Blow-Up for a Periodic Two-Component Camassa-Holm Equation with Generalized Weakly Dissipation ()
1. Introduction
In this paper, we consider the Cauchy problem of periodic two-component Camassa-Holm equation with a generalized weakly dissipation:
(1.1)
where
and k is a fixed constant;
is a free parameter.
It is well known that the two-component integrable Camassa-Holm equation is
(1.2)
which is a model for wave motion on shallow water, where
standing for the fluid velocity at time
in the spatial x direction [1],
is in connection with the horizontal deviation of the surface from equilibrium (i.e. amplitude). Equation (1.2) possesses a bi-Hamiltonian structure [2] and the solution interaction of peaked travelling waves and wave breaking [1] [2] [3]. It is completely integrable [3] and becomes the Camassa-Holm equation when
.
Equation (1.2) was derived physically by Constantin and Ivanov [4] in the context of shallow water theory. As soon as this equation was put forward, it attracted attention of a large number of researchers. Escher et al. [5] established the local well-posedness and present the blow-up scenarios and several blow-up results of strong solutions to Equation (1.2). Constantin and Ivanov [6] investigated the global existence and blow-up phenomena of strong solutions of Equation (1.2). Guan and Yin [7] obtained a new global existence result for strong solutions to Equation (1.2) and several blow-up results, which improved the results in [6]. Gui and Liu [8] established the local well-posedness for Equation (1.2) in a range of the Besov spaces, they also characterized a wave breaking mechanism for strong solutions. Hu and Yin [9] [10] studied the blow-up phenomena and the global existence of Equation (1.2).
Dissipation is an inevitable phenomenon in real physical word. It is necessary to study periodic two-Camassa-Holm equation with a generalized weakly dissipation. Hu and Yin [11] study the blow-up of solutions to a weakly dissipative periodic rod equation. Hu considered global existence and blow-up phenomena for a weakly dissipative two-component Camassa-Holm system [12] [13]. The purpose of this paper is to study the blow-up phenomenon of the solutions of Equation (1.1). The results show that the behavior of solutions to the periodic two-component Camassa-Holm equation with a generalized weakly dissipation is similar to Equation (1.2) and the blow-up rate of Equation (1.1) is not affected by the dissipative term when
.
The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 gives the local well-posedness of the Cauchy problem associated with Equation (1.1). The blow-up criteria for solutions and two conditions for wave breaking in finite time are given in Section 3. Furthermore, we also learn the blow-up rate of solutions. In Section 4, we address the global existence of Equation (1.1).
2. Local Well-Posedness
Let us introduce some notations, the
is the circle of unit length, the
stands for the integer part of
, the
stands for the convolution, the
is used to represent the norm of Banach space X.
In this section, we investigate the local well-posedness for the Cauchy problem of Equation (1.1) by applying Kato’s theory [14] in
,
.
For convenience we recall the Kato’s theorem in the suitable form for our purpose. Consider the following abstract quasilinear evolution equation:
(2.1)
There are two Hilbert’s spaces X and Y, Y is continuously and densely embedded in X and
is a topological isomorphism, the
stands for the space of all bounded linear operator from Y to X.
Theorem 2.1 [14] 1)
, for
with
(2.2)
where
,
, i.e.
is quasi-m-accretive, uniformly on bounded sets in Y.
2)
, where
is uniformly bounded on a bounded sets in Y
(2.3)
where
,
.
3)
is a bounded map on bounded sets in Y
(2.4)
(2.5)
where
,
are constants which only depending
.
If the 1), 2), 3) hold, given
, there is a maximal
depending only on
and a unique solution u of Equation (2.1) such that
(2.6)
Moreover, the map
is continuous from Y to
.
Note that
,
,
for all
and
. Then Equation (1.1) can be rewritten as
(2.7)
Theorem 2.2 Let
with
, there exists a maximal time
which is independent on s and exists a unique solution
of Equation (1.1) in the interval
with initial data
, such that the solution depends continuously on the initial data.
The remainder of this section is devoted the proof of Theorem 2.2. Let
,
,
,
,
, and
(2.8)
The [15] shows that Q is an isomorphism from
onto
. It is sufficiently to verify
,
,
satisfy 1), 2), 3) to prove the theorem 2.2. For this purpose, the following lemmas are necessary.
Lemma 2.1 [15] The operator
is defined in (2.8) with
,
belongs to
.
Lemma 2.2 [15] The operator
is defined in (2.8) with
,
belongs to
.
Lemma 2.3 [15] The operator
is defined in (2.8) with
,
belongs to
, moreover,
(2.9)
where
.
Lemma 2.4 [15] Let
with
,
, then the operator
and
(2.10)
for
, and
.
Lemma 2.5 Let
,
, and
Then f is bounded on bounded sets in
and satisfies
1)
,
(2.11)
2)
,
(2.12)
Proof: For any
,
,
Let
, then
,
Making
in the above inequality, it shows that f is bounded on bounded sets in
, the proof of 1) is complete.
Similarly, the inequality (2.12) also can be proved.
Proof of Theorem 2.2: The 1) is true for
from the inequality (2.9), the 2) is true for
from the inequality (2.10), the 3) is true for
from the inequalities (2.11) (2.12). According to the Theorem 2.1, the proof of the Theorem 2.2 is complete.
3. Blow-Up
This section will establish a blow-up criterion for solution of Equation (1.1) when
.
Theorem 3.1 [8] [16] Let
and
be the solution of (1.1) with initial data
,
, T is the maximal time of existence of the solution, then
(3.1)
Consider the following equation of trajectory:
(3.2)
The (3.2) shows
is the differential homeomorphism for every
(3.3)
Hence
(3.4)
Lemma 3.1 [17] Let
and
, then for every
, there exists at least one point
with
The function
is absolutely continuous in
with
a.e. in
.
Lemma 3.2 Let
with
, there exist a maximal time
and a unique solution
of Equation (1.1) with initial data
, then we have
(3.5)
Proof: Multiply the first equation of Equation (1.1) by u and integrate
(3.6)
The second equation of Equation (1.1) can be rewritten as
Multiply the above equation by
and integrate
(3.7)
According to (3.6) and (3.7)
Then
Notice that
, then
Lemma 3.3 [18] [19] 1) For every
, we have
(3.8)
where the constant
is the best constant.
2) For every
, we have
(3.9)
where the best constant c is
.
3) For every
, we have
(3.10)
Lemma 3.4 Suppose
, and
be the solution of Equation (1.1) with initial data
,
, and T be the maximal time of existence, then
where
.
Proof: The theorem 2.2 and a density argument imply that it is sufficient to prove the desired estimates for
.
Differentiate the first equation of Equation (2.7) with respect to x
(3.11)
Define
(3.12)
From the Fermat’s lemma, we know
there exists
such that
(3.13)
Set
,
(3.14)
From (3.11) and the second equation of Equation (1.1), we obtain
(3.15)
where
.
Notice that
, then
From (3.8) (3.9) and (3.10), we have
Therefore we get the upper bound of f
(3.16)
Similarly, we turn to the lower bound of f
(3.17)
According to (3.16) and (3.17)
(3.18)
From Sobolev’s embedding theorem, we have
, due to the periodic of Equation (1.1), then
(3.19)
hence
(3.20)
From the second Equation of (3.15), we have
then
For any given
, define
(3.21)
then
is
-function in
and satisfies
Next, we will show
.
By contradictory arguement, there exists
such that
. Making
, we have
then
.
From (3.21), we know
(3.22)
On the other hand, from the first Equation of (3.15), we have
It yields a contradiction, then the proof of the Lemma 3.4 is complete.
Lemma 3.5 Suppose
, and
be the solution of Equation (1.1) with initial data
,
, and T is the maximal time of the solution. If there exists
such that
(3.23)
then
(3.24)
Proof: For any given
, define
the second equation of Equation (1.1) becomes
then
.
From (3.23), we know
. Hence
which together with (3.4), then the proof of lemma 3.5 is complete.
Theorem 3.2 Suppose
, and
be the solution of Equation (1.1) with initial data
,
, and T is the maximal time of existence of the solution, then the solution of Equation (1.1) blows up in finite time if and only if
(3.25)
Proof: Suppose that
and (3.25) is invalid, then there exists
satisfies
The Lemma 3.4 shows that
is bounded on
, i.e.
, where
. Then from the Theorem 3.1, we have
, which contradicts the assumption
.
On the other hand, Sobolev embedding theorem
with
implies that if (3.25) holds, then the corresponding solution blows up in finite time, the proof of Theorem 3.2 is complete.
Next we give two blow-up conditions in finite time.
Theorem 3.3 Suppose
, and
be the solution of Equation (1.1) with initial data
,
, and T is the maximal time of existence of the solution. If there exists
satisfies
(3.26)
and
(3.27)
then the corresponding solution u of Equation (1.1) blows up in finite time when
, where
Proof: Without loss of generality, assume
, and choose
such that
,
, along the trajectory
, we rewrite the transport Equation of
in (2.7) as
(3.28)
From (3.26), we have
Let
, then
, from (3.28)
(3.29)
From (3.11), (3.29) and
, we obtain
(3.30)
where
(3.31)
Modify the estimates:
The similar process to (3.16) leads to
From the above inequality and (3.27), we have
, then
(3.32)
So
is strictly decreasing in
.
If there exist global solutions, we will show that this leads to a contradiction. Let
integrating (3.32) over
yields
(3.33)
Hence we know
.
From (3.32), we have
(3.34)
Integrating (3.34) over
and knowing
, we get
then
, as
Thus
is a contradiction with
.
The proof of the Theorem 3.3 is complete.
Theorem 3.4 Let
, and
be the solution of Equation (1.1) with initial data
,
, and T is the maximal time of existence of the solution. If there exists
satisfies
(3.35)
and
(3.36)
then the corresponding solution u of Equation (1.1) blows up in finite time when
,where
Proof: From (3.16), we have
From (3.36), we have
,
is strictly decreasing on
and set
.
Because
, then
Similar discussion of the Theorem 3.3
,
Hence
.
The proof of the theorem 3.4 is complete.
Next we will show the blow-up rate of solutions and the result shows: the blow-up rate is not affected by the weakly dissipation.
Theorem 3.5 (blow-up rate) Let
, and
be the solution of Equation (1.1) with initial data
,
, and T is the maximal time of existence of the solution. If
, then
Proof: Without loss of generality, assume
.
Set
(3.37)
From (3.30), we have
(3.38)
Because of
, there exists
satisfies
and
. Since m is locally Lipschitz, m is absolutely continuous. We deduce that m is decreasing in
and
(3.39)
According to (3.38) and (3.39)
Integrating (3.39) over
with respect to
, notice that
, then
Since
is arbitrary, so
That is
, the blow-up rate of solutions of Equation (1.1) is not effected by the weakly dissipation.
4. Global Existence
In this section, we provide a sufficient condition for the global solution of Equation (1.1) in the case
.
Theorem 4.1 Let
,
with
, there exist a maximal time
and a unique solution
of Equation (1.1) with initial data. Assume that
, then
1) when
,
2) when
,
where
Proof: It is sufficient to prove the desired results for
.
1) We will estimate the
.
From (3.22), we have
(4.1)
Let
, thus we have
(4.2)
where f is defined as (3.15). The second Equation of (3.15) shows that
and
have the same sign. Hence
.
Suppose
, define the function
(4.3)
which is positive on
.
Differentiate
(4.4)
where
.
Then
(4.5)
where
.
From (4.3), we have
(4.6)
then
Suppose
, define the function
(4.7)
Differentiate
(4.8)
then
(4.9)
Here we apply Young’s inequality
, for
,
.
Hence
2) Next we control
.
Similarly,
Suppose
, define the function
(4.10)
From (3.20) and (4.8), we obtain
, then
.
Similarly, we get
then
Suppose
, define the function
(4.11)
From (3.20) and (4.4), we have
, then
.
Hence
Theorem 4.2 Let
,
with
, there exist a maximal time
and a unique solution
of Equation (1.1) with initial data. If
, then
and the the solution
is global.
Proof: By contradictory arguement, assume
and the solution blows up. The Theorem 3.1 shows
(4.12)
The assumptions and the Theorem 4.1 show
For all
, that is a contradiction to (4.12).
The proof of Theorem 4.2 is complete.