Cubic NLS: Difference between revisions

From DispersiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
m (More bib cleaning)
Line 10: Line 10:
* GWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 thanks to L<sup>2</sup> conservation
* GWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 thanks to L<sup>2</sup> conservation
** GWP can be pushed below to certain of the Gallilean spaces in [VaVe-p]. For instance one has GWP when the Fourier transform of the data decays like |<font face="Symbol">x</font><nowiki>|^{-5/12-}. Ideally one would like to replace this with 0-.</nowiki>
** GWP can be pushed below to certain of the Gallilean spaces in [VaVe-p]. For instance one has GWP when the Fourier transform of the data decays like |<font face="Symbol">x</font><nowiki>|^{-5/12-}. Ideally one would like to replace this with 0-.</nowiki>
* If the cubic non-linearity is of <u>u</u> <u>u</u> <u>u</u> or u u u type (as opposed to the usual |u|<sup>2</sup> u type) then one can obtain LWP for s > -5/12 [[references#Gr-p2 Gr-p2]]. If the nonlinearity is of <u>u</u> <u>u</u> u type then one has LWP for s > -2/5 [[references#Gr-p2 Gr-p2]].
* If the cubic non-linearity is of <u>u</u> <u>u</u> <u>u</u> or u u u type (as opposed to the usual |u|<sup>2</sup> u type) then one can obtain LWP for s > -5/12 [[Bibliography#Gr-p2 |Gr-p2]]. If the nonlinearity is of <u>u</u> <u>u</u> u type then one has LWP for s > -2/5 [[Bibliography#Gr-p2 |Gr-p2]].
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is sometimes known as the Zakharov-Shabat equation and is completely integrable (see e.g. [</nowiki>[Bibliography#AbKauNeSe1974|AbKauNeSe1974]]; all higher order integer Sobolev norms stay bounded. Growth of fractional norms might be interesting, though.
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is sometimes known as the Zakharov-Shabat equation and is completely integrable (see e.g. [</nowiki>[Bibliography#AbKauNeSe1974|AbKauNeSe1974]]; all higher order integer Sobolev norms stay bounded. Growth of fractional norms might be interesting, though.
* In the focusing case there are soliton and multisoliton solutions, however the defocusing case does not admit such solutions.
* In the focusing case there are soliton and multisoliton solutions, however the defocusing case does not admit such solutions.
Line 19: Line 19:
** For large real analytic data, these asymptotics were obtained in [[Bibliography#GiVl2001|GiVl2001]]
** For large real analytic data, these asymptotics were obtained in [[Bibliography#GiVl2001|GiVl2001]]
** Refinements to the convergence and regularity of the modified wave operators was obtained in [[Bibliography#Car2001|Car2001]]
** Refinements to the convergence and regularity of the modified wave operators was obtained in [[Bibliography#Car2001|Car2001]]
* On the half line R^+, global well-posedness in H^2 was established in [[references:CrrBu.1991 CrrBu.1991]], [[references:Bu.1992 Bu.1992]]
* On the half line R^+, global well-posedness in H^2 was established in [[Bibliography#CrrBu1991 |CrrBu1991]], [[Bibliography#Bu1992 |Bu1992]]
* On the interval, the inverse scattering method was applied to generate solutions in [GriSan-p].
* On the interval, the inverse scattering method was applied to generate solutions in [GriSan-p].


Line 27: Line 27:
====Cubic NLS on <math>T^1</math>====
====Cubic NLS on <math>T^1</math>====


* LWP for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>0 [[references:Bo1993 Bo1993]].
* LWP for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>0 [[Bibliography#Bo1993 |Bo1993]].
** For s<0 one has failure of uniform local well-posedness [CtCoTa-p], [BuGdTz-p].In fact, the solution map is not even continuous from H^s to H^sigma for any sigma, even for small times and small data [CtCoTa-p3].
** For s<0 one has failure of uniform local well-posedness [CtCoTa-p], [BuGdTz-p].In fact, the solution map is not even continuous from H^s to H^sigma for any sigma, even for small times and small data [CtCoTa-p3].
* GWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 thanks to L<sup>2</sup> conservation [[references:Bo1993 Bo1993]].
* GWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 thanks to L<sup>2</sup> conservation [[Bibliography#Bo1993 |Bo1993]].
** One also has GWP for random data whose Fourier coefficients decay like 1/|k| (times a Gaussian random variable) [[references:Bo1995c Bo1995c]]. Indeed one has an invariant measure.
** One also has GWP for random data whose Fourier coefficients decay like 1/|k| (times a Gaussian random variable) [[Bibliography#Bo1995c |Bo1995c]]. Indeed one has an invariant measure.
* If the cubic non-linearity is of <u>u</u> <u>u</u> <u>u</u> type (instead of |u|<sup>2</sup> u) then one can obtain LWP for s > -1/3 [[references#Gr-p2 Gr-p2]]
* If the cubic non-linearity is of <u>u</u> <u>u</u> <u>u</u> type (instead of |u|<sup>2</sup> u) then one can obtain LWP for s > -1/3 [[Bibliography#Gr-p2 |Gr-p2]]
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is completely integrable [</nowiki>[references:AbMa1981 AbMa.1981]]; all higher order integer Sobolev norms stay bounded. Growth of fractional norms might be interesting, though.
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is completely integrable </nowiki>[[Bibliography#AbMa1981 |AbMa1981]]; all higher order integer Sobolev norms stay bounded. Growth of fractional norms might be interesting, though.
* Methods of inverse scattering have also been successfully applied to cubic NLS on an interval [FsIt-p]
* Methods of inverse scattering have also been successfully applied to cubic NLS on an interval [FsIt-p]


Line 38: Line 38:


* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 0, thus this is an [#L^2-critical_NLS L^2 critical NLS].
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 0, thus this is an [#L^2-critical_NLS L^2 critical NLS].
* LWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 [[references:CaWe1990 CaWe1990]].
* LWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 [[Bibliography#CaWe1990|CaWe1990]].
** For s=0 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** For s=0 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** LWP has also been obtained in Besov spaces [[references:Pl2000 Pl2000]], [Pl-p] and Fourier-Lorentz spaces [CaVeVi-p] at the scaling of L<sup>2</sup>. This is also connected with the construction of self-similar solutions to NLS (which are generally not in the usual Sobolev spaces globally in space).
** LWP has also been obtained in Besov spaces [[Bibliography#Pl2000|Pl2000]], [Pl-p] and Fourier-Lorentz spaces [CaVeVi-p] at the scaling of L<sup>2</sup>. This is also connected with the construction of self-similar solutions to NLS (which are generally not in the usual Sobolev spaces globally in space).
** Below L^2 we have ill-posedness by Gallilean invariance considerations in both the focusing [KnPoVe-p] and defocusing [CtCoTa-p2] cases.
** Below L^2 we have ill-posedness by Gallilean invariance considerations in both the focusing [KnPoVe-p] and defocusing [CtCoTa-p2] cases.
* GWP for s>4/7 in the defocussing case [[references:CoKeStTkTa2002 CoKeStTkTa2002]]
* GWP for s>4/7 in the defocussing case [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa2002|CoKeStTkTa2002]]
** For s>3/5 this was shown in [[references:Bo1998 Bo1998]].
** For s>3/5 this was shown in [[Bibliography#Bo1998|Bo1998]].
** For s>2/3 this was shown in [[references:Bo1998 Bo1998]], [[references:Bo1999 Bo1999]].
** For s>2/3 this was shown in [[Bibliography#Bo1998|Bo1998]], [[Bibliography#Bo1999|Bo1999]].
** For s<font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 this follows from Hamiltonian conservation.
** For s<font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 this follows from Hamiltonian conservation.
** For small L<sup>2</sup> data one has GWP and scattering for any cubic nonlinearity (not necessarily defocussing or Hamiltonian). More precisely, one has global well-posedness whenever the data has an L<sup>2</sup> norm strictly smaller than the ground state Q [[references:Me1993 Me1993]]. If the L<sup>2</sup> norm is exactly equal to that of Q then one has blow-up if and only if the data is a pseudo-conformal transformation of the ground state [[references:Me1993 Me1993]], [[references:Me1992 Me1992]]. In particular, the ground state is unstable.
** For small L<sup>2</sup> data one has GWP and scattering for any cubic nonlinearity (not necessarily defocussing or Hamiltonian). More precisely, one has global well-posedness whenever the data has an L<sup>2</sup> norm strictly smaller than the ground state Q [[Bibliography#Me1993|Me1993]]. If the L<sup>2</sup> norm is exactly equal to that of Q then one has blow-up if and only if the data is a pseudo-conformal transformation of the ground state [[Bibliography#Me1993|Me1993]], [[Bibliography#Me1992|Me1992]]. In particular, the ground state is unstable.
*** Scattering is known whenever the solution is sufficiently small in L^2 norm, or more generally whenever the solution is L<sup>4</sup> in spacetime.Presumably one in fact has scattering whenever the mass is strictly smaller than the ground state, though this has not yet been established.
*** Scattering is known whenever the solution is sufficiently small in L^2 norm, or more generally whenever the solution is L<sup>4</sup> in spacetime.Presumably one in fact has scattering whenever the mass is strictly smaller than the ground state, though this has not yet been established.
** The s>4/7 result is probably improvable by correction term methods.
** The s>4/7 result is probably improvable by correction term methods.
** Remark: s=1/2 is the least regularity for which the non-linear part of the solution has finite energy (Bourgain, private communication).
** Remark: s=1/2 is the least regularity for which the non-linear part of the solution has finite energy (Bourgain, private communication).
** Question: What happens for large L<sup>2</sup> data? It is known that the only way GWP can fail at L<sup>2</sup> is if the L<sup>2</sup> norm concentrates [[references:Bo1998 Bo1998]]. Blowup examples with multiple blowup points are known, either simultaneously [[references:Me1992 Me1992]] or non-simultaneously [[references:BoWg1997 BoWg1997]]. It is conjectured that the amount of energy which can go into blowup points is quantized. The H^1 norm in these examples blows up like |t|^{-1}. It is conjectured that slower blow-up examples exist, in particular numerics suggest a blowup rate of |t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2} [[references:LanPapSucSup1988 LanPapSucSup1988]]; interestingly, however, if we perturb NLS to the [misc:Zakharov-2 Zakharov system] then one can only have blowup rates of |t|^{-1}.
** Question: What happens for large L<sup>2</sup> data? It is known that the only way GWP can fail at L<sup>2</sup> is if the L<sup>2</sup> norm concentrates [[Bibliography#Bo1998|Bo1998]]. Blowup examples with multiple blowup points are known, either simultaneously [[Bibliography#Me1992|Me1992]] or non-simultaneously [[Bibliography#BoWg1997|BoWg1997]]. It is conjectured that the amount of energy which can go into blowup points is quantized. The H^1 norm in these examples blows up like |t|^{-1}. It is conjectured that slower blow-up examples exist, in particular numerics suggest a blowup rate of |t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2} [[Bibliography#LanPapSucSup1988|LanPapSucSup1988]]; interestingly, however, if we perturb NLS to the [misc:Zakharov-2 Zakharov system] then one can only have blowup rates of |t|^{-1}.
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. Heuristically, GWP results in H</nowiki><sup>s</sup> transfer to GWP and scattering results in L<sup>2</sup>(|x|<sup>2s</sup>) thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation. Thus for instance GWP and scattering occurs this weighted space for s>2/3 (the corresponding statement for, say, s > 4/7 has not yet been checked).
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. Heuristically, GWP results in H</nowiki><sup>s</sup> transfer to GWP and scattering results in L<sup>2</sup>(|x|<sup>2s</sup>) thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation. Thus for instance GWP and scattering occurs this weighted space for s>2/3 (the corresponding statement for, say, s > 4/7 has not yet been checked).
* In the periodic case the H^k norm grows like O(t^{2(k-1)+}) as long as the H<sup>1</sup> norm stays bounded. In the non-periodic case it is O(t^{(k-1)+}) [[references:St1997 St1997]], [[references:St1997b St1997b]]; this was improved to t^{2/3 (k-1)+} in [[references:CoDeKnSt-p CoDeKnSt-p]], and also generalized to higher order multilinearity. A preliminary analysis suggests that the I-method can push the growth bounds down to t^{(k-1)+/2}.
* In the periodic case the H^k norm grows like O(t^{2(k-1)+}) as long as the H<sup>1</sup> norm stays bounded. In the non-periodic case it is O(t^{(k-1)+}) [[Bibliography#St1997|St1997]], [[Bibliography#St1997b|St1997b]]; this was improved to t^{2/3 (k-1)+} in [[Bibliography#CoDeKnSt-p |CoDeKnSt-p]], and also generalized to higher order multilinearity. A preliminary analysis suggests that the I-method can push the growth bounds down to t^{(k-1)+/2}.
* Question: Is there scattering in the cubic defocussing case, in L<sup>2</sup> or H<sup>1</sup>? (certainly not in the focussing case thanks to solitons). This problem seems of comparable difficulty to the GWP problem for large L<sup>2</sup> data (indeed, the pseudo-conformal transformation morally links the two problems).
* Question: Is there scattering in the cubic defocussing case, in L<sup>2</sup> or H<sup>1</sup>? (certainly not in the focussing case thanks to solitons). This problem seems of comparable difficulty to the GWP problem for large L<sup>2</sup> data (indeed, the pseudo-conformal transformation morally links the two problems).
** For powers slightly higher than cubic, the answer is yes [[references:Na1999c Na1999c]], and indeed we have bounded H^k norms in this case [Bourgain?].
** For powers slightly higher than cubic, the answer is yes [[Bibliography#Na1999c|Na1999c]], and indeed we have bounded H^k norms in this case [Bourgain?].
** If the data has sufficient decay then one has scattering. For instance if xu(0) is in L<sup>2</sup> [[references:Ts1985 Ts1985]]. This was improved to x^{2/3+} u(0) in L<sup>2</sup> in [[references:Bo1998 Bo1998]], [[references:Bo1999 Bo1999]]; the above results on GWP will probably also extend to scattering.
** If the data has sufficient decay then one has scattering. For instance if xu(0) is in L<sup>2</sup> [[Bibliography#Ts1985|Ts1985]]. This was improved to x^{2/3+} u(0) in L<sup>2</sup> in [[Bibliography#Bo1998|Bo1998]], [[Bibliography#Bo1999|Bo1999]]; the above results on GWP will probably also extend to scattering.
* This equation has also been studied on bounded domains, see [BuGdTz-p]. Sample results: blowup solutions exist close to the ground state, with a blowup rate of (T-t)<sup>-1</sup>. If the domain is a disk then uniform LWP fails for 1/5 < s < 1/3, while for a square one has LWP for all s>0. In general domains one has LWP for s>2.
* This equation has also been studied on bounded domains, see [BuGdTz-p]. Sample results: blowup solutions exist close to the ground state, with a blowup rate of (T-t)<sup>-1</sup>. If the domain is a disk then uniform LWP fails for 1/5 < s < 1/3, while for a square one has LWP for all s>0. In general domains one has LWP for s>2.


Line 62: Line 62:
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 0.
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 0.
* For RxT one has LWP for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>0 [TkTz-p2].
* For RxT one has LWP for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>0 [TkTz-p2].
* For TxT one has LWP for s>0 [[references:Bo1993 Bo1993]].
* For TxT one has LWP for s>0 [[Bibliography#Bo1993|Bo1993]].
* In the defocussing case one has GWP for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>1 in both cases by Hamiltonian conservation.
* In the defocussing case one has GWP for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>1 in both cases by Hamiltonian conservation.
** On T x T one can improve this to s > 2/3 by the I-method by De Silva, Pavlovic, Staffilani, and Tzirakis (and also in an unpublished work of Bourgain).
** On T x T one can improve this to s > 2/3 by the I-method by De Silva, Pavlovic, Staffilani, and Tzirakis (and also in an unpublished work of Bourgain).
* In the focusing case on TxT one has blowup for data close to the ground state, with a blowup rate of (T-t)<sup>-1</sup> [BuGdTz-p]
* In the focusing case on TxT one has blowup for data close to the ground state, with a blowup rate of (T-t)<sup>-1</sup> [BuGdTz-p]
* If instead one considers the sphere S<sup>2</sup> then uniform local well-posedness fails for 3/20 < s < 1/4 [[references:BuGdTz2002 BuGdTz2002]], [Ban-p], but holds for s>1/4 [BuGdTz-p7].
* If instead one considers the sphere S<sup>2</sup> then uniform local well-posedness fails for 3/20 < s < 1/4 [[Bibliography#BuGdTz2002|BuGdTz2002]], [Ban-p], but holds for s>1/4 [BuGdTz-p7].
** For s > ½ this is in [BuGdTz-p3].
** For s > ½ this is in [BuGdTz-p3].
** These results for the sphere can mostly be generalized to other Zoll manifolds.
** These results for the sphere can mostly be generalized to other Zoll manifolds.
Line 73: Line 73:


* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1/2.
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1/2.
* LWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 1/2 [[references:CaWe1990 CaWe1990]].
* LWP for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 1/2 [[Bibliography#CaWe1990|CaWe1990]].
** For s=1/2 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** For s=1/2 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** For s<1/2 we have ill-posedness, indeed the H^s norm can get arbitrarily large arbitrarily quickly [CtCoTa-p2]. In the focusing case we have instantaneous blowup from the virial identity and scaling.
** For s<1/2 we have ill-posedness, indeed the H^s norm can get arbitrarily large arbitrarily quickly [CtCoTa-p2]. In the focusing case we have instantaneous blowup from the virial identity and scaling.
** For s > 1/2 there is unconditional well-posedness [[references:FurPlTer2001 FurPlTer2001]]
** For s > 1/2 there is unconditional well-posedness [[Bibliography#FurPlTer2001|FurPlTer2001]]
*** For s >= 2/3 this is in [[references:Ka1995 Ka1995]].
*** For s >= 2/3 this is in [[Bibliography#Ka1995|Ka1995]].
* GWP and scattering for s > 4/5 in the defocussing case [[references:CoKeStTkTa-p8 CoKeStTkTa-p8]]
* GWP and scattering for s > 4/5 in the defocussing case [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa-p8 |CoKeStTkTa-p8]]
** For s > 5/6 GWP is in [[references:CoKeStTkTa2002 CoKeStTkTa2002]]
** For s > 5/6 GWP is in [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa2002|CoKeStTkTa2002]]
** For s>11/13 GWP is in [[references:Bo1999 Bo1999]]
** For s>11/13 GWP is in [[Bibliography#Bo1999|Bo1999]]
** For radial data and s > 5/7 GWP and scattering is in s>5/7 [[references:Bo1998b Bo1998b]], [[references:Bo1999 Bo1999]].
** For radial data and s > 5/7 GWP and scattering is in s>5/7 [[Bibliography#Bo1998b|Bo1998b]], [[Bibliography#Bo1999|Bo1999]].
** For s<font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 this follows from Hamiltonian conservation. One also has scattering in this case [[references:GiVl1985 GiVl1985]].
** For s<font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 this follows from Hamiltonian conservation. One also has scattering in this case [[Bibliography#GiVl1985|GiVl1985]].
** For small H^{1/2} data one has GWP and scattering for any cubic nonlinearity (not necessarily defocussing or Hamiltonian). More generally one has scattering whenever the solution is L<sup>5</sup> in spacetime.
** For small H^{1/2} data one has GWP and scattering for any cubic nonlinearity (not necessarily defocussing or Hamiltonian). More generally one has scattering whenever the solution is L<sup>5</sup> in spacetime.
** In the focusing case one has blowup whenever the energy is negative [[references:Gs1977 Gs1977]], [[references:OgTs1991 OgTs1991]], and in particular one has blowup arbitrarily close to the ground state [[references#BerCa1981 BerCa1981]], [[references:SaSr1985 SaSr1985]].If however the energy remains bounded (which is automatic in the defocusing case) then one has at most polynomial growth of high Sobolev norms, with the local higher Sobolev norms H^s_loc remaining bounded for all time [[references:Bo1996c Bo1996c]], [[references:Bo1998b Bo1998b]].Also in the focusing radial case with bounded energy, the solution becomes asymptotically smooth and spatially decaying away from the origin, once one strips out the radiation component [Ta-p7]
** In the focusing case one has blowup whenever the energy is negative [[Bibliography#Gs1977|Gs1977]], [[Bibliography#OgTs1991|OgTs1991]], and in particular one has blowup arbitrarily close to the ground state [[Bibliography#BerCa1981 |BerCa1981]], [[Bibliography#SaSr1985|SaSr1985]].If however the energy remains bounded (which is automatic in the defocusing case) then one has at most polynomial growth of high Sobolev norms, with the local higher Sobolev norms H^s_loc remaining bounded for all time [[Bibliography#Bo1996c|Bo1996c]], [[Bibliography#Bo1998b|Bo1998b]].Also in the focusing radial case with bounded energy, the solution becomes asymptotically smooth and spatially decaying away from the origin, once one strips out the radiation component [Ta-p7]


====Cubic NLS on <math>T^3</math>====
====Cubic NLS on <math>T^3</math>====


* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1/2.
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1/2.
* LWP is known for s >1/2 [[references:Bo1993 Bo1993]].
* LWP is known for s >1/2 [[Bibliography#Bo1993|Bo1993]].


====Cubic NLS on <math>R^4</math>====
====Cubic NLS on <math>R^4</math>====


* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1.
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1.
* LWP is known for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 [[references:CaWe1990 CaWe1990]].
* LWP is known for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 [[Bibliography#CaWe1990|CaWe1990]].
** For s=1 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** For s=1 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** For s<1 we have ill-posedness, indeed the H^s norm can get arbitrarily large arbitrarily quickly [CtCoTa-p2]. In the focusing case we have instantaneous blowup from the virial identity and scaling.
** For s<1 we have ill-posedness, indeed the H^s norm can get arbitrarily large arbitrarily quickly [CtCoTa-p2]. In the focusing case we have instantaneous blowup from the virial identity and scaling.
* GWP and scattering for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>1 in the radial case [[references:Bo1999 Bo1999]]. A major obstacle is that the Morawetz estimate only gives L<sup>4</sup>-type spacetime control rather than L<sup>6</sup>.
* GWP and scattering for s<font face="Symbol">³</font>1 in the radial case [[Bibliography#Bo1999|Bo1999]]. A major obstacle is that the Morawetz estimate only gives L<sup>4</sup>-type spacetime control rather than L<sup>6</sup>.
** For small non-radial H<sup>1</sup> data one has GWP and scattering. In fact one has scattering whenever the solution has a bounded L<sup>6</sup> norm in spacetime.
** For small non-radial H<sup>1</sup> data one has GWP and scattering. In fact one has scattering whenever the solution has a bounded L<sup>6</sup> norm in spacetime.


Line 105: Line 105:


* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1.
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 1.
* LWP is known for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 2 [[references:Bo1993d Bo1993d]].
* LWP is known for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 2 [[Bibliography#Bo1993d|Bo1993d]].


====Cubic NLS on <math>S^6</math>====
====Cubic NLS on <math>S^6</math>====

Revision as of 16:56, 31 July 2006

Cubic NLS on R

  • Scaling is sc = -1/2.
  • LWP for s ³ 0 Ts1987, CaWe1990 (see also GiVl1985).
    • This is sharp for reasons of Gallilean invariance and for soliton solutions in the focussing case [KnPoVe-p]
      • The result is also sharp in the defocussing case [CtCoTa-p], due to Gallilean invariance and the asymptotic solutions in Oz1991.
      • Below s ³0 the solution map was known to be not C2 in Bo1993
    • For initial data equal to a delta function there are serious problems with existence and uniqueness [KnPoVe-p].
    • However, there exist Gallilean invariant spaces which scale below L2 for which one has LWP. They are defined in terms of the Fourier transform VaVe2001. For instance one has LWP for data whose Fourier transform decays like |x|^{-1/6-}. Ideally one would like to replace this with |x|^{0-}.
  • GWP for s ³ 0 thanks to L2 conservation
    • GWP can be pushed below to certain of the Gallilean spaces in [VaVe-p]. For instance one has GWP when the Fourier transform of the data decays like |x|^{-5/12-}. Ideally one would like to replace this with 0-.
  • If the cubic non-linearity is of u u u or u u u type (as opposed to the usual |u|2 u type) then one can obtain LWP for s > -5/12 Gr-p2. If the nonlinearity is of u u u type then one has LWP for s > -2/5 Gr-p2.
  • Remark: This equation is sometimes known as the Zakharov-Shabat equation and is completely integrable (see e.g. [[Bibliography#AbKauNeSe1974|AbKauNeSe1974]]; all higher order integer Sobolev norms stay bounded. Growth of fractional norms might be interesting, though.
  • In the focusing case there are soliton and multisoliton solutions, however the defocusing case does not admit such solutions.
  • In the focussing case there is a unique positive radial ground state for each energy E. By translation and phase shift one thus obtains a four-dimensional manifold of ground states (aka solitons) for each energy. This manifold is H1-stable Ws1985, Ws1986. Below the energy norm orbital stability is not known, however there are polynomial bounds on the instability CoKeStTkTa2003b.
  • This equation is related to the evolution of vortex filaments under the localized induction approximation, via the Hasimoto transformation, see e.g. Hm1972
  • Solutions do not scatter to free Schrodinger solutions. In the focussing case this can be easily seen from the existence of solitons. But even in the defocussing case wave operators do not exist, and must be replaced by modified wave operators Oz1991, see also [CtCoTa-p]. For small, decaying data one also has asymptotic completeness HaNm1998.
    • For large Schwartz data, these asymptotics can be obtained by inverse scattering methods ZkMan1976, SeAb1976, No1980, DfZx1994
    • For large real analytic data, these asymptotics were obtained in GiVl2001
    • Refinements to the convergence and regularity of the modified wave operators was obtained in Car2001
  • On the half line R^+, global well-posedness in H^2 was established in CrrBu1991, Bu1992
  • On the interval, the inverse scattering method was applied to generate solutions in [GriSan-p].

Cubic NLS on

  • LWP for s³0 Bo1993.
    • For s<0 one has failure of uniform local well-posedness [CtCoTa-p], [BuGdTz-p].In fact, the solution map is not even continuous from H^s to H^sigma for any sigma, even for small times and small data [CtCoTa-p3].
  • GWP for s ³ 0 thanks to L2 conservation Bo1993.
    • One also has GWP for random data whose Fourier coefficients decay like 1/|k| (times a Gaussian random variable) Bo1995c. Indeed one has an invariant measure.
  • If the cubic non-linearity is of u u u type (instead of |u|2 u) then one can obtain LWP for s > -1/3 Gr-p2
  • Remark: This equation is completely integrable AbMa1981; all higher order integer Sobolev norms stay bounded. Growth of fractional norms might be interesting, though.
  • Methods of inverse scattering have also been successfully applied to cubic NLS on an interval [FsIt-p]

Cubic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 0, thus this is an [#L^2-critical_NLS L^2 critical NLS].
  • LWP for s ³ 0 CaWe1990.
    • For s=0 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
    • LWP has also been obtained in Besov spaces Pl2000, [Pl-p] and Fourier-Lorentz spaces [CaVeVi-p] at the scaling of L2. This is also connected with the construction of self-similar solutions to NLS (which are generally not in the usual Sobolev spaces globally in space).
    • Below L^2 we have ill-posedness by Gallilean invariance considerations in both the focusing [KnPoVe-p] and defocusing [CtCoTa-p2] cases.
  • GWP for s>4/7 in the defocussing case CoKeStTkTa2002
    • For s>3/5 this was shown in Bo1998.
    • For s>2/3 this was shown in Bo1998, Bo1999.
    • For s³ 1 this follows from Hamiltonian conservation.
    • For small L2 data one has GWP and scattering for any cubic nonlinearity (not necessarily defocussing or Hamiltonian). More precisely, one has global well-posedness whenever the data has an L2 norm strictly smaller than the ground state Q Me1993. If the L2 norm is exactly equal to that of Q then one has blow-up if and only if the data is a pseudo-conformal transformation of the ground state Me1993, Me1992. In particular, the ground state is unstable.
      • Scattering is known whenever the solution is sufficiently small in L^2 norm, or more generally whenever the solution is L4 in spacetime.Presumably one in fact has scattering whenever the mass is strictly smaller than the ground state, though this has not yet been established.
    • The s>4/7 result is probably improvable by correction term methods.
    • Remark: s=1/2 is the least regularity for which the non-linear part of the solution has finite energy (Bourgain, private communication).
    • Question: What happens for large L2 data? It is known that the only way GWP can fail at L2 is if the L2 norm concentrates Bo1998. Blowup examples with multiple blowup points are known, either simultaneously Me1992 or non-simultaneously BoWg1997. It is conjectured that the amount of energy which can go into blowup points is quantized. The H^1 norm in these examples blows up like |t|^{-1}. It is conjectured that slower blow-up examples exist, in particular numerics suggest a blowup rate of |t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2} LanPapSucSup1988; interestingly, however, if we perturb NLS to the [misc:Zakharov-2 Zakharov system] then one can only have blowup rates of |t|^{-1}.
  • Remark: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. Heuristically, GWP results in Hs transfer to GWP and scattering results in L2(|x|2s) thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation. Thus for instance GWP and scattering occurs this weighted space for s>2/3 (the corresponding statement for, say, s > 4/7 has not yet been checked).
  • In the periodic case the H^k norm grows like O(t^{2(k-1)+}) as long as the H1 norm stays bounded. In the non-periodic case it is O(t^{(k-1)+}) St1997, St1997b; this was improved to t^{2/3 (k-1)+} in CoDeKnSt-p, and also generalized to higher order multilinearity. A preliminary analysis suggests that the I-method can push the growth bounds down to t^{(k-1)+/2}.
  • Question: Is there scattering in the cubic defocussing case, in L2 or H1? (certainly not in the focussing case thanks to solitons). This problem seems of comparable difficulty to the GWP problem for large L2 data (indeed, the pseudo-conformal transformation morally links the two problems).
    • For powers slightly higher than cubic, the answer is yes Na1999c, and indeed we have bounded H^k norms in this case [Bourgain?].
    • If the data has sufficient decay then one has scattering. For instance if xu(0) is in L2 Ts1985. This was improved to x^{2/3+} u(0) in L2 in Bo1998, Bo1999; the above results on GWP will probably also extend to scattering.
  • This equation has also been studied on bounded domains, see [BuGdTz-p]. Sample results: blowup solutions exist close to the ground state, with a blowup rate of (T-t)-1. If the domain is a disk then uniform LWP fails for 1/5 < s < 1/3, while for a square one has LWP for all s>0. In general domains one has LWP for s>2.

Cubic NLS on and

  • Scaling is sc = 0.
  • For RxT one has LWP for s³0 [TkTz-p2].
  • For TxT one has LWP for s>0 Bo1993.
  • In the defocussing case one has GWP for s³1 in both cases by Hamiltonian conservation.
    • On T x T one can improve this to s > 2/3 by the I-method by De Silva, Pavlovic, Staffilani, and Tzirakis (and also in an unpublished work of Bourgain).
  • In the focusing case on TxT one has blowup for data close to the ground state, with a blowup rate of (T-t)-1 [BuGdTz-p]
  • If instead one considers the sphere S2 then uniform local well-posedness fails for 3/20 < s < 1/4 BuGdTz2002, [Ban-p], but holds for s>1/4 [BuGdTz-p7].
    • For s > ½ this is in [BuGdTz-p3].
    • These results for the sphere can mostly be generalized to other Zoll manifolds.

Cubic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 1/2.
  • LWP for s ³ 1/2 CaWe1990.
    • For s=1/2 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
    • For s<1/2 we have ill-posedness, indeed the H^s norm can get arbitrarily large arbitrarily quickly [CtCoTa-p2]. In the focusing case we have instantaneous blowup from the virial identity and scaling.
    • For s > 1/2 there is unconditional well-posedness FurPlTer2001
      • For s >= 2/3 this is in Ka1995.
  • GWP and scattering for s > 4/5 in the defocussing case CoKeStTkTa-p8
    • For s > 5/6 GWP is in CoKeStTkTa2002
    • For s>11/13 GWP is in Bo1999
    • For radial data and s > 5/7 GWP and scattering is in s>5/7 Bo1998b, Bo1999.
    • For s³ 1 this follows from Hamiltonian conservation. One also has scattering in this case GiVl1985.
    • For small H^{1/2} data one has GWP and scattering for any cubic nonlinearity (not necessarily defocussing or Hamiltonian). More generally one has scattering whenever the solution is L5 in spacetime.
    • In the focusing case one has blowup whenever the energy is negative Gs1977, OgTs1991, and in particular one has blowup arbitrarily close to the ground state BerCa1981, SaSr1985.If however the energy remains bounded (which is automatic in the defocusing case) then one has at most polynomial growth of high Sobolev norms, with the local higher Sobolev norms H^s_loc remaining bounded for all time Bo1996c, Bo1998b.Also in the focusing radial case with bounded energy, the solution becomes asymptotically smooth and spatially decaying away from the origin, once one strips out the radiation component [Ta-p7]

Cubic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 1/2.
  • LWP is known for s >1/2 Bo1993.

Cubic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 1.
  • LWP is known for s ³ 1 CaWe1990.
    • For s=1 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
    • For s<1 we have ill-posedness, indeed the H^s norm can get arbitrarily large arbitrarily quickly [CtCoTa-p2]. In the focusing case we have instantaneous blowup from the virial identity and scaling.
  • GWP and scattering for s³1 in the radial case Bo1999. A major obstacle is that the Morawetz estimate only gives L4-type spacetime control rather than L6.
    • For small non-radial H1 data one has GWP and scattering. In fact one has scattering whenever the solution has a bounded L6 norm in spacetime.


The large data non-radial case is still open, and very interesting. The main difficulty is infinite speed of propagation and the possibility that the H1 norm could concentrate at several different places simultaneously.

Cubic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 1.
  • LWP is known for s ³ 2 Bo1993d.

Cubic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 2.
  • Uniform LWP holds in Hs for s > 5/2 [BuGdTz-p3].
  • Uniform LWP fails in the energy class H1 [BuGdTz-p2]; indeed we have this failure for any NLS on S^6, even ones for which the energy is subcritical. This is in contrast to the Euclidean case, where one has LWP for powers p < 2.