Constraint maps into a spherical cap

OpenYear of origin: 2025

Posted online: 2025-07-13 07:39:47Z by Henrik Shahgholian2

Cite as: P-250713.9

  • Analysis of PDEs
View pdf

General Description View the group

We propose several open problems that likely represent just the tip of the iceberg in the emerging theory of Constraint Maps, a field recently revitalized by the current authors. Before exploring the problems listed below, we recommend that interested readers consult the two main survey papers [1], [2], which provide a more accessible introduction to the topic.

The mathematical problem of interest is to study minimizers (or critical points of) $u: \Omega \to \overline{M}$ of the Dirichlet energy (in an appropriate space) given by \begin{equation} E(u) = \frac{1}{2} \int_{\Omega } \left( | D u|^2 + G(x,u) \right) \, dx. %\qquad (\Omega \subset N_1, \quad dx= dvol_{N_1}). \end{equation} Here $D u $ is the gradient of the vector-valued function $u$, $G(x,u)$ is a given function, and if necessary appropriate boundary values are prescribed. Here we also have $\Omega \subset \Bbb R^n$, and $M \subset \Bbb R^m$. In general $M^c$ being convex is a central assumption in order to obtain so-called free boundary.

In general one can consider maps $u$ from one manifold to another $u: N_1 \to N_2$, where $\Omega \subset N_1 $. Since most if not all questions we consider are of local nature, boundary values are ignored. The class of maps $u$ are also subject to the constraint, i.e., the image of the maps remains within (the closure of) a prescribed domain $M \subset N_2$, with boundary.

Since the case where $N_2 = \mathbb{R}$ and $M = \mathbb{R}_+$ corresponds to the scalar setting commonly known as the obstacle problem and is well understood, we will throughout this proposal assume that $N_2$ has dimension greater than one.

The local nature of the problem also suggests that maps from an $n$-dimensional manifold $N_1$ may, without loss of generality, be treated as maps from $\mathbb{R}^n$. In this setting, the governing equations are replaced by their counterparts involving the Laplace–Beltrami operator (the so-called tension field). This substitution poses primarily technical challenges, rather than introducing fundamental conceptual difficulties, and we thus assume $N_1 = \Bbb R^n$. In our problems we shall also for the sake of presentation, and to avoid technical challenges, we only consider flat target manifolds, i.e., $N_2 = \Bbb R^m$.

We recall a few definitions from the references [1], [2]:

$u^{-1}(M)$: Non-coincidence set, the bulk for Euler equation through outer variation.

$u^{-1}(\partial M)$: Coincidence set, the bulk for Euler equation through inner variation.

$\mathcal{F}(u):= \partial u^{-1}(M)$: Free boundary, the unknown boundary between the above regions.

$\Sigma(u)$: The set of discontinuities of the map.

We also need to present the distance and projection components of the maps, by decomposing the map $u$ into two components \begin{equation} u= (\rho \circ u) \nu\circ u + \Pi \circ u, \end{equation} where $\rho (u (x)) = \hbox{dist} (x, M^c)$, and $\Pi$ projection onto $M^c$, and $\nu$ the unit normal on $\partial M$ pointing into $M$.

Below, we present a collection of open problems, grouped together for convenience but formulated as distinct, individual challenges. These problems can be found at [2].

Problem's Description

This problem pertains to the more geometric setting of constraint maps between Riemannian manifolds.

For $h\in (-1,0]$, consider the spherical cap $$\Bbb S^{m-1}_{h,+}\equiv\{x\in \Bbb S^{m-1}: x_n\geq h\}\subset \Bbb R^m $$ whose (relative) boundary is the latitude line $P_h:=\partial \Bbb S^{m-1}_{h,+}$. We can consider energy minimizing maps $u\in W^{1,2}(\Bbb B^n, \Bbb S^{m-1}_{h,+})$, which develop a free boundary $\partial u^{-1}(P_h).$ Are there discontinuities of $u$ on the free boundary?

We note that the answer to this problem may depend on $n$ and $h$: if $h=0$ and $n\leq 7$ then $u$ is smooth, Schoen1984. Moreover, the case $h\geq 0$ is likely not very interesting, since if $u$ omits a neighborhood of the equator it should be smooth Solomon1985.

  1. ArticleIs an originConstraint maps and free boundaries

    Notices of the American Mathematical Society 72, 494-503, 2025

  2. ArticleIs an originConstraint Maps: Insights and Related Themes

    arXiv

  3. Article Constraint maps with free boundaries: the obstacle case

    Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 248, Paper No. 79, 36, 2024fulltext

  4. ArticleIs an originConstraint maps with free boundaries: the bernoulli case

    Journal of the European Mathematical Society (JEMS)arXiv

  5. Article Constraint maps: singularities vs free boundaries

    arXiv:2407.21128, 2024fulltext

  6. Article On the fine structure of the free boundary for the classical obstacle problem

    Inventiones Mathematicae 215, 311-366, 2019fulltext


No solutions added yet

No remarks yet

  • Created at: 2025-07-13 07:39:47Z