Existence results for a nonlinear nonautonomus transmission problem via domain perturbation

The map is well defined. Indeed, by the harmonicity and regularity properties of single layer potentials (cf. Theorem 3.4 (i)-(ii)), we know that

for all (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2. We now show that it is bijective. So, we take a pair of functions (h^o,h^i) \in C^{1,\alpha}_{\mathrm{h}}(\overline{\Omega^o} \setminus \Omega) \times C^{1,\alpha}_{\mathrm{h}}(\overline{\Omega}) and we prove that there exists a unique quintuple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 such that

By the uniqueness of the classical solution of the Dirichlet boundary value problem, the second equation in (Proof), (Proof) is equivalent to

(notice that, since h^i is an element of C^{1,\alpha}_{\mathrm{h}}(\overline{\Omega}), we have h^i_{|\partial\Omega} \in C^{1,\alpha} (\partial\Omega) \subseteq C^{0,\alpha} (\partial\Omega)). By Theorem 3.4 (iv), there exists a unique pair (\eta^i,\rho^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega)_0 \times \mathbb{R} such that (Proof) holds. Then it remains to show that there exists a unique triple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\rho^o) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) \times \mathbb{R} such that

By the jump relations for the single layer potential (cf. Theorem 3.4 (iii)) and by the uniqueness of the classical solution of the Neumann-Dirichlet mixed boundary value problem, equation (Proof) is equivalent to the following system of integral equations:

(notice that, by h^o \in C^{1,\alpha}_{\mathrm{h}}(\overline{\Omega}), we get h^o_{|\partial\Omega} \in C^{1,\alpha} (\partial\Omega) \subseteq C^{0,\alpha} (\partial\Omega) and \nu_{\Omega} \cdot \nabla h^o_{|\partial\Omega} \in C^{0,\alpha} (\partial\Omega)). Then we observe that by Theorem 3.4 (iv), the map from C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) \times \mathbb{R} to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) that takes a triple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\rho^o) to the pair of functions \left(V_{\partial\Omega^o} [\mu^o] + \rho^o, \frac{1}{2} \mu^i \right) is an isomorphism. Moreover, by the properties of integral operators with real analytic kernel and no singularities (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]) and by Theorem 3.5, the map from C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) \times \mathbb{R} to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) that takes a triple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\rho^o) to the pair of functions (v^-_{\Omega}[\mu^i]_{|\partial\Omega^o}, W^\ast_{\partial\Omega}[\mu^i] + \nu_{\Omega} \cdot \nabla v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o]_{|\partial\Omega}) is compact. Hence, the map from C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) \times \mathbb{R} to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega) that takes a triple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\rho^o) to the pair of functions

is a compact perturbation of an isomorphism and therefore it is a Fredholm operator of index 0. Thus, to complete the proof, it suffices to show that (Proof) with (h^o_{|\partial\Omega^o}, \nu_{\Omega} \cdot \nabla h^o_{|\partial\Omega}) = (0,0) implies (\mu^o,\mu^i,\rho^o)=(0,0,0). If

then by the jump relations for the single layer potential (cf. Theorem 3.4 (iii)) and by the uniqueness of the classical solution of Neumann-Dirichlet mixed boundary value problem, one deduces that (v^+_{\Omega^o} [\mu^o] + v^-_{\Omega}[\mu^i] + \rho^o)_{| \overline{\Omega^o} \setminus \Omega}=0. Moreover, by the continuity of v_{\Omega}[\mu^i] in \mathbb{R}^n, we have that (v^+_{\Omega^o} [\mu^o] + v^-_{\Omega}[\mu^i] + \rho^o)_{| \partial\Omega} = (v^+_{\Omega^o} [\mu^o] + v^+_{\Omega}[\mu^i] + \rho^o)_{|\partial\Omega} = 0. Then by the uniqueness of the classical solution of Dirichlet boundary value problem in \Omega we deduce that

By the jump relations for the single layer potential (cf. Theorem 3.4 (iii)), adding and subtracting the term \nu_{\Omega} \cdot \nabla ( v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o] +\rho^o)_{|\partial\Omega} and taking into account (Proof), we get

Thus, by (Proof), we obtain V_{\Omega^o} [\mu^o] + \rho^o = 0 on \partial \Omega^o, which implies (\mu^o,\rho^o)=(0,0) (cf. Theorem 3.4 (iv)). Hence (\mu^o,\mu^i,\rho^o)=(0,0,0) and the proof is complete.

We first prove (i). We write J_A in the form J_A = \tilde{J}^{+}_A \circ \tilde{J}_A \circ \tilde{J}^{-}_A, where \tilde{J}^{-}_A is the inclusion of L^2(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i) \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 into L^2(\partial\Omega^o) \times (L^2(\partial\Omega^i))^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2, \tilde{J}_A is the map from L^2(\partial\Omega^o) \times (L^2(\partial\Omega^i))^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 into itself that takes (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) to the quintuple \tilde{J}_A[\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i] defined by

and \tilde{J}^{+}_A is the map from L^2(\partial\Omega^o) \times (L^2(\partial\Omega^i))^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 into L^2(\partial\Omega^o) \times (L^2(\partial\Omega^i))^2 that takes a quintuple (f,g_1,g_2,c_1,c_2) to the triple \tilde{J}^{+}_A[f,g_1,g_2,c_1,c_2] defined by

Then we observe that \tilde{J}^{+}_A is a Fredholm operator of index 2, because \mathrm{Coker}\, \tilde{J}^{+}_A = \{0\} and \mathrm{Ker}\, \tilde{J}^{+}_A = \mathrm{Span}\, \{(0,A_{11},A_{21},1,0), (0,A_{12},A_{22},0,1)\}, and that \tilde{J}^{-}_A is Fredholm of index -2, because \mathrm{Ker}\, \tilde{J}^{-}_A = \{0\} and \mathrm{Coker}\, \tilde{J}^{-}_A = \mathrm{Span}\, \{(1,0,0,0,0), (0,0,1,0,0)\}. Next, we observe that the map from L^2(\partial\Omega^o) \times (L^2(\partial\Omega^i))^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 into itself that takes a quintuple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) to the quintuple (-\frac{1}{2}\mu^o,\frac{1}{2}\mu^i,-\frac{1}{2}\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) is a linear isomorphism. Moreover, by the mapping properties of the integral operators with real analytic kernel and no singularity (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]), by the compactness of the operators W^\ast_{\partial\Omega^o} and W^\ast_{\partial\Omega^i} from L^2(\partial\Omega^o) to itself and from L^2(\partial\Omega^i) to itself, respectively (see comments below Definition 3.3), by the compactness of the operator V_{\partial\Omega^i} from L^2(\partial\Omega^i) into itself (see Costabel [Co88, Thm. 1]), and by the bilinearity and continuity of the product from C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i) to L^2(\partial\Omega^i), we deduce that the map from L^2(\partial\Omega^o) \times (L^2(\partial\Omega^i))^2 \times \mathbb{R}^2 into itself that takes a quintuple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) to the quintuple \tilde{J}^C_A[\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i] defined by

is compact. Hence, we conclude that \tilde{J}_A is a compact perturbation of an isomorphism and therefore it is Fredholm of index 0. Since the index of a composition of Fredholm operators is the sum of the indexes of the components, we deduce that J_A is a Fredholm operator of index 0. Therefore, in order to complete the proof of point (i), it suffices to prove that J_A is injective. Thus, we now assume that (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in L^2(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i) \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 and that

We first verify that (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i) is actually in C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0. In fact, by the definition of J_{A,1} in (4.3), by the fact that \nu_{\Omega^o} \cdot \nabla v^-_{\Omega^i}[\mu^i]_{|\partial\Omega^o} \in C^{0}(\partial\Omega^o) (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]), and by Theorem 3.8, we deduce that \mu^o \in C^{0}(\partial\Omega^o). Let \mathcal{K}\equiv(\mathcal{K}_1, \mathcal{K}_2) be the map from L^2(\partial\Omega^i)\times L^2(\partial\Omega^i)_0 to itself that takes a pair (\mu^i,\eta^i)\in L^2(\partial\Omega^i)\times L^2(\partial\Omega^i)_0 to

Notice that each component of \mathcal{K} is a linear combinations of integral operators with a continuous kernel of order n-2 (see Definition 3.6 and comments below). By the fact that \mu^o \in C^0(\partial\Omega^i) and by the first condition in (?), we know that 2(A_{11},A_{12}) \cdot (v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o]_{|\partial\Omega^i} + \rho^o , \rho^i ), -2(A_{21},A_{22}) \cdot (v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o]_{|\partial\Omega^i} + \rho^o ,\rho^i ) belong to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \subseteq C^{0}(\partial\Omega^i). Then (Proof) and the definition of the operator \mathcal{K} imply that (I + \mathcal{K})[\mu^i,\eta^i] \in (C^{0}(\partial\Omega^i))^2. Hence, by Theorem 3.7 we conclude that (\mu^i,\eta^i) \in C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0. Then by mapping properties of integral operators with real analytic kernel and no singularity (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]) and by classical known results in potential theory (cf. Miranda [Mi70, Chap. II, § 14]), we know that \nu_{\Omega^o} \cdot \nabla v^-_{\Omega^i}[\mu^i]_{|\partial\Omega^o} \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) and v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o]_{|\partial\Omega^i}, \, \nu_{\Omega^i} \cdot \nabla v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o]_{|\partial\Omega^i}, \, V_{\partial\Omega^i}[\eta^i], \, V_{\partial\Omega^i}[\mu^i]\in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i). Hence, by (Proof) and by the membership of A \in M_2(C^{0,\alpha} (\partial\Omega^i)) (cf. first condition in (?)), we obtain that \left( -\frac{1}{2} I + W^\ast_{\partial\Omega^o} \right) [\mu^o] \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) and \left( \frac{1}{2} I + W^\ast_{\partial\Omega^i} \right) [\mu^i], \left( -\frac{1}{2} I + W^\ast_{\partial\Omega^i} \right) [\eta^i] \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i). Then Theorem 3.8 implies (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0. By the jump relations (cf. Theorem 3.4 (iii)), by Lemma 4.1, and by (Proof), we deduce that the pair (U^o_{\Omega^i}[\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i],U^i_{\Omega^i}[\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i]) defined by (?), (?) is a solution of the boundary value problem (4.2). Then by Lemma 4.2, we have that

which implies (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i)=(0,0,0,0,0), by the uniqueness of the representation provided by Lemma 4.1. We now prove statement (ii). First we note that the integral operators that appear in the definition (4.3) of J_A have either a weakly singular or a real analytic kernel. It follows that J_A is continuous from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1] for the properties of integral operators with real analytic kernels). Then we observe that, by Theorems 3.7 and 3.8, if we have J_A[\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i] \in C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 for some (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in L^2(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i) \times L^2(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2, then (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i) \in C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 (see also the argument used after (Proof) to prove that (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i) belongs to C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0). Then, by statement (i) we deduce that J_A is a bijective continuous linear map from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2. By the Open Mapping Theorem it follows that J_A is a linear homeomorphism from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2. The proof of statement (iii) is similar to that of statement (ii) and we leave it to the zealous reader (see also the argument used after (Proof) to prove that (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i) belongs to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0).

By Lemma 4.1 and by the jump relations of Theorem 3.4, we know that if (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 then the pair

defined by (?), (?) is a solution of problem (?) if an only if

Then, by subtracting in both sides of (Proof) the term

and by the invertibility of J_A from C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i))^2 provided by Proposition 4.3 (iii), the validity of the statement follows.

By the properties of integral operators with real analytic kernel and no singularities (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]) and by the compactness of the embedding of C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) into C^0(\partial\Omega^i), v^+_{\Omega^o}[\cdot]_{|\partial\Omega^i} is compact from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 into C^0(\partial\Omega^i). By mapping properties of the single layer potential (cf. Miranda [Mi70, Chap. II, §14, III]) and by the compactness of the embedding of C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) into C^0(\partial\Omega^i), V_{\partial\Omega^i} is compact from C^0(\partial\Omega^i) into itself. Hence, by the bilinearity and continuity of the product of continuous functions, the map from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 that takes the quintuple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) to the triple given by

is continuous and maps bounded sets into sets with compact closure, i.e., is compact. Moreover, by assumption (?), one readily verifies that the operators \mathcal{N}_{F_1} and \mathcal{N}_{F_2} are continuous from (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 into C^0(\partial\Omega^i). Hence the map from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 that takes the quintuple (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) to the triple

is compact. Finally, by Proposition 4.3 (ii), J_A is a linear isomorphism from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 and, accordingly, T_A is compact.

We plan to apply the Leray-Schauder Theorem 4.6 to the operator T_A defined by (?) in the Banach space C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2. By Proposition 4.5 we already know that T_A is a continuous operator from C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 and maps bounded sets into sets with compact closure. So in order to apply the Leray-Schauder Theorem 4.6, we are left to show that if \lambda \in ]0,1[ and if

with (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2, then there exists a constant C \in ]0,+\infty[ (which does not depend on \lambda and (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i)), such that

By (Proof) and by |\lambda|<1, we readily deduce that

By the growth condition (?), we can show that

for all pair of functions (h^i_1,h^i_2) \in (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2. Hence, by (Proof) and by the definition of T_A in (?), we deduce that there exist two constants C_1,C_2 \in ]0,+\infty[, which depend only on the operator norm of J_A^{(-1)} from C^0(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^0(\partial\Omega^i))^2 to C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 (cf. Theorem 4.3 (ii)), on \|f^o\|_{\partial\Omega^o}, on the constant C_F \in ]0,+\infty[ provided by the growth condition (?) (cf. (Proof)), on the norm of the bounded linear operator v^+_{\Omega^o}[\cdot]_{|\partial\Omega^i} from C^0(\partial\Omega^o) to C^0(\partial\Omega^i), and on the norm of the bounded linear operator V_{\partial\Omega^i} from C^0(\partial\Omega^i) into itself, such that

Then, by a straightforward calculation, we can show the existence of a constant C>0 such that inequality (Proof) holds true (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis [La07, proof of Thm. 7.2]). Hence, by the Leray-Schauder Theorem 4.6 there exists at least one solution

of (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) = T_A(\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i). Finally, by the definition of T_A (cf. (?)), we conclude that (\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0) is a solution in C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 of the nonlinear system (4.4).

Let T_A be as in (?). By Proposition 4.7, we deduce the existence of a quintuple (\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0) \in C^0(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^0(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 such that (\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0) = T_A(\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0). By the mapping properties of integral operators with real analytic kernel and no singularities (cf. Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]), v^+_{\Omega^o}[\mu^o_0]_{|\partial\Omega^i} belongs to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i). By classical results in potential theory (cf. Miranda [Mi70, Chap. II, §14, III]), V_{\Omega^i}[\mu^i_0] and V_{\Omega^i}[\eta^i_0] belong to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i). Then, by condition (?) and by the membership of A \in M_2(C^{0,\alpha} (\partial\Omega^i)) and of f^o \in C^{0,\alpha} (\partial\Omega^o), we obtain that

belongs to the product space C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i))^2. Finally, by the invertibility of the operator J_A from C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) \times (C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i))^2, we obtain that (\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2. In particular, by Proposition 4.4 we deduce that the pair given by (?), (?) is a solution of (?) (cf. (?)).

We first observe that, by the regularity of \phi \in \mathcal{A}^{\Omega^o}_{\partial\Omega^i}, if (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2, then

Moreover, since \overline{\Omega^i[\phi]} \subset \Omega^o, we can apply Lemma 4.1 with \Omega=\Omega^i[\phi]. Then by the jump relations for the single layer potential (cf. Theorem 3.4 (iii)), by a change of variable on \phi(\partial \Omega^i) and by the definition of M (cf. (?)), we obtain that the pair of functions

is a solution of problem (?) if and only if (5.1) is satisfied. Finally, since \phi_0\equiv \text{id}_{\partial\Omega^i} (cf. (?)) and by the definition of J_A (cf. (4.3)), we obtain that, for all (\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2, equation (5.1) is equivalent to the system (4.4). Then the existence of a solution (\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0) of (5.1) follows by Proposition 4.7.

We only prove the analyticity of M_2. The analyticity of M_1 and of M_3 can be proved similarly and it is left to the reader.

Therefore, we now analyse M_2. The map from \mathcal{A}^{\Omega^o}_{\partial\Omega^i} \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) that takes (\phi,\mu^i) to the function of the variable t\in\partial\Omega^i defined by

is real analytic by the real analyticity result for the dependence of layer potentials upon perturbation of the support and of the density of Lanza de Cristoforis and Rossi [LaRo04, Thm. 3.12] and Lanza de Cristoforis [La07-2, Prop. 7] (see also Lemma 2.1). The map from \mathcal{A}^{\Omega^o}_{\partial\Omega^i} \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) that takes (\phi,\mu^o) to the function of the variable t \in\partial\Omega^i defined by

can be proven to be real analytic by

the properties of integral operators with real analytic kernels and no singularities (see Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]). For the third term of M_2 we proceed in this way. The map from \mathcal{A}^{\Omega^o}_{\partial\Omega^i} \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o) to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) that takes (\phi,\mu^o) to the function of the variable t\in\partial\Omega^i defined by

can be proven to be real analytic by

the properties of integral operators with real analytic kernels and no singularities (see Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]). The map from \mathcal{A}^{\Omega^o}_{\partial\Omega^i} \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) that takes (\phi,\mu^o) to the function of the variable t\in\partial\Omega^i defined by

is real analytic by a result of real analytic dependence for the single layer potential upon perturbation of the support and of the density (see Lanza de Cristoforis and Rossi [LaRo04, Thm. 3.12], Lanza de Cristoforis [La07-2, Prop. 7]). Similarly we can treat V_{\partial\Omega^i[\phi]}[\eta^i\circ \phi^{(-1)}](\phi(\cdot)). Hence, by the real analyticity of the composition of real analytic maps and by (?), we conclude that the map from \mathcal{A}^{\Omega^o}_{\partial\Omega^i} \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2 to C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) that takes a sextuple (\phi,\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i) to the function

is real analytic. As a consequence M_2 is real analytic.

By standard calculus in Banach spaces, we can verify that the partial differential (5.3) is the linear and continuous operator defined by

for all (\tilde{\mu}^o,\tilde{\mu}^i,\tilde{\eta}^i,\tilde{\rho}^o,\tilde{\rho}^i) \in C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^o)_0 \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i) \times C^{0,\alpha}(\partial\Omega^i)_0 \times \mathbb{R}^2. Then, by Proposition 4.3 with A=A_{\mathcal{N}_F,0} (cf. (4.3)) and since A_{\mathcal{N}_F,0} satisfies (?), we conclude that \partial_{(\mu^o,\mu^i,\eta^i,\rho^o,\rho^i)} M[\phi_0,\mu^o_0,\mu^i_0,\eta^i_0,\rho^o_0,\rho^i_0] is an isomorphism of Banach spaces.

We prove (i). By Definition ?, ?, by (?), (?) and by Lemma 2.1, we have

and for all \phi \in Q_0. By the assumption Q_\mathtt{int} \subseteq Q_0 and Theorem 5.4, we know that the map from Q_\mathtt{int} to \mathbb{R} that takes \phi to R^i[\phi] is real analytic. Moreover, by the real analyticity of N^i[\cdot] (cf. Theorem 5.4) and by the properties of integral operators with real analytic kernels and no singularities (see Lanza de Cristoforis and Musolino [LaMu13, Prop. 4.1]), we can prove that the map from Q_\mathtt{int} to C^{1,\alpha}(\overline{\Omega_\mathtt{int}}) that takes \phi to the function \int_{\partial\Omega^i} S_n(x-\phi(s)) \, N^i[\phi](s) \, \tilde{\sigma}_n[\phi](s) \,d\sigma_s of the variable x \in \overline{\Omega_\mathtt{int}} is real analytic (see also Lemma 2.1). Hence, we deduce the validity of (i). The proof of (ii) is similar and it is left to the reader.