# Difference between revisions of "Cubic NLW/NLKG on R3"

From DispersiveWiki

Jump to navigationJump to searchm (More bib cleaning) |
|||

Line 1: | Line 1: | ||

− | |||

* Scaling is <math>s_c = 1/2</math>. | * Scaling is <math>s_c = 1/2</math>. | ||

* LWP for <math>s \geq 1/2</math> by Strichartz estimates (see e.g. [[Bibliography#LbSo1995|LbSo1995]]; earlier references exist) | * LWP for <math>s \geq 1/2</math> by Strichartz estimates (see e.g. [[Bibliography#LbSo1995|LbSo1995]]; earlier references exist) | ||

Line 5: | Line 4: | ||

** One can improve the critical space <math>H^{1/2}</math> to a slightly weaker Besov space [Pl-p2]. | ** One can improve the critical space <math>H^{1/2}</math> to a slightly weaker Besov space [Pl-p2]. | ||

** For <math>s<1/2</math> one has instantaneous blowup in the focusing case, and unbounded growth of H^s norms in the defocusing case [CtCoTa-p2] | ** For <math>s<1/2</math> one has instantaneous blowup in the focusing case, and unbounded growth of H^s norms in the defocusing case [CtCoTa-p2] | ||

− | * GWP for <math>s>3/4</math> [[ | + | * GWP for <math>s>3/4</math> [[Bibliography#KnPoVe-p2 |KnPoVe-p2]] for defocussing NLKG.(An alternate proof is in [[Bibliography#GalPl2003|GalPl2003]]). |

** For <math>s\geq1</math> this is clear from energy conservation (for both NLKG and NLW). | ** For <math>s\geq1</math> this is clear from energy conservation (for both NLKG and NLW). | ||

** One also has GWP and scattering for data with small <math>H^{1/2}</math> norm for general cubic non-linearities (and for either NLKG or NLW). | ** One also has GWP and scattering for data with small <math>H^{1/2}</math> norm for general cubic non-linearities (and for either NLKG or NLW). |

## Revision as of 15:57, 31 July 2006

- Scaling is .
- LWP for by Strichartz estimates (see e.g. LbSo1995; earlier references exist)
- When the time of existence depends on the profile of the data and not just on the norm.
- One can improve the critical space to a slightly weaker Besov space [Pl-p2].
- For one has instantaneous blowup in the focusing case, and unbounded growth of H^s norms in the defocusing case [CtCoTa-p2]

- GWP for KnPoVe-p2 for defocussing NLKG.(An alternate proof is in GalPl2003).
- For this is clear from energy conservation (for both NLKG and NLW).
- One also has GWP and scattering for data with small norm for general cubic non-linearities (and for either NLKG or NLW).
- In the defocussing case one has scattering for large data BaeSgZz1990, see also [Hi-p3].
- Improvement is certainly possible, both in lowering the s index and in replacing NLKG with NLW.
- In the focussing case there is blowup from large data by the ODE method.

- For periodic defocussing NLKG there is a weak turbulence effect in for (low frequencies decay in time) but a symplectic non-squeezing effect in H^{1/2} Kuk1995b.In particular cannot be a symplectic phase space for .