1: \documentclass[11pt]{article}

2: 

3: 

4: \usepackage{amssymb,amsmath,amsfonts,amsthm}

5: \usepackage{graphicx,psfrag}

6: 

7: 

8: \newcommand{\N}{{\mathbb N}}

9: \newcommand{\R}{{\mathbb R}}

10: \newcommand{\SP}{{\mathbb S}}

11: \newcommand{\W}{{\mathbb W}}

12: 

13: 

14: \newtheorem{thh}{Theorem}

15: \newtheorem{lemm}{Lemma}

16: \newtheorem{prop}{Proposition}

17: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}

18: \newtheorem{remarque}{Remark}

19: 

20: 

21: \setlength{\textwidth}{16cm}

22: \setlength{\textheight}{26cm}

23: \setlength{\oddsidemargin}{0cm}

24: \setlength{\evensidemargin}{0cm}

25: \setlength{\topmargin}{-1in}

26: 

27: 

28: 

29: 

30: 

31: 

32: \begin{document}

33: 

34: 

35: 

36: \title{Shock Profiles for Non Equilibrium Radiating Gases}

37: 

38: \author{Chunjin {\sc Lin}$^\dag$, Jean-Fran\c{c}ois {\sc Coulombel}$^{\dag \ddag}$, 

39: Thierry {\sc Goudon}$^{\dag \ddag}$\\

40: \\

41: {\small $\dag$ Team SIMPAF--INRIA Futurs \& Universit\'e Lille 1, 

42: Laboratoire Paul Painlev\'e, UMR CNRS 8524}\\

43: {\small Cit\'e scientifique, 59655 VILLENEUVE D'ASCQ Cedex, France}\\

44: {\small $\ddag$ CNRS}\\

45: {\small E-mails: {\tt chunjin.lin@math.univ-lille1.fr}, 

46: {\tt jfcoulom@math.univ-lille1.fr}},\\

47: {\small \tt thierry.goudon@math.univ-lille1.fr}}

48: \date{\today}

49: \maketitle

50: 

51: 

52: \begin{abstract}

53: We study a model of radiating gases that describes the interaction of an 

54: inviscid gas with photons. We show the existence of smooth traveling waves 

55: called 'shock profiles', when the strength of the shock is small. Moreover, 

56: we prove that the regularity of the traveling wave increases when the 

57: strength of the shock tends to zero.

58: \end{abstract}

59: 

60: 

61: 

62: 

63: 

64: 

65: \section{Introduction and main results}

66: 

67: 

68: 

69: We are interested in a system of PDEs describing astrophysical flows, where 

70: a gas interacts with radiation through energy exchanges. Similar questions 

71: arise in the modeling of reentry problems, or high temperature combustion 

72: phenomena. The gas is described by its density $\rho >0$, its bulk velocity 

73: $u \in \R$, and its specific total energy $E=e+u^2/2$, where $e$ stands for 

74: the specific internal energy. (Our analysis is restricted to a one-dimensional 

75: framework, but this is not a loss of generality, as shown below.) We consider 

76: a situation where the gas is not in thermodynamical equilibrium with the 

77: radiations, which are thus described by their own energy $n$. The evolution 

78: of the gas flow is governed by the system:

79: \begin{equation}

80: \label{eulerevol}

81: \begin{cases}

82: \partial_t \rho +\partial_x (\rho \, u)=0 \, ,& \\

83: \partial_t (\rho \, u) +\partial_x (\rho \, u^2+P)=0\, ,& \\

84: \partial_t (\rho \, E) +\partial_x (\rho \, E \, u+P \, u)=n-\theta^4 \, ,& 

85: \end{cases}

86: \end{equation}

87: where the right-hand side in the last equation accounts for energy exchanges 

88: with the radiations, $P$ being the pressure of the gas, and $\theta$ its 

89: temperature. Throughout the paper, we always assume that the gas obeys the 

90: perfect gas pressure law:

91: \begin{equation}

92: \label{pressure}

93: P=R \, \rho \, \theta =(\gamma-1) \, \rho \, e \, ,

94: \end{equation}

95: where $R$ is the perfect gas constant, and $\gamma>1$ is the ratio of the 

96: specific heats at constant pressure, and volume. This assumption yields many 

97: algebraic simplifications, but we believe that our results still hold for a 

98: general pressure law satisfying the usual requirements of thermodynamics. 

99: System \eqref{eulerevol} is completed by considering that radiations are 

100: described by a stationary diffusion regime that reads:

101: \begin{equation}

102: \label{diffn}

103: -\partial_{xx} n =\theta^4 -n \, .

104: \end{equation}

105: We detail in Appendix \ref{model} how the system \eqref{eulerevol}, \eqref{diffn} 

106: can be formally derived by asymptotics arguments, starting from a more complete 

107: system involving a kinetic equation for the specific intensity of radiation.

108: 

109: 

110: As a matter of fact, the operator $(1-\partial_{xx})$ can be explicitly 

111: inverted, and \eqref{diffn} can be recast as a convolution:

112: \begin{equation}

113: \label{diffn2}

114: n(t,x) =\dfrac{1}{2} \, \displaystyle \int_{\R} 

115: {\rm e}^{-|x-y|} \, \theta (t,y)^4 \, dy \, .

116: \end{equation}

117: Let us introduce the quantity:

118: \begin{equation}

119: \label{defq}

120: q(t,x) :=-\partial_x n \, (t,x)=\dfrac{1}{2} \displaystyle \int_{\R} 

121: {\rm e}^{-|x-y|} \, {\rm sgn}(x-y) \, \theta (t,y)^4 \, dy \, ,

122: \end{equation}

123: where sgn is the sign function:

124: \begin{equation*}

125: {\rm sgn} (x)=\begin{cases}

126: 1 &\text{if $x>0$,} \\

127: 0 &\text{if $x=0$,} \\

128: -1 &\text{if $x<0$.}

129: \end{cases}

130: \end{equation*}

131: The quantity $q$ can be interpreted as the radiative heat flux. Then, we 

132: can rewrite \eqref{eulerevol}, \eqref{diffn} as follows:

133: \begin{equation}

134: \label{Euler2}

135: \begin{cases}

136: \partial_t \rho +\partial_x (\rho \, u) =0\, ,& \\

137: \partial_t (\rho \, u) +\partial_x (\rho \, u^2+P)=0 \, ,& \\

138: \partial_t (\rho \, E) +\partial_x (\rho \, E \, u +P \, u +q) =0 \, ,& 

139: \end{cases}

140: \end{equation}

141: with $q$ given by \eqref{defq}. Recall that $E=e+u^2/2$, and $P$ is given 

142: by \eqref{pressure}.

143: 

144: 

145: In this paper, we address the question of the influence of the energy exchanges 

146: on the structure of shock waves. More precisely, let us consider given states at 

147: infinity $(\rho_\pm, u_\pm,e_\pm)$, and let us asume that:

148: \begin{equation}

149: \label{shock}

150: (\rho,u,e)(t,x) =\begin{cases}

151: (\rho_-,u_-,e_-) &\text{if $x<\sigma \, t$,} \\

152: (\rho_+,u_+,e_+) &\text{if $x>\sigma \, t$,}

153: \end{cases}

154: \end{equation}

155: is a shock wave, with speed $\sigma$, solution to the standard Euler 

156: equations (that is, system \eqref{Euler2} with $q \equiv 0$). We refer to 

157: \cite{lax,serrelivre,smoller} for a detailed study of shock waves for the 

158: Euler equations. The question we ask is the following: does there exist a 

159: traveling wave $(\rho,u,e)(x-\sigma t)$ solution to \eqref{Euler2}, with $q$ 

160: given by \eqref{defq}, that satisfies the asymptotic conditions:

161: \begin{equation}

162: \label{asym-cond}

163: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow \pm\infty} (\rho,u,e)(\xi) =(\rho_\pm,u_\pm,e_\pm) \, .

164: \end{equation}

165: In other words, we are concerned with the existence of a shock profile, and a 

166: natural expectation (at least for shocks of small amplitude) is that the step 

167: shock \eqref{shock} is smoothed into a continuous profile, due to the dissipation 

168: introduced by \eqref{diffn}. The analogous problem for the compressible Navier-Stokes 

169: system has been treated a long time ago, see \cite{gilbarg}, without any smallness 

170: assumption on the shock wave. Concerning radiative transfer, a formal analysis 

171: of shock profiles has been performed in \cite{HB}, together with rough numerical 

172: simulations. (We refer also to \cite{ZR,MM} for the physical background.) The 

173: main purpose of this work is to make the analysis of \cite{HB} rigorous. Since 

174: we are only concerned in this paper with the existence of shock profiles, and not 

175: with their stability, the problem is purely one-dimensional (due to the Galilean 

176: invariance of the Euler equations). This is why we have directly restricted to 

177: the one-dimensional case. However, the formal derivation of Appendix \ref{model} 

178: is made in several space dimensions.

179: 

180: 

181: Before stating our main results, let us mention that a simplified version 

182: of \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq} has been introduced, and studied in \cite{SchoTad} and later in

183: \cite{kawanishi,kawanishi2}. This 'baby-model' consists in a Burgers 

184: type equation:

185: \begin{equation*}

186: \partial_t u + \partial_x  \Big( \dfrac{u^2}{2} \Big)=-\partial_x q \, ,

187: \end{equation*}

188: coupled to the diffusion equation:

189: \begin{equation*}

190: -\partial_{xx} q+q=-\partial_x u \, .

191: \end{equation*}

192: These two equations can be seen as a scalar version of \eqref{Euler2}, 

193: \eqref{defq} since they can be recast as:

194: \begin{equation}

195: \label{Kburgers}

196: \partial_t u +\partial_x \Big( \dfrac{u^2}{2} \Big) =Ku-u \, ,

197: \end{equation} 

198: where $K$ is the integral operator already arising in \eqref{defq}:

199: \[

200: Ku (t,x)=\dfrac{1}{2} \displaystyle \int_{\R} {\rm e}^{-|x-y|} \, u(t,y) \, dy \, .

201: \]

202: The thorough study of \eqref{Kburgers} has motivated a lot of works; we mention 

203: in particular \cite{nishi,marcati,tadmor,serre}. Clearly \eqref{Kburgers} can be 

204: seen as a prototype for discussing \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq}; nevertheless, 

205: replacing \eqref{Euler2}, and \eqref{defq} by \eqref{Kburgers} has two important 

206: consequences: the equation becomes scalar, and the 'diffusion' $K-1$ applies to 

207: the unique unknown (while in \eqref{Euler2}, the 'diffusion' appears through the 

208: radiative heat flux $q$ only in the third equation). Our work is a first attempt 

209: to extend the known results for \eqref{Kburgers} to the more physical model 

210: \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq}.

211: 

212: 

213: Let us now state our main results. The first result deals with the existence 

214: of smooth shock profiles when the strength of the shock is small:

215: 

216: 

217: \begin{thh}

218: \label{exis}

219: Let $\gamma$ satisfy

220: \begin{equation*}

221: 1< \gamma <\dfrac{\sqrt{7}+1}{\sqrt{7}-1} \simeq 2.215 \, ,

222: \end{equation*}

223: and let $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$ be fixed. Then there exists a positive constant 

224: $\delta$ (that depends on $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, and $\gamma$) such that, for 

225: all state $(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)$ verifying:

226: \begin{itemize}

227: \item $\|(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)-(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)\| \le \delta$,

228: 

229: \item the function \eqref{shock} is a shock wave, with speed $\sigma$, for 

230: the (standard) Euler equations,

231: \end{itemize}

232: then there exists a $C^2$ traveling wave $(\rho,u,e)(x-\sigma t)$ solution 

233: to \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq}, \eqref{asym-cond}.

234: \end{thh}

235: 

236: 

237: As in the study of the 'baby-model' \eqref{Kburgers}, the existence of 

238: a smooth shock profile is linked to a smallness assumption on the shock 

239: strength, see \cite{kawanishi}. Here the smallness parameter $\delta$ 

240: may depend on the state $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, while for \eqref{Kburgers}, 

241: the smallness parameter is uniform (and even explicit!).

242: 

243: 

244: The restriction on the adiabatic constant $\gamma$ might be unnecessary, 

245: but it simplifies the proof, and it covers the main physical cases 

246: $1<\gamma \le 2$.

247: 

248: 

249: Our second result is also in the spirit of \cite{kawanishi}, and deals with 

250: the smoothness of the shock profile constructed in the previous Theorem:

251: 

252: 

253: \begin{thh}

254: \label{smooth}

255: Let $\gamma$ satisfy

256: \begin{equation*}

257: 1< \gamma < \dfrac{\sqrt{7}+1}{\sqrt{7}-1} \simeq 2.215 \, ,

258: \end{equation*}

259: and let $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$ be fixed. Then there exists a decreasing 

260: sequence of positive numbers $(\delta_n)_{n \in \N}$ (the sequence depends 

261: on $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, and $\gamma$) such that, for all $n\in \N$, and for 

262: all state $(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)$ verifying:

263: \begin{itemize}

264: \item $\|(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)-(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)\| \le \delta_n$,

265: 

266: \item the function \eqref{shock} is a shock wave, with speed $\sigma$, for 

267: the (standard) Euler equations,

268: \end{itemize}

269: then there exists a $C^{n+2}$ traveling wave $(\rho,u,e)(x-\sigma t)$ solution 

270: to \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq}, \eqref{asym-cond}.

271: \end{thh}

272: 

273: 

274: To a large extent, our analysis follows the arguments of \cite{HB}, \cite{SchoTad} and 

275: \cite{kawanishi}. The proof of Theorem \ref{exis} is presented in Section 

276: \ref{Proof}, while Section \ref{moresmooth} is devoted to the proof of 

277: Theorem \ref{smooth}. The investigation of strong shocks, as well as 

278: stability issues will be addressed in a forthcoming work.

279: 

280: 

281: 

282: 

283: 

284: 

285: \section{Existence of smooth shock profiles}

286: \label{Proof}

287: 

288: 

289: 

290: In this section, we prove Theorem \ref{exis}. We first recall some basic facts 

291: on shock waves for the Euler equations. Then, we make some transformations on 

292: the traveling wave equation. Eventually, we prove Theorem \ref{exis} by using 

293: an auxiliary system of Ordinary Differential Equations, that is introduced and 

294: studied in the last paragraph of this section.

295: 

296: 

297: 

298: 

299: 

300: 

301: \subsection{Shock wave solutions to the Euler equations}

302: 

303: 

304: 

305: In this paragraph, we recall some basic facts about the (entropic) shock 

306: wave solutions to the Euler equations:

307: \begin{equation*}

308: \begin{cases}

309: \partial_t \rho +\partial_x (\rho \, u) =0 \, ,\\

310: \partial_t (\rho \, u) +\partial_x (\rho \, u^2 +P) =0 \, ,\\

311: \partial_t (\rho \, E) +\partial_x (\rho \, E \, u+ P \, u) = 0 \, ,

312: \end{cases}

313: \end{equation*}

314: where $P$, and $E$ are given as in the introduction. We refer to 

315: \cite{lax,serrelivre,smoller} for all the details, and omit the calculations. 

316: In all what follows, we only consider shock waves that satisfy Lax shock 

317: inequalities. We shall thus speak of $1$-shock waves, or $3$-shock waves.

318: 

319: 

320: We consider a fixed 'left' state $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$. Then the 'right' states 

321: $(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)$ such that $(\rho_\pm,u_\pm,e_\pm)$ define a $1$-shock 

322: wave, with speed $\sigma$, is a half-curve initiating at $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$. 

323: Introducing the notation $v_\pm=u_\pm -\sigma$, the Rankine-Hugoniot jump 

324: conditions can be rewritten as:

325: \begin{equation}

326: \label{defjC1C2}

327: \begin{cases}

328: \rho_+ \, v_+ =\rho_- \, v_- =:j \, ,\\

329: \rho_+ \, v_+^2 +P_+ =\rho_- \, v_-^2 +P_- =:j \, C_1 \, ,\\

330: \rho_+ \, v_+ \big( e_+ +\dfrac{v_+^2}{2} \big) +P_+ \, v_+ 

331: =\rho_- \, v_- \big( e_- +\dfrac{v_-^2}{2} \big) +P_- \, v_- =:j \, C_2 \, .

332: \end{cases}

333: \end{equation}

334: Observe that $v_-$ does not only depend on the 'left' state $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, 

335: but also on $(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)$, because $v_-$ is defined with the help of the 

336: shock speed $\sigma$. Consequently, the constants $j$, $C_1$, and $C_2$ depend 

337: on both $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, and $(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)$.

338: 

339: 

340: For $1$-shocks, that is when the inequalities:

341: \begin{equation*}

342: u_+ -c_+ < \sigma <u_+ \, ,\quad \sigma < u_- -c_- \, ,

343: \end{equation*}

344: are satisfied ($c$ denotes the sound speed), all quantities $j$, $C_1$, and 

345: $C_2$ are positive. Moreover, when the strength of the shock tends to zero, 

346: that is when $(\rho_+,u_+,e_+)$ tends to $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, one has

347: \begin{equation}

348: \label{asymp}

349: \begin{pmatrix}

350: \sigma \\

351: j \\

352: C_1 \\

353: C_2 \end{pmatrix} \longrightarrow \begin{pmatrix}

354: u_- - c_- \\

355: \rho_- \, c_- \\

356: c_- +(\gamma-1) e_-/c_- \\

357: \gamma \, e_- +c_-^2/2 \end{pmatrix} \, .

358: \end{equation}

359: Consequently, when the strength of the shock is small, all quantities 

360: $j$, $C_1$, $C_2$ are bounded away from zero. Recall also that $1$-shocks 

361: are compressive, in the sense that $\rho_+ >\rho_-$. This inequality 

362: immediately implies that $0<v_+ <v_-$. Eventually, the strength of the 

363: shock tends to zero if, and only if $u_+$ tends to $u_-$ (in that case, 

364: we also have $\rho_+ \rightarrow \rho_-$, and $e_+ \rightarrow e_-$ 

365: because of the Rankine-Hugoniot jump conditions).

366: 

367: 

368: In all what follows, we limit our discussion to the case of $1$-shocks 

369: for simplicity, but the extension to $3$-shocks is immediate.

370: 

371: 

372: 

373: 

374: 

375: 

376: \subsection{Reduction of the traveling wave equation}

377: 

378: 

379: 

380: In this paragraph, we derive, and transform the equation satisfied by 

381: traveling wave solutions to \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq}. A traveling 

382: wave solution to \eqref{Euler2}, \eqref{defq} with speed $\sigma$ is a 

383: solution $(\rho,u,e)(x-\sigma t)$. For such solutions, the radiative 

384: heat flux $q$ also depends on the sole variable $x-\sigma t$:

385: \begin{equation*}

386: q(x-\sigma t)=\dfrac{1}{2} \displaystyle \int_{\R} 

387: {\rm e}^{-|x-\sigma t-y|} \, {\rm sgn}(x-\sigma t-y) \, \theta (y)^4 \, dy \, ,

388: \end{equation*}

389: and \eqref{Euler2} reads:

390: \begin{equation*}

391: \begin{cases}

392: (\rho\, (u-\sigma))' =0 \, ,\\

393: (\rho \, u \, (u-\sigma)+(\gamma-1) \, \rho \, e)' =0 \, ,\\

394: (\rho \, (e+\frac{u^2}{2}) \, (u-\sigma)+(\gamma-1) \, \rho \, e \, u+q)' =0 \, ,

395: \end{cases}

396: \end{equation*}

397: where $'$ denotes differentiation with respect to the variable 

398: $\xi=x-\sigma t$. Introducing the new unknown $v=u-\sigma$, the 

399: above system is easily seen to be equivalent to:

400: \begin{equation}

401: \label{Euler-xi}

402: \begin{cases}

403: (\rho \, v)'=0 \, ,\\

404: (\rho \, v^2+(\gamma-1)\, \rho \, e)' =0 \, ,\\

405: (\rho \, v \, (e+\frac{v^2}{2})+(\gamma-1) \, \rho \, v \, e+q)' =0 \, .

406: \end{cases}

407: \end{equation}

408: Since we are looking for a shock profile, the traveling wave solution 

409: should also satisfy:

410: \begin{equation}

411: \label{asym-cond2}

412: \lim_{\xi\to \pm\infty} (\rho,v,e) =(\rho_{\pm},v_{\pm},e_{\pm}) \, ,

413: \end{equation}

414: where $v_{\pm}=u_{\pm}-\sigma$, and $(\rho_\pm,u_\pm,e_\pm)$ defines a 

415: $1$-shock wave with speed $\sigma$ for the Euler equations. Notice that 

416: the quantity $a=|u_+-u_-|/2$, that measures the strength of the shock, 

417: is invariant with respect to our change of velocity, that is 

418: $a=|u_+-u_-|/2=|v_+-v_-|/2$. Recall also that for $1$-shocks, 

419: there holds $v_->v_+>0$.

420: 

421: 

422: Observing that we have:

423: \begin{equation*}

424: q(\xi)=\dfrac{1}{2} \displaystyle \int_0^{+\infty} {\rm e}^{-y} \, 

425: \big( \theta (\xi-y)^4 -\theta (\xi+y)^4 \big) \, dy \, ,

426: \end{equation*}

427: we conclude that $q$ tends to zero at $\pm \infty$ by Lebesgue's Theorem 

428: (because $\theta$ is necessarily bounded since it has finite limits at 

429: $\pm \infty$). We can thus integrate the system 

430: \eqref{Euler-xi}-\eqref{asym-cond2} once, and \eqref{Euler-xi} reads 

431: equivalently:

432: \begin{equation}

433: \label{system}

434: \begin{cases}

435: (\rho \, v)(\xi)=j \, ,\\

436: (\rho \, v^2+(\gamma-1) \, \rho \, e)(\xi)=j \, C_1 \, ,\\

437: (\rho \, v \, (e+\frac{v^2}{2})+(\gamma-1) \, \rho \, v \, e+q)(\xi)=j \, C_2 \, ,

438: \end{cases}

439: \end{equation}

440: where the constants $j,$ $C_1$ and $C_2$ are given by the Rankine-Hugoniot 

441: conditions \eqref{defjC1C2}. For small shocks, the positive constants $j$, 

442: $C_1$, $C_2$ have the asymptotic behavior \eqref{asymp}.

443: 

444: 

445: From the two first equations of \eqref{system}, we derive the relations:

446: \begin{equation*}

447: \rho (\xi)=\dfrac{j}{v(\xi)} \, ,\quad 

448: e(\xi)=\dfrac{(C_1-v(\xi)) \, v(\xi)}{\gamma-1} \, .

449: \end{equation*}

450: The third equation of \eqref{system} thus reduces to:

451: \begin{equation}

452: \label{v-q}

453: v(\xi)^2 -\dfrac{2 \, \gamma \, C_1}{\gamma+1} \, v(\xi) 

454: +\dfrac{2 \, (\gamma-1) \, C_2}{\gamma+1} 

455: =\dfrac{2 \, (\gamma-1)}{j \, (\gamma+1)} \, q(\xi) \, .

456: \end{equation}

457: Using the equation of state \eqref{pressure}, as well as the second equation 

458: of \eqref{system}, we get:

459: \begin{equation*}

460: \theta (\xi)=\dfrac{(\gamma-1) \, e(\xi)}{R} =\dfrac{(C_1-v(\xi)) \, v(\xi)}{R} \, .

461: \end{equation*}

462: Consequently, \eqref{v-q} can be recast as an integral equation with a single 

463: unknown function $v$:

464: \begin{equation}

465: \label{eqv}

466: v(\xi)^2 -\dfrac{2 \, \gamma \, C_1}{\gamma+1} \, v(\xi) 

467: +\dfrac{2 \, (\gamma-1) \, C_2}{\gamma+1} 

468: =\dfrac{(\gamma-1)}{j \, (\gamma+1) \, R^4} \int_\R {\rm e}^{-|\xi-y|} \, 

469: {\rm sgn} (\xi-y) \, v(y)^4 (C_1-v(y))^4 \, dy \, .

470: \end{equation}

471: We are searching for a solution $v$ to \eqref{eqv}, that satisfies the asymptotic 

472: conditions $v(\xi)\rightarrow v_\pm$, as $\xi \rightarrow \pm \infty$.

473: 

474: 

475: \begin{remarque}

476: If we find a $C^2$ solution $v$ to \eqref{eqv} that does not vanish, and that 

477: satisfies $v(\xi) \to v_{\pm}$ as $\xi \to \pm \infty$, then we obtain a $C^2$ 

478: shock profile $(\rho,u,e)$ by simply setting:

479: \begin{equation*}

480: \rho(\xi)=\dfrac{j}{v(\xi)} \, ,\quad u(\xi)=v(\xi)+\sigma \, ,\quad 

481: e(\xi)=\dfrac{(C_1-v(\xi))\, v(\xi)}{\gamma-1} \, .

482: \end{equation*}

483: In particular, if $v(\xi) \in [v_+,v_-]$ for all $\xi$, then $v$ does not vanish.

484: \end{remarque}

485: 

486: 

487: \begin{remarque}

488: Since the heat flux $q$ vanishes at $\pm \infty$, \eqref{eqv} can be also 

489: rewritten as:

490: \begin{equation*}

491: (v(\xi)-v_-)(v(\xi)-v_+) =

492: \dfrac{(\gamma-1)}{j \, (\gamma+1) \, R^4} \int_\R {\rm e}^{-|\xi-y|} \, 

493: {\rm sgn} (\xi-y) \, v(y)^4 \, (C_1-v(y))^4 \, dy \, .

494: \end{equation*}

495: \end{remarque}

496: 

497: 

498: We are going to rewrite \eqref{eqv} as a second order differential equation, 

499: that will be easier to study than the integral equation \eqref{eqv}. Indeed, 

500: assuming that $v$ is a $C^2$ function of $\xi$, and differentiating twice 

501: \eqref{eqv} with respect to $\xi$, we get (see \cite{HB} for the details of 

502: the computations):

503: \begin{equation}

504: \label{eqv1}

505: (v-\dfrac{\gamma \, C_1}{\gamma+1}) \, v''+(v')^2 

506: -\dfrac{4 \, (\gamma-1)}{j \, (\gamma+1) \, R^4} \, (C_1-v)^3 \, v^3 

507: \, (C_1-2v) \, v' -\dfrac{1}{2} \, (v-v_-) \, (v-v_+) =0 \, .

508: \end{equation}

509: Conversely, if $v$ is a $C^2$ solution to \eqref{eqv1} that satisfies 

510: $v(\xi) \to v_{\pm}$ as $\xi \to \pm \infty$, then $v$ is also a solution 

511: to \eqref{eqv}. If in addition $v$ takes its values in the interval 

512: $[v_+,v_-]$, then we can construct a $C^2$ shock profile, and thus prove 

513: Theorem \ref{exis}.

514: 

515: 

516: The differential equation \eqref{eqv1} can be simplified by introducing the 

517: new unknown function $\hat{v}=v-(v_- +v_+)/2$, and by rewriting the second 

518: order differential equation as a first order system:

519: \begin{equation}

520: \label{ode}

521: \left\{

522: \begin{array}{lll}

523: \hat{v}' &=& w \, ,\\

524: \hat{v} \, w' &=& -w^2-f(\hat{v}) \, w+\dfrac{\hat{v}^2-a^2}{2} \, ,

525: \end{array}

526: \right.

527: \end{equation}

528: where $f$ is the following polynomial function:

529: \begin{equation}

530: \label{fun f}

531: f(\hat{v})=\dfrac{4 \, (\gamma-1)}{j \, R^4 \, (\gamma+1)} \, 

532: \left( \dfrac{C_1}{\gamma+1}-\hat{v} \right)^3 \, 

533: \left( \hat{v}+\dfrac{\gamma\, C_1}{\gamma+1} \right)^3 \, 

534: \left( 2\hat{v}+\dfrac{(\gamma-1) \, C_1}{\gamma+1} \right) \, .

535: \end{equation}

536: We recall that $a=|v_- -v_+|/2$, and that $a$ measures the strength of the 

537: shock.

538: 

539: 

540: \begin{remarque}

541: \label{f0}

542: The asymptotic behavior \eqref{asymp} of $j$, $C_1$, and $C_2$ shows that when 

543: the strength of the shock tends to zero ($a \to 0^+$), the limit of $f(0)$ is 

544: given by:

545: \begin{equation*}

546: f(0) \rightarrow \dfrac{4 \, \gamma^3 \, (\gamma -1)^2}{R^4 \, (\gamma +1)^8} 

547: \, \dfrac{(c_- +(\gamma-1) \, \frac{e_-}{c_-})^7}{\rho_- \, c_-} >0 \, .

548: \end{equation*}

549: \end{remarque}

550: 

551: 

552: Since $v_+ <v_-$ for a $1$-shock, we are searching for a solution to \eqref{ode} 

553: that is defined on all $\R$, and that satisfies:

554: \begin{equation}

555: \label{asy-ode}

556: \lim_{\xi \to -\infty} (\hat{v},w)(\xi) = (a,0) \, ,\quad 

557: \lim_{\xi \to +\infty} (\hat{v},w)(\xi) = (-a,0) \, .

558: \end{equation}

559: To prove Theorem \ref{exis}, we are thus reduced to showing the existence 

560: of a heteroclinic orbit for \eqref{ode} that connects the stationary solutions 

561: $(\pm a,0)$. Due to the previous transformation $\hat{v}=v-(v_-+v_+)/2$, if 

562: $\hat{v}$ takes its values in $[-a,a]$, then $v=\hat{v}+(v_-+v_+)/2$ will 

563: take its values in the interval $[v_+,v_-]$, and therefore will not vanish.

564: 

565: 

566: \begin{remarque}

567: The system \eqref{ode} is 'singular' at $\hat{v}=0$. Nevertheless, we are 

568: searching for a smooth solution connecting $(\pm a,0)$, so that $\hat{v}$ 

569: vanishes in at least one point. Because $w'=\hat{v}''$ should also have a 

570: limit at this point, a $C^2$ shock profile can exist only if the equation:

571: \begin{equation*}

572: w^2 +f(0) \, w +\dfrac{a^2}{2} =0 \, ,

573: \end{equation*}

574: has real roots. The corresponding discriminant condition turns out to be 

575: much less simple than the one found in \cite{kawanishi} for the 'baby model' 

576: \eqref{Kburgers}. (In particular, $f(0)$ depends on the shock through the 

577: constants $j$, and $C_1$). This is a first 'nonexplicit' restriction on 

578: the shock strength to derive the existence of a smooth shock profile.

579: \end{remarque}

580: 

581: 

582: Due to the singular nature of the system \eqref{ode} at $\hat{v}=0$, it is 

583: more convenient to work on an auxiliary system of ODEs, where the singularity 

584: has been eliminated (at least formally) thanks to a change of variables. This 

585: procedure was already used in \cite{kawanishi}. In the next paragraph, we 

586: shall introduce this auxiliary system, and complete the proof of Theorem 

587: \ref{exis}.

588: 

589: 

590: 

591: 

592: 

593: 

594: \subsection{Existence of a heteroclinic orbit}

595: 

596: 

597: 

598: We begin with a result on an auxiliary system of ODEs, where the singularity 

599: at $\hat{v}=0$ has been eliminated:

600: 

601: 

602: \begin{prop}

603: \label{lem}

604: Assume that $\gamma$ satisfies $1<\gamma<(\sqrt{7}+1)/(\sqrt{7}-1)$, and 

605: consider the following system of ODEs:

606: \begin{equation}

607: \label{ode-ref}

608: \left\{

609: \begin{array}{rcl}

610: V' & = & V\, W \, ,\\

611: W' & = & -W^2-f(V) \, W+\dfrac{(V^2-a^2)}{2} \, .

612: \end{array}

613: \right.

614: \end{equation}

615: There exists a positive constant $a_0$, that depends only on 

616: $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, and $\gamma$ such that if the shock strength $a$ 

617: satisfies $a\in (0,a_0]$, the following properties hold:

618: \begin{itemize}

619: \item $f(0)^2-2a^2>0$, and we define $w_0 := \big( 

620: -f(0)+\sqrt{f(0)^2-2a^2} \big) /2 <0$.

621: 

622: \item There exists a solution $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$ to \eqref{ode-ref} that 

623: is defined on all $\R$, and that satisfies

624: \begin{equation*}

625: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow -\infty} (V_\flat,W_\flat)(\eta) =(a,0) \, ,\quad 

626: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} (V_\flat,W_\flat)(\eta) =(0,w_0) \, .

627: \end{equation*}

628: Furthermore, $V_\flat$ is decreasing, and the convergence of $V_\flat$ to 

629: $0$ as $\eta \rightarrow +\infty$ is exponential.

630: 

631: 

632: \item There exists a solution $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ to \eqref{ode-ref} that 

633: is defined on all $\R$, and that satisfies

634: \begin{equation*}

635: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow -\infty} (V_\sharp,W_\sharp)(\eta) =(-a,0) \, ,\quad 

636: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} (V_\sharp,W_\sharp)(\eta) =(0,w_0) \, .

637: \end{equation*}

638: Furthermore, $V_\sharp$ is increasing, and the convergence of $V_\sharp$ to 

639: $0$ as $\eta \rightarrow +\infty$ is exponential.

640: \end{itemize}

641: \end{prop}

642: 

643: 

644: Assuming that the result of Proposition \ref{lem} holds, the existence of 

645: a heteroclinic orbit for \eqref{ode} connecting $(\pm a,0)$ can be derived 

646: by following the analysis of \cite{SchoTad, kawanishi}. We briefly recall the method. 

647: Using the solution $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$, we introduce the change of variable:

648: $$

649: \Xi_\flat (\eta) = -\int_{\eta}^{+\infty} V_\flat (\zeta) \, d\zeta \, .

650: $$

651: Since $V_\flat$ tends to $0$ exponentially as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$, 

652: $\Xi_\flat$ is well-defined, and it is an increasing $C^\infty$ diffeomorphism 

653: from $\R$ to $(-\infty,0)$. Then $(\hat{v}_\flat,w_\flat) :=(V_\flat,W_\flat) 

654: \circ \Xi_\flat^{-1}$ is a $C^\infty$ solution to \eqref{ode} on the interval 

655: $(-\infty,0)$, that satisfies:

656: \begin{equation*}

657: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow -\infty} (\hat{v}_\flat,w_\flat)(\xi) =(a,0) \, ,\quad 

658: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^-} (\hat{v}_\flat,w_\flat)(\xi) =(0,w_0) \, .

659: \end{equation*}

660: Similarly, with the help of the solution $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ we can construct 

661: a $C^\infty$, decreasing diffeomorphism $\Xi_\sharp$ from $\R$ to $(0,+\infty)$, 

662: and a $C^\infty$ solution $(\hat{v}_\sharp,w_\sharp)$ to \eqref{ode} on the interval 

663: $(0,+\infty)$. This solution $(\hat{v}_\sharp,w_\sharp)$ connects $(0,w_0)$ and 

664: $(-a,0)$, as $\xi$ varies from $0^+$ to $+\infty$. Let us now 'glue' the solutions 

665: $(\hat{v}_\flat,w_\flat)$, and $(\hat{v}_\sharp,w_\sharp)$, by defining:

666: \begin{equation}

667: \label{defsolution}

668: (\hat{v},w) (\xi) :=\begin{cases}

669: (\hat{v}_\flat,w_\flat) (\xi) &\text{if $\xi<0$,}\\

670: (\hat{v}_\sharp,w_\sharp) (\xi) &\text{if $\xi>0$,}

671: \end{cases}

672: \end{equation}

673: and extend the functions $\hat{v}$, and $w$ at $0$ by setting 

674: $(\hat{v},w)(0)=(0,w_0)$. In this way, $\hat{v}$, and $w$ are continuous 

675: on $\R$, and $C^\infty$ on $\R \setminus \{ 0\}$. It remains to show that 

676: $\hat{v} \in C^2(\R)$, that $(\hat{v},w)$ solves \eqref{ode} on $\R$, and 

677: that $\hat{v}$ takes its values in $(-a,a)$.

678: 

679: 

680: Observe first of all that $\hat{v}$ is a decreasing function, because of 

681: the monotonicity properties of $V_\flat,V_\sharp,\Xi_\flat,\Xi_\sharp$. Using 

682: the asymptotic behavior of $V_\flat$, $V_\sharp$ at $-\infty$, we get that 

683: $\hat{v}(\xi) \in (-a,a)$ for all $\xi \in \R$.

684: 

685: 

686: Let us now note that the above construction of $(\hat{v},w)$ shows that 

687: $(\hat{v},w)$ is a solution to \eqref{ode} on $\R \setminus \{ 0\}$. In 

688: particular, $\hat{v}' (\xi)=w(\xi)$ if $\xi \neq 0$. Moreover, $w$ is 

689: continuous on $\R$, so $\hat{v} \in C^1(\R)$, and $\hat{v}'(0)=w(0)=w_0$. 

690: To prove that $\hat{v}\in C^2(\R)$, it is sufficient to show that $w\in 

691: C^1(\R)$, which is equivalent to showing that $w'$ has a limit at $0$ 

692: (because we already know that $w$ is $C^\infty$ on $\R \setminus \{ 0\}$). 

693: To prove that $w'$ has a limit at $0$, we are going to study the asymptotic 

694: behavior of $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$, and $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ at $+\infty$. 

695: More precisely, let us denote $U(V,W)$ the vector field associated to the 

696: ODE \eqref{ode-ref}:

697: \begin{equation}

698: \label{defU}

699: U(V,W)=\begin{pmatrix}

700: V \, W \\

701: -W^2- f(V) \, W+\dfrac{(V^2-a^2)}{2} \end{pmatrix} \, ,

702: \end{equation}

703: where $f$ is given by \eqref{fun f}. The Jacobian matrix of $U$ at 

704: $(0,w_0)$ is:

705: \begin{equation*}

706: \begin{pmatrix}

707: w_0 & 0 \\

708: -f'(0) \, w_0 & -2\, w_0-f(0) \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix}

709: \lambda_1^{(0)} & 0 \\

710: b_0 & \lambda_2^{(0)} \end{pmatrix} \, .

711: \end{equation*}

712: For $a$ sufficiently small, one checks that $\lambda_2^{(0)}<\lambda_1^{(0)}<0$ 

713: (see Proposition \ref{lem} for the definition of $w_0$). The eigenvectors 

714: corresponding to the eigenvalues $\lambda_1^{(0)}$ and $\lambda_2^{(0)}$ are:

715: \begin{equation*}

716: e_1^{(0)}=\begin{pmatrix}

717: f(0)+3 \, w_0\\

718: b_0 \end{pmatrix} \, ,\quad e_2^{(0)}=\begin{pmatrix}

719: 0\\ 

720: 1 \end{pmatrix} \, .

721: \end{equation*}

722: The standard theory of autonomous ODEs, see e.g. \cite{pontriaguine}, shows that 

723: there are exactly two solutions to \eqref{ode-ref} that tend to $(0,w_0)$ as 

724: $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$, and that are tangent to the straight line $(0,w_0) 

725: +\R \, e_2^{(0)}$. Moreover, all the other solutions to \eqref{ode-ref} that 

726: tend to $(0,w_0)$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$ are tangent to the straight line 

727: $(0,w_0) +\R \, e_1^{(0)}$. Now, it is rather simple to see that the two solutions 

728: to \eqref{ode-ref} that tend to $(0,w_0)$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$, and that 

729: are tangent to the straight line $(0,w_0) +\R \, e_2^{(0)}$, satisfy 

730: $V \equiv 0$, and:

731: \begin{equation*}

732: W'=-W^2-f(0) \, W -\dfrac{a^2}{2} \, .

733: \end{equation*}

734: Because the solutions $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$, and $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ given by 

735: Proposition \ref{lem} cannot satisfy $V_\flat \equiv 0$, and $V_\sharp \equiv 0$, 

736: we can conclude that the solutions $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$, and $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ 

737: are tangent to $(0,w_0) +\R \, e_1^{(0)}$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$. In 

738: particular, this yields:

739: \begin{equation}

740: \label{asympderiv}

741: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_\flat' (\eta)}{V_\flat' (\eta)} 

742: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_\sharp' (\eta)}{V_\sharp' (\eta)} 

743: =\dfrac{-f'(0) \, w_0}{f(0)+3 \, w_0} \, .

744: \end{equation}

745: (A quick verification shows that $f(0)+3 \, w_0>0$ for small enough $a$.) 

746: From the construction of the solutions $(\hat{v}_\flat,w_\flat)$, and 

747: $(\hat{v}_\sharp,w_\sharp)$, we get:

748: \begin{equation*}

749: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^-} w_\flat' (\xi) 

750: =\lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^+} w_\sharp' (\xi) 

751: =\dfrac{-f'(0) \, w_0^2}{f(0)+3 \, w_0} \, .

752: \end{equation*}

753: As a consequence, when $a$ is small enough, $w \in C^1(\R)$, and therefore 

754: $\hat{v} \in C^2(\R)$. Moreover, $(\hat{v},w)$ solves \eqref{ode} on 

755: $\R \setminus \{ 0\}$, so by continuity, it solves \eqref{ode} on $\R$. 

756: This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{exis}, provided that the result 

757: of Proposition \ref{lem} holds.

758: 

759: 

760: 

761: 

762: 

763: 

764: \subsection{Proof of Proposition \ref{lem}}

765: 

766: 

767: 

768: In this paragraph, we prove Proposition \ref{lem}, which will complete the 

769: proof of Theorem \ref{exis}. At first, we define the set:

770: $$

771: P = \Big\{ (V,W) | V \in [-a,a], W^2+f(V) \, W-\dfrac{V^2-a^2}{2}=0 \Big\} \, ,

772: $$

773: so that the points $(\pm a,0)$ belong to $P$. The following Lemma gives a 

774: description of $P$ for $a>0$ small enough. We refer to figure \ref{K} for 

775: a schematic picture.

776: 

777: 

778: \begin{figure}

779: \centering

780: \psfrag{A}{$a$}

781: \psfrag{B}{$-a$}

782: \psfrag{C}{$V$}

783: \psfrag{D}{$W$}

784: \psfrag{E}{$\overline{V}$}

785: \psfrag{P1}{$P_1$}

786: \psfrag{P2}{$P_2$}

787: \psfrag{w0}{$w_0$}

788: \includegraphics{EnsembleP.eps}

789: \caption{The set $P =P_1 \cup P_2$.}

790: \label{K}

791: \end{figure}

792: 

793: 

794: \begin{lemm}

795: \label{geo}

796: Assume that $1 < \gamma < (\sqrt{7}+1)/(\sqrt{7}-1)$. Then there exists 

797: a constant $a_0>0$, that only depends on $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$ and $\gamma$ 

798: such that if the shock strength $a$ satisfies $a\in (0,a_0]$, we have the 

799: following results:

800: \begin{itemize}

801: \item For all $V \in [-a,a]$, $f(V)^2+2\, (V^2-a^2)>0$. We can 

802: thus define

803: \begin{align*}

804: \forall \, V \in [-a,a] \, ,\quad 

805: \W_1(V) &= \dfrac{-f(V)+\sqrt{f(V)^2 +2\, (V^2-a^2)}}{2} \, ,\\

806: \W_2(V) &= \dfrac{-f(V)-\sqrt{f(V)^2 +2\, (V^2-a^2)}}{2} \, .

807: \end{align*}

808: 

809: \item $P = P_1\cup P_2$, where $P_1$ and $P_2$ are two curves defined by

810: $$

811: P_1 =\big\{ (V,\W_1(V)) | V \in [-a,a] \big\} \, , \quad 

812: P_2 =\big\{ (V,\W_2(V)) | V \in [-a,a] \big\} \, ,

813: $$

814: so that the points $(\pm a,0)$, and $(0,w_0)$ belong to $P_1$.

815: 

816: \item There exists a unique point $\overline{V} \in \, (-a,0)$ such that 

817: $\W_1$ is increasing on the interval $[\overline{V},a]$, and $\W_1$ is 

818: decreasing on the interval $[-a,\overline{V}]$.

819: 

820: \item For all $V \in [\overline{V},0]$, one has 

821: $\W_2(V) < \W_1(\overline{V})$.

822: \end{itemize}

823: \end{lemm}

824: 

825: 

826: \begin{proof}

827: Let us first define a function $\Delta$ by setting:

828: \begin{equation*}

829: \Delta (V) := f(V)^2 +2 \, (V^2-a^2) \, .

830: \end{equation*}

831: Using \eqref{asymp}, for $a$ small enough, we have:

832: \begin{equation*}

833: \dfrac{C_1}{\gamma +1} -a \ge \kappa >0 \, ,\quad 

834: \dfrac{\gamma \, C_1}{\gamma +1} -a \ge \kappa >0 \, ,\quad 

835: \dfrac{(\gamma -1)\, C_1}{\gamma +1} -2a \ge \kappa >0 \, ,

836: \end{equation*}

837: where $\kappa$ is a positive constant that only depends on $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$ 

838: and $\gamma$. Moreover, \eqref{asymp} also shows that $j \ge \kappa$ for 

839: $a \in (0,a_0]$, up to restricting $\kappa$. Consequently, there exist 

840: $a_0>0$, and $\kappa>0$ such that for $a \in (0,a_0]$, we have $f(V) \ge \kappa$, 

841: and $\Delta (V) \ge \kappa$ for all $V\in [-a,a]$. This directly shows that 

842: the set $P$ is the union of the two curves $P_1$, and $P_2$. It is rather 

843: clear from the definition of $P_1$ that $(\pm a,0)$, and $(0,w_0)$ belong 

844: to $P_1$ (recall that $w_0$ is defined in Proposition \ref{lem}). Observe 

845: also that $\W_2(V) <\W_1 (V) \le 0$ for $V \in [-a,a]$, and $\W_1(V)<0$ if 

846: $V \in (-a,a)$.

847: 

848: 

849: The functions $\W_1$, and $\W_2$ are $C^\infty$ on $[-a,a]$. Moreover, we 

850: compute the relation:

851: \begin{equation}

852: \label{derivW1}

853: \forall \, V \in [-a,a] \, ,\quad 

854: \sqrt{\Delta (V)} \, \W_1'(V) =V-\W_1(V) \, f'(V) \, ,

855: \end{equation}

856: and from \eqref{fun f}, we also compute

857: \begin{multline}

858: \label{derivf}

859: f'(V)=\dfrac{14 \, (\gamma-1)}{j \, R^4 \, (\gamma+1)} \\

860: \left( \dfrac{C_1}{\gamma+1}-\hat{v} \right)^2 \, 

861: \left( \hat{v}+\dfrac{\gamma\, C_1}{\gamma+1} \right)^2 \, 

862: \left( 2\hat{v}+\dfrac{(\gamma-1) \, C_1}{\gamma+1} +\dfrac{C_1}{\sqrt{7}} \right) 

863: \left( -2\hat{v}-\dfrac{(\gamma-1) \, C_1}{\gamma+1} +\dfrac{C_1}{\sqrt{7}} \right) \, .

864: \end{multline}

865: As we have done for $f$, and $\Delta$, a careful analysis shows that for 

866: $1<\gamma<(\sqrt{7}+1)/(\sqrt{7}-1)$, and for $a$ small enough, one has 

867: $f'(V) \ge \kappa>0$ for all $V \in [-a,a]$, because each term in the product 

868: \eqref{derivf} is positive. Using this information in \eqref{derivW1}, we can 

869: already conclude that $\W_1$ is increasing on the interval $[0,a]$ (see figure 

870: \ref{K}). Moreover, the relation \eqref{derivW1} also shows that $\W'_1(0)>0$, 

871: and $\W'_1(-a)<0$. Consequently, there exists some $\overline{V} \in (-a,0)$ 

872: such that $\W_1'(\overline{V})=0$. Let us prove that $\overline{V}$ is the only 

873: zero of $\W_1'$. We claim that it is sufficient to show the following property:

874: \begin{equation}

875: \label{property}

876: \W_1' (V) =0 \Longrightarrow \W_1'' (V) >0 \, .

877: \end{equation}

878: Indeed, if the property \eqref{property} holds true, then any point where $\W_1'$ 

879: vanishes is a local strict minimum. If there existed two such local strict minima 

880: $-a<\overline{V}_1<\overline{V}_2<a$, then $\W_1$ would admit a local maximum 

881: $\overline{V}_3 \in (\overline{V}_1,\overline{V}_2)$, which is obviously 

882: impossible. Therefore let us prove that the property \eqref{property} holds 

883: true.

884: 

885: 

886: Differentiating \eqref{derivW1} with respect to $V$, we obtain that if 

887: $\W_1'(\overline{V})=0$, then

888: $$

889: \sqrt{\Delta (\overline{V})} \, \W_1''(\overline{V}) = 1 -f''(\overline{V}) 

890: \, \W_1(\overline{V}) \, .

891: $$

892: Observing that

893: \begin{equation*}

894: |f''(\overline{V}) \, \W_1(\overline{V})| \le C \, |\W_1(\overline{V})| 

895: \le C \, \dfrac{a^2 -\overline{V}^2}{f(\overline{V})} \le 

896: \dfrac{C \, a^2}{\kappa} \, ,

897: \end{equation*}

898: for suitable positive constants $C$, and $\kappa$ (that are independent 

899: of $a \in (0,a_0]$), we can conclude that $\W_1''(\overline{V})>0$, provided 

900: that $a$ is small enough. This completes the proof that $\W_1'$ has a unique 

901: zero $\overline{V} \in (-a,0)$, and therefore $\W_1$ is decreasing on 

902: $[-a,\overline{V}]$, and is increasing on $[\overline{V},a]$.

903: 

904: 

905: For the last point of the lemma, we use the relation:

906: $$

907: \W_1'(V) +\W_2'(V)=-f'(V)<0 \, .

908: $$

909: Because $\W_1'(V)\ge 0$ for $V \in [\overline{V},0]$, we get $\W_2'(V)<0$ 

910: for $V \in [\overline{V},0]$. Thus for $V \in [\overline{V},0]$, we have 

911: $\W_2(V) \le \W_2 (\overline{V}) <\W_1 (\overline{V})$, and the proof of 

912: the Lemma is complete.

913: \end{proof}

914: 

915: 

916: Using Lemma \ref{geo}, we are going to prove Proposition \ref{lem}. 

917: The analysis follows \cite{gilbarg}.

918: 

919: 

920: As we have already seen in the preceeding paragraph, the point $(w_0,0)$ is 

921: a stable node of \eqref{ode-ref}. We now study the nature of the equilibrium 

922: points $(\pm a,0)$. Recall that the vector field associated to \eqref{ode-ref} 

923: is denoted $U$, see \eqref{defU}. The Jacobian matrix of $U$ at $(a,0)$ is:

924: \begin{equation*}

925: \begin{pmatrix}

926: 0 & a \\

927: a & f(a) \end{pmatrix} \, ,

928: \end{equation*}

929: so it has exactly one negative eigenvalue $\mu_1$, and one positive eigenvalue 

930: $\mu_2$ (the equilibrium point $(a,0)$ is a saddle point):

931: \begin{equation*}

932: \mu_1 =\dfrac{-f(a)-\sqrt{f(a)^2+4 \, a^2}}{2} \, ,\quad 

933: \mu_2 =\dfrac{-f(a)+\sqrt{f(a)^2+4 \, a^2}}{2} \, .

934: \end{equation*}

935: An eigenvector associated to $\mu_2$, and is $r_2=(a,\mu_2)$. Moreover, 

936: using the relation \eqref{derivW1}, we can check that for $a$ small enough, 

937: the following inequality holds:

938: \begin{equation}

939: \label{ineg1}

940: 0 <\dfrac{\mu_2}{a} < \dfrac{a}{f(a)} =\W_1'(a) \, ,

941: \end{equation}

942: where the function $\W_1$ is defined in Lemma \ref{geo}. Let us now define a 

943: compact set $K_1$ by:

944: \begin{equation*}

945: K_1 := \Big\{ (V,W) \in [0,a] \times \R \, | \, \W_1 (V) \le W \le 0 \Big\} \, ,

946: \end{equation*}

947: Then the inequalities \eqref{ineg1} show that for $s<0$ small enough, the 

948: point $(a,0) + s \, r_2$ belongs to the interior of $K_1$. We refer to 

949: figure \ref{compactK1} for a detailed picture of the situation.

950: 

951: 

952: \begin{figure}

953: \centering

954: \psfrag{$W$}{$W$}

955: \psfrag{$V$}{$V$}

956: \psfrag{$w_0$}{$w_0$}

957: \psfrag{$a$}{$a$}

958: \psfrag{$K_1$}{$K_1$}

959: \psfrag{A}{$(a,0)+{\mathbb R} \, r_2$}

960: \includegraphics{compactK1.eps}

961: \caption{The compact set $K_1$.}

962: \label{compactK1}

963: \end{figure}

964: 

965: 

966: From the standard theory of autonomous ODEs, see e.g. \cite{pontriaguine}, we 

967: know that there exists a maximal solution $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$ to \eqref{ode-ref} 

968: that tends to the saddle point $(a,0)$ as $\eta$ tends to $-\infty$, and that 

969: is tangent to the half-straight line $(a,0) +\R^- \, r_2$. This solution is 

970: defined on an open interval $(-\infty,\eta_*)$ (with possibly $\eta_*=+\infty$). 

971: For large negative $\eta$, the preceeding analysis shows that 

972: $(V_\flat,W_\flat) (\eta)$ belongs to the interior of $K_1$. Moreover, 

973: $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$ cannot reach the boundary of $K_1$. Indeed $V_\flat$ cannot 

974: identically vanish so $(V_\flat,W_\flat)(\eta) \not \in \partial K_1 \cap 

975: \{ V=0\}$. Similarly, we have $(V_\flat,W_\flat)(\eta) \neq (a,0)$. Eventually, 

976: on the set:

977: \begin{equation*}

978: \Big\{ (V,0) \, | \, V \in (0,a) \Big\} \cup 

979: \Big\{ (V,\W_1(V)) \, | \, V \in \, (0,a) \Big\} \, ,

980: \end{equation*}

981: the vector field $U$ is not zero, and is directed towards the interior of 

982: $K_1$. Therefore the solution $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$ cannot reach $\partial K_1$, 

983: so it takes its values in the compact set $K_1$. The maximal solution 

984: $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$ is thus defined on $\R$. It cannot reach the boundary 

985: of $K_1$, so $W_\flat$ takes negative values, which means that $V_\flat$ is 

986: decreasing (because $V_\flat'=V_\flat \, W_\flat$). Because $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$ 

987: takes values in the interior of $K_1$, the function $W_\flat$ is also decreasing. 

988: This shows that $(V_\flat,W_\flat)(\eta)$ has a limit as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$, 

989: and this limit is necessarily  be a stationary solution of \eqref{ode-ref}. The 

990: only possibility is that $(V_\flat,W_\flat)(\eta)$ tends to $(0,w_0)$ as $\eta$ 

991: tends to $+\infty$. The convergence is necessarily exponential, because the 

992: Jacobian matrix of $U$ at $(0,w_0)$ has two negative eigenvalues, see e.g. 

993: \cite{pontriaguine}.

994: 

995: 

996: To construct the other solution $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$, we argue similarly by defining 

997: a compact set $K_2$:

998: \begin{equation*}

999: K_2 := \Big\{ (V,W) \in [-a,\overline{V}] \times \R | \W_1 (V) \le W \le 0 \Big\} 

1000: \cup \Big\{ 

1001: (V,W) \in [\overline{V},0] \times \R | \W_1 (\overline{V}) \le W \le 0 \Big\} \, ,

1002: \end{equation*}

1003: see figure \ref{compactK2}. The Jacobian matrix of $U$ at $(-a,0)$ has one 

1004: negative eigenvalue $\nu_1$, and one positive eigenvalue $\nu_2$, with:

1005: \begin{equation*}

1006: \nu_2 = \dfrac{-f(-a)+\sqrt{f(-a)^2+4 \, a^2}}{2} \, .

1007: \end{equation*} 

1008: An eigenvector associated to the eigenvalue $\nu_2$ is $R_2=(-a,\nu_2)$. 

1009: As was done earlier, we check that the inequalities:

1010: \begin{equation*}

1011: \W_1'(-a)=\dfrac{-a}{f(-a)} < \dfrac{\nu_2}{-a} <0 \, ,

1012: \end{equation*}

1013: hold true. Therefore, one can reproduce the above analysis, and show that there 

1014: exists a solution $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ to \eqref{ode-ref} that takes its values 

1015: in $K_2$ (and is thus defined on $\R$), and that tends to $(-a,0)$ at $-\infty$. 

1016: Moreover, $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ can not reach the boundary of $K_2$, so $V_\sharp$ 

1017: is increasing. It only remains to study the monotonicity of $W_\sharp$. This is 

1018: slightly more complicated than for $W_\flat$. Observe that $K_2$ is the union of 

1019: the sets:

1020: \begin{align*}

1021: K_2^1 &:=\Big\{ (V,W) \in [-a,0] \times \R \, | \, \W_1 (V) \le W \le 0 \Big\} \, ,\\

1022: K_2^2 &:=\Big\{ (V,W) \in [\overline{V},0] \times \R \, | \, 

1023: \W_1 (\overline{V}) \le W \le \W_1(V) \Big\} \, .

1024: \end{align*}

1025: When $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ takes its values in the interior of $K_2^1$, the function 

1026: $W_\sharp$ is decreasing (this is the case for large negative $\eta$). At the opposite, 

1027: when $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ takes its values in the interior of $K_2^2$, the function 

1028: $W_\sharp$ is increasing, because thanks to Lemma \ref{geo}, we have:

1029: \begin{align*}

1030: W_\sharp'(\eta) 

1031: &=-W_\sharp(\eta)^2 -f(V_\sharp(\eta)) \, W_\sharp(\eta) 

1032: +\dfrac{V_\sharp(\eta)^2 -a^2}{2} \\

1033: &=\big( 

1034: \W_1 (V_\sharp(\eta)) -W_\sharp (\eta) \big) \, 

1035: \big( W_\sharp(\eta) -\W_2 (V_\sharp(\eta)) \big) \\

1036: &\ge \big( \W_1 (V_\sharp(\eta)) -W_\sharp (\eta) \big) \, 

1037: \big( \W_1(\overline{V}) -\W_2 (V_\sharp(\eta)) \big) >0 \, .

1038: \end{align*}

1039: Moreover, if $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp) (\eta_0)$ belongs to the interior of $K_2^2$ for 

1040: some $\eta_0 \in \R$, then $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp) (\eta)$ belongs to the interior of 

1041: $K_2^2$ for all $\eta \ge \eta_0$ (because it cannot reach the boundary of $K_2^2$ 

1042: for $\eta \ge \eta_0$). Summing up, either $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)(\eta)$ belongs to 

1043: $K_2^1$ for all $\eta$, and $W_\sharp$ is monotonic on $\R$, either 

1044: $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)(\eta)$ belongs to $K_2^2$ for all $\eta$ greater than some 

1045: $\eta_0$, and $W_\sharp$ is monotonic on $[\eta_0,+\infty)$. In any case, the function 

1046: $W_\sharp$ is monotonic on a neighborhood of $+\infty$, and thus has a limit at 

1047: $+\infty$. This shows that $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)(\eta)$ tends to $(0,w_0)$ as $\eta$ 

1048: tends to $+\infty$, and the convergence is exponential. As a matter of fact, we 

1049: have seen in the preceeding paragraph that $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ is tangent to the 

1050: straight line $(0,w_0)+\R \, e_1^{(0)}$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$, so one can 

1051: check that $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp) (\eta)$ belongs to the interior of $K_2^2$ for 

1052: large positive $\eta$. This means that $W_\sharp$ is decreasing on some interval 

1053: $(-\infty,\eta_0)$, and increasing on $[\eta_0,+\infty)$. The proof of 

1054: Proposition \ref{lem} is now complete.

1055: 

1056: 

1057: \begin{figure}

1058: \centering

1059: \psfrag{$W$}{$W$}

1060: \psfrag{$V$}{$V$}

1061: \psfrag{$K_2$}{$K_2$}

1062: \psfrag{$-a$}{$-a$}

1063: \psfrag{A}{$\overline{V}$}

1064: \psfrag{B}{$W_1(\overline{V})$}

1065: \psfrag{C}{$(-a,0)+{\mathbb R} \, R_2$}

1066: \includegraphics{compactK2.eps}

1067: \caption{The compact set $K_2$.}

1068: \label{compactK2}

1069: \end{figure}

1070: 

1071: 

1072: 

1073: 

1074: 

1075: 

1076: \section{Additional regularity of shock profiles}

1077: \label{moresmooth}

1078: 

1079: 

1080: 

1081: As should be clear from the preceeding section, the key point in the construction 

1082: of a shock profile is Proposition \ref{lem} that gives the existence of two 

1083: heteroclinic orbits for the system \eqref{ode-ref}. To prove Theorem \ref{smooth}, 

1084: we are going to study the behavior of the derivatives of $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$, and 

1085: $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ near $+\infty$. The proof of Theorem \ref{smooth} follows 

1086: from an induction argument. To make the arguments clear, we deal with the first 

1087: case separately. In all what follows, $(V_\flat,W_\flat)$, and $(V_\sharp,W_\sharp)$ 

1088: are the solutions to \eqref{ode-ref} that are defined in Proposition \ref{lem}, 

1089: and $(\hat{v},w)$ denotes the solution to \eqref{ode} that is defined by 

1090: \eqref{defsolution}. We have the following:

1091: 

1092: 

1093: \begin{prop}

1094: \label{n=3}

1095: Under the assumptions of Proposition \ref{lem}, there exists a positive constant 

1096: $a_1 \le a_0$ (that depends on $(\rho_-,u_-,e_-)$, and $\gamma$), such that for 

1097: all $a \in (0,a_1]$, one has $w \in C^2 (\R)$, $\hat{v} \in C^3 (\R)$, and:

1098: \begin{equation*}

1099: w(\xi)=w_0 +w_1 \, \hat{v} (\xi) +w_2 \, \hat{v} (\xi)^2 +o(\hat{v} (\xi)^2) \, ,\quad 

1100: \text{\rm as $\xi \rightarrow 0$,}

1101: \end{equation*}

1102: for some suitable constants $w_1,w_2$ ($w_0$ has already been defined in Proposition 

1103: \ref{lem}).

1104: \end{prop}

1105: 

1106: 

1107: \begin{proof}

1108: Recall that $V_b$, and $V_\sharp$ do not vanish on $\R$, so we can introduce 

1109: some $C^\infty$ functions $W_{\flat,1}$, and $W_{\sharp,1}$ that are defined by:

1110: \begin{equation*}

1111: W_\flat = w_0 + V_\flat \, W_{\flat,1} \, ,\quad 

1112: W_\sharp = w_0 + V_\sharp \, W_{\sharp,1} \, .

1113: \end{equation*}

1114: Substituting in \eqref{ode-ref} shows that $(V_\flat,W_{\flat,1})$, and 

1115: $(V_\sharp,W_{\sharp,1})$ are solutions to the system:

1116: \begin{equation}

1117: \label{w_1}

1118: \begin{cases}

1119: V' = V (w_0+V \, W_1) \, , &\\

1120: W_1' = -w_0 \, \dfrac{f(V)-f(0)}{V} -2 \, V \, W_1^2 -3 \, w_0 \, W_1 

1121: -f(V) \, W_1 +\dfrac{V}{2} \, . &

1122: \end{cases}

1123: \end{equation}

1124: Moreover, we already know from Proposition \ref{lem}, and \eqref{asympderiv} 

1125: that:

1126: \begin{equation*}

1127: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} (V_\flat,W_{\flat,1}) (\eta) 

1128: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} (V_\sharp,W_{\sharp,1}) (\eta) 

1129: =\Big( 0,\dfrac{-f'(0) \, w_0}{f(0)+3 \, w_0} \Big) \, .

1130: \end{equation*}

1131: 

1132: 

1133: We denote $U_1 (V,W_1)$ the vector field associated with \eqref{w_1}:

1134: \begin{equation*}

1135: U_1 (V,W_1) := \begin{pmatrix} 

1136: V (w_0+V \, W_1) \\

1137: -w_0 \, \dfrac{f(V)-f(0)}{V} -2 \, V \, W_1^2 -3 \, w_0 \, W_1 

1138: -f(V) \, W_1 +\dfrac{V}{2} \end{pmatrix} \, .

1139: \end{equation*}

1140: Recall that $f$ is a polynomial function of degree $7$, see \eqref{fun f}, 

1141: thus $F(V) :=(f(V)-f(0))/V$ is a polynomial function of degree $6$, and we have 

1142: $F(0)=f'(0)$, $F'(0)=f''(0)/2$. Obviously the system of ODEs \eqref{w_1} admits 

1143: the equilibrium point $(0,w_1)$, where:

1144: \begin{equation*}

1145: w_1 :=\dfrac{-F(0) \, w_0}{f(0)+3\, w_0} =\dfrac{-f'(0) \, w_0}{f(0)+3\, w_0} \, .

1146: \end{equation*}

1147: We are now going to study the nature of the equilibrium point $(0,w_1)$, and show 

1148: that for $a$ small enough, this equilibrium point is a stable node for \eqref{w_1}. 

1149: Then we shall show that $w \in C^2 (\R)$, and $\hat{v} \in C^3 (\R)$. In the end, 

1150: we shall derive the asymptotic expansion near $\xi=0$.

1151: 

1152: 

1153: \underline{Step 1}: the Jacobian matrix of $U_1$ at $(0,w_1)$ is:

1154: \begin{equation*}

1155: \begin{pmatrix}

1156: w_0 & 0\\

1157: \dfrac{1}{2} -2\, w_1^{2} -f'(0)\, w_1 -\dfrac{f''(0)}{2} \, w_0 & -f(0)-3\, w_0

1158: \end{pmatrix} =\begin{pmatrix}

1159: \lambda_1^{(1)} & 0 \\

1160: b_1 & \lambda_2^{(1)} \end{pmatrix} \, .

1161: \end{equation*}

1162: Using Remak \ref{f0}, we can conclude that for sufficiently small $a$, that 

1163: is $a \in (0,a_1]$ for some positive number $a_1$ less than $a_0$, one has 

1164: $\lambda_2^{(1)} <\lambda_1^{(1)}<0$, that is, $f(0)+4\, w_0>0$. Moreover, 

1165: the eigenvectors corresponding to the eigenvalues $\lambda_1^{(1)}$, and 

1166: $\lambda_2^{(1)}$ are:

1167: \begin{equation*}

1168: e_1^{(1)} =\begin{pmatrix}

1169: f(0) +4\, w_0\\ 

1170: b_1 \end{pmatrix} \, ,\quad

1171: e_2^{(1)} =\begin{pmatrix}

1172: 0\\ 

1173: 1 \end{pmatrix} \, .

1174: \end{equation*}

1175: Consequently, $(0,w_1)$ is a stable node of \eqref{w_1}, and there are exactly 

1176: two solutions to \eqref{w_1} that tend to $(0,w_1)$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$, 

1177: and that are tangent to the straight line $(0,w_1) +\R \, e_2^{(1)}$. All the other 

1178: solutions to \eqref{w_1} that tend to $(0,w_1)$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$ are 

1179: tangent to the straight line $(0,w_1) +\R \, e_1^{(1)}$. As in the preceeding 

1180: section, we can thus conclude that:

1181: \begin{equation}

1182: \label{eq:0}

1183: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\flat,1}'(\eta)}{V_\flat'(\eta)} 

1184: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\sharp,1}'(\eta)}{V_\sharp'(\eta)} 

1185: =\dfrac{b_1}{f(0)+4\, w_0} \, .

1186: \end{equation}

1187: 

1188: 

1189: \underline{Step 2}: if we let $g_1$ denote the second coordinate of 

1190: the vector field $U_1$, we have $W_{\flat,1}'=g_1(V_\flat,W_{\flat,1})$, and 

1191: $W_{\sharp,1}'=g_1(V_\sharp,W_{\sharp,1})$. Differentiating once with respect 

1192: to $\eta$, and using \eqref{eq:0}, we end up with:

1193: \begin{equation}

1194: \label{eq:1}

1195: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\flat,1}''(\eta)}{V_\flat'(\eta)} 

1196: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\sharp,1}''(\eta)}{V_\sharp'(\eta)} 

1197: = \ell_1 \, ,

1198: \end{equation}

1199: where the real number $\ell_1$ can be explicitely computed (but its exact expression 

1200: is of no use). Following the analysis of the preceeding section, we define some 

1201: functions $w_{\flat,1} := W_{\flat,1} \circ \Xi_\flat^{-1}$, and $w_{\sharp,1} 

1202: := W_{\sharp,1} \circ \Xi_\sharp^{-1}$. First of all, \eqref{eq:0} yields:

1203: \begin{equation}

1204: \label{eq:2}

1205: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^-} w_{\flat,1}' (\xi) 

1206: =\lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^+} w_{\sharp,1}' (\xi) 

1207: =\dfrac{b_1 \, w_0}{f(0)+4\, w_0} \, .

1208: \end{equation}

1209: Observe now that we have the relations:

1210: \begin{equation*}

1211: \hat{v}_\flat \, w_{\flat,1}' =W_{\flat,1}' \circ \Xi_\flat^{-1} \, ,\quad 

1212: \hat{v}_\sharp \, w_{\sharp,1}' =W_{\sharp,1}' \circ \Xi_\sharp^{-1} \, ,

1213: \end{equation*}

1214: and combining with \eqref{eq:1}, we get:

1215: \begin{equation}

1216: \label{eq:3}

1217: \begin{split}

1218: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^-} (\hat{v}_\flat \, w_{\flat,1}')' (\xi) 

1219: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\flat,1}''(\eta)}{V_\flat (\eta)} 

1220: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} 

1221: \dfrac{W_{\flat,1}''(\eta) \, W_\flat (\eta)}{V_\flat' (\eta)} =\ell_1 \, w_0 \, ,\\

1222: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^+} (\hat{v}_\sharp \, w_{\sharp,1}')' (\xi) 

1223: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\sharp,1}''(\eta)}{V_\sharp (\eta)} 

1224: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} 

1225: \dfrac{W_{\sharp,1}''(\eta) \, W_\sharp (\eta)}{V_\sharp' (\eta)} =\ell_1 \, w_0 \, .

1226: \end{split}

1227: \end{equation}

1228: Differentiating twice the relations $w_\flat =w_0 +\hat{v}_\flat \, w_{\flat,1}$, 

1229: and $w_\sharp =w_0 +\hat{v}_\sharp \, w_{\sharp,1}$, we obtain:

1230: \begin{gather*}

1231: w_\flat'' =\hat{v}_\flat'' \, w_{\flat,1} +\hat{v}_\flat' \, w_{\flat,1}' 

1232: +(\hat{v}_\flat \, w_{\flat,1}')' =w_\flat' \, w_{\flat,1} 

1233: +w_\flat \, w_{\flat,1}' +(\hat{v}_\flat \, w_{\flat,1}')' \, ,\\

1234: w_\sharp'' =w_\sharp' \, w_{\sharp,1} 

1235: +w_\sharp \, w_{\sharp,1}' +(\hat{v}_\sharp \, w_{\sharp,1}')' \, .

1236: \end{gather*}

1237: Using \eqref{eq:2}, and \eqref{eq:3}, we get $w_\flat'' (0^-)=w_\sharp'' (0^+)$. 

1238: Using the definition \eqref{defsolution}, this shows that $w \in C^2 (\R)$, and 

1239: using $\hat{v}'=w$, we obtain $\hat{v} \in C^3 (\R)$.

1240: 

1241: 

1242: \underline{Step 3}: note that we have the following expansions near $\xi=0$:

1243: \begin{align*}

1244: &w(\xi) = w(0) +w'(0) \, \xi +\dfrac{w''(0)}{2} \, \xi^2 +o(\xi^2) \, ,\\

1245: &\hat{v}(\xi) = w(0) \, \xi +\dfrac{w'(0)}{2} \, \xi^2 +o(\xi^2) \, ,

1246: \end{align*}

1247: with $w(0)=w_0 <0$. We can thus combine these expansions, and derive:

1248: \begin{equation*}

1249: w(\xi) = w_0 +\alpha \, \hat{v}(\xi) +\beta \, \hat{v}(\xi)^2 

1250: +o(\hat{v}(\xi)^2) \, ,

1251: \end{equation*}

1252: for some appropriate real numbers $\alpha$, and $\beta$, that we are going 

1253: to determine. From the relation $w_\flat (\xi)=w_0+\hat{v}_\flat(\xi) \, 

1254: w_{\flat,1} (\xi)$, and using that $w_{\flat,1} (\xi)$ tends to $w_1$ as 

1255: $\xi$ tends to $0^-$, we first get $\alpha=w_1$. Then from \eqref{eq:2}, 

1256: and from the relation $\hat{v}_\flat'(0^-)=w_0$, we can obtain:

1257: \begin{equation*}

1258: w_{\flat,1} (\xi)=w_1 +\dfrac{b_1}{f(0)+4\, w_0} \, \hat{v}_\flat (\xi) 

1259: +o(\hat{v}_\flat (\xi)) \, ,\quad \text{as $\xi \rightarrow 0^-$.}

1260: \end{equation*}

1261: We thus obtain $\beta=b_1/(f(0)+4\, w_0)$, which yields:

1262: \begin{equation*}

1263: w(\xi) = w_0 +w_1 \, \hat{v}(\xi) +w_2 \, \hat{v}(\xi)^2 +o(v(\xi)^2) \, ,

1264: \end{equation*}

1265: where $w_2 :=b_1/(f(0)+4\, w_0)$. This latter expansion will be generalized 

1266: to any order in what follows.

1267: \end{proof}

1268: 

1269: 

1270: We now turn to the proof of Theorem \ref{smooth}. More precisely, we are going 

1271: to prove the following result, that is a refined version of Theorem \ref{smooth}:

1272: 

1273: 

1274: \begin{thh}

1275: \label{smooth2}

1276: Let the assumptions of Proposition \ref{lem} be satisfied. Then there exists a 

1277: nonincreasing sequence of positive numbers $(a_n)_{n \in \N}$ such that, for 

1278: all integer $n$, if $a \in (0,a_n]$, then $w \in C^{n+1} (\R)$, and $\hat{v} 

1279: \in C^{n+2} (\R)$. Moreover, $w$ admits the following asymptotic expansion 

1280: near $\xi=0$:

1281: \begin{equation}

1282: \label{expansion}

1283: w(\xi) =w_0+w_1 \, \hat{v}(\xi) +\cdots +w_{n+1} \, \hat{v} (\xi)^{n+1} 

1284: +o(\hat{v} (\xi)^{n+1}) \, ,

1285: \end{equation}

1286: where the real numbers $w_0,\dots,w_{n+1}$ are defined by:

1287: \begin{equation*}

1288: \begin{cases}

1289: w_0 =\dfrac{-f(0)+\sqrt{f(0)^2 -2\, a^2}}{2} \, ,& \\

1290: w_k =\dfrac{b_{k-1}}{f(0) +(k+2)\, w_0} \, ,&\text{\rm for $k=1,\dots,n+1$,}

1291: \end{cases}

1292: \end{equation*}

1293: and the real numbers $b_0,\dots,b_n$ are given by:

1294: \begin{equation*}

1295: \begin{cases}

1296: b_0 = -f'(0) \, w_0 \, ,& \\

1297: b_1 =\dfrac{1}{2}-2 \, w_1^2 -f'(0) \, w_1 -\dfrac{f''(0)}{2} \, w_0 \, ,& \\

1298: b_k =-\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{k+1} \dfrac{f^{(i)}(0)}{i!} \, w_{k+1-i} 

1299: -\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^k (i+1) \, w_i \, w_{k+1-i} \, ,& 

1300: \text{\rm for $k=2,\dots,n$.}

1301: \end{cases}

1302: \end{equation*}

1303: \end{thh}

1304: 

1305: 

1306: \begin{proof}

1307: The case $n=0$ has been proved in the preceeding section, while the case $n=1$ 

1308: is proved in Proposition \ref{n=3}. (The reader can check that the definition of 

1309: $w_0$, $w_1$, $w_2$, $b_0$, and $b_1$ coincide with our previous notations.) We 

1310: prove the general case by using an induction with respect to $n$, and we thus 

1311: assume that the result of Theorem \ref{smooth2} holds up to the order $n \ge 1$. 

1312: We are going to construct $a_{n+1}$ so that the conclusion of Theorem \ref{smooth2} 

1313: holds for $a \in (0,a_{n+1}]$. In particular, the real numbers $w_0,\dots,w_{n+1}$, 

1314: and $b_0,\dots,b_n$ are given as in Theorem \ref{smooth2}, and we can already define 

1315: the real number $b_{n+1}$ by the formula:

1316: \begin{equation*}

1317: b_{n+1} :=-\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{n+2} \dfrac{f^{(i)}(0)}{i!} \, w_{n+2-i} 

1318: -\displaystyle \sum_{i=1}^{n+1} (i+1) \, w_i \, w_{n+2-i} \, .

1319: \end{equation*}

1320: (Observe indeed that this definition only involves $w_0,\dots,w_{n+1}$, and not 

1321: $w_{n+2}$.)

1322: 

1323: 

1324: \underline{Step 1}: because $V_\flat$, and $V_\sharp$ do not vanish, we can 

1325: introduce some functions $W_{\flat,n+1}$, and $W_{\sharp,n+1}$ by the relations:

1326: \begin{equation*}

1327: W_\flat =w_0 +w_1 \, V_\flat +\cdots +w_n \, V_\flat^n 

1328: +W_{\flat,n+1} \, V_\flat^{n+1} \, ,\quad 

1329: W_\sharp =w_0 +w_1 \, V_\sharp +\cdots +w_n \, V_\sharp^n 

1330: +W_{\sharp,n+1} \, V_\sharp^{n+1} \, .

1331: \end{equation*}

1332: Thanks to Taylor's formula, we can write the polynomial function $f$ as:

1333: \begin{equation*}

1334: f(V)=f(0)+f'(0) \, V+\dfrac{f''(0)}{2} \, V^2 +\cdots 

1335: +\dfrac{f^{(n)}(0)}{n!} \, V^n +V^{n+1} \, F_{n+1} (V) \, ,

1336: \end{equation*}

1337: where $F_{n+1}$ is a polynomial function such that:

1338: \begin{equation*}

1339: F_{n+1} (0)=\dfrac{f^{(n+1)}(0)}{(n+1)!} \, ,\quad 

1340: F_{n+1}' (0)=\dfrac{f^{(n+2)}(0)}{(n+2)!} \, .

1341: \end{equation*}

1342: Substituting the expression of $W_\flat$, and $W_\sharp$ in \eqref{ode-ref} 

1343: shows (after a tedious computation!) that $(V_\flat,W_{\flat,n+1})$, and 

1344: $(V_\sharp,W_{\sharp,n+1})$ are solutions to the following system of ODEs:

1345: \begin{equation}

1346: \label{eq:k}

1347: \begin{cases}

1348: V' = V \, (w_0+w_1 \, V +\cdots +w_n \, V^n +W_{n+1} \, V^{n+1}) \, ,& \\

1349: W_{n+1}' =g_{n+1} (V,W_{n+1}) \, ,& 

1350: \end{cases}

1351: \end{equation}

1352: where the function $g_{n+1}$ is given by:

1353: \begin{align}

1354: g_{n+1} (V,W_{n+1}) := &-(n+2) \, W_{n+1} \left( \sum_{k=0}^n w_k \, V^k 

1355: +V^{n+1} \, W_{n+1} \right) -W_{n+1} \, \sum_{k=0}^n (k+1) \, w_k \, V^k \notag\\

1356: &-W_{n+1} \, f(V) -F_{n+1} (V) \, \sum_{k=0}^n w_k \, V^k +b_n 

1357: +\dfrac{f^{(n+1)}(0)}{(n+1)!} +V \, Q_{n+1}(V) \, ,\label{defgn+1}

1358: \end{align}

1359: and $Q_{n+1}$ is a polynomial function that satisfies:

1360: \begin{equation*}

1361: Q_{n+1}(0)=b_{n+1} +(n+4) \, w_1 \, w_{n+1} +f'(0) \, w_{n+1} 

1362: +\dfrac{f^{(n+1)}(0)}{(n+1)!} \, w_1 +\dfrac{f^{(n+2)}(0)}{(n+2)!} \, w_0 \, .

1363: \end{equation*}

1364: When $n=1$, one has $Q_2 \equiv Q_2(0)=0$ (see the above definition for $b_2$). 

1365: Using the expansion \eqref{expansion}, which is part of the induction assumption, 

1366: we also know that:

1367: \begin{equation*}

1368: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} (V_\flat,W_{\flat,n+1}) (\eta) 

1369: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} (V_\sharp,W_{\sharp,n+1}) (\eta) 

1370: =(0,w_{n+1}) =\Big( 0,\dfrac{b_n}{f(0)+(n+2)\, w_0} \Big) \, .

1371: \end{equation*}

1372: 

1373: 

1374: With the above definitions for $g_{n+1}$, and $Q_{n+1}$, we can check that 

1375: $(0,w_{n+1})$ is a stationary solution to \eqref{eq:k}. (Recall that $w_{n+1}$ 

1376: is defined as in Theorem \ref{smooth2} by the induction assumption.) We can 

1377: also evaluate the Jacobian matrix of the vector field associated with the 

1378: system of ODEs \eqref{eq:k}:

1379: $$

1380: \begin{pmatrix}

1381: w_0 & 0 \\

1382: b_{n+1} & -f(0)-(n+3) \, w_0 \end{pmatrix} =

1383: \begin{pmatrix}

1384: \lambda_1^{(n+1)} & 0 \\

1385: b_{n+1} & \lambda_2^{(n+2)} \end{pmatrix} \, .

1386: $$

1387: There exists a positive number $a_{n+1} \le a_n$ such that for all $a \in 

1388: (0,a_{n+1}]$, one has $\lambda_2^{(n+2)}<\lambda_1^{(n+2)}<0$, or equivalently 

1389: $f(0)+(n+4) \, w_0>0$. In that case, the eigenvectors corresponding to the 

1390: eigenvalues $\lambda_1^{(n+1)}$ and $\lambda_2^{(n+1)}$ are:

1391: $$

1392: e_1^{(n+1)} =\begin{pmatrix}

1393: f(0)+(n+4) \, w_0 \\

1394: b_{n+1} \end{pmatrix} \, ,\quad e_2^{(n+1)}=\begin{pmatrix}

1395: 0 \\

1396: 1 \end{pmatrix} \, .

1397: $$

1398: Using the same argument as in the proof of Proposition \ref{n=3}, we can 

1399: conclude that the solutions $(V_\flat,W_{\flat,n+1})$, and 

1400: $(V_\sharp,W_{\sharp,n+1})$ of \eqref{eq:k} are tangent to the straight line 

1401: $(0,w_{n+1}) +\R \, e_1^{(n+1)}$ as $\eta$ tends to $+\infty$. In particular, 

1402: this yields:

1403: \begin{equation}

1404: \label{lim0}

1405: \lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\flat,n+1}'(\eta)}{V_\flat'(\eta)} 

1406: =\lim_{\eta \rightarrow +\infty} \dfrac{W_{\sharp,n+1}'(\eta)}{V_\sharp'(\eta)} 

1407: =\dfrac{b_{n+1}}{f(0)+(n+4)\, w_0} =:w_{n+2} \, .

1408: \end{equation}

1409: 

1410: 

1411: \underline{Step 2}: let us define the function $\widetilde{w}_{n+1}$ by the formula:

1412: \begin{equation*}

1413: \widetilde{w}_{n+1} (\xi) :=\begin{cases}

1414: W_{\flat,n+1} \circ \Xi_\flat^{-1} (\xi) &\text{if $\xi<0$,}\\

1415: w_{n+1} &\text{if $\xi=0$,}\\

1416: W_{\sharp,n+1} \circ \Xi_\sharp^{-1} (\xi) &\text{if $\xi>0$.}

1417: \end{cases}

1418: \end{equation*}

1419: With this definition, $\widetilde{w}_{n+1}$ is continuous, and we have the relation:

1420: \begin{equation}

1421: \label{recurrence0}

1422: w=w_0 +w_1 \, \hat{v} +\dots+w_n \, \hat{v}^n 

1423: +\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^{n+1} \, .

1424: \end{equation}

1425: Moreover, using \eqref{lim0}, we obtain:

1426: \begin{equation}

1427: \label{recurrence4}

1428: \lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^-} \dfrac{\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' (\xi)}{\hat{v}'(\xi)}

1429: =\lim_{\xi \rightarrow 0^+} \dfrac{\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' (\xi)}{\hat{v}'(\xi)}

1430: =w_{n+2} \, ,

1431: \end{equation}

1432: which yields $\widetilde{w}_{n+1}'(0^+)=\widetilde{w}_{n+1}'(0^-)$. Therefore, we 

1433: have $\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \in C^1 (\R)$. Moreover, using \eqref{eq:k}, we can compute:

1434: \begin{equation}

1435: \label{recurrence1}

1436: \widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v} =g_{n+1} (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1}) \, ,

1437: \end{equation}

1438: so we get $\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v} \in C^1(\R)$.

1439: 

1440: 

1441: \underline{Step 3}: we use an induction argument to show that $w \in C^{n+2} (\R)$ 

1442: (which will imply immediately $\hat{v} \in C^{n+3} (\R)$). More precisely, we assume 

1443: that for some $k \in \{ 0,\dots,n \}$, we have:

1444: \begin{equation}

1445: \label{recurrence2}

1446: \widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^k \in C^{k+1}(\R) \, ,\quad 

1447: w \in C^{k+1} (\R) \, ,\quad 

1448: \widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+1} \in C^{k+1} (\R) \, .

1449: \end{equation}

1450: We are going to show that this property implies the same property with $k$ replaced 

1451: by $k+1$. (Observe that step 2 above shows that the property \eqref{recurrence2} holds 

1452: for $k=0$.) 

1453: 

1454: 

1455: We note that $\hat{v} \in C^{k+2} (\R)$, because $\hat{v}'=w \in C^{k+1} (\R)$. Moreover, 

1456: we have $\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^{k+1} =(\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^k) \, 

1457: \hat{v} \in C^{k+1} (\R)$, and we also have:

1458: \begin{equation*}

1459: (\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^{k+1})'=\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+1}

1460: +(k+1) \, (\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^k) \, w \in C^{k+1} (\R) \, .

1461: \end{equation*}

1462: Therefore, we get $\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, \hat{v}^{k+1} \in C^{k+2} (\R)$.

1463: 

1464: 

1465: Using the relation \eqref{recurrence0}, we immediately obtain $w \in C^{k+2}(\R)$. 

1466: 

1467: 

1468: We have $\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+2}=(\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+1}) 

1469: \, \hat{v} \in C^{k+1} (\R)$, and using \eqref{recurrence1}, we derive:

1470: \begin{multline}

1471: \label{recurrence3}

1472: \big( \widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+2} \big)' =\big( 

1473: g_{n+1} (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1}) \, \hat{v}^{k+1} \big)' \\

1474: = (\partial_1 g_{n+1}) (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1}) \, \hat{v}^{k+1} \, w 

1475: +(\partial_2 g_{n+1}) (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1}) \, \widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+1} 

1476: +(k+1) \, g_{n+1} (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1}) \, \hat{v}^k \, w \, ,

1477: \end{multline}

1478: where $\partial_1 g_{n+1}$ (resp. $\partial_2 g_{n+1}$) denotes the partial derivative 

1479: of $g_{n+1}$ with respect to its first (resp. second) variable. From the definition 

1480: \eqref{defgn+1}, we see that $g_{n+1} (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1})$ can be decomposed 

1481: as follows:

1482: \begin{equation*}

1483: g_{n+1} (\hat{v},\widetilde{w}_{n+1})=-(n+2) \, \widetilde{w}_{n+1}^2 \, \hat{v}^{n+1} 

1484: +\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \, P_1(\hat{v}) +P_0(\hat{v}) \, ,

1485: \end{equation*}

1486: where $P_0$, and $P_1$ are polynomial functions. Using this decomposition, and 

1487: the induction assumption \eqref{recurrence2}, we can show that each term of the 

1488: sum in the right-hand side of \eqref{recurrence3} belongs to $C^{k+1} (\R)$. 

1489: Consequently $\widetilde{w}_{n+1}' \, \hat{v}^{k+2}$ belongs to $C^{k+2} (\R)$, 

1490: and \eqref{recurrence2} holds with $k$ replaced by $k+1$. Because \eqref{recurrence2} 

1491: holds for $k=0$, we get that \eqref{recurrence2} holds for $k=n+1$, so we have 

1492: proved $w \in C^{n+2} (\R)$, and $\hat{v} \in C^{n+3}(\R)$.

1493: 

1494: 

1495: \underline{Step 4}: it remains to show that $w$ satisfies the asymptotic expansion 

1496: \eqref{expansion} at the order $n+1$. Using \eqref{recurrence4}, and 

1497: $\widetilde{w}_{n+1} \in C^1 (\R)$, we obtain:

1498: \begin{equation*}

1499: \widetilde{w}_{n+1} (\xi)-w_{n+1}=w_{n+2} \, \hat{v} (\xi) +o(\hat{v} (\xi)) 

1500: \, ,\quad \text{as $\xi \rightarrow 0$.}

1501: \end{equation*}

1502: Plugging this expansion in \eqref{recurrence0}, we obtain \eqref{expansion} at the 

1503: order $n+1$, so the proof of the induction is complete.

1504: \end{proof}

1505: 

1506: 

1507: Once we know that the function $\hat{v}$ belongs to $C^{n+2} (\R)$, for 

1508: $a \in (0,a_n]$, then $v=\hat{v}+(v_-+v_+)/2$ also belongs to $C^{n+2} (\R)$, 

1509: and we have already seen in the previous section that $v$ does not vanish 

1510: because $v(\xi)>v_+>0$ for all $\xi$. Moreover, the components $(\rho,u,e)$ 

1511: of the shock profile are given by:

1512: \begin{equation*}

1513: \rho(\xi)=\dfrac{j}{v(\xi)} \, ,\quad u(\xi)=v(\xi)+\sigma \, ,\quad 

1514: e(\xi)=\dfrac{(C_1-v(\xi))\, v(\xi)}{\gamma-1} \, ,

1515: \end{equation*}

1516: so one has $(\rho,u,e) \in C^{n+2} (\R)$, and the proof of Theorem \ref{smooth} 

1517: is complete. (Recall that the strength of the shock tends to zero if, and only 

1518: if $a=|u_+-u_-|/2$ tends to zero.)

1519: 

1520: 

1521: 

1522: 

1523: 

1524: 

1525: \appendix

1526: \section{Formal derivation of the model}

1527: \label{model}

1528: 

1529: 

1530: 

1531: It is worth describing how the model \eqref{eulerevol}, \eqref{diffn} can be 

1532: obtained from a more complete physical system. The derivation we propose below 

1533: remains formal -- a rigorous proof being certainly delicate and beyond the scope 

1534: of this work -- and we refer to \cite{BD, GL, LHM, MM} for further details. Let 

1535: us introduce the specific intensity of radiation $f(t,x,v)$, that depends on 

1536: a time variable $t\ge 0$, a space variable $x\in \R^N$, and a direction $v\in 

1537: \SP^{N-1}$. We make the 'grey assumption', which means that the frequency 

1538: dependence is ignored (all photons have the same frequency). Photons are 

1539: subject to two main interaction phenomena:

1540: \begin{itemize}

1541: \item scattering produces changes in the direction of the photons,

1542: 

1543: \item absorption/emission where photons are lost/produced through a transfer 

1544: mecanism with the surrounding gas.

1545: \end{itemize}

1546: The scattering phenomenon is described by the operator:

1547: \[

1548: Q_s(f)(t,x,v)=\sigma_s \, \Big( 

1549: \displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} f(t,x,v') \, dv'-f(t,x,v) \Big) \, ,

1550: \]

1551: (with $dv$ the normalized Lebesgue measure on $\SP^{N-1}$), and the 

1552: absorption/emission phenomenon is described by the operator:

1553: \[

1554: Q_a(f)(t,x,v)=\sigma_a \, \Big( 

1555: \dfrac{\sigma}{\pi} \, \theta (t,x)^4 -f(t,x,v) \Big) \, ,

1556: \]

1557: where we used the Stefan-Boltzmann emission law, $\theta$ being the temperature 

1558: of the gas, and $\sigma$ the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. In these definitions, 

1559: the coefficients $\sigma_{s,a}$ are given positive quantities. These phenomena 

1560: are both characterized by a typical mean free path, denoted $\ell_s,\ell_a$ 

1561: respectively. Therefore, the evolution of the specific intensity is driven by:

1562: \begin{equation}

1563: \label{kindim}

1564: \dfrac{1}{c} \, \partial_t f +v \cdot \nabla_x f =\dfrac{1}{\ell_s} \, Q_s(f) 

1565: +\dfrac{1}{\ell_a} \, Q_a(f)=Q(f) \, ,

1566: \end{equation}

1567: where $c$ stands for the speed of light. The equation \eqref{kindim} is 

1568: coupled to the Euler system describing the evolution of the fluid:

1569: \begin{equation}

1570: \label{eulerevolbis}

1571: \begin{cases}

1572: \partial_t \rho +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, u) =0 \, ,& \\

1573: \partial_t (\rho \, u) +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, u\otimes u) +\nabla_x P

1574: =-\dfrac{1}{c} \displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} v \, Q(f) \, dv \, ,& \\

1575: \partial_t (\rho \, E) +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, E \, u+P\, u) 

1576: =-\displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} Q(f) \, dv \, .&

1577: \end{cases}

1578: \end{equation}

1579: The equations \eqref{kindim}, \eqref{eulerevolbis} are thus coupled by the 

1580: exchanges of both momentum and energy, and by the Stefan-Boltzmann emission 

1581: law. Observe that only the emission/absorption operator enters into the energy 

1582: equation since the scattering operator is conservative (this would be different 

1583: if Doppler corrections were taken into account). Note also that the total energy:

1584: \[

1585: \dfrac{1}{c} \displaystyle \int_{\R^N} \int_{\SP^{N-1}} f \, dv \, dx 

1586: +\displaystyle \int_{\R^N} \rho \, E \, dx \, ,

1587: \]

1588: is (formally) conserved. Writing the system \eqref{eulerevolbis}, and the 

1589: kinetic equation \eqref{kindim} in the dimensionless form, we can make four 

1590: dimensionless parameters appear:

1591: \begin{description}

1592: \item - $\mathcal C$, the ratio of the speed of light over the typical sound 

1593: speed of the gas,

1594: 

1595: \item - $\mathcal L_s$, the Knudsen number associated to the scattering,

1596: 

1597: \item - $\mathcal L_a$, the Knudsen number associated to the absorption/emission,

1598: 

1599: \item - $\mathcal P$, which compares the typical energy of radiation and the 

1600: typical energy of the gas.

1601: \end{description}

1602: We thus obtain the rescaled equations:

1603: \begin{equation}

1604: \label{adim}

1605: \begin{cases}

1606: \dfrac{1}{\mathcal C} \, \partial_t f + v \cdot \nabla_x f 

1607: =\dfrac{1}{\mathcal L_s} \, Q_s(f)+\dfrac{1}{\mathcal L_a} \, Q_a(f) \, ,& \\

1608: \partial_t \rho +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, u)=0 \, ,& \\

1609: \partial_t (\rho \, u) +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, u \otimes u) +\nabla_x P 

1610: =\dfrac{\mathcal P}{\mathcal L_s} \, \sigma_s \, 

1611: \displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} v \, f(v) \, dv \, ,& \\

1612: \partial_t (\rho \, E) +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, E \, u+P\, u) 

1613: =-\dfrac{\mathcal P}{\mathcal L_a} \, \sigma_a \, \Big( 

1614: \theta^4 -\displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} f (v) \, dv \Big) \, .&

1615: \end{cases}

1616: \end{equation}

1617: System \eqref{eulerevol}, \eqref{diffn} is then obtained in two steps. First of 

1618: all, we assume $\mathcal C \gg 1$. Next, we keep $\mathcal P$ of order 1, and we 

1619: are concerned here with a regime where scattering is the leading phenomenon: the 

1620: mean free paths are rescaled according to:

1621: \[

1622: \mathcal L_s \simeq \dfrac{1}{\mathcal C} \, ,\qquad 

1623: \mathcal L_a \simeq \mathcal C \, .

1624: \]

1625: The asymptotics can be readily understood by means of the Hilbert expansion:

1626: \[

1627: f=f^{(0)} +\dfrac{1}{\mathcal C} \, f^{(1)} +\dfrac{1}{\mathcal C^2} \, f^{(2)}+\dots

1628: \]

1629: Identifying the terms arising with the same power of $1/\mathcal C$, we get:

1630: \begin{description}

1631: \item - at the leading order, $f^{(0)}$ belongs to the kernel of the scattering 

1632: operator, so that is does not depend on the microscopic variable $v$: 

1633: $f^{(0)}(t,x,v)=n(t,x)$,

1634: 

1635: \item - the relation $Q_s(f^{(1)})=v \cdot \nabla_x f^{(0)}$ then leads to: 

1636: $f^{(1)}(t,x,v)=-\frac{1}{\sigma_s}\, v \cdot \nabla_x n(t,x)$,

1637: 

1638: \item - integrating the equation for $f^{(2)}$ over the sphere yields:

1639: \[

1640: \partial_t n -\dfrac{1}{N \, \sigma_s} \, \Delta_x n 

1641: =\sigma_a \, ( \theta^4 -n) \, .

1642: \]

1643: \end{description}

1644: Note also that in the momentum equation, we have:

1645: \[

1646: \dfrac{\sigma_s}{\mathcal L_s} \displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} v \, f(v) \, dv 

1647: \simeq \sigma_s \, \displaystyle \int_{\SP^{N-1}} v \, f^{(1)}(v) \, dv 

1648: =-\dfrac{1}{N} \, \nabla_x n \, .

1649: \]

1650: Finally, we obtain the limit system:

1651: \begin{equation}

1652: \label{lim1}

1653: \begin{cases}

1654: \partial_t \rho +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, u)=0\, ,& \\

1655: \partial_t (\rho \, u) +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, u \otimes u) +\nabla_x P 

1656: =-\dfrac{\mathcal P}{N} \, \nabla_x n \, ,& \\

1657: \partial_t (\rho \, E) +\nabla_x \cdot (\rho \, E \, u +P\, u) 

1658: =-\mathcal P \, \sigma_a \, ( \theta^4-n ) \, ,& \\

1659: \partial_t n -\dfrac{1}{N \, \sigma_s} \, \Delta_x n =\sigma_a \, 

1660: ( \theta^4-n ) \, .

1661: \end{cases}

1662: \end{equation}

1663: The system \eqref{lim1} describes a nonequilibrium regime, where the material 

1664: and the radiations have different temperatures ($\theta\neq n^{1/4}$); the 

1665: equilibrium regime would correspond to assuming that the emission/absorption 

1666: is the leading contribution.

1667: 

1668: 

1669: After this first asymptotics, we perform a second asymptotics where we set:

1670: \[

1671: \mathcal P \ll 1 \, ,\qquad \mathcal P \, \sigma_a=1 \, ,\qquad 

1672: N\, \sigma_s=1/\sigma_a \, .

1673: \]

1674: This leads to \eqref{eulerevol}, \eqref{diffn}. Of course, one might wonder 

1675: how this second approximation modifies the shock profiles compared to 

1676: \eqref{lim1}, in particular when we get rid of the radiative pressure 

1677: in the momentum equation. We refer to \cite[page 579]{MM} for some aspects 

1678: of this problem.

1679: 

1680: 

1681: 

1682: 

1683: 

1684: 

1685: \bibliographystyle{alpha}

1686: \bibliography{lcg}

1687: \end{document}

1688: