Citation: Joseph L. Shomberg. Well-posedness and global attractors for a non-isothermal viscous relaxationof nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard equations[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(2): 102-136. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.2.102
[1] | Jean De Dieu Mangoubi, Mayeul Evrard Isseret Goyaud, Daniel Moukoko . Pullback attractor for a nonautonomous parabolic Cahn-Hilliard phase-field system. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 22037-22066. doi: 10.3934/math.20231123 |
[2] | Dieunel DOR . On the modified of the one-dimensional Cahn-Hilliard equation with a source term. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14672-14695. doi: 10.3934/math.2022807 |
[3] | Aymard Christbert Nimi, Daniel Moukoko . Global attractor and exponential attractor for a Parabolic system of Cahn-Hilliard with a proliferation term. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 1383-1399. doi: 10.3934/math.2020095 |
[4] | Pierluigi Colli, Gianni Gilardi, Jürgen Sprekels . Distributed optimal control of a nonstandard nonlocal phase field system. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(3): 225-260. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.225 |
[5] | Hyun Geun Lee . A mass conservative and energy stable scheme for the conservative Allen–Cahn type Ohta–Kawasaki model for diblock copolymers. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 6719-6731. doi: 10.3934/math.2025307 |
[6] | Alain Miranville . The Cahn–Hilliard equation and some of its variants. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(3): 479-544. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.2.479 |
[7] | Narcisse Batangouna . A robust family of exponential attractors for a time semi-discretization of the Ginzburg-Landau equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 1399-1415. doi: 10.3934/math.2022082 |
[8] | Harald Garcke, Kei Fong Lam . Global weak solutions and asymptotic limits of a Cahn–Hilliard–Darcy system modelling tumour growth. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(3): 318-360. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.3.318 |
[9] | Xiaoxia Wang, Jinping Jiang . The pullback attractor for the 2D g-Navier-Stokes equation with nonlinear damping and time delay. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 26650-26664. doi: 10.3934/math.20231363 |
[10] | Grace Noveli Belvy Louvila, Armel Judice Ntsokongo, Franck Davhys Reval Langa, Benjamin Mampassi . A conserved Caginalp phase-field system with two temperatures and a nonlinear coupling term based on heat conduction. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 14485-14507. doi: 10.3934/math.2023740 |
Inside a bounded domain (container) Ω⊂R3, we consider a phase separation model for a binary solution (e.g. a cooling alloy),
ϕt=∇⋅[κ(ϕ)∇μ], |
where ϕ is the order-parameter (the relative difference of the two phases),κ is the mobility function (which we set κ≡1 throughout this article),and μ is the chemical potential (the first variation of the free-energy E with respect to ϕ).In the classical model,
μ=−Δϕ+F′(ϕ)andE(ϕ)=∫Ω(12|∇ϕ|2+F(ϕ))dx, |
where F describes the density of potential energy in Ω (e.g. the double-well potential F(s)=(1−s2)2).
Recently the nonlocal free-energy functional appears in the literature [13],
E(ϕ)=∫Ω∫Ω14J(x−y)(ϕ(x)−ϕ(y))2dxdy+∫ΩF(ϕ)dx, |
hence,the chemical potential is,μ=aϕ−J∗ϕ+F′(ϕ), where
a(x)=∫ΩJ(x−y)dyand(J∗ϕ)(x)=∫ΩJ(x−y)ϕ(y)dy. |
In this article we consider the following problems: for α>0,δ>0,and ε>0 the relaxation Problem Pα,ε is,given T>0 and (ϕ0,θ0)tr, find (ϕ+,θ+)tr satisfying
ϕ+t=Δμ+ in Ω×(0,T) | (1.1) |
μ+=aϕ+−J∗ϕ++F′(ϕ+)+αϕ+t−δθ+ in Ω×(0,T) | (1.2) |
εθ+t−Δθ+=−δϕ+t in Ω×(0,T) | (1.3) |
∂nμ+=0 on Γ×(0,T) | (1.4) |
∂nθ+=0 on Γ×(0,T) | (1.5) |
ϕ+(x,0)=ϕ0(x) at Ω×{0} | (1.6) |
θ+(x,0)=θ0(x) at Ω×{0}. | (1.7) |
The main focus of this article is to examine the the asymptotic behavior of solutions to Problem Pα,ε,via global attractors,and the regularity of these attractors.For ease of presentation,throughout we assume there is δ0>0 so that δ∈(0,δ0],and also (α,ε)∈(0,1]×(0,1].
Let us now give some preliminary words on the motivation for using nonlocal diffusion.First,in [2,Equation (0.2)] the nonlocal diffusion terms aϕ−J∗ϕ appear as,
∫ΩJ(x−y)(ϕ(x,t)−ϕ(y,t))dy, |
i.e. a(x)=J∗1.Heuristically,this integral term "takes into account the individuals arriving at or leaving position x from other places."In this setting,the term a(x)≥0 is a factor of how many individuals arrive at position x.Since the integration only takes place over Ω, individuals are not entering nor exiting the domain.Hence,this representation is faithful to the desired mass conservation law we typically associate with Neumann boundary conditions. Although Neumann boundary conditions for the chemical potential μ make sense from the physical point of view of mass conservation,it is not necessarily true that the interface between the two phases is always orthogonal to the boundary,which is implied by the boundary condition ∂nϕ=0 which commonly appears in the literature. This is partially alleviated by using nonlocal diffusion on ϕ.
We report an important observation (cf. [12,Equations (2.2)-(2.3)]).
Remark 1.1.Once we have determined the values of ϕ(t) and θ(t) for any value t=t∗,then the value of the chemical potential μ can be found by solving the boundary value problem (e.g. we illustrate with Problem Pα,ε),
μ(t∗)−αΔμ(t∗)=aϕ(t∗)−J∗ϕ(t∗)+F′(ϕ(t∗))−δθ(t∗)in Ω,∂nμ(t∗)=0on Γ. |
There is obvious motivation already in the literature to investigate Problem Pα,ε from the point of view of a singular limit of a Caginalp type phase-field system (cf.[9,Equations (1.1)-(1.3)],[10,Equations (1.1)-(1.3)] and [21]).Of the non-isothermal,nonlocal Allen-Cahn system,
{αϕt+aϕ−J∗ϕ+F′(ϕ)=δθ ε1θt−Δθ=−δϕt, | (1.8) |
with α>0,δ>0,and ε1>0, the singular limit ε1→0+ formally recovers the following isothermal,viscous,nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard equation,
ϕt−Δ(aϕ−J∗ϕ+F′(ϕ)+αϕt)=0. | (1.9) |
Equation (1.9) in the case where F is a singular (logarithmic) potential was studied in [11]. We should also notice that when we iterate this procedure to an appropriate non-isothermal version of (1.9),the resulting system is equivalent to (1.9). Indeed,when we consider the system,
{ϕt=Δμμ=aϕ−J∗ϕ+F′(ϕ)+αϕt−δθ ε2θt−Δθ=−δϕt, |
the formal limit ε2→0+ yields the isothermal,viscous,nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard equation,
φt=Δ(aϕ−J∗ϕ+F′(ϕ)+βφt), |
where
β=α1+δ2andφ(t)=ϕ((1+δ2)t). |
Moreover,these relations effectively mean speeding up time by a factor of 1+δ2 is equivalent to `loosening' the viscosity by the same factor (in the sense that the strong damping term has a weaker affect).
Finally,we now mention that (cf. [19]) the term −δϕt could be thought of as the linearization ddtG(ϕ) for some appropriate function G. In this case the internal energy is nonlinear in the order parameter θ; i.e.,e:=θ+G(ϕ).
The first goal of this article concerns determining the global well-posedness of the model problem Problem Pα,ε. Second,we wish to determine the asymptotic behavior of the solutions to Problem Pα,ε up to the existence of global attractors (or universal attractors) for appropriate α and ε.
The main points of this article are as follows:
• For Problem Pα,ε we establish (global) well-posedness of weak solutions using minimal assumptions on the nonlinear term F.
• The weak solutions generate a strongly continuous one-parameter family of solution operators; i.e.,a semigroup,which in turn admits a bounded absorbing set and certain compactness properties. Consequently the associated dynamical system is gradient.
• The semigroup also admits a global attractor.We show the global attractor is bounded in a more regular space with √αμ∈L∞(0,∞;H2(Ω)). Each of these properties hold for every α∈(0,1] and ε∈(0,1].
The next section provides the functional framework behind Problem Pα,ε.
Now we detail some preliminaries that will be applied to both problems.To begin,define the spaces H:=L2(Ω) and V:=H1(Ω) with norms denoted by,‖⋅‖ and ‖⋅‖V,respectively. Otherwise,we write the norm of the Banach space X with ‖⋅‖X.The inner-product in H is denoted by (⋅,⋅).Denote the dual space of V by V′,and the dual paring in V′×V is denoted by ⟨⋅,⋅⟩.For every ψ∈V′,we denote by ⟨ψ⟩ the average of ψ over Ω,that is,
⟨ψ⟩:=1|Ω|⟨ψ,1⟩, |
where |Ω| is the Lebesgue measure of Ω.Throughout,we denote by ˆψ:=ψ−⟨ψ⟩ and for future reference,observe ⟨ˆψ⟩=⟨ψ−⟨ψ⟩⟩=0.We will refer to the following norm in V′,which is equivalent to the usual one,
‖ψ‖2V′=‖A−1/2N(ψ−⟨ψ⟩)‖2+⟨ψ⟩2. |
Define the space L20(Ω):={ϕ∈L2(Ω):⟨ϕ⟩=0}.Let AN=−Δ:L20(Ω)→L20(Ω) with domain D(AN)={ψ∈H2(Ω):∂nψ=0 on Γ} denote the "Neumann-Laplace" operator.Of course the operator AN generates a bounded analytic semigroup,denoted e−ANt,and the operator is nonnegative and self-adjoint on L2(Ω). Recall,the domain D(AN) is dense in H2(Ω).Further,define V0:={ψ∈V:⟨ψ⟩=0},and V′0:={ψ∈V′:⟨ψ⟩=0}.Then AN:V→V′,AN∈L(V,V′),is defined by,for all u,v∈V,
⟨ANu,v⟩=∫Ω∇u⋅∇vdx. |
It is well known that the restriction AN∣V0 maps V0 to V′0 isomorphically,and the inverse map N=A−1N:V′0→V0, is defined by,for all ψ∈V′0 and f∈V0
ANNψ=ψ,NANf=f. |
Additionally,these maps satisfy the relations,for all u∈V0 and v,w∈V′0,
⟨ANu,Nv⟩=⟨u,v⟩,⟨v,Nw⟩=⟨w,Nv⟩. | (2.1) |
The Sobolev space V is endowed with the norm,
‖ψ‖2V:=‖∇ψ‖2+⟨ψ⟩2. | (2.2) |
Denote by λΩ>0 the constant in the Poincaré-Wirtinger inequality,
‖ψ−⟨ψ⟩‖≤√λΩ‖∇ψ‖. | (2.3) |
Whence,for cΩ:=max{λΩ,1},there holds,for all ψ∈V,
‖ψ‖2≤λΩ‖∇ψ‖2+⟨ψ⟩2≤cΩ‖ψ‖2V. | (2.4) |
For each m≥0,α>0,and ε>0 define the following energy phase-space for Problem Pα,ε,
Hα, εm:={ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr∈H×H:|⟨ϕ⟩|,|⟨θ⟩|≤m}, |
which is Hilbert when endowed with the α,ε-dependent norm whose square is given by,
‖ζ‖ 2Hα, εm:=‖ϕ‖2V′+α‖ϕ‖2+ε‖θ‖2. |
When we are concerned with the dynamical system associated with Problem Pα,ε,we will utilize the following metric space
Xα,εm:={ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr∈Hα,εm:F(ϕ)∈L1(Ω)}, |
endowed with the metric
dXα,εm(ζ1,ζ2):=‖ζ1−ζ2‖Hα,εm+|∫ΩF(ϕ1)dx−∫ΩF(ϕ2)dx|1/2. |
We also define the more regular phase-space for Problem Pα,ε,
Vα,εm:={ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr∈V×V:|⟨ϕ⟩|,|⟨θ⟩|≤m}, |
with the norm whose square is given by,‖ζ‖2Vα,εm:=‖ϕ‖2+α‖ϕ‖2V+ε‖θ‖2V.
The following assumptions on J and F are based on [7, 11]:
(H1) J∈W1,1(R3),J(−x)=J(x),and a(x):=∫ΩJ(x−y)dy>0 a.e. in Ω.
(H2) F∈C2,1loc(R) and there exists c0>0 such that,for all s∈R,
F″(s)+infx∈Ωα(x)≥c0. |
(H3) There exists c1>12‖J‖L1(R3) and c2∈R such that,for all s∈R,
F(s)≥c1s2−c2. |
(H4) There exists c3>0,c4≥0, and p∈(1,2] such that,for all s∈R,
|F′(s)|p≤c3|F(s)|+c4. |
(H5) There exist c5,c6>0, and q>0 such that,for all s∈R,
F″(s)+infx∈Ωα(x)≥c5|s|2q−c6. |
Let us make some remarks and report some important consequences of these assumptions. From [5,Remark 2]: assumption (H2) implies that the potential F is a quadratic perturbation of a (strictly) convex function. Indeed,if we set a∗:=‖a‖L∞(Ω),then F can be represented as
F(s)=G(s)−a∗2s2, | (2.5) |
with G∈C2(R) being strictly convex,since G″≥c0.With (H3),for each m≥0 there are constants c7,c8,c9,c10>0 (with c8 and c9 depending on m and F) such that,
F(s)−c7≤c8(s−m)2+F′(s)(s−m), | (2.6) |
12|F′(s)|(1+|s|)≤F′(s)(s−m)+c9, | (2.7) |
and
|F(s)|−c10≤|F′(s)|(1+|s|). | (2.8) |
The last inequality appears in [12,page 8]. Withthe positivity condition (H3),it follows that,for all s∈R,
|F′(s)|≤c3|F(s)|+c4. | (2.9) |
A word of notation: In many calculations,functional notation indicating dependence on the variable t is dropped; for example,we will write ψ in place of ψ(t). Throughout the article,C>0 will denote a \emph{generic} constant,while Q:Rd+→R+ will denote a \emph{generic} increasing function in each of the d components. Unless explicitly stated,all of these generic terms will be independent of the parameters α, δ, ε,T, and m. Finally,throughout we will use the following abbreviations
cJ:=‖J‖L1(Ω)anddJ:=‖∇J‖L1(Ω). | (2.10) |
Definition 3.1. ForT>0,δ0>0,δ∈(0,δ0],(α,ε)∈(0,1]×(0,1],and ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈H×H with F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω),we say that ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr is a weak solution of Problem Pα,ε on [0,T] if ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr satisfies
ϕ∈C([0,T];H)∩L2(0,T;V), | (3.1) |
ϕt∈L2(0,T;V′), | (3.2) |
√αϕt∈L2(0,T;V), | (3.3) |
μ=a(x)ϕ−J∗ϕ+F′(ϕ)+αϕt−δθ∈L2(0,T;V), | (3.4) |
θ∈C([0,T];H)∩L2(0,T;V), | (3.5) |
θt∈L2(0,T;V′). | (3.6) |
In addition,upon setting,
ρ=ρ(x,ϕ):=a(x)ϕ+F′(ϕ), | (3.7) |
for every φ,ϑ∈V, there holds,for almost all t∈(0,T),
⟨ϕt,φ⟩+(∇ρ,∇φ)−(∇(J∗ϕ),∇φ)+α(∇ϕt,∇φ)=δ(∇θ,∇φ) | (3.8) |
ε⟨θt,ϑ⟩+(∇θ,∇ϑ)=−δ⟨ϕt,ϑ⟩. | (3.9) |
Also,there holds,
ϕ(0)=ϕ0andθ(0)=θ0. | (3.10) |
We say that ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr is a global weak solution of Problem Pα,ε if it is a weak solution on [0,T],for any T>0. The initial conditions (3.10) hold in the L2-sense; i.e.,for every φ,ϑ∈V,
(ϕ(0),φ)=(ϕ0,φ)and(θ(0),ϑ)=(θ0,ϑ) | (3.11) |
hold.
It is well-known that the average value of ϕ is conserved (cf. e.g. [28,Section III.4.2]). Indeed,taking φ=1 in (3.8) yields,∂∂t∫Ωϕ(x,t)dx=0 and we naturally recover the conservation of mass
⟨ϕ(t)⟩ =⟨ϕ0⟩. | (3.12) |
In addition to (3.12),taking ϑ=1 in (3.9) yields ∂∂t∫Ωθ(x,t)dx=0 and we also establish
⟨θ(t)=⟨θ0⟩as well as∂t⟨ϕ(t)⟩=∂t⟨θ(t)⟩=0. | (3.13) |
Together,(3.12) and (3.13) constitute conservation of enthalpy.
Theorem 3.2. Assume (H1)-(H5) hold with p∈(65,2] and q≥12. For any ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈H×H with F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω),there exists a global weak solution ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr to Problem Pα,ε in the sense of Definition 3.1 satisfying the additional regularity,for any T>0,
ϕ ∈ L∞(0,T;L2+2q(Ω)), | (3.14) |
√αϕ ∈ L∞(0,T;V), | (3.15) |
F(ϕ) ∈ L∞(0,T;L1(Ω)), | (3.16) |
θt ∈ L2(0,T;H). | (3.17) |
Furthermore,setting
Eε(t):=14∫Ω∫ΩJ(x−y)(ϕ(x,t)−ϕ(y,t))2dxdy+∫ΩF(ϕ(x,t))dx+ε2∫Ωθ(t)2dx, | (3.18) |
the following energy equality holds,for all ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈Hα,εm with F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω),and t∈[0,T],
Eε(t)+∫t0(‖∇μ(s)‖2+α‖ϕt(s)‖2+‖∇θ(s)‖2)ds=Eε(0). | (3.19) |
proof.We follow the proofs of [5,Theorem 1] and [22,Theorem 2.1].The proof proceeds in several steps.The existence proof begins with a Faedo-Galerkin approximation procedure to which we later pass to the limit. We first assume that ϕ0∈D(AN) and θ0∈H. (The first assumption will be used to show that there is a sequence {ϕ0n}∞n=1 such that ϕ0n→ϕ0 in H2(Ω) as well as L∞(Ω),which will be important in light of the fact that F(ϕ0n) is of arbitrary polynomial growth per assumptions (H1)-(H5).)The existence of a weak solution for ϕ0∈H with F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω) will follow from a density argument and by exploiting the fact that the potential F is a quadratic perturbation of a convex function (cf. equation (2.5)).
Step 1 (Construction and boundedness of approximate maximal solutions) Recall that the linear operator AN+I is positive and self-adjont on H. Then we have a complete system of eigenfunctions {ψi}∞i=1 of the eigenvalue problem (AN+I)ψi=λiψi in H with ψi∈D(AN)={χ∈H2(Ω):∂nχ=0 on Γ}.We know by spectral theory that the eigenvalues may be ordered and counted according to their multiplicities in order to form a (real) diverging sequence. The set of respective eigenvectors,{ψi}∞i=1,forms an orthogonal basis in V,which we may assume is orthonormal in H.
Define the subspaces
Ψn:=span{ψ1,ψ2,…,ψn}andΨ∞:=⋃∞n=1Ψn. |
By construction,clearly Ψ∞ is dense in D(AN).Then,for any fixed T>0 and n∈N, we will seek functions of the form
ϕn(t)=n∑k=1ak(t)ψkandθn(t)=n∑k=1bk(t)ψk, | (3.20) |
that solve the following approximating problems for any δ0>0, δ∈(0,δ0], (α,ε)∈(0,1]×(0,1],and for all t∈[0,T],
(ϕn′,φ)+(∇ρn(⋅,ϕn),∇φ)−(∇J∗ϕn,∇φ)+α(∇ϕ′n,∇φ) =δ(∇θn,∇φ), | (3.21) |
ε(θn′,ϑ)+(∇θn,∇ϑ) =−δ(ϕn′,ϑ), | (3.22) |
ρn=ρ(⋅,ϕn) :=a(⋅)ϕn+F′(ϕn), | (3.23) |
μn=Pn(ρn−J∗ϕn +αϕn′−δθn), | (3.24) |
(ϕn(0),φ) =(ϕ0n,φ), | (3.25) |
(θn(0),ϑ) =(θ0n,ϑ), | (3.26) |
for every φ,ϑ∈Ψn,and where ϕ0n=Pnϕ0 and θ0n=Pnθ0; Pn being the n-dimensional projection of H onto Ψn. Throughout the remainder of the proof we set M0:=⟨ϕ0⟩ and N0:=⟨θ0⟩.The functions ai and bi are assumed to be (at least) C2((0,T)).It is also worth noting that (3.12) and (3.13),also hold for the discretized functions ϕn and θn.
To show the existence of at least one solution to(3.21)-(3.26),we now suppose that n is fixed and we take φ=ϕk and ϑ=θk for some 1≤k≤n. Then substituting the discretized functions (3.20) into (3.21)-(3.26),we arrive at a system of n ODEs in the unknowns ak=ak(t) and bk=bk(t) on Ψn. Since J∈W1,1(R3) and F∈C2,1loc(R),we may apply Cauchy's/Carathéodory's theorem for ODEs to find that there is Tn∈(0,T) such that ak,bk∈C2((0,Tn)),for 1≤k≤n,and (3.21)-(3.22) hold in the classical sense for all t∈[0,Tn]. Since F′∈C1(R),this argument shows the existence of a unique maximal solution to the projected problem (3.21)-(3.26).
Now we need to derive some a priori estimates to apply to the approximate maximal solutions to show that Tn=+∞,for every n≥1,and that the corresponding sequences ϕn,θn and μn are bounded in some appropriate function spaces. To begin,we take φ=μn as a test function in 3.21 and ϑ=θn as a test function in (3.22),to obtain
(ϕn′,μn)+(∇ρ(⋅,ϕn),∇μn)−(∇J∗ϕn,∇μn)+α(∇ϕ′n,∇μn) =δ(∇θn,∇μn), | (3.27) |
and
ε2ddt‖θn‖2+‖∇θn‖2=−δ(ϕ′n,θn). | (3.28) |
Now we write (recall J is even by (H1),so,in H,(J∗ϕn)ϕ′n=(J∗ϕ′n)ϕn),
(ϕ′n,μn)=(ϕ′n,aϕn−J∗ϕn+F′(ϕn)+αϕn′−δθn)=ddt{12‖√aϕn‖2−12(J∗ϕn,ϕn)+∫ΩF(ϕn)dx}+α‖ϕ′n‖2−δ(ϕ′n,θn)=ddt{14∫Ω∫ΩJ(x−y)(ϕn(x)−ϕn(y))2dxdy+∫ΩF(ϕn)dx}+α‖ϕ′n‖2−δ(ϕ′n,θn). | (3.29) |
Also,
(∇ρ(⋅,ϕn),∇μn)=−(ρ(⋅,ϕn),Δμn) =(−ρn,Δμn) =(∇ρn,∇μn), |
where ρn:=Pnρ(⋅,ϕn)=μn+Pn(J∗ϕn)−αϕ′n+δθn.Hence,
(∇ρ(⋅,ϕn),∇μn)=‖∇μn‖2+(∇(Pn(J∗ϕn)),∇μn)−α(∇ϕ′n,∇μn)+δ(∇θn,∇μn). | (3.30) |
Combining (3.18) (with the discritized functions),(3.27)-(3.30) yields the differential identity,
ddtEε+‖∇μn‖2+‖∇θn‖2+α‖ϕ′n‖2+(∇(Pn(J∗ϕn)),∇μn)−(∇J∗ϕn,∇μn)=[0] | (3.31) |
Estimating the two products in (3.31),we find
(∇(Pn(J∗ϕn)),∇μn)≤‖∇(Pn(J∗ϕn))‖2+14‖∇μn‖2≤‖(AN+I)1/2Pn(J∗ϕn)‖2+14‖∇μn‖2≤‖∇J∗ϕn‖2+‖J∗ϕn‖2+14‖∇μn‖2≤(d2J+c2J)‖ϕn‖2+14‖∇μn‖2, | (3.32) |
and
(ΔJ∗ϕn,Δμn)≤d2j‖ϕn‖2+14‖Δμn‖2. | (3.33) |
Observe that with the aid of hypothesis (H3),there holds
Eε =14∫Ω∫ΩJ(x−y)(ϕn(x)−ϕn(y))2dxdy+∫ΩF(ϕn)dx+ε2∫Ωθ2ndx=12‖√aϕn‖2−12(J∗ϕn,ϕn)+∫ΩF(ϕn)dx+ε2‖θn‖2≥12∫Ω(a+2c1−‖J‖L1(Ω))ϕ2ndx−c2|Ω|+ε2‖θn‖2≥c1−cj2‖ϕn‖2−c2|Ω|+ε2‖θn‖2. | (3.34) |
Now,combining (3.31)-(3.33) and integrating the resulting inequality with respect to t over (0,Tn) and applying (3.34) to the result produces,
(c1−cJ2)‖ϕn(t)‖2+ε2‖θn(t)‖2+12∫t0‖∇μn(s)‖2ds+∫t0‖∇θn(s)‖2ds+α∫t0‖ϕ′n(s)‖2ds ≤(c2J+2d2J)∫t0‖ϕn(s)‖2ds+Eε(0)+c2|Ω|. |
Using the basic estimate ‖Pnψ‖≤‖ψ‖ we find,
[Eε(0)=14∫Ω∫ΩJ(x−y)(ϕ0n(x)−ϕ0n(y))2dxdy+∫ΩF(ϕ0n)dx+ε2∫Ωθ20ndx n & ≤C(cJ,|Ω|)‖ϕ0‖2+∫ΩF(ϕ0)dx+12‖θ0‖2. | (3.35) |
The hypothesis that F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω) where ϕ0∈D(AN) implies that ϕ0n→ϕ0 in H2(Ω),and hence L∞(Ω).Moreover,
‖ϕn(t)‖2+ε‖θn(t)‖2 +∫t0‖∇μn(s)‖2ds+∫t0‖θn(s)‖2Vds+α∫t0‖ϕ′n(s)‖2ds ∖ notagn & ≤1ν0(c2J+2d2J)∫t0‖ϕn(s)‖2ds+Q(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm)+N20⋅T, | (3.36) |
where (and with (H3)),
$ν0=ν0(J):=min{c1−cJ2,12}>0, | (3.37) |
and where the extra term appearing on the right-hand side of (3.36) is to make the V norm for θn on the left-hand side.Since the right-hand side of (3.36) is independent of n and t,we deduce,by means of a Gr\"onwall inequality,that Tn=+∞, for every n≥1, i.e.,the projected problem (3.21)-(3.26) has a unique global in time solution as T>0 is arbitrary,and (3.36) is satisfied for every t≥0. Furthermore,from (3.36),we obtain the following estimates for any given 0<T<+∞,
ϕn is uniformly bounded in L∞(0,T;H), | (3.38) |
θn is uniformly bounded in L∞(0,T;H), | (3.39) |
∇μn is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;H), | (3.40) |
θn is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;V), | (3.41) |
√αϕ′n is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;H), | (3.42) |
F(ϕn) is uniformly bounded in L∞(0,T;L1(Ω)). | (3.43) |
(The last inclusion follows from the definition of Eε and (3.34).)
Now to show
ϕn is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;V), | (3.44) |
we observe the two basic estimates hold for every η>0,
(∇μn,∇ϕn)≤14c0η‖∇μn‖2+c0η‖∇ϕn‖2, |
and
(∇μn,∇ϕn)≥c0‖∇ϕn‖2−d2J2c0η‖ϕn‖2−2c0η‖∇ϕn‖2+α‖∇ϕn‖2−δ204c0η‖∇θn‖2−c0η‖∇ϕn‖2=(c01−3η)+α)‖∇ϕn‖2−d2J2c0η‖ϕn‖2−δ204c0η‖∇θn‖2. |
Together,these two yield
(c0(1−4η)+α)‖∇ϕn‖2−d2J2c0η‖ϕn‖2−δ204c0η‖∇θn‖2≤14c0η‖∇μn‖2, | (29) |
and with (3.38),(3.40) and (3.41) we deduce (3.44).
Now we seek a uniform bound for ⟨μn⟩ in L2(0,T;H) so that we may bound μn uniformly in L2(0,T;V) (by virtue of (2.2)). A simple estimate with (2.9) shows,
⟨μn⟩=⟨aϕn⟩−⟨Pn(J∗ϕn+F′(ϕn))⟩+α⟨ϕ′n⟩−δ⟨θn⟩=1|Ω|(a,ϕn)−1|Ω|(Pn(J∗ϕn),1)+1|Ω|(Pn(F′(ϕn)),1)+α|Ω|(ϕ′n,1)−δ|Ω|(θn,1)≤1|Ω|‖J∗1‖‖ϕn‖+1|Ω|1/2‖J∗ϕn‖+1|Ω|‖F′(ϕn)‖L1(Ω)+α|Ω|1/2‖ϕ′n‖+δ0|Ω|1/2‖θn‖≤2cJ|Ω|1/2‖ϕn‖+c3|Ω|‖F(ϕn)‖L1(Ω)+c4|Ω|+α|Ω|1/2‖ϕ′n‖+δ0|Ω|1/2‖θn‖. | (3.45) |
The desired bound now follows because of the uniform boundsin (3.38),and (3.41)-(3.43). Thus,we have shown
μn is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;V), | (3.46) |
F′(ϕn) is uniformly bounded in L∞(0,T;L1(Ω)). | (3.47) |
Moreover,directly from (3.46) and the discretized equation
(ϕn′,φ)=−(∇μn,∇φ), |
we also have,
ϕ′n is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;V′). | (3.48) |
Next we obtain a bound for √αϕn.Indeed,we take φ=ϕn in (3.21) to obtain,
12ddt{‖ϕn‖2+α‖∇ϕn‖2}+((∇a)ϕn+a∇ϕn−∇J∗ϕn+F″(ϕn)∇ϕn,∇ϕn) =δ(∇θn,∇ϕn). | (3.49) |
Since J is even,with a change of variable we have ((∇a)ϕn,∇ϕn)=−((∇J)ϕn,∇ϕn),and by the density of W1,∞(R3) in W1,1(R3),there is a sequence (Jk)∞k=1⊂W1,∞(R3) such that Jk→J in W1,1(R3).So we estimate (recall (2.10))
((∇a)ϕn+a∇ϕn−∇J∗ϕn+F″(ϕn)∇ϕn,∇ϕn)=((a+F″(ϕn))∇ϕn,∇ϕn)+((∇a)ϕn−∇J∗ϕn,∇ϕn)≥c0‖∇ϕn‖2−‖∇Jk‖L∞(Ω)‖∇ϕn‖‖ϕn‖−‖∇J‖L1(Ω)‖∇ϕn‖‖ϕn‖≥c0‖∇ϕn‖2−‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)‖∇ϕn‖‖ϕn‖−dJ‖∇ϕn‖‖ϕn‖≥c02‖∇ϕn‖2−1c0(‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)+d2J)‖ϕn‖2, | (3.50) |
and we use the basic estimate,
δ(Δθn,∇ϕn)≤δ20c0‖Δθn‖2+c04‖∇ϕn‖2. | (3.51) |
Together (3.49)-(3.51) produce,
ddt{‖ϕn‖2+α‖∇ϕn‖2}+c02‖∇ϕn‖2≤2c0(‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)+d2J)‖ϕn‖2+2δ20c0‖∇θn‖2. | (3.52) |
Utilizing the bounds (3.38) and (3.41) following (3.36),and the definition of the V norm (2.2),we integrate (3.52) with respect to t over (0,T) to find,
‖ϕn(t)‖2+α‖ϕn(t)‖2V+c02∫t0‖∇ϕn(s)‖2ds ≤2c0(‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)+d2J)∫t0‖ϕn(s)‖2ds+2δ20c0∫t0‖∇θn(s)‖2ds+‖ϕ0n‖2+α‖∇ϕ0n‖2+α|⟨ϕ0n⟩|2 ≤Q(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm,T)+‖∇ϕ0n‖2. | (3.53) |
This estimate implies
√αϕn is uniformly bounded in L∞(0,T;V). | (3.54) |
We use the above results to bound θ′n.Let us choose ϑ=θ′n in in (3.22),which yields
12ddt‖θn‖2+‖θ′n‖2=−δ(ϕ′n,θ′n)≤12‖ϕ′n‖2+δ202‖θ′n‖. |
Integration over (0,T) and the bounds (3.39) and (3.43) shows us that,
‖θn(t)‖2+∫t0‖θ′n(s)‖2ds≤∫t0‖ϕ′n(s)‖2ds+δ20∫t0‖θ′n(s)‖2ds+‖θ0n‖2≤1ν0Q(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm), |
and hence,
θ′n is uniformly bounded in L2(0,T;H). | (3.55) |
Finally,we provide a bound for {ρ(⋅,ϕn)}.Using (H4) again (see (2.9)),we easily find,for any p∈(1,2],
‖ρ(⋅,ϕn)‖Lp(Ω)≤‖a‖L∞(Ω)‖ϕn‖+‖F′(ϕn)‖Lp(Ω)≤|Ω|‖Jn‖L∞(Ω)‖ϕn‖+(c3∫Ω|F(ϕn)|dx+c4)1/p. | (3.56) |
Employing (3.38) and (3.43) and the fact that W1,∞(R3) is dense in W1,1(R3),it follows from (3.56) that
ρ(⋅,ϕn) ∈ L∞(0,T;Lp(Ω)). | (3.57) |
This concludes Step 1.
Step 2 (Convergence of approximate solutions) In this step we pass to the limit to show that Problem Pα,ε has a solution in the distributional sense,then we argue by density that this solution satisfies the identities for all appropriate test functions. From the uniform bounds (3.38),(3.39),(3.41),(3.42),(3.44),(3.46),(3.48),(3.54),(3.55),and (3.57),by Alaoglu’s theorem (cf. e.g. [23,Theorem 6.64])there is a subsequence of (ϕn,θn)tr (generally not relabeled) and functions
ϕ ∈ L∞(0,T;H)∩L2(0,T;V), | (3.58) |
√αϕ ∈ L∞(0,T;V), | (3.59) |
θ ∈ L∞(0,T;H)∩L2(0,T;V), | (3.60) |
μ ∈ L2(0,T;V), | (3.61) |
ρ ∈ L∞(0,T;Lp(Ω)), | (3.62) |
and
ϕ′ ∈ L2(0,T;V′), | (3.63) |
√αϕ′ ∈ L2(0,T;H), | (3.64) |
θ′ ∈ L2(0,T;H), | (3.65) |
such that,as n→∞,
ϕn⇀ϕ weakly-* in L∞(0,T;H), | (3.66) |
ϕn⇀ϕ weakly in L2(0,T;V), | (3.67) |
√αϕn⇀√αϕ weakly-* in L∞(0,T;V), | (3.68) |
θn⇀θ weakly-* in L∞(0,T;H), | (3.69) |
θn⇀θ weakly in L2(0,T;V), | (3.70) |
μn⇀μ weakly in L2(0,T;V), | (3.71) |
ρn⇀ρ weakly-* in L∞(0,T;Lp(Ω)), | (3.72) |
and
ϕ′n⇀ϕt weakly in L2(0,T;V′), | (3.73) |
√αϕ′n⇀√αϕt weakly in L2(0,T;H), | (3.74) |
θ′n⇀θt weakly in L2(0,T;H). | (3.75) |
Additionally,on account of the Aubin-Lions (compact) embedding (cf. e.g. [29,Theorem 3.1.1]),
{χ∈L2(0,T;V), χt∈L2(0,T;V′)}→L2(0,T;H), |
we have
ϕn→ϕ strongly in L2(0,T;H), | (3.76) |
θn→θ strongly in L2(0,T;H). | (3.77) |
An immediate consequence of (3.76) is
J∗ϕn→J∗ϕ strongly in L2(0,T;V), | (3.78) |
We are now in position to pass to the limit in (3.21)-(3.26) to show show that ϕ,θ,μ,and ρ satisfy (1.2) and (3.7)-(3.10). To begin,using the pointwise convergence in (3.76) and the (sequential) continuity assumption on F in (H2),we immediately find
ρn→aϕ+F′(ϕ)a.e.in$Ω×(0,T).$ | (3.79) |
Thanks to (3.72),we have (3.7); i.e.,
ρ=aϕ+F′(ϕ). |
Since
μn=Pn(ρn−J∗ϕn+αϕ′n−δθn) |
then,for every φ∈Ψj,every k∈{1,…,j} with j≥1 fixed,and for every χ∈C∞0((0,T)), there holds
∫T0(μn(t),φ)χ(t)dt=∫T0(ρn(t)−J∗ϕn(t)+αϕ′n(t)−δθn(t),φ)χ(t)dt. | (3.80) |
Letting n→+∞ in (3.80),whereby using (3.71),(3.72),(3.74),(3.77) and (3.78),and by the density of Ψ∞ in H,we arrive at the equality (1.2); indeed,
μ=ρ−J∗ϕ+αϕ′+δθ =aϕ+F′(ϕ)−J∗ϕ+αϕt+δθ |
holds in the distributional sense.Moreover,we may update (3.62) to include
ρ ∈ L2(0,T;H). | (3.81) |
We now show show (3.8) and (3.9) hold. To this end,multiply (3.21) and (3.22) by χ∈C∞0((0,T)) and ω∈C∞0((0,T)),respectively,and integrate with respect to t over (0,T).This yields,
∫T0(ϕn′(t),φ)χ(t)dt+∫T0(ρn(t),−Δφ)χ(t)dt−∫T0(∇J∗ϕn(t),∇φ)χ(t)dt+α∫T0(ϕ′n(t),−Δφ)χ(t)dt=δ∫T0(∇θn(t),∇φ)χ(t)dt, | (3.82) |
and
ε∫T0(θn′(t),ϑ)ω(t)dt+∫T0(∇θn(t),∇ϑ)ω(t)dt =−δ∫T0(ϕn′(t),ϑ)ω(t)dt. | (3.83) |
On (3.82) we pass to the limit n→+∞ using (3.70),(3.72),(3.73) and (3.78) to arrive at (3.8) for every φ∈V by virtue of a standard density argument.Similarly,from (3.83) for every ϑ∈V,we gain(3.9) using (3.70),(3.73) and (3.75).
To show (3.10) hold,we integrate (3.21) and (3.22) overr (0,t) and pass to the limit n→+∞.This finishes Step 2.
Step [3] (Energy identity) To begin,let ϕ0∈D(AN),θ0∈H and let ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr be the corresponding weak solution. Recall from (3.76),we have for almost any t∈(0,T),
ϕn(t)→ϕ(t)stronglyin H anda.e.in Ω. | (3.84) |
Since F is measurable (see (H3)),Fatou's lemma implies
∫ΩF(ϕ(t))dx≤liminfn→+∞∫ΩF(ϕn(t))dx. | (3.85) |
Additionally,thanks to (3.78) and the fact that Pn∈L(V,V),then
Pn(J∗ϕn)→J∗ϕin$L2(0,T;V)$. | (3.86) |
Integrating (3.31) on (0,t),and passing to the limit while keeping in mind (3.84)-(3.86) and (3.70),(3.71) and (3.74),as well as the weak lower-semicontinuity of the norm,we arrive at the differential inequality
Eε(t)+∫t0(‖∇μ(s)‖2+α‖ϕt(s)‖2+‖∇θ(s)‖2)ds≤Eε(0). | (3.87) |
We now show the energy equality (3.19) holds..The proof is based on the proof of [5,Corollary 2].Here we require the regularity given in (H5).Indeed,take φ=μ in (3.8). Because of (3.4),we find the product ⟨ϕt,μ⟩ must contain the dual pairing ⟨ϕt,F′(ϕ)⟩.It is here where we employ (2.5) where G is monotone increasing.Now define the functional G:H→R by
G(ϕ):={∫ΩG(ϕ)dxif G(ϕ)∈L1(Ω),+∞otherwise. |
Now by[4,Proposition 2.8,Chapter II],it follows that G is convex,lower semicontinuous on H,and ξ∈∂G(ϕ) if and only if ξ=G′(ϕ)=G(ϕ) almost everywhere in Ω.Applying [6,Proposition 4.2],also,for almost all t∈(0,T),
⟨ϕt,F′(ϕ)⟩=⟨ϕt,G(ϕ)⟩−a∗⟨ϕt,ϕ⟩=ddt{G(ϕ)−a∗2‖ϕ‖2}=ddt∫ΩF(ϕ)dx. | (3.88) |
Hence,
12ddt {‖√aϕ‖2−(ϕ,J∗ϕ)+∫ΩF(ϕ)dx}+α‖ϕt‖2−δ⟨ϕt,θ⟩+‖∇μ‖2=0. |
Next we add in the identity obtained after taking ϑ=θ in (3.9) and apply (3.18) to find
ddt{14∫Ω∫ΩJ(x−y)(ϕ(x)−ϕ(y))2dxdy+∫ΩF(ϕ)dx+ε2‖θ‖2}+α‖ϕt‖2+‖∇θ‖2+‖∇μ‖2=0 |
Integrating this differential identity on (0,t) produces (3.19) as claimed.This concludes Step 3.
Step 4 (Assuming ϕ0∈H is such that F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω),and the continuity conditions) Take ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈Hα,εm where F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω).Proceeding exactly as in [5,page 440] the bounds (3.38)-(3.44),(3.46)-(3.48) and (3.54),(3.55) and (3.57) hold.Then applying the Aubin-Lions compactness embedding and find ϕ,θ, μ,and ρ that satisfy (3.58)-(3.62).Passing to the limit in the variational formulation for ζk=(ϕk,θ)tr,we find the pair ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr is a solution corresponding to the initial data ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈Hα,εm for which F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω).
Finally,the continuity properties
ϕ∈C([0,T];H)andθ∈C([0,T];H) | (3.89) |
follow from the classical embedding (cf.[26,Lemma 5.51]),
{χ∈L2(0,T;V), χt∈L2(0,T;V′)}→C([0,T];H), |
and the conditions (3.58)2 and (3.60)2 with (3.63) and (3.65) established above.This finishes the proof of the theorem.
Remark 3.3. From (3.19) we see that if there is a t0>0 in which
Eε(t0)=Eε(0), |
then,for all t∈(0,t0),
∫t0(‖∇μ(s)‖2+α‖ϕt(s)‖2+‖∇θ(s)‖2)ds=0. | (3.90) |
Hence,we deduce ϕt(t)=0 and θt(t)=0 for all t∈(0,t0).Therefore,ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr is a fixed point of the trajectory ζ(t)=Sα,ε(t)ζ0.Since the semigroup Sα,ε(t) is precompact (per Lemma 3.10 and Lemma 3.11,the system (Xα,εm,Sα,ε,Eε) is gradient/conservative for each α∈(0,1] and ε∈(0,1].
The following proposition establishes the uniqueness of weak solutions to Problem Pα,ε. Furthermore,it shows that the semigroup Sα,ε (defined below) is strongly continuous with respect to the metric Xα,εm.
Proposition 3.4. Assume (H1)-(H4) hold. Let T>0,m≥0,δ0>0,δ∈(0,δ0],(α,ε)∈(0,1]×(0,1],and ζ01=(ϕ01,θ01)tr,ζ02=(ϕ02,θ02)tr∈Hα,εm be such that F(ϕ01),F(ϕ02)∈L1(Ω).Let ζ1(t)=(ϕ1(t),θ1(t)) and ζ2(t)=(ϕ2(t),θ2(t)) denote the weak solution to Problem Pα,ε corresponding to the data ζ01 and ζ02,respectively.Then there are positive constants ˉν1=ˉν1(c0,J,α,ε,δ0)∼{α−2,ε−1} and ˉν2=ˉν2(F,J,Ω,δ0),independent of T,ζ01,and ζ02,such that,for all t∈[0,T],
‖ζ1(t)−ζ2(t)‖2Hα,εm+∫t0(2‖∂tϕ1(s)−∂tϕ2(s)‖2V′+α‖∂tϕ1(s)−∂tϕ2(s)‖2+2‖θ1(s)−θ2(s)‖2V)ds≤eˉν1t(‖ζ1(0)−ζ2(0)‖2Hα,εm+2ˉν2ˉν1(|M1−M2|+|N1−N2|)2) | (3.91) |
where Mi:=⟨ϕi(0)⟩,Ni:=⟨θi(0)⟩,i=1,2.
proof We see that upon setting,for all t∈[0,T],
ˉζ(t)=(ˉϕ(t),ˉθ(t)):=(ϕ1(t),θ1(t))−(ϕ2(t),θ2(t))=ζ1(t)−ζ2(t), |
the difference ˉζ=(ˉϕ,ˉθ) formally satisfies the equations
ˉϕt=Δˉμ in Ω×(0,T) | (3.92) |
ˉμ=aˉϕ−J∗ˉϕ+F′(ϕ1)−F′(ϕ2)+αˉϕt−δˉθ in Ω×(0,T) | (3.93) |
εˉθt−Δˉθ=−δˉϕt in Ω×(0,T) | (3.94) |
∂nˉμ=0 on Γ×(0,T) | (3.95) |
∂nˉθ=0 on Γ×(0,T) | (3.96) |
ˉϕ(x,0)=ϕ01(x)−ϕ02(x) at Ω×{0} | (3.97) |
ˉθ(x,0)=θ01(x)−θ02(x) at Ω×{0}. | (3.98) |
Multiply (3.92)-(3.94) by,A−1N(ˉϕt+ˉϕ−⟨ˉϕ⟩),ˉϕt+ˉϕ,and ˉθ,respectively (notice that,by (3.12) ˉϕt+ˉϕ−⟨ˉϕ⟩∈V′0),and sum the resulting identities to yield,for almost all t∈[0,T],
ddt{‖ˉϕ‖2V′+α‖ˉϕ‖2+ ε‖ˉθ‖2}+2‖ˉϕt‖2V′+2α‖ˉϕt‖2+2‖ˉθ‖2V +2(aˉϕ+F′(ϕ1)−F′(ϕ2),ˉϕt+ˉϕ)−2(J∗ˉϕ,ˉϕt+ˉϕ)−2δ(ˉθ,ˉϕ) =2|Ω|⟨ˉϕ⟩⟨ˉμ⟩+2⟨ˉθ⟩2. | (3.99) |
Estimating the resulting products using assumption (H2) yields,
2(aˉϕ+F′(ϕ1)−F′(ϕ2),ˉϕt+ˉϕ)≥2c0(ˉϕ,ˉϕt)+2c0‖ˉϕ‖2≥2c0(1−c0α)‖ˉϕ‖2−α2‖ˉϕt‖2, | (3.100) |
recalling J∈W1,1(R3) and following [7,Proposition 5,(4.2) and (4.3)] we also write,
2|(J∗ˉϕ,ˉϕ)|≤2‖A1/2N(J∗ˉϕ)‖‖A−1/2Nˉϕ‖≤d2J‖ˉϕ‖2+‖ˉϕ‖2V′+C|Ω||⟨ˉϕ⟩|, | (3.101) |
−2(J∗ˉϕ,ˉϕt) ≥−2‖J∗ˉϕ‖‖ˉϕt‖ =−2c2Jα‖ˉϕ‖2−α2‖ˉϕt‖2, | (3.102) |
and
−2δ(ˉθ,ˉϕ)≥−δ20‖ˉθ‖2−‖ˉϕ‖2. | (3.103) |
Combining (3.99)-(3.103),we have,for almost all t∈[0,T],
ddt{‖ˉϕ‖2V′+α‖ˉϕ‖2+ ε‖ˉθ‖2}+2‖ˉϕt‖2V′+α‖ˉϕt‖2+2‖ˉθ‖2V ≤‖ˉϕ‖2V′+1α(2c0(c0α−1)+d2J+2c2Jα+1)⋅α‖ˉϕ‖2+δ20ε⋅ε‖ˉθ‖2 +C|Ω|⟨ˉϕ⟩⟨ˉμ⟩+2⟨ˉθ⟩2. | (3.104) |
We readily find that there is a constant,
ˉν1=ˉν1(c0,cJ,dJ,α,ε,δ0):=max{1,1α(2c0(c0α−1)+d2J+2c2Jα+1),δ20ε}≥1, | (3.105) |
and,using the local Lipschitz assumption (H2),it is easy to show that,
|⟨ˉμ⟩|≤CF|⟨ˉϕ⟩|+δ0|⟨ˉθ⟩| =:ˉμ∗, | (3.106) |
for some positive constant CF depending on cJ and the Lipschitz bound on F′. Thus,(3.104) becomes,for almost all t∈[0,T],
ddt{‖ˉϕ‖2V′+α‖ˉϕ‖2+ ε‖ˉθ‖2}+2‖ˉϕt‖2V′+α‖ˉϕt‖2+2‖ˉθ‖2V ∖ notag≤ˉν1(‖ˉϕ‖2V′+α‖ˉϕ‖2+ ε‖ˉθ‖2)+C|Ω||⟨ˉϕ⟩|ˉμ∗+2⟨ˉθ⟩2. | (3.107) |
Integrating (3.107) over (0,t),we obtain,for all t∈[0,T],
‖ˉϕ(t)‖2V′+α‖ˉϕ(t)‖2+ε‖ˉθ(t)‖2+∫t0(2‖ˉϕt(s)‖2V′+α‖ˉϕt(s)‖2+2‖ˉθ(s)‖2V)ds≤eˉν1t‖ˉζ(0)‖2Hα,εm+2ˉν1|(|Ω||⟨ˉϕ⟩|ˉμ∗+|⟨ˉθ⟩|2)(eˉν1t−1)≤eˉν1t(‖ˉζ(0)‖2Hα,εm+2ˉν2ˉν1(|⟨ˉϕ⟩|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|)2), | (3.108) |
where ˉν2=ˉν2(F,J,Ω,δ0):=max{CF,|Ω|,δ02|Ω|,1}≥1.From (3.108) we find the estimate (3.91) holds.This finishes the proof.
As before,we can now formalize the semi-dynamical system generated by Problem Pα,ε.
Corollary 3.5. Let the assumptions of Theorem 3.2 be satisfied. We can define a strongly continuous semigroup (of solution operators) Sα,ε=(Sα,ε(t))t≥0,for each α>0 and ε>0,
Sα, ε(t):Xα, εm→Xα, εm |
by setting,for all t≥0,
Sα, ε(t)ζ0:=ζ(t) |
where ζ(t)=(ϕ(t),θ(t)) is the unique global weak solution to Problem Pα,ε.Furthermore,as a consequence of (3.91),if we assume
M1=M2andN1=N2, |
the semigroup Sα,ε(t):Xα,εm→Xα,εm is Lipschitz continuous on Xα,εm,uniformly in t on compact intervals.
We now give a dissipation estimate for Problem Pα,ε from which we deduce the existence of an absorbing set.The idea of the estimate follows [12,Proposition 2].It is here where we require the slight modification of hypothesis (H1).
Lemma 3.6. Assume (H1)-(H4) hold.Let m≥0,δ0>0,δ∈(0,δ0],(α,ε)∈(0,1]×(0,1],ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈Hα,εm with F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω).Assume ζ=(ϕ,θ)tr is a weak solution to Problem Pα,ε.There is a positive constant ν3=ν3(δ0,J,Ω),but independent of α,ε,and ζ0,such that,for all t≥0,the following holds,
‖ˆϕ(t)‖2V′+α‖ˆϕ(t)‖2+‖√aϕ(t)‖2+‖ˆθ(t)‖2+(F(ϕ(t)),1)−(J∗ϕ(t),ˆϕ(t))+∫t+1t(‖ϕt(s)‖2V′+α‖ϕt(s)‖2+‖θ(s)‖2V)ds≤Q(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm)e−ν3t+1ν3Q(m), | (3.109) |
for some monotonically increasing functions Q.
Consequently,the set given by
Bα,ε0:={ζ∈Hα,εm:‖ζ‖2Hα,εm≤1ν3Q(m)+1}, | (3.110) |
where Q(⋅,⋅) is the function from (3.109),is a closed,bounded absorbing set in Hα,εm,positively invariant under the semigroup Sα,ε.
proof We give a formal calculation that can be justified by a suitable Faedo-Galerkin approximation based on the proof of Theorem 3.2 above.Let M0:=⟨ϕ0⟩ and N0:=⟨θ0⟩.Multiply (1.1)-(1.3) by,A−1Nϕt,ϕt,and ˆθ:=θ−N0,respectively,then integrate over Ω,applying (2.1) (since ϕt=ϕt−⟨ϕt⟩ belongs to V′0; recall (3.12)),and sum the resulting identities to arrive at the differential identity,which holds for almost all t≥0,
ddt{‖√aϕ‖2+ε‖ˆθ‖2+2(F(ϕ),1)−(J∗ϕ,ϕ)}+2‖ϕt‖2V′+2α‖ϕt‖2+2‖∇θ‖2=[0] | (3.111) |
Let ˆϕ:=ϕ−M0.We further multiply (1.1)-(1.2) by,2ξA−1Nˆϕ and 2ξˆϕ,respectively,in H,where ξ>0 is to be determined below.Observe ⟨ˆϕ⟩=0 and ‖ˆϕ‖2=‖ϕ‖2−M20|Ω|.This yields,for almost all t≥0,
ddt{ξ‖ˆϕ‖2V′+ξα‖ˆϕ‖2}+2ξ‖√aˆϕ‖2+2ξ(F′(ϕ),ˆϕ)=2ξ(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)+2ξδ(θ,ˆϕ)−2ξM0(a,ˆϕ). | (3.112) |
Together,(3.111) and (3.112) make the differential identity,
ddt{ξ‖ˆϕ‖2V′+ξα‖ˆϕ‖2+‖√aϕ‖2+ε‖ˆθ‖2+2(F(ϕ),1)−(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)}+2‖ϕt‖2V′+2α‖ϕt‖2+2ξ‖√aˆϕ‖2+2‖∇θ‖2+2ξ(F′(ϕ),ˆϕ)=2ξ(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)+2ξδ(θ,ˆϕ)−2ξM0(a,ˆϕ). | (3.113) |
Introduce the functional defined by,for all t≥0 and ξ>0,
E(t):=ξ‖ˆϕ(t)‖2V′+ξα‖ˆϕ(t)‖2+‖√aϕ(t)‖2+ε‖ˆθ(t)‖2+2(F(ϕ(t)),1)−(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)+CF. | (3.114) |
(Observe,E(t)=2Eε(t)+ξ‖ˆϕ(t)‖2V′+ξα‖ˆϕ(t)‖2+CF.)Because of assumption (H3) and the assumption that F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω),we know
2(F(ϕ),1)−(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)≥(2c1−2c1)‖ˆϕ‖2+2c1M20|Ω|−2c2|Ω|, | (3.115) |
thus the constant CF may be chosen sufficiently large to insure E(t) is non-negative for all t≥0,α∈(0,1],ε∈(0,1],and ξ>0.Then we rewrite (3.113) as,
ddtE+τE=H, | (3.116) |
for some 0<τ<ξ, and where
H(t):=τξ‖ˆϕ(t)‖2V′+τξα‖ˆϕ(t)‖2+τ‖√aϕ(t)‖2+τε‖ˆθ(t)‖2+2τ(F(ϕ(t)),1)−τ(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)+τCF−2‖ϕt(t)‖2V′−2α‖ϕt(t)‖2−2ξ‖√aˆϕ(t)‖2−2‖∇θ(t)‖2−2ξ(F′(ϕ(t)),ˆϕ(t))+2ξ(J∗ϕ(t),ˆϕ(t))+2ξδ(θ(t),ˆϕ(t))−2ξM0(a,ˆϕ(t)). | (3.117) |
Estimating the products on the right-hand side using the assumptions (H1)-(H3) as well as Young's inequality for convolutions (cf. e.g. [1,Corollary 2.25]),and the Poincaré-type inequality (2.4) yields (and recall δ∈(0,δ0]),
2ξ(J∗ϕ,ˆϕ)≤2ξ‖J∗ϕ‖‖ˆϕ‖≤2ξcJ‖ˆϕ‖2+M20‖a‖2∞+ξ2‖ˆϕ‖2, | (3.118) |
2ξδ(θ,ˆϕ)≤2ξδ0‖θ‖‖ˆϕ‖≤ξδ20‖θ‖2+ξ‖ˆϕ‖2≤2ξδ20λΩ‖∇θ‖2+2ξδ20|Ω|N20+ξ‖ˆϕ‖2, | (3.119) |
and
−2ξM0(a,ˆϕ)≤2ξM0‖a‖‖ˆϕ‖ =2ξM0‖J∗1‖‖ˆϕ‖ ≤2ξM0cJ|Ω|1/2‖ˆϕ‖ ≤M20c2J|Ω|+ξ2‖ˆϕ‖2. | (3.120) |
With assumption (H3) we now consider,with the aid of (2.6)-(2.8) (setting m=M0),
2τ(F(ϕ),1)−2ξ(F′(ϕ),ˆϕ)=−2τ((F′(ϕ),ˆϕ)−(F(ϕ),1))−2(ξ−τ)(F′(ϕ),ˆϕ)=−2τ(F′(ϕ)ˆϕ−F(ϕ),1)−2(ξ−τ)(F′(ϕ),ˆϕ)≤2τc9|Ω|+2τc10‖ˆϕ‖2−(ξ−τ)(|F(ϕ)|,1)+2(ξ−τ)c11+(ξ−τ)c12. | (3.121) |
By (H1) again,we find that for a fixed 0<a0<essinfΩa(x) (this is where we need the slightly stricter version of (H1)),there holds
a0‖ˆϕ‖2≤‖√aˆϕ‖2. |
Moreover,due to the continuous embedding H↪V′, there is a constant,which we denote CΩ>0,so that C−2Ω‖ˆϕ‖2V′≤‖ˆϕ‖2 (cf. e.g. [20,p. 243,Equation (6.7)]),and,now with 0<ξ<1,
−2ξ‖√aˆϕ‖2≤−a02C−2Ω‖ˆϕ‖2V′−a02‖ˆϕ‖2−ξ‖√aˆϕ‖2. | (3.122) |
Also observe that,using the Poincaré-type inequality (2.3) again,we have
−(2−2ξδ20λΩ)‖∇θ‖2≤−(1−2ξδ20λΩ)‖∇θ‖2−1λΩ‖ˆθ‖2. | (3.123) |
Combining (3.117)-(3.123) yields,
H≤(τξ−a02C−2Ω)‖ˆϕ‖2V′+(τξα+2ξcJ+ξ+2ξ2+2τc10−a02)‖ˆϕ‖2 +(τ−ξ2)‖√aϕ‖2+(τε−1λΩ)‖ˆθ‖2−(ξ−τ)(|F(ϕ)|,1) −2‖ϕt‖2V′−2α‖ϕt‖2−(1−2ξδ20λΩ)‖∇θ‖2 +τCF+M20c2J|Ω|+2ξδ20|Ω|N20+2τc9|Ω|+2(ξ−τ)c11+(ξ−τ)c12+ξM20|Ω|(⟨a⟩−a0)+M20‖a‖2∞. | (3.124) |
We should note that the additional constants in a on the right-hand side of (3.124) is due to the fact that
−ξ‖√aˆϕ‖2≥−ξ‖√aϕ‖2−ξM20|Ω|(⟨a⟩−a0). |
Inserting (3.124) into (3.116) produces the differential inequality (this is where we use the condition that 0<α≤1 and 0<ε≤1),
ddtE+2‖ϕt‖2V′+2α‖ϕt‖2+(1−2ξδ20λΩ)‖θ‖2V +a04C−2Ω‖ˆϕ‖2V′+(a02−2ξcJ−ξ−2ξ2−2τc10)α‖ˆϕ‖2+ξ‖√aϕ‖2+1λΩε‖ˆθ‖2+(ξ−τ)(F(ϕ),1)+τCF≤τCF+M20c2J|Ω|+2ξδ20|Ω|N20+(1−2ξδ20λΩ)N20 +2τc9|Ω|+2(ξ−τ)c11+(ξ−τ)c12+ξM20|Ω|(⟨a⟩−a0)+M20‖a‖2∞. |
The extra term with N0 now appearing on the right-hand side is used to make the V norm in θ. Now we easily see that there are 0<τ<ξ<1 so that
ν3=ν3(δ0,J,Ω):=min{1−2ξδ20λΩ,a02−2ξcJ−ξ−2ξ2−2τc10}>0. |
Now there holds,for almost all t≥0,
ddtE+ν3E+‖ϕt‖2V′+2α‖ϕt‖2+ν3‖θ‖2V≤Q(m). | (3.125) |
Neglecting the normed terms ‖ϕt‖2V′+2α‖ϕt‖2+ν3‖θ‖2V,then employing a Gr\"{o}nwall inequality yields,for all t≥0,
E(t)≤e−ν3tE(0)+1ν3Q(m). | (3.126) |
Recall that F(ϕ0)∈L1(Ω) by assumption,so now we easily arrive at
‖ˆϕ(t)‖2V′+α‖ˆϕ(t)‖2+‖√aϕ(t)‖2+‖ˆθ(t)‖2+(F(ϕ(t)),1)−(J∗ϕ(t),ˆϕ(t)) ≤E(0)e−ν3t+1ν3Q(m). | (3.127) |
Also,by neglecting the positive term ν3E in (3.125)} and integrating this time over (t,t+1),we find,with (3.126),for all t≥0,
∫t+1t(‖ϕt(s)‖2V′+α‖ϕt(s)‖2+‖θ(s)‖2V)ds≤E(0)e−ν3t+(1ν3+1)Q(m). | (3.128) |
Together,(3.127) and (3.128) establish (3.109).
The existence of the set Bα,ε0 described in (3.110) follows directly from the dissipation estimate (3.109); indeed,(cf. e.g. [3]).To see why Bα,ε0 is absorbing,consider any nonempty bounded subset B in Hα,εm∖Bα,ε0.Then we have that Sα,ε(t)B⊆Bα,ε0,in Hα,εm,for all t≥t0,where
t0:=max{1ν3ln(E(0)),0}. | (3.129) |
This completes the proof.
Remark 3.7. According to the proof,ν3 is a function of δ0 and the relation is ν3∼1−cδ20>0 for a sufficiently small constant c>0.
Remark 3.8. The following global uniform bound follows immediately from estimate (3.109) and (3.114).Under the assumptions of Lemma (3.109),there holds
limsupt→+∞‖ζ(t)‖Hα,εm≤E(0)+1ν3Q(m)=:Q(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm,m) | (3.130) |
for a monotonically increasing function Q,independent of α and ε
The main result in this section is
Theorem 3.9. For each α∈(0,1] and ε∈(0,1] the semigroup Sα,ε=(Sα,ε(t))t≥0 admits a global attractor Aα,ε in Hα,εm. The global attractor is invariant under the semiflow Sα,ε (both positively and negatively) and attracts all nonempty bounded subsets of Hα,εm; precisely,
1 for each t≥0,Sα,ε(t)Aα,ε=Aα,ε,and
2 for every nonempty bounded subset B of Hα,εm,
limt→∞distHα,εm(Sα,ε(t)B,Aα,ε):=limt→∞supζ∈Binfξ∈Aα,ε‖Sα,ε(t)ζ−ξ‖Hα,εm=0. |
Additionally,
3 the global attractor is unique maximal compact invariant subset in Hα,εm given by
Aα,ε:=ω(Bα,ε0):=⋂s≥0¯⋃t≥sSα,ε(t)Bα,ε0Hα,εm. |
Furthermore,
4 The global attractor Aα,ε is connected and given by the union of the unstable manifolds connecting the equilibria of Sα,ε(t).
5 For each ζ0=(ϕ0,θ0)tr∈Hα,εm,the set ω(ζ0) is a connected compact invariant set,consisting of the fixed points of Sα,ε(t).
With the existence of a bounded absorbing set set B0α,ε (in Lemma 3.6,the existence of a global attractor now depends on the precompactness of the semigroup of solution operators Sα,ε. We begin by discussing the precompactness of the second component θ which follows from a straight forward result. Indeed,the next result refers to the instantaneous regularization of the "thermal" function θ. This result will also be useful later in Section 3.4.
Lemma 3.10. Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.6,the global weak solutions to Problem Pα,ε satisfy the following: for every τ>0,
θ∈L∞(τ,∞;V)∩L2(τ,∞;H2(Ω)), | (3.131) |
and,for all t≥τ, there hold the bounds,
‖θ(t)‖V≤Qα,ε(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm,m) | (3.132) |
where Qα,ε∼{α−1/2,ε−1/2},and
∫t0‖θ(s)‖2H2(Ω)ds≤Qα(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm,m), | (3.133) |
where Qα∼α−1.
proof The result follows from a standard density argument (cf. e.g. [29,pp. 243-244]). We return to the beginning of the proof of Theorem 3.2 by letting θ0∈D(AN)={ψ∈H2(Ω):∂nψ=0},ϑ=−Δθn,and T>0. In place of (3.28),we find there holds
ddtε‖∇θn‖2+‖Δθn‖2≤δ20αα‖ϕn′‖2. | (3.134) |
Multiplying (3.134) by t to then integrate over (0,T) yields,
tε‖θn(t)‖2V+∫t0s‖Δθn(s)‖2ds≤∫t0(δ20αs⋅α‖ϕn′(s)‖2+‖θn(s)‖2V)ds≤δ20αt∫t0α‖ϕn′(s)‖2ds+∫t0‖θn(s)‖2Vds. | (3.135) |
Here we integrate (3.125) on (0,T) after omitting the positive terms ν3E+‖ϕt‖2V′ from the left-hand side to find the bounds
δ20αt∫t0α‖ϕ′n(s)‖2Vds≤δ20αt∫t0α‖ϕt(s)‖2Vds≤δ20αE(0)⋅t+δ20αQ(m)⋅t2 | (3.136) |
and
∫t0‖θn(s)‖2Vds≤∫t0‖θ(s)‖2Vds≤1ν3E(0)+1ν3Q(m)⋅t. | (3.137) |
When we combine (3.135)-(3.137) and choose any 0<τ<T,we find,for all τ≤t<T,
‖θn(t)‖2V≤1εE(0)(δ20α+1ν3τ)+1εQ(m)(δ20αT+1ν3). | (3.138) |
Moreover,for every τ>0 and t≥τ such that τ≤t<T,
∫t0‖Δθn(s)‖2ds ≤1τE(0)(δ20α+1ν3τ)+1τQ(m)(δ20αT+1ν3). | (3.139) |
(Observe,these bounds are independent of t and n.)Thus,there is θ∈L∞(τ,T;V)∩L2(τ,T;D(AN)) such that up to a subsequence (not relabeled),as n→∞
θn⇀θweakly-* inL∞(τ,T;V),θn⇀θweakly inL2(τ,T;D(AN)). | (3.140) |
For the heat equation equation (1.3),the H2-elliptic regularity estimate is
‖θ‖H2(Ω)≤C(‖ANθ‖+δ0‖ϕt‖), | (3.141) |
thus,for the above bounds we also find
θn⇀θ weakly in L2(τ,T;H2(Ω)). | (3.142) |
In order to recover the result for θ0∈H,recall that D(AN) is dense in H,so for any θ0∈H,there is a sequence (θ0n)∞n=1⊂D(AN) such that θ0n→θ0 in H.Therefore,for any θ0∈H and T>0 we deduce (3.134)-(3.142) hold as well.Finally,the required bound (3.132) follows from (3.138),and (3.133) follows from (3.139). This completes the proof.
The precompactness of the semigroup of solution operators Sα,ε now depends on the precompactness of the first component. To this end we will show there is a t∗>0 such that the map Sα,ε(t∗) is a so-called α-contraction on B0; that is,there is a time t∗>0,a constant 0<ν<1 and a precompact pseudometric M∗ on B0,where B0 is the bounded absorbing set from Lemma 3.6,such that for all ζ1,ζ2∈B0,
‖Sα,ε(t∗)ζ1−Sα,ε(t∗)ζ2‖H0≤ν‖ζ1−ζ2‖H0+M∗(ζ1,ζ2). | (3.143) |
Such a contraction is commonly used in connection with phase-field type equations as an alternative to establish the precompactness of a semigroup; for some particular recent results see,[14, 25, 30].
Lemma 3.11. Under the assumptions of Proposition 3.4 where ζ01,ζ02∈B0,there is a positive constant ˉν4=ˉν4(J,Ω), such that for all t≥0,
‖ζ1(t)−ζ2(t)‖2Hα,εm≤e−ˉν4t‖ζ1(0)−ζ2(0)‖2Hα,εm+C1∫t0‖ϕ1(s)−ϕ2(s)‖2ds+C2(1+eˉν1t)(|M1−M2|2+|N1−N2|2)+eˉν1t‖ζ1(0)−ζ2(0)‖2Hα,εm, | (3.144) |
where C1>0 depends on δ0, cJ,and the embedding H↪V′,C2>0 depends on F,J,Ω, δ0,and cJ,and where the constant ˉν1 is given in Proposition (3.143).Consequently,there is t∗>0 such that the operator Sα,ε(t∗) is a strict contraction up to the precompact pseudometric on B0,in the sense of (3.143),given by
M∗(ζ01,ζ02) :=C∗(∫t∗0‖ϕ1(s)−ϕ2(s)‖2ds+|M1−M2|2+|N1−N2|2+‖ζ01−ζ02‖2Hα,εm)1/2, | (3.145) |
where C∗>0 depends on t∗ and ˉν1, but is independent of t,α,and ε. Furthermore,Sα,ε is precompact on B0. \end{lemma}
proof The proof is based on the proof of Proposition 3.4.Here we multiply (3.92)-(3.94) by,respectively,A−1N(ˉϕ−⟨ˉϕ⟩),ˉϕ−⟨ˉϕ⟩ and ˉθ,then sum the resulting identities to yield,
ddt‖ˉζ‖2Hα,εm+2‖A1/2Nˉθ‖2+2(aˉϕ+F′(ϕ1)−F′(ϕ2),ˉϕ)−2(J∗ˉϕ,ˉϕ)=2δ(ˉθ,ˉϕ)−2δ(ˉϕt,ˉθ)+2⟨ˉϕ⟩⟨ˉμ⟩|Ω|. | (3.146) |
This time estimating the resulting products using assumption (H2) yields,
2(aˉϕ+F′(ϕ1)−F′(ϕ2),ˉϕ) ≥2c0‖ˉϕ‖2≥c0C−2Ω‖ˉϕ‖2V′+c0‖ˉϕ‖2, | (3.147) |
where we recall the continuous embedding H↪V′.We also write,
−(J∗ϕ,ϕ) ≥−‖J‖L1(Ω)‖ˉϕ‖2 =−cJ‖ˉϕ‖2, | (3.148) |
2δ(ˉθ,ˉϕ) ≤2δ0‖A1/2Nˉθ‖‖A−1/2Nˉϕ‖ ≤12‖A1/2Nˉθ‖2+2δ20‖ˉϕ‖2V′, | (3.149) |
and,
−2δ(ˉϕt,ˉθ)≤2δ0‖A−1/2Nˉϕt‖‖A1/2Nˉθ‖ ≤2δ20‖ˉϕt‖2V′+12‖A1/2Nˉθ‖2. | (3.150) |
Combining (3.146)-(3.150),then applying the Poincaré inequality inequality (2.4),we have,for almost all t∈[0,T],
ddt‖ˉζ‖2Hα,εm+c0C−2Ω‖ˉϕ‖2V′+c0⋅α‖ˉϕ‖2+‖ˉθ‖2V≤2δ20‖ˉϕ‖2V′+cJ‖ˉϕ‖2+2δ20‖ˉϕt‖2V′+2|⟨ˉϕ⟩||⟨ˉμ⟩||Ω|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|. | (3.151) |
We readily find that there is a positive constant (independent of α∈(0,1]),
ˉν4=ˉν4(J,Ω):=min{c0C−2Ω,c0,c−1Ω}, |
such that (3.151) becomes,with (3.106),for almost all t∈[0,T],
ddt‖ˉζ‖2Hα,εm+ˉν4‖ˉζ‖2Hα,εm≤2δ20‖ˉϕ‖2V′+cJ‖ˉϕ‖2+2δ20‖ˉϕt‖2V′+2|⟨ˉϕ⟩|μ∗|Ω|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|. | (3.152) |
After applying Gr\"{o}nwall's inequality to (3.152),we obtain,for all t≥0,
‖ˉζ(t)‖2Hα,εm≤e−ˉν4t‖ˉζ(0)‖2Hα,εm+∫t0(2δ20‖ˉϕ(s)‖2V′+cJ‖ˉϕ(s)‖2+2δ20‖ˉϕt(s)‖2V′)ds+1ˉν4(2|⟨ˉϕ⟩|μ∗|Ω|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|). | (3.153) |
It is important to note that by (3.91),
∫t02δ20‖ˉϕt(s)‖2V′ds≤2δ20eˉν1t(‖ˉζ(0)‖2Hα,εm+2ˉν2ˉν1(|⟨ˉϕ⟩|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|)2)≤Ceˉν1t(‖ˉζ(0)‖2Hα,εm+(|⟨ˉϕ⟩|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|)2), | (3.154) |
where C=C(F,J,Ω,δ0)>0. Moreover,with (3.106) again,
1ˉν4(2|⟨ˉϕ⟩|μ∗|Ω|+|⟨ˉθ⟩|) ≤C(|⟨ˉϕ⟩|2+|⟨ˉθ⟩|2), | (3.155) |
where here C>0 depends on cJ,δ0,and the Lipschitz bound on F′. Together (3.153)-(3.155) yield the estimate (3.144).
Clearly there is a t∗>0 so that e−ˉν4t∗/2<1. Thus,the operator Sα,ε(t∗) is a strict contraction up to the pseudometric M∗ defined by (3.145).The pseudometric M∗ is precompact thanks to the Aubin-Lions compact embedding (cf. e.g. [29,Theorem 3.1.1]
{χ∈L2(0,t∗;V):χt∈L2(0,t∗;V′)}→L2(0,t∗;H). |
Finally,with the compactness result for the second component given in Lemma 3.10,the operators Sα,ε are precompact on Hα,εm.The proof is complete.
proof of Theorem 3.9 The precompactness of the solution operators Sα,ε follows via the method of precompact pseudometrics (see Lemma 3.10 and Lemma 3.11).With the existence of a bounded absorbing set Bα,ε0 in Hα,εm (Lemma 3.6,the existence of a global attractor in Hα,εm is well-known and can be found in [27, 3] for example.Additional characteristics of the attractor follow thanks to the gradient structure of Problem Pα,ε (Remark 3.3).In particular,the first three claims in the statement of Theorem 3.9 are a direct result of the existence of the an absorbing set,a Lyapunov functional Eε,and the fact that the system (Xα,εm,Sα,ε(t),Eε) is gradient. The fourth property is a direct result [27,Theorem VII.4.1],the fifth follows from [29,Theorem 6.3.2].This concludes the proof.
Our next aim is to bound the global attractor in a more regular space by showing the existence of an absorbing set in Vα,εm.Once this is established,we will bound the (α-weighted) chemical potential √αμ in H2(Ω), which also establishes a bound in L∞(Ω). Some of the results in this subsection require hypothesis (H5) with q≥2,and hence the existence of a global attractor for Problem Pα,ε.
Lemma 3.12. Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.6,the set given by
Bα,ε1:={ζ∈Vα,εm:‖ζ‖2Vα,εm≤(1ε+1)(E(0)+(2ν3+1)Qα(m)+1)}, | (3.156) |
for some positive monotonically increasing function Qα∼α−1,is a closed,bounded absorbing set in Vα,εm,positively invariant under the semigroup Sα,ε.
proof Because we already know the existence of an absorbing set in Hα,εm,bounded uniformly in α and ε,the proof is relatively simple and follows a very standard idea (cf. e.g. [24,Section 11.1.2]).Multiply (1.1)-(1.3) ϕ, ANϕ, and ANθ,respectively,then sum the resulting identities to find,
12ddt{‖ϕ‖2+α‖∇ϕ‖2+ε‖∇θ‖2}+((∇a)ϕ+a∇ϕ−∇J∗ϕ+F″(ϕ)∇ϕ,∇ϕ)+‖Δθ‖2=δ(∇θ,∇ϕ)+δ(ϕt,Δθ). | (3.157) |
Recalling the scheme supporting (3.50),we have
((∇a)ϕ+a∇ϕ−∇J∗ϕ+F″(ϕ)∇ϕ,∇ϕ)≥c02‖∇ϕ‖2−1c0(‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)+d2J)‖ϕ‖2. | (3.158) |
We estimate the remaining two products on the right-hand side of (3.157) as,
δ(∇θ,∇ϕ)≤δ20c0‖∇θ‖2+c04‖∇ϕ‖2, | (3.159) |
and
δ(ϕt,Δθ)≤δ20‖ϕt‖2+‖Δθ‖2. | (3.160) |
Together,(3.157)-(3.160) produce,
ddt{‖ϕ‖2+α‖∇ϕ‖2+ ε‖∇θ‖2}+c02‖∇ϕ‖2 ≤2c0(‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)+d2J)‖ϕ‖2+2δ20c0‖∇θ‖2+2δ20‖ϕt‖2. | (3.161) |
For t≥1,integrating (3.161) over t−1<s<t yields,
‖ϕ(t)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(t)‖2+ε‖∇θ(t)‖2+c02∫ts‖∇ϕ(σ)‖2dσ≤‖ϕ(s)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(s)‖2+ε‖∇θ(s)‖2+2c0(‖Jk‖W1,∞(Ω)+d2J)∫ts‖ϕ(σ)‖2dσ+2δ20c0∫ts‖∇θ(σ)‖2dσ+2δ20α∫tsα‖ϕt(σ)‖2dσ. |
Hence,using the bounds (3.128) and (3.130) (also see (3.114)),we find
‖ϕ(t)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(t)‖2+ε‖∇θ(t)‖2≤‖ϕ(s)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(s)‖2+ε‖∇θ(s)‖2+(e−ν3t+1)E(0)+(2ν3+1)Qα(m), | (3.162) |
where ν3>0 is described in Lemma (3.162) and Qα∼α−1. Then integrating (3.162) with respect to s on (t−1,t) shows,
‖ϕ(t)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(t)‖2+ε‖∇θ(t)‖2≤1ε∫tt−1(‖ϕ(s)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(s)‖2+ε‖∇θ(s)‖2)ds+(e−ν3t+1)E(0)+(2ν3+1)Qα(m). |
Once again we rely on (3.128) (hence the factor of ε−1 above) to find
‖ϕ(t)‖2+α‖∇ϕ(t)‖2+ε‖∇θ(t)‖2≤(1ε+1)((e−ν3t+1)E(0)+(2ν3+1)Qα(m)). | (3.163) |
Hence,the left-hand side does eventually go into a ball. With estimate (3.163),we deduce the existence of the regular absorbing set Bα,ε1.This completes the proof.
Remark 3.13. We draw two useful facts from (3.163).The first is the time uniform bound
limsupt→+∞‖ζ(t)‖2Vα,εm ≤(1ε+1)(E(0)+1ν3Qα(m)) =:Qα,ε(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm,m). | (3.164) |
This bound becomes arbitrarily large as α→0+ or ε→0+. Second,the "time of entry" of any nonempty bounded subset B of Vα,εm in Bα,ε1 under the solution operator Sα,ε(t) is given by
t1:=max{1ν3lnE(0),0}. |
The following result now follows in a standard way (cf. e.g. [27]).
Corollary 3.14. For each α∈(0,1] and ε∈(0,1],the global attractor Aα,ε is bounded in Vα,εm,i.e.,Aα,ε⊂Bα,ε1, and compact in Hα,εm.
Remark 3.15.The radius of the absorbing set Bα,ε1 in Hα,εm may be larger than the radius of Bα,ε1 in Vα,εm.This is due to the (compact) embedding Vα,εm↪Hα,εm.Moreover,from (3.163) we find that the "radius" of the set Bα,ε1 depends on α and ε like,respectively,α−1 and ε−1.
The following result refers to the instantaneous regularization of the α-weighted chemical potential √αμ.
Lemma 3.16. Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.6,the global weak solutions to Problem Pα,ε satisfy the following,for every τ>0,
√αμ∈L∞(τ,∞;D(AN))andμ∈L∞(τ,∞;V), | (3.165) |
and for all t≥τ there holds,
α‖Δμ(t)‖2+‖μ(t)‖2V≤1α(Q(‖ζ0‖Hα,εm)+1ν3Q(m)), | (3.166) |
where \nu_3 and Q are due to (3.109) (hence,the right-hand side of (3.166) is independent of \varepsilon,but dependent on \delta_0 like \frac{1}{\nu_3}\sim\delta_0^{-1}). \end{lemma}
proof To begin,multiply (1.1) and (1.2) by,respectively,\alpha A_N\mu and A_N\mu in L^2(\Omega) and sum the resulting identities.(Recall that with \zeta_0=(\phi_0,\theta_0)^{tr}\in\mathbb{H}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m,we only know that \mu\in L^2(0,T;V) by (3.4); hence,\Delta\mu\in L^2(0,T;V')). Hence,the aforementioned multiplication is formal,but can be rigorously justified using the above Galerkin approximation procedure).We then have
\alpha \|{{A}_{N}}\mu {{\|}^{2}}+\|\nabla \mu {{\|}^{2}}\text{ }=(a\phi -J*\phi +{F}'(\phi )-\delta \theta ,{{A}_{N}}\mu ).\text{ } |
After applying a basic estimate to the right-hand side,we easily arrive at
\alpha \|{{A}_{N}}\mu {{\|}^{2}}+\|\nabla \mu {{\|}^{2}}\text{ }\le \frac{4}{\alpha }\left( \|\sqrt{a}\phi {{\|}^{2}}+c_{J}^{2}\|\phi {{\|}^{2}}+\|{F}'(\phi ){{\|}^{2}}+\delta _{0}^{2}\|\theta {{\|}^{2}} \right),\text{ } |
to which we employ the bounds (2.9),(3.109) and (3.45) to find (3.166) as claimed.
Lemma 3.17. Under the assumptions of Lemma 3.6,the global weak solutions to Problem P_{\alpha,\varepsilon} satisfy the following,
{{\phi }_{t}}\text{ }\in \text{ }{{L}^{\infty }}(0,\infty ;{V}'), | (3.167) |
\sqrt{\alpha }{{\phi }_{t}}\text{ }\in \text{ }{{L}^{\infty }}(0,\infty ;H), | (3.168) |
\theta \text{ }\in \text{ }{{L}^{\infty }}(0,\infty ;V). | (3.169) |
and there is a positive constant \nu_5=\nu_5(\alpha,F)\sim\alpha^{-1},independent of \zeta_0,such that,for all t\ge0,there holds,
\|{{\phi }_{t}}(t)\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}+\alpha \|{{\phi }_{t}}(t){{\|}^{2}}+\|\theta (t)\|_{V}^{2}\le \left( {{e}^{-{{\nu }_{5}}t}}+\frac{1}{{{\nu }_{5}}} \right)Q(\|{{\zeta }_{0}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{H}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}},m), | (3.170) |
for some monotonically increasing function Q. (Observe,the right-hand side of (3.170) can be bounded independent of \alpha.)
proof We will only give a formal derivation of (3.170) as the remaining details are justified within the Galerkin approximation scheme already given in the beginning of this section. Now,we differentiate (1.1) and (1.2) with respect to t and write the resulting equations in the terms
u:={{\phi }_{t}},\quad \varpi :={{\theta }_{t}},\quad m:={{\mu }_{t}}, |
which now gives,
{{u}_{t}}=\Delta m\text{ in }\Omega \times (0,\infty ) | (3.171) |
m=au-J*u+{F}''(\phi )u+\alpha {{u}_{t}}-\delta \varpi \text{ in }\Omega \times (0,\infty ) | (3.172) |
\varepsilon {{\theta }_{t}}-\Delta \theta =-\delta {{\phi }_{t}}\text{ in }\Omega \times (0,\infty ) | (3.173) |
{{\partial }_{n}}m=0\text{ on }\Gamma \times (0,\infty ) | (3.174) |
{{\partial }_{n}}\theta =0\text{ on }\Gamma \times (0,\infty ) | (3.175) |
\alpha u(x,0)=\mu (0)-a\phi (0)+J*\phi (0)-{F}'(\phi (0))+\delta \theta (0)\text{ at }\Omega \times \{0\} | (3.176) |
\theta (x,0)={{\theta }_{0}}\text{ at }\Omega \times \{0\}. | (3.177) |
Multiply (3.173) by \varpi in L^2(\Omega),so
\frac{d}{dt}\|\theta \|_{V}^{2}+2\varepsilon \|\varpi {{\|}^{2}}=-2\delta (u,\varpi ). | (3.178) |
Now,in L^2(\Omega),multiply (3.171) and (3.172) by A_N^{-1}u and u,respectively,and sum the resulting identity to (3.178) to obtain (recall \langle u \rangle=0,so A^{-1}_Nu belongs to V_0'),
\frac{d}{dt}\text{ }\left\{ \|u\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}+\alpha \|u{{\|}^{2}}+\|\theta \|_{V}^{2} \right\}+2((a+{F}''(\phi ))u,u)+2\varepsilon \|\varpi {{\|}^{2}}=2(J*u,u). | (3.179) |
Estimating the products in a similar fashion as we have already done above shows,
2((a+{F}''(\phi ))u,u)\text{ }\ge 2{{c}_{0}}\|u{{\|}^{2}}\text{ }\ge {{c}_{0}}\|u{{\|}^{2}}+{{c}_{0}}C_{\Omega }^{-2}\|u\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}, | (3.180) |
since \|u\|_{V'}\le C_\Omega\|u\|,and
\begin{array}{*{35}{l}} 2(J*u,u) & \le 2{{c}_{J}}\|u{{\|}^{2}}. \\ \end{array} | (3.181) |
Combining (3.179)-(3.181),
\frac{d}{dt}\left\{ \|u\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}+\alpha \|u{{\|}^{2}}+\|\theta \|_{V}^{2} \right\}+{{\nu }_{5}}\left( \|u\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}+\alpha \|u{{\|}^{2}}+\|\theta \|_{V}^{2} \right)+2\varepsilon \|\varpi {{\|}^{2}}\le 2{{c}_{J}}\|u{{\|}^{2}}, | (3.182) |
where 0<\nu_5=\nu_5(\alpha):=\min\{c_0 C^{-2}_\Omega,\frac{c_0}{\alpha},1\}\sim\alpha^{-1}. Since u=\phi_t is uniformly bounded in L^2(\Omega) (see (3.130)),then integrating (3.182) on (0,t) produces,
\begin{align} & \|u(t)\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}+\alpha \|u(t){{\|}^{2}}+\|\theta (t)\|_{V}^{2}+\int_{0}^{t}{\varepsilon }\|\varpi (s){{\|}^{2}}ds \\ & \le {{e}^{-{{\nu }_{5}}t}}\left( \|u(0)\|_{{{V}'}}^{2}+\alpha \|u(0){{\|}^{2}}+\|\theta (0)\|_{V}^{2} \right)+Q(\|{{\zeta }_{0}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{H}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}},m). \\ \end{align} | (3.183) |
Observe \varpi=\theta_t\in L^2(0,T;L^2(\Omega)) (see (3.17)) so we are free to omit the term. Recall that the initial conditions are taken in the weak/L^2-sense,for all \varphi\in V,
(\mu (0),\varphi )=\underset{t\to {{0}^{+}}}{\mathop{\lim }}\,(\mu (t),\varphi ), |
hence,by (3.4),we conclude
\mu (0)\in V\to H. | (3.184) |
Similarly,with (3.7) and (3.81),
\rho (\cdot ,\phi (0)):=a\phi (0)+{F}'(\phi (0))\in V\to H. | (3.185) |
Then using (3.176),(3.89),(3.184),and (3.185),
\alpha u(0)=\mu (0)-a\phi (0)+J*\phi (0)-{F}'(\phi (0))+\delta \theta (0)\in H. | (3.186) |
It should also be mentioned that \theta_0\in H,while,with (3.11),for all \vartheta\in V,
({{\theta }_{0}},\vartheta )=(\theta (0),\vartheta ). |
Hence,the bound on the right-hand side of (3.183) is well defined. This establishes (3.170).This finishes the proof.
The final result is this section concerns bounding the global attractor \mathcal{A}^{\alpha,\varepsilon} in a more regular subspace of \mathbb{V}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m.For each m\ge0,\alpha\in(0,1] and \varepsilon\in(0,1],we now define the regularized phase-space
\mathbb{W}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }:=\{\zeta ={{(\phi ,\theta )}^{tr}}\in \mathbb{V}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }:\sqrt{\alpha }\mu \in {{H}^{2}}(\Omega ),\ |\langle \phi \rangle |,|\langle \theta \rangle |\le m\},\text{ } |
with the norm inherited from \mathbb{V}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m.Also,we define the following metric space
\mathcal{Y}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }:=\left\{ \zeta ={{(\phi ,\theta )}^{tr}}\in \mathbb{W}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }:F(\phi )\in {{L}^{1}}(\Omega ) \right\},\text{ } |
endowed with the metric
{{d}_{\mathcal{Y}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}}({{\zeta }_{1}},{{\zeta }_{2}}):=\|{{\zeta }_{1}}-{{\zeta }_{2}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{V}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}}+{{\left| \int_{\Omega }{F}({{\phi }_{1}})dx-\int_{\Omega }{F}({{\phi }_{2}})dx \right|}^{1/2}}.\text{ }{{d}_{\mathcal{Y}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}}({{\zeta }_{1}},{{\zeta }_{2}}):=\|{{\zeta }_{1}}-{{\zeta }_{2}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{V}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}}+{{\left| \int_{\Omega }{F}({{\phi }_{1}})dx-\int_{\Omega }{F}({{\phi }_{2}})dx \right|}^{1/2}}.\text{ } |
Theorem 3.18. For each \alpha\in(0,1],\varepsilon\in(0,1] and for any t\ge t_*,the semigroup S_{\alpha,\varepsilon} satisfies S_{\alpha,\varepsilon}(t):\mathcal{X}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m\rightarrow\mathcal{Y}^\alpha_m. Moreover,the global attractor \mathcal{A}^{\alpha,\varepsilon} admitted by the semigroup S_{\alpha,\varepsilon} is bounded in \mathbb{W}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m and compact in \mathbb{H}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m.
proof To begin,we let \zeta_0=(\phi_0,\theta_0)^{tr}\in\mathbb{H}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m be such that F(\phi_0)\in L^1(\Omega) (i.e. \zeta_0\in\mathcal{X}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m).By the precompactness of the solution operators (see Remark 3.3),we know that,for all t\ge t_*,S_{\alpha,\varepsilon}(t)\zeta_0\in\mathbb{V}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m (t_* was given in Lemma 3.11 and we may choose \tau=t_* in Lemma 3.10).Letting \zeta_1=S_{\alpha,\varepsilon}(t)\zeta_0, it now suffices to show that S_{\alpha,\varepsilon}(t)\zeta_1\in\mathbb{W}^{\alpha,\varepsilon}_m for all t\ge t_*; i.e.,we will show that
\sqrt{\alpha }\mu \in {{L}^{\infty }}({{t}_{*}},\infty ;{{H}^{2}}(\Omega )). | (3.187) |
Since \phi_t=\Delta\mu, the estimate (3.170) shows,
\|\nabla \mu (t){{\|}^{2}}+\alpha \|\Delta \mu (t){{\|}^{2}}\le \left( 1+\frac{1}{{{\nu }_{5}}} \right)Q(\|{{\zeta }_{0}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{H}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}},m). | (3.188) |
Adding \langle\mu(t)\rangle^2 to both sides of (3.188) and applying the Poincaré inequality (2.4) (on the left) and (3.166) (on the right),we now have
c_{\Omega }^{-1/2}\|\mu (t){{\|}^{2}}+\alpha \|\Delta \mu (t){{\|}^{2}}\le Q(\|{{\zeta }_{0}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{H}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}},m) | (3.189) |
for some positive monotonically increasing function Q. In this setting,the (standard) H^2-elliptic regularity estimate is
\sqrt{\alpha }\|\mu {{\|}_{{{H}^{2}}(\Omega )}}\text{ }\le C(\sqrt{\alpha }\|{{A}_{N}}\mu \|+\|\mu \|)\text{ } |
for some positive constant C, so with (3.189) we readily find
\sqrt{\alpha }\|\mu {{\|}_{{{H}^{2}}(\Omega )}}\text{ }\le Q(\|{{\zeta }_{0}}{{\|}_{\mathbb{H}_{m}^{\alpha ,\varepsilon }}},m). | (3.190) |
This establishes (3.187) and completes the proof.
In this article we have shown that the relaxation Problem P_{\alpha,\varepsilon} is globally well-posed and generates a dissipative and conservative semigroup of solution operators which,in turn,admit a family of global attractors that possess a certain degree of regularity.The relaxation problem considered here presented many difficulties due to the presence of the nonlocal diffusion terms on the order parameter \phi.
Some interesting future work would include determining whether the (fractal) dimension of the global attractors found here is finite and independent of \alpha and \varepsilon.Additionally,it would also be interesting to establish an upper-semicontinuity result for the family of global attractors when \alpha\rightarrow0^+ and \varepsilon\rightarrow0^+ (compare this to the standard diffusion case in [12]).
Hence,we should also examine the existence of an exponential attractor for Problem P_{\alpha,\varepsilon},and naturally,its basin of attraction.With that result,we could seek a robustness result for the family of exponential attractors.Examining problems related to stability (and hence the approximation of the longterm behavior of a relaxation problem to the associated limit problem) may prove to be an important source of further work on nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard and nonlocal phase field models.
Of course,some future work may examine several variants to the current model. Such variants may include a convection term that accounts for the effects of an averaged (fluid) velocity field,which naturally couples with a nonisothermal Navier-Stokes equation (on the former,see for example [22]).Indeed,one may include nonconstant mobility in the nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard equation (cf. e.g. [8]). It may be interesting to generalize the coupled heat equation to a Coleman-Gurtin type equation. Also,one may examine the associated nonlocal phase-field model (1.8),and the effects of generalizing the heat equation along the lines of [15, 16, 17, 18] where Fourier's law is replaced with a Maxwell-Cattaneo law because in this more realistic setting,"disturbances" propagate at a finite speed.
It would also be interesting to study the nonlocal variant of the Cahn-Hilliard and phase-field equations by introducing relevant dynamic boundary conditions (again,see [12]).In this case,several interesting difficulties may arise concerning the regularity of solutions because,typically in applications,H^1(\Omega) regularity (or better) is sought in order to define the trace of the solution; recall,trace:H^s(\Omega)\rightarrow H^{s-1/2}(\Gamma). Additionally,we should study the case when the potential is singular (see hypotheses in in [11,Section 3],for example).
The author would like to thank Professor Ciprian G. Gal for recommending portions of this project. In addition,the author is indebted to the anonymous referee(s) for their careful reading of the manuscript,which undoubtably improved the paper.
[1] | Robert A. Adams and John J. F. Fournier, Sobolev spaces, second ed., Pure and Applied Mathematics - Volume 140, Academic Press / Elsevier Science, Oxford, 2003. |
[2] | Fuensanta Andreu-Vaillo, Jos´e M. Maz´on, Julio D. Rossi, and J. Juli´an Toledo-Melero, Nonlocal diffusion problems, Mathematical Surveys and Monographs, vol. 165, American Mathematical Society, Real Sociedad Matem´atica Espa˜nola, 2010. |
[3] | A. V. Babin and M. I. Vishik, Attractors of evolution equations, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1992. |
[4] | Viorel Barbu, Nonlinear semigroups and differential equations in Banach spaces, Noordhoff International Publishing, Bucharest, 1976. |
[5] | Pierluigi Colli, Sergio Frigeri, and Maurizio Grasselli, Global existence of weak solutions to a nonlocal Cahn–Hilliard–Navier–Stokes system, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 386 (2012), no. 1, 428–444. |
[6] | Pierluigi Colli, Pavel Krejˇc´ı, Elisabetta Rocca, and J¨urgen Sprekels, Nonlinear evolution inclusions arising from phase change models, Czechoslovak Math. J. 57 (2007), no. 132, 1067–1098. |
[7] | Sergio Frigeri and Maurizio Grasselli, Global and trajectory attractors for a nonlocal Cahn–Hilliard–Navier–Stokes system, J. Dynam. Differential Equations 24 (2012), no. 4, 827–856. |
[8] | Sergio Frigeri, Maurizio Grasselli, and Elisabetta Rocca, A diffuse interface model for two-phase incompressible flows with nonlocal interactions and nonconstant mobility, arXiv:1303.6446v2 (2015). |
[9] | Ciprian G. Gal and Maurizio Grasselli, The non-isothermal Allen–Cahn equation with dynamic boundary conditions, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 22 (2008), no. 4, 1009–1040. |
[10] | Ciprian G. Gal, Maurizio Grasselli, and Alain Miranville, Robust exponential attractors for singularly perturbed phase-field equations with dynamic boundary conditions, NoDEA Nonlinear Differential Equations Appl. 15 (2008), no. 4–5, 535–556. |
[11] | Ciprian G. Gal and Murizio Grasselli, Longtime behavior of nonlocal Cahn–Hilliard equations, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 34 (2014), no. 1, 145–179. |
[12] | Ciprian G. Gal and Alain Miranville, Uniform global attractors for non-isothermal viscous and non-viscous Cahn–Hilliard equations with dynamic boundary conditions, Nonlinear Anal. Real World Appl. 10 (2009), no. 3, 1738–1766. |
[13] | Giambattista Giacomin and Joel L. Lebowitz, Phase segregation dynamics in particle systems with long range interactions. i. macroscopic limits, J. Statist. Phys. 87 (1997), no. 1–2, 37–61. |
[14] | Maurizio Grasselli, Finite-dimensional global attractor for a nonlocal phase-field system, Istituto Lombardo (Rend. Scienze) Mathematica 146 (2012), 113–132. |
[15] | Maurizio Grasselli, Hana Petzeltov´a, and Giulio Schimperna, Asymptotic behavior of a nonisothermal viscous cahn-hilliard equation with inertial term, J. Differential Equations 239 (2007), no. 1, 38–60. |
[16] | L. Herrera and D. Pav´on, Hyperbolic theories of dissipation: Why and when do we need them?, Phys. A 307 (2002), 121–130. |
[17] | D. D. Joseph and Luigi Preziosi, Heat waves, Rev. Modern Phys. 61 (1989), no. 1, 41–73. |
[18] | D. D. Joseph and Luigi Preziosi, Addendum to the paper: “heat waves”, Rev. Modern Phys. 62 (1990), no. 2, 375–391. |
[19] | Pavel Krejˇc´ı and J¨urgen Sprekels, Nonlocal phase-field models for non-isothermal phase transitions and hysteresis, Adv. Math. Sci. Appl. 14 (2004), no. 2, 593–612. |
[20] | Albert J. Milani and Norbert J. Koksch, An introduction to semiflows, Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics - Volume 134, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2005. |
[21] | Alain Miranville and Sergey Zelik, Robust exponential attractors for singularly perturbed phasefield type equations, Electron. J. Differential Equations 2002 (2002), no. 63, 1–28. |
[22] | Francesco Della Porta and Maurizio Grasselli, Convective nonlocal cahn-hilliard equations with reaction terms, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. Ser. B 20 (2015), no. 5, 1529–1553. |
[23] | Michael Renardy and Robert C. Rogers, An introduction to partial differential equations, second ed., Texts in Applied Mathematics - Volume 13, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2004. |
[24] | James C. Robinson, Inertial manifolds for the Kuramoto–Sivashinsky equation, Physics Letters (1994), no. 184, 190–193. |
[25] | Murizio Grasselli Giulio Schimperna, Nonlocal phase-field systems with general potentials, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 33 (2013), no. 11–12, 5089–5106. |
[26] | Hiroki Tanabe, Equations of evolution, Pitman, London, 1979. |
[27] | Roger Temam, Infinite-dimensional dynamical systems in mechanics and physics, Applied Mathematical Sciences - Volume 68, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1988. |
[28] | Roger Temam, Navier-Stokes equations - theory and numerical analysis, reprint ed., AMS Chelsea Publishing, Providence, 2001. |
[29] | Songmu Zheng, Nonlinear evolution equations, Monographs and Surveys in Pure and Applied Mathematics - Volume 133, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2004. |
[30] | Songmu Zheng and Albert Milani, Global attractors for singular perturbations of the Cahn– Hilliard equations, J. Differential Equations 209 (2005), no. 1, 101–139. |