Our aim in this paper is to study generalizations of the Caginalp phase-field system based on a thermomechanical theory involving two temperatures and a nonlinear coupling. In particular, we prove well-posedness results. More precisely, the existence and uniqueness of solutions, the existence of the global attractor and the existence of an exponential attractor.
Citation: 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[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 14485-14507. doi: 10.3934/math.2023740
[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] | Brice Landry Doumbé Bangola . Phase-field system with two temperatures and a nonlinear coupling term. AIMS Mathematics, 2018, 3(2): 298-315. doi: 10.3934/Math.2018.2.298 |
[3] | Franck Davhys Reval Langa, Armel Judice Ntsokongo . A conserved phase-field model based on type II heat conduction. AIMS Mathematics, 2018, 3(2): 288-297. doi: 10.3934/Math.2018.2.288 |
[4] | Armel Andami Ovono, Alain Miranville . On the Caginalp phase-field system based on the Cattaneo law with nonlinear coupling. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(1): 24-42. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.1.24 |
[5] | Joseph L. Shomberg . Well-posedness and global attractors for a non-isothermal viscous relaxationof nonlocal Cahn-Hilliard equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2016, 1(2): 102-136. doi: 10.3934/Math.2016.2.102 |
[6] | Armel Judice Ntsokongo, Daniel Moukoko, Franck Davhys Reval Langa, Fidèle Moukamba . On higher-order anisotropic conservative Caginalp phase-field type models. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(2): 215-229. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.2.215 |
[7] | Cyril Dennis Enyi, Soh Edwin Mukiawa . Dynamics of a thermoelastic-laminated beam problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 5261-5286. doi: 10.3934/math.2020338 |
[8] | Yang Wang, Jihui Wu . Long-time dynamics of nonlinear MGT-Fourier system. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(4): 9152-9163. doi: 10.3934/math.2024445 |
[9] | 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 |
[10] | Feng Zhou, Hongfang Li, Kaixuan Zhu, Xin Li . Dynamics of a damped quintic wave equation with time-dependent coefficients. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(9): 24677-24698. doi: 10.3934/math.20241202 |
Our aim in this paper is to study generalizations of the Caginalp phase-field system based on a thermomechanical theory involving two temperatures and a nonlinear coupling. In particular, we prove well-posedness results. More precisely, the existence and uniqueness of solutions, the existence of the global attractor and the existence of an exponential attractor.
The Caginalp phase-field system
∂tu+Δ2u−Δf(u)=−Δθ, | (1.1) |
∂tα−Δθ=−∂tu, | (1.2) |
has been proposed in [1] to model phase transition phenomena, e.g. melting-solidification phenomena, in certain classes of materials. In this context, u is the order parameter and θ the relative temperature (relative to the equilibrium melting temperature), f is a given function (precisely, the derivative of a doublewell potential F). This system has been studied, e.g., [2,6,7,8,9,10,11,13,15] and [17].
Equations (1.1) and (1.2) are based on the total free energy
Ψ(u,θ)=∫Ω(12|∇u|2+F(u)−uθ−12θ2)dx, | (1.3) |
where Ω is the domain occupied by the material (we assume that it is a bounded and smooth domain of Rn, n=2 or 3 with boundary Γ).
We then introduce the enthalpy H defined by
H=−∂θψ, | (1.4) |
where ∂ denotes a variational derivative, so that
H=u+θ. | (1.5) |
The gouverning equations for u and θ are finally given by
∂tu=Δ∂uψ, | (1.6) |
where ∂u stands for the variational derivative with respect to u, which yields (1.1). Then, we have the energy equation
∂tH=−divq, | (1.7) |
where q is the thermal flux vector. Assuming the classical Fourier law
q=−∇θ, | (1.8) |
we obtain (1.1) and (1.2).
Now, one drawback of the Fourier law is that it predicts that thermal signals propagate with an infinite speed, which violates causality (the so-called "paradox of heat conduction", see, e.g. [5]). Therefore, several modifications of (1.8) have been proposed in the literature to correct this unrealistic feature, leading to a second order in time equation for the temperature.
A different approach to heat conduction was proposed in the Sixties (see, [14,16]), where it was observed that two temperatures are involved in the definition of the entropy: the conductive temperature θ, influencing the heat conduction contribution, and the thermodynamic temperature, appearing in the heat supply part. For time-independent models, it appears that these two temperatures coincide in absence of heat supply. Actually, they are generally different in time for example, [8] and references therein for more discussion on the subject. In particular, this happens for non-simple materials. In that case, the two temperatures are related as follows (see [4,5]).
θ=α−△α, | (1.9) |
Our aim in this paper is to study a generalization of the Caginalp phase-field system based on these two temperatures theory and the usual Fourier law with a nonlinear coupling. In particular, we obtain the existence and the uniqueness of the solutions and we prove the existence of the exponential attractors and, thus, of finite-dimensional global attractors.
We consider the following initial and boundary value problem:
∂tu+Δ2u−Δf(u)=−Δg(u)(α−△α), | (2.1) |
∂tα−Δ∂tα+Δ2α−Δα=−g(u)∂tu, | (2.2) |
u=Δu=α=Δα=0onΓ, | (2.3) |
u|t=0=u0,α|t=0=α0, | (2.4) |
where Γ is the boundary of the spatial domain Ω.
We make the following assumptions on nonlinearities f and g:
fisofclassC2(R),f(0)=0,g∈C2(R),g(0)=0, | (2.5) |
∣G(s)∣<c1F(s)+c2,c0,c1,c2⩾0,s∈R, | (2.6) |
∣g(s)s∣<c3(∣G(s)∣2+1),c3⩾0,s∈R, | (2.7) |
c4sk+2−c5≤F(s)≤f(s)s+c0≤c6sk+2−c7,c4,c6>0,c5,c7⩾0,s∈R, | (2.8) |
∣g(s)∣<c8(∣s∣+1),∣g′(s)∣≤c9c8,c9⩾0,s∈R, | (2.9) |
∣f′(s)∣≤c10(∣s∣k+1),c10⩾0,s∈R, | (2.10) |
where k is an integer, G(s)=∫s0g(τ)dτ,and,F(s)=∫s0f(τ)d(τ).
We denote by ‖.‖ the usual L2-norm (with associated scalar product ((., .))) and set ‖.‖−1=‖(−Δ)−12.‖, where −Δ denotes the minus Laplace operator with Dirichlet boundary conditions. More generally, ‖.‖X denotes the norm in the Banach space X. Throughout this paper, the same letters c, c′ and c″ denotes (generally positive) constants which may change from line to line, or even in a same line. Similarly, the same letter Q denotes monotone increasing (with respect to each argument) functions which may change from line to line, or even in a same line.
Remark 2.1. In our case, to obtain equations (2.1) and (2.2), the total free energy reads in terms of the conductive temperature θ
ψ(u,θ)=∫Ω(12|∇u|2+F(u)−G(u)θ−12θ2)dx, | (2.11) |
where f=F′ and g=G′, and (1.6) yields, in view of (1.9), the evolution equation for the order parameter (2.1). Furthermore, the enthalpy now reads
H=G(u)+θ=G(u)+α−△α, |
which yields thanks to (1.7), the energy equation,
∂α∂t−△∂α∂t+divq=−g(u)∂u∂t. |
Considering the usual Fourier law (q=−∇θ), we have (2.2).
We can note that we still have an infinite speed of propagation here.
The estimates derived in this section are formal, but they can easily be justified within a Galerkin scheme. In what follows, the Poincaré, Hölder and Young inequalities are extensively used, Without further referring to them.
We rewrite (2.1) in the equivalent form:
(−Δ)−1∂tu−Δu+f(u)=g(u)(α−Δα). | (3.1) |
We multiply (3.1) by ∂tu and integrate over Ω, we have
((−Δ)−1∂tu,∂tu)+(−Δu,∂tu)+(f(u),∂tu)=(g(u)(α−Δα),∂tu), |
which gives
12ddt(‖∇u‖2+2∫ΩF(u)dx)+‖∂tu‖2−1=∫Ωg(u)∂tu(α−Δα)dx. | (3.2) |
We multiply (2.2) by (α−Δα) and integrate over Ω, we have
(∂tα,α−Δα)+(Δ2α,α−Δα)+(−Δ∂tα,α−Δα)+(−Δα,α−Δα)=−(g(u)∂tu,(α−Δα)), |
which gives,
12ddt‖α−Δα‖2+‖∇α‖2+2‖Δα‖2+‖∇Δα‖2=−∫Ωg(u)∂tu(α−Δα)dx | (3.3) |
(note that ‖α−Δα‖2=‖α‖2+2‖∇α‖2+‖Δα‖2).
Summing (3.2) and (3.3), we find
ddt(‖∇u‖2+‖α−Δα‖2+2∫ΩF(u)dx)+2‖∇α‖2+4‖Δα‖2+2‖∇Δα‖2+2‖∂tu‖2−1=0, | (3.4) |
which yields,
dE1dt+c(‖∇α‖2+‖Δα‖2+‖∇Δα‖2+‖∂tu‖2−1)≤c. | (3.5) |
where
E1=‖∇u‖2+‖α−Δα‖2+2∫ΩF(u)dx, | (3.6) |
Owing to (2.8), we obtain
c(‖u‖2H1(Ω)+‖α‖2H2(Ω)+‖u‖k+2Lk+2(Ω))−c′≤E1≤c"(‖u‖2H1(Ω)+‖α‖2H2(Ω)+‖u‖k+2Lk+2(Ω))−c‴, | (3.7) |
We multiply (2.1) by u and integrate over Ω, we have
ddt‖u‖2−1+c(‖u‖2H1(Ω)+∫ΩF(u)dx)≤c2‖α‖2H2(Ω)+2c0. | (3.8) |
Summing (3.5) and δ(3.8), where δ>0 is small enough, we have
ddtE2+c(E2+‖∇Δα‖2+‖∂tu‖2−1)≤c,c>0, | (3.9) |
where
E2=E1+δ‖u‖2−1, |
satifies
c(‖u‖2H1(Ω)+‖u‖k+2Lk+2(Ω)+‖α‖2H2(Ω))−c′≤E2≤c″(‖u‖2H1(Ω)+‖u‖k+2Lk+2(Ω)+‖α‖2H2(Ω))−c‴,c,c″>0. |
In particular, we deduce from (3.9) and Gronwall's lemma the dissipative estimate
‖u(t)‖2H1(Ω)+‖u(t)‖k+2Lk+2(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)+∫t0e−c(t−s)(‖∇Δα(s)‖2+‖∂tu(s)‖2−1)ds≤c(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖u0‖k+2Lk+2(Ω)+‖α0‖2H2(Ω))e−ct,c>0,t≥0. | (3.10) |
We multiply (2.1) by ∂tu and integrate over Ω, we obtain
ddt‖Δu‖2+2‖∂tu‖2=2∫ΩΔf(u)∂tudx−2∫ΩΔg(u)(α−Δα)∂tu)dx. | (3.11) |
We multiply (2.2) by −Δ(α−Δα) and integrate over Ω, we obtain
ddt‖∇(α−Δα)‖2+2‖Δα‖2+4‖∇Δα‖2+2‖Δ2α‖=2∫Ωg(u)∂tu.Δ(α−Δα)dx. | (3.12) |
(note that ‖∇(α−Δα)‖2=‖∇α‖2+2‖Δα‖2+‖∇Δα‖2)
Summing (3.11) and (3.12), we find
ddt(‖Δu‖2+‖∇(α−Δα)‖2)+2‖Δα‖2+4‖∇Δα‖2+2‖Δ2α‖2+2‖∂tu‖2=2(Δf(u),∂tu)−2(Δg(u)(α−Δα),∂tu)+2(g(u)∂tu,Δ(α−Δα)). | (3.13) |
This, let find estimates of (3.13) right terms, using H¨older inequality, owing to α∈H2(Ω) with continuous injection the H2(Ω)⊂L∞(Ω), we have
2|(Δf(u),∂tu)|≤c‖f(u)‖2H2(Ω)+13‖∂tu‖2. | (3.14) |
Furthermore,
2|(Δg(u)(α−Δα),∂tu)|≤2∫Ω|Δg(u)||(α−Δα)|L∞(Ω)|∂tu|dx≤2c‖Δg(u)‖‖∂tu‖≤c‖Δg(u)‖2+13‖∂tu‖2, | (3.15) |
and,
2|(g(u)∂tu,Δ(α−Δα))|=2|((α−Δα)Δg(u),∂tu)|≤c1‖Δg(u)‖2+c3‖∂tu‖2. | (3.16) |
Inserting (3.14), (3.15) and (3.16) into (3.13), we find
ddt(‖Δu‖2+‖∇(α−Δα)‖2)+2‖Δα‖2+4‖∇Δα‖2+2‖Δ2α‖2+c5‖∂tu‖2≤c‖f(u)‖2H2(Ω)+c‖Δg(u)‖2. | (3.17) |
We recall that H2(Ω)⊂C(¯Ω) and owing to (2.5), we obtain
‖f(u)‖2H2(Ω)+‖g(u)‖2H2(Ω)≤Q(‖u‖H2(Ω)). | (3.18) |
and inserting (3.18) into (3.17), we find
ddt(‖Δu‖2+‖∇(α−Δα)‖2)+2‖Δα‖2+4‖∇Δα‖2+‖Δ2α‖2+c5‖∂tu‖2≤Q(‖u‖H2(Ω)). | (3.19) |
In particular, we deduce
ddt(‖Δu‖2+‖∇(α−Δα)‖2)≤Q(‖u‖H2(Ω)). | (3.20) |
We set
y=‖Δu‖2+‖∇(α−Δα)‖2, | (3.21) |
we deduce from (3.20) an inequation of the form
y′≤Q(y). | (3.22) |
Let z be the solution to the ordinary differential equation
z′=Q(z),z(0)=y(0). | (3.23) |
It follows from the comparison principle, that there exists a time
T0=T0(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))>0 belonging to, say (0,12) such that
y(t)≤z(t),∀t∈[0,T0], | (3.24) |
hence
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H3(Ω)≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),∀t≤T0. | (3.25) |
We now differentiate (3.1) with respect to time, and have
(−Δ)−1∂2tu−Δ∂tu+f′(u)∂tu=g′(u)∂tu(α−Δα)+g(u)(∂tα−Δ∂tα). | (3.26) |
Owing to (2.2), we have
(−Δ)−1∂2tu−Δ∂tu+f′(u)∂tu=g′(u)∂tu(α−Δα)−g2(u)∂tu+g(u)Δα. | (3.27) |
We multiply (3.27) by t∂tu and integrate over Ω, we find for t≤T0
ddt(t‖∂tu‖2−1)+2t‖∇∂tu‖2+2(f′(u)∂tu,t∂tu)=2∫Ωg′(u)∂tu(α−Δα).t∂tudx−2∫Ωg2(u)∂tu.t∂tudx+2∫Ωg(u)Δα.t∂tudx. | (3.28) |
Owing to (2.9), (3.18) and (3.25), we obtain t≤T0
|2(f′(u)∂tu,t∂tu)|≤2tQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖∂tu‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))(t‖∂tu‖2−1)+t2‖∇∂tu‖2. | (3.29) |
Using to the interpolation inequality note that, ‖∂tu‖2≤c‖∂tu‖−1‖∇∂tu‖.
Owing to (3.25) and that −Δα∈L2(Ω)⊂H−1(Ω), we have
|2(g(u)(Δα,t∂tu)|≤2tQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖Δα‖‖∂tu‖≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))(t‖Δα‖2+t‖∂tu‖2)≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))(t‖α‖2H2(Ω)+t‖∇∂tu‖2). | (3.30) |
Using the estimates (2.9) and owing to (3.25), we find
|2(g′(u)∂tu(α−Δα),t∂tu)|≤2tQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖∂tu‖2≤tQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖∂tu‖2−1+t2‖∇∂tu‖2. | (3.31) |
Owing to (3.25), we have
|2(g2(u)∂tu,t∂tu,)|≤tQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖∂tu‖2−1+t2‖∇∂tu‖2. | (3.32) |
In inserting (3.29), (3.30), (3.31), (3.32) into (3.28) and owing to (3.25), we find
ddt(t‖∂tu‖2−1)+ct‖∇∂tu‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))(t‖∂tu‖2−1)+ct‖α‖2H2(Ω). | (3.33) |
In particular, owing to (3.5), (3.10), (3.25) and (3.33), Gronwall's lemma and, we find
‖∂tu‖2−1≤1tQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),∀t∈(0,T0]. | (3.34) |
We multiply (3.27) by ∂tu and integrate over Ω, we have
ddt‖∂tu‖2−1+‖∇∂tu‖2≤c(‖∂tu‖2−1+‖α‖2H2(Ω)). | (3.35) |
Owing to (3.10), (3.25) and Granwall's lemma, then the estimates (3.35) becomes
‖∂tu‖2−1≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖∂tu(T0)‖2−1,c≥0,t≥T0, | (3.36) |
hence, owing to (3.34), we have
‖∂tu‖2−1≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),c≥0,t≥T0. | (3.37) |
We now rewrite (3.1), for t≥T0 fixed, in the form
−Δu+f(u)=hu(t),u=0onΓ, | (3.38) |
where
hu(t)=−(−Δ)−1∂tu+g(u)(α−Δα). | (3.39) |
We multiply (3.39) by hu(t) and integrate over Ω, we have
‖hu(t)‖2≤c(‖∂tu‖2−1+‖α‖2H2(Ω)). | (3.40) |
Owing to (3.34)-(3.37), we obtain
‖hu(t)‖2≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),c>0,t≥T0. | (3.41) |
We multiply (3.38) by u, owing to (2.8) and integrate over Ω, we find
‖∇u‖2+c∫ΩF(u)dx≤c‖hu(t)‖2+c′,c>0. | (3.42) |
We multiply (3.38) by −Δu, owing to (3.9)-(3.25) and integrate over Ω, we have
‖Δu‖2≤‖hu(t)‖2+c‖∇u‖2, | (3.43) |
we deduce the (3.41)-(3.43), we obtain
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c′,c≥0,t≥T0. | (3.44) |
Owing to (3.25), we find
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),c≥0,t≥0. | (3.45) |
Then the estimate (3.3) becomes
ddt‖α−Δα‖2+2‖∇α‖2+2‖Δα‖2+2‖∇Δα‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))(‖α−Δα‖2+‖∂tu‖2). | (3.46) |
Owing to (3.25) and (3.36), we have
‖α−Δα‖2+‖∂tu‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)). | (3.47) |
Owing to (3.35)-(3.37) and we integrate over T0 to t, we deduce that
‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)+∫tT0(‖∇α(s)‖2+‖Δα(s)‖2+‖∇Δα(s)‖2)ds≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),t≥T0, | (3.48) |
which implies
‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),c>0,t≥T0. | (3.49) |
Combining (3.44) and (3.49), we have
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c,c≥0,t≥T0. | (3.50) |
Finally, we deduce (3.35) and (3.50) that
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤ectQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c,c>0,t≥0. | (3.51) |
Integrating (3.51) between 0 to 1, we obtain
∫10‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)dt≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c. | (3.52) |
We multiply (2.1) by u and integrate over Ω, we have
ddt‖u‖2+c‖Δu‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))(‖∇u‖2+‖α‖2H3(Ω)). | (3.53) |
Owing to (3.18) and (3.25), we find
ddt‖u‖2+c‖Δu‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)). | (3.54) |
We deduce the (3.54), we have
∫10‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)dt≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)). | (3.55) |
The estimates (3.52) and (3.55) conclude that there exists T∈(0,1) such that
‖u(T)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(T)‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c, | (3.56) |
which implies
‖u(1)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(1)‖2H2(Ω)≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c. | (3.57) |
Owing to (3.10), (3.51) and (3.57), we have the estimate dissipative following
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤e−ctQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))+c,c>0,t≥0. | (3.58) |
We multiply (2.2) by Δ∂tα and integrate over Ω, we have
ddt(‖∇Δα‖2+‖Δα‖2)+‖Δ∂tα‖2+‖∇∂tα‖2≤Q(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω))‖∂tu‖2−1. | (3.59) |
Owing to (3.35)-(3.37) and integrate between T0 to t, we deduce that
∫tT0(‖Δ∂tα(s)‖2+‖∇∂tα(s)‖2)ds≤e−ctQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω)),t≥T0, | (3.60) |
Setting y=‖∇Δα‖2,g=0 and h=‖∂tu‖2−1, we deduce from (3.60) that
y′≤gy+h,t≥t0, | (3.61) |
where, owing to the above estimates, y, g and h satisfy the assumptions of the uniform Gronwall's lemme (for t≥t0), and for t≥t0+r,
∫t+rt‖∇Δα‖2ds≤e−ctQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω),r)+c(r),c>0,t≥r, | (3.62) |
which implies
‖α(t)‖2H3(Ω)≤e−ctQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω),r)+c(r),c>0,t≥r. | (3.63) |
We deduce owing to (3.58) and (3.63) that
‖u(t)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H3(Ω)≤e−ctQ(‖u0‖H2(Ω),‖u0‖Lk+2(Ω),‖α0‖H3(Ω),r)+c(r),c(r)>0,t≥r. | (3.64) |
Based on the a priori estimates, we have the
Theorem 4.1. We assume that (u0,α0)∈(H2(Ω)∩H10(Ω)∩LK+2(Ω))×(H3(Ω)∩H10(Ω)). Then, the system (2.1)-(2.4) possesses at least solution (u,α) such that u∈L∞(0,T;H2(Ω)∩H10(Ω)∩Lk+2(Ω)), α∈L∞(0,T;H3(Ω)∩H10(Ω)) and ∂tu∈L2(0,T;H−1(Ω)),∀T>0.
Proof. The proof is based on the estimate (3.64) and, e.g., a standard Galerkin scheme.
We have, concerning the uniqueness, the following.
Theorem 4.2. We assume that the assumptions of Theorem 4.1 hold. Then, the solution obtained in Theorem 4.1 is unique.
Proof. Let now (u1,α1) and (u2,α2) be two solutions to (2.1)-(2.4) with initial data (u1,0,α1,0) et (u2,0,α2,0) ∈(H2(Ω)∩H10(Ω)∩LK+2(Ω))×(H3(Ω)∩H10(Ω)) respectively. We set (u,α)=(u1,α1)−(u2,α2) and (u0,α0)=(u1,0,α1,0)−(u2,0,α2,0). Then (u,α) verifies the following problem.
(−Δ)−1∂tu−Δu−(f(u1)−f(u2))=g(u1)(α−Δα)+(g(u1)−g(u2))(α2−Δα2), | (4.1) |
∂tα−Δ∂tα+Δ2α−Δα=−g(u1)∂tu−(g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2, | (4.2) |
u=Δu=α=Δα=0onΓ, | (4.3) |
u|t=0=u0,α|t=0=α0. | (4.4) |
We multiply (4.1) by ∂tu and integrate over Ω, we have
12ddt‖∇u‖2+‖∂tu‖2−1+∫Ω(f(u1)−f(u2))∂tudx=∫Ωg(u1)(α−Δα)∂tudx−∫Ω(g(u1)−g(u2))(α2−Δα2)∂tudx. | (4.5) |
We multiply (4.2) by (α−Δα) and integrate Ω, we obtain
ddt‖α−Δα‖2+2‖∇α‖2+4‖Δα‖2+2‖∇Δα‖2=−2∫Ωg(u1)∂tu(α−Δα)dx−2∫Ω(g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2(α−Δα)dx≤2∫Ω|∇g(u1)||(−Δ)−1∂tu||α−Δα|dx+2∫Ω|g(u1)−g(u2)||∂tu2||α−Δα|dx≤c4‖∂tu‖2−1+c‖∂tu2‖2+c‖α−Δα‖2. | (4.6) |
Summing (4.5) and (4.6) and integrate over Ω, we find
ddt(‖∇u‖2+‖α−Δα‖2)+2‖∇α‖2+4‖Δα‖2+2‖∇Δα‖2+2‖∂tu‖2−1+2∫Ω(f(u1)−f(u2))∂tudx=c‖α−Δα‖2+c‖∂tu2‖2+c4‖∂tu‖2−1−2∫Ω(g(u1)−g(u2))(α2−Δα2)∂tudx+2∫Ωg(u1)(α−Δα)∂tudx, | (4.7) |
which implies
ddtE4+2‖∇α‖2+4‖Δα‖2+2‖∇Δα‖2+c′‖∂tu‖2−1+2∫Ω(f(u1)−f(u2))∂tudx=+c‖α−Δα‖2+c‖∂tu2‖2−2∫Ω(g(u1)−g(u2))(α2−Δα2)∂tudx+2∫Ωg(u1)(α−Δα)∂tudx, | (4.8) |
where
E4=‖∇u‖2+‖α−Δα‖2, |
satisfies
E4≥c(‖u‖2H1(Ω)+‖α‖2H2(Ω)). | (4.9) |
Find the estimates for (4.8),
2|((f(u1)−f(u2),∂tu)|≤2|∇(fu1)−f(u2))||(−Δ)−12∂tu|≤2‖∇(fu1)−f(u2))‖2+12‖∂tu‖2−1. | (4.10) |
Besides
2‖∇(fu1)−f(u2))‖2=2∫Ω|∇(f′((u1s+(1−s)u2)u|2dx≤2∫Ω|(∫10f′((u1s+(1−s)u2)ds∇u+∫10f″((u1s+(1−s)u2)(|u||∇u1|+|u||∇u2|)ds|2dx≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))‖∇u‖2+Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))‖u‖2≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))(‖∇u‖2+‖u‖2)≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))‖∇u‖2. | (4.11) |
Inserting (4.11) into the estimates (4.10), we find
2|((f(u1)−f(u2),∂tu)|≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))‖∇u‖2+12‖∂tu‖2−1. | (4.12) |
Furthermore
2|(g(u1)−g(u2)(α2−Δα2),∂tu2)|≤2∫Ω|∇(g(u1)−g(u2)||α2−Δα2||(Δ)−12∂tu2|dx≤|α2−Δα2|L∞(Ω)(∫Ω|u||(−Δ)−12∂tu‖×∫10|g′(su12+(1−s)u2)|dsdx)≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))∫Ω|u||(−Δ)−12∂tu2|dx≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))×‖∇u‖2+12‖∂tu‖2−1. | (4.13) |
and
2|(g(u1)(α−Δα),∂tu)|≤2|((−Δ)12(g(u1))(α−Δα),(−Δ)−12∂tu)|≤2∫Ω|∇g(u1)||α−Δα||(−Δ)−1∂tu|dx≤∫Ω|∇g(u1)|L∞|α−Δα||∂tu|−1dx≤2c‖α−Δα‖‖∂tu‖−1≤c‖α−Δα‖+c2‖∂tu‖2. | (4.14) |
Inserting (4.12), (4.13) and (4.14) into (4.8), owing (3.37), we find
ddtE4+2‖∇α‖2+c‖α‖2H2(Ω)+2‖∇Δα‖2+c‖∂tu‖2−1≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω)))(‖∇u‖2), | (4.15) |
which gives
ddtE4+2‖∇α‖2+c‖α‖2H2(Ω)+2‖∇Δα‖2+c‖∂tu‖2−1≤Q(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))E4. | (4.16) |
Applying Granwall's lemme, into (4.16), we find
‖u(t)‖2H1(Ω)+‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤ectQ(‖u1,0‖H2(Ω),‖u2,0‖H2(Ω),‖α1,0‖H3(Ω),‖α2,0‖H3(Ω))(‖α0‖2H2(Ω)+‖u0‖2H1(Ω)), | (4.17) |
hence the uniqueness, as well as continuous depending with respect to the initial data.
We set Ψ=(H2(Ω)∩H10(Ω)∩LK+2(Ω))×(H3(Ω)∩H10(Ω)). It follows from Theorem 4.2, that we have the continuous (with respect to the H1(Ω)×H2(Ω)-norm) of the following semigroup
S(t):Ψ⟶Ψ,(u0,α0)⟶(u(t),α(t)), |
(i.e,S(0)=I,S(t)oS(s)=S(t+s),t,s≥0). We then deduce from (3.47) the following theorem.
Theorem 4.3. The semigroup S(t) is dissipative in Ψ, i.e., there exists a bounded set B∈Ψ(called absorbing set) such that, for every bounded B∈Ψ, there exists t0=t0(B)≥0 such that t≥t0 implies S(t)B⊂B0.
Remark 4.1. It is easy to see that we can assume, without loss of generality, that B0 is positively invariant by S(t),i.e.,S(t)B0⊂B0,∀t≥0. Furthermore, it follows from (3.64) that S(t) is dissipative in H2(Ω)×H3(Ω) and it follows from (3.63) that we can take B0 in H2(Ω)×H3(Ω).
Corollary 4.1. The semigroup S(t) possesses the global attractor A who is bounded in H2(Ω)×H3(Ω) and compact in Ψ.
The aim of this section is to prove the existence of exponential attractors for the semigroup S(t),t≥0, associated to the problem (2.1)-(2.4). To do so, we need the semigroup that has to be Lipschitz continuous, satisfying the smoothing property and checking a Hölder continuous with respect to time. This is enough to conclude on the existence of exponential attractors.
Lemma 5.1. Let (u1,α1) and (u2,α2) be two solutions to (2.1)-(2.4) with initial data (u1,0,α1,0) and (u2,0,α2,0), respectively, belonging to B0. Then, the corresponding solutions of the problem (2.1)-(2.4) satisfy the following estimate
‖u1(t)−u2(t)‖2H2(Ω)+‖α1(t)−α2(t)‖2H3(Ω)≤cec′t(‖u1,0−u2,0‖2H1(Ω)+‖α1,0−α2,0‖2H2(Ω)),t≥1, | (5.1) |
where the constants only depend on B0.
Proof. We set (u,α)=(u1,α1)−(u2,α2) and (u0,α0)=(u1,0,α1,0)−(u2,0,α2,0), then (u,α) satisfies
(−Δ)−1∂tu−Δu−(f(u1)−f(u2))=g(u1)(α−Δα)−(g(u1)−g(u2))(α2−Δα2), | (5.2) |
∂tα−Δ∂tα+Δ2α−Δα=−g(u1)∂tu−(g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2, | (5.3) |
u=Δu=α=Δα=0onΓ | (5.4) |
u|t=0=u0,α|t=0=α0. | (5.5) |
We first deduce from (4.16) that
‖∇u(t)‖2+‖α(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤cec′t(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖α0‖2H2(Ω)),c′>0,t≥0, | (5.6) |
and
∫t0(‖∇α(s)‖2+‖∇Δα(s)‖2+‖∂tu(s)‖2−1)ds≤cec′t(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖α0‖2H2(Ω)),c′>0,t≥0, | (5.7) |
where the constants only depend on B0.
We differentiate (5.2) with respect to time and have, owing to (5.3), we obtain
(−Δ)−1∂tθ+Δθ−f′(u1)θ+(f′(u1)−f′(u2))∂tu2=g′(u1)∂tu1(α−Δα)+g2(u1)θ−g(u1)(g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2+g(u1)Δα+g′(u1)θ(α2−Δα2)+(g′(u1)−g′(u2))∂tu2(α2−Δα2)+(g(u1)−g(u2))(∂tα2−Δ∂tα2), | (5.8) |
where θ=∂tu and u1=u+u2.
We multiply (5.8) by (t−T0)θ and integrate over Ω, where T0 is same as in one of previous section, we have
12ddt((t−T0)‖θ‖2−1)+(t−T0)‖∇θ‖2≤|(g2(u1)θ,(t−T0)θ)|+|((f′(u1)−f′(u2))∂tu2,(t−T0)θ)|+|(g′(u1)∂tu1(α−Δα),(t−T0)θ|+|(g(u1)(g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2,(t−T0)θ)|+|(g(u1)Δα,(t−T0)θ|+|(g′(u1)θ(α2−Δα2),(t−T0)θ)|+|((g′(u1)−g′(u2))∂tu2(α2−Δα2),(t−T0)θ)|+|((g(u1)−g(u2))(∂tα2−Δ∂tα2),(t−T0)θ)|+|(f′(u1)θ,(t−T0)θ)|. | (5.9) |
We have,
|(g2(u)θ,(t−T0)θ)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g2(u)||θ|2dx≤c(t−T0)‖θ‖2(owing(2.9)andH2(Ω)⊂L∞(Ω)), | (5.10) |
Noting that u1,u2∈H2(Ω)⊂L∞(Ω), we have
|((f′(u1)−f′(u2))∂tu2,(t−T0)θ)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|f′(u1)−f′(u2)||θ||∂tu2|dx≤(t−T0)∫Ω|3u21−3u22||θ||∂tu2|dx≤c(t−T0)(‖u1‖L∞+‖u2‖L∞)∫Ω|u||θ||∂tu2|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω|u|L4|θ|L4|∂tu2|dx≤c(t−T0)‖u‖L4‖θ‖L4‖∂tu2‖≤c(t−T0)‖∇u‖‖∇θ‖‖∂tu2‖, | (5.11) |
Furthermore,
|((g′(u1)−g′(u2))∂tu2(α2−Δα2),(t−T0)θ)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g′(u1)−g′(u2)||∂tu2||α2−Δα2||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω|∂tu2||α2−Δα2||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)‖α2−Δα2‖L4‖θ‖L4‖∂tu2‖≤c(t−T0)‖∇(α2−Δα2)‖‖∇θ‖‖∂tu2‖≤c(t−T0)‖∇θ‖‖∂tu2‖, | (5.12) |
Using (2.9) and (4.17), we find
|(g′(u1)∂tu1(α−Δα),(t−T0)θ|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g′(u1)||∂tu1||α−Δα||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω|∂tu1||α−Δα||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω|∂tu1||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)‖∂tu1‖‖θ‖, | (5.13) |
noting that u1∈H2(Ω) and α∈H3(Ω), then
|(g′(u1)θ(α2−Δα2),(t−T0)θ)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g′(u1)||α2−Δα2||θ|2dx≤c(t−T0)‖θ‖2, | (5.14) |
after Green, we have
|(g(u)Δα,(t−T0)θ|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|∇α||g′(u)∇u||θ|dx+(t−T0)∫Ω|∇α||g(u)||∇θ|dx≤c(t−T0)‖∇α‖‖θ‖+c(t−T0)‖∇α‖‖∇θ‖, | (5.15) |
we have that α2∈H2(Ω), then
|((g(u1)−g(u2))(∂tα2−Δ∂tα2),(t−T0)θ)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g(u1)−g(u2)||∂tα2−Δ∂tα2||θ|dx≤(t−T0)∫Ω|u|L4|∂tα2−Δ∂tα2||θ|L4dx≤(t−T0)‖u‖L4‖∂tα2−Δ∂tα2‖‖θ‖L4≤(t−T0)‖∇u‖‖∂tα2−Δ∂tα2‖‖∇θ‖≤c(t−T0)‖∇u‖‖∇θ‖, | (5.16) |
moreover
|(g(u1)(g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2,(t−T0)θ)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g(u1)||g(u1)−g(u2)||∂tu2||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω|g(u1)||∂tu2||θ|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω(|u1|L4+1)|∂tu2||θ|L4dx≤c(t−T0)(‖u1‖L4+1)‖∂tu2‖‖θ‖L4≤c(t−T0)‖∂tu2‖‖θ‖L4, | (5.17) |
and
|(f′(u1)θ,(t−T0)θ)|≤c(t−T0)‖θ‖2, | (5.18) |
where the constants only depend on B0.
By substituting (5.10), (5.11), (5.12), (5.13), (5.14), (5.15), (5.16), (5.17) and (5.18) into (5.9), we have, owing to the interpolation inequality,
ddt((t−T0)‖θ‖2−1)+34(t−T0)‖∇θ‖2≤c(t−T0)‖θ‖2−1+c(t−T0)‖θ‖‖∂tu2‖+2c(t−T0)‖θ‖‖∂tu1‖+14c(t−T0)‖∇α‖. | (5.19) |
We now multiply (5.3) by −(t−T0)α and intégrate over Ω, we obtain
(∂tα,−(t−T0)α)+(−Δ∂tα,−(t−T0)α)+(−Δα,−(t−T0)α)+(Δ2α,(t−T0)α)=(−g(u1)∂tu,−(t−T0)α)+((g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2,−(t−T0)α), |
which implies
12ddt((t−T0)‖α‖2+(t−T0)‖∇α‖2)+(t−T0)‖∇α‖2+(t−T0)‖Δα‖2≤|(−g(u1)∂tu,−(t−T0)α)|+|((g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2,−(t−T0)α)|. | (5.20) |
For that, let find the estimates of (5.20) right terms, using Hölder inequality, we have
|(−g(u1)∂tu,−(t−T0)α)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g(u1)||∂tu||α|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω(|u1|L4+1)|∂tu||α|L4dx≤c(t−T0)(‖∇u1‖L4+1)‖∂tu‖‖α‖L4≤c(t−T0)‖∇α‖‖∂tu‖, | (5.21) |
and
|((g(u1)−g(u2))∂tu2,−(t−T0)α)|≤(t−T0)∫Ω|g(u1)−g(u2)||α||∂tu2|dx≤c(t−T0)∫Ω|u|L4|α|L4|∂tu2|dx≤c(t−T0)‖∇u‖‖∇α‖‖∂tu2‖≤c(t−T0)‖∇α‖‖∂tu2‖. | (5.22) |
Inserting (5.21) and (5.22) into (5.20), we find
ddt[(t−T0)(‖α‖2+‖∇α‖2)]+2(t−T0)‖∇α‖2+2(t−T0)‖Δα‖2≤2c(t−T0)‖∇α‖‖∂tu‖+2c(t−T0)‖∇α‖‖∂tu2‖. | (5.23) |
Noting that (u,α)=(u2,α2)=(u1,α1), then
∫tT0‖∂tu2(s)‖2dx≤cec′t,t≥T0, | (5.24) |
where the constants only depend on B0.
Combining (5.19) and (5.23), we find
ddtE5++2(t−T0)‖Δα‖2+c(t−T0)‖∇θ‖2+2(t−T0)‖∇α‖2≤c(t−T0)(‖θ‖2−1+‖α‖2H1(Ω))+c(t−T0)(‖∂tu1‖2+‖∂tu2‖2), | (5.25) |
where
E5=(t−T0)(‖θ‖2−1+‖∇α‖2+‖α‖2). | (5.26) |
Applying Gronwall's lemma to (5.25) over [T0,t], we have
‖θ(t)‖2−1+‖α(t)‖2H1(Ω)+∫tT0(‖∇α(s)‖2+‖Δα(s)‖2+‖∇θ(s)‖2)e−c(s−t)ds≤∫tT0(‖∂tu1(s)‖2+‖∂tu2(s)‖2)e−c(s−t)ds+E(0)ect, | (5.27) |
which implies
‖θ(t)‖2−1+‖α(t)‖2H1(Ω)≤cec′t(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖α0‖21),c>0, | (5.28) |
finally, we obtain
‖∂tu(t)‖2−1+‖α(t)‖2H1(Ω)≤cec′t(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖α0‖2H2(Ω)),c>0,t≥1, | (5.29) |
where the constants only depend on B0.
We rewrite (5.8) in the form
−Δu=˜hu(t),u=0onΓ. | (5.30) |
for t≥1 fixed, where
˜hu(t)=−(−Δ)−1∂tu−(f(u1)−f(u2))+g(u1)(α−Δα)+(g(u1)−g(u2))(α2−Δα2). | (5.31) |
We multiply (5.31) by ˜hu(t) and integrate over Ω, we have
(˜hu(t),˜hu(t))=−((−Δ)−1∂tu,˜hu(t))−(f(u1)−f(u2),˜hu(t))−(g(u1)(α−Δα),˜hu(t))+((−Δ)−1[(Δg(u1)−Δg(u2))(α2−Δα2)],˜hu(t)), |
which implies
‖˜hu(t)‖2≤c‖˜hu(t)‖‖∂tu‖−1+|((f(u1)−f(u2),˜hu(t))|+|(g(u1)(α−Δα),˜hu(t))|+|((−Δ)−1[(Δg(u1)−Δg(u2))(α2−Δα2)],˜hu(t))|. | (5.32) |
Here
|((f(u1)−f(u2),˜hu(t))|≤∫Ω|f(u1)−f(u2)||˜hu(t)|dx≤‖f(u1)−f(u2)‖‖˜hu(t)‖≤c‖f(u1)−f(u2)‖2+16‖˜hu(t)‖2, | (5.33) |
furthermore u1,u2∈H2(Ω)⊂L∞(Ω), then
‖f(u1)−f(u2)‖2≤∫Ω|f(u1)−f(u2)|2dx≤∫Ω∫10|f′(u1s+(1−s)u2|2|u|2dsdx≤∫10|f′(u1s+(1−s)u2|2ds∫Ω|u|2dx≤c∫10(‖su1+(1−s)u2‖2kL∞+1)ds∫Ω|u|2dx≤c(‖u1+u2‖2kL∞+1)‖u‖2, | (5.34) |
if n=2 where n=3, for k≤1(in particular k=1), preceding estimate give
‖f(u1)−f(u2)‖2≤c(‖u1‖2L∞+‖u2‖2L∞+1)‖u‖2H10, | (5.35) |
if n=2 where n=3 with k>1, owing we have
‖f(u1)−f(u2)‖2≤c((‖u1‖2L∞+‖u2‖2L∞)k+1)‖u‖2H10, | (5.36) |
on the one hand,
|(g(u1)(α−Δα),˜hu(t))|≤∫Ω|g(u1)||α−Δα||˜hu(t)|dx≤∫Ω|g(u1)|L∞|α−Δα||˜hu(t)|dx≤c‖α−Δα‖‖˜hu(t)‖≤c‖α−Δα‖2+16‖˜hu(t)‖2≤c‖α‖2H2(Ω)+16‖˜hu(t)‖2, | (5.37) |
on the other hand,
|((−Δ)−1[(Δg(u1)−Δg(u2))(α2−Δα2)],˜hu(t))|=|((Δg(u1)−Δg(u2))(α2−Δα2),˜hu(t))|≤∫Ω|Δg(u1)−Δg(u2)||α2−Δα2||(−Δ)−1˜hu(t)|dx≤∫Ω|Δu1−Δu2||α2−Δα2||(−Δ)−1˜hu(t)|dx≤∫Ω|Δu1−Δu2|L∞|α2−Δα2||(−Δ)−1˜hu(t)|dx≤c∫Ω|α2−Δα2||(−Δ)−1˜hu(t)|dx≤c‖α2−Δα2‖2+16‖˜hu(t)‖2, | (5.38) |
combining (5.33), (5.36), (5.37) and (5.38), we find
‖˜hu(t)‖2≤c(‖∂tu‖2−1+‖α‖2H2(Ω))+c‖∇u‖2+c‖α2−Δα2‖2. | (5.39) |
Using (5.29) and (5.6), we obtain
‖˜hu(t)‖2≤cec′t(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖θ0‖2H2(Ω)),t≥1, | (5.40) |
where the constants only depend on B0
We multiply (5.30) by and intergrate over Ω, we find
‖Δu‖2≤‖˜hu(t)‖2, | (5.41) |
hence, owing to (5.40), we have
‖Δu‖2≤cec′t(‖u0‖2H1(Ω)+‖θ0‖2H2(Ω)),t≥1, | (5.42) |
we finally deduce from (5.29) and (5.42), the estimate (5.1) which concludes the proof
Lemma 5.2. Let (u1,α1) and (u2,α2) be two solutions to (2.1)-(2.4) with initial data (u1,0,α1,0) and (u2,0,α2,0), respectively, belonging to B0. Then, the semigroup {S(t))}t≥0 is Lipschitz continuity with respect to space, i.e, there exists the constant c>0 such that
‖u1(t)−u2(t)‖2H1(Ω)+‖α1(t)−α2(t)‖2H2(Ω)≤cec′t(‖u1,0−u2,0‖2H1(Ω)+‖α1,0−α2,0‖2H2(Ω)),t≥1, | (5.43) |
where the constants only depend on B0.
Proof. The proof of the Lemma 5.2 is a direct consequence of the estimate (5.6).
It just remains to prove the Hölder continuity with respect to time.
Lemma 5.3. Let (u,α) be the solution of (5.2)-(5.5) with intial data (u0,α0)\; in B0. Then, the semigroup {S(t))}t≥0 is Hölder continuous with respect to time, i.e, there exists the constant c>0 such that ∀t1,t2∈[0,T]
‖S(t1)(u0,α0)−S(t2)(u0,α0)‖Ψ≤c|t1−t2|12, | (5.44) |
where the constants only depend on B0 and Γ.
Proof.
‖S(t1)(u0,α0)−S(t2)(u0,α0)‖Ψ=‖(u(t1)−u(t2),α(t1)−α2))‖Ψ≤‖u(t1)−u(t2)‖H1(Ω)+‖α(t1)−α(t2)‖H2(Ω)≤c(‖∇(u(t1)−u(t2))‖+‖α(t1)−α(t2)‖H2(Ω))≤(‖∫t2t1∇∂tuds‖+‖∫t2t1∂tα‖H2)≤c|t1−t2)|12|∫t2t1(‖∇∂tu‖2+‖∂tα‖2H2)ds|12. | (5.45) |
Noting that, thanks to (3.5) and (3.37), we have
|∫t2t1‖∇∂tu‖2ds|≤c, | (5.46) |
where the constant c depends only on B0 and T≥T0 such that t1,t2∈[0,T].
Furthermore, multiplying (5.3) by (−Δ)−1∂tα and integrate over Ω, we obtain
ddt‖α‖2+c‖∂tα‖2−1+2‖∇∂tα‖2+2‖∂tα‖2≤c(‖∂tu2‖2+‖∂tu‖2), | (5.47) |
and it follows from (3.60), (5.24), (5.46) and (5.47) that
|∫t2t1‖∂tα‖2H2(Ω)ds|≤c, | (5.48) |
‖S(t1)(u0,α0)−S(t2)(u0,α0)‖Ψ≤c|t1−t2|12, | (5.49) |
where c only depends on B0 and T such that t1,t2∈[0,T].
Finally, we obtain thanks to (5.46) and (5.48), the estimate (5.44). Thus, the Lemma is proved. We finally deduce from Lemma 5.1, Lemma 5.2 and Lemma 5.3 the following result (see, e.g. [12]).
Theorem 5.1. The semigroup S(t) possesses an exponential attractor M⊂B0, i.e.,
(i) M is compact in H1(Ω)×H2(Ω);
(ii) M is positively invariant, S(t)M⊂M,t≥0;
(iii) M has finite fractal dimension in H1(Ω)×H2(Ω);
(iv) M attracts exponentially fast the bounded subsets of Ψ
∀B∈Ψbounded,distH1(Ω)×H2(Ω)(S(t)B,M)≤Q(‖B‖Ψ)e−ct,c>0,t≥0, |
where the constant c is independent of B and distH1(Ω)×H2(Ω) denotes the Hausdorff semidistance between sets defined by
distH1(Ω)×H2(Ω)(A,B)=supa∈Ainfb∈B‖a−b‖H1(Ω)×H2(Ω). |
Remark 5.1. Setting ˜M=S(1)M, we can prove that ˜M is an exponential attractor for S(t), but now in the topology of Ψ.
Since M (or ˜M) is a compact attracting set, we deduce from Theorem 5.1 and standard results (see, e.g, [3,12]) the
Corollary 5.1. The semigroup S(t) possesses the finite-dimensional global attractor A⊂B0.
Remark 5.2. We note that the global attractor A is the smallest (for the inclusion) compact set of the phase space which is invariant by the flow (i.e. S(t)A=A,∀t≥0) and attractors all bounded sets of initial data as time goes to infinity; thus, it appears as a suitable object in view of the study of asymptotic behaviour of the system. Furthermore, the finite dimensionality means, roughly speaking, that, even though the initial phase space is infinite dimensional, the reduced dynamics is, in some proper sense, finite dimensional and can be described by a finite number of parameters.
The existence of the global attractor being established, one question is to know whether this attractor has a finite dimension in terms of the fractal or Hausdorff dimension. This is the aim of the final section.
Remark 5.3. Comparing to the global attractor, an exponentiel attractor is expected to be more robust under perturbations. Indeed, the rate of attraction of trajectories to the global attractor may be slow and it is very difficult, if not impossible, to estimate this rate of attraction with respect to the physical parameters of the problem in general. As a consequence, global attractors may change drastically under small perturbations.
This manuscript explains in a clear way, the context of dynamic system with two temperatures, when the relative solution exists. The existence of exponential attractor, associated to the problem (2.1)-(2.4) that we have proved, allow to assert that the existing solution of the problem (2.1)-(2.4) that we have shown in this work, belongs to the finite-dimensional subset called global attractor, from a certain time.
The authors thank the referees for their careful reading of the paper and useful comments.
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests in this paper.
[1] |
G. Caginalp, Conserved-phase field system: implications for kinetic undercooling, phys. Rev. B., 38 (1988), 789–791. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.38.789 doi: 10.1103/PhysRevB.38.789
![]() |
[2] |
M. Grasselli, A. Miranville, V. Pata, S. Zelik, Welle-posedness and long time behavior of a parabolic-hyperbolic phase-field system with singular potentials, Math. Nachr., 280 (2007), 1475–1509. https://doi.org/10.1002/mana.200510560 doi: 10.1002/mana.200510560
![]() |
[3] |
L. Cherfils, A. Miranville, S. Peng, Higher-order generalized Cahn-Hilliard equations, Electronic Journal of Qualitative Theory of Differential Equations, 2017 (2017), 1–22. https://doi.org/10.14232/ejqtde.2017.1.9 doi: 10.14232/ejqtde.2017.1.9
![]() |
[4] |
B. L. Doumbé Bangola, Global and esponential attractors for a Caginalp type phase-field problem, Cent. Eur. J. Math., 11 (2013), 1651–1676. https://doi.org/10.2478/s11533-013-0258-0 doi: 10.2478/s11533-013-0258-0
![]() |
[5] |
B. L. Doumbé Bangola, Phase-field system with two temperatures and a nonlinear coupling term, AIMS Math., 3 (2018), 298–315. https://doi.org/10.3934/Math.2018.2.298 doi: 10.3934/Math.2018.2.298
![]() |
[6] |
A. Miranville, Some mathematical models in phase transition, Discrete Contin. Dyn. Systems Seres S, 7 (2014), 271–306. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdss.2014.7.271 doi: 10.3934/dcdss.2014.7.271
![]() |
[7] |
A. Miranville, On higher-order anisotropic conservative Caginalp phase-field systems, Appl. Math. Optim., 77 (2018), 297–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00245-016-9375-z doi: 10.1007/s00245-016-9375-z
![]() |
[8] |
A. Miranville, R. Quintanilla, Some generalizations of Caginalp phase-field system, Appl. Anal., 88 (2009), 877–894. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036810903042182 doi: 10.1080/00036810903042182
![]() |
[9] |
A. Miranville, R. Quintanilla, A Caginalp phase-field system based on type Ⅲ heat conduction with two temperatures, Quart. Appl. Math., 74 (2016), 375–398. https://doi.org/10.1090/qam/1430 doi: 10.1090/qam/1430
![]() |
[10] |
A. Miranville, R. Quintanilla, A generalization of the Caginalp phase-field system based on the Cattaneo law, Nonlinear Anal. TMA, 71 (2009), 2278–2290. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2009.01.061 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2009.01.061
![]() |
[11] |
A. Miranville, S. Zelik, Attractors for dissipative partial differential equations in bounded and unbounded domains, in Handbook of Differential Equations, Evolutionary Partial Differential Equations, Handbook of differential equations: evolutionary equations, 4 (2008), 103–200. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1874-5717(08)00003-0 doi: 10.1016/S1874-5717(08)00003-0
![]() |
[12] |
A. Miranville, Asymptotic behaviour of a generalized Cahn-hilliard equation for with a proliferation term, Appl. Anal., 92 (2013), 1308–1321. https://doi.org/10.1080/00036811.2012.671301 doi: 10.1080/00036811.2012.671301
![]() |
[13] |
A. Miranville, S. Zelik, Robust exponential attractors for Cahn-Hilliard type equations with singular potentials, Math. Methods Appl. Sci., 27 (2004), 545–582. https://doi.org/10.1002/mma.464 doi: 10.1002/mma.464
![]() |
[14] |
P. J. Chen, M. E. Gurtin, On a theory of heat conduction involving two temperatures, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. (ZAMP), 19 (1968), 614–627. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01594969 doi: 10.1007/BF01594969
![]() |
[15] |
P. J. Chen, M. E. Gurtin, W. O. Williams, A note on non-simple heat conduction, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. (ZAMP), 19 (1968), 969–970. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01602278 doi: 10.1007/BF01602278
![]() |
[16] |
P. J. Chen, M. E. Gurtin, W. O. Williams, On the thermodynamics of non-simple materials with two temperatures, Z. Angew. Math. Phys. (ZAMP), 20 (1969), 107–112. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01591120 doi: 10.1007/BF01591120
![]() |
[17] | J. W. Cahn, On spinodal decomposition, Acta Metall., 9 (1961), 795–861. |