A pseudospectral quadrature method for Navier-Stokes equations on rotating spheres

M. Ganesh, Q. T. Le Gia and I. H. Sloan

arXiv: 1009.3308v1 · PDF · 17 September 2010
Categories: math.NA, cs.NA
Licence: CC0 1.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

In this work, we describe, analyze, and implement a pseudospectral quadrature method for a global computer modeling of the incompressible surface Navier-Stokes equations on the rotating unit sphere. Our spectrally accurate numerical error analysis is based on the Gevrey regularity of the solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations on the sphere. The scheme is designed for convenient application of fast evaluation techniques such as the fast Fourier transform (FFT), and the implementation is based on a stable adaptive time discretization.

Items 21

Theorem

Theorem 2.1

FPTG

If {\bf u}_0 \in \mathcal D(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2}) and {\bf f} \in L^\infty((0,\infty);\mathcal D(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^s e^{\sigma_1 \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}})), for some s, \sigma_1 > 0, then for all t>0 there exists a T^* > 0, depending only on \nu,{\bf f}, and \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf u}_0\|_{L^2(TS)}, such that the NSE (?) on S have a unique regular solution {\bf u}(\cdot, t)

and {\bf u}(\cdot,t) \in G^{s+1/2}_{\sigma(t)}, where \sigma(t) = \min\{t,T^*,\sigma_1\}.

Theorem

Theorem 2.2

PUZL

Let {\bf u}_0 \in \mathcal D(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2}) and {\bf f} \in C([0,T];\mathcal D(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\sigma_1 \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}})), with s~\geq~1/4. Let the domain \ensuremath{\mathbb T} be defined by

\ensuremath{\mathbb T} := \{\zeta=r e^{i\theta}: 0 \leq r \leq T;\ |\theta| \le \pi/4\}.

We assume further that {\bf f}(\cdot,\zeta) is analytic for \zeta\in\ensuremath{\mathbb T} and that

K := \sup \{ \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf f}(\cdot,\zeta)\|^2 : \zeta=re^{i\theta} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb T}\} < \infty.

Then there exists T^{**} > 0 such that

\| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r\cos\theta)\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(\zeta) \|^2 \le M_1, \qquad \zeta \in \ensuremath{\mathbb T} \mbox{ and } |\zeta| \le T^{**},

where M_1 depends on \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf u}(0)\| and hence {\bf u}(\cdot,\zeta) \in G^{s+1/2}_{\psi(r\cos\theta)}, where
\psi(x)~:=~\min\{x,T^{**},\sigma_1\}.

Proof of Theorem 2.2

Let \zeta = r e^{i\theta} with r > 0 and |\theta| \leq \pi/4, and let

{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta) := \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(\zeta).

The definition of \psi gives \frac{d}{dx} \psi := \psi'(x) \le 1, and \psi \le \sigma_1, thus for fixed \theta we find

\begin{aligned} \frac{d}{dr} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta) & = & \psi'(r\cos\theta) \cos\theta \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(\zeta) \\ & & + e^{i\theta} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} \frac{d{\bf u}}{d\zeta}(\zeta). \end{aligned}

Using (?) in

\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dr} \left\|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta) \right\|^2 = \Re\left(\frac{d}{dr} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta), {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta) \right), \end{aligned}

where \Re(\cdot) denotes the real-part function, we get

\begin{aligned} \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{dr} \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta)\|^2 &= \psi'(r\cos\theta)\cos\theta\; \Re\;(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta), {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta)) \\ && +\Re\; e^{i\theta} (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} \frac{d{\bf u}}{d\zeta}(\zeta) , {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta)). \end{aligned}

Using (?) for the last term in (?) together with the fact that

(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^s e^{\psi(r\cos\theta)\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}}\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf u},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}}{\bf u}) = 0

(see [cao_rammaha_titi99, Lemma 1]), we find

\begin{aligned} & & \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{dr} \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } (\zeta) \|^2 + \nu \cos\theta \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta) \|^2 \\ & = & \psi'(r\cos\theta) \cos\theta(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } ,{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } ) - \Re\; e^{i\theta} ( \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u}),{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }) \\ & & + \Re\; e^{i\theta} (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}}{\bf f}, \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }), \end{aligned}

where in (?) and below we write {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } = {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }(\zeta), {\bf u} = {\bf u}(\zeta), {\bf f} = {\bf f}(\zeta), \psi = \psi(r \cos\theta). From [cao_rammaha_titi99, Lemma 2], we have (with p=\max\{2-s,7/4\} = 7/4, since s \geq 1/4),

|( \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u}),{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} })| \le C \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }\|^{3-p} \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }\|^p.

Applying \psi' \leq 1, the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, (?)

and Young’s inequality (ab \le a^q/q + b^{q'}/q' with 1/q+1/q'=1) with q=2 and q=2/(2-p) in (?), we get

\begin{aligned} & & \frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{dr} \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 + \nu \cos\theta \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 \\ &\le& \cos\theta \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \| \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \| + C \|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^{3-p} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^p + \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf f}\| \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \| \\ &\le& \frac{\nu\cos\theta}{4} \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 + \frac{\cos\theta}{\nu} \|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 \\ &&+ C^{\frac{2}{2-p}} \frac{(2-p)}{p} \left(\frac{p}{\nu\cos\theta}\right)^{\frac{p}{2-p}} \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^{\frac{2(3-p)}{2-p}} + \frac{\nu\cos\theta}{2} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2\\ &&+\frac{1}{\nu\cos\theta}\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf f}\|^2+ \frac{\nu\cos\theta}{4} \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2} {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2. \end{aligned}

Therefore,

\begin{aligned} \frac{d}{dr} \|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 &\le& \frac{2 \cos\theta}{\nu} \|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 + C \left(\frac{1}{\nu\cos\theta}\right)^{\frac{p}{2-p}} \| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^{\frac{2(3-p)}{2-p}} + \frac{2}{\nu\cos\theta} \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf f} \|^2 \\ &\le& \frac{2 \cos\theta}{\nu} (1+\|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2) + C \left(\frac{1}{\nu\cos\theta}\right)^{\frac{p}{2-p}} (1+\| {\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2)^{\frac{3-p}{2-p}} + \\ & & \frac{2}{\nu\cos\theta}\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s} e^{\psi \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf f}\|^2 . \end{aligned}

Using |\theta| \le \pi/4, and \frac{3-p}{2-p}= 5,

in (?), we get

\frac{d}{dr} \|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} } \|^2 \le C (1+\|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }\|^{2})^5 + \frac{2\sqrt{2}}{\nu} K.

With |\theta| \le \pi/4 fixed, let

y(r) = 1 + \|{\bf u}_{\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} }\|^2.

Then on using (?) and y\ge 1 we obtain

\frac{d}{dr} y \le C y^{5},

and hence on integrating the inequality we find that

y(r) \le 2 y(0)

provided that

0 \le r \le \frac{15}{64C} \frac{1}{(y(0))^4} = \frac{15}{64C} \frac{1}{ (1+\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf u}(0)\|^2)^4 }.

By setting

T^{**}:= \frac{15}{64C} \frac{1}{ (1+\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2}{\bf u}(0)\|^2)^4 },\quad M_1 = 1+2\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2}{\bf u}(0)\|^2,

we deduce that (?) holds for 0 \leq r \le T^{**}.

Theorem

Theorem 2.3

2GZR

Suppose {\bf u}_0 and {\bf f} satisfy all the conditions in the domain \ensuremath{\mathbb T} as in Theorem 2.2.

Then

\| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r\cos\theta)\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(\zeta) \|^2 \le M_3, \qquad \zeta \in \ensuremath{\mathbb T} \mbox{ and } |\mbox{Im }\zeta| \le T^{**}/\sqrt{2},

where M_3:=1+2M_2^2, T^{**} depends on M_2, and hence {\bf u}(\cdot,\zeta) \in G^{s+1/2}_{\psi(r\cos\theta)} for all \zeta \in \ensuremath{\mathbb T} with |\mbox{Im }\zeta| \le T^{**}/\sqrt{2}.

Used by Proof

Proof of Theorem 2.3

We proceed as in the proof of Theorem 2.2 to obtain the ordinary differential equation

\frac{d}{dr} y \le C y^5,

where y(r) = 1+\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}}{\bf u}(r e^{i\theta})\|^2. On integrating the inequality we find that

y(r) \le 2 y(0)

provided that

0 \le r \le \frac{15}{64C} \frac{1}{ (1+\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf u}(0)\|^2)^4 }.

We define

T_1(\rho):= \frac{15}{64C} \frac{1}{ (1+\rho^2)^4 },\quad \rho \ge 0.

If T_1(\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2}{\bf u}(0)\|) \ge T we have finished the proof. Otherwise, we let

T^{**} = T_1(M_2),

where M_2 is given in (?). For \zeta = r e^{i\theta} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb T}, 0 \leq r \le T^{**},

\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r \cos\theta) \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(r e^{i\theta}) \|^2 \le 1 + 2\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf u}(0)\|^2.

Consequently, (?) holds for 0 \leq r \le T^{**} with M_3 = 1+2\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf u}(0)\|^2.

Next we consider the case \zeta = T^{**}+ r e^{i\theta}, with r \in [0,T^{**}]. We define, for |\theta| \leq \pi/4,

{\bf v}(re^{i\theta}) := {\bf u}(T^{**}+re^{i\theta}), \qquad r \in [0,T^{**}].

Using

\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} {\bf v}(0)\| \le M_2 we can apply the previous arguments

to obtain (?) (with {\bf u} replaced with {\bf v}) for 0\le r\le T^{**}.

We complete the proof and obtain the bound (?) by repeating the last argument n times, where n=\lceil T/T^{**} \rceil.

Lemma

Lemma 3.1

TB2B

Let \alpha>0 be given. If {\bf v} \in {\mathcal D}(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{\alpha/2}) then

\|{\bf v} - {\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf v}\| \le N^{-\alpha} \|{\bf v}\|_{H^\alpha(TS)}.

Used by Example 2

Proof of Lemma 3.1

Using (?), (?), and (?) we get

\begin{aligned} \|{\bf v} - {\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf v}\|^2= \sum_{L=N+1}^\infty\sum_{m=-L}^L |\widehat{{\bf v}}_{L,m}|^2 & \le N^{-2\alpha} \sum_{L=N+1}^\infty\sum_{m=-L}^L\lambda^{\alpha}_L |\widehat{{\bf v}}_{L,m}|^2 \\ & \le N^{-2\alpha}\| {\bf v} \|^2_{H^\alpha(TS)}. \end{aligned}

Theorem

Theorem 3.1

TXJ3

Let {\bf u}_0 and {\bf f} satisfy (?).

Then

\|{\bf u}-\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N\| \le C \lambda^{-s-1/2}_{N+1} e^{-\sigma(t) \lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \le C N^{-2s-1} e^{-\sigma(t) N}, \qquad t \in [0, T],

where \sigma(t) is as in Theorem 2.1.

Used by Proof, Proof

Proof of Theorem 3.1

Using the fact that \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N = {\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf u}, we have

\begin{aligned} \|{\bf u} - \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N \|^2 &= \sum_{L>N} \sum_{|m| \le L} |\widehat{{\bf u}}_{L,m}|^2 \\ &\le& \lambda^{-2s-1}_{N+1} e^{-2\sigma(t)\lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \sum_{L>N} \sum_{|m|\le L} \lambda^{2s+1}_L e^{2\sigma(t) \lambda^{1/2}_L } |\widehat{{\bf u}}_{L,m}|^2 \\ &\le& \lambda^{-2s-1}_{N+1} e^{-2\sigma(t)\lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\sigma(t)\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(t) \|^2 \\ &\le& C \lambda^{-2s-1}_{N+1} e^{-2\sigma(t)\lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \end{aligned}

where in the last step we used (?). The last inequality in (?) follows from the fact that N^2 \leq \lambda_{N+1} = (N+1)(N+2).

Theorem

Theorem 3.2

5G0E

Let {\bf u}_0, {\bf f} satisfy (?).

We assume further that {\bf f} is analytic in \ensuremath{\mathbb T} and (?) holds.

Then for t \in (0, T),

\left\|\frac{d}{dt}\left({\bf u}-\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N\right)\right \| \le C \lambda^{-s-1/2}_{N+1} e^{-\psi_1(t) \lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \le C N^{-2s-1} e^{-\psi_1(t) N},

where \psi_1(t) = \min\{(1-1/\sqrt{2})t,T^{**},\sigma_1\}, and T^{**} is as in Theorem 2.3.

Used by Proof

Proof of Theorem 3.2

Let t \in (0, T) be fixed. Let {\bf p}_N(\zeta) = ({\bf u} - \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N)(\zeta) be the standard complexification of {\bf u} - \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N at \zeta = r e^{i\theta}. Using Theorem 2.3 and the Cauchy integral formula,

\frac{d{\bf p}_N(t)}{dt}= \frac{1}{2\pi i } \int_{\Gamma} \frac{{\bf p}_N(\zeta)}{(t-\zeta)^2} d\zeta,

where for t>0, \Gamma is a circle in the \zeta plane with center (t,0) and radius
\min\{t/\sqrt{2},T^{**}/\sqrt{2},T-t\},

a condition that ensures that \zeta=r e^{i\theta} \in \Gamma lies in the region \ensuremath{\mathbb T} with |\mbox{Im }\zeta| \le T^{**}/\sqrt{2}.

Using the fact that \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N = {\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf u}, for \zeta = r e^{i\theta} \in \Gamma we have,

from Theorem 2.3,

\begin{aligned} \|{\bf p}_N(\zeta)\|&= \|{\bf u}(\zeta) - \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N(\zeta) \|^2 \\ & = & \sum_{L>N} \sum_{|m| \le L} |\widehat{{\bf u}}_{L,m}|^2 \\ &\le& \lambda^{-2s-1}_{N+1} e^{-2\psi(r\cos \theta)\lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \sum_{L>N} \sum_{|m|\le L} \lambda^{2s+1}_L e^{2\psi(r\cos \theta) \lambda^{1/2}_L } |\widehat{{\bf u}}_{L,m}|^2 \\ &\le& \lambda^{-2s-1}_{N+1} e^{-2\psi(r\cos \theta)\lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\psi(r \cos \theta)\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}} {\bf u}(\zeta) \|^2 \\ &\le& C \lambda^{-2s-1}_{N+1} e^{-2\psi(r\cos \theta)\lambda^{1/2}_{N+1}} \\ &\le& C N^{-2(2s+1)} e^{-2\psi(r\cos\theta) N}. \end{aligned}

For \zeta = r e^{i\theta} \in \Gamma it is easily seen that r \cos\theta \ge (1-1/\sqrt{2})t, and hence that

\psi(r\cos\theta) \ge \min \{(1-1/\sqrt{2})t,T^{**},\sigma_1\} =: \psi_1(t).

On using (?) in (?) we get

\left\|\frac{d}{dt}\left({\bf u}-\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N\right)(t)\right\| \le \frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{\Gamma} \frac{\|{\bf p}_N(\zeta)\|}{|t-\zeta|^2} d\zeta \le C N^{-2s-1} e^{-\psi_1(t) N}.

Uses Theorem 2.3, Theorem 3.1

Theorem

Theorem 4.1

EKMI

Let {\bf u}_0 and {\bf f} satisfy (?). Let N\ge 1 be an integer. Let {\bf u}_N be the solution of the pseudospectral quadrature Galerkin system (?). Then there exists a constant C depending on \nu, \|{\bf u}_0\|_V and \|{\bf f}\|_{\infty} := \max_{t \in [0, T] } \|{\bf f}(t)\|_{C(TS)} so that

\max_{t \in [0, T]} \|{\bf u}_N\|_V \le C.

Proof of Theorem 4.1

The proof follows by repeating the arguments described in the first four pages of [constantin_foias, Section 9] (proving [constantin_foias, Proposition 9.1]), provided that we establish [constantin_foias, Inequalities (9.3) and (9.13)] for our system (?) on the spherical surface with additional Coriolis term and quadrature approximations.

Using (?), (?) and the exactness of the quadrature rule (given by (?)-(?)), we have \left(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N),{\bf u}_N\right)_M = 0. Using (?), the symmetry of the coefficients of {\bf u}_N in (?) and the exactness of the quadrature, we get

(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)_M= (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N) = (-2\Omega i) \sum_{L=1}^N \lambda^{-1}_L \sum_{|m|\le L} m|\alpha_{L,m}|^2 = 0.

By taking {\bf v} to be {\bf u}_N in (?) and using \|{\bf u}_N\|^2 = ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)_M, \|{\bf u}_N\|_V^2 = (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)_M, (?), Young’s inequality and the fact that all the eigenvalues \lambda_J of \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} (corresponding to eigenvectors in {\bf u}_N) satisfy \lambda_J \geq \lambda_1 = 2, J = 1, \cdots, N, we obtain

\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{dt} \|{\bf u}_N\|^2 + \nu \|{\bf u}_N\|_V^2 = ({\bf f},{\bf u}_N)_M \le \|{\bf f}\|_{\infty} \|{\bf u}_N\| \le \frac{ \|{\bf f}\|^2_{\infty} } {4\nu} + \nu \|{\bf u}_N\|^2 \leq \frac{ \|{\bf f}\|^2_{\infty} } {4\nu} + \frac{\nu}{2} \|{\bf u}_N\|_V^2,

Hence, for our discrete system (?), we obtain [constantin_foias, Inequality (9.3)]:

\frac{d}{dt} \|{\bf u}_N \|^2 + \nu \|{\bf u}_N\|_V^2 \le \frac{\|{\bf f}\|^2_{\infty}}{\nu \lambda_1}.

Again using (?), the exactness of the quadrature rule, eigenfunction properties of \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}}, and the symmetry of the coefficients of {\bf u}_N in (?), we get

(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf u}_N,\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N) = (-2\Omega i) \sum_{L=1}^N \sum_{|m|\le L} m|\alpha_{L,m}|^2 =0,

By taking {\bf v} to be \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N in equation (?), and using \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N\|^2 = (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N,\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N)_M, (?), and (?), we obtain

\frac{1}{2} \frac{d}{dt} \|{\bf u}_N\|^2_V + \nu \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N\|^2 + b({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N,\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N) = ({\bf f},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N)_M.

Using [ilin91, Lemma 3.1], b({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N,\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N) = 0. The term ({\bf f},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N)_M can be estimated by using the exactness of the quadrature and Young’s inequality:

({\bf f},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N)_M \le \|{\bf f}\|_{\infty} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N\| \le \frac{ \|{\bf f}\|^2_{\infty} } {2 \nu} + \frac{\nu}{2} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N\|^2

Hence we obtain a stronger version of [constantin_foias, Inequality (9.13)] for our quadrature discrete scheme (?):

\frac{d}{dt} \|{\bf u}_N\|^2_V + \nu \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N\|^2 \le \frac{ \|{\bf f}\|^2_{\infty} } {\nu \lambda_1}.

Thus, the result follows from arguments in [constantin_foias, Page 74-77].

Theorem

Theorem 4.2

E38G

Let {\bf u}_0, {\bf f} satisfy (?), (?).

Then there exists a T^{\#}> 0, depending only on \nu,{\bf f}, {\bf u}_0 and the uniform bound in (?) (and hence there exists 0 < \mu(t) < \min\{t,T^{\#},\sigma_1\}) such that for all t \in (0,T),

\|{\bf u}-{\bf u}_N\| \le C \left[ N^{-2s-1} e^{-\mu(t) N} + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right].

In particular, with 2s being an integer

\|{\bf u}-{\bf u}_N\| \le C N^{-2s}.

Used by Example 2

Proof of Theorem 4.2

Let {\bf w}_N = \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N - {\bf u}_N, where the comparison function \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N is the solution of (?). Since {\bf u} - {\bf u}_N = {\bf p}_N + {\bf w}_N, where {\bf p}_N = {\bf u} - \widetilde{{\bf u}}_N, in view of Theorem 3.1 and 3.2, existence of T^{\#} and \mu(t) follows and it is sufficient to show that \|{\bf w}_N\| \le C \left[ N^{-2s-1} e^{-\mu(t) N} + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right]. For any {\bf v} \in V_N, using (?), (?), and (?),

\begin{aligned} && \hspace{-0.2in} (({\bf w}_N)_t, {\bf v}) + \nu (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf w}_N, {\bf v}) + (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf w}_N,{\bf v}) \\ && \hspace{-0.2in} = (({\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N})_t,{\bf v})+\nu (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N},{\bf v})+(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\widetilde{{\bf u}}}_N,{\bf v}) -(({\bf u}_N)_t,{\bf v})-\nu(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u}_N,{\bf v})-(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf u}_N,{\bf v}) \\ && \hspace{-0.2in} = (({\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N})_t,{\bf v})+\nu(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N},{\bf v})+(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\widetilde{{\bf u}}}_N,{\bf v}) -({\bf f},{\bf v})_M + (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N),{\bf v}) \\ && \hspace{-0.2in} = (({\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N})_t,{\bf v})+\nu(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} {\bf u},{\bf v}) + (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\widetilde{{\bf u}}}_N,{\bf v}) - ({\bf f},{\bf v})_M + (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N),{\bf v}) \\ && \hspace{-0.2in} = (({\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N}-{\bf u})_t,{\bf v})+({\bf f},{\bf v}) - ({\bf f},{\bf v})_M + (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\widetilde{{\bf u}}_N}-\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf u},{\bf v}) + (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)-\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u}),{\bf v}). \end{aligned}

Using the orthogonal projection {\mathbf \Pi}_N in (?), we can write this relation in functional form as

\frac{d{\bf w}_N}{dt} = (-\nu \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} -\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} ){\bf w}_N - \mathbf{{\mathbf \Pi}_N} \left[({\bf p}_N)_t + \boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf p}_N\right] + {\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f} + {\mathbf \Pi}_N\left[\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N) - \boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u})\right].

Integrating with respect to t and using {\bf w}_N(0)=0, we have

\begin{aligned} {\bf w}_N (t) &= \int_{0}^t e^{-(t-s)(\nu \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} +\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} )} \left[- {\mathbf \Pi}_N (\frac{d}{ds}{\bf p}_N + \boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf p}_N) + {\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f} \right](s) \;ds \\ & & + \int_{0}^t e^{-(t-s)(\nu \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} +\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} )} {\mathbf \Pi}_N \left[\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)-\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u})\right](s) \;ds. \end{aligned}

Let

R_N(\epsilon, t-s) = \|\nu^{\epsilon}{\mathbf \Pi}_N \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{\epsilon} e^{-(t-s)(\nu \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} +\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} )}\|.

On using (?), with \delta \in (1/2,1), and the uniform boundedness of the orthogonal projection {\mathbf \Pi}_N, we get

\begin{aligned} & & \|e^{-(t-s)(\nu \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} +\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} )}{\mathbf \Pi}_N\left[\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)-\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u})\right]\| \\ & & \le \frac{R_N(\delta, t-s)}{\nu^{\delta}} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta}{\mathbf \Pi}_N (\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u}_N,{\bf u}_N)-\boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf u}))\| \le C R_N(\delta,t-s) \|{\bf u}_N-{\bf u}\|. \end{aligned}

Taking norms and using \|{\bf u}_N -{\bf u}\| \le \|{\bf w}_N\|+\|{\bf p}_N\| together with (?), and (?) in (?), we obtain

\begin{aligned} \|{\bf w}_N(t)\| &\le & \left[\|\frac{d}{dt}{\bf p}_N\| + \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf p}_N\| + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right] \int_{0}^{t} R_N(0, t-s)\;ds \\ && + C \int_0^t R_N(\delta, t-s) (\|{\bf p}_N(s)\|+\|{\bf w}_N(s)\|) ds. \end{aligned}

Using Gronwall’s inequality, we obtain for each t \in [0,T],

\begin{aligned} \|{\bf w}_N(t)\| &\le & C \left\{ \left[\|\frac{d}{dt}{\bf p}_N\| + \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf p}_N\| + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right] \int_{0}^{t} R_N(0, t-s)\;ds \right. \\ && \qquad \left . + \|{\bf p}_N\|\ \int_0^t R_N(\delta, t-s)\;ds \right \}. \end{aligned}

For \epsilon \in [0,1], we have to bound

\int_0^t R_N(\epsilon , t-s)\;ds = \int_0^t R_N(\epsilon , r)\;dr.

Using also (?) and (?),

R_N(\epsilon, r) \leq \max_{1\le L\le N; |m|\le L } |(\nu\lambda_L)^{\epsilon} e^{-\nu \lambda_L r}e^{-2\Omega irm\lambda^{-1/2}_L}| \le \max_{ z \in[\nu\lambda_1,\nu\lambda_N]} z^\epsilon e^{-rz}.

Thus

R_N(r) \le\begin{cases} (\nu \lambda_N)^\epsilon e^{-\nu\lambda_N r} & \mbox{ if } r \le \epsilon/(\nu\lambda_N), \cr \epsilon^\epsilon e^{-\epsilon} r^{-\epsilon} & \mbox{ if } \epsilon/(\nu\lambda_N) \le r \le \epsilon/(\nu\lambda_1) ,\cr (\nu \lambda_1)^\epsilon e^{-\nu\lambda_1 r} & \mbox{ if } r \ge \epsilon/(\nu\lambda_1).\cr \end{cases}

With

I_1 = [0,\epsilon/(\nu\lambda_N)]\cap[0,t], \quad I_2 = [\epsilon/(\nu\lambda_N),\epsilon/(\nu\lambda_1)]\cap [0,t], \quad I_3 = [\epsilon/(\nu\lambda_1),t]\cap [0,t],

the interval of integration in (?) can be subdivided into these three intervals. In particular, using (?) and (?), we get

\int_{I_1} R_N(r) dr \le \int_{I_1} (\nu\lambda_N)^\epsilon e^{-\nu\lambda_N r} dr \le \frac{(1-e^{-\epsilon})}{(\nu\lambda_N)^{1-\epsilon}} \leq C,

\int_{I_2} R_N(r) dr \le \int_{I_2} \epsilon^\epsilon e^{-\epsilon} r^{-\epsilon} dr \le \frac{\epsilon e^{-\epsilon}}{(1-\epsilon)} \left[ \left(\frac{1}{\nu\lambda_1}\right)^{(1-\epsilon)} - \left(\frac{1}{\nu\lambda_N}\right)^{(1-\epsilon)}\right] \le C,

and

\int_{I_3} R_N(r) dr \le \int_{I_3} (\nu\lambda_1)^\epsilon e^{\nu \lambda_1 r} dr \le \frac{ (e^{-\epsilon}-e^{-\nu\lambda_1 t}) } {(\nu \lambda_1)^{1-\epsilon}} \le C.

Using (?)- (?) in (?), we get

\int_0^t R_N(\epsilon , t-s)\;ds \le C, \qquad \epsilon \in [0,1].

Substituting this in (?), we get

\|{\bf w}_N(t)\| \le C \left[\|\frac{d}{dt}{\bf p}_N\| + \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf p}_N\| + \|{\bf p}_N\|\ + \left\| {\mathbf \Pi}_N{\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right].

The term \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{C}} {\bf p}_N \| in (?) can be simplified using (?) and the fact that {\bf p}_N is tangential (and hence \widehat{{\bf x}} \cdot {\bf p}_N(\widehat{{\bf x}}) = 0),

\left[\widehat{{\bf x}} \times {\bf p}_N(\widehat{{\bf x}})\right] \cdot \left[\overline{(\widehat{{\bf x}} \times {\bf p}_N(\widehat{{\bf x}})}\right] = \left[\widehat{{\bf x}} \cdot \widehat{{\bf x}}\right] \left[{\bf p}_N(\widehat{{\bf x}}) \cdot \overline{{\bf p}_N(\widehat{{\bf x}})}\right] = \| {\bf p}_N \|^2,

and hence

\|{\bf w}_N(t)\| \le C \left[\|\frac{d}{dt}{\bf p}_N\| + \|{\bf p}_N\|\ + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right].

Hence from Theorem 3.1 and 3.2, for all t \in (0, T) we have

\|{\bf u}-{\bf u}_N\| \le C \left[ N^{-2s-1} e^{-\mu(t) N} + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \right].

In particular, using (?) and (?) with 2s being an integer, we get

\left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \le \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_N{\bf f} - {\bf f}\right\| + \left\| {\bf f} - {\mathbf L}_N {\bf f}\right\| \le C N^{-2s}.

Now the result (?) follows from (?) and (?).

Uses Theorem 3.1, Theorem 3.2

Example

Example 1

HL4J

Our test case first example is (?) with

{\bf u}|_{t=0}(\widehat{{\bf x}}) = {\bf u}_0(\widehat{{\bf x}}) = g(0)[{\mathbf W}_1(\widehat{{\bf x}}) - {\mathbf W}_2(\widehat{{\bf x}})],

g(t) = \nu e^{-t}[\sin(5t) + \cos(10t)], \quad {\mathbf W}_1 = {\mathbf Z}_{1,0} + 2\Re({\mathbf Z}_{1,1}), \; {\mathbf W}_2 = {\mathbf Z}_{2,0} + 2\Re({\mathbf Z}_{2,1} + {\mathbf Z}_{2,2}),

where {\mathbf Z}_{L,m} is given by (?), \Re(\cdot) denotes the real-part function, and the external force {\bf f}(\widehat{{\bf x}},t) in (2.1) is chosen so that

{\bf u}(\widehat{{\bf x}},t) = tg(t)\sum_{L=1}^{N_0} \left[{\bf Z}_{L,0}+ 2 \sum_{m=1}^L \Re({\mathbf Z}_{L,m})\right](\widehat{{\bf x}}) + g(t) {\mathbf W}_1(\widehat{{\bf x}}) + (t-1)g(t){\mathbf W}_2(\widehat{{\bf x}}),

is the exact tangential divergence-free velocity field, solving the NSE (?). The exact test field (?)-(?) has high oscillations both in space and time, and exponentially decays in time. Note the dependence on a parameter N_0, the maximum order of the spherical harmonics in the exact solution.

In our calculation of the approximate solution {\bf u}_N, we chose N=N_0, so that all frequencies of the exact solution can be recovered. The solution (?) is then used to validate our algorithm and code by numerical adaptive time-integration of (?), for various values of N=N_0. In particular, for a fixed integration tolerance error, we demonstrate in Figure ? that all N modes in (?) can indeed be recovered by the approximate solution {\bf u}_N, within the chosen error tolerance, for all N = N_0 = 70, 80, 90, 100.

The paper has a figure here, which this page does not show.

Example

Example 2

PUBS

Having established the validity of our algorithm for a simple known solution, we use the same code to simulate unknown velocity and vorticity fields generated by (?) with random initial velocity field as in [debussche_dubois_temam, fengler_freeden] with angular velocity of the rotation \Omega = 1 and \nu^{-1} = 10,000 in (?).

The initial flow and external force in this benchmark example satisfy the main assumption (?) for any s, \sigma_1>0 and hence, as proved in Theorem 4.2, the approximate solution {\bf u}_N is spectrally accurate and converges super-algebraically with order given by (?) for any s > 0. As mentioned in Section ?, this is the main advantage of the present paper over the recent paper [fengler_freeden], where such spectrally accurate convergence results are neither discussed nor proved. On the other hand, convergence results for two-dimensional problems on a Euclidean plane, supported by numerical experiments, have formed a core part of research on the NSE over the last few decades, see [debussche_dubois_temam, Foias_book, temam79] and references therein.

The random initial tangential divergence-free velocity field, having properties similar to those considered in [debussche_dubois_temam, page 305] and [fengler_freeden, page 988] (but not exactly same as in [debussche_dubois_temam, fengler_freeden], due to randomness), is a smooth function {\bf u}_0 = {\bf v} \in G^{s/2}_\sigma, a Gevrey class of order s and index \sigma, see (?), for any s, \sigma > 0, with Fourier coefficients \widehat{{\bf v}}_{L,m},~~ L = 1, 2, \cdots, |m| \leq L, defined by

\widehat{{\bf v}}_{L,m} = \begin{cases} a_L \exp(i \phi_m) & L=1,\ldots,20;~ m=0,\ldots,L, \cr a_L (-1)^m \exp(-i \phi_m) & L=1,\ldots,20;~ m=-L, \cdots, -1, \cr 0, & L > 20;~ m = -L, \ldots, L, \end{cases}

where \phi_0 = 0, and \phi_m \in (0,2\pi) are random numbers for m > 0, and a_L = b_L/||\mathbf{b}||, with \mathbf{b} \in \ensuremath{\mathbb R}^{20} having components b_L = 2/\left[L+(\nu L)^{2.5}\right],~L=1,\ldots, 20. The vorticity stream function \Psi (see (?)) of \boldsymbol{\mathrm{Vort}} \, {\bf u}(\cdot,0) in Figure ? demonstrates the randomness of the field at time t = 0.

The external force field {\bf f} = {\bf f}(\widehat{{\bf x}},t) in (?) for our simulation is motivated by that considered in [debussche_dubois_temam, page 305] and is exactly same as that in [fengler_freeden, page 988]. The source term {\bf f} is a decaying tangential divergence-free field which, for any s, \sigma > 0, belongs to C([0,T];\mathcal D(\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{s+1/2} e^{\sigma \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1/2}})) (for any T > 0) with the only non-zero Fourier coefficient being \widehat{{\bf f}(t)}_{3,0}. The Fourier coefficient \widehat{{\bf f}(t)}_{3,0} is a continuous function in time and is defined by

\widehat{{\bf f}(t)}_{3,0} = \begin{cases} 1, & 0 \le t \le 10, \cr \cos(\pi t/5)\exp(-(t-10)/5) & t>10. \cr \end{cases}

The impact of the external force on the numerical velocity and its complement (generating the approximate inertial manifold) is demonstrated in Figure ? with the time evolution of the velocity field matching that of the external force, leading to little change in evolution process of the velocity

as the external force gets smaller and smaller.

We chose a fixed relative error tolerance to be of accuracy at least \mathcal{O}(10^{-3}), for adaptive time-integration solving the N^2+2N-dimensional system ordinary differential equations (?) in time, using backward differential formulas with variable order (one to five) and variable adaptive time step sizes that meet the fixed error tolerance.

As discussed in the next subsection, the high-frequency components of the solution turn out to be unreliable as t increases, [debussche_dubois_temam], presumably because of the time discretization error. We therefore retained only the frequency components up to some order N_1 \le N, correspondingly, we define an additional approximation of {\bf u}_N, defined in (?)-(?), by

{\bf u}_{N_1;N} (\cdot,t) := {\mathbf \Pi}_{N_1} {\bf u}_N (\cdot,t), \qquad N_1 \leq N.

As in Theorem 4.2, for the spatially discrete pseudospectral quadrature method, assuming (?) and exact time integration of (?), and hence using (?), (3.1), and (?), we get spectral convergence:

\|{\bf u}- {\bf u}_{N_1;N}\| \le \left\|{\bf u} - {\mathbf \Pi}_{N_1} {\bf u}\right\| + \left\|{\mathbf \Pi}_{N_1}\left({\bf u} - {\bf u}_N\right)\right\| \le C \left[N_1^{-2(s+1)} + N^{-2s} \right] \leq C N_1^{-2s}.

Our simulated approximate velocity fields

{\bf U}_{75}(t) := {\bf u}_{75;100}(t), \quad \mbox{ for }t = 10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60,

are in Figure ?–? and the associated vorticity stream function \Psi_{75}(t) of \boldsymbol{\mathrm{Vort}} \, {\bf U}_{75}(t) (computed using (?)) are in Figure ?–?. These figures demonstrate that the initial random flow with several smaller structures evolve into regular flow with larger structures, similar to those observed in [debussche_dubois_temam, page 307]. The choice of N_1 will be discussed in the next subsection.

Uses Theorem 4.2, Lemma 3.1

Proposition

Proposition 6.1

T7SD

Let s_1,s_2,s_3 \ge 0 be real numbers, and we assume that s_1+s_2+s_3 \ge 1 and (s_1,s_2,s_3)\ne (0,0,1),(0,1,0),(1,0,0). Then there exists a constant depending on s_1,s_2,s_3 such that

|b({\bf u},{\bf v},{\bf w})| \le C \|{\bf u}\|_{H^{s_1}(TS)} \|{\bf v}\|_{H^{s_2+1}(TS)} \| {\bf w}\|_{H^{s_3}(TS)}

or in the extrapolated form, writing H^{s}(TS) = H^{s}_{TS}, for all {\bf u},{\bf v},{\bf w} \in C^\infty(TS)

\begin{aligned} |b({\bf u},{\bf v},{\bf w})| \le C & \|{\bf u}\|^{1+[s_1]-s_1}_{H^{[s_1]}_{TS}} \|{\bf u}\|^{s_1-[s_1]}_{H^{[s_1]+1}_{TS}} \|{\bf v}\|^{1+[s_2]-s_2}_{H^{[s_2]+1}_{TS}} \|{\bf v}\|^{s_2-[s_2]}_{H^{[s_2]+2}_{TS}} \|{\bf w}\|^{1+[s_3]-s_3}_{H^{[s_3]}_{TS}} \|{\bf w}\|^{s_3-[s_3]}_{H^{[s_3]+1}_{TS}}. \end{aligned}

Used by Proof

Proof of Proposition 6.1

Let {\bf u},{\bf v},{\bf w} \in C^\infty(TS) and \widetilde{{\bf u}},\widetilde{{\bf v}},\widetilde{{\bf w}} be their corresponding extension to the spherical layer \widetilde{\Omega}:=S\times I. Let us consider first the case s_i <1 for i=1,2,3. Define associated constants q_1, q_2, q_2, q_4 so that \sum_{i=1}^4 \frac{1}{q_i} = 1 and \frac{1}{q_i} = \frac{1}{2} - \frac{s_i}{2} for i=1,2,3. Then, by Hölder’s inequality

\begin{aligned} |b({\widetilde{{\bf u}}},{\widetilde{{\bf v}}},{\widetilde{{\bf w}}})| &= \left |\sum_{i,j = 1}^{3}\int_{\widetilde\Omega} \widetilde{u}_j \frac{\partial \widetilde{v}_i}{\partial x_j} \widetilde{w}_i 1 \right| \le \|{\widetilde{{\bf u}}}\|_{L^{q_1}(\Omega)} \| \nabla {\widetilde{{\bf v}}} \|_{L^{q_2}(\Omega)} \|{\widetilde{{\bf w}}}\|_{L^{q_3}(\Omega)} \|1\|_{L^{q_4}(\Omega)} \\ \end{aligned}

Restricting to the sphere by (?) and (?) then using the Sobolev embedding theorem on the sphere (?) we have

\begin{aligned} |b({\bf u},{\bf v},{\bf w})| &\le& C \|{\bf u}\|_{L^{q_1}_{TS}} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Grad}} \, {\bf v}\|_{L^{q_2}_{TS}} \|{\bf w}\|_{L^{q_3}_{TS}} \le C \|{\bf u}\|_{H^{s_1}_{TS}} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{Grad}} \, {\bf v}\|_{H^{s_2}_{TS}} \|{\bf w}\|_{H^{s_3}_{TS}}. \end{aligned}

Lemma

Lemma 6.1

02CG

Let \delta \in (1/2,1) be given and {\bf u}, {\bf v} \in V. Then there exists C, independent of {\bf u} and {\bf v}, such that

\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf v})\| \le C \left\{ \begin{array}{cc} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1-\delta} {\bf u} \| \|{\bf v}\| & \\ \|{\bf u}\| \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1-\delta} {\bf v}\| & \\ \end{array}, \right. \qquad {\bf u}, {\bf v} \in V.

Proof of Lemma 6.1

Let {\bf u},{\bf v},{\bf w} \in V. Hence from (?), and by using Proposition 6.1 with s_1=0, s_2=2\delta-1>0 and s_3=2-2\delta>0,

|b({\bf u},{\bf v},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} {\bf w})| = |b({\bf u},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta}{\bf w},{\bf v})| \le C \|{\bf u}\| \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta}{\bf w}\|_{H^{2\delta}(TS)} \|{\bf v}\|_{H^{2-2\delta}(TS)}.

Since \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} {\bf w}\|_{H^{2\delta}(TS)} = \| \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{\delta} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} {\bf w}\| = \|{\bf w}\|, we get

|b({\bf u},{\bf v},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} {\bf w})| \le C \|{\bf u}\| \|{\bf w}\| \|{\bf v}\|_{H^{2-2\delta}(TS)}, \qquad {\bf w} \in V.

Since the inequality is true for all {\bf w} \in V, we obtain the first bound

\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf v}) \| \le C \|{\bf u}\| \|{\bf v}\|_{H^{2-2\delta}(TS)} = C \|{\bf u}\| \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1-\delta}{\bf v}\|.

To obtain the second bound, we again use (?) and Proposition 6.1 but with s_1=2-2\delta, s_2 = 2\delta-1 and s_3=0,

\begin{aligned} |b({\bf u},{\bf v},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta}{\bf w})| = |b({\bf u},\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta}{\bf w},{\bf v})| &\le& C \| {\bf u} \|_{H^{2-2\delta}(TS)} \|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} {\bf w}\|_{H^{2\delta}(TS)} \|{\bf v}\| \\ &= C\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1-\delta} {\bf u}\| \|{\bf w}\| \|{\bf v}\|, \qquad {\bf w} \in V. \end{aligned}

Since the inequality is true for all {\bf w} \in H, we obtain

\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{-\delta} \boldsymbol{\mathrm{B}} ({\bf u},{\bf v}) \| \le C\|\boldsymbol{\mathrm{A}} ^{1-\delta}{\bf u}\| \|{\bf v}\|.

Uses Proposition 6.1

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:1009.3308v1 by M. Ganesh, Q. T. Le Gia and I. H. Sloan, under the licence CC0 1.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/1009/1009.3308.jsonl.