Cubic NLS on R2: Difference between revisions

From DispersiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
 
No edit summary
Line 14: Line 14:
** The <math>s>4/7\,</math> result is probably improvable by correction term methods.
** The <math>s>4/7\,</math> result is probably improvable by correction term methods.
** Remark: <math>s=1/2\,</math> is the least regularity for which the non-linear part of the solution has finite energy (Bourgain, private communication).
** Remark: <math>s=1/2\,</math> is the least regularity for which the non-linear part of the solution has finite energy (Bourgain, private communication).
** Question: What happens for large <math>L^2\,</math> data? It is known that the only way GWP can fail at <math>L^2\,</math> is if the <math>L^2\,</math> 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 <math>H^1\,</math> norm in these examples blows up like <math>|t|^{-1}\,.</math> It is conjectured that slower blow-up examples exist, in particular numerics suggest a blowup rate of <math>|t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2}\,</math> [[LanPapSucSup1988]]; interestingly, however, if we perturb NLS to the [[Zakharov system]] then one can only have blowup rates of <math>|t|^{-1}\,.</math>
** For powers slightly higher than cubic, one has scattering for large mass data [[Na1999c]], and indeed we have bounded <math>H^k\,</math> norms in this case [Bourgain?].
** If the data has sufficient decay then one has scattering. For instance if <math>xu(0)\,</math> is in <math>L^2\,</math> [[Bibliography#Ts1985|Ts1985]]. This was improved to <math>x^{2/3+} u(0) \in L^2\,</math> in [[Bo1998]], [[Bibliography#Bo1999|Bo1999]]; the above results on GWP will probably also extend to scattering.
* ''Remark'': This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. Heuristically, GWP results in <math>H^s\,</math> transfer to GWP and scattering results in <math>L^2(|x|^{2s})\,</math> thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation. Thus for instance GWP and scattering occurs this weighted space for <math>s>2/3\,</math> (the corresponding statement for, say, <math>s > 4/7\,</math> has not yet been checked).
* ''Remark'': This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. Heuristically, GWP results in <math>H^s\,</math> transfer to GWP and scattering results in <math>L^2(|x|^{2s})\,</math> thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation. Thus for instance GWP and scattering occurs this weighted space for <math>s>2/3\,</math> (the corresponding statement for, say, <math>s > 4/7\,</math> has not yet been checked).
* In the periodic case the <math>H^k\,</math> norm grows like <math>O(t^{2(k-1)+})\,</math> as long as the <math>H^1\,</math> norm stays bounded. In the non-periodic case it is <math>O(t^{(k-1)+})\,</math> [[St1997]], [[St1997b]]; this was improved to <math>t^{2/3 (k-1)+}\,</math> 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 <math>t^{(k-1)+/2}\,.</math>
* Question: Is there scattering in the cubic defocussing case, in <math>L^2\,</math> or <math>H^1\,</math>? (certainly not in the focussing case thanks to solitons). This problem seems of comparable difficulty to the GWP problem for large <math>L^2\,</math> 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 <math>H^k\,</math> norms in this case [Bourgain?].
** If the data has sufficient decay then one has scattering. For instance if <math>xu(0)\,</math> is in <math>L^2\,</math> [[Bibliography#Ts1985|Ts1985]]. This was improved to <math>x^{2/3+} u(0) \in L^2\,</math> in [[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 <math>(T-t)^{-1}\,</math>. If the domain is a disk then uniform LWP fails for <math>1/5 < s < 1/3\,</math>, while for a square one has LWP for all <math>s>0\,.</math> In general domains one has LWP for <math>s>2.</math>.


== Open question: large mass scattering ==
What happens for large <math>L^2\,</math> data? It is known that the only way GWP can fail at <math>L^2\,</math> is if the <math>L^2\,</math> 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 <math>H^1\,</math> norm in these examples blows up like <math>|t|^{-1}\,.</math> It is conjectured that slower blow-up examples exist, in particular numerics suggest a blowup rate of <math>|t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2}\,</math> [[LanPapSucSup1988]]; interestingly, however, if we perturb NLS to the [[Zakharov system]] then one can only have blowup rates of <math>|t|^{-1}\,.</math>
[[Category:Open problems]]
[[Category:Schrodinger]]
[[Category:Schrodinger]]
[[Category:Equations]]
[[Category:Equations]]

Revision as of 21:27, 5 August 2006

The theory of the cubic NLS on R^2 is as follows.

  • Scaling is , thus this is a [mass critical NLS].
  • LWP for CaWe1990.
    • For 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 . 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 we have ill-posedness by Gallilean invariance considerations in both the focusing KnPoVe-p and defocusing CtCoTa-p2 cases.
  • GWP for in the defocussing case CoKeStTkTa2002
    • For this was shown in Bo1998.
    • For this was shown in Bo1998, Bo1999.
    • For this follows from Hamiltonian conservation.
    • For small 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 norm strictly smaller than the ground state Q Me1993. If the 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 norm, or more generally whenever the solution is 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 result is probably improvable by correction term methods.
    • Remark: is the least regularity for which the non-linear part of the solution has finite energy (Bourgain, private communication).
    • For powers slightly higher than cubic, one has scattering for large mass data Na1999c, and indeed we have bounded norms in this case [Bourgain?].
    • If the data has sufficient decay then one has scattering. For instance if is in Ts1985. This was improved to in Bo1998, Bo1999; the above results on GWP will probably also extend to scattering.
  • Remark: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. Heuristically, GWP results in transfer to GWP and scattering results in thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation. Thus for instance GWP and scattering occurs this weighted space for (the corresponding statement for, say, has not yet been checked).

Open question: large mass scattering

What happens for large data? It is known that the only way GWP can fail at is if the 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 norm in these examples blows up like It is conjectured that slower blow-up examples exist, in particular numerics suggest a blowup rate of LanPapSucSup1988; interestingly, however, if we perturb NLS to the Zakharov system then one can only have blowup rates of