• $d\in\mathbb N$
  • $\lambda^d$ denote the Lebesgue measure on $\mathbb R^d$
  • $\Lambda\subseteq\mathbb R^d$ be open
  • $\mathcal V:=\left\{v\in C_c^\infty(\Lambda)^d:\nabla\cdot v=0\right\}$, $$V:=\overline{\mathcal V}^{\left\|\;\cdot\;\right\|_{H^1(\Lambda,\:\mathbb R^d)}}$$ and $$H:=\overline{\mathcal V}^{\left\|\;\cdot\;\right\|_{L^2(\Lambda,\:\mathbb R^d)}}=\overline V^{\left\|\;\cdot\;\right\|_{L^2(\Lambda,\:\mathbb R^d)}}\tag 1$$
  • $W^1((0,T),V):=\left\{u\in L^1_{\text{loc}}((0,T),V):u\text{ is weakly differentiable}\right\}$

I want to reformulate $$\left\{\begin{array}{rll}\displaystyle\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}-\nu\Delta u+\left(u\cdot\nabla\right)u+\frac1\rho\nabla p&=&f&&\text{in }[0,T]\times\Lambda\\ u(0,\;\cdot\;)&=&u_0&&\text{in }\Lambda\end{array}\right.\tag 2$$ as a semilinear evolution equation on $H$.

It's easy to see that $$(A_0u)v:=\sum_{i=1}^d\langle\nabla u_i,\nabla v_i\rangle_{L^2(\Lambda,\:\mathbb R^d)}\;\;\;\text{for }u,v\in V$$ is a bounded linear operator from $V$ to $V'$. Moreover, if $d\le 4$ and $\Lambda$ is bounded, then $$b(u,v,w):=\int_\Lambda(u\cdot\nabla)v\cdot w\:{\rm d}\lambda^d\;\;\;\text{for }u,v,w\in H_0^1(\Lambda,\mathbb R^d)$$ is a well-defined bounded trilinear form on $H_0^1(\Lambda,\mathbb R^d)$ and hence $$B(u,v):=\left.b(u,v,\;\cdot\;)\right|_V\;\;\;\text{for }u,v\in V$$ is a bounded bilinear operator from $V\times V$ to $V'$. Now, let $u$ be a classical solution of $(2)$ and $$\tilde u(t):=u(t,\;\cdot\;)\;\;\;\text{for }t\in(0,T)\;.$$ A straightforward calculation yields $\tilde u\in W^1((0,T),V)$ with $$\tilde u'(t)+\nu A_0\tilde u(t)+B(\tilde u(t),\tilde u(t))=0\;\;\;\text{for all }t\in[0,T].\tag 3$$

Note that $(3)$ is an equation in $V'$ and hence any solution $\tilde u\in W^1((0,T),V)$ of $(3)$ corresponds to the notion of a weak solution of $(2)$. Since I'm interested in a mild solution of $(2)$, I somehow need to reformulate $(2)$ as an equation in $H$.

It's well-known that $$A:=\left.A_0\right|_{\mathcal D(A)}$$ with $D(A):=V\cap H^2(\Lambda,\mathbb R^d)$ is a densely-defined linear operator on $H$. Moreover, $-A$ is the generator of a contraction $C_0$-semigroup $S$ on $H$.

Now, I've often seen that people call $$v(t)=S(t)v_0+\int_0^tS(t-s)B(v(s),v(s))\:{\rm ds}\;\;\;\text{for all }t\in[0,T]\tag 4$$ the mild equation corresponding to $(2)$.

However, I expect that a solution $v$ of $(4)$ is $H$-valued! As stated above, if $v(t)\in\mathcal D(A)$, then $A_0v(t)\in H$ for all $t\in[0,T]$, but the $B(v(t),v(t))$ are still $V'$-valued.

Is this simply ruled out by $V'\cong V$ or has $(4)$ to be understood in a special sense?

In order to prevent any confusion: My problem with $(4)$ is that $A_0v(t)+B(v(t),v(t))\not\in H$, cause $B(v(t),v(t))\not\in H$, even when $v(t)\in\mathcal D(A)$, for any $t\in[0,T]$.

  • $\begingroup$ Have you really used the additional $H^2$ regularity of $v(t) \in D(A)$? Shouldn't this be (by far) enough for $B$ to give rise to a continuous linear form on $H$? $\endgroup$ – Hannes Dec 7 '16 at 9:27
  • $\begingroup$ @Hannes I need a continuous linear operator on $H$, not a continuous linear form. $\endgroup$ – 0xbadf00d Dec 7 '16 at 10:47
  • $\begingroup$ Yes, that's what I meant. Sorry, I shouldn't have called it form in this context. $\endgroup$ – Hannes Dec 7 '16 at 12:08
  • $\begingroup$ @Hannes Meanwhile, I've seen that some authors define $\tilde B(u,v):=\operatorname P_H\left[(u\cdot\nabla)v\right]$ even for $u,v\in V$, where $\operatorname P_H$ is the orthogonal projection from $L^2(\Lambda,\mathbb R^d)$ onto $H$; see, for example, here on page 2. But I don't see that $(u\cdot\nabla)v\in L^2(\Lambda,\mathbb R^d)$ for all $u,v\in V$. I've just asked for this on MSE. $\endgroup$ – 0xbadf00d Dec 7 '16 at 13:55
  • $\begingroup$ I think you need $u,v$ in $D(A)$, both in the paper regarding the projection, and here, and use the additional $H^2$ regularity for elements from $D(A)$. $\endgroup$ – Hannes Dec 7 '16 at 15:08

You are right, $(4)$ has to be understood in the special sense that the semigroup $S(t)$ (and the (Leray?) $L^2$-projection operator to $H$, as well) extend to a wider space, that of "distributional derivatives of $L^1$ functions". Then $(4)$ makes sense as soon as $v(t)\in H$ (with some measurability in $t$).

  • $\begingroup$ Please take note of my last three comments below the question. I'm only interested in mild solutions of $(2)$; which should be easier than finding a weak solution. From my understanding, $(3)$ is the wrong equation to consider, unless one is searching for weak solutions. However, I can't find any good reference which is considering mild solutions of $(2)$ (and hence of $(6)$). $\endgroup$ – 0xbadf00d Dec 7 '16 at 16:54

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.