This paper proves the existence of global weak solutions to the 3D Navier-Stokes equations with initial data in weighted L2 spaces, expanding understanding of solutions with less regular initial conditions.
Contribution
It introduces new energy control methods to establish global weak solutions with initial data in weighted L2 spaces and provides a new proof for discretely self-similar solutions.
Findings
01
Existence of global weak solutions with initial data in weighted L2 spaces.
02
New energy control techniques for Navier-Stokes equations.
03
Alternative proof for discretely self-similar solutions.
Abstract
We show the existence of global weak solutions of the 3D Navier-Stokes equations with initial velocity in the weighted spaces L 2 wγ , where w γ (x) = (1 + |x|) --γ and 0 < γ≤ 2, using new energy controls. As application we give a new proof of the existence of global weak discretely self-similar solutions of the 3D Navier-Stokes equations for discretely self-similar initial velocities which are locally square inte-grable.
∥Rjf∥Lwδp≤Cp,δ∥f∥Lwδp and ∥Mf∥Lwδp≤Cp,δ∥f∥Lwδp.
∥Rjf∥Lwδp≤Cp,δ∥f∥Lwδp and ∥Mf∥Lwδp≤Cp,δ∥f∥Lwδp.
∥θ∗f∥Lwδp≤Cp,δ∥f∥Lwδp∥θ∥1.
∥θ∗f∥Lwδp≤Cp,δ∥f∥Lwδp∥θ∥1.
∣θ∗f(x)∣≤∥θ∥1Mf(x)
∣θ∗f(x)∣≤∥θ∥1Mf(x)
⎩⎨⎧∂tu=Δu−(b⋅∇)u−∇q+∇⋅F∇⋅u=0,spacespace
⎩⎨⎧∂tu=Δu−(b⋅∇)u−∇q+∇⋅F∇⋅u=0,spacespace
∇q=∇(i=1∑3j=1∑3RiRj(biuj−Fi,j))
∇q=∇(i=1∑3j=1∑3RiRj(biuj−Fi,j))
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.
Full text
Weak solutions for Navier–Stokes equations with
initial data in weighted L2 spaces.
Pedro Gabriel Fernández-Dalgo111LaMME, Univ Evry, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, 91025, Evry, France 222e-mail : [email protected], [email protected] , Pierre Gilles Lemarié–Rieusset333LaMME, Univ Evry, CNRS, Université Paris-Saclay, 91025, Evry, France 444e-mail : [email protected]
Abstract
We show the existence of global weak solutions of the 3D Navier-Stokes equations with initial velocity
in the weighted spaces Lwγ2, where wγ(x)=(1+∣x∣)−γ and 0<γ≤2, using new energy controls. As
application we give a new proof of the existence of global weak discretely self-similar solutions of the 3D
Navier–Stokes equations for discretely self-similar initial velocities which are locally square integrable.
Infinite-energy weak Leray solutions to the Navier–Stokes equations were introduced by Lemarié-Rieusset
in 1999 [8] (they are presented more completely in [9] and [10]). This has allowed to show the
existence of local weak solutions for a uniformly locally square integrable initial data.
Other constructions of infinite-energy solutions for locally uniformly square integrable
initial data were given in 2006 by Basson [1] and in 2007 by Kikuchi and Seregin [7]. These
solutions allowed Jia and Sverak [6] to construct in 2014 the self-similar solutions for large
(homogeneous of degree -1) smooth data. Their result has been extended in 2016 by Lemarié-Rieusset
[10] to solutions for rough locally square integrable data. We remark that an homogeneous (of degree
-1) and locally square integrable data is automatically uniformly locally L2.
Recently, Bradshaw and Tsai [2] and Chae and Wolf [3] considered the case of solutions which are self-similar according to a discrete subgroup
of dilations. Those solutions are related to an initial data which is self-similar only for a discrete group of dilations; in contrast to the case of self-similar solutions for all dilations, such an initial data, when
locally L2, is not necessarily uniformly locally L2, therefore their
results are no consequence of constructions described by Lemarié-Rieusset in [10].
In this paper, we construct
an alternative theory to obtain infinite-energy global weak solutions for large initial data, which
include the discretely self-similar locally square integrable data. More specifically, we consider the weights
[TABLE]
with 0<γ, and the spaces
[TABLE]
Our main theorem is the following one :
Theorem 1
Let 0<γ≤2. If u0 is a divergence-free vector field such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3) and if F is a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,+∞),Lwγ2), then the Navier–Stokes equations with initial value u0
[TABLE]
has a global weak solution u such that :
∙
for every 0<T<+∞, u belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the pressure p is related to u and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
where, for every 0<T<+∞, ∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(uiuj) belongs to L4((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRjFi,j belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the map t∈[0,+∞)↦u(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,+∞) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
the solution u is suitable : there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ on (0,+∞)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
In particular, we have the energy controls
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
A key tool for proving Theorem 1 and for applying it to the study of discretely self-similar solutions is given by the following a priori estimates for an advection-diffusion problem :
Theorem 2
Let 0<γ≤2. Let 0<T<+∞. Let u0 be a divergence-free vector field such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3) and F be a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2). Let b be a time-dependent divergence free vector-field (∇⋅b=0) such that b∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
Let u be a solution of the following advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
be such that :
∙
u* belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)*
∙
the pressure p is related to u, b and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
where ∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(biuj) belongs to L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRjFi,j belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the map t∈[0,T)↦u(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ on (0,T)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
Then, we have the energy controls
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
where Cγ depends only on γ (and not on T, and not on b, u, u0 nor F).
In particular, we shall prove the following stability result :
Theorem 3
Let 0<γ≤2. Let 0<T<+∞. Let u0,n be divergence-free vector fields such that u0,n∈Lwγ2(R3) and Fn be tensors such that Fn∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2). Let bn be time-dependent divergence free vector-fields such that bn∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
Let un be solutions of the following advection-diffusion problems
[TABLE]
such that :
∙
un* belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇un belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)*
∙
the pressure pn is related to un, bn and Fn by the formula
[TABLE]
∙
the map t∈[0,T)↦un(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μn on (0,T)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
If u0,n is strongly convergent to u0,∞ in Lwγ2, if the sequence Fn is strongly convergent to F∞ in L2((0,T),Lwγ2), and if the sequence bn is bounded in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23), then there exists p∞, u∞, b∞ and an increasing sequence (nk)k∈N with values in N such that
∙
unk* converges -weakly to u∞ in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2), ∇unk converges weakly to ∇u∞ in L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
bnk* converges weakly to b∞ in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23), pnk converges weakly to p∞ in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5)+L2((0,T),Lwγ2)*
∙
unk* converges strongly to u∞ in Lloc2([0,T)×R3) : for every T0∈(0,T) and every R>0, we have*
[TABLE]
Moreover, u∞ is a solution of the advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
and is
such that :
∙
the map t∈[0,T)↦u∞(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ∞ on (0,T)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
Notations.
All along the text, Cγ is a positive constant whose value may change from line to line but which depends only on γ.
2 The weights wδ.
We consider the weights wδ=(1+∣x∣)δ1 where 0<δ and x∈R3. A very important feature of those weights is the control of their gradients :
[TABLE]
Lemma 1** (Muckenhoupt weights)**
If 0<δ<3 and 1<p<+∞, then wδ belongs to the Muckenhoupt class Ap.
**Proof : **We recall that a weight w belongs to Ap(R3) for 1<p<+∞ if and only if it satisfies the reverse Hölder inequality
[TABLE]
For all 0<R≤1 the inequality ∣x−y∣<R implies
21(1+∣x∣)≤1+∣y∣≤2(1+∣x∣), thus we can control the left
side in (3) for wδ by 4pδ.
For all R>1 and ∣x∣>10R, we have that the inequality ∣x−y∣<R implies
109(1+∣x∣)≤1+∣y∣≤1011(1+∣x∣), thus we can control the left
side in (3) for wδ by (911)pδ.
Finally, for R>1 and ∣x∣≤10R, we write
[TABLE]
The lemma is proved. ⋄
Lemma 2
If 0<δ<3 and 1<p<+∞, then the Riesz transforms Ri and the Hardy–Littlewood maximal function operator are bounded on Lwδp=Lp(wδ(x)dx) :
[TABLE]
**Proof : **
The boundedness of the Riesz transforms or of the Hardy–Littlewwod maximal function on Lp(wγdx) are basic properties of the Muckenhoupt class Ap [5].
⋄
We will use strategically the next corollary, which is specially useful
to obtain discretely self-similar solutions.
Corollary 1** (Non-increasing kernels)**
Let θ∈L1(R3) be a non-negative radial function which is radially non-increasing. Then, if 0<δ<3 and 1<p<+∞, we have, for f∈Lwδp, the inequality
[TABLE]
**Proof : **We have the well-known inequality for radial non-increasing kernels [4]
We illustrate the utility of Lemma 2 with the following corollaries:
Corollary 2
Let 0<γ<25 and 0<T<+∞. Let F be a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2). Let b be a time-dependent divergence free vector-field (∇⋅b=0) such that b∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
Let u be a solution of the following advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
*be such that :
u belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2), and the pressure q belongs to D′((0,T)×R3).
Then, the gradient of the pressure ∇q is necessarily
related to u, b and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(biuj) belongs to L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRjFi,j belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
**Proof : **
We define
[TABLE]
As 0<γ<25 we can use Lemma 2 and (2) to obtain
∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(biuj) belongs to L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRjFi,j belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
Taking the divergence in (4), we obtain Δ(q−p)=0. We take a test function α∈D(R) such that α(t)=0 for all ∣t∣≥ε, and a test function β∈D(R3); then the distribution ∇q∗(α⊗β) is well defined on (ε,T−ε)×R3.
We fix t∈(ε,T−ε) and define
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
Convolution with a function in D(R3) is a bounded operator on Lwγ2 and on Lw6γ/56/5 (as, for φ∈D(R3) we have ∣f∗φ∣≤CφMf). Thus, we may conclude from (5) that Aα,β,t∈Lwγ2+Lw6γ/56/5. If max{γ,2γ+2}<δ<5/2 , we have Aα,β,t∈Lw6δ/56/5.
In particular, Aα,β,t is a tempered distribution. As we have
[TABLE]
we find that Aα,β,t is a polynomial.
We remark that for all 1<r<+∞ and 0<δ<3, Lwδr does not contain non-trivial polynomials.
Thus, Aα,β,t=0. We then use an approximation of identity ϵ41α(ϵt)β(ϵx) and conclude that ∇(q−p)=0. ⋄
Actually, we can answer a question posed by Bradshaw and Tsai in [2] about the nature of the pressure for self-similar solutions of the Navier–Stokes equations. In effect, we have the next corollary:
Corollary 3
Let 1<γ<25 and 0<T<+∞. Let F be a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
Let u be a solution of the following problem
[TABLE]
*be such that :
u belongs to L∞([0,+∞),L2)loc and ∇u belongs to L2([0,+∞),L2)loc, and the pressure q is in D′((0,T)×R3).
We suppose that there exists λ>1 such that λ2F(λ2t,λx)=F(t,x) and λu(λ2t,λx)=u(t,x).
Then, the gradient of the pressure ∇q is necessarily
related to u and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(uiuj) belongs to L4((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) and ∑i=13∑j=13RiRjFi,j belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
**Proof : **
We shall use Corollary 2, and thus we need to show that u belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2∩L3((0,T),L3γ/23)) and ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2). In fact,
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
For ∇u, we compute
for k∈N,
[TABLE]
We may conclude that ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2), since for γ>1 we have ∑k∈Nλ(1−γ)k<+∞.
Now, we use the Sobolev embeddings described in next Lemma (Lemma 3) to get that u belongs to L2((0,T),Lw3γ6), and thus (by interpolation with L∞((0,T),Lwγ2)) to L4((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
In particular, ∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(uiuj) belongs to L4((0,T),Lw56γ6/5), since we have
[TABLE]
⋄
Lemma 3** (Sobolev embeddings)**
Let δ>0. If f∈Lwδ2 and ∇f∈Lwδ2 then f∈Lw3δ6 and
[TABLE]
**Proof : **Since both f and wδ/2 are locally in H1, we write
[TABLE]
and thus
[TABLE]
Thus, wδ/2f belongs to L6 (since H1⊂L6), or equivalently f∈Lw3δ6. ⋄
3 A priori estimates for the advection-diffusion problem.
Let 0<t0<t1<T. We take a function α∈C∞(R) which is non-decreasing, with α(t) equal to [math] for t<1/2 and equal to 1 for t>1. For 0<η<min(2t0,T−t1), we define
[TABLE]
We take as well a non-negative function ϕ∈D(R3) which is equal to 1 for ∣x∣≤1 and to [math] for ∣x∣≥2. For R>0, we define ϕR(x)=ϕ(Rx). Finally, we define, for ϵ>0, wγ,ϵ=(1+ϵ2+∣x∣2)δ1. We have αη,t0,t1(t)ϕR(x)wγ,ϵ(x)∈D((0,T)×R3) and αη,t0,t1(t)ϕR(x)wγ,ϵ(x)≥0. Thus, using the local energy balance (1) and the fact that μ≥0, we find
[TABLE]
We remark that, independently from R>1 and ϵ>0, we have (for 0<γ≤2)
[TABLE]
Moreover, we know that u belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2)∩L2((0,T),Lw3γ6) hence to L4((0,T),Lw3γ/23). Since T<+∞, we have as well u∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23). (This is the same type of integrability as required for b).
Moreover, we have pui∈Lw3γ/21 since wγp∈L2((0,T),L6/5+L2) and wγ/2u∈L2((0,T),L2∩L6). All those remarks will allow us to use dominated convergence.
We first let η go to [math]. We find that
[TABLE]
Let us define
[TABLE]
As we have
[TABLE]
we find that, when t0 and t1 are Lebesgue points of the measurable function AR,ϵ
[TABLE]
Then, by continuity, we can let t0 go to [math] and thus replace t0 by [math] in the inequality. Moreover, if we let t1 go to t, then by weak continuity,
we find that AR,ϵ(t)≤limt1→tAR,ϵ(t1), so that we may as well replace t1 by t∈(0,T). Thus we find that for every t∈(0,T), we have
[TABLE]
Thus, letting R go to +∞ and then ϵ go to [math], we find by dominated convergence that,
for every t∈(0,T), we have
[TABLE]
Now we write
[TABLE]
Writing
[TABLE]
and using the fact that w6γ/5∈A6/5 and wγ∈A2, we get
Another direct consequence is the following uniqueness result for the advection-diffusion problem with a (locally in time), bounded b :
Corollary 5
.
Let 0<γ≤2. Let 0<T<+∞. Let u0 be a divergence-free vector field such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3) and F be a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2). Let b be a time-dependent divergence free vector-field (∇⋅b=0) such that b∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23). Assume moreover that b belongs to Lt2Lx∞(K) for every compact subset K of (0,T)×R3.
Let (u1,p1) and (u2,p2) be two solutions of the following advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
be such that, for k=1 and k=2, :
∙
uk* belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇uk belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)*
∙
the pressure pk is related to uk, b and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
∙
the map t∈[0,T)↦uk(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
Then u1=u2.
**Proof : **Let v=u1−u2 and q=p1−p2. Then we have
[TABLE]
Moreover on every compact subset K of (0,T)×R3, b⊗v is in Lt2Lx2, while it belongs globally to Lt3Lw6γ/56/5. Writing, for φ,ψ∈D((0,T)×R3) such that ψ=1 on the neigborhood of the support of φ,
[TABLE]
we find that ∥q1∥L2L2≤Cφ,ψ∥ψb⊗v∥L2L2 and
[TABLE]
with
[TABLE]
Thus, we may take the scalar product of ∂tv with v and find that
[TABLE]
Thus we are under the assumptions of Theorem 2 and we may use Corollary 4 to find that v=0. ⋄
3.3 Active transportation.
We begin with the following lemma :
Lemma 4
Let α be a non-negative bounded measurable function on [0,T) such that, for two constants A,B≥0, we have
[TABLE]
If T0>0 and T1=min(T,T0,4B(A+BT0)21), we have, for every t∈[0,T1], α(t)≤2(A+BT0).
**Proof : **We write α≤1+α3. We define
[TABLE]
We have, for t∈[0,T1], α≤Φ≤Ψ. Since Ψ is C1, we may write
[TABLE]
and thus
[TABLE]
We thus find
[TABLE]
The lemma is proven. ⋄
Corollary 6
Assume that u0, u, p, F and b satisfy assumptions of Theorem 2, Assume moreover that b is controlled by u : for every t∈(0,T),
[TABLE]
Then there exists a constant Cγ≥1 such that if T0<T is such that
If s>0, σ∈R and (fn) is a sequence of functions on (0,T)×Rd such that, for all T0∈(0,T) and all φ∈D(R3)
∙
φfn* is bounded in L2((0,T0),Hs)*
∙
φ∂tfn* is bounded in L2((0,T0),Hσ)*
then there exists a subsequence (fnk) such that fnk is strongly convergent in Lloc2([0,T)×R3) : if f∞ is the limit, we have for all T0∈(0,T) and all R0>0
[TABLE]
**Proof : **With no loss of generality, we may assume that σ<min(1,s).
Define g by gn(t,x)=α(t)φ(x)fn(t,x) if t>0 and gn(t,x)=α(t)φ(x)fn(−t,x) if t<0, where α∈C∞ on (0,T), is equal to 1 on [0,T0] and equal to [math] for t>2T+T0, and φ(x)=1 on B(0,R0).
Then the support of gn is contained in [−2T+T0,2T+T0]×Suppφ.
Moreover, gn is bounded in Lt2Hs and ∂tgn is bounded in L2Hσ so that gn is bounded in Hρ(R×R3) with ρ=s+1−σs (just write (1+τ2+ξ2)s+1−σs≤((1+τ2)(1+ξ2)σ)s+1−σs((1+ξ2)s)s+1−σ1−σ).. By the Rellich lemma, we know that there is a subsequence gnk which is strongly convergent in L2(R×R3), thus a subsequence fnk which is strongly convergent in L2((0,T0)×B(0,R0)).
We then iterate this argument for an increasing sequence of times T0<T1<⋯<TN→T and an increasing sequence of radii R0<R1<⋯<RN→+∞ and finish the proof. by the classical diagonal process of Cantor. ⋄
Assume that u0,n is strongly convergent to u0,∞ in Lwγ2 and that the sequence Fn is strongly convergent to F∞ in L2((0,T),Lwγ2), and assume that the sequence bn is bounded in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23). Then, by Theorem 2 and Corollary 4, we know that un is bounded in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇un is bounded in L2((0,T),Lwγ2). In particular, writing
pn=pn,1+pn,2 with
[TABLE]
we get that pn,1 is bounded in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) and pn,2 is bounded in L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
If φ∈D(R3), we find that φun is bounded in L2((0,T),H1)
and, writing
[TABLE]
φ∂tun is bounded in L2L2+L2W−1,6/5+L2H−1⊂L2((0,T),H−2). Thus, by Lemma 6, there exists u∞ and an increasing sequence (nk)k∈N with values in N such that
unk converges strongly to u∞ in Lloc2([0,T)×R3) : for every T0∈(0,T) and every R>0, we have
[TABLE]
As un is bounded in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇un is bounded in L2((0,T),Lwγ2), the convergence of unk to u∞ in D′((0,T)×R3) implies that unk converges *-weakly to u∞ in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇unk converges weakly to ∇u∞ in L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
By Banach–Alaoglu’s theorem, we may assume that there exists b∞ such that bnk converges weakly to b∞ in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
In particular bnk,iunk,j is weakly convergent in (L6/5L6/5)loc and thus in D′((0,T)×R3); as it is bounded in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5), it is weakly convergent in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) to b∞,iu∞,j. Let
[TABLE]
As the Riesz transforms are bounded on Lw56γ6/5 and on Lwγ2, we find that pnk,1 is weakly convergent in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5) to p∞,1 and that pnk,2 is strongly convergent in L2((0,T),Lwγ2) to p∞,2.
In particular, we find that in D′((0,T)×R3)
[TABLE]
In particular, ∂tu∞ is locally in L2H−2, and thus u∞ has representative such that t↦u∞(t,.) is continuous from [0,T) to D′(R3) and coincides with u∞(0,.)+∫0t∂tu∞ds. In D′((0,T)×R3), we have that
[TABLE]
Thus, u∞(0,.)=u0,∞, and u∞ is a solution of (AD∞).
Next, we define
[TABLE]
As un is bounded in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇un is bounded in L2((0,T),Lwγ2), it is bounded in L2((0,T),Lw3γ/26) and by interpolation with L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) it is bounded in L10/3((0,T),Lw5γ/310/3). Thus, unk is locally bounded in L10/3L10/3 and locally strongly convergent in L2L2; it is then strongly convergent in L3L3. Thus, Ank is convergent in D′((0,T)×R3) to
[TABLE]
In particular, A∞=limnk→+∞∣∇unk∣2+μnk. If Φ∈D((0,T)×R3) is non-negative, we have
[TABLE]
(since Φ∇unk is weakly convergent to Φ∇u∞ in L2L2). Thus, there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ∞ on (0,T)×R3 such that A∞=∣∇u∞∣2+μ∞, i.e. such that
we see that unk(t,.) is convergent to u∞(t,.) in D′(R3), hence is weakly convergent in Lloc2 (as it is bounded in Lwγ2), so that :
[TABLE]
Similarly, as ∇unk is weakly convergent in L2Lwγ2, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, letting R go to +∞ and then ϵ go to [math], we find by dominated convergence that,
for every t∈(0,T), we have
[TABLE]
Letting t go to [math], we find
[TABLE]
On the other hand, we know that u∞ is weakly continuous in Lwγ2 and thus we have
[TABLE]
This gives ∥u0,∞∥Lwγ22=limt→0∥u∞(t,.)∥Lwγ22, which allows to turn the weak convergence into a strong convergence. Theorem 3 is proven. ⋄
5 Solutions of the Navier–Stokes problem with initial data in Lwγ2.
We now prove Theorem 1. The idea is to approximate the problem by a Navier–Stokes problem in L2, then use the a priori estimates (Theorem 2) and the stability theorem (Theorem 3) to find a solution to the Navier–Stokes problem with data in Lwγ2).
5.1 Approximation by square integrable data.
Lemma 7** (Leray’s projection operator)**
Let 0<δ<3 and 1<r<+∞. If v is a vector field on R3 such that v∈Lwδr, then there exists a unique decompostion
[TABLE]
such that
∙
vσ∈Lwδr* and ∇⋅vσ=0.*
∙
v∇∈Lwδr* and ∇∧v∇=0.*
We shall write vσ=Pv, where P is Leray’s projection operator.
Similarly, if v is a distribution vector field of the type v=∇⋅G with G∈Lwδr then there exists a unique decompostion
[TABLE]
such that
∙
there exists H∈Lwδr such that vσ=∇⋅H and ∇⋅vσ=0.
∙
there exists q∈Lwδr such that v∇=∇q (and thus ∇∧v∇=0).
We shall still write vσ=Pv. Moreover, the function q is given by
[TABLE]
**Proof : **As wδ∈Ar the Riesz transforms are bounded on Lwδr.
Using the identity
[TABLE]
we find (if the decomposition exists) that
[TABLE]
This proves the uniqueness. By linearity, we just have to prove that v=0⟹v∇=0. We have Δv∇=0, and thus v∇ is harmonic; as it belongs to S′, we find that it is a polynomial. But a polynomial which belongs to Lwδr must be equal to [math].
Similarly, if v∇=∇q, then Δq=∇⋅v∇=∇⋅v=0; thus q is harmonic and belongs to Lwδr, hence q=0.
For the existence, it is enough to check that v∇,i=−∑j=13RiRjvj in the first case and v∇=∇q with q=∑i=13∑j=13RiRj(Gi,j) in the second case fulfill the conclusions of the lemma. ⋄
Lemma 8
Let 0<γ≤2. Let u0 be a divergence-free vector field such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3) and F be a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,+∞),Lwγ2). Let ϕ∈D(R3) be a non-negative function which is equal to 1 for ∣x∣≤1 and to [math] for ∣x∣≥2. For R>0, we define ϕR(x)=ϕ(Rx), u0,R=P(ϕRu0) and FR=ϕRF. Then u0,R is a divergence-free square integrable vector field and limR→+∞∥u0,R−u0∥Lwγ2=0. Similarly, FR belongs to L2L2 and limR→+∞∥FR−F∥L2((0,+∞),Lwγ2)=0.
**Proof : **By dominated convergence, we have limR→+∞∥ϕRu0−u0∥Lwγ2=0. We conclude by writing u0,R−u0=P(ϕRu0−u0).
⋄
5.2 Leray’s mollification.
We want to solve the Navier–Stokes equations with initial value u0 :
[TABLE]
We begin with Leray’s method [11] for solving the problem in L2 :
[TABLE]
The idea of Leray is to mollify the non-linearity by replacing uR⋅∇ by (uR∗θϵ)⋅∇, where θ(x)=ϵ31θ(ϵx), θ∈D(R3), θ is non-negative and radially decreasing and ∫θdx=1. We thus solve the problem
[TABLE]
The classical result of Leray states that the problem (NSR,ϵ) is well-posed :
Lemma 9
Let v0∈L2 be a divergence-free vector field. Let G∈L2((0,+∞),L2). Then
the problem
[TABLE]
has a unique solution vϵ in L∞((0,+∞),L2)∩L2((0,+∞),H˙1). Moreover, this solution belongs to C([0,+∞),L2).
We use Lemma 9 and find a solution uR,ϵ to the problem (NSR,ϵ).
Then we check that uR,ϵ fulfills the assumptions of Theorem 2 and of Corollary 6 :
∙
uR,ϵ belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇uR,ϵ belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the map t∈[0,+∞)↦uR,ϵ(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,+∞) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
on (0,T)×R3, uR,ϵ fulfills the energy equality :
[TABLE]
with bR,ϵ=uR,ϵ∗θϵ.
∙
bR,ϵ is controlled by uR,ϵ : for every t∈(0,T),
[TABLE]
Thus, we know that, for every time T0 such that
[TABLE]
we have
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Moreover, we have that
[TABLE]
so that
[TABLE]
Let Rn→+∞ and ϵn→0. Let u0,n=u0,Rn, Fn=FRn, bn=bRn,ϵn and un=uRn,ϵn. We may then apply Theorem 3, since u0,n is strongly convergent to u0 in Lwγ2, Fn is strongly convergent to F in L2((0,T0),Lwγ2), and the sequence bn is bounded in L3((0,T0),Lw3γ/23). Thus there exists p, u, b and an increasing sequence (nk)k∈N with values in N such that
∙
unk converges *-weakly to u in L∞((0,T0),Lwγ2), ∇unk converges weakly to ∇u in L2((0,T0),Lwγ2)
∙
bnk converges weakly to b in L3((0,T0),Lw3γ/23), pnk converges weakly to p in L3((0,T0),Lw56γ6/5)+L2((0,T0),Lwγ2)
∙
unk converges strongly to u in Lloc2([0,T0)×R3).
Moreover, u is a solution of the advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
and is
such that :
∙
the map t∈[0,T0)↦u(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T0) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ on (0,T0)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
Finally, as bn=θϵn∗(un−u)+θϵn∗u, we see that bnk is strongly convergent to u in Lloc3([0,T0)×R3), so that b=u : thus, u is a solution of the Navier–Stokes problem on (0,T0). (It is easy to check that
[TABLE]
as ui,nkuj,nk is weakly convergent to uiuj in
L4((0,T0),Lw56γ6/5) and w56γ∈A6/5).
In order to finish the proof, we shall use the scaling properties of the Navier–Stokes equations : if λ>0, then u is a solution of the Cauchy initial value problem for the Navier–Stokes equations on (0,T) with initial value u0 and forcing tensor F if and only if uλ(t,x)=λu(λ2t,λx) is a solution of the Navier–Stokes equations on (0,T/λ2) with initial value u0,λ(x)=λu0(λx) and forcing tensor Fλ(t,x)=λ2F(λ2t,λx).
We take λ>1 and for n∈N we consider the Navier–Stokes problem with initial value v0,n=λnu0(λn⋅) and forcing tensor Fn=λ2nF(λ2n⋅,λn⋅). Then we have seen that we can find a solution vn on (0,Tn), with
[TABLE]
Of course, we have vn(t,x)=λnun(λ2nt,λnx) where un is a solution of the Navier–Stokes equations on (0,λ2nTn) with initial value u0 and forcing tensor F
Lemma 10
[TABLE]
**Proof : **We have
[TABLE]
We have
[TABLE]
as γ≤2 and we have, by dominated convergence,
[TABLE]
Similarly, we have
[TABLE]
Thus, limn→+∞λ2nTn=+∞.
⋄
Now, for a given T>0, if λ2nTn>T for n≥nT, then un is a solution of the Navier-Stokes problem on (0,T). Let wn(t,x)=λnTun(λ2nTt,λnTx). For n≥nT, wn is a solution of the Navier-Stokes problem on (0,λ−2nTT) with initial value v0,nT and forcing tensor FnT.
As λ−2nTT≤TnT, we have
Thus, we have a uniform control of un and of ∇un on (0,T) for n≥nT. We may then apply the Rellich lemma (Lemma 6) and Theorem 3 to find a subsequence unk that converges to a global solution of the Navier–Stokes equations. Theorem 1 is proven. ⋄
6 Solutions of the advection-diffusion problem with initial data in Lwγ2.
The proof of Theorem 1 on the Navier–Stokes problem can be easily adapted to the case of the advection-diffusion problem :
Theorem 4
Let 0<γ≤2. Let 0<T<+∞. Let u0 be a divergence-free vector field such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3) and F be a tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2). Let b be a time-dependent divergence free vector-field (∇⋅b=0) such that b∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
Then the advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
has a solution u such that :
∙
u* belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)*
∙
the pressure p is related to u, b and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
∙
the map t∈[0,T)↦u(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ on (0,T)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
**Proof : **Again, we define ϕR(x)=ϕ(Rx), u0,R=P(ϕRu0) and FR=ϕRF. Moreover, we define bR=P(ϕRb). We then solve the mollified problem
[TABLE]
for which we easily find a unique solution uR,ϵ in L∞((0,T),L2)∩L2((0,T),H˙1). Moreover, this solution belongs to C([0,T),L2).
Again, uR,ϵ fulfills the assumptions of Theorem 2 :
∙
uR,ϵ belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇uR,ϵ belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the map t∈[0,T)↦uR,ϵ(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,T) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
Let Rn→+∞ and ϵn→0. Let u0,n=u0,Tn, Fn=FRn, bn=bRn,ϵn and un=uRn,ϵn. We may then apply Theorem 3, since u0,n is strongly convergent to u0 in Lwγ2, Fn is strongly convergent to F in L2((0,T),Lwγ2), and the sequence bn is strongly convergent to b in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23). Thus there exists p, u and an increasing sequence (nk)k∈N with values in N such that
∙
unk converges *-weakly to u in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2), ∇unk converges weakly to ∇u in L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
pnk converges weakly to p in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5)+L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
unk converges strongly to u in Lloc2([0,T)×R3).
We then easily finish the proof. ⋄
7 Application to the study of λ-discretely self-similar solutions
We may now apply our results to the study of λ-discretely self-similar solutions for the Navier–Stokes equations.
Definition 1
Let u0∈Lloc2(R3). We say that u0 is a λ-discretely self-similar function
(λ-DSS) if there exists λ>1 such that λu0(λx)=u0.
A vector field u∈Lloc2([0,+∞)×R3) is λ-DSS if there exists λ>1 such that λu(λ2t,λx)=u(t,x).
A forcing tensor F∈Lloc2([0,+∞)×R3) is λ-DSS if there exists λ>1 such that λ2F(λ2t,λx)=F(t,x).
We shall speak of self-similarity if u0, u or F are λ-DSS for every λ>1.
Examples :
∙
Let γ>1 and λ>1. Then, for two positive constants Aγ,λ and Bγ,λ, we have :
if u0∈Lloc2(R3) is λ-DSS, then u0∈Lwγ2 and
[TABLE]
∙
u0∈Lloc2 is self-similar if and only if it is of the form u0=∣x∣w0(∣x∣x) with w0∈L2(S2).
∙
F belongs to L2((0,+∞),Lwγ2) with γ>1 and is self-similar if and only if it is of the form F(t,x)=t1F0(tx) with ∫∣F0(x)∣2∣x∣1dx<+∞.
Proof :
∙
If u0 is λ-DSS and if k∈Z we have
[TABLE]
with ∑k∈Z(1+λk)γλk<+∞ for γ>1.
∙
If u0 is self-similar, we have u0(x)=∣x∣1u0(∣x∣x). From this equality, we find that, for λ>1
[TABLE]
∙
If F is self-similar, then it is of the form F(t,x)=t1F0(tx). Moreover, we have
[TABLE]
with Cγ=∫0+∞(1+θ)γ1θdθ<+∞. ⋄
In this section, we are going to give a new proof of the results of Chae and Wolf [3] and Bradshaw and Tsai [2] on the existence of λ-DSS solutions of the Navier–Stokes problem (and of Jia and Šverák [6] for self-similar solutions) :
Theorem 5
Let 4/3<γ≤2 and λ>1. If u0 is a λ-DSS divergence-free vector field (such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3)) and if F is a λ-DSS tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that F∈Lloc2([0,+∞)×R3) , then the Navier–Stokes equations with initial value u0
[TABLE]
has a global weak solution u such that :
•
u* is a λ-DSS vector field*
∙
for every 0<T<+∞, u belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇u belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the map t∈[0,+∞)↦u(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,+∞) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
∙
the solution u is suitable : there exists a non-negative locally finite measure μ on (0,+∞)×R3 such that
[TABLE]
7.1 The linear problem.
Following Chae and Wolf, we consider an approximation of the problem that is consistent with the scaling properties of the equations : let θ be a non-negative and radially decreasing function in D(R3) with ∫θdx=1; We define θϵ,t(x)=(ϵt)31θ(ϵtx). We then will study the “mollified” problem
[TABLE]
and begin with the linearized problem
[TABLE]
Lemma 11
Let 1<γ≤2. Let λ>1 Let u0 be a λ-DSS divergence-free vector field such that u0∈Lwγ2(R3) and F be a λ-DSS tensor F(t,x)=(Fi,j(t,x))1≤i,j≤3 such that, for every T>0, F∈L2((0,T),Lwγ2). Let b be a λ-DSS time-dependent divergence free vector-field (∇⋅b=0) such that, for every T>0, b∈L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23).
Then the advection-diffusion problem
[TABLE]
has a unique solution v such that :
∙
for every positive T, v belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇v belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
the pressure p is related to v, b and F through the Riesz transforms Ri=−Δ∂i by the formula
[TABLE]
∙
the map t∈[0,+∞)↦v(t,.) is weakly continuous from [0,+∞) to Lwγ2, and is strongly continuous at t=0 :
[TABLE]
This solution v is a λ-DSS vector field.
**Proof : **As we have ∣b(t,.)∗θϵ,t∣≤Mb(t,.) and thus
[TABLE]
we see that we can use Theorem 4 to get a solution v on (0,T).
As clearly b∗θϵ,t belongs to Lt2Lx∞(K) for every compact subset K of (0,T)×R3, we can use Corollary 5 to see that v is unique.
Let w(t,x)=λ1v(λ2t,λx). As b∗θϵ,t is still λ-DSS, we see that w is solution of (LNSϵ) on (0,T), so that w=v. This means that v is λ-DSS. ⋄
7.2 The mollified Navier–Stokes equations.
The solution
v provided by Lemma 11 belongs to L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23) (as v belongs to L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇v belongs to L2((0,T),Lwγ2)). Thus we have a mapping Lϵ:b↦v which is defined from
[TABLE]
to XT,γ by Lϵ(b)=v.
Lemma 12
For 4/3<γ, XT,γ is a Banach space for the equivalent norms ∥b∥L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23) and ∥b∥L3((0,T/λ2),×B(0,λ1)).
**Proof : **We have
[TABLE]
and , for k∈N,
[TABLE]
We may conclude, since for γ>4/3 we have ∑k∈Nλk(2−23γ)<+∞.
Lemma 13
For 4/3<γ≤2, the mapping Lϵ is continuous and compact on XT,γ.
**Proof : **Let bn be a bounded sequence in XT,γ and let vn=Lϵ(bn).
We remark that the sequence bn(t,.)∗θϵ,t is bounded in XT,γ.
Thus, by Theorem 2 and Corollary 4, the sequence vn is bounded in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇vn is bounded in L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
We now use Theorem 3 and get that then there exists q∞, v∞, B∞ and an increasing sequence (nk)k∈N with values in N such that
∙
vnk converges *-weakly to v∞ in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2), ∇vnk converges weakly to ∇v∞ in L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
bnk∗θϵ,t converges weakly to B∞ in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23), ,
∙
the associated pressures qnk converge weakly to q∞ in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5)+L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
vnk converges strongly to v∞ in Lloc2([0,T)×R3) : for every T0∈(0,T) and every R>0, we have
[TABLE]
As wγvn is bounded in L∞((0,T),L2) and in L2((0,T),L6), it is bounded in L10/3((0,T)×R3). The strong convergence of vnk in Lloc2([0,T)×R3) then implies the strong convergence of vnk in Lloc3((0,T)×R3).
Moreover, v∞ is still λ-DSS (a property that is stable under weak limits).We find that v∞∈XT,γ and that
[TABLE]
This proves that Lϵ is compact.
If we assume moreover that bn is convergent to b∞ in XT,γ, then necessarily we have B∞=b∞∗θϵ,t, and v∞=Lϵ(b∞). Thus, the relatively compact sequence vn can have only one limit point; thus it must be convergent. This proves that Lϵ is continuous. ⋄
Lemma 14
Let 4/3<γ≤2. If, for some μ∈[0,1], v is a solution of v=μLϵ(v) then
[TABLE]
where the constant Cu0,F,γ,T depends only on u0, F, γ and T (but not on μ nor on ϵ).
**Proof : **We have v=μw; with
[TABLE]
Multiplying by μ, we find that
[TABLE]
We then use Corollary 6. We choose T0∈(0,T) such that
[TABLE]
Then, as
[TABLE]
we know that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
In particular, we have
[TABLE]
As v is λ-DSS, we can go back from T0 to T.
⋄
Lemma 15
Let 4/3<γ≤2. There is at least one solution uϵ of the equation uϵ=Lϵ(uϵ).
**Proof : **Obvious due to the Leray–Schauder principle (and the Schaefer theorem), since Lϵ is continuous and compact and since we have uniform a priori estimates for the fixed points of μLϵ for 0≤μ≤1. ⋄
We may now finish the proof of Theorem 5. We consider the solutions uϵ of uϵ=Lϵ(uϵ).
By Lemma 14, uϵ is bounded in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23), and so is uϵ∗θϵ,t. We then know, by Theorem 2 and Corollary 4, that the familly uϵ is bounded in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2) and ∇uϵ is bounded in L2((0,T),Lwγ2).
We now use Theorem 3 and get that then there exists p, u, B and a decreasing sequence (ϵk)k∈N (converging to [math]) with values in (0,+∞) such that
∙
uϵk converges *-weakly to u in L∞((0,T),Lwγ2), ∇uϵk converges weakly to ∇u in L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
uϵk∗θϵk,t converges weakly to B in L3((0,T),Lw3γ/23)
∙
the associated pressures pϵk converge weakly to p in L3((0,T),Lw56γ6/5)+L2((0,T),Lwγ2)
∙
uϵk converges strongly to u in Lloc2([0,T)×R3).
Moreover we easily see that B=u. Indeed, we have that u∗θϵ,t converges strongly in Lloc2((0,T)×R3) as ϵ goes to [math] (since it is bounded by Mu and converges, for each fixed t, strongly in Lloc2(R3)); moreover, we have ∣(u−uϵ)∗θϵ,t∣≤Mu−uϵ, so that the strong convergence of uϵk to u is kept by convolution with θϵ,t as far as we work on compact subsets of (0,T)×R3 (and thus don’t allow t to go to [math]).
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] A. Basson, Solutions spatialement homogènes adaptées des équations de Navier–Stokes , Thèse, Université d’Évry, 2006.
2[2] Z. Bradshaw and T.P. Tsai, Discretely self-similar solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations with data in L loc 2 subscript superscript 𝐿 2 loc L^{2}_{\rm loc} , to appear in Analysis and PDE.
3[3] D. Chae and J. Wolf, Existence of discretely self-similar solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations for initial value in L loc 2 ( ℝ 3 ) subscript superscript 𝐿 2 loc superscript ℝ 3 L^{2}_{\rm loc}(\mathbb{R}^{3}) , Ann. Inst. H. Poincaré Anal. Non Linéaire 35 (2018), 1019–1039..
5[5] L. Grafakos, Modern harmonic analysis (2nd ed.) , Springer, 2009.
6[6] H. Jia and V. Šverák, Local-in-space estimates near initial time for weak solutions of the N avier- S tokes equations and forward self-similar solutions , Invent. Math. 196 2014, 233–265.
7[7] N. Kikuchi and G. Seregin, Weak solutions to the Cauchy problem for the Navier–Stokes equations satisfying the local energy inequality , in Nonlinear equations and spectral theory. Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. Ser. 2, 220, M.S. Birman and N.N. Uraltseva eds., 2007, 141–164.
8[8] P.G. Lemarié–Rieusset, Solutions faibles d’énergie infinie pour les équations de Navier–Stokes dans ℝ 3 superscript ℝ 3 \mathbb{R}^{3} , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Serie I. 328 (1999), 1133–1138.