Incompressible limit of the compressible magnetohydrodynamic equations with vanishing viscosity coefficients

We divide the proof into several steps.

Step 1: Basic energy estimates and compact arguments.

By the assumption on the initial data we obtain, from the energy inequality (?), that the total energy \mathcal{E}^\epsilon(t) has a uniform upper bound for a.e. t\in [0,T], T>0. This uniform bound implies that \rho^\epsilon |{\bf u}^\epsilon|^2 and \big((\rho^\epsilon)^\gamma-1-\gamma(\rho^\epsilon-1)\big)/{\epsilon^2} are bounded in L^\infty(0,T;L^1) and {\bf H}^\epsilon is bounded in L^\infty(0,T;L^2). By an analysis similar to that used in [LM98], we find

which implies that

By the results of [DG99], we have the following estimate on {\bf u}^\epsilon,

Furthermore, the fact that \rho^\epsilon |{\bf u}^\epsilon|^2 and |{\bf H}^\epsilon|^2 are bounded in L^\infty(0,T;L^1) implies the following convergence (up to the extraction of a subsequence \epsilon_n):

Our main task in this section is to show that \mathbf{J}={\bf u} and \mathbf{K}={\bf H} in some sense, where ({\bf u},{\bf H}) is the strong solution to the ideal incompressible MHD equations (?)-(?).

Step 2: Description and cancelation of the oscillations.

In order to describe the oscillations caused by the initial data, we use the ideas introduced in [S94, M01b] and the dispersion property of the linear wave equations [DG99, M01b].

We project the momentum equation (?) on the “gradient vector-fields” to find

Below we assume a\gamma=1 for simplicity, otherwise we can change \varphi^\epsilon to \varphi^\epsilon/({a\gamma}). Noticing \rho^\epsilon=1+\epsilon\varphi^\epsilon, we can write (?) and (Proof) as

where \mathbf{F}^\epsilon is given by

Therefore, we introduce the following group defined by \mathcal{L}(\tau)=e^{\tau L}, \tau \in \mathbb{R}, where L is the operator defined on \mathcal{D}'\times (\mathcal{D}')^{d} by

Then, it is easy to check that e^{\tau L} is an isometry on each H^r\times (H^r)^d for all r\in \mathbb{R} and for all \tau \in \mathbb{R}. Denoting

then we have

Thus, \frac{\partial^2\bar \phi}{\partial \tau ^2}-\Delta \bar \phi =0.

Let (\phi^\epsilon, \mathbf{g}^\epsilon=\nabla q^\epsilon) be the solution of the following system

Here we have used Q(\sqrt{\rho^\epsilon_0}{\bf u}^\epsilon_0) as an approximation of Q( {\rho^\epsilon_0}{\bf u}^\epsilon_0) since \|Q({\rho^\epsilon_0}{\bf u}^\epsilon_0)-Q(\sqrt{\rho^\epsilon_0}{\bf u}^\epsilon_0)\|_{L^1}\rightarrow 0 as \epsilon \rightarrow 0.

Our main idea is to use \phi^\epsilon and {\bf g}^\epsilon as test functions and plug them into the total energy \mathcal{E}^\epsilon(t) to cancel the oscillations. We introduce the following regularization for the initial data, \Pi^{\epsilon,\delta}_0=\Pi^\epsilon_0 \ast \chi^\delta, Q^\delta( \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon_0}{\bf u}^\epsilon_0)=Q( \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon_0}{\bf u}^\epsilon_0) \ast \chi^\delta, and denote by (\phi^{\epsilon,\delta},{\bf g}^{\epsilon,\delta}=\nabla q^{\epsilon,\delta}) the corresponding solution to the equations (Proof)-(Proof) with initial data \phi^{\epsilon,\delta}|_{t=0}=\Pi^{\epsilon,\delta}_0, {\bf g}^{\epsilon,\delta}|_{t=0}=Q^\delta( \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon_0}u^\epsilon_0). Here \chi \in C^\infty_0(\mathbb{R}^d) is the Friedrich’s mollifier, i.e., \int_{\mathbb{R}^d} \chi =1 and \chi^\delta(x)=(1/\delta^d)\chi(x/\delta). Since the equations (Proof)-(Proof) are linear, it is easy to verify that \phi^{\epsilon,\delta}=\phi^{\epsilon}\ast \chi^\delta , {\bf g}^{\epsilon,\delta}={\bf g}^{\epsilon}\ast \chi^\delta.

Using the Strichartz estimate of the linear wave equations [DG99], we have

for all l,r> 2 and \sigma>0 such that

The estimate (Proof) implies that for arbitrary but fixed \delta and for all s\in \mathbb{R}, we have

Step 3: The modulated energy functional and uniform estimates.

We first recall the energy inequality of the compressible MHD equations (?)-(?) for almost all t,

The conservation of energy for the ideal incompressible MHD equations (?)-(?) reads

From the system (Proof)-(Proof) we get that, for all t,

Using \phi^{\epsilon,\delta} as a test function and noticing \rho^\epsilon=1+\epsilon \varphi^\epsilon, we obtain the following weak formulation of the continuity equation (?)

We use {\bf u} and {\bf g}^{\epsilon,\delta}=\nabla q^{\epsilon,\delta} as test functions to the momentum equation (?) respectively to deduce

and

Similarly, using {\bf H} as a test function to the magnetic field equation (?), we get

Summing up (Proof), (Proof) and (Proof), and inserting (Proof)-(Proof) into the resulting inequality, we can deduce the following inequality by a straightforward computation

where

We first deal with R_1^\epsilon(t) and R_2^\epsilon(t) on the right-hand side of the inequality (Proof). Denoting \mathbf{w}^{\epsilon,\delta}=\sqrt{\rho^\epsilon} {\bf u}^\epsilon -{\bf u}-{\bf g}^{\epsilon,\delta}, \mathbf{Z}^{\epsilon}= {\bf H}^\epsilon -{\bf H}, integrating by parts and making use of the facts that {\rm div}\, {\bf H}^\epsilon =0, {\rm div}\, {\bf u} =0, and {\rm div}\,{\bf H} =0, we obtain that

and

Substituting (Proof) and (Proof) into the inequality (Proof), we conclude

where

Step 4: Convergence of the modulated energy functional.

To show the convergence of the modulated energy functional and to finish our proof, we have to estimate the reminders S^{\epsilon,\delta}_1(t) and S^\epsilon_i(t), i=2,\dots,7. We remark that the terms S^{\epsilon}_3(t), S^{\epsilon}_6(t) and S^{\epsilon}_7(t) where the magnetic field is not included are estimated in the similar way as in [M01b].

First in view of (Proof) and the following two elementary inequalities

for some positive constant M and 0<\delta<1, we obtain

Then, by using Hölder inequality, the estimates (Proof) and (Proof), the assumption on the initial data, the strong convergence of \rho^\epsilon, the estimates on {\bf u}^\epsilon, \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon}{\bf u}^\epsilon and {\bf H}^\epsilon, and the regularities of {\bf u} and {\bf H}, we can show that S^{\epsilon,\delta}_1(t) converges to 0 for all fixed \delta and almost all t, uniformly in t when \epsilon goes to 0. The similar arguments can be found in [DG99] and [HW3].

Next, we begin to estimate the terms S^\epsilon_i(t),i=2,\dots, 7. For the term S^{\epsilon}_2(t), by Young’s inequality and the regularity of {\bf u} and {\bf H}, we have

For the term S^{\epsilon}_3(t), by Hölder’s inequality, the estimate (Proof), the assumption on the initial data, the estimate on \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon}{\bf u}^\epsilon, and the regularity of {\bf u}, we infer that

For the term S^{\epsilon}_4(t), making use of the basic inequality (?), the regularity of {\bf H}, and Hölder’s inequality, we get

Note that there is no uniform estimate on ||{\bf u}^\epsilon||_{L^2(0,T;L^2)} in Y^\epsilon(t) (see the estimate (Proof)). We have to deal with Y^\epsilon(t) in dimension two and three, respectively. In the case of d=2, using Sobolev’s imbedding, the basic inequality (?), the assumption (2.3), and the inequality (Proof), we obtain

where \sigma =1-(\alpha+\beta)/2>0 due to 0<\alpha+\beta<2. For d=3, using Sobolev’s imbedding, the basic inequality (?), the assumption (2.3), the inequality (Proof), and \|{\bf u}^\epsilon\|_{L^6(\mathbb{R}^3)}\leq C\|\nabla {\bf u}^\epsilon||_{L^2(\mathbb{R}^3)}, we obtain

where \sigma =1-(\alpha+\beta)/2>0.

For the term S^{\epsilon}_5(t), one can utilize the inequality (Proof), the inequality (Proof), the estimate on \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon}{\bf u}^\epsilon, the regularity of {\bf H}, and \rho^\epsilon-1=\rho^\epsilon-\sqrt{\rho^\epsilon} +\sqrt{\rho^\epsilon} -1 to deduce

Here 2-{\alpha}/{2}>1 and 5/3-{\alpha}/{2}>0 since 0<\alpha<2.

Using (2.1), (Proof) and (Proof), the term S^{\epsilon}_6(t) can be bounded as follows.

where \kappa=\min\{2,\gamma\} and we have used the conditions s>d/2+2 and \gamma>1.

Finally, to estimate the term S^\epsilon_7(t), we rewrite it as

where

Applying arguments similar to those used for S^{\epsilon}_{3}(t) and S^{\epsilon}_{6}(t), we arrive at the following boundedness

Thus by collecting all estimates above and applying the Gronwall’s inequality we deduce that, for almost all t\in (0,T),

where

Noticing that the projection P is a bounded linear mapping from L^2 to L^2, we obtain that

Thanks to (Proof), we further obtain that

The uniform convergence (in t) of P(\sqrt{\rho^\epsilon}{\bf u}^\epsilon) to {\bf u} in L^2(\mathbb{R}^d) is proved.

Now we claim that \mathbf{J}={\bf u} and \mathbf{K}={\bf H}. Since {\bf g}^{\epsilon,\delta} tends weakly-\ast to zero by (Proof), \mathbf{w}^{\epsilon,\delta} tends weakly-\ast to \mathbf{J} - {\bf u}. It is easy to see that \mathbf{Z}^\epsilon tends weakly-\ast to \mathbf{K} - {\bf H}. Hence by (Proof), we obtain that

where we have used the fact that \| \text{weak-}\ast\text{--}\lim\theta^\epsilon\|_{L^\infty(0,T;L^2)}\leq \varlimsup_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0}\|\theta^\epsilon||_{L^\infty(0,T;L^2)} for any \theta^\epsilon\in L^\infty(0,T;L^2). Thus we deduce \mathbf{J}={\bf u} and \mathbf{K}={\bf H} in L^\infty(0,T; L^2) by letting \delta go to 0.

Finally, we show the local strong convergence of \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon}{\bf u}^\epsilon to {\bf u} in L^r(0,T; L^2(\Omega)) for all 1\leq r<+\infty on any bounded domain \Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^d. In fact, for all t\in [0,T], we have

for any q>2. Using the estimate (Proof), we can take the limit on \epsilon and then on \delta as above to deduce that \sqrt{\rho^\epsilon}{\bf u}^\epsilon converges to {\bf u} in L^r(0,T; L^2(\Omega)). Thus we complete our proof.