1
$\begingroup$

Take $$ u_t(t) + A(t)u(t) = f(t), $$ $$ u(0) = u(T), $$ where $A$ is an linear elliptic operator and the first equation is an equality in $L^2(0,T;V^*)$ for $V \subset H \subset V^*$ Hilbert triple. (there is slight abuse of notation in the equality but never mind)

Under what conditions does a solution to this problem exist? By solution I mean $u \in L^2(0,T;V)$ with $u_t \in L^2(0,T;V^*)$ (or $u_t \in L^2(0,T;H)$ if data is smooth enough). Apart from requiring maybe $A(0) = A(T)$ and $f(0) = f(T)$.

How does one prove this via the Galerkin approach?

I know of two ways: 1) To use a maximal monotone approach as in Roubicek's book. This seems like overkill though for such a simple PDE 2) To use a fixed point method to show that the Galerkin approximations $u_n$ are also periodic ($u_n(0) = u_n(T)$). However this requires initial data to be of appropriate size so that the fixed point map maps into a compact set and Brouwer's FP theorem can be used.

So I guess there must be a simple way but I can't find it. I posted this on the StackExchange site too (https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/651194/weak-periodic-solution-of-parabolic-pde) but I didn't get any answer. Thanks.

$\endgroup$
4
  • $\begingroup$ Is there a particular reason why it is necessary to use a Galerkin approach? $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 10:16
  • $\begingroup$ @ChristopherA.Wong I prefer Galerkin approach because it is constructive and I am also not familiar with other approaches (semigroups). $\endgroup$
    – matt.x
    Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 10:50
  • $\begingroup$ OK, I will think about this problem. It's good that you specifically mentioned semigroups because, in most nice cases (like the strongly elliptic case), that approach is quite slick. $\endgroup$ Commented Jan 27, 2014 at 19:05
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ In the finite dimensional case when $A(t)$ is a (time) periodic matrix this is usualy called Floquet theory. Googling Floquet+parabolic returns a fair amounf of answers. Otherwise Lieberman seems to have a paper dedicated to this issue in CPDE, see tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/… (but I don't know the paper and I don't have access to it right now so it might be irrelevant, in which case I apologize) $\endgroup$ Commented Feb 2, 2014 at 13:48

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .