Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                

Stability of extremal domains for the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian operator

Marcos P. Cavalcante Universidade Federal de Alagoas, Instituto de Matemática, Maceió, AL - 57072 - 970, Brazil marcos@pos.mat.ufal.br  and  Ivaldo Nunes Universidade Federal do Maranhão, Departamento de Matemática, São Luís, MA - 65080 - 805, Brazil ivaldo.nunes@ufma.br
Abstract.

In this paper, we compute the second variation of the first Dirichlet eigenvalue on extremal domains and establish criteria for stability. We classify the stable extremal domains in the 2-sphere and in higher-dimensional spheres when the boundary is minimal. We also prove topological bounds for stable domains with nonnegative total Gaussian curvature in a general compact Riemannian surface.

1. Introduction

Let (Mn,g)superscript𝑀𝑛𝑔(M^{n},g)( italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g ) be a complete Riemannian manifold of dimension n2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n ≥ 2. For each compact domain ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M with smooth boundary, let λ1(Ω)>0subscript𝜆1Ω0\lambda_{1}(\Omega)>0italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) > 0 denote the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian operator on ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω with Dirichlet boundary condition. Given 0<v<vol(M,g)0𝑣vol𝑀𝑔0<v<\operatorname{vol}(M,g)0 < italic_v < roman_vol ( italic_M , italic_g ), a very interesting isoperimetric probem in spectral geometry and shape optimization is that of investigating the minimizers or, more generally, the critical points of the functional ΩMλ1(Ω)Ω𝑀maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset M\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) defined on the class of domains ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M such that vol(Ω)=vvolΩ𝑣\operatorname{vol}(\Omega)=vroman_vol ( roman_Ω ) = italic_v.

Regarding to this problem, Faber [10] and Krahn [18] proved that, in nsuperscript𝑛\mathbb{R}^{n}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, geodesic balls are the only global minimizers of Ωnλ1(Ω)Ωsuperscript𝑛maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) subject to a volume constraint. More precisely, they proved that if ΩnΩsuperscript𝑛\Omega\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}roman_Ω ⊂ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a compact domain, then λ1(Ω)λ1(B)subscript𝜆1Ωsubscript𝜆1𝐵\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\geq\lambda_{1}(B)italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_B ), where Bn𝐵superscript𝑛B\subset\mathbb{R}^{n}italic_B ⊂ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a geodesic ball such that vol(Ω)=vol(B)volΩvol𝐵\operatorname{vol}(\Omega)=\operatorname{vol}(B)roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) = roman_vol ( italic_B ), and equality holds if and only if ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a geodesic ball. We note that the analogous result is true in 𝕊nsuperscript𝕊𝑛\mathbb{S}^{n}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the round sphere, and nsuperscript𝑛\mathbb{H}^{n}blackboard_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the hyperbolic space (see, for example, Chapter IV, Section 2, of [6]).

In turn, it is known that a compact domain Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) with smooth boundary is a critical point of the functional ΩMλ1(Ω)Ω𝑀maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset M\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) with respect to volume preserving deformations of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in M𝑀Mitalic_M if and only if the first eigenfunctions of the Laplacian operator of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with Dirichlet boundary condition solve the following overdetermined problem:

{Δφ+λ1(Ω0)φ=0in Ω,φ=0on Ω,φν=con Ω,casesΔ𝜑subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0𝜑0in Ω𝜑0on Ω𝜑𝜈𝑐on Ω\displaystyle\left\{\begin{array}[]{rl}\Delta\varphi+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})% \varphi=0&\text{in }\Omega,\\ \varphi=0&\text{on }\partial\Omega,\\ \dfrac{\partial\varphi}{\partial\nu}=c&\text{on }\partial\Omega,\end{array}\right.{ start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_Δ italic_φ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_φ = 0 end_CELL start_CELL in roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_φ = 0 end_CELL start_CELL on ∂ roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG = italic_c end_CELL start_CELL on ∂ roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

where c0𝑐0c\neq 0italic_c ≠ 0 is a constant and ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν denotes the outward unit normal vector along Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This follows from the first variation formula for the first Dirichlet eigenvalue of the Laplacian operator, known as Hadamard formula, which was originally proved by Garabedian and Schiffer [12] in Euclidean space and later by El Soulfi and Ilias [8] to general Riemannian manifolds. From now on, following [22], we say that a compact domain Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) with smooth boundary is an extremal domain if it is a critical point of ΩMλ1(Ω)Ω𝑀maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset M\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) with respect to volume preserving deformations. We refer the reader to Section 2 for details and precise definitions.

In Euclidean space nsuperscript𝑛\mathbb{R}^{n}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, in hyperbolic space nsuperscript𝑛\mathbb{H}^{n}blackboard_H start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, and in the round hemisphere 𝕊+nsubscriptsuperscript𝕊𝑛\mathbb{S}^{n}_{+}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT + end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, only geodesic balls are extremal domains. This result follows from the classical work of Serrin [27], and its extension to space forms by Kumaresan and Prajapat [19], on elliptic overdetermined problems, which was proved using the moving plane method introduced by Alexandrov in [2].

Extremal domains share many similarities with embedded hypersurfaces of constant mean curvature, and significant progress has been made in recent years regarding their existence, regularity, and classification. For example, in [22], Pacard and Sicbaldi demonstrated the existence of extremal domains with small volume in compact Riemannian manifolds (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) by assuming that the scalar curvature of M𝑀Mitalic_M has a nondegenerate critical point. In [7], Delay and Sicbaldi improved this result by removing the condition on the scalar curvature of M𝑀Mitalic_M.

Recently, Lamboley and Sicbaldi [20] established that for any connected compact Riemannian manifold (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) and given 0<v<vol(M,g)0𝑣vol𝑀𝑔0<v<\operatorname{vol}(M,g)0 < italic_v < roman_vol ( italic_M , italic_g ), there exists an open set ΩMsuperscriptΩ𝑀\Omega^{\star}\subset Mroman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊂ italic_M that is smooth except for a singular set of codimension less than n5𝑛5n-5italic_n - 5, satisfying

λ1(Ω)=inf{λ1(Ω):ΩM is an open subset and vol(Ω)=v}.subscript𝜆1superscriptΩinfimumconditional-setsubscript𝜆1ΩΩ𝑀 is an open subset and volΩ𝑣\lambda_{1}(\Omega^{\star})=\inf\{\lambda_{1}(\Omega):\Omega\subset M\text{ is% an open subset and }\operatorname{vol}(\Omega)=v\}.italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) = roman_inf { italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) : roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M is an open subset and roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) = italic_v } .

In particular, ΩsuperscriptΩ\Omega^{\star}roman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a smooth extremal domain if n=2,3𝑛23n=2,3italic_n = 2 , 3 or 4444. On the other hand, Espinar and Mazet [9] proved that simply connected extremal domains (and, in fact, f𝑓fitalic_f-extremal disks) in 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are geodesic disks.

It is worth mentioning that all the above results have parallels in the context of hypersurfaces of constant mean curvature (see, for example, [31], [21], [3], [15], [13], and [17]). For more results on the existence of extremal domains, we refer the reader to [28] and [29].

Furthermore, numerous examples of extremal domains can be constructed on Riemannian manifolds endowed with an isometric action by a compact Lie group (see Section 2.1). In particular, this construction provides many examples of extremal domains on the round sphere 𝕊nsuperscript𝕊𝑛\mathbb{S}^{n}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT that are not geodesic balls. This shows that the moving plane method used by Serrin in [27] fails in this case.

In this paper, we initiate the investigation of the stability properties of extremal domains. We say that an extremal domain Ω(M,g)Ω𝑀𝑔\Omega\subset(M,g)roman_Ω ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) is stable if it minimizes the first Dirichlet eigenvalue functional up to the second order with respect to volume preserving deformations.

In Section 3, we derive the second variation formula and establish a criterion for stability, obtaining important insights into the geometry of extremal domains. Using this criterion, we give a complete characterization of stable extremal domains in the round sphere 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. We prove the following theorem:

Theorem 1.1.

Let Ω(𝕊2,gcan)Ωsuperscript𝕊2subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛\Omega\subset(\mathbb{S}^{2},g_{can})roman_Ω ⊂ ( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) be an extremal domain. If ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is stable, then it is necessarily a geodesic disk.

This theorem can be considered as the parallel of the Barbosa-do Carmo-Eschenburg theorem [4]. It is interesting to observe that Theorem 1.1, combined with Lamboley-Sicbaldi’s theorem proved in [20] and cited above, provides an alternative proof of the Faber-Krahn inequality in 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, which states that for any 0<v<4π0𝑣4𝜋0<v<4\pi0 < italic_v < 4 italic_π, if Ω𝕊2Ωsuperscript𝕊2\Omega\subset\mathbb{S}^{2}roman_Ω ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a compact domain with area v𝑣vitalic_v, then:

λ1(Ω)λ1(D),subscript𝜆1Ωsubscript𝜆1𝐷\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\geq\lambda_{1}(D),italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_D ) ,

where D𝕊2𝐷superscript𝕊2D\subset\mathbb{S}^{2}italic_D ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a geodesic disk with area v𝑣vitalic_v and equality holds if and only if ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a geodesic disk.

In the case that n=2𝑛2n=2italic_n = 2 and M2=(𝕊2,gcan)superscript𝑀2superscript𝕊2subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛M^{2}=(\mathbb{S}^{2},g_{can})italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = ( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), Theorems 1.1 and 1.2 in [20] imply that there exists a smooth domain ΩsuperscriptΩ\Omega^{\star}roman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT such that λ1(Ω)λ1(Ω)subscript𝜆1Ωsubscript𝜆1superscriptΩ\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\geq\lambda_{1}(\Omega^{\star})italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ). In particular, ΩsuperscriptΩ\Omega^{\star}roman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a stable extremal domain and, in fact, a global minimizer of λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with an area constraint. By Theorem 1.1 above, we have that ΩsuperscriptΩ\Omega^{\star}roman_Ω start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⋆ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is a geodesic disk D𝐷Ditalic_D. Moreover, if λ1(Ω)=λ1(D)subscript𝜆1Ωsubscript𝜆1𝐷\lambda_{1}(\Omega)=\lambda_{1}(D)italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_D ), then ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a stable extremal domain. Applying Theorem 1.1 again we have that ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is also a geodesic disk, thus proving the Faber-Krahn inequality in 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

In general, for stable extremal domains ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω in a given Riemannian surface (M2,g)superscript𝑀2𝑔(M^{2},g)( italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g ), we prove the following restriction on the topology of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω.

Theorem 1.2.

Let (M2,g)superscript𝑀2𝑔(M^{2},g)( italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g ) be an orientable compact Riemannian surface. If ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M is a stable extremal domain with nonnegative total Gauss curvature, that is, ΩKg𝑑a0subscriptΩsubscript𝐾𝑔differential-d𝑎0\int_{\Omega}K_{g}\,da\geq 0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ≥ 0, then the only possible values for the genus gΩsubscript𝑔Ωg_{\Omega}italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω and the number r𝑟ritalic_r of connected components of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω are:

  1. (1)

    gΩ=0subscript𝑔Ω0g_{\Omega}=0italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 and r{1,2,3,4,5}𝑟12345r\in\{1,2,3,4,5\}italic_r ∈ { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 };

  2. (2)

    gΩ=1subscript𝑔Ω1g_{\Omega}=1italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1 and r{1,2,3,4,5,6,7}𝑟1234567r\in\{1,2,3,4,5,6,7\}italic_r ∈ { 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 }.

In particular, it follows that stable extremal domains in a sphere (𝕊2,g)superscript𝕊2𝑔(\mathbb{S}^{2},g)( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g ) with nonnegative curvature have at most 5555 boundary components.

Since the Faber-Krahn inequality is true on 𝕊nsuperscript𝕊𝑛\mathbb{S}^{n}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for any n2𝑛2n\geq 2italic_n ≥ 2, it is a very natural question to ask if the characterization proved in Theorem 1.1 can be extended to stable extremal domains in 𝕊nsuperscript𝕊𝑛\mathbb{S}^{n}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, for n3𝑛3n\geq 3italic_n ≥ 3. By using a result due to Reilly (see [23, Theorem 4]), we are able to give the following description of stable extremal domains Ω𝕊nΩsuperscript𝕊𝑛\Omega\subset\mathbb{S}^{n}roman_Ω ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, n3𝑛3n\geq 3italic_n ≥ 3, in the case ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω is a minimal hypersurface.

Theorem 1.3.

Let Ω(𝕊n,gcan)Ωsuperscript𝕊𝑛subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛\Omega\subset(\mathbb{S}^{n},g_{can})roman_Ω ⊂ ( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) be an extremal domain such that ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω is a compact minimal hypersurface. If ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is stable, then ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a hemisphere.

Finally, we would like to mention that our methods are inspired by those used by Ros and Vergasta [25] to study stable constant mean curvature hypersurfaces with free boundary in convex domains of nsuperscript𝑛\mathbb{R}^{n}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

2. Basic definitions and first variation formula for λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

Let (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) be a smooth Riemannian manifold. For each smooth compact domain ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M, let λ1(Ω)subscript𝜆1Ω\lambda_{1}(\Omega)italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) denote its first eigenvalue of the Laplacian operator with Dirichlet boundary condition. We will start this section by defining what we mean by a local deformation of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω in M𝑀Mitalic_M.

A smooth local deformation of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω in M𝑀Mitalic_M is a smooth one-parameter family of domains ΩtMsubscriptΩ𝑡𝑀\Omega_{t}\subset Mroman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_M, t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), given by Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), where ft:MM:subscript𝑓𝑡𝑀𝑀f_{t}:M\to Mitalic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : italic_M → italic_M is the smooth flow of some smooth vector field V𝔛(M)𝑉𝔛𝑀V\in\mathfrak{X}(M)italic_V ∈ fraktur_X ( italic_M ). If, in addition, vol(Ωt)=vol(Ω)volsubscriptΩ𝑡volΩ\operatorname{vol}(\Omega_{t})=\operatorname{vol}(\Omega)roman_vol ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) for all t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), then we say that Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) is a volume preserving local deformation of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω.

Let Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), be a smooth local deformation of a smooth compact domain ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M. As the first Dirichlet eigenvalue of the Laplacian operator is simple, it follows from the implicit function theorem that the function t(ε,ε)λ1(Ωt)𝑡𝜀𝜀maps-tosubscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ) ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is smooth.

Definition 2.1 (Extremal domains).

We say that a smooth compact domain Ω(M,g)Ω𝑀𝑔\Omega\subset(M,g)roman_Ω ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) is extremal if

ddt|t=0λ1(Ωt)=0,evaluated-at𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡0\left.\dfrac{d}{dt}\right|_{t=0}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})=0,divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0 ,

for any volume preserving local deformation Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), t(ε,ϵ)𝑡𝜀italic-ϵt\in(-\varepsilon,\epsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ϵ ), of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω in M𝑀Mitalic_M.

Next, we will state the Hadarmad formula proved by El Soufi and Ilias [8] which gives a first variation formula for the functional ΩMλ1(Ω)Ω𝑀maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset M\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ).

Proposition 2.2 (El Soufi and Ilias, [8]).

Let (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) be a smooth Riemannian manifold and let ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M be a smooth compact domain. Let Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), be a smooth local deformation of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω. We have

(2.1) ddt|t=0λ1(Ωt)=Ωv(φν)2𝑑,evaluated-at𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡subscriptΩ𝑣superscript𝜑𝜈2differential-d\left.\dfrac{d}{dt}\right|_{t=0}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})=-\int_{\partial\Omega}% v\left(\dfrac{\partial\varphi}{\partial\nu}\right)^{2}d\ell,divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ ,

where ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν is the outward unit normal vector along ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω, v=V,ν𝑣𝑉𝜈v=\left\langle V,\nu\right\rangleitalic_v = ⟨ italic_V , italic_ν ⟩ is the normal displacement of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω induced by the deformation,and φC(Ω)𝜑superscript𝐶Ω\varphi\in C^{\infty}(\Omega)italic_φ ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) is the first Dirichlet positive eigenfunction of the Laplacian operator on ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω such that φL2(Ω)=1subscriptnorm𝜑superscript𝐿2Ω1\|\varphi\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}=1∥ italic_φ ∥ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1

We notice that if Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), is volume preserving, that is, vol(Ωt)=vol(Ω)volsubscriptΩ𝑡volΩ\operatorname{vol}(\Omega_{t})=\operatorname{vol}(\Omega)roman_vol ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) for all t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), then Ωv𝑑=0subscriptΩ𝑣differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}v\,d\ell=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ = 0. Conversely, if vC(Ω)𝑣superscript𝐶Ωv\in C^{\infty}(\partial\Omega)italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( ∂ roman_Ω ) is such that Ωv𝑑=0subscriptΩ𝑣differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}v\,d\ell=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ = 0, then there exists a smooth local deformation Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), such that dft/dt|t=0=vνevaluated-at𝑑subscript𝑓𝑡𝑑𝑡𝑡0𝑣𝜈df_{t}/dt|_{t=0}=v\nuitalic_d italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_t | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_v italic_ν on ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω.

Therefore, it follows as a consequence of (2.1), that ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is an extremal domain if and only if its first eigenfunctions of Laplacian operator with Dirichlet boundary condition solve the following overdetermined elliptic problem:

{Δφ+λ1(Ω)φ=0in Ω,φ=0on Ω,φν=con Ω,casesΔ𝜑subscript𝜆1Ω𝜑0in Ω𝜑0on Ω𝜑𝜈𝑐on Ω\displaystyle\left\{\begin{array}[]{rl}\Delta\varphi+\lambda_{1}(\Omega)% \varphi=0&\textrm{in }\Omega,\\ \varphi=0&\textrm{on }\partial\Omega,\\ \dfrac{\partial\varphi}{\partial\nu}=c&\textrm{on }\partial\Omega,\end{array}\right.{ start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_Δ italic_φ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) italic_φ = 0 end_CELL start_CELL in roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_φ = 0 end_CELL start_CELL on ∂ roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG = italic_c end_CELL start_CELL on ∂ roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

where c0𝑐0c\neq 0italic_c ≠ 0.

2.1. Examples

Assume that there exists an isometric action of a compact Lie group 𝖦𝖦\mathsf{G}sansserif_G on a Riemannian manifold M𝑀Mitalic_M, and let ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M be a domain invariant under the action of 𝖦𝖦\mathsf{G}sansserif_G with a single connected boundary component. If φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ is a first eigenfunction, then φθ𝜑𝜃\varphi\circ\thetaitalic_φ ∘ italic_θ also solves the Dirichlet eigenvalue problem in Ω=θ(Ω)Ω𝜃Ω\Omega=\theta(\Omega)roman_Ω = italic_θ ( roman_Ω ) for all θ𝖦𝜃𝖦\theta\in\mathsf{G}italic_θ ∈ sansserif_G. Since λ1(Ω)subscript𝜆1Ω\lambda_{1}(\Omega)italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) is simple, it follows that φθ=cθφ𝜑𝜃subscript𝑐𝜃𝜑\varphi\circ\theta=c_{\theta}\varphiitalic_φ ∘ italic_θ = italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ, defining a group homomorphism θcθmaps-to𝜃subscript𝑐𝜃\theta\mapsto c_{\theta}italic_θ ↦ italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Due to the compactness of 𝖦𝖦\mathsf{G}sansserif_G, we have cθ=1subscript𝑐𝜃1c_{\theta}=1italic_c start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1, proving that φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ is 𝖦𝖦\mathsf{G}sansserif_G-invariant. This invariance implies that φν𝜑𝜈\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial\nu}divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG is constant along ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω.

A basic non-trivial example using this construction is given by the action 𝖦=𝖲𝖮(k+1)×𝖲𝖮(nk)𝖦𝖲𝖮𝑘1𝖲𝖮𝑛𝑘\mathsf{G}=\mathsf{SO}(k+1)\times\mathsf{SO}(n-k)sansserif_G = sansserif_SO ( italic_k + 1 ) × sansserif_SO ( italic_n - italic_k ) on the unit round sphere 𝕊nn+1superscript𝕊𝑛superscript𝑛1\mathbb{S}^{n}\subset\mathbb{R}^{n+1}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊂ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT when we consider n+1=k+1nksuperscript𝑛1direct-sumsuperscript𝑘1superscript𝑛𝑘\mathbb{R}^{n+1}=\mathbb{R}^{k+1}\oplus\mathbb{R}^{n-k}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k + 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊕ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. In this case, the invariant domains are the solid tori ΩrsubscriptΩ𝑟\Omega_{r}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, r(0,π/2)𝑟0𝜋2r\in(0,\pi/2)italic_r ∈ ( 0 , italic_π / 2 ), whose boundaries are given by the principal orbits of 𝖦𝖦\mathsf{G}sansserif_G, Σ(r)=𝕊k(cosr)×𝕊nk1(sinr)Σ𝑟superscript𝕊𝑘𝑟superscript𝕊𝑛𝑘1𝑟\Sigma(r)=\mathbb{S}^{k}(\cos r)\times\mathbb{S}^{n-k-1}(\sin r)roman_Σ ( italic_r ) = blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_cos italic_r ) × blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - italic_k - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_sin italic_r ). In particular, Ω(π/4)Ω𝜋4\partial\Omega(\pi/4)∂ roman_Ω ( italic_π / 4 ) is a minimal hypersurface. Note that, by choosing suitable values for r(0,π/2)𝑟0𝜋2r\in(0,\pi/2)italic_r ∈ ( 0 , italic_π / 2 ), we can also construct extremal 𝖦𝖦\mathsf{G}sansserif_G-domains from this family with two boundary components.

Another family of examples of extremal domains we can construct using this method are the solid tori Drn1×𝕊1Tnsubscriptsuperscript𝐷𝑛1𝑟superscript𝕊1superscript𝑇𝑛D^{n-1}_{r}\times\mathbb{S}^{1}\subset T^{n}italic_D start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT × blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊂ italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, r(0,1)𝑟01r\in(0,1)italic_r ∈ ( 0 , 1 ), where Tnsuperscript𝑇𝑛T^{n}italic_T start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT stands for the flat n𝑛nitalic_n-torus. From this particular family, Sicbaldi [28] and Schlenk-Sicbaldi [26] constructed new extremal domains using bifurcation techniques.

3. Second variation formula for λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and stability of extremal domains

Let (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) and Ω0MsubscriptΩ0𝑀\Omega_{0}\subset Mroman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_M be a smooth Riemannian manifold and a smooth compact domain, respectively. Suppose that Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is extremal. Since Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a critical point of the functional ΩMλ1(Ω)Ω𝑀maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset M\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), it is natural to investigate the second variation of this functional at Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. In this section, we will present a second variation formula for this functional, in a very general setting. As a consequence, we will give a criterion for a given extremal domain Ω0MsubscriptΩ0𝑀\Omega_{0}\subset Mroman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_M to be stable.

Definition 3.1 (Stable extremal domains).

We say that an extremal domain Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) is stable if

d2dt2|t=0λ1(Ωt)0,evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2𝑡0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡0\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\right|_{t=0}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\geq 0,divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≥ 0 ,

for any volume preserving local deformation Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ), t(ε,ϵ)𝑡𝜀italic-ϵt\in(-\varepsilon,\epsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ϵ ), of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in M𝑀Mitalic_M.

In the following proposition, we present a formula for the second variation for the functional ΩMλ1(Ω)Ω𝑀maps-tosubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\subset M\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ⊂ italic_M ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) at an extremal domain Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, with respect to volume preserving local deformations.

Proposition 3.2 (Second variation formula for λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT).

Let Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) be an extremal domain and let φ0C(Ω0)subscript𝜑0superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0\varphi_{0}\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{0})italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) be the first Dirichlet positive eigenfunction of the Laplacian operator on Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with φ0L2(Ω0)=1subscriptnormsubscript𝜑0superscript𝐿2subscriptΩ01\|\varphi_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega_{0})}=1∥ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1. For any volume preserving local deformation Ωt=ft(Ω0)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡subscriptΩ0\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega_{0})roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in M𝑀Mitalic_M, we have

(3.1) d2dt2|t=0λ1(Ωt)=2c2Ω0(vv^ν+Hv2)𝑑,evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2𝑡0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡2superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑣^𝑣𝜈𝐻superscript𝑣2differential-d\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\right|_{t=0}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})=2c^{2}\int_{% \partial\Omega_{0}}\Big{(}v\frac{\partial\widehat{v}}{\partial\nu}+Hv^{2}\Big{% )}\,d\ell,divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 2 italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_H italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ ,

where H𝐻Hitalic_H is the mean curvature of Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with respect to the outward unit normal vector ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν, v=dft/dt|t=0,ν𝑣evaluated-at𝑑subscript𝑓𝑡𝑑𝑡𝑡0𝜈v=\left\langle df_{t}/dt|_{t=0},\nu\right\rangleitalic_v = ⟨ italic_d italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_t | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν ⟩ is the normal displacement of Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT induced by the deformation, c=φ0/ν𝑐subscript𝜑0𝜈c=\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial\nuitalic_c = ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν and v^^𝑣\widehat{v}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG is a (Δ+λ1(Ω0))Δsubscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0(\Delta+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0}))( roman_Δ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) )-extension of v𝑣vitalic_v, that is, v^^𝑣\widehat{v}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG is a solution to the following problem:

{Δv^+λ1v^=0in Ω0,v^=von Ω0.casesΔ^𝑣subscript𝜆1^𝑣0in subscriptΩ0^𝑣𝑣on subscriptΩ0\left\{\begin{array}[]{rl}\Delta\widehat{v}+\lambda_{1}\widehat{v}=0&\textrm{% in }\Omega_{0},\\ \widehat{v}=v&\textrm{on }\partial\Omega_{0}.\end{array}\right.{ start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_Δ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG = 0 end_CELL start_CELL in roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG = italic_v end_CELL start_CELL on ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY
Proof.

See the Appendix A. ∎

Remark 3.3.

Let Ω(M,g)Ω𝑀𝑔\Omega\subset(M,g)roman_Ω ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) be a smooth compact domain and let φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ be a first Dirichlet eigenfunction of the Laplacian operator on ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω. Given vC(Σ)𝑣superscript𝐶Σv\in C^{\infty}(\Sigma)italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Σ ), as a consequence of the Fredholm alternative, there exists a (Δ+λ1(Ω))Δsubscript𝜆1Ω(\Delta+\lambda_{1}(\Omega))( roman_Δ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) )-extension v^^𝑣\widehat{v}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG of v𝑣vitalic_v if and only if

(3.2) Ωvφν𝑑=0.subscriptΩ𝑣𝜑𝜈differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}v\dfrac{\partial\varphi}{\partial\nu}\,d\ell=0.∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 .

Moreover, v^^𝑣\widehat{v}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG is unique up to an addition of a multiple of φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ (see, for example, Lemma 2.5 of [30]). In the case Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) is an extremal domain, we know that φ0/νsubscript𝜑0𝜈\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial\nu∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν is constant along ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω. Thus, (3.2) becomes

Ω0v𝑑=0,subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑣differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v\,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

which is equivalent to say that the local deformation of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT given by v𝑣vitalic_v is volume preserving.

Remark 3.4.

The second variation formula given by (3.1) is presented in [16, Theorem 2.5.6] in the case (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) is the standard Euclidean space nsuperscript𝑛\mathbb{R}^{n}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. To the best of the authors knowledge, it is the first time this formula for extremal domains in general Riemmanian manifolds appears in the literature.

We recall that volume preserving local deformations of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are in bijection with functions in the space (Ω0)={vC(Ω0):Ω0v𝑑=0}subscriptΩ0conditional-set𝑣superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑣differential-d0\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega_{0})=\{v\in C^{\infty}(\partial\Omega_{0}):\int_{% \partial\Omega_{0}}v\,d\ell=0\}caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = { italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) : ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 } of smooth functions on the boundary of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with zero average. Motivated by Proposition 3.1, we consider the quadratic form

Q:(Ω0)×(Ω0):𝑄subscriptΩ0subscriptΩ0Q:\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega_{0})\times\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega_{0})\to% \mathbb{R}italic_Q : caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) × caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) → blackboard_R

given by

Q(v,w)=Ω0(vw^ν+Hvw)𝑑,𝑄𝑣𝑤subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑣^𝑤𝜈𝐻𝑣𝑤differential-dQ(v,w)=\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}\left(v\frac{\partial\widehat{w}}{\partial\nu}% +Hvw\right)\,d\ell,italic_Q ( italic_v , italic_w ) = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_w end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_H italic_v italic_w ) italic_d roman_ℓ ,

where w^^𝑤\widehat{w}over^ start_ARG italic_w end_ARG is a (Δ+λ1(Ω0))Δsubscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0(\Delta+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0}))( roman_Δ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) )-extension of w𝑤witalic_w to Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. This setup allows us to define the index of an extremal domain.

Definition 3.5 (Index of Extremal Domains).

If Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) is an extremal domain, then the Morse index of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is given by

Ind(Ω0)=max{dimV:V(Ω0) and Q is negative definite on V}.IndsubscriptΩ0:dimension𝑉𝑉subscriptΩ0 and 𝑄 is negative definite on 𝑉\operatorname{Ind}(\Omega_{0})=\max\{\dim V:V\subset\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega% _{0})\text{ and }Q\text{ is negative definite on }V\}.roman_Ind ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = roman_max { roman_dim italic_V : italic_V ⊂ caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) and italic_Q is negative definite on italic_V } .

By this definition, the index represents the number of linearly independent, volume-preserving variations that decrease the first Dirichlet eigenvalue. In particular, Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is stable if and only if Ind(Ω0)=0IndsubscriptΩ00\operatorname{Ind}(\Omega_{0})=0roman_Ind ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0.

Now, we have the following useful criterion for the stability of extremal domains.

Proposition 3.6.

An extremal domain Ω0(M,g)subscriptΩ0𝑀𝑔\Omega_{0}\subset(M,g)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) is stable if and only if

Ω0|v|2𝑑aλ1(Ω0)Ω0v2𝑑a+Ω0Hv2𝑑0,subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript𝑣2differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript𝑣2differential-d𝑎subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝐻superscript𝑣2differential-d0\int_{\Omega_{0}}|\nabla v|^{2}\,da-\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}v^% {2}\,da+\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}Hv^{2}\,d\ell\geq 0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_v | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ ≥ 0 ,

for all vC(Ω0)𝑣superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0v\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{0})italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) such that Ω0v𝑑g=0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑣differential-dsubscript𝑔0\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v\,d\ell_{g}=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.

Proof.

Given vC(Ω0)𝑣superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0v\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{0})italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), define

S(v,v)=S0(v,v)+Ω0Hv2𝑑,𝑆𝑣𝑣subscript𝑆0𝑣𝑣subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝐻superscript𝑣2differential-dS(v,v)=S_{0}(v,v)+\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}Hv^{2}\,d\ell,italic_S ( italic_v , italic_v ) = italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v , italic_v ) + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ ,

where S0(u,v)=Ω0u,v𝑑aλ1(Ω0)Ω0uv𝑑asubscript𝑆0𝑢𝑣subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑢𝑣differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑢𝑣differential-d𝑎S_{0}(u,v)=\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla u,\nabla v\rangle\,da-\lambda_{1}(% \Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}uv\,daitalic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u , italic_v ) = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ italic_u , ∇ italic_v ⟩ italic_d italic_a - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_u italic_v italic_d italic_a.

Integrating by parts, we obtain that

(3.3) S(v|Ω0^,v|Ω0^)=Q(v|Ω0,v|Ω0),𝑆^evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0^evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0𝑄evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0S(\widehat{v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}},\widehat{v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}})=Q(v|_{% \partial\Omega_{0}},v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}),italic_S ( over^ start_ARG italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG , over^ start_ARG italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) = italic_Q ( italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ,

where v|Ω0^^evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0\widehat{v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}}over^ start_ARG italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG is a (Δ+λ1(Ω0))Δsubscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0(\Delta+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0}))( roman_Δ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) )-extension of v|Ω0evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Now, since S0(u,u)0subscript𝑆0𝑢𝑢0S_{0}(u,u)\geq 0italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_u , italic_u ) ≥ 0 for all uC(Ω0)𝑢superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0u\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{0})italic_u ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) such that u=0𝑢0u=0italic_u = 0 on Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we have that

(3.4) S(v|Ω0^,v|Ω0^)S(v,v),𝑆^evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0^evaluated-at𝑣subscriptΩ0𝑆𝑣𝑣S(\widehat{v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}},\widehat{v|_{\partial\Omega_{0}}})\leq S(v% ,v),italic_S ( over^ start_ARG italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG , over^ start_ARG italic_v | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) ≤ italic_S ( italic_v , italic_v ) ,

for all vC(Ω0)𝑣superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0v\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{0})italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Therefore, from (3.3) and (3.4) we conclude the proof. ∎

We conclude this section with some properties of Jacobi functions associated to the first Dirichlet eigenvalue.

We say that a function v(Ω)𝑣Ωv\in\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega)italic_v ∈ caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω ) is a Jacobi function of λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT if

Ω(v^ν+Hv)w𝑑=0,subscriptΩ^𝑣𝜈𝐻𝑣𝑤differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}\left(\dfrac{\partial\widehat{v}}{\partial\nu}+Hv\right)w% \,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_H italic_v ) italic_w italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

for all w(Ω)𝑤Ωw\in\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega)italic_w ∈ caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω ).

The next lemma presents basic facts about Jacobi functions of λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT that will be used in Section 5.

Lemma 3.7.

Let Ω(M,g)Ω𝑀𝑔\Omega\subset(M,g)roman_Ω ⊂ ( italic_M , italic_g ) be an extremal domain.

  • (i)

    v(Ω)𝑣Ωv\in\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega)italic_v ∈ caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω ) is a Jacobi function of λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT if and only if there exist c𝑐c\in\mathbb{R}italic_c ∈ blackboard_R and a (Δ+λ1(Ω))Δsubscript𝜆1Ω(\Delta+\lambda_{1}(\Omega))( roman_Δ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) )-extension v^^𝑣\widehat{v}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG of v𝑣vitalic_v such that

    v^ν+Hv=con Ω.^𝑣𝜈𝐻𝑣𝑐on Ω\dfrac{\partial\widehat{v}}{\partial\nu}+Hv=c\quad\text{on }\partial\Omega.divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_H italic_v = italic_c on ∂ roman_Ω .
  • (ii)

    If ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is stable and v(Ω)𝑣Ωv\in\mathcal{F}(\partial\Omega)italic_v ∈ caligraphic_F ( ∂ roman_Ω ) satisfies

    Ω(v^ν+Hv)v𝑑=0,subscriptΩ^𝑣𝜈𝐻𝑣𝑣differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}\left(\dfrac{\partial\widehat{v}}{\partial\nu}+Hv\right)v% \,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_H italic_v ) italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

    then v𝑣vitalic_v is a Jacobi function.

4. Instability of rotationally symmetric annuli in 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT

Given r0(0,π/2)subscript𝑟00𝜋2r_{0}\in(0,\pi/2)italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ ( 0 , italic_π / 2 ), let Ar0(𝕊2,gcan)subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝕊2subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛A_{r_{0}}\subset(\mathbb{S}^{2},g_{can})italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) be the rotationally symmetric domain given by Ar0={p𝕊2:d𝕊2(p,γ0)r0}subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0conditional-set𝑝superscript𝕊2subscript𝑑superscript𝕊2𝑝subscript𝛾0subscript𝑟0A_{r_{0}}=\{p\in\mathbb{S}^{2}:d_{\mathbb{S}^{2}}(p,\gamma_{0})\leq r_{0}\}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = { italic_p ∈ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT : italic_d start_POSTSUBSCRIPT blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_p , italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≤ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT }, where γ0=𝕊2{x3=0}subscript𝛾0superscript𝕊2subscript𝑥30\gamma_{0}=\mathbb{S}^{2}\cap\{x_{3}=0\}italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∩ { italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 }.

Since Ar0subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0A_{r_{0}}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is rotationally symmetric and it is also symmetric with respect to γ0subscript𝛾0\gamma_{0}italic_γ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, it is not difficult to see that Ar0subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0A_{r_{0}}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an extremal domain for all r0(0,π/2)subscript𝑟00𝜋2r_{0}\in(0,\pi/2)italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ ( 0 , italic_π / 2 ).

In this section, we will show that all these rotationally symmetric annuli are unstable extremal domains. We start with the following lemma.

Lemma 4.1.

Let Ω𝕊2Ωsuperscript𝕊2\Omega\subset\mathbb{S}^{2}roman_Ω ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be a stable extremal domain. If ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω has at least two connected components and Ωxi𝑑=0subscriptΩsubscript𝑥𝑖differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}x_{i}\,d\ell=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 for all i=1,2,3𝑖123i=1,2,3italic_i = 1 , 2 , 3, then λ1(Ω)1subscript𝜆1Ω1\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\leq 1italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≤ 1.

Proof.

By Proposition 3.6, the stability of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω means that

(4.1) Ωκgv2𝑑+Ω|v|2𝑑aλ1(Ω)Ωv2𝑑a0subscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔superscript𝑣2differential-dsubscriptΩsuperscript𝑣2differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1ΩsubscriptΩsuperscript𝑣2differential-d𝑎0\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}v^{2}\,d\ell+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla v|^{2}\,da-% \lambda_{1}(\Omega)\int_{\Omega}v^{2}\,da\geq 0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_v | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ≥ 0

for all vC(Ω)𝑣superscript𝐶Ωv\in C^{\infty}(\Omega)italic_v ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) such that Ωv𝑑=0subscriptΩ𝑣differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}v\,d\ell=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_d roman_ℓ = 0, where κgsubscript𝜅𝑔\kappa_{g}italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the geodesic curvature of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω.

Since Ωxi𝑑=0subscriptΩsubscript𝑥𝑖differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}x_{i}\,d\ell=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 for all i=1,2,3𝑖123i=1,2,3italic_i = 1 , 2 , 3, we can use x1,x2subscript𝑥1subscript𝑥2x_{1},x_{2}italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and x3subscript𝑥3x_{3}italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as test functions in (4.1). By summing over i=1,2,3𝑖123i=1,2,3italic_i = 1 , 2 , 3, we get

(4.2) Ωκg𝑑+2Area(Ω)λ1(Ω)Area(Ω).subscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔differential-d2AreaΩsubscript𝜆1ΩAreaΩ\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\,d\ell+2\operatorname{Area}(\Omega)\geq\lambda% _{1}(\Omega)\operatorname{Area}(\Omega).∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + 2 roman_Area ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) roman_Area ( roman_Ω ) .

Let r𝑟ritalic_r be the number of connected components of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω. Since r2𝑟2r\geq 2italic_r ≥ 2, we have by the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem that Ωκg𝑑=Area(Ω)+2π(2r)Area(Ω)subscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔differential-dAreaΩ2𝜋2𝑟AreaΩ\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\,d\ell=-\operatorname{Area}(\Omega)+2\pi(2-r)% \leq-\operatorname{Area}(\Omega)∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = - roman_Area ( roman_Ω ) + 2 italic_π ( 2 - italic_r ) ≤ - roman_Area ( roman_Ω ). Thus, by this inequality and by (4.2), we have

Area(Ω)λ1(Ω)Area(Ω).AreaΩsubscript𝜆1ΩAreaΩ\operatorname{Area}(\Omega)\geq\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\operatorname{Area}(\Omega).roman_Area ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) roman_Area ( roman_Ω ) .

Therefore, λ1(Ω)1subscript𝜆1Ω1\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\leq 1italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≤ 1. ∎

Now we have:

Proposition 4.2.

The rotationally symmetric annuli Ar0(𝕊2,gcan)subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝕊2subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛A_{r_{0}}\subset(\mathbb{S}^{2},g_{can})italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ ( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) are not stable for any r0(0,π/2)subscript𝑟00𝜋2r_{0}\in(0,\pi/2)italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ ( 0 , italic_π / 2 ).

Proof.

First, note that we can write gcansubscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛g_{can}italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on Ar0subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0A_{r_{0}}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as gcan=dr2+cos2rdθ2subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛𝑑superscript𝑟2superscript2𝑟𝑑superscript𝜃2g_{can}=dr^{2}+\cos^{2}r\,d\theta^{2}italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_d italic_r start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + roman_cos start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_d italic_θ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT on [r0,r0]×𝕊1subscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0superscript𝕊1[-r_{0},r_{0}]\times\mathbb{S}^{1}[ - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] × blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where r0(0,π/2)subscript𝑟00𝜋2r_{0}\in(0,\pi/2)italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ ( 0 , italic_π / 2 ).

We note that the first eigenfunction of ΔgcansubscriptΔsubscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛\Delta_{g_{can}}roman_Δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on Ar0subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0A_{r_{0}}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with Dirichlet boundary condition is a radial function, that is, it depends only on r𝑟ritalic_r.

If φ=φ(r)𝜑𝜑𝑟\varphi=\varphi(r)italic_φ = italic_φ ( italic_r ), then

Δgcanφ=φ′′(tanr)φ.subscriptΔsubscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛𝜑superscript𝜑′′𝑟superscript𝜑\Delta_{g_{can}}\varphi=\varphi^{\prime\prime}-(\tan r)\varphi^{\prime}.roman_Δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ = italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( roman_tan italic_r ) italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

We would like to investigate the first eigenvalue of the following problem:

φ′′(tanr)φ+λφ=0,φ(r0)=φ(r0)=0.formulae-sequencesuperscript𝜑′′𝑟superscript𝜑𝜆𝜑0𝜑subscript𝑟0𝜑subscript𝑟00\varphi^{\prime\prime}-(\tan r)\varphi^{\prime}+\lambda\varphi=0,\quad\varphi(% -r_{0})=\varphi(r_{0})=0.italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - ( roman_tan italic_r ) italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_λ italic_φ = 0 , italic_φ ( - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_φ ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0 .

Define f(r)=cosr𝑓𝑟𝑟f(r)=\sqrt{\cos r}italic_f ( italic_r ) = square-root start_ARG roman_cos italic_r end_ARG. Since f𝑓fitalic_f solves

(4.3) f=12(tanr)f,superscript𝑓12𝑟𝑓f^{\prime}=-\frac{1}{2}(\tan r)f,italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ( roman_tan italic_r ) italic_f ,

we have, by a simple computation, that w=fφ𝑤𝑓𝜑w=f\varphiitalic_w = italic_f italic_φ solves

w′′f′′fw+λw=0,w(r0)=w(r0)=0.formulae-sequencesuperscript𝑤′′superscript𝑓′′𝑓𝑤𝜆𝑤0𝑤subscript𝑟0𝑤subscript𝑟00w^{\prime\prime}-\frac{f^{\prime\prime}}{f}w+\lambda w=0,\quad w(-r_{0})=w(r_{% 0})=0.italic_w start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG italic_w + italic_λ italic_w = 0 , italic_w ( - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_w ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0 .

As a consequence, we have

(4.4) λ1(Ar0)=infr0r0(w)2+(f′′f)w2drr0r0w2𝑑r,subscript𝜆1subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0infimumsuperscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0superscriptsuperscript𝑤2superscript𝑓′′𝑓superscript𝑤2𝑑𝑟superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0superscript𝑤2differential-d𝑟\lambda_{1}(A_{r_{0}})=\inf\frac{\int_{-r_{0}}^{r_{0}}(w^{\prime})^{2}+\left(% \frac{f^{\prime\prime}}{f}\right)w^{2}\,dr}{\int_{-r_{0}}^{r_{0}}w^{2}\,dr},italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = roman_inf divide start_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_w start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) italic_w start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_r end_ARG start_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_w start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_r end_ARG ,

where the infinfimum\infroman_inf is taken over the set of functions w𝑤witalic_w defined on [r0,r0]subscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0[-r_{0},r_{0}][ - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] such that w(r0)=w(r0)=0𝑤subscript𝑟0𝑤subscript𝑟00w(-r_{0})=w(r_{0})=0italic_w ( - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_w ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 0.

Our next goal is to find a lower estimate for λ1(Ar0)subscript𝜆1subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0\lambda_{1}(A_{r_{0}})italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ).

First, it follows from (4.3) that

f′′f=1214tan2r.superscript𝑓′′𝑓1214superscript2𝑟\frac{f^{\prime\prime}}{f}=-\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{4}\tan^{2}r.divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG roman_tan start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r .

Moreover, we have

r0r0(w)2𝑑rr0r0w2𝑑r(π2r0)2.superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0superscriptsuperscript𝑤2differential-d𝑟superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0superscript𝑤2differential-d𝑟superscript𝜋2subscript𝑟02\frac{\int_{-r_{0}}^{r_{0}}(w^{\prime})^{2}\,dr}{\int_{-r_{0}}^{r_{0}}w^{2}\,% dr}\geq\left(\frac{\pi}{2r_{0}}\right)^{2}.divide start_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_w start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_r end_ARG start_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_w start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_r end_ARG ≥ ( divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT .

Note that for |r|r0<π/3𝑟subscript𝑟0𝜋3|r|\leq r_{0}<\pi/3| italic_r | ≤ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < italic_π / 3, we have

(4.5) (f′′f)(r)(f′′f)(r0)>1214tan2(π/3)=54superscript𝑓′′𝑓𝑟superscript𝑓′′𝑓subscript𝑟01214superscript2𝜋354\left(\frac{f^{\prime\prime}}{f}\right)(r)\geq\left(\frac{f^{\prime\prime}}{f}% \right)(r_{0})>-\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{4}\tan^{2}(\pi/3)=-\frac{5}{4}( divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) ( italic_r ) ≥ ( divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) > - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG roman_tan start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_π / 3 ) = - divide start_ARG 5 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG

and

(4.6) (π2r0)2>94superscript𝜋2subscript𝑟0294\left(\frac{\pi}{2r_{0}}\right)^{2}>\frac{9}{4}( divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT > divide start_ARG 9 end_ARG start_ARG 4 end_ARG

for |r|r0<π/3𝑟subscript𝑟0𝜋3|r|\leq r_{0}<\pi/3| italic_r | ≤ italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < italic_π / 3.

Thus, it follows from (4.4) and estimates (4.5) and (4.6) that

λ1(π2r0)2+(f′′f)(r0)>1.subscript𝜆1superscript𝜋2subscript𝑟02superscript𝑓′′𝑓subscript𝑟01\lambda_{1}\geq\left(\frac{\pi}{2r_{0}}\right)^{2}+\left(\frac{f^{\prime\prime% }}{f}\right)(r_{0})>1.italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ ( divide start_ARG italic_π end_ARG start_ARG 2 italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + ( divide start_ARG italic_f start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_f end_ARG ) ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) > 1 .

From this and by using Lemma 4.1, we can conclude the instability of the extremal annuli Ar0𝕊2subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝕊2A_{r_{0}}\subset\mathbb{S}^{2}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for all r0<π/3subscript𝑟0𝜋3r_{0}<\pi/3italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < italic_π / 3.

Now, suppose that r0π/3subscript𝑟0𝜋3r_{0}\geq\pi/3italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ italic_π / 3 and define φ(r)=sinr/sinr0𝜑𝑟𝑟subscript𝑟0\varphi(r)=\sin r/\sin r_{0}italic_φ ( italic_r ) = roman_sin italic_r / roman_sin italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on Ar0subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0A_{r_{0}}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Note that φ(r0)=1𝜑subscript𝑟01\varphi(r_{0})=1italic_φ ( italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 1 and φ(r0)=1𝜑subscript𝑟01\varphi(-r_{0})=-1italic_φ ( - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = - 1. Thus, Ar0φ𝑑=0subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0𝜑differential-d0\int_{\partial A_{r_{0}}}\varphi\,d\ell=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ italic_d roman_ℓ = 0.

We have

Ar0κgφ2𝑑+Ar0|φ|2𝑑aλ1(Ar0)Ar0φ2𝑑asubscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0subscript𝜅𝑔superscript𝜑2differential-dsubscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎\displaystyle\int_{\partial A_{r_{0}}}\kappa_{g}\varphi^{2}\,d\ell+\int_{A_{r_% {0}}}|\nabla\varphi|^{2}\,da-\lambda_{1}(A_{r_{0}})\int_{A_{r_{0}}}\varphi^{2}% \,da∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a <\displaystyle<< Ar0κg+Ar0|φ|2𝑑asubscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0subscript𝜅𝑔subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎\displaystyle\int_{\partial A_{r_{0}}}\kappa_{g}+\int_{A_{r_{0}}}|\nabla% \varphi|^{2}\,da∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a
=\displaystyle== Area(Ar0)+Ar0|φ|2𝑑a,Areasubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎\displaystyle-\operatorname{Area}(A_{r_{0}})+\int_{A_{r_{0}}}|\nabla\varphi|^{% 2}\,da,- roman_Area ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ,

where we have used the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem in the last equality.

We have

(4.7) Area(Ar0)=2πr0r0cosrdr=4πsinr0Areasubscript𝐴subscript𝑟02𝜋superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0𝑟𝑑𝑟4𝜋subscript𝑟0\operatorname{Area}(A_{r_{0}})=2\pi\int_{-r_{0}}^{r_{0}}\cos r\,dr=4\pi\sin r_% {0}roman_Area ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 2 italic_π ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cos italic_r italic_d italic_r = 4 italic_π roman_sin italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
(4.8) Ar0|φ|2𝑑a=2πsin2r0r0r0cos3rdr=4πsinr04π3sinr0.subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎2𝜋superscript2subscript𝑟0superscriptsubscriptsubscript𝑟0subscript𝑟0superscript3𝑟𝑑𝑟4𝜋subscript𝑟04𝜋3subscript𝑟0\int_{A_{r_{0}}}|\nabla\varphi|^{2}\,da=\frac{2\pi}{\sin^{2}r_{0}}\int_{-r_{0}% }^{r_{0}}\cos^{3}r\,dr=\frac{4\pi}{\sin r_{0}}-\frac{4\pi}{3}\sin r_{0}.∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a = divide start_ARG 2 italic_π end_ARG start_ARG roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_cos start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r italic_d italic_r = divide start_ARG 4 italic_π end_ARG start_ARG roman_sin italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG - divide start_ARG 4 italic_π end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG roman_sin italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

By (4.7) and (4.8) we have

Ar0κgφ2𝑑+Ar0|φ|2𝑑aλ1(Ar0)Ar0φ2𝑑a<4πsinr0(143sin2r0)0,subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0subscript𝜅𝑔superscript𝜑2differential-dsubscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0subscriptsubscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝜑2differential-d𝑎4𝜋subscript𝑟0143superscript2subscript𝑟00\int_{\partial A_{r_{0}}}\kappa_{g}\varphi^{2}\,d\ell+\int_{A_{r_{0}}}|\nabla% \varphi|^{2}\,da-\lambda_{1}(A_{r_{0}})\int_{A_{r_{0}}}\varphi^{2}\,da<\frac{4% \pi}{\sin r_{0}}\left(1-\frac{4}{3}\sin^{2}r_{0}\right)\leq 0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a < divide start_ARG 4 italic_π end_ARG start_ARG roman_sin italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ( 1 - divide start_ARG 4 end_ARG start_ARG 3 end_ARG roman_sin start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≤ 0 ,

since r0π/3subscript𝑟0𝜋3r_{0}\geq\pi/3italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ italic_π / 3.

Thus, we conclude that the annulus Ar0𝕊2subscript𝐴subscript𝑟0superscript𝕊2A_{r_{0}}\subset\mathbb{S}^{2}italic_A start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is also unstable for r0π/3subscript𝑟0𝜋3r_{0}\geq\pi/3italic_r start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ italic_π / 3.

5. Proof of Theorem 1.1

Let Ω𝕊2Ωsuperscript𝕊2\Omega\subset\mathbb{S}^{2}roman_Ω ⊂ blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be a stable extremal domain and let 1Ω,2Ω,,rΩsuperscript1Ωsuperscript2Ωsuperscript𝑟Ω\partial^{1}\Omega,\partial^{2}\Omega,\ldots,\partial^{r}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω , ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω , … , ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω, r1𝑟1r\geq 1italic_r ≥ 1, be the connected components of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω.

For each unit vector a3𝑎superscript3a\in\mathbb{R}^{3}italic_a ∈ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, define the following vector field on 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT: Va(x)=axsubscript𝑉𝑎𝑥𝑎𝑥V_{a}(x)=a\wedge xitalic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = italic_a ∧ italic_x, where \wedge denotes the vector product in 3superscript3\mathbb{R}^{3}blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

Now, define φa:Ω:subscript𝜑𝑎Ω\varphi_{a}:\partial\Omega\to\mathbb{R}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : ∂ roman_Ω → blackboard_R by φa(x)=Va(x),ν(x)subscript𝜑𝑎𝑥subscript𝑉𝑎𝑥𝜈𝑥\varphi_{a}(x)=\langle V_{a}(x),\nu(x)\rangleitalic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) = ⟨ italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_x ) , italic_ν ( italic_x ) ⟩, where ν𝜈\nuitalic_ν denotes the outward unit normal vector along ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω. Since div𝕊2Va=0subscriptdivsuperscript𝕊2subscript𝑉𝑎0\operatorname{div}_{\mathbb{S}^{2}}V_{a}=0roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0, we have

(5.1) kΩφa𝑑=0,subscriptsuperscript𝑘Ωsubscript𝜑𝑎differential-d0\int_{\partial^{k}\Omega}\varphi_{a}\,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

for all k=1,2,,r𝑘12𝑟k=1,2,\ldots,ritalic_k = 1 , 2 , … , italic_r.

The vector field Vasubscript𝑉𝑎V_{a}italic_V start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT generates a one-parameter family of rotations ft:𝕊2𝕊2:subscript𝑓𝑡superscript𝕊2superscript𝕊2f_{t}:\mathbb{S}^{2}\to\mathbb{S}^{2}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT : blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT → blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT around the vector a𝑎aitalic_a. Consider the local deformation of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω in 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT given by Ωt=ft(Ω)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡Ω\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega)roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ). As ftsubscript𝑓𝑡f_{t}italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is an isometry of 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for all t𝑡titalic_t, we have that λ1(Ωt)=λ1(Ω)subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝜆1Ω\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})=\lambda_{1}(\Omega)italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) for all t𝑡titalic_t. In particular,

d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡00\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}=0divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0

and, by Proposition 3.2, this implies that

Ω(φa^ν+κgφa)φa𝑑=0.subscriptΩ^subscript𝜑𝑎𝜈subscript𝜅𝑔subscript𝜑𝑎subscript𝜑𝑎differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}\left(\dfrac{\partial\widehat{\varphi_{a}}}{\partial\nu}+% \kappa_{g}\varphi_{a}\right)\varphi_{a}\,d\ell=0.∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 .

Therefore, since ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is stable, we have by Lemma 3.7 that φasubscript𝜑𝑎\varphi_{a}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a Jacobi function of λ1subscript𝜆1\lambda_{1}italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, that is, there exists a function φa^C(Ω)^subscript𝜑𝑎superscript𝐶Ω\widehat{\varphi_{a}}\in C^{\infty}(\Omega)over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) such that

(5.2) {Δφa^+λ1(Ω)φa^=0onΩ,φa^ν+κgφa=conΩ.casesΔ^subscript𝜑𝑎subscript𝜆1Ω^subscript𝜑𝑎0onΩ^subscript𝜑𝑎𝜈subscript𝜅𝑔subscript𝜑𝑎𝑐onΩ\left\{\begin{array}[]{rcl}\Delta\widehat{\varphi_{a}}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega)% \widehat{\varphi_{a}}=0&\mbox{on}&\Omega,\vspace{0.2cm}\\ \dfrac{\partial\widehat{\varphi_{a}}}{\partial\nu}+\kappa_{g}\varphi_{a}=c&% \mbox{on}&\partial\Omega.\end{array}\right.{ start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_Δ over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG = 0 end_CELL start_CELL on end_CELL start_CELL roman_Ω , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν end_ARG + italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c end_CELL start_CELL on end_CELL start_CELL ∂ roman_Ω . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

After adding φa^^subscript𝜑𝑎\widehat{\varphi_{a}}over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG to a constant multiple of φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ, if necessary, where φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ is the first eigenfuncion of the Laplacian operator on ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω with Dirichlet boundary condition such that φ>0𝜑0\varphi>0italic_φ > 0 and φL2(Ω)=1subscriptnorm𝜑superscript𝐿2Ω1\|\varphi\|_{L^{2}(\Omega)}=1∥ italic_φ ∥ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1, we may assume without loss of generality that c=0𝑐0c=0italic_c = 0 in the second equation above.

Next, fix k{1,2,,r}𝑘12𝑟k\in\{1,2,\ldots,r\}italic_k ∈ { 1 , 2 , … , italic_r }. We know that 𝕊2kΩsuperscript𝕊2superscript𝑘Ω\mathbb{S}^{2}\setminus\partial^{k}\Omegablackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∖ ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω consists of two connected components, both homeomorphic to a disk. Let W𝑊Witalic_W be one of these connected components. Note that W=kΩ𝑊superscript𝑘Ω\partial W=\partial^{k}\Omega∂ italic_W = ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω. Now, let D𝐷Ditalic_D be the closed geodesic disk of largest radius such that DW¯𝐷¯𝑊D\subset\overline{W}italic_D ⊂ over¯ start_ARG italic_W end_ARG. Because of the way D𝐷Ditalic_D was chosen, we have that D𝐷\partial D∂ italic_D touches kΩsuperscript𝑘Ω\partial^{k}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω tangentially at least at two points. In particular, if aD𝑎𝐷a\in Ditalic_a ∈ italic_D is the center of D𝐷Ditalic_D, then φasubscript𝜑𝑎\varphi_{a}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes at least at two points on kΩsuperscript𝑘Ω\partial^{k}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω. We claim that φasubscript𝜑𝑎\varphi_{a}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes at least at one more point of kΩsuperscript𝑘Ω\partial^{k}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω. In fact, if akΩ𝑎superscript𝑘Ω-a\in\partial^{k}\Omega- italic_a ∈ ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω, we are done. If not, we let Wsuperscript𝑊W^{\prime}italic_W start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT be the connected component of 𝕊2kΩsuperscript𝕊2superscript𝑘Ω\mathbb{S}^{2}\setminus\partial^{k}\Omegablackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∖ ∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω which contains a𝑎-a- italic_a and consider Dsuperscript𝐷D^{\prime}italic_D start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, the geodesic closed disk centered at a𝑎-a- italic_a contained in W¯¯superscript𝑊\overline{W^{\prime}}over¯ start_ARG italic_W start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG with the largest possible radius. In this case, we have that Dsuperscript𝐷\partial D^{\prime}∂ italic_D start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ′ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT touches kΩsuperscript𝑘Ω\partial^{k}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω tangentially at least at one point. Thus, this proves our claim.

Following ideas from Ros and Vergasta [25], we will prove in the following that Ωφa^1(0)Ωsuperscript^subscript𝜑𝑎10\Omega\setminus\widehat{\varphi_{a}}^{-1}(0)roman_Ω ∖ over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) has at least three connected components. Let M1,,Mlsubscript𝑀1subscript𝑀𝑙M_{1},\ldots,M_{l}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , … , italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be the connected components of Ωφa^1(0)Ωsuperscript^subscript𝜑𝑎10\Omega\setminus\widehat{\varphi_{a}}^{-1}(0)roman_Ω ∖ over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ). By applying the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem to each Misubscript𝑀𝑖M_{i}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we obtain

area(Mi)=2πχ(Mi)Miκg𝑑k=1jiθki,areasubscript𝑀𝑖2𝜋𝜒subscript𝑀𝑖subscriptsubscript𝑀𝑖subscript𝜅𝑔differential-dsuperscriptsubscript𝑘1subscript𝑗𝑖subscriptsuperscript𝜃𝑖𝑘\operatorname{area}(M_{i})=2\pi\chi(M_{i})-\int_{\partial M_{i}}\kappa_{g}\,d% \ell-\sum_{k=1}^{j_{i}}\theta^{i}_{k},roman_area ( italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = 2 italic_π italic_χ ( italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_j start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_θ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

where θkisubscriptsuperscript𝜃𝑖𝑘\theta^{i}_{k}italic_θ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are the external angles of Misubscript𝑀𝑖\partial M_{i}∂ italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

By summing over i=1,2,,l𝑖12𝑙i=1,2,\ldots,litalic_i = 1 , 2 , … , italic_l, we get that

area(Ω)=2π(i=1lχ(Mi))Ωκg𝑑jθj,areaΩ2𝜋superscriptsubscript𝑖1𝑙𝜒subscript𝑀𝑖subscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔differential-dsubscript𝑗subscript𝜃𝑗\operatorname{area}(\Omega)=2\pi\left(\sum_{i=1}^{l}\chi(M_{i})\right)-\int_{% \partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\,d\ell-\sum_{j}\theta_{j},roman_area ( roman_Ω ) = 2 italic_π ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_χ ( italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

where jθjsubscript𝑗subscript𝜃𝑗\sum_{j}\theta_{j}∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT stands for the sum of the external angles of all nodal domains Misubscript𝑀𝑖M_{i}italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

By the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem applied to ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω, we have

(5.3) 2π(2r)=2π(i=1lχ(Mi))jθj.2𝜋2𝑟2𝜋superscriptsubscript𝑖1𝑙𝜒subscript𝑀𝑖subscript𝑗subscript𝜃𝑗2\pi(2-r)=2\pi\left(\sum_{i=1}^{l}\chi(M_{i})\right)-\sum_{j}\theta_{j}.2 italic_π ( 2 - italic_r ) = 2 italic_π ( ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_l end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_χ ( italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) - ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Now, it follows from (5.1) that φasubscript𝜑𝑎\varphi_{a}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes in at least two points of iΩsuperscript𝑖Ω\partial^{i}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω, for all i=1,2,,r𝑖12𝑟i=1,2,\ldots,ritalic_i = 1 , 2 , … , italic_r. Moreover, we know that for φasubscript𝜑𝑎\varphi_{a}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT vanishes in at least three points of kΩsuperscript𝑘Ω\partial^{k}\Omega∂ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_k end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_Ω. This implies that

(5.4) jθj2π(12+r).subscript𝑗subscript𝜃𝑗2𝜋12𝑟\sum_{j}\theta_{j}\geq 2\pi\left(\dfrac{1}{2}+r\right).∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_θ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≥ 2 italic_π ( divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG + italic_r ) .

Thus, by (5.3) and (5.4) we can conclude that

i=1χ(Mi)52>2.subscript𝑖1𝜒subscript𝑀𝑖522\sum_{i=1}\chi(M_{i})\geq\dfrac{5}{2}>2.∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_χ ( italic_M start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ≥ divide start_ARG 5 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG > 2 .

This implies that Ω(φa^)1(0)Ωsuperscript^subscript𝜑𝑎10\Omega\setminus(\widehat{\varphi_{a}})^{-1}(0)roman_Ω ∖ ( over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) has at least three connected components.

But since ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a stable extremal domain and φa^^subscript𝜑𝑎\widehat{\varphi_{a}}over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG solves (5.2) we have that Ω(φa^)1(0)Ωsuperscript^subscript𝜑𝑎10\Omega\setminus(\widehat{\varphi_{a}})^{-1}(0)roman_Ω ∖ ( over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( 0 ) has at most two connected components unless φa^0^subscript𝜑𝑎0\widehat{\varphi_{a}}\equiv 0over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ≡ 0. Thus, it follows from the above argument that φa^0^subscript𝜑𝑎0\widehat{\varphi_{a}}\equiv 0over^ start_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ≡ 0, which implies that ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is rotationally symmetric.

Since the rotationally symmetric extremal annuli are unstable we have that ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a geodesic ball.

6. Proof of Theorem 1.2

Let (M2,g)superscript𝑀2𝑔(M^{2},g)( italic_M start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g ) be an orientable Riemannian surface and let ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M be a stable extremal domain. Suppose that ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω has nonnegative total Gauss curvature, that is, ΩKg𝑑a0subscriptΩsubscript𝐾𝑔differential-d𝑎0\int_{\Omega}K_{g}\,da\geq 0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ≥ 0.

By a result of Gabard [11, Théorème 7.2.], which improved a previous result due to Alfhors [1], there exists a proper conformal branched cover φ=(φ1,φ2):Ω𝔻2:𝜑subscript𝜑1subscript𝜑2Ωsuperscript𝔻2\varphi=(\varphi_{1},\varphi_{2}):\Omega\to\mathbb{D}^{2}italic_φ = ( italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) : roman_Ω → blackboard_D start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, where 𝔻22superscript𝔻2superscript2\mathbb{D}^{2}\subset\mathbb{R}^{2}blackboard_D start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊂ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the closed unit disk, of degree at most gΩ+rsubscript𝑔Ω𝑟g_{\Omega}+ritalic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_r. Moreover, after composing φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ with a conformal diffeomorphism of 𝔻2superscript𝔻2\mathbb{D}^{2}blackboard_D start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT if necessary, we may suppose that

Ωφi𝑑=0,subscriptΩsubscript𝜑𝑖differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}\varphi_{i}\,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

for i=1,2𝑖12i=1,2italic_i = 1 , 2.

Thus, by the stability of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω, we have that

i=12Ωκgφi2𝑑+i=12Ω|φi|2𝑑aλ1(Ω)i=12Ωφi2𝑑a.superscriptsubscript𝑖12subscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔superscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖2differential-dsuperscriptsubscript𝑖12subscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖2differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1Ωsuperscriptsubscript𝑖12subscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖2differential-d𝑎\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\varphi_{i}^{2}\,d\ell+\sum_{i=1}% ^{2}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla\varphi_{i}|^{2}\,da\geq\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\sum_{i=1}^% {2}\int_{\Omega}\varphi_{i}^{2}\,da.∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a .

Since φ𝜑\varphiitalic_φ is conformal and has degree at most gΩ+rsubscript𝑔Ω𝑟g_{\Omega}+ritalic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_r,

i=12Ω|φi|2𝑑a2π(gΩ+r).superscriptsubscript𝑖12subscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖2differential-d𝑎2𝜋subscript𝑔Ω𝑟\sum_{i=1}^{2}\int_{\Omega}|\nabla\varphi_{i}|^{2}\,da\leq 2\pi(g_{\Omega}+r).∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ≤ 2 italic_π ( italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_r ) .

Thus, it follows from this and from the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem that

2π(22gΩr)+2π(gΩ+r)λ1(Ω)i=12Ωφi2𝑑a+ΩKg𝑑a>0.2𝜋22subscript𝑔Ω𝑟2𝜋subscript𝑔Ω𝑟subscript𝜆1Ωsuperscriptsubscript𝑖12subscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖2differential-d𝑎subscriptΩsubscript𝐾𝑔differential-d𝑎02\pi(2-2g_{\Omega}-r)+2\pi(g_{\Omega}+r)\geq\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\sum_{i=1}^{2}% \int_{\Omega}\varphi_{i}^{2}\,da+\int_{\Omega}K_{g}\,da>0.2 italic_π ( 2 - 2 italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - italic_r ) + 2 italic_π ( italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_r ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_K start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a > 0 .

Thus, 4π2πgΩ>04𝜋2𝜋subscript𝑔Ω04\pi-2\pi g_{\Omega}>04 italic_π - 2 italic_π italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0, that is, gΩ<2subscript𝑔Ω2g_{\Omega}<2italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT < 2.

Now, in order to estimate the number r𝑟ritalic_r of connected components of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω, we use a similar, but different, balancing argument. Let Ω¯¯Ω\overline{\Omega}over¯ start_ARG roman_Ω end_ARG denote a compact Riemannian surface obtained from ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω by attaching a conformal disk at any connected component of ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω, such that Ω¯¯Ω\overline{\Omega}over¯ start_ARG roman_Ω end_ARG and ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω have the same genus. There exists a nonconstant holomorphic map ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,ψ3):Ω¯𝕊2:𝜓subscript𝜓1subscript𝜓2subscript𝜓3¯Ωsuperscript𝕊2\psi=(\psi_{1},\psi_{2},\psi_{3}):\overline{\Omega}\to\mathbb{S}^{2}italic_ψ = ( italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) : over¯ start_ARG roman_Ω end_ARG → blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT of degree at most 1+(gΩ+1)/21subscript𝑔Ω121+\left\lfloor(g_{\Omega}+1)/2\right\rfloor1 + ⌊ ( italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 ) / 2 ⌋ (see, for example, [14], p.261), where 𝕊23superscript𝕊2superscript3\mathbb{S}^{2}\subset\mathbb{R}^{3}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊂ blackboard_R start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the unit sphere centered at the origin. Again, after composing ψ𝜓\psiitalic_ψ with a conformal diffeomorphism of 𝕊2superscript𝕊2\mathbb{S}^{2}blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT if necessary, we may assume that

Ωψi𝑑=0,subscriptΩsubscript𝜓𝑖differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}\psi_{i}\,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

for i=1,2,3𝑖123i=1,2,3italic_i = 1 , 2 , 3.

For each i=1,2,3𝑖123i=1,2,3italic_i = 1 , 2 , 3, we define φi=ψi|Ωsubscript𝜑𝑖evaluated-atsubscript𝜓𝑖Ω\varphi_{i}=\psi_{i}|_{\Omega}italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Since i=13φi2=1superscriptsubscript𝑖13superscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖21\sum_{i=1}^{3}\varphi_{i}^{2}=1∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1 in ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω, it follows from the stability of ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω that

Ωκg𝑑+8π(1+gΩ+12)subscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔differential-d8𝜋1subscript𝑔Ω12absent\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\,d\ell+8\pi\left(1+\left\lfloor% \dfrac{g_{\Omega}+1}{2}\right\rfloor\right)\geq∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + 8 italic_π ( 1 + ⌊ divide start_ARG italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ⌋ ) ≥ Ωκg𝑑+i=13Ω¯|ψi|2𝑑asubscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔differential-dsuperscriptsubscript𝑖13subscript¯Ωsuperscriptsubscript𝜓𝑖2differential-d𝑎\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\,d\ell+\sum_{i=1}^{3}\int_{% \overline{\Omega}}|\nabla\psi_{i}|^{2}\,da∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT over¯ start_ARG roman_Ω end_ARG end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_ψ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a
>\displaystyle>> Ωκg𝑑+i=13Ω|φi|2𝑑asubscriptΩsubscript𝜅𝑔differential-dsuperscriptsubscript𝑖13subscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝜑𝑖2differential-d𝑎\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega}\kappa_{g}\,d\ell+\sum_{i=1}^{3}\int_{\Omega% }|\nabla\varphi_{i}|^{2}\,da∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ + ∑ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a
\displaystyle\geq λ1(Ω)area(Ω)>0.subscript𝜆1ΩareaΩ0\displaystyle\,\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\operatorname{area}(\Omega)>0.italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) roman_area ( roman_Ω ) > 0 .

By the Gauss-Bonnet Theorem, we have that

12π2πr4πgΩ+8πgΩ+12>0.12𝜋2𝜋𝑟4𝜋subscript𝑔Ω8𝜋subscript𝑔Ω12012\pi-2\pi r-4\pi g_{\Omega}+8\pi\left\lfloor\dfrac{g_{\Omega}+1}{2}\right% \rfloor>0.12 italic_π - 2 italic_π italic_r - 4 italic_π italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 8 italic_π ⌊ divide start_ARG italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ⌋ > 0 .

Therefore, if gΩ=0subscript𝑔Ω0g_{\Omega}=0italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0, then 12π2πr>012𝜋2𝜋𝑟012\pi-2\pi r>012 italic_π - 2 italic_π italic_r > 0 which implies that r<5𝑟5r<5italic_r < 5. In the case gΩ=1subscript𝑔Ω1g_{\Omega}=1italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1, we have 16π2πr>016𝜋2𝜋𝑟016\pi-2\pi r>016 italic_π - 2 italic_π italic_r > 0 and this implies r<8𝑟8r<8italic_r < 8.

7. Proof of Theorem 1.3

Suppose that Ω(𝕊n,gcan)Ωsuperscript𝕊𝑛subscript𝑔𝑐𝑎𝑛\Omega\subset(\mathbb{S}^{n},g_{can})roman_Ω ⊂ ( blackboard_S start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_a italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) is a stable extremal domain such that ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω is a compact minimal hypersurface, that is, HΩ=0subscript𝐻Ω0H_{\partial\Omega}=0italic_H start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0. It follows from a result due to Reilly [24, Theorem 4] that λ1(Ω)nsubscript𝜆1Ω𝑛\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\geq nitalic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_n with equality if and only if ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a hemisphere.

Since ΩΩ\partial\Omega∂ roman_Ω is minimal, it is well known that

Ωxi𝑑=0,subscriptΩsubscript𝑥𝑖differential-d0\int_{\partial\Omega}x_{i}\,d\ell=0,∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ = 0 ,

for all i=1,2,,n+1𝑖12𝑛1i=1,2,\ldots,n+1italic_i = 1 , 2 , … , italic_n + 1.

Thus, using the coordinate functions as test functions in Proposition 3.6, we get

Ω|xi|2𝑑aλ1(Ω)Ωxi2𝑑asubscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝑥𝑖2differential-d𝑎subscript𝜆1ΩsubscriptΩsuperscriptsubscript𝑥𝑖2differential-d𝑎\int_{\Omega}|\nabla x_{i}|^{2}\,da\geq\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\int_{\Omega}x_{i}^{% 2}\,da∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | ∇ italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_a

for all i=1,2,,n+1𝑖12𝑛1i=1,2,\ldots,n+1italic_i = 1 , 2 , … , italic_n + 1.

By summing over i=1,2,,n+1𝑖12𝑛1i=1,2,\ldots,n+1italic_i = 1 , 2 , … , italic_n + 1 and using that |xi|2=1xi2superscriptsubscript𝑥𝑖21superscriptsubscript𝑥𝑖2|\nabla x_{i}|^{2}=1-x_{i}^{2}| ∇ italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT | start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 1 - italic_x start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, we have

nvol(Ω)λ1(Ω)vol(Ω).𝑛volΩsubscript𝜆1ΩvolΩn\operatorname{vol}(\Omega)\geq\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\operatorname{vol}(\Omega).italic_n roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) ≥ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) .

This implies λ1(Ω)nsubscript𝜆1Ω𝑛\lambda_{1}(\Omega)\leq nitalic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) ≤ italic_n. Thus, λ1(Ω)=nsubscript𝜆1Ω𝑛\lambda_{1}(\Omega)=nitalic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) = italic_n and ΩΩ\Omegaroman_Ω is a hemisphere.

Appendix A Proof of Proposition 3.2

Let (M,g)𝑀𝑔(M,g)( italic_M , italic_g ) be a Riemannian manifold and let Ω0MsubscriptΩ0𝑀\Omega_{0}\subset Mroman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⊂ italic_M be an extremal domain. In this section, we will deduce the second variation formula (3.1) for the first eigenvalue functional Ωλ1(Ω)maps-toΩsubscript𝜆1Ω\Omega\mapsto\lambda_{1}(\Omega)roman_Ω ↦ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) at Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Let φ0C(Ω0)subscript𝜑0superscript𝐶subscriptΩ0\varphi_{0}\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{0})italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) be the first eigenfunction of the Laplacian operator on Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with Dirichlet boundary condition such that φ0>0subscript𝜑00\varphi_{0}>0italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0 on Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and φ0L2(Ω0)=1subscriptnormsubscript𝜑0superscript𝐿2subscriptΩ01\|\varphi_{0}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega_{0})}=1∥ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1. Since Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is extremal, there is a constant c𝑐c\in\mathbb{R}italic_c ∈ blackboard_R such that φ0/ν0=csubscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0𝑐\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial\nu_{0}=c∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c on Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

For each smooth domain ΩMΩ𝑀\Omega\subset Mroman_Ω ⊂ italic_M, define

J(Ω)=λ1(Ω)+c2vol(Ω).𝐽Ωsubscript𝜆1Ωsuperscript𝑐2volΩJ(\Omega)=\lambda_{1}(\Omega)+c^{2}\operatorname{vol}(\Omega).italic_J ( roman_Ω ) = italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω ) + italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_vol ( roman_Ω ) .

Let Ωt=ft(Ω0)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡subscriptΩ0\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega_{0})roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), be a local deformation of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in M𝑀Mitalic_M given by a smooth vector field V𝔛(M)𝑉𝔛𝑀V\in\mathfrak{X}(M)italic_V ∈ fraktur_X ( italic_M ). It is well known that

ddtvol(Ωt)=Ωtvt𝑑t,t(ε,ε),formulae-sequence𝑑𝑑𝑡volsubscriptΩ𝑡subscriptsubscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑣𝑡differential-dsubscript𝑡for-all𝑡𝜀𝜀\dfrac{d}{dt}\operatorname{vol}(\Omega_{t})=\int_{\partial\Omega_{t}}v_{t}\,d% \ell_{t},\quad\forall\,t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon),divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG roman_vol ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∀ italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ) ,

where vt=V,νtsubscript𝑣𝑡𝑉subscript𝜈𝑡v_{t}=\left\langle V,\nu_{t}\right\rangleitalic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ⟨ italic_V , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩, νtsubscript𝜈𝑡\nu_{t}italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT denotes the outward unit normal vector along ΩtsubscriptΩ𝑡\partial\Omega_{t}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, and dt𝑑subscript𝑡d\ell_{t}italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the volume element of ΩtsubscriptΩ𝑡\partial\Omega_{t}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT induced by g𝑔gitalic_g.

Therefore, by Proposition 2.2, we have

(A.1) ddtJ(Ωt)=Ωtvt[(φtνt)2c2]𝑑t,t(ε,ε),formulae-sequence𝑑𝑑𝑡𝐽subscriptΩ𝑡subscriptsubscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑣𝑡delimited-[]superscriptsubscript𝜑𝑡subscript𝜈𝑡2superscript𝑐2differential-dsubscript𝑡for-all𝑡𝜀𝜀\dfrac{d}{dt}J(\Omega_{t})=-\int_{\partial\Omega_{t}}v_{t}\left[\left(\dfrac{% \partial\varphi_{t}}{\partial\nu_{t}}\right)^{2}-c^{2}\right]\,d\ell_{t},\quad% \forall\,t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon),divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG italic_J ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∀ italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ) ,

where φtC(Ωt)subscript𝜑𝑡superscript𝐶subscriptΩ𝑡\varphi_{t}\in C^{\infty}(\Omega_{t})italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∈ italic_C start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∞ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) denotes the positive first eigenfunction of the Laplacian operator on ΩtsubscriptΩ𝑡\Omega_{t}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with Dirichlet boundary condition and such that φtL2(Ωt)=1subscriptnormsubscript𝜑𝑡superscript𝐿2subscriptΩ𝑡1\|\varphi_{t}\|_{L^{2}(\Omega_{t})}=1∥ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∥ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_L start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 1.

Since φ0/ν0=csubscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0𝑐\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial\nu_{0}=c∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c, it follows from (A.1) that Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is a critical point of J𝐽Jitalic_J with respect to all local deformations Ωt=ft(Ω0)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡subscriptΩ0\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega_{0})roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in M𝑀Mitalic_M, not only the volume-preserving ones. Moreover, we have

d2dt2J(Ωt)|t=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2𝐽subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\displaystyle\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}J(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_J ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =Ω0v0[ddt(φtνt)2|t=0]𝑑0absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0delimited-[]evaluated-at𝑑𝑑𝑡superscriptsubscript𝜑𝑡subscript𝜈𝑡2𝑡0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=-\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\left[\left.\dfrac{d}{dt}\left(% \frac{\partial\varphi_{t}}{\partial\nu_{t}}\right)^{2}\right|_{t=0}\right]\,d% \ell_{0}= - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT [ divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ] italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=2Ω0v0φ0ν0(ddtφtνt|t=0)𝑑0.absent2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0evaluated-at𝑑𝑑𝑡subscript𝜑𝑡subscript𝜈𝑡𝑡0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=-2\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\dfrac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{% \partial\nu_{0}}\left(\left.\dfrac{d}{dt}\dfrac{\partial\varphi_{t}}{\partial% \nu_{t}}\right|_{t=0}\right)\,d\ell_{0}.= - 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ( divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

From now on, we will denote derivatives with respect to t𝑡titalic_t at t=0𝑡0t=0italic_t = 0 by using dots.

Note that

(φtνt)˙˙subscript𝜑𝑡subscript𝜈𝑡\displaystyle\dot{\left(\frac{\partial\varphi_{t}}{\partial\nu_{t}}\right)}over˙ start_ARG ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) end_ARG =ddt|t=0φt,νtabsentevaluated-at𝑑𝑑𝑡𝑡0subscript𝜑𝑡subscript𝜈𝑡\displaystyle=\frac{d}{dt}\Big{|}_{t=0}\langle\nabla\varphi_{t},\nu_{t}\rangle= divide start_ARG italic_d end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t end_ARG | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩
=φ˙,ν0+φ0,ν˙absent˙𝜑subscript𝜈0subscript𝜑0˙𝜈\displaystyle=\langle\nabla\dot{\varphi},\nu_{0}\rangle+\langle\nabla\varphi_{% 0},\dot{\nu}\rangle= ⟨ ∇ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + ⟨ ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , over˙ start_ARG italic_ν end_ARG ⟩
=φ˙ν0+φ0ν˙.absent˙𝜑subscript𝜈0subscript𝜑0˙𝜈\displaystyle=\frac{\partial\dot{\varphi}}{\partial\nu_{0}}+\frac{\partial% \varphi_{0}}{\partial\dot{\nu}}.= divide start_ARG ∂ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG + divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ over˙ start_ARG italic_ν end_ARG end_ARG .

Let gt=ft(g)subscript𝑔𝑡superscriptsubscript𝑓𝑡𝑔g_{t}=f_{t}^{*}(g)italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∗ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_g ) be the pullback metric of g𝑔gitalic_g on Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Let h=g˙˙𝑔h=\dot{g}italic_h = over˙ start_ARG italic_g end_ARG be the derivative tensor at t=0𝑡0t=0italic_t = 0. Note that h=Vgsubscript𝑉𝑔h=\mathcal{L}_{V}gitalic_h = caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g, where \mathcal{L}caligraphic_L denotes the Lie derivative.

Since φ0=(φ0/ν0)ν0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0\nabla\varphi_{0}=\left(\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial\nu_{0}\right)\nu_{0}∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = ( ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we get φ0,ν˙=(φ0/ν0)ν0,ν˙subscript𝜑0˙𝜈subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0˙𝜈\langle\nabla\varphi_{0},\dot{\nu}\rangle=\left(\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial% \nu_{0}\right)\langle\nu_{0},\dot{\nu}\rangle⟨ ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , over˙ start_ARG italic_ν end_ARG ⟩ = ( ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟨ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , over˙ start_ARG italic_ν end_ARG ⟩. Moreover, since νt,νt=1subscript𝜈𝑡subscript𝜈𝑡1\langle\nu_{t},\nu_{t}\rangle=1⟨ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ = 1 for all t𝑡titalic_t, it follows directly that

ν0,ν˙=12h(ν0,ν0).subscript𝜈0˙𝜈12subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0\langle\nu_{0},\dot{\nu}\rangle=-\dfrac{1}{2}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0}).⟨ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , over˙ start_ARG italic_ν end_ARG ⟩ = - divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) .

Therefore,

d2dt2J(Ωt)|t=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2𝐽subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\displaystyle\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}J(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_J ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =2Ω0v0φ0ν0φ˙ν0𝑑0+Ω0v0(φ0ν0)2h(ν0,ν0)𝑑0absent2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0˙𝜑subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0superscriptsubscript𝜑0subscript𝜈02subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=-2\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\dfrac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{% \partial\nu_{0}}\dfrac{\partial\dot{\varphi}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\,d\ell_{0}+\int% _{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\left(\dfrac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}% \right)^{2}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})\,d\ell_{0}= - 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG ∂ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=2cΩ0v0φ˙ν0𝑑0+c2Ω0v0h(ν0,ν0)𝑑0.absent2𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0˙𝜑subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=-2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\dfrac{\partial\dot{\varphi}}{% \partial\nu_{0}}\,d\ell_{0}+c^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{% 0})\,d\ell_{0}.= - 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Now, suppose that Ωt=ft(Ω0)subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝑓𝑡subscriptΩ0\Omega_{t}=f_{t}(\Omega_{0})roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_f start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ), t(ε,ε)𝑡𝜀𝜀t\in(-\varepsilon,\varepsilon)italic_t ∈ ( - italic_ε , italic_ε ), is a volume-preserving local deformation. Note that, in this case, we have

d2dt2J(Ωt)|t=0=d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0.evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2𝐽subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}J(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}=\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{% 2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}.divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_J ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Moreover, we also have that Ω0v0𝑑0=0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript00\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\,d\ell_{0}=0∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.

Let v^0subscript^𝑣0\widehat{v}_{0}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT be a (Δ+λ1(Ω0))Δsubscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0(\Delta+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0}))( roman_Δ + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) )-extension of v0subscript𝑣0v_{0}italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, that is, v^0subscript^𝑣0\widehat{v}_{0}over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT solves the following problem (see Remark 3.3):

{Δv^0+λ1(Ω0)v^0=0in Ω0,v^0=v0on Ω0.casesΔsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣00in subscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝑣0on subscriptΩ0\left\{\begin{array}[]{rl}\Delta\widehat{v}_{0}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})% \widehat{v}_{0}=0&\textrm{in }\Omega_{0},\\ \widehat{v}_{0}=v_{0}&\textrm{on }\partial\Omega_{0}.\end{array}\right.{ start_ARRAY start_ROW start_CELL roman_Δ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 end_CELL start_CELL in roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_CELL start_CELL on ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT . end_CELL end_ROW end_ARRAY

Using that φ˙=0˙𝜑0\dot{\varphi}=0over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG = 0 along Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, the Green formula yields

Ω0v0φ˙ν0𝑑0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0˙𝜑subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\frac{\partial\dot{\varphi}}{% \partial\nu_{0}}\,d\ell_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =Ω0(v^0Δφ˙φ˙Δv^0)𝑑a0absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0Δ˙𝜑˙𝜑Δsubscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=\int_{\Omega_{0}}\left(\widehat{v}_{0}\Delta\dot{\varphi}-\dot{% \varphi}\Delta\widehat{v}_{0}\right)\,da_{0}= ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Δ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG - over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG roman_Δ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=Ω0v^0(Δφ˙+λ1(Ω0)φ˙)𝑑a0,absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0Δ˙𝜑subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0˙𝜑differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=\int_{\Omega_{0}}\widehat{v}_{0}\left(\Delta\dot{\varphi}+% \lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\dot{\varphi}\right)\,da_{0},= ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Δ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

where da0𝑑subscript𝑎0da_{0}italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the volume element of Ω0subscriptΩ0\Omega_{0}roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT.

Now, differentiating the equation Δgtφt+λ1(Ωt)φt=0subscriptΔsubscript𝑔𝑡subscript𝜑𝑡subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡subscript𝜑𝑡0\Delta_{g_{t}}\varphi_{t}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\varphi_{t}=0roman_Δ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 we get

Δ˙φ0+Δφ˙+λ˙1φ0+λ1(Ω0)φ˙=0.˙Δsubscript𝜑0Δ˙𝜑subscript˙𝜆1subscript𝜑0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0˙𝜑0\dot{\Delta}\varphi_{0}+\Delta\dot{\varphi}+\dot{\lambda}_{1}\varphi_{0}+% \lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\dot{\varphi}=0.over˙ start_ARG roman_Δ end_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + roman_Δ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG + over˙ start_ARG italic_λ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG = 0 .

And so, since λ˙1=0subscript˙𝜆10\dot{\lambda}_{1}=0over˙ start_ARG italic_λ end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0 we have

Δφ˙+λ1(Ω0)φ˙=Δ˙φ0.Δ˙𝜑subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0˙𝜑˙Δsubscript𝜑0\Delta\dot{\varphi}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\dot{\varphi}=-\dot{\Delta}\varphi_% {0}.roman_Δ over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over˙ start_ARG italic_φ end_ARG = - over˙ start_ARG roman_Δ end_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Combining these identities, we arrive at

(A.2) d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0=2cΩ0v^0Δ˙φ0𝑑a0+c2Ω0v0h(ν0,ν0)𝑑0,evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0˙Δsubscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}=2c\int_{\Omega% _{0}}\widehat{v}_{0}\dot{\Delta}\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}+c^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega_% {0}}v_{0}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})\,d\ell_{0},divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over˙ start_ARG roman_Δ end_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

where Δ˙φ0=h,2φ0divh(φ0)+12(trΩ0h),φ0˙Δsubscript𝜑0superscript2subscript𝜑0divsubscript𝜑012subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0\dot{\Delta}\varphi_{0}=-\langle h,\nabla^{2}\varphi_{0}\rangle-\operatorname{% div}h(\nabla\varphi_{0})+\frac{1}{2}\langle\nabla(\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0% }}h),\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangleover˙ start_ARG roman_Δ end_ARG italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = - ⟨ italic_h , ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ - roman_div italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) + divide start_ARG 1 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ⟨ ∇ ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ (see [5, 8]).

Integrating by parts, we have

Ω0h,2φ0v^0𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript2subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle h,\nabla^{2}\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{% v}_{0}\,da_{0}- ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_h , ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =Ω0div(h(φ0,)v^0)𝑑a0+Ω0divh(φ0)v^0𝑑a0absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\cdot)% \widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{0}+\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}h(\nabla\varphi_{0% })\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}= - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ⋅ ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+Ω0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+\int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})% \,da_{0}+ ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=Ω0h(φ0,ν0)v^0𝑑0+Ω0divh(φ0)v^0𝑑a0absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript0subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=-\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nu_{0})\widehat{v% }_{0}\,d\ell_{0}+\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}h(\nabla\varphi_{0})% \widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}= - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+Ω0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0.subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+\int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})% \,da_{0}.+ ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Plugging this identity into (A.2) and noting that

h(φ0,ν0)=(φ0/ν0)h(ν0,ν0)=ch(ν0,ν0)on Ω0,formulae-sequencesubscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0𝑐subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0on subscriptΩ0h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nu_{0})=\left(\partial\varphi_{0}/\partial\nu_{0}\right)h% (\nu_{0},\nu_{0})=ch(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})\quad\text{on }\partial\Omega_{0},italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = ( ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = italic_c italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) on ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

we get

d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\displaystyle\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =2cΩ0h(φ0,ν0)v0𝑑0+2cΩ0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0absent2𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=-2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d% \ell_{0}+2c\int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{0}= - 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+cΩ0v^0(trΩ0h),φ0𝑑a0+c2Ω0v0h(ν0,ν0)𝑑0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\quad+c\int_{\Omega_{0}}\widehat{v}_{0}\langle\nabla(% \operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h),\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\,da_{0}+c^{2}\int_{% \partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})\,d\ell_{0}+ italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=c2Ω0vh(ν0,ν0)𝑑0+2cΩ0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0absentsuperscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑣subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=-c^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}vh(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})\,d\ell_{0}+2c% \int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{0}= - italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+cΩ0(trΩ0h),φ0v^0𝑑a0.𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+c\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla(\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{% 0}}h),\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}.+ italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Using h=Vgsubscript𝑉𝑔h=\mathcal{L}_{V}gitalic_h = caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g, we have

Ω0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =Ω0(Vg)(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑉𝑔subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=\int_{\Omega_{0}}\left(\mathcal{L}_{V}g\right)(\nabla\varphi_{0}% ,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{0}= ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g ) ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=Ω0(φ0V,v^0+v^0V,φ0)𝑑a0.absentsubscriptsubscriptΩ0subscriptsubscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscriptsubscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle=\int_{\Omega_{0}}\left(\langle\nabla_{\nabla\varphi_{0}}V,\nabla% \widehat{v}_{0}\rangle+\langle\nabla_{\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}}V,\nabla\varphi_{0% }\rangle\right)\,da_{0}.= ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ⟨ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + ⟨ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

On the other hand,

div(V,v^0φ0)div𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0\displaystyle\text{div}(\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\nabla\varphi_{0})div ( ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) =V,v^0,φ0+V,v^0Δφ0absent𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0Δsubscript𝜑0\displaystyle=\langle\nabla\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle,\nabla% \varphi_{0}\rangle+\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\Delta\varphi_{0}= ⟨ ∇ ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=φ0V,v^0+V,φ0v^0λ1(Ω0)V,v^0φ0absentsubscriptsubscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0𝑉subscriptsubscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0\displaystyle=\langle\nabla_{\nabla\varphi_{0}}V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle+% \langle V,\nabla_{\nabla\varphi_{0}}\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle-\lambda_{1}(% \Omega_{0})\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\varphi_{0}= ⟨ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + ⟨ italic_V , ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=φ0V,v^0+2v^0(V,φ0)λ1(Ω0)V,v^0φ0,absentsubscriptsubscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0superscript2subscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0\displaystyle=\langle\nabla_{\nabla\varphi_{0}}V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle+% \nabla^{2}\widehat{v}_{0}(V,\nabla\varphi_{0})-\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\langle V% ,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\varphi_{0},= ⟨ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

and similarly,

div(V,φ0v^0)div𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0\displaystyle\text{div}(\langle V,\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})div ( ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) =v^0V,φ0+2φ0(V,v^0)λ1(Ω0)V,φ0v^0.absentsubscriptsubscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript𝜑0superscript2subscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0\displaystyle=\langle\nabla_{\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}}V,\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle+% \nabla^{2}\varphi_{0}(V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})-\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\langle V% ,\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}.= ⟨ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Thus, we have that

Ω0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0=subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0absent\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{% 0}=∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Ω0div(V,v^0φ0)𝑑a0Ω02v^0(V,φ0)𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript2subscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}\text{div}(\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}% \rangle\nabla\varphi_{0})\,da_{0}-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\nabla^{2}\widehat{v}_{0}(V% ,\nabla\varphi_{0})\,da_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT div ( ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,v^0φ0𝑑a0+Ω0div(V,φ0v^0)𝑑a0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\widehat{v}_{0% }\rangle\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}+\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(\langle V,% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{0}+ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
Ω02φ0(V,v^0)𝑑a0+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,φ0v^0𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript2subscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\nabla^{2}\varphi_{0}(V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})% \,da_{0}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\varphi_{0}% \rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}- ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== Ω0(V,v^0φ0ν0+V,φ0v^0ν0)𝑑0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}\left(\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}% \rangle\frac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}+\langle V,\nabla\varphi_{0}% \rangle\frac{\partial\widehat{v}_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\right)\,d\ell_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG + ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
Ω0(2v^0(V,φ0)+2φ0(V,v^0))𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript2subscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript𝜑0superscript2subscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\left(\nabla^{2}\widehat{v}_{0}(V,\nabla\varphi% _{0})+\nabla^{2}\varphi_{0}(V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\right)\,da_{0}- ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) + ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,v^0φ0𝑑a0+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,φ0v^0𝑑a0.subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\widehat% {v}_{0}\rangle\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}% \langle V,\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}.+ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Now, on Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we have V=VT+v0ν0𝑉superscript𝑉𝑇subscript𝑣0subscript𝜈0V=V^{T}+v_{0}\nu_{0}italic_V = italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and φ0=cν0subscript𝜑0𝑐subscript𝜈0\nabla\varphi_{0}=c\nu_{0}∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_c italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, where VTsuperscript𝑉𝑇V^{T}italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the component of V𝑉Vitalic_V tangent to Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Moreover, note that

2v^0(V,φ0)+2φ0(V,v^0)=v^0,φ0,V.superscript2subscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript𝜑0superscript2subscript𝜑0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉\nabla^{2}\widehat{v}_{0}(V,\nabla\varphi_{0})+\nabla^{2}\varphi_{0}(V,\nabla% \widehat{v}_{0})=\langle\nabla\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0},\nabla\varphi_{0}% \rangle,V\rangle.∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) + ∇ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = ⟨ ∇ ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ , italic_V ⟩ .

Thus

Ω0h(φ0,v^0)𝑑a0=subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0absent\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}h(\nabla\varphi_{0},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0})\,da_{% 0}=∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Ω0(VT,v^0φ0ν0+v0v^0ν0φ0ν0+v0φ0ν0v^0ν0)𝑑0subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript𝑉𝑇subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}\left(\langle V^{T},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0% }\rangle\frac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}+v_{0}\frac{\partial% \widehat{v}_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\frac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}+v% _{0}\frac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\frac{\partial\widehat{v}_{0}}{% \partial\nu_{0}}\right)\,d\ell_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ⟨ italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG + italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
Ω0v^0,φ0,V𝑑a0+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,v^0φ0𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0},% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle,V\rangle\,da_{0}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_% {0}}\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}- ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ , italic_V ⟩ italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,φ0v^0𝑑a0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\varphi_% {0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}+ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== cΩ0VT,v^0𝑑0+2cΩ0v0v^0ν0𝑑0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0superscript𝑉𝑇subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\,c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}\langle V^{T},\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}% \rangle\,d\ell_{0}+2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\frac{\partial\widehat{v}_{% 0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\,d\ell_{0}italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
Ω0v^0,φ0,V𝑑a0+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,v^0φ0𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0},% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle,V\rangle\,da_{0}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_% {0}}\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}- ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ , italic_V ⟩ italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,φ0v^0𝑑a0.subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\varphi_% {0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}.+ italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Next, let us deal with the last integral in the formula of d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\left.\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by applying integration by parts again and using that trΩ0h=2divVsubscripttrsubscriptΩ02div𝑉\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h=2\operatorname{div}Vroman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = 2 roman_div italic_V.

We have:

Ω0trΩ0h,φ0v^0𝑑a0=subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0absent\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h,% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}=∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = Ω0div((trΩ0h)v^0φ0)𝑑a0Ω0(trΩ0h)div(v^0φ0)𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}((\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0% }}h)\widehat{v}_{0}\nabla\varphi_{0})\,da_{0}-\int_{\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{% tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h)\operatorname{div}(\widehat{v}_{0}\nabla\varphi_{0})\,da_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) roman_div ( over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== Ω0(trΩ0h)v0φ0ν0𝑑02Ω0divVdiv(v^0φ0)da0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript02subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑑subscript𝑎0\displaystyle\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h)v_{0}% \frac{\partial\varphi_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\,d\ell_{0}-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}% \operatorname{div}V\operatorname{div}(\widehat{v}_{0}\nabla\varphi_{0})\,da_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div italic_V roman_div ( over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=\displaystyle== cΩ0(trΩ0h)v0𝑑0+cΩ0h(ν0,ν0)v0𝑑0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\,c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{tr}_{\partial\Omega_{0% }}h)v_{0}\,d\ell_{0}+c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d\ell_% {0}italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2Ω0divVdiv(v^0φ0)da0,2subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑑subscript𝑎0\displaystyle-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}V\operatorname{div}(\widehat% {v}_{0}\nabla\varphi_{0})\,da_{0},- 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div italic_V roman_div ( over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

where in the last equality we have used that trΩ0h=trΩ0h+h(ν0,ν0)subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h=\operatorname{tr}_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h+h(\nu_% {0},\nu_{0})roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h = roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h + italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). Now, since V=Vg𝑉subscript𝑉𝑔V=\mathcal{L}_{V}gitalic_V = caligraphic_L start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_g, we have that

Ω0trΩ0h,φ0v^0𝑑a0=subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0absent\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h,% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}=∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =  2cΩ0(divΩ0V)v0𝑑0+cΩ0h(ν0,ν0)v0𝑑02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscriptdivsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\,2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{div}_{\partial\Omega_% {0}}V)v_{0}\,d\ell_{0}+c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d% \ell_{0}2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2Ω0divV(v^0,φ0+v^0Δφ0)𝑑a02subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0Δsubscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}V(\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{% 0},\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle+\widehat{v}_{0}\Delta\varphi_{0})\,da_{0}- 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div italic_V ( ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ + over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT

By using that Δφ0+λ1(Ω0)φ0=0Δsubscript𝜑0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscript𝜑00\Delta\varphi_{0}+\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\varphi_{0}=0roman_Δ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0, we obtain that

Ω0trΩ0h,φ0v^0𝑑a0=subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0absent\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h,% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}=∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =  2cΩ0(divΩ0V)v0𝑑0+cΩ0h(ν0,ν0)v0𝑑02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscriptdivsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\,2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{div}_{\partial\Omega_% {0}}V)v_{0}\,d\ell_{0}+c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d% \ell_{0}2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2Ω0divV(v^0,φ0λ1(Ω0)v^0φ0)𝑑a02subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}V(\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{% 0},\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle-\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\widehat{v}_{0}\varphi_{0})% \,da_{0}- 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div italic_V ( ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ - italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=\displaystyle==  2cΩ0(divΩ0V)v0𝑑0+cΩ0h(ν0,ν0)v0𝑑02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscriptdivsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\,2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{div}_{\partial\Omega_% {0}}V)v_{0}\,d\ell_{0}+c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d% \ell_{0}2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2Ω0div(v^0,φ0V)𝑑a0+2Ω0V,v^0,φ0𝑑a02subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript𝑎02subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0% },\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle V)\,da_{0}+2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla% \langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0},\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\rangle\,da_{0}- 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_V ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ⟩ italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+2λ1(Ω0)Ω0(divV)v^0φ0𝑑a0.2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0div𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle+2\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}(\operatorname{div}V)% \widehat{v}_{0}\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}.+ 2 italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_div italic_V ) over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

As divΩ0V=divΩ0VT+Hv0subscriptdivsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscriptdivsubscriptΩ0superscript𝑉𝑇𝐻subscript𝑣0\operatorname{div}_{\partial\Omega_{0}}V=\operatorname{div}_{\partial\Omega_{0% }}V^{T}+Hv_{0}roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V = roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT + italic_H italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT on Ω0subscriptΩ0\partial\Omega_{0}∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, we obtain that

Ω0trΩ0h,φ0v^0𝑑a0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscripttrsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla\operatorname{tr}_{\Omega_{0}}h,% \nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ roman_tr start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =2cΩ0v0divΩ0VTd0+2cΩ0H(v0)2𝑑0absent2𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscriptdivsubscriptΩ0superscript𝑉𝑇𝑑subscript02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝐻superscriptsubscript𝑣02differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\operatorname{div}_{\partial% \Omega_{0}}V^{T}\,d\ell_{0}+2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}H(v_{0})^{2}\,d\ell_{0}= 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+cΩ0h(ν0,ν0)v0𝑑02Ω0div(v^0,φ0V)𝑑a0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript02subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d\ell_{0% }-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0},\nabla% \varphi_{0}\rangle V)\,da_{0}+ italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_V ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+2Ω0V,v^0,φ0𝑑a0+2λ1(Ω0)Ω0div(v^0φ0V)𝑑a02subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎02subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_% {0},\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\rangle\,da_{0}+2\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{% \Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(\widehat{v}_{0}\varphi_{0}V)\,da_{0}+ 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ⟩ italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_V ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2λ1(Ω0)Ω0(V,φ0v^0+V,v^0φ0)𝑑a02subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad-2\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}(\langle V,\nabla% \varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}+\langle V,\nabla\widehat{v}_{0}\rangle% \varphi_{0})\,da_{0}- 2 italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=2cΩ0Ω0v0,VT𝑑0+2cΩ0H(v0)2𝑑0absent2𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0superscript𝑉𝑇differential-dsubscript02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝐻superscriptsubscript𝑣02differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=-2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}\langle\nabla_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_% {0},V^{T}\rangle\,d\ell_{0}+2c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}H(v_{0})^{2}\,d\ell_{0}= - 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ ∇ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_V start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+cΩ0h(ν0,ν0)v0𝑑02Ω0div(v^0,φ0V)𝑑a0𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝜈0subscript𝜈0subscript𝑣0differential-dsubscript02subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+c\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}h(\nu_{0},\nu_{0})v_{0}\,d\ell_{0% }-2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_{0},\nabla% \varphi_{0}\rangle V)\,da_{0}+ italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h ( italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_V ) italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
+2Ω0V,v^0,φ0𝑑a02λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,φ0v^0𝑑a02subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎02subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript𝜑0subscript^𝑣0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad+2\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\langle\nabla\widehat{v}_% {0},\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\rangle\,da_{0}-2\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{% \Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle\widehat{v}_{0}\,da_{0}+ 2 ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ⟩ italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 2 italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2λ1(Ω0)Ω0V,v^0φ0𝑑a0.2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ0subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝑉subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0differential-dsubscript𝑎0\displaystyle\quad-2\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{0})\int_{\Omega_{0}}\langle V,\nabla% \widehat{v}_{0}\rangle\varphi_{0}\,da_{0}.- 2 italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟨ italic_V , ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_a start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT .

Thus, substituting into the formula above for d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\left.\frac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and canceling some terms, we have that

d2dt2λ1(Ωt)|t=0evaluated-atsuperscript𝑑2𝑑superscript𝑡2subscript𝜆1subscriptΩ𝑡𝑡0\displaystyle\left.\dfrac{d^{2}}{dt^{2}}\lambda_{1}(\Omega_{t})\right|_{t=0}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_t start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 1 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) | start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_t = 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT =4c2Ω0v0v^0ν0𝑑0+2c2Ω0H(v0)2𝑑0absent4superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜈0differential-dsubscript02superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0𝐻superscriptsubscript𝑣02differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=4c^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}v_{0}\dfrac{\partial\widehat{v}_{% 0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}\,d\ell_{0}+2c^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}H(v_{0})^{2}\,d% \ell_{0}= 4 italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT + 2 italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_H ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
2cΩ0div(v^0,φ0V)𝑑02𝑐subscriptsubscriptΩ0divsubscript^𝑣0subscript𝜑0𝑉differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle\quad-2c\int_{\Omega_{0}}\operatorname{div}(\langle\nabla\widehat% {v}_{0},\nabla\varphi_{0}\rangle V)\,d\ell_{0}- 2 italic_c ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_div ( ⟨ ∇ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT , ∇ italic_φ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ italic_V ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT
=2c2Ω0(v0v^0ν0+H(v0)2)𝑑0,absent2superscript𝑐2subscriptsubscriptΩ0subscript𝑣0subscript^𝑣0subscript𝜈0𝐻superscriptsubscript𝑣02differential-dsubscript0\displaystyle=2c^{2}\int_{\partial\Omega_{0}}\left(v_{0}\dfrac{\partial% \widehat{v}_{0}}{\partial\nu_{0}}+H(v_{0})^{2}\right)\,d\ell_{0},= 2 italic_c start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ∫ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∂ roman_Ω start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT divide start_ARG ∂ over^ start_ARG italic_v end_ARG start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ∂ italic_ν start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG + italic_H ( italic_v start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) italic_d roman_ℓ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ,

and this finishes the proof.

Acknowledgments

M.C. would like to express his gratitude to Princeton University for its hospitality, especially to Fernando Codá Marques, whose insightful questions inspired this work. This work was carried out while the authors were visiting ICTP - International Centre for Theoretical Physics, as associates. M.C. and I.N. acknowledge support from the ICTP through the Associates Programme (2022-2027 and 2019-2024, respectively). The authors are very grateful to the Institute and to Claudio Arezzo for their hospitality.

The authors were partially supported by the Brazilian National Council for Scientific and Technological Development (CNPq) under Grant 405468/ 2021-0. M.C. was also supported by CNPq under Grant 11136/ 2023-0 and by the Foundation for Research Support of the State of Alagoas (FAPEAL) under Grant 60030.0000000323/2023.

References

  • [1] Lars V. Ahlfors, Open Riemann surfaces and extremal problems on compact subregions, Comment. Math. Helv. 24 (1950), 100–134.
  • [2] A. D. Aleksandrov, Uniqueness theorems for surfaces in the large. I–III, Vestn. Leningr. Univ., Mat. Mekh. Astron. 11 (1956), no. 4, 5–17.
  • [3] F. J. jun. Almgren, Existence and regularity almost everywhere of solutions to elliptic variational problems with constraints, Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 81 (1975), 151–154.
  • [4] J. Lucas Barbosa, Manfredo P. do Carmo, and Jost-Hinrich Eschenburg, Stability of hypersurfaces of constant mean curvature in Riemannian manifolds, Math. Z. 197 (1988), no. 1, 123–138.
  • [5] M. Berger, Sur les premières valeurs propres des variétés riemanniennes, Compositio Math. 26 (1973), 129–149. MR 316913
  • [6] Isaac Chavel, Eigenvalues in Riemannian geometry, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 115, Academic Press, Inc., Orlando, FL, 1984, Including a chapter by Burton Randol, With an appendix by Jozef Dodziuk. MR 768584
  • [7] Erwann Delay and Pieralberto Sicbaldi, Extremal domains for the first eigenvalue in a general compact Riemannian manifold, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 35 (2015), no. 12, 5799–5825.
  • [8] Ahmad El Soufi and Saïd Ilias, Domain deformations and eigenvalues of the Dirichlet Laplacian in a Riemannian manifold, Illinois J. Math. 51 (2007), no. 2, 645–666. MR 2342681
  • [9] José M. Espinar and Laurent Mazet, Characterization of f𝑓fitalic_f-extremal disks, J. Differ. Equations 266 (2019), no. 4, 2052–2077.
  • [10] G. Faber, Beweis, daß unter allen homogenen Membranen von gleicher Fläche und gleicher Spannung die kreisförmige den tiefsten Grundton gibt., Münch. Ber. 1923, 169-172 (1923)., 1923.
  • [11] Alexandre Gabard, On the conformal order representation of Riemannian surfaces and a characterization of separating families of curves, Comment. Math. Helv. 81 (2006), no. 4, 945–964.
  • [12] P. R. Garabedian and M. Schiffer, Variational problems in the theory of elliptic partial differential equations, J. Ration. Mech. Anal. 2 (1953), 137–171.
  • [13] E. Gonzalez, U. Massari, and I. Tamanini, On the regularity of boundaries of sets minimizing perimeter with a volume constraint, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 32 (1983), 25–37.
  • [14] Phillip Griffiths and Joseph Harris, Principles of algebraic geometry, Pure and Applied Mathematics. A Wiley-Interscience Publication. New York etc.: John Wiley & Sons. XII, 813 p. £ 29.60; $ 58.00 (1978)., 1978.
  • [15] Michael Grüter, Boundary regularity for solutions of a partitioning problem, Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal. 97 (1987), 261–270.
  • [16] Antoine Henrot, Extremum problems for eigenvalues of elliptic operators, Front. Math., Basel: Birkhäuser, 2006.
  • [17] Heinz Hopf, Differential geometry in the large. Seminar lectures New York University 1946 and Stanford University 1956. With a preface by S. S. Chern, Lect. Notes Math., vol. 1000, Springer, Cham, 1983.
  • [18] E. Krahn, Über eine von Rayleigh formulierte Minimaleigenschaft des Kreises., Math. Ann. 94 (1925), 97–100.
  • [19] S. Kumaresan and Jyotshana Prajapat, Serrin’s result for hyperbolic space and sphere, Duke Math. J. 91 (1998), no. 1, 17–28. MR 1487977
  • [20] Jimmy Lamboley and Pieralberto Sicbaldi, Existence and regularity of Faber-Krahn minimizers in a Riemannian manifold, J. Math. Pures Appl. (9) 141 (2020), 137–183.
  • [21] F. Pacard and X. Xu, Constant mean curvature spheres in Riemannian manifolds, Manuscr. Math. 128 (2009), no. 3, 275–295.
  • [22] Frank Pacard and Pieralberto Sicbaldi, Extremal domains for the first eigenvalue of the Laplace-Beltrami operator, Ann. Inst. Fourier 59 (2009), no. 2, 515–542.
  • [23] Robert C. Reilly, Applications of the Hessian operator in a Riemannian manifold, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 26 (1977), 459–472.
  • [24] by same author, Applications of the Hessian operator in a Riemannian manifold, Indiana Univ. Math. J. 26 (1977), 459–472.
  • [25] Antonio Ros and Enaldo Vergasta, Stability for hypersurfaces of constant mean curvature with free boundary, Geom. Dedicata 56 (1995), no. 1, 19–33. MR 1338315
  • [26] Felix Schlenk and Pieralberto Sicbaldi, Bifurcating extremal domains for the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian, Adv. Math. 229 (2012), no. 1, 602–632.
  • [27] James Serrin, A symmetry problem in potential theory, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal. 43 (1971), 304–318. MR 333220
  • [28] Pieralberto Sicbaldi, New extremal domains for the first eigenvalue of the Laplacian in flat tori, Calc. Var. Partial Differ. Equ. 37 (2010), no. 3-4, 329–344.
  • [29] by same author, Extremal domains of big volume for the first eigenvalue of the Laplace-Beltrami operator in a compact manifold, Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré, Anal. Non Linéaire 31 (2014), no. 6, 1231–1265.
  • [30] Hung Tran, Index characterization for free boundary minimal surfaces, Commun. Anal. Geom. 28 (2020), no. 1, 189–222.
  • [31] Rugang Ye, Foliation by constant mean curvature spheres, Pac. J. Math. 147 (1991), no. 2, 381–396.