1: %\documentclass{amsart}

2: \documentclass[11pt]{article}

3: %\usepackage{showkeys}

4: \usepackage{amsmath}

5: \usepackage{amssymb}

6: \usepackage{amsthm}

7: \usepackage{enumerate}

8: \usepackage{graphicx}

9: %\pagestyle{headings}

10: 

11: 

12: \date{\today}

13: 

14: \textwidth =16.0cm

15: \textheight=23.0cm

16: \oddsidemargin = 0cm

17: \evensidemargin = 0cm

18: \topmargin=-2cm

19: \def\n{{\bf n}}

20: \def\R{\mathbb{R}}

21: \def\N{\mathbb{N}}

22: \def\D{\partial}

23: 

24: 

25: \def\eps{\varepsilon}

26: 

27: 

28: %

29: \newcommand{\AAA}{{\mathbb A}}

30: \newcommand{\BB}{{\mathbb B}}

31: \newcommand{\CC}{{\mathbb C}}

32: \newcommand{\DD}{{\mathbb D}}

33: \newcommand{\EE}{{\mathbb E}}

34: \newcommand{\FF}{{\mathbb F}}

35: \newcommand{\GG}{{\mathbb G}}

36: \newcommand{\HH}{{\mathbb H}}

37: \newcommand{\II}{{\mathbb I}}

38: \newcommand{\JJ}{{\mathbb J}}

39: \newcommand{\KK}{{\mathbb K}}

40: \newcommand{\LL}{{\mathbb L}}

41: \newcommand{\MM}{{\mathbb M}}

42: \newcommand{\NN}{{\mathbb N}}

43: \newcommand{\OO}{{\mathbb O}}

44: \newcommand{\PP}{{\mathbb P}}

45: \newcommand{\QQ}{{\mathbb Q}}

46: \newcommand{\RR}{{\mathbb R}}

47: \newcommand{\SSS}{{\mathbb S}}

48: \newcommand{\TT}{{\mathbb T}}

49: \newcommand{\XX}{{\mathbb X}}

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

51: 

52: 

53: 

54: % Les caligraphi\'ees

55: 

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

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

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

59: \newcommand\cD{\mathcal{D}}

60: \newcommand\cE{\mathcal{E}}

61: \newcommand\cF{\mathcal{F}}

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

63: \newcommand\cJ{\mathcal{J}}

64: \newcommand\cK{\mathcal{K}}

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

66: \newcommand\cM{\mathcal{M}}

67: \newcommand\cN{\mathcal{N}}

68: \newcommand\cO{\mathcal{O}}

69: \newcommand\cP{\mathcal{P}}

70: \newcommand\cQ{\mathcal{Q}}

71: \newcommand\cS{\mathcal{S}}

72: \newcommand\cT{\mathcal{T}}

73: \newcommand\cU{\mathcal{U}}

74: \newcommand\cV{\mathcal{V}}

75: \newcommand\cW{\mathcal{W}}

76: \newcommand\cX{\mathcal{X}}

77: \newcommand\cY{\mathcal{Y}}

78: \newcommand\cZ{\mathcal{Z}}

79: 

80: 

81:  % Les rondes

82: 

83: \def\ra{{\ronde A}}

84: \def\rb{{\ronde B}}

85: \def\rl{{\ronde L}}

86: \def\rc{{\ronde C}}

87: \def\rq{{\ronde Q}}

88: \def\rd{{\ronde D}}

89: \def\rh{{\ronde H}}

90: \def\rp{{\ronde P}}

91: \def\rs{{\ronde S}}

92: \def\rt{{\ronde T}}

93: \def\rf{{\ronde F}}

94: \def\re{{\ronde E}}

95: \def\ri{{\ronde I}}

96: \def\rk{{\ronde K}}

97: \def\rx{{\ronde X}}

98: \def\ry{{\ronde Y}}

99: 

100: 

101: %les bold

102: 

103: \def\bb{{\bf b}}

104: \def\bff{{\bf f}}

105: \def\bh{{\bf h}}

106: \def\bn{{\bf n}}

107: \def\bu{{\bf u}}

108: \def\br{{\bf r}}

109: \def\bv{{\bf v}}

110: \def\bw{{\bf w}}

111: \def\bB{{\bf B}}

112: \def\bF{{\bf F}}

113: \def\bJ{{\bf J}}

114: \def\bH{{\bf H}}

115: \def\bK{{\bf K}}

116: \def\bL{{\bf L}}

117: \def\bM{{\bf M}}

118: \def\bN{{\bf N}}

119: \def\bP{{\bf P}}

120: \def\bQ{{\bf Q}}

121: \def\bS{{\bf S}}

122: \def\bR{{\bf R}}

123: \def\bT{{\bf T}}

124: \def\bU{{\bf U}}

125: \def\bV{{\bf V}}

126: \def\bW{{\bf W}}

127: \def\bX{{\bf X}}

128: \def\bZ{{\bf Z}}

129: \def\b1{{\bf 1}}

130: 

131: 

132: %les autres

133: \def\ta{\tilde{a}}

134: \def\tw{\tilde{w}}

135: \def\tOmega{\tilde{\Omega}}

136: \def\tGamma{\tilde{\Gamma}}

137: \def\tSigma{\tilde{\Sigma}}

138: \def\ou{\overline{u}}

139: \def\ov{\overline{v}}

140: \def\div{\mbox{{\rm div}}\;}

141: \def\rot{\mbox{{\rm curl}}\;}

142: 

143: \def\Dn{\partial _{{\bf n}}}

144: \def\id{\mathrm{Id }}

145: 

146: 

147: 

148: 

149: \newtheorem{definition}{Definition}[section]

150: \newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]

151: \newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}[section]

152: \newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}[section]

153: \newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}[section]

154: \newtheorem{remark}{Remark}[section]

155: \newtheorem{remarks}{Remarks}[section]

156: \newtheorem{step}{Step}

157: \newtheorem{stepbd}{Step}

158: %numerotation des equations par section

159: \def\thesection{\arabic{section}}

160: \def\theequation{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}

161: 

162: \numberwithin{equation}{section}

163: 

164: \begin{document}

165: \begin{center}

166: { \Large \bf On the ferromagnetism equations

167: with large variations solutions  }

168: \end{center}

169: 

170: 

171: 

172: 

173: \begin{center}

174: 

175: Olivier  Gu\`es and Franck Sueur\footnote{Laboratoire d'Analyse,

176: de Topologie et de Probabilit\'e. Centre de Math\'ematiques et

177: d'Informatique. 39, rue F. Joliot Curie  13453 Marseille Cedex 13 

178: \\ gues@cmi.univ-mrs.fr  , fsueur@cmi.univ-mrs.fr 

179: \\ $2000$ MSC: $35$K$50$,  $35$K$55$,   $35$Q$60$,  $35$Q$20$ 

180: \\  Key words: Landau-Lifschitz

181: equations, BKW method, Asymptotic expansion, Boundary layer}

182:  

183: \end{center}

184: 

185: \medskip

186: 

187: \bigskip

188: 

189: %\tableofcontents

190: 

191: \begin{abstract}

192: We exhibit some large variations solutions of the Landau-Lifschitz

193: equations as the exchange coefficient $\eps^2$ tends to zero. 

194: These solutions  are

195: described by some asymptotic expansions which involve

196: some internals layers by means  of some large amplitude fluctuations  in

197: a neighborhood of  width  $\sim \eps$ of an hypersurface contained in the domain.

198: Despite the nonlinear  behaviour of these layers  we manage to justify

199: locally in time these asymptotic expansions.

200: \end{abstract}

201: 

202: \section{Introduction}

203: 

204:  Ferromagnetic materials can attain a large magnetization under the action of a small applied magnetic field.

205:  To explain this phenomenon, in $1907$, Weiss suggested that a \textit{spontaneous magnetization} occurs.

206:  In $1928$ Heisenberg explained the spontaneous magnetization postulated by Weiss in terms of the \textit{exchange energy}.

207:   In $1935$ Landau and Lifschitz (cf. \cite{LL}) proposed a quantitative theory, now known as \textit{micromagnetics}. 

208: For a  piece of ferromagnet-which is supposed to be a regular bounded open set $\Omega$ in $\RR^3$ 

209: with a smooth boundary, and locally on one side of $\Gamma$-

210:   the magnetic state at a point $x \in \Omega$ at time  $t$ is given by a

211:   vector $u(t,x) \in \RR^3$ which belongs to the unit sphere of $\RR^3$,

212:    called the  \textit{magnetic moment}.  The Landau-Lifschitz equations  read:

213: %

214: \begin{eqnarray}  

215: \label{LL1} 

216:  \D_t{u^\eps } =   u^\eps  \wedge ( \cH(u^\eps ) + \eps^2 \Delta u^\eps  ) 

217: - u^\eps  \wedge \big( u^\eps  \wedge ( \cH(u^\eps ) + \eps^2 \Delta u^\eps  ) \big) \quad  

218:  \mbox{ in  }  \Omega  ,

219:  \end{eqnarray} 

220: %

221: where $\eps >0$ is the exchange coefficient. 

222: We denote ${\cH}(u) := H_{|\Omega }  \in L^2(\Omega;\RR^3 )$ 

223: where the magnetic field $ H \in L^2(\RR^3;\RR^3)$, 

224: is the unique solution of the following elliptic problem,

225: 

226: \begin{equation} 

227: \label{H} 

228: \left\{\begin{array}{l} 

229: H \in L^2( \RR^3;\RR^3) \ ,\\ 

230: \\ 

231: \rot H =0\mbox { in }\RR^3 \ ,\\ 

232: \\ 

233: \div (H +\overline{u})=0\mbox { in }\RR^3 \ , 

234: \end{array} \right. 

235: \end{equation} 

236: 

237: where $\overline{u}$ means the extension of $u$ 

238: by $0$ outside of the set $\Omega$. 

239: The equations (\ref{LL1}) are supplemented by the homogeneous Neumann boundary condition:

240: %

241: \begin{eqnarray} 

242:  \label{LL2} 

243: \Dn u^\eps  = 0 \,  \mbox{ in \  }  \Gamma   , 

244: \end{eqnarray} 

245: % 

246: where $\bn$ is the unitary outward normal at the boundary $\Gamma$, and by an initial condition:

247: %

248: \begin{eqnarray} 

249: \label{LL3} 

250: u^\eps _{| t=0}  = u_0 .

251: \end{eqnarray} 

252: % 

253: The solution 

254: must also satisfy the constraint

255: \begin{equation} \label{unit}

256: | u^\eps (t,x) | = 1 , \quad  \mbox{ for \  }  x\in \Omega , \ t \geq 0 

257: \end{equation}

258: which is obviously propagated from the initial data

259: as soon as it is satisfied at $t=0$.

260: 

261: In this paper we study the asymptotic behaviour of the solutions of the Landau-Lifschitz 

262: equations (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3}) as the exchange coefficient

263: $\eps$ tends to zero. 

264: From a formal point of view, when $\eps=0$, the system (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3})

265: becomes 

266: % 

267: \begin{equation}  

268: \label{LL0} 

269: \left\{ 

270: \begin{array}{l}  

271:  \D_t{u^0} =   u^0 \wedge \cH(u^0) 

272: - u^0 \wedge ( u^0 \wedge  \cH(u^0)  ) \quad  

273:  \mbox{ in  } \Omega  \\ 

274: \\ 

275: u^0_{| t=0}  = u_0 \ ,

276: \end{array} 

277: \right. 

278: \end{equation} 

279: % 

280: where no boundary condition is needed. 

281: In the paper \cite{CFG1} it is proved that, for 

282: \emph{smooth enough solutions} the system (\ref{LL0})

283: is a "good approximation" of the full system (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3})

284: in the sense that the solution $u^0$

285: of (\ref{LL0}) is indeed limit in $L^2([0,T]\times \Omega)$

286:  of solutions $u^\eps$ of (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3})

287: as $\eps \rightarrow 0$. However, this result holds under

288: the assumption that   $u^0$ belongs

289: to the space $\cC\big( [0,T],H^5(\Omega)\big)$ where $H^5(\Omega)$

290: is the usual Sobolev space.

291: In particular this assumption excludes the case where $u^0$

292: is \emph{discontinuous } across 

293: an hypersurface contained in $\Omega$

294: and it was one  motivation  behind this paper to treat that case.

295: 

296: 

297: First of all, let us observe that the system (\ref{LL0})

298: actually admits discontinuous solutions. To simplify,

299: we will restrict the analysis to piecewise smooth solutions. 

300: We assume that   $\Sigma$ is  a smooth

301: compact hypersurface contained in $\Omega$.

302: For $0 \leq   s < \infty$ call $H^s_\Sigma(\Omega)$ the set of functions

303: $u\in L^2(\Omega)$ such that $u_{|\Omega_\pm} \in H^s( \Omega_\pm )$

304: where $H^s(\Omega_\pm)$ is the usual Sobolev space on $L^2$. 

305: We endow  $H^s_\Sigma(\Omega)$  with the norm

306: $$

307: \| u \|_{H^s_\Sigma} := \| u_{|\Omega_-}  \|_{H^s(\Omega_-)} 

308: + \| u_{|\Omega_+}  \|_{H^s(\Omega_+)} 

309: $$

310: This definition

311: extends to the case when $s=\infty$: the space $H^\infty_\Sigma(\Omega)$  is

312: the natural Fr\'echet space. 

313: We get the following result of global existence of solution of

314: $(\ref{LL0})$ discontinuous through the hypersurface  $\Sigma$.

315: %

316:  \begin{theorem}

317: \label{hyp}

318: Let $s \in \,]\frac{3}{2} , \infty ]$ and $u_0 \in H^s_\Sigma(\Omega) $.

319: Then there  exists a unique $u^0 \in \cC^\infty\big(\RR, H^s_\Sigma(\Omega) \big)$

320: solution of the Cauchy problem $(\ref{LL0})$.

321: \end{theorem}

322: %

323: \begin{proof}

324: This result can be easily

325: obtained by following the proof of Proposition $4.1$ of \cite{CFG1}, with

326: only a few adaptations.

327: By the way in the closer setting of semilinear symmetric hyperbolic system, it is

328: well known since the works of M\'etivier \cite{m1}

329: that there exist some local piecewise regular solutions

330: discontinuous across a smooth hypersurface which is a characteristic

331: hypersurface of constant multiplicity for this hyperbolic system. 

332: In the present setting, the proof is in fact

333: simpler since the hypersurface $\Sigma$ is totally characteristic.

334: Moreover thanks to $(\ref{unit}) $ and since the operator $\mathcal{H}$ satisfies the

335: transmission property,  our setting allows to conclude to a global

336: existence. 

337: \end{proof}

338: 

339: Let us now claim a first theorem about the asymptotic behaviour of the solutions of the Landau-Lifschitz 

340: equations (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3}) as the exchange coefficient

341: $\eps$ tends to zero.  

342: 

343: \begin{theorem}

344: \label{main}

345: %

346: Let $u^0 \in \cC^\infty\big(\RR, H^\infty_\Sigma(\Omega) \big) $

347: be a solution of $(\ref{LL0})$. 

348:  There exist $T>0$ and a family

349: of solutions $u^\eps \in \cC^\infty([0,T] \times \Omega)$,

350: $\eps \in ]0,1]$,

351: of the equation $(\ref{LL1})$ on $[0,T] \times \Omega$,

352: of the equation $(\ref{LL2})$ on $[0,T] \times \Gamma$,

353: such that  there exist $C >0$ and $\eps_0$  such that for all $\eps \in

354: ]0,\eps_0 ]$,

355: %

356: \begin{eqnarray*}

357: || u^\eps - u^0 ||_{L^2([0,T] \times \Omega)} \leqslant C \eps^\frac{1}{2} .

358: \end{eqnarray*}

359: 

360: \end{theorem}

361: 

362: To begin with some comments about Theorem $\ref{main}$ let us stress that

363: we do not prescribe the initial data $(\ref{LL3})$ for the $u^\eps$.

364: Thus the traces of the  $u^\eps$ at $t=0$ are not equal in general to  the trace of  $u^0$ at $t=0$. 

365: So Theorem $\ref{main}$ claims the existence of  local in time solutions  $u^\eps  \in \cC^\infty$, 

366: of the equation $(\ref{LL1})$ on $ \Omega$,

367: of the equation $(\ref{LL2})$ on $ \Gamma$, which converge to $u^0$ as

368: $\eps$ tends to zero in $L^2$, with a rate of convergence in $\eps^\frac{1}{2}$.

369: 

370: 

371: 

372: Indeed, in this paper, we will claim a more accurate result in  Theorem

373: $\ref{main2}$ by showing that the $u^\eps$ can be described with a WKB expansion 

374: which involves some boundary layers profiles. 

375: On one hand, a boundary layer appears near the boundary to compensate the lost of the Neumann condition

376:  from the complete model (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3}) to

377: the limite model  (\ref{LL0})  ($\eps = 0$). 

378: Such a boundary layer was already studied in paper \cite{CFG1}.

379:  The amplitude of this boundary is

380: weak and its behaviour is linear.

381: On another hand, there are some boundary layers on each side of the hypersurface $\Sigma$. 

382: Their task is to compensate the lost of transmission conditions across $\Sigma$ 

383: from the complete model  (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3}) to

384: the limit model  (\ref{LL0})  ($\eps = 0$). 

385: 

386: 

387: 

388: \begin{remark}

389: \rm

390: Such an analysis is inspired by the paper \cite{S1} where we show that discontinuous solutions of

391:  multidimensional semilinear symmetric hyperbolic systems,

392:  which are regular outside of a smooth hypersurface characteristic of constant multiplicity, are 

393:   limits, when $\eps \rightarrow 0$, of solutions  $(u^\eps)_{\eps \in ]0,1]}$ of the system perturbated 

394:   by a viscosity of size $\eps $. 

395: In this paper, we adapt the method to the ferromagnetism quasi-static

396: model,

397: where in particular the non local operator ${\cH}$ occurs.

398: We point out that for the limit model ($\eps=0$), the hypersurface is totally characteristic.

399: As a consequence, the analysis involves only characteristic boundary layers.

400: On the opposite, \cite{S1} stresses the occurrence of characteristic and non characteristic boundary layers.

401:  It could be also possible -as in \cite{S1}- to study the case where the singularity  is weaker than a jump of the function $u^0$ 

402: as a jump of a derivative of the function $u^0$.

403: Then we can take $T$ as big as we want and the quality of the approximation is as better 

404: as the jump concerns a higher order

405: derivative. We also refer to papers \cite{GW}, \cite{GR}, \cite{S1} for the use of boundary layers in transmission strategy.

406: \end{remark}

407: 

408: \begin{remark}

409: \rm

410: It could be interesting to know if it is possible to obtain such a result 

411: in the non static case for which the Landau-Lifschitz 

412: equation is coupled with the Maxwell system of electromagnetic. 

413: For such a model an

414: analysis of the boundary layer induced by the Neumann boundary condition

415: on $\Gamma$ is performed in \cite{CFG2}.

416: \end{remark}

417: 

418: \begin{remark}

419: \rm

420: With the same method than the one used in this paper, it is

421: possible to get global in time

422: $O(\eps^s)$ approximation  for all $s < \frac{1}{2}$.

423: More precisely  for any $s <  \frac{1}{2}$ there exists a family

424: of solutions $u^\eps  \in \cC^\infty([0,T_\eps] \times \Omega)$, of the equation $(\ref{LL1})$ on $[0,T_\eps] \times \Omega$,

425: of the equation $(\ref{LL2})$ on $[0,T_\eps] \times \Gamma$,

426: $\eps \in ]0,1]$, with lim$_{\eps \rightarrow 0^+} \, T_\eps = \infty$,

427: such that  for all $T>0$,  there exists $C >0$ and $\eps_0$  such that for all $\eps \in

428: ]0,\eps_0 ]$, there holds 

429: $|| u^\eps - u^0 ||_{L^2([0,T] \times \Omega)} \leqslant C \eps^s$ .

430: 

431: 

432: \end{remark}

433: 

434: 

435: \section{Asymptotic expansion} 

436: 

437: 

438: Let us fix some notations.

439: We will use the letter $\mathcal{S}$ to denote the Schwarz space of

440: rapidly decreasing functions.

441: We  define  the boundary layer profile spaces  

442: %

443: \begin{eqnarray*}

444:   \mathcal{N}_{\pm} (T) :=    H^\infty ( [0,T] \times \Omega, \mathcal{S}( \RR^\pm ) ).

445: \end{eqnarray*} 

446: %

447: Since we will need an equation of

448: the boundary $\Gamma$, we fix once for all a function

449: $\Phi \in \cC^{\infty}(\RR^3, \RR)$ and we assume that

450: $\Omega = \{ \Phi > 0 \}$, $ \Gamma = \{ \Phi = 0 \}$ 

451: and  $| \nabla \Phi (x) | = 1 $ in an open neighborhood $\mathcal{V}_\Gamma $ 

452: of $\Gamma $ \footnote{ Hence for $x \in \Omega \cap \mathcal{V}_\Gamma$: 

453: $\Phi(x) = dist(x,\Gamma )$.}.  

454: Let us also  fix a function 

455: $\Psi \in \cC^{\infty}(\RR^3, \RR)$ such that 

456: $\Sigma = \{ \Psi=0 \} $

457:  and such that  $| \nabla \Psi (x) | = 1 $ in an open neighborhood $\mathcal{V}_\Sigma$ 

458: of $\Sigma $ \footnote{ Hence for $x \in \Omega \cap \mathcal{V}_\Sigma$: 

459: $\psi (x) = dist(x,\Sigma)$.}. 

460: We assume that the neighborhoods   $\mathcal{V}_\Gamma$ and  $\mathcal{V}_\Sigma$ have

461: been fixed small enough in order that $\cV_\Gamma \cap \cV_\Sigma =

462: \varnothing$.

463:  We will denote

464: $\Omega_+ := \Omega \cap \{ \Psi > 0 \}$ and

465: $\Omega_- := \Omega \cap \{ \Psi < 0 \}$.

466: We consider a $C^\infty$ unit vector field  $\partial_\bn $ which coincides on

467: $\mathcal{V}_\Gamma$ with  $- \nabla _x \Phi \cdot \nabla_x $ and on

468: $\mathcal{V}_\Sigma$ with  $- \nabla _x \Psi \cdot \nabla_x $.

469: 

470: 

471: \input epsf   

472: $$

473: \epsfxsize3.2in   

474: \epsffile{ferrop.eps}   

475: $$

476: 

477: In the easier case where $u^0$ is continuous across the hypersurface

478: $\Sigma$, paper \cite{CFG1} shows the existence of solutions $u^\eps $,

479: $\eps \in ]0,1]$,

480: of the equation $(\ref{LL1})$ in $\Omega$,

481: of the equation $(\ref{LL2})$ on $ \Gamma$,  

482: of the form

483: %

484: \begin{eqnarray*}

485: u^{\eps}  (t,x) &:=& u^0   (t,x) +  \eps \Big( 

486: \mathfrak{U} (t,x, \frac{\Phi(x)}{\eps} )  +  \mathbf{w}^{\eps}  (t,x)\Big)

487: \end{eqnarray*} 

488: %

489: where the function $\mathfrak{U}$ is in $\mathcal{N}_{+} (\infty)$ and

490: satisfies $\mathfrak{U}(t,x,z)=0$ for $x \notin \mathcal{V}_\Gamma$.

491: The function $\mathfrak{U} $ describes a boundary layer which appears near the boundary 

492: to compensate the lost of the Neumann condition

493:  from the complete model (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3}) to

494: the limit model  (\ref{LL0})  ($\eps = 0$). 

495:  The amplitude of this boundary is

496: weak and its behaviour is linear.

497: For sake of completeness we will state this in

498: section $\ref{deja}$.

499: The  functions  $\mathbf{w}^{\eps} $ can be seen as remainders.

500: 

501: 

502: Here since we deal with a ground state $ u^0 $ which is  discontinuous across the  hypersurface

503: $\Sigma$, 

504: we look for solutions $u^\eps $,

505: $\eps \in ]0,1]$,

506: of the equation $(\ref{LL1})$ in $\Omega$,

507: of the equation $(\ref{LL2})$ on $ \Gamma$,  

508: of the form

509: %

510: \begin{eqnarray}

511: \label{decomp}

512: u^{\eps}  (t,x) :=  \mathcal{U}  (t,x, \frac{\Psi(x)}{\eps}) 

513: +  \eps \Big(\mathfrak{U} (t,x, \frac{\Phi(x)}{\eps} )  +  \mathbf{w}^{\eps}  (t,x)  \Big).

514: \end{eqnarray} 

515: %

516: The function $\mathcal{U}$

517: describes a large amplitude  internal layer

518: profile i.e. a sharp

519: transition  in the neighborhood of the hypersurface $\Sigma$ of width

520: $\sim \eps$.

521: More precisely the function $\mathcal{U}$ is $\cC^\infty$ and satisfies

522: %

523: \begin{eqnarray}

524: \label{sharp1}

525: \lim_{y\rightarrow \pm \infty}   \mathcal{U}  (t,x, y) &=&

526:   u^0  (t,x ) \quad \text{for} \ x \in \mathcal{V}_\Sigma \cap \Omega_\pm

527:   \\ \label{sharp2}

528:   \mathcal{U}  (t,x, y)&=& u^0  (t,x ) \quad \text{for} \ x \notin

529:   \mathcal{V}_\Sigma \ \text{and} \ y \in \R

530: \end{eqnarray} 

531: %

532: The profile $\mathfrak{U}$, as we have already said it above, was  constructed in  \cite{CFG1}. 

533: The  functions  $ \mathbf{w}^{\eps}  $ can still be seen as remainders.

534: Let us explain this time more precisely what we mean by remainders.

535: Let us fix a finite set of smooth vectors fields $\cT_0 = \{

536: \cZ_i(x;\D_x) ; i=1, \cdots ,\mu \}$ on $\RR^3$, tangent to the

537: surfaces $\Gamma$ and $\Sigma$ (that is satisfying $\cZ_i(x;\D_x)

538: \Phi =0$ on $\Gamma$ and $\cZ_i(x;\D_x)\Psi = 0$ on $\Sigma$, for

539: all $i\in \{1, \cdots , \mu\}$), and generating the algebra of

540: smooth vector fields tangent to $\Gamma \cup \Sigma$. These vector

541: fields can be viewed as vector fields on $\RR^{4}$ tangent to $\RR

542: \times \Gamma$ and to $\RR \times \Sigma$. By adding the vector

543: field $\D_t$ to the family, one gets the set $\cT := \{ \D_t \} \cup

544: \cT_0  $ which generates the set of smooth vector fields in $\RR^4 $

545: tangent to $(\RR \times \Gamma) \cup (\RR \times \Sigma)$. We denote

546: $\cZ_0 := \D_t$. For all multi-index $\alpha \in

547: \NN^{1+\mu}$ we note $\cZ^\alpha = \D_t^{\alpha_0}\cZ^{\alpha_1}_1.

548: \cdots . \cZ^{\alpha_\mu}_\mu$, with $\alpha = (\alpha_0, \alpha_1,

549: \cdots , \alpha_\mu)$. 

550: Let us introduce the usual  norm:

551: $$

552: \| u \|_{m} := \sum_{|\alpha| \leq m \, , \, \alpha \in

553: \NN^{1+\mu}} | \cZ^\alpha u

554: \|_{L^2(]0,T[ \times \Omega)},

555: $$

556: and note $H^m_{co}(]0,T[\times \Omega)$  the space of $u\in

557: L^2(]0,T[ \times \Omega)$ such that this norm is finite. 

558: We introduce the set $E$ of the family $( \mathbf{w}^\eps  )

559: _{0<\eps\leqslant 1})$ of functions  in $L^2(]0,T[ \times \Omega)$ such that for all $m \in \N$, there exists $\eps_0 >0$ such that

560: \begin{eqnarray}

561: \label{estiti}

562: \text{sup}_{0<\eps\leqslant \eps_0} \, (|| \mathbf{w}^{\eps} ||_{m} + ||\eps \partial_\n

563: \, \mathbf{w}^{\eps} ||_{m} +  \eps (|| \mathbf{w}^{\eps} ||_{\infty}  +

564: ||\cZ \mathbf{w}^{\eps}

565: ||_{\infty} + ||\eps \partial_\n \,  \mathbf{w}^{\eps}||_{\infty} ))<

566: \infty .

567: \end{eqnarray} 

568: %

569: 

570: In fact Theorem \ref{main} is the straightforward consequence of the

571: following result.

572: 

573: 

574: \begin{theorem}

575: \label{main2}

576: 

577: Let $u^0 \in \cC^\infty\big(\RR, H^\infty_\Sigma(\Omega) \big) $

578: be a solution of $(\ref{LL0})$. 

579: There exist $T>0$, a profile $\mathcal{U}$ in $\cC^\infty ((0,T) \times

580: \Omega \times \R )$ which  satisfies 

581: $(\ref{sharp1})-(\ref{sharp2})$

582: and a family $( \mathbf{w}^\eps)$ in $E$

583:  such that the function $u^\eps$ given by the formula (\ref{decomp}) are solutions in  $C^\infty$  

584:  of the equation  $(\ref{LL1})$ on $[0,T] \times \Omega$,

585: of the equation $(\ref{LL2})$ on $[0,T] \times \Gamma$.

586: \end{theorem}

587: %

588: Theorem \ref{main2}  exhibits some large variations solutions of the Landau-Lifschitz

589: equations as the exchange coefficient $\eps^2$ tends to zero, 

590: by means of the  asymptotic expansions (\ref{decomp}).

591: The remainder of the paper is devoted to the proof of Theorem \ref{main2}.

592:  As in \cite{CFG1}, since the magnetic moment $u$ is unimodular, the equation (\ref{LL1}) is equivalent

593:  for smooth solutions to the following

594: one:

595: %

596: \begin{eqnarray}

597: \label{LL1new}

598: \cL^\eps( u^\eps, \D )\, u^\eps =

599:     \bF\big(u^\eps, \eps \D_x u^\eps,

600:      \cH(u^\eps)\big)

601: \end{eqnarray}

602: where we have noted

603: $$

604: \cL^\eps(v,\D) := \D_t - \eps^2 \Delta_x - \eps^2 v \wedge \Delta_x,

605: $$

606: and

607: $$

608: \bF(u,V,H):= |V|^2u + u\wedge H - u\wedge (u\wedge H),

609: $$

610: for all $u\in \RR^3$, $V\in \cM(\RR^3,\RR^3)$, $H\in \RR^3$.

611: From now on we will  deal with equation (\ref{LL1new}) rather than 

612: (\ref{LL1}).

613: We will proceed in three steps.

614: In subsection $\ref{s1}$ we will define the profile $\mathcal{U}$  as a

615: local in time solution of a pair of

616: nonlinear equations in $\Omega \times \R_\pm $ coupled by some

617: transmissions conditions on $\{y=0\}$.

618: In  subsection $\ref{deja}$  we  will recall the results of \cite{CFG1} about the profile $\mathfrak{U}$.

619: In subsection $\ref{s3}$  we  will  prove the existence of some remainders $\mathbf{w}^\eps$

620:  till the

621: lifetime $T$ of the profile $\mathcal{U}$.

622: Eventually we will show that the remainders $\mathbf{w}^\eps$ satisfy the

623: uniform  estimates uniform (\ref{estiti}).

624: 

625: \subsection{Construction of the internal layers }

626: \label{s1}

627: 

628: 

629: Despite that $\pm \frac{\Psi(x)}{\eps}>0$ when  $x \in \Omega_\pm$ we will define $\mathcal{U}$ for all $(x,z) \in \Omega \times

630: \R_\pm $ since this will not cause any additional difficulty.

631: An Uryshon argument yields the existence of two functions  $u^{0}_\pm$  in $H^\infty ( (0,\infty) \times \Omega )$ such

632: that $u^{0}_\pm = u^{0}$ for all $x \in \Omega_\pm \cup  (\Omega_\mp -

633: \mathcal{V}_\Sigma)$.

634: %The existence of such smooth extensions is insured by ...

635: We look for a viscous internal layer

636: profile $\mathcal{U}$ of the form

637: %

638: \begin{eqnarray}

639: \label{R1}

640: \mathcal{U}(t,x,y) := 

641:  \left\{

642:  \begin{array}{cc}

643:   u^{0}_+  (t,x) + \mathcal{U}_{+}  (t,x, y)  \quad

644:   &\text{if} \ y>0,

645:  \vspace{0.3cm}\\ u^{0}_-  (t,x) + \mathcal{U}_{-}  (t,x, y)  \quad

646:   &\text{if} \ y<0 .

647:  \end{array}

648:  \right.

649: \end{eqnarray} 

650: %

651: The functions $\mathcal{U}_\pm$ are in $\mathcal{N}_{\pm} (T)$.

652: These functions  describe some internal large amplitude boundary layers,

653:  on each side of the hypersurface $\Sigma$. 

654: To insure that the function $\mathcal{U}$ is in $C^1 ( (0,T) \times \Omega  \times  \R)$

655: it is necessary to impose the transmission conditions:

656: %

657: \begin{eqnarray}

658:  \label{p2}

659: \left.

660: \begin{array}{c}

661:  \mathcal{U}_{+} -  \mathcal{U}_{- } = - u^0_{+} + u^0_{- } ,

662: \\ \partial_y \mathcal{U}_{+} - \partial_y \mathcal{U} _{- } =0

663: \end{array}

664: \right\}

665: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

666: \end{eqnarray}

667: %

668: %\subsubsection{Construction of the internal layer $\mathcal{U}_{(i)}$}

669: 

670: In Theorem $\ref{profil0}$ we will define the profiles $\mathcal{U}_\pm$ 

671: as local solutions of

672: nonlinear equations in $\Omega \times \R_\pm $ coupled by some

673: transmissions conditions on $\{y=0\}$.

674: Let us look for convenient  equations. 

675: We will plug the functions $u^{\eps,0}$ defined by 

676: $u^{\eps,0} (t,x) := \mathcal{U}(t,x, \frac{\Psi(x)}{\eps})$

677: instead of  $u^\eps$ in $(\ref{LL1new})$.

678: In general it is not possible to verify  $(\ref{LL1new}) $ but we will try

679: to choose the functions  $\mathcal{U}_\pm$ such that the error term is as

680: small as possible.

681: Let us begin to look at the left side of $(\ref{LL1new})$.

682: With (\ref{R1})

683:   we get  in $L^\infty$ 

684:   %

685: \begin{eqnarray}

686: \label{M1}

687: \mathcal{L}^{\eps} (u^{\eps,0} , \partial ) u^{\eps,0}  = 

688: \partial_t \, u_{\pm}^0  + 

689: \Big( L(\mathcal{U} , \partial_t ,  \partial_y^2 )  \mathcal{U}_{\pm}   \Big)| + O(\eps) \quad   \mathrm{for} \

690:   x \in  \Omega_\pm  ,

691: \end{eqnarray}

692: %

693: where the vertical bar $|$ means that $y$ is evaluated in $y=

694: \frac{\Psi(x)}{\eps}$ and 

695: %

696: \begin{eqnarray*}

697: L(U,\partial_{t}, \partial_{y}^2) := \partial_t - \partial_y^2 - U \wedge \partial_y^2 .

698: \end{eqnarray*} 

699: %

700: We now turn to the right side of $(\ref{LL1new})$.  

701: We first look at  the

702: action of $\cH$ on the family $u^{\eps,0}$:

703: %

704: \begin{eqnarray*}

705: \cH(u^{\eps,0} ) = \cH(u^0_\pm ) - (\mathcal{U}_\pm  . n)| \, n + O(\eps).

706: \end{eqnarray*}

707: %

708: Then 

709: %

710: \begin{eqnarray}

711: \label{M2}

712:  \bF\big(u^\eps, \eps \D_x u^\eps,    \cH(u^\eps)\big) := 

713:   \bF\big(u^0_\pm, 0,   \cH(u^0_\pm)\big)

714:  + F_\pm ( \mathcal{U}_\pm , \partial_y  \mathcal{U}_\pm  )|  + O(\eps) \quad   \mathrm{for} \

715:   x \in  \Omega_\pm   ,

716:  \end{eqnarray}

717:  with for all $U\in \RR^3$, $V\in \cM(\RR^3,\RR^3)$, 

718: %

719: \begin{eqnarray*}

720:  F_\pm (  U, V  )  &:=&

721:  | V |^2 \, ( u^0_\pm  + U )

722: + U \wedge  \cH (u^0_\pm ) - (U  . n) ( u^0_\pm  +  U)  \wedge   n

723: \\ \nonumber  && + U \wedge (  u^0_\pm +U)

724:  \wedge (   \cH (u^0_\pm ) - (U  . n) n  )

725:  +  u^0_\pm  \wedge (  U  \wedge  (   \cH (u^0_\pm )   - (U  . n) n ) )

726: \\ \nonumber  && -  (U  . n) u^0_\pm  \wedge (  u^0_\pm   \wedge    n )

727: \end{eqnarray*}

728: %

729: Thanks to (\ref{M1}) and (\ref{M2})  we get by looking at the terms at order $0$

730: %

731: \begin{eqnarray*}

732: \partial_t \,   u_{\pm}^0+ 

733:  L(\mathcal{U} , \partial_t ,  \partial_y^2 )  \mathcal{U}_\pm = \bF\big(u^0_\pm, 0,   \cH(u^0_\pm)\big)

734:  + F_\pm ( \mathcal{U}_\pm , \partial_y  \mathcal{U}_\pm  ) .

735: \end{eqnarray*}

736: %

737: Since for $x \in  \Omega_\pm$, the functions $u^0_\pm$ satisfies

738: $(\ref{LL0})$  we could simplify and we get

739: the nonlinear equations 

740: %

741: \begin{eqnarray}

742: \label{p1} L(  u_{\pm}^0 + \mathcal{U}_\pm ,\partial_{t}, \partial_{y}^2 ) \mathcal{U}_\pm =

743:  F_\pm ( \mathcal{U}_\pm , \partial_y  \mathcal{U}_\pm  ) .

744:  \end{eqnarray}

745: %

746: The equations  $(\ref{p1})$ are parabolic with respect to $t,y$, the

747: variable $x$ can be seen as a parameter.

748: The following theorem claims that it is possible to find some solutions

749: $\mathcal{U}_{\pm} \in \mathcal{N}_{\pm} (T)$ of these equations even for all $x \in   \Omega  $.

750: 

751: 

752: \begin{theorem}

753: \label{profil0}

754: There exists $T > 0$ and there exist some functions $\mathcal{U}_{\pm} \in \mathcal{N}_{\pm} (T)$

755:  which verify the equations $(\ref{p1})$ when $(t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times

756:  \R_\pm $ and  the transmission conditions $(\ref{p2})$.

757:  Moreover precisely for all $x \notin \mathcal{V}_\Sigma$ and $y \in  \R_\pm $ 

758: there holds $\mathcal{U}_{\pm}  (t,x, y)= 0$.

759: \end{theorem}

760: 

761: \begin{proof}

762: 

763: We will proceed in four steps.

764: 

765: \begin{stepbd}

766: We begin to reduce the problem to homogeneous boundary conditions. 

767: \end{stepbd}

768: 

769: We introduce the functions $V_{\pm} $ and $ \mathcal{U}_{\pm} $ given by 

770:  the formula

771: %

772: \begin{eqnarray*}

773: V_{\pm} (t,x,y) &:=& (1-\frac{e^{\mp y}}{2}) u^0_\pm (t,x) + \frac{e^{\mp y}}{2}

774: u^0_\mp (t,x) ,

775: \\ \mathbf{W}_{\pm} (t,x,y)&:=& \mathcal{U}_{\pm} (t,x,y) \pm  \frac{1}{2} (u^0_+  (t,x)-

776: u^0_- (t,x)) e^{\mp y} .

777: \end{eqnarray*} 

778: %

779: Thus the transmission conditions $(\ref{p2})$ reads:

780: %

781: \begin{eqnarray}

782:  \label{np2}

783: \left.

784: \begin{array}{c}

785:  \mathbf{W}_{+} - \mathbf{W}_{-} =  0 ,

786: \\ \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{+} - \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{-} =0

787: \end{array}

788: \right\}

789: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

790: \end{eqnarray} 

791: %

792: Moreover the equations  (\ref{p1})-(\ref{p2}) read for $ (t,x,y) \in 

793: (0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm$:

794: %

795: \begin{eqnarray}

796: \label{++}

797:  L (V_{\pm} + \mathbf{W}_{\pm} ,\partial_{t},  \partial_{y}^2 )

798: \mathbf{W}_{\pm} &=& \hat{F}_{\pm} (t,x,y,\mathbf{W}_{\pm} , \partial_y

799: \mathbf{W}_{\pm}) ,

800: \end{eqnarray} 

801: %

802: where $\hat{F}_{\pm}$ are $C^\infty$ functions such that the functions

803: $\hat{F}_{\pm}(t,x,y, 0,0) $ are rapidly decreasing with respect to $y$.

804: %

805: \begin{stepbd}

806: We prove the existence of compatible initial data. 

807: \end{stepbd}

808: Let us to explain why the initial values $\mathbf{W}_{0,+}$ must satisfy some compatibility conditions 

809: at the corner $\{ t= y=0 \} $ are required in order to obtain smooth

810: solutions $\mathbf{W}_{\pm}$ of the problem  (\ref{++})-(\ref{np2}) with

811: $\mathbf{W}_{\pm} |_{t=0}:= \mathbf{W}_{0,\pm} $.

812: We start with the condition of order $0$. 

813: Set $t=0$ in the transmission conditions (\ref{np2}) to see that  $\mathbf{W}_{0,+}$ must satisfy  the relation 

814: %

815: \begin{eqnarray}

816:  \label{comp0}

817: \left.

818: \begin{array}{c}

819:  \mathbf{W}_{+} - \mathbf{W}_{0,-} =  0 ,

820: \\ \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{0,+} - \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{0,-} =0

821: \end{array}

822: \right\}

823: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (x,y) \in  \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

824: \end{eqnarray} 

825: %

826: %

827: Now, for each $k \geqslant 1$, apply the derivative $\partial_t^k $ to the  transmission conditions (\ref{p2}). 

828: We get

829: %

830: \begin{eqnarray*}

831: \left.

832: \begin{array}{c}

833: \partial_t^k \mathbf{W}_{+} - \partial_t^k\mathbf{W}_{-} =  0 ,

834: \\ \partial_y \partial_t^k \mathbf{W}_{+} - \partial_y \partial_t^k  \mathbf{W}_{-} =0

835: \end{array}

836: \right\}

837: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

838: \end{eqnarray*} 

839: %

840: Now remark that, by iteration, we can extirpate $\partial_t^k \mathbf{W}_{\pm}$ by the interior equations (\ref{p1}) in terms of

841:  derivatives with respect to $y$. More precisely there exists some smooth functions $C^k_{\pm} $ such that 

842:  $\partial_t^k \mathbf{W}_{\pm} = C^k_{\pm} ( (\partial_y^l

843:  \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k})$.

844:  Thus the following $k$th order compatibility condition must hold:

845:  %

846:  \begin{eqnarray}

847:  \label{compk}

848: \left.

849: \begin{array}{c}

850: C^k_{+} ( (\partial_y^l \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) 

851: - C^k_{-} ( (\partial_y^l \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) =0 ,

852: \\ \partial_y C^k_{+} ( (\partial_y^l \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) 

853: - \partial_y C^k_{-} ( (\partial_y^l \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) =0 .

854: \end{array}

855: \right\}

856: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (x,y) \in  \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

857: \end{eqnarray} 

858: %

859: 

860: \begin{lemma}

861: 

862: There exist some initial values $\mathbf{W}_{0,\pm}$ in $H^\infty (\Omega , \mathcal{S} (\R_\pm ))$ 

863: which  satisfy the relation (\ref{comp0}) and (\ref{compk}) for all $k \geqslant 1$. 

864: 

865: \end{lemma}

866: 

867: 

868: \begin{proof}

869: 

870: As we will follows the method of \cite{S1}, we only sketch the proof for sake of completeness. 

871: We start by analyzing more accurately the compatibility conditions and more especially the way the functions  $C^k_{\pm} $

872: depend on the derivatives with respect to $y$. Indeed they exists some functions $\tilde{C}^k_{\pm} $ such that 

873:  %

874:  \begin{eqnarray*}

875: C^k_{\pm} ( (\partial_y^l \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) =   \tilde{C}^k_{\pm} ( (\partial_y^l \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant

876: 2k-1})

877: + (\partial_y^{2k} + (V_{\pm} + \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )  \wedge  \partial_y^{2k} ) \mathbf{W}_{\pm} .

878: \end{eqnarray*} 

879: %

880: Since   given two functions $ \mathbf{W}^{(0)}_{\pm}$  in $H^\infty (\Omega )$ the applications

881:  %

882:  \begin{eqnarray*}

883:  \mathbf{W}_{\pm} \mapsto \mathbf{W}_{\pm} + ( V_{\pm}  +  \mathbf{W}^{(0)}_{\pm} ) \wedge   \mathbf{W}_{\pm} 

884: \end{eqnarray*} 

885: %

886: are two automorphisms of $H^\infty (\Omega )$

887: and an iteration, we deduce by iteration that there exists 

888: a family $(\mathbf{W}^{(k)}_{\pm})_{k \in \N}$ in $H^\infty (\Omega )$ such that 

889: %

890:  \begin{eqnarray*}

891:  \left.

892: \begin{array}{c}

893: C^k_{+} ( (\partial_y \mathbf{W}^{(l)}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) 

894: - C^k_{-} ( (\partial_y \mathbf{W}^{(l)}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) =0 ,

895: \\ \partial_y C^k_{+} ( (\partial_y \mathbf{W}^{(l)}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) 

896: - \partial_y C^k_{-} ( (\partial_y \mathbf{W}^{(l)}_{\pm} )_{l \leqslant 2k}) =0 .

897: \end{array}

898: \right.

899:  \end{eqnarray*} 

900: %

901:  We end the proof by a classical Borel argument.

902: \end{proof}

903: 

904: As a consequence, we will assume in the rest of the proof that the functions $\mathbf{W}_{\pm}$ vanish for $t\leqslant 0$.

905: \begin{stepbd}

906: We look for linear estimates.

907: \end{stepbd}

908: In order to use an iterative scheme, we look at the linear problem 

909: %

910: \begin{eqnarray}

911: \label{l1} 

912: L (\mathfrak{W}_{\pm}, \partial_{t}, \partial_{y}^2 )

913: \mathbf{W}_{\pm} = f_{\pm} \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm ,

914: \\ \label{l2} 

915: \left.

916: \begin{array}{c}

917:  \mathbf{W}_{+} - \mathbf{W}_{-} =  0 ,

918: \\ \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{+} - \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{-} =0

919: \end{array}

920: \right\}

921: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

922: \end{eqnarray} 

923: %

924: For all real $\lambda \geqslant 1$, the space $L^2 ((0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm)$ 

925: is endowed with the scalar product associated

926: to the Euclidean norm

927: %

928:  \begin{eqnarray*}

929:  || \mathbf{W}_{\pm} ||_{0,\lambda,T} := || e^{- \lambda t} \, W_{\pm} ||_{L^2 ((0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm)  }

930:  \end{eqnarray*} 

931: %

932: In order to avoid heavy notations, we will denote $W:=(\mathbf{W}_+ , \mathbf{W}_- )$, $f:=(f_+ , f_- )$ and $ \mathfrak{W} :=(

933: \mathfrak{W}_+ , \mathfrak{W}_- )$. 

934: We endow the space $ L^2 ((0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_+) \times L^2 ((0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_-)  $ with the scalar product

935: associated to the Euclidean norm 

936: %

937:  \begin{eqnarray*}

938:  || W ||_{0,\lambda,T} :=  || \mathbf{W}_+ ||_{+,0,\lambda,T} + || \mathbf{W}_- ||_{-,0,\lambda,T} .

939:  \end{eqnarray*} 

940: %

941: For $m \in \N$, we introduce the following weighted norms:

942: %

943:  \begin{eqnarray*}

944:  || W ||_{m,\lambda,T} := 

945:  \sum_{|\alpha| \leqslant m} \, || \partial_{t,x}^\alpha \, W ||_{0,\lambda,T} ,

946:  \ \text{and} \  | W |_{m,\lambda,T} := 

947:  \sum_{|\alpha| \leqslant m} \, || \partial_{t,x}^\alpha \,

948:  \partial_{y}^{\alpha_4} \, W ||_{0,\lambda,T},

949: \end{eqnarray*} 

950: %

951: where $\alpha:=(\alpha_0 ,..., \alpha_3) \in \N^4$ and

952: $\partial_{t,x}^\alpha :=\partial_{t}^{\alpha_0} \partial_{1}^{\alpha_1}

953: \partial_{2}^{\alpha_2} \partial_{3}^{\alpha_3}.$

954: %

955: \begin{proposition}

956: 

957: Let $R>0$. If $ \mathfrak{W}_\pm$  verify the following estimates 

958: %

959:  \begin{eqnarray*}

960:  || \mathfrak{W}_+ ||_{Lip ((0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_+)} + ||\mathfrak{W}_+ ||_{Lip ((0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_+)}

961:  + | \mathfrak{W} |_{m,\lambda,T} < R ,

962: \end{eqnarray*} 

963: %

964:   and the following  boundary conditions

965: %

966:  \begin{eqnarray}

967:   \label{l3}

968: \left.

969: \begin{array}{c}

970:  \mathfrak{W}_{+} - \mathfrak{W}_{-} =  0 ,

971: \\ \partial_y \mathfrak{W}_{+} - \partial_y  \mathfrak{W}_{-} =0

972: \end{array}

973: \right\}

974: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \},

975: \end{eqnarray} 

976: %

977:  then there exist $\lambda_m >0$ and for all $k \in \N$, $\mu_{k,m} > 0$, such that for all $\lambda \geqslant \lambda_m$, 

978:  %

979:  \begin{eqnarray}

980:  \label{esti1}

981:  | W |_{m,\lambda,T}   \leqslant \frac{\lambda_m}{\lambda}  | f |_{m,\lambda,T}  

982: \end{eqnarray} 

983: %

984: and for all $ \mu \geqslant \mu_{k,m} $,

985:  %

986:  \begin{eqnarray}

987:    \label{esti2}

988:     |y^k \, W |_{m,\lambda,T} \leqslant \frac{\mu_{k,m}}{\mu}  \sum_{j=0}^k | y^j \, f |_{m,\mu,T} .

989: \end{eqnarray} 

990: %

991: \end{proposition}

992: 

993: 

994: 

995: \begin{proof}

996: 

997: We  multiply the equation (\ref{l1}) by $\mathbf{W}_{\pm}$ and integrate for $(x,y) \in   \Omega \times \R_\pm$.

998: Hence

999: %

1000: \begin{eqnarray}

1001: \label{estim}

1002: (1/2) \partial_t \int_{\Omega  \times \R_\pm} | \mathbf{W}_{\pm} |^2 - J_{1,\pm}- J_{2,\pm}

1003:  =  \int_{\Omega  \times \R_\pm} f_{\pm} . \mathbf{W}_{\pm}

1004: \\ \nonumber \mathrm{where} \ J_{1,\pm} := \int_{\Omega  \times \R_\pm} \mathbf{W}_{\pm} . \partial_y^2 \mathbf{W}_{\pm}

1005: \ \mathrm{and} \ J_{2,\pm} := \int_{\Omega  \times \R_\pm} \mathbf{W}_{\pm} .  (

1006: \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} \wedge \partial_y^2)  \mathbf{W}_{\pm} .

1007: \end{eqnarray} 

1008: %

1009:  Integrating by parts, we get 

1010: %

1011: \begin{eqnarray*}

1012: J_{1,\pm} = 

1013: - \int_{\Omega \times \R_\pm } | \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{\pm} |^2

1014: - I_{1,\pm} ,

1015: \ \mathrm{and} \ J_{2,\pm} = 

1016: - \int_{\Omega \times \R_\pm } \mathbf{W}_{\pm} .  ( \partial_y \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} \wedge \partial_y)  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}

1017: - I_{2,\pm} ,

1018: \\ \nonumber 

1019:  \mathrm{where} \ I_{1,\pm} := \int_{\Omega } ( \mathbf{W}_{\pm}. \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )|_{y=0} ,

1020: \ \mathrm{and} \   I_{2,\pm} := \int_{\Omega } (\mathbf{W}_{\pm} .  (  \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} \wedge \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}))|_{y=0} .

1021: \end{eqnarray*} 

1022: %

1023: Using the boundary conditions (\ref{l2}) and (\ref{l3}), we get $I_{1,+} - I_{1,-} =  I_{2,+} - I_{2,-} =  0$.

1024: Taking that into account we add the two estimates in (\ref{estim}).

1025: Then we multiply by $e^{-2 \lambda t}$ and integrate in time.

1026: By a Gronwall lemma we get  that there exists $c >0$ such that for all $\lambda \geqslant c$, 

1027: %

1028: \begin{eqnarray}

1029: \label{estiL2}

1030:  | \partial_y W |^2_{0,\lambda,T} + \lambda | W |^2_{0,\lambda,T} \leqslant c  |<f,W>_{\lambda,T}| .

1031: \end{eqnarray} 

1032: %

1033: 

1034: We go on with  estimates tangential to $\{y=0\}$. 

1035: To do this we apply the derivative $\partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, $ to the equations (\ref{l1})-(\ref{l2}). 

1036: So we get that $\partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} $ verify

1037:  %

1038: \begin{eqnarray}

1039: \label{l1tan} 

1040: L ( \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} , \partial_{t},\partial_{y}^2 )

1041: \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} = \tilde{f}_{\pm}  \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm ,

1042: \\ \label{l2tan} 

1043: \left.

1044: \begin{array}{c}

1045: \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \,  \mathbf{W}_{+} - \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathbf{W}_{-} =  0 ,

1046: \\ \partial_y \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathbf{W}_{+} - \partial_y  \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathbf{W}_{-} =0

1047: \end{array}

1048: \right\}

1049: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \},

1050: \end{eqnarray} 

1051: %

1052: where 

1053: %

1054: \begin{eqnarray}

1055: \label{source}

1056: \tilde{f}_{\pm} := \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, f_{\pm} 

1057: + \sum_{|\alpha_1 | + |\alpha_2 | = |\alpha|, |\alpha_2 | < |\alpha|} 

1058:  \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \, \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge  \partial_y^2 \, \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} .

1059: \end{eqnarray} 

1060: %

1061: We apply the tangential derivative $\partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, $ to the boundary conditions (\ref{l3}) and get

1062: %

1063:  \begin{eqnarray}

1064:   \label{l3tan}

1065: \left.

1066: \begin{array}{c}

1067: \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathfrak{W}_{+} - \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \,  \mathfrak{W}_{-} =  0 ,

1068: \\ \partial_y \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \,  \mathfrak{W}_{+} - \partial_y \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \,  \mathfrak{W}_{-} =0

1069: \end{array}

1070: \right\}

1071: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \},

1072: \end{eqnarray} 

1073: %

1074: Using the estimate (\ref{estiL2}), we get, for all $\lambda \geqslant c$, 

1075: %

1076: \begin{eqnarray*}

1077: | \partial_y \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, W |^2_{0,\lambda,T} 

1078:  + \lambda | \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, W |^2_{0,\lambda,T} \leqslant 

1079:  c  |<\tilde{f} , \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, W  >_{\lambda,T}|.

1080: \end{eqnarray*} 

1081: %

1082: Thanks to (\ref{source}), we get

1083: %

1084: \begin{eqnarray}

1085: <\tilde{f} , \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, W  >_{\lambda,T} = 

1086: < \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, f  , \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, W  >_{\lambda,T}

1087: + \sum_{|\alpha_1 | + |\alpha_2 | = |\alpha|, |\alpha_2 | < |\alpha|}  I_{\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } ,

1088: \end{eqnarray} 

1089: %

1090: where $ I_{\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } := I_{+,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } + I_{-,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 }$ with

1091: %

1092: \begin{eqnarray*}

1093: I_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } := < \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \, \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge  \partial_y^2 \,

1094: \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} , \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} >_{\lambda,T} .

1095: \end{eqnarray*} 

1096: %

1097: Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we get

1098: %

1099: \begin{eqnarray*}

1100: |< \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, f  , \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, W  >_{\lambda,T} | 

1101: \leqslant | f|_{0,\lambda,T} \, .| W|_{0,\lambda,T} .

1102: \end{eqnarray*} 

1103: %

1104:   We are going to estimate, for all $ \alpha_1 , \alpha_2 $ 

1105: such that $|\alpha_1 | + |\alpha_2 | = |\alpha|, |\alpha_2 | < |\alpha|$, the term $ I_{\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 }$.

1106: Integrating by parts, we get

1107: $I_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } :=  \sum_{l=1}^3 \, I^l_{ \pm,\alpha_1 ,

1108: \alpha_2 },$

1109: with

1110: %

1111: \begin{eqnarray*}

1112:  I^1_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } &:=& - 

1113:  < \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \, \partial_y \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge  \partial_y \, \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm}

1114:  , \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} >_{\lambda,T} ,

1115: \\  I^2_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } &:=& -  

1116:  < \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \,  \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge  \partial_y \, \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} ,

1117: \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{\pm}>_{\lambda,T} ,

1118: \\ I^3_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } &:=& \mp   <<

1119: \{  (\partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \, \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} \wedge  \partial_y \, \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} )\}|_{y=0},

1120: \{ \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha} \, \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{\pm} \}|_{y=0} >>_{\lambda,T} ,

1121: \end{eqnarray*} 

1122: %

1123: where $<<.,.>>_{\lambda,T}$ denotes the scalar product of $L^2 ((0,T) \times \Omega )$ associated to the mesure $e^{-\lambda t} dt

1124: dx$. 

1125:  Thanks to the boundary conditions   (\ref{l2tan})-(\ref{l3tan}), 

1126: we get $ I^3_{ +,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } - I^3_{ -,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } = 0$.

1127: Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we get

1128: %

1129: \begin{eqnarray*}

1130: | I^1_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 }| &\leqslant& 

1131: | \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \, \partial_y \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge  \partial_y \, \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm}

1132: |_{0,\lambda,T} \, . ||  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}||_{m,\lambda,T} ,

1133: \\ | I^2_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 }| &\leqslant& |  \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_1} \,  \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge  \partial_y \,

1134: \partial_{t,x}^{\alpha_2} \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm} |_{0,\lambda,T} \, . || \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}||_{m,\lambda,T} ,

1135:  \end{eqnarray*} 

1136: %

1137: Using Gargliardo-Nirenberg inequalities, we get

1138: %

1139: \begin{eqnarray*}

1140: | I^1_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } |   &\leqslant 

1141:  & \quad c ( ||\partial_y \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} ||_{m,\lambda,T} . ||  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}   ||_{Lip} 

1142:  +   || \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} ||_{Lip} . || \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{\pm} ||_{m,\lambda,T} ). ||\mathbf{W}_{\pm}||_{m,\lambda,T} ,

1143: \\  | I^2_{ \pm,\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } | &\leqslant 

1144:  & \quad c ( || \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} ||_{m-1,\lambda,T} . ||  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}   ||_{Lip} 

1145:  +   | \mathfrak{W}_{\pm} |_{Lip} . || \partial_y \mathbf{W}_{\pm} ||_{m-1,\lambda,T} ). || \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}||_{m,\lambda,T} .

1146: \end{eqnarray*} 

1147: %

1148: Hence we get 

1149: %

1150: \begin{eqnarray*}

1151: |I_{\alpha_1 , \alpha_2 } | &\leqslant& \frac{1}{2} || \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}||^2_{m,\lambda,T} 

1152: + C ( || \mathbf{W}_{\pm}||^2_{m,\lambda,T} + || \partial_y  \mathbf{W}_{\pm}||^2_{m-1,\lambda,T}).

1153: \end{eqnarray*} 

1154: %

1155: We deduce that there exists $\lambda_m >0$ 

1156: such that for all $\lambda \geqslant \lambda_m$, there holds 

1157: $ || W ||_{m,\lambda,T}  \leqslant \frac{\lambda_m}{\lambda}  || f

1158: ||_{m,\lambda,T} $.

1159: 

1160: To prove  the estimates (\ref{esti1}), it remains to get 

1161:  normal estimates.

1162: The cases $\alpha_4 =0$ or $1$ are already treated in the tangential estimates.

1163: If  $\alpha_4 \geqslant 2$, we proceed by iteration, extirpating $\partial_y^2 \mathbf{W}_{\pm}$ from the equations.

1164: 

1165: It remains to get the estimates (\ref{esti2}). 

1166: First we notice that  for  $p \geqslant 1$ the function $y^p \, \mathbf{W}_{\pm}$ verify the initial boundary value problem

1167: %

1168: \begin{eqnarray*}

1169: L (\mathfrak{W}_{\pm}, \partial_{t}, \partial_{y}^2 )

1170: \mathbf{W}_{\pm}^{[p]} = f_{\pm}^{[p]} \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm ,

1171: \\ \left.

1172: \begin{array}{c}

1173:  \mathbf{W}^{[p]}_{+} - \mathbf{W}^{[p]}_{-} =  0 ,

1174: \\ \partial_y \mathbf{W}^{[p]}_{+} - \partial_y  \mathbf{W}^{[p]}_{-} =0

1175: \end{array}

1176: \right\}

1177: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \},

1178: \\  \mathbf{W}^{[p]}_{\pm} = 0 \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  \{ 0 \} \times \Omega \times \R_\pm  ,

1179: \end{eqnarray*} 

1180: %

1181: where

1182: %

1183: \begin{eqnarray*}

1184: f_{\pm}^{[p]} &=& y^p \, f_{\pm} 

1185: + \sum_{j=0}^{p-1} \, ( q^1_j \partial_y  \mathbf{W}^{[j]}_{\pm} +  q^2_j \, \mathfrak{W}_{\pm}  \wedge \partial_y 

1186: \mathbf{W}^{[j]}_{\pm}),

1187: \end{eqnarray*} 

1188: %

1189: where the $q^1_j$ and the $q^2_j$ are in $\N$. 

1190: Thus we prove, by iteration on $p$  and thanks to the inequality

1191: (\ref{esti1}),  the estimate

1192: %

1193: \begin{eqnarray*}

1194: \sqrt{\mu} || \partial_y (y^p \, W)||_{m,\mu,T} + \mu || y^p \, W||_{m,\mu,T}  \leqslant \sum_{j=0}^p || y^j \,

1195: f||_{m,\mu,T} 

1196: \end{eqnarray*} 

1197: %

1198: which implies the estimate (\ref{esti2}). 

1199: 

1200: \end{proof}

1201: \begin{stepbd}

1202: We use an iterative scheme.

1203: \end{stepbd}

1204: We define the iterative scheme $(\mathbf{W}^\nu_{\pm})_{\nu \in \N}$ by setting

1205: $ \mathbf{W}^0_{\pm}$ equal to zero 

1206: and, by iteration, when $\mathbf{W}^\nu_{\pm}$ is defined, we take $\mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{\pm}$ as solution of 

1207: %

1208: \begin{eqnarray*}

1209:   L (V_{\pm} + \mathbf{W}^\nu_{\pm} , \partial_{t}, \partial_{y}^2 )

1210: \mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{\pm} = \hat{F}(t,x,y,  \mathbf{W}^\nu_{\pm} , \partial_y

1211: \mathbf{W}^\nu_{\pm}) \quad  \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,\infty) \times \Omega \times \R_\pm ,

1212: \\  \left.

1213: \begin{array}{c}

1214:  \mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{+} - \mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{-} =  0 ,

1215: \\ \partial_y \mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{+} - \partial_y  \mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{-} =0

1216: \end{array}

1217: \right\}

1218: \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \} ,

1219: \\ \mathbf{W}^{\nu+1}_{\pm} = 0 \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,y) \in  \{ 0 \} \times \Omega \times \R_\pm .

1220: \end{eqnarray*} 

1221: %

1222: 

1223: Thanks to the linear estimates, to a Sobolev embedding and to some Gargliardo-Nirenberg inequalities, we show that the

1224: iterative scheme $(\mathbf{W}^\nu_{\pm})_{\nu \in \N}$ converge, when $\nu \rightarrow +\infty $  toward 

1225:  some  solutions $\mathbf{W}_{\pm}  \in \mathcal{N}_{\pm} (T)$ of the

1226:  problem (\ref{++})-(\ref{np2}). By going back to the original problem

1227:  (\ref{p1})-(\ref{p2}), the first sentence of Theorem $\ref{profil0}$ is

1228:  now proved. When $x \notin \mathcal{V}_\Sigma$, the function $u^0_+ -

1229:  u^0_-$ in the right hand side of  (\ref{p1}) vanishes and so do the

1230:  functions  $\mathcal{U}_{\pm}  $.

1231: 

1232: \end{proof}

1233: \begin{remark}

1234: \rm

1235: Notice that the possibility of a blow-up  can be controlled with Lipschitz norm in a very classical way. 

1236: However we do not know whether the solutions $\mathcal{U}$ actually

1237: blow-up or globally exist.

1238: \end{remark}

1239: \subsection{Construction of  $\mathfrak{U}$}

1240: \label{deja}

1241: 

1242: In this section we define the  boundary layer profile

1243: $\mathfrak{U}$ as a solution of a linear boundary value problem. 

1244: Let us recall that this function describes a boundary layer which appears near the boundary 

1245: to compensate the lost of the Neumann condition

1246:  from the complete model (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3}) to

1247: the limit model  (\ref{LL0})  ($\eps = 0$). 

1248: Such a boundary layer was already mentioned in paper \cite{CFG1}.

1249: Let $\Theta$  be a $C^\infty$  function on

1250: $\Omega$ such that $\Theta =1$   in a neighborhood $\mathcal{W}_\Gamma$

1251:  of $\Gamma$ such that

1252: $\mathcal{W}_\Gamma \subset \subset  \mathcal{V}_\Gamma$

1253:  and  $\Theta =0$  in $\Omega -

1254:  \mathcal{W}_\Gamma$.

1255: 

1256: \begin{theorem}

1257: There exists $\mathfrak{U}  \in \mathcal{N}_{+} (T)$ which verifies

1258: \begin{eqnarray*}

1259:  L ( u^0 , \partial_{t}, \partial_{z}^2 ) \mathfrak{U}

1260: & = & -( \mathfrak{U}. n) u^0 \wedge   n

1261:  + \mathfrak{U}  \wedge   \cH(u^0 ) 

1262: \\ \nonumber && + \mathfrak{U} \wedge ( u^0 \wedge \cH(u^0 ) )

1263: -( \mathfrak{U}. n)   u^0 \wedge ( u^0  \wedge  n )

1264:  +u^0 \wedge ( \mathfrak{U}  \wedge \cH(u^0 ) ,

1265:  \end{eqnarray*}

1266: when $(t,x,z) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \R_+ $,

1267: \begin{eqnarray}

1268:   \partial_z \mathfrak{U}  = \Theta (x) \partial_\mathfrak{n} u^0

1269:   \quad \mathrm{when} \ (t,x,z) \in  (0,T) \times \Omega \times \{ 0 \}.

1270: \end{eqnarray}

1271: Moreover there holds $\mathfrak{U}(t,x,z)=0$ for $x  \notin \mathcal{V}_\Sigma$.

1272: \end{theorem}

1273: 

1274: \begin{proof}

1275: Proceeding as in the proof of Theorem $\ref{profil0}$, we prove the existence of compatible initial data. 

1276: Then we follow the proof of Proposition $4.2$ of \cite{CFG1}.

1277: \end{proof}

1278: 

1279: 

1280: \subsection{Construction of $\mathbf{w}^\eps$ }

1281: \label{s3}

1282: In this section, we look at the remainder $\mathbf{w}^\eps$.

1283: We will proceed in four steps.

1284: First in section \ref{c1} we  will reduce the initial problem  (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3})

1285: for the unknown  $u^\eps$ to a problem for $\mathbf{w}^\eps$. 

1286: Indeed in order  to get a homogeneous boundary problem,  we will add a

1287: corrector to $\mathbf{w}^\eps$ and rather work with the resulting term $w^\eps$. 

1288: Some Borel classical arguments will insure the existence of convenient

1289: initial data for the resulting reduced problem which means that

1290: compatibility conditions either on $\Gamma$ and on $\Sigma$ are satisfied.

1291: We will  prove that the solutions of this nonlinear problems

1292: exist not only for a common non trivial time, in fact even till the

1293: lifetime $T$ of the profiles $\mathcal{U}$.

1294: Moreover these  solutions satisfy some estimates uniform with respect to

1295: $\eps$.

1296:  The method lies on  a simple Picard iterative scheme  (cf. section

1297:  \ref{c2}) and on linear estimates (cf. section

1298:  \ref{c3}). 

1299: More precisely we will use  $L^2$-type conormal estimates of  only the

1300: two first normal derivatives, and some Lipschitz estimates.

1301: A few carefulness reveals that the presence of the operator $\mathcal{H}$ does not

1302: cause any loss of factor $\eps$ or any loss of derivatives.

1303: 

1304: \subsubsection{A reduced problem}

1305: \label{c1}

1306: 

1307: Since we look for  solutions  $u^\eps$ of (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3})

1308:  of the form (\ref{decomp}) where the functions 

1309:  \begin{eqnarray*}

1310: \label{decomp2}

1311: a^{\eps}  (t,x) &:=&  \mathcal{U}  (t,x, \frac{\Psi(x)}{\eps}) 

1312: +  \eps \Big(\mathfrak{U} (t,x, \frac{\Phi(x)}{\eps} )  +  \mathbf{w}^{\eps}  (t,x)  \Big)

1313: \end{eqnarray*} 

1314:  have been constructed above, 

1315: we look for a problem in term of the  remainder $\mathbf{w}^\eps$.

1316: In fact, in order to get a homogeneous boundary problem,  we choose a function $\rho(t,x) \in H^\infty$ such that

1317: \begin{eqnarray}

1318: \label{B1}

1319:   \Dn \rho\, |_\Gamma  &=& - \Dn   \mathfrak{U} (t,x,0)|_{\Gamma}.

1320:  \end{eqnarray}

1321:  and will look for remainders $\mathbf{w}^\eps$

1322:  of the form $\mathbf{w} ^\eps =  \rho + w^\eps $. 

1323:  Let us explain why. 

1324: On the boundary $\Gamma$, the function  $a^\eps $ satisfies:

1325: \begin{equation}

1326: \label{B2}

1327: \Dn a^\eps|_{\Gamma} = \eps \, \Dn \mathfrak{U} (t,x,0)|_{\Gamma},

1328: \end{equation}

1329: Hence in general $a^\eps$ does not satisfy the homogeneous Neumann

1330: boundary condition on $  \Gamma$. 

1331:  We  define the function $ \ta^\eps := a^\eps + \eps \rho$.

1332: Thus we look for solutions  $u^\eps$ of (\ref{LL1})-(\ref{LL2})-(\ref{LL3})

1333:  of the form $ u^\eps =   a^\eps + \eps \, \mathbf{w}^\eps     =    \ta^\eps + \eps \, w^\eps $. 

1334:  Combine (\ref{LL2}), (\ref{B1}) and (\ref{B2}) to find a homogeneous

1335:  Neumann boundary condition on $\Gamma $ for $w^\eps$:

1336: \begin{eqnarray}

1337: \label{5}

1338: \Dn w^\eps  &=& 0  \quad  \mathrm{on} \ ]0,T[ \times \Gamma.

1339: \end{eqnarray}

1340: 

1341: 

1342: We now look for an equation on the unknown $w^\eps$.

1343: The function $\ta^\eps$ belongs to  $\cC^1((0,T)\times \Omega)$ and

1344: to $H^\infty_\Sigma(\Omega)$.

1345: Moreover, $\ta^\eps$ satisfies the equation

1346: \begin{equation}\label{2}

1347:     \cL(\ta^\eps,\D)\, \ta^\eps =

1348:     \bF\big(\ta^\eps, \eps \D_x \ta^\eps,

1349:      \cH(\ta^\eps)\big) + \eps  r^\eps

1350: \end{equation}

1351: where the family $(r^\eps )_\eps$ lies in the set $E$ (defined above

1352: Theorem $\ref{main2}$).

1353: The system for the unknown $w^\eps(t,x)$ writes

1354: \begin{equation}

1355:     \begin{aligned}

1356:     \label{4} \cL ( \ta^\eps + \eps w^\eps  , \D) w^\eps =

1357: K(\eps,\ta^\eps,&\eps \D_x \ta^\eps,\cH(\ta^\eps),

1358: w^\eps,\eps\D_x w^\eps,\cH(w^\eps)) +  r^\eps

1359:  \quad  \mathrm{in } \  ]0,T[ \times \Omega

1360:     \end{aligned}

1361: \end{equation}

1362: where $K$ is a smooth function of its arguments. Let us use more

1363: concise notations, and note

1364: \begin{eqnarray}

1365: A^\eps := \big(\, \ta^\eps,\eps \D_x

1366: \ta^\eps,\cH(\ta^\eps) \, \big)

1367: \quad \text{and} \quad 

1368: W^\eps := \big(\,  w^\eps,\eps\D_x w^\eps,\cH(w^\eps)  \, \big).

1369: \end{eqnarray}

1370: Then, the Taylor formula shows that the function $K$ has the

1371: following form:

1372: \begin{equation}

1373: \nonumber

1374: %\label{92}

1375: K(\eps,A^\eps, W^\eps) = G(\eps, A^\eps, \eps  W^\eps) W^\eps

1376: \end{equation}

1377: where $G$ depends smoothly on its arguments (including $\eps$),

1378: which will be useful in the sequel. 

1379: 

1380: 

1381:  Following \cite{S1} there exist a family $(w^\eps_{\text{init}})_\eps$ 

1382:  of  compatible  initial conditions for the problem (\ref{4})-(\ref{5})

1383:  which verifies suitable uniform estimates with respect to $\eps$.

1384: We choose such a family.

1385: 

1386: \subsubsection{The iterative scheme}

1387: \label{c2}

1388: 

1389: We want to solve the problem (\ref{4}),(\ref{5}). We use

1390: a simple Picard(-Banach-Caccioppoli)  iterative scheme defining a sequence $w^{\eps,\nu}$

1391: which will converge to the solution of the problem. For clarity, we

1392: adopt the following more concise notations

1393: $$

1394: A^\eps :=\big(\, \ta^\eps,\eps \D_x

1395: \ta^\eps,\cH(\ta^\eps)\, \big) \quad    \text{and}   \quad   W^{\eps,\nu} :=

1396: \big(\, w^{\eps,\nu},\eps\D_x w^{\eps,\nu}, \cH(w^{\eps,\nu}) \,

1397: \big).

1398: $$

1399: With these notations, the iterative scheme writes

1400: \begin{equation}

1401:     \begin{aligned}

1402:     \label{50} \cL ( \ta^\eps + \eps w^{\eps, \nu}  , \D)

1403:     w^{\eps,\nu+1} = f^{\eps, \nu}

1404:  \quad  \mathrm{in } \  ]0,T[ \times \Omega

1405:     \end{aligned}

1406: \end{equation}

1407: where

1408: \begin{equation}\label{91}

1409:    f^{\eps,\nu} := G(\eps,A^\eps,

1410: \eps W^{\eps,\nu}) W^{\eps,\nu} +  r^\eps

1411: \end{equation}

1412: %(the function $G$ has been introduced in (\ref{92}) ). 

1413: This equation

1414: is coupled with the initial and boundary conditions:

1415: \begin{eqnarray}\label{51}

1416:   \Dn w^{\eps, \nu +1} &=& 0 \ \mathrm{on} \ ]0,T[ \times \Gamma \\

1417:   w^{\eps, \nu +1}|_{t=0} &=& w^\eps_{\text{init}}.\label{52}

1418: \end{eqnarray}

1419: The iterative scheme  is initialized with $w^{\eps,0}(t,x) :=

1420: w^\eps_{\text{init}}(x)$.

1421: 

1422: 

1423: \subsubsection{Estimates for a linear parabolic system}

1424: \label{c3}

1425: 

1426: Consider the linear problem

1427: \begin{eqnarray}

1428: % \nonumber to remove numbering (before each equation)

1429: \label{num1}

1430:   \cL(\ta^\eps + \eps \bb, \D) \bu  &=& f \

1431:   \mathrm{on} \ ]0,T[ \times \Omega\\

1432: \label{num2}  \Dn \bu &=& 0 \ \mathrm{on} \ ]0,T[ \times \Gamma ,

1433: \end{eqnarray}

1434: We endow the space $H^m_{co}(]0,T[\times \Omega)$  with the usual weighted norm with $\lambda \geq 1$:

1435: $$

1436: \|  \bu \|_{m,\lambda} := \sum_{|\alpha| \leq m \, , \, \alpha \in

1437: \NN^{1+\mu}} \lambda ^{m-|\alpha|}\| e^{-\lambda t} \cZ^\alpha \bu

1438: \|_{L^2(]0,T[ \times \Omega)}.

1439: $$

1440:  In order to estimate the initial data, we introduce the similar norms

1441: built with the set $\cT_0$ instead of $\cT$, integrating on $\Omega$

1442: instead of $[0,T]\times \Omega$:

1443: $$

1444: | \bu |_{m,\lambda} := \sum_{|\alpha| \leq m \, , \, \alpha_0 = 0\, ,

1445: \, \alpha \in \NN^{1+\mu}} \lambda ^{m-|\alpha|}\|  \cZ^\alpha \bu

1446: \|_{L^2(\Omega)}.

1447: $$

1448: We will use the following classical

1449: Gagliardo-Moser-Nirenberg estimates  for conormal derivatives (see

1450: \cite{G2}).

1451: \begin{lemma}\label{moser}

1452: Let $m\in \NN$. There is $c_m>0$ such that, for any $a_1, \dots, a_k

1453: \in H^m_{co}(]0,T[\times \Omega) \cap L^\infty(]0,T[\times \Omega)$,

1454:  for all multi-index $\alpha_1 \in \NN^{\mu +1}, \dots , \alpha_k

1455: \in \NN^{\mu +1}$, with $|\alpha_1|+\dots +|\alpha_k| \leq m$, for all $\lambda \geq 1$:

1456: \begin{equation}\label{89}

1457: \| \cZ^{\alpha_1} a_1 \dots \cZ^{\alpha_k}a_k \|_{0,\lambda} \ \leq

1458: \ c_m \ \sum_{1 \leq j\leq k} \Big( \| a_j\|_{m,\lambda} \prod_{i

1459: \ne j} \|a_i\|_\infty \Big).

1460: \end{equation}

1461: \end{lemma}

1462: 

1463: The following proposition gives some $\eps$-conormal estimates for the

1464: two first normal derivatives of the solutions of the problem 

1465: (\ref{num1})-(\ref{num2}).

1466: 

1467: 

1468: \begin{proposition}

1469: \label{22}

1470: Let $R>0$ be an arbitrary constant and $m \geqslant 3$.  There exist

1471: $C_m(R)>0$ and $\lambda_m>0$ such that for $\sigma$ fixed constant large enough, depending only on

1472: the choices of the vector fields $\cZ_j$, the following holds true. Assume that

1473: \begin{equation}\label{44}

1474: \eps  \, ( \ \|\bb\|_\infty +\sum_{0\leq j\leq \mu} \|\cZ_j

1475: \bb\|_\infty+\|\eps \D_x \bb\|_\infty \ ) \, \leq \, R,

1476: \end{equation}

1477: then, for all $\lambda \geq \lambda_m$,  the following estimates hold:

1478: \begin{equation}\label{20}

1479: \begin{aligned}

1480:    \|\eps  \D_x \bu\|_{m,\lambda} +

1481:    \lambda \|\bu\|_{m,\lambda}

1482:     \ &\leq \ C_m(R) \ \big[ \ \lambda^{-1}\ \| f \|_{m,\lambda} + \ I_{m,\lambda}(\bu)\\

1483:     &+ \ \eps \, (\, \|\eps \D_x \bb \|_{m,\lambda} +

1484:     \| \bb\|_{m,\lambda}\, )\ (\, \|\bu\|_\infty + \|\eps\D_x \bu\|_\infty \, )\ \big],

1485:     \end{aligned}

1486: \end{equation}

1487: where

1488: $$

1489: I_{m,\lambda}(\bu) := \sum _{0 \leq k \leq m}|(\D_t^k \bu)_{|t=0}

1490: |_{m-k,\lambda}.

1491: $$

1492: and

1493: \begin{equation}\label{43}

1494: \begin{aligned}

1495: \|(\eps \Dn)^2 \bu \|_{m,\lambda} \ \leq \ C_{m}(R) \big[ \

1496: \|f\|_{m,\lambda} + \| \bu \|_{m+1,\lambda} 

1497: + \eps \|\bb\|_{m +1,\lambda}\,(\|\bu\|_{\infty} +

1498: \|f\|_\infty) \  \ \\

1499: + \eps \| \eps \Dn \bu \|_{m +1,\lambda} + \eps^2 \| \bu

1500: \|_{m+2,\lambda} \ \big].

1501: \end{aligned}

1502: \end{equation}

1503: \end{proposition}

1504: 

1505: \begin{proof}

1506: 

1507: \emph{Step 1}.

1508: Let us note $\bv:= e^{-\lambda t} \, \bu$, which satisfies

1509: \begin{eqnarray}

1510:   \cL(\ta^\eps_{app} + \eps \bb, \D) \bv + \lambda \bv &=&

1511:    e^{-\lambda t} f \label{10}\

1512:   \mathrm{on} \ ]0,T[ \times \Omega\\

1513:   \Dn \bv &=& 0 \ \mathrm{on} \ ]0,T[ \times \Gamma.\\

1514:   \bv &=& w^\eps_{\text{init}} \ \mathrm{on} \ t=0.

1515: \end{eqnarray}

1516:  Let us note $\| . \|_{L^2}$ the $L^2$ norm in

1517:  $[0,T]\times \Omega$, and $|.|_{L^2}$

1518:  the $L^2$ norm in $\Omega$. Multiplying  (\ref{10}) by $\bv$ and integrating 

1519: on $]0,T[ \times \Omega$ gives the following estimate,

1520: integrating by parts

1521: the $\eps^2 \Delta_x$ with Green's formula in $\Omega$:

1522: \begin{equation}\label{11}

1523:     \eps^2 \|\nabla_x \bv \|^2_{L^2}+ \lambda \| \bv \|^2_{L^2}

1524:     \leq  2 \ |(( e^{-\lambda t}f, \bv ))_{L^2}|

1525:     + |\bv(0)|_{L^2} ,

1526: \end{equation}

1527: for all $\lambda \geq \lambda_0$ if $\lambda_0$ is fixed

1528: large enough, and for all $\eps >0$. In terms of $\bu$ it writes

1529: \begin{equation}\label{11'}

1530:     \eps^2 \|\nabla_x \bu \|^2_{0,\lambda}+ \lambda \| \bu \|^2_{0,\lambda}

1531:     \leq  2 \ |(( f, \bu ))_{L^2_\lambda}|+ |\bu(0)|_{L^2},

1532: \end{equation}

1533: where $L^2_\lambda $ is the Hilbert space $L^2(]0,T[ \times \Omega, d\mu)$

1534: with the measure $d\mu := e^{-2\lambda t} dt dx$.

1535: 

1536: 

1537: Using now the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality in the right hand side, and absorbing in the left hand side the term

1538: in $\|v\|_{L^2}^2$ yields the desired estimate

1539: for $m=0$ and some constant $c_0 >0$.

1540: \\

1541: \\ \emph{Step 2}. We show the inequality by induction on $m$.

1542: Assume it for $m-1$. We apply a tangential operator $\cZ^\alpha$

1543: with fields $\cZ_i \in \cT$ to the system, and $|\alpha| = m$. The function

1544: $\cZ^\alpha \bu$ satisfies the same boundary conditions.

1545: The $L^2$ estimate (\ref{11'}) gives, for $\lambda \geq \lambda_0$:

1546: \begin{equation}\label{21}

1547: \begin{aligned}

1548:      \eps^2 \|\nabla_x \cZ^\alpha \bu \|^2_{L^2}+ \lambda \| \cZ^\alpha \bu \|^2_{L^2}

1549:     \leq&  2 |(( e^{-\lambda t}\cZ^\alpha f  +  [(\ta^\eps_{app} + \eps \bb)\eps^2\Delta_x,\cZ^\alpha ]\wedge

1550:     \bu   , \cZ^\alpha\bu ))_{L^2_\lambda}|.

1551: \end{aligned}

1552: \end{equation}

1553: where $[.,.]$  denotes the commutator. 

1554: Using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and $2ab\leq 2\lambda^{-1} \, a^2 + \lambda b^2/2$ yields:

1555: \begin{equation}\label{12}

1556: \begin{aligned}

1557:      \eps^2 \|\nabla_x \cZ^\alpha \bu \|^2_{L^2}+ \frac{\lambda}{2} \| \cZ^\alpha \bu \|^2_{L^2}\

1558:     \leq&  \ \frac{2}{\lambda}\ \|e^{-\lambda t}\cZ^\alpha f\|^2_{L^2}\\

1559:     + \ 2 \ |(([(\ta^\eps_{app} &+ \eps \bb)\eps^2\Delta_x,\cZ^\alpha ]\wedge \bu , \cZ^\alpha \bu))_{L^2_\lambda}|.

1560: \end{aligned}

1561: \end{equation}

1562: We need to control the second term in the right hand side of (\ref{12}). The commutator

1563: $[\ \ta^\eps_{app}\, \eps^2\Delta_x,\cZ^\alpha ]$

1564: writes as a finite sum

1565: \begin{equation}\label{13}

1566:     \eps ^2  \sum_{|\beta|\leq m+1} a_\beta^\eps(t,x) \cZ^\beta +

1567:     \eps   \sum_{|\gamma|\leq m} b_\gamma^\eps(t,x) \eps \Dn \cZ^\gamma

1568:     +   \sum_{|\delta|\leq m-1} c_\delta^\eps(t,x) (\eps\Dn)^2

1569:      \cZ^\delta

1570: \end{equation}

1571: where the coefficients $a_\beta^\eps$ , $b_\gamma^\eps$,

1572: $c_\delta^\eps$ are bounded functions satisfying

1573: \begin{equation}

1574: \label{14}    \sup _{\eps \in ]0,1]}\|\eps \Dn a_\beta^\eps\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} 

1575:     + \|\eps \Dn b_\gamma^\eps\|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} + \|\eps \Dn c_\delta^\eps \|_{L^\infty(\Omega)} < \infty

1576: \end{equation}

1577: for all $\beta, \gamma, \delta$, because (\ref{14})

1578: holds clearly if we replace  $L^\infty(\Omega)$ by

1579:  $L^\infty(\Omega_+)$ or by $L^\infty(\Omega_-)$,

1580:  and because $\ta^\eps_{app}$ is in

1581: $H^1(\Omega)$ for all $\eps >0$.

1582: Hence we are led to control the corresponding three sort of terms:

1583: \begin{eqnarray}

1584: \label{15}

1585: \eps^2 (( \ a_\beta^\eps \cZ^\beta \bu \, ,

1586:     \, \cZ^\alpha \bu \ ))_{L^2_\lambda} ,  \

1587:     \eps (( \ b_\gamma^\eps (\eps \Dn) \cZ^\gamma \bu \, ,

1588:     \, \cZ^\alpha \bu \ ))_{L^2_\lambda} , \

1589:     (( \ c_\delta^\eps (\eps \Dn)^2 \cZ^\delta \bu \, ,

1590:     \, \cZ^\alpha \bu \ ))_{L^2_\lambda},

1591: \end{eqnarray}

1592: where $|\beta| \leq m+1$, $|\gamma| \leq m$, $|\delta| \leq m-1$.

1593: The first two terms in (\ref{15}) are simply controlled by

1594: $\delta  \| \eps \nabla_x \bu \|^2_{m,\lambda} +

1595: C_\delta \, \delta^{-1} \,  \| \bu \|^2_{m,\lambda}$

1596: for $\delta$ arbitrarily small, and $C_\delta$ being a constant

1597: depending on $\delta$, but independent of $\eps$.

1598: For the third term one uses an integration by parts (by Green's formula) of the field $\Dn$ to show that this term writes as a sum of terms of the form

1599: $$

1600: d^\eps \

1601: \eps^{2-j-j'}(( (\eps \Dn)^j\cZ^{\delta}  \bu, (\eps \Dn)^{j'} \cZ^{\alpha} \bu ))_{L^2_\lambda}

1602: $$

1603: where $|\delta| \leq m-1$, $j,j'\in \{0,1\}$,

1604: and $d^\eps$ is a bounded function (uniformly in $\eps$)

1605: since all the boundary terms terms vanishes:

1606: $\Dn \cZ^\alpha \bu|_{\D \Omega} = 0$,  for all $\alpha \in \RR^\mu.$

1607: It follows that the third term in (\ref{15}) is controlled by

1608: $C\lambda^{-1} \| \eps\nabla_x \bu \|^2_{m,\lambda}

1609: + C\| \bu \|^2_{m,\lambda}$

1610: for a constant $C$ independent of $\eps$, and all $\lambda \geq 1$.

1611: Hence, by choosing  a $\delta >0$ arbitrarily small, and $\lambda_1>0$ large enough, there holds

1612: \begin{equation}

1613: \nonumber

1614: %\label{18}

1615:      | \ (( \ [\ta^\eps_{app} \eps^2\Delta_x,\cZ^\alpha ]\wedge \bu \, ,

1616:     \, \cZ^\alpha \bu \ ))_{L^2_\lambda} \ | \ \leq \

1617:     \delta  \| \eps \nabla_x \bu \|^2_{m,\lambda} +

1618: c_m \| \bu \|^2_{m,\lambda}

1619: \end{equation}

1620: for all $\lambda \geq \lambda_1$, and for all $\eps\in ]0,1]$,

1621: with a constant $c_m$ independent of $\eps$.

1622: 

1623: 

1624: We need now to estimate the term

1625: \begin{equation}\label{24}

1626: (( [\ \eps \bb\, \eps^2\Delta_x,\cZ^\alpha ]\wedge \bu , \cZ^\alpha \bu))_{L^2_\lambda}.

1627: \end{equation}

1628: The commutator $[\ \bb\, \eps^2\Delta_x,\cZ^\alpha ]$

1629: writes as a finite sum

1630: \begin{eqnarray}

1631: \nonumber

1632: \eps ^2  \sum_{|\beta |\leq m,|\beta '|\leq m+1, |\beta| + |\beta'| \leq m+2} a_{\beta,\beta '}

1633: (\cZ^\beta\bb )\cZ^{\beta'} \label{25}\\

1634: \nonumber

1635:    + \ \eps   \sum_{|\gamma |\leq m,|\gamma '|\leq m, |\gamma|+|\gamma'| \leq m+1} b_{\gamma,\gamma '}(\cZ^{\gamma }\bb )(\eps \Dn) \cZ^{\gamma '} \label{26}\\

1636:  \nonumber

1637:    +  \  \sum_{|\delta |\leq m,|\delta '|\leq m-1, |\delta| + |\delta'| \leq m } c_{\delta, \delta '}

1638:     (\cZ^{\delta }\bb)(\eps\Dn)^2

1639:      \cZ^{\delta '} \label{27}

1640: \end{eqnarray}

1641: where $a_{\beta,\beta '}, b_{\gamma,\gamma '},

1642: c_{\delta, \delta '}$ are smooth fonctions on $\overline{\Omega}$. Hence to control the term (\ref{24}) we are led to

1643: estimate tri-linear terms in $(\bb,\bu,\bu)$ of the following form

1644: (where $d\mu := e^{-2\lambda t}dt dx$):

1645: \begin{eqnarray}

1646: \eps ^2 \int _{]0,T[\times \Omega} a_{\beta, \beta '}

1647: \cZ^\beta\bb .\cZ^{\beta'}\bu_i . \cZ^\alpha \bu_j \ d\mu ,

1648: \quad |\beta|\leq m, |\beta '|\leq m+1, |\beta| + |\beta'| \leq m+2 \label{28}\\

1649: \eps \int _{]0,T[\times \Omega} b_{\gamma,\gamma '}\ \cZ^{\gamma }\bb \ . \ \eps \Dn \cZ^{\gamma '}\bu_i \ . \ \cZ^\alpha \bu_j \ d\mu , \quad |\gamma|\leq m, |\gamma '|\leq m, |\gamma|+|\gamma'| \leq m+1 \label{29}\\

1650: \int _{]0,T[\times \Omega} c_{\delta,\delta '}\ \cZ^{\delta }\bb . \,

1651: (\eps \Dn)^2 \cZ^{\delta '}\bu_i \, .  \cZ^\alpha \bu_j \ d\mu , \quad

1652: |\delta|\leq m, |\delta '|\leq m-1, |\delta|+|\delta'| \leq m  ,   \label{30}

1653: \end{eqnarray}

1654: where the $\bu_i$ are the components of the vector $\bu$.

1655: Let us treat the term (\ref{30}). By the green formula, the integral can be written as a sum of integrals of the form

1656: \begin{eqnarray}

1657:      \int _{]0,T[\times \Omega} c_{\delta,\delta '}\ \cZ^{\delta }\eps \Dn\bb . \cZ^{\delta '}\eps \Dn\bu_i .  \cZ^\alpha \bu_j \ d\mu \label{31}\\

1658:     \int _{]0,T[\times \Omega} c_{\delta,\delta '}\ \cZ^{\delta }\bb . \, \cZ^{\delta'}\eps\Dn\bu_i .\,  \cZ^\alpha\eps\Dn\bu_j \ d\mu ,\label{32}\\

1659:     \eps \ \int _{]0,T[\times \Omega} d_{\delta,\delta '}\ \cZ^{\delta }\bb . \, \cZ^{\delta '}\eps \Dn\bu_i \, . \cZ^\alpha \bu_j \ d\mu ,\label{33}

1660: \end{eqnarray}

1661: and other terms involving lower order derivatives easy to control.

1662: The term (\ref{31}) is controlled by

1663: $$

1664: c \| \eps \Dn \cZ^\delta \bb \eps \Dn \cZ^{\delta '}\bu_i\|_{0,\lambda}

1665: \ \| \bu_j \|_{m,\lambda},

1666: $$

1667: which is bounded by using the Gagliargo-Nirenberg-Moser estimate by

1668: \begin{equation}

1669: \nonumber

1670:     c\big( \ \| \eps \Dn \bb \|_{m,\lambda} |\eps \Dn \bu|_\infty +

1671:     \| \eps \Dn \bu \|_{m,\lambda} |\eps \Dn \bb|_\infty \ \big)\

1672:     \|\bu\|_{m,\lambda}

1673: \end{equation}

1674: and hence by

1675: \begin{equation}

1676: %\label{35}

1677: \nonumber

1678:     c(1+R) \big( \ \| \eps \Dn \bb \|_{m,\lambda} |\eps \Dn \bu|_\infty +

1679:     \| \eps \Dn \bu \|_{m,\lambda}  \big)\

1680:     \|\bu\|_{m,\lambda}.

1681: \end{equation}

1682: For the term (\ref{32}) there are two cases. The first case is when $\delta = 0$.

1683: In that case the integral is bounded by

1684: $$

1685: c \ \| \eps \Dn \bu_i \|_{m-1,\lambda} \

1686: \| \bu_j \|_{m, \lambda} \ \leq \

1687: \lambda ^{-1} \| \eps \Dn \bu \|_{m,\lambda} ^2.

1688: $$

1689: The second case is when $|\delta| \geq 1$. In that case we write

1690: $\cZ^\delta \bb = \cZ^{\delta"} \cZ_k\bb$ and apply the Gagliardo-Nirenberg-Moser inequality with $\cZ\bb$ in $L^\infty$.

1691: The term in bounded by

1692: $$

1693: c\big( \ \| \cZ\bb \|_{m-1,\lambda} |\eps \Dn \bu|_\infty +

1694:     \| \eps \Dn \bu \|_{m-1,\lambda} |\cZ \bb|_\infty \ \big)\

1695:     \|\eps \Dn \bu\|_{m,\lambda}

1696: $$

1697: and hence by

1698: \begin{equation}

1699: %\label{36}

1700: \nonumber

1701:   c \ \| \bb \|_{m,\lambda} |\eps \Dn \bu|_\infty  \|\eps \Dn \bu\|_{m,\lambda}

1702:     +

1703:     c R \lambda ^{-1}  \| \eps \Dn \bu \|_{m,\lambda}^2

1704: \end{equation}

1705: The next terms like (\ref{33}) are easier to treat in the same way,

1706: and are bounded by the same terms.

1707: The term (\ref{30}) was the more delicate to

1708: estimate. The terms (\ref{29}) and (\ref{28}) are

1709: simpler and can be treated in a similar way.

1710: Replacing in the right hand side of (\ref{21}) and summing over all the possible

1711: operators $\cZ^\alpha$ gives the desired estimate, and the proposition

1712: is proved.

1713: \end{proof}

1714: 

1715: \subsubsection{Iteration}

1716: \label{c4}

1717: 

1718: 

1719: 

1720: Now classical arguments show the convergence of the iterative scheme

1721: if $\eps \in ]0,\eps_0]$ and $\eps_0$ is small enough. We describe

1722: the main lines (see \cite{S1}). Let us fix an integer $m

1723:  > 4$, and note

1724: $$

1725: R := 1 + \sup_{0<\eps<1}  \{ \eps  \, ( \ \| w^{\eps, 0}\|_\infty

1726: +\sum_{0\leq j\leq \mu} \|\cZ_j w^{\eps, 0}\|_\infty+\|\eps \D_x

1727: w^{\eps, 0}\|_\infty \ ) \}.

1728: $$

1729: 

1730: \begin{proposition}

1731: 

1732: Let be given $\lambda >1 $. 

1733: Then there exists  $h>1$ such that  for  $\eps_0>0$ small enough,  for

1734: all $\nu \in \NN$, for all $\eps \in ]0,\eps_0]$, there hold

1735: \begin{equation}\label{53}

1736:  \| w^{\eps, \nu}\|_\infty +\sum_{0\leq j\leq \mu}

1737: \|\cZ_j w^{\eps, \nu}\|_\infty+\|\eps \D_x w^{\eps, \nu}\|_\infty  <

1738: R\eps ^{-1}

1739: \end{equation}

1740: and

1741: \begin{equation}\label{54}

1742:  \| w^{\eps,\nu}\|_{m,\lambda} +

1743:  \| \eps \D_\n w^{\eps,\nu}\|_{m,\lambda} <

1744: h.

1745: \end{equation}

1746: \end{proposition}

1747: 

1748: \begin{proof} 

1749: %We define

1750: %\begin{equation}

1751: %h:= ...

1752: %\end{equation}

1753: 

1754: For  $h$ large enough,

1755: the inequalities  (\ref{53}) and (\ref{54}) are satisfied for $\nu=0$. 

1756: Now suppose that $w^{\eps,\nu}$ satisfies (\ref{53}), (\ref{54}). 

1757: We want to prove that  $w^{\eps,\nu+1}$ also satisfies (\ref{53}), (\ref{54}).

1758: The proposition \ref{22} gives a constant $C_m(R)$ and the inequality

1759: (\ref{20}) holds with $\bu = w^{\eps,\nu+1}$, $\bb = w^{\eps,\nu}$,

1760: and $f=f^{\eps,\nu}$ defined in (\ref{91}).

1761:  In order to control the right hand side of (\ref{50}), we need a

1762: control of $\|\cH(w^{\eps,\nu})\|_\infty$ and of

1763: $\|\cH(w^{\eps,\nu})\|_{m,\lambda}$, which is a consequence of the

1764: following lemma.

1765: \begin{lemma}\label{94} Let $m\in \NN$. There exists $c>0$ such that for

1766: all $\lambda \geq 1$,

1767: \begin{equation}

1768: \| \cH(v)\|_{m,\lambda} + \| \eps \D_\n \cH(v)\|_{m-1,\lambda} \leq c (\|

1769: v\|_{m,\lambda} + \|\eps  \D_\n v\|_{m-1,\lambda} ).

1770: \end{equation}

1771: \end{lemma}

1772: 

1773: 

1774: \begin{proof}

1775:  We note $E(\D) := ( \div , \rot )$ the operator from $[\cS'(\RR^3)]^3$ to $[\cS'(\RR^3)]^4$. We denote

1776: by $E^{-1}(\D)$ the inverse operator. Then $u = E^{-1}(\D) f$, is

1777: defined by $\hat{u}(\xi) = -i |\xi|^{-2} \big(\hat{a}(\xi) \xi - \xi \wedge

1778: \hat{b}(\xi) \big) $ where $\hat{f}(\xi)=( \hat{a} (\xi),

1779:       \hat{b}(\xi)) \in \RR \times \RR^3$. Thus 

1780: $\hat{u}(\xi) = M (\xi) \hat{f}(\xi)$,  where  $M(\xi)$ is a $3\times 4$ matrix whose entries are

1781: \emph{rational functions of $\xi$ homogeneous of degree $-1$}. Let

1782: us fix $\chi \in \cC^\infty_0(\RR^3, \RR)$ such that $\chi(\xi)=0$

1783: when $|\xi| \leq 1$ and $\chi(\xi)=1$ when $|\xi|\geq 2$, and call

1784: $P(D)$ and $R(D)$ the operators from  $[\cS'(\RR^3)]^4$ to

1785: $[\cS'(\RR^3)]^3$ defined by

1786: $P(D)f := \cF^{-1}\big(\, \chi M \hat{f}\, \big)$ and $ R(D)f :=

1787: \cF^{-1}\big(\, (1-\chi) \hat{f}\, \big)$

1788: where $\cF^{-1}$ means the inverse Fourier transform. In the

1789: sequel we will simply note $\cS'(\RR^3)$ and $L^2(\tOmega)$ instead

1790: of $\big[\cS'(\RR^3)\big]^4$ and $\big[L^2(\tOmega)\big]^4$, meaning

1791: that we talk about the \emph{components} of the vector valued

1792: functions, the (finite) number of components being understood. We

1793: have $E^{-1}(\D) = P(D) + R(D).$

1794: The operator $P(D)$ is a special case of classical

1795: pseudo-differential operator of class $S^{1}_{-1,0}(\RR^3 \times

1796: \RR^3)$, elliptic, and $R(D)$ is an infinitely smoothing operator of

1797: class $S^{-\infty}_{1,0}(\RR^3 \times \RR^3)$.

1798: 

1799: Let us now take into account the $t$ coordinate. Let us note

1800: $\tOmega= ]0,T[\times \Omega$,  $\tGamma = ]0,T[\times \Gamma$ and

1801: $\tSigma = ]0,T[\times \Sigma$. We extend the actions of $P$ and $R$

1802: to the spaces of functions or distributions which depend also on $t$

1803: like $L^2(\tOmega)$ or $C\big( [0,T],\cS'(\RR^3)\big)$, by

1804: considering $t$ as a parameter so that $Pu(t,x) := P(D)u(t,.)(x)$.

1805: Let $v \in H^m_{co}(\tOmega; \RR^4)$ such that $\Dn v \in

1806: H^{m-1}_{co}(\tOmega; \RR^4)$.   Then $\cH(v)= u_{|\tOmega}$ where

1807: $u\in L^2([0,T]\times \RR^3)$ is defined by

1808: $   E(\D)u = \overline{E(\D)v} +

1809:     (v_{|\tGamma}.\bn) \otimes \delta_{\tGamma} $,

1810: where the notation $\overline{V}$ means the extension of $V$ by $0$

1811: to $[0,T]\times \RR^3$ (or to $\RR^3$, depending on the context).

1812: 

1813: Let us note

1814: $f :=\overline{E(\D)v}$, which is in $H^{m-1}_{co}(]0,T[\times \RR^3),$

1815: and $g=(v.\bn)_{|\Gamma}$. This trace is well defined since by

1816: assumption $v\in H^1(\tOmega)$, and using local coordinates patches

1817: one sees that

1818: %\begin{equation}\label{101}

1819: $g \in H^{m-\frac{1}{2}}(\tGamma)$,

1820: %\end{equation}

1821: the usual Sobolev spaces. The operator $P(D)$ satisfies the

1822: \emph{transmission property} (introduced by Boutet de Monvel

1823: \cite{BMV}, \cite{BMV2}) on $\Omega$ and on $\RR^3\setminus \Omega$

1824: because its symbol is a rational function of $\xi$, which is a

1825: sufficient condition to satisfy the transmission condition. The

1826: transmission property has been also studied and used by  Grubb,

1827: and we also refer to papers 

1828: \cite{Grubb1} and \cite{Grubb2}. To avoid many repetitions, we will

1829: note in what follows $\Omega_1 := \Omega$ and

1830: $\Omega_2=\RR^3\setminus \Omega$. Since $P(D)$ is elliptic of order

1831: 1, the transmission property implies (see \cite{Grubb1} and

1832: \cite{Grubb2}) that if $ v \in H^s(\Omega)$ then for $j=1,2$,

1833:     $\big( P(D) \overline{v} \big)_{|\Omega_j}

1834:     \in H^{s+1}(\Omega_j)$.

1835: Let us note note $u_{(j)} = u_{|\tOmega_j}$, for $j=1, 2$, so that

1836: $\cH(v)= u_{(1)}\in L^2(\tOmega)$. Using the notations of

1837: \cite{BMV}, \cite{Grubb1}, \cite{Grubb2},

1838: \begin{equation}\label{102}

1839: u _{(j)}= \big( E^{-1}(D)\overline{v}\big)_{|\tOmega_{(j)}} =

1840: P(D)^{(j)} f + K^{(j)}_\Gamma (g) + R(D)^{(j)}E(\D)\overline{v},

1841: \end{equation}

1842: where

1843:  $P(D)^{(j)} f = (P(D)f)_{|\tOmega_{(j)}}$,

1844:  $R(D)^{(j)}\ov= (R(D)\ov)_{|\tOmega_{(j)}}$ and where

1845: $K^{(j)}_\Gamma (g) = \big(\,P(D)\big( g \otimes \delta_\Gamma)\,

1846: \big)_{|\tOmega_{(j)}}$  is the "Poisson operator":

1847: \begin{equation}\label{103}

1848: K_\Gamma^{(j)} : H^s(\Gamma) \rightarrow H^{s+1/2}(\Omega^{(j)}),

1849: \quad

1850: \end{equation}

1851: (linear continuous), extended to functions depending on $t$ as a

1852: parameter. (See theorems 2.4 and 2.5 of \cite{Grubb2}).

1853: 

1854: 

1855: 

1856: Let us now prove the lemma. First of all, $\D_t^m\cH(v)=\cH(\D_t^m

1857: v)$ is in $L^2(\tOmega)$ because $\D_t^m v\in L^2(\tOmega)$ and

1858: $\cH$ acts on $L^2(\tOmega)$. It is also easy to show that

1859: $\D_t^{m-1}\cH(v) \in H^1(\tOmega)$: by assumption, for any $t\in

1860: [0,T]$, $\D_t^{m-1}v(t,.) \in H^1(\Omega)$, hence

1861: $\cH(\D_t^{m-1}\ov)(t,.) \in H^1(\Omega)$ because

1862: $\D_t^{m-1}\ov(t,.)$ is piecewise-$H^1$ and because of the

1863: properties of $\cH$.

1864: % (lemma \ref{tech1}). 

1865:  Hence $\D_x\D_t^{m-1}\cH(v)

1866: \in L^2(\tOmega)$ and since we already know that $\D_t^m\cH(v) \in

1867: L^2(\tOmega)$ we have proved that $\D_t^{m-1}\cH(v)\in

1868: H^1(\tOmega)$.

1869: 

1870: 

1871: Let us show now that $\cZ_j\D_t^{m-2}\cH(v) \in H^1(\tOmega)$ for

1872: $j=1, \dots , \mu$. We have

1873: $    E(\D)u = f + g \otimes \delta_\Gamma $.

1874: Since $E(\D)$ is elliptic (as an operator in $\cS'(\RR^3)$, but not

1875: in $\cS'(\RR^4)$), we can express the normal derivatives of $u$ in

1876: term of tangential derivatives and of $E(\D)u$, and this implies

1877: that the commutator $[E(\D),\cZ_j]u$ writes

1878: \begin{equation}\label{107}

1879: [E(\D), \cZ_j ]u = \sum_1^\mu A_j \cZ_j u + A_0 f + B g\otimes

1880: \delta_\Gamma

1881: \end{equation}

1882: where $A_j,B$ are matrices with $\cC_b^\infty$ entries (depending on

1883: the fields $\cZ_j$). It follows that

1884: $$

1885: E(\D)\cZ_j u = \sum_{|\alpha|\leq 1} M_\alpha \cZ^\alpha f +

1886: \sum_{|\alpha|\leq 1} N_\alpha (\cZ^\alpha g) \otimes \delta_\Gamma

1887: $$

1888: with $\cC_b^\infty(\RR^3)$ matrices $M_\alpha, N_\alpha$, and

1889: applying $\D_t^{m-2}$ gives:

1890: \begin{equation}\label{108}

1891: E(\D)\cZ_j \D_t^{m-2} u = \sum_{|\alpha|\leq 1} M_\alpha .

1892: \cZ^\alpha \D_t^{m-2}f + \sum_{|\alpha|\leq 1} N_\alpha .

1893: (\cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2} g) \otimes \delta_\Gamma

1894: \end{equation}

1895: Now $\cZ^\alpha \D_t^{m-2}f \in L^2(\tOmega)$, because $f=

1896: \overline{E(\D)v}$, and the transmission property implies that for every

1897: $t\in [0,T]$, the function 

1898:   $  P(D)^{(j)}\big(\, \cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-1}f \, \big)(t,.)$

1899:   is in $  H^1\big( \, \Omega_{(j)} \, \big)$. This implies that $\D_x P(D)^{(j)}\big(\,

1900: \cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2}f \, \big)\in L^2(\tOmega)$ and since we already

1901: know that $\D_t P(D)^{(j)}\big(\, \cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2}f \, \big)\in

1902: L^2(\tOmega)$ from the previous case, we deduce that for $j=1, 2$ the functions 

1903:     $P(D)^{(j)}\big(\, \cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2}f \, \big)$ is in

1904:     $H^1\big( \, \tOmega_{(j)} \, \big)$.

1905: Concerning the boundary term in (\ref{108}), since $g \in

1906: H^{m-\frac{1}{2}}(\tGamma)$ we know that

1907:  $\cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2} g \in H^{1/2}(\Gamma)$ and

1908: the property (\ref{103}) implies that, for all $t\in [0,T]$, the

1909: functions $K_\Gamma^{(j)} \big( \, \cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2} g \, \big)(t,.) $

1910: is in

1911: $H^1\big(\Omega_{(j)}\big)$.

1912: By the same way as before we deduce that for $j=1, 2$ the functions 

1913: $K_\Gamma^{(j)} \big( \, \cZ^\alpha\D_t^{m-2} g \, \big) $ is in

1914: $H^1\big(\tOmega_{(j)}\big) $.

1915: Now, applying $E(\D)^{-1} = P(D) + R(D)$ to the equation

1916: (\ref{108}) gives $\cZ_j

1917: \D_t^{m-2}u_{(j)} \in H^1\big(\tOmega_{(j)}\big)$ as claimed. Then,

1918: the proof can be continued by induction in the same way.

1919: \end{proof}

1920: 

1921: 

1922: 

1923: 

1924: 

1925: 

1926: 

1927: 

1928: 

1929: 

1930: 

1931: 

1932: The lemma \ref{94},

1933: together with the Gagliardo-Nirenberg-Moser estimates and the

1934: induction assumption, implies that (like the majoration of the term

1935: (5.25) in paper \cite{S1}):

1936: \begin{equation}\label{95}

1937:     \| f^{\eps,\nu} \|_{m,\lambda} \leq c (R)

1938:     (\|w^{\eps,\nu}\|_{m,\lambda}+ \| \eps \D_x

1939:     w^{\eps,\nu}\|_{m,\lambda}) < c(R) \rho(\lambda).

1940: \end{equation}

1941: Hence, the proposition \ref{22} implies that

1942: \begin{equation}\label{96}

1943: \begin{aligned}

1944: \|\eps \D_x w^{\eps,\nu+1}\|_{m,\lambda}+ \lambda

1945: \|w^{\eps,\nu+1}\|_{m,\lambda} &\leq C_m(R) \big[ \lambda^{-1} c(R)

1946: \rho(\lambda) \\

1947: &+ R (\|w^{\eps,\nu+1}\|_\infty + \| \eps

1948: \D_xw^{\eps,\nu+1}\|_\infty)  + I_{m,\lambda}

1949: (w^{\eps,\lambda})\big].

1950: \end{aligned}

1951: \end{equation}

1952: We now use the following Sobolev inequalities:

1953: \begin{eqnarray*}

1954:     \eps^{1/2} \| \bu \|_\infty &\leq&  e^{\sigma \lambda }

1955:     ( \| \bu\|_{m,\lambda} +

1956:     \|\eps\Dn \bu\|_{m,\lambda}),

1957: \\   \eps^{1/2} \| \eps\Dn \bu \|_\infty &\leq&  e^{\sigma \lambda }

1958:     ( \| \eps \Dn\bu\|_{m,\lambda} +

1959:     \|(\eps\Dn)^2\bu\|_{m,\lambda}).

1960: \end{eqnarray*}

1961: By taking $\lambda $ large enough et $\eps >0$

1962: small enough 

1963: the inequality (\ref{53}) is also satisfied for $w^{\eps, \nu +1}$

1964: and the proof by induction is complete.

1965: \end{proof}

1966: 

1967: Now by extracting a convergent subsequence it is a classical

1968: argument to show the convergence in $L^2(]0,T[\times \Omega)$ of

1969: $w^{\eps,\nu}$ to a solution $w^\eps$ of the non linear problem

1970: which satisfies the same estimates $(\ref{53})$, $(\ref{54})$. This

1971: concludes the proof of  Theorem $\ref{main2}$. \hfill $\Box$

1972: 

1973: 

1974: 

1975: \begin{thebibliography}{ll}

1976: 

1977: 

1978: \bibitem{BMV} L. Boutet de Monvel, {\it Comportement d'un

1979: op\'erateur pseudodiff\'erentiel sur une vari\'et\'e \`a bord},

1980: J. Anal. Math 17 (1966), 241-304.

1981: 

1982: \bibitem{BMV2} L. Boutet de Monvel, {\it Boundary problems for

1983: pseudo-differential operators}, Acta. Math. 126 (1971), 11-51.

1984: 

1985: \bibitem{CF2} G. Carbou, P. Fabrie, {\it Regular Solutions for

1986: Landau-Lifschitz Equation in a Bounded Domain}, Differential and

1987: Integral Equations, {\bf 14} (2001), 213-229.

1988: 

1989: \bibitem{CFG1} G. Carbou, P. Fabrie, O. Gu\`es, {\it Couche limite

1990: dans un mod\`ele de ferromagn\'etisme}, Comm. Partial Differential

1991: Equations {\bf 27} (2002), 1467-1495.

1992: 

1993:  \bibitem{CFG2} G. Carbou, P. Fabrie, O. Gu\`es {\it  On the ferromagnetism equations in the non static case},

1994: Communications on Pure and Applied Analysis,

1995:     3,2004, p367-393.

1996: 

1997: \bibitem{Grubb1} G. Grubb, {\it Parabolic Pseudo-differential

1998: Boundary Problems and Applications},Lecture Notes in Math., N.1495,

1999: (1991), Edts: L. Cattabriga, L. Rodino, Springer-Verlag, p.46-117 .

2000: 

2001: \bibitem{Grubb2} G. Grubb, L. H\"ormander,

2002: {\it The transmission property}, Math. Scand., 67, (1990), 273-289.

2003: 

2004: \bibitem{G2} O. Gu\`es, {\it Probl\`eme mixte hyperbolique

2005: quasilin\'eaire caract\'eristique}, Comm. Partial Diff. Equa., {\bf

2006: 15}, (1990), N$^o$ 5, P. 595-645.

2007: 

2008: \bibitem{GR} O. Gu\`es, J. Rauch 

2009:  {\it  Nonlinear Asymptotics for Hyperbolic Internal Waves of Small Width},

2010: J. Hyperbolic PDE, 2006.

2011: 

2012: \bibitem{GW} O. Gu\`es,  M.  Williams

2013:      {\it Curved shocks as viscous limits: a boundary problem approach},

2014: Indiana University Mathematics Journal,

2015:   51, 2002, 2, p421-450.

2016:   

2017: \bibitem{LL}  L. Landau, E. Lifschitz, { Electrodynamique des milieux

2018: continues,} cours de

2019: physique th\'eorique, tome VIII (ed. Mir) Moscou, 1969.

2020: 

2021: \bibitem{m1} G. M\'etivier, {\it The {C}auchy problem for semilinear hyperbolic systems with

2022:               discontinuous data}, Duke Mathematical Journal, 53,

2023:      1986, 4, p983-1011.

2024: 

2025: \bibitem{S1} F. Sueur, {\it Approche visqueuse de solutions discontinues de

2026: syst\`emes hyperboliques semilin\'eaires},  Annales de l'Institut

2027: Fourier, volume 56, fascicule 1, p183-245, 2006.

2028: 

2029: 

2030: 

2031: 

2032: \end{thebibliography}

2033: \end{document}

2034: 

2035: