\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{hyperref}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
\emph{Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2012 (2012), No. 236, pp. 1--16.\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-2012/236\hfil Multiplicity of positive solutions]
{Multiplicity of positive solutions for a
gradient system with an exponential nonlinearity}

\author[N. Megrez, K. Sreenadh, B. Khaldi \hfil EJDE-2012/236\hfilneg]
{Nasreddine Megrez, K. Sreenadh, Brahim Khaldi}  % in alphabetical order

\address{Nasreddine Megrez \newline
Chemical and Material Engineering Department,
University of Alberta \\
9107 - 116 Street, Edmonton (Alberta) T6G 2V4, Canada}
\email{nmegrez@gmail.com}

\address{K. Sreenadh \newline
Department of Mathematics,
Indian Institute of Technology Delhi Hauz Khaz, New Delhi-16, India}
\email{sreenadh@gmail.com}

\address{Brahim Khaldi \newline
Departement of Sciences, University of Bechar\\
 PB 117, Bechar 08000, Algeria}
\email{khaldibra@yahoo.fr}

\thanks{Submitted June 16, 2011. Published December 26, 2012.}
\subjclass[2000]{35J50, 35J57, 35J60}
\keywords{Gradient system; exponential nonlinearity; multiplicity}

\begin{abstract}
 In this article, we consider the problem
 \begin{gather*}
 -\Delta u = \lambda u^{q} + f_1(u,v) \quad \text{in } \Omega\\
 -\Delta v = \lambda v^{q} + f_{2} (u,v) \quad \text{in } \Omega\\
 u, v > 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega \\
 u = v = 0 \quad \text{on } \partial\Omega,
 \end{gather*}
 where $\Omega$ is a bounded domain in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$, $0<q<1$, and
 $\lambda>0$. We show that there exists a real number
 $\Lambda$ such that the above problem admits at least two solutions for
 $\lambda\in(0,\Lambda)$, and no solution for $\lambda>\Lambda$.
\end{abstract}

\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}
\allowdisplaybreaks

\section{Introduction}

 In this article, we study the existence of multiple solutions of the
system of partial differential equations
\begin{equation} \label{Plambda}
\begin{gathered}
 -\Delta u = \lambda u^{q} + {f_1 (u,v)} \quad \text{in } \Omega\\
 -\Delta v = \lambda v^{q} + {f_{2} (u,v)} \quad \text{in } \Omega\\
u, v > 0 \quad \text{in } \Omega\\
u = v = 0 \quad \text{on } \partial\Omega,
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where $\Omega$ is a bounded domain in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$,
$0 < q < 1$, $\lambda>0 $, and $f_i$, $i=1,2$ satisfy the following conditions:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(H1)] $f_i \in C^1 (\mathbb{R}^{2})$,
$ f_i(t,s) >0 $ for $t>0$ and $s>0$; $f_i (t,s)=0$ if $t\le0$ or $s \le 0$.

\item[(H2)] The maps $t \mapsto f_i(t,.)$ and $s\mapsto f_i(.,s)$ are
nondecreasing for all $t>0$, $s>0$.

\item[(H3)]  For all $\epsilon>0$,
\[\lim_{t^{2}+s^{2} \to \infty} f_i(t,s)
e^{-(1-\epsilon) ( t^{2}+s^{2} )} =\infty, \quad
\lim_{t^{2}+s^{2}\to \infty} f_i (t,s) e^{- (1+\epsilon)( t^{2}+s^{2})}=0.
\]

\item[(H4)] There exists $\overline{\lambda}$ such that
$$
\lambda t^{q}+f_1(t,s)>\lambda_1t\quad\text{and}\quad
\lambda s^{q}+f_{2}(t,s)>\lambda_1s
$$
for all $\lambda > \overline{\lambda}$ and $s,t > 0$,
where $\lambda_1$ is the first eigenvalue of $-\Delta$ on
$H_0^1(\Omega)$.

\item[(H5)] Let $F(t,s)$ be a $C^{2}$ function such that
\begin{gather*}
\frac{\partial{F}}{\partial{t}}={f_1(t,s)}, \quad
\frac{\partial{F}}{\partial{s}}={f_{2}(t,s)},
\\
\lim_{(t,s)\to(0,0)}\frac{F(t,s)}{t^{k}+s^{k}}=0 \quad
\text{for some $k>1$},\\
\lim_{t^{2}+s^{2}\to\infty}\frac{F(t,s)}{e^{(1+\epsilon)(t^{2}+s^{2})}}=0,
\quad \forall\epsilon>0.
\end{gather*}

\item[(H6)] There exists a constant $\kappa\geq0 $ such that
$$
 \lim_{| t| ,| s|
\to+\infty}\frac{F(t,s)}{f_1(t,s)+f_{2}(t,s)} =\kappa
$$


\item[(H7)] For every $\epsilon >0$,
$$
 \lim_{t^{2}+s^{2}\to \infty } \frac{\partial f_i(t,s)}{\partial t}
e^{-(1-\epsilon )(t^{2}+s^{2})}=\infty ,\quad
\lim_{t^{2}+s^{2}\to \infty } \frac{\partial f_i(t,s)}{\partial s}
e^{-(1+\epsilon )(t^{2}+s^{2})}=0.
$$
\end{itemize}

As examples of a function satisfying the above assumptions, we have
$$
F(t,s)= \begin{cases}
(t^{2}+s^{2})e^{t^{2}+s^{2}} & \text{if } t>0, \; s>0\\
 0 & \text{otherwise}.
 \end{cases}
$$
So
\begin{gather*}
f_1(t,s)=  \begin{cases}
 2t(t^{2}+s^{2}+1)e^{t^{2}+s^{2}} & \text{if } t>0, \; s>0\\
 0 & \text{otherwise},
 \end{cases}
\\
f_{2}(t,s)=  \begin{cases}
 2s(t^{2}+s^{2}+1)e^{t^{2}+s^{2}} & \text{if } t>0, \; s>0\\
 0 & \text{otherwise}.
\end{cases}
\end{gather*}

 Starting from the work of Adimurthi \cite{A}, there are many
results in the scalar case for problems involving exponential growth, for
example \cite{DR}, \cite{Do}. Systems involving exponential nonlinearities in
two dimension have also been studied in \cite{DMR}.
  Recently, lot of interest has been shown for studying the
multiplicity of positive solutions with nonlinearities of sublinear growth at
origin. In this direction we mention the works of Ambrosetti-Brezis-Cerami
\cite{ABC} for higher dimensions, and Prashanth-Sreenadh \cite{PS} in the case
of $\mathbb{R}^{2}$.

  Our aim in this article is to generalize the result in \cite{PS} to
the case of systems. One of the motivations of this work is that parameter
dependent systems with exponential nonlinearities have been recently shown to
be very involved in relativistic Abelian Chern-Simons model with two Higgs
particles and two gauge fields, see \cite{CCL,LPY,LP,LY}.
Chern-Simons theories are applied in condensed matter physics,
anyon physics, superconductivity, quantum mechanics, and electro magnetic spin
density, to mention a few. This system may also be applied to heat transfer
modeling in a nuclear fuel rod where the nonlinearities $f_1$ and $f_{2}$
represent the energy production.

 We shall find the weak solutions of the system $(P_{\lambda}) $ in the space
$$
\mathcal{H} := H^1_0(\Omega) \times H^1_0(\Omega)
$$
endowed with the norm
$$
\| (u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}: =
\Big[\int_{\Omega} \Big( |\nabla u|^{2} + |\nabla v|^{2} \Big) dx \Big]^{1/2}.
$$

  Throughout this paper, we denote by $\|\cdot\| _{1,2}$ the norm of Sobolev
 space $H_0^1(\Omega)$. To handle exponential
nonlinearity for dimension $N=2$, the  Moser-Trudinger inequality
\cite{M,T} plays the same role as the Sobolev imbedding Theorem for the
case of polynomial nonlinearity in dimension $N\geq3$. In this paper, we will
use the following adapted version of Moser-Trudinger inequality for the pair
$(u,v)$ \cite{LLY}:

\begin{lemma} \label{lem1.1}
Let $(u,v) \in\mathcal{H}$, then
 $ \int_{\Omega} e^{\gamma( u^{2} +v^{2}) } dx < +\infty$ for any
$\gamma>0$. Moreover, there exists a constant $C=C(\Omega)$ such that
\begin{equation}
	\label{eq:1.1}
	\sup_{\| (u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}} = 1} \int_{\Omega}
e^{\gamma( u^{2} + v^{2}) } dx \le C, \quad\text{provided } \gamma \le 4\pi.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
  Let $r_1 = \| u \|_{1,2}^{2}$ and $r_2=\|v\|_{1,2}^{2}$,
be such that $r_1 + r_2 = 1$. Then, we have
$$ \int_{\Omega} e^{\gamma \frac{u^{2}}{r_1}}\,dx < C,\quad
 \int_{\Omega} e^{\gamma \frac{v^{2}}{r_2}}\,dx < C, \quad
\text{for all } \gamma \le 4\pi.
$$
Hence, using H\"older inequality, \eqref{eq:1.1} can be obtained as follows
$$
\int_{\Omega} e^{\gamma ( u^{2} + v^{2} )} \,dx
\le ( \int_{\Omega}
e^{\gamma \frac{u^{2}}{r_1}} \,dx )^{ r_1}
( \int_{\Omega} e^{\gamma \frac{v^{2}}{r_2}} \,dx )^{r_{2}} \le C^{ r_1 + r_2} = C.
$$
\end{proof}
  It follows from the above inequality that the imbedding
\[
(u,v)\in\mathcal{H}\mapsto e^{( |u|^{\alpha}+|v|^{\alpha}) }\in
L^1(\Omega)
\]
is compact for $\alpha<2$. Also, it can be shown using a class of functions called
the Moser functions, that the above imbedding is not compact for $\alpha=2$.


  Weak solutions of \eqref{Plambda} are the functions $u,v\in H^1_0(\Omega)$
such that
\begin{gather*}
\int_{\Omega} \nabla u. \nabla\phi\,dx = \lambda\int_{\Omega} u^{q} \phi\,dx
+ \int_{\Omega} f_1 (u,v) \phi\,dx,
\\
\int_{\Omega} \nabla v. \nabla\psi\,dx = \lambda\int_{\Omega} v^{q} \psi\,dx
+ \int_{\Omega} f_{2}(u,v) \psi\,dx,
\end{gather*}
for all $\phi,\psi\in H^1_0(\Omega)$.

  The main results of this article are given in the following theorem.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm1.2}
There exists $\Lambda> 0$ such that \eqref{Plambda} admits at least two
solutions for all $\lambda\in(0, \Lambda)$, and no solution for
 $\lambda> \Lambda$.
\end{theorem}

  Let us write $H(u,v)$ as
\[
H(u,v) = \frac{\lambda}{q+1} \Big( |u|^{q+1} +|v|^{q+1} \Big) + F(u,v),
\]
and let
\[
h_1(u,v) = \frac{\partial{H}}{\partial{u}} = \lambda u^{q} +
f_1(u,v), \quad
h_{2}(u,v) = \frac{\partial{H}}{\partial{v}} = \lambda
v^{q} + f_{2}(u,v).
\]
  Using (H6), for $R$ sufficiently large
\begin{equation} \label{eq:R}
H(u,v) \le C ( h_1 (u,v) + h_{2}(u,v) ), \quad\text{for } |u|> R,
\text{ and } |v| > R.
\end{equation}
The functional associated with  \eqref{Plambda} is given by
\[
E (u,v) = \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} \Big( |\nabla u|^{2} + |\nabla v|^{2}
\Big) dx - \int_{\Omega} H(u,v)\, dx.
\]
It is well defined on $\mathcal{H}$ and $C^1(\mathcal{H},\mathbb{R})$. Also,
for all $(\phi,\psi)\in\mathcal{H}$, we have
\[
E'(u,v)(\phi,\psi) = \int_{\Omega} \nabla u.\nabla\phi\,dx
+\int_{\Omega} \nabla v. \nabla\psi\,dx -\int_{\Omega} h_1(u,v) \phi\,dx
-\int_{\Omega} h_{2}(u,v) \psi\,dx,
\]
 Our approach is to construct an $H^1$ local minimum
$(u_{\lambda},v_{\lambda})$ for $E$ for $\lambda$ in the largest interval
of existence $(0,\Lambda)$, and then use the generalized mountain-pass
Theorem of Ghoussoub-Priess \cite{GP}
about $(u_{\lambda},v_{\lambda})$ to obtain
a second solution.


\section{Existence of a minimal solution and a local minimum for $E$}


  In this section, we prove the existence of a minimal solution
 $(u_{\lambda}, v_{\lambda}) $ of \eqref{Plambda}, and then we show 
that this minimal solution is a local minimum for $E$. A
solution $( u_{\lambda}, v_{\lambda}) $ is said to be minimal if
any other solution $(u,v) $ of \eqref{Plambda}
satisfies $u \ge u_{\lambda}$ and $v \ge v_{\lambda}$ in $\Omega$.

\begin{lemma} \label{lm-lambda_0}
There exists $\lambda_0 > 0$ such that \eqref{Plambda} admits a solution for
all $\lambda\in(0,\lambda_0) $.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
From assumption (H5), for any $\epsilon>0$, we obtain $C>0$, such that
\[ 
|F(u,v)|\le C \Big( |u|^{k+1} +|v|^{k+1} \Big) e^{(1+\epsilon)(u^2 + v^2)}
\]
For $\|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}} =\rho$ such that 
 $\rho^2 \le \frac{ 2 \pi}{1 + \epsilon}$, and by H\"older's inequality
and the Moser-Trudinger \mbox{inequality \eqref{eq:1.1},} we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\big| \int_{\Omega} F(u,v) dx | \\
&\le C \Big(\int_{\Omega} \big(|u|^{(k+1)} + |v|^{(k+1)}\big) 
 e^{ (1+\epsilon)(u^2+v^2)} dx \Big)\\
& \le C \bigg(\int_{\Omega} \big( |u|^{(k+1)} + |v|^{(k+1)} \big) \\
&\quad\times \exp\Big((1+\epsilon) ( \frac{u^2}{\|u\|^2_{1,2} + \|v\|^2_{1,2}} 
 + \frac{v^2}{\|u\|^2_{1,2}+\|v \|^2_ {1,2}}
) ( \|u\|_{1,2}^{2} + \|v\|_{1,2}^{2} ) \Big)dx \bigg) \\
&\le C \Big( \Big( \int_{\Omega} |u|^{2(k+1)} dx\Big)^{1/2} 
+ \Big(\int_{\Omega} |v|^{ 2(k+1)} dx\Big)^{1/2}
\Big) \\
&\le C\Big(\|u\|_{1,2}^{k+1}+\|v\|_{1,2}^{k+1}\Big),
\end{align*}
where $C$ is a generic constant.
  Therefore, for $\|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}} =\rho$, we have
\begin{align*}
E(u,v) 
&\ge \frac{1}{2} \|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2} 
 - C \Big( \|u\|_{1,2}^{k+1} + \|v\|_{1,2}^{k+1} \Big)
 -\frac{\lambda}{q+1} \Big( \|u\|_{L^{q+1}}^{q+1} + \|v\|_{L^{q+1}}^{q+1} \Big)
\\
&\ge \frac{1}{2} \|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2} 
 -  C \Big( \|u\|_{1,2}^{k+1} + \|v\|_{1,2}^{k+1} \Big) 
 -\frac{\lambda}{q+1} \Big( C_1 \|u\|_{1,2}^{q+1} + C_2 \|v\|_{1,2}^{q+1} \Big)
\\
&\ge \frac{1}{2} \|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^2 
 - C \Big(\|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{k+1} + \|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{k+1} \Big)\\ 
&\quad -\frac{\lambda}{q+1} \Big(C_1 \|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{q+1} 
 + C_2\|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{q+1}\Big)\\
&\ge \frac{1}{2} \rho^2 - 2 C \rho^{k+1} - \tilde{C}\lambda \rho^{q+1}.
\end{align*}
Now, we may fix $\rho, \lambda_0>0$ small enough such that $E(u,v)>0$ for all
 $\lambda\in (0,\lambda_0)$. We note that $E(tu,tv)<0$ for
$t>0$ small enough. So, $\inf_{\|(u,v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}\le \rho} E(u,v) <0$
and if this infimum is achieved at some
$(u_\lambda,v_\lambda)$, then $(u_\lambda,v_\lambda)$ becomes a solution of \eqref{Plambda}.
Let $\{ (u_n,v_n)\}
\subset \{\|(u_n,v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} \le \rho\} $ 
be a minimizing sequence and let $(u_n,v_n)\rightharpoonup (u_\lambda,v_\lambda)$
in $\mathcal{H}$.
Clearly,
\[ 
\|(u_\lambda,v_\lambda)\|_{\mathcal{H}} \le \liminf_{n\to \infty}
\|(u_n,v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}}.
\]
Now, we can choose $\rho <\pi$ so that $\{F(u_n,v_n)\}$ is bounded 
in $L^r(\Omega)$ for some $r>1$. Using this fact and Holders inequality,
it is not difficult to show that $\{F(u_n,v_n)\}$ is equi-integrable
family in $L^1(\Omega)$ and $\lim_{|A|\to 0} \int_{A} |F(u_n,v_n)|dx =0$. 
Therefore, by Vitali's convergence Theorem, we
obtain 
\[
\int_{\Omega} F(u_n,v_n) dx \to \int_{\Omega} F(u_{\lambda},v_{\lambda}) dx.
\]
Hence, $(u_\lambda,v_\lambda)$ is a minimizer of $E(u,v)$.
By the maximum principle, we obtain $u_\lambda, v_\lambda >0$ in $\Omega$.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{lem2.2}
Let $\Lambda :=\sup\{\lambda: \text{ \eqref{Plambda} admits a
solution}\}$. Then $0<\Lambda<\infty$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lm-lambda_0}, it is clear that $\Lambda >0$. 
Suppose $\Lambda =\infty $. Then
there exists a sequence $\lambda _n \to \infty $ such that
\eqref{Plambda} with $\lambda=\lambda_n$ has a solution
 $(u_{\lambda _n},v_{\lambda_n})$. Hence
\begin{equation} \label{eq:2}
\lambda_1\int_{\Omega } u_{\lambda _n}\phi _1\,dx
=\int_{\Omega }\nabla u_{\lambda_n}\nabla \phi _1\,dx
=\int_{\Omega } \Big( \lambda _n u_{\lambda_n}^{q}
+f_1(u_{\lambda_n},v_{\lambda_n})\Big)\phi _1\,dx.
\end{equation}
where $\phi_1$ is the  eigenfunction associated with the
first eigenvalue $\lambda _1$ of $-\Delta $ on $H_0^1(\Omega )$.

  Now, we choose $\lambda_n > \overline{\lambda}$. By (H4) we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:4}
\lambda_n t^{q}+f_1(t,s)>\lambda _1t, \quad 
\lambda_n s^{q}+f_{2}(t,s)>\lambda _1s.
\end{equation}
  From \eqref{eq:2} and \eqref{eq:4}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:5}
\lambda_1\int_{\Omega }u_{\lambda_n}\phi _1dx
> \lambda_1\int_{\Omega }u_{\lambda_n}\phi _1dx
\end{equation}
  which is absurd. Hence, $\Lambda$ is finite.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}
For all $\lambda\in(0, \Lambda)$, \eqref{Plambda} admits a solution.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Suppose $\lambda' < \lambda < \lambda ''< \Lambda $ and 
\eqref{Plambda} with $\lambda=\lambda'$,  and with
$\lambda=\lambda''$ admit  solutions 
$ ( u_{\lambda'}, v_{\lambda'}) $, $ (u_{\lambda''}, v_{\lambda''})$
respectively. 
Then $( u_{\lambda'}, v_{\lambda'})$ is a subsolution
of \eqref{Plambda}, and $ (u_{\lambda''}, v_{\lambda''})$ is a supersolution 
of \eqref{Plambda}, and hence, by the monotone
iterative procedure, there exists a solution of \eqref{Plambda}.
\end{proof}


We recall the following well known comparison Theorem, whose proof
can be found in \cite{PS-2002}.

\begin{lemma} \label{lem2.4}
Let $f:[0,\infty) \to[0, \infty)$ be such that 
$f(t)/t$ is non-increasing for $t>0$. Let $v,w \in W^{1,2}_0(\Omega)$ be
weak sub and super solutions (respectively) of
\begin{gather*}
-\Delta u  = f(u),\quad u > 0 \quad\text{in } \Omega\\
u  =0 \quad \text{on } \partial\Omega.
\end{gather*}
Then $w\ge v$ a.e. in $\Omega$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{lemma} \label{lem2.5}
For all $\lambda\in(0,\Lambda)$, \eqref{Plambda} admits a minimal 
solution $(u_{\lambda}, v_{\lambda})$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Let $v_0$ be the unique solution of the problem
\begin{equation} \label{Slambda}
\begin{gathered}
-\Delta u = \lambda u^q , \quad u > 0 \quad\text{in } \Omega\\
u = 0 \quad \text{on } \partial \Omega
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
  Then, $(v_0, v_0)$ is a subsolution of \eqref{Plambda}.
 Now, let $(u,v)$ be a solution of \eqref{Plambda}. Then,
$u$ and $v$ are supersolutions of \eqref{Slambda},
 and by the above weak comparison
Theorem, $u\ge v_0$, and $v \ge v_0$.
By the monotone iteration procedure with $\underline{U} = (v_0, v_0)$,
 and $\overline{U} =(u,v)$ as sub and super-solutions of \eqref{Plambda},
we obtain a solution $(u_{\lambda}, v_{\lambda})$. It is easy to see that
$(u_{\lambda} , v_{\lambda})$ is the minimal solution.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma} \label{lm-local-min}
$(u_{\lambda}, v_{\lambda})$ is a local minimum of $E$ in $\mathcal{H}$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We use Perron's method as in \cite{Haitao} and \cite{Kaur-Sreenadh}.
Arguing by contradiction, let us suppose that there exists 
$\lambda \in( 0,\Lambda ) $ and a sequence $(u_n,v_n)$ such that 
$(u_n,v_n)\to (u_{\lambda },v_{\lambda })$ strongly in 
$\mathcal{H}$ and $E(u_n,v_n)<E(u_{\lambda },v_{\lambda })$.

Let $\lambda <\lambda _0<\Lambda $ and let 
$(u_{\lambda _0},v_{\lambda _0})$ be the minimal solution of 
\eqref{Plambda} with $\lambda=\lambda_0$.
Let $\overline{U} =( \overline{u},\overline{v})=(u_{\lambda _0},v_{\lambda _0})$, 
and let $\underline{U}=( \underline{u},\underline{v}) = (v_0,v_0) $, 
where $v_0$ is the unique solution of \eqref{Slambda}.
Consider the following cut-off functions:
\begin{gather*}
y_{1,n}(x) = \begin{cases}
\underline{u}(x) & \text{if } u_n(x) \leq \underline{u}(x) \\
u_n (x) & \text{if } \underline{u}(x) \leq u_n(x) \leq \overline{u}(x) \\
\overline{u}(x) & \text{if } u_n(x) \geq \overline{u}(x)
 \end{cases}
\\
y_{2,n}(x) = \begin{cases}
\underline{v}(x) & \text{if } v_n(x) \leq \underline{v}(x) \\
v_n (x) & \text{if } \underline{v}(x) \leq v_n(x) \leq \overline{v}(x) \\
\overline{v}(x) & \text{if } v_n(x) \geq \overline{v}(x).
\end{cases}
\end{gather*}
Also define
\begin{gather*}
W_n =( w_{1,n},w_{2,n}) :=( ( u_n-
\overline{u}) ^{+},( v_n-\overline{v}) ^{+}) , \\
Z_n =( z_{1,n},z_{2,n}) :=( ( u_n-
\underline{u}) ^{-},( v_n-\underline{v}) ^{-}).
\end{gather*}
  We also define the following subsets:
\begin{gather*}
S_{1,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :u_n( x) <\underline{u}
( x) \text{ and }v_n( x) <\underline{v}(x) \} , \\
S_{2,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :u_n( x) <\underline{u}
( x) \text{ and }\underline{v}( x) \leq v_n(
x) \leq \overline{v}( x) \} , \\
S_{3,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :u_n( x) <\underline{u}
( x) \text{ and }v_n( x) >\overline{v}(x) \} , \\
S_{4,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :\underline{u}( x) \leq
u_n( x) \leq \overline{u}( x) \text{ and }
v_n( x) <\underline{v}( x) \} , \\
S_{5,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :\underline{u}( x) \leq
u_n( x) \leq \overline{u}( x) \text{ and }
v_n( x) >\overline{v}( x) \} , \\
S_{6,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :u_n( x) >\underline{u}
( x) \text{ and }v_n( x) <\underline{v}(x) \} , \\
S_{7,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :u_n( x) >\underline{u}
( x) \text{ and }\underline{v}( x) \leq v_n(
x) \leq \overline{v}( x) \} , \\
S_{8,n} =\{ x\in \Omega :u_n( x) >\underline{u}
( x) \text{ and }v_n( x) >\overline{v}(x) \}.
\end{gather*}
Then,
\begin{equation} \label{027}
\begin{gathered}
(u_n,v_n)=( y_{1,n},y_{2,n}) -( z_{1,n},z_{2,n})
+( w_{1,n},w_{2,n}),
\\
( y_{1,n},y_{2,n}) \in M:=\big\{ ( u,v) \in \mathcal{H
}: \underline{u}\leq u\leq \overline{u}\text{ and }\underline{v}\leq
v\leq \overline{v}\big\} ,
\\
E(u_n,v_n) = E( y_{1,n},y_{2,n}) + \sum_{i=1}^{8} A_{i,n},
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{gather*}
\begin{aligned}
A_{1,n}& =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{1,n}}\Big(|\nabla u_n|^{2}-|\nabla
\underline{u}|^{2}\Big)dx+\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{1,n}}\Big(|\nabla
v_n|^{2}-|\nabla \underline{v}|^{2}\Big)dx\\
&\quad -\int_{S_{1,n}}\Big(
H(u_n,v_n)-H(\underline{u},\underline{v})\Big)dx,
\end{aligned} \\
A_{2,n} =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{2,n}}\Big(|\nabla u_n|^{2}-|\nabla
\underline{u}|^{2}\Big)dx - \int_{S_{2,n}}\Big(H(u_n,v_n)-H(\underline{u}
,v_n)\Big)dx,
\\
\begin{aligned}
A_{3,n}& =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{3,n}}\Big(|\nabla u_n|^{2}-|\nabla
\underline{u}|^{2}\Big)dx+\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{3,n}}\Big(|\nabla
v_n|^{2}-|\nabla \overline{v}|^{2}\Big)dx\\
&\quad -\int_{S_{3,n}}\Big(
H(u_n,v_n)-H(\underline{u},\overline{v})\Big)dx,
\end{aligned}\\
A_{4,n} =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{4,n}}\Big(|\nabla v_n|^{2}-|\nabla
\underline{v}|^{2}\Big)dx-\int_{S_{4,n}}\Big(H(u_n,v_n)-H(u_n,
\underline{v})\Big)dx,
\\
A_{5,n} =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{5,n}}\Big(|\nabla v_n|^{2}-|\nabla \overline{
v}|^{2}\Big)dx-\int_{S_{5,n}}\Big(H(u_n,v_n)-H(u_n,\overline{v})\Big)
dx, \\
\begin{aligned}
A_{6,n}& =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{6,n}}\Big(|\nabla u_n|^{2}-|\nabla \overline{
u}|^{2}\Big)dx+\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{6,n}}\Big(|\nabla v_n|^{2}-|\nabla
\underline{v}|^{2}\Big)dx\\
&\quad -\int_{S_{6,n}}\Big(H(u_n,v_n)-H(\overline{u},
\underline{v})\Big)dx,
\end{aligned}\\
A_{7,n} =\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{7,n}}\Big(|\nabla u_n|^{2}-|\nabla \overline{
u}|^{2}\Big)dx-\int_{S_{7,n}}\Big(H(u_n,v_n)-H(\overline{u},v_n)\Big)
dx,
\\
\begin{aligned}
A_{8,n}&=\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{8,n}}\Big(|\nabla u_n|^{2}-|\nabla \overline{u}
|^{2}\Big)dx+\frac{1}{2}\int_{S_{8,n}}\Big(|\nabla v_n|^{2}-|\nabla
\overline{v}|^{2}\Big)dx\\
&\quad -\int_{S_{8,n}}\Big(H(u_n,v_n)-H(\overline{u},
\overline{v})\Big)dx.
\end{aligned}
\end{gather*}
  Following Perron's method as in the proof of
\cite[Proposition 2.2]{Adi-Jac}, one can states that
$E(u_{\lambda },v_{\lambda }) = \underset{M}{\inf}\; E(u,v)$,
and then concludes that
$$
E(u_n,v_n) \geq E(u_{\lambda },v_{\lambda}) + \sum_{i=1}^{8} A_{i,n}.
$$
Now, since $(u_n,v_n)\to(u_{\lambda },v_{\lambda })$ strongly in
$\mathcal{H}$, $\underline{u}<u_{\lambda }<\overline{u}$ and
$\underline{v}<v_{\lambda }<\overline{v}$ in
$\overline{\Omega }$, we have
$\operatorname{meas}( S_{i,n}) _{i=1-8}\to 0$  as $n\to \infty$.
Therefore,
$$
\Vert W_n\Vert_{\mathcal{H}}, \, \Vert Z_n\Vert_{\mathcal{H}} \to 0
\quad \text{as } n \to \infty .
$$
Using \eqref{027}, mean value Theorem, and (H2), we obtain for some
$0<\theta <1$:
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^{8} A_{i,n}
& \geq \frac{1}{2}\Big(\Vert W_n\Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}+\Vert Z_n\Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}\Big)
 -\int_{\Omega }\nabla \underline{u}\nabla z_{1,n}dx
\\
&\quad + \int_{ S_{1,n}\cup S_{2,n}\cup S_{3,n}} h_1(\underline{u}-\theta
 z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta z_{2,n})z_{1,n}dx
 -\int_{\Omega }\nabla \underline{v}\nabla z_{2,n}dx\\
&\quad + \int_{ S_{1,n}\cup S_{4,n}\cup S_{6,n}} h_{2}(\underline{u}-\theta
 z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta z_{2,n})z_{2,n}dx
 + \int_{\Omega }\nabla \overline{u}\nabla w_{1,n}dx \\
 &\quad -\int_{ S_{6,n}\cup S_{7,n}\cup S_{8,n}} h_1
 (\overline{u}+\theta w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta w_{2,n}) w_{1,n}dx
 + \int_{\Omega } \nabla\overline{v} \nabla w_{2,n}dx \\
 &\quad  - \int_{ S_{3,n}\cup S_{5,n}\cup S_{8,n}} h_{2}
 (\overline{u}+\theta w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta w_{2,n})w_{2,n}dx.
\end{align*}
Since $( \overline{u},\overline{v}) $(resp. $( \underline{u},\underline{v}) $)
 is a supersolution (resp. subsolution ) of \eqref{Plambda},
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^{8} A_{i,n} 
&\geq \frac{1}{2}\Big(\Vert W_n \Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}
+\Vert Z_n \Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}\Big)\\
&\quad +\int_{S_{1,n}\cup S_{2,n}\cup S_{3,n}}\Big(h_1(\underline{u}-\theta
 z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta z_{2,n})
 -h_1(\underline{u},\underline{v})\Big)z_{1,n}dx \\
 &\quad +\int_{S_{1,n}\cup S_{4,n}\cup S_{6,n}}\Big(h_{2}(\underline{u}-\theta z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta
 z_{2,n})-h_{2}(\underline{u},\underline{v})\Big)z_{2,n}dx
 \\
 &\quad -\int_{S_{6,n}\cup S_{7,n}\cup S_{8,n}}
 \Big(h_1(\overline{u}+\theta w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta
 w_{2,n})-h_1(\overline{u},\overline{v})\Big)w_{1,n}dx
 \\
 &\quad -\int_{S_{3,n}\cup S_{5,n}\cup S_{8,n}}
 \Big(h_{2}(\overline{u}+\theta w_{1,n},\overline{v}
 +\theta w_{2,n})-h_{2}(\overline{u},\overline{v}) \Big)w_{2,n}dx
 \\
 & \geq \frac{1}{2}\Big(\Vert W_n\Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}
 +\Vert Z_n\Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}\Big)
 -\int_{S_{1,n}\cup  S_{2,n}\cup S_{3,n}}
 \Big(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial t}(\underline{u}
 -\theta 'z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta'
 z_{2,n})\\
&\quad +\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial s}(\underline{u}
  -\theta'z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta'z_{2,n})
 \Big)z_{1,n}^{2}dx 
\\
 &\quad -\int_{S_{1,n}\cup S_{4,n}\cup S_{6,n}}
 \Big(\frac{\partial h_{2}}{\partial t}
 (\underline{u}-\theta'z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta'z_{2,n})
\\
 &\quad -\frac{\partial h_{2}}{\partial s}(\underline{u}-\theta
 'z_{1,n},\underline{v}-\theta 'z_{2,n})\Big)z_{2,n}^{2}dx
\\
 &\quad -\int_{S_{6,n}\cup S_{7,n}\cup S_{8,n}}
 \Big(\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial t}(\overline{u}+\theta
 'w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta'w_{2,n})\\
&\quad  +\frac{\partial h_1}{\partial t}(\overline{u}
 +\theta'w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta 'w_{2,n})\Big)w_{1,n}^{2}dx
\\
 &\quad -\int_{S_{3,n}\cup S_{5,n}\cup S_{8,n}}
 \Big(\frac{\partial h_{2}}{\partial t}(\overline{u}+\theta
 'w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta'w_{2,n})\\
&\quad  +\frac{\partial h_{2}}{\partial s}(\overline{u}+\theta
 'w_{1,n},\overline{v}+\theta 'w_{2,n})\Big)w_{2,n}^{2}dx.
\end{align*}
It follows from (H7), \eqref{eq:1.1}, H\"{o}lder's and Sobolev's inequalities
that for $n$ sufficiently large,
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=1}^{8} A_{i,n}
&\geq \frac{1}{2}\Big(\| W_n\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}+\Vert Z_n
 \Vert_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}\Big)\\
&\quad -C_1\int_{S_{1,n}\cup S_{2,n}\cup S_{3,n}}e^{( 1+\varepsilon )
 ( \underline{u}^{2}+\underline{v}^{2}) }z_{1,n}^{2}dx
\\
 &\quad -C_{2}\int_{S_{1,n}\cup S_{4,n}\cup S_{6},n}e^{( 1+\varepsilon ) ( \underline{u}^{2}+\underline{v}^{2})
 }z_{2,n}^{2}dx\\
&\quad -C_{3}\int_{S_{6,n}\cup S_{7,n}\cup S_{8,n}}e^{(
 1+\varepsilon ) ( ( \overline{u}+w_{1,n}) ^{2}+(
 \overline{v}+w_{2,n}) ^{2}) }w_{1,n}^{2}dx \\
 &\quad -C_{4}\int_{S_{3,n}\cup S_{5,n}\cup S_{8,n}}e^{( 1+\varepsilon
 ) ( ( \overline{u}+w_{1,n}) ^{2}+( \overline{v}
 +w_{2,n}) ^{2}) }w_{2,n}^{2}dx \\
 & \geq \frac{1}{2}\Big(\| W_n\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}+\Vert
 Z_n\Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}\Big)-o( 1) \Big(\| W_n\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}
 +\Vert Z_n\Vert _{\mathcal{H}}^{2}\Big).
\end{align*}
Hence $E(u_n,v_n)\geq E(u_{\lambda },v_{\lambda })$ which is a
contradiction.
\end{proof}

\section{Existence of a second solution}

  Throughout this section, we fix $\lambda \in (0, \Lambda)$ and we denote
 by $(u_{\lambda}, v_{\lambda})$ the local minimum of $E$
obtained in the previous section as the minimal solution of \eqref{Plambda}. 
Using min-max methods and Mountain pass lemma around a closed set, we prove 
the existence of a second solution $(\overline{u}_\lambda , \overline{v}_\lambda )$ 
of \eqref{Plambda} such that $\overline{u}_\lambda \ge u_\lambda $ and 
$\overline{v}_\lambda \ge v_\lambda $ in $\Omega$.
 Let $T = \{ (u,v): u\ge u_\lambda, v\ge v_\lambda \text{ a.e. in } \Omega \}$.

  We note that $ \lim_{t\to+\infty} E(u_\lambda + t u, v_\lambda + t v) = -
\infty$ for any $(u, v) \in\mathcal{H}\setminus\{0\} $. Hence, we may fix
$(\tilde{u}, \tilde{v}) \in\mathcal{H}\setminus\{0\} $ such that 
$E(u_\lambda + \tilde{u}, v_\lambda + \tilde{v} ) < 0 $.
We define the mountain pass level
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:13}\rho_0= \inf_{\gamma\in\Gamma} \sup_{t \in[0,1] }
E(\gamma(t)),
\end{equation}
where $ \Gamma = \{ \gamma: [0,1] \to\mathcal{H} : \gamma\in C, \; \gamma(0) 
= (u_\lambda, v_\lambda), \text{ and }
 { \gamma(1) = (u_\lambda + \tilde{u}, v_{\lambda} + \tilde{v} ) } \}$.
  It follows that $\rho_0 \ge E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$.
 If $\rho_0 = E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) $, we
obtain that $\inf\{E(u,v): \|(u,v)-(u_\lambda,v_\lambda)\|_{\mathcal{H}} = R \} 
= E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$
for all $R\in(0, R_0)$ for some $R_0$ small.

  We now let $\mathcal{F} = T $ if $\rho_0 > E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$, and
$ \mathcal{F}= T \cap \{ \| (u-u_\lambda,v-v_\lambda ) \|_{\mathcal{H}} 
= \frac{R_0}{2} \} $ if
$\rho_0 = E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) $.
We have the following upper bound on $\rho_0$.

\begin{lemma}\label{lm-rho_0}
With $\rho_0$ defined as in \eqref{eq:13}, we have 
$\rho_0 < E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) + 2\pi$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality, we assume that $0 \in \Omega$. Define the sequence
$$
\tilde{\psi}_n(x) = \begin{cases}
\frac{1}{2 \sqrt{\pi}} (\log n)^{1/2}
  &\text{if } 0 \le |x| \le \frac{1}{n}\\
\frac{1}{2 \sqrt{ \pi}} \frac{\log (1/|x|)}{(\log n) ^{1/2} }
 &\text{if } \frac{1}{n} \le |x| \le 1\\
0 & \text{if} |x| \ge 1
\end{cases}
$$
  Now, consider $ (\tilde{\psi}_n,\tilde{\psi}_n )\in \mathcal{H}$. 
Then $\| (\tilde{\psi}_n,\tilde{\psi}_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} = 1$.
 We now choose $\delta > 0 $ such that $ B_{\delta} (0) \subset \Omega$ 
and let $\psi_n (x) = \tilde{\psi}_n (\frac{x}{\delta})$.
Then, $\psi_n$ has support in $B_{\delta} (0) $ and $ ( \psi_n, \psi_n)$ 
is such that $\| ( \psi_n, \psi_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} = 1$ for all $n$.
  Now, suppose $\rho_0 \ge E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)+ 2 \pi$ and we
derive a contradiction. This means that for some $t_n,\; s_n >0$:
$$
E(u_\lambda+t_n \psi_n, v_\lambda+s_n \psi_n) 
= \sup_{t, s >0} E( { u_\lambda + } t \psi_n, { v_\lambda + } s \psi_n) 
\ge E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)+ { 2 \pi}, \quad \forall n.
$$
Since $E(u_\lambda+t u, v_\lambda+s v) \to -\infty$ as 
$t,s \to +\infty$, we obtain that $(t_n, s_n)$ is bounded in $\mathbb{R}^2$.
Then, using $\| (\psi_n, \psi_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} = 1$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\frac{ t_n^2 + s_n^{2} }{4} + \int_{\Omega} 
\Big( t_n \nabla u_\lambda \nabla \psi_n + s_n \nabla v_\lambda \nabla \psi_n \Big) dx\\
&\ge \int_{\Omega} \Big( H(u_\lambda+t_n \psi_n, v_\lambda +s_n \psi_n) 
- H(u_\lambda ,v_\lambda) \Big)dx + 2\pi 
\end{align*}
Now, using the fact that $(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$ is a solution, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{3.2new}
\begin{aligned}
 \frac{ t_n^2 + s_n^{2} }{4} 
&\ge \int_{\Omega} \Big[ H(u_\lambda+t_n \psi_n, v_\lambda +s_n \psi_n)\\
&\quad  - H(u_\lambda ,v_\lambda)
- \psi_n \Big( t_n h_1(u_\lambda,v_\lambda) + s_n h_2(u_\lambda,v_\lambda) \Big) \Big] dx 
+ 2\pi .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Using (H2) we have that $h_1,\; h_2$ are non-decreasing,
then there exist $\theta_n \in (0,1)$ such that
\begin{align*}
& \int_{\Omega} \Big[ H(u_\lambda+t_n \psi_n, v_\lambda +s_n \psi_n)
 - H(u_\lambda ,v_\lambda) - \psi_n \Big( t_n h_1(u_\lambda,v_\lambda) 
 + s_n h_2 (u_\lambda,v_\lambda) \Big) \Big] dx\\
&= \int_{\Omega} \psi_n^{2} \Big[ t_n^{2} \frac{\partial h_1}{\partial u}(u_\lambda
  + \theta_n t_n\psi_n, v_\lambda + \theta_n s_n\psi_n) 
  + s_n^{2} \frac{\partial h_2}{\partial v} ( u_\lambda +\theta_n t_n\psi_n, v_\lambda
  + \theta_n s_n \psi_n) \\
& + t_n s_n \frac{\partial h_1}{\partial v} ( u_\lambda +\theta_n t_n\psi_n, v_\lambda 
  + \theta_n s_n \psi_n) + t_n s_n \frac{\partial h_2}{\partial u} 
  ( u_\lambda +\theta_n t_n\psi_n, v_\lambda + \theta_n s_n \psi_n) \Big] dx\\ 
&\ge 0 \,.
\end{align*}
Now, by \eqref{3.2new}, we see that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:14}
t_n^2 + s_n^{2} \ge { 8 \pi}, \quad \text{for all } n
\end{equation}
Since $(t_n, s_n)$ is a critical point of $ E(u_\lambda +t \psi, v_\lambda+ s \psi)$, 
we obtain
$$ 
E' (u_\lambda + t \psi_n, v_\lambda + s \psi_n)_{|_{(t,s) = (t_n,s_n)}} = 0.
$$
Then
\begin{align*}
t_n^2 + s_n^2
&= \int_{\Omega} \Big [ \Big( h_1 (u_\lambda + t_n \psi_n, v_\lambda 
 + s_n \psi_n)-h_1(u_\lambda,v_\lambda) \Big) t_n \\
&\quad + \Big( h_2 (u_\lambda + t_n\psi_n, v_\lambda + s_n\psi_n ) 
 - h_2(u_\lambda,v_\lambda) \Big) s_n \Big ] \psi_n dx.
\end{align*}
Since $t_n\psi_n\to \infty$, $s_n\psi_n\to \infty$ on 
$  \{ |x|\le \delta/n  \}$, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{eq:15}
\begin{aligned}
t_n^2 + s_n^2
&\ge  \int_{ \Omega \cap \{ |x| \le \delta/n \}} e^{(t_n^2 + s_n^2) \psi_n^2} (t_n+s_n) \psi_n dx \\
&=  \frac{\sqrt{\pi} \delta^2}{{ 2} n^2 }
e^{(t_n^2 + s_n^2 )  \frac{\log n}{ { 4} \pi}}
(t_n + s_n) (\log n) ^{1/2} \\
&=  \frac{\sqrt{\pi} \delta^2}{2}
e^{ (\frac{t_n^2 + s_n^2}{{ 4 \pi}} - 2 ) \log n}
(t_n + s_n) (\log n)^{1/2}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
  This and \eqref{eq:14} imply that
\begin{equation}\label{eq:c16}
t_n^2 + s_n^2 \to  8 \pi,
\end{equation}
and by \eqref{eq:15} we obtain
$$
t_n^2 + s_n ^2 \ge (t_n + s_n) (\log n) ^{1/2}.
$$
This in turn implies that $ t_n^2 + s_n^2 \to \infty $ as
$n \to \infty$, which contradicts \eqref{eq:c16}.
\end{proof}

\begin{definition} \label{def3.2} \rm
Let $\mathcal{F} \subset\mathcal{H} $ be a closed set. We say that a sequence
$(u_n, v_n) \subset\mathcal{H} $ is a Palais-Smale sequence for $E$ at
level $\rho$ around $\mathcal{F}$, and we denote $(PS)_{\mathcal{F},\rho}$,
if
\begin{gather*}
\lim_{n \to +\infty} dist \Big((u_n,v_n), \mathcal{F} \Big) = 0, \quad
\lim_{n \to +\infty} E(u_n, v_n) = \rho, \\
\lim_{n\to+\infty} \|E'(u_n, v_n) \|_{\mathcal{H}^{-1}} = 0.
\end{gather*}
\end{definition}

\begin{lemma}\label{lm-ps} 
Let $\mathcal{F} \subset\mathcal{H}$ be a closed set and
$\rho\in\mathbb{R}$. Let $\{(u_n, v_n) \} \subset\mathcal{H}$ be a
$(PS)_{\mathcal{F},\rho}$ sequence. Then there exists $(u_0, v_0)$ such
that, up to a subsequence, $u_n \rightharpoonup u_0$ and $v_n
\rightharpoonup v_0$ in $H^1_0 (\Omega)$, and
\begin{gather*}
\lim_{n\to\infty} \int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_n,v_n)dx ={\ \int
_{\Omega} h_1 (u_0, v_0) dx} , \\
\lim_{n\to\infty} \int_{\Omega} h_{2} (u_n,v_n)dx ={\ \int
_{\Omega} h_{2} (u_0, v_0) dx}
\end{gather*}
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We have the following relations as $n \to +\infty $
\begin{gather}\label{eq:6}
\frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_n |^2 dx 
+ \frac{1}{2}\int_{\Omega} |\nabla v_n |^2 dx 
- \int_{\Omega} H(u_n, v_n) dx = \rho + o_n(1)
\\
\label{eq:7}
\big| \int_{\Omega } \nabla u_n. \nabla \varphi \,dx - \int_{\Omega} h_1
(u_n, v_n) \varphi \,dx \big| 
\le o_n(1) \| \varphi\|, \;\; \forall \varphi \in H^1_0(\Omega)
\\
\label{eq:8}
\big| \int_{\Omega } \nabla v_n. \nabla \varphi \,dx - \int_{\Omega} h_2
(u_n, v_n) \varphi \,dx \big| 
\le o_n(1) \| \varphi\|, \;\; \forall \varphi \in H^1_0(\Omega)
\end{gather}

\noindent\textbf{Step 1:} We claim that
\begin{gather*}
 \sup_n \Big (\| u_n \|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} + \|v_n \|_{H^1_0(\Omega)}\Big ) 
< +\infty,\\
\sup_n \int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_n, v_n) u_n dx < +\infty,\\
\sup_n \int_{\Omega} h_2 (u_n, v_n) v_n dx < +\infty.
\end{gather*}
We note that for all $\varepsilon > 0$, there exists $s_{\varepsilon}$ 
such that
$$
h (t,s) \le \varepsilon \Big( h_1(t,s) t + h_2(t,s)s \Big),\quad\text{for }
 |s|,\; |t| \ge s_{\varepsilon} . 
$$
From \eqref{eq:6}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{eq:9}
\frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} \Big (|\nabla u_n |^2 
+ |\nabla v_n |^2 \Big )dx \le C_{\varepsilon} + \varepsilon \int_{\Omega}
\Big ( h_1 (u_n, v_n) u_n + h_2 (u_n, v_n) v_n \Big ) dx
\end{equation}
  From \eqref{eq:7} with $ \varphi = u_n$, and \eqref{eq:8} with 
$\varphi = v_n$, we obtain
\begin{gather*}
\int_{\Omega } h_1 (u_n, v_n) u_n dx \le \int_{\Omega} |\nabla
u_n|^2 dx + o(1) \| u_n\|_{H^1_0 (\Omega)}, 
\\
\int_{\Omega } h_2 (u_n, v_n) v_n dx \le \int_{\Omega} |\nabla
v_n|^2 dx + o(1) \| v_n\|_{H^1_0 (\Omega)}.
\end{gather*}
From \eqref{eq:9} we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega} \Big ( h_1 (u_n, v_n) u_n + h_2 (u_n, v_n)
v_n \Big ) dx \\
& \le  2 C_{\varepsilon} + 2 \varepsilon \int_{\Omega}
 \Big ( h_1 (u_n, v_n) u_n + h_2 (u_n, v_n) v_n \Big ) dx + o(1)\\
&\le  \frac{2 C_{\varepsilon}}{1-2\varepsilon} + o(1)
 \Big ( \|u_n \| + \|v_n\| \Big).
\end{align*}
  Substituting this in \eqref{eq:9}, we obtain
$$ 
 \sup_n \Big ( \| u_n \|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} + \|v_n \|_{H^1_0(\Omega)} \Big )
 < +\infty,
$$
which  implies
$$ 
\sup_n \int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_n, v_n)u_n dx < \infty, \quad
\sup_n \int_{\Omega} h_2 (u_n, v_n)v_n dx <\infty.
 $$

\noindent\textbf{Step 2:}
We claim that
\begin{gather}\label{eq:10}
\lim_{n\to+\infty} \int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_n, v_n) dx
= \int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_0, v_0) dx,
\\
\label{eq:11}
\lim_{n\to+\infty} \int_{\Omega} h_2 (u_n, v_n) dx
= \int_{\Omega} h_2 (u_0, v_0) dx,
\\
\label{eq:12}
\lim_{n\to+\infty} \int_{\Omega} H(u_n, v_n) dx
= \int_{\Omega} H(u_0, v_0) dx
\end{gather}
  Let $|A|$ denote the Lebesgue measure of $A \subset \mathbb{R}^2$.
 We show that $\{ h_1(u_n,v_n)\}$ and $\{ h_2(u_n,v_n) \}$ are 
equi-integrable in $L^1$, and then, \eqref{eq:10} and \eqref{eq:11} 
follow from Vitali's convergence Theorem.
\eqref{eq:12} follows from \eqref{eq:R} and the Lebesgue dominated 
convergence Theorem.
  We claim that for all $\varepsilon >0$, there exists $\delta > 0$ such 
that for any $A \subset \Omega $ with $|A|< \delta $, we have
$$
 \sup_n \int_{A} | h_2 (u_n,v_n) | dx \le \varepsilon.
$$
Let $ C_1 = \sup_n \int_{A} | h_2 (u_n,v_n)v_n | dx $.
 By step 1, $ C_1 < +\infty$.
  Since $\{ u_n \}$ and $\{ v_n \}$ are bounded in $H^1_0$, 
by \eqref{eq:7} and \eqref{eq:8} we have
$$
 \int_{\Omega} | h_2 (u_n,v_n) u_n | dx < \infty, \quad 
\int_{\Omega} | h_1(u_n,v_n) v_n | dx < \infty .
$$
Let $C_2 = \sup_n \int_{A} | h_2(u_n,v_n)u_n | dx$, and let
 $ C = \max \Big\{ C_1, C_2 \Big\}$. Define
$$ 
\mu_{\varepsilon} = \max_{|t| \le \frac{3C}{\varepsilon},\, |s| \le \frac{3C}
{\varepsilon}} \Big\{ |h_2 (t, s) | \Big\}. 
$$
Then, for any $A \subset \Omega$ with 
$|A|\le \frac{\varepsilon }{ 3 \mu_{\varepsilon}} $, we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\int_{A} | h_2 (u_n,v_n) | \,dx \\
&\le \int_{A \cap  \{|u_n|,\; |v_n| \le \frac{3 C}{\varepsilon}\}} 
| h_2 (u_n,v_n)| \,dx 
+ \int_{A \cap \{ |v_n| \ge \frac{3C}{\varepsilon}\}} 
 \frac {| h_2(u_n, v_n) v_n |}{ v_n}\, dx
\\
&\quad + \int_{ A \cap \{ |u_n| \ge \frac{3C}{\varepsilon} \} } 
\frac {| h_2(u_n, v_n) u_n |}{ u_n} \,dx \\
&\le |A| \mu_{\varepsilon} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3} + \frac{\varepsilon}{3}
\le \varepsilon.
\end{align*}
which shows the equi-integrability of $\{ h_2(u_n,v_n) \}$. 
In a similar way, we can show the equi-integrability of $\{ h_1(u_n,v_n) \}$.
This completes step 2 and the proof of Lemma~\ref{lm-ps}.
\end{proof}

  We will also use the following version of Lion's Lemma \cite{lions}.

\begin{lemma}\label{lm-lions}
 Let $\{(u_n, v_n)\}$ be a sequence in $\mathcal{H}$ such that 
$\|(u_n,v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}}=1$, for all $n$ and 
$u_n \rightharpoonup u, \; v_n \rightharpoonup v $ in $H^1_0$ 
for some $(u,v) \ne (0,0)$. Then, for 
$ { 4 \pi} <p< 4 \pi (1-\|u\|^2_{1,2}-\|v\|^2_{1,2})^{-1}$,
\[ 
\sup_{n\geq 1} \int_{\Omega} e^{p (u_n^2 +v_n^2)} dx < \infty
 \]
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
It is easy to see that
\begin{gather*} 
\lim_{n\to \infty} \|(u_n -u, v_n-v)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}} 
= \lim_{n\to \infty} \|u_n -u\|^2_{1,2} + \|v_n-v\|^2_{1,2} 
= 1 - \|u\|^2_{1,2} - \|v\|^2_{1,2}, 
\\
u_n^{2} \le (u_n-u)^2 + 2 \epsilon u_n^{2} + C_\epsilon u^2 \quad
\text{ for  $\epsilon$ small.} 
\end{gather*}
Then
\[
\int_{\Omega} e^{ p ( u_n^{2}+v_n^{2} ) } dx 
\le \int_{\Omega} e^{ p ( (u_n -u)^2 + (v_n-v)^2)} e^{ p \epsilon (u_n^2+v_n^{2})}
e^{(u^2+v^2) C_\epsilon} dx.
\]
 Now, using  H\"older's inequality with $r_1, r_2, r_3$ such 
that $\frac{1}{r_1}+\frac{1}{r_2}+\frac{1}{r_3}=1$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega} e^{ p (u_n^{2}+v_n^{2})} dx 
&\le \Big( \int_{\Omega} e^{ p r_1 ( (u_n-u)^2 + (v_n -v)^2)} dx \Big)^{1/r_1}
 \Big(\int e^{ \epsilon p r_2 (u_n^2 +v_n^2)} dx \Big)^{1/r_2}\\
&\quad\times  \Big( \int e^{ pr_3 (u^2 +v^2) C_\epsilon} dx \Big)^{1/r_3}.
\end{align*}
The second and third integrals are finite for $\epsilon$ small and 
using inequality \eqref{eq:1.1}. For the first integral we have
\begin{align*}
&\int_{\Omega} e^{ p r_1 ( (u_n-u)^2 +(v_n -v)^2)} dx \\
&= \int_{\Omega} e^{ p r_1 ( \frac{u_n-u}{\|(u_n-u,v_n-v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}} )^2
+ (\frac{v_n-v}{\|(u_n-u,v_n-v)\|_{\mathcal{H}}} )^2 
\|(u_n-u, v_n-v)\|^2_{\mathcal{H}} } dx.
\end{align*}
 We can choose $r_1>1 $ and close to 1 such that 
$p r_1 (1-\|u\|^2_{1,2} - \|v\|^2_{1,2}) < 4\pi$ by
the hypothesis and the first equation of this proof. 
Hence, this is bounded again thanks to inequality \eqref{eq:1.1}.
\end{proof}

 Now, we prove our main result.

\begin{theorem} \label{thm3.5}
For $\lambda\in(0,\Lambda)$, problem \eqref{Plambda} has a second 
nontrivial solution $(\overline{u}_\lambda , \overline{v}_\lambda )$ such that 
$\overline{u}_\lambda \ge u_\lambda > 0 $ and $\overline{v}_\lambda \ge v_\lambda > 0 $ 
in $\Omega$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Let $ \{(u_n, v_n)\} $ be a Palais-Smale sequence for $E$ at the level 
$\rho_0$ around $\mathcal{F} $. Existence of a such sequence can be 
obtained using Ekeland Variational principle on $\mathcal{F}$ 
(\cite{Adi-Jac,GP}).
Then, by Lemma \ref{lm-ps}, there exist 
$(\overline{u}_\lambda, \overline{v}_\lambda )$ and a subsequence denoted again 
by ${(u_n,v_n)}$, such that $u_n \rightharpoonup \overline{u}_\lambda$ 
and $v_n\rightharpoonup \overline{v}_\lambda$ in $H^1_0(\Omega)$. 
It is easy to verify that $(\overline{u}_\lambda,\overline{v}_\lambda )$ is 
a solution of \eqref{Plambda}.

  It remains to show that 
$(\overline{u}_\lambda, \overline{v}_\lambda) \not\equiv (u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$. We suppose
that $\overline{u}_\lambda \equiv u_\lambda$ and $\overline{v}_\lambda \equiv v_\lambda$ 
and we derive a contradiction:


\noindent\textbf{Case 1:} $\rho_0 = E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$.
In this case, we recall that
\begin{gather*}
\mathcal{F} = \{ (u,v) \in T : \|(u-u_\lambda,v-v_\lambda)\|_{\mathcal{H}} 
= \frac{R_0}{2} \}, \\
 E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)+ o(1) = E(u_n,v_n) 
= \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_n|^2 dx +
\frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla v_n|^2 dx 
- \int_{\Omega} H (u_n, v_n) dx . 
\end{gather*}
From Lemma \ref{lm-ps}, (equation \eqref{eq:8}) we
have $\int_{\Omega} H (u_n,v_n) dx \to \int_{\Omega} H(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)$.
Thus, $\| (u_n -u_\lambda, v_n-v_\lambda)\|_{\mathcal{H}} = o(1)$, which
contradicts the fact that $(u_n, v_n) \in \mathcal{F} $.


\noindent\textbf{Case 2:} $\rho_0 \neq E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) $.
  In this case $\rho_0 -E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) \in (0, 2 \pi)$ and $E(u_n, v_n) \to
\rho_0$.
Let $\beta_0 = \int_{\Omega} H({u}_\lambda, {v}_\lambda) dx$. Then from Lemma \ref{lm-ps},
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:16}
\frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_n|^2 dx +
\frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla v_n|^2 dx \to (\rho_0+\beta_0) \quad
\text{as } n \to \infty
\end{equation}
Also, by Fatou's lemma we have that 
$E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) \le \liminf_{n\to +\infty} E(u_n, v_n)$.
 If $\{ (u_n,v_n) \}$ does not converge strongly in $\mathcal{H}$, 
then $E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda) <\rho_0$.
By Lemma \ref{lm-rho_0}, for $\epsilon$ small, we have
$$ 
(1+\epsilon) (\rho_0 -E(u_\lambda, v_\lambda)) <2 \pi .
$$
Hence, from \eqref{eq:16} we have
\begin{align*}
(1+\epsilon) \|(u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2} 
&< 4 \pi \frac{\rho_0+\beta_0}{\rho_0-E({u}_\lambda,{v}_\lambda)} \\
&< 4\pi \frac{\rho_0+\beta_0}{\rho_0+\beta_0 -\frac{1}{2}\|({u}_\lambda, {v}_\lambda)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}}\\
&< 4\pi \Big( 1-\frac{1}{2} ( \frac{\|({u}_\lambda,{v}_\lambda)
\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2}}{\rho_0+\beta_0})
 \Big)^{-1}\\
&< 4\pi \Big( 1 - \| \frac{{u}_\lambda}{\sqrt{2(\rho_0+\beta_0)}} \|_{1,2} 
- \| \frac{{v}_\lambda}{\sqrt{2(\rho_0+\beta_0)}}\|_{1,2} \Big)^{-1}.
\end{align*}
Now, choose  $p > 4 \pi $ such that 
$$
(1+\epsilon) \|(u_n,v_n)\|_{ \mathcal{H}}^{2} \le p 
< 4\pi ( 1 - \| \frac{{u}_\lambda}{\sqrt{2(\rho_0+\beta_0)}}\|_{1,2} 
- \| \frac{{v}_\lambda}{\sqrt{2(\rho_0+\beta_0)}} \|_{1,2} )^{-1}.
$$
Since 
$\frac{u_n}{\|(u_n,v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}}} \rightharpoonup 
 \frac{{u}_\lambda}{\sqrt{2 (\rho_0 +\beta_0)}}$ 
and
$\frac{v_n}{\|(u_n,v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}}} \rightharpoonup 
\frac{{v}_\lambda}{\sqrt{2 (\rho_0 +\beta_0)}}$ weakly in $H^1_0(\Omega)$, 
by Lemma \ref{lm-lions}, we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq:new}
\sup_n \int_{\Omega} \exp\Big( p 
\big[ \big( \frac{u_n}{\|(u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} } \big)^{2} 
+ \big( \frac{v_n}{\|(u_n, v_n) \|_{\mathcal{H}}} \big)^{2} \big] \Big) dx
 < \infty
\end{equation}
From the definition of $h_1$, for any $\delta>0,$ there exists a constant 
$C>0$ such that
$$ 
\sup_n h_1 (u_n, v_n) \le C e^{(1+ \delta) (u_n^2 + v_n^2)}.
$$
Now, it is not difficult to show that ${h_1}(u_n,v_n)\in L^{ q} (\Omega) $ 
for some $q>1$.
Indeed, taking $\delta$ close to zero and  $q$ close to $1$ such that 
$ q(1+\delta) < 1+\epsilon $,
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Omega} \Big | h_1(u_n, v_n) \Big |^{ q} dx 
&\le C \int_{\Omega} e^{{ q} (1 + \delta) (u_n^2 +v_n ^2)} dx\\
&\le { C \int_{\Omega} e^{ { q} (1+ \delta) \Big [ \Big( \frac{u_n}{\|(u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} }
 \Big)^{2} + \Big( \frac{v_n}{ \|(u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} } \Big)^{2} \Big ] \|( u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}}^{2} } dx}\\
&\le  C \int_{\Omega} e^{ p \Big [ \Big( \frac{u_n}{\|(u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} } \Big)^{2} +
 \Big( \frac{v_n}{ \|(u_n, v_n)\|_{\mathcal{H}} } \Big)^{2} \Big ] } dx 
\end{align*}
Now, using \eqref{eq:new}, we obtain that $h_1 \in L^{ q}(\Omega)$. 
So, by H\"older inequality we have
and the assumption that $\overline{u}_\lambda=u_\lambda, \overline{v}_\lambda=v_\lambda$, we have
$$
\int_{\Omega} h_1(u_n,v_n) u_n dx \longrightarrow 
\int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_\lambda, v_\lambda) \mbox{ as } n \to \infty .
$$
Hence,
\begin{align*}
o(1)= E' (u_n,v_n)(u_n,0)
&= \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_n |^2 dx -
\int_{\Omega} h_1 (u_n, v_n) u_n dx\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_n |^2 dx 
-\int_{\Omega} |\nabla u_\lambda|^2+ o(1).
\end{align*}
  Similarly, we obtain 
$\int_{\Omega} |\nabla v_n |^2 dx = \int_{\Omega} |\nabla v_\lambda|^2+o(1)$.
This is a contradiction to the assumption that $\rho_0 \ne { E(u_\lambda,v_\lambda) } $.
\end{proof}

\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
 The authors would like to thank the anonymous referees for theirs comments an
suggestions. Nasreddine Megrez would like to thank Professor Fraser Forbes for
interesting discussions about the applicability of this problem to heat transfer.

\begin{thebibliography}{99}

\bibitem{A} Adimurthi; 
\emph{Existence of Positive Solutions of the Semilinear
Dirichlet Problem with Critical Growth for the $n$-Laplacian,} Ann. Della.
Scuola. Norm. Sup. di Pisa, Serie IV, Vol.XVII, Fasc. 3 (1990), pp. 393-413.

\bibitem{Adi-Jac} Adimurthi, J. Giacomoni;
\emph{Multiplicity of positive solutions for a singular
and critical elliptic problem in $\mathbb{R}^{2}$},
 Communications in Contemporary Mathematics Vol. 8, No. 5 (2006), pp. 621-656

\bibitem{ABC} A. Ambrosetti, H. Brezis, G. Cerami;
\emph{Combined effects of concave and convex nonlinearities in some 
elliptic problems}, J. Funct. Anal. 122 (1994) pp. 519-543.

\bibitem{AP} F. V. Atkinson and L. A. Peletier;
 \emph{Ground states and Dirichlet Problems for $-\Delta u=f(u)$ in
 $ \mathbb{R}^2$ }, Arch. Ration Mech. Anal. 96(2) (1986), pp. 147-166.

\bibitem{BT} M. Badiale and G. Tarantello;
\emph{Existence and Multiplicity for elliptic problems
with critical growth and discontinuous nonlinearities}, 
Nonlinear Anal. 29(6) (1997), pp. 639-677.

\bibitem{BN} H. Brezis, L. Nirenberg;
\emph{$H\sp1$ versus $C\sp1$ local
minimizers}, C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris Ser. I Math. 317 (1993) pp. 465-472.

\bibitem{CCL} J. L. Chern, Z. Y. Chen,  C. S. Lin;
\emph{Uniqueness of Topological Solutions and the Structure of Solutions 
for the Chern-Simons System with Two Higgs Particles}, 
Commun. Math. Phys. 296, (2010)323-351.

\bibitem{DR} D. G. de Figueiredo, O. H. Miyagaki, B. Ruf;
\emph{Elliptic equations in $R\sp 2$ with nonlinearities in the critical 
growth range}, Calc. Var. Partial Differential Equations, 
Vol. 3, (1995), no.2, pp. 139--153.

\bibitem{DMR} D. G. de Figueiredo, J. M. Do \`O , B. Ruf;
\emph{Critical and subcritical elliptic systems in dimension two}, 
Indiana Univ. Math. J. Vol 53, no 4, (2004), pp. 1037--1054.

\bibitem{GP} N. Ghoussoub, D. Preiss;
\emph{A general mountain pass principle for locating and classifying 
critical points,} Anal. Non Lineaire,
Vol. 6 no. 5 (1989), pp. 321-330.

\bibitem{Haitao} Y. Haitao;
\emph{Multiplicity and asymptotic behavior of positive solutions for 
a singular semilinear elliptic problem}, J. Differential Equations, 
189, (2003), pp. 487-512.

\bibitem{Do} Joao Marcos B. do \`O;
\emph{Semiliear Dirichlet problems for the
$N$-Laplacian in $\mathbb{R}^{N}$ with nonlinearities in critical growth
range}, Differential and Integral equations, 9, 5 (1996), pp. 967-979.

\bibitem{Kaur-Sreenadh} B. S. Kaur,  K. Sreenadh;
\emph{Multiple positive solutions for a singular elliptic equation 
with Neumann boundary condition in two dimensions}, 
Electron. J. Diff. Equ., vol. 2009 (2009), No. 43, pp. 1-13.

\bibitem{lions} P. L. Lions;
\emph{The concentration compactness principle in the calculus of variations}, 
part I, Rev. Mat. Iberoamericana 1 (1) (1985), pp. 185-201.

\bibitem{LLY} Y. Li, P. Liu,  Y. Yang;
\emph{Moser-Trudinger inequalities of vector bundle over a compact 
Riemannian manifold of dimension 2}, Calc.
Var. Vol. 28, (2006), pp. 59-83.

\bibitem{LPY} C. S. Lin, A. C. Ponce, Y. Yang;
\emph{A system of elliptic equations arising in Chern-Simons field theory}. 
J. Fun. Anal. 247 (2007) 289-350.

\bibitem{LP} C. S. Lin, J. V. Prajapat;
\emph{Vortex Condensates for Relativistic Abelian Chern-Simons Model 
with Two Higgs Scalar Fields and Two Gauge Fields on a Torus},
 Commun. Math. Phys. 288, (2009) 311-347.

\bibitem{LY} C. S. Lin, S. Yan;
\emph{Bubbling Solutions for Relativistic Abelian Chern-Simons Model on a Torus},
 Commun. Math. Phys. 297, (2010) 733-758.

\bibitem{M} J. Moser;
 \emph{A sharp form of an inequality by N.Trudinger},
Indiana Univ. Math. Jour., Vol.20, no.11 (1971), pp. 1077-1092.

\bibitem{PS-2002} S. Prashanth and K. Sreenadh;
 \emph{Multiplicity results in a ball for p-Laplace equation with 
positive nonlinearity,} Advances in
Differential Equations, Vol. 7, no. 7 (2002), pp. 877-896.

\bibitem{PS} S. Prashanth, K. Sreenadh;
\emph{Existence of multiple positive solutions for N-Laplacian 
in a bounded domaine in $\mathbb{R}^{N}$},
Advanced Nonlinear Studies, Vol. 5, (2005), pp. 13-21.

\bibitem{T} N. S. Trudinger;
\emph{On embedding into Orlicz spaces and some applications}, 
Journal of Math. Mech., Vol. 17 (1967), pp. 473-484.

\end{thebibliography}


\end{document}
