Semilinear NLW: Difference between revisions
(→Necessary conditions for [[LWP]]: Typos) |
|||
(5 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
Typically <math>F</math> is a [[power type]] nonlinearity. If <math>F</math> is the gradient of some function <math>V</math>, then we have a [[conserved]] [[Hamiltonian]] | Typically <math>F</math> is a [[power type]] nonlinearity. If <math>F</math> is the gradient of some function <math>V</math>, then we have a [[conserved]] [[Hamiltonian]] | ||
<center><math>\int | <center><math>\int \frac{ |\phi_t |^2}{ 2} + \frac{|\nabla \phi |^2}{2} + V( \phi )\ dx.</math></center> | ||
For NLKG there is an additional term of <math>| \phi |^2 /2</math> in the integrand, which is useful for controlling the low frequencies of <math>f</math> . If V is positive definite then we call the NLW [[defocusing]]; if <math>V</math> is negative definite we call the NLW [[focusing]]. | For NLKG there is an additional term of <math>| \phi |^2 /2</math> in the integrand, which is useful for controlling the low frequencies of <math>f</math> . If V is positive definite then we call the NLW [[defocusing]]; if <math>V</math> is negative definite we call the NLW [[focusing]]. | ||
Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
To analyze these equations in <math>H^s</math> we need the non-linearity to be sufficiently smooth. More precisely, we will always assume either that <math>F</math> is smooth, or that <math>F</math> is a p^th-[[power type]] non-linearity with <math>p > [s]+1</math>. | To analyze these equations in <math>H^s</math> we need the non-linearity to be sufficiently smooth. More precisely, we will always assume either that <math>F</math> is smooth, or that <math>F</math> is a p^th-[[power type]] non-linearity with <math>p > [s]+1</math>. | ||
The scaling regularity is <math>s_c = d | The scaling regularity is | ||
<center> | |||
<math>s_c = \frac{d}{2} - \frac{2}{(p-1)}</math>. | |||
</center> | |||
Notable powers of <math>p</math> include the <math>L^2</math>-critical power <math>p_{L^2} = 1 + 4/d</math>, the <math>H^{1/2}</math>-critical or [[conformal]] power p_{H^{1/2}} = 1 + 4/(d-1), and the <math>H^1</math>-critical'' power <math>p_{H^1} = 1 + 4/{d-2}</math>. <br /> | |||
{| class="MsoNormalTable" style="width: 100.0%; mso-cellspacing: 1.5pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in" width="100%" border="1" | {| class="MsoNormalTable" style="width: 100.0%; mso-cellspacing: 1.5pt; mso-padding-alt: 0in 0in 0in 0in" width="100%" border="1" | ||
Line 91: | Line 95: | ||
The following necessary conditions for [[LWP]] are known. | The following necessary conditions for [[LWP]] are known. | ||
* Firstly, for focussing NLW/NLKG one has blowup in finite time for large data, as can be seen by the [[ODE method]]. One can scale this and obtain ill-posedness for any focussing NLW/NLKG in the supercritical regime s < s_c; this has been extended to the defocusing case in [[CtCoTa-p2]]. By using Lorentz scaling instead of isotropic scaling one can also obtain ill-posedness whenever s is below the conformal regularity <center><math>s_{conf} = (d+1)/4 - 1/(p-1)</math></center> in the focusing case; the defocusing case is still open. In the <math>H^{1/2}</math>-critical power or below, this condition is stronger than the scaling requirement. | |||
** When <math>d \geq 2</math> and 1 < p < p_{H^{1/2}} with the focusing sign, [[blowup]] is known to occur when a certain [[Lyapunov functional]] is negative, and the rate of blowup is [[self-similar]] [[MeZaa2003]]; earlier results are in [[AntMe2001]], [[CafFri1986]], [[Al1995]], [[KiLit1993]], [[KiLit1993b]]. To make sense of the non-linearity in the sense of distributions we need s \geq 0 (indeed we have illposedness below this regularity by a high-to-low [[cascade]], see [[CtCoTa-p2]]). In the one-dimensional case one also needs the condition <math>1/2 - s < 1/p</math> to keep the non-linearity integrable, because there is no Strichartz smoothing to exploit. | |||
<center><math>s_{conf} = (d+1)/4 - 1/(p-1)</math></center> | * Finally, in three dimensions one has [[ill-posedness]] when <math>p=2</math> and <math>s = s_{conf} = 0</math> [[Lb1993]]. | ||
in the focusing case; the defocusing case is still open. In the | |||
<math>H^{1/2}</math>-critical power or below, this condition is | |||
stronger than the scaling requirement. | |||
** When <math>d \geq 2</math> and 1 < p < p_{H^{1/2}} with the focusing sign, [[blowup]] is known to occur when a certain [[Lyapunov functional]] is negative, and the rate of blowup is [[self-similar]] [[MeZaa2003]]; earlier results are in [[AntMe2001]], [[CafFri1986]], [[Al1995]], [[KiLit1993]], [[KiLit1993b]]. | |||
To make sense of the non-linearity in the sense of distributions we need s \geq 0 (indeed we have illposedness below this regularity by a high-to-low [[cascade]], see [[CtCoTa-p2]]). In the one-dimensional case one also needs the condition <math>1/2 - s < 1/p</math> to keep the non-linearity integrable, because there is no Strichartz smoothing to exploit. | |||
* In dimensions <math>d\leq3 </math> the above necessary conditions are also sufficient for LWP. | |||
* For d>4 sufficiency is only known assuming the condition | |||
<center><math>p (d/4-s) \leq 1/2 ( (d+3)/2 - s)</math> (*)</center> | |||
and excluding the double endpoint when (*) holds with equality and s=s_{conf} [[Ta1999]]. The main tool is two-scale [[Strichartz estimates]]. | and excluding the double endpoint when (*) holds with equality and s=s_{conf} [[Ta1999]]. The main tool is two-scale [[Strichartz estimates]]. | ||
* By using standard Strichartz estimates this was proven with (*) replaced by <center><math>p ((d+1)/4-s) \leq (d+1)/2d ( (d+3)/2 - s)</math>; (**)</center> see [[KeTa1998]] for the double endpoint when (**) holds with equality and s=s_{conf}, and [[LbSo1995]] for all other cases. A slightly weaker result also appears in [[Kp1993]]. GWP and [[scattering]] for NLW is known for data with small <math>H^{s_c}</math> norm when <math>p</math> is at or above the <math>H^{1/2}</math>-critical power (and this has been extended to Besov spaces; see [[Pl-p4]]. This can be used to obtain self-similar solutions, see [MiaZg-p2]). One also has GWP in <math>H^1</math> in the defocussing case when p is at or below the <math>H^1</math>-critical power. (At the critical power this result is due to [[Gl1992]]; see also [[SaSw1994]]. For radial data this was shown in [[Sw1988]].) For more scattering results, see below. | |||
<center><math>p ((d+1)/4-s) \leq (d+1)/2d ( (d+3)/2 - s)</math>; | |||
(**)</center> | |||
see [[KeTa1998]] for the double endpoint when (**) holds with equality and s=s_{conf}, and [[LbSo1995]] for all other cases. A slightly weaker result also appears in [[Kp1993]]. | |||
GWP and [[scattering]] for NLW is known for data with small <math>H^{s_c}</math> norm when <math>p</math> is at or above the <math>H^{1/2}</math>-critical power (and this has been extended to Besov spaces; see [[Pl-p4]]. This can be used to obtain self-similar solutions, see [MiaZg-p2]). One also has GWP in <math>H^1</math> in the defocussing case when p is at or below the <math>H^1</math>-critical power. (At the critical power this result is due to [[Gl1992]]; see also [[SaSw1994]]. For radial data this was shown in [[Sw1988]].) For more scattering results, see below. | |||
For the defocussing NLKG, GWP in <math>H^s</math>, <math>s < 1</math>, is known in the following cases: | For the defocussing NLKG, GWP in <math>H^s</math>, <math>s < 1</math>, is known in the following cases: | ||
* <math>d=3, p = 3, s > 3/4</math> [[KnPoVe-p2]] | * <math>d=3, p = 3, s > 3/4</math> [[KnPoVe-p2]] | ||
* <math>d=3, 3 \leq p < 5, s > [4(p-1) + (5-p)(3p-3-4)]/[2(p-1)(7-p)]</math> [[MiaZgFg-p]] | * <math>d=3, 3 \leq p < 5, s > [4(p-1) + (5-p)(3p-3-4)]/[2(p-1)(7-p)]</math> [[MiaZgFg-p]] | ||
Line 132: | Line 114: | ||
[MiaZgFg-p]. Note that this is the range of p for which s_conf obeys both the scaling condition <math>s_{conf} > s_c</math> and the condition (**). | [MiaZgFg-p]. Note that this is the range of p for which s_conf obeys both the scaling condition <math>s_{conf} > s_c</math> and the condition (**). | ||
* <math>d=2, 3 \leq p \leq 5, s > (p-2)/(p-1)</math> [[Fo-p]]; this is | * <math>d=2, 3 \leq p \leq 5, s > (p-2)/(p-1)</math> [[Fo-p]]; this is | ||
for the NLW instead of NLKG. | for the NLW instead of NLKG. | ||
* <math>d=2, p > 5, s > (p-1)/p</math> [[Fo-p]]; this is for the NLW | * <math>d=2, p > 5, s > (p-1)/p</math> [[Fo-p]]; this is for the NLW | ||
instead of NLKG. | instead of NLKG. GWP and blowup has also been studied for the NLW with a conformal factor <center><math>\Box u = (t^2 + (1 - (t^2-x^2)/4)^2)^{-(d-1)p/4 + (d+3)/4} |u|^p</math>;</center> the significance of this factor is that it behaves well under conformal compactification. See [[Aa2002]], [[BcKkZz2002]], [[Gue2003]] for some recent results. A substantial [[scattering for NLW/NLKG|scattering theory for NLW and NLKG]] is known. The [[non-relativistic limit]] of NLKG has attracted a fair amount of research. | ||
GWP and blowup has also been studied for the NLW with a conformal factor | |||
<center><math>\Box u = (t^2 + (1 - (t^2-x^2)/4)^2)^{-(d-1)p/4 + | |||
(d+3)/4} |u|^p</math>;</center> | |||
the significance of this factor is that it behaves well under conformal compactification. See [[Aa2002]], [[BcKkZz2002]], [[Gue2003]] for some recent results. | |||
A substantial [[scattering for NLW/NLKG|scattering theory for NLW and NLKG]] is known. | |||
The [[non-relativistic limit]] of NLKG has attracted a fair amount of research. | |||
====Specific semilinear wave equations==== | ====Specific semilinear wave equations==== | ||
* [[Sine-Gordon]] | * [[Sine-Gordon]] | ||
* [[Liouville's equation]] | |||
* [[Quadratic NLW/NLKG]] | * [[Quadratic NLW/NLKG]] | ||
* [[Cubic NLW/NLKG]] ([[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R|on R]], [[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R2|on R^2]], [[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R3|on R^3]], and [[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R4|on R^4]]) | * [[Cubic NLW/NLKG]] ([[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R|on R]], [[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R2|on R^2]], [[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R3|on R^3]], and [[Cubic NLW/NLKG on R4|on R^4]]) |
Latest revision as of 23:37, 22 January 2009
Semilinear wave equations
[Note: Many references needed here!]
Semilinear wave equations (NLW) and semi-linear Klein-Gordon equations (NLKG) take the form
respectively where is a function only of and not of its derivatives, which vanishes to more than first order.
Typically is a power type nonlinearity. If is the gradient of some function , then we have a conserved Hamiltonian
For NLKG there is an additional term of in the integrand, which is useful for controlling the low frequencies of . If V is positive definite then we call the NLW defocusing; if is negative definite we call the NLW focusing.
To analyze these equations in we need the non-linearity to be sufficiently smooth. More precisely, we will always assume either that is smooth, or that is a p^th-power type non-linearity with .
The scaling regularity is
.
Notable powers of include the -critical power , the -critical or conformal power p_{H^{1/2}} = 1 + 4/(d-1), and the -critical power .
Dimension d |
Strauss exponent (NLKG) |
-critical exponent |
Strauss exponent (NLW) |
H^{1/2}-critical exponent |
H^1-critical exponent |
1 |
3.56155... |
5 |
infinity |
infinity |
N/A |
2 |
2.41421... |
3 |
3.56155... |
5 |
infinity |
3 |
2 |
2.33333... |
2.41421... |
3 |
5 |
4 |
1.78078... |
2 |
2 |
2.33333... |
3 |
Necessary conditions for LWP
The following necessary conditions for LWP are known.
- Firstly, for focussing NLW/NLKG one has blowup in finite time for large data, as can be seen by the ODE method. One can scale this and obtain ill-posedness for any focussing NLW/NLKG in the supercritical regime s < s_c; this has been extended to the defocusing case in CtCoTa-p2. By using Lorentz scaling instead of isotropic scaling one can also obtain ill-posedness whenever s is below the conformal regularity
in the focusing case; the defocusing case is still open. In the -critical power or below, this condition is stronger than the scaling requirement. - When and 1 < p < p_{H^{1/2}} with the focusing sign, blowup is known to occur when a certain Lyapunov functional is negative, and the rate of blowup is self-similar MeZaa2003; earlier results are in AntMe2001, CafFri1986, Al1995, KiLit1993, KiLit1993b. To make sense of the non-linearity in the sense of distributions we need s \geq 0 (indeed we have illposedness below this regularity by a high-to-low cascade, see CtCoTa-p2). In the one-dimensional case one also needs the condition to keep the non-linearity integrable, because there is no Strichartz smoothing to exploit.
- Finally, in three dimensions one has ill-posedness when and Lb1993.
- In dimensions the above necessary conditions are also sufficient for LWP.
- For d>4 sufficiency is only known assuming the condition
and excluding the double endpoint when (*) holds with equality and s=s_{conf} Ta1999. The main tool is two-scale Strichartz estimates.
- By using standard Strichartz estimates this was proven with (*) replaced by
; (**) see KeTa1998 for the double endpoint when (**) holds with equality and s=s_{conf}, and LbSo1995 for all other cases. A slightly weaker result also appears in Kp1993. GWP and scattering for NLW is known for data with small norm when is at or above the -critical power (and this has been extended to Besov spaces; see Pl-p4. This can be used to obtain self-similar solutions, see [MiaZg-p2]). One also has GWP in in the defocussing case when p is at or below the -critical power. (At the critical power this result is due to Gl1992; see also SaSw1994. For radial data this was shown in Sw1988.) For more scattering results, see below.
For the defocussing NLKG, GWP in , , is known in the following cases:
[MiaZgFg-p]. Note that this is the range of p for which s_conf obeys both the scaling condition and the condition (**).
- Fo-p; this is
for the NLW instead of NLKG.
- Fo-p; this is for the NLW
instead of NLKG. GWP and blowup has also been studied for the NLW with a conformal factor
the significance of this factor is that it behaves well under conformal compactification. See Aa2002, BcKkZz2002, Gue2003 for some recent results. A substantial scattering theory for NLW and NLKG is known. The non-relativistic limit of NLKG has attracted a fair amount of research.
Specific semilinear wave equations
- Sine-Gordon
- Liouville's equation
- Quadratic NLW/NLKG
- Cubic NLW/NLKG (on R, on R^2, on R^3, and on R^4)
- Quartic NLW/NLKG
- Quintic NLW/NLKG (on R, on R^2, and on R^3)
- Septic NLW/NLKG (on R, on R^2, and on R^3)