
\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
{\em Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2004(2004), No. 19, pp. 1--10.\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 2004 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}

\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2004/19\hfil Existence of solutions]
{Existence of solutions to nonlocal and singular elliptic
problems via Galerkin method}

\author[F. J. S. A. Corr\^ea \& S. D. B. Menezes\hfil EJDE-2004/19\hfilneg]
{Francisco Julio S. A. Corr\^ea \& Silvano D. B. Menezes}  % in alphabetical order

\address{Francisco Julio S. A. Corr\^ea \hfill\break
Departamento de Matem\'atica-CCEN \\
Universidade Federal do Par\'a \\
66.075-110 Bel\'em Par\'a Brazil}
\email{fjulio@ufpa.br}

\address{Silvano D. B. Menezes\hfill\break
Departamento de Matem\'atica-CCEN \\
Universidade Federal do Par\'a \\
66.075-110 Bel\'em Par\'a Brazil}
\email{silvano@ufpa.br}


\date{}
\thanks{Submitted December 15, 2003. Published February 11, 2004.}
\subjclass[2000]{35J60, 35J25}
\keywords{Nonlocal elliptic problems, Galerkin Method}


\begin{abstract}
 We study the existence of solutions to the nonlocal elliptic  equation
 $$
 -M(\|u\|^2)\Delta u =  f(x,u)
 $$
 with zero Dirichlet boundary conditions on a bounded and smooth
 domain of $\mathbb{R}^n$.
 We consider the $M$-linear case with $f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$,
 and the sub-linear case $f(u)=u^{\alpha}$, $0<\alpha <1$.
 Our main tool is the Galerkin method for both cases when $M$
 continuous and when $M$ is discontinuous.
\end{abstract}

\date{}
\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{prop}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}


\section{Introduction}

In this paper we study some questions related to the
existence of solutions for the nonlocal elliptic problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1.1}
\begin{gathered}
-M(\|u\|^2)\Delta u =  f \quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u =0 \quad \mbox{on }  \partial\Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^{N}$ is a bounded smooth domain,
$f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$  and $M:\mathbb{R}\to\mathbb{R}$ is
a function whose behavior will be stated later, and the norm in
$H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$ is $\|u\|^2=\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^2$.

The main purpose of this work is establishing properties on $M$
under which problem \eqref{eq:1.1}, and its nonlinear counterpart,
possesses a solution.
This  equation has called our attention because the operator
$$
Lu:=M(\|u\|^2)\Delta u
$$
contains the nonlocal term $M(\|u\|^2)$ which poses some
interesting mathematical questions. Also the operator $L$ appears in the
Kirchhoff equation, which arises in nonlinear vibrations,
namely
\begin{gather*}
u_{tt}-M\big(\int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^2dx\big)\Delta u =
f(x,u) \quad \mbox{in } \Omega \times (0,T),\\
u=0 \quad\mbox{on }\partial\Omega \times (0,T),\\
u(x,0)=u_{0}(x), \quad u_{t}(x,0)=u_{1}(x).
\end{gather*}
For more details on physical motivation of this problem the
interested reader is invited to consult Eisley, Limaco-Medeiros
\cite{eisley,limaco} and the references therein. In a
previous paper Alves-Corr\^ea \cite{alves} focused their attention
on problem \eqref{eq:1.1} in case $M(t)\geq m_{0}>0$, for all
$t\geq 0$, where $m_{0}$ is a constant. Among other things they
studied the above $M$-linear  problem \eqref{eq:1.1} where $M$,
besides the strict positivity mentioned before, satisfies the
following assumption:
\begin{quote}
The function $H:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ with
$$H(t)=M(t^2)t$$
is monotone and $H(\mathbb{R})=\mathbb{R}$.
\end{quote}
The above authors also studied the sublinear problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:1.2}% equation 1.2
\begin{gathered}
-M(\|u\|^2)\Delta u = u^{\alpha}\quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
                    u=0 \quad \mbox{on } \partial\Omega ,\\
                    u>0 \quad \mbox{in } \Omega \,,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $0<\alpha <1$, $M$ is a non-increasing continuous function,
$H$ is increasing, $H(\mathbb{R})=\mathbb{R}$ and
$$
G(t)=t[M(t^2)]^{2/(1-\alpha)}
$$
is injective. Under these assumptions it is proved that
\eqref{eq:1.2} possesses a unique solution. A straightforward
computation shows that the function $M(t)=\exp (-t)+C$, with $C$
a positive constant, satisfies the above assumptions.

In the present paper we prove similar results by allowing  $M$
to attain negative values and $M(t)\geq m_{0}>0$ only for $t$
large enough.

This is possible thanks to a device explored by Alves-de
Figueiredo \cite{alves-fig}, who use Galerkin method to attack a
non-variational elliptic system. The technique can be conveniently
adapted to problems such as \eqref{eq:1.1} and \eqref{eq:1.2}. In
this way we improve substantially the existence result  on the
above problems mainly because our assumptions on $M$ are
weakened. Indeed, we may also consider the case in which $M$
possesses a singularity. The method we use rests heavily on the
following result whose proof may be found in Lions \cite[p.53]{lions},
and it is a well known variant of Brouwer's Fixed Point Theorem.

\begin{prop} \label{prop1.1}
Suppose that $F:\mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}^m $ is a
continuous function such that $\langle F(\xi ),\xi \rangle \geq 0$ on
$|\xi|=r$, where $\langle \cdot , \cdot \rangle$ is the usual inner product in
$\mathbb{R}^m $ and $| \cdot |$ its related norm. Then, there
exists $z_{0}\in \overline{B_{r}}(0)$ such that $F(z_{0})=0$.
\end{prop}

We recall that by a solution of \eqref{eq:1.1} we mean a weak solution,
that is, a function $u\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$ such that
$$
M(\|u\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u\cdot\nabla\varphi
=\int_{\Omega}f(x,u)\varphi ,\quad \mbox{for all } \varphi\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega ).
$$
We point out that, depending on the regularity of $f(\cdot ,u)$, a
bootstrap argument may be used to show that a weak solution is a
classical solution, i.e., a function in $C_{0}^2(\overline{\Omega})$.
This happens, for instance, with the solution obtained in Theorem \ref{thm4.1}.

This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 is devoted to the
study of the $M$-linear problem in the continuous case.
In Section 3 the $M$-linear is studied in case $M$ possesses a
discontinuity. In Section 4 we focus our attention on the sublinear problem.
In Section 5 we analyze another type of nonlocal problem.

\section{The $M$-linear Problem:  Continuous Case}% section 2

In this section we are concerned with the $M$-linear problem
\eqref{eq:1.1} where $f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$ and
$M:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ is a continuous function
satisfying
\begin{itemize}

\item[(M1)] There are positive numbers $t_{\infty}$ and $m_{0}$ such that
$M(t)\geq m_{0}$, for all $t\geq t_{\infty}$.
\end{itemize}

\begin{theorem} \label{thm2.1}
Under assumption (M1), for each $0\neq f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$
problem \eqref{eq:1.1} possesses a weak solution.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Inspired by Alves-de Figueiredo \cite{alves-fig} we use the Galerkin Method.
First let us take
$M^{+}=\max\{M(t),0\}$, the positive part of $M$, and consider the
auxiliary problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2.1}% equation 2.1
\begin{gathered}
-M^{+}(\|u\|^2)\Delta u=f \quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u=0 \quad \mbox{on }\partial\Omega .
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
We will prove that problem \eqref{eq:2.1} possesses solution and
such a solution also solves problem \eqref{eq:1.1}. We point out
that $M^{+}$ also satisfies assumption (M1). We are ready to
apply the Galerkin Method by using Proposition \ref{prop1.1}.
Let
$\sum =\{e_{1},\ldots ,e_{m},\ldots \}$
be an orthonormal basis of the Hilbert space $H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$.
For each $m\in \mathbb{N}$  consider the finite
dimensional Hilbert space
$$
\mathbb{V}_{m}=\mathop{\rm span}\{e_{1},\ldots ,e_{m}\}.
$$
Since $(\mathbb{V}_{m},\|\cdot\|)$ and $(\mathbb{R}^m ,|\cdot |)$
are isometric and isomorphic, where $\|\cdot\|$ is the usual norm
in $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega )$ and $|\cdot |$ is the Euclidian norm in
$\mathbb{R}^m $, $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle$ its corresponding inner
product, we make, with no additional comment, the identification
$$
u=\sum_{j=1}^m \xi_{j}e_{j}\longleftrightarrow \xi
=(\xi_{1},\ldots ,\xi_{m}),\quad \|u\|=|\xi |.
$$
We will show that for each $m$ there is $u_{m}\in \mathbb{V}_{m}$,
an approximate solution of \eqref{eq:2.1}, satisfying
$$
M^{+}(\|u_{m}\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u_{m}\cdot\nabla e_{i}=\langle\langle
f,e_{i}\rangle\rangle,\quad i=1,\ldots, m.
$$
where $\langle\langle \; , \;\rangle\rangle$ is the duality pairing between
$H^{-1}(\Omega )$ and $H^{1}_{0}(\Omega )$.
First we consider the function $F:\mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}^m $ given by
\begin{gather*}
F(\xi )=(F_{1}(\xi ),\ldots ,F_{m}(\xi )), \\
F_{i}(\xi )=M^{+}(\|u\|)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u\cdot \nabla
e_{i}-\langle\langle f,e_{i}\rangle\rangle,
\end{gather*}
where $i=1,\ldots,m$ and $u=\sum_{j=1}^m \xi_{j}e_{j}$.
So that
$$
F_{i}(\xi )=M^{+}(\|u\|^2)\xi_{i}-\langle\langle f,e_{i}\rangle\rangle.
$$
With the above identifications one has
$$
\langle F(\xi ),\xi \rangle=M^{+}(\|u\|^2)\|u\|^2-\langle\langle f,u\rangle\rangle.
$$
Using (M1), H$\ddot{o}$lder and Poincar\'e inequalities we get
$$
\langle F(\xi ),\xi \rangle \geq  m_{0}\|u\|^2-C\|f\|_{H^{-1}}\|u\|\geq 0,
$$
if $\|u\|=r$, for $r$ large enough, where $\|f\|_{H^{-1}}$ is the
norm of the linear form $f$. Thus, because of Proposition \ref{prop1.1},
there is $u_{m}\in \mathbb{V}_{m}$, $\|u_{m}\|\leq r$, $r$ does
not depend on $m$, such that
$$
M^{+}(\|u_{m}\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u_{m}\cdot\nabla e_{i}=\langle\langle
f,e_{i}\rangle\rangle,\quad i=1,\ldots ,m,
$$
which implies that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2.2}
M^{+}(\|u_{m}\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u_{m}\cdot \nabla\omega
=\langle\langle f,\omega\rangle\rangle , \quad
\text{for all }\omega\in\mathbb{V}_{m}.
\end{equation}
Because $(\|u_{m}\|^2)$ is a bounded real sequence and $M^{+}$
is continuous one has
$$
\|u_{m}\|^2\to \tilde{t}_{0},
$$
for some $\tilde{t}_{0}\geq 0$, and
$$
u_{m}\rightharpoonup u \text{ in } H_{0}^{1}(\Omega),\quad
u_{m}\to u\text{ in }L^2(\Omega),\quad
M^{+}(\|u_{m}\|^2)\to M^{+}(\tilde{t}_{0}),
$$
perhaps for a subsequence.

Take $k\leq m$, $\mathbb{V}_{k}\subset \mathbb{V}_{m}$. Fix $k$ and
let $m\to \infty$ in equation \eqref{eq:2.2} to obtain
$$
M^{+}(\tilde{t}_{0})\int_{\Omega}\nabla u\cdot \nabla \omega =\langle\langle
f,\omega \rangle\rangle,\quad \text{for all } \omega\in\mathbb{V}_{k}.
$$
Since $k$ is arbitrary we will have that the last equality remains
true for all $\omega \in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$. If
$M^{+}(\tilde{t}_{0})=0$ we would have $\langle\langle f,\omega \rangle\rangle=0$ for
all $\omega\in H_{0}^{1}$ and so $f=0$  in $H^{-1}(\Omega )$ which
is a contradiction. Consequently $M^{+}(\tilde{t}_{0})>0$ and so
$M(\tilde{t}_{0})=M^{+}(\tilde{t}_{0})$.

We now take $\omega =u_{m}$ in  \eqref{eq:2.2} to obtain
$$
M(\|u_{m}\|^2)\|u_{m}\|^2=\langle\langle f,u_{m}\rangle\rangle
$$
and so $M(\tilde{t}_{0})\tilde{t}_{0}=\langle\langle
f,u\rangle\rangle$. From this equality and
$$
M(\tilde{t}_{0})\|u\|^2=\langle\langle f,u\rangle\rangle
$$
we have $\|u\|^2=\tilde{t}_{0}$ which shows that the function
$u$ is a weak solution of problem \eqref{eq:1.1} and the proof of
Theorem \ref{thm2.1} is complete.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark} \label{rmk2.1} \rm
It follows from the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1} that the solution $u$
obtained there satisfies $M(\|u\|^2)>0$ (of course, if we had
used another device in order to obtain a solution of
\eqref{eq:1.1} such a property might not be true).
\end{remark}

We claim that there is only one solution to \eqref{eq:1.1}
satisfying this property. This may be proved as follows. Let $u$
and $v$ be solutions of \eqref{eq:1.1} obtained as before. Since
$u$ and $v$ are weak solutions of \eqref{eq:1.1} one has
$$
M(\|u\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u\cdot \nabla \omega
=M(\|v\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla v\cdot \nabla\omega ,\quad
\text{for all } \omega\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )\,.
$$
Hence $M(\|u\|^2)u$ and $M(\|v\|^2)v$ are both solutions of the
problem
\begin{gather*}
-\Delta U =  f \quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
U=0 \quad \mbox{on }  \partial\Omega .
\end{gather*}
By the uniqueness one has $M(\|u\|^2)u=M(\|v\|^2)v$ in
$\Omega$ and so $M(\|u\|^2)\|u\|=M(\|v\|^2)\|v\|$. Supposing
that the function $t\to M(t^2)t$ is increasing for $t>0$
one obtains that $\|u\|=\|v\|$. Consequently
\begin{gather*}
-\Delta u =  -\Delta v\quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u=v \quad \mbox{on }  \partial\Omega .
\end{gather*}
and then $u=v$ in $\Omega$. Hence, we have proved that problem
\eqref{eq:1.1} possesses only one solution $u$ if $t\to M(t^2)t$ is increasing
for $t>0$.

\begin{remark} \label{rmk2.2} \rm
If $M(t_{0})=0$ for some $t_{0}>0$  and $f=0$ in $H^{-1}(\Omega )$
then we lose uniqueness. In fact,   let $u\neq 0$ be a function in
$C_{0}^2(\overline{\Omega})$ and set $v=\sqrt{t_{0}}\,u/\|u\|$. In
this case  $\|v\|^2=t_{0}$ and so
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2.3}% equation 2.3
\begin{gathered}
-M(\|v\|^2)\Delta v=0 \quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
v=0 \quad \mbox{on }\partial\Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
that is, for each nonzero function $u\in C_{0}^2(\overline{\Omega})$ the function
$v$ defined above is a nontrivial solution of (\ref{eq:2.3}).
\end{remark}

\begin{remark}[A Dual Problem] \label{rmk2.3} \rm
Suppose that $M:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ is a continuous
function satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item[(\~M1)] There are positive numbers $\tilde{t}_{\infty}$ and $
\tilde{m}_{0}$ such that
$M(t)\leq -\widetilde{m}_{0}$ for all $t\geq\tilde{t}_{\infty}$.
\end{itemize}
In this case \eqref{eq:1.1} possesses a solution. Indeed,
suppose $f\neq 0$ in $H^{-1}(\Omega )$ and consider the problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:2.4}
\begin{gathered}
-\widetilde{M}(\|u\|^2)\Delta u =  f \quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u=0 \quad\mbox{on }  \partial\Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{M}(t)=-M(t)$. Clearly $\widetilde{M}$ satisfies
(M1) and so problem (\ref{eq:2.4}) possesses a solution
$v\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$ with $\widetilde{M}(\|v\|^2)>0$. Hence
$u=-v$ is a solution of \eqref{eq:1.1} with $M(\|u\|^2)<0$.
\end{remark}

\section{The $M$-linear Problem: A Discontinuous Case}%section 3

In this section we concentrate our interest on problem
\eqref{eq:1.1} when $M$ possesses a  discontinuity. More
precisely, we study problem \eqref{eq:1.1} with
$M:\mathbb{R}/\{\theta \}\to \mathbb{R}$ continuous such
that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(M2)] $\lim_{t\to \theta^{+}}M(t)=\lim_{t\to \theta^{-}}M(t)=+\infty$

\item[(M3)] $\limsup_{t\to +\infty}M(t^2)t=+\infty$ and  (M1) is satisfied
for some $t_{\infty}>\theta$.
\end{itemize}

\begin{theorem} \label{thm3.1}
If $M$ satisfies (M1)--(M3) problem \eqref{eq:1.1} possesses a
solution $u\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$, for each $0\neq f\in
H^{-1}(\Omega )$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} We first consider the sequence
of functions $M_{n}:\mathbb{R}\to \mathbb{R}$ given by
$$
M_{n}(t)=\begin{cases}
n, & \theta -\epsilon'_{n}\leq t\leq \theta +\epsilon''_{n},\\
M(t), & t\leq \theta -\epsilon'_{n}  \mbox{ or }  t\geq \theta +\epsilon''_{n},
\end{cases}
$$
for $n>m_{0}$, where $\theta -\epsilon'_{n}$ and
$\theta +\epsilon''_{n}$, $\epsilon'_{n}$, $\epsilon''_{n}>0$, are,
respectively, the points closest to $\theta$, at left and at
right, so that
$$
M(\theta -\epsilon'_{n})=M(\theta +\epsilon''_{n})=n.
$$
We point out that, in this case,
$\epsilon'_{n},\epsilon''_{n}\to 0$ as $n\to \infty$.

Take $n>m_{0}$ and observe that the horizontal lines
$y=n$ cross the graph of $M$. Hence $M_{n}$ is continuous and
satisfies (M1), for each $n>m_{0}$. In view of this, for each
$n$ like above, there is $u_{n}\in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$ satisfying
$$
M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)\int\nabla u_{n}\cdot \nabla \omega =\langle\langle f,
\omega \rangle\rangle , \quad \text{for all } \omega \in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega ).
$$
Taking $\omega =u_{n}$ in the above equation one has
$$
M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)\|u_{n}\|^2=\langle\langle f,u_{n}\rangle\rangle ,
$$
and so
$$
M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)\|u_{n}\|\leq \|f\|_{H^{-1}}
$$
Because of (M3) the sequence $(\|u_{n}\|)$ must be bounded.
Hence
\begin{gather*}
u_{n}\rightharpoonup u \quad \text{in } H_{0}^{1}(\Omega ),\\
u_{n}\to u \quad \text{in } L^2(\Omega ), \\
\|u_{n}\|^2\to \theta_{0},\quad \text{for some } \theta_{0},
\end{gather*}
perhaps for subsequences.

If $M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)\to 0$, then $\langle\langle f, \omega \rangle\rangle
=0$, for all $\omega \in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$, which is impossible
because $0\neq f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$. Thus if
$(M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)$ converges its limit is different of zero.
Suppose that $\|u_{n}\|^2\to \theta$.

If $\|u_{n}\|^2>\theta +\epsilon''_{n}$ or $\|u_{n}\|^2<\theta
-\epsilon'_{n}$, for infinitely many $n$, we would get
$M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)=M(\|u_{n}\|^2)$, for such $n$,
and so
$$
M(\|u_{n}\|^2)\|u_{n}\|^2=\langle\langle f, u_{n}\rangle\rangle \;\Rightarrow\;
+\infty =\langle\langle f,u \rangle\rangle
$$
which is a contradiction.
On the other hand, if there are infinitely many $n$ so that $\theta
-\epsilon'_{n}\leq \|u_{n}\|^2\leq \theta +\epsilon''_{n}\;
\Rightarrow \;M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)=n$ and so $n\|u_{n}\|^2=\langle\langle
f,u_{n}\rangle\rangle \; \Rightarrow \; \infty =\langle\langle f, u \rangle\rangle$ and we arrive
again in a contradiction.

Consequently $\|u_{n}\|^2\to \theta_{0}\neq\theta $
which implies that for $n$ large enough
$$
\|u_{n}\|^2<\theta -\epsilon'_{n} \quad \text{or} \quad
\|u_{n}\|^2>\theta +\epsilon''_{n}
$$
and so
$M_{n}(\|u_{n}\|^2)=M(\|u_{n}\|^2)$
which yields
$$
M(\|u_{n}\|^2)\int_{\Omega}\nabla u_{n}\cdot\nabla \omega =\langle\langle
f, \omega \rangle\rangle , \quad \forall \omega \in H_{0}^{1}(\Omega ).
$$
Consequently $ M(\theta_{0} )\int_{\Omega}\nabla u\cdot \nabla
\omega =\langle\langle f, \omega \rangle\rangle, \; \text{for all} \; \omega \in
H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$ which implies
$M(\|u_{n}\|^2)\|u_{n}\|^2=\langle\langle f,u_{n}\rangle\rangle $ and taking limits
$$
M(\theta_{0} )\theta_{0} =\langle\langle f, u\rangle\rangle
$$
Hence
$M(\theta_{0} )\|u\|^2=M(\theta_{0} )\theta_{0}$.
Reasoning as before we conclude that $M(\theta_{0} )\neq 0$ and so
$\|u\|^2= \theta_{0}$ and the proof of the theorem is
complete.
\end{proof}


\section{A Sublinear Problem}% section 4

In this section we focus our attention on problem
\eqref{eq:1.2}. More precisely, we have the following result:

\begin{theorem} \label{thm4.1}
If $M$ satisfies assumption (M1), $M(t)\leq m_{\infty}$, for
some positive constant $m_{\infty}$ and all $t\geq 0$, and
$\lim_{t\to\infty} M(t^2)t^{1-\alpha}=+\infty$, then
problem \eqref{eq:1.2} possesses a solution.
\end{theorem}


Since the proof of this theorem is quite similar to the one in
Alves-de Figueiredo \cite{alves-fig} we omit it and make only some
remarks giving some directions on how to proceed.
First of all we have to consider the problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4.1}
\begin{gathered}
-M(\|u\|^2)\Delta u  = (u^{+})^{\alpha}+\lambda\phi (x)
\quad\mbox{in } \Omega ,\\
u=0 \quad \mbox{on }\partial\Omega ,\\
u>0 \quad\mbox{in } \Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda >0$ is a parameter, $\phi >0$ is a function in
$H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$, and $u^{+}=\max \{u,0\}$ is the positive part
of $u$. Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1} we found, for
each $\lambda \in (0,\tilde{\lambda })$, a solution $u_{\lambda}$
of equation (\ref{eq:4.1}) and, in view of  $M(\|u_{\lambda
}\|^2)>0$- we can prove that $u_{\lambda}\geq 0$-, using the
maximum principle to conclude that $u_{\lambda}>0$. Hence
\begin{equation}\label{eq:4.2} % equation 4.2
\begin{gathered}
-M(\|u_{\lambda }\|^2)\Delta u_{\lambda }
= (u_{\lambda})^{\alpha}+\lambda\phi (x)\geq u_{\lambda }^{\alpha}
\quad\mbox{in } \Omega ,\\
u_{\lambda }=0 \quad \mbox{on }\partial\Omega ,\\
u_{\lambda }>0 \quad \mbox{in } \Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
which implies
\begin{gather*}
-\Delta u_{\lambda }\geq m_{\infty}^{-1}u_{\lambda}^{\alpha}\quad \mbox{in }
\Omega ,\\
u_{\lambda }=0\quad \mbox{on }\partial\Omega .
\end{gather*}
Thanks to a result by Ambrosetti-Br\'ezis-Cerami \cite{abc}, one
has
$$
u_{\lambda }\geq m_{\infty}^{-1}\omega_{1} ,
$$
where $\omega_{1}>0$ in $\Omega$ is the only positive solution of
\begin{gather*}
-\Delta \omega_{1}=\omega_{1}^{\alpha}\quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
\omega_{1}=0 \quad \mbox{on }\partial\Omega .
\end{gather*}
As in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1} one has that
$\|u_{\lambda }\|\leq r_{\lambda}$ where $r_{\lambda}$ is a positive constant
that depends on $\lambda$.

Let us consider $\lambda\in (0,\overline{\lambda })$ and make
$\lambda\to 0^{+}$. For we have  to guarantee that
$(\|u_{\lambda}\|)$ is bounded for all $\lambda\in
(0,\overline{\lambda })$. First observe that
$$
M(\|u_{\lambda}\|^2)\|u_{\lambda}\|^2=\int_{\Omega}u_{\lambda}^{\alpha
+1}+\lambda \int_{\Omega}\phi u_{\lambda}
$$
Because $0<\alpha <1$ and using some standard arguments we have
$$
M(\|u_{\lambda})\|^2\|u_{\lambda}\|^{1-\alpha}\leq
C+\frac{C}{\|u_{\lambda}\|}
$$
Since $M(t^2)t^{1-\alpha}\to +\infty$ as $t\to
\infty$ we have that $(\|u_{\lambda}\|)$ is bounded for all
$\lambda\in (0,\overline{\lambda})$. Finally, we may take
$\lambda\to 0$ to obtain a solution $u$ of problem
\eqref{eq:1.2}.

\section{Another Nonlocal Problem}% section 5

Next, we make some remarks on a nonlocal problem
which is a slight generalization of  one studied by
Chipot-Lovat \cite{chilo} and Chipot-Rodrigues \cite{chiro}. More
precisely, the above authors studied the problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5.1}% equation 5.1
\begin{gathered}
-a\big(\int_{\Omega}u\big)\Delta u =  f \quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u=0 \quad \mbox{on } \partial\Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega\subset \mathbb{R}^{N}$ is a bounded domain,
$N\geq 1$, and $a:\mathbb{R}\to (0,+\infty )$ is a given
function.
Equation (\ref{eq:5.1}) is the stationary version of the parabolic
problem
\begin{gather*}
u_{t}-a\big(\int_{\Omega} u(x,t)dx\big)\Delta u  =
f \quad \mbox{in } \Omega \times (0,T),\\
u=0 \quad \mbox{on } \partial\Omega \times (0,T),\\
u(x,0)=u_{0}(x),\quad u_{t}(x,0)=u_{1}(x).
\end{gather*}
Here $T$ is some arbitrary time and $u$ represents, for instance, the
density of a population subject to spreading. See \cite{chilo,chiro} for more
details. In particular, \cite{chilo} studies
problem (\ref{eq:5.1}), with $f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$, and proves
the following result.

\begin{prop} \label{prop5.1}
Let $a:\mathbb{R}\to (0,+\infty )$ be a positive function, $f\in
H^{-1}(\Omega )$. Then problem (\ref{eq:5.1}) has as many
solutions $\mu$ as the equation
$$
a(\mu )\mu =\langle\langle f,\varphi \rangle\rangle ,
$$
where $\varphi$ is the function(unique) satisfying
\begin{gather*}
          -\Delta \varphi  =  1\quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
          \varphi =0 \quad \mbox{on } \partial\Omega ,
\end{gather*}
\end{prop}

Now, we study the nonlocal problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5.2}
\begin{gathered}
-a\big(\int_{\Omega}|u|^{q}\big)\Delta u =  f\quad \mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u=0 \quad\mbox{on } \partial\Omega ,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ and $f$ are as before and $1<q<2N/(N-2),N\geq 3$.
When $q=2$ we have the well known Carrier equation.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm5.1}
If $t\mapsto a(t)$ is a decreasing and continuous function, for
$t\geq 0$,
 $\lim_{t\to +\infty}a(t^{q})t=+\infty$ and $t\mapsto a(t^{q})t$ is
 injective, for $t\geq 0$,
 then, for each $0\neq
f\in H^{-1}(\Omega )$, problem (\ref{eq:5.2}) possesses a unique
weak solution.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
As in the proof of Theorem \ref{thm2.1}, let
$F:\mathbb{R}^m \to \mathbb{R}^m $ be the function
$F(\xi )=(F_{1}(\xi ),\ldots ,F_{m}(\xi ))$, where
$$
F_{i}(\xi )=a(\|u\|_{q}^{q})\int_{\Omega}\nabla u\cdot\nabla
e_{i}-\langle\langle f,e_{i}\rangle\rangle ,\quad  i=1,\ldots ,m
$$
with $u=\sum_{j=1}^m \xi_{j}e_{j}$ and the identifications of
$\mathbb{R}^m $ and $\mathbb{V}_{m}$ mentioned before. So
$$
F_{i}(\xi )=a(\|u\|_{q}^{q})\xi_{i}-\langle\langle f,e_{i}\rangle\rangle ,
\quad i=1,\ldots ,m
$$
and then
$$
<F(\xi ),\xi >=a(\|u\|_{q}^{q})\|u\|^2-\langle\langle f,u\rangle\rangle
$$
We have to show that there is $r>0$ so that $\langle F(\xi ), \xi \rangle\geq
0$, for all $|\xi |=r$ in $\mathbb{V}_{m}$. Suppose, on the
contrary, that for each $r>0$ there is $u_{r}\in \mathbb{V}_{m}$
such that $\|u_{r}\|=r$ and
$$
\langle F(\xi_{r}),\xi_{r}\rangle <0, \quad  \xi_{r}\leftrightarrow u_{r}.
$$
Taking $r=n\in \mathbb{N}$ we obtain a sequence $(u_{n})$,
$\|u_{n}\|=n$, $u_{n}\in \mathbb{V}_{m}$ and
$$
\langle F(u_{n}),u_{n}\rangle
=a(\|u_{n}\|_{q}^{q})\|u_{n}\|^2-\langle\langle f,u_{n}\rangle\rangle <0
$$
and so
$$
a(\|u_{n}\|_{q}^{q})\|u_{n}\|<C\|f\|,\quad \forall n=1,2,\ldots .
$$
Because of the continuous immersion $H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )\subset
L^{q}(\Omega )$ one gets $\|u\|_{q}\leq C\|u\|$ and the
monotonicity  of $a$ yields $a(\|u\|_{q}^{q})\geq a(C\|u\|^{q})$
and so
$$
a(C\|u_{n}\|^{q})\|u_{n}\|< C\|f\|.
$$
In view of $\lim_{t\to +\infty}a(t^{q})t=+\infty$ one has
that $\|u_{n}\|\leq C,\forall n\in \mathbb{N}$, which contradicts
$\|u_{n}\|=n$. So, there is $r_{m}>0$ such that $\langle F(\xi ), \xi \rangle
\geq 0,$ for all $|\xi |=r_{m}$. In view of Proposition \ref{prop1.1} there
is $u_{m}\in \mathbb{V}_{m}$, $\|u_{m}\|\leq r_{m}$ such that
$F_{i}(u_{m})=0, i=1,\ldots ,m$, that is,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5.3}
a\left(\|u_{m}\|_{q}^{q}\right)\int_{\Omega}\nabla
u_{m}\cdot\nabla\omega =\langle\langle f,\omega\rangle\rangle
,\quad \forall\omega\in\mathbb{V}_{m}.
\end{equation}

Reasoning as before, by using the facts that $t\to a(t)$ is
decreasing for $t\geq 0$ and $\lim_{t\to
+\infty}a(t^{q})t=+\infty$, we conclude that $\|u_{m}\|\leq
C,\forall m=1,2\ldots  $ for some constant $C$ that does not
depend on $m$. Hence, $u_{m}\rightharpoonup u$ in
$H_{0}^{1}(\Omega )$, $u_{m}\to u$ in $L^{q}(\Omega ), \;
1<q<\frac{2N}{N-2}$, and so $\|u_{m}\|_{q}\to \|u\|_{q}$. Taking
limits on both sides of equation (\ref{eq:5.3}) we conclude that
the function $u$ is a weak solution of problem (\ref{eq:5.2}).
Since $a(t^{q})t$ is injective on $t\geq 0$ such a solution is
unique.
\end{proof}

\begin{remark} \label{rmk5.1} \rm
The function
$$
a(t)=\frac{1}{t^{2\beta}+1},
$$
where $\beta$ and $q$ are related by $2\beta q<1$, satisfies the
assumptions of Theorem \ref{thm5.1}.
\end{remark}

\begin{remark} \label{rmk5.2} \rm
Following the same steps of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm4.1} we can prove
that the problem
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5.4}
\begin{gathered}
-a\big(\int_{\Omega}|u|^{q}\big)\Delta u =  u^{\alpha}\quad
\mbox{in }\Omega ,\\
u=0 \quad\mbox{on } \partial\Omega ,\\
u>0 \quad\mbox{in }  \Omega.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $0<\alpha <1$, and $a$ satisfies the assumptions in Theorem \ref{thm5.1}
possesses a solution.
\end{remark}

\begin{thebibliography}{99}

\bibitem{alves} C. O. Alves \& F. J. S. A. Corr\^ea,
{\it On existence of solutions for a class of problem involving a nonlinear
operator}, Communications on applied nonlinear analysis, 8(2001),
N. 2, 43-56.

\bibitem{alves-fig} C. O. Alves \& D. G. de Figueiredo,
{\it Nonvariational elliptic systems via Galerkin methods},
Function Spaces, Differential Operators and  Nonlinear Analysis -
The Hans Triebel Anniversary Volume, Ed. Birkhauser, Switzerland,
47-57, 2003.

\bibitem{abc}A. Ambrosetti, H. Brezis \& G. Cerami, {\it Combined
effects of concave and convex nonlinearities in some elliptic
problems}, J. Funct. Anal. 122(1994), 519-543.

\bibitem{chilo}M. Chipot \& B. Lovat, {\it Some remarks on
nonlocal elliptic and parabolic problems}, Nonlinear Analysis,
T.M.A., Vol. 30, No. 7,(1997), 4619-4627.

\bibitem{chiro}M. Chipot \& J. F. Rodrigues, {\it On a class of
nonlocal nonlinear elliptic problems}, Mathematical Modelling and
Numerical Analysis, Vol. 26, No. 3, 1992, 447-468.

\bibitem{eisley}J. G. Eisley, {\it Nonlinear vibrations of beams and
rectangular plates}, Z. Anger. Math. Phys. 15,(1964)167-175.

\bibitem{limaco}J. Limaco \& L. A. Medeiros, {\it
Kirchhoff-Carrier elastic strings in noncylindrical domains},
Portugaliae Mathematica, Vol. 14. N. 04,(1999)464-500.

\bibitem{lions} J. L. Lions, {\it Quelques M\'ethodes de r\'esolution des probl\'emes aux
 limites non lin\'eaires}, Dunod, Gauthier-Villars, Paris, 1969.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
