{Corollary 2.3},
since $u^{\dag}_k\stackrel{k}{\to}0$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.
This, in conjunction with the above estimate, implies
\begin{equation}
\int h u^{\dag}_k u_k\stackrel{k}{\to}0.
\label{rev2}
\end{equation}
Furthermore,
\begin{eqnarray}
   \Big|\int a(x)g(u_k)u^{\dag}_k\Big|\stackrel{k}{\to}0.
\label{rev3}
\end{eqnarray}
Effectively,  given $\varepsilon>0$, since $a\in
L^{2N/(N+2)}$, there exists $R'''>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\Big(\int_{[B_{R'''}(0)]^c}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)^\frac{N+2}{2N}
<\frac{\varepsilon}{M\sup_{k}\|u_k\|}.
\label{my48}
\end{equation}
Since $\{y_k\}$ is unbounded, we take $n_0$ such that
$|y_{n_{0}}|>R'''+2R$. Then
$B_{2R}(y_{n_{0}})\subset[B_{R'''}(0)]^{c}$; thus, by (\ref{7})
and (\ref{my48}),
\begin{align*}
\Big|\int ag(u_k)u^{\dag}_{k}\Big|
&\leqslant  M\int_{B_{2R}(y_{n_{0}})}|a||g(u_k)u^{\dag}_{k}|\\
&\leqslant M\|u_k\|\Big(\int _{[B_{R'''}(0)]^c}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)
^{(N+2)/(2N)}\\
&< \varepsilon\quad\mbox{for all } k,
\end{align*}
from which (\ref{rev3}) follows.
Finally,
\begin{equation}
\int\nabla u_k\cdot\nabla u^{\dag}_k=\int|\nabla u^{\dag}_k|^2
+\theta_4(\varepsilon),\label{rev4}
\end{equation}
where $\theta_4\to 0$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$.
This follows from (\ref{4}), the estimate
\[
     \Big| \int\nabla u_k \cdot\nabla u^{\dag}_k-\int|\nabla u^{\dag}_k|^2\Big|
\leqslant C_1\int_{R\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R}|u_k|+C_2\int_{R\leqslant|x-y_k|
\leqslant 2R}|\nabla u_k|^2 ,
\]
and an argument similar to that used to obtain (\ref{4}), by observing that
$\{R\leqslant|x-y_k|\leqslant 2R\}\subset\{R\leqslant |x-y_k|\leqslant 2R_k\}$
and applying the Sobolev's embedding Theorem.
Thus, using (\ref{rev2}), (\ref{rev3}) and
(\ref{rev4}) in (\ref{rev1}), and recalling (\ref{1}), we obtain
$$
0<\alpha-\varepsilon\leqslant\int_{B_\frac{R}{2}(y_k)}|\nabla u^{\dag}_k|^2
\leqslant\int |\nabla u^{\dag}_k|^2=o(1)\quad\mbox{as }k\to\infty,
$$
which is a contradiction.

 Since vanishing and dichotomy in Lemma \ref{lions}  do not hold,
necessarily compactness holds; i.e., there exists $\{ y_n\} \subset\mathbb{R}^N $
such that for all $\varepsilon$ there exists $R>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\int_{B_{R}(y_{n})}|\nabla u_n|^2\geqslant\sigma-\varepsilon \quad\mbox{for all }n.
\label{newcomp}
\end{equation}
 Now, it follows from (\ref{newcomp}) and the fact that
$\int |\nabla u_n|^2 = \sigma$ for all $n$ that
\begin{equation}
\int_{[B_R(y_n)]^c}|\nabla u_n|^2<\varepsilon\quad\mbox{for all } n.
\label{9}
\end{equation} \smallskip

\noindent \textbf{Claim:} $\{y_n\}$ is bounded.
 If $\{y_n\}$ is not bounded, then $ u_n\to 0$
weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ as $n\to\infty$. To see why
this is the case, take $\phi\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ and let
$\varepsilon>0$.  There exists $R'>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\Big(\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}|\nabla \phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}<
\varepsilon/(2\sup_{n}\|u_n\|). \label{revision1}
\end{equation}
Since $\{y_n\}$ is not bounded, we may assume that $|y_n |\to\infty$ as $n\to\infty$, and so
there exists $n_0$ such that $|y_{n_{0}}|>R'+R_0$,
where we choose $R_o >0$, whose existence is guaranteed by part (i) of Lemma \ref{lions}
(see also (\ref{9})), such that
\begin{equation}
\Big(\int_{[B_{R_{0}}(y_{n_{0}})]^{c}} |\nabla
u_n|^2\Big)^{1/2}<\varepsilon/(2\|\phi\|). \label{revision2}
\end{equation}
Also, $B_{R_0}(y_{n_{0}})\subset [B_{R'}(0)]^{c}$.  Thus,
\begin{align*}
\Big|\int \nabla u_n\cdot\nabla\phi\Big|
&\leqslant \|u_n\|\Big(\int_{B_{R_0}(y_{n_{0}})}|\nabla\phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}
+\|\phi\|\Big(\int_{[B_{R_0}(y_{n_{0}})]^{c}}|\nabla u_n|^2\Big)^{1/2}\\
&\leqslant \|u_n\|\Big(\int_{[B_{R'}(0)]^{c}}|\nabla\phi|^2\Big)^{1/2}
+\|\phi\|\Big(\int_{[B_{R_0}(y_{n_{0}})]^{c}}|\nabla u_n|^2\Big)^{1/2},
\end{align*}
so that, by  (\ref{revision1}) and (\ref{revision2}),
$$
\big|\int \nabla u_n \cdot \nabla\phi\big|<\varepsilon\quad\mbox{for all }n>n_0 .
$$
Since  $\phi\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ was arbitrary, we conclude that $ u_n\to 0$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ as stated. Consequently, using the assumption that $(u_n )$ is a bounded $(PS)_c$ sequence,
we obtain
\begin{equation}
\int|\nabla u_n|^2-\int ag(u_n)u_n =o(1)\quad\mbox{as }n\to\infty,
\label{comp1}
\end{equation}
since $u\to \int hu^2$ is weakly continuous by Corollary \ref{Corollary 2.3},
and $u\mapsto \int fu$ is also weakly continuous. Moreover,
\begin{equation}
\int ag(u_n)u_n=\int_{B_{R}(y_n)}ag(u_n)u_n+\int_{[B_{R}(y_n)]^{c}} ag(u_n)u_n.
\label{comp2}
\end{equation}
Since $\{y_n\}$ is not bounded, it follows that
$$
\Big(\int_{B_{R}(y_n)}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)^\frac{N+2}{2N}\to 0
\quad\mbox{as } n\to\infty.
$$
Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\Big|\int_{B_{R}(y_n)}ag(u_n)u_n\Big|\leqslant C
\Big(\int_{B_{R}(y_n)}|a|^{2N/(N+2)}\Big)\to 0
\quad\mbox{as } n\to\infty.
\label{comp3}
\end{equation}
In addition,  by (\ref{embed}) and (\ref{9}),
$$
\int_{[B_{R}(y_n)]^{c}}|u_n|^{2N/(N-2)}<C^* \varepsilon
$$
So, by H\"older's inequality,
$$
\big|\int_{[B_{R}(y_n)]^{c}}ag(u_n)u_n\big|\leqslant C\varepsilon^{1/2^*}.
$$
Thus, in view of (\ref{comp2}) and (\ref{comp3}), we obtain from (\ref{comp1})
and (\ref{newcomp}) that
$$
\sigma-\varepsilon\leqslant\int_{B_{R}(y_n)}|\nabla u_n|^2\leqslant
\int |\nabla u_n|^2=C\varepsilon^{1/2^*} + o(1)\quad\mbox{as } n\to\infty,
$$
which clearly leads to a contradiction as $\varepsilon\to 0$.
Therefore, $\{y_n\}$ cannot be unbounded.
Thus, $\{y_n\}$ is bounded in the compactness case of the concentration-compactness
Lemma \ref{lions}.

Since $\{y_n\}\subset {\mathbb{R}^N}$ is bounded,  there exists $R^*>0$
such that $B_R (y_n )\subset B_{R^*} (0)$ for all $n=1,2,3,\ldots$.
We may also choose $R^*$ large enough so that
\begin{equation}
\int_{B_{R^*} (0)^c} |a|^{\frac{2N}{N+2}} < \varepsilon^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}.
\label{aestimate}
\end{equation}
Put $\Omega = B_{R^*}(0)$ and note that $\Omega$ satisfies the
hypotheses of the Rellich-Kondrachov Theorem \cite[Theorem 7.26, p. 171]{G-T}.

Given that $({u}_n)$ is a bounded sequence, there exists a
subsequence, $(u_{n_k } )$, such that ${u}_{n_k} \to u $
weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ as $k\to\infty$.  Moreover, given
$1\leqslant t<2^*$,  we may assume that ${u}_{n_k} \to u$
strongly in $L^t(\Omega)$  as $k\to\infty$, since $\Omega$ is
bounded, passing to a subsequence if necessary, by the
Rellich-Kondrachov Theorem.

Observe that, since $B_R (y_n )\subset \Omega$ for all $n=1,2,3,\ldots$, then
$\Omega^c  \subset B_R (y_n )^c $ for all $n$.  It then follows from (\ref{9})
that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega^c}|\nabla u_n|^2<\varepsilon\ \mbox{ for all } n.
\label{new9}
\end{equation}
We want to show that
\begin{equation}
\int |\nabla (u_{n_k } -u)|^2\to 0\quad\mbox{as } k\to\infty.
\label{comp4}
\end{equation}
We have
\begin{align*}
\int |\nabla (u_{n_k}-u)|^2
&=\int \nabla (u_{n_k}-u)\cdot\nabla(u_{n_k}-u)\\
&=\int \nabla u_{n_k}\cdot\nabla(u_{n_k}-u)-\int \nabla u\cdot\nabla(u_{n_k}-u),
\end{align*}
where $\int \nabla u\cdot\nabla(u_{n_k}-u)\to 0$ as $k\to\infty$, by the
definition of weak convergence in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. Consequently, (\ref{comp4})
will follow if we can prove that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to\infty} \int \nabla u_{n_k}\cdot\nabla(u_{n_k}-u) = 0.
\label{comp5}
\end{equation}
Now from the fact that $(u_n )$ is a bounded $(PS)_c$ sequence it follows that
\begin{equation}
\Big|\int \nabla u_{n_k} \cdot\nabla (u-u_{n_k})-\lambda\int hu_{n_k} (u-u_{n_k})-
\int ag(u_{n_k})(u-u_{n_k})\Big|=o(1)
\label{comp6}
\end{equation}
as $k\to\infty$, since $\int f(u-u_n)\to 0$ as $n\to\infty$.

We estimate the second integral on the left--hand side of (\ref{comp6}) as
follows:
$$
\Big|\int hu_{n_k} (u-u_{n_k})\Big|\leqslant
\Big|\int_{\Omega} hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k})\Big|
+ \Big|\int_{{\Omega}^c} hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k})\Big|,
$$
where, by H\"older's inequality,
$$
\Big|\int_{\Omega} hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k})\Big| \leqslant
|h|_{_{L^\alpha}} \Big(\int_{\Omega} |u_{n_k}|^{2N/(N-2)} \Big)
^{(N-2)/(2N)}\Big(\int_{\Omega} |u-u_{n_k}|^s\Big)^{1/s},
$$
 where $\frac{1}{s}=\frac{1}{2} + \frac{2}{N}-\frac{1}{\alpha}$, so that $s<2^*$.
 Hence, by the Rellich-Kondrachov Theorem, we may assume that
$u_{n_k}\to u$ strongly in $L^s(\Omega)$.  Consequently,
\begin{equation}
\int_{\Omega} hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k})=o(1)\quad\mbox{as }k\to\infty.
\label{comp7}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by H\"older's inequality and the assumption that
$(u_n )$ is bounded,
$$
\Big|\int_{\Omega^c} hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k})\Big| \leqslant
C|h|_{_{L^{\frac{N}{2}}}} \Big(\int_{\Omega^c} |u_{n_k}|^{2N/(N-2)} \Big)
^{(N-2)/(2N)} .
$$
Thus, by (\ref{embed}) and (\ref{new9}),
$$
\Big|\int_{\Omega^c} hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k})\Big| \leqslant
C\varepsilon\quad\mbox{for all } k.
$$
Therefore, it follows from (\ref{comp7}) that
\begin{equation}
\limsup_{k\to\infty} \left| \int  hu_{n_k}(u-u_{n_k}) \right| \leqslant
C\varepsilon .
\label{comp8}
\end{equation}
Similarly, for the third integral on the left-hand side of (\ref{comp6}),
\begin{equation}
\Big|\int_{\Omega} ag(u_{n_k})(u-u_{n_k})\Big|
\leqslant C\int_{\Omega}|u-u_{n_k}|\to 0\quad\mbox{as } k\to\infty,
\label{comp9}
\end{equation}
since $a\in L^\infty$ and $u_{n_k}\to u$ strongly in $L^1(\Omega)$.
To estimate the integral over $\Omega^c$ use H\"older's inequality together
with the
assumptions that $(u_n )$ and $g$ are bounded to obtain
$$
\Big|\int_{\Omega^c } ag(u_{n_k})(u-u_{n_k})\Big|\leqslant
C\Big( \int_{\Omega^c } |a|^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}\Big)^{(N+2)/(2N)}.
$$
It then follows from (\ref{aestimate}) that
$$
\Big|\int_{\Omega^c } ag(u_{n_k})(u-u_{n_k})\Big|\leqslant C\varepsilon.
$$
Consequently, by (\ref{comp9}),
\begin{equation}
\limsup_{k\to\infty} \Big|\int  ag(u_{n_k})(u-u_{n_k})\Big|\leqslant C\varepsilon .
\label{comp10}
\end{equation}
Hence, since $\varepsilon$ is arbitrary, (\ref{comp5}) follows from (\ref{comp6}),
(\ref{comp8}) and (\ref{comp10}),
and (\ref{comp5}) in turn implies (\ref{comp4}); that is,
$$
\|u_{n_k}-u\|^2 = \int |\nabla(u_{n_k}-u)|^2=o(1)\quad\mbox{as }k\to\infty.
$$
i.e. $u_{n_k}\to u$ strongly  in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.
\end{proof}


Now, with $J_{\lambda}$ satisfying the $(PS)_c$ condition, once we can show that
every $(PS)_{c}$ sequence is bounded, we are able to prove some existence results
for problem \eqref{Plf}. Existence will be obtained as a consequence of the
following saddle point theorem of Rabinowitz.

\begin{theorem}[Saddle Point Theorem \cite{R}] \label{sadd}
 Let $E=V\oplus X $, where $E$ is a real Banach space and $V\not= \{0\}$ and is
finite dimensional. Suppose $I\in \mathcal{C}^1(E,{\mathbb{R}})$ satisfies the
$(PS)$ condition,
\begin{itemize}
\item[($I_1$)] there is a constant $\alpha$ and a bounded neighborhood $D$ of 0 in
$V$ such that $I\big|_{\partial D}\leqslant\alpha$, and 
\item[($I_2$)] there is a constant $\beta>\alpha$ such that
$I|_{X}\geqslant \beta$.
\end{itemize}
Then, $I$ possesses a critical value $c\geqslant\beta$. Moreover $c$ can be
characterized as
$$c=\inf_{h\in\Gamma}\max_{u\in\overline{D}} I(h(u)),$$
where
$\Gamma=\{h\in\mathcal{C}(\overline{D},E):h=\mbox{id on }\partial D\}$.
\end{theorem}

First, we consider the case when $\lambda$ in the problem \eqref{Plf} is not
an eigenvalue of the eigenvalue problem (\ref{a1}):
%eqn12
\begin{gather*}
 -\Delta u=\lambda h(x)u\quad \mbox{in } \mathbb{R}^N,\;h>0\;a.e. ,\\
u\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2} .
\end{gather*}
We are now in a position to prove Theorem \ref{Thm1}.
% \label{Proposition 3.3}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm1}]
 Suppose $(u_n)$ is a $(PS)_c$ sequence.
First, we show that $(u_n)$ is bounded in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. We
argue by contradiction. Assume $(\int|\nabla u_n|^2)^{1/2} =t_n
\to \infty$ and define $v_n = u_n/t_n$; then,
$(\int|\nabla v_n|^2)^{1/2} =1$ for all $n$. So we have, passing
to a subsequence if necessary, that $v_n \rightharpoonup v$ weakly
in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}(\mathbb{R}^N)$, since $(v_n)$ is bounded.

Now we claim that $v(x)\equiv 0$.
As a consequence of the assumption $\|J'_{\lambda}(u_n)\|\to 0$ as $n\to\infty$,
we have
\begin{align*}
\langle J'_{\lambda}(u_n),\phi \rangle
&=  \int \nabla u_n\cdot \nabla \phi dx-\lambda \int h(x)u_n \phi dx\\
&\quad -\int a(x)g(u_n)\phi dx-\int f(x)\phi=o(1)\|\phi\|
\end{align*}
as $n\to\infty$, for all $\phi \in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. Dividing the previous
 equation by $t_n=|\nabla u_n |_2$ we obtain
\begin{equation}
\int \nabla v_n \cdot\nabla \phi- \lambda \int h(x)v_n \phi-\int a(x) \frac{g(u_n)}{t_n}\phi
-\int \frac{f(x)\phi}{t_{n}}=o(1)
\label{13}
\end{equation}
as $n\to\infty$. Given that $g$ is bounded and that $\phi \in
\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$ implies $\phi \in L^{2N/(N-2)}$,  we obtain
from (\ref{13})
\begin{eqnarray}
\int \nabla v_n \cdot\nabla\phi -\lambda\int hv_n \phi-\frac{C}{t_n}=o(1)
\quad\mbox{as }n\to\infty,
\label{14}
\end{eqnarray}
by H\"{o}lder's inequality.
Thus, letting $n\to\infty$ in (\ref{14}),
$$
\int \nabla v \cdot\nabla\phi-\lambda \int hv\phi=0.
$$
Since $\lambda$ is not an eigenvalue of problem (\ref{a1}), we conclude that $v=0$
a.e. in $\mathbb{R}^N$.
Substituting $\phi=v_n$ in (\ref{14}) we obtain
\begin{equation}
\int |\nabla v_n|^2-\lambda\int hv^{2}_{n}-\frac{C}{t_n}=o(1)
\quad\mbox{as }n\to\infty,
\label{my50}
\end{equation}
where we have used the fact that  $\int h v^{2}_{n}\to 0$ and $\int fv_n\to 0$ as
$n\to\infty$ since $v_n \to v = 0$ weakly in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$
(see  Corollary \ref{Corollary 2.3}).
Moreover, given that $\int |\nabla v_{n}|^2=\|v_n\|^2=1$ we obtain
from (\ref{my50}) that
$$
1-\frac{C}{t_n}=o(1)\quad\mbox{as }n\to\infty,
$$
which leads clearly to a contradiction as $t_n\to \infty$.
Therefore, $u_n$ is bounded in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.
Thus, every $(PS)_c$ sequence is bounded. Hence, by Proposition
\ref{Proposition 3.2},  $J_{\lambda}$ satisfies the $(PS)_c$ condition.

Next we prove that $J_{\lambda}$ satisfies the hypotheses of the Saddle Point
Theorem \ref{sadd}.
 Let $\varphi_1$ be an eigenfunction corresponding to $\lambda_1$. Recall
that $\|\varphi_1\|=1$. Consider
\begin{align*}
J_{\lambda}(t\varphi_1)
&=\frac{1}{2}t^2 \int|\nabla\varphi_1|^2
-\frac{\lambda}{2}t^2\int h(x)\varphi^{2}_{1}-\int a(x)G(t\varphi_1)
-t\int f(x)\varphi_1\\
&=\frac{1}{2}t^2\big(1-\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_1}\big)
-\int a(x)G(t\varphi_1)-t\int f(x)\varphi_1.
\end{align*}
Recall that $|G(s)|\leqslant C|s|$ for all $s\in{\mathbb{R}}$. Therefore,
\begin{align*}
 J_{\lambda}(t\varphi_1)
 &\leqslant-\frac{1}{2}\big(\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_1}-1\big)t^2
 +C|t|\int a(x)|\varphi_1|\\
&\leqslant -\frac{1}{2}\big(\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_1}-1\big)t^2+C_1|t|
\big(|a|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}+|f|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}\big)|\varphi_1|_{L^{2N/(N-2)}}.
\end{align*}
Let $V=\mathop{\rm span}\{\varphi_1\}$; it then follows from the last inequality that
$$
\lim_{\|v\|\to\infty,\;v\in V}J_{\lambda}(v)=-\infty.
$$
Finally, let $X=V^{\perp}=\{w\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2}:\langle w,\varphi_1\rangle=0\}$.
Then $\lambda_2\int hw^2\leqslant\int|\nabla w|^2$  for all $w\in X$ and
$$
J_{\lambda}(w)\geqslant\frac{1}{2}\big(1-\frac{\lambda}{\lambda_2}\big)
\|w\|^2-C_1\big(|a|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}+|f|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}\big)\|w\|
$$
for any $w\in X$. Therefore, $J_{\lambda}(w)\to+\infty$ as $\|w\|\to\infty$ in $X$.
Consequently, $(I_1 )$ and $(I_2 )$ in the Saddle Point Theorem \ref{sadd} hold,
and so $J_{\lambda}$ has a critical point, which establishes Theorem \ref{Thm1}.
\end{proof}

\noindent\textbf{Remark.}
This argument can be extended to the case $\lambda_k<\lambda<\lambda_{k+1}$
where $\lambda_k$ and $\lambda_{k+1}$ are consecutive eigenvalues of problem
(\ref{a1}).

\section{A Resonance Problem}

In this section we consider the problem
\begin{equation} \label{Pl1}
\begin{gathered}
-\Delta u = \lambda_1 h(x) u + a(x)g(u)+f(x),\\
u\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_1$ is the first eigenvalue of (\ref{a1}) over $\mathbb{R}^N$.
We can solve problem \eqref{Pl1} if we impose a condition similar to one used by
Ahmad, Lazer and Paul in \cite{ALP} on $G(u)$ and $f$; that is condition \eqref{alp}
in the statement of Theorem \ref{Thm2}.


\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm2}]  % \ref{Propsion 3.3}
We first show  that $J_{\lambda_{1}}$ satisfies the $(PS)_{c}$ condition
for any $c\in\mathbb{R}$, and then we verify that $J_{\lambda_{1}}$ satisfies
the conditions of the saddle point theorem of Rabinowitz (cf. Theorem \ref{sadd}).

Let $(u_m)$ be a $(PS)_c$ sequence for the functional $J_{\lambda_{1}}$
defined in (\ref{J}) for $\lambda=\lambda_1$.   We claim that $(u_m)$ is bounded.

Write $u_m=v_m+w_m$, where $v_n\in span\{\varphi_1\}=V$ and $w_m\in V^{\perp}=X$
for each $m\in\mathbb{N}$. First we show that $(w_m)$ is bounded in
$\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$. Since $\|J'_{\lambda_{1}}(u_m)\|\stackrel{m}{\to} 0$,
there exists $m_0\in \mathbb{N}$ such that if $m\geqslant m_0$, then
$$
\Big|\int\nabla u_m\cdot\nabla v-\lambda_1\int hu_m v-\int ag(u_m)v-\int fv\Big|
\leqslant\|v\| \quad\mbox{for all } v\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2} .
$$
In particular, if $v=w_m$, we have
$$
\Big|\int|\nabla w_m|^2-\lambda_1\int hw^{2}_{m}\Big|\leqslant \|w_m\|
+\Big|\int ag(u_m)w_m\Big|+\Big|\int fw_m\Big|\quad\mbox{ for } m\geqslant m_o .
$$
Given that $\lambda_2\int hv^2\leqslant\|v\|^2$ for all $v\in X$,  we obtain
$$
\big(1-\frac{\lambda_1}{\lambda_2}\big)\|w_m\|^2
\leqslant\|w_m\|+C\big(|a|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}+|f|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}\big)\|w_m\|
\quad\mbox{ for } m\geqslant m_o,
$$
from which it follows that $(w_m)$ is bounded in $\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$.

Next we show that $(v_m)$ is bounded. Observe that
$J_{\lambda_1}(u_m)\stackrel{m}{\to}c$ implies that $J_{\lambda_1}(u_m)$ is bounded;
say $|J_{\lambda_1}(u_m)|\leqslant C_1$ for all $m$, where
\begin{align*}
    J_{\lambda_1}(u_m)&= \frac{1}{2}\int|\nabla u_m|^2-\frac{\lambda_1}{2}\int hu^{2}_{m}-\int aG(u_m)\\
&= \frac{1}{2}\int |\nabla w_m|^2-\frac{\lambda_1}{2}\int hw^{2}_{m}\\
&\quad-\int a\left[G(v_m+w_m)-G(v_m)\right]-\int aG(v_m)-\int fv_m .
\end{align*}
Note that $|G(v_m+w_m)-G(v_m)|\leqslant M|w_m|$. Hence,
$$
\Big|\int a[G(v_m+w_m)-G(v_m)]\Big|\leqslant M\int a|w_m|\leqslant C_3\|w_m\| .
$$
So we obtain
\begin{align*}
  \Big|\int aG(v_m)+\int fv_m\Big|
&\leqslant |J(u_m)|+C_2\|w_m\|^2+ C_3\|w_m\|\\
&\leqslant C_1+C_2\|w_m\|^2+C_3\|w_m\|.
\end{align*}
Given that $(w_m)$ is bounded, we have
$$
\Big|\int a(x) G(v_m)+\int fv_m\Big|\leqslant C\quad \mbox{for all}\ m .
$$
Therefore, if \eqref{alp} holds, then $(v_m)$ is bounded in
$\mathcal{D}^{1,2}$, otherwise $\int aG(v_m)+\int fv_m$
would approach infinity as $m\to\infty$, by \eqref{alp}. We therefore conclude
that $(u_m )$ is bounded, and
so by Theorem \ref{Thm1} we have that $J_{\lambda_1}$ satisfies the $(PS)_c$
condition.

To show that the other hypotheses of the Saddle Point Theorem \ref{sadd} are
satisfied, we proceed  as in
the proof of Theorem \ref{Thm1}. If $u\in X$, we have
$u=\sum^{\infty}_{j=2}a_j\varphi_j$, hence
$$
\int|\nabla u|^2-\lambda_1\int hu^2=\sum^{2}_{j=2}a^{2}_{j}
\big(1-\frac{\lambda_{1}}{\lambda_{j}}\big)\geqslant
\big(1-\frac{\lambda_{1}}{\lambda_{2}}\big)\|u\|^2.
$$
Moreover, since $|g(s)|\leqslant M$ for all $s\in {\mathbb{R}}$, we have that,
for all $u\in \mathcal{D}^{1,2}$,
$$
\Big|\int aG(u)\Big|\leqslant M\int |a||u|
\leqslant M|a|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}|u|_{L^{2N/(N-2)}}\leqslant C\|u\|.
$$
Therefore $J_{\lambda}$ is bounded from below on $X$; i.e. ($I_2$)
in the Saddle Point Theorem \ref{sadd} holds. Finally, if $v\in V$,
we have
$$
J_{\lambda_{1}}(v)=-\int aG(v)-\int fv.
$$
But $\int aG(v)+\int fv\to\infty$ as
$\|v\|\to\infty$ by \eqref{alp} and, therefore, ($I_1$) in the Saddle Point Theorem
(\ref{sadd}) also holds.
Hence,  $J_{\lambda_1}$  has a critical point and the theorem follows.
\end{proof}

\noindent\textbf{Remark.}
The existence result in Theorem \ref{Thm2} can be extended to the problem
\eqref{Plf} with $\lambda=\lambda_{n}$ for $n>1$ by modifying condition
\eqref{alp} appropriately. In fact, suppose the eigenspace corresponding to
$\lambda_n$ is
$E_{\lambda_{n}}=\mathop{\rm span}\{\varphi_{n_{1}},\varphi_{n_{2}},\dots,
\varphi_{n_{k}}\}$,
then \eqref{alp} is replaced by
$$
\lim_{t^{2}_{1}+\cdots+t^{2}_{k}\to\infty}\int a(x)G(t_{1}\varphi_{n_{1}}
+\dots+t_{k}\varphi_{n_{k}})+\int f(t_{1}\varphi_{n_{1}}+\dots
+t_{k}\varphi_{n_{k}})=\infty.
$$
\textbf{Remark.}
 Suppose $\lim_{s\to\infty} g(s)=g_{\infty}$ and
$\lim_{s\to-\infty} g(s)=g_{-\infty}$ exist. Then, if
$g_{\infty}>0$ and $g_{-\infty}<0$,
$G(s)=\int^{s}_{0}g(t)dt\to\infty$ as
$|s|\to\infty$. Consequently, by L' H\^{o}spital's rule,
the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem and the fact that
$\varphi_1>0$ a.e. in $\mathbb{R}^N$ we have that
$$
\lim_{|t|\to\infty}\frac{1}{t}\int a(x)G(t\varphi_1)
=\lim_{|t|\to\infty}\int ag(t\varphi_1)\varphi_1
= \begin{cases}
g_{\infty}\int a\varphi_1 &\mbox{as }t\to\infty,\\
g_{-\infty}\int a\varphi_1 &\mbox{as }t\to-\infty .
\end{cases}
$$
Thus, the condition \eqref{alp} in the resonance Theorem \ref{Thm2} holds if
\[
g_{\infty}\int a\varphi_1+\int f\varphi_1>0\quad
\mbox{and}\quad g_{-\infty}\int a\varphi_1+\int f\varphi_1<0 ,
\]
or
\begin{equation} \label{LL}
g_{-\infty}\int a\varphi_1<-\int f\varphi_1<g_{\infty}\int a\varphi_1.
\end{equation}
This is the original Landesman-Lazer condition in \cite{LL} for the case
of resonance around the first eigenvalue.

It can be shown that if
$$
g_{-\infty}<g(s)<g_{+\infty}\quad\mbox{for all }s\in\mathbb{R},
$$
then \eqref{LL} is necessary and sufficient for the solvability
of \eqref{Pl1}. If $g_{-\infty}=g_{+\infty}$, then the
Landesman-Lazer condition \eqref{LL} cannot hold, and if
$g_{-\infty}$ and $g_{+\infty}$ are both zero, then 
condition \eqref{alp} might not hold in general. This corresponds to
what is known as strong resonance, which will be treated in the
next section for the case $f\equiv 0$.

\section{A Strongly Resonant Problem}

As an example of a strongly resonant problem (cf. \cite{B-B}) we have
\begin{equation} \label{Pl0}
\begin{gathered}
   -\Delta u = \lambda_n h(x) u + a(x)g(u),\quad n\geqslant 1 ,\\
   u\in\mathcal{D}^{1,2},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $g(s)\to 0$ as $|s|\to\infty$ and $a\in L^1\cap L^{\infty}$.
In this section we prove Theorem (\ref{Thm3}) which states that,
under conditions \eqref{MyStrongRes} and \eqref{StrongRes2} on $G$, problem \eqref{Pl0} has a weak solution.
This will extend to $\mathbb{R}^N$ the results in \cite{EL} for bounded domains.
We use the following extension of the saddle point theorem by Rabinowitz.

\begin{theorem}[Linking Theorem \cite{EL}] \label{link}
Let $E=X_1\oplus X_2$ be a real Banach space with $X_1$ finite dimensional.
Suppose $I\in\mathcal{C}^1(E,{\mathbb{R}})$ and satisfies:
\begin{itemize}
\item[($I_0$)] There exists $\beta\in{\mathbb{R}}$ such that
$I(u)\leqslant\beta$ for every $u\in X_1$.
\item[($I_1$)] There exists $\gamma\in {\mathbb{R}}$ such that
$I(u)\geqslant\gamma$ for every $u\in X_2$.
\item[($I_2$)] There exist $r_1>0$ and $\alpha>\gamma$ such that
$I(u)\geqslant\alpha$ for every $u\in X_2$ with $\|u\|_{E}\geqslant r_1$.
\end{itemize}
If $I$ satisfies the $(PS)_c$ condition for every $c>\gamma$ and every
$(PS)_{c}$ sequence is bounded, then $I$ possesses a critical value
$b\geqslant\gamma$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{Thm3}]
Observe that since $ L^{1}\cap L^{\infty}\subset L^q$
for any $q\in (1,\infty)$, Proposition \ref{Proposition 3.2}
applies to the functional $ J_{\lambda_{n}} $ given in equation (\ref{J})
with $f=0$.

Define the subspaces $E_k:=\mathop{\rm span}\{\varphi_1,\dots,\varphi_k\}$ and
$L_k:=\mathop{\rm span}\{\varphi_i:\lambda_{i}=\lambda_{k}\}$ for every
$k\in \mathbb{N}$; also, set $E_0=\{0\}$. We show first that
$J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)$ satisfies the $(PS)_c$ condition for every
$c\in (-\Lambda,\infty)$. By Proposition \ref{Proposition 3.2} it
is enough to show that if $c\in (-\Lambda,\infty)$ and $(u_m)$ is
a $(PS)_c$ sequence, then $(u_m)$ is bounded.

Let $(u_m)$ be a $(PS)_{c}$ sequence for $J_{\lambda}$. Assume by
contradiction that $(u_m)$ is not bounded. Write
$u_m=u^{+}_{m}+u^{0}_{m}+u^{-}_{m}$, where $u^{+}_{m}\in
(E_n)^{\perp}$, $u^{0}_{m}\in L_n$, and $u^{-}_{m}\in E_{n-1}$.
Since $\|J'_{\lambda_{n}}(u_m )\|\to 0$ as $m\to\infty$,
it follows that there exists $m_o \in \mathbb{N}$ for which
\begin{equation}
\Big|\int\nabla u_m\nabla u^{+}_{m}-\lambda_n\int hu_mu^{+}_{m}
-\int ag(u_m)u^{+}_{m}\Big|
\leqslant \|u^{+}_{m}\| \quad\mbox{for } m\geqslant m_o .
\label{my51}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, since $g$ is bounded,
$$
\Big|\int ag(u_m)u^{+}_{m}\Big|\leqslant M\int |a||u^{+}_{m}|
\leqslant M|a|_{L^{2N/(N+2)}}\Big(\int|u^{+}_{m}|^\frac{N-2}{2N}\Big)^{2N/(N-2)}
\leqslant C\|u^{+}_{m}\|
$$
for all $m$.  Consequently, it follows from (\ref{my51}) that there exists $C_1>0$
such that
$$
\frac{\lambda_{n+1}-\lambda_{n}}{\lambda_{n+1}}\|u^{+}_{m}\|^2
\leqslant C_1\|u^{+}_{m}\| \quad\mbox{ for }\ m\geqslant m_o .
$$
Therefore, $(u^{+}_{m})$ is bounded.

For $(u^{-}_{m})$, since $u^{-}_{m}\in E_{n-1}$ implies
$\lambda_{n-1}\geqslant\frac{\int|\nabla u^{-}_{m}|^2}{\int
h(u^{-}_{m})^2}$, by similar calculations as for $u^{+}_{m}$, we
obtain that there exists $C_2>0$ such that
$$
\Big|\frac{\lambda_{n-1}-\lambda_n}{\lambda_{n-1}}\Big|\|u^{-}_{m}\|^2
\leqslant C_2\|u^{-}_{m}\| \quad\mbox{for}\ m\geqslant m_o .
$$
Consequently, $(u^{-}_m)$ is also bounded. Moreover, we will show shortly that
\begin{equation}
\|u^{\pm}_{m}\|\to 0\quad\quad\mbox{as }m\to\infty.
\label{cero}
\end{equation}
This will follow from the fact that $g(s)\to 0$
as $|s|\to\infty$. In fact, from
$$
\Big|\frac{\lambda_{n+1}-\lambda_n}{\lambda_{n+1}}\Big|\|u^{+}_{m}\|^2
-\Big|\int ag(u_m)u^{+}_{m}\Big|
\leqslant \Big|\langle J'_{\lambda_{n}}(u_m),u^{+}_{m}\rangle\Big|
$$
and H\"{o}lder's inequality, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\Big|\frac{\lambda_{n+1}-\lambda_n}{\lambda_{n+1}}\Big|\|u^{+}_{m}\|
\leqslant \|J'_{\lambda_{n}}(u_m)\|
+C\Big(\int |a|^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}|g(u_m)|^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}\Big)^{(N+2)/(2N)}.
\label{r1}
\end{equation}
Since $\|J'_{\lambda_{n}}(u_m)\|\to 0$ as $m\to\infty$, condition
(\ref{cero}), for  $u_m^{+}$, follows  from (\ref{r1}) once we
show that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{m\to\infty}\int |a|^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}|g(u_m)|^{\frac{2N}{N+2}}=0.
\label{r2}
\end{equation}
 Define $v_m=u_{m}^{0}/\|u_{m}^{0}\|$ for all $m$.  Then, since $L_n$ is finite
dimensional, we may assume, passing to a subsequence if necessary, that there
exists $v\in L_n$ such that $\|v\|=1$ and
\begin{equation}
v_m(x)\to v(x)\quad\mbox{a.e. as } m\to\infty.
\label{r3}
\end{equation}
For a given $\varepsilon>0$,  find $R>0$ such that
\begin{equation}
\int _{[B_{R}(0)]^{c}} |a|^{2N/(N+2)}<\frac{\varepsilon}{M^{2N/(N+2)}}.
\label{r4}
\end{equation}
Since $\|u_{m}^{+}\|$ and $\|u_{m}^{-}\|$ are bounded, we may assume,
as a consequence of the Rellich-Kondrachov Theorem
\cite[Theorem 7.26]{G-T}, passing to subsequences if necessary, that there exist
functions $w^{\pm}\in H^{1}(B_{R}(0))$ such that
 $u_{m}^{\pm}(x)\to w^{\pm}$ a.e. in $B_{R}(0)$ as $m\to \infty$
\cite[p. 58]{B}. It then follows from
$$
u_m(x)=\|u_{m}^{0}\|\Big(\frac{u_{m}^{-}(x)}{\|u_{m}^{0}\|}+v_m(x)
+\frac{u_{m}^{+}(x)}{\|u_{m}^{0}\|}\Big),
$$
(\ref{r3}), and the unique continuation property of the
eigenfunctions that
$$
|u_m(x)|\to\infty\quad\mbox{a.e. in }B_{R}(0)\quad\mbox{as }m\to\infty,
$$
since $\|u_{m}^{0}\|\to\infty$ as $m\to\infty$.
Therefore, by the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem and the
fact that $g(s)\to 0$ as $s\to\infty$,
$$
\lim_{m\to\infty} \int_{B_{R}(0)} |a|^{2N/(N+2)}|g(u_m)|^{2N/(N+2)}=0 .
$$
Hence, in view of (\ref{r4}),
$$
\limsup_{m\to\infty} \int |a|^{2N/(N+2)}|g(u_m)|^{2N/(N+2)}\leqslant \varepsilon ,
$$
from which (\ref{r2}) follows. Consequently, (\ref{cero}) is established
for $(u_m^{+})$.  Similar calculations lead to the analogous result for
$(u_m^{-})$.

Now, from
 $$
 G(u_m)-G(u^{0}_{m})=\int^{1}_{0}g(u^{0}_{m}+t(u^{+}_{m}+u^{-}_{m}))(u^{+}_{m}
 +u^{-}_{m})dt\,,
$$
we obtain
\begin{align*}
\Big|\int aG(u_m)-\int aG(u^{0}_{m})\Big|
&\leqslant \Big|\int\int^{1}_{0}ag(u^{0}_{m}+t(u^{+}_{m}+u^{-}_{m}))(u^{+}_{m}
+u^{-}_{m})\Big|\\
&\leqslant \int^{1}_{0}\int |a||g(u^{0}_{m}+t(u^{+}_{m}+u^{-}_{m}))(u^{+}_{m}
+u^{-}_{m})|dtdx\\
&\leqslant M|a|_{\frac{2N}{N+2}}\Big(\int |u^{+}_{m}
+u^{-}_{m}|^\frac{N-2}{2N}dx\Big)^{2N/(N-2)}\\
&\leqslant  C\|u^{+}_{m}+u^{-}_{m}\| .
\end{align*}
It then follows from (\ref{cero}) and the above inequality that
$$
\int aG(u_m)=\int aG(u^{0}_{m})+o(1)\;\mbox{as}\;m\to\infty .
$$
Thus,
\[
\liminf_{m\to\infty}\int aG(u_m)\geqslant  \liminf_{m\to\infty}\int aG(u^{0}_{m})
\geqslant \liminf_{\stackrel{\|u\|\to\infty}{u\in L_n}}\int aG(u)=\Lambda .
\]
Hence,
\begin{equation}
\liminf_{m\to\infty}\int aG(u_m)\geqslant\Lambda.
\label{15}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by $J_{\lambda_{n}}(u_m)\to c$ and (\ref{cero}) we have
\begin{align*}
c&= \lim_{m\to\infty}J_{\lambda_{n}}(u_m)=\lim_{m\to\infty}
\Big\{\int|\nabla u_m|^2-\lambda_n\int hu^{2}_{m}-\int aG(u_m)\Big\}\\
&= \lim_{m\to\infty}
\Big\{\int |\nabla u^{+}_{m}|-\lambda_n\int h(u^{+}_{m})^2
+\int |\nabla u^{-}_{m}|^2-\lambda_n\int h|u^{-}_{m}|^2-\int a G(u_m)\Big\}\\
&=  -\lim_{m\to\infty}\int aG(u_m) .
\end{align*}
By hypothesis, $c>-\Lambda$, thus
$\lim_{m\to\infty}\int aG(u_m)<\Lambda $,
which contradicts (\ref{15}). Therefore, $(u_m)$ must be bounded if
$c\in (-\Lambda,\infty)$.

To show the existence of a weak solution we use the Linking
Theorem, Theorem \ref{link} (see \cite{EL}). Define $(E_n)^{\perp}:=X_2$,
then $\lambda_{n+1}\leqslant\frac{\int|\nabla u|^2}{\int hu^2}$
for all $u\in X_2$. So, given any  $u\in X_2$, it follows from
(\ref{StrongRes2}) that
\begin{align*}
J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)&= \frac{1}{2}\int|\nabla u|^2-\frac{1}{2}\lambda_n\int hu^2-\int aG(u)\\
&\geqslant \frac{1}{2}\big( 1-\frac{\lambda_{n}}{\lambda_{n+1}}\big)
\|u\|^2 - \int\frac{a}{|a|_{L^{1}}}\Lambda\\
&\geqslant -\Lambda;
\end{align*}
i.e., $J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)\geqslant\gamma\in {\mathbb{R}}$ for all
$u\in X_2$ with $\gamma:=-\Lambda$.  So condition $(I_1)$ in
Theorem \ref{link} holds.

On the other hand, from
$$
J_{\lambda_{n}}(u) \geqslant \frac{1}{2}\big(1-\frac{\lambda_{n}}{\lambda_{n+1}}\big)
\|u\|^2+\gamma ,
$$
it follows that $J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)\to\infty$ as $\|u\|\to\infty$
(since  $\lambda_{n+1}>\lambda_n$), and therefore ($I_2$) in Theorem \ref{link}
also holds.

Now, define $X_1:=E_n$. If $n>1$, we may write $u=u_1+u_0$ where $u_1\in E_{n-1}$
and $u_0\in L_n$. For $u\in E_{n-1}$ we know that
$\lambda_{n-1}\geqslant \frac{\int |\nabla u|^2}{\int hu^2}$;  thus, for
$u\in X_1$,
\begin{align*}
J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)&= \frac{1}{2}\int |\nabla (u_0+u_1)|^2-\frac{\lambda_n}{2}
\int h(u_0+u_1)^2-\int aG(u)\\
&= \frac{1}{2}\int |\nabla u_1|^2-\frac{\lambda_n}{2}\int hu^{2}_{1}-\int aG(u)\\
&\leqslant - \frac{1}{2}\big(\frac{\lambda_n}{\lambda_{n-1}}-1 \big)\|u_1\|^2
-\int(aG(u)-aG(u_0))-\int a G(u_0).
\end{align*}
 From $G(u)-G(u_0)=\int^{1}_{0}g(u_0+tu_1)u_1dt$ we get that
$|G(u)-G(u_0)|\leqslant M|u_1|$, so that the above inequality becomes
\begin{equation}
J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)\leqslant
- \frac{1}{2}\big(\frac{\lambda_n}{\lambda_{n-1}}-1 \big)\|u_1\|^2 + C\|u_1\|
-\int aG(u_0).
\label{strong1}
\end{equation}
It then follows from (\ref{strong1}) and the condition (\ref{MyStrongRes}) that
 there exists a real constant $\beta$ such that
$J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)\leqslant \beta$ for all $u\in X_1$
which is condition ($I_0$) in Theorem \ref{link}.

For $n=1$ we have
$$
J_{\lambda_{n}}(u) = -\int aG(u)\quad\mbox{for}\ u\in X_1,
$$
which, by (\ref{MyStrongRes}), yields $\beta\in {\mathbb{R}}$ such that
$J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)\leqslant\beta$ for all $u\in X_1$ i.e., ($I_0$) in
Theorem \ref{link} holds.
Therefore, $J_{\lambda_{n}}(u)$ has a critical value $b\geqslant\gamma$ and
the theorem is established.
\end{proof}

As a consequence of Theorem \ref{Thm3}, we have the following statement.

\begin{coro} \label{coro 3.6}
Let $g:{\bf R}\to {\bf R}$ be a continuous function satisfying
$\lim_{|s|\to\infty}g(s)=0$.  Suppose
that  $a>0$ a.e.,
$$
G(s)\to\xi\in{\mathbb{R}}\quad\mbox{as }|s|\to\infty,\quad
\mbox{and}\quad
G(s)\leq\xi\quad\mbox{for every }s\in{\mathbb{R}}.
$$
Then problem \eqref{Pl0} has a weak solution.
\end{coro}

 This corollary follows from Theorem \ref{Thm3}, the unique continuation
property of the eigenfunctions, and the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem.


\begin{thebibliography}{00}

\bibitem{AR} {\sc N.  Aronszajn},
A unique continuation theorem for solutions of elliptic partial differential
equations or inequalities of second order, {\it Journ. de Math.}, {\bf XXXVI},
fasc. 3, 1957.

 \bibitem{ALP}  {\sc S. Ahmad, A. C.  Lazer} and {\sc J. L. Paul},
Elementary critical point theory and Perturbations of elliptic
boundary-value problems at resonance, {\it Indiana Univ. Math. J.} {\bf 25}
(1976), 933-944.

\bibitem{B} {\sc H. Br\'{e}zis},
Analyse Fonctionnelle Th\'{e}orie et Applications. {\it Dunod} (1999).

\bibitem{B-B} {\sc P.  Bartolo, V.  Benci} and {\sc D. Fortunato},
Abstract Critical Point Theorems and Applications to some Nonlinear Problems
with Strong Resonance at Infinity,
{\it Nonlinear Analysis, Theory, Methods \& Applications} {\bf V.7,}
No.9, (1983) 981-1012.

\bibitem{CI-G} {\sc S. Cingolani} and {\sc J. G\'{a}mez},
Positive Solutions of a Semilinear Elliptic Equation on $\mathbb{R}^N$ with
Indefinite Nonlinearity, {\it Journal of Advanced Differential Equations}
{\bf V1} (1996), 773-779.

\bibitem{CO-T} {\sc D. G. Costa} and {\sc H. Tehrani}, Existence of Positive
Solutions for a Class of Indefinite Elliptic Problems in $\mathbb{R}^N$,
{\it Calc. Var. and PDE} {\bf 13} (2001) 159-189.

\bibitem{CO-T1} {\sc D. G. Costa} and {\sc H. Tehrani},
On a Class of Asymptotically Linear Elliptic Problems in $\mathbb{R}^N$,
{\it J. Diff. Eqs.} {\bf 173}, (2001), 470-494.

\bibitem{G-T} {\sc D. Gilbarg}  and {\sc N. S. Trudinger},
Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order {\it Springer}, 1998.

\bibitem{HL} {\sc G.  Hetzer} and {\sc  E. M. Landesman},
On the Solvability of a Semilinear Operator Equation at Resonance as Applied
to Elliptic Boundary Value Problems in Unbounded Domains,
{\it Journal of Differential Equations} {\bf Vol. 50}, No.3 December 1983.

\bibitem{J}{\sc  L. Jeanjean},
On the Existence of Bounded Palais-Smale Sequences and Application to a
Landesman-Lazer type Problem set on $\mathbb{R}^n$,
{\it Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh} {\bf 129A} (1999), 787-809.

\bibitem{L1} {\sc P. L. Lions},
The Concentration-Compactness Principle in the Calculus of Variations.
The Locally Compact Case, Part 1,
{\it Ann. Inst. Henry Poincar\'{e}, Anal. Non Lin\'{e}aire} {\bf 1} (1984), 109-145.


\bibitem{LL} {\sc E. M. Landesman}, and {\sc  A. C. Lazer},
Nonlinear Perturbations of Linear Elliptic Boundary Value Problems at Resonance,
{\it J. Math. Mech.} {\bf 19} (1970), 609-623.

\bibitem{M} {\sc G. Metzen},
Nonresonance Semilinear Operator Equations in Unbounded Domains
{\it Nonlinear Analysis Th. Meth. \& Appl.} {\bf Vol. 11}, No. 10, (1987) 1185-1192.

\bibitem{R} {\sc P. H. Rabinowitz},
Minimax Methods in Critical Point Theory with Applications to Partial
Differential Equations. {\it Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences
Regional Conference Series in Mathematics}, Number 65 AMS

\bibitem{EL} {\sc E. A. de B. e Silva},
 Linking Theorems and Applications to Semilinear Elliptic Problems at Resonance,
{\it Non Linear Analysis, Theory, Methods \& Applications},
{\bf Vol 16}, No. 5, (455-477) 1991.

\bibitem{SZ} {\sc C. A. Stuart} and {H. S. Zhou},
Applying the Mountain-Pass Theorem to an Asymptotically Linear Elliptic
Equation on $\mathbb{R}^N$, {\it Comm. Part. Diff. Eqs.}
 {\bf 24} (1999), 1731-1758.

\bibitem{W} {\sc M. Willem},
Minimax Theorems, {\it Progress in Nonlinear Differential Equations and
Their Applications,} Vol 24, Birkh\"{a}user (1996).

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
