1: \documentclass{amsart} %{amsart}%{article}%{elsart}

2: \usepackage{graphicx}

3: \usepackage{amssymb, amsmath}

4: \usepackage{amsfonts}

5: \usepackage{amssymb}

6: \usepackage{sidecap}

7: 

8: %\usepackage{psfig}

9: \usepackage{float}

10: 

11: \floatplacement{figure}{H}

12: 

13: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}

14: \newtheorem{acknowledgement}[theorem]{Acknowledgment}

15: %\newtheorem{algorithm}[theorem]{Algorithm}

16: \newtheorem{assumption}{Assumption}

17: \newtheorem{axiom}[theorem]{Axiom}

18: \newtheorem{case}{Case}

19: \newtheorem{claim}[theorem]{Claim}

20: \newtheorem{conclusion}[theorem]{Conclusion}

21: \newtheorem{condition}[theorem]{Condition}

22: \newtheorem{conjecture}[theorem]{Conjecture}

23: \newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}

24: \newtheorem{criterion}[theorem]{Criterion}

25: \newtheorem{definition}[theorem]{Definition}

26: \newtheorem{example}{Example}

27: \newtheorem{exercise}[theorem]{Exercise}

28: \newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}

29: \newtheorem{notation}[theorem]{Notation}

30: \newtheorem{problem}[theorem]{Problem}

31: \newtheorem{proposition}[theorem]{Proposition}

32: \newtheorem{remark}[theorem]{Remark}

33: \newtheorem{solution}[theorem]{Solution}

34: \newtheorem{summary}[theorem]{Summary}

35: %\newenvironment{proof}[1][Proof]{\textbf{#1.} }{\ \rule{0.5em}{0.5em}}

36: %\newtheorem{figure}{Figure}

37: \newcommand{\calm}{\mathcal M}

38: \newcommand{\circd}{\mathop{D}\limits^\circ}

39: \newcommand{\circm}{\mathop{M}\limits^\circ}

40: \newcommand{\circq}{\mathop{Q}\limits^\circ}

41: \newcommand{\divv}{\text{\rm div}}

42: \newcommand{\ind}{\text{\rm ind}}

43: \newcommand{\cA}{\mathcal A}

44: \newcommand{\cB}{\mathcal B}

45: \newcommand{\cC}{\mathcal C}

46: \newcommand{\cH}{\mathcal H}

47: \newcommand{\cL}{\mathcal L}

48: \newcommand{\C}{\mathbb C}

49: \newcommand{\N}{\mathbb N}

50: \newcommand{\Z}{\mathbb Z}

51: \newcommand{\bZ}{{\bf Z}}

52: \newcommand{\Q}{\mathbb Q}

53: \newcommand{\bQ}{{\bf Q}}

54: \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb R}

55: \newcommand{\im}{\text{\rm im}}

56: \newcommand{\id}{\text{\rm id}}

57: \newcommand{\ext}{\text{\rm Ext}}

58: \newcommand{\pdim}{\text{$P$-$\dim$}}

59: \newcommand{\socle}{\text{\rm socle}}

60: \newcommand{\sgn}{\text{\rm sign}}

61: \newcommand{\dist}{\text{\rm dist}}

62: \def\T{\mathbb T}

63: \def\la{\label}

64: \hyphenation{Lem-ma}

65: %\newcommand{\tg}{t_g}

66: %%% can't define \ker it is already defined

67: %%  \qed already defined

68: 

69: 

70: \def\bt{\begin{thm}}

71: \def\et{\end{thm}}

72: 

73: \def\bl{\begin{lem}}

74: \def\el{\end{lem}}

75: 

76: \def\bd{\begin{defi}}

77: \def\ed{\end{defi}}

78: 

79: \def\bc{\begin{cor}}

80: \def\ec{\end{cor}}

81: 

82: \def\bp{\begin{proof}}

83: \def\ep{\end{proof}}

84: 

85: \def\br{\begin{rem}}

86: \def\er{\end{rem}}

87: 

88: \newtheorem{thm}{Theorem}[section]

89: %\newtheorem{lem}[thm]{Lemma}

90: \newtheorem{lem}{Lemma}[section]

91: \newtheorem{defi}{Definition}[section]

92: %\newtheorem{example}[Example]{chapter}

93: \newtheorem{ex}{Example}[section]

94: %\newtheorem{example}{Example}[chapter]

95: \newtheorem{prop}[thm]{Proposition}

96: \newtheorem{xca}[thm]{Exercise}

97: \newtheorem{rem}{Remark}[section]

98: \newtheorem{cor}{Corollary}[section]

99: %\newtheorem{assumption}[thm]{Assumption}

100: \newtheorem{method}[thm]{Method}

101: 

102: \renewcommand{\theequation}{\thesection.\arabic{equation}}

103: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

104: \numberwithin{theorem}{section}

105: %\numberwithin{lemma}{section}

106: \numberwithin{example}{section}

107: %\numberwithin{definition}{section}

108: %\numberwithin{remark}{section}

109: 

110: \numberwithin{figure}{section}

111: 

112: \begin{document}

113: 

114: \title{Cahn-Hilliard Equations  and Phase Transition Dynamics  for Binary Systems}

115: 

116: \author[Ma]{Tian Ma}

117: \address[TM]{Department of Mathematics, Sichuan University,

118: Chengdu, P. R. China}

119: 

120: \author[Wang]{Shouhong Wang}

121: \address[SW]{Department of Mathematics,

122: Indiana University, Bloomington, IN 47405}

123: \email{showang@indiana.edu}

124: 

125: \thanks{The work was supported in part by the

126: Office of Naval Research and by the National Science Foundation.}

127: 

128: \keywords{}

129: \subjclass{}

130: 

131: \begin{abstract} The process of phase separation of binary systems is described by the Cahn-Hilliard equation.  The main objective of this article is to give a classification on the dynamic phase transitions for binary systems using either the classical Cahn-Hilliard equation or the Cahn-Hilliard equation coupled with entropy, leading to some interesting physical predictions. 

132: The analysis is based on dynamic transition theory for nonlinear systems and new classification scheme for dynamic transitions, developed recently by the authors. 

133: \end{abstract}

134: \maketitle

135: \tableofcontents

136: 

137: \section{Introduction}

138: \label{sc1}

139: Cahn-Hilliard equation  describes the process of phase separation, by which the two components of a binary fluid spontaneously separate and form domains pure in each component. The main objective of this article is to provide a theoretical approach to dynamic phase transitions for binary systems.

140: 

141: Classically, phase transitions are classified by  the Ehrenfest classification scheme,  based on  the lowest derivative of the free energy that is discontinuous at the transition. 

142: In general, it is a difficult task to classify phase transitions of higher order, which appears in many equilibrium phase transition systems, such as the PVT system, the ferromagnetic system, superfluids as well as the binary systems studied in this article. 

143: 

144: For this purpose, a new  dynamic transition theory is developed recently by the authors. This new theory provides an efficient tool to analyze phase transitions of higher order. With this theory in our disposal, a new  dynamic  classification scheme is obtained, and classifies  phase transitions into three categories: Type-I, Type-II and Type-III, corresponding mathematically  to continuous,  jump, and  mixed transitions, respectively; see the Appendix as well as two recent books by the authors \cite{b-book, chinese-book} for details. 

145: 

146: There have been extensive studies in the past on the dynamics of 

147: the Cahn-Hilliard equations. However, very little is known about the higher order transitions encountered for this problem, and this article gives a complete classification of the dynamics transitions for binary systems. The results obtained lead in particular to various physical predictions. First,  the order of  phase transitions is precisely determined by the sign of  a nondimensional 

148: parameter $K$ such that if $K>0$, the transition is first-order with latent heat and if $K <0$, the transition is second-order. Second, a theoretical transition diagram is derived, leading in particular  to  a prediction that there is only second-order transition for molar fraction near $1/2$. This is different from the prediction made by the classical transition diagram. Third, a critical length scale  is derived such that no phase separation occurs at any temperature if the length of the container is smaller than the critical length scale. These physical predictions will be addressed in another article.

149: 

150: 

151: This article is organized as follows. In Section 2, both the classical Cahn-Hilliard equation and the Cahn-Hilliard equation coupled with entropy are introduced in a unified fashion using a general principle for equilibrium phase transitions outlined in Appendix B. Sections 3-6 analyze dynamic transitions for 

152: the Cahn-Hilliard equation in general domain, rectangular domain, with periodic boundary conditions, and for the Cahn-Hilliard equation coupled with entropy. 

153:  Physical conclusions are given in Section 7, and the dynamic transition theory is recalled in  Appendix A.

154: 

155: 

156: \section{Dynamic Phase Transition  Models for Binary Systems}

157: Materials compounded by two components $A$ and $B$, such as  binary

158: alloys, binary solutions and polymers, are called binary

159: systems. Sufficient cooling of a binary system may lead to phase

160: separations, i.e., at the critical temperature, the concentrations

161: of both components $A$ and $B$ with homogeneous distribution undergo  changes,

162: leading to heterogeneous distributions in space. Phase separation

163: of binary systems observed will be in one of two main ways. The first is by nucleation in which sufficiently large nuclei of the

164: second phase appear randomly and grow, and this corresponds to Type-II phase transitions. The second is  by spinodal

165: decomposition in which the systems appear to nuclear at once, and

166: periodic or semi-periodic structure is seen, and this corresponds to Type-I phase transitions. 

167: 

168: Since binary systems are conserved, the equations describing the

169: Helmholtz process and the Gibbs process are the same. Hence,

170: without distinction we use the term "free energy" to discuss this

171: problem. 

172: 

173: Let $u_A$   and $u_B$ be the concentrations of components $A$  and  $B$ respectively,  then $u_B=1-u_A$.  In a homogeneous state, $u_B=\bar{u}_B$ is a constant, and the

174: entropy density $S_0=\bar{S}_0$ is also a constant. We take $u, S$

175: the concentration and entropy density deviations:

176: $$u=u_B-\bar{u}_B,\ \ \ \ S=S_0-\bar{S}_0$$

177: By (\ref{7.28}) and (\ref{7.29}), the free energy is given

178: by

179: \begin{equation}

180: F(u,S)=F_0+\int_{\Omega} \Big[\frac{\mu_1}{2}|\nabla u|^2+\frac{\mu_2}{2}|\nabla

181: S|^2+\frac{\beta_1}{2}|S|^2+\beta_0Su\label{8.49}

182:  +\beta_2Su^2+\sum^{2p}_{k=1}\alpha_ku^k\Big]dx.

183: \end{equation}

184: Since  entropy is increasing as $u\rightarrow 0$, and by

185: $$

186: \frac{\delta}{\delta S}F(u,S)=-\mu_2\Delta

187: S+\beta_1S+\beta_0u+\beta_2u^2=0,

188: $$ 

189: we have 

190: \begin{equation}

191: \beta_0=0,\ \ \ \ \beta_1>0,\ \ \ \ \beta_2>0,\label{8.50}

192: \end{equation}

193: which implies that $S$ is a decreasing function of $|u|$.

194: 

195: According (\ref{7.38}) and (\ref{7.32}),  we derive from (\ref{8.49}) and

196: (\ref{8.50})  the  following equations governing a binary system:

197: \begin{equation}

198: \left.

199: \begin{aligned} &\frac{\partial S}{\partial t}=k_1\Delta

200: S-a_1S-a_2u^2,\\

201: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=-k_2\Delta^2u+b_0\Delta (Su)+\Delta

202: f(u),\\

203: &\int_{\Omega}u(x,t)dx=0,

204: \end{aligned}

205: \right.\label{8.51}

206: \end{equation}

207: where $k_1,k_2,b_0,a_1,a_2$ are positive constants, and

208: \begin{equation}

209: f(u)=\sum^{2p-1}_{k=1}b_ku^k,\ \ \ \ b_{2p-1}>0 \ \ \ \ (p\geq

210: 2).\label{8.52}

211: \end{equation}

212: 

213: Physically sound boundary condition for (\ref{8.51}) is either the Neumann boundary condition:

214: \begin{equation}

215: \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}=\frac{\partial\Delta u}{\partial

216: n}=0,\ \ \ \ \frac{\partial S}{\partial n}=0\ \ \ \ \text{on}\

217: \partial\Omega ,\label{8.53}

218: \end{equation}

219: with  $\Omega\subset \R^n$  $(1\leq n\leq 3)$ being  a bounded domain, or 

220: the periodic boundary condition:

221: \begin{equation}

222: u(x+KL)=u(x),\ \ \ \ S(x+KL)=S(x)\label{8.54}

223: \end{equation}

224: with  $\Omega =[0,L]^n,K=(k_1,\cdots,k_n),1\leq n\leq 3.$

225: 

226: \medskip

227: 

228: For simplicity, in this section we always assume that $p=2$. Thus,

229: function (\ref{8.52}) is rewritten as

230: \begin{equation}

231: f(u)=b_1u+b_2u^2+b_3u^3,\ \ \ \ b_3>0.\label{8.55}

232: \end{equation}

233: Based on Theorem \ref{t5.1}, we have to assume that there exists a

234: temperature $T_1>0$ such that $b_1=b_1(T)$ satisfies

235: \begin{equation}

236: b_1(T)\left\{

237: \begin{aligned}

238: &  >0&&  \quad \text{  if } T>T_1,\\

239: & =0&&  \quad \text{ if } T=T_1,\\

240: & <0&&  \quad \text{ if } T<T_1.

241: \end{aligned}

242: \right.\label{8.56}

243: \end{equation}

244: 

245: %\subsection{Cahn-Hilliard equation}

246: %\la{s8.2.2}

247: 

248: If we ignore the coupled action of entropy in (\ref{8.49}), then

249: the free energy $F$ is in the following form

250: $$F(u)=F_0+\int_{\Omega}\left[\frac{\mu_1}{2}|\nabla

251: u|^2+\frac{\alpha_1}{2}u^2+\frac{\alpha_2}{3}u^3+\frac{\alpha_3}{4}u^4\right]dx,$$

252: and the equations (\ref{8.51}) are the following classical  Cahn-Hilliard

253: equation:

254: \begin{equation}

255: \left.

256: \begin{aligned} 

257: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial

258: t}=-k\Delta^2u+\Delta f(u),\\

259: &\int_{\Omega}u(x,t)dx=0,

260: \end{aligned}

261: \right.\label{8.57}

262: \end{equation}

263: where $f(u)$ is as in (\ref{8.55}).

264: 

265: \section{Phase Transition in General Domains}

266: \la{s8.2.3}

267: In this section, we shall discuss 

268: the Cahn-Hilliard equation from the mathematical point of view. We start with  the nondimensional form of equation. Let

269: \begin{align*}

270: &x=lx^{\prime}, &&  t=\frac{l^4}{k}t^{\prime}, && u=u_0u^{\prime},\\

271: &\lambda =-\frac{l^2b_1}{k},&& \gamma_2=\frac{l^2b_2u_0}{k},

272: && \gamma_3=\frac{l^2b_3u^2_0}{k},

273: \end{align*}

274: where $l$ is a given length,  $u_0=\bar{u}_B$ is the constant

275: concentration of $B$, and $\gamma_3>0$. Then the equation (\ref{8.57}) can be

276: rewritten as follows (omitting the primes)

277: \begin{equation}

278: \left.

279: \begin{aligned} 

280: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial

281: t}=-\Delta^2u-\lambda\Delta u+\Delta (\gamma_2u^2+\gamma_3u^3),\\

282: &\int_{\Omega}u(x,t)dx=0,\\

283: &u(x,0)=\varphi .

284: \end{aligned}

285: \right.\label{8.58}

286: \end{equation}

287: 

288: Let

289: $$

290:  H=\left\{u\in L^2(\Omega )\ |\ \int_{\Omega}udx=0\right\}.$$

291: For the Neumann boundary condition (\ref{8.53}) we define

292: $$

293: H_1=\left\{u\in H^4(\Omega )\cap H\ \Big|\ \frac{\partial u}{\partial

294: n}=\frac{\partial\Delta u}{\partial

295: n}=0\ \text{ on } \partial \Omega \right\},$$ 

296: and for the periodic boundary

297: condition (\ref{8.54}) we define

298: $$H_1=\left\{u\in H^4(\Omega )\cap H\ \Big|\ u(x+KL)=u(x) \ \ \forall

299: K\in \Z^n\right\}.$$

300: 

301: Then we define the operators $L_{\lambda}=-A+B_{\lambda}$ and

302: $G:H_1\rightarrow H$ by

303: \begin{equation}

304: \left.

305: \begin{aligned} 

306: & Au=\Delta^2u,\\

307: & B_{\lambda}u=-\lambda\Delta u,\\

308: & G(u)=\gamma_2\Delta u^2+\gamma_3\Delta u^3.

309: \end{aligned}

310: \right.\label{8.59}

311: \end{equation}

312: 

313: Thus, the Cahn-Hilliard equation (\ref{8.58}) is equivalent to the

314: following operator equation

315: \begin{equation}

316: \left.

317: \begin{aligned} &\frac{du}{dt}=L_{\lambda}u+G(u), \\

318: &u(0)=\varphi

319: \end{aligned}

320: \right.\label{8.60}

321: \end{equation}

322: It is known that the operators defined by (\ref{8.59}) satisfy the

323: conditions (\ref{5.2}) and (\ref{5.3}).

324: 

325: 

326: We first consider the case where $\Omega\subset \R^n(1\leq n\leq

327: 3)$ is a general bounded and smooth domain. Let $\rho_k$ and $e_k$ be the

328: eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of the following eigenvalue problem:

329: \begin{equation}

330: \left.

331: \begin{aligned} 

332:  &-\Delta e_k=\rho_ke_k,\\

333: &\frac{\partial e_k}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,\\

334: &\int_{\Omega}e_kdx=0.

335: \end{aligned}

336: \right.\label{8.61}

337: \end{equation}

338: The eigenvalues of (\ref{8.61}) satisfy

339: $ 0<\rho_1\leq\rho_2\leq\cdots\leq\rho_k\leq\cdots,$  and $ \lim_{k \to \infty} \rho_k= \infty$. The eigenfunctions $\{e_k\}$ of (\ref{8.61})

340: constitute an orthonormal  basis of $H$. Furthermore,  the

341: eigenfunctions of (\ref{8.61}) satisfy

342: $$\frac{\partial\Delta e_k}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,\ \ \

343: \ k=1,2,\cdots .$$ 

344: Hence, $\{e_k\}$ is also an orthogonal basis of

345: $H_1$ under the following equivalent norm

346: $$\|u\|_1=\left[\int_{\Omega}|\Delta^2u|^2dx\right]^{{1}/{2}}.$$

347: 

348: We are now in position to give a phase transition theorem 

349: for the problem (\ref{8.58}) with the following

350: Neumann boundary condition:

351: \begin{equation}

352: \frac{\partial u}{\partial n} =0,\ \ \ \

353: \frac{\partial\Delta u}{\partial

354: n}=0 \qquad \text{ on } \partial \Omega.\label{8.62}

355: \end{equation}

356: 

357: \bt\la{t8.3}

358: Assume that $\gamma_2=0$ and $\gamma_3>0$ in

359: (\ref{8.58}), then the following assertions hold true:

360: 

361: \begin{enumerate}

362: 

363: \item[(1)] If the first eigenvalue $\rho_1$ of (\ref{8.61}) has

364: multiplicity $m\geq 1$, then the problem (\ref{8.58}) with

365: (\ref{8.62}) bifurcates from $(u,\lambda )=(0,\rho_1)$ on $\lambda

366: >\rho_1$ to an attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$, homeomorphic to an

367: $(m-1)$-dimensional sphere $S^{m-1}$, and $\Sigma_{\lambda}$

368: attracts $H \setminus \Gamma$,  where $\Gamma$ is the stable manifold of $u=0$

369: with codimension $m$. 

370: 

371: \item[(2)] $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ contains at

372: least $2m$ singular points. If $m=1, \Sigma_{\lambda}$ has exactly

373: two steady states $\pm u_{\lambda}$, and if $m=2,

374: \Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$ has at most eight singular points.

375: 

376: 

377: \item[(3)]  Each singular point $u_{\lambda}$ in

378: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ can be expressed as

379: $$u_{\lambda}=\left(\lambda

380: -\rho_1\right)^{{1}/{2}} w +o(|\lambda

381: -\rho_1|^{{1}/{2}}),$$ 

382: where $w$ is an eigenfunction corresponding to the first eigenvalue of  (\ref{8.61}).

383: \end{enumerate}

384: \et

385: 

386: \bp

387: We proceed in several steps as follows.

388: 

389: \medskip

390: 

391: {\sc Step 1.} It is clear that the eigenfunction $\{e_k\}$ of

392: (\ref{8.61}) are also eigenvectors of the linear operator

393: $L_{\lambda}=-A+B_{\lambda}$ defined by (\ref{8.59}) and the

394: eigenvalues of $L_{\lambda}$ are given by

395: \begin{equation}

396: \beta_k(\lambda )=\rho_k(\lambda -\rho_k),\ \ \ \ k=1,2,\cdots

397: .\label{8.63}

398: \end{equation}

399: It is easy to verify the conditions (\ref{5.4}) and (\ref{5.5})

400: in our case  at $\lambda_0=\rho_1$. We shall prove this theorem

401: using the attractor bifurcation theory introduced in \cite{b-book}.

402: 

403: We need to verify that $u=0$ is a global asymptotically stable

404: singular point of (\ref{8.60}) at $\lambda =\rho_1$. By

405: $\gamma_2=0$, from the energy integration of (\ref{8.58}) we can

406: obtain

407: \begin{equation}

408: \frac{1}{2}\frac{d}{dt}\int_{\Omega}u^2dx=\int_{\Omega}\left[-|\Delta

409: u|^2+\rho_1|\nabla u|^2-3\gamma_3u^2|\nabla

410: u|^2\right]dx\label{8.64}

411: \end{equation}

412: $$\leq -C\int_{\Omega}|\Delta

413: v|^2dx-3\gamma_3\int_{\Omega}u^2|\nabla u|^2dx,$$ where $C>0$ is a

414: constant, $u=v+ w $, and $\int_{\Omega}v wdx=0$, and $w$ is a first engenfunction. It follows from

415: (\ref{8.64}) that $u=0$ is global asymptotically stable. 

416: Hence, %forbookTheorems \ref{t2.24} and \ref{t5.4}, 

417: for Assertion (1), we only have to prove that  

418: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ is homeomorphic to $S^{m-1}$, as the rest of  this assertion follows directly from the attractor bifurcation theory introduced in \cite{b-book}.

419: 

420: \bigskip

421: 

422: {\sc Step 2.} Now we prove that the bifurcated attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$

423: from $(0,\rho_1)$ contains at least $2m$ singular points.

424: 

425: Let $g(u)=-\Delta u-\lambda u+\gamma_3u^3$. Then the stationary

426: equation of (\ref{8.58})  is given by 

427: \begin{align*}

428: &\Delta g(u)=0,\\

429: &\int_{\Omega}udx=0,

430: \end{align*}

431: which is equivalent, by the maximum principle,  to

432: \begin{equation}

433: \left.

434: \begin{aligned} 

435: &-\Delta u-\lambda

436: u+\gamma_3u^3=\text{constant},\\

437: &\int_{\Omega}udx=0,\\

438: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0.

439: \end{aligned}

440: \right.\label{8.65}

441: \end{equation}

442: By the Lagrange multiplier theorem, (\ref{8.65}) is the Euler

443: equation of the following functional with zero average constraint:

444: \begin{align}

445: & F(u)=\int_{\Omega}\left[\frac{1}{2}|\nabla

446: u|^2-\frac{\lambda}{2}u^2+\frac{\gamma_3}{4}u^4\right]dx,\label{8.66}

447: \\

448: & u\in \left\{u\in H^1(\Omega )\cap H\ \Big|\ \

449: \frac{\partial u}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0\quad \int_{\Omega}udx=0\right\}. \nonumber 

450: \end{align}

451:  Since $F$ is an even functional, %forbookby Theorem \ref{t3.8}, 

452:  by the classical Krasnoselskii bifurcation theorem for even functionals, 

453:  (\ref{8.66}) bifurcates from

454: $\lambda >\rho_1$ at least to $2m$ mini-maximum points, i.e., 

455: equation (\ref{8.65}) has at least $2m$ bifurcated solutions on

456: $\lambda >\rho_1$. Hence, the attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$

457: contains at least $2m$ singular points.

458: 

459: \bigskip

460: 

461: {\sc Step 3.} 

462: To complete the proof, we reduce the equation (\ref{8.60}) to the

463: center manifold near $\lambda =\rho_1$. 

464: By the approximation formula given in \cite{b-book},  

465: the reduced equation of (\ref{8.60}) is given by:

466: \begin{equation}

467: \frac{dx_i}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda

468: )x_i-\gamma_3\rho_1\int_{\Omega}v^3e_{1i}dx  + o(|x|^3)\qquad \text{ for }  1\leq i\leq

469: m,\label{8.67}

470: \end{equation}

471: where $\beta_1(\lambda )=\rho_1(\lambda -\rho_1)$, 

472: $v=\sum^m_{i=1}x_ie_{1i}$, 

473: and $\{e_{11},\cdots,e_{1m}\}$ are the first eigenfunctions

474: of (\ref{8.61}). Equations (\ref{8.67}) can be rewritten as

475: \begin{equation}

476: \frac{dx_i}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda

477: )x_i-\gamma_3\rho_1\int_{\Omega}\left(\sum^m_{j=1}x_je_{1j}\right)^3e_{1i}dx+o(|x|^3).\label{8.68}

478: \end{equation}

479: Let

480: $$ g(x)=\left(\int_{\Omega}v^3e_{11}dx,\cdots,\int_{\Omega}v^3e_{1m}dx\right),

481: \qquad  v(x)=\sum^m_{j=1}x_je_{1j}.

482: $$

483:  Then for any $x\in \R^m$,

484: \begin{equation}\label{8.69}

485: <g(x),x>=\sum^m_{i=1}x_i\int_{\Omega}v^3e_{1i}dx

486: =\int_{\Omega}v^4dx \geq C|x|^4,

487: \end{equation}

488: for some constant $C>0$.

489: 

490: Thus by the attractor bifurcation theorem \cite{b-book}, 

491: it follows from (\ref{8.68}) and (\ref{8.69}) 

492:  that the attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ is homeomorphic to

493: $S^{m-1}$. Hence, Assertion (1) is proved. The other conclusions

494: in Assertions (2) and (3) can be derived from (\ref{8.68}) and

495: (\ref{8.69}). The proof is complete.

496: \qed

497: \ep

498: 

499: 

500: Physically, the coefficients $\gamma_2$ and $\gamma_3$ depend on

501: $u_0=\bar{u}_B$, the temperature $T$, and the pressure $p$:

502: $$

503: \gamma_k=\gamma_k(u_0,T,p), \qquad k=2,3.

504: $$

505: The set of points satisfying

506: $\gamma_2(u_0,T,p)=0$ has measure zero in $(u_0,T,p)\in \R^3$.

507: Hence, it is more interesting to consider the case where

508: $\gamma_2\neq 0$.

509: 

510: For this purpose, let the multiplicity of the first eigenvalue $\rho_1$ of

511: (\ref{8.61}) be $m\geq 1$, and $\{e_1,\cdots,e_m\}$ be the first

512: eigenfunctions. We introduce the following quadratic equations

513: \begin{equation}

514: \left.

515: \begin{aligned} 

516: & \sum^m_{i,j=1}a^k_{ij}x_ix_j=0\quad &&\text{ for } 1\leq

517: k\leq m,\\

518: & a^k_{ij}=\int_{\Omega}e_ie_je_kdx.

519: \end{aligned}

520: \right.\label{8.70}

521: \end{equation}

522: 

523: \bt\la{t8.4}

524: Let $\gamma_2\neq 0$,  $\gamma_3>0$, and

525: $x=0$ be an isolated singular point of (\ref{8.70}). Then the

526: phase transition of (\ref{8.58}) and (\ref{8.62}) is either

527: Type-II or Type-III. Furthermore, the problem (\ref{8.58}) with

528: (\ref{8.62}) bifurcates to at least one singular point on each side

529: of $\lambda =\rho_1$, and has a saddle-node bifurcation on

530: $\lambda <\rho_1$. In particular,  if $m=1$, then the following

531: assertions hold true:

532: 

533: \begin{enumerate}

534: 

535: \item[(1)] The phase transition is Type-III, and a neighborhood

536: $U\subset H$ of $u=0$ can be decomposed into two sectorial regions

537: $\bar{U}=\bar{D}_1(\pi )+\bar{D}_2(\pi )$ such that the phase

538: transition in $D_1(\pi )$ is the first order, and in $D_2(\pi )$

539: is the $n$-th order with $n\geq 3$. 

540: 

541: \item[(2)] The bifurcated

542: singular point $u_{\lambda}$ on $\lambda >\rho_1$ attracts

543: $D_2(\pi )$, which can be expressed as

544: \begin{equation} 

545:  u_{\lambda}=(\lambda

546: -\rho_1)e_1/\gamma_2a+o(|\lambda -\rho_1|),\label{8.71}

547: \end{equation}

548: where, by assumption,   

549: $a=\int_{\Omega}e^3_1dx  \neq 0$.

550: 

551: \item[(3)] When $|\gamma_2a|=\varepsilon$ is small, the

552: assertions in the transition perturbation theorems (Theorems \ref{t6.10}

553: and \ref{t6.11}) hold true.

554: \end{enumerate}

555: \et

556: 

557: \br\la{r8.4}

558: {\rm

559: We shall see later that when $\Omega$ is a

560: rectangular domain,  i.e., 

561: $$\Omega =\Pi^n_{k=1}(0,L_k)\subset \R^n

562: \qquad (1\leq n\leq 3),$$ 

563: then $a=\int_{\Omega} e_1^3 dx =0$. However, for almost all non-rectangular

564: domains $\Omega$,  the first eigenvalues are

565: simple and $a\neq 0$. Hence, the Type-III phase transitions for

566: general domains are generic.\qed

567: }

568: \er

569: 

570: \bp[Proof of Theorem \ref{t8.4}]

571: Assertions (1)-(3) can be directly

572: proved using Theorems \ref{t5.9}, \ref{t6.10}, and \ref{t6.11}. 

573: By assumption, $u=0$ is a

574: second order non-degenerate singular point of (\ref{8.60}) at

575: $\lambda =\rho_1$, which implies that $u=0$ is not locally

576: asymptotically stable. Hence, it follows from Theorems \ref{t5.3}  and

577: the steady state bifurcation theorem for  even-order

578: nondegenerate singular points \cite{b-book}  that the phase transition of (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.62})

579: is either Type-II or Type-III, and there is at least one singular

580: point bifurcated on each side of $\lambda =\rho_1$.

581: 

582: Finally, we shall apply Theorem \ref{t6.4} to prove that there exists a

583: saddle-node bifurcation on $\lambda <\rho_1$.

584: 

585: It is known that

586: $$\text{ind}(L_{\lambda}+G,0)

587: = \left\{

588: \begin{aligned}

589: & \text{even}&& \text{ if }  \lambda =\rho_1,\\

590: & 1&& \text{ if }  \lambda <\rho_1.

591: \end{aligned}

592: \right.$$ 

593: Moreover, since $L_{\lambda}+G$ defined by (\ref{8.59})

594: is a gradient-type operator,  we can

595: derive  that

596: $$\text{ind}(L_{\rho_1}+G,0)\leq 0.$$

597: Hence there is a bifurcated branch $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ on $\lambda

598: <\rho_1$ such that

599: $$

600: \text{ind}(L_{\lambda}+G,u_{\lambda})=-1

601: \qquad \forall u_{\lambda}\in\Sigma_{\lambda},\ \ \ \ \lambda <\rho_1.

602: $$ 

603: It is

604: clear that the eigenvalues (\ref{8.63}) of $L_{\lambda}$ satisfy

605: (\ref{5.4}) and (\ref{5.5}). For any

606: $\lambda\in \R^1$ (\ref{8.60}) possesses a global attractor.

607: Therefore, for bounded $\lambda ,b<\lambda\leq\rho_1$, the

608: bifurcated branch $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ is bounded:

609: $$\|u_{\lambda}\|_H\leq C\qquad \forall

610: u_{\lambda}\in\Sigma_{\lambda},\ \ \ \ -\infty

611: <b<\lambda\leq\rho_1.$$ 

612: We need to prove that there exists

613: $\widetilde{\lambda}<\rho_1$ such that for all $\lambda

614: <\widetilde{\lambda}$ equation (\ref{8.60}) has no nonzero

615: singular points.

616: 

617: By the energy estimates of (\ref{8.60}),   

618: for any $\lambda <\widetilde{\lambda}=-{\gamma^2_2}/{2\gamma_3}$  

619: and  $u\neq 0$ in $ H$, 

620: \begin{align*}

621: &\int_{\Omega}\left[|\Delta u|^2-\lambda |\nabla

622: u|^2+2\gamma_2u|\nabla u|^2+3\gamma_3u^2|\nabla u|^2\right]dx\\

623: &\geq \int_{\Omega}|\Delta u|^2dx+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla

624: u|^2(-\lambda -2|\gamma_2u|+3\gamma_3u^2)dx\\

625: &\geq \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^2dx+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla

626: u|^2(-\lambda

627: +\gamma_3u^2+2\gamma_3(u-\frac{\gamma_2}{\gamma_3})^2-\frac{\gamma^2_2}{2\gamma_3})dx\\

628: &\geq \int_{\Omega}|\nabla u|^2dx+\int_{\Omega}|\nabla

629: u|^2(-\lambda -\frac{\gamma^2_2}{2\gamma_3})dx\\

630: &> 0.

631: \end{align*}

632: Therefore, when $\lambda <\widetilde{\lambda}$,

633: (\ref{8.60}) has no nontrivial singular points in $H$. Thus we

634: infer from Theorem \ref{t6.4} that there exists a saddle-node bifurcation

635: on $\lambda <\rho_1$. This proof is complete. 

636: \ep

637: 

638: \section{Phase Transition in Rectangular Domains}

639: \la{s8.2.4}

640: The dynamical properties of phase separation of a binary system in

641: a rectangular container is very different from that in a general

642: container. We see in the previous section that the phase

643: transitions in general domains are Type-III,  and  we shall show

644: in the following that the phase transitions in rectangular domains

645: are either Type-I or Type-II, which are distinguished by a critical

646: size of the domains.

647: 

648: Let $\Omega =\Pi^n_{k=1}(0,L_k)\subset \R^n$  $ (1\leq n\leq 3)$ be a

649: rectangular domain. 

650: We first consider the case where 

651: \begin{equation}

652: L=L_1>L_j\qquad  \forall 2\leq j\leq n.\label{8.72}

653: \end{equation}

654: 

655: 

656: \bt\la{t8.5}

657: Let $\Omega =\Pi^n_{k=1}(0,L_k)$ satisfy

658: (\ref{8.72}). The following assertions hold true:

659: 

660: \begin{enumerate}

661: 

662: \item[(1)]  If $$\gamma_3<\frac{2L^2}{9\pi^2}\gamma^2_2,$$ then  the

663: phase transition of (\ref{8.58}) and (\ref{8.62}) at $\lambda

664: =\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ is Type-II. In particular, the problem

665: (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.62}) bifurcates from $(u,\lambda

666: )=(0,\pi^2/L^2)$ on $\lambda <\pi^2/L^2$ to exactly two equilibrium

667: points which are saddles, and there are two saddle-node

668: bifurcations on $\lambda < {\pi^2}/{L^2}$ as shown in Figure

669: \ref{f8.8-1}. 

670: 

671: \item[(2)] If $$\gamma_3>\frac{2L^2}{9\pi^2}\gamma^2_2,$$  

672: then the transition is Type-I. In particular, 

673: the problem bifurcates on $\lambda >\pi^2/L^2$ to exactly two

674: attractors $u^T_1$ and $u^T_2$ which can be expressed as

675: \begin{equation}

676:  u^T_{1,2}=\pm\frac{\sqrt{2}(\lambda

677: -\frac{\pi^2}{L^2})^{{1}/{2}}}{\sigma^{{1}/{2}}}\cos\frac{\pi

678: x_1}{L}+o(|\lambda -\frac{\pi^2}{L^2}|^{{1}/{2}}),\label{8.73}

679: \end{equation}

680: where 

681: $\sigma =\frac{3\gamma_3}{2}-\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{3\pi^2}.

682: $

683: \end{enumerate}

684: \et

685: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

686:   \centering

687:   \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{8-8.pdf}

688:   \caption{Type-II transition as given by Theorem~\ref{t8.5}.}\la{f8.8-1}

689:  \end{SCfigure}

690: 

691: \bp

692: With the spatial domain as given,   the first eigenvalue and eigenfunction of

693: (\ref{8.61}) are given by

694: $$\rho_1=\pi^2/L^2,\ \ \ \ e_1=\cos\frac{\pi x_1}{L}.$$

695: The eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of $L_{\lambda}=-A+B_{\lambda}$

696: defined by (\ref{8.59}) are as follows:

697: \begin{align}

698: & \beta_K=|K|^2(\lambda -|K|^2),\label{8.74}\\

699: & e_K=\cos\frac{k_1\pi x_1}{L_1}\cdots\cos\frac{k_n\pi x_n}{L_n},\label{8.75}

700: \end{align}

701: where

702: \begin{align*}

703: &K=\left(\frac{k_1\pi}{L_1},\cdots,\frac{k_n\pi}{L_n}\right)&&  \forall 

704:   k_i\in \Z,\ \ \ \ 1 \leq i\leq n, \\

705: &|K|^2=\pi^2\sum^n_{i=1}k^2_i/L^2_i&& |K|^2\neq 0.

706: \end{align*}

707: 

708: By the approximation of the center manifold obtained in \cite{b-book},  the  reduced equation of

709: (\ref{8.60}) to the center manifold is given by

710: \begin{equation}

711: \frac{dy}{dt}= \beta_1(\lambda )y 

712:  -\frac{2\pi^2}{(L_1\cdots

713: L_n)L^2_1}

714: \int_{\Omega}\left[\gamma_2y^2e^3_1 +\gamma_3y^3 e^4_1

715: +\gamma_2 (ye_1+\Phi (y))^2e_1\right]dx,

716: \label{8.76}

717: \end{equation}

718: where $y\in \R^1$, $\Phi (y)$ is the center manifold function, and

719: \begin{equation}

720: \beta_1(\lambda )=\frac{\pi^2}{L^2}(\lambda -\frac{\pi^2}{L^2}).\label{8.77}

721: \end{equation}

722: Direct calculation implies that 

723: \begin{eqnarray}

724: &&\int_{\Omega}e^3_1dx=\int^{L_1}_0\cdots\int^{L_n}_0\cos^3\frac{\pi

725: x_1}{L}dx=0,\label{8.78}\\

726: &&\int_{\Omega}e^4_1dx=L_2\cdots L_n\int^L_0\cos^4\frac{\pi

727: x_1}{L}dx_1=\frac{3}{8}L_1\cdots L_n.\label{8.79}

728: \end{eqnarray}

729: By (\ref{8.78}) and $\Phi (y)=O(|y|^2)$ we obtain

730: \begin{equation}

731: \int_{\Omega}(ye_1+\Phi )^2e_1dx=2y\int_{\Omega}\Phi

732: (y)e^2_1dx+o(|y|^3)\label{8.80}

733: \end{equation}

734: It follows that

735: \begin{align*}

736: & 

737: \Phi (y) = \sum^{\infty}_{|K|^2>\pi^2/L^2}\phi_K(y)e_K+o(|y|^2)\\

738: & \phi_K(y)= \frac{\gamma_2y^2}{-\beta_K\|e_K\|^2_H}\int_{\Omega}\Delta

739: e^2_1\cdot e_Kdx = 

740: \frac{|K|^2\gamma_2y^2}{\beta_K\|e_K\|^2_H}\int_{\Omega}e_Ke^2_1dx.

741: \end{align*}

742: Notice that

743: $$\int_{\Omega}e_Ke^2_1dx=

744: \left\{

745: \begin{aligned}

746: &0&& \forall  K\neq\left(\frac{2\pi}{L_1},0,\cdots,0\right),\\

747: &L_1\cdots L_n/4&& \forall 

748: K=\left(\frac{2\pi}{L_1},0,\cdots,0\right).

749: \end{aligned}

750: \right.

751: $$ 

752: Then we have

753: $$

754: \Phi (y)=\frac{\gamma_2y^2}{2(\lambda

755: -4\pi^2/L^2)}\cos\frac{2\pi x_1}{L}+o(|y|^2).

756: $$ 

757: Inserting $\Phi

758: (y)$ into (\ref{8.80}) we find

759: \begin{align}

760: \int_{\Omega}(ye_1+\Phi )^2e_1dx

761: =&\frac{\gamma_2y^3}{\lambda -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}}\int_{\Omega}\cos\frac{2\pi

762: x_1}{L}e^2_1dx+o(|y|^3)\label{8.81}\\

763: =&\frac{L_1\cdots L_n}{4}\cdot\frac{\gamma_2}{\lambda

764: -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}}y^3+o(|y|^3).\nonumber

765: \end{align}

766: Finally, by (\ref{8.78}), (\ref{8.79}) and (\ref{8.81}),   we derive from (\ref{8.76})

767:  the following reduced equation of (\ref{8.60}): 

768:  \begin{equation}

769: \frac{dy}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda

770: )y-\frac{\pi^2}{2L^2}\left(\frac{3\gamma_3}{2}

771: +\frac{\gamma^2_2}{\lambda -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}}\right)y^3+o(|y|^3).\label{8.82}

772: \end{equation}

773: Near the critical point $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$, the coefficient

774: $$\frac{3\gamma_3}{2}+\frac{\gamma^2_2}{\lambda

775: -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}}=\frac{3\gamma_3}{2}-\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{3\pi^2}.$$

776: 

777: Thus, by Theorem \ref{t5.2} we derive from (\ref{8.82}) the assertions of

778: the theorem except the claim for the saddle-node bifurcation in

779: Assertion (1), which can be proved in the same fashion as used

780: in Theorem \ref{t8.4}. The proof is complete. 

781: \ep

782: 

783: 

784: We now consider the case where $\Omega =\Pi^n_{k=1}(0,L_k)$

785: satisfies  that 

786: \begin{equation}

787:  L=L_1=\cdots =L_m > L_j  \qquad \text{for } 2\leq m\leq 3, m < j \le n.

788:  \label{8.83}

789: \end{equation}

790: 

791: 

792: \bt\la{t8.6}

793:  Let $\Omega =\Pi^n_{k=1}(0,L_k)$ satisfy

794: (\ref{8.83}). Then the following assertions hold true:

795: 

796: \begin{enumerate}

797: \item  If 

798: $$\gamma_3>\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2,$$ 

799: then the phase transition of the problem (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.62}) at $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ is Type-I, satisfying the following properties:

800: 

801: \begin{enumerate}

802: 

803: \item  The problem bifurcates on $\lambda >\pi^2/L^2$ to an attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$, containing exactly $3^m-1$ non-degenerate singular points, 

804: and $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ is homeomorphic to an $(m-1)$-dimensional 

805: sphere $S^{m-1}$.

806: 

807: \item For $m=2$, the attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$

808: contains 4 minimal attractors, as shown in Figure \ref{f8.9-1}. 

809: 

810: \item For

811: $m=3, \Sigma_{\lambda}=S^2$ contains  $8$ minimal attractors as shown in Figure~\ref{f8.10}(a),  if 

812: $$\gamma_3 < \frac{22 L^2}{9\pi^2} \gamma_2^2,$$

813: and contains $6$ minimal attractors as shown  in Figure \ref{f8.10}(b)

814: if 

815: $$\gamma_3 > \frac{22 L^2}{9\pi^2} \gamma_2^2.$$

816: \end{enumerate}

817: 

818: 

819: \item If 

820: $$\gamma_3<\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2,$$

821: then the transition is Type-II. 

822: In particular, the problem has

823: a saddle-node bifurcation on $\lambda <\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$, and

824: bifurcates on both side of $\lambda =\lambda_0$ to exactly $3^m-1$

825: singular points which are non-degenerate.

826: \end{enumerate}

827: \et

828: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

829:   \centering

830:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-9-1.pdf}

831:   \caption{For  $m=2, \Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$ and

832: $Z_{2k}$  $(1\leq k\leq 4)$ are attractors.}\la{f8.9-1}

833:  \end{SCfigure}

834: \begin{figure}[hbt]

835:   \centering

836:   \includegraphics[width=0.38\textwidth]{8-10a.pdf}\qquad 

837:   \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{8-10b.pdf}

838:   \caption{For $m=3$, $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^2$, (a) $\pm

839: Z_k$  $(1\leq k\leq 4)$ are attractors, (b) $\pm Y_k$  $(1\leq k\leq 3)$

840: are attractors.}\la{f8.10}

841:  \end{figure}

842: 

843: 

844: \bp 

845:  We proceed in several steps as follows.

846: 

847: \medskip

848: 

849: {\sc Step 1.} Consider the center manifold reduction. It is known

850: that the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of

851: $L_{\lambda}=-A+B_{\lambda}$ are given by (\ref{8.74}) and

852: (\ref{8.75}) with $L_1=\cdots =L_m$.  %forbook(\ref{1.123}), 

853: As before, the reduced

854: equations of (\ref{8.60}) are  given by 

855: \begin{equation}

856: \frac{dy}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda)y+g(y)+o(|y|^3),\label{8.84}

857: \end{equation}

858: where $y=(y_1,\cdots,y_m)\in \R^m$, $\beta_1(\lambda )$ is as in

859: (\ref{8.77}), and

860: \begin{align*}

861: &g(y)=\frac{2\pi^2}{L_1\cdots L_nL^2_1}(G_2(y)+G_3(y)+G_{23}(y)),\\

862: & G_2(y)=-\gamma_2\left(\int_{\Omega}v^2e_1dx,\cdots,\int_{\Omega}v^2e_mdx\right),\\

863: & G_3(y)=-\gamma_3\left(\int_{\Omega}v^3e_1dx,\cdots,\int_{\Omega}v^3e_mdx\right),\\

864: &G_{23}(y)=-\gamma_2\left(\int_{\Omega}u^2e_1dx,\cdots,\int_{\Omega}u^2e_mdx\right).

865: \end{align*}

866: Here 

867: $ e_i=\cos\pi x_i/L $  for   $ 1\leq i\leq m$,  $L$  is given by  (\ref{8.83}), 

868: $ v=\sum^m_{i=1}y_ie_i,$   $u=v+\Phi (y)$   and $\Phi$ is the center manifold function.

869: Direct computation shows that  

870: \begin{align}

871: & 

872: \left.\begin{aligned}

873:  \int_{\Omega}v^2e_idx

874:       =&  \int_{\Omega}\left(\sum^m_{j=1}y_j\cos\pi

875:             x_j/L\right)^2\cos\pi x_i/Ldx=0, \\

876:  \int_{\Omega}v^3e_idx=& 

877:      \int_{\Omega}\left(\sum^n_{j=1}y_k\cos\pi x_j/L\right)^3\cos\pi x_i/Ldx\\

878:  =& \frac{3}{4}L_1\cdots

879: L_n\left(\frac{1}{2}y^3_i+y_i\sum_{j\neq i}y^2_j\right),

880: \end{aligned}

881: \right.\label{8.85} \\

882: &

883: \int_{\Omega}u^2e_idx=\int_{\Omega}\left(\sum^m_{j=1}y_je_j+\Phi

884: (y)\right)^2e_idx \nonumber \\

885: & \qquad \qquad = 2\sum^m_{j=1}y_j\int_{\Omega}\Phi (y)e_je_idx

886: + \int_\Omega \Phi^2(y) e_idx. \label{8.86}

887: \end{align}

888: 

889: 

890: We need to compute the center manifold function $\Phi (y)$. 

891: As in \cite{b-book}, we have

892: \begin{equation}

893: \Phi

894: (y)=\sum^{\infty}_{|K|>\pi^2/L^2}\phi_K(y)e_K+o(|y|^2)+O(|y|^2|\beta_1|),\label{8.87}

895: \end{equation}

896: where

897: \begin{align*}

898: \phi_K(y) =&\frac{\gamma_2}{-\beta_K(\lambda)<e_K,e_K>}

899: \int_{\Omega}\Delta v^2e_Kdx\\

900: =&\frac{|K|^2\gamma_2}{\beta_K(\lambda)<e_K,e_K>}

901: \int_{\Omega}v^2e_Kdx\\

902: =&\frac{|K|^2\gamma_2}{\beta_K<e_K,e_K>}\sum^m_{i,j=1}y_iy_i\int_{\Omega}e_ie_ie_Kdx.

903: \end{align*}

904: It is clear that

905: $$\int_{\Omega}e_ie_je_Kdx=\int_{\Omega}\cos\frac{\pi

906: x_i}{L}\cos\frac{\pi x_j}{L}e_kdx=0,$$ 

907: if 

908: $$ K\neq K_i+K_j, \qquad  K_i=\left(\frac{\pi}{L_1}\delta_{1i},\cdots,\frac{\pi}{L_n}\delta_{ni}\right).

909: $$

910: By (\ref{8.74}) and (\ref{8.75}) we have

911: \begin{align*}

912: \phi_K(y) =

913: &

914: \frac{\gamma_2y_iy_j(2-\delta_{ij})}{(\lambda -|K|^2)<e_K,e_K>}\int_{\Omega}e_ie_je_Kdx\\

915: =

916: &\left\{

917: \begin{aligned} 

918: &  \frac{\gamma_2y^2_i}{2(\lambda  -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2})}&& \text{ if }  i=j,\\

919: & \frac{2\gamma_2y_iy_j}{(\lambda -\frac{2\pi^2}{L^2})}&& \text{ if }   i\neq j,

920: \end{aligned}

921: \right.

922: \end{align*}

923: for $K=K_i+K_j$. 

924: Thus, by (\ref{8.87}), we obtain 

925: $$

926: \Phi (y)=\sum^m_{i=1}\frac{\gamma_2}{2(\lambda

927: -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2})}y^2_i\cos\frac{2\pi x_i}{L}

928: +\sum^m_{l>r}\frac{2\gamma_2}{(\lambda

929: -\frac{2\pi^2}{L^2})}y_ly_r\cos\frac{\pi x_l}{L}\cos\frac{\pi x_r}{L}.

930: $$

931: Inserting $\Phi (y)$ into (\ref{8.86}) we derive

932: \begin{align*}

933: \int_{\Omega}u^2e_idx= &

934:  \frac{\gamma_2}{\lambda-\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}} 

935: \int_{\Omega} \left[y^3_i  \cos^2\frac{\pi

936: x_i}{L}\cos\frac{2\pi x_i}{L}+ 4y_i\sum_{j\neq

937: i}y^2_j \cos^2\frac{\pi x_j}{L}\cos^2\frac{\pi

938: x_i}{L}\right]dx \\

939: & + o(|y|^3).

940: \end{align*}

941:  Direct computation gives that

942: \begin{equation}

943: \int_{\Omega}u^2e_idx=\frac{\gamma_2L_1\cdots

944: L_n}{4}\left[\frac{y^3_i}{\lambda -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}}+\frac{4y_i}{\lambda

945: -\frac{2\pi^2}{L^2}}\sum_{j\neq i}y^2_j\right] + o(|y|^3).\label{8.88}

946: \end{equation}

947: Putting (\ref{8.85}) and (\ref{8.88}) in (\ref{8.84}), we get the

948: reduced equations in the following form

949: \begin{equation}

950: \frac{dy_i}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda

951: )y_i-\frac{\pi^2}{2L^2}\left[\sigma_1y^3_i+\sigma_2y_i\sum_{j\neq

952: i}y^2_j\right]+o(|y|^3) \quad \forall 1\leq i\leq m,\label{8.89}

953: \end{equation}

954: where

955: \begin{equation}

956: \sigma_1=\frac{3\gamma_3}{2}+\frac{\gamma^2_2}{\lambda

957: -\frac{4\pi^2}{L^2}},\qquad 

958: \sigma_2=3\gamma_3+\frac{4\gamma^2_2}{\lambda -\frac{2\pi^2}{L^2}}.

959: \label{8.90}

960: \end{equation}

961: 

962: {\sc Step 2.}

963:  It is known that the transition type of (\ref{8.60}) at

964: the critical point $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ is completely determined

965: by (\ref{8.89}), i.e., by the following equations

966: \begin{equation}

967: \frac{dy_i}{dt}=-\frac{\pi^2}{2L^2}\left[\sigma^0_1y^3_i+\sigma^0_2y_i\sum_{k\neq

968: i}y^2_k\right]\qquad \forall  1\leq i\leq m,\label{8.91}

969: \end{equation}

970: where

971: $$\sigma^0_1=\frac{3\gamma_3}{2}-\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{3\pi^2},\qquad \sigma^0_2=3\gamma_3-\frac{4L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}.

972: $$ 

973: It is easy to see that

974: \begin{equation}

975: \left.

976: \begin{aligned}

977: &\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2>0\Leftrightarrow\gamma_3>\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2,\\

978: &\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2<0\Leftrightarrow\gamma_3<\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2.

979: \end{aligned}

980: \right.\label{8.92}

981: \end{equation}

982: 

983: {\sc Step 3.} We consider the case where $m=2$. Thus, the transition

984: type of (\ref{8.91}) is equivalent to that of the following equations

985: \begin{equation}

986: \left.

987: \begin{aligned}

988: &\frac{dy_1}{dt}=-y_1[\sigma^0_1y^2_1+\sigma^0_2y^2_2],\\

989: &\frac{dy_2}{dt}=-y_2[\sigma^0_1y^2_2+\sigma^0_2y^2_1].

990: \end{aligned}

991: \right.\label{8.93}

992: \end{equation}

993: We can see that on the straight lines

994: \begin{equation}

995: y^2_1=y^2_2, \label{8.94}

996: \end{equation}

997: equations (\ref{8.93}) satisfy that

998: $$\frac{dy_2}{dy_1}=\frac{y_2}{y_1}\qquad \text{ for }\

999: \sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2\neq 0,\ \ \ \ (y_1,y_2)\neq 0.$$

1000: Hence the straight lines (\ref{8.94}) are orbits of

1001: (\ref{8.93})   if  $\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2\neq 0$. Obviously, the

1002: straight lines

1003: \begin{equation}

1004: y_1=0 \text{  and }  y_2=0 \label{8.95}

1005: \end{equation}

1006: are also orbits of (\ref{8.93}).

1007: 

1008: There are four straight lines determined by (\ref{8.94}) and

1009: (\ref{8.95}), and each of them contains two orbits. Hence, the

1010: system (\ref{8.93}) has at least eight straight line orbits.  

1011: Hence it is not hard to see that the number of straight line orbits of

1012: (\ref{8.93}), if finite, is eight.

1013: 

1014: Since (\ref{8.60}) is a gradient-type equation, 

1015: there are no elliptic regions at $y=0$; see \cite{b-book}. Hence, when

1016: $\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2>0$ all the straight line orbits  on

1017: (\ref{8.94}) and (\ref{8.95}) tend to $y=0$, as shown in Figure

1018: \ref{f8.11} (a), which implies that the regions are parabolic and

1019: stable, therefore $y=0$ is asymptotically stable for (\ref{8.93}).

1020: Accordingly, by the attractor bifurcation theorem in \cite{b-book}, the transition of (\ref{8.89}) at

1021: $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ is Type-I.

1022: 

1023: When $\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2<0$ and $\sigma^0_1>0$, namely

1024: $$\frac{2}{9}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}<\gamma_3<\frac{26}{27}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2},$$

1025: the four straight line orbits on (\ref{8.94}) are outward from

1026: $y=0$, and other four on (\ref{8.95}) are toward $y=0$, as shown

1027: in Figure \ref{f8.11} (b), which implies that all regions at $y=0$ are

1028: hyperbolic. Hence, by Theorem \ref{t5.3},  the transition of (\ref{8.89})

1029: at $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ is Type-II.

1030: 

1031: When $\sigma^0_1\leq 0$, then $\sigma^0_2<0$ too. In this case, no

1032: orbits of (\ref{8.93}) are toward $y=0$, as shown in Figure \ref{f8.11}

1033: (c), which implies by Theorem \ref{t5.3} that the transition is Type-II.

1034: 

1035: Thus by (\ref{8.92}), for $m=2$ we prove that the transition is

1036: Type-I if $\gamma_3>\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$, and Type-II

1037: if  $\gamma_3<\frac{26 L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$.

1038: \begin{figure}[hbt]

1039:   \centering

1040:   \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{8-11a.pdf} 

1041:   \includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{8-11b.pdf} 

1042:   \includegraphics[width=0.28\textwidth]{8-11c.pdf}

1043:   \caption{The topological structure of flows of

1044: (\ref{8.89}) at $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$, (a) as

1045: $\gamma_3>\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$; (b) as

1046: $\frac{2L^2}{9\pi^2}\gamma^2_2<\gamma_3<\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$;

1047: and (c) $\gamma_3\leq\frac{2L^2}{9\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$.}

1048:   \la{f8.11}

1049:  \end{figure}

1050: 

1051: 

1052: {\sc Step 4.} Consider the case where $m=3$. Thus, (\ref{8.91}) are

1053: written as

1054: \begin{equation}

1055: \left.

1056: \begin{aligned}

1057: &\frac{dy_1}{dt}=-y_1[\sigma^0_1y^2_1+\sigma^0_2(y^2_2+y^2_3)],\\

1058: &\frac{dy_2}{dt}=-y_2[\sigma^0_1y^2_2+\sigma^0_2(y^2_1+y^2_3)],\\

1059: &\frac{dy_3}{dt}=-y_3[\sigma^0_1y^2_3+\sigma^0_2(y^2_1+y^2_2)].

1060: \end{aligned}

1061: \right.\label{8.96}

1062: \end{equation}

1063: It is clear that the straight lines

1064: \begin{align}

1065: & y_i=0, \quad  y_j=0\qquad  \text{ for } i\neq j,\ 1\leq i,\ j\leq

1066: 3,\label{8.97} \\

1067: &

1068: \left\{

1069: \begin{aligned} 

1070: & y^2_i=y^2_j, \quad y_k=0&& \text{ for } i\neq j,i\neq

1071: k,j\neq k,1\leq i,j,k\leq 3,\\

1072: & y^2_1=y^2_2=y^2_3,

1073: \end{aligned}

1074: \right.\label{8.98}

1075: \end{align}

1076: consist of orbits of (\ref{8.96}). There are total 13 straight

1077: lines in (\ref{8.97}) and (\ref{8.98}), each of which consists of

1078: two orbits. Thus, (\ref{8.96}) has at least 26 straight line

1079: orbits. We shall show that (\ref{8.96}) has just the straight

1080: line orbits given by (\ref{8.97}) and (\ref{8.98}). In fact, we

1081: assume that the line

1082: $$y_2=z_1y_1,\ \ \ \ y_3=z_2y_1\ \ \ \ (z_1,z_2\ \text{are\ real\

1083: numbers})$$ is a straight line orbit of (\ref{8.96}). Then

1084: $z_1,z_2$ satisfy

1085: \begin{equation}

1086: \left.

1087: \begin{aligned}

1088: &\frac{dy_2}{dy_1}=z_1=z_1\frac{\sigma^0_1z^2_1+\sigma^0_2(1+z^2_2)}{\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2(z^2_1+

1089: z^2_2)},\\

1090: &\frac{dy_3}{dy_1}=z_2=z_2\frac{\sigma^0_1z^2_2+\sigma^0_2(1+z^2_1)}{\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2(z^2_1+z^2_2)}.

1091: \end{aligned}

1092: \right.\label{8.99}

1093: \end{equation}

1094: It is easy to see that when $\sigma^0_1\neq\sigma^0_2$ the

1095: solutions $z_1$ and $z_2$ of (\ref{8.99}) take only the values

1096: $$z_1=0,\pm 1;\ \ \ \ z_2=0,\pm 1.$$

1097: In the same fashion, we can prove that the straight line orbits of

1098: (\ref{8.96}) given by

1099: $$y_1=\alpha_1y_3,\ \ \ \ y_2=\alpha_2y_3,\ \ \ \ \text{and}\

1100: y_1=\beta_1y_2,\ \ \ \ y_3=\beta_2y_2$$ have to satisfy that

1101: $$\alpha_i=0,\pm 1\ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \beta_i=0,\pm 1\ \ \ \

1102: (i=1,2).$$ Thus, we prove that when $\sigma^0_1\neq\sigma^0_2$,

1103: the number of straight line orbits of (\ref{8.96}) is exactly 26.

1104: 

1105: When $\sigma^0_1=\sigma^0_2$, we have that

1106: $\gamma_3=\frac{22}{9}\frac{L^2}{\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$ which implies

1107: that $\sigma^0_1=\sigma^0_2>0$. In this case, it is clear that

1108: $y=0$ is an asymptotically stable singular point of (\ref{8.96}).

1109: Hence, the transition of (\ref{8.89}) at $\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ is

1110: I-type.

1111: 

1112: When $\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2>0$ and $\sigma^0_1\neq\sigma^0_2$, all

1113: straight line orbits of (\ref{8.96}) are toward $y=0$, which

1114: implies  that the regions at $y=0$, are stable, and

1115: $y=0$ is asymptotically stable; see \cite{b-book}. Thereby the transition of

1116: (\ref{8.89}) is Type-I.

1117: 

1118: When $\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2<0$ with $\sigma^0_1>0$, we can see, as

1119: in the case of $m=2$, that the regions at $y=0$ are hyperbolic,

1120: and when $\sigma^0_1+\sigma^0_2<0$ with $\sigma_1\leq 0$ the

1121: regions at $y=0$ are unstable. Hence, the transition is Type-II.

1122: 

1123: 

1124: \medskip

1125: 

1126: {\sc Step 5.} We prove Assertion (1). By Steps 3 and 4, if 

1127: $\gamma_3>\frac{26L^2}{27\pi^2}\gamma^2_2$,  

1128: the reduced equation

1129: (\ref{8.89}) bifurcates on $\lambda >\lambda_0=\pi^2/L^2$ to an

1130: attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$. All bifurcated equilibrium points of

1131: (\ref{8.60}) are one to one correspondence  to the bifurcated

1132: singular points of (\ref{8.89}). Therefore,  we only have to consider the stationary equations:

1133: \begin{equation}

1134: \beta_1(\lambda

1135: )y_i-\frac{\pi^2}{2L^2}[\sigma_1y^3_i+\sigma_2y_i\sum_{j\neq

1136: i}y^2_j]+o(|y|^3)=0,\ \ \ \ 1\leq i\leq m,\label{8.100}

1137: \end{equation}

1138: where $\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ are as in (\ref{8.90}).

1139: 

1140: Consider the following approximative equations of (\ref{8.100})

1141: \begin{equation}

1142: \beta_1(\lambda )y_i-y_i(a_1y^2_i+a_2\sum_{j\neq i}y^2_j)=0\qquad 

1143: \text{ for }  1\leq i\leq m,\label{8.101}

1144: \end{equation}

1145: where $a_1=\pi^2\sigma_1/2L^2, a_2=\pi^2\sigma_2/2L^2$. It is

1146: clear that each regular bifurcated solution of (\ref{8.101})

1147: corresponds to a regular bifurcated solution of (\ref{8.100}).

1148: 

1149: We first prove that (\ref{8.101}) has $3^m-1$ bifurcated solutions

1150: on $\lambda >\lambda_0$. For each $k$  $(0\leq k\leq m-1)$,

1151: (\ref{8.101}) has $C^k_m\times 2^{m-k}$ solutions as follows: 

1152: \begin{equation}

1153: \left.

1154: \begin{aligned} 

1155: & y_{j_1}=0,\cdots,y_{j_k}=0 &&\text{ for } 1\leq j_l\leq

1156: m,\\

1157: & y^2_{r_1}=\cdots=y^2_{r_{m-k}}=\beta_1(a_1+(m-k-1)a_2)^{-1}

1158: &&\text{ for } r_i\neq  j_l.

1159: \end{aligned}

1160: \right.\label{8.102}

1161: \end{equation}

1162: Hence, the number of all bifurcated solutions of (\ref{8.101}) is

1163: $$\sum^{m-1}_{k=0}C^k_m\times 2^{m-k}=(2+1)^m-1=3^m-1.$$

1164: 

1165: We need to prove that all bifurcated solutions of (\ref{8.101})

1166: are regular. The Jacobian matrix of (\ref{8.101}) is given by

1167: \begin{equation}

1168: Dv=

1169: \begin{pmatrix}

1170: \beta_1-h_1(y)  &  2a_2y_1y_2      &\cdots   &    2a_2y_1y_m\\

1171: 2a_2y_2y_1      &   \beta_1-h_2(y) &\cdots   &    2a_2y_2y_m\\

1172: \vdots                &\vdots                  &             &    \vdots\\

1173: 2a_2y_my_1     & 2a_2y_my_2      &\cdots   &  \beta_1-h_m(y)

1174: \end{pmatrix},

1175: \label{8.103}

1176: \end{equation}

1177: where

1178: $$h_i(y)=3a_1y^2_i+a_2\sum_{j\neq i}y^2_j.$$

1179: For the solutions in (\ref{8.102}), without loss of generality, we

1180: take

1181: \begin{align*}

1182: &y_0=(y^0_1,\cdots,y^0_m),\\

1183: &y^0_i=0\qquad   \qquad 1\leq i\leq k, \\

1184: &y^0_{k+1}=\cdots=y^0_m=\beta^{{1}/{2}}_1(a_1+(m-k-1)a_2)^{-{1}/{2}}

1185: \end{align*}

1186: Inserting them into (\ref{8.103}) we find

1187: \begin{equation}

1188: Dv(y_0)=

1189: \left(\begin{matrix} \beta I_k&0\\

1190: 0&A_{m-k}

1191: \end{matrix}

1192: \right), \label{8.104}

1193: \end{equation}

1194: where

1195: \begin{align*}

1196: & 

1197: \beta

1198: =\beta_1\left(1-\frac{(m-k)a_2}{a_1+(m-k-1)a_2}\right)=\frac{(\sigma_1-\sigma_2)\beta_1}{\sigma_1+

1199: (m-k-1)\sigma_2}, \\

1200: & A_{m-k} =

1201: \left(\begin{matrix}

1202: \beta_1-(3a_1+(m-k-1)a_2)(y^{0}_{k+1})^2  &  \cdots & 2a_2(y^{0}_{k+1})^2\\

1203: \vdots&&\vdots\\

1204: 2a_2(y^{0}_{k+1})^2&\cdots&\beta_1-(3a_1+(m-k-1)a_2)(y^{0}_{k+1})^2

1205: \end{matrix}

1206: \right).

1207: \end{align*}

1208: Direct computation shows that 

1209: $$\text{det}A_{m-k}=\frac{\pi^{2m}\beta^m_1}{(a_1+(m-k-1)a_2)^mL^{2m}}\text{det}

1210: \left(\begin{matrix}

1211: -\sigma_1&\sigma_2&\cdots&\sigma_2\\

1212: \sigma_2&-\sigma_1&\cdots&\sigma_2\\

1213: \vdots&\vdots& & \vdots\\

1214: \sigma_2&\sigma_2&\cdots&-\sigma_1

1215: \end{matrix}

1216: \right),$$ 

1217: where $\sigma_1,\sigma_2$ are given by (\ref{8.90}).

1218: 

1219: Obviously, there are only finite number of $\lambda >\pi^2/L^2$

1220: satisfying

1221: \begin{align*}

1222: & \beta (\lambda )=\frac{(\sigma_1(\lambda )-\sigma_2(\lambda

1223: ))\beta_1(\lambda )}{\sigma_1(\lambda )+(m-k-1)\sigma_2(\lambda

1224: )}=0,\\

1225: & \text{det}A_{m-k}(\lambda )=0.

1226: \end{align*}

1227: Hence, for any $\lambda -\pi^2/L^2>0$ sufficiently small

1228: the Jacobian matrices (\ref{8.103}) at the singular points

1229: (\ref{8.102}) are non-degenerate. Thus, the bifurcated solutions of

1230: (\ref{8.101}) are regular.

1231: 

1232: Since all bifurcated singular points of (\ref{8.58}) with

1233: (\ref{8.62}) are non-degenerate, and when $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ is

1234: restricted on $x_ix_j$-plane $(1\leq i,j\leq m)$ the singular

1235: points are connected by their stable and unstable manifolds. 

1236: Hence all singular points in $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ are

1237: connected by their stable and unstable manifolds. Therefore,

1238: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ must be homeomorphic to a sphere $S^{m-1}$.

1239: 

1240: Assertion (1) is proved.

1241: 

1242: 

1243: \medskip

1244: 

1245: {\sc Step 6. Proof of Assertions (2) and (3).} When $m=2$, by

1246: Step 5, $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$ contains 8 non-degenerate singular

1247: points. By a theorem on minimal attractors in \cite{b-book},  $4$ singular points must be 

1248: attractors and the others are repellors, as shown in Figure \ref{f8.9-1}.

1249: 

1250: When $m=3$, we take the six singular points

1251: $$\pm Y_1=(\pm\beta_1a^{-1}_1,0,0),\pm

1252: Y_2=(0,\pm\beta_1a^{-1}_1,0),\pm Y_3=(0,0,\pm\beta_1a^{-1}_1)$$

1253: Then the Jacobian matrix (\ref{8.103}) at $Y_i$  $(1\leq i\leq 3)$ is

1254: $$Dv(\pm Y_i)=\left(\begin{array}{lll}

1255: \rho_1&&0\\

1256: &\rho_2\\

1257: 0&&\rho_3

1258: \end{array}

1259: \right),

1260: $$ 

1261: where

1262: $\rho_j=\beta_1\left(1-\frac{\sigma_2}{\sigma_1}\right)$ 

1263: as $j\neq i$ and $\rho_i=-2\beta_1$. Obviously, as $\sigma_2<\sigma_1$, 

1264: $0< \rho_j$ $(j\neq i)$ and $\rho_i<0$, in this case, $\pm Y_k$ $(1\leq

1265: k\leq 3)$ are repellors in $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^2$, which implies

1266: that $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ contains $8$ attractors $\pm z_k$  $(1\leq k\leq

1267: 4)$ as shown in Figure \ref{f8.10} (a). As $\sigma_2>\sigma_1,

1268: \rho_j<0$ $(1\leq j\leq 3)$, the six singular point $\pm Y_k$  $(1\leq

1269: k\leq 3)$ are attractors, which implies that $\Sigma_{\lambda}$

1270: contains only six minimal attractors as shown in Figure \ref{f8.10} (b).

1271: Thus Assertion (2) is proved.

1272: 

1273: The claim for the saddle-node bifurcation in Assertion (3) can be

1274: proved by using the same method as in the proof of  Theorem \ref{t8.4}, and the claim

1275: for the singular point bifurcation can be proved by the same

1276: fashion as used in Step 5.

1277: 

1278: The proof of this theorem is complete.

1279: \ep

1280: 

1281: \br\la{r8.5}

1282: {\rm

1283: For the domain $\Omega =[0,L]^m\times D\subset

1284: \R^n(1\leq m<n)$ where $n\geq 2$ is arbitrary and $D\subset

1285: \R^{n-m}$ a bounded open set, Theorems \ref{t8.5} and \ref{t8.6} are also valid

1286: provided $\pi^2/L^2<\lambda_1$, where $\lambda_1$ is the first

1287: eigenvalue of the equation

1288: $$\left.

1289: \begin{aligned}

1290: &-\Delta e=\lambda e,&\ \ \ \ x\in D\subset \R^{n-m},\\

1291: &\frac{\partial e}{\partial n}|_{\partial D}=0,\\

1292: &\int_Dedx=0.

1293: \end{aligned}

1294: \right.

1295: $$ 

1296: }\er

1297: 

1298: 

1299: \br\la{r8.6}

1300: {\rm

1301: In Theorem \ref{t8.6}, the minimal

1302: attractors in the bifurcated attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ can be

1303: expressed as

1304: \begin{equation}

1305: u_{\lambda}=(\lambda -\pi^2/L^2)^{{1}/{2}}e+o(|\lambda

1306: -\pi^2/L^2|^{{1}/{2}}),\label{8.105}

1307: \end{equation}

1308: where $e$ is a first eigenfunction of (\ref{8.61}). The expression

1309: (\ref{8.105}) can be derived from the reduced equations

1310: (\ref{8.89}).

1311: 

1312: We address here that the exponent $\beta ={1}/{2}$ in

1313: (\ref{8.105}), called the critical exponent in physics, is an

1314: important index in the phase transition theory in statistical

1315: physics, which arises only in the Type-I or the continuous phase

1316: transitions. It is interesting to point out that the critical

1317: exponent $\beta =1$ in (\ref{8.71}) is different from these $\beta

1318: ={1}/{2}$ appearing in (\ref{8.73}) and (\ref{8.105}). The

1319: first one occurs when  the container $\Omega\subset \R^3$ is a 

1320: non rectangular region, and the second one occurs when $\Omega$ is a

1321: rectangle or a cube. We shall continue to discuss this problem later

1322: from the physical viewpoint. \qed

1323: }\er

1324: 

1325: \section{Phase Transitions Under Periodic Boundary Conditions}

1326: \la{s8.2.5}

1327: 

1328: 

1329: When the sample or container $\Omega$ is a loop, or a torus, or 

1330: bulk in size, then the periodic boundary conditions are necessary.

1331: In this section, we shall discuss the problems in a loop domain

1332: and in the whole space $\Omega =\R^n$.

1333: 

1334: Let $\Omega =S^1\times (r_1,r_2)\subset \R^2$ be a loop domain,

1335: $0<r_1<r_2$. Then the boundary condition is given by

1336: \begin{equation}

1337: \left.

1338: \begin{aligned} 

1339: &u(\theta +2k\pi ,r)=u(\theta ,r)&& \text{ for } 

1340: 0\leq\theta\leq 2\pi ,\  r_1<r<r_2,\   k\in \Z,\\

1341: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial r}=0,\ \ \ \

1342: \frac{\partial^3u}{\partial r^3}=0&& \text{ at } r=r_1,r_2.

1343: \end{aligned}

1344: \right.\label{8.106}

1345: \end{equation}

1346: 

1347: Assume that the gap $r_2-r_1$ is small in comparison with the mean

1348: radius $r_0=(r_1+r_2)/2$. With proper scaling, we take

1349: the gap $r_2-r_1$ as $r_2-r_1=1$. Then this assumption is

1350: \begin{equation}

1351: r_0=(r_1+r_2)/2\gg 1, \qquad r_2-r_1 =1.\label{8.107}

1352: \end{equation}

1353: With this  condition, the Laplacian operator can be

1354: approximately expressed as

1355: \begin{equation}

1356: \Delta =\frac{\partial^2}{\partial

1357: r^2}+\frac{1}{r^2_0}\frac{\partial^2}{\partial\theta^2}.\label{8.108}

1358: \end{equation}

1359: 

1360: With the boundary condition (\ref{8.106}) and the operator

1361: (\ref{8.108}), the eigenvalues and eignfunctions of the linear

1362: operator $L_{\lambda}=-A+B_{\lambda}$ defined by (\ref{8.59}) are

1363: given by

1364: \begin{align*}

1365: & 

1366: \beta_K(\lambda )=K^2(\lambda -K^2), \\

1367: & e^1_K=\cos k_1\theta\cos k_2\pi (r-r_1),\\

1368: & e^2_K=\sin k_1\theta\cos k_2\pi (r-r_1), \\

1369: & K^2=\frac{k^2_1}{r^2_0}+k^2_2 &&  k_1,k_2\in \Z.

1370: \end{align*}

1371: 

1372: By (\ref{8.107}), the first eigenvalue of $L_{\lambda}$

1373: is

1374: $$\beta_1(\lambda )=\frac{1}{r^2_0}(\lambda -\frac{1}{r^2_0}),$$

1375: which has multiplicity 2, and the first eigenfunctions are

1376: $e^1_1=\cos\theta $  and $e^2_1=\sin\theta .$

1377: 

1378: 

1379: \bt\la{t8.7}

1380: Let $\Omega =S^1\times (r_1,r_2)$ 

1381: satisfy (\ref{8.107}). Then the following assertions hold true:

1382: 

1383: \begin{enumerate}

1384: 

1385: \item 

1386: If 

1387: $$\gamma_3>\frac{2r^2_0}{9}\gamma^2_2, $$

1388: then 

1389: the phase transition of (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.106}) at

1390: $\lambda_0=1/ r^2_0$ is Type-I. Furthermore, the problem

1391: (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.106}) bifurcates on $\lambda

1392: >\lambda_0=r^{-2}_0$ to a cycle attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$

1393: which consists of singular points, as shown in Figure \ref{f8.12}, and

1394: the singular points in $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ can be expressed as

1395: \begin{align*}

1396: & u_{\lambda}=\sigma^{-{1}/{2}}\left(\lambda

1397: -\frac{1}{r^2_0}\right)^{{1}/{2}}\cos (\theta

1398: +\theta_0)+o\left(|\lambda -\frac{1}{r^2_0}|^{{1}/{2}}\right),\\

1399: & \sigma =\frac{3}{4}\gamma_3-\frac{1}{6} r^2_0\gamma^2_2,

1400: \end{align*}

1401: where $\theta_0$ is the angle of $u_{\lambda}$ in

1402: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$. 

1403: 

1404: \item If

1405: $$\gamma_3<\frac{2r^2_0}{9}\gamma^2_2, $$  

1406: then the transition  is Type-II. Moreover,  the problem bifurcates on

1407: $\lambda <\lambda_0$ to  a cycle invariant set $\Gamma_{\lambda}=S^1$

1408: consisting of singular points, and there is a singularity

1409: separation at $\lambda^*<\lambda_0$,  where $\Gamma_{\lambda}$

1410: and an $S^1$ attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$ are generated such

1411: that the system undergoes a transition at $\lambda =\lambda_0$ from $u=0$ to

1412: $u_{\lambda}\in\Sigma_{\lambda}$, as shown in Figure \ref{f8.13}.

1413: \end{enumerate}

1414: \et

1415: 

1416: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

1417:   \centering

1418:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-12.pdf}

1419:   \caption{All points in $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ are singular

1420: points.}\la{f8.12}

1421:  \end{SCfigure}

1422: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

1423:   \centering

1424:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-13.pdf}

1425:   \caption{The point $\lambda^*$ is a singularity separation point

1426: from where two invariant sets $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ and

1427: $\Gamma_{\lambda}$ are separated with $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ being an

1428: attractor, and $\Gamma_{\lambda}\rightarrow 0$ as

1429: $\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_0$.}\la{f8.13}

1430:  \end{SCfigure}

1431: 

1432: \bp

1433: Let  $v=y\cos\theta +z\sin\theta$, 

1434: $u=v+\Phi (y,z)$,  and  $\Phi$ is the center manifold function. Then the

1435: reduced equations of (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.106}) are given by

1436: \begin{equation}

1437: \left.

1438: \begin{aligned} 

1439: &\frac{dy}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda

1440: )y+\frac{1}{\pi}\int^{r_1+1}_{r_1}\int^{2\pi}_0[\gamma_2\Delta

1441: v^2+\gamma_3\Delta v^3+\gamma_2\Delta u^2]e^1_1drd\theta ,\\

1442: &\frac{dz}{dt}=\beta_1(\lambda

1443: )z+\frac{1}{\pi}\int^{r_1+1}_{r_1}\int^{2\pi}_0[\gamma_2\Delta

1444: v^2+\gamma_3\Delta v^3+\gamma_2\Delta u^2]e^2_1drd\theta .

1445: \end{aligned}

1446: \right.\label{8.109}

1447: \end{equation}

1448: Direct computation shows that  (\ref{8.109})  can be  rewritten as

1449: \begin{equation}

1450: \left.

1451: \begin{aligned} 

1452: &\frac{dy}{dt}

1453: =\beta_1y-\frac{1}{\pi

1454: r^2_0}\left[\frac{3\pi}{4}\gamma_3y(y^2+z^2)

1455: +

1456: \int^{2\pi}_0 2\gamma_2 \Phi [y \cos^2\theta

1457:  + z \sin\theta\cos\theta] d\theta

1458: \right],\\

1459: &\frac{dz}{dt}=\beta_1z-\frac{1}{\pi

1460: r^2_0}\left[\frac{3\pi}{4}\gamma_3z(y^2+z^2)+

1461: \int^{2\pi}_02\gamma_2 \Phi [ z\sin^2\theta

1462:  + y \cos\theta\sin\theta] d\theta \right],

1463: \end{aligned}

1464: \right.\label{8.110}

1465: \end{equation}

1466: and the center manifold function $\Phi =\Phi (y,z)$ is

1467: $$

1468: \Phi =\frac{2\gamma_2}{\beta_2(\lambda )r^2_0}(y^2-z^2)\cos 2\theta

1469: +\frac{4\gamma_2}{\beta_2(\lambda )r^2_0}yz\sin 2\theta,

1470: $$ 

1471: where

1472: $$

1473: \beta_2(\lambda )=\frac{4}{r^2_0}(\lambda -\frac{4}{r^2_0}).

1474: $$

1475: Putting $\Phi$ into (\ref{8.110}), we obtain the approximate

1476: equations of (\ref{8.109}) as follows

1477: \begin{equation}

1478: \left.

1479: \begin{aligned}

1480: &\frac{dy}{dt}=\beta_1y-\frac{1}{r^2_0}\left(\frac{3}{4}\gamma_3+\frac{\gamma^2_2}{2(\lambda

1481: -4r^{-2}_0)}\right)y(y^2+z^2),\\

1482: &\frac{dz}{dt}=\beta_1z-\frac{1}{r^2_0}\left(\frac{3}{4}\gamma_3+\frac{\gamma^2_2}{2(\lambda

1483: -4r^{-2}_0)}\right)z(y^2+z^2).

1484: \end{aligned}

1485: \right.\label{8.111}

1486: \end{equation}

1487: At $\lambda =\lambda_0=r^{-2}_0$, we have

1488: $$\frac{3}{4}\gamma_3+\frac{\gamma^2_2}{2(\lambda

1489: -4r^{-2}_0)}=\frac{3}{4}\gamma_3-\frac{1}{6}r^2_0\gamma^2_2.$$

1490: 

1491: In the same fashion as used in Theorem \ref{t8.6}, we derive from (\ref{8.111}) the assertions of this theorem. Here the statement that the 

1492: bifurcated cycle $\Sigma_{\lambda}=S^1$ consists of singular

1493: points  can proved by that the equation (\ref{8.58}) with

1494: (\ref{8.106}) is invariant under the translation

1495: $$u(\theta ,r)\rightarrow u(\theta +\theta_0,r) \ \ \ \

1496: \forall\theta_0\in \R^1,$$ which ensures that the singular points

1497: of (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.106}) arise as a cycle $S^1$. Thus,

1498: the theorem is proved. 

1499: \ep

1500: 

1501: \bigskip

1502: 

1503: Now, we consider the problem that the equation (\ref{8.58}) is

1504: defined in the whole space $\Omega =\R^n$  $(n\geq 2)$, with the

1505: periodic boundary condition

1506: \begin{equation}

1507: u(x+2K\pi )=u(x)\qquad \forall  K=(k_1,\cdots,k_n)\in \Z^n.\label{8.112}

1508: \end{equation}

1509: In this case, the eigenvalues and eigenfunctions of $L_{\lambda}$

1510: are given by

1511: \begin{align*}

1512: & 

1513: \beta_K(\lambda )=|K|^2(\lambda -|K|^2),&& K=(k_1,\cdots,k_n),\quad  |K|^2=k^2_1+\cdots+k^2_n, \\

1514: & e^1_K=\cos (k_1x_1+\cdots+k_nx_n),&& e^2_K=\sin (k_1x_1+\cdots+k_nx_n).

1515: \end{align*}

1516:  It is clear that the first eigenvalue $\beta_1(\lambda

1517: )=\lambda -1$ of $L_{\lambda}$ has multiplicity $2n$, and the

1518: first eigenfunctions are 

1519: $$e^1_j=\cos x_j,\ \ \ \ e^2_j=\sin x_j\qquad  \forall 1\leq j\leq n.$$

1520: 

1521: \bt\la{t8.8}

1522: \begin{enumerate}

1523: 

1524: \item If

1525: $$\gamma_3>\frac{14}{27}\gamma^2_2,$$ 

1526: then the phase transition of

1527: (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.112}) at $\lambda_0=1$ is Type-I. Moreover, 

1528: 

1529: \begin{enumerate}

1530: \item the problem bifurcates

1531: from $(u,\lambda )=(0,1)$  to an attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$

1532: homeomorphic to a $(2n-1)$-dimensional sphere $S^{2n-1}$, and 

1533: \item 

1534: for each $k\ (0\leq

1535: k\leq n-1)$, the attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ contains

1536: $C^k_n$-dimensional tori $\T^{n-k}$

1537:  consisting of singular points.

1538: \end{enumerate}

1539: 

1540: \item 

1541: If 

1542: $$\gamma_3<\frac{14}{27}\gamma^2_2,$$ 

1543:  then the transition  is Type-II. 

1544: \end{enumerate}

1545: \et

1546: 

1547: \bp

1548: We only have to prove Assertion (2), as the remaining part of the theorem is 

1549: essentially the same as  the proof for Theorem \ref{t8.6}. 

1550: 

1551: Since the space of all even functions is an invariant space of

1552: $L_{\lambda}+G$ defined by (\ref{8.59}), the problem (\ref{8.58})

1553: with (\ref{8.112}) has solutions given in (\ref{8.102}) with

1554: $m=n$ in the space of even functions.

1555: 

1556: By the translation invariance of (\ref{8.58}) and (\ref{8.112}),

1557: for each $k$  $(0\leq k\leq n-1)$ and a fixed index

1558: $(j_1,\cdots,j_k)$, the steady state solution associated with

1559: (\ref{8.102}) generates an $(n-k)$-dimensional torus  $\T^{n-k}$ which

1560: consists of steady state solutions of (\ref{8.58}) and

1561: (\ref{8.112}). For example if $(j_1,\cdots,j_k)=(1,\cdots,k)$, the

1562: $(n-k)$-dimensional singularity torus $\T^{n-k}$ is

1563: $$\T^k=\left\{u(x+\theta )=\sum^n_{j=k+1}y_j\cos (x_j+\theta_j)+o(|y|),\

1564: \ \ \ \forall (\theta_{n+1},\cdots,\theta_n)\in \R^{n-k}\right\},

1565: $$ 

1566: where

1567: $u(x)$ is the steady state solution of (\ref{8.58}) with

1568: (\ref{8.112}) associated with (\ref{8.102}) with $y_1=\cdots

1569: =y_k=0, y_{k+1}=\cdots=y_n$.

1570: 

1571: Obviously, for a fixed $(j_1,\cdots,j_k)$, the $2^{n-k}$ steady

1572: state solutions of (\ref{8.58}) and (\ref{8.112}) associated with

1573: (\ref{8.102}) are in the same singular torus $\T^{n-k}$.

1574: Furthermore, for two different index $k$-tuples $(j_1,\cdots,j_k)$

1575: and $(i_1,\cdots,i_k)$, the two associated singularity tori are

1576: different. Hence, for each $0\leq k\leq n-1$, there are exactly

1577: $C^k_n$  $(n-k)$-dimensional singularity tori in $\Sigma_{\lambda}$.

1578: Thus the proof is complete.

1579: \ep

1580: 

1581: \section{Cahn-Hilliard Equations Coupled with Entropy}

1582: \la{s8.2.6}

1583: 

1584: 

1585: When a phase separation takes place in a binary system, the entropy

1586: varies, and if the phase transition is Type-II, it will yield

1587: latent heat. Hence, it is necessary to discuss the equations

1588: (\ref{8.51}), which are called the Cahn-Hilliard equations coupled

1589: with entropy.

1590: 

1591: To make the equations (\ref{8.51}) non-dimensional, let

1592: \begin{align*}

1593: &x=lx^{\prime},&&  t=\frac{1}{k_2}l^4t^{\prime},&& 

1594: u=u_0u^{\prime},&& S=S_0S^{\prime},\\

1595: &\mu =\frac{k_1}{k_2}l^2, &&  \alpha_1=\frac{1}{k_2}l^4a_1,&& \alpha_2=\frac{l^2}{k_2S_0}u^2_0a_2,&& \lambda =-\frac{l^2}{k_2}b_1,\\

1596: &

1597: \gamma_1=\frac{l^2}{k_2}S_0b_0,&&

1598: \gamma_2=\frac{l^2}{k_2}u_0b_2,&&

1599: \gamma_3=\frac{l^2}{k_2}u^2_0b_3.

1600: \end{align*}

1601: Omitting the primes, equations (\ref{8.51}) are in the following

1602: form

1603: \begin{equation}

1604: \left.\begin{aligned} &\frac{\partial S}{\partial t}=\mu\Delta

1605: S-\alpha_1S-\alpha_2u^2,\\

1606: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial t}=-\Delta^2u-\lambda\Delta u+\Delta

1607: (\gamma_1Su+\gamma_2u^2+\gamma_3u^3),\\

1608: &\int_{\Omega}u(x,t)dx=0,\\

1609: &\frac{\partial }{\partial n} ( u,     \Delta u, S) =0 \qquad  \text{ on } \partial \Omega,\\

1610: &u(x,0)=\varphi (x).

1611: \end{aligned}

1612: \right.\label{8.113}

1613: \end{equation}

1614: 

1615: By assumptions (\ref{8.50}) and (\ref{8.52}), the coefficients

1616: satisfy

1617: $$\mu >0,\ \ \ \ \alpha_1>0,\ \ \ \ \alpha_2>0,\ \ \ \

1618: \gamma_1>0,\ \ \ \ \gamma_3>0.$$ 

1619: 

1620: 

1621: 

1622: \bt\la{t8.9}

1623: Let $\Omega

1624: =\Pi^n_{k=1}(0,L_k)\subset \R^n$ satisfy that $L=L_1=\cdots

1625: =L_m>L_j(1\leq m\leq n)$ for  any $j> m$. 

1626: 

1627: \begin{enumerate}

1628: 

1629: \item[(1)] For the case where  $m=1$, let 

1630: $$\sigma

1631: =\frac{3}{2}\gamma_3-\frac{\alpha_2\gamma_1}{\alpha_1}-\frac{\alpha_2\gamma_1L^2}{2(\alpha_1L^2+4\pi^2\mu

1632: )}-\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{3\pi^2}.$$

1633: 

1634: \begin{enumerate}

1635: 

1636: \item  If $\sigma <0$, then  the phase transition of

1637: (\ref{8.113}) at $\lambda =\pi^2/L^2$ is Type-II and Assertion (1)

1638: in Theorem \ref{t8.5} holds  true.

1639: 

1640: \item If $\sigma >0$ the phase transition is

1641: Type-I and Assertion (2) in Theorem \ref{t8.5} holds  true.

1642: 

1643: \end{enumerate}

1644: 

1645: \item[(2)] For the case where  $m\geq 2$, let 

1646: $$\widetilde{\sigma}=\frac{9}{2}\gamma_3-\alpha_2\gamma_1\left(\frac{2}{\alpha_1}+\frac{L^2}{2(\alpha_1L^2+

1647: 4\pi^2\mu

1648: )}+\frac{2L^2}{\alpha_1L^2+2\pi^2\mu}\right)-\frac{13L^2\gamma^2_2}{3\pi^2}.$$

1649: 

1650: \begin{enumerate}

1651: 

1652: \item If

1653: $\widetilde{\sigma}>0$,  the phase transition of (\ref{8.113}) at

1654: $\lambda =\pi^2/L^2$ is Type-I and Assertions (1) and (2) in

1655: Theorem \ref{t8.6} hold true. 

1656: 

1657: \item If $\widetilde{\sigma}<0$, then  the phase transition

1658: is Type-II and Assertion (3) in  Theorem \ref{t8.6} holds  true.

1659: \end{enumerate}

1660: 

1661: \end{enumerate}

1662: \et

1663: 

1664: 

1665: \bp

1666:  It suffices to compute the reduced equations of

1667: (\ref{8.113}) on the center manifold. Similar to (\ref{8.89}), the

1668: second order approximation of the reduced equation can be

1669: expressed as

1670: \begin{align}

1671: \frac{dy_i}{dt}=&\beta_1y_i-\frac{\pi^2}{2L^2}[\sigma_1y^3_i+\sigma_2y_i\sum_{j\neq

1672: i}y^2_j]\label{8.114}\\

1673: &-\frac{2\pi^2}{L_1\cdots

1674: L_nL^2}\gamma_1\sum^m_{j=1}y_j\int_{\Omega}\Phi_1(y)\cos\frac{\pi

1675: x_i}{L}\cos\frac{\pi x_j}{L}dx,\nonumber

1676: \end{align}

1677: where $\beta_1,\sigma_1$ and $\sigma_2$ are as in (\ref{8.89}),

1678: and the center manifold function $\Phi_1(y)$ derived

1679: from the first equation in (\ref{8.113}) can be expressed as

1680: \begin{equation}

1681: \left.

1682: \begin{aligned} 

1683: &\Phi_1(y)=\sum^{\infty}_{|K|\geq

1684: 0}\Phi_K(y)\varphi_K\\

1685: &\Phi_K(y)=\frac{-\alpha_2}{\lambda_K\|\varphi_K\|^2}\int_{\Omega}

1686: \left(\sum^m_{i=1}y_i\cos

1687: \frac{\pi x_i}{L}\right)^2\varphi_Kdx

1688: \end{aligned}

1689: \right.\label{8.115}

1690: \end{equation}

1691: where $\lambda_K$ and $\varphi_K$ are the eigenvalues and

1692: eigenfunctions of the following equation

1693: \begin{align*}

1694: &-\mu\Delta\varphi_K+\alpha_1\varphi_K=\lambda_K\varphi_K,\\

1695: &\frac{\partial\varphi_K}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,

1696: \end{align*} 

1697: which are given by 

1698: \begin{align*}

1699: & \lambda_K=\alpha_1+\mu K^2\pi^2,\\

1700: & \varphi_0=1,\ \ \ \ \varphi_K=\cos\frac{k_1\pi

1701: x_1}{L^2_1}\cdots\cos\frac{k_n\pi x_n}{L^2_n}, \\

1702: & K=(k_1/L_1,\cdots,k_n/L_n),\quad   |K|^2=\sum^n_{i=1}k^2_i/L^2_i&& \text{ for } k_i\in \Z,\ \ \ \ 1\leq i\leq n.

1703: \end{align*}

1704: 

1705: Let 

1706: $$K_i=(\delta_{i1}/L_1,\cdots,\delta_{in}/L_n).$$

1707: Then  we find

1708: \begin{align*}

1709: \Phi_0 =&  \frac{-\alpha_2}{\alpha_1L_1\cdots L_n}\int_{\Omega}\left(\sum^n_{i=1}y_i\cos\frac{\pi

1710: x_i}{L}\right)^2dx=\frac{-\alpha_2}{2\alpha_1}\sum^m_{j=1}y^2_j, 

1711: \\

1712: \Phi_k=&\frac{-\alpha_2}{\lambda_K\|\varphi_K\|^2}\int_{\Omega}\left(\sum^m_{i=1}y_i\cos\frac{\pi

1713: x_i}{L}\right)^2dx\\

1714: =&\left\{

1715:   \begin{aligned} 

1716:      &  0&& \text{ if }  K\neq K_l+K_r,\\

1717:      &\frac{-\alpha_2}{\lambda_K\|\varphi_K\|^2}\sum^m_{i,j=1}y_iy_j\int_{\Omega}\cos\frac{\pi

1718: x_i}{L}\cos\frac{\pi x_j}{L}\varphi_Kdx&& \text{ if }  K=K_l+K_r,

1719: \end{aligned}

1720: \right.

1721: \end{align*}

1722: for some $1\leq r, l\leq m$. Thus we derive that

1723: \begin{align*}

1724: \Phi_K=

1725: &\left\{

1726: \begin{aligned}

1727:   &\frac{-\alpha_2}{\lambda_K\|\varphi_K\|^2}y^2_j\int_{\Omega}\cos^2\frac{\pi

1728: x_j}{L}e_k&& \text{ if }  K=K_j+K_j, \ \ 1\leq j\leq m\\

1729: &\frac{-2\alpha_2}{\lambda_K\|\varphi_K\|^2}y_iy_j\int_{\Omega}\cos\frac{\pi

1730: x_i}{L}\cos\frac{\pi x_j}{L}e_K && \text{ if } K=K_i+K_j, \ \ i\neq j

1731: \end{aligned}

1732: \right.\\

1733: =&\left\{\begin{aligned} &\frac{-\alpha_2}{2(\alpha_1+4\pi^2\mu

1734: /L^2)}y^2_j  \qquad \qquad && \text{ if }K=2K_j, \ \ 1\leq j\leq m,\\

1735: &\frac{-2\alpha_2}{\alpha_1+2\pi^2\mu /L^2}y_iy_j  && \text{ if }

1736: K=K_i+K_j, \ \ i\neq j,\  \ 1\leq i,j\leq m.

1737: \end{aligned}

1738: \right.

1739: \end{align*}

1740: Putting $\Phi_0$ and $\Phi_K$ in (\ref{8.115}) we obtain

1741: \begin{align*}

1742: \Phi_1=&\frac{-\alpha_2}{2\alpha_1}\sum^n_{j=1}y^2_j-\frac{\alpha_2}{2(\alpha_1+4\pi^2\mu

1743: /L^2)}\sum^n_{j=1}y^2_j\cos\frac{2\pi x_j}{L}\\

1744: &-\frac{2\alpha_2}{\alpha_1+2\pi^2\mu

1745: /L^2}\sum_{i<j}y_iy_j\cos\frac{\pi x_i}{L}\cos\frac{\pi x_j}{L}.

1746: \end{align*}

1747: 

1748: Then, inserting $\Phi_1$ into (\ref{8.114}),  we derive the following reduced

1749: equations:

1750: \begin{align}

1751: \frac{dy_i}{dt}=

1752: &\beta_1(\lambda)y_i-\frac{\pi^2}{2L^2}\left[\left(\sigma_1-\frac{\alpha_2\gamma_1}{\alpha_1}-\frac{\alpha_2\gamma_1}

1753: {2(\alpha_1+4\pi^2\mu /L^2}\right)y^3_i\right.\label{8.116}\\

1754: &+ \left. \left(\sigma_2-\frac{\alpha_2\gamma_1}{\alpha_1}-\frac{2\alpha_2\gamma_1}{\alpha_1+2\pi^2\mu

1755: /L^2}\right)y_i\sum_{j\neq i}y^2_j \right],\ \ \ \ 1\leq i\leq

1756: m. \nonumber

1757: \end{align}

1758: Then the remaining part of the proof can be achieved in the same fashion as the proofs for Theorems \ref{t8.5} and \ref{t8.6}. The proof is complete.

1759: \ep

1760: 

1761: 

1762: \br\la{r8.7}

1763: {\rm

1764: From the phenomenological viewpoint, the

1765: coefficient $\mu >0$ in (\ref{8.113}) is small. If let $\mu =0$,

1766: then in the equilibrium state we have that

1767: $S=-\frac{\alpha_2}{\alpha_1}u^2$. In this case, (\ref{8.113}) are

1768: referred to the original Cahn-Hilliard equation (\ref{8.58}) with

1769: $\gamma^{\prime}_3=\gamma_3-\alpha_2\gamma_1/\alpha_1$ as  

1770: the coefficient of the cubic term, and the

1771: criterion  $\sigma =0$ in Assertions (1) and (2) of Theorem \ref{t8.9}

1772: are respectively equivalent to

1773: $$\gamma^{\prime}_3=\frac{2}{9}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}\ \ \ \

1774: \text{and}\ \ \ \

1775: \gamma^{\prime}_3=\frac{26}{27}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2},$$

1776: which coincide with these in Theorems \ref{t8.5} and \ref{t8.6}. Hence, if we

1777: consider the coefficient $\mu >0$ small, then the criterion

1778: $\sigma =0$ are respectively equivalent to

1779: $$\gamma^{\prime}_3=\frac{2}{9}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}-\frac{4}{3}\frac{\pi^2\mu\alpha_2\gamma_1}{\alpha^2_1L^2},

1780: \ \ \ \ \text{and}\ \ \ \ \

1781: \gamma^{\prime}_3=\frac{26}{27}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}-\frac{4}{3}\frac{\pi^2\mu\alpha_2\gamma_1}{\alpha^2_1L^2}.$$

1782: Hence the item $-(4\pi^2\mu\alpha_2\gamma_1)/3\alpha^2_1L^2$ is

1783: the effect yielded by $\mu\Delta S$.

1784: \qed

1785: }\er

1786: 

1787: \section{Physical remarks}

1788: \la{s8.2.7}

1789: 

1790: We now address  the physical significance for the phase

1791: transition theorems obtained in the previous sections.

1792: 

1793: \subsection{Equation of critical parameters}For a binary system, the equation describing the control

1794: parameters $T,p,\Omega$ at the critical states is simple. 

1795: 

1796: We first

1797: consider the critical temperature $T_c$. There are two different

1798: critical temperatures $T_1$ and $T_0$ in the Cahn-Hilliard

1799: equation. $T_1$ is the one given by (\ref{8.56}),  at which the

1800: coefficient $b_1(T,p)$ or $\lambda =-l^2b_1(T,p)/k$ will change its

1801: sign, and $T_0$ satisfies that $\lambda_0<\lambda_1$, and for

1802: fixed $p$,

1803: \begin{equation}

1804: \lambda (T)\left\{

1805: \begin{aligned} 

1806: &  <\rho_1&& \text{ if } T>T_0,\\

1807: & =\rho_1  && \text{ if } T=T_0,\\

1808: & >\rho_1 && \text{ if } T<T_0,

1809: \end{aligned}

1810: \right.

1811: \label{8.117}

1812: \end{equation}

1813: where $\rho_1$ is the first eigenvalue of (\ref{8.61}), which

1814: depends on the geometrical properties of the material such as the size of the container of the sample $\Omega$. When $\Omega =(0,L)^m\times D\subset \R^n$ is a

1815: rectangular domain with $L>$ diameter of $D, \rho_1=\pi^2/L^2$.

1816: Hence, in general at the critical temperature $T_1$ a binary

1817: system does not undergo any phase transitions, but the phase transition  does occur at $T=T_0$.

1818: 

1819: At $T_1$ and $T_0$ we know that

1820: \begin{equation}

1821: \lambda (T_1)=0,\ \ \ \ \lambda (T_0)=\rho_1.\label{8.118}

1822: \end{equation}

1823: For a rectangular domain, $\rho_1=\pi^2/L^2$, therefore from

1824: (\ref{8.118}) we see that $T_1$ is a limit of the critical

1825: temperature $T_0$ of phase transition as the size of $\Omega$

1826: tends to infinite.

1827: 

1828: In fact,  for a general domain, it is easy to see that the first eigenvalue $\rho_1$ of the Laplace operator

1829: is inversely  proportional to the square of  the  maximum diameter of

1830: $\Omega$:

1831: \begin{equation}

1832: \rho_1\sim\frac{1}{L^2},\label{8.120}

1833: \end{equation}

1834: where $L$ represents the diameter scaling of $\Omega$. 

1835: 

1836: Thus the equation  of critical parameters in the

1837: Cahn-Hilliard equation, by (\ref{8.118}) and (\ref{8.120}), is

1838: given by

1839: \begin{equation}

1840: \lambda (T,p)=\frac{C}{L^2},\label{8.121}

1841: \end{equation}

1842: where $C>0$ is a constant depending on the geometry of $\Omega$.

1843: According to the Hildebrand theory (see Reichl \cite{reichl}), the function

1844: $\lambda (T,p)$ can be expressed in a explicit formula. If

1845: regardless of the term $|\nabla u|^2$, the molar Gibbs free energy

1846: takes the following form

1847: \begin{equation}

1848: g=\mu_A(1-u)+\mu_Bu+RT(1-u)\ln (1-u)+RTu\ln

1849: u+au(1-u),\label{8.122}

1850: \end{equation}

1851: where $\mu_A,\mu_B$ are the chemical potential of $A$ and $B$

1852: respectively, $R$ the molar gas constant, $a>0$ the measure of

1853: repel action between $A$ and $B$. Therefore, the coefficient $b_1$

1854: in (\ref{8.55}) with constant $p$ is

1855: $$b_1=\frac{\partial^2g}{\partial

1856: u^2}|_{u=u_0}=\frac{1}{u_0(1-u_0)}RT-a\ \ \ \ (a=a(p)),$$ where

1857: $u_0=\bar{u}_B$ is the constant concentration of $B$. Hence

1858: $$\lambda

1859: (T,p)=-\frac{l^2}{k}b_1=\frac{2al^2}{k}-\frac{l^2R}{ku_0(1-u_0)}T.$$

1860: Thus, equation (\ref{8.121}) is expressed as

1861: \begin{equation}

1862: \frac{l^2R}{ku_0(1-u_0)}T=\frac{2al^2}{K}-\frac{C}{L^2}.\label{8.123}

1863: \end{equation}

1864: Equation (\ref{8.123}) gives the critical parameter curve of a

1865: binary system with constant pressure for temperature $T$ and

1866: diameter scaling $L$ of container $\Omega$.  Because $T\geq 0$,

1867: from (\ref{8.122}) we can deduce the following physical

1868: conclusion.

1869: 

1870: \bigskip

1871: 

1872: \noindent

1873: {\bf Physical Conclusion 7.1.}  %8.3

1874: {\it 

1875: Under constant pressure, for any

1876: binary system with given geometrical shape of the container $\Omega$,

1877: there is a value $L_0>0$ such that as the diameter scaling

1878: $L<L_0$, no phase separation takes place at all temperature $T\geq

1879: 0$, and as $L>L_0$ phase separation will occur at some critical

1880: temperature $T_0>0$ satisfying (\ref{8.123}).

1881: }

1882: 

1883: \medskip

1884: 

1885: We shall see later that it is a universal property  that the dynamical

1886: properties of phase transitions depend on the geometrical shape

1887: and size of the container or sample $\Omega$.

1888: 

1889: 

1890: 

1891: \subsection{Physical explanations of phase transition theorems}

1892: 

1893: We first briefly recall the classical

1894: thermodynamic theory for a binary system. Physically, phase

1895: separation processes taking place in an unstable state are called

1896: spinodal decompositions; see Cahn and Hilliard \cite{CH57} and Onuki \cite{onuki}. 

1897: When consider the concentration $u$ as homogeneous in $\Omega$,

1898: then by (\ref{8.122}) the dynamic equation of a binary system is

1899: an ordinary differential equation:

1900: \begin{equation}

1901: \frac{du}{dt} = -\frac{dg}{du}\label{8.124}=

1902: 2au-RT\ln\frac{u}{1-u}+\mu_A-\mu_B-a.

1903: \end{equation}

1904: 

1905: Let $u_0$  $(0<u_0<1)$ be the steady state solution of (\ref{8.124}).

1906: Then, by the Taylor expansion at $u=u_0$, omitting the $n$th order

1907: terms with $n\geq 4$, (\ref{8.124}) can be rewritten as

1908: \begin{equation}

1909: \frac{dv}{dt}=\lambda v+b_2v^2+b_3v^3,\label{8.125}

1910: \end{equation}

1911: where 

1912: \begin{align*}

1913: & v=u-u_0,   &&   \lambda =2a-\frac{1}{u_0(1-u_0)}RT,\\

1914: & b_2=\frac{1-2u_0}{2u^2_0(1-u_0)^2}RT, &&b_3=-\frac{1}{3}\frac{1-u_0-2u^2_0+3u^3_0}{u^3_0(1-u_0)^4}RT.

1915: \end{align*}

1916: It is easy to see that

1917: \begin{align*}

1918: &b_2\left\{

1919:   \begin{aligned} 

1920:      & =0&& \text{ if } u_0=\frac{1}{2},\\

1921: &   \neq 0&& \text{ if } u_0\neq\frac{1}{2},

1922: \end{aligned}

1923: \right.\\

1924: &b_3<0 \qquad   \forall 0<u_0<1.

1925: \end{align*}

1926: 

1927: It is clear that the critical parameter curve $\lambda=0$  in the $T-u_0$ plane is given by 

1928: $$T_0=2a u_0 (1-u_0)/R,$$

1929: which is schematically illustrated in the classical phase diagram; see the dotted line in Figure~\ref{f8.14}. We obtain from (\ref{8.125}) the following  transition steady states: 

1930: $$

1931: v^\pm = \frac{-1}{2b_3}(b_2 \pm \sqrt{b_2^2 -4b_3 \lambda})\qquad \text{ for } b_2^2 -4b_3 \lambda>0.

1932: $$

1933: By Theorem~\ref{t8.4}, we see that there is $T^*=T^*(u_0)$   satisfying 

1934: that $b_2^2-4b_3 \lambda=0$; namely, 

1935: \begin{equation}

1936:  T^* = \frac{ 2 a u_0 (1-u_0)}{R(1-\beta(u_0))}, \qquad 

1937:  \beta(u_0)= \frac{3 (1-2u_0)^2(1-u_0)}{16(1-u_0-2u_0^2 + 3u_0^3)},

1938:  \label{8.126-1}

1939: \end{equation}

1940: such that if $T_0 < T < T^*$, 

1941: \begin{align*}

1942: &

1943: v^+ \text{ is } \left\{

1944: \begin{aligned}

1945: & \text{ locally stable (metastable) } && \text{ for } 0 < u_0 < \frac12, \\

1946: & \text{ unstable } && \text{ for } \frac12 < u_0 < 1, 

1947: \end{aligned}

1948: \right.  \\

1949: &

1950: v^- \text{ is } \left\{

1951: \begin{aligned}

1952: & \text{ locally stable (metastable) } && \text{ for }   \frac12< u_0 <1, \\

1953: & \text{ unstable } && \text{ for } 0 < u_0 <  \frac12.

1954: \end{aligned}

1955: \right.  

1956: \end{align*}

1957: Here 

1958: $$T^*(u_0) =\frac{T_0(u_0)}{1-\beta_0(u_0)} \ge T_0(u_0)$$

1959: is illustrated by the solid line in Figure~\ref{f8.14}. 

1960: This shows that the region $T_0(u_0) < T < T^*(u_0)$  is metastable, which is marked 

1961: by the shadowed region in Figure \ref{f8.14}. See, among others,  Reichl \cite{reichl}, 

1962:  Novick-Cohen and Segal \cite{NS84} ,  and Langer \cite{langer71} 

1963: for the phase transition diagram from the classical thermodynamic theory.

1964: 

1965: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

1966:   \centering

1967:   \includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{8-14.pdf}

1968:   \caption{Typical phase diagram from classical

1969: thermodynamic theory.}

1970:   \la{f8.14}

1971:  \end{SCfigure}

1972: 

1973: In the following we shall discuss the spinodal decomposition in a unified fashion by

1974: applying the phase transition theorems presented in the previous sections.

1975: 

1976: As mentioned in the Introduction, phase separation processes

1977: of binary systems occur in two ways, one of which proceeds

1978: continuously depending on $T$, and the other one does not.

1979: Obviously, the classical theory does not explain these phenomena.

1980: In fact, the first one can be described by the Type-I phase

1981: transition, and the second one can be explained by the Type-II and

1982: Type-III phase transitions.

1983: 

1984: We first consider the case where the container $\Omega

1985: =\Pi^n_{i=1}(0,L_i)$ with $L=L_1=\cdots=L_m>L_j(j>m)$ is a

1986: rectangular  domain. Thus, by Theorems \ref{t8.5} and \ref{t8.6} 

1987: (or Theorem \ref{t8.9})

1988: there are only two phase transition types: Type-I  and Type-II, 

1989: with the type of transition  depending on $L$. We see that if

1990: $$L^2<\left\{\begin{aligned}

1991: &\frac{9}{2}\frac{\pi^2\gamma_3}{\gamma^2_2} && \text{for}\

1992: m=1,\\

1993: &\frac{27}{26}\frac{\pi^2\gamma_3}{\gamma^2_2}  && \text{for}\

1994: m\geq 2, \end{aligned} \right.

1995: $$ 

1996: then the transition  is Type-I, i.e., the phase

1997: pattern formation gradually varies as the  temperature

1998: decreases. In this case, no meta-stable states and no latent heat

1999: appear. The phase diagram is given by Figure \ref{f8.15}, 

2000: where the solid lines $u_i^T$ ($i=1,2$) represent   the transition solutions.

2001: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

2002:   \centering

2003:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-15.pdf}

2004:   \caption{The state $u_0=\bar{u}_B$ is

2005: stable  if $T_c=T_0 < T$, and  the state $u_0$ is unstable  if $T < T_0$, where $T_0$

2006: is as in (\ref{8.117}).}

2007:   \la{f8.15}

2008:  \end{SCfigure}

2009: 

2010: If $L$ satisfies that

2011: $$L^2>\left\{\begin{aligned}

2012: &\frac{9}{2}\frac{\pi^2\gamma_3}{\gamma^2_2} &&  \text{for}\

2013: m=1,\\

2014: &\frac{27}{26}\frac{\pi^2\gamma_3}{\gamma^2_2} && \text{for}\

2015: m\geq 2,

2016: \end{aligned}

2017: \right.

2018: $$ 

2019: then the phase transition is Type-II. Namely,  there is a

2020: leaping change in phase pattern formation at the critical temperature

2021: $T_c$. The phase diagram for Type-II  transition is given by Figure \ref{f8.16}.

2022: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

2023:   \centering

2024:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-16.pdf}

2025:   \caption{A Type-II phase transition.}

2026: \la{f8.16}

2027:  \end{SCfigure}

2028: 

2029: 

2030: In Figure \ref{f8.16}, 

2031: $T_0$ is the critical temperature as in (\ref{8.117}), 

2032: $T^*$  is  defined by (\ref{8.126-1}) and is the saddle-node bifurcation point of (\ref{8.125}).

2033: The constant concentration $u=u_0$ is stable in $T_c<T$,  is

2034: meta-stable in $T_0<T<T_c$, and is unstable in $T<T_0$.

2035: The two bifurcated states $U^T_1$

2036: and $U^T_2$  from $T^*$ are meta-stable in $T_0<T<T^*$, and  are stable in $T<T_0$. 

2037: Here for $i=1,2$, $U_i^T=u^T_i + u_0$, and $u_i$ are the separated solutions of 

2038: (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.62}) from $T^*$.

2039: 

2040: There is a remarkable difference between Type-I and Type-II transitions.  The

2041: Type-I phase transition occurs at $T=T_0$ and Type-II does in

2042: $T_0<T<T^*$. Furthermore, latent heat is 

2043: accompanied  the Type-II phase transition. Actually, when a binary

2044: system undergoes a transition  from $u_0$ to $U^T_i$  $(i=1,2)$, 

2045: there is a gap  $|U^T_i-u_0|^2=|u_i^T|^2>\varepsilon >0$  for any $T_0<T<T^*$. 

2046: By the first

2047: equation in (\ref{8.113}) it yields a jump of entropy between

2048: $u_0$ and $U^T_i$:

2049: $$

2050: \delta S_i=\int_{\Omega}Sdx

2051: =-\frac{\alpha_2}{\alpha_1}\int_{\Omega}|u^T_i|^2dx<0,

2052: $$

2053: where $S=S_i-\bar{S}_0$ represents the entropy density deviation.

2054: Hence the latent heat is given by

2055: $$\delta H=T\delta

2056: S_i=-\frac{\alpha_2T}{\alpha_1}\int_{\Omega}|u^T_i|^2dx<0,$$

2057: which implies that the process from $u_0$ to $U^T_i$ is

2058: exothermic, and the process from $U^T_i$ to $u_0$ is endothermic.

2059: 

2060: Now, we consider the case where the container $\Omega$ is

2061: non rectangular. Thus, by Theorem \ref{t8.4} the transition is Type-III,   and its

2062: phase diagram is given by Figure \ref{f8.17}.

2063: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

2064:   \centering

2065:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-17.pdf}

2066:   \caption{A Type-III phase transition.}\la{f8.17}

2067:  \end{SCfigure}

2068: 

2069: 

2070: In Figure \ref{f8.17},  $T_0$  and $T^*$ are the same as those in Figure \ref{f8.16}. The state $u_0$ is stable in

2071: $T^*<T$, is metastable in $T_0<T<T^*$, and unstable in $T<T_0$.

2072: The equilibrium state $U^T_1$ separated from $T^*$ is metastable in

2073: $T_0<T<T^*$, and is stable in $T<T_0$. However, the equilibrium

2074: state $U^T_2$ separated from $T^*$ is unstable in $T_0<T<T^*$, and

2075: is metastable in $T<T_0$.

2076: % Hence, $u_0$ is supercooled in

2077: %$T_0<T<T^*$ and $u^T_1$ is superheated in $T_0<T<T^*$.

2078: 

2079: Similar to the Type-II, the Type-III phase transition has also

2080: latent heat, which occurs in $T_0<T<T^*$. But the difference

2081: between Type-II and Type-III is that Type-II has $2m $  $(m\geq 1)$

2082: stable equilibrium states separated from $T=T^*$, but Type-III has

2083: just one. The $2m$ stable states of a Type-II transition  are of some symmetry

2084: caused by $\Omega$, and we shall investigate it later. A

2085: particular aspect of Type-III is that there is a  state

2086: $U^T_2$ bifurcated from $(u,T)=(u_0,T_0)$, which is rarely

2087: observed in experiments.

2088: 

2089: \subsection{Symmetry and periodic structure}Physical experiments have shown that in pattern formation via

2090: phase separation,  periodic or semi-periodic structure appears. From

2091: Theorems \ref{t8.7} and \ref{t8.8} we  see that for the loop domains and bulk

2092: domains which can be considered as $\R^n$ or $\R^m\times D$  $(D\subset

2093: \R^{n-m})$ the steady state solutions of the Cahn-Hilliard equation

2094: are periodic, and for rectangular domains they are semi-periodic,  and the periodicity is associated with the mirror image symmetry.

2095: 

2096: Let $\Omega =(0,L)^m\times D$  $(m\geq 1)$. By Remark  \ref{r8.5},

2097: Theorem \ref{t8.5} is valid for $\Omega$. Actually, in this case the

2098: following space

2099: $$

2100: \widetilde{H}=\left\{u\in L^2(\Omega )|\

2101: u=\sum^{\infty}_{|K|=1}y_k\cos\frac{k_1\pi}{L}x_1\cdots\cos\frac{k_m\pi}{L}x_m

2102: \right\}\subset

2103: H

2104: $$ 

2105: is invariant for the Cahn-Hilliard equation (\ref{8.58}) and

2106: (\ref{8.62}). All separated equilibrium states in Theorem \ref{t8.5} are

2107: in $\widetilde{H}$. From the physical viewpoint, all equilibrium states

2108: $u(x)$ and their mirror image states

2109: $u(L-x^{\prime},x^{\prime\prime})$ are the same to describe  the pattern

2110: formation. Mathematically, under the mirror image transformation

2111: $$

2112: x\rightarrow (L-x^{\prime},x^{\prime\prime}),\ \ \ \

2113: x^{\prime}=(x_1,\cdots,x_m),\ \ \ \

2114: x^{\prime\prime}=(x_{m+1},\cdots,x_n),

2115: $$ 

2116: the Cahn-Hilliard equation (\ref{8.58}) with (\ref{8.62}) is invariant. Hence,

2117:  the steady state solutions will appear in pairs. In

2118: particular, for  Type-I phase transition, there is a remarkable mirror

2119: image symmetric. We address this problem as follows.

2120: 

2121: Let $m=1$ in $\Omega =(0,L)^m\times D$. By (\ref{8.73}) there are

2122: two bifurcated stable equilibrium states, and their projections on

2123: the first eigenspace are

2124: \begin{eqnarray*}

2125: &&u_1=y\cos\frac{\pi x_1}{L},\ \ \ \ u_2=-y\cos\frac{\pi

2126: x_1}{L},\\

2127: &&y=\sqrt{2(\lambda

2128: -\pi^2/L^2)}/\left(\frac{3}{2}\gamma_3-\frac{L^2}{3\pi^2}\gamma^2_2\right).

2129: \end{eqnarray*}

2130: It is clear that $u_2(x_1)=u_1(L-x_1)$.

2131: 

2132: Let $m=2$. By Theorem \ref{t8.6} the bifurcated attractor

2133: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ contains 8 equilibrium states, whose projections

2134: are given by

2135: \begin{eqnarray*}

2136: &&u^{\pm}_1=\pm y_0e_1,\ \ \ \ u^{\pm}_2=\pm y_1(e_1+e_2),\\

2137: &&u^{\pm}_3=\pm y_0e_2,\ \ \ \ u^{\pm}_4=\pm y_1(-e_1+e_2),

2138: \end{eqnarray*}

2139: where $e_1=\left(\cos\frac{\pi

2140: x_1}{L},0\right)$  and $e_2=\left(0,\cos\frac{\pi x_2}{L}\right)$ form an

2141: orthogonal basis in $\R^2$, and 

2142: \begin{eqnarray*}

2143: &&y_0=\sqrt{2(\lambda -\pi^2/L^2)}/\sqrt{\sigma_1},\\

2144: &&y_1=\sqrt{2(\lambda -\pi^2/L^2)}/\sqrt{\sigma_1+\sigma_2}\ \ \ \ \text{ with }

2145: \sigma_1,\sigma_2\ \text{as\ in\ (\ref{8.90})}.

2146: \end{eqnarray*}

2147: These eight equilibrium states constitute an octagon in $\R^2$, as

2148: shown in Figure \ref{f8.18}, and they are divided into two classes:

2149: ${\mathcal{A}}_1=\left\{u^{\pm}_1,u^{\pm}_3\right\}$ and

2150: ${\mathcal{A}}_3=\left\{u^{\pm}_2,u^{\pm}_4\right\}$ by the

2151: $\frac{\pi}{2}$-rotation group $G(\frac{\pi}{2})$. 

2152: Namely,  with the action of $G(\frac{\pi}{2}), {\mathcal{A}}_i$  $(i=1,2)$ are

2153: invariant:

2154: $$Bu\in{\mathcal{A}}_i,\ \ \ \ \forall u\in{\mathcal{A}}_i\

2155: \text{and}\ B\in G(\frac{\pi}{2}),$$ 

2156: where $G(\frac{\pi}{2})$ consists of

2157: the orthogonal matrices

2158: $$B^{\pm}_1=\pm\left(\begin{matrix}

2159: 1&0\\

2160: 0&1

2161: \end{matrix}

2162: \right),\ \ \ \ 

2163: B^{\pm}_2=\pm\left(\begin{matrix} 1&0\\

2164: 0&-1

2165: \end{matrix}

2166: \right),\ \ \ \ 

2167: B^{\pm}_3=\pm\left(\begin{matrix} 0&-1\\

2168: 1&0

2169: \end{matrix}

2170: \right),\ \ \ \ 

2171: B^{\pm}_4=\pm\left(\begin{matrix} 0&1\\

2172: 1&0

2173: \end{matrix}

2174: \right).$$ 

2175: The stability of the equilibrium states $u_k$ is associated

2176: with  both classes ${\mathcal{A}}_1$ and ${\mathcal{A}}_2$,

2177: i.e., either the elements in ${\mathcal{A}}_1$ are stable, or those

2178: in ${\mathcal{A}}_2$ are stable; see Figure \ref{f8.9-1}. By (\ref{8.104})

2179: we can derive  the criterion as follows

2180: \begin{align*}

2181: &  u^{\pm}_{2k+1}\in{\mathcal{A}}_1 

2182: \text{ are stable }  &&  \Leftrightarrow \quad \frac{22}{9}\frac{L^2 \gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}>\gamma_3>\frac{26}{27}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2} && \text{ for } k=0,1, \\

2183: & u^{\pm}_{2k}\in{\mathcal{A}}_2  \text{ are stable } && \Leftrightarrow \quad \gamma_3>\frac{22}{9}\frac{L^2 \gamma^2_2}{\pi^2} && \text{ for } k=1, 2,

2184: \end{align*}

2185: \begin{SCfigure}[25][t]

2186:   \centering

2187:   \includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{8-18.pdf}

2188:   \caption{The eight equilibrium states in the case where $m=2$ 

2189:   given by Theorem~\ref{t8.6}.}\la{f8.18}

2190:  \end{SCfigure}

2191: 

2192: In Figure \ref{f8.18}, we see that elements  in ${\mathcal{A}}_1$ and

2193: ${\mathcal{A}}_2$ have a $\frac{\pi}{4}$ difference in their phase

2194: angle. However, in their pattern structure,

2195: $u^{\pm}_{2K+1}\in{\mathcal{A}}_1$ and

2196: $u^{\pm}_{2k}\in{\mathcal{A}}_2$ also have a $\pi /4$ deference at

2197: the angle between the lines of $u^{\pm}_{2K+1}=0$ and

2198: $u^{\pm}_{2K}=0$. In fact, the lines that

2199: \begin{eqnarray*}

2200: &&u^+_1=-u^-_1=y_0\cos\frac{\pi x_1}{L}=0,\ \ \ \ \text{and}\\

2201: &&u^+_3=-u^-_3=y_0\cos\frac{\pi x_2}{L}=0

2202: \end{eqnarray*}

2203: are given by $x_1=L/2$ and $x_2=L/2$ respectively, as shown in

2204: Figure \ref{f8.19}(a), and the lines

2205: \begin{eqnarray*}

2206: &&u^+_2=-u^-_2=y_1\left(\cos\frac{\pi x_1}{L}+\cos\frac{\pi

2207: x_2}{L}\right)=0,\ \ \ \ \text{and}\\

2208: &&u^+_4=-u^-_4=y_1\left(-\cos\frac{\pi x_1}{L}+\cos\frac{\pi

2209: x_2}{L}\right)=0

2210: \end{eqnarray*}

2211: are given by $x_2=L-x_1$ and $x_2=x_1$ respectively as shown in

2212: Figure \ref{f8.19}(b).

2213: \begin{figure}[hbt]

2214:   \centering

2215:   \includegraphics[width=0.28\textwidth]{8-19a.pdf}\qquad

2216:   \includegraphics[width=0.28\textwidth]{8-19b.pdf}

2217:   \caption{}\la{f8.19}

2218:  \end{figure}

2219: 

2220: Let $m=3$. Then the bifurcated attractor $\Sigma_{\lambda}$

2221: contains 26 equilibrium states which can by divide into three

2222: classes by the 3-dimensional

2223: $\left(\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}\right)$-rotation

2224: group $G\left(\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2},\frac{\pi}{2}\right)$ as

2225: follows

2226: \begin{align*}

2227: &{\mathcal{A}}_1=\left\{u^{\pm}_1=\pm y_0e_1,u^{\pm}_2=\pm

2228: y_0e_2,u^{\pm}_3=\pm y_0e_3\right\}, \\

2229: &{\mathcal{A}}_2=\left\{u^{\pm}_4=\pm y_1(e_1+e_2),u^{\pm}_5=\pm

2230: y_1(e_1+e_3),u^{\pm}_6=\pm y_1(e_2+e_3),\right.\\

2231: &\ \ \ \ u^{\pm}_7=\pm y_1(-e_1+e_2),u^{\pm}_8=\pm

2232: y_1(-e_1+e_3),u^{\pm}_9=\pm y_1(-e_2+e_3)\}, \\

2233: &{\mathcal{A}}_3=\{u^{\pm}_{10}=\pm

2234: y_1(e_1+e_2+e_3),u^{\pm}_{11}=\pm y_1(-e_1+e_2+3_3),\\

2235: &\ \ \ \ u^{\pm}_{12}=\pm y_1(e_1-e_2+e_3),u^{\pm}_{13}=\pm

2236: y_1(e_1+e_2-e_3)\}.

2237: \end{align*}

2238: Only these elements in ${\mathcal{A}}_1$ or in ${\mathcal{A}}_3$

2239: are stable, and  they are determined by the

2240: following criterion

2241: \begin{align*}

2242: &\text{elements in}\ {\mathcal{A}}_1\ \text{is\

2243: stable}\Leftrightarrow\frac{22}{9}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}>\gamma_3>\frac{26}{27}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2},\\

2244: &\text{elements\ in}\ {\mathcal{A}}_3\ \text{is\

2245: stable}\Leftrightarrow \gamma_3>\frac{22}{9}\frac{L^2\gamma^2_2}{\pi^2}.

2246: \end{align*}

2247: 

2248: \subsection{Critical exponents}

2249: From (\ref{8.73}) and (\ref{8.105}) we see that for Type-I phase

2250: transition of a binary system the critical exponent $\beta

2251: =\frac{1}{2}$. In this case, it is a second order phase transition with the Ehrenfest classification scheme,

2252: and there is a gap in heat capacity at critical temperature $T_0$.

2253: To see this, by (\ref{8.73}) and (\ref{8.105}) we have

2254: $$u^T=\left\{\begin{aligned}

2255: & 0 &&\text{if}\ T_0<T,\\

2256: &\alpha (\lambda (T)-\pi^2/L^2)^{{1}/{2}}e_1+o(|\lambda

2257: -\pi^2/L^2|^{{1}/{2}})&&\text{if}\ T<T_0,

2258: \end{aligned}

2259: \right.

2260: $$ 

2261: and the free energy for (\ref{8.58}) at $u^T$ is

2262: \begin{align*}

2263: F(u^T)=&\int_{\Omega}\left[\frac{1}{2}|\nabla

2264: u^T|^2-\frac{\lambda}{2}|u^T|^2+o(|u^T|^2)\right]dx\\

2265: =&\int_{\Omega}\frac{1}{2}[-\Delta u^T-\lambda

2266: u^T]u^T+\frac{1}{3}\gamma_2(u^T)^3+\frac{1}{4}\gamma_3(u^T)^4dx\\

2267: =&\left\{\begin{aligned} 

2268: &0 &&  \text{if}\ T_0<T,\\

2269: &-\frac{\alpha^2}{2}(\lambda

2270: -\pi^2/L^2)^2\cdot\int_{\Omega}[e^2_1+\frac{\alpha^2}{4}\gamma_3e^4_1]dx+o(|\lambda

2271: -\pi^2/L^2|^2) && \text{if} \ T > T_0.

2272: \end{aligned}

2273: \right.

2274: \end{align*}

2275: Thus, the heat capacity $C$ at $T=T_0$ satisfies

2276: $$C^+-C^-=-T_0\frac{\partial^2F(u^T)}{\partial

2277: T^2}\Big|_{T_0^+}+T_0\frac{\partial^2F(u^T)}{\partial

2278: T^2}\Big|_{T_0^-}=\alpha_1T_0\left(\frac{d\lambda}{dT}\right)^2|_{T=T_0}.$$

2279: It is known that $d\lambda /dT\neq 0$; hence the heat capacity at

2280: $T=T_0$ has a finite jump.

2281: 

2282: From (\ref{8.71}) we know that for the Type-III case, the critical

2283: exponent $\beta =1$. Thus, it is not hard to  deduce

2284: that the continuous phase transition in Type-III is of the 3rd order.

2285: 

2286: 

2287: \appendix

2288: 

2289: \section{Dynamic Transition Theory for Nonlinear Systems}

2290: In this appendix we recall some basic elements of the dynamic transition theory developed by the authors \cite{b-book, chinese-book}, which are used to carry out the dynamic transition analysis for the binary systems in this article. 

2291: 

2292: \subsection{New classification scheme}

2293: Let $X$  and $ X_1$ be two Banach spaces,   and $X_1\subset X$ a compact and

2294: dense inclusion. In this chapter, we always consider the following

2295: nonlinear evolution equations

2296: \begin{equation}

2297: \left. 

2298: \begin{aligned} 

2299: &\frac{du}{dt}=L_{\lambda}u+G(u,\lambda),\\

2300: &u(0)=\varphi ,

2301: \end{aligned}

2302: \right.\label{5.1}

2303: \end{equation}

2304: where $u:[0,\infty )\rightarrow X$ is unknown function,  and 

2305: $\lambda\in \R^1$  is the system parameter.

2306: 

2307: Assume that $L_{\lambda}:X_1\rightarrow X$ is a parameterized

2308: linear completely continuous field depending continuously on

2309: $\lambda\in \R^1$, which satisfies

2310: \begin{equation}

2311: \left. 

2312: \begin{aligned} 

2313: &L_{\lambda}=-A+B_{\lambda}   && \text{a sectorial operator},\\

2314: &A:X_1\rightarrow X   && \text{a linear homeomorphism},\\

2315: &B_{\lambda}:X_1\rightarrow X&&  \text{a linear compact  operator}.

2316: \end{aligned}

2317: \right.\label{5.2}

2318: \end{equation}

2319: In this case, we can define the fractional order spaces

2320: $X_{\sigma}$ for $\sigma\in \R^1$. Then we also assume that

2321: $G(\cdot ,\lambda ):X_{\alpha}\rightarrow X$ is $C^r(r\geq 1)$

2322: bounded mapping for some $0\leq\alpha <1$, depending continuously

2323: on $\lambda\in \R^1$, and

2324: \begin{equation}

2325: G(u,\lambda )=o(\|u\|_{X_{\alpha}}),\ \ \ \ \forall\lambda\in

2326: \R^1.\label{5.3}

2327: \end{equation}

2328: 

2329: Hereafter we always assume the conditions (\ref{5.2}) and

2330: (\ref{5.3}), which represent that the system (\ref{5.1}) has

2331: a dissipative structure.

2332: 

2333: \bd\la{d5.1}

2334: We say that the system (\ref{5.1}) has a

2335: transition of equilibrium from $(u,\lambda )=(0,\lambda_0)$ on

2336: $\lambda >\lambda_0$ (or $\lambda <\lambda_0)$ if  the following two conditions are 

2337: satisfied:

2338: 

2339: \begin{itemize}

2340: 

2341: \item[(1)] when $\lambda <\lambda_0$ (or $\lambda >\lambda_0),

2342: u=0$ is locally asymptotically stable for (\ref{5.1}); and

2343: 

2344: \item[(2)] when $\lambda >\lambda_0$ (or $\lambda <\lambda_0)$,

2345: there exists a neighborhood $U\subset X$ of $u=0$ independent of

2346: $\lambda$, such that for any $\varphi\in U \setminus \Gamma_{\lambda}$ the

2347: solution $u_{\lambda}(t,\varphi )$ of (\ref{5.1}) satisfies that

2348: $$\left. 

2349: \begin{aligned}

2350: &\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|u_{\lambda}(t,\varphi

2351: )\|_X\geq\delta (\lambda )>0,\\

2352: &\lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_0}\delta(\lambda )\geq 0,

2353: \end{aligned}

2354: \right.$$ 

2355: where $\Gamma_{\lambda}$ is the stable manifold of

2356: $u=0$, with  codim $\Gamma_{\lambda}\geq 1$ in $X$

2357: for $\lambda >\lambda_0$ (or $\lambda <\lambda_0)$.

2358: \end{itemize}

2359: \ed

2360: 

2361: Obviously, the attractor bifurcation of (\ref{5.1}) is a type of

2362: transition. However,  bifurcation and

2363: transition are two different, but related concepts. 

2364: Definition \ref{d5.1} defines the transition of (\ref{5.1}) from a stable

2365: equilibrium point to other states (not necessary equilibrium state).

2366: In general, we can define transitions from one attractor to

2367: another as follows.

2368: 

2369: 

2370: Let the eigenvalues (counting multiplicity) of $L_{\lambda}$ be given by

2371: $$\{\beta_j(\lambda )\in \C\ \   |\ \ j=1,2,\cdots\}$$

2372: Assume that

2373: \begin{align}

2374: &  \text{Re}\ \beta_i(\lambda )

2375: \left\{ 

2376:  \begin{aligned} 

2377:  &  <0 &&    \text{ if } \lambda  <\lambda_0,\\

2378: & =0 &&      \text{ if } \lambda =\lambda_0,\\

2379: & >0&&     \text{ if } \lambda >\lambda_0,

2380: \end{aligned}

2381: \right.   &&  \forall 1\leq i\leq m,  \label{5.4}\\

2382: &\text{Re}\ \beta_j(\lambda_0)<0 &&  \forall j\geq

2383: m+1.\label{5.5}

2384: \end{align}

2385: 

2386: The following theorem is a basic principle of transitions from

2387: equilibrium states, which provides sufficient conditions and a basic

2388: classification for transitions of nonlinear dissipative systems.

2389: This theorem is a direct consequence of the center manifold

2390: theorems and the stable manifold theorems; we omit the proof.

2391: 

2392: \bt\la{t5.1}

2393:  Let the conditions (\ref{5.4}) and

2394: (\ref{5.5}) hold true. Then, the system (\ref{5.1}) must have a

2395: transition from $(u,\lambda )=(0,\lambda_0)$, and there is a

2396: neighborhood $U\subset X$ of $u=0$ such that the transition is one

2397: of the following three types:

2398: 

2399: \begin{itemize}

2400: \item[(1)] {\sc Continuous Transition}: 

2401: there exists an open and dense set

2402: $\widetilde{U}_{\lambda}\subset U$ such that for any

2403: $\varphi\in\widetilde{U}_{\lambda}$,  the solution

2404: $u_{\lambda}(t,\varphi )$ of (\ref{5.1}) satisfies

2405: $$\lim\limits_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_0}\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|u_{\lambda}(t,\varphi

2406: )\|_X=0.$$ In particular, the attractor bifurcation of (\ref{5.1})

2407: at $(0,\lambda_0)$ is a continuous transition.

2408: 

2409: \item[(2)] {\sc Jump Transition}: 

2410: for any $\lambda_0<\lambda <\lambda_0+\varepsilon$ with some $\varepsilon >0$, there is an open

2411: and dense set $U_{\lambda}\subset U$ such that 

2412: for any $\varphi\in U_{\lambda}$, 

2413: $$\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|u_{\lambda}(t,\varphi

2414: )\|_X\geq\delta >0,$$ 

2415: where $\delta >0$ is independent of $\lambda$. 

2416: This type of transition  is also called the discontinuous 

2417: transition. 

2418: 

2419: \item[(3)] {\sc Mixed Transition}: 

2420: for any $\lambda_0<\lambda <\lambda_0+\varepsilon$  with some $\varepsilon >0$, 

2421: $U$ can be decomposed into two open sets

2422: $U^{\lambda}_1$ and $U^{\lambda}_2$  ($U^{\lambda}_i$ not necessarily

2423: connected):

2424: $$\bar{U}=\bar{U}^{\lambda}_1+\bar{U}^{\lambda}_2,\ \ \

2425: \ U^{\lambda}_1\cap U^{\lambda}_2=\emptyset ,$$ 

2426: such that

2427: \begin{align*}

2428: &\lim\limits_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_0}\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|u(t,\varphi

2429: )\|_X=0   &&   \forall\varphi\in U^{\lambda}_1,\\

2430: & \limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|u(t,\varphi

2431: )\|_X\geq\delta >0 && \forall\varphi\in U^{\lambda}_2.

2432: \end{align*}

2433: %where  $U^{\lambda}_1$ is called the stable domain,  and  $U^{\lambda}_2$

2434: %is the unstable domain.

2435: \end{itemize}

2436: \et

2437: 

2438: 

2439: With this theorem in our disposal, we are in position to give a new dynamic classification scheme for dynamic phase transitions.

2440: 

2441: \begin{definition}[Dynamic Classification of Phase Transition]

2442: The phase transitions for  (\ref{5.1}) at $\lambda =\lambda_0$ is classified using  their  dynamic properties: continuous, jump, and mixed as given in Theorem~\ref{t5.1}, which are called Type-I, Type-II and Type-III respectively.

2443: \end{definition}

2444: 

2445: An important aspect of the  transition theory is to determine which 

2446: of the three types of transitions given by Theorem \ref{t5.1} occurs in

2447: a specific  problem. By  reduction to the center manifold of

2448: (\ref{5.1}), we know that the type of transitions for (\ref{5.1}) at

2449: $(0,\lambda_0)$ is completely dictated  by its reduction equation

2450: near $\lambda =\lambda_0$, which can be

2451: expressed as:

2452: \begin{equation}

2453: \frac{dx}{dt}=J_{\lambda}x+PG(x + \Phi (x,\lambda ),\lambda ) \ \ \

2454: \ \text{ for } x\in \R^m,\label{5.6}

2455: \end{equation}

2456: where $J_{\lambda}$ is the $m\times m$ order Jordan matrix

2457: corresponding to the eigenvalues given by (\ref{5.4}),  $\Phi

2458: (x,\lambda )$ is the center manifold function of (\ref{5.1}) near

2459: $\lambda_0$, $P:X\rightarrow E_{\lambda}$ is the canonical

2460: projection, and 

2461: $$

2462: E_{\lambda}=\cup_{1\leq i\leq m}\cup_{k\in N}\{u\in X_1|\ \

2463: (L_{\lambda}-\beta_i(\lambda ))^ku=0\}

2464: $$ 

2465: is the eigenspace of $L_{\lambda}$.

2466: 

2467: By the spectral theorem, (\ref{5.6}) can be expressed into the

2468: following explicit form

2469: \begin{equation}

2470: \frac{dx}{dt}=J_{\lambda}x+g(x,\lambda ),\label{5.7}

2471: \end{equation}

2472: where

2473: \begin{equation}

2474: \left. 

2475: \begin{aligned} 

2476: &g(x,\lambda )=(g_1(x,\lambda ),\cdots

2477: ,g_m(x,\lambda )),\\

2478: &g_j(x,\lambda )= <G(\sum^m_{i=1}x_ie_i + \Phi (x,\lambda ),\lambda

2479: ), e^*_j> \quad   \forall 1\leq j\leq m.

2480: \end{aligned}

2481: \right.\label{5.8}

2482: \end{equation}

2483: Here $e_j$ and $e^*_j$  $(1\leq j\leq m)$ are the eigenvectors of

2484: $L_{\lambda}$ and $L^*_{\lambda}$ respectively corresponding to the

2485: eigenvalues $\beta_j(\lambda )$ as in (\ref{5.4}).

2486: 

2487: In particular, if $G(u,\lambda )$ has the Taylor expansion

2488: \begin{equation}

2489: G(u,\lambda )=G_k(u,\lambda )+o(\|u\|^k_{X_{\alpha}}),\label{5.9}

2490: \end{equation}

2491: for some $k\geq 2$, where $G_k(u,\lambda )$ is a $k$-multilinear operator, then (\ref{5.7})  can be rewritten as

2492: \begin{equation}

2493: \frac{dx}{dt}=J_{\lambda}x+g_k(x,\lambda

2494: )+o(|x|^k),\label{5.10}

2495: \end{equation}

2496: where

2497: \begin{align*}

2498: &g_k(x,\lambda )=(g_{k1}(x,\lambda ),\cdots ,g_{km}(x,\lambda)),\\

2499: &g_{kj}(x,\lambda )=<G_k(\sum^n_{i=1}x_ie_i,\lambda ),e^*_j>

2500: &&    \forall 1\leq j\leq m.

2501: \end{align*}

2502: 

2503: When $x=0$ is an isolated singular point of $g_k(x,\lambda )$, in

2504: general the transition of (\ref{5.1}) is determined by the

2505: first-order approximate bifurcation equation of (\ref{5.10}) as follows:

2506: \begin{equation}

2507: \frac{dx}{dt}=J_{\lambda}x+g_k(x,\lambda ).\label{5.11}

2508: \end{equation}

2509: 

2510: The following theorem is useful to distinguish the transition

2511: types of (\ref{5.1}) at $(u,\lambda )=(0,\lambda_0)$.

2512: 

2513: 

2514: \bt\la{t5.2}

2515: Let the conditions (\ref{5.4}) and

2516: (\ref{5.5}) hold true, and $U\subset \R^m$ be a neighborhood of $x=0$.

2517: Then we have the following assertions:

2518: 

2519: \begin{itemize}

2520: 

2521: \item[(1)] If the transition of (\ref{5.1}) at $(0,\lambda_0)$ is

2522: continuous, then there is an open and dense set

2523: $\widetilde{U}\subset U$ such that for any $x_0\in\widetilde{U}$

2524: the solution $x(t,x_0)$ of (\ref{5.7}) at $\lambda =\lambda_0$

2525: with $x(0,x_0)=x_0$ satisfies that

2526: $$\lim\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}x(t,x_0)=0.$$

2527: 

2528: \item[(2)] If there exists an open and dense set

2529: $\widetilde{U}\subset U$ such that for any $x_0\in\widetilde{U}$

2530: the solution $x(t,x_0)$ of (\ref{5.7}) at $\lambda =\lambda_0$

2531: satisfies

2532: $$\limsup_{t\rightarrow\infty}|x(t,x_0)|\neq 0,$$

2533: then the transition is a jump transition. 

2534: 

2535: \item[(3)] If the transition is

2536: mixed, then there exists an open set $\widetilde{U}\subset U$

2537: such that for any $x_0\in\widetilde{U}$ the solution $x(t,x_0)$ of

2538: (\ref{5.7}) at $\lambda =\lambda_0$ with $x(0,x_0)=x_0$ satisfies

2539: $$\lim\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}x(t,x_0)=0.$$

2540: 

2541: 

2542: \item[(4)] If the vector field in (\ref{5.7}) at $\lambda

2543: =\lambda_0$ satisfies

2544: $$<J_{\lambda_0}x+g(x,\lambda_0),x><0\quad \forall x\in U,\ x\neq 0,$$

2545: then the transition of (\ref{5.1}) at $(0,\lambda_0)$ is an

2546: $S^{m-1}$-attractor bifurcation, and  the transition  is continuous. 

2547: 

2548: \item[(5)] If the vector field $g(x,\lambda_0)$ given by (\ref{5.8})

2549: satisfies

2550: $$<g(x,\lambda_0),x>>0 \ \ \ \ \forall x\in U,\ \ \ \ x\neq 0,$$

2551: then the transition is jump.

2552: \end{itemize}

2553: \et

2554: 

2555: In general, the conditions in Assertions (1)-(3) of Theorem \ref{t5.2}

2556: are not sufficient. They, however, do give sufficient conditions when (\ref{5.1}) has

2557: a variational structure. To see this, let (\ref{5.1}) be a gradient-type equation. Under the conditions (\ref{5.4}) and (\ref{5.5}), in a

2558: neighborhood $U\subset X$ of $u=0$, the center manifold $M^c$ in

2559: $U$ at $\lambda =\lambda_0$ consists three subsets

2560: $$M^c=W^u+W^s+D,$$

2561: where $W^s$ is the stable set, $W^u$ is the unstable set, and $D$ is  the

2562: hyperbolic set of (\ref{5.7}). Then we have the following

2563: theorem.

2564: 

2565: 

2566: \bt\la{t5.3} 

2567: Let (\ref{5.1}) be a gradient-type equation,

2568: and the conditions (\ref{5.4}) and (\ref{5.5}) hold true. If $u=0$

2569: is an isolated singular point of (\ref{5.1}) at $\lambda

2570: =\lambda_0$, then we have the following assertions:

2571: 

2572: \begin{itemize}

2573: 

2574: \item[(1)] The transition of (\ref{5.1}) at $(u,\lambda)=(0,\lambda_0)$ is continuous if and only if $u=0$ is locally asymptotically stable at $\lambda =\lambda_0$, i.e., the center

2575: manifold is stable: $M^c=W^s$. Moreover, (\ref{5.1}) 

2576: bifurcates from $(0,\lambda_0)$ to minimal attractors consisting  of

2577: singular points of (\ref{5.1}). 

2578: 

2579: \item[(2)] If the stable set $W^s$ of (\ref{5.1}) has no interior points in $M^c$, i.e.,

2580: $M^c=\bar{W}^u+\bar{D}$, then the transition is jump.

2581: \end{itemize}

2582: \et

2583: 

2584: \subsection{Transitions from simple eigenvalues}

2585: We consider the transition of (\ref{5.1}) from a simple critical

2586: eigenvalue. Let the eigenvalues $\beta_j(\lambda )$ of

2587: $L_{\lambda}$ satisfy (\ref{5.4})  and (\ref{5.5}) with $m=1$.

2588: Then the first eigenvalue $\beta_1(\lambda )$ must be a real eigenvalue. 

2589: Let $e_1(\lambda )$ and $e^*_1(\lambda )$   be  the eigenvectors of

2590: $L_{\lambda}$ and $L^*_{\lambda}$ respectively corresponding to

2591: $\beta_1(\lambda )$ with

2592: $$L_{\lambda_0}e_1=0,\ \ \ \ L^*_{\lambda_0}e^*_1=0,\ \ \ \

2593: <e_1,e^*_1>=1.$$ 

2594: Let $\Phi (x,\lambda )$    be the center manifold

2595: function of (\ref{5.1}) near $\lambda =\lambda_0$. We assume that

2596: \begin{equation}

2597: <G(xe_1+\Phi (x,\lambda_0),\lambda_0),e^*_1>=\alpha

2598: x^k+o(|x|^k),\label{5.36}

2599: \end{equation}

2600: where $k\geq 2$ an integer and $\alpha\neq 0$ a real number.

2601: \begin{figure}%[hbt]

2602:   \centering

2603:   \includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{5-5a.pdf} \quad 

2604:   \includegraphics[width=0.2\textwidth]{5-5b.pdf}

2605:   \caption{Topological structure of the jump transition of

2606: (\ref{5.1}) when $k$=odd and $\alpha >0$: (a) $\lambda

2607: <\lambda_0$; (b) $\lambda\geq\lambda_0$. Here the horizontal line

2608: represents the center manifold.}\la{f5.5}

2609:  \end{figure}

2610:  \begin{figure}%[hbtp]

2611:   \centering

2612:   \includegraphics[width=0.23\textwidth]{5-6a.pdf}

2613:   \includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{5-6b.pdf}

2614:   \caption{Topological structure of the continuous transition

2615: of (\ref{5.1}) when $k$=odd and $\alpha <0$: (a)

2616: $\lambda\leq\lambda_0$; (b) $\lambda >\lambda_0$.}\la{f5.6}

2617:  \end{figure}

2618:  \begin{figure}%[hbtp]

2619:   \centering

2620:   \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{5-7a.pdf}

2621:    \includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{5-7b.pdf} 

2622:    \includegraphics[width=0.32\textwidth]{5-7c.pdf}

2623:   \caption{Topological structure of the mixing transition of

2624: (\ref{5.1}) when $k$=even and $\alpha\neq 0$: (a) $\lambda

2625: <\lambda_0$; (b) $\lambda =\lambda_0$; (c) $\lambda >\lambda_0$. Here

2626: $U^{\lambda}_1$ is the unstable domain, and $U^{\lambda}_2$ the

2627: stable domain.}\la{f5.7}

2628:  \end{figure}

2629: 

2630: \bt\la{t5.8}

2631: Assume  (\ref{5.4})  and (\ref{5.5}) with $m=1$, and (\ref{5.36}).  If $k$=odd and $\alpha\neq 0$ in (\ref{5.36}) then

2632: the following assertions hold true:

2633: 

2634: \begin{itemize}

2635: 

2636: \item[(1)] If $\alpha >0$,  then (\ref{5.1}) has a jump

2637: transition from $(0,\lambda_0)$, and bifurcates on $\lambda

2638: <\lambda_0$ to exactly two saddle points $v^{\lambda}_1$ and

2639: $v^{\lambda}_2$ with the Morse index one, as shown in Figure \ref{f5.5}.

2640: 

2641: \item[(2)] If $\alpha <0$,  then (\ref{5.1}) has a continuous

2642: transition from $(0,\lambda_0)$, which is an attractor bifurcation

2643:  as shown in Figure \ref{f5.6}. 

2644: 

2645: \item[(3)] The bifurcated singular points $v^{\lambda}_1$ and $v^{\lambda}_2$ 

2646: in the above cases can

2647: be expressed in the following form

2648: $$v^{\lambda}_{1,2}=\pm |\beta_1(\lambda )/\alpha

2649: |^{{1}/{k-1}}e_1(\lambda )+o(|\beta_1|^{{1}/{k-1}}).$$

2650: 

2651: \end{itemize}

2652: \et

2653: 

2654: 

2655: 

2656: \bt\la{t5.9}

2657:  Assume  (\ref{5.4})  and (\ref{5.5}) with $m=1$,  and

2658: (\ref{5.36}). If $k$=even and $\alpha\neq 0$, then we have the

2659: following assertions:

2660: 

2661: \begin{enumerate}

2662: 

2663: \item (\ref{5.1}) has a mixed transition from

2664: $(0,\lambda_0)$. More precisely, there exists a neighborhood

2665: $U\subset X$ of $u=0$ such that $U$ is separated into two disjoint

2666: open sets $U^{\lambda}_1$ and $U^{\lambda}_2$ by the stable

2667: manifold $\Gamma_{\lambda}$ of $u=0$ satisfying the following properties:

2668: 

2669: \begin{enumerate}

2670: 

2671: \item $U=U^{\lambda}_1+U^{\lambda}_2+\Gamma_{\lambda}$,

2672: 

2673: \item the transition in $U^{\lambda}_1$ is jump, and 

2674: 

2675: \item the transition in $U^{\lambda}_2$ is

2676: continuous. The local transition structure is as shown in Figure \ref{f5.7}.

2677: 

2678: \end{enumerate}

2679: 

2680: \item (\ref{5.1}) bifurcates in $U^{\lambda}_2$ to a unique

2681: singular point $v^{\lambda}$ on $\lambda >\lambda_0$, which is an

2682: attractor such that for any $\varphi\in U^{\lambda}_2$, 

2683: $$\lim\limits_{t\rightarrow\infty}\|u(t,\varphi

2684: )-v^{\lambda}\|_X=0,$$

2685: where $u(t,\varphi )$ is the solution of (\ref{5.1}). 

2686: 

2687: \item (\ref{5.1})\ bifurcates on $\lambda <\lambda_0$ to a unique saddle

2688: point $v^{\lambda}$ with the Morse index one. 

2689: 

2690: \item The bifurcated singular point $v^{\lambda}$ can be expressed as

2691: $$v^{\lambda}=-(\beta_1(\lambda )/\alpha

2692: )^{{1}/{(k-1)}}e_1+o(|\beta_1|^{{1}/{(k-1)}}).$$

2693: \end{enumerate}

2694: \et

2695: 

2696: \subsection{Singular Separation}

2697: \la{s6.2}

2698: In this section, we study  an important

2699: problem associated with the discontinuous transition of

2700: (\ref{5.1}), which we call  the singular separation.

2701: 

2702: \bd\la{d6.1}

2703: \begin{enumerate}

2704: 

2705: \item 

2706: An invariant set $\Sigma$ of (\ref{5.1}) is called a singular

2707: element if $\Sigma$ is either a singular point or a periodic

2708: orbit. 

2709: 

2710: \item Let $\Sigma_1\subset X$ be a singular

2711: element of (\ref{5.1}) and $U\subset X$ a neighborhood of

2712: $\Sigma_1$. We say that (\ref{5.1}) has a singular separation of

2713: $\Sigma$ at $\lambda =\lambda_1$ if 

2714: 

2715: \begin{enumerate}

2716: 

2717: \item (\ref{5.1}) has no singular

2718: elements in $U$ as $\lambda <\lambda_1$ (or $\lambda >\lambda_1$),

2719: and generates a singular element $\Sigma_1\subset  U$ at $\lambda

2720: =\lambda_1$,  and 

2721: 

2722: \item there are branches of singular elements

2723: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$, which are  separated from $\Sigma_1$ for $\lambda

2724: >\lambda_1$ (or $\lambda <\lambda_1$), i.e.,

2725: $$\lim\limits_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda_1}\max_{x\in\Sigma_{\lambda}}\text{dist}(x,\Sigma_1)=0.$$

2726: \end{enumerate}

2727: 

2728: \end{enumerate}

2729: \ed

2730: 

2731: A special case of singular separation is the saddle-node

2732: bifurcation defined as follows.

2733: 

2734: \bd\la{d6.2}

2735: Let $u_1\in X$ be a singular point of

2736: (\ref{5.1}) at $\lambda =\lambda_1$ with $u_1\neq 0$. We say that

2737: (\ref{5.1}) has a saddle-node bifurcation at $(u_1,\lambda_1)$ if

2738: 

2739: \begin{enumerate}

2740: 

2741: \item the index of $L_{\lambda}+G$ at $(u_1,\lambda_1)$ is zero, i.e.,

2742: ind$(-(L_{\lambda_1}+G),u_1)=0$, 

2743: 

2744: \item  there are two branches

2745: $\Gamma_1(\lambda )$ and $\Gamma_2(\lambda )$ of singular points

2746: of (\ref{5.1}), which  are separated from $u_1$ for $\lambda >\lambda_1$

2747: (or $\lambda <\lambda_1)$,  i.e.,  for any

2748: $u_{\lambda}\in\Gamma_i(\lambda )$ $(i=1,2)$ we have

2749: $$u_{\lambda}\rightarrow u_1\ \text{in}\ X\ \ \ \ \text{as}\

2750: \lambda\rightarrow\lambda_1, $$ 

2751: and

2752: 

2753: \item  the indices of

2754: $u^i_{\lambda}\in\Gamma_i(\lambda )$ are as follows

2755: $$\text{ind}(-(L_{\lambda}+G),u_{\lambda})=

2756: \left\{

2757: \begin{aligned}

2758: &  1  &&  \text{ if } u_{\lambda}\in\Gamma_2(\lambda ),\\

2759: &  -1  &&  \text{ if } u_{\lambda}\in\Gamma_1(\lambda ).

2760: \end{aligned}

2761: \right.$$

2762: \end{enumerate}

2763: \ed

2764: 

2765: 

2766: Intuitively, the saddle-node bifurcation is

2767: schematically shown as in Figure~\ref{f6.1}, where the singular points in

2768: $\Gamma_1(\lambda )$ are saddle points and in $\Gamma_2(\lambda )$

2769: are nodes, and the singular separation of periodic orbits is as in

2770: shown Figure~\ref{f6.2}.

2771: \begin{figure}[hbt]

2772:   \centering

2773:   \includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{6-1.pdf}

2774:   \caption{Saddle-node bifurcation.}\la{f6.1}

2775:  \end{figure}

2776: \begin{figure}[hbt]

2777:   \centering

2778:   \includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{6-2.pdf}

2779:   \caption{Singular separation of periodic orbits.}\la{f6.2}

2780:  \end{figure}

2781: 

2782: 

2783: For the singular separation we can give a general principle as

2784: follows, which provides a basis for singular separation theory.

2785: 

2786: \bt\la{t6.4}

2787: Let the conditions (\ref{5.4}) and

2788: (\ref{5.5}) hold true. Then we have the following assertions.

2789: 

2790: \begin{enumerate}

2791: 

2792: \item[(1)] If (\ref{5.1}) bifurcates from $(u,\lambda

2793: )=(0,\lambda_0)$   to a branch $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ of singular elements on

2794: $\lambda <\lambda_0$ which is bounded in $X\times (-\infty

2795: ,\lambda_0)$ then (\ref{5.1}) has a singular separation of

2796: singular elements at some $(\Sigma_0,\lambda_1)\subset X\times

2797: (-\infty ,\lambda_0)$. 

2798: 

2799: \item[(2)] If the bifurcated branch

2800: $\Sigma_{\lambda}$ consists of singular points which has index $-1$,

2801: i.e., 

2802: $$\text{ind}(-(L_{\lambda}+G),u_{\lambda})=-1 \ \ \ \ \forall u_{\lambda}\in

2803: E_{\lambda},\ \ \ \ \lambda <\lambda_0,$$ then the singular

2804: separation is a saddle-node bifurcation from some

2805: $(u_1,\lambda_1)\in X\times (-\infty ,\lambda_0).$

2806: \end{enumerate}

2807: \et

2808: 

2809: 

2810: We consider the equation (\ref{5.1}) defined on the Hilbert spaces

2811: $X=H, X_1=H_1$. Let $L_{\lambda}=-A+\lambda B$. For $L_{\lambda}$

2812: and $G(\cdot ,\lambda ):H_1\rightarrow H$, we assume that

2813: $A:H_1\rightarrow H$ is symmetric, and

2814: \begin{eqnarray}

2815: &&<Au,u>_H\geq c\|u\|^2_{H_{{1}/{2}}},\label{6.46}\\

2816: &&<Bu,u>_H\geq c\|u\|^2_H,\label{6.47}\\

2817: &&<Gu,u>_H\leq -c_1\|u\|^p_H+c_2\|u\|^2_H,\label{6.48}

2818: \end{eqnarray}

2819: where $p>2, c, c_1, c_2>0$ are constants.

2820: 

2821: \bt\la{t6.5}

2822:  Assume the conditions (\ref{5.3}),

2823: (\ref{5.4}) and (\ref{6.46})-(\ref{6.48}), then (\ref{5.1}) has a

2824: transition at $(u,\lambda )=(0,\lambda_0)$, and the following

2825: assertions hold true:

2826: 

2827: \begin{enumerate}

2828: \item[(1)] If $u=0$ is an even-order nondegenerate singular point

2829: of $L_{\lambda}+G$ at $\lambda =\lambda_0$, then (\ref{5.1}) has a

2830: singular separation of singular points at some $(u_1,\lambda_1)\in

2831: H\times (-\infty ,\lambda_0)$. 

2832: 

2833: \item[(2)]  If $m=1$ and $G$

2834: satisfies (\ref{5.36}) with $\alpha >0$ if $k$=odd and $\alpha\neq

2835: 0$ if $k$=even, then (\ref{5.1}) has a saddle-node bifurcation at

2836: some singular point $(u_1,\lambda_1)$ with $\lambda_1<\lambda_0$.

2837: \end{enumerate}

2838: \et

2839: 

2840: \subsection{Transition and Singular Separation of Perturbed Systems}

2841: We consider the following perturbed equation of (\ref{5.1}): 

2842: \begin{equation}

2843: \frac{du}{dt}=(L_{\lambda}+S^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda})u+G(u,\lambda

2844: )+T^{\varepsilon}(u,\lambda ),\label{6.56}

2845: \end{equation}

2846: where $L_{\lambda}$ and $G_{\lambda}$ are as in (\ref{5.1}),

2847: $S^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}:X_{\sigma}\rightarrow X$ is a linear

2848: perturbed operator,

2849: $T^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}:X_{\sigma}\rightarrow X$ a $C^1$

2850: nonlinear perturbed operator,  and  $X_{\sigma}$ the fractional order

2851: space, $0\leq\sigma <1$. Also assume that 

2852: $G_{\lambda},T^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}$ are

2853: $C^3$ on $u$, and

2854: \begin{equation}

2855: \left.

2856: \begin{aligned} 

2857: & \|S^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}\|<\varepsilon,\\

2858: & \|T^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}\|<\varepsilon ,\\

2859: & T^{\varepsilon}(u,\lambda )=o(\|u\|_{X_{\alpha}}).

2860: \end{aligned}

2861: \right.\label{6.57}

2862: \end{equation}

2863: 

2864: Let  (\ref{5.4})  and (\ref{5.5}) with $m=1$ hold true, $G(u,\lambda )=G_2(u,\lambda

2865: )+o(\|u\|^2_{X_1})$, where $G_2(\cdot ,\lambda )$ is a bilinear

2866: operator, and

2867: \begin{equation}

2868: b=<G_2(e,\lambda_0),e^*>\neq 0,\label{6.65}

2869: \end{equation}

2870: where $e\in X$ and $e^*\in X^*$ are the eigenvectors of

2871: $L_{\lambda}$ and $L^*_{\lambda}$ corresponding to

2872: $\beta_1(\lambda )$ at $\lambda =\lambda_0$ respectively.

2873: 

2874: We now consider the transition associated with the saddle-node

2875: bifurcation of the perturbed system (\ref{6.56}). Let $h(x,\lambda

2876: )$ be the center manifold function of (\ref{5.1}) near $\lambda

2877: =\lambda_0$. Assume that

2878: \begin{equation}

2879: <G(xe+h(x,\lambda_0),\lambda_0),e^*>=b_1x^3+o(|x|^3),\label{6.66}

2880: \end{equation}

2881: where $b_1\neq 0$, and $e$ and $e^*$ are as in (\ref{6.65}).

2882: 

2883: Then we have the following theorems.

2884: 

2885: \bt\la{t6.10}

2886:  Let the conditions (\ref{5.4})  and (\ref{5.5}) with $m=1$, and

2887: (\ref{6.66}) hold true, and $b_1<0$. Then there is an

2888: $\varepsilon >0$ such that if  $S^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}$ and

2889: $T^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}$ satisfy (\ref{6.57}), then the transition of

2890: (\ref{6.56}) is either continuous or mixed. If the transition is

2891: continuous, then Assertions (2) and (3) of Theorem \ref{t5.8} are valid

2892: for (\ref{6.56}). If the transition is mixed, then the

2893: following assertions hold true:

2894: 

2895: \begin{enumerate}

2896: 

2897: \item[(1)] (\ref{6.56}) has a saddle-node bifurcation at some

2898: point $(u_1,\lambda_1)\in X\times (-\infty

2899: ,\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0)$, and there are exactly two branches

2900: $$\Gamma^{\lambda}_i=\{(u^{\lambda}_i,\lambda )|\ \lambda_1<\lambda

2901: <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0+\delta\} \qquad   i=1,2, $$ 

2902: separated from

2903: $(u_1,\lambda_1)$ as shown in Figure~\ref{f6.1}, which satisfy that 

2904: \begin{align*}

2905: &  \|u^{\lambda}_2\|_X\neq 0  &&\forall (u^{\lambda}_2,\lambda

2906: )\in\Gamma^{\lambda}_2,\ \ \ \ \lambda_1<\lambda

2907: <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0+\delta ,\\

2908: & \lim_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0}\|u^{\lambda}_1\|_X=0 &&

2909: \forall  (u^{\lambda}_1,\lambda )\in\Gamma^{\lambda}_1.

2910: \end{align*}

2911: 

2912: 

2913: \item[(2)] There is a neighborhood $U\subset X$ of

2914: $u=0$, such that for each $\lambda$ with $\lambda_1<\lambda

2915: <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0+\delta$ and

2916: $\lambda\neq\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0, U$ contains only two

2917: nontrivial singular points $u^{\lambda}_1$ and $u^{\lambda}_2$ of

2918: (\ref{6.56}). 

2919: 

2920: \item[(3)] For each $\lambda_1<\lambda

2921: <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0+\delta , U$ can be decomposed into two

2922: open sets $\bar{U}=\bar{U}^{\lambda}_1+\bar{U}^{\lambda}_2$ with

2923: $U^{\lambda}_1\cap U^{\lambda}_2=\emptyset$, such that

2924: 

2925: \begin{enumerate}

2926: 

2927: \item if $  \lambda_1<\lambda <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0$, 

2928: $$0\in U^{\lambda}_1,\ \ \ \ u^{\lambda}_2\in U^{\lambda}_2,\ \ \

2929: \ u^{\lambda}_1\in\partial U^{\lambda}_1\cap\partial

2930: U^{\lambda}_2,$$ with $u=0$ and $u^{\lambda}_2$ being

2931: attractors which attract $U^{\lambda}_1$ and $U^{\lambda}_2$

2932: respectively, and

2933: 

2934: \item if  $ \lambda^{\varepsilon}_0<\lambda <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0+\delta$,

2935: $$u^{\lambda}_1\in U^{\lambda}_1,\ \ \ \ u^{\lambda}_2\in

2936: U^{\lambda}_2,\ \ \ \ 0\in\partial U^{\lambda}_1\cap\partial

2937: U^{\lambda}_2, $$ 

2938: with $u^{\lambda}_1$ and

2939: $u^{\lambda}_2$ being attractors which attract $U^{\lambda}_1$ and

2940: $U^{\lambda}_2$ respectively. 

2941: 

2942: \end{enumerate}

2943: 

2944: \item[(4)] Near $(u,\lambda)=(0,\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0),u^{\lambda}_1$ 

2945: and $u^{\lambda}_2$

2946: can be expressed as 

2947: \begin{equation} 

2948: \left.

2949: \begin{aligned}

2950: & u^{\lambda}_1=\alpha_1(\lambda ,\varepsilon )e+o(|\alpha_1|),\\

2951: & u^{\lambda}_2=\alpha_2(\lambda ,\varepsilon )e+o(|\alpha_2|),\\

2952: & \lim_{  \lambda\rightarrow\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0  }  

2953: \alpha_1(\lambda ,\varepsilon )= 0,\\

2954: & \alpha_2(\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0,\varepsilon )\neq 0,

2955: \end{aligned}

2956: \right.\label{6.67}

2957: \end{equation}

2958: where $e$ is as in (\ref{6.66}).

2959: \end{enumerate}

2960: \et

2961: 

2962: 

2963: \bt\la{t6.11} Assume the conditions (\ref{5.4})  and (\ref{5.5}) with $m=1$, and

2964: (\ref{6.66}) with $b_1>0$. Then, there is an $\varepsilon >0$ such

2965: that when $S^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}$ and

2966: $T^{\varepsilon}_{\lambda}$ satisfy (\ref{6.57}), the transition of

2967: (\ref{6.56}) is either jump or mixed. If it is jump transition,  then

2968: Assertions (1) and  (3) of Theorem \ref{t5.8} are valid for (\ref{6.56}). 

2969: If it is mixed, then the following assertions hold true:

2970: 

2971: \begin{enumerate}

2972: 

2973: \item[(1)] (\ref{6.56}) has a saddle-node bifurcation at some

2974: point $(u_1,\lambda_1)\in X\times (\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0,+\infty

2975: )$, and there are exactly two branches

2976: $$\Gamma^{\lambda}_i=\{(u^{\lambda}_i,\lambda )|\

2977: \lambda^{\varepsilon}_0-\delta <\lambda <\lambda_1\} \qquad   (i=1,2), $$

2978: separated from $(u_1,\lambda_1)$, which satisfy

2979: \begin{align*}

2980: &  \|u^{\lambda}_2\|_X=0 &&\forall (u^{\lambda}_2,\lambda)\in\Gamma^*_2,\ \ \ \ \lambda^{\varepsilon}_0-\varepsilon

2981: <\lambda <\lambda_1,\\

2982: & \lim\limits_{\lambda\rightarrow\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0}\|u^{\lambda}_1\|_X=0

2983: && \forall 

2984: (u^{\lambda}_1,\lambda )\in\Gamma^{\lambda}_1.

2985: \end{align*}

2986: 

2987: 

2988: \item[(2)] There is a neighborhood $U\subset X$ of

2989: $u=0$, such that for each $\lambda$ with

2990: $\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0-\delta <\lambda <\lambda_1, U$ contains

2991: only two nontrivial singular points $u^{\lambda}_1$ and

2992: $u^{\lambda}_2$ of (\ref{6.56}). 

2993: 

2994: 

2995: \item[(3)] For every

2996: $\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0-\delta <\lambda <\lambda_1, U$ can be

2997: decomposed into three open sets

2998: $\bar{U}=\bar{U}_0+\bar{U}_1+\bar{U}_2$ with $U_i\cap

2999: U_j=\emptyset$ $ (i\neq j)$ such that

3000: 

3001: \begin{enumerate}

3002: 

3003: \item  if   $ \lambda^{\varepsilon}_0-\delta <\lambda <\lambda^{\varepsilon}_0$, 

3004: then 

3005: $$u=0\in U^{\lambda}_0,\ \ \ \ u^{\lambda}_i\in\partial

3006: U^{\lambda}_i\cap\partial U^{\lambda}_0(i=1,2),$$ 

3007: with $u=0$ being an attractor which

3008: attracts $U^{\lambda}_0$ and $U^{\lambda}_i(i=1,2)$ two saddle

3009: points with the Morse index one, and

3010: 

3011: \item  if   $ \lambda^{\varepsilon}_0<\lambda <\lambda_1$,  then 

3012: $$u^{\lambda}_1\in U^{\lambda}_1,\ \ \ \ u^{\lambda}_2\in\partial

3013: U^{\lambda}_2\cap\partial U^{\lambda}_1,\ \ \ \ 0\in\partial

3014: U^{\lambda}_1\cap\partial U^{\lambda}_0,$$ 

3015: with $u^{\lambda}_1$

3016: being an attractor which attracts $U^{\lambda}_1$ and

3017: $u^{\lambda}_2$ and $u=0$ being saddle points with the Morse index

3018: one. 

3019: 

3020: \end{enumerate}

3021: 

3022: \item[(4)] Near $(0,\lambda^0_{\varepsilon}),u^{\lambda}_1$

3023: and $u^{\lambda}_2$ can be expressed by (\ref{6.67}).

3024: \end{enumerate}

3025: \et

3026: 

3027: \section{Ginzburg-Landau Models}

3028: %\subsection{Thermodynamic potentials}

3029: \label{s7.2.2}

3030: In this subsection, we introduce the time-dependent Ginzburg-Landau model for equilibrium phase transitions. 

3031: 

3032: We start with thermodynamic potentials and the Ginzburg-Landau free energy. As we know, four thermodynamic potentials-- internal energy, the enthalpy, the Helmholtz free energy and the Gibbs free energy--are useful in the chemical thermodynamics of reactions and non-cyclic processes. 

3033: 

3034: Consider a thermal system, its order parameter $u$ changes in

3035: $\Omega\subset \R^n$ $(1\leq n\leq 3)$. In this situation,  the free energy of this system is of the form

3036: %\begin{widetext}

3037: \begin{equation}

3038: {\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda

3039: )= {\mathcal{H}}_0 

3040:  +\int_{\Omega}\Big[\frac{1}{2}\sum^m_{i=1}\mu_i|\nabla

3041: u_i|^2  +g(u,\nabla u,\lambda )\Big]dx\label{7.28}

3042: \end{equation}

3043: %\end{widetext}

3044: where $N\geq 3$ is an integer,

3045: $u=(u_1,\cdots,u_m),\mu_i=\mu_i(\lambda )>0$, and $g(u,\nabla

3046: u,\lambda )$ is a $C^r(r\geq 2)$ function of $(u,\nabla u)$ with

3047: the Taylor expansion \begin{equation} g(u,\nabla u,\lambda

3048: )=\sum\alpha_{ijk}u_iD_ju_k+\sum^N_{|I|=1}\alpha_Iu^I+o(|u|^N)-fX,\label{7.29}

3049: \end{equation}

3050: where $I=(i_1,\cdots,i_m),i_k\geq 0$ are integer,

3051: $|I|=\sum^m_{k=1}i_k$, the coefficients $\alpha_{ijk}$ and

3052: $\alpha_I$ continuously depend on $\lambda$, which are determined

3053: by the concrete physical problem, $u^I=u^{i_1}_1\cdots u^{im}_m$

3054: and $fX$ the generalized work.

3055: 

3056: A thermal system is controlled by some parameter $\lambda$. When

3057: $\lambda$ is far from the critical point $\lambda_0$ the system

3058: lies on a stable equilibrium state $\Sigma_1$, and when $\lambda$

3059: reaches or exceeds $\lambda_0$ the state $\Sigma_1$ becomes unstable, and 

3060: meanwhile the system will undergo a transition  from $\Sigma_1$ to another stable

3061: state $\Sigma_2$. The basic principle is that there often exists  fluctuations in the system leading  to a deviation from the equilibrium states, and  the phase transition process is a

3062: dynamical behavior, which should be described by a time-dependent

3063: equation.

3064: 

3065: To derive a general time-dependent model, first we recall that  the classical  

3066: le Ch\^atelier  principle amounts to saying that 

3067: for a stable  equilibrium state of a system $\Sigma$, when the system deviates from

3068: $\Sigma$ by a small perturbation or fluctuation, there will be a

3069: resuming force to restore this system to return to the stable state

3070: $\Sigma$.

3071: Second, we know that  a stable equilibrium state of a thermal system must

3072: be the minimal value point of the thermodynamic potential. 

3073: 

3074: By the mathematical characterization of gradient systems and the le Ch\^atelier principle, for a system with

3075: thermodynamic potential ${\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )$, the governing

3076: equations are essentially determined by the functional

3077: ${\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )$.

3078: When the order parameters $(u_1,\cdots,u_m)$ are nonconserved

3079: variables, i.e., the integers

3080: $$\int_{\Omega}u_i(x,t)dx=a_i(t)\neq\text{constant}.$$

3081: then the time-dependent equations are given by

3082: \begin{equation}

3083: \left.

3084: \begin{aligned} 

3085: &\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial

3086: t}=-\beta_i\frac{\delta}{\delta u_i}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda

3087: )+\Phi_i(u,\nabla u,\lambda ),\\

3088: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0\ \ \ \

3089: (\text{or}\ u|_{\partial\Omega}=0),\\

3090: &u(x,0)=\varphi (x),

3091: \end{aligned}

3092: \right.\label{7.30}

3093: \end{equation}

3094: for any $1 \le i \le m$, 

3095: where $\delta /\delta u_i$ are the variational derivative,

3096: $\beta_i>0$ and $\Phi_i$ satisfy

3097: \begin{equation}

3098: \int_{\Omega}\sum_i\Phi_i\frac{\delta}{\delta

3099: u_i}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )dx=0.\label{7.31}

3100: \end{equation}

3101: The condition (\ref{7.31})  is  required by

3102: the Le Ch\^atelier principle. In the concrete problem, the terms

3103: $\Phi_i$ can be determined by physical laws and (\ref{7.31}).

3104: 

3105: When the order parameters are the number density and the system

3106: has no material exchange with the external, then $u_j$  $(1\leq j\leq

3107: m)$ are conserved, i.e.,

3108: \begin{equation}

3109: \int_{\Omega}u_j(x,t)dx=\text{constant}.\label{7.32}

3110: \end{equation}

3111: This conservation law requires a continuous equation

3112: \begin{equation}

3113: \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial t}=-\nabla\cdot J_j(u,\lambda

3114: ),\label{7.33}

3115: \end{equation}

3116: where $J_j(u,\lambda )$ is the flux of component $u_j$. In

3117: addition, $J_j$ satisfy

3118: \begin{equation}

3119: J_j=-k_j\nabla (\mu_j-\sum_{i\neq j}\mu_i),\label{7.34}

3120: \end{equation}

3121: where $\mu_l$ is the chemical potential of component $u_l$, 

3122: \begin{equation}

3123: \mu_j-\sum_{i\neq j}\mu_i=\frac{\delta}{\delta

3124: u_j}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )-\phi_j(u,\nabla u,\lambda

3125: ), \label{7.35}

3126: \end{equation}

3127: and  $\phi_j(u,\lambda )$ is a function depending on the other

3128: components $u_i$ $(i\neq j)$. When $m=1$, i.e., the system consists of

3129: two components $A$ and $B$, this term $\phi_j=0$. Thus, from

3130: (\ref{7.33})-(\ref{7.35}) we obtain the dynamical equations as

3131: follows

3132: \begin{equation}

3133: \left.

3134: \begin{aligned} &\frac{\partial u_j}{\partial

3135: t}=\beta_j\Delta\left[\frac{\delta}{\delta

3136: u_j}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )-\phi_j(u,\nabla u,\lambda )\right],\\

3137: &\frac{\partial u}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,\ \ \ \

3138: \frac{\partial\Delta u}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,\\

3139: &u(x,0)=\varphi (x),

3140: \end{aligned}

3141: \right.\label{7.36}

3142: \end{equation}

3143: for $1 \le j \le m$, 

3144: where $\beta_j>0$ are constants, $\phi_j$ satisfy

3145: \begin{equation}

3146: \int_{\Omega}\sum_j\Delta\phi_j\cdot\frac{\delta}{\delta

3147: u_j}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )dx=0.\label{7.37}

3148: \end{equation}

3149: 

3150: If the order parameters $(u_1,\cdots,u_k)$ are coupled to the

3151: conserved variables $(u_{k+1},\cdots,u_m)$, then the dynamical

3152: equations are

3153: \begin{equation}

3154: \left.

3155: \begin{aligned} 

3156: &\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial t}

3157:    =-\beta_i\frac{\delta}{\delta u_i}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda)+\Phi_i(u,\nabla u,\lambda ),\\

3158: & \frac{\partial u_j}{\partial t}

3159:   =\beta_j\Delta\left[\frac{\delta}{\delta u_j}{\mathcal{H}}(u,\lambda )

3160:     -\phi_j(u,\nabla u,\lambda )\right],\\

3161: &\frac{\partial u_i}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0\ \ \ \

3162: (\text{or}\ u_i|_{\partial\Omega}=0),\\

3163: &\frac{\partial u_j}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,\ \ \ \

3164: \frac{\partial\Delta u_j}{\partial n}|_{\partial\Omega}=0,\\

3165: &u(x,0)=\varphi (x).

3166: \end{aligned}

3167: \right.\label{7.38}

3168: \end{equation}

3169: for $1 \le i \le k$  and $k+1 \le j \le m$.

3170: 

3171: The model (\ref{7.38}) gives a general form of the governing

3172: equations to thermodynamic phase transitions.  Hence, the dynamics of

3173: equilibrium phase transition in statistic physics is based on the new Ginzburg-Landau formulation  (\ref{7.38}).

3174: 

3175: Physically, the initial value condition $u(0)=\varphi$ in

3176: (\ref{7.38}) stands for the fluctuation of system or perturbation

3177: from the external. Hence, $\varphi$ is generally small. However,

3178: we can not exclude the possibility of a bigger noise $\varphi$.

3179: 

3180: \bibliographystyle{siam}

3181: \def\cprime{$'$}

3182: \begin{thebibliography}{1}

3183: 

3184: \bibitem{CH57}

3185: {\sc J.~Cahn and J.~E. Hilliard}, {\em Free energy of a nonuniform system I.

3186:   interfacial energy}, J. Chemical Physics, 28 (1957), pp.~258--267.

3187: 

3188: \bibitem{langer71}

3189: {\sc J.~Langer}, {\em Theory of spinodal decomposition in allays}, Ann. of

3190:   Physics, 65 (1971), pp.~53--86.

3191: 

3192: \bibitem{b-book}

3193: {\sc T.~Ma and S.~Wang}, {\em Bifurcation theory and applications}, vol.~53 of

3194:   World Scientific Series on Nonlinear Science. Series A: Monographs and

3195:   Treatises, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd., Hackensack, NJ, 2005.

3196: 

3197: \bibitem{chinese-book}

3198: \leavevmode\vrule height 2pt depth -1.6pt width 23pt, {\em Stability and

3199:   Bifurcation of Nonlinear Evolutions Equations}, Science Press (in Chinese),

3200:   Beijing, 2007.

3201: 

3202: \bibitem{NS84}

3203: {\sc A.~Novick-Cohen and L.~A. Segel}, {\em Nonlinear aspects of the

3204:   {C}ahn-{H}illiard equation}, Phys. D, 10 (1984), pp.~277--298.

3205: 

3206: \bibitem{onuki}

3207: {\sc O.~Onuki}, {\em Phase transition dynamics}, Combridge Univ. Press.,

3208:   (2002).

3209: 

3210: \bibitem{reichl}

3211: {\sc L.~E. Reichl}, {\em A modern course in statistical physics}, A

3212:   Wiley-Interscience Publication, John Wiley \& Sons Inc., New York,

3213:   second~ed., 1998.

3214: 

3215: \end{thebibliography}

3216: 

3217: \end{document}

3218: