Book 6B

© 2026 NeckPinch · www.neckpinch.com · All rights reserved.

Course 6Book 6B: Linear PDE: Characteristics, Waves and RegularityChapter 7

Schauder Theory and the Continuity Method

Hölder estimates for the Newtonian potential, interior and global Schauder estimates, and existence by continuity.

59 min read · Updated Oct 20, 2026

Read with Jost, Partial Differential Equations, chapter 13 ("The regularity theory of Schauder and the continuity method": CαC^\alpha-regularity for the Poisson equation, the Schauder estimates, existence by continuity); Gilbarg and Trudinger, Elliptic Partial Differential Equations of Second Order, chapters 4 and 6, is the classic reference and the source of several proofs below; Taylor III, §13.8 (Hölder spaces) and §14.4 (interior elliptic regularity). This chapter proves the Hölder estimate for the Newtonian potential and the interior Schauder estimate in full, and the continuity method; the boundary estimates are stated.

In this chapter · 8 sections
  1. 7.1How smooth is the gravitational field inside the Earth?
  2. 7.2Why continuity is not enough
  3. 7.3The Newtonian potential of a Hölder function
  4. 7.4The interior estimate for the Laplacian
  5. 7.5Variable coefficients: freezing and absorbing
  6. 7.6Global estimates and the continuity method
  7. 7.7History
  8. 7.8Exercises
  9. ↗Free resources

6A.7 Parabolic Regularity stated the Schauder estimates and called them the estimates quoted in every short-time existence proof. This chapter proves them, for elliptic equations, which is where the ideas are clearest; the parabolic estimates of 6A.7 Parabolic Regularity are proved by the same scheme with the heat kernel in place of the Newtonian kernel (Lieberman, chapter 4; Krylov's lectures).

The question is the one 4A.14 Hölder Spaces raised: if Δu=f\Delta u = f and ff is continuous, is uu twice continuously differentiable? Not always: there is a continuous ff whose solution has unbounded second derivatives. But if ff is Hölder continuous, then the second derivatives of uu are Hölder continuous with the same exponent, with an estimate. The proof has two halves. First, an explicit computation with the fundamental solution shows that the Newtonian potential ∫Φ(x−y)f(y) dy\int\Phi(x - y)f(y)\,dy of a Hölder function has Hölder second derivatives: the singular integral converges because Hölder continuity supplies just enough cancellation. Second, freezing the coefficients: an equation with variable Hölder coefficients looks, on a small ball, like an equation with constant coefficients plus a small error, and the error can be absorbed. The second half is the most reusable technique in the chapter: it is how almost every estimate for variable-coefficient and nonlinear equations is proved.

With the estimates in hand, the method of continuity solves the Dirichlet problem for general elliptic operators: deform the operator to the Laplacian, and show that the set of parameters where the problem is solvable is both open and closed. Openness is linear algebra in Banach spaces; closedness is exactly the a priori estimate. The same open-and-closed argument proves the Calabi conjecture (Yau, 1978) and is the standard way geometric existence theorems are organised.

By the end of this chapter you will be able to:

  • explain why Hölder continuity, and not continuity, is the right hypothesis, in terms of the cancellation in the singular kernel D2ΦD^2\Phi;
  • prove that the Newtonian potential of a CαC^\alpha function is C2,αC^{2,\alpha}, with an estimate;
  • prove the interior Schauder estimate for variable-coefficient elliptic equations, by freezing coefficients, an interpolation inequality, and an absorption lemma;
  • state the global Schauder estimate and prove the method of continuity;
  • use the method to solve the Dirichlet problem for general elliptic operators, and recognise the open-closed structure of geometric existence proofs.

How smooth is the gravitational field inside the Earth?

In the world Model Density jumps and the smoothness of potentials

The gravitational potential VV of a planet satisfies ΔV=4πGρ\Delta V = 4\pi G\rho, where ρ\rho is the mass density and GG the gravitational constant. Inside the Earth the density is far from smooth. At the core–mantle boundary, about 29002900 km down, it almost doubles: in the Preliminary Reference Earth Model of Adam Dziewonski and Don Anderson (1981), it jumps from about 5.65.6 g/cm³ at the base of the mantle to about 9.99.9 g/cm³ at the top of the liquid outer core.

What does this do to the potential and to the gravitational field −∇V-\nabla V? Across the interface, the second derivatives of VV must jump, because ΔV\Delta V jumps; so VV is not C2C^2. But the field itself is continuous (Gauss's law: the flux through a small pillbox straddling the interface is determined by the enclosed mass, which goes to zero with the box), and in fact ∇V\nabla V is Hölder continuous with every exponent less than 11. Away from the interface, inside each layer where the density varies smoothly, VV is as smooth as ρ\rho allows, plus two derivatives. Schauder theory makes these statements precise and quantitative: Hölder continuity of the source within a region gives Hölder continuity of all second derivatives of the potential in that region, with estimates, and the loss of regularity is confined to where the source is rough. It is also why geophysicists can model the gravity field of a layered Earth by solving Poisson's equation layer by layer and matching the potential and its normal derivative across interfaces.

Why continuity is not enough

Recall the fundamental solution Φ\Phi (6A.2 Harmonic Functions), with −ΔΦ=δ0-\Delta\Phi = \delta_0, and the Newtonian potential of ff over a bounded set BB,

w(x)=∫BΦ(x−y)f(y) dy,w(x) = \int_B\Phi(x - y)f(y)\,dy,

which solves −Δw=f-\Delta w = f in BB when ff is smooth enough (6A.2 Harmonic Functions). Its derivatives come from those of Φ\Phi:

∂iΦ(z)=−zinα(n)∣z∣n,∂ijΦ(z)=1nα(n)(nzizj∣z∣n+2−δij∣z∣n),\partial_i\Phi(z) = -\frac{z_i}{n\alpha(n)|z|^n}, \qquad \partial_{ij}\Phi(z) = \frac{1}{n\alpha(n)}\Big(\frac{nz_iz_j}{|z|^{n+2}} - \frac{\delta_{ij}}{|z|^n}\Big),

and in general ∣∂βΦ(z)∣≤C∣z∣2−n−∣β∣|\partial^\beta\Phi(z)| \leq C|z|^{2-n-|\beta|} for ∣β∣≥1|\beta| \geq 1. The first derivatives are integrable near 00 (they behave like ∣z∣1−n|z|^{1-n}), so ∇w=∫∇Φ(x−y)f(y) dy\nabla w = \int\nabla\Phi(x - y)f(y)\,dy for merely bounded ff. The second derivatives behave like ∣z∣−n|z|^{-n}, which is not integrable near 00: ∫∣z∣<1∣z∣−ndz=∞\int_{|z|<1}|z|^{-n}dz = \infty (3A.5 Product Measures and Change of Variables). So ∂ijw\partial_{ij}w cannot be computed by putting ∂ijΦ\partial_{ij}\Phi under the integral sign.

What saves the day is cancellation. The kernel ∂ijΦ\partial_{ij}\Phi has average zero over every sphere centred at 00 (Exercise 7.11): it is positive in some directions and negative in others, in balance. So ∫ε<∣z∣<1∂ijΦ(z) dz\int_{\varepsilon<|z|<1}\partial_{ij}\Phi(z)\,dz is bounded independently of ε\varepsilon, although the integral of its absolute value is not. Integrated against a function ff, the cancellation helps if ff is nearly constant near the singularity: write f(y)=f(x)+(f(y)−f(x))f(y) = f(x) + (f(y) - f(x)). The constant part is handled by cancellation, and the rest by the smallness of f(y)−f(x)f(y) - f(x). If ∣f(y)−f(x)∣≤[f]α∣y−x∣α|f(y) - f(x)| \leq [f]_\alpha|y - x|^\alpha, the integrand becomes O(∣x−y∣α−n)O(|x - y|^{\alpha - n}), which is integrable. Hölder continuity buys exactly the integrability that the kernel lacks. Mere continuity gives ∣f(y)−f(x)∣≤ω(∣x−y∣)|f(y) - f(x)| \leq \omega(|x - y|) for a modulus of continuity ω\omega, and ω(r)r−n\omega(r)r^{-n} is integrable near 00 only if ∫0ω(r)rdr<∞\int_0\frac{\omega(r)}{r}dr < \infty (a "Dini" condition); for ω(r)=1log⁡(1/r)\omega(r) = \frac{1}{\log(1/r)} it is not, and 4A.14 Hölder Spaces's example lives exactly there.

Notation for the rest of the chapter: for a function gg on a set EE, ∣g∣0;E=sup⁡E∣g∣|g|_{0;E} = \sup_E|g| and [g]α;E=sup⁡x≠y∈E∣g(x)−g(y)∣∣x−y∣α[g]_{\alpha;E} = \sup_{x\neq y\in E}\frac{|g(x) - g(y)|}{|x - y|^\alpha} (4A.14 Hölder Spaces). Throughout, 0<α<10 < \alpha < 1; the case α=1\alpha = 1 fails, for the same reason that continuity fails at α=0\alpha = 0 (Exercise 7.12).

The Newtonian potential of a Hölder function

Lemma 7.1 First derivatives of the Newtonian potential

If ff is bounded and integrable on a bounded set BB, then w∈C1(Rn)w \in C^1(\mathbb{R}^n) and ∂iw(x)=∫B∂iΦ(x−y)f(y) dy\partial_iw(x) = \int_B\partial_i\Phi(x - y)f(y)\,dy.

Proof. Let v(x)=∫B∂iΦ(x−y)f(y) dyv(x) = \int_B\partial_i\Phi(x - y)f(y)\,dy, which converges since ∣∂iΦ(z)∣≤C∣z∣1−n|\partial_i\Phi(z)| \leq C|z|^{1-n} is locally integrable. Fix a smooth cut-off η(t)\eta(t) with η=0\eta = 0 for t≤1t \leq 1, η=1\eta = 1 for t≥2t \geq 2, 0≤η≤10 \leq \eta \leq 1, ∣η′∣≤2|\eta'| \leq 2, and let ηε(z)=η(∣z∣/ε)\eta_\varepsilon(z) = \eta(|z|/\varepsilon). The function wε(x)=∫BΦ(x−y)ηε(x−y)f(y) dyw_\varepsilon(x) = \int_B\Phi(x - y)\eta_\varepsilon(x - y)f(y)\,dy has a smooth kernel, so ∂iwε=∫∂i(Φηε)(x−y)f(y) dy\partial_iw_\varepsilon = \int\partial_i(\Phi\eta_\varepsilon)(x - y)f(y)\,dy. The kernels of vv and ∂iwε\partial_iw_\varepsilon agree where ∣x−y∣≥2ε|x - y| \geq 2\varepsilon, so

∣v(x)−∂iwε(x)∣≤∣f∣0∫∣z∣≤2ε(∣∂iΦ(z)∣+2ε∣Φ(z)∣)dz≤C∣f∣0 ε∣log⁡ε∣|v(x) - \partial_iw_\varepsilon(x)| \leq |f|_0\int_{|z|\leq2\varepsilon}\Big(|\partial_i\Phi(z)| + \frac2\varepsilon|\Phi(z)|\Big)dz \leq C|f|_0\,\varepsilon|\log\varepsilon|

(the log⁡\log only for n=2n = 2), and similarly ∣w−wε∣≤C∣f∣0ε2∣log⁡ε∣|w - w_\varepsilon| \leq C|f|_0\varepsilon^2|\log\varepsilon|. Both tend to 00 uniformly in xx, so wε→ww_\varepsilon \to w and ∂iwε→v\partial_iw_\varepsilon \to v uniformly; hence w∈C1w \in C^1 with ∂iw=v\partial_iw = v (2B.5 Uniform Convergence and Arzelà–Ascoli).

Lemma 7.2 Second derivatives of the Newtonian potential

Let BB be a ball and f∈Cα(B‾)f \in C^\alpha(\overline B). Then w∈C2(B)w \in C^2(B), −Δw=f-\Delta w = f in BB, and for x∈Bx \in B,

∂ijw(x)=∫B∂ijΦ(x−y)(f(y)−f(x)) dy−f(x)∫∂B∂iΦ(x−y) νj(y) dS(y),\partial_{ij}w(x) = \int_B\partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y)\big(f(y) - f(x)\big)\,dy - f(x)\int_{\partial B}\partial_i\Phi(x - y)\,\nu_j(y)\,dS(y),

where ν\nu is the outward unit normal to ∂B\partial B.

Proof. Let v(x)v(x) be the right side; the first integral converges because its integrand is at most C[f]α∣x−y∣α−nC[f]_\alpha|x - y|^{\alpha - n}. Let uε(x)=∫B∂iΦ(x−y)ηε(x−y)f(y) dyu_\varepsilon(x) = \int_B\partial_i\Phi(x - y)\eta_\varepsilon(x - y)f(y)\,dy, a smooth function of xx, which converges uniformly to ∂iw\partial_iw by the previous proof. For x∈Bx \in B and 2ε<dist⁡(x,∂B)2\varepsilon < \operatorname{dist}(x, \partial B), differentiate under the integral and split f(y)=(f(y)−f(x))+f(x)f(y) = (f(y) - f(x)) + f(x):

∂juε(x)=∫B∂j(∂iΦ ηε)(x−y)(f(y)−f(x)) dy+f(x)∫B∂xj[(∂iΦ ηε)(x−y)] dy.\partial_ju_\varepsilon(x) = \int_B\partial_j(\partial_i\Phi\,\eta_\varepsilon)(x - y)\big(f(y) - f(x)\big)\,dy + f(x)\int_B\partial_{x_j}\big[(\partial_i\Phi\,\eta_\varepsilon)(x - y)\big]\,dy.

In the last integral, ∂xj\partial_{x_j} of a function of x−yx - y is −∂yj-\partial_{y_j} of it, so by the divergence theorem it equals −∫∂B(∂iΦ ηε)(x−y)νj(y) dS(y)-\int_{\partial B}(\partial_i\Phi\,\eta_\varepsilon)(x - y)\nu_j(y)\,dS(y), and ηε=1\eta_\varepsilon = 1 on ∂B\partial B by the choice of ε\varepsilon. So ∂juε(x)\partial_ju_\varepsilon(x) differs from v(x)v(x) only through the first integral, over ∣x−y∣≤2ε|x - y| \leq 2\varepsilon:

∣v(x)−∂juε(x)∣≤[f]α∫∣z∣≤2ε(∣∂ijΦ(z)∣+2ε∣∂iΦ(z)∣)∣z∣α dz≤C[f]α∫∣z∣≤2ε∣z∣α−ndz=C[f]αεα.|v(x) - \partial_ju_\varepsilon(x)| \leq [f]_\alpha\int_{|z|\leq2\varepsilon}\Big(|\partial_{ij}\Phi(z)| + \frac2\varepsilon|\partial_i\Phi(z)|\Big)|z|^\alpha\,dz \leq C[f]_\alpha\int_{|z|\leq2\varepsilon}|z|^{\alpha-n}dz = C[f]_\alpha\varepsilon^\alpha.

This tends to 00 uniformly on compact subsets of BB, so ∂iw∈C1(B)\partial_iw \in C^1(B) with ∂j∂iw=v\partial_j\partial_iw = v.

For the equation, sum over i=ji = j. Since ∑i∂iiΦ=ΔΦ=0\sum_i\partial_{ii}\Phi = \Delta\Phi = 0 away from 00, the first integral contributes nothing. In the second, ∑i∂iΦ(x−y)νi(y)=−∇y[Φ(x−y)]⋅ν\sum_i\partial_i\Phi(x - y)\nu_i(y) = -\nabla_y[\Phi(x - y)]\cdot\nu, and the flux of ∇yΦ(⋅−x)\nabla_y\Phi(\cdot - x) out of any domain containing xx is −1-1 (6A.2 Harmonic Functions). So Δw(x)=−f(x)⋅(−1)⋅(−1)=−f(x)\Delta w(x) = -f(x)\cdot(-1)\cdot(-1) = -f(x).

Theorem 7.3 Hölder estimate for the Newtonian potential

Let B1=B(x0,R)B_1 = B(x_0, R) and B2=B(x0,2R)B_2 = B(x_0, 2R), f∈Cα(B2‾)f \in C^\alpha(\overline{B_2}), and ww the Newtonian potential of ff over B2B_2. Then w∈C2,α(B1‾)w \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline{B_1}) and

∣D2w∣0;B1+Rα[D2w]α;B1≤C(∣f∣0;B2+Rα[f]α;B2),|D^2w|_{0;B_1} + R^\alpha[D^2w]_{\alpha;B_1} \leq C\big(|f|_{0;B_2} + R^\alpha[f]_{\alpha;B_2}\big),

with CC depending only on nn and α\alpha.

Proof. Throughout, CC depends only on nn and α\alpha, and we use the formula of Lemma 7.2 on B=B2B = B_2. Write J(x)=∫∂B2∂iΦ(x−y)νj(y) dS(y)J(x) = \int_{\partial B_2}\partial_i\Phi(x - y)\nu_j(y)\,dS(y) and V(x)=∫B2∂ijΦ(x−y)(f(y)−f(x)) dyV(x) = \int_{B_2}\partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y)(f(y) - f(x))\,dy, so ∂ijw=V−fJ\partial_{ij}w = V - fJ.

Sup bound. For x∈B1x \in B_1 and y∈∂B2y \in \partial B_2, ∣x−y∣≥R|x - y| \geq R, so ∣J(x)∣≤CR1−n⋅Rn−1=C|J(x)| \leq CR^{1-n}\cdot R^{n-1} = C. And ∣V(x)∣≤[f]α∫∣z∣≤3RC∣z∣α−ndz=C[f]αRα|V(x)| \leq [f]_\alpha\int_{|z|\leq3R}C|z|^{\alpha-n}dz = C[f]_\alpha R^\alpha. So ∣D2w∣0;B1≤C(∣f∣0+Rα[f]α)|D^2w|_{0;B_1} \leq C(|f|_0 + R^\alpha[f]_\alpha).

Hölder bound, boundary term. Let x,xˉ∈B1x, \bar x \in B_1, δ=∣x−xˉ∣≤2R\delta = |x - \bar x| \leq 2R. Then f(x)J(x)−f(xˉ)J(xˉ)=f(x)(J(x)−J(xˉ))+(f(x)−f(xˉ))J(xˉ)f(x)J(x) - f(\bar x)J(\bar x) = f(x)(J(x) - J(\bar x)) + (f(x) - f(\bar x))J(\bar x). By the mean value theorem, ∣J(x)−J(xˉ)∣≤δsup⁡∣D2Φ∣⋅∣∂B2∣≤CδR≤C(δR)α|J(x) - J(\bar x)| \leq \delta\sup|D^2\Phi|\cdot|\partial B_2| \leq C\frac\delta R \leq C\big(\frac\delta R\big)^\alpha (as δR≤2\frac\delta R \leq 2). So this part is at most C(∣f∣0R−α+[f]α)δαC(|f|_0R^{-\alpha} + [f]_\alpha)\delta^\alpha.

Hölder bound, volume term. Let ξ=x+xˉ2\xi = \frac{x + \bar x}{2} and split B2B_2 into B(ξ,δ)∩B2B(\xi, \delta)\cap B_2 (near) and the rest (far).

Near part: B(ξ,δ)⊂B(x,32δ)B(\xi, \delta) \subset B(x, \frac32\delta), so ∣∫near∂ijΦ(x−y)(f(y)−f(x)) dy∣≤C[f]α∫∣z∣≤32δ∣z∣α−ndz=C[f]αδα\big|\int_{\text{near}}\partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y)(f(y) - f(x))\,dy\big| \leq C[f]_\alpha\int_{|z|\leq\frac32\delta}|z|^{\alpha-n}dz = C[f]_\alpha\delta^\alpha, and the same for xˉ\bar x.

Far part: write the difference of integrands as

(∂ijΦ(x−y)−∂ijΦ(xˉ−y))(f(y)−f(xˉ))+∂ijΦ(x−y)(f(xˉ)−f(x)).\big(\partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y) - \partial_{ij}\Phi(\bar x - y)\big)\big(f(y) - f(\bar x)\big) + \partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y)\big(f(\bar x) - f(x)\big).

For the first piece: for yy outside B(ξ,δ)B(\xi, \delta) and x^\hat x on the segment [x,xˉ][x, \bar x], ∣x^−y∣≥∣ξ−y∣−δ2≥12∣ξ−y∣|\hat x - y| \geq |\xi - y| - \frac\delta2 \geq \frac12|\xi - y|, so the mean value theorem and ∣D3Φ(z)∣≤C∣z∣−n−1|D^3\Phi(z)| \leq C|z|^{-n-1} give ∣∂ijΦ(x−y)−∂ijΦ(xˉ−y)∣≤Cδ∣ξ−y∣−n−1|\partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y) - \partial_{ij}\Phi(\bar x - y)| \leq C\delta|\xi - y|^{-n-1}. Also ∣f(y)−f(xˉ)∣≤[f]α(∣y−ξ∣+δ2)α≤C[f]α∣y−ξ∣α|f(y) - f(\bar x)| \leq [f]_\alpha(|y - \xi| + \frac\delta2)^\alpha \leq C[f]_\alpha|y - \xi|^\alpha. So the first piece contributes at most

Cδ[f]α∫∣y−ξ∣≥δ∣y−ξ∣α−n−1dy=Cδ[f]αδα−11−α=C[f]αδα,C\delta[f]_\alpha\int_{|y-\xi|\geq\delta}|y - \xi|^{\alpha-n-1}dy = C\delta[f]_\alpha\frac{\delta^{\alpha-1}}{1 - \alpha} = C[f]_\alpha\delta^\alpha,

which is finite exactly because α<1\alpha < 1. For the second piece, ∣f(xˉ)−f(x)∣≤[f]αδα|f(\bar x) - f(x)| \leq [f]_\alpha\delta^\alpha, and by the divergence theorem

∫B2∖B(ξ,δ)∂ijΦ(x−y) dy=∫∂B(ξ,δ)∂iΦ(x−y)νj dS−∫∂B2∂iΦ(x−y)νj dS,\int_{B_2\setminus B(\xi,\delta)}\partial_{ij}\Phi(x - y)\,dy = \int_{\partial B(\xi,\delta)}\partial_i\Phi(x - y)\nu_j\,dS - \int_{\partial B_2}\partial_i\Phi(x - y)\nu_j\,dS,

with ν\nu the outward normals of the two spheres (the region's boundary is ∂B2\partial B_2 outward and ∂B(ξ,δ)\partial B(\xi, \delta) inward, and ∂xj=−∂yj\partial_{x_j} = -\partial_{y_j} supplies the signs). On ∂B(ξ,δ)\partial B(\xi, \delta), ∣x−y∣≥δ2|x - y| \geq \frac\delta2, so the first boundary integral is at most Cδ1−n⋅δn−1=CC\delta^{1-n}\cdot\delta^{n-1} = C; the second is at most CC as before. This cancellation, the kernel integrating to something bounded over an annulus, is the one described in the previous section.

Adding everything, ∣∂ijw(x)−∂ijw(xˉ)∣≤C(∣f∣0;B2R−α+[f]α;B2)δα|\partial_{ij}w(x) - \partial_{ij}w(\bar x)| \leq C(|f|_{0;B_2}R^{-\alpha} + [f]_{\alpha;B_2})\delta^\alpha, which is the claim after multiplying by RαR^\alpha.

The estimate is scale-invariant: replacing f(x)f(x) by f(λx)f(\lambda x) and RR by R/λR/\lambda changes both sides by the same factor. That is why the weights RαR^\alpha appear, and it is how one checks that an estimate is correctly stated (4A.14 Hölder Spaces's rehearsal).

The interior estimate for the Laplacian

Theorem 7.4 Interior Schauder estimate for Poisson's equation

Let u∈C2(B(x0,2R))u \in C^2(B(x_0, 2R)) satisfy Δu=f\Delta u = f with f∈Cα(B(x0,2R)‾)f \in C^\alpha(\overline{B(x_0, 2R)}). Then u∈C2,α(B(x0,R)‾)u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline{B(x_0, R)}), and with Br=B(x0,r)B_r = B(x_0, r),

R2∣D2u∣0;BR+R2+α[D2u]α;BR≤C(∣u∣0;B2R+R2∣f∣0;B2R+R2+α[f]α;B2R).R^2|D^2u|_{0;B_R} + R^{2+\alpha}[D^2u]_{\alpha;B_R} \leq C\big(|u|_{0;B_{2R}} + R^2|f|_{0;B_{2R}} + R^{2+\alpha}[f]_{\alpha;B_{2R}}\big).

Proof. Let ww be the Newtonian potential of −f-f over B2RB_{2R}, so Δw=f\Delta w = f in B2RB_{2R}, and h=u−wh = u - w, harmonic in B2RB_{2R}. By Theorem 7.3, with the balls BR⊂B2RB_R \subset B_{2R}, ww satisfies the estimate. For hh, use the derivative estimates for harmonic functions (6A.2 Harmonic Functions): on B3R/2B_{3R/2}, ∣Dkh∣≤CkR−k∣h∣0;B2R|D^kh| \leq C_kR^{-k}|h|_{0;B_{2R}} for k=2,3k = 2, 3. Then for x,y∈BRx, y \in B_R: if ∣x−y∣≤R2|x - y| \leq \frac R2 the segment lies in B3R/2B_{3R/2} and ∣D2h(x)−D2h(y)∣≤C∣h∣0R3∣x−y∣≤C∣h∣0R2+α∣x−y∣α|D^2h(x) - D^2h(y)| \leq C\frac{|h|_0}{R^3}|x - y| \leq C\frac{|h|_0}{R^{2+\alpha}}|x - y|^\alpha; if ∣x−y∣>R2|x - y| > \frac R2, then ∣D2h(x)−D2h(y)∣≤2C∣h∣0R2≤C′∣h∣0R2+α∣x−y∣α|D^2h(x) - D^2h(y)| \leq 2C\frac{|h|_0}{R^2} \leq C'\frac{|h|_0}{R^{2+\alpha}}|x - y|^\alpha. So R2∣D2h∣0;BR+R2+α[D2h]α;BR≤C∣h∣0;B2RR^2|D^2h|_{0;B_R} + R^{2+\alpha}[D^2h]_{\alpha;B_R} \leq C|h|_{0;B_{2R}}. Finally ∣h∣0≤∣u∣0+∣w∣0|h|_0 \leq |u|_0 + |w|_0 and ∣w∣0;B2R≤∣f∣0sup⁡x∫B2R∣Φ(x−y)∣ dy≤CR2∣f∣0|w|_{0;B_{2R}} \leq |f|_0\sup_x\int_{B_{2R}}|\Phi(x - y)|\,dy \leq CR^2|f|_0 (with a log⁡R\log R correction when n=2n = 2, which is removed by scaling to R=1R = 1 first). Add the estimates for ww and hh.

Constant coefficients. If L0u=∑i,jaij∂ijuL_0u = \sum_{i,j}a^{ij}\partial_{ij}u with a constant symmetric matrix A=(aij)A = (a^{ij}), λ∣ξ∣2≤Aξ⋅ξ≤Λ∣ξ∣2\lambda|\xi|^2 \leq A\xi\cdot\xi \leq \Lambda|\xi|^2, the linear change of variables x=A1/2yx = A^{1/2}y turns L0L_0 into the Laplacian: if v(y)=u(A1/2y)v(y) = u(A^{1/2}y), then Δv(y)=(L0u)(A1/2y)\Delta v(y) = (L_0u)(A^{1/2}y) (6A.1 What a PDE Is's transformation rule B=JAJTB = JAJ^{\mathsf T} with J=A−1/2J = A^{-1/2}). Balls become ellipsoids whose axes are between λ\sqrt\lambda and Λ\sqrt\Lambda times the radius, so Theorem 7.4 holds for L0L_0 with balls BR⊂B2RB_R \subset B_{2R} replaced by BR⊂BκRB_R \subset B_{\kappa R}, κ=2Λ/λ\kappa = 2\sqrt{\Lambda/\lambda}, and CC depending also on λ\lambda and Λ\Lambda. Covering a ball by smaller balls (the usual trick) gives the version with BRB_R and B2RB_{2R} again, with a larger constant. We use it in this form:

R2+α[D2u]α;BR/2≤C0(∣u∣0;BR+R2∣L0u∣0;BR+R2+α[L0u]α;BR),C0=C0(n,α,λ,Λ).(∗)R^{2+\alpha}[D^2u]_{\alpha;B_{R/2}} \leq C_0\big(|u|_{0;B_R} + R^2|L_0u|_{0;B_R} + R^{2+\alpha}[L_0u]_{\alpha;B_R}\big), \qquad C_0 = C_0(n, \alpha, \lambda, \Lambda).\tag{$*$}

Variable coefficients: freezing and absorbing

Now consider

Lu=∑i,jaij(x)∂iju+∑ibi(x)∂iu+c(x)u=fLu = \sum_{i,j}a^{ij}(x)\partial_{ij}u + \sum_ib^i(x)\partial_iu + c(x)u = f

on B1=B(0,1)B_1 = B(0, 1), with aij=ajia^{ij} = a^{ji}, uniform ellipticity λ∣ξ∣2≤aijξiξj≤Λ∣ξ∣2\lambda|\xi|^2 \leq a^{ij}\xi_i\xi_j \leq \Lambda|\xi|^2, and Hölder coefficients: ∣aij∣0+[aij]α|a^{ij}|_{0} + [a^{ij}]_\alpha, ∣bi∣0+[bi]α|b^i|_0 + [b^i]_\alpha, ∣c∣0+[c]α|c|_0 + [c]_\alpha all at most Λ\Lambda on B1B_1. Two tools come first, both elementary.

Lemma 7.5 Interpolation

Let u∈C2,α(Bs‾)u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline{B_s}) for a ball BsB_s of radius ss, and 0<η≤s0 < \eta \leq s. Then

∣D2u∣0;Bs≤ηα[D2u]α;Bs+16η2∣u∣0;Bs,∣Du∣0;Bs≤η∣D2u∣0;Bs+4η∣u∣0;Bs.|D^2u|_{0;B_s} \leq \eta^\alpha[D^2u]_{\alpha;B_s} + \frac{16}{\eta^2}|u|_{0;B_s}, \qquad |Du|_{0;B_s} \leq \eta|D^2u|_{0;B_s} + \frac{4}{\eta}|u|_{0;B_s}.

Proof. Let x∈Bsx \in B_s and ee a unit vector. Move xx towards the centre by η2\frac\eta2 (or to the centre, if it is closer): the new point yy satisfies ∣x−y∣≤η2|x - y| \leq \frac\eta2 and B(y,η2)⊂BsB(y, \frac\eta2) \subset B_s. With h=η2h = \frac\eta2, Taylor's theorem gives a point θ\theta on the segment from y−hey - he to y+hey + he with

u(y+he)−2u(y)+u(y−he)=h2D2u(θ)(e,e),u(y + he) - 2u(y) + u(y - he) = h^2D^2u(\theta)(e, e),

so ∣D2u(θ)(e,e)∣≤4∣u∣0h2=16∣u∣0η2|D^2u(\theta)(e, e)| \leq \frac{4|u|_0}{h^2} = \frac{16|u|_0}{\eta^2}. And ∣x−θ∣≤η|x - \theta| \leq \eta, so ∣D2u(x)(e,e)∣≤∣D2u(θ)(e,e)∣+[D2u]αηα|D^2u(x)(e, e)| \leq |D^2u(\theta)(e, e)| + [D^2u]_\alpha\eta^\alpha. The norm of a symmetric matrix is max⁡∣e∣=1∣M(e,e)∣\max_{|e|=1}|M(e, e)| (1A.6 Symmetric Matrices and the Spectral Theorem), which gives the first inequality. The second is the same with the first difference u(y+he)−u(y−he)=2hDu(θ)⋅eu(y + he) - u(y - he) = 2hDu(\theta)\cdot e and ∣x−θ∣≤η|x - \theta| \leq \eta.

Lemma 7.6 Absorption

Let φ≥0\varphi \geq 0 be bounded on [12,1][\frac12, 1], and suppose there are θ<1\theta < 1 and constants A,B,β≥0A, B, \beta \geq 0 with

φ(r)≤θφ(s)+A(s−r)β+Bwhenever 12≤r<s≤1.\varphi(r) \leq \theta\varphi(s) + \frac{A}{(s - r)^\beta} + B \qquad\text{whenever } \tfrac12 \leq r < s \leq 1.

Then φ(12)≤c(θ,β)(A+B)\varphi(\frac12) \leq c(\theta, \beta)(A + B).

Proof. Choose τ∈(0,1)\tau \in (0, 1) with θτ−β<1\theta\tau^{-\beta} < 1, and points r0=12r_0 = \frac12, rk+1=rk+(1−τ)τk⋅12r_{k+1} = r_k + (1 - \tau)\tau^k\cdot\frac12, which increase to 11. Applying the hypothesis with r=rkr = r_k, s=rk+1s = r_{k+1} and iterating mm times,

φ(12)≤θmφ(rm)+∑k<mθk(A 2β(1−τ)βτkβ+B)≤θmsup⁡φ+2βA(1−τ)β∑k(θτ−β)k+B∑kθk.\varphi(\tfrac12) \leq \theta^m\varphi(r_m) + \sum_{k<m}\theta^k\Big(\frac{A\,2^\beta}{(1 - \tau)^\beta\tau^{k\beta}} + B\Big) \leq \theta^m\sup\varphi + \frac{2^\beta A}{(1 - \tau)^\beta}\sum_k(\theta\tau^{-\beta})^k + B\sum_k\theta^k.

Let m→∞m \to \infty: the first term tends to 00 because φ\varphi is bounded, and both series converge.

The lemma turns an inequality that controls a quantity on a smaller ball by a fraction of the same quantity on a larger ball into an honest bound. It is the device that makes freezing work: the frozen-coefficient error is small, but it is measured on a slightly larger ball.

Theorem 7.7 Interior Schauder estimate

Under the hypotheses above, every u∈C2,α(B1‾)u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline{B_1}) satisfies

∣u∣C2,α(B1/2)≤C(∣u∣0;B1+∣f∣0;B1+[f]α;B1),C=C(n,α,λ,Λ),|u|_{C^{2,\alpha}(B_{1/2})} \leq C\big(|u|_{0;B_1} + |f|_{0;B_1} + [f]_{\alpha;B_1}\big), \qquad C = C(n, \alpha, \lambda, \Lambda),

where ∣u∣C2,α=∣u∣0+∣Du∣0+∣D2u∣0+[D2u]α|u|_{C^{2,\alpha}} = |u|_0 + |Du|_0 + |D^2u|_0 + [D^2u]_\alpha.

Proof. Let φ(r)=[D2u]α;Br\varphi(r) = [D^2u]_{\alpha;B_r} for 12≤r≤1\frac12 \leq r \leq 1, bounded because u∈C2,α(B1‾)u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline{B_1}). Fix 12≤r<s≤1\frac12 \leq r < s \leq 1 and let ρ=σ(s−r)\rho = \sigma(s - r), where σ∈(0,12]\sigma \in (0, \frac12] will be chosen small. Throughout, CC denotes constants depending only on nn, α\alpha, λ\lambda, Λ\Lambda, and all sup norms and seminorms without a subscript are over BsB_s.

Freezing. Fix x0∈Brx_0 \in B_r; then B(x0,ρ)⊂BsB(x_0, \rho) \subset B_s. Let L0=aij(x0)∂ijL_0 = a^{ij}(x_0)\partial_{ij}, so that on B(x0,ρ)B(x_0, \rho)

L0u=F:=(aij(x0)−aij(x))∂iju−bi∂iu−cu+f.L_0u = F := \big(a^{ij}(x_0) - a^{ij}(x)\big)\partial_{ij}u - b^i\partial_iu - cu + f.

The point is that the first term is small on a small ball: ∣aij(x0)−aij(x)∣≤Λρα|a^{ij}(x_0) - a^{ij}(x)| \leq \Lambda\rho^\alpha there.

Estimating FF. Using [gh]α≤∣g∣0[h]α+[g]α∣h∣0[gh]_\alpha \leq |g|_0[h]_\alpha + [g]_\alpha|h|_0 and, on a ball of radius ρ\rho, [g]α≤(2ρ)1−α∣Dg∣0[g]_\alpha \leq (2\rho)^{1-\alpha}|Dg|_0 for g=∂iug = \partial_iu and g=ug = u,

ρ2∣F∣0;B(x0,ρ)+ρ2+α[F]α;B(x0,ρ)≤Cρ2+α(ραφ(s)+∣D2u∣0)+C(ρ2∣Du∣0+ρ2∣u∣0)+Cρ2+αρ−α(ρ∣D2u∣0+∣Du∣0+∣u∣0)+ρ2∣f∣0+ρ2+α[f]α.\rho^2|F|_{0;B(x_0,\rho)} + \rho^{2+\alpha}[F]_{\alpha;B(x_0,\rho)} \leq C\rho^{2+\alpha}\big(\rho^\alpha\varphi(s) + |D^2u|_0\big) + C\big(\rho^2|Du|_0 + \rho^2|u|_0\big) + C\rho^{2+\alpha}\rho^{-\alpha}\big(\rho|D^2u|_0 + |Du|_0 + |u|_0\big) + \rho^2|f|_0 + \rho^{2+\alpha}[f]_\alpha.

(The first term comes from [(a(x0)−a)D2u]α≤Λρα[D2u]α+Λ∣D2u∣0[(a(x_0) - a)D^2u]_\alpha \leq \Lambda\rho^\alpha[D^2u]_\alpha + \Lambda|D^2u|_0; the rest from the lower-order terms.) Since ρ≤1\rho \leq 1, this simplifies to

ρ2∣F∣0+ρ2+α[F]α≤Cρ2+2αφ(s)+Cρ2(∣D2u∣0+∣Du∣0+∣u∣0)+C(∣f∣0+[f]α).\rho^2|F|_0 + \rho^{2+\alpha}[F]_\alpha \leq C\rho^{2+2\alpha}\varphi(s) + C\rho^2\big(|D^2u|_0 + |Du|_0 + |u|_0\big) + C\big(|f|_0 + [f]_\alpha\big).

The frozen estimate. Apply (∗)(*) on B(x0,ρ)B(x_0, \rho) and divide by ρ2+α\rho^{2+\alpha}:

[D2u]α;B(x0,ρ/2)≤Cραφ(s)+Cρ−α(∣D2u∣0+∣Du∣0+∣u∣0)+Cρ−2−α∣u∣0+Cρ−2−α(∣f∣0+[f]α).[D^2u]_{\alpha;B(x_0,\rho/2)} \leq C\rho^\alpha\varphi(s) + C\rho^{-\alpha}\big(|D^2u|_0 + |Du|_0 + |u|_0\big) + C\rho^{-2-\alpha}|u|_0 + C\rho^{-2-\alpha}\big(|f|_0 + [f]_\alpha\big).

From small balls to BrB_r. For x,y∈Brx, y \in B_r: if ∣x−y∣<ρ2|x - y| < \frac\rho2, then y∈B(x,ρ2)y \in B(x, \frac\rho2) and the quotient ∣D2u(x)−D2u(y)∣∣x−y∣α\frac{|D^2u(x) - D^2u(y)|}{|x - y|^\alpha} is bounded by the left side above (with x0=xx_0 = x); if ∣x−y∣≥ρ2|x - y| \geq \frac\rho2, it is at most 2∣D2u∣0(ρ2)−α2|D^2u|_0(\frac\rho2)^{-\alpha}. So

φ(r)≤Cραφ(s)+Cρ−α(∣D2u∣0+∣Du∣0)+Cρ−2−α(∣u∣0+∣f∣0+[f]α).\varphi(r) \leq C\rho^\alpha\varphi(s) + C\rho^{-\alpha}\big(|D^2u|_0 + |Du|_0\big) + C\rho^{-2-\alpha}\big(|u|_0 + |f|_0 + [f]_\alpha\big).

Interpolating away the lower derivatives. By Lemma 7.5 on BsB_s with η=ερ\eta = \varepsilon\rho (note η≤s\eta \leq s): ρ−α∣D2u∣0≤εαφ(s)+16ε−2ρ−2−α∣u∣0\rho^{-\alpha}|D^2u|_0 \leq \varepsilon^\alpha\varphi(s) + 16\varepsilon^{-2}\rho^{-2-\alpha}|u|_0, and ρ−α∣Du∣0≤ρ−α(ρ∣D2u∣0+4ρ−1∣u∣0)\rho^{-\alpha}|Du|_0 \leq \rho^{-\alpha}\big(\rho|D^2u|_0 + 4\rho^{-1}|u|_0\big), which is bounded the same way. Hence

φ(r)≤C(ρα+εα)φ(s)+Cερ−2−α(∣u∣0;B1+∣f∣0;B1+[f]α;B1).\varphi(r) \leq C\big(\rho^\alpha + \varepsilon^\alpha\big)\varphi(s) + C_\varepsilon\rho^{-2-\alpha}\big(|u|_{0;B_1} + |f|_{0;B_1} + [f]_{\alpha;B_1}\big).

Choosing the constants and absorbing. Choose ε\varepsilon with Cεα≤14C\varepsilon^\alpha \leq \frac14, and then σ\sigma with Cσα≤14C\sigma^\alpha \leq \frac14, so that C(ρα+εα)≤12C(\rho^\alpha + \varepsilon^\alpha) \leq \frac12 (recall ρ=σ(s−r)≤σ\rho = \sigma(s - r) \leq \sigma). With ρ−2−α=σ−2−α(s−r)−2−α\rho^{-2-\alpha} = \sigma^{-2-\alpha}(s - r)^{-2-\alpha},

φ(r)≤12φ(s)+C(∣u∣0+∣f∣0+[f]α)(s−r)2+α.\varphi(r) \leq \frac12\varphi(s) + \frac{C(|u|_0 + |f|_0 + [f]_\alpha)}{(s - r)^{2+\alpha}}.

Lemma 7.6 gives [D2u]α;B1/2=φ(12)≤C(∣u∣0;B1+∣f∣0;B1+[f]α;B1)[D^2u]_{\alpha;B_{1/2}} = \varphi(\frac12) \leq C(|u|_{0;B_1} + |f|_{0;B_1} + [f]_{\alpha;B_1}). The bounds for ∣D2u∣0|D^2u|_0 and ∣Du∣0|Du|_0 on B1/2B_{1/2} follow from Lemma 7.5.

The structure is worth memorising: freeze (compare with constant coefficients at a point), estimate the error (small because the coefficients are Hölder and the ball is small), pass from small balls to the whole ball (near pairs and far pairs), interpolate (lower derivatives cost a little of the top seminorm and a lot of the sup norm), absorb (iterate over nested balls). By scaling, the estimate on B1/2B_{1/2} gives estimates on BR/2B_{R/2} with the usual powers of RR.

Higher regularity. If the coefficients and ff are in Ck,αC^{k,\alpha}, differentiate the equation: each derivative ∂lu\partial_lu satisfies an equation of the same form whose right side involves derivatives of the coefficients times derivatives of uu of order at most two, which are CαC^\alpha by what has been proved. So ∂lu∈C2,α\partial_lu \in C^{2,\alpha}, that is, u∈C3,αu \in C^{3,\alpha}, and by induction u∈Ck+2,αu \in C^{k+2,\alpha} (this needs u∈C3u \in C^{3} first, which a difference-quotient version of the argument supplies: Gilbarg–Trudinger, Theorem 6.17). Smooth coefficients and data give smooth solutions: the Hölder-space bootstrap, parallel to the Sobolev bootstrap of 6A.6 Weak Solutions and Elliptic Regularity.

Global estimates and the continuity method

Up to the boundary, the same freezing argument works, with the half-space in place of the whole space as the model, after flattening the boundary by a C2,αC^{2,\alpha} change of coordinates. The model estimate for the half-space comes from the Green's function with images (6B.4 Green’s Functions, Separation of Variables and Transforms). The result:

Theorem 7.8 Global Schauder estimate (statement)

Let Ω\Omega be a bounded domain with C2,αC^{2,\alpha} boundary, LL as above with coefficients in Cα(Ω‾)C^\alpha(\overline\Omega), and u∈C2,α(Ω‾)u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline\Omega) with u=φu = \varphi on ∂Ω\partial\Omega, φ∈C2,α(Ω‾)\varphi \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline\Omega). Then

∣u∣C2,α(Ω)≤C(∣u∣0;Ω+∣Lu∣Cα(Ω)+∣φ∣C2,α(Ω)),|u|_{C^{2,\alpha}(\Omega)} \leq C\big(|u|_{0;\Omega} + |Lu|_{C^\alpha(\Omega)} + |\varphi|_{C^{2,\alpha}(\Omega)}\big),

with CC depending on nn, α\alpha, λ\lambda, Λ\Lambda and Ω\Omega (Gilbarg–Trudinger, Theorem 6.6).

If c≤0c \leq 0 (with the sign convention of this chapter, where LL has +aij∂ij+a^{ij}\partial_{ij}), the maximum principle bounds the ∣u∣0|u|_0 term: ∣u∣0;Ω≤∣φ∣0;∂Ω+C∣Lu∣0;Ω|u|_{0;\Omega} \leq |\varphi|_{0;\partial\Omega} + C|Lu|_{0;\Omega}, with CC depending on λ\lambda, Λ\Lambda and the diameter of Ω\Omega (Gilbarg–Trudinger, Theorem 3.7; the proof compares uu with sup⁡∣φ∣+(eγd−eγx1)sup⁡∣Lu∣λ\sup|\varphi| + (e^{\gamma d} - e^{\gamma x_1})\frac{\sup|Lu|}{\lambda} for large γ\gamma, as in 6A.5 Maximum Principles's elliptic weak maximum principle). Combining, for c≤0c \leq 0,

∣u∣C2,α(Ω)≤C(∣Lu∣Cα(Ω)+∣φ∣C2,α(Ω)).(∗∗)|u|_{C^{2,\alpha}(\Omega)} \leq C\big(|Lu|_{C^\alpha(\Omega)} + |\varphi|_{C^{2,\alpha}(\Omega)}\big).\tag{$**$}

This is an a priori estimate: it bounds any solution that happens to exist. The continuity method converts it into existence.

Theorem 7.9 The method of continuity

Let XX be a Banach space, YY a normed space, and L0,L1:X→YL_0, L_1 : X \to Y bounded linear operators. For t∈[0,1]t \in [0, 1] let Lt=(1−t)L0+tL1L_t = (1 - t)L_0 + tL_1, and suppose there is a constant CC with

∥x∥X≤C∥Ltx∥Yfor all x∈X and t∈[0,1].\|x\|_X \leq C\|L_tx\|_Y \qquad\text{for all } x \in X \text{ and } t \in [0, 1].

Then L1L_1 is onto if and only if L0L_0 is.

Proof. Let S={t∈[0,1]:Lt is onto}S = \{t \in [0, 1] : L_t \text{ is onto}\}. For t∈St \in S, LtL_t is one-to-one (by the estimate) and onto, with inverse bounded by CC. Let t∈St \in S and τ∈[0,1]\tau \in [0, 1]. To solve Lτx=yL_\tau x = y, rewrite it as

Ltx=y+(Lt−Lτ)x=y+(τ−t)(L0−L1)x,that is,x=Lt−1y+(τ−t)Lt−1(L0−L1)x.L_tx = y + (L_t - L_\tau)x = y + (\tau - t)(L_0 - L_1)x, \qquad\text{that is,}\qquad x = L_t^{-1}y + (\tau - t)L_t^{-1}(L_0 - L_1)x.

The right side is a contraction of XX in xx when ∣τ−t∣ C (∥L0∥+∥L1∥)<1|\tau - t|\,C\,(\|L_0\| + \|L_1\|) < 1, so by Banach's fixed point theorem (2B.2 Completeness and Contraction) it has a fixed point. So SS contains every τ\tau within δ=12C(∥L0∥+∥L1∥)\delta = \frac{1}{2C(\|L_0\| + \|L_1\|)} of each of its points, and δ\delta does not depend on tt. If 0∈S0 \in S, then [0,δ]⊂S[0, \delta] \subset S, then [0,2δ]⊂S[0, 2\delta] \subset S, and after finitely many steps 1∈S1 \in S. The converse is the same with 00 and 11 exchanged.

The uniformity of CC over the whole path is the whole point: it makes the step size δ\delta uniform, so that the steps reach 11. In geometric applications one usually phrases it as openness (the solvable set is open, by an implicit function theorem) and closedness (it is closed, because a priori estimates and Arzelà–Ascoli let limits of solutions be solutions). Here, with a linear problem, both are packaged in one contraction.

Theorem 7.10 The Dirichlet problem in Hölder spaces

Let Ω\Omega be a bounded domain with C2,αC^{2,\alpha} boundary, and LL uniformly elliptic with coefficients in Cα(Ω‾)C^\alpha(\overline\Omega) and c≤0c \leq 0. Then for every f∈Cα(Ω‾)f \in C^\alpha(\overline\Omega) and φ∈C2,α(Ω‾)\varphi \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline\Omega) there is a unique u∈C2,α(Ω‾)u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline\Omega) with Lu=fLu = f in Ω\Omega and u=φu = \varphi on ∂Ω\partial\Omega.

Proof. Subtracting φ\varphi, it suffices to treat φ=0\varphi = 0. Let X={u∈C2,α(Ω‾):u=0 on ∂Ω}X = \{u \in C^{2,\alpha}(\overline\Omega) : u = 0 \text{ on } \partial\Omega\}, a closed subspace of C2,αC^{2,\alpha} and so a Banach space, Y=Cα(Ω‾)Y = C^\alpha(\overline\Omega), L0=ΔL_0 = \Delta and L1=LL_1 = L. Each Lt=(1−t)Δ+tLL_t = (1 - t)\Delta + tL is uniformly elliptic with ellipticity constants between min⁡(1,λ)\min(1, \lambda) and max⁡(1,Λ)\max(1, \Lambda), Hölder coefficients bounded uniformly in tt, and zero-order coefficient tc≤0tc \leq 0; so (∗∗)(**) holds for all LtL_t with one constant CC. By Theorem 7.9 it suffices that Δ:X→Y\Delta : X \to Y is onto: for every f∈Cα(Ω‾)f \in C^\alpha(\overline\Omega), the problem Δu=f\Delta u = f, u=0u = 0 on ∂Ω\partial\Omega, has a solution in C2,α(Ω‾)C^{2,\alpha}(\overline\Omega). This is Kellogg's theorem: subtract the Newtonian potential of an extension of ff (which is C2,αC^{2,\alpha} by Theorem 7.3) to reduce to the Dirichlet problem for harmonic functions with C2,αC^{2,\alpha} boundary data, which Perron's method solves (6B.6 Perron’s Method and Barriers, the C2C^2 boundary has exterior spheres), and the boundary Schauder estimate shows the solution is C2,αC^{2,\alpha} up to the boundary (Gilbarg–Trudinger, Theorems 6.14 and 4.3). Uniqueness is the maximum principle.

Where this goes Schauder and continuity in geometry

The parabolic Schauder estimates (6A.7 Parabolic Regularity), proved by the same freezing scheme, make the linearised Ricci–DeTurck operator an isomorphism between parabolic Hölder spaces, which is step 3 of the short-time existence scheme of 6A.8 Nonlinear Parabolic Equations and 6C.12 Quasilinear Parabolic Systems. The continuity method is how Shing-Tung Yau proved the Calabi conjecture (1978): to solve a complex Monge–Ampère equation det⁡(gijˉ+∂i∂jˉφ)=etFdet⁡(gijˉ)\det(g_{i\bar j} + \partial_i\partial_{\bar j}\varphi) = e^{tF}\det(g_{i\bar j}), deform tt from 00 to 11; openness is the implicit function theorem with the Laplacian as linearisation, and closedness is a chain of a priori estimates ending with a C2,αC^{2,\alpha} estimate of Schauder type (6C.10 Fully Nonlinear Equations and Monge–Ampère). Hamilton's 1982 Ricci flow paper used the Nash–Moser implicit function theorem, a continuity-type argument for operators that lose derivatives, before DeTurck's simplification made Schauder theory enough.

History

Juliusz Schauder proved his estimates in 1934, building on work of Otto Hölder (1882) on the Newtonian potential of Hölder densities, of Arthur Korn, and of Leon Lichtenstein. Oliver Kellogg proved the boundary regularity of potentials in 1929–31. The method of continuity goes back to Sergei Bernstein's work on nonlinear elliptic equations in the early 1900s and was put in its modern form by Schauder and by Jean Leray and Schauder in 1934. Gilbarg and Trudinger's book (1977) became the standard reference. The modern proof by freezing and an absorption lemma, presented here, is in the tradition of Sergio Campanato's and Mariano Giaquinta's work from the 1960s onward; Leon Simon gave a short proof by blow-up and compactness in 1997. Yau's proof of the Calabi conjecture appeared in 1978.

Recall Where we stand

Second derivatives of the fundamental solution are not integrable, but they cancel on spheres, and Hölder continuity of ff supplies the missing integrability: the Newtonian potential of a CαC^\alpha function is C2,αC^{2,\alpha}, with a scale-invariant estimate, for 0<α<10 < \alpha < 1. Adding harmonic derivative bounds gives the interior Schauder estimate for Δu=f\Delta u = f, and a linear change of variables gives it for constant coefficients. For variable Hölder coefficients, freeze at a point, estimate the error on a small ball, interpolate lower derivatives, and absorb with an iteration lemma: ∣u∣C2,α(B1/2)≤C(∣u∣0+∣f∣Cα)|u|_{C^{2,\alpha}(B_{1/2})} \leq C(|u|_0 + |f|_{C^\alpha}). With the global estimate and the maximum principle, the method of continuity deforms LL to Δ\Delta and solves the Dirichlet problem in C2,αC^{2,\alpha} for any uniformly elliptic LL with Hölder coefficients and c≤0c \leq 0. 6B.8 Lᵖ Theory and Strong Solutions proves the corresponding estimates in LpL^p, where the cancellation of the kernel is exploited by the Calderón–Zygmund theory.

Exercises

Exercise 7.11 The kernel averages to zero on spheres

Show that ∫∂B(0,r)∂ijΦ dS=0\int_{\partial B(0,r)}\partial_{ij}\Phi\,dS = 0 for every r>0r > 0 and all i,ji, j. (For i≠ji \neq j use the symmetry zi↦−ziz_i \mapsto -z_i; for i=ji = j use ∫∂Bzi2 dS=r2n∣∂B∣\int_{\partial B}z_i^2\,dS = \frac{r^2}{n}|\partial B| by symmetry among coordinates.) Deduce that ∫ε<∣z∣<1∂ijΦ(z) dz=0\int_{\varepsilon<|z|<1}\partial_{ij}\Phi(z)\,dz = 0, although ∫ε<∣z∣<1∣∂ijΦ∣→∞\int_{\varepsilon<|z|<1}|\partial_{ij}\Phi| \to \infty as ε→0\varepsilon \to 0.

Solution

For i≠ji \neq j, ∂ijΦ=zizjα(n)∣z∣n+2\partial_{ij}\Phi = \frac{z_iz_j}{\alpha(n)|z|^{n+2}} is odd in ziz_i, and the sphere is symmetric under zi↦−ziz_i \mapsto -z_i. For i=ji = j, ∂iiΦ=1nα(n)(nzi2∣z∣n+2−1∣z∣n)\partial_{ii}\Phi = \frac{1}{n\alpha(n)}\big(\frac{nz_i^2}{|z|^{n+2}} - \frac{1}{|z|^n}\big), and on ∣z∣=r|z| = r, ∫nzi2=r2∣∂B∣\int nz_i^2 = r^2|\partial B|, so the integral is 1nα(n)r−n(r2∣∂B∣r−2−∣∂B∣)=0\frac{1}{n\alpha(n)}r^{-n}(r^2|\partial B|r^{-2} - |\partial B|) = 0. Integrating over r∈(ε,1)r \in (\varepsilon, 1) in polar coordinates gives 00. But ∣∂ijΦ∣≥c∣z∣−n|\partial_{ij}\Phi| \geq c|z|^{-n} on a set of directions of positive measure, so ∫ε<∣z∣<1∣∂ijΦ∣≥clog⁡1ε\int_{\varepsilon<|z|<1}|\partial_{ij}\Phi| \geq c\log\frac1\varepsilon.

Exercise 7.12 The endpoints fail

(a) For u=xylog⁡(x2+y2)u = xy\log(x^2 + y^2) in the plane, show that Δu=8xyx2+y2\Delta u = \frac{8xy}{x^2 + y^2}, which is bounded but discontinuous at the origin. (b) Show that uxy=log⁡(x2+y2)+2−4x2y2(x2+y2)2u_{xy} = \log(x^2 + y^2) + 2 - \frac{4x^2y^2}{(x^2 + y^2)^2}, which is unbounded near the origin. So a bounded Δu\Delta u does not give bounded second derivatives: the estimate fails at α=0\alpha = 0. The same phenomenon one derivative higher shows that a Lipschitz Δu\Delta u does not give Lipschitz second derivatives, which is why the theory needs 0<α<10 < \alpha < 1.

Solution

(a) With ℓ=log⁡(x2+y2)\ell = \log(x^2 + y^2) and r2=x2+y2r^2 = x^2 + y^2: ux=yℓ+2x2yr2u_x = y\ell + \frac{2x^2y}{r^2}, uxx=2xyr2+4xyr2−4x3yr4u_{xx} = \frac{2xy}{r^2} + \frac{4xy}{r^2} - \frac{4x^3y}{r^4}, and by symmetry uyy=6xyr2−4xy3r4u_{yy} = \frac{6xy}{r^2} - \frac{4xy^3}{r^4}. Adding, Δu=12xyr2−4xy(x2+y2)r4=8xyr2\Delta u = \frac{12xy}{r^2} - \frac{4xy(x^2 + y^2)}{r^4} = \frac{8xy}{r^2}, bounded (by 44) and discontinuous at 00 (it is 4sin⁡2θ4\sin2\theta). (b) uxy=∂y(yℓ+2x2yr2)=ℓ+2y2r2+2x2r2−4x2y2r4=ℓ+2−4x2y2r4u_{xy} = \partial_y\big(y\ell + \frac{2x^2y}{r^2}\big) = \ell + \frac{2y^2}{r^2} + \frac{2x^2}{r^2} - \frac{4x^2y^2}{r^4} = \ell + 2 - \frac{4x^2y^2}{r^4}, and ℓ=log⁡r2→−∞\ell = \log r^2 \to -\infty. So D2uD^2u is unbounded while Δu\Delta u is bounded.

Exercise 7.13 Checking scale invariance

Let uλ(x)=u(λx)u_\lambda(x) = u(\lambda x) and fλ(x)=λ2f(λx)f_\lambda(x) = \lambda^2f(\lambda x), so Δuλ=fλ\Delta u_\lambda = f_\lambda when Δu=f\Delta u = f. Show that each term of the estimate in Theorem 7.4 for uλu_\lambda on BR/λB_{R/\lambda} equals the corresponding term for uu on BRB_R. Conclude that it suffices to prove the estimate for R=1R = 1.

Solution

D2uλ(x)=λ2D2u(λx)D^2u_\lambda(x) = \lambda^2D^2u(\lambda x), so (R/λ)2∣D2uλ∣0;BR/λ=R2∣D2u∣0;BR(R/\lambda)^2|D^2u_\lambda|_{0;B_{R/\lambda}} = R^2|D^2u|_{0;B_R}; Hölder quotients pick up λα\lambda^\alpha from ∣x−y∣α|x - y|^\alpha, so (R/λ)2+α[D2uλ]α=R2+α[D2u]α(R/\lambda)^{2+\alpha}[D^2u_\lambda]_\alpha = R^{2+\alpha}[D^2u]_\alpha; similarly for fλf_\lambda with its extra λ2\lambda^2. Every term is unchanged, so the estimate for R=1R = 1 implies it for all RR.

Exercise 7.14 The continuity method for matrices

Let A0A_0, A1A_1 be n×nn\times n matrices with ∣x∣≤C∣Atx∣|x| \leq C|A_tx| for all xx and all t∈[0,1]t \in [0, 1], where At=(1−t)A0+tA1A_t = (1 - t)A_0 + tA_1. Show directly that det⁡At\det A_t never vanishes, so det⁡A0\det A_0 and det⁡A1\det A_1 have the same sign. Conversely, show that if every AtA_t is invertible then a uniform CC exists, and explain why in infinite dimensions the estimate is the real content.

Solution

If det⁡At=0\det A_t = 0, some x≠0x \neq 0 has Atx=0A_tx = 0, contradicting ∣x∣≤C∣Atx∣|x| \leq C|A_tx|. The determinant is a continuous non-vanishing function of tt, so its sign is constant. Conversely, if every AtA_t is invertible, t↦∥At−1∥t \mapsto\|A_t^{-1}\| is continuous on the compact interval, hence bounded, which gives CC. In infinite dimensions an injective bounded operator need not have a bounded inverse, nor be onto, so the uniform estimate is an extra piece of information, and it is exactly what Schauder theory supplies.

Exercise 7.15 Liouville from Schauder

Let uu be harmonic on Rn\mathbb{R}^n with ∣u(x)∣≤C(1+∣x∣)2+β|u(x)| \leq C(1 + |x|)^{2+\beta} for some β<α\beta < \alpha. Use Theorem 7.4 on BRB_R with R→∞R \to \infty to show [D2u]α=0[D^2u]_\alpha = 0, hence D2uD^2u is constant and uu is a quadratic polynomial.

Solution

With f=0f = 0, R2+α[D2u]α;BR≤C∣u∣0;B2R≤C(1+2R)2+βR^{2+\alpha}[D^2u]_{\alpha;B_R} \leq C|u|_{0;B_{2R}} \leq C(1 + 2R)^{2+\beta}, so [D2u]α;BR≤CRβ−α→0[D^2u]_{\alpha;B_R} \leq CR^{\beta - \alpha} \to 0. Hence D2uD^2u is constant on Rn\mathbb{R}^n, and uu is a polynomial of degree at most 22.

Exercise 7.16 Rehearsal: the continuity method for a nonlinear equation

On the flat torus Tn\mathbb{T}^n, consider Δu−u−u3=f\Delta u - u - u^3 = f for a given f∈Cα(Tn)f \in C^\alpha(\mathbb{T}^n). Run the continuity method along the path Δu−u−u3=tf\Delta u - u - u^3 = tf, t∈[0,1]t \in [0, 1], starting from u=0u = 0 at t=0t = 0. (a) Openness. The linearisation at a solution uu is v↦Δv−(1+3u2)vv \mapsto \Delta v - (1 + 3u^2)v. Show by the maximum principle that it is injective on C2,αC^{2,\alpha}, and (granting the Fredholm theory of 6A.6 Weak Solutions and Elliptic Regularity in Hölder spaces) invertible; conclude by the implicit function theorem in Banach spaces (2B.9 The Inverse and Implicit Function Theorems) that the set of solvable tt is open. (b) Closedness. At a maximum of uu, Δu≤0\Delta u \leq 0, so u+u3≤−tf≤∣f∣0u + u^3 \leq -tf \leq |f|_0 there; deduce ∣u∣0≤∣f∣0|u|_0 \leq |f|_0. Then use the Schauder estimate (with Δu=u+u3+tf\Delta u = u + u^3 + tf as the right side, after a first step bounding its Hölder norm) to bound ∣u∣C2,α|u|_{C^{2,\alpha}} uniformly in tt, and conclude with Arzelà–Ascoli that the solvable set is closed. (c) Hence the equation has a solution for every ff. Yau's proof of the Calabi conjecture has exactly this shape, with the complex Monge–Ampère equation in place of this semilinear one and much harder a priori estimates (6C.10 Fully Nonlinear Equations and Monge–Ampère).

Solution

(a) If Δv=(1+3u2)v\Delta v = (1 + 3u^2)v and vv has a positive maximum, then at that point Δv≤0<(1+3u2)v\Delta v \leq 0 < (1 + 3u^2)v, a contradiction; likewise for a negative minimum. So v=0v = 0. (b) At a maximum point of uu, u+u3=Δu−tf≤∣f∣0u + u^3 = \Delta u - tf \leq |f|_0; since s+s3≥ss + s^3 \geq s for s≥0s \geq 0, max⁡u≤∣f∣0\max u \leq |f|_0, and similarly min⁡u≥−∣f∣0\min u \geq -|f|_0. Then Δu=u+u3+tf\Delta u = u + u^3 + tf is bounded; LpL^p or C1,βC^{1,\beta} estimates (or interpolation) make uu Lipschitz with a uniform bound, so the right side is uniformly CαC^\alpha, and the Schauder estimate gives a uniform C2,αC^{2,\alpha} bound. If tk→tt_k \to t with solutions uku_k, a subsequence converges in C2C^2 (by Arzelà–Ascoli, uniform C2,αC^{2,\alpha} bounds give C2C^2 convergence) to a solution at tt. (c) The solvable set contains 00, is open and closed in [0,1][0, 1], hence is all of [0,1][0, 1].

Free resources for this chapter

Chosen for what this chapter covers, and all free to read. Links checked Oct 20, 2026.

© 2026 NeckPinch (www.neckpinch.com). All content in the guidebook (text, mathematics, figures and exercises) is protected by copyright. All rights reserved. No part may be copied, republished or redistributed without written permission.