Weak solutions obtained by the vortex method for the 2D Euler equations are Lagrangian and conserve the energy
Gennaro Ciampa, Gianluca Crippa, Stefano Spirito

TL;DR
This paper proves that solutions to the 2D Euler equations obtained through the vortex method are Lagrangian and conserve energy when the initial vorticity is in $L^p$ with $p>1$, extending known results to a broader class of solutions.
Contribution
It demonstrates that vortex method solutions are Lagrangian and energy-conserving for initial vorticity in $L^p$, with $p>1$, broadening the understanding of weak solutions.
Findings
Vortex method solutions are Lagrangian.
Solutions conserve energy for $p>1$.
Extends conservation results to broader initial vorticity classes.
Abstract
We discuss the Lagrangian property and the conservation of the kinetic energy for solutions of the 2D incompressible Euler equations. Existence of Lagrangian solutions is known when the initial vorticity is in with . Moreover, if all weak solutions are conservative. In this work we prove that solutions obtained via the vortex method are Lagrangian, and that they are conservative if .
Peer Reviews
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.
Weak solutions obtained by the vortex method for the 2D Euler equations are Lagrangian and conserve the energy
Gennaro Ciampa
GSSI - Gran Sasso Science Institute
Viale Francesco Crispi 7
67100 L’Aquila
Italy & Department Mathematik Und Informatik
Universität Basel
Spiegelgasse 1
CH-4051 Basel
Switzerland
,
Gianluca Crippa
Department Mathematik Und Informatik
Universität Basel
Spiegelgasse 1
CH-4051 Basel
Switzerland
and
Stefano Spirito
DISIM - Dipartimento di Ingegneria e Scienze dell’Informazione e Matematica
Università degli Studi dell’Aquila
Via Vetoio
67100 L’Aquila
Italy
Abstract.
We discuss the Lagrangian property and the conservation of the kinetic energy for solutions of the 2D incompressible Euler equations. Existence of Lagrangian solutions is known when the initial vorticity is in with . Moreover, if all weak solutions are conservative. In this work we prove that solutions obtained via the vortex method are Lagrangian, and that they are conservative if .
Key words and phrases:
2D Euler equations; vortex methods; Lagrangian solutions; Conservation of Energy.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
Primary: 35Q35, Secondary: 35Q31.
1. Introduction
The two-dimensional Euler equations
[TABLE]
model the motion of an incompressible inviscid fluid. The unknowns are the velocity field and the scalar pressure . In two dimensions, a very special role is played by the vorticity, which is defined as
[TABLE]
Note that the vorticity is a scalar quantity and that system (1.1) can be rewritten in terms of as
[TABLE]
where and is defined as
[TABLE]
The coupling between the velocity and the vorticity given by the formula
[TABLE]
is known as Biot-Savart law and it is an alternative way to express (1.2).
Existence and uniqueness of classical solutions of (1.1) is very well-known for smooth initial data and was proved first locally in time in [15] and then globally in time in [26]. Smooth solutions enjoy two very natural properties: the first one is that they are Lagrangian, namely they solve the equivalent formulation of (1.1) given by the following system of O.D.E.
[TABLE]
The second property is that smooth solutions conserve the kinetic energy, namely
[TABLE]
When we consider solutions in weaker classes it is not clear whether they satisfy (1.4) or (1.5). The goal of this paper is to prove these properties for weak solutions with vorticity control constructed by the vortex-blob approximation. In order to clarify how this result fits in the theory of weak solutions of the two-dimensional Euler equations we give a brief overview on the state of the art for this topic.
In their seminal paper [14], DiPerna and Majda prove the existence of measure-valued solutions of (1.1) under the assumption of vortex-sheet initial vorticity, that is . Precisely, they give the definition of an approximate solution sequence of the two-dimensional incompressible Euler equations and they show that this kind of approximate solutions converge to measure-valued solutions. Moreover, they give three different examples of approximation methods that satisfy their definition:
- (ES)
Approximation by exact smooth solutions of (1.1);
- (VV)
Vanishing viscosity from the two-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations;
- (VB)
Vortex blob approximation.
For initial vorticities with they proved global existence of weak solutions of (1.1) obtained trough the methods (ES) and (VV), while for weak solutions constructed by (VB) the same result was obtained by Beale in [3]. Note that uniqueness of weak solutions in the class considered in [14] is still an open problem, contrary to the case in which uniqueness has been proved by Yudovich [27].
Concerning the Lagrangian property (1.4), in [17] it has been observed that when , with , any weak solution of the Euler equations in vorticity form (1.3) is renormalized in the sense of DiPerna and Lions [13] and admits a representation formula in terms of the flow of the velocity as in (1.4). Moreover, when with , all solutions obtained as limit of (ES) are Lagrangian as a consequence of the stability theorem in [13]. The case of weak solutions produced by (ES) with -initial vorticity is considered in [5].
Regarding the vanishing viscosity limit, in [11] it has been proved that solutions obtained via (VV) are Lagrangian if , while the case is considered in [10]. Note that the Lagrangian property is non-trivial even at the linear level for the transport equation
[TABLE]
In fact, in [21, 22, 20] the authors show via convex-integration techniques that there exist solutions of the linear transport equation which are not Lagrangian, if the integrability of and of are much below the threshold provided by the DiPerna-Lions’ theory [13]. In particular, for the 2D Euler equations we are in the situation described in [20] when we assume low integrability conditions on the initial vorticity, namely with .
Regarding solutions that preserve the kinetic energy, in [7] the authors consider (1.1) on the two-dimensional flat torus and prove that all weak solutions satisfy the energy conservation (1.5) if the vorticity with . The proof is based on a mollification argument and the exponent is required in order to have weak continuity of a commutator term in the energy balance. The authors also give an example of the sharpness of the exponent in their argument. Moreover, they show that if , with , solutions constructed by (ES) and (VV) conserve the energy.
In this paper we consider weak solutions obtained by the vortex-blob approximation (VB). We refer to Section 3 for the precise description of the vortex-blob method, which is the prototype of several important numerical schemes and is based on the idea of approximating the vorticity with a finite number of cores which evolve according to the velocity of the fluid.
We introduce the following definition.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let and . We say that is a VB-solution of the 2D incompressible Euler equations with initial datum if
- •
is a weak solution of (1.1)
- •
there exists an approximate sequence constructed with the vortex-blob method such that, as along a subsequence,
[TABLE]
Our main results concern the Lagrangian property and the conservation of the kinetic energy of VB-solutions. These results are contained respectively in Theorem 4.3 and Theorem 5.6.
In order to prove that VB-solutions are Lagrangian we will not rely on a duality argument, as done in [11]. We will prove a new, to the best of our knowledge, estimate on the distance between the approximate vorticity obtained by vortex-blob approximation and the solution of a linear transport equation where the advecting term is the approximate velocity field obtained by the vortex-blob approximation. Moreover, we will prove the equi-integrability of the sequence of approximate vorticity constructed via (VB) and exploit the stability theorems for Lagrangian solutions of the linear transport equation contained in [6, 9]. In particular, the equi-integrability of the approximate vorticity will also allow us to improve the existence result of Beale in [3] to the case of initial vorticity .
In the proof of the conservation of the energy (Theorem 5.6), we will use a modified version of the Serfati identity [1, 23] in order to prove the global convergence in of the approximate velocity together with a precise blow-up estimate for the velocity. We will also prove a local balance of the energy for VB-solutions when with .
It is worth to notice that, even if the vortex-blob is a numerical scheme that does not come from physical considerations, it provides solutions that are Lagrangian and conservative, two important physical properties. We think that it is an interesting problem to investigate whether in general there is any implication between Lagrangian and conservative solutions.
Organization of the paper
The paper is divided as follows. In Section 2 we fix the notations and we recall some results about the linear transport equation. In Section 3 we describe the vortex-blob approximation and we prove some preliminary estimates from [3]; then we prove the equi-integrability of the approximate vorticity and the extension of Beale’s result to the case of . In Section 4 we prove that VB-solutions are Lagrangian and in Section 5 that they are conservative.
2. Notations and Preliminaries
This section is divided in two subsections: in the first one we fix the notations used in the sequel, while in the second one we recall the definitions of distributional, Lagrangian and renormalized solutions to the transport equation. We focus our attention on the case when the vector field is divergence-free, but all definitions and results can be extended to the case of bounded divergence with suitable changes.
2.1. Notations
We will denote by the standard Lebesgue spaces and with their norm. We will use the notation when the norm is computed on a subset . Moreover, denotes the space of functions defined on with compact support. The Sobolev space of functions with distributional derivatives of first order in is denoted by . The spaces denote the space of functions which are locally in respectively. We will denote by the space and by its dual space. Moreover, we will say that a function is in if for every function . We also denote by the space of finite Radon measures on . We denote by the space of all measurable functions defined on such that
[TABLE]
for all , and
[TABLE]
and analogously for the spaces . We denote by the ball of radius and center the origin in , by the standard Lebesgue measure in , and for we consider the push-forward measure of defined by
[TABLE]
Finally, it is useful to denote with the following variant of the convolution
[TABLE]
With the notations above it is easy to check that if is a scalar function and is a vector field, then
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
2.2. Linear Transport Equation
Consider the Cauchy problem for the linear transport equation
[TABLE]
where the vector field and the initial datum are given. The Cauchy-Lipschitz theory gives existence and uniqueness of smooth solutions of , provided the vector field is Lipschitz in space uniformly in time. When the vector field is not Lipschitz, classical solutions do not exist in general and weaker definitions of solutions must be considered. We start with the definition of distributional solutions.
Definition 2.1**.**
Let be a divergence-free vector field and , where . The function is a distributional solution of (2.1) if for any the following equality holds:
[TABLE]
The existence of global weak solutions in the sense of the previous definition is proved in [13]. We note that the definition of distributional solution requires that the product : this is in general not true in several applications, as in the case of the 2D Euler equations. For this reason in [13] the authors introduce also the concept of renormalized solutions.
Definition 2.2**.**
Let be a divergence-free vector field and for some . A function is called renormalized solution of if for any , vanishing in a neighbourhood of [math], the equality
[TABLE]
holds for any .
It is worth noticing that, when and satisfy the integrability hypothesis in Definition 2.1, renormalized solutions are distributional solutions.
Finally we give the definition of Lagrangian solutions, which encodes at a weak level the fact that the solution of (2.1) admits a representation formula in terms of the flow of the vector field . We start by giving the definition of regular Lagrangian flow introduced in [2].
Definition 2.3**.**
Let be a divergence-free vector field. We say that is a regular Lagrangian flow associated to if
- (1)
for a.e. the map is an absolutely continuous integral solution of the ordinary differential equation
[TABLE] 2. (2)
the push-forward measure
[TABLE]
Now we are ready to give the definition of Lagrangian solutions of the transport equation (2.1).
Definition 2.4**.**
Let be given. A function is called a Lagrangian solution of (2.1) if and there exists an a.e. invertible regular Lagrangian flow associated to such that
[TABLE]
for all and a.e. , where denotes the inverse map in space at a fixed time .
Next, we recall a stability result for Lagrangian solutions of (2.1). We start by stating the hypothesis on the vector field which will be often used in the following:
- (R1)
The vector field can be decomposed as
[TABLE]
with and .
- (R2a)
The vector field satisfies
[TABLE]
- (R2b)
For every we have
[TABLE]
where are singular integral operators of fundamental type in (acting as operators in at fixed time) and the function . See [6] for the main definitions.
- (R3)
The vector field satisfies
[TABLE]
The stability theorem for Lagrangian solutions of the transport equation (2.1) that we will use in the sequel is the following, see [9, 6] for the proof.
Theorem 2.5**.**
Let be divergence-free vector fields satisfying assumptions (R1), (R2a) or (R2b), (R3). Assume that in and that for some decomposition as in assumption (R1) we have that
[TABLE]
Consider a Lagrangian solution of (2.1) with coefficient and initial datum , as well as associated to and . If in with , then in .
We conclude this subsection with a technical lemma which gives an estimate on the measure of the superlevels of a regular Lagrangian flow ; the proof can be found in [9]. Define the set as
[TABLE]
Lemma 2.6**.**
Let be a vector field which admits a decomposition as in (R1) and let be a regular Lagrangian flow relative to with compression constant . Then for every it holds
[TABLE]
where the function depends on and , and satisfies for fixed and .
3. The vortex blob method
This section is devoted to the description of the vortex blob approximation and some of its properties.
3.1. Description of the method.
Consider an initial vorticity with . Let , we consider two small parameters in , which later will be chosen as functions of , denoted by and .
First of all, we consider the lattice
[TABLE]
and define the square with sides of lenght parallel to the coordinate axis and centered at . Let be a standard mollifier and define
[TABLE]
For any the support of is contained in a fixed compact set in , then it can be tiled by a finite number of squares . Define the quantities
[TABLE]
Let be another mollifier, we define the approximate vorticity to be
[TABLE]
where is a solution of the O.D.E. system
[TABLE]
with defined as
[TABLE]
where . Note that, since and are -dependent, we only use the superscript . The ordinary differential equations (3.3) are known as the vortex-blob approximation.
It is not difficult to show the bound
[TABLE]
see [14]. From (3.5) it follows that, for every fixed , there exists a unique smooth solution of the O.D.E. system (3.3), which implies that and are well-defined smooth functions. Note that and are not exact solutions of the Euler equations because of the presence of an error term, due to the fact that each blob is rigidly translated by the flow. Precisely, the approximate vorticity satisfies the following equation
[TABLE]
where by a direct computation the error term is given by
[TABLE]
Concerning the approximate velocity , consider the quantity
[TABLE]
Since satisfies the system
[TABLE]
we derive that there exists a function such that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then, the velocity given by the vortex-blob approximation verifies the following equations
[TABLE]
Since is divergence-free, can be rewritten as where
[TABLE]
3.2. A priori estimates
In this subsection we give the proof of some a priori estimates on , , and the error term , taken from [3]. First of all, we introduce the following auxiliary problem. Let be the solution of the linear transport equation with vector field , that is
[TABLE]
Since satisfies (3.5), there exists a unique smooth solution , which is given by the formula
[TABLE]
where is the flow of , that is,
[TABLE]
Moreover, since , we have
[TABLE]
We will use in order to prove uniform -bounds on . Before doing that, note that can be seen as a discretization of , since a change of variables gives
[TABLE]
compare with (3.2). We now give a lemma which is, loosely speaking, an estimate on the norms of the error we commit substituting the integral in (3.14) with the sum in (3.2). The following estimate is new for , while the case has been proved in [3].
Lemma 3.1**.**
Let and let be chosen as
[TABLE]
where is a positive constant. Then, the estimate
[TABLE]
holds for all , where is a positive constant which does not depend on .
Proof.
We start by proving the inequality (3.16) in the case . By using the definitions of and we have that
[TABLE]
For we have the following estimate
[TABLE]
So, for any we have that
[TABLE]
where is the Lipschitz constant of the flow , which is bounded by
[TABLE]
as a consequence of (3.5). Then, rescaling in the variable in (3.17) we have
[TABLE]
Choosing the function as in (3.15) we get (3.16) for .
For we can argue in a similar way; by the same computations as in (3.17) we have that
[TABLE]
and we can estimate as before, so that
[TABLE]
and choosing as in (3.15) we get the result.
Finally, by interpolating we have
[TABLE]
and this concludes the proof. ∎
We are now in the position to prove the uniform bound on .
Lemma 3.2**.**
Let . Then, the approximate vorticities defined in (3.2) satisfy the following
[TABLE]
for , and
[TABLE]
Proof.
First of all, the case follows directly from the definition of since
[TABLE]
Let consider now and let and be the sets
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
By Chebishev inequality
[TABLE]
uniformly in time. Let the solution of , we have that
[TABLE]
On the other hand, for the set we have
[TABLE]
since on . Combining the previous estimates, since , taking the supremum in time we have the result.
Finally, the case follows from the triangle inequality and (3.16). ∎
We give now a convergence result for the error term (see [3] for the proof).
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let with , then the quantity defined in (3.10) satisfies
[TABLE]
In particular, for we have the following bound
[TABLE]
where and with . Moreover, choosing where are positive constants, we have that satisfies the following additional bound
[TABLE]
which goes to [math] choosing as above and .
It is worth to note that the dependence on of the bound in (3.20) is due to the fact that, in order to obtain the convergence in (3.19), for we need to regularize the initial vorticity, while is not needed for .
The uniform bound of Lemma 3.2 together with Lemma 3.3 are the core of the proof of the theorem proved by Beale in [3], where he showed the existence of VB-solutions when the initial vorticity is in , with , and compactly supported. In detail:
Theorem 3.4**.**
Let and assume that the vorticity for some . Let given by the vortex-blob approximation with parameters chosen so that for some , and for some constants . Then up to subsequences, converges strongly in to a classical weak solution of the Euler equations with initial velocity .
3.3. The case
In this subsection we consider the case of initial vorticities . In particular, we prove the equi-integrability of the sequence of approximate vorticities given by the vortex-blob method and this will be crucial in the extension of Beale’s result to the case . Moreover, the fact that is equi-integrable will also be fundamental for the applications of the linear theory discussed in Section 2 to the 2D Euler equations. We start by showing the equi-integrability of in the following (up to our knowledge original) lemma.
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let and defined as (3.1). Then the approximate vorticities as in (3.2) are equi-integrable in .
Proof.
We divide the proof in several steps.
Step 1 The sequence is equi-integrable.
We start by proving the equi-integrability of the sequence on small sets; we have that
[TABLE]
Since is divergence-free we have that , so the measure of the set is indipendent from and and then the equi-integrability of gives the result.
We move now to the proof of the equi-integrability at infinity; we have that
[TABLE]
where . By Lemma 2.6, the measure of the set
[TABLE]
can be made arbitrary small for big enough, indipendently from and . Then by the equi-integrability of the claim of the first step follows.
Step 2 The sequence is equi-integrable.
We start by proving the equi-integrability of on small sets. Since the initial datum has compact support (uniformly in ) and converges strongly, therefore weakly, to in , De la Vallé-Poussin’s theorem provides the existence of a function positive, increasing and superlinear such that
[TABLE]
Then, for we have that
[TABLE]
Note that in (3.22) we have taken the modulus inside the integral and used that is increasing, while in (3.23) we used Jensen’s inequality since is convex and is a probability measure. Multiplying (3.12) by , integrating in space and using the divergence-free condition of , from the equi-integrability of it follows that
[TABLE]
Then, taking the supremum in time and in in (3.21) and estimating (3.24) with (3.25) shows the equi-integrability on small sets. The equi-integrability at infinity is an immediate consequence of that of .
Step 3 The sequence is equi-integrable.
We start by proving equi-integrability on small sets. We can compute
[TABLE]
Fix . The first term can be estimate using and choosing so that for
[TABLE]
For the second term we use the equi-integrability of . There exists such that
[TABLE]
if . So taking , assuming and then taking the supremum in time, the equi-integrability on small sets is proven.
We prove now the equi-integrability at infinity. Fix and decompose
[TABLE]
Since is equi-integrable there exists such that for every
[TABLE]
and by (3.16), if we consider we obtain
[TABLE]
For we do not use estimate (3.16) but we focus our attention on the flows . From the definition of we know
[TABLE]
For the flows we have that for a given finite time
[TABLE]
Since which is compact, we have . Decompose the Biot-Savart Kernel as where and . Using Young inequality for convolutions we get
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Then by (3.27) we have that
[TABLE]
Defining as
[TABLE]
we have that for
[TABLE]
so that in (3.26) we integrate out of the support of and the integral therefore vanishes. Setting and taking the supremum in and we have the result since depends only on . ∎
If we assume in addition that the initial vorticity , then the initial velocity is locally square integrable; this is the content of the following proposition.
Proposition 3.6**.**
Let and defined as in (3.4). Then and
[TABLE]
Proof.
First of all, we decompose where is a smooth steady solution of the 2D Euler equations and is at each time in with zero total circulation. To do this, consider the same mollifier as in the definition of in (3.2) and set
[TABLE]
[TABLE]
Then, solves the following equation
[TABLE]
Multiplying (3.28) by and integrating over we have
[TABLE]
Since is a bounded operator in we get
[TABLE]
In order to conclude, it is enough to prove that is finite. Note that
[TABLE]
The previous sum is a discretization of the integral
[TABLE]
which is by hypothesis bounded in . Since in the definition of the kernel is chosen to be the same as in (3.3), the discretization error can be pointwise bounded by , which is small by our choice of . It follows that , and therefore is uniformly bounded in where is such that . For , is just and then
[TABLE]
and it is easy to see that it is bounded by
[TABLE]
thus it is bounded in . ∎
The equi-integrability of the vortex-blob vorticity guarantees the phenomenon of concentration-cancellations, see [25]. This fact together with the consistency of the method implies the existence of VB-solutions in the case of initial vorticity. In particular with Lemma 3.5 we improve the result of [3] to the case and this is the content of the following theorem.
Theorem 3.7**.**
Let and assume that the vorticity . Let be given by the vortex-blob approximation with the parameters chosen so that for some , and for certain . Then there exists a subsequence of which converges strongly in for any and weakly in to a classical weak solution of the Euler equations with initial velocity .
Proof.
We just sketch the proof since it follows the proof of [3], [12] and [25].
Step 1 Compactness.
Since , by Theorem 2 in [3] we have the existence of such that
[TABLE]
and for every we have the strong convergence
[TABLE]
Moreover, for every test function with using Lemma 3.3 we have that
[TABLE]
Step 2 Convergence.
In order to conclude we have to prove the convergence of the non-linear term
[TABLE]
By the special structure of the non-linearity in two dimension, it is sufficient to prove the following convergence, see [12, 18]
[TABLE]
for any and . We rewrite the left hand side as
[TABLE]
where
[TABLE]
for some constant . As shown in [12, Proposition 1.2.3], the function , is continuous outside the diagonal of and goes to [math] at infinity. Moreover, by Lemma 3.5 we know that
[TABLE]
and then following the proof of Theorem 1 in [25] it is not difficult to prove that
[TABLE]
which is enough to conclude. ∎
4. Convergence to Lagrangian solutions
In this section we prove that VB-solutions satisfy the 2D Euler equations in the Lagrangian and renormalized sense. Let us start with the following lemma.
Lemma 4.1**.**
Let be the 2D Biot-Savart kernel and denote by . Then for any and all
[TABLE]
where . Moreover choosing such that
[TABLE]
if is uniformly bounded in , then the sequence is relatively sequentally compact in .
Proof.
We start by proving (4.1). Fix with . For , we have for all , , thus we have that
[TABLE]
Then we estimate
[TABLE]
Next, for we have
[TABLE]
and then
[TABLE]
Combining (4.3) and (4) we get (4.1).
To prove the compactness we want to verify the hypotesis of the Fréchet-Kolmogorov theorem. Let be a bounded sequence in . We want to prove that
[TABLE]
Thanks to the properties of the convolution, we have that
[TABLE]
which concludes the proof since our choice of implies that . ∎
We summarize in the following lemma the convergence of the vortex-blob method to VB-solutions.
Lemma 4.2**.**
Let be a VB-solution and let be the approximate vorticity and velocity constructed by the vortex-blob approximation as in the Definition 1.1. Let or for , then there exists
[TABLE]
such that up to subsequences the following hold true
- (i)
if , then satisfies (R2a) and
[TABLE]
- (ii)
if , then satisfies (R2b) and for every
[TABLE]
- (iii)
.
Proof.
We divide the proof in several steps.
Step 1 Convergence of the vorticity.
By Lemma 3.2, we have that the approximate vorticity satisfies
[TABLE]
Moreover, when we also have by Lemma 3.5 that is equi-integrable. Then, there exists such that
[TABLE]
Step 2 Convergence of the velocity.
The approximate velocity satisfies the following uniform bound
[TABLE]
as a consequence of Young’s inequality in the case and of Proposition 3.6 for . Moreover, since is a VB-solution, we have that
[TABLE]
In addition, for some we also have the following uniform bound
[TABLE]
(see [3]). Then, thanks to Aubin-Lions’ Lemma together with Lemma 4.1, for we can upgrade the convergence (4.8) to
[TABLE]
while for we have
[TABLE]
for any , and this concludes the proof. ∎
We can now prove our first main theorem.
Theorem 4.3**.**
Let be a VB-solution. Then satisfies the Euler equations in the sense of Lagrangian and renormalized solutions.
Proof.
We divide the proof in two steps.
Step 1 Representation formula and additional regularity of .
Let be a sequence constructed via the vortex blob method which converges to as in Lemma 4.2. We want to prove that a.e. in . For we have
[TABLE]
where we have used the fact that for every . By varing we have the result. Moreover, the gradient of can be written as
[TABLE]
where each is a singular integral operator of fundamental type with kernel the distributional derivative . Hence satisfies hypothesis (R2b) if since define singular integral operators of fundamental type (see Remark 2.11 in [6] for the definition of a singular integral on functions). In the case , by standard Calderòn-Zygmund theory on singular integrals we have the estimate
[TABLE]
and then satisfies (R2a).
Step 2 Lagrangian property of the solution.
Let be chosen as in the previous step and consider the auxiliary problem (3.11) introduced in Section 3. By Theorem 2.5 we have the existence of such that
[TABLE]
where and is the unique regular Lagrangian flow of . In order to conclude we want to prove that a.e.. Let and compute
[TABLE]
By estimate (3.16) and standard properties of the convolution, it is easy to check that the previous sum goes to [math] as , and by varying we have that a.e. in . ∎
Remark 4.4**.**
Note that the Step 2 of the proof of Theorem 4.3 together with the estimate in Lemma 3.16 give that the convergence in (4.6) of the approximate vorticity towards the Lagrangian solution is actually strong.
5. Conservation of the energy
In this section we prove our second main result, namely the conservation of the kinetic energy for VB-solutions. We recall the definition of conservative weak solution of the 2D Euler equations from [7].
Definition 5.1**.**
Let be a weak solution of (1.1) with initial datum . We call a conservative weak solution if
[TABLE]
First of all, note that in the previous definition we are dealing with initial data which are globally square integrable in space, which is equivalent to requiring that the vorticity has zero mean value. This is the content of the following proposition, which can be found in [19, Prop. 3.3]:
Proposition 5.2**.**
An incompressible velocity field in with vorticity of compact support has finite kinetic energy if and only if the vorticity has zero mean value, that is
[TABLE]
Before continuing with our result on the vortex-blob approximation, we recall a theorem proved in [7] about the conservation of the energy for weak solutions of the Euler equations. This will be useful in order to better understand our result.
Theorem 5.3**.**
Fix and let be a weak solution of the 2D Euler equations (1.1) with with . Then is conservative. Moreover, the following local energy balance law holds in the sense of distributions
[TABLE]
Note that in the previous theorem assumption (5.1) is not needed since is a bounded domain and then even if the vorticity does not have zero mean value. The method of the proof is based on a mollification argument and the exponent is sharp for the method. In particular, the theorem is still valid if we consider weak solutions , with zero mean, such that with .
We now prove that under hypothesis (5.1) the approximate velocity given by the vortex-blob method is globally square integrable in space.
Lemma 5.4**.**
Let which verifies (5.1). Then the velocity field given by (3.4) verifies the following uniform bound
[TABLE]
provided that with .
Proof.
Multiply the equation (3.9) by ; integrating over the whole plane and by using the notation introduced in Section 2.1, we obtain
[TABLE]
which means that
[TABLE]
Integrating in time we have that
[TABLE]
Note that verifies the hypothesis of Proposition 5.2 and, since the support of is uniformly bounded in , we have that
[TABLE]
where the constant is indipendent from . We omit the details of the proof of the previous inequality since it can be done with the same computations of the bound of the norm of in Proposition 3.6. This fact together with Lemma 3.3 gives the result. ∎
With the previous lemma we can prove that the velocity field converges globally in towards : this will be fundamental in the proof of Theorem 5.6.
Lemma 5.5**.**
Let , with , which verifies (5.1). Let be a VB-solution and as in Definition 1.1. Then, up to a subsequence not relabelled the velocity field satisfies the following convergence
[TABLE]
Proof.
According to Lemma 4.2 and Remark 4.4, up to a subsequence not relabelled, there exists such that
[TABLE]
Moreover, by Lemma 5.4 both and are in . In order to prove the convergence stated in (5.2), we will prove that is a Cauchy sequence in . Let be any infinitesimal sequence. We denote the velocity field and the vorticity given by the vortex-blob approximation. We divide the proof in several steps.
Step 1 A Serfati identity for the vortex-blob approximation.
In this step we derive a formula for the approximate velocity in the same spirit of the Serfati identity derived in [1, 23].
Let be a smooth function such that if and for . Differentiating in time the Biot-Savart formula we obtain that for
[TABLE]
Now we use the equation (3.6) for obtaining
[TABLE]
and substituting in (5.3) we obtain
[TABLE]
Since and by the identity
[TABLE]
we obtain that
[TABLE]
where the notation was already introduced. Substituting the expressions (5.5) and (5.6) in (5.3) and integrating in time we have that satisfies the following formula:
[TABLE]
Step 2 is a Cauchy sequence in .
Using formula (5.7) we can prove that is a Cauchy sequence. We consider with . By linearity of the convolution we have that satisfies the following
[TABLE]
In order to estimate we estimate separately the norms of the terms on the right hand side of (5.8). We start by estimating : given , since the initial datum converges in to , we have that there exists such that
[TABLE]
We deal now with : if with , by Young’s convolution inequality we have that
[TABLE]
where is such that , while for
[TABLE]
Notice that and for any . Moreover, by the strong convergence of in and the bound we conclude that both in the case and in the case there exists such that
[TABLE]
for any . We deal now with : by Young’s convolution inequality we have that
[TABLE]
We add and subtract in and by Hölder inequality we have
[TABLE]
For the first factor in (5.11) we have that
[TABLE]
and it is easy to see that each term on the right hand side has uniformly bounded norm. Then we have that
[TABLE]
Finally, we deal with : again by Young’s inequality we have that
[TABLE]
Arguing as for , since is in , a straightforward computation shows that is bounded in . On the other hand, goes to [math] in so there exists such that for all we have that
[TABLE]
Then, putting together (5.9),(5.10),(5.12) and (5.13) we obtain that for all
[TABLE]
and by Gronwall’s lemma
[TABLE]
Taking the supremum in time in (5.15) we have the result. ∎
We are now in position of proving our second main theorem
Theorem 5.6**.**
Let be a VB-solution and assume that the initial vorticity , with , satisfies (5.1). Then is a conservative weak solution. Moreover, if the following local energy balance holds
[TABLE]
Proof.
We divide the proof in two steps.
Step 1 Local balance of the energy.
Since the result for is a consequence of Theorem 5.3, we give the proof under the assumption . Let constructed by the vortex-blob method as in the definition of VB-solutions. We have that
[TABLE]
For the convergence (5.17) is a consequence of Lemma 5.5, while for it follows from Sobolev inequality and the strong convergence of the vorticity. Indeed, by the Calderòn-Zygmund theorem we have that
[TABLE]
and by interpolating the spaces and the convergence in (5.17) holds.
The pressure solves the following equation
[TABLE]
and by elliptic regularity we have that , where , with uniform bounds. Therefore there exists a scalar function such that
[TABLE]
Let be a test function. Multiplying the equation (3.9) by and integrating in space and time we get
[TABLE]
We start by considering the error term in (5.20): we have that
[TABLE]
Then, by Hölder inequality and Calderòn-Zygmund theorem we have that
[TABLE]
which goes to [math] as choosing in the construction of the approximation as in Lemma 3.3. We consider now (5.19). By the convergence in (5.17) we have that
[TABLE]
We deal now with the second term in (5.19). It is here that the restriction to comes into play: in this range the Sobolev exponent . Then, the convergences in (5.17) and (5.18) imply that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
and this concludes the proof of (5.16).
Step 2 Conservation of the kinetic energy.
We prove now that is a conservative weak solution for any . Multiplying (3.9) by and integrating in space and time we have that
[TABLE]
For the second term on the right hand side, by Lemma 3.3 we have that
[TABLE]
which goes to [math] as . Then, by the convergence (5.2) and letting in (5.21) we have that
[TABLE]
which gives the result. ∎
Concluding remarks
Note that the previous proof the global convergence of the velocity field in (5.2), which depends on the strong convergence of the vorticity, allows us to prove the conservation of the energy for . In fact, the local balance of the energy (5.16) actually implies the conservation of the norm of for by choosing properly the test functions. For example, we can choose the test function to be ; letting and then we obtain the result. A suitable modification of our argument allow to prove the convergence (5.2) also for solutions constructed as limit of (ES) and (VV) and this extend the result of [7] to the case of the full plane. This suggests that the three methods are somehow equivalent since, under the same hypothesis, they produce weak solutions that share the properties of being Lagrangian and conservative.
Acknowledgments
This research has been supported by the ERC Starting Grant 676675 FLIRT. Gennaro Ciampa and Stefano Spirito acknowledge the support of INdAM-GNAMPA.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] D. M. Ambrose, J. P. Kelliher, M. C. Lopes Filho, H. J. Nussenzveig Lopes : Serfati solutions to the 2D Euler equations on exterior domain. J. Differential Equations, 𝟐𝟓𝟗 259 \mathbf{259} , (2015), 4509-4560.
- 2[2] L. Ambrosio : Transport equation and Cauchy problem for BV vector fields. Inventiones Mathematicae, 𝟏𝟓𝟖 158 \mathbf{158} , (2004), 227-260.
- 3[3] J. T. Beale : The approximation of weak solutions to the 2-D Euler equations by vortex elements. Multidymensional Hyperbolic Problems and Computations, Edited by J. Glimm and A. Majda, IMA Vol. Math. Appl. 𝟐𝟗 29 \mathbf{29} , (1991), 23-37.
- 4[4] A. Bohun, F. Bouchut, G. Crippa : Lagrangian flows for vector fields with anisotropic regularity. Ann. Inst. H. Poincarè Anal. Non Linèaire, 𝟑𝟑 33 \mathbf{33} , 6 (2016), 1409-1429.
- 5[5] A. Bohun, F. Bouchut, G. Crippa : Lagrangian solutions to the 2D Euler system with L 1 superscript 𝐿 1 L^{1} vorticity and infinite energy. Nonlinear Analysis: Theory, Methods & Applications, 𝟏𝟑𝟐 132 \mathbf{132} , (2016), 160-172.
- 6[6] F. Bouchut, G. Crippa : Lagrangian flows for vector fields with gradient given by a singular integral. J. Hyperbolic Diff. Equ., 𝟏𝟎 10 \mathbf{10} , (2013), 235-282.
- 7[7] A. Cheskidov, M. C. Lopes Filho, H. J. Nussenzveig Lopes, R. Shvydkoy : Energy conservation in Two-dimensional incompressible ideal fluids. Comm. Math. Phys., 𝟑𝟒𝟖 348 \mathbf{348} , (2016), 129-143.
- 8[8] G. Ciampa : Ph.D. Thesis , in preparation.
