\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{hyperref}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
\emph{Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2012 (2012), No. 149, pp. 1--20.\newline
ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu
\newline ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu}
\thanks{\copyright 2012 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}
\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2012/149\hfil Exact behavior of singular solutions]
{Exact behavior of singular solutions to Protter's problem 
 with lower order terms}

\author[A. Nikolov, N. Popivanov\hfil EJDE-2012/149\hfilneg]
{Aleksey Nikolov, Nedyu Popivanov}
  % in alphabetical order

\address{Aleksey Nikolov \newline
Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics,
University of Sofia,
1164 Sofia, Bulgaria}
\email{lio6kata@yahoo.com}

\address{Nedyu Popivanov \newline
Faculty of Mathematics and Informatics,
University of Sofia, 1164 Sofia, Bulgaria}
\email{nedyu@fmi.uni-sofia.bg}

\thanks{Submitted May 8, 2012. Published August 29, 2012.}
\subjclass[2000]{35L05, 35L20, 35D05, 35A20}
\keywords{Wave equation; boundary value problems; generalized solutions;
\hfill\break\indent singular solutions; propagation of singularities}

\begin{abstract}
 For the (2+1)-D wave equation  Protter formulated (1952)  some boundary
 value problems which are  three-dimensional analogues of the Darboux
 problems on the plane. Protter studied these problems  in a 3-D domain,
 bounded by two characteristic cones  and by a planar region.  Now  it is
 well known that, for an infinite number of smooth functions  in the
 right-hand side, these problems do not have classical solutions, because of
 the strong  power-type singularity which appears in the generalized
 solution. In the present paper we consider  the wave equation involving
 lower order terms  and obtain new a priori estimates describing the exact
 behavior of  singular solutions of the third boundary value problem.
 According to the new estimates their singularity is of the same order as in
 case of the wave equation without lower order terms.
\end{abstract}

\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}
\newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\allowdisplaybreaks

\section{Introduction}

We denote points in $\mathbb{R}^3$ by $(x,t)=(x_1,x_2,t)$ and consider the
wave equation involving lower order terms
\begin{equation}
Lu\equiv u_{x_1x_1}+u_{x_2x_2}-u_{tt}+b_1u_{x_1}+b_2u_{x_2}+bu_{t}+cu=f
\label{eq0p1}
\end{equation}
in a simply connected region
\[
\Omega_0:=\{(x,t):0<t<1/2,t<\sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}<1-t\}.
\]
The region $\Omega_0\subset \mathbb{R}^3$ is bounded by the disk
\[
\Sigma_0:=\{(x,t):t=0,x_1^2+x_2^2<1\}
\]
with center at the origin $O(0,0,0)$ and the characteristic surfaces of
\eqref{eq0p1}:
\begin{gather*}
\Sigma_1:=\{(x,t):0<t<1/2,\sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}=1-t\}, \\
\Sigma_{2,0}:=\{(x,t):0<t<1/2,\sqrt{x_1^2+x_2^2}=t\}.
\end{gather*}
In this work we will study the problem

\subsection*{Problem $\boldsymbol{P_\alpha }$}  
Find solutions to
\eqref{eq0p1} in $\Omega_0$ that satisfy the conditions
\begin{equation}
u|_{\Sigma_1}=0,\quad [ u_{t}+\alpha u]|_{\Sigma _0\backslash O}=0,
\label{eq0p3}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha \in C^{1}(\bar{\Sigma}_0)$. 
The adjoint problem to $\mathbf{P}_{\alpha }$ is as follows. 

\subsection*{Problem $\boldsymbol{P_\alpha ^{\ast }}$}  
Find a solution of the adjoint equation
\[
L^{\ast }u\equiv
u_{x_1x_1}+u_{x_2x_2}-u_{tt}-(b_1u)_{x_1}-(b_2u)_{x_2}-(bu)_{t}+cu=g\quad
\text{ in }\Omega_0
\]
with the boundary conditions:
\[
u|_{\Sigma_{2,0}}=0,\quad [ u_{t}+(\alpha +b)u]|_{\Sigma_0}=0.
\]

The following problems were introduced by Protter \cite{Pr}.

\subsection*{Protter's Problems} 
Find a solution of the wave equation
\begin{equation}
\square u\equiv \Delta_{x}u-u_{tt}\equiv u_{x_1x_1}+u_{x_2x_2}-u_{tt}=f
\quad \text{in }\Omega _0  \label{eq0p30}
\end{equation}
with one of the following boundary conditions
\[
\begin{alignedat}{2}
 P1:&\quad u|_{\Sigma_0\cup \Sigma_1}=0, & \quad
P1^{\ast }:&\quad u|_{\Sigma_0\cup \Sigma_{2,0}}=0\,; \\ P2:&\quad
u|_{\Sigma_1}=0,u_{t}|_{\Sigma_0}=0,&\quad P2^{\ast}:&\quad
u|_{\Sigma_{2,0}}=0,u_{t}|_{\Sigma_0}=0\,.
\end{alignedat}
\]

Protter \cite{Pr} formulated and investigated both Problems $P1$ and
 $P1^{\ast }$ in $\Omega_0$ as multi-dimensional analogues of the Darboux
problem on the plane. It is well known that the corresponding Darboux
problems on $\mathbb{R}^2$ are well posed, which is not true for the
Protter's problems in $\mathbb{R}^3$ or $\mathbb{R}^4$. The uniqueness
of a classical solution of Problem $P1$ in the $(3+1)-D$ case was proved by
Garabedian \cite{Gar}. For recent results concerning the Protter's problems
with lower order terms \eqref{eq0p1} -- \eqref{eq0p3} see Hristov,
Popivanov, Schneider \cite{last} and references therein, also see
Grammatikopoulos et al \cite{GHP}. For further publications in this area see
Aldashev \cite{Ald93} -- \cite{Ald03}, Edmunds and Popivanov \cite{EP98},
Choi and Park \cite{JB02}, Cher \cite{Kan98}, Popivanov and Popov \cite{NT02}
-- \cite{NT04}. Let us mention some special orthogonality conditions on $f$,
found in Popivanov and Popov \cite{NT02} -- \cite{NT04}, which in the case
of the wave equation in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and $\mathbb{R}^4$ control the
order of singularity of the generalized solutions of Problems $P1$ and $P2$.
Unfortunately, we do not know of any such conditions in the more general
case of equation \eqref{eq0p1}.

On the other hand, Bazarbekov and Bazarbekov \cite{BB} gives in $\mathbb{R}
^4$ another analogue of the classical Darboux problem in the
four-dimensional domain corresponding to $\Omega_0$. Some different
statements of Darboux type problems in $\mathbb{R}^3$ or some connected
with them Protter problems for mixed type equations (also studied in Protter
\cite{Prot}) can be found in Aldashev \cite{Ald05}, Aziz and Schneider \cite
{AS}, Bitsadze \cite{Bits}, Kharibegashvili \cite{Kh95}, Popivanov and
Schneider \cite{PS93}. Protter problems for mixed type equations in 
$\mathbb{R}^3$ involving lower order terms are considered in Rassias 
\cite{Ras1}--\cite{Ras2} and Hristov et al \cite{HPS}, where uniqueness theorems are
proved under some conditions on the coefficients of the equation. In Lupo
and Payne \cite{LP03}--\cite{LP05} and Lupo et al \cite{LPP} one finds
results for mixed type equations including some special nonlinearity with
supercritical exponent term in various situations, namely for the Frankl'
and Guderley-Morawetz problem in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$ and for the Protter
problem in $\mathbb{R}^{N+1}$ with $N\geq2$. The existence of bounded or
unbounded solutions for the wave equation in $\mathbb{R}^3$ and $\mathbb{R}
^4$, as well as for the Euler-Poisson-Darboux equation has been studied in
Cher \cite{Kan98}, Choi \cite{JB01}, Choi and Park \cite{JB02},
Grammatikopoulos et al \cite{GPP}, Popivanov and Popov \cite{NT04}.

According to the ill-possedness of Protter's Problems $P1$ and $P2$, it is
interesting to find some of their regularizations. A nonstandard, nonlocal
regularization of Problem P1, can be found in Edmunds and Popivanov \cite
{EP98}. In the present paper we are looking for some other kind of
regularization and formulate the following problem.

\subsection*{Open Question 1} Is it possible to find
conditions for the coefficients $b_1, b_2, b, c$ and $\alpha$, under which
for all smooth functions $f$ Problem $P_{\alpha }$ has only regular
solutions?  
\medskip

\noindent\textbf{Remark.} If the answer to the above question is positive,
then, using an operator $L_k$ with lower order perturbations in the wave
equation \eqref{eq0p30}, we can find possible regularization for Problem $
P2.\ $Solving the equation $L_ku_k=f$, with $L_k\to \square $ (i.e. $
b_{1k},b_{2k},b_{3k},c_k\to 0)$ and $\alpha_k\to 0$, we can find an
approximated sequence $u_k$. Due to the fact that in this case the cones $
\Sigma_1$ and $\Sigma_{2,0}$ are again characteristics for $L_k$, this
process, with respect to our boundary value problem, looks to be natural.

For Problem \eqref{eq0p1}, \eqref{eq0p3}, i.e. $P_{\alpha }$ and $\alpha
(x)\neq 0$, there are only few publications and we refer the reader to 
\cite{last} and \cite{GHP}. In the case of the equation \eqref{eq0p1}, which
involves either lower order terms or some other type of perturbation,
Problem $P_{\alpha }$ in $\Omega_0$ with $\alpha (x)\equiv 0$ has been
studied by Aldashev \cite{Ald93}--\cite{Ald03}.

Next, we formulate the following well known result Kwang-Chang \cite{Tong},
Popivanov and Schneider \cite{PS88}, presented here in the terms of the
polar coordinates $x_1=\varrho \cos \varphi $, $x_2=\varrho \sin \varphi$.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm1.1}
For all $n\in \mathbb{N}$, $n\geq 4$; $a_{n},b_{n}$ arbitrary constants, the
functions
\begin{equation}
v_{n}(\varrho ,\varphi ,t)=t\varrho ^{-n}\left( \varrho
^2-t^2\right) ^{n-\frac{3}{2}}(a_{n}\cos n\varphi +b_{n}\sin
n\varphi )  \label{eq0p5}
\end{equation}
are classical solutions of the homogeneous problem $P1^{\ast }$ and the
functions
\begin{equation}
w_{n}(\varrho ,\varphi ,t)=\varrho ^{-n}\left( \varrho ^2-t^2\right) ^{n-
\frac{1}{2}}(a_{n}\cos n\varphi +b_{n}\sin n\varphi )  \label{eq0p6}
\end{equation}
are classical solutions of the homogeneous problem $P2^{\ast }$.
\end{theorem}

This theorem shows that for the classical solvability (see Bitsadze \cite
{Bits}) of the problem $P1$ (respectively, $P2$) the function $f$ at least
must be orthogonal to all smooth functions \eqref{eq0p5} (respectively,
\eqref{eq0p6}). The reason of this fact has been found by Popivanov and
Schneider in \cite{PS88}, where they announced for Problems $P1$ and $P2$
that there exist singular solutions for the wave equation \eqref{eq0p30}
with power type isolated singularities even for very smooth functions $f$.
Using Theorem \ref{thm1.1}, Popivanov and Schneider \cite{PS95} proved the
existence of generalized solutions of Problems $P1$ and $P2$, which have at
least power type singularities at the vertex $O$ of the cone $\Sigma_{2,0}$.
Considering Problems $P1$ and $P2$, Popivanov and Schneider \cite{PS88}
announced the existence of singular solutions for both wave and degenerate
hyperbolic equations (see Popivanov and Schneider \cite{PS93}). The first a
priori estimates for singular solutions of Protter's Problems $P1$ and $P2$,
concerning the wave equation in $\mathbb{R}^3$, were obtained in \cite
{PS95}. On the other hand, for the case of the wave equation in $\mathbb{R}
^{m+1}$, Aldashev \cite{Ald93} announced that there exist solutions of
Problem $P1$ (respectively, $P2$) in the domain $\Omega _{\varepsilon }$,
which blow up on the cone $\Sigma_{2,\varepsilon }$ like $\varepsilon
^{-(n+m-2)}$ (respectively, $\varepsilon ^{-(n+m-1)}$), when $\varepsilon
\to 0$ and the cone $\Sigma_{2,\varepsilon }:=\{\varrho =t+\varepsilon \}$
approximates $\Sigma_{2,0}$. It is obvious that for $m=2$ this result can be
compared with the estimate \eqref{qram} of Theorem \ref{thmG} below. For the
homogeneous Problem $P_{\alpha }^{\ast }$ (except the case $\alpha \equiv 0$
, i.e. except Problem $P2^{\ast }$), even for the wave equation, we do not
know of nontrivial solutions analogous to \eqref{eq0p5} and \eqref{eq0p6}.
Anyway, in Grammatikopoulos et al \cite{GHP} under appropriate conditions
for the coefficients of the general equation \eqref{eq0p1}, we derive
results which ensure the existence of many singular solutions of Problem $
P_{\alpha }$. Here we refer also to Khe Kan Cher \cite{Kan98}, who gives
some nontrivial solutions for the homogeneous Problems $P1^{\ast }$ and 
$P2^{\ast }$, but in the case of Euler-Poisson-Darboux equation. These
results are closely connected to those of Theorem \ref{thm1.1}.

To formulate known results for Problem $P_{\alpha }$ we first recall the
definition of generalized solutions.

\begin{definition}[\cite{GHP}] \label{def1.1} \rm
A function $u=u(x_{1,}x_2,t)$ is called a \textsl{generalized
solution} of problem $P_{\alpha }$ in $\Omega_0$, if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $u\in C^{1}(\bar{\Omega}_0\backslash O)$,
$[u_{t}+\alpha (x)u]\bigr\rvert_{\Sigma_0\backslash O}=0$,
$u\bigr\rvert_{\Sigma_1}=0$,
\item the equality
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega_0}[u_{t}v_{t}-u_{x_1}v_{x_1}-u_{x_2}v_{x_2}
+(b_1u_{x_1}+b_2u_{x_2}+bu_{t}+cu-f)v]dx_1dx_2dt \\
&=\int_{\Sigma_0}\alpha (x)(uv)(x,0)dx_1dx_2
\end{align*}
holds for all $v$ from
\[
V_0:=\{ v\in C^1(\bar{\Omega}_0): [v_{t}+(\alpha +b)v]\bigr\rvert
_{\Sigma_0}=0,\; v=0\text{ in a neighborhood of  }\Sigma_{2,0}\}.
\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}

The Definition \ref{def1.1} assures that generalized solutions of Problem 
$P_{\alpha }$ may have singularities on the cone $\Sigma_{2,0}$.

In \cite{GHP} is proved the following existence theorem for solutions of
Problem $P_{\alpha }$ which have singularities on $\Sigma_{2,0}$.

In next Theorem we denote $a_1:=b_1\cos \varphi+b_2\sin \varphi,
a_2:=\varrho^{-1}(b_2\cos \varphi-b_1\sin \varphi)$ and we assume that 
$a_1,a_2,b,c$ are independent on $\varphi$, i. e. they are functions of 
$(|x|,t)$ only and $\alpha$ is function of $(|x|)$.

\begin{theorem} [\cite{GHP}] \label{thmG}
Let $\alpha\geq 0;$ $a_1$, $b$,
$c\in C^{1}({\bar{\Omega}}_0\backslash O)$, $a_2\equiv 0$ and
\[
a_1(|x|,t)\geq |b|(|x|,t),\quad
 a_1(|x|,t)\geq 2|x|c(|x|,t),\quad
(x,t)\in {\Omega }_0.
\]
Then for each function
\[
f_{n}(x,t)=|x|^{-n}(|x|
^2-t^2)^{n-1/2}\cos
n(\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1}) \in C^{n-2}({\bar{\Omega}}_0)\cap C^{\infty }({\Omega }
_0),
\]
$n\in \mathbb{N}$, $n \geq 4$ the corresponding generalized solution $u_{n}$ of the problem
$P_{\alpha }$ belongs to $C^2({\bar{\Omega}}_0\backslash O)$ and
satisfies the estimate
\begin{equation}
|u_{n}(x,t)|_{t=|x|}\geq c_0|x|^{-n}|\cos n(\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1})|,\quad
0<|x|<1/2,
\label{qram}
\end{equation}
where $c_0=const>0$.
\end{theorem}

In the same paper one can find a proof of the uniqueness of the treated
problem. Note that the generalized solutions in this theorem have
singularities at the vertex $O$ of the cone $\Sigma_{2,0}$ and that these
singularities do not propagate in the direction of the bicharacteristics on
the characteristic cone $\Sigma_{2,0}$. For results concerning the
propagation of singularities for solutions of second order operators see 
H\"{o}rmander \cite[Chapter 24.5]{H}. 

On the other hand, Hristov,  Popivanov and Schneider in \cite{last}
(see Theorem 4.4 there in) obtained some upper bounds for all the solutions
of this problem, considering the case that the coefficients $b_1, b_2, b, c$
and $\alpha$ are smooth functions in $\bar{\Omega}_0$ (the coefficients of
the equation \eqref{eq0p1} in polar coordinates, like it is in Theorem 
\ref{thmG}, do not depend on $\varphi$) and also assuming the function 
$f \in C(\bar{\Omega}_0)$ to be of the form
\begin{equation}
f(\varrho ,\varphi ,t)=f_{n}^{(1)}(\varrho ,t)\cos n\varphi
+f_{n}^{(2)}(\varrho ,t)\sin n\varphi, n\in\mathbb{N}.  \label{eqf}
\end{equation}
These upper bounds can be written of the form:
\begin{equation}
|u(x,t)|\leq C_0\max_{\bar{\Omega}_0}{\{|f_{n}^{(1)}|+|f_{n}^{(2)}|\}}
|x|^{-n-\psi(K)},  \label{eqest1}
\end{equation}
where $C_0$ is a positive constant,
\[
K:=\max\big\{\sup_{\bar{\Omega}_0} |b_1|, \sup_{\bar{\Omega}_0} |b_2|,
\sup_{\bar{\Omega}_0} |b|, \sup_{\bar{\Omega}_0} |c|, \sup_{0\leq |x| \leq
1} |\alpha(|x|)|\big\}
\]
and $\psi(K)$ is a positive function which blows up as $K$ blows up.

In the present paper this estimate is improved by the following main result

\begin{theorem} \label{mainres}
Let the right-hand side function $f$ in the equation \eqref{eq0p1} is of 
the form \eqref{eqf},
$b_1, b_2, b, c\in C(\bar{\Omega}_0)$, $\alpha\in C^1([0,1])$,
$f_n^{(i)}\in C(\bar{\Omega}_0)$, $i=1,2$ and
$a_1,a_2,b,c$ are functions of $(|x|,t)$, $\alpha=\alpha(|x|)$, 
where $a_1:=b_1\cos(\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1})+b_2\sin(\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1})$, 
$a_2:=|x|^{-1}(b_2\cos (\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1})-b_1\sin(\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1}))$.
Then for the generalized solution $u(x,t)$ of Problem $\mathbf{P}_\alpha$ the following estimate
\begin{equation}
|u(x,t)|\leq C_\sigma\max_{\bar{\Omega}_0}{\{|f_{n}^{(1)}|+|f_{n}^{(2)}|\}}
 |x|^{-n-\sigma}  \label{eqest2}
\end{equation}
holds, where $\sigma$ is an arbitrary positive number and $C_\sigma$ is a positive
constant depending on $\sigma$, $n$ and all coefficients of \eqref{eq0p1}.
\end{theorem}

\begin{remark} \rm
A new point here, as distinct from \eqref{eqest1}, is the fact that the order of singularity
does not depend on the lower order terms of \eqref{eq0p1} and on the
boundary coefficient $\alpha$.
\end{remark}

Comparing this estimate with the lower bound of the singular solutions found
in Theorem \ref{thmG}, we see that we have obtained their exact asymptotic
behavior.

First, in this work we follow the exposition of Hristov et al \cite{last}
until Theorem 4.4. This takes the next three sections.

In Section 2 Problem $P_{\alpha }$ is reduced to a two-dimensional problem
in the following steps. First, we transform equation \eqref{eq0p1} in polar
coordinates, i.e.
\begin{equation}
Lu=\frac{1}{\varrho }(\varrho u_{\varrho })_{\varrho }+\frac{1}{\varrho ^2}
u_{\varphi \varphi }-u_{tt}+a_1u_{\varrho }+a_2u_{\varphi }+bu_{t}+cu=f,
\label{eq0polar}
\end{equation}
($a_1:=b_1cos \varphi+b_2sin \varphi$, 
$a_2:=\varrho^{-1}(b_2cos \varphi-b_1sin \varphi)$), considering, as noted before, a polar symmetry of
$a_1,a_2,b,c$ and $\alpha$, and a special form of the right-hand side
\eqref{eqf}. Next, we ask for generalized solution of the form
\begin{equation}
u(\varrho ,\varphi ,t)=u_{n}^{(1)}(\varrho ,t)\cos n\varphi
+u_{n}^{(2)}(\varrho ,t)\sin n\varphi.  \label{equ}
\end{equation}
Thus separating the variables we succeed in reducing the problem to a
two-dimen\-sional one for functions $\{u_n^{(1)}(\varrho,t),u_n^{(2)}(
\varrho,t)\}$, called Problem $P_{\alpha,1}$. Finally, using characteristic
coordinates $\xi=1-\varrho-t$, $\eta=1-\varrho+t$ and new functions
\begin{equation}
u_n^{(i)}(\xi,\eta):=z_n^{(i)}(\varrho,t):=\varrho^{\frac{1}{2}
}u_n^{(i)}(\varrho,t), i=1,2,  \label{eq0pnewf}
\end{equation}
we obtain a system for $\{u_n^{(1)}(\xi,\eta),u_n^{(2)}(\xi,\eta)\}$, called
Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$.

In Section 3 an equivalent integral equation system of Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$
is constructed.

In Section 4 are presented some results from \cite{last} which we use in the
next section. Also, here is formulated the main result of \cite{last},
Theorem 4.4, which ensures the existence of a generalized solution of the
two-dimensional Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$ and gives upper bounds of possible
singularity. Using this theorem, after the inverse transformation to Problem
$P_{\alpha}$, one comes to \eqref{eqest1}.

In Section 5 we prove Theorem \ref{mainres}, the main result of this work.

The next Section 6 is dedicated to the singular solutions. Modifying a
little the proof of Theorem \ref{thmG}, we deduce the following result.
\begin{theorem} \label{thmGN}
Let $\alpha\geq 0;$ $b_1$, $b_2$, $b$,
$c\in C^{1}({\bar{\Omega}}_0\backslash O)$ and
$$
b_1=a_1(|x|,t)\cos(\arctan x_2/x_1),\quad b_2=a_1(|x|,t)\sin(\arctan x_2/x_1)
$$
with some function $a_1(|x|,t)$ for which
$a_1\geq|b|, a_1\geq2|x| c$.
Then for each function of the form
\begin{gather*}
f(x,t)=f_n(|x|,t)\cos n(\arctan x_2/x_1)\quad
\text{or}\\
f(x,t)=f_n(|x|,t)\sin n(\arctan x_2/x_1), \quad
n\in\mathbb{N}
\end{gather*}
in the right-hand side of the equation, satisfying the following conditions:
\[
f_n\in C(\bar{\Omega}_0),\quad
 f_n\not\equiv0\quad\text{in }\Omega_0 ,\quad
\text{either }f_n\geq0\text{ or }f_n\leq0\quad\text{in }\Omega_0,
\]
the corresponding generalized solution $u_{n}$ of the problem
$P_{\alpha }$
satisfies the estimate
\begin{equation} \label{qram2}
|u_{n}(x,t)|\geq C_0|x|^{-n}|\cos n(\arctan \frac{x_2}{x_1})|,\quad
C_0=\text{const}>0
\end{equation}
in some neighborhood of $ O(0,0,0)$.
\end{theorem}

The difference between this theorem and Theorem \ref{thmG} is that we have
the same result for a wider class of right-hand side functions and, as well,
in \eqref{qram2} we estimate $|u_{n}(x,t)|$, while in \eqref{qram} is
estimated the restriction $|u_{n}(x,t)|_{t=|x|}$.

In the case of wave equation without lower order terms and $\alpha\equiv0$,
Theorem \ref{thmGN} is in correspondence with the results deduced so far.
Actually, in \cite{DPP} one can find an asymptotic expansion of the
generalized solution at the origin. According to this work, the order of
singularity of the solution is less than $n$ only if some orthogonality
conditions are fulfilled, namely if the function $f_n$ is orthogonal to some
solutions of the adjoint homogeneous problem $P2^{\ast}$. If $f_n$ does not
change its sign, a necessary orthogonality condition is not fulfilled.

In the case of wave equation with lower order terms, we do not know such
orthogonality conditions ``controlling'' the order of singularity of the
corresponding solution.

\subsection*{Open Question 2} 
Can one find some orthogonality
conditions in the case of the equation \eqref{eq0p1}, under which we have a
lower order of singularity?



\section{Preliminaries}

As we noted in the previous section, we consider \eqref{eq0p1} in polar
coordinates (see \eqref{eq0polar}) in case that the right-hand side of the
equation is of the form \eqref{eqf} and we ask for the generalized solution
to be of the form \eqref{equ}. Here we assume that all coefficients of
\eqref{eq0polar} depend only on $\varrho$ and $t$, and we set $
\alpha(x)\equiv\alpha(\varrho)\in C^1[0,1]$.

Thus from \eqref{eq0p1} we obtain the system
\begin{equation}  \label{eq2p1}
\begin{gathered} 
\frac{1}{\varrho }(\varrho u_{n,\varrho
}^{(1)})_{\varrho }-u_{n,tt}^{(1)}+a_1u_{n,\varrho
}^{(1)}+bu_{n,t}^{(1)}+(c-\frac{n^2} {\varrho
^2})u_{n}^{(1)}+na_2u_{n}^{(2)}=f_{n}^{(1)}, \\ \frac{1}{\varrho }(\varrho
u_{n,\varrho }^{(2)})_{\varrho }-u_{n,tt}^{(2)}+a_1u_{n,\varrho
}^{(2)}+bu_{n,t}^{(2)}+(c-\frac{n^2} {\varrho
^2})u_{n}^{(2)}-na_2u_{n}^{(1)}=f_{n}^{(2)}. \end{gathered}
\end{equation}
To deal with singularities on $t=\varrho$, especially at $(0,0)$, we
consider \eqref{eq2p1} in the domain
\[
G_{\varepsilon }=\{(\varrho ,t):t>0,\varepsilon +t<\varrho
<1-t\},\varepsilon>0
\]
which is bounded by the disc $S_0 =\{(\varrho ,t):t=0,0<\varrho <1\}$, and
\[
S_1=\{(\varrho ,t):\varrho =1-t\},\quad S_{2,\varepsilon }=\{(\varrho
,t):\varrho =t+\varepsilon \}
\]
and treat the following problem (omitted the index $n$):

\subsection*{Problem $\boldsymbol{P_{\alpha ,1}}$} 
Find solutions $ u=(u^{(1)},u^{(2)})$ of system \eqref{eq2p1} which satisfy
\[
u^{(i)}|_{S_1\cap\partial G_\varepsilon}=0,\quad
[u_t^{(i)}+\alpha(\varrho)u^{(i)}]|_{S_0\cap\partial G_\varepsilon}=0,\quad
i=1,2.
\]
\begin{definition} \rm
A function $u=(u^{(1)},u^{(2)})(\varrho ,t)$ is called a \textsl{generalized
solution} of Problem $P_{\alpha ,1}$ in $G_{\varepsilon }$, $\varepsilon >0$,
if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $u\in C^{1}({\bar{G}}_{\varepsilon })$, $[u_{t}^{(i)}+\alpha (\varrho
)u^{(i)}]\bigr\rvert_{S_0\cap \partial G_{\varepsilon }}=0$, $u^{(i)}
\bigr\rvert_{S_1\cap \partial G_{\varepsilon }}=0,i=1,2;$

\item The equalities
\begin{align*}
&\int_{G_{\varepsilon }}\big[u_{t}^{(1)}v_{1,t}-u_{\varrho
}^{(1)}v_{1,\varrho }+\big( a_1u_{\varrho }^{(1)}+bu_{t}^{(1)}+(c
-\frac{n^2}{\varrho ^2})u^{(1)}+na_2u^{(2)}
-f^{(1)}\big) v_1\big] \varrho d\varrho \,dt \\
&=\int_{S_0\cap \partial G_{\varepsilon }}\alpha
(\varrho )u^{(1)}v_1\varrho \,d\varrho ,\\
&\int_{G_{\varepsilon }}[u_{t}^{(2)}v_{2,t}-u_{\varrho
}^{(2)}v_{2,\varrho }+\big( a_1u_{\rho }^{(2)}+bu_{t}^{(2)}
+(c-\frac{n^2}{\varrho ^2})u^{(2)}-na_2u^{(1)}
 -f^{(2)}\big) v_2\big] \varrho d\varrho \,dt\\
&=\int_{S_0\cap \partial G_{\varepsilon }}\alpha (\varrho
)u^{(2)}v_2\varrho \,d\varrho
\end{align*}
hold for all
\[
v_1,v_2\in V_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}=\{{v\in
C^{1}({\bar{G}}_{\varepsilon
}):[v_{t}+(\alpha +b)v]\bigr\rvert_{S_0\cap \partial G_{\varepsilon }}=0,v
\bigr\rvert_{S_{2,\varepsilon }\cap \partial G_{\varepsilon }}=0\}.}
\]
\end{enumerate}
\label{def2.1}
\end{definition}

Introducing a new function
\begin{equation}
z^{(i)}(\varrho ,t)=\varrho ^{\frac{1}{2}}u^{(i)}(\varrho ,t)
=z^{(i)}(\varrho(\xi,\eta) ,t(\xi,\eta))=:U^{(i)}(\xi,\eta),\ i=1,2,
\label{eqU}
\end{equation}
in characteristic coordinates
\begin{equation}  \label{charcoord}
\xi =1-\varrho -t,\quad \eta =1-\varrho +t
\end{equation}
we obtain the system
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} U_{\xi \eta }^{(1)}-A_1U_{\xi }^{(1)}-B_1U_{\eta
}^{(1)}-C_1U^{(1)}-D_1U^{(2)}=F^{1}(\xi ,\eta )\text{ \quad in
}D_{\varepsilon }, \\ U_{\xi \eta }^{(2)}-A_2U_{\xi }^{(2)}-B_2U_{\eta
}^{(2)}-C_2U^{(2)}-D_2U^{(1)}=F^2(\xi ,\eta )\text{ \quad in }D_{\varepsilon
}, \end{gathered} \label{eqdarbu}
\end{equation}
where $D_{\varepsilon }=\{(\xi ,\eta ):0<\xi <\eta <1-\varepsilon \}$ and
\begin{equation}
F^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )=\frac{1}{4\sqrt{2}}(2-\xi-\eta )^{\frac{1}{2}
}f^{(i)}(\varrho (\xi ,\eta ),t(\xi ,\eta )), i=1,2,  \label{eqF}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} A_1=A_2=\frac{1}{4}(a_1+b), \quad B_1=B_2=\frac{1}{4}
(a_1-b), \\ D_2=-D_1=\frac{1}{4}na_2,\quad 
C_1=C_2=\frac{1}{4}\Big\{
\frac{4n^2-1}{(2-\xi -\eta )^2}+\frac{a_1}{2-\xi -\eta }-c\Big\} .
\end{gathered}  \label{eqABCD}
\end{equation}
Note, that Problem $P_{\alpha,1}$ is reduced to the Darboux-Goursat problem
for the system \eqref{eqdarbu} in $D_\varepsilon$. Note also, that if we
consider this problem in $D_0$ , then the coefficients $C_i, D_i (i=1,2)$
are singular at the point $(1,1)$.

To investigate the smoothness or the singularities of solutions at the
original problem $P_{\alpha }$ on $\Sigma_{2,0}$, we are looking for
classical solutions for the system \eqref{eqdarbu} not only in the domain 
$D_{\varepsilon }$, but also in the domain
\[
D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}:=\{(\xi ,\eta ):0<\xi <\eta <1,0<\xi <1-\varepsilon
\},\quad \varepsilon >0,
\]
where $D_{\varepsilon }\subset D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$. Thus we come to the
following question.

\subsection*{Problem $\boldsymbol{P_{\alpha ,2}}$} Find solutions 
$(U^{(1)},U^{(2)})(\xi,\eta)$ of system \eqref{eqdarbu} in $D_{\varepsilon
}^{(1)}$, which satisfy the boundary conditions
\begin{equation}
U^{(i)}(0,\eta )=0,(U_{\eta }^{(i)}-U_{\xi }^{(i)})(\xi ,\xi )+\alpha (1-\xi
)U^{(i)}(\xi ,\xi )=0,  \label{bound}
\end{equation}
$i=1,2$, $\xi \in (0,1-\varepsilon )$, $\eta\in(0,1)$.


\section{A system of integral equations for problem 
$\boldsymbol{P_{\alpha,2}}$}

We consider a point $(\xi_0,\eta_0)\in D_\varepsilon^{(1)}$ and rectangle 
$R$, triangle $T$ defined by
\begin{gather*}
R:=\{(\xi ,\eta ):0<\xi <\xi_0,\xi_0<\eta <\eta_0\}, \\
T:=\{(\xi ,\eta ):0<\xi <\xi_0,\xi <\eta <\xi_0\}.
\end{gather*}
By use of Green's theorem in
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} I_R^{(i)}:=\iint_{R}U_{\xi \eta }^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\,d\xi
d\eta \,=\int_0^{\xi_0}
\Big(\int_{\xi_0}^{\eta_0}U_{\xi \eta }^{(i)}(\xi
,\eta )\,d\eta \Big)\,d\xi, \\
 I_T^{(i)}:=\iint_{T}U_{\xi \eta }^{(i)}(\xi
,\eta )\,d\xi d\eta \,=\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_{\xi }^{\xi_0}U_{\xi \eta
}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\,d\eta \Big)\,d\xi , 
\end{gathered}  \label{eqIRT}
\end{equation}
$i=1,2$, and the boundary conditions \eqref{bound} we obtain
\begin{equation}
I_R^{(i)}+2I_T^{(i)}=U^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)
-\int_0^{\xi _0}\alpha (1-\xi)U^{(i)}(\xi ,\xi )\,d\xi .  \label{eqIR+2T}
\end{equation}
We set $p^{(i)}:=U_{\xi }^{(i)}$, $q^{(i)}:=U_{\eta }^{(i)}$ and define (see
\eqref{eqdarbu})
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} 
E^{(1)}(\xi, \eta):=[F^1+A_1p^{(1)}+B_1q^{(1)}
+C_1U^{(1)}+D_1U^{(2)}](\xi ,\eta ), \\ 
E^{(2)}(\xi, \eta):=[F^2+A_2p^{(2)}+B_2q^{(2)} +C_2U^{(2)}+D_2U^{(1)}](\xi ,\eta ).
\end{gathered}  \label{eqE}
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eqIRT} - \eqref{eqE} and \eqref{eqdarbu} we obtain six integral
equations ($i=1,2$)
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
U^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)
&=\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_{\xi_0}^{\eta_0}E^{(i)}(\xi
,\eta )\,d\eta \Big)d\xi+2\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_0^\eta E^{(i)}(\xi
,\eta )\,d\xi \Big)d\eta\\
&\quad +\int_0^{\xi_0}\alpha(1-\xi)U^{(i)}(\xi,\xi)d\xi, \label{IU} 
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
p^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)
=\int_0^{\xi_0}E^{(i)}(\xi ,\xi_0
)d\xi+\int_{\xi_0}^{\eta_0}E^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta)d\eta
+\alpha(1-\xi_0)U^{(i)}(\xi_0,\xi_0),  \label{Ip}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
q^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)=\int_0^{\xi_0}E^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta_0 )d\xi  \label{Iq}
\end{equation}
The system \eqref{IU}--\eqref{Iq} is equivalent to the system
\eqref{eqdarbu} with the boundary conditions \eqref{bound}.

\begin{remark}\label{rmk3.1} \rm
We recall that in Section 2 the index $n$ in system \eqref{eq2p1} 
was omitted.
We see that in \eqref{eqdarbu} the coefficients 
$C_i,D_i$ $(i=1,2)$ depend on $n$,
where on the right-hand side we have
\[
F^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )=\frac{1}{4\sqrt{2}}(2-\xi -\eta )^{\frac{1
}{2}}f_n^{(i)}(\varrho (\xi ,\eta ),t(\xi ,\eta )).
\]
Therefore for fixed $n\in\mathbb{N}$ solutions $(U^{(1)},U^{(2)})$ of the integral
equation system \eqref{IU} - \eqref{Iq} depend on $n$ and will be later marked by
$(U_n^{(1)},U_n^{(2)})$, which gives functions $(u_n^{(1)},u_n^{(2)})$ by relation
$\varrho ^{\frac{1}{2}}u^{(i)}(\varrho ,t)=U_n^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)$ (see \eqref{eqU}).

Furthermore we observe that classical solutions $(U_n^{(1)},U_n^{(2)})\in C^1(\bar{D}_\varepsilon^{(1)})$,
$U_{n,\xi\eta}^{(i)}\in C(\bar{D}_\varepsilon^{(1)})$ of the integral equation system
define functions $(u_n^{(1)},u_n^{(2)})$ which are generalized solutions of Problem
$P_{\alpha,1}$ in $\bar{G}_0\backslash(0,0)$.
\end{remark}


\section{Solutions of the system and first upper estimates}

We define in $D_\varepsilon^{(1)}$ functions 
$(U_m^{(i)},p_m^{(i)},q_m^{(i)}) $, $i=1,2$, $m\in\mathbb{N}$, by the
formulas
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned} 
U_{m+1}^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0) 
&=\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_{\xi
_0}^{\eta_0}E_{m}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta ) \,d\eta \Big)\,d\xi
+2\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_0^{\eta }E_{m}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta ) \,d\xi
\Big)\,d\eta \\ 
&\quad +\int_0^{\xi_0}\alpha (1-\xi )U_{m}^{(i)}(\xi ,\xi
)\,d\xi ,\quad \ i=1,2;\quad m=0,1,2\dots \\ p_{m+1}^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)
=&\int_0^{\xi_0}E_{m}^{(i)}(\xi ,\xi_0)\,d\xi +\int_{\xi_0}^{\eta
_0}E_{m}^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta )\,d\eta \\ 
&\quad +\alpha
(1-\xi_0)U_{m}^{(i)}(\xi_0,\xi_0),\ \quad i=1,2;\quad m=0,1,2\dots \\
q_{m+1}^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)
&=\int_0^{\xi _0}E_{m}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta_0)\,d\xi
,\quad i=1,2;\quad m=0,1,2\dots \\
 U_0^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)&=0,\quad
p_0^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)=0, q_0^{(i)}(\xi_0,\eta_0)=0,\quad i=1,2,
\end{aligned}  \label{eqappr}
\end{equation}
in $D_\varepsilon^{(1)}$, where
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}\label{eqEm}
 E_{m}^{(1)}(\xi ,\eta )
:=[F^{1}+A_1p_{m}^{(1)}+B_1q_{m}^{(1)}+C_1U_{m}^{(1)}+D_1U_{m}^{(2)}](\xi
,\eta ), \\ E_{m}^{(2)}(\xi ,\eta )
:=[F^2+A_2p_{m}^{(2)}+B_2q_{m}^{(2)}+C_2U_{m}^{(2)}+D_2U_{m}^{(1)}](\xi
,\eta ). \end{gathered}
\end{equation}

Now we formulate some results from  Hristov et al \cite{last} which we use
later.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{last}] \label{lemma41}
Let for $(\xi_0,\eta_0)\in D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}=\{(\xi ,\eta ):0<\xi <\eta <1,0<\xi <1-\varepsilon
\},\varepsilon >0$, and $\mu\in\mathbb{R}_+$ define
\[
I_\mu:=\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_{\xi_0}^{\eta_0}(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\mu-2}
d\eta \Big)d\xi+2\int_0^{\xi_0}\Big(\int_\xi^{\xi_0}(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\mu-2}
d\eta \Big)d\xi.
\]
Then
\[
I_\mu\leq\frac{1}{\mu(\mu+1)}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu}.
\]
\end{lemma}

As we mentioned in the introduction, we treat in this paper the equation
\eqref{eq0p1} in case that its coefficients are continuous in 
$\bar{\Omega}_0 $, so we may set
\begin{equation}  \label{Cd1}
\sup_{\bar{\Omega}_0}\{|b_1|,|b_2|,|b|\}\leq K_1, \quad
\sup_{\bar{\Omega}_0}|c|\leq K_0,\quad
\sup_{[0,1]}|\alpha(\varrho)|\leq K_\alpha.
\end{equation}
Then, from \eqref{eqABCD} we obtain the following bounds
\begin{gather*}
|a_1|\leq2K_1, |a_2|\leq\frac{2K_1}{\rho}, |A_1|=|A_2|\leq\frac{3K_1}{4}, \\
|B_1|=|B_2|\leq\frac{3K_1}{4}, |D_1|=|D_2|\leq\frac{nK_1}{2\rho}=\frac{nK_1
}{2-\xi-\eta}, \\
|C_1|=|C_2|\leq\frac{\nu(\nu+1)}{(2-\xi-\eta)^2}+\frac{K_1}{2(2-\xi-\eta)}+
\frac{K_0}{4},
\end{gather*}
where $\nu:=n-\frac{1}{2}$.
According to \eqref{eqEm}
\[
E_{m}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta
):=[F^i+A_ip_{m}^{(i)}+B_iq_{m}^{(i)}+C_iU_{m}^{(i)}+D_iU_{m}^{(
\gamma _i)}](\xi ,\eta ),
\]
with $\gamma _{1}=2,\gamma _{2}=1$ and thus for $i=1,2$ we have
\begin{equation} \label{eqestEm}
\begin{aligned}
&|(E_{m}^{(i)}-E_{m-1}^{(i)})(\xi ,\eta )|\\
&\leq \big\{ \frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{
(2-\xi -\eta )^{2}}+\frac{K_{1}}{2(2-\xi -\eta )}+\frac{K_0}{4}\big\}
|U_{m}^{(i)}-U_{m-1}^{(i)}|   \\
&\quad +\frac{(\nu +1/2)K_{1}}{2-\xi -\eta }|U_{m}^{(\gamma _i)}-U_{m-1}^{(\gamma
_i)}|+\frac{3K_{1}}{4}|p_{m}^{(i)}-p_{m-1}^{(i)}|+\frac{3K_{1}}{4}
|q_{m}^{(i)}-q_{m-1}^{(i)}|.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}

\begin{lemma}[\cite{last}] \label{lemma42}
Let the conditions \eqref{Cd1} be fulfilled and there exists a constant $A>0$, 
such that
\begin{gather*}
|(U_m^{(i)}-U_{m-1}^{(i)})(\xi_0, \eta_0)|\leq A(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu},\\
|(p_m^{(i)}-p_{m-1}^{(i)})(\xi_0, \eta_0)|\leq\mu A(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu-1},\\
|(q_m^{(i)}-q_{m-1}^{(i)})(\xi_0, \eta_0)|\leq\mu A(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu-1},
\end{gather*}
where $\mu\in\mathbb{R}_+, \mu>\nu=n-1/2, m\in\mathbb{N}$.
 If the parameter $\delta_\nu$ is such, that
\begin{equation}
\label{deltanu}
(\mu-\nu)(\mu+\nu+1)\geq\delta_\nu\mu(\mu+1)+(3\mu+2\nu+2)K_1
+2(\mu+1)K_\alpha+K_0,
\end{equation}
then for $m\in\mathbb{N}$, $i=1,2$ we have
\begin{gather*}
|(U_{m+1}^{(i)}-U_m^{(i)})(\xi_0, \eta_0)|\leq A(1-\delta_\nu)(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu},\\
|(p_{m+1}^{(i)}-p_m^{(i)})(\xi_0, \eta_0)|\leq\mu A(1-\delta_\nu)(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu-1},\\
|(q_{m+1}^{(i)}-q_m^{(i)})(\xi_0, \eta_0)|\leq\mu A(1-\delta_\nu)(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu-1}.
\end{gather*}
\end{lemma}

\begin{lemma}[\cite{last}] \label{lemma43}
Let now $\nu=n-1/2,n\in\mathbb{N}$ be fixed. If the parameter $\mu$ is
large enough, $\mu>\nu$, then
\begin{equation}
\label{largemu}
(\mu-\nu)(\mu+\nu+1)-[(3\mu+2\nu+2)K_1
+2(\mu+1)K_\alpha+K_0]>0
\end{equation}
and we can choose the parameter $\delta_\nu>0$, such that the condition \eqref{deltanu}
to be fulfilled.
\end{lemma}

In \cite{last} the integral equation system \eqref{IU}--\eqref{Iq} is
solved by the successive approximations method and the following important
theorem is proved.

\begin{theorem}[\cite{last}] \label{thm44}
Let $n\in\mathbb{N}$ be fixed. Assume:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $a_1=b_1cos \varphi+b_2sin \varphi, a_2=\varrho^{-1}(b_2cos \varphi-b_1sin \varphi), b, c$
are functions of $(\varrho,t)$, $\alpha=\alpha(\rho)$;

\item[(ii)] $b_1, b_2, b, c\in C(\bar{\Omega}_0)$, $\alpha(\varrho)\in C^1([0,1])$,
$f_n^{(i)}\in C(\bar{\Omega}_0)$, $i=1,2$;

\item[(iii)] the parameter $\mu=\mu_n$ is such large, that
\[
(\mu-\nu)(\mu+\nu+1)>(3\mu+2\nu+2)K_1+2(\mu+1)K_\alpha+K_0
\]
(see Lemma \ref{lemma43}).
\end{itemize}
Then there exists a classical solution $(U_n^{(1)},U_n^{(2)})\in C^1(\bar{D}_\varepsilon^{(1)})$,
$U_{n,\xi_0\eta_0}^{(i)}\in C(\bar{D}_\varepsilon^{(1)})$ of Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$
and the following estimates hold:
\begin{equation}\label{estimateU}
\begin{gathered}
|U_n^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)|\leq A_\mu\delta_\nu^{-1}(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\mu},\\
|U_{n,\xi}^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)|\leq\mu A_\mu\delta_\nu^{-1}(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\mu-1},\\
|U_{n,\eta}^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)|\leq\mu A_\mu\delta_\nu^{-1}(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\mu-1},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{gather*}
A_\mu:=\frac{1}{\mu(\mu+1)}\max_{\bar{G}_0}|
\frac{1}{4\sqrt{2}}(2\varrho)^{\mu+\frac{5}{2}}f_n^{(i)}(\varrho,t)|,
\\
\delta_\nu:=\frac{1}{\mu(\mu+1)}\{(\mu-\nu)(\mu+\nu+1)-[(3\mu+2\nu+2)K_1
+2(\mu+1)K_\alpha+K_0]\}
\end{gather*}
\end{theorem}

After the inverse transformation to Problem $P_\alpha$ (using the relation
\eqref{eqU}), we see that the first estimate of \eqref{estimateU} is
equivalent to \eqref{eqest1}. Next, we aim to refine this result.

\section{New (exact) upper estimates}

\begin{theorem}\label{thmnew}
Let $n\in\mathbb{N}$ be fixed and the conditions (i) and (ii) from
Theorem \ref{thm44} be fulfilled. Then for each number $\sigma>0$ there
exists a positive constant $C_\sigma$, such that the inequalities
\begin{equation}\label{newestimates}
\begin{gathered}
|U_n^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)|\leq C_\sigma\max_{\bar{D}_0^{(1)}}
 |F^{(i)}|(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\nu-\sigma},\\
|U_{n,\xi}^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)C_\sigma\max_{\bar{D}_0^{(1)}}
|F^{(i)}|(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\nu-\sigma-1},\\
|U_{n,\eta}^{(i)}(\xi,\eta)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)C_\sigma\max_{\bar{D}_0^{(1)}}
|F^{(i)}|(2-\xi-\eta)^{-\nu-\sigma-1}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
hold in $\bar{D}_\varepsilon^{(1)}$, $i=1,2$. $C_\sigma>0$ depends on
the numbers $\nu,\sigma,K_1,K_0$ and $K_\alpha$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
 Let us choose and fix some $\mu >\nu $ satisfying
Lemma \ref{lemma43}. Next, we choose and fix an arbitrary positive number 
$\sigma $, such that $\nu +\sigma <\mu $. Further, we choose
 $\delta_\nu\in (0,1)$ satisfying the condition \eqref{deltanu} from Lemma 
\ref{lemma42}.
From Lemma \ref{lemma43} we see that it is possible. Now we introduce the
positive number
\begin{equation}  \label{tau}
\tau :=\max\{(1-\delta_\nu),\theta \}<1,
\end{equation}
where
\[
\theta :=\frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma /2)(\nu +\sigma /2+1)}.
\]
For shortness in the further calculations, we denote
\[
N(K_{1},K_0,K_{\alpha }):=\frac{(5\nu +3\sigma +2)K_1+K_0+2(\nu
+\sigma+1/2)K_\alpha+1} {(\nu +\sigma-1/2)(\nu +\sigma+1/2)}.
\]
Note that $N(K_{1},K_0,K_{\alpha })>0$ and
\[
\frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)}<\theta.
\]
Next, we divide $D_\varepsilon^{(1)}$ by the line
\[
2-\xi-\eta=\frac{1}{N(K_1, K_0, K_\alpha)^2}\left(\theta- \frac{\nu(\nu+1)}{
(\nu+\sigma)(\nu+\sigma+1)}\right)^2
\]
and obtain two parts: 
\begin{align*}
D1&:=\Big\{(\xi,\eta):0<\xi<\eta<1,\phantom{\frac{1}{2}} 0<\xi<1-\varepsilon, \\
&\quad (2-\xi-\eta)^{1/2}>\frac{1}{N(K_1, K_0, K_\alpha)}\Big(\theta- \frac{
\nu(\nu+1)}{(\nu+\sigma)(\nu+\sigma+1)}\Big)\Big\},
\end{align*}
and 
\begin{align*}
D2&:=\Big\{(\xi,\eta):0<\xi<\eta<1,\phantom{\frac{1}{2}}
 0<\xi<1-\varepsilon, \\
&\quad (2-\xi-\eta)^{1/2}\leq\frac{1}{N(K_1, K_0, K_\alpha)}\Big(\theta-
\frac{\nu(\nu+1)}{(\nu+\sigma)(\nu+\sigma+1)}\Big)\Big\}\,.
\end{align*}
It is possible that $D1=\emptyset$ or $D2=\emptyset$.

Finally, for $\lambda >0$ we denote
\begin{equation}  \label{Alambda}
A_{\lambda }:=\frac{1}{\lambda (\lambda +1)}\max_{(\xi _0,\eta _0)\in
\bar{D}_0^{(1)}}|(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{\lambda +2}F^{(i)}(\xi _0,\eta
_0)|
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}  \label{C1F}
C_{1}=\max \big\{A_{\nu +\sigma },\,\frac{\mu }{\nu +\sigma }A_{\mu }
\max_{\overline{D1}}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\mu +\nu +\sigma }
\big\}\leq C_{\mu ,\sigma }\max_{\bar{D}_0^{(1)}}|F^{(i)}|,
\end{equation}
where $C_{\mu ,\sigma }>0$ do not depend on $F^{(i)}$. If $D1=\emptyset $ we
set $\max_{\overline{D1}} (\ldots )=1$. Now, we are ready to prove
Theorem \ref{thmnew} by induction.

\textbf{(i)} For $m=0$:
\begin{gather*}
 U_{n,0}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )=p_{n,0}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )=q_{n,0}^{(i)}(\xi
,\eta )\equiv 0\text{ in }\bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}, \\
 E_{n,0}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )=F_{n}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta ).
\end{gather*}

\textbf{(ii)} For $m=1$:
\begin{align*}
&(U_{n,1}^{(i)}-U_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0) \\
&=\int_0^{\xi _0}\Big( \int_{\xi _0}^{\eta _0}E_{n,0}^{(i)}(\xi
,\eta )\,d\eta \Big) \,d\xi +2\int_0^{\xi _0}\Big( \int_0^{\eta
}E_{n,0}^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\,d\xi \Big) \,d\eta \\
&=\int_0^{\xi _0}\Big( \int_{\xi _0}^{\eta _0}(2-\xi -\eta
)^{-\lambda -2}(2-\xi -\eta )^{\lambda +2}F^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\,d\eta \Big)
\,d\xi \\
&\quad +2\int_0^{\xi _0}\Big( \int_0^{\eta }(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\lambda
-2}(2-\xi -\eta )^{\lambda +2}F^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\,d\xi \Big) \,d\eta .
\end{align*}
Applying Lemma \ref{lemma41} and recalling \eqref{Alambda}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
|(U_{n,1}^{(i)}-U_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)|\leq A_{\lambda }(2-\xi
_0-\eta _0)^{-\lambda }.  \label{umu1}
\end{equation}
Likewise we have
\[
(p_{n,1}^{(i)}-p_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)=\int_0^{\xi
_0}F^{(i)}(\xi ,\xi _0)d\xi +\int_{\xi _0}^{\eta _0}F^{(i)}(\xi
_0,\eta )d\eta
\]
and with integration
\begin{equation}
|(p_{n,1}^{(i)}-p_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)|\leq \lambda A_{\lambda
}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\lambda -1},  \label{pmu1}
\end{equation}
respectively
\begin{equation}
|(q_{n,1}^{(i)}-q_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)|\leq \lambda A_{\lambda
}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\lambda -1}.  \label{qmu1}
\end{equation}

For $\lambda =\nu +\sigma$ we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} 
|(U_{n,1}^{(i)}-U_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq
A_{\nu+\sigma}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma},\\
|(p_{n,1}^{(i)}-p_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)
A_{\nu+\sigma}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma-1},\\
|(q_{n,1}^{(i)}-q_{n,0}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)
A_{\nu+\sigma}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma-1}. 
\end{gathered}\label{upqsigma1}
\end{equation}

\textbf{(iii)} For $m=2,3,\ldots $
Now with Lemma \ref{lemma42}, the inequalities \eqref{umu1}--\eqref{qmu1}
for $\lambda =\mu $ and induction, there exist sequences 
$\{U_{n,m}^{(i)}\}$, $\{p_{n,m}^{(i)}\}$ and $\{q_{n,m}^{(i)}\}$,
 $m\in \mathbb{N}$, of
continuous functions and the estimates
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} 
|(U_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-U_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq
A_\mu(1-\delta_\nu)^m(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu},\\
|(p_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-p_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq\mu
A_\mu(1-\delta_\nu)^m(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu-1},\\
|(q_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-q_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq\mu
A_\mu(1-\delta_\nu)^m(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\mu-1} 
\end{gathered}\label{m+1estimates}
\end{equation}
hold for $m=0,1,2,\ldots$.

For the points $(\xi _0,\eta _0)\in D1$ from \eqref{m+1estimates} we
obtain:
\begin{align*}
&|(U_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-U_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)| \\
&\leq A_{\mu }(1-\delta _{\nu })^{m}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma
}\max_{\bar{D}1}{(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\mu +\nu +\sigma }},
\\
&|(p_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-p_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)| \\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma )\frac{\mu }{\nu +\sigma }A_{\mu }(1-\delta _{\nu
})^{m}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma -1}\max_{\bar{D}1}{(2-\xi
_0-\eta _0)^{-\mu +\nu +\sigma }},
\\
&|(q_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-q_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)| \\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma )\frac{\mu }{\nu +\sigma }A_{\mu }(1-\delta _{\nu
})^{m}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma-1}\max_{\bar{D}1}{(2-\xi
_0-\eta _0)^{-\mu +\nu +\sigma }}.
\end{align*}
Thus using \eqref{tau} and \eqref{C1F} in $D1$ for $m\in N$ we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered} 
|(U_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-U_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq
C_1\tau^m(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma},\\
|(p_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-p_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)C_1\tau^m(2-
\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma-1},\\
|(q_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-q_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)C_1\tau^m(2-
\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma-1}. 
\end{gathered}  \label{estD1}
\end{equation}

For $(\xi_0,\eta_0)\in D2$ we will show that such estimates hold too.

Our induction hypothesis is that for some $m\in \mathbb{N}$ is true
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}\label{estD2mm-1}
|(U_{n,m}^{(i)}-U_{n,m-1}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq
C_1\tau^{m-1}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma},\\
|(p_{n,m}^{(i)}-p_{n,m-1}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)C_1
\tau^{m-1}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma-1},\\
|(q_{n,m}^{(i)}-q_{n,m-1}^{(i)})(\xi_0,\eta_0)|\leq(\nu+\sigma)C_1
\tau^{m-1}(2-\xi_0-\eta_0)^{-\nu-\sigma-1} 
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
in $D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$, which for $m=1$ is fulfilled according to
\eqref{upqsigma1} and $C_{1}\geq A_{\nu +\sigma }$. Now, we are trying to
approve \eqref{estD1} in $D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$, which is already known in
$D1$.

By setting the inequalities \eqref{estD2mm-1} in \eqref{eqestEm} 
we derive
\begin{align*}
&|(E_{m}^{(i)}-E_{m-1}^{(i)})|(\xi ,\eta ) \\
&\leq \Big\{ \frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(2-\xi -\eta )^{2}}+\frac{K_{1}}{2(2-\xi
-\eta )}+\frac{K_0}{4}\Big\} C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\nu
-\sigma } \\
&\quad +\frac{(\nu +1/2)K_{1}}{2-\xi -\eta }C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\nu
-\sigma }\\
&\quad +\frac{3K_{1}}{2}(\nu +\sigma )C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\nu
-\sigma -1} \\
&\leq C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}\Big\{ \nu (\nu +1)(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\nu -\sigma -2}+
(5\nu +3\sigma +2)K_{1}(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\nu -\sigma -3/2} \\
&\quad  +K_0(2-\xi -\eta )^{-\nu -\sigma -3/2}\Big\}
\end{align*}
everywhere in $D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$. Now we are ready to apply Lemma 
\ref{lemma41} for all the terms in the brackets, since they are of power less
than $-2$. We substitute the last inequality in the formulas \eqref{eqappr}
and with integration and Lemma \ref{lemma41} we obtain:
\begin{align*}
&|(U_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-U_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)|\\
&\leq C_{1}\tau
 ^{m-1}\Big\{ \frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)}
 (2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma } \\
&\quad  +\frac{(5\nu +3\sigma +2)K_{1}+K_0}{(\nu +\sigma-1/2 )(\nu
 +\sigma+1/2)}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma +1/2} \Big\} \\
&\quad +K_{\alpha }\int_0^{\xi _0}|(U_{n,m}^{(i)}-U_{n,m-1}^{(i)})(\xi ,\xi
 )|d\xi \\
&\leq C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma }\Big\{ \frac{\nu
(\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)}\\
&\quad +(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{1/2}N(K_{1},K_0,K_{\alpha })\Big\} ,
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
&|(p_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-p_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)|\\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma)C_{1}\tau ^{m-1} 
 \Big\{ \frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)} (2-\xi
_0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma -1}  \\
&\quad +\frac{(5\nu +3\sigma +2)K_{1}+K_0}{(\nu +\sigma-1/2 )(\nu +\sigma+1/2)
}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma -1/2} \Big\} 
\\
&\quad +2K_{\alpha }C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-2\xi _0)^{-\nu -\sigma-1/2 } \\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma )C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma -1} 
\Big\{ \frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)}\\
&\quad +(2-\xi_0-\eta _0)^{1/2}N(K_{1},K_0,K_{\alpha })\Big\} ,
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
&|(q_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-q_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)|\\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma)C_{1}\tau ^{m-1}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma -1} 
 \Big\{ \frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)}\\
 &
\quad +(2-\xi_0-\eta _0)^{1/2} N(K_{1},K_0,K_{\alpha })\Big\}
\end{align*}
in $D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$. Since
\[
\frac{\nu (\nu +1)}{(\nu +\sigma )(\nu +\sigma +1)}+(2-\xi _0-\eta
_0)^{1/2}N(K_{1},K_0,K_{\alpha })\leq \theta \leq \tau \quad\text{in }
 D2
\]
by definition, for the points $(\xi_0,\eta _0)\in D2$ from the last
three inequalities we obtain \eqref{estD1}. Then by induction we conclude that
the estimates \eqref{estD1} hold in $D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$ for 
$m=2,3,\ldots$.


The functions $\{U_{n,m}^{(i)},p_{n,m}^{(i)},q_{n,m}^{(i)}\}_{m=0}^{\infty }$
belong to $C(\bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)})$ and we have uniform convergence
to some functions 
$\{U_{n}^{(i)},p_{n}^{(i)},q_{n}^{(i)}\}\in C(\bar{D}
_{\varepsilon }^{(1)})$, as $m\to \infty $ and
\begin{align*}
|U_{n}^{(i)}(\xi _0,\eta _0)|
&=\big|\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}(U_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-U_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)\big| \\
&\leq C_{1}(1-\tau )^{-1}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma },
\\
|U_{n,\xi _0}^{(i)}(\xi _0,\eta _0)|
&=\big|\sum_{m=0}^{\infty
}(p_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-p_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)\big| \\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma )C_{1}(1-\tau )^{-1}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma
-1},
\\
|U_{n,\eta _0}^{(i)}(\xi _0,\eta _0)|
&=\big|\sum_{m=0}^{\infty}(q_{n,m+1}^{(i)}-q_{n,m}^{(i)})(\xi _0,\eta _0)\big| \\
&\leq (\nu +\sigma )C_{1}(1-\tau )^{-1}(2-\xi _0-\eta _0)^{-\nu -\sigma -1}.
\end{align*}
In view of \eqref{C1F}, these estimates coincide with \eqref{newestimates}
with $C_{\sigma }=C_{\mu,\sigma}(1-\tau )^{-1}$. 
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{mainres}]
First, we note that the
conditions (i) and (ii) of Theorem \ref{thm44} are fulfilled, hence we can
apply Theorem \ref{thmnew}. Using the relations \eqref{eqU} and
\eqref{charcoord}, we make the inverse transformation from Problem 
$P_{\alpha,2}$ to Problem $P_{\alpha }$ and we see that the
generalized solution $u(x,t)$ belongs to $C^{1}(\bar{\Omega}_0\backslash O)
$ and the estimates
\begin{gather*}
 |u(x,t)|\leq C_{n,\sigma }\max_{\bar{\Omega}_0}{
\{|f_{n}^{(1)}|+|f_{n}^{(2)}|\}}|x|^{-n-\sigma }, \\
 \sum_{|\beta |=1}|D^{\beta }u(x,t)|\leq n C_{n,\sigma }\max_{\bar{\Omega}
_0}{\{|f_{n}^{(1)}|+|f_{n}^{(2)}|\}} |x|^{-n-\sigma -1}
\end{gather*}
hold, where $C_{n,\sigma }>0$ depends on $n$, $\sigma$ and all coefficients
of \eqref{eq0p1}.
\end{proof}

It is easy to generalize this result in the following way.

\begin{theorem}\label{thcomn}
Let the right-hand function $f(\varrho,\varphi,t)$ of  \eqref{eq0polar} be a 
trigonometric polynomial
\begin{equation}\label{trigp}
f=\sum_{n=0}^l f_n^{(1)}(\varrho,t)\cos n\varphi+f_n^{(2)}(\varrho,t)\sin n\varphi,
\quad l\in\mathbb{N}.
\end{equation}
If  conditions (i) and (ii) of Theorem \ref{thm44} are fulfilled, then 
there exists one and only one generalized solution 
$u(x,t)\in C^1(\bar{\Omega}_0\backslash O)$ of Problem $P_{\alpha }$ and the a 
priori estimates
\begin{gather*}
 |u(x,t)|\leq C_{l,\sigma}\max_{\bar{\Omega}_0}{\{|f_{l}^{(1)}|+|f_{l}^{(2)}|\}}
    |x|^{-l-\sigma}+O(|x|^{-l-\sigma+1}), \\
\sum_{|\beta|=1}|D^\beta u(x,t)|\leq C_{l,\sigma}
    \max_{\bar{\Omega}_0}{\{|f_{l}^{(1)}|+|f_{l}^{(2)}|\}}
    |x|^{-l-\sigma-1}+O(|x|^{-l-\sigma})
\end{gather*}
hold.
\end{theorem}



\section{On the singularity of solutions of problem $\boldsymbol{P_{\alpha,2}}$}

In this section we derive some sufficient conditions on the coefficients and
the right-hand side of \eqref{eq0p1} for the existence of singular solutions
of the problem we treat. We follow Grammatikopoulos et al \cite{GHP} (see
Theorem \ref{thmG}) and making some modifications we extend this result.

First, we represent an important lemma

\begin{lemma} [\cite{GHP}] \label{lemmamax}
Consider Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$.
Let $F^i, A_i, B_i,  C_i,  D_i\in C({\bar{D}}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)})$, 
$i=1,2$,
\begin{equation}
A_i\geq 0,\quad B_i\geq 0,\quad C_i\geq 0,\quad
D_i\geq 0,\quad \alpha (1-\xi )\geq 0
\quad \text{ in }\bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}, \quad i=1,2
\label{ABCDgeq0}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
F^{(i)}\geq 0\quad \text{in } \bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)},\quad i=1,2.  \label{Feq0}
\end{equation}
Then for the solution $(U^{(1)},U^{(2)})$ of Problem $P_{\alpha ,2}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{Ugeq0}
U^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\geq 0,\quad 
U_{\eta }^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\geq 0,\quad
U_{\xi }^{(i)}(\xi ,\eta )\geq 0\quad \text{for }(\xi ,\eta )\in 
\bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)},\; i=1,2.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

Note that in view of $D_1=-D_2$ (see \eqref{eqABCD}) for \eqref{ABCDgeq0} to
be fulfilled is necessary $D_1=D_2\equiv0$, so in this case we may consider
the system \eqref{eqdarbu} as two independent single equations
\begin{equation}  \label{darbusingle}
U_{\xi \eta }-AU_{\xi }-BU_{\eta }-CU=F(\xi ,\eta )
\end{equation}
with boundary conditions
\begin{equation}  \label{bound2}
U(0,\eta )=0,\quad (U_{\eta }-U_{\xi })(\xi ,\xi )+\alpha (1-\xi )U(\xi ,\xi
)=0.
\end{equation}
Next, we formulate the main result in this section.

\begin{theorem} \label{thmsingul}
Consider the problem \eqref{darbusingle}, \eqref{bound2}. Let for
the coefficients we assume $A,B,C\in C(\bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}), \alpha(1-\xi)
\in C^1([0,1-\varepsilon])$ and
\begin{equation}\label{somcon}
A\geq 0,\quad B\geq 0,\quad C\geq\frac{4n^2-1}{4(2-\xi -\eta )^2},\quad \alpha (1-\xi )\geq 0
\text{ in ${\bar{D}}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$}.
\end{equation}
Additionally, let $F(\xi,\eta)\in C(\bar{D}_{\varepsilon }^{(1)})$
does not change its sign (that means either $F\geq0$ or $F\leq0$)
and $F\not\equiv0$ in $D_0^{(1)}$.

Then for $\eta\in(0,1]$ and $\varepsilon\in(0,\varepsilon_F)$, where
$\varepsilon_F\in(0,1)$ is a number depending on $F$, holds
\begin{equation}\label{geqest}
|U(1-\varepsilon,\eta)|\geq C_0\varepsilon^{-(n-\frac{1}{2})},\quad
 C_0=\text{const}>0.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof} 
We will consider the case $F\geq0$. The case $F\leq0 $ is obviously analogous.
In \cite{GHP} was shown the existence of classical solution $U(\xi,\eta)$ of
the problem we treat.

We introduce a function
\[
W(\xi,\eta):=\frac{(1-\xi)^{n-1/2}(1-\eta)^{n-1/2}}{(2-\xi-\eta)^{n-1/2}}.
\]
We see that $W(\xi,\eta)>0$ in $D_\varepsilon^{(1)}$. Next, since $
F\not\equiv0$ in $D_0^{(1)}$ and it is continuous in each $
D_\varepsilon^{(1)}$, we conclude that there exists an open ball in $
D_0^{(1)}$ where $F>0$. Therefore, if we consider $\varepsilon$ small enough
(smaller than some $\varepsilon_F$), we have the inequality
\begin{equation}  \label{K}
\int_{D_\varepsilon}(FW)(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta\geq K,\quad K=\text{const}>0.
\end{equation}
Recall that $D_{\varepsilon }=\{(\xi ,\eta ):0<\xi <\eta <1-\varepsilon \}$,
$D_{\varepsilon }\subset D_{\varepsilon }^{(1)}$.

Using \eqref{darbusingle} we transform \eqref{K} in the following way:
\begin{align*}
0<K&\leq\int_{D_\varepsilon}(FW)(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta \\
&=\int_{D_\varepsilon}(U_{\xi\eta}W)(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta
-\int_{D_\varepsilon}[(AU_\xi+BU_\eta)W](\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta \\
&\quad -\int_{D_\varepsilon}(CUW)(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta :=I_1-I_2-I_3.
\end{align*}
Since Lemma \ref{lemmamax} is fulfilled (consequently, $U\geq0, U_\xi\geq0,
U_\eta\geq0$) and $W\geq0$, we see that $I_2\geq0$ and we may neglect this
term:
\begin{equation}  \label{KI1I3}
0<K\leq I_1-I_3.
\end{equation}
Taking into account the first boundary condition from \eqref{bound2} and
integrating by parts we compute:
\begin{align*}
I_1&=\int_{D_\varepsilon}(U_{\xi\eta}W)(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta \\
&=\int_{D_\varepsilon}(UW_{\xi\eta})(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta
-\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}(U_\xi W+UW_\eta)(\xi,\xi)d\xi \\
&\quad +\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}(U_\xi W)(\xi,1-\varepsilon)d\xi
:=I_{D_\varepsilon}-I_{\partial1}+I_{\partial2}.
\end{align*}
Next, we calculate
\[
W_{\xi\eta}(\xi,\eta)=\frac{4n^2-1}{4(2-\xi -\eta )^2}W(\xi,\eta).
\]
From here and \eqref{somcon} it follows that
\[
I_{D_\varepsilon}-I_3=\int_{D_\varepsilon}\Big(\frac{4n^2-1}{4(2-\xi -\eta
)^2} -C\Big)(UW)(\xi,\eta)d\xi d\eta \leq0.
\]
Using this conclusion, from \eqref{KI1I3} we derive
\[
0<K\leq I_1-I_3=I_{D_\varepsilon}-I_{\partial1}+I_{\partial2}-I_3\leq-I_{
\partial1}+I_{\partial2}.
\]
A calculation shows that
\begin{equation}  \label{Wetaxixi}
W_\eta(\xi,\xi)=\frac{1}{2}[W(\xi,\xi)]_\xi.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, using the second boundary condition from \eqref{bound2}
we compute
\begin{equation}  \label{Uxixixi}
U_\xi(\xi,\xi)=\frac{1}{2}[U(\xi,\xi)]_\xi+\frac{1}{2}\alpha(1-\xi)U(\xi,
\xi).
\end{equation}
Then substituting \eqref{Wetaxixi} and \eqref{Uxixixi} in the expression for
$I_{\partial1}$ gives
\begin{align*}
I_{\partial1}
&=\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}(U_\xi W+UW_\eta)(\xi,\xi)d\xi \\
&=\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}\Big\{\frac{1}{2}[U(\xi,\xi)]_\xi W(\xi,\xi)
 +\frac{1}{2}\alpha(1-\xi)U(\xi,\xi)W(\xi,\xi) \\
&\quad +\frac{1}{2}U(\xi,\xi)[W(\xi,\xi)]_\xi \Big\}d\xi \\
&=\frac{1}{2}\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}[UW(\xi,\xi)]_\xi d\xi +\frac{1}{2}
\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}\alpha(1-\xi)(UW)(\xi,\xi)d\xi \\
&=\frac{1}{2}(UW)(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon) +\frac{1}{2}
\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}\alpha(1-\xi)(UW)(\xi,\xi)d\xi\geq0,
\end{align*}
where in the last inequality we use the sign of $\alpha$ from 
\eqref{somcon}. Thus \eqref{KI1I3} becomes
\begin{equation}  \label{KId2}
0<K\leq I_{\partial2}.
\end{equation}
It is easy to check that $W_\xi\leq0 $ in $\bar{D}_\varepsilon$ and we can
estimate $I_{\partial2}$,
\begin{align*}
I_{\partial2}
&=\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}(U_\xi W)(\xi,1-\varepsilon)d\xi \\
&=-\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}(UW_\xi)(\xi,1-\varepsilon)d\xi
+(UW)(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon) \\
&\leq U(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon)\int_0^{1-\varepsilon}|W_\xi(\xi,1-
\varepsilon)|d\xi \\
&=U(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon)W(0,1-\varepsilon)\\
&=U(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon)(1+\varepsilon)^{-(n-\frac{1}{2}
)}\varepsilon^{n-\frac{1}{2}}.
\end{align*}
We set this estimate in \eqref{KId2} and conclude that
\[
U(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon)\geq(1+\varepsilon)^{n-\frac{1}{2}
}K\varepsilon^{-(n-\frac{1}{2})}, \quad \varepsilon\in(0,\varepsilon_F).
\]
Recalling once again that Lemma \ref{lemmamax} implies $U_\eta\geq0$ in 
$\bar{D}_{\varepsilon}^{(1)}$ we see that 
$U(1-\varepsilon,\eta)\geq U(1-\varepsilon,1-\varepsilon)$ in 
$\bar{D}_{\varepsilon}^{(1)}$ for $\eta\in(0,1]$.

From this fact and the last estimate immediately follows the assertion of
this theorem. 
\end{proof}

\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thmGN}]
 First, we transform Problem $P_{\alpha}$ to Problem $P_{\alpha,1}$ and in
 view of the relations
\[
a_1=b_1\cos \varphi+b_2\sin \varphi,\quad a_2=\varrho^{-1}(b_2\cos
\varphi-b_1\sin \varphi)
\]
we see that the following relations hold
\[
a_2\equiv0, \quad a_1\geq|b|, \quad a_1\geq2\varrho c, \quad
\alpha(\varrho)\geq0\quad\text{in}\quad G_{\varepsilon}
\]
for the coefficients of system \eqref{eq2p1}. Next, we reduce Problem 
$P_{\alpha,1}$ to Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$ and recalling the relations
\begin{gather*} 
A_1=A_2=\frac{1}{4}(a_1+b), \quad B_1=B_2=\frac{1}{4}
(a_1-b), \\ D_2=-D_1=\frac{1}{4}na_2,\quad
 C_1=C_2=\frac{1}{4}\Big\{\frac{4n^2-1}{(2-\xi -\eta )^2}
+\frac{a_1}{2-\xi -\eta }-c\Big\},
\end{gather*}
we see that $D_1=D_2\equiv0$ and the inequalities \eqref{somcon} hold.
Furthermore, it is easy to check that the remaining conditions of Theorem
\ref{thmsingul} are also fulfilled, hence for $\eta\in(0,1]$ and $
\varepsilon\in(0,\varepsilon_F)$ the estimate \eqref{geqest} holds. From
this, making the inverse transformation from Problem $P_{\alpha,2}$ to
Problem $P_{\alpha}$, we obtain the estimate \eqref{qram2} in some
neighborhood of $O(0,0,0)$. 
\end{proof}

\subsection*{Acknowledgements} 
The research was partially supported by the
Bulgarian NSF under grants DO 02-75/2008 and DO 02-115/2008.


\begin{thebibliography}{99}

\bibitem{Ald93} S. A. Aldashev;
\emph{Correctness of multidimensional Darboux
problems for the wave equation}, Ukrainian Math. J., \textbf{45 }(1993),
1456-1464.

\bibitem{Ald03} S. A. Aldashev;
\emph{Special Darboux-Protter problems for a class
of multidimensional hyperbolic equations}, Ukrainian Math. J., \textbf{55 }
(2003), no. 1, 126-135.

\bibitem{Ald05} S. A. Aldashev;
\emph{A criterion for the existence of
eigenfunctions of the Darboux-Protter spectral problem for degenerating
multidimensional hyperbolic equations}. Differ. Equations, \textbf{41 }
(2005), no. 6, 833-839.

\bibitem{AS} A. K. Aziz, M. Schneider;
\emph{Frankl-Morawetz problems in $R^3$},
SIAM J. Math. Anal., \textbf{10 } (1979), 913-921.

\bibitem{BB} Ar. B. Bazarbekov, Ak. B. Bazarbekov;
\emph{Goursat and Darboux problems for the three-dimensional wave equation}, 
Differ. Equations, \textbf{38 }(2002), 695-701.

\bibitem{Bits} A. V. Bitsadze;
\emph{Some classes of partial differential equations}, 
Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, New York, 1988.

\bibitem{JB01} Jong Bae Choi;
\emph{On Darboux-Protter problems for the hyperbolic
equations with Bessel operators}, Far East J. Appl. Math., \textbf{5 }(2001),
no. 1, 75-85.

\bibitem{JB02} Jong Bae Choi, Jong Yeoul Park;
\emph{On the conjugate Darboux-Protter problems for the two-dimensional 
wave equations in the special case}, 
J. Korean Math. Soc., \textbf{39 }(2002), no. 5, 681-692.

\bibitem{DPP} L. Dechevski, N. Popivanov, T. Popov;
\emph{Asymptotic expansions of singular solutions of Protter problem},
Abstract and Applied Analysis, (2012) (in print)

\bibitem{EP98} D. E. Edmunds, N. I. Popivanov;
\emph{A nonlocal regularization of some over-determined boundary value problems I}, 
SIAM J. Math. Anal., \textbf{29 } (1998), No1, 85-105.

\bibitem{Gar} P. R. Garabedian;
\emph{Partial differential equations with more than
two variables in the complex domain}, J. Math. Mech., \textbf{9 } (1960),
241-271.

\bibitem{GHP} M. K. Grammatikopoulos, T. D. Hristov, N.I. Popivanov;
\emph{Singular solutions to Protter's problem for the 3-D wave equation involving
lower order terms}, Electron. J. Diff. Eqns., \textbf{2003} (2003), No. 03,
31p. 

\bibitem{GPP} M. K. Grammatikopoulos, N. Popivanov, T. Popov;
\emph{New singular solutions of Protter's problem for the 3-D wave equation}, 
Abstract and Applied Analysis, \textbf{2004 }(2004), No. 4, pp. 315-335.

\bibitem{H} L. H\"{o}rmander;
\emph{The Analysis of Linear Partial Differential
Operators III}. Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York-Tokyo (1985).

\bibitem{last} T. Hristov, N. Popivanov, M. Schneider;
\emph{Estimates of singular solutions of Protter's problem for the 3-D hyperbolic 
equations}, Commun. Appl. Anal. \textbf{10} (2006), no. 2, 97-125.

\bibitem{HPS} T. D. Hristov, N. I. Popivanov, M. Schneider;
\emph{On the uniqueness of generalized and quasi- regular solutions for 
equations of mixed type in $R^3$}, Sib. Adv. Math., \textbf{4 }(2011), no. 4, 262-273.

\bibitem{Kh95} S. Kharibegashvili;
\emph{On the solvability of a spatial problem
of Darboux type for the wave equation}, Georgian Math. J., \textbf{2} (1995),
385-394.

\bibitem{Kan98} Khe Kan Cher;
\emph{On nontrivial solutions of some homogeneous
boundary value problems for the multidimensional hyperbolic
Euler-Poisson-Darboux equation in an unbounded domain}, Differ. Equations,
\textbf{34} (1998), 139--142.

\bibitem{Kan981} Khe Kan Cher;
\emph{On the conjugate Darboux-Protter problem for
the two-dimensional wave equation in the special case}. Nonclassical
equations in mathematical physics (Russian) (Novosibirsk, 1998), 17--25,
Izdat. Ross. Akad. Nauk Sib. Otd. Inst. Mat., Novosibirsk, 1998.

\bibitem{LP03} D. Lupo, K. R. Payne;
\emph{Critical exponents for semilinear
equations of mixed elliptic-hyperbolic and degenerate types}, Comm. Pure
Appl. Math., \textbf{56 } (2003), 403-424.

\bibitem{LP05} D. Lupo, K.R. Payne;
\emph{Conservation laws for equations of mixed elliptic-hyperbolic type}, 
Duke Math. J., \textbf{127 } (2005), 251-290.

\bibitem{LPP} D. Lupo, K. R. Payne,  N. Popivanov;
\emph{Nonexistence of nontrivial solutions for supercritical equations of mixed
elliptic-hyperbolic type}, In: Progress in Non-Linear Differential Equations
and Their Applications, \textbf{66}, Birkhauser, Basel, (2006), 371-390.

\bibitem{MWT} C. S. Morawetz;
\emph{Mixed equations and transonic flow}, J.
Hyperbolic Differ. Equ., \textbf{1 }(2004), no. 1, 1-26.

\bibitem{Nak92} A. M. Nakhushev;
\emph{Criteria for continuity of the gradient of
the solution to the Darboux problem for the Gellerstedt equation}, Differ.
Equations, \textbf{28} (1992), 1445-1457.

\bibitem{PS88} N. I. Popivanov, M. Schneider;
\emph{The Darboux problem in $ R^3 $ for a class of degenerated hyperbolic equations},
 Comptes Rend. de l'Acad. Bulg. Sci., \textbf{41,} 11 (1988), 7--9.

\bibitem{PS93} N. I. Popivanov, M. Schneider;
\emph{The Darboux problems in $R^3$ for a class of degenerated hyperbolic equations}, 
J. Math. Anal. Appl., \textbf{175 }(1993), 537-579.

\bibitem{PS95} N. I. Popivanov, M. Schneider;
\emph{On M. H. Protter problems for the wave equation in $R^3$}, 
J. Math. Anal. Appl., \textbf{194} (1995), 50-77.

\bibitem{NT02} N. I. Popivanov, T. P. Popov;
\emph{Exact behavior of the singularities for the 3-D Protter's problem 
for the wave equation}, Inclusion Methods for Nonlinear Problems with 
Applications in Engineering, Economics and Physics, Computing,
 (ed. J. Herzberger), [Suppl] \textbf{16 }(2002), 213--236.

\bibitem{NT03} N. I. Popivanov, T. P. Popov;
\emph{Estimates for the singular solutions of the 3-D Protter's problem}, 
Annuaire de l'Universite de Sofia, \textbf{96 }(2003), 117-139.

\bibitem{NT04} N. I. Popivanov, T. P. Popov;
\emph{Singular solutions of Protter's problem for the 3+1-D wave equation}, 
Interal Transforms and Special Functions, \textbf{15 }(2004), no. 1, 73-91.

\bibitem{Pr} M. H. Protter;
\emph{A boundary value problem for the wave equation
and mean value problems}, Annals of Math. Studies, \textbf{33 }(1954),
247-257.

\bibitem{Prot} M. H. Protter;
\emph{New boundary value problem for the wave
equation and equations of mixed type}, J. Rat. Mech. Anal., \textbf{3 }
(1954), 435-446.

\bibitem{Ras1} J. M. Rassias;
\emph{Mixed type partial differential equations with
initial and boundary values in fluid mechanics}, Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat.,
\textbf{13 }(2008), no. J08, 77-107.

\bibitem{Ras2} J. M. Rassias;
\emph{Tricomi-Protter problem of nD mixed type equations},
 Int. J. Appl. Math. Stat., \textbf{8 }(2007), no. M07, 76-86.

\bibitem{Tong} Tong Kwang-Chang;
\emph{On a boundary value problem for the wave equation}, 
Science Record, New Series, \textbf{1} (1957), 1-3.

\end{thebibliography}

\end{document}
