NLS on manifolds and obstacles: Difference between revisions

From DispersiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
No edit summary
mNo edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol"><font face="Symbol"><span style="mso-list: Ignore">·</span></font></span>For the cubic equation on two-dimensional surfaces one has LWP in <math>H^s\,</math> for <math>s > 1/2\,</math> [BuGdTz-p3]
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: Symbol; mso-bidi-font-family: Symbol"><font face="Symbol"><span style="mso-list: Ignore">·</span></font></span>For the cubic equation on two-dimensional surfaces one has LWP in <math>H^s\,</math> for <math>s > 1/2\,</math> [BuGdTz-p3]


<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;"><font face="&quot;Courier New&quot;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore">o</span></font></span>For <math>s \ge 1\,</math> one has GWP [[Bibliography#Vd1984|Vd1984]], [[Bibliography#OgOz1991|OgOz1991]] and regularity [[Bibliography#BrzGa1980|BrzGa1980]]
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;"><font face="&quot;Courier New&quot;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore">o</span></font></span>For <math>s \ge 1\,</math> one has GWP [[Vd1984]], [[OgOz1991]] and regularity [[BrzGa1980]]


<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;"><font face="&quot;Courier New&quot;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore">o</span></font></span>For <math>s < 0\,</math> uniform ill-posedness can be obtained by adapting the argument in [[Bibliography#BuGdTz2002|BuGdTz2002]] or [CtCoTa-p]
<span style="mso-fareast-font-family: &quot;Courier New&quot;"><font face="&quot;Courier New&quot;"><span style="mso-list: Ignore">o</span></font></span>For <math>s < 0\,</math> uniform ill-posedness can be obtained by adapting the argument in [[BuGdTz2002]] or [CtCoTa-p]


A key tool here is the development of Strichartz estimates on curved space. For general manifolds one has all the <math>L^q_t L^r_x\,</math> Strichartz estimates (locally in time), but with a loss of <math>1/q\,</math> derivatives, see [BuGdTz-p3]. (This though compares favorably to Sobolev embedding, which would require a loss of <math>2/q\,</math> derivatives). When the manifold is flat outside of a compact set and obeys a non-trapping condition, the optimal Strichartz estimates (locally in time) were obtained in [StTt-p]. <br /> When instead the manifold is decaying outside of a compact set and obeys a non-trapping condition, the Strichartz estimates (locally in time) with an epsilon loss were obtained by Burq [Bu-p3]; in the special case of <math>L^4\,</math> estimates on <math>R^3\,</math>, and for non-trapping asymptotically conic manifolds, the epsilon was removed in [HslTaWun-p]
A key tool here is the development of Strichartz estimates on curved space. For general manifolds one has all the <math>L^q_t L^r_x\,</math> Strichartz estimates (locally in time), but with a loss of <math>1/q\,</math> derivatives, see [BuGdTz-p3]. (This though compares favorably to Sobolev embedding, which would require a loss of <math>2/q\,</math> derivatives). When the manifold is flat outside of a compact set and obeys a non-trapping condition, the optimal Strichartz estimates (locally in time) were obtained in [StTt-p]. <br /> When instead the manifold is decaying outside of a compact set and obeys a non-trapping condition, the Strichartz estimates (locally in time) with an epsilon loss were obtained by Burq [Bu-p3]; in the special case of <math>L^4\,</math> estimates on <math>R^3\,</math>, and for non-trapping asymptotically conic manifolds, the epsilon was removed in [HslTaWun-p]
Line 15: Line 15:
** The same is true for the endpoint <math>d=3, p=3\,</math> if the energy is sufficiently small [BuGdTz-p4].
** The same is true for the endpoint <math>d=3, p=3\,</math> if the energy is sufficiently small [BuGdTz-p4].
** If <math>d \le 4\,</math> then the flow map is Lipschitz [BuGdTz-p4]
** If <math>d \le 4\,</math> then the flow map is Lipschitz [BuGdTz-p4]
** For <math>d=2, p \le 3\,</math> this is in [[Bibliography#BrzGa1980|BrzGa1980]], [[Bibliography#Vd1984|Vd1984]], [[Bibliography#OgOz1991|OgOz1991]]
** For <math>d=2, p \le 3\,</math> this is in [[BrzGa1980]], [[Vd1984]], [[OgOz1991]]
* If <math>p < 1 + 2/d\,</math> then one has GWP in <math>L^2\,</math> [BuGdTz-p4]
* If <math>p < 1 + 2/d\,</math> then one has GWP in <math>L^2\,</math> [BuGdTz-p4]
** For <math>d=3\,</math> GWP for smooth data is in [[Bibliography#Jor1961|Jor1961]]
** For <math>d=3\,</math> GWP for smooth data is in [[Jor1961]]
** Again, in the non-obstacle theory one would expect <math>p < 1 + 4/d\,</math>
** Again, in the non-obstacle theory one would expect <math>p < 1 + 4/d\,</math>
** if <math>p < 1 + 1/d\,</math> then one also has strong uniqueness in the class <math>L^2\,</math> [BuGdTz-p4]
** if <math>p < 1 + 1/d\,</math> then one also has strong uniqueness in the class <math>L^2\,</math> [BuGdTz-p4]
Line 24: Line 24:


* Local well-posedness in <math>H^s\,</math> for <math>s > d/2\,</math> can be obtained by energy methods.
* Local well-posedness in <math>H^s\,</math> for <math>s > d/2\,</math> can be obtained by energy methods.
* In two dimensions when <math>p \le 3\,</math>, global well-posedness in the energy class (assuming energy less than the ground state, in the <math>p=3\,</math> focusing case) is in [[Bibliography#BrzGa1980|BrzGa1980]], [[Bibliography#Vd1984|Vd1984]], [[Bibliography#OgOz1991|OgOz1991]], [[Bibliography#Ca1989|Ca1989]].More precise asymptotics of a minimal energy blowup solution in the focusing <math>p=3\,</math> case are in [BuGdTz-p], [Ban-p3]
* In two dimensions when <math>p \le 3\,</math>, global well-posedness in the energy class (assuming energy less than the ground state, in the <math>p=3\,</math> focusing case) is in [[BrzGa1980]], [[Vd1984]], [[OgOz1991]], [[Ca1989]].More precise asymptotics of a minimal energy blowup solution in the focusing <math>p=3\,</math> case are in [BuGdTz-p], [Ban-p3]
* When <math>p > 1 + 4/d\,</math> blowup can occur in the focusing case [[Bibliography#Kav1987|Kav1987]]
* When <math>p > 1 + 4/d\,</math> blowup can occur in the focusing case [[Kav1987]]


== Specific manifolds and equations ==
== Specific manifolds and equations ==
Line 31: Line 31:
* Improved results are known for the [[cubic NLS]] for certain special manifolds, such as spheres, cylinders, and torii.
* Improved results are known for the [[cubic NLS]] for certain special manifolds, such as spheres, cylinders, and torii.
* The [[quintic NLS]] has also been studied on several special manifolds, such as the circle.
* The [[quintic NLS]] has also been studied on several special manifolds, such as the circle.
* GWP and scattering for defocusing NLS on Schwarzchild manifolds for radial data is in [[Bibliography#LabSf1999|LabSf1999]]
* GWP and scattering for defocusing NLS on Schwarzchild manifolds for radial data is in [[LabSf1999]]


[[Category:Equations]]
[[Category:Equations]]
[[Category:Schrodinger]]
[[Category:Schrodinger]]

Revision as of 14:33, 10 August 2006

The NLS has been studied on non-flat manifolds. For instance, for smooth two-dimensional compact surfaces one has LWP in [BuGdTz-p3], while for smooth three-dimensional compact surfaces and one has LWP in for , together with weak solutions in [BuGdTz-p3]. In the special case of a sphere one has LWP in for and [BuGdTz-p3].

·For the cubic equation on two-dimensional surfaces one has LWP in for [BuGdTz-p3]

oFor one has GWP Vd1984, OgOz1991 and regularity BrzGa1980

oFor uniform ill-posedness can be obtained by adapting the argument in BuGdTz2002 or [CtCoTa-p]

A key tool here is the development of Strichartz estimates on curved space. For general manifolds one has all the Strichartz estimates (locally in time), but with a loss of derivatives, see [BuGdTz-p3]. (This though compares favorably to Sobolev embedding, which would require a loss of derivatives). When the manifold is flat outside of a compact set and obeys a non-trapping condition, the optimal Strichartz estimates (locally in time) were obtained in [StTt-p].
When instead the manifold is decaying outside of a compact set and obeys a non-trapping condition, the Strichartz estimates (locally in time) with an epsilon loss were obtained by Burq [Bu-p3]; in the special case of estimates on , and for non-trapping asymptotically conic manifolds, the epsilon was removed in [HslTaWun-p]

Outside of a non-trapping obstacle (with Dirichlet boundary conditions), the known results are as follows.

  • If then one has GWP in H^1 assuming a coercivity condition (e.g. if the nonlinearity is defocusing) [BuGdTz-p4].
    • Note there is a loss compared with the non-obstacle theory, where one expects the condition to be .
    • The same is true for the endpoint if the energy is sufficiently small [BuGdTz-p4].
    • If then the flow map is Lipschitz [BuGdTz-p4]
    • For this is in BrzGa1980, Vd1984, OgOz1991
  • If then one has GWP in [BuGdTz-p4]
    • For GWP for smooth data is in Jor1961
    • Again, in the non-obstacle theory one would expect
    • if then one also has strong uniqueness in the class [BuGdTz-p4]

On a domain in , with Dirichlet boundary conditions, the results are as follows.

  • Local well-posedness in for can be obtained by energy methods.
  • In two dimensions when , global well-posedness in the energy class (assuming energy less than the ground state, in the focusing case) is in BrzGa1980, Vd1984, OgOz1991, Ca1989.More precise asymptotics of a minimal energy blowup solution in the focusing case are in [BuGdTz-p], [Ban-p3]
  • When blowup can occur in the focusing case Kav1987

Specific manifolds and equations

  • Improved results are known for the cubic NLS for certain special manifolds, such as spheres, cylinders, and torii.
  • The quintic NLS has also been studied on several special manifolds, such as the circle.
  • GWP and scattering for defocusing NLS on Schwarzchild manifolds for radial data is in LabSf1999