Quintic NLS: Difference between revisions

From DispersiveWiki
Jump to navigationJump to search
m (More bib cleaning)
Line 2: Line 2:


* This equation may be viewed as a simpler version of [#dnls-3_on_R cubic DNLS], and is always at least as well-behaved. It has been proposed as a modifiation of the Gross-Pitaevski approximation for low-dimesional Bose liquids [[Bibliography#KolNewStrQi2000|KolNewStrQi2000]]
* This equation may be viewed as a simpler version of [#dnls-3_on_R cubic DNLS], and is always at least as well-behaved. It has been proposed as a modifiation of the Gross-Pitaevski approximation for low-dimesional Bose liquids [[Bibliography#KolNewStrQi2000|KolNewStrQi2000]]
* Scaling is s<sub>c</sub> = 0, thus this is an [#L^2-critical_NLS L^2 critical NLS].
* Scaling is <math>s_c = 0\,</math>, thus this is an [#L^2-critical_NLS <math>L^2</math> critical NLS].
* LWP is known for s <font face="Symbol">³</font> 0 [[Bibliography#CaWe1990|CaWe1990]], [[Bibliography#Ts1987|Ts1987]].
* LWP is known for <math>s \ge 0\,</math> [[Bibliography#CaWe1990|CaWe1990]], [[Bibliography#Ts1987|Ts1987]].
** For s=0 the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** For <math>s=0\,</math> the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
** Below L^2 we have ill-posedness by Gallilean invariance considerations in both the focusing [KnPoVe-p] and defocusing [CtCoTa-p2] cases.
** Below <math>L^2\,</math> we have ill-posedness by Gallilean invariance considerations in both the focusing [KnPoVe-p] and defocusing [CtCoTa-p2] cases.
* GWP for s>4/9 in the defocussing case [Tzi-p]
* GWP for <math>s>4/9\,</math> in the defocussing case [Tzi-p]
** For s>1/2 this is in [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa-p6 |CoKeStTkTa-p6]]
** For <math>s>1/2\,</math> this is in [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa-p6 |CoKeStTkTa-p6]]
** For s>2/3 this is in [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa-p4 |CoKeStTkTa-p4]].
** For <math>s>2/3\,</math> this is in [[Bibliography#CoKeStTkTa-p4 |CoKeStTkTa-p4]].
** For s > 32/33 this is implicit in [[Bibliography#Tk-p |Tk-p]].
** For <math>s > 32/33\,</math> this is implicit in [[Bibliography#Tk-p |Tk-p]].
** For s<font face="Symbol">³</font> 1 this follows from LWP and Hamiltonian conservation.
** For <math>s\ge 1\,</math> this follows from LWP and Hamiltonian conservation.
** One has GWP and scattering for small L<sup>2</sup> data for any quintic non-linearity. The corresponding problem for large L<sup>2</sup> data and defocussing nonlinearity is very interesting, but probably very difficult, perhaps only marginally easier than the corresponding problem for the [#Cubic_NLS_on_R^2 2D cubic NLS]. It would suffice to show that the solution has a bounded L<sup>6</sup> norm in spacetime.
** One has GWP and scattering for small <math>L^2\,</math> data for any quintic non-linearity. The corresponding problem for large <math>L^2\,</math> data and defocussing nonlinearity is very interesting, but probably very difficult, perhaps only marginally easier than the corresponding problem for the [#Cubic_NLS_on_R^2 2D cubic NLS]. It would suffice to show that the solution has a bounded <math>L^6\,</math> norm in spacetime.
** Explicit blowup solutions (with large L<sup>2</sup> norm) are known in the focussing case [[Bibliography#BirKnPoSvVe1996|BirKnPoSvVe1996]]. The blowup rate in H<sup>1</sup> is t<sup>-1</sup> in these solutions. This is not the optimal blowup rate; in fact an example has been constructed where the blowup rate is |t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2}[Per-p]. Furthermore, one always this blowup behavior (or possibly slower, though one must still blow up by at least |t|^{-1/2}) whenever the energy is negative [MeRap-p], [MeRap-p2], and one either assumes that the mass is close to the critical mass or that xu is in L^2.
** Explicit blowup solutions (with large <math>L^2\,</math> norm) are known in the focussing case [[Bibliography#BirKnPoSvVe1996|BirKnPoSvVe1996]]. The blowup rate in <math>H^1\,</math> is <math>t^{-1}\,</math> in these solutions. This is not the optimal blowup rate; in fact an example has been constructed where the blowup rate is <math>|t|^{-1/2} (log log|t|)^{1/2}\,</math>[Per-p]. Furthermore, one always this blowup behavior (or possibly slower, though one must still blow up by at least <math>|t|^{-1/2}\,</math>) whenever the energy is negative [MeRap-p], [MeRap-p2], and one either assumes that the mass is close to the critical mass or that <math>xu\,</math> is in <math>L^2\,</math>.
*** One can modify the explicit solutions from [[Bibliography#BirKnPoSvVe1996|BirKnPoSvVe1996]] and in fact create solutions which blow up at any collection of specified points in spacetime [[Bibliography#BoWg1997|BoWg1997]], [[Bibliography#Nw1998|Nw1998]].
*** One can modify the explicit solutions from [[Bibliography#BirKnPoSvVe1996|BirKnPoSvVe1996]] and in fact create solutions which blow up at any collection of specified points in spacetime [[Bibliography#BoWg1997|BoWg1997]], [[Bibliography#Nw1998|Nw1998]].
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. GWP results in H</nowiki><sup>s</sup> automatically transfer to GWP and scattering results in L<sup>2</sup>(|x|<sup>s</sup>) thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation.
* ''Remark''<nowiki>: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. GWP results in <math>H^s\,</math> automatically transfer to GWP and scattering results in <math>L^2(|x|^s)\,</math> thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation.
* Solitons are H<sup>1</sup>-unstable.
* Solitons are <math>H^1\,</math>-unstable.


<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center"><center>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: center"><center>

Revision as of 13:52, 3 August 2006

Quintic NLS on

  • This equation may be viewed as a simpler version of [#dnls-3_on_R cubic DNLS], and is always at least as well-behaved. It has been proposed as a modifiation of the Gross-Pitaevski approximation for low-dimesional Bose liquids KolNewStrQi2000
  • Scaling is , thus this is an [#L^2-critical_NLS critical NLS].
  • LWP is known for CaWe1990, Ts1987.
    • For the time of existence depends on the profile of the data as well as the norm.
    • 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 [Tzi-p]
    • For this is in CoKeStTkTa-p6
    • For this is in CoKeStTkTa-p4.
    • For this is implicit in Tk-p.
    • For this follows from LWP and Hamiltonian conservation.
    • One has GWP and scattering for small data for any quintic non-linearity. The corresponding problem for large data and defocussing nonlinearity is very interesting, but probably very difficult, perhaps only marginally easier than the corresponding problem for the [#Cubic_NLS_on_R^2 2D cubic NLS]. It would suffice to show that the solution has a bounded norm in spacetime.
    • Explicit blowup solutions (with large norm) are known in the focussing case BirKnPoSvVe1996. The blowup rate in is in these solutions. This is not the optimal blowup rate; in fact an example has been constructed where the blowup rate is [Per-p]. Furthermore, one always this blowup behavior (or possibly slower, though one must still blow up by at least ) whenever the energy is negative [MeRap-p], [MeRap-p2], and one either assumes that the mass is close to the critical mass or that is in .
      • One can modify the explicit solutions from BirKnPoSvVe1996 and in fact create solutions which blow up at any collection of specified points in spacetime BoWg1997, Nw1998.
  • Remark<nowiki>: This equation is pseudo-conformally invariant. GWP results in automatically transfer to GWP and scattering results in thanks to the pseudo-conformal transformation.
  • Solitons are -unstable.

Quintic NLS on

  • This equation may be viewed as a simpler version of cubic DNLS, and is always at least as well-behaved.
  • Scaling is sc = 0.
  • LWP is known for s > 0 Bo1993.
    • For s < 0 the solution map is not uniformly continuous from C^k to C^{-k} for any k [CtCoTa-p3].
  • GWP is known in the defocusing case for s > 4/9 (De Silva, Pavlovic, Staffilani, Tzirakis)
    • For s > 2/3 this is commented upon in [Bo-p2] and is a minor modification of [CoKeStTkTa-p].
    • For s >= 1 one has GWP in the defocusing case, or in the focusing case with small L^2 norm, by Hamiltonian conservation.
      • In the defocusing case one has GWP for random data whose Fourier coefficients decay like 1/|k| (times a Gaussian random variable) Bo1995c; this is roughly of the regularity of H^{1/2}. Indeed one has an invariant measure. In the focusing case the same result holds assuming the L2 norm is sufficiently small.


Quintic NLS on

  • Scaling is sc = 1/2.
  • LWP is known 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<s_c 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 for s ³ 1 by Hamiltonian conservation.
    • This has been improved to s > 1-e in CoKeStTkTa2003b. This result can of course be improved further.
    • Scattering in the energy space Na1999c
    • One also has GWP and scattering for small H^{1/2} data for any quintic non-linearity.

Quintic 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<s_c 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 defocusing case [CoKeStTkTa-p]
    • For radial data this is in [Bo-p], Bo1999.
    • Blowup can occur in the focussing case from Glassey's virial identity.