This paper analyzes the linear stability of line solitary waves in the 2D Benney-Luke equation, revealing resonant eigenvalues and describing their evolution, with implications for understanding water wave dynamics.
Contribution
It provides a detailed spectral analysis of the transverse linear stability of solitary waves in the 2D Benney-Luke equation, highlighting resonant eigenvalues and their effects.
Findings
01
Resonant continuous eigenvalues near zero in weak surface tension case
02
Linear evolution of eigenmodes described by a 1D damped wave equation
03
Exponential decay of solutions in weighted space over time
Abstract
In this paper, we study transverse linear stability of line solitary waves to the 2-dimensional Benney-Luke equation which arises in the study of small amplitude long water waves in 3D. In the case where the surface tension is weak or negligible, we find a curve of resonant continuous eigenvalues near 0. Time evolution of these resonant continuous eigenmodes is described by a 1D damped wave equation in the transverse variable and it gives a linear approximation of the local phase shifts of modulating line solitary waves. In exponentially weighted space whose weight function increases in the direction of the motion of the line solitary wave, the other part of solutions to the linearized equation decays exponentially as t→∞.
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
In this paper, we study transverse linear stability of line solitary
waves to the 2-dimensional Benney-Luke equation which arises in
the study of small amplitude long water waves in 3D. In the case
where the surface tension is weak or negligible, we find a curve of
resonant continuous eigenvalues near [math]. Time evolution of these
resonant continuous eigenmodes is described by a 1D damped wave
equation in the transverse variable and it gives a linear approximation
of the local phase shifts of modulating line solitary waves. In
exponentially weighted space whose weight function increases in the
direction of the motion of the line solitary wave, the other part of
solutions to the linearized equation decays exponentially as t→∞.
In this paper, we study transverse linear stability of line solitary waves
for the Benney-Luke equation
[TABLE]
The Benney-Luke equation is an approximation model of small amplitude
long water waves with finite depth originally derived by Benney and
Luke [4] as a model for 3D water waves. Here
Φ=Φ(t,x,y) corresponds to a velocity potential of water waves.
We remark that (1.1) is an isotropic model for propagation of
water waves whereas KdV, BBM and KP equations are unidirectional
models. See e.g. [6, 7] for the other bidirectional
models of 2D and 3D water waves.
The parameters a, b are positive and satisfy a−b=τ^−1/3, where
τ^ is the inverse Bond number.
If we think of waves propagating in one direction, slowly evolving in
time and having weak transverse variation, then the Benney-Luke equation
can be formally reduced to the KP-II equation if 0<a<b and
to the KP-I equation if a>b>0.
More precisely, the Benney-Luke equation (1.1) is reduced to
[TABLE]
in the coordinate t~=ϵ3t, x~=ϵ(x−t) and
y~=ϵ2y by taking terms only of order ϵ5,
where Φ(t,x,y)=ϵf(t~,x~,y~).
See e.g. [22] for the details.
In this paper, we will assume 0<a<b, which corresponds to the case where
the surface tension is weak or negligible.
The solution Φ(t) of the Benney-Luke equation (1.1) formally
satisfies the energy conservation law
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and (1.1) is globally well-posed in the energy class
(H˙2(R2)∩H˙1(R2))×H1(R2) (see [40]).
The Benney Luke equation (1.1) has a 3-parameter family of line solitary wave
solutions
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
is a solution of
[TABLE]
Stability of solitary waves to the 1-dimensional Benney-Luke equation
are studied by [38] for the strong surface tension case
a>b>0 and by [30] for the weak surface tension case b>a>0.
If a>b>0, then (1.1) has a stable ground state for c
satisfying 0<c2<1 ([33, 39]).
See also [23] for the algebraic decay property of the ground state.
In view of [42, 43],
line solitary waves for the 2-dimensional Benney-Luke equation
are expected to be unstable in this parameter regime.
On the other hand if 0<a<b and c:=1+ϵ2 is close to 1 (the sonic speed),
then φc(x−ct) is expected to be transversally stable because
qc(x) is similar to a KdV 1-soliton and
line solitons of the KP-II equation is transversally stable
([21, 27, 28]).
The dispersion relation for the linearization of (1.1) around [math] is
[TABLE]
for a plane wave solution Φ(t,x,y)=ei(xξ+yη−ωt).
If b>a>0, then ∣∇ω∣≤1 and line solitary waves travel
faster than the maximum group velocity of linear waves. Measuring the
size of perturbations with an exponentially weighted norm biased in
the direction of motion of a line solitary wave, we can observe that
perturbations which are decoupled from the line solitary wave decay as
t→∞.
In the 1-dimensional case, small solitary waves are exponentially linearly
stable in the weighted space and λ=0 is an isolated eigenvalue
of the linearized operator (see [30]).
In our problem, however, the value λ=0 is not an isolated eigenvalue.
This is because line solitary waves do not decay in the transverse
direction. Indeed, for any size of line solitary waves of
(1.1), there appears a curve of continuous spectrum that goes
through λ=0 and locates in the stable half plane
(Theorem 2.1). The curve of continuous eigenvalues has to do
with perturbations that propagate toward the transverse direction
along the crest of the line solitary wave
(Theorem 2.3). If line solitary waves are small,
the rest of the spectrum locates in a stable half plane
{λ∈C∣ℜλ≤−β<0}
(Theorem 2.4). For the KP-II equation,
the spectrum of the linearized operator around a 1-line
soliton near λ=0 can be obtained explicitly thanks to the
integrability of the equation (see [2, 9, 28]). In this
paper, we will use the Lyapunov-Schmidt method to find resonant
eigemodes of the linearized operator.
To prove non-existence of unstable modes for the linearized operator
around small line solitary waves, we make use of the KP-II
approximation of the the linearized operator of (1.1) on long
length scales and make use of the transverse linear stability of line
solitons for the KP-II equation. For 1-dimensional long wave
models, non-existence of unstable modes for the linearized operator
around solitary waves has been proved by utilizing spectral stability
of KdV solitons. See e.g. [12, 27, 24, 34, 36] and
[30] for the 1-dimensional Benney-Luke equation. We expect
that the KP-II approximation of the linearized operator is useful to
other 2-dimensional long wave models such as KP-BBM and Boussinesq
systems with no surface tension (see e.g. [10]).
Now let us introduce several notations.
For an operator A, we denote by σ(A) the spectrum
and by D(A) and R(A) the domain and the range of the
operator A, respectively.
For Banach spaces V and W, let B(V,W) be the space of all
linear continuous operators from V to W and
∥T∥B(V,W)=sup∥x∥V=1∥Tu∥W for T∈B(V,W).
We abbreviate B(V,V) as B(V).
For f∈S(Rn) and m∈S′(Rn), let
[TABLE]
and (m(D)f)(x)=(2π)−n/2(mˇ∗f)(x).
We denote ⟨f,g⟩ by
[TABLE]
for Cm-valued functions f=(f1,⋯,fm) and
g=(g1,⋯,gm).
Let Lα2(R2)=L2(R2;e2αxdxdy), Lα2(R)=L2(R;e2αxdx)
and let Hαk(R2) and Hαk(R) be Hilbert spaces with the norms
[TABLE]
We use a≲b and a=O(b) to mean that there exists a
positive constant such that a≤Cb.
Various constants will be simply denoted
by C and Ci (i∈N) in the course of the
calculations. We denote ⟨x⟩=1+x2 for x∈R.
2. Statement of the result
Since (1.1) is isotropic and translation invariant,
we may assume θ=γ=0 in (1.3) without loss of generality.
Let Ψ=∂tΦ, A=I−aΔ and B=I−bΔ. Then
in the moving coordinate z=x−ct, the Benney-Luke equation (1.1)
can be rewritten as
[TABLE]
Let rc(z)=−cqc(z).
Linearizing (2.1) around (Φ,Ψ)=(φc(z),rc(z)),
we have
[TABLE]
We study linear stability of (2.2) in a weighted space
X:=Hα1(R2)×Lα2(R2).
Let L(η)u(z)=e−iyηL(eiyηu(z)) for η∈R. Note that
V is independent of y. For each small η=0, the operator
L(η) has two stable eigenvalues.
Theorem 2.1**.**
Let 0<a<b and k∈N. Fix c>1 and α∈(0,αc).
Then there exist a positive constant η0,
λ(η)∈C∞([−η0,η0]),
[TABLE]
such that
[TABLE]
where λ1 and λ2 are positive constants,
A0=1−a∂z2, B0=1−b∂z2 and
[TABLE]
Remark 2.1*.*
We remark that L(0) is a linearized operator of the 1-dimensional
Benney-Luke equation around φc(z) and
ζ1 and ζ2 belong to the generalized kernel of L(0).
More precisely,
[TABLE]
The eigenvalue λ=0 for L(0)
splits into two stable eigenvalues λ(±η) for L(η)
with η=0.
In the exponentially weighted space Lα2(R),
the value λ=0 is an isolated eigenvalue of L(0) and there
exists a β>0 such that
[TABLE]
provided c>1 and c is sufficiently close to 1.
See Lemma 2.1, Theorem 2.3 and Appendix B in [30].
Remark 2.2*.*
We expect that ζk(⋅,η) and ζk+(⋅,η) (k=1, 2) do not belong to L2(R) as is the same with
continuous resonant modes for the KP-II equation. This is a reason why we study spectral stability of L in
the exponentially weighted space X.
We will prove Theorem 2.1 by using the Lyapunov Schmidt method
in Section 6.
Let P(η0) be the spectral projection onto the subspace
corresponding to the continuous eigenvalues
{λ(η)}−η0≤η≤η0 and
Q(η0)=I−P(η0).
Let Z=Q(η0)(Hα1(R2)×Lα2(R2)).
If L is spectrally stable, then etL∣Z is exponentially stable.
Corollary 2.2**.**
Let 0<a<b, c>1 and α∈(0,αc). Consider the operator L
in the space X=Hα1(R2)×Lα2(R2).
Assume that there exist positive
constants β and η0 such that
[TABLE]
where L∣Z is the restriction of the operator L on Z.
Then for any β′<β, there exists a positive constant C such that
[TABLE]
The semigroup estimate (2.8) follows from the assumption
(H) and the Geahart-Prüss theorem [15, 37] which
tells us that the boundedness of C0-semigroup in a Hilbert space is
equivalent to the uniform boundedness of the resolvent operator on the
right half plane. See also [17, 18].
Time evolution of the continuous eigenmodes
{etλ(η)g(z,η)}−η0≤η≤η0 can be considered
as a linear approximation of non-uniform phase shifts of modulating
line solitary waves.
For the KP-II equation, modulations of the local amplitude and the angle of
the local phase shift of a line soliton are described by a system of Burgers’
equations (see [28, Theorems 1.4 and 1.5]).
In this paper, we find the first order asymptotics of solutions for the
linearized equation (2.2) is described by a wave equation
with a diffraction term and it tends to a constant multiple of the
x-derivative of the line solitary wave as t→∞.
Theorem 2.3**.**
Let 0<a<b, c>1, α be as in Theorem 2.2 and
(Φ0,Ψ0)∈Hα2(R2)×Hα1(R2).
Assume (H). Then a solution of (2.2) with
(Φ(0),∂tΦ(0))=(Φ0,Ψ0) satisfies
[TABLE]
where f(y)=⟨cB0Ψ0−A0∂zΦ0,qc⟩,
Ht(y)=(4πλ2t)−1/2e−y2/4λ2t,
κ1=2λ1dcdE(qc,rc) and
Wt(y)=(2κ1)−1 for y∈[−λ1t,λ1t]
and Wt(y)=0 otherwise.
We remark that if f(y) is well localized and ∫Rf(y)dy=0,
then Ht∗Wt∗f(y)≃(2κ1)−1∫Rf(y)dy on any
compact intervals in y as t→∞. The first order asymptotics
of solutions to (2.2) suggests that the local phase shift
of line solitary waves propagate mostly at constant speed toward y=±∞.
If c is close to 1, then the assumption (H) is valid
and the spectrum of L is similar to that of the linearized KP-II operator
around a line soliton.
To utilize the spectral property of the linearized operators of
the KP-II equation around 1-line solitons,
we introduce the scaled parameters and variables
[TABLE]
and translate the solitary wave profile qc(x) as
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
We remark that the operator LKP
is the linearization of the KP-II equation
[TABLE]
around its line soliton solution θ0(x−t).
The linearized operator LKP has continuous eigenvalues
λKP(η)=3iη1+iγ1η
which has to do with dynamics of modulating
line solitons (see [9, 28] and Section 3.1).
In the low frequency regime,
we can deduce the eigenvalue problem
[TABLE]
to LKP∂z^u=Λ∂z^u
provided ϵ is sufficiently small.
More precisely, we have the following.
Theorem 2.4**.**
Let c=1+ϵ2, α=α^ϵ and α^∈(0,α^0/2).
Then there exist positive constants
ϵ0, η0, β^ and a smooth function
λϵ(η) such that if ϵ∈(0,ϵ0), then
[TABLE]
where K is a constant that does not depend on t.
3. Resonant modes of the linearized operator
In this section, we will prove the existence of resonant continuous
eigenvalues of L near λ=0 and show that
the resonant eigenvalues and resonant eigenmodes for L are similar to
those for the linearized KP-II operator LKP
provided line solitary waves are small.
3.1. Spectral stability in the KP-II scaling regime
First, we recall some spectral properties of the linearized KP-II
equation around 1-line solitons. Let us consider the eigenvalue
problem of the linearized operator of (2.11) around
θ0. Let
[TABLE]
Formally, we have LKP(u(z)eiyη)=eiyη(LKP(η)u)(z).
The operator LKP,0 is spectrally stable
in exponentially weighted spaces.
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let α^∈(0,α^0) and
β^0=2α^{1−(b−a)α^2}. Then
[TABLE]
Moreover, there exists a positive constant C such that
if ℜΛ>−β^0,
[TABLE]
Proof.
By the Plancherel theorem,
[TABLE]
for any g∈C0(R2) and
an operator m(D):=2π1mˇ∗f
is bounded on Lα2(R2) if and only if
[TABLE]
Suppose f∈Lα2(R2) and that u is a solution of
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
where LKP,0(ξ,η)=2i{(b−a)ξ3+ξ−ξ−1η2}.
Since
[TABLE]
it follows from (3.5) that for j=0,1,2 and Λ with
ℜΛ>−β^0,
[TABLE]
Thus we have (3.1) and (3.2).
Moreover, we have (3.3) because
∣ℑLKP,0(ξ+iα^,η)∣≲{−ℜLKP,0(ξ+iα^,η)}3/2.
∎
Let γ1=4(b−a)/3, x^=2α^0x
and
[TABLE]
Using Lemma 2.1 in [28] and the change of variable
[TABLE]
we have for η∈R∖{0},
[TABLE]
To resolve the singularity of g0(x,η) and the degeneracy of
g0∗(x,η) at η=0, we decompose them into
their real parts and imaginary parts. Let
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
Moreover, we see that
g0,k(x,η) and g0,k∗(x,η) are even in η and that
for k=1, 2 and α^∈(0,α^0),
[TABLE]
Let PKP(η0) be the spectral projection to resonant modes
{g0(x,±η)eiyη}−η0≤η≤η0 defined by
[TABLE]
and let QKP(η0)=I−PKP(η0).
By Lemma 3.1 in [28], the operator PKP(η0) and QKP(η0) are
bounded on Lα^2(R2) for α^∈(0,α^0).
Moreover, we have the following.
Proposition 3.2**.**
Let α^∈(0,α^0) and η∗ be a positive number satisfying
2α^(ℜ1+iγη∗−1)=α^.
For any η0∈(0,η∗), there exists a positive number b such that
[TABLE]
Proof.
By Proposition 3.2 in [28], there exist positive constants
b1 and C such that
[TABLE]
If ℜΛ≥−b>−b1, then
[TABLE]
∎
3.2. Resonant modes
In this subsection, we will prove the existence of continuous resonant modes
of L near λ=0 by using the Lyapunov Schmidt method.
Let
[TABLE]
If eiyη(u1(z),u2(z)) is a solution of (2.12), then
[TABLE]
or equivalently,
[TABLE]
We will find solutions of (3.9) in
Hα1(R)×Lα2(R) for small η. Using the change
of variables (2.9) and (2.10) and
dropping the hats in the resulting equation, we have
[TABLE]
where U(z)=∂zu1(z/ϵ) and
[TABLE]
Let Lϵ(η) be an operator on Lα^2(R) with
D(Lϵ)=Hα^3(R) for an α^∈(0,α^ϵ)
and
[TABLE]
We remark that F(U,Λ,0,η)=2LKP(η)U−2ΛU
and the translated eigenvalue problem (3.12) is
similar to the eigenvalue problem of the KP-II equation
provided ϵ is sufficiently small.
For small η=0, (3.9) has two eigenvalues
in the vicinity of [math].
First, we will find an approximate solution of (3.12).
Let U(η)=U0+ηU1+η2U2+O(η3),
Λ(η)=iΛ1,ϵ0η−Λ2,ϵ0η2+O(η3)
and formally equate the powers of η in (3.12). Then
[TABLE]
Let θ1,ϵ(z)=∂cqc(ϵz),
θϵ,d(z)=dθϵ(dz)
and θ~1,ϵ=2∂dθϵ,d∣d=1.
By (1.4),
where kerg(A) denotes the generalized kernel of the operator A.
Differentiating (1.4) with respect to c and x,
using the change of variables (2.9), (2.10)
and dropping the hats in the resulting equation,
we have
[TABLE]
Combining (3.13), (3.14), (3.17), (3.20)
and the fact that ker(Lϵ(0))=span{θϵ′}, we have
[TABLE]
up to the constant multiplicity, where C1 is an arbitrary constant.
Next, we will determine Λ1,ϵ0.
Multiplying (3.15) by θϵ and substituting (3.21)
into the resulting equation, we have from (3.18)
[TABLE]
Since θϵ is even and θϵ′ and T1(ϵ,0)θϵ′ are odd,
we have ⟨T1(ϵ,0)θϵ′,θϵ⟩=⟨θϵ′,θϵ⟩=0
and
[TABLE]
By (3.16) and the fact that
(T1(ϵ,0)∂z)∗θϵ=−T1(ϵ,0)θϵ′=−c−1∂z{(Aϵ(0)+c2Bϵ(0)}θϵ,
we have
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
we have Λ1,ϵ0=±31+O(ϵ2).
Now we will use the Lyapunov Schmidt method to prove existence of
solutions to (3.12) satisfying
(U(η),Λ(η))≃(θϵ′−iηΛ1,ϵ0θ1,ϵ,iηΛ1,ϵ0).
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let α^∈(0,α^0/2).
There exist positive constants ϵ0 and η0 such that (3.12)
has a solution (Uϵ(η),Λϵ(η)) satisfying
for any η∈[−η0,η0] and k≥0,
[TABLE]
where Λ1,ϵ0 and Λ2,ϵ0 are constants satisfying
Λ1,ϵ0=31+O(ϵ2) and Λ2,ϵ0=3α^02+O(ϵ2).
Moreover,
[TABLE]
and the mapping
[−η0,η0]∋η↦(Uϵ(η),Λϵ(η))∈Hα^k(R)×R
is smooth for any k≥0.
Here we use (3.20) and the fact that
{T1(ϵ,η)−T1(ϵ,0)}θϵ′=2bcϵ4η2θϵ′.
Let Pϵ:Lα^2→kerg(Lϵ(0)) be the spectral projection associated
with Lϵ(0) and let Qϵ=I−Pϵ(0).
Since U∈QϵLα^2(R), we can translate (3.28) into
[TABLE]
where Lϵ(η)=QϵLϵ(η)Qϵ.
Let k1 be a positive number such that
[TABLE]
Suppose supη∈[−η0,η0](∣Λ1(η)∣+∣γ(η)∣)≤k2 for a k2>0.
Since
∥QϵLϵ(0)−1Qϵ∥B(Lα^2(R),Hα^3(R)) is uniformly bounded in ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and
[TABLE]
we see that Lϵ(η)−1:QϵLα^2(R)→QϵHα^3(R)
is uniformly bounded in ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and η∈[−η0,η0]
provided ϵ0 and η0 are sufficiently small.
Thus there exists a positive constant C1 such that
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
By (3.18) and (3.23),
f4(ϵ)=3⟨θ0,θ0⟩+O(ϵ2).
Using (3.22), (3.23) and the fact that
(Λ1,ϵ0)2=31+O(ϵ2) and
Next, we compute the Fréchet derivative of (F1,F2) at
U0=(U0,γϵ0,Λ1,ϵ0,ϵ,0).
By (3.18), (3.20), (3.23)
and (3.33),
[TABLE]
and D(γ,Λ1)(F1,F2)(U0)=(∂γF1(U0)∂γF2(U0)∂Λ1F1(U0)∂Λ1F2(U0)) is invertible.
Thus by the implicit function theorem, there exists a smooth curve
(γϵ(η),Λ1,ϵ(η)) around η=0 satisfying
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
and Λ2,ϵ0=91∥θ0∥L1(R)2∥θ0∥L2(R)−2+O(ϵ2)=2/(3α^)+O(ϵ2).
Letting Λϵ(η)=iηΛ1,ϵ(η) and
[TABLE]
we have (3.24) and (3.26) because
Lϵ(η)=Lϵ(−η)
and Fj(γ,Λ,η,ϵ)=Fj(γ,Λ,−η,ϵ) for
j=1, 2.
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let c, α^, ϵ0 and η0
be as in Lemma 3.3.
For any ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and η∈[−ϵ2η0,ϵ2η0], let
λ(η)=ϵ3Λϵ(ϵ−2η),
u(z,η)=t(u1(z,η),u2(z,η)),
v(z,η)=t(v1(z,η),v2(z,η)) and
[TABLE]
Then
[TABLE]
Moreover, for any k∈N, the mappings
[−ϵ2η0,ϵ2η0]∋η↦u(ϵ−1⋅,η)∈Hα^k(R)×Hα^k−1(R)
and [−ϵ2η0,ϵ2η0]∋η↦v(ϵ−1⋅,η)∈H−α^k(R)×H−α^k−1(R) are smooth.
Proof.
By (3.10),(3.11) and the definition of Uϵ(η),
we see that u(z,η) is a solution of (3.9) with λ=λ(η).
The mappings η↦u(ϵ−1⋅,η) and v(ϵ−1⋅,η)
are smooth thanks to the smoothness of Uϵ(η)
and (3.36) follows from (3.26).
Suppose L(η)∗(v1v2)=λ(−η)(v1v2) and v~2=B(η)−1v2. Then
[TABLE]
Formally, we have v2,c(η)∗=−v2,c(η) and
v1,c(η)∗+c∂zv2,c(η)∗=v1,c(η)−cv2,c(η)∂z.
Using the change of variable z↦−z and the fact that
qc is an even function, we see that v~2(−z) satisfies (3.10)
with λ=λ(−η) and that
[TABLE]
is a solution of (3.39).
Thus we prove L(η)∗v(⋅,η)=λ(−η)v(⋅,η).
We have (3.37) from (3.35) since
λ(η)=λ(η) for
η∈[−ϵ2η0,ϵ2η0]∖{0}.
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
Using the fact that θϵ and θ1,ϵ are even, we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
In the last line, we use (2.10).
Since U(η)⊥θϵ and
∥Bϵ(0)θϵ−θϵ∥L−α^2=O(ϵ2), we have
⟨U0,Bϵ(0)θϵ⟩=O(ϵ2).
Combining the above with (3.23) and the fact that
λ(ϵ2η)=ϵ3{iηΛ1,ϵ0+O(η2)},
we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Note that ℜ⟨u(⋅,ϵ2η),v(⋅,ϵ2η)⟩
is even in η thanks to (3.36).
Thus we have
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
and (3.45)–(3.48) follow immediately from the definitions
of gk and gk∗ (k=1, 2).
∎
Now we define a spectral projection to resonant modes.
Let P(η0) be an operator defined by
[TABLE]
for f∈X and let Q(η0)=I−P(η0).
Using Corollary 3.5, we can prove that P(η0)
and Q(η0) are spectral projections associated with L
in exactly the same way with [28, Lemma 3.1].
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let c=1+ϵ2 and α∈(0,α^0/2). Then there exist positive constants
ϵ0 and η1 such that for any ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and η0∈[0,η1],
(1)
∥P(ϵ2η0)f∥X≤C∥f∥X* for any f∈X,
where C is a positive constant depending only on α, ϵ and η1,*
2. (2)
LP(ϵ2η0)f=P(ϵ2η0)Lf* for any f∈D(L),*
3. (3)
P(ϵ2η0)2=P(ϵ2η0)* on X,*
4. (4)
etLP(ϵ2η0)=P(ϵ2η0)etL* on X.*
4. Properties of the free operator L0
In this section, we investigate properties of the linearized operator
L0 in X.
To begin with, we investigate the spectrum of L0.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let αc′=bc−ac−1.
Suppose 0<a<b, c>1 and α∈(0,αc′). Then
[TABLE]
By (3.5), the operator
(m11(D)m21(D)m12(D)m22(D))
is bounded on X if and only if
[TABLE]
The symbol of the operator L0 is
[TABLE]
and we observe
L0(ξ,η)P(ξ,η)=diag(λ+(ξ,η),λ−(ξ,η))P(ξ,η),
where
[TABLE]
To investigate properties of the resolvent operator (λ−L0)−1,
we need the following.
Claim 4.2**.**
Suppose 0<a<b and α>0. Then
[TABLE]
Claim 4.3**.**
Suppose 0<a<b and 0<α<αc. Then
[TABLE]
Claim 4.4**.**
Suppose 0<a<b, c>1 and α∈(0,αc′). Then for (ξ,η)∈R2,
Since ℑμ(iα,η)=α2−η2 for η∈[−α,α]
and ℑμ(iα,η)=0 for η∈R satisfying ∣η∣>α,
we have (4.3) for ξ=0.
Let s=η2, γ1(ξ,s)=ℜμ(ξ+iα,η) and
γ2(ξ,s)=ℑμ(ξ+iα,η).
To prove (4.3), it suffices to show that
γ2(ξ,s) is monotone decreasing in s when ξ=0.
Differentiating
[TABLE]
with respect to s, we have
[TABLE]
Combining (4.13) with (4.4), we have ∂sγ2<0.
Thus we prove (4.3).
Since 0<a<b and 1−bα2>0 for α∈(0,αc),
it follows from (4.14) that
[TABLE]
By (4.15), we have the first part of (4.7) and
(4.5) because ℜS(iα,0)=1−bα21−aα2>0
and S(ξ+iα,η) is continuous in (ξ,η)∈R2.
Eq. (4.6) follows from (4.5) and (4.16).
We have c>S(iα,0) for α∈(0,αc).
By (4.14) and the triangle inequality,
[TABLE]
and ∣S(ξ+iα,η)∣=S(iα,0) if and only if ξ=η=0.
Thus we have the second part of (4.7).
Furthermore, we have (4.8) from (4.17) since
∣S∣≤(∣S∣2+1)/2. Thus we complete the proof.
∎
Using Claim 4.3, we will estimate the upper and
lower bounds of λ±(ξ+iα,η).
In view of (4.1), (4.7), (4.20) and (4.21),
the operator λ−L0 has a bounded inverse on X if
[TABLE]
Thus we have
[TABLE]
and Lemma 4.1 follows immediately from
(4.9), (4.11) and (4.23).
∎
To prove the boundedness of (λ−L)−1 restricted on
Q(η0)X for a small η0>0,
the estimate (4.11) in Claim 4.4
is insufficient.
To have a better estimate on (λ−λ−(D))−1,
we will estimate λ−(ξ,η) in the high frequency regime,
the middle frequency regime and in the low frequency regime, separately.
Let δ=ϵ1/20, K=δ−3 and
[TABLE]
Obviously, we have R2=Ahigh∪Aξ,m∪Aη,m∪Alow
and Alow⊂Alow.
Suppose c=1+ϵ2 and that ϵ is a small positive number.
In the low frequency regime Alow,
[TABLE]
where z^=ϵz, y^=ϵ2y and
LKP,0(Dz^,Dy^)=−21{(b−a)∂z^3−∂z^+∂z^−1∂y^2}.
More precisely, we have the following.
Lemma 4.5**.**
Let c=1+ϵ2, α=ϵα^ and α^ϵ=1/bc2−a.
Let ξ=ϵξ^, η=ϵ2η^.
Suppose α^∈(0,α^ϵ).
Then there exist positive constants ϵ0 and C such
that for ϵ∈(0,ϵ0),
Combining (4.29)–(4.31) and the fact that
c=1+2ϵ2+O(ϵ4), we have
(4.24).
If (ξ,η)∈Alow, then
∣ξ^∣≤K and ∣η^∣/∣ξ^+iα^∣≤K(K+α^)/α^
and we can prove (4.25) in exactly the same way.
Suppose (ξ,η)∈Aξ,m.
Then ξ=O(δ), α/ξ=O(K−1) and η/ξ=O(δ).
By (4.10),
[TABLE]
Thus we have (4.26) provided ϵ0, δ and K−1
are sufficiently small.
By (4.32) and the above,
we have (4.27) provided ϵ0, δ and K−1
are sufficiently small.
Finally, we will prove (4.28).
Suppose (ξ,η)∈Ahigh and ∣ξ∣≥δ.
Then there exists a positive constant C1 such that ξ2+η2−α2≥C1δ2 and it follows from (4.10) that
[TABLE]
Suppose (ξ,η)∈Ahigh and ∣η∣∣ξ+iα∣−1≥δ.
By (4.3) and (4.13),
Substituting (4.33) and (4.34)
into (4.32), we have (4.28).
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
Finally, we will estimate operator norms of
(λ−λ±(D))−1 on L2(Rα2) and its subspaces.
Let ρy and ρ~y be functions on R such that
ρy(η)+ρ~y(η)=1 for η∈R and
[TABLE]
Let ρz(ξ) be the characteristic function
of {ξ∈C∣∣ℜξ∣≤Kϵ},
ρ~z(ξ)=1−ρz(ξ) and
[TABLE]
We remark that Alow=suppρz(ξ)ρy(η).
Lemma 4.6**.**
Let c, α, and α^ be as in Lemma 4.5.
Let β^∈(0,8α^) and λ∈Ωϵ:={λ∈C∣ℜλ≥−β^ϵ3}.
Then there exist positive constants C and ϵ0 such that if ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and
λ∈Ωϵ,
Finally, we will prove (4.39).
By (4.25), we have for λ∈Ωϵ and
(ξ,η)∈Alow,
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
5. Spectral stability for small line solitary waves
In this section, we will prove Theorem 2.4.
For small line solitary waves, the spectrum of the linearized operator
L is well approximated by that of LKP in the low frequency regime,
while the spectrum of L is close to that of the free operator L0
in the high-frequency regime.
We will show that any spectrum of L locates
in the stable half plane and is bounded away from the imaginary axis
except for the continuous eigenvalues {λϵ(η)}.
More precisely, we will prove
[TABLE]
Since the potential part of L is independent of y, we can
estimate the high frequency part in y and the low frequency part in y,
separately.
5.1. Spectral stability for high frequencies in y
First, we will estimate solutions of the resolvent equation
[TABLE]
for f∈ρ~y(Dy)X.
In the high frequency regime in y, the potential term
V is relatively small compared with λ−L0.
Lemma 5.1**.**
Let c, α, α^ and Ωϵ be as in Lemma 4.6.
There exists a positive number ϵ0 such that if ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and λ∈Ωϵ,
then
Using (5.7),
we can estimate r21 and r22 in exactly the same way.
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
5.2. Spectral stability for low frequencies in y
Now we will estimate solutions of (5.2) for
f∈ρy(Dy)X satisfying the orthogonality condition
[TABLE]
Let f~=(f~1,f~2) and f=(f1,f2)=P(D)f~. To begin with, We
will show that (5.10) is reduced to the secular term
condition that f~2 does not include the resonant modes of the
linearized KP-II operator LKP in the limit ϵ→0.
Let Eϵ:Lα2(R2)→Lα^2(R2) be an isomorphism defined by
(Eϵf)(x,y):=ϵ−3/2f(ϵ−1x,ϵ−2y) and let
[TABLE]
Note that
P(D):Y×Y→ρy(Dy)X is isomorphic for small ϵ>0 because
∣μ(ξ+iα,η)∣ is bounded away from [math] for η∈suppρy.
Let P(η0) be the projection on L2(R2;C2) defined by
[TABLE]
The subspaces Z and Z are isomorphic
provided ϵ is small.
Lemma 5.2**.**
Let ϵ0 and η0 be sufficiently small positive numbers.
Then for ϵ∈(0,ϵ0), there exists an operator
Π:Z→Z
such that
[TABLE]
Let
W1=Hα1(R)×Lα2(R), W0=Lα2(R;C2),
W0∗=L−α2(R;C2) and W1∗=H−α−1(R)×L−α2(R).
To prove Lemma 5.2, we need the following.
Claim 5.3**.**
Let α^∈(0,α^0), α=α^ϵ and let ϵ0 and η0 be sufficiently small positive numbers.
If ϵ∈(0,ϵ0) and η∈[−η0,η0], then
Since ∥∂z−1ρ~z(Dz)∥B(Lα2(R))≤(Kϵ)−1 and
supη∈[−ϵ2η0,ϵ2η0]∥∂zgk∗(⋅,η)∥L−α2(R)=O(ϵ)
by Corollary 3.5,
[TABLE]
Hence it follows from the Plancherel theorem and the above that
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have ∥ρ~z(Dz)P(ϵ2η0)f∥Lα2(R)2≲K−1∥f∥Lα2(R2).
Thus we prove (5.13).
Next, we will show ρz(Dz)P(ϵ2η0)ρz(Dz)≃ρz(Dz)Eϵ−1PKP(η0)Eϵρz(Dz).
By the fact that ρz(Dz) is bounded on Lα2(R2)
and ∥f(⋅)∥Lα2(R)=ϵ−1/2∥f(ϵ−1⋅)∥Lα^(R)2,
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
Indeed, it follows from Corollary 3.5 that
II3=O(ϵ2+η2) and that for k=1, 2,
[TABLE]
Combining the above with Claim 5.3 and (A.8),
we have II1=O(η2) and II2=O(K−2ϵ) and
we have II4=O(η2) from (3.6).
We can prove
[TABLE]
in the same way.
Since
[TABLE]
for f=P(D)f~, we have from (5.14)
and (5.15) that
[TABLE]
Finally, we will prove that for a τ0>0,
[TABLE]
Since g~0(z,η):=eα^zg0(z,η) and g~0∗(z,η)=e−α^zg0∗(z,η) are analytic on {z∈C∣∣ℑz∣<α^0} and
supτ∈[−τ0,τ0](∥g0~(z+iτ,η)∥L1(Rz)+∥g~0∗(z+iτ,η)∥L1(Rz))<∞ for any τ0∈[0,α^0)
and η∈[−η0,η0],
it follows from the Paley-Wiener theorem that there exists a Cτ0
for any τ0∈[0,α^) such that
[TABLE]
By (5.17) and the definition of PKP(η0),
we have (5.17).
Combining (5.13), (5.16) and
(5.17), we have (5.12).
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
Next, we will show that (λ−L)−1∣Z is uniformly bounded in λ∈Ωϵ.
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let c, α and ϵ0 be as in Lemma 5.1.
Then there exists a positive constant C such that
We decompose fˉ2 and uˉ2 into the high frequency part
and the low frequency part.
Let uˉ2,h=ρ~z(Dz)uˉ2, uˉ2,ℓ=ρz(Dz)uˉ2,
fˉ2,h=ρ~z(Dz)uˉ2 and fˉ2,ℓ=ρz(Dz)fˉ2.
Then
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
To estimate uˉ2,h and uˉ2,ℓ, we need the following.
Lemma 5.5**.**
Let α^∈(0,α^0/2),α=α^ϵ and Ωϵ be
as in Lemma 4.6.
There exists an ϵ0>0 such that
[TABLE]
Lemma 5.6**.**
Let α^∈(0,α^0/2) and α=α^ϵ.
Let β^ be a small positive number and
Ωϵ be as in Lemma 4.6.
There exist positive constants ϵ0 and η0 such that if
ϵ∈(0,ϵ0),
To prove Lemma 5.6, we approximate
λ−(D)+a2 by LKP and apply Proposition 3.2.
Let Eϵ:Lα2(R2)→Lα^2(R2) be an isomorphism defined by
(Eϵf)(x,y):=ϵ−3/2f(x/ϵ,y/ϵ2),
a2,ϵ=ϵ−3Eϵa2Eϵ−1 and
λ−,ϵ(ξ,η)=ϵ−3λ−(ϵξ,ϵ2η).
Then
[TABLE]
where ρKP(ξ,η)=ρz(ϵξ)ρy(ϵ2η) and
[TABLE]
By (4.36) and (A.11), we have III1=O(K5ϵ2).
By (3.5),
[TABLE]
Since
[TABLE]
by (4.25) and
supℜΛ≥−β^/2,(ξ,η)∈R2(1+∣ξ∣)∣Λ−LKP,0(ξ+iα^,η)∣−1<∞
thanks to Lemma 3.1, we have
Now we are in position to prove Theorem 2.4.
Lemmas 3.3, 3.4,
5.1 and 5.4
imply (2.13) and (2.14).
Taking β^>0 smaller if necessary, we see from
Gearhart-Prüss theorem that for small ϵ>0,
there exists a K=K(ϵ) satisfying (2.15).
This completes the proof of Theorem 2.4.
In this section, we will show that the eigenvalue λ=0
of L(0) splits into two stable eigenvalues of L(η) for small
η=0 without assuming smallness of line solitary waves.
As in Subsection 3.2, we will use Lyapunov Schmidt method.
To begin with, we expand L(η) as
L(η)=L(0)+η2L1(η) with
[TABLE]
We easily see that ∥L1(η)∥B(Hα1(R)×Lα2(R))=O(1) as η→0.
Using the ansatz
[TABLE]
we will solve the eigenvalue problem (3.9).
Suppose L(η)ζ(η)=λζ(η) and
z(η)⊥ζ1∗, ζ2∗. Then
[TABLE]
where Q0:Hα1(R)×Lα2(R)→⊥kerg(L(0))∗)
is a spectral projection associated with L(0).
The operator
L(0):Hα2(R)×Hα1(R)→Hα1(R)×Lα2(R)
is a Fredholm operator of index zero.
In fact, we see from Claim 4.4, (4.20) and (4.21) with λ=0 that
L0(0):Hα2(R)×Hα1(R)→Hα1(R)×Lα2(R))
has a bounded inverse and V(0) is a compact operator on Hα1(R)×Lα2(R).
Note that λ+(Dz,0)−1∈B(Lα2(R),Hα1(R)) by (4.7) and the fact that ∂z−1∈B(Lα2(R),Hα1(R)).
Thus there exist positive constants C and k such that if
∣η∣(∣λ1∣+∥L1(η)∥B(Hα1(R)×Lα2(R)))<k,
then a solution z=z(λ1,γ,η) of (6.1) satisfies
In view of (6.4) and (6.6), we have
λ1,0:=−⟨ζ2,ζ2∗⟩⟨L1(0)ζ1,ζ2∗⟩>0.
Since
[TABLE]
it follows from the implicit function theorem that
there exists an η0>0,
λ1(η), γ(η)∈C1([−η0,η0]) such that
λ1(0)=λ1,0, γ(0)=γ0 and
Fk(λ1(η),γ(η),η)=0 for η∈[−η0,η0]
and k=1, 2.
Moreover, we have
[TABLE]
and λ(η)=iλ1,0η−λ2,0η2+O(η3).
Thus we prove (2.4) and (2.5).
To obtain the asymptotic expansion of ζ∗(η), let
v~2(z,η)=ζ(−z,−η)⋅t(1,0),
where ⋅ denotes the inner product in C2 and
[TABLE]
As in the proof of Lemma 3.4,
we have L(η)ζ∗(η)=λ(−η)ζ∗(η).
Since
[TABLE]
we have (2.6). We can show (2.7) in the same way
as the proof of Lemmas 3.3 and 3.4.
Finally, we will prove λ2,0>0.
By (6.4) and the definition of λ2,0,
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
Using the fact that qc and ∂cqc are even,
qc′ is odd and B0−1f retains the parity of f, we have
[TABLE]
In the last line, we use (A0−c2B0)qc+23cqc2=0.
Analogously, we have
[TABLE]
where (∂z−1)∗f=−∫−∞zf(z1)dz1.
By integration by parts,
To show that n(c)>0 for all c>1 and b>a>0, we set ρ=c2 and
differentiate n(ρ) twice to get
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since n′(1)=12(b−a)2+36(b−a)b>0, n′(ρ)>0 for all ρ>1. Since n(1)=15(b−a)2>0, thus, n(ρ)>0 for all ρ>1.
In the same way, to show that d(ρ)>0 for all ρ>1 and b>a>0, we set ρ=c2 and differentiate d(ρ) to obtain
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Since d′(1)=15(b−a)2+40(b−a)b>0, d′(ρ)>0 for all ρ>1. Since d(1)=15(b−a)2>0, thus, d(ρ)>0 for all ρ>1.
Since dcdE(qc,rc)>0, d(c)>0 and n(c)>0 for c>1,
we conclude from (6.12) that λ2,0>0.
This completes the proof of Theorem 2.1.
The Gearhart-Prüss theorem [15, 37] tells us
the semigroup estimate (2.8) follows from
uniform boundedness of (λ−L)−1Q(η0) in a stable half plane.
Let Ω={λ∣ℜλ≥−β′}.
Applying [37, Corollary 4] to a Hilbert space Q(η0)X,
we have (2.8) provided
(λ−L)−1Q(η0) is uniformly bounded in Ω.
Thus to prove Theorem 2.2, it suffices to show the following.
Lemma 7.1**.**
Let c>1 and α∈(0,αc). Assume (H) for β∈(0,α(c−1)/2) and
an η0>0. Then for any β′<β,
[TABLE]
Proof.
By (H), the restricted resolvent (λ−L)−1Q(η0) is
uniformly bounded on any compact subset of Ω.
Thus by Lemma 4.1 and (5.3), we have
(7.1) provided
[TABLE]
for sufficiently large K1. To prove (7.2), we apply the
argument for the 1-dimensional Benney-Luke equation [30] for
low frequencies in y and use the argument in §5.1 for
high frequencies in y.
Let K2>0, χ be the characteristic function of [−K2,K2]
and χ~(η)=1−χ(η) for η∈R.
First, we will show that
In view of (4.9) and (4.11),
we have limλ∈Ω,λ→∞∥(λ−λ±(D))−1f∥Lα2(R2)=0
for any f∈Lα2 thanks to the dominated convergence theorem.
Thus we prove (λ−λ±(D))−1→0 strongly as λ→∞
with λ∈Ω.
Since μ(D)B−1qcχ(Dy), B−1qc′′χ(Dy):Hα1→Hα1 are compact,
we see that limλ∈Ω,λ→∞∥r11(λ)∥B(Hα1)=0
as in [30, p.265].
We can prove
Let e(t,η)=∣κ(η)c1(t,η)∣2+∣c2(t,η)∣2. Then
e(t,η)=e2tℜλ(η)e(0,η) and
[TABLE]
because κ(η)=κ1η+O(η3) with κ1=0 and
ℜλ(η)=−λ2η2+O(η4) with λ2>0.
Since κ(η) and ℑλ(η) are odd and ℜλ(η)
is even, it follows from Theorem 2.1 and (8.1) that
[TABLE]
By the variation of the constants formula,
[TABLE]
where etA0(η)=e−tλ2η2(costλ1η−κ1ηsintλ1ηκ1ηsintλ1ηcostλ1η). Using (8.2), we have for k=0 and 1,
[TABLE]
Since f(y)=⟨Φ(0,⋅,y),ζ2∗⟩ and
∥g2∗(⋅,η)−ζ2∗∥L−α2(R)=O(η2), we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Combining (8.3) and (8.4) with ∥g1(⋅,η)−ζ1∥Lα2(R)=O(η2),
we have for k=0 and 1,
[TABLE]
Since ∥f^∥L2=∥f∥L2≲∥Φ0∥Lα2(R2)+∥Ψ∥Lα2(R2),
[TABLE]
Using the Plancherel theorem, (8.2), (8.5) and (8.6), we have
Appendix A Miscellaneous estimates of operator norms
In this section, we collect estimates of the norm of operators.
A solitary wave profile qc(x) is similar to KdV 1-solitons provided
c is close to 1.
In view of (2.10), we have the following estimates on derivatives
of qc.
Claim A.1**.**
Let c=1+ϵ2, α=α^ϵ and α^∈(0,α^0/2).
There exists positive constants ϵ0 and C such that
[TABLE]
Next, we collect estimates of ∂z, μ(D), S(D) and B−1.
Claim A.2**.**
Let α^>0 and α=α^ϵ.
There exists a positive constants ϵ0 such that
if ϵ∈(0,ϵ0),
In the last inequality, we use the fact that c=1+O(ϵ2).
Combining the above with the fact that
∥ϵ−2qc(⋅/ϵ)−θ0∥C1=O(ϵ2),
we have (A.11).
Thus we complete the proof.
∎
Since LKPPKP(η0)=PKP(η0)LKP,
we have (A.13) from (A.14).
∎
Acknowledgment
This research is supported by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Number JP25400174.
Bibliography44
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] M. J. Ablowitz and C. W. Curtis, Conservation laws and non-decaying solutions for the Benney-Luke equation , Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A Math. Phys. Eng. Sci. 469 (2013), 20120690, 16 pp.
2[2] J. C. Alexander, R. L. Pego and R. L. Sachs, On the transverse instability of solitary waves in the Kadomtsev-Petviashvili equation , Phys. Lett. A 226 (1997), 187–192.
3[3] T. B. Benjamin, The stability of solitary waves , Proc. Roy. Soc. (London) Ser. A, 328 (1972), 153–183.
4[4] D. J. Benney and J. C. Luke, Interactions of permanent waves of finite amplitude , J. Math. Phys., 43 (1964), 309–313.
5[5] J. Bona, On the stability theory of solitary waves , Proc. Roy. Soc. London Ser. A, 344 (1975), 363–374.
6[6] J. L. Bona, T. Colin, and C. Guillopé, Propagation of long-crested water waves , Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 33 (2013), 599–-628.
7[7] J. L. Bona, M. Chen, and J.-C. Saut, Boussinesq equations and other systems for small-amplitude long waves in nonlinear dispersive media. I. Derivation and linear theory , J. Nonlinear Sci., 12 (2002), 283–318.
8[8] J. L. Bona, T. Colin and D. Lannes, Long wave approximations for water waves , Arch. Ration. Mech. Anal., 178 (2005), 373–410.