- Research
- Open access
- Published:
Pullback attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}\) for semilinear heat equation in expanding domains
Boundary Value Problems volume 2020, Article number: 58 (2020)
Abstract
In this article, we consider the pullback attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}\) of pullback attractor for semilinear heat equation with domains expanding in time. Firstly, we establish higher-order integrability of difference about variational solutions; then, we prove the continuity of variational solution in \(H_{0}^{1}(O_{t})\). As application of continuity, we obtain the pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}\)-norm.
1 Introduction
Let \(\{\mathcal {O}_{t}\}_{t\in \mathbb{R}}\) be a family of nonempty bounded open subsets of \(\mathbb{R}^{N}\) such that
Define
and
We consider the following initial boundary value problem with homogeneous Dirichlet boundary condition:
where \(u_{\tau }:\mathcal{O}_{\tau } \rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) and \(f:Q_{\tau }\rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) are given for \(\tau \in \mathbb{R}\), and \(g\in C^{1}(\mathbb{R},\mathbb{R})\) satisfies the conditions: there exist nonnegative constants \(\alpha _{1}\), \(\alpha _{2}\), β, l, and \(p\geqslant 2\) such that
and
For later observe that there exist nonnegative constants \(\tilde{\alpha _{1}},\tilde{\alpha _{2}},\tilde{\beta }\) such that
where
For each \(T>\tau \), consider the auxiliary problem
where \(u_{\tau }:\mathcal{O}_{\tau } \rightarrow \mathbb{R}\) for \(\tau \in \mathbb{R}\), g satisfies (4)–(5) and \(f\in L^{2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb{R};L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}))\).
The issue of non-cylindrical region usually refers to the problem that spatial region changes with time, also known as the problem of variable region. Variable region problems are applied widely in physics, chemistry, and cybernetics, so have been focused on relevant experts. Compared with the invariant regional system, the study of variable regional problem can vividly describe the actual phenomena. In addition, the problem defined in the variable region is essentially non-autonomous, so the discussion of variable regional problem adds vitality to the development and perfection of theory of non-autonomous system.
Based on the actual requirement, many mathematical researchers began to focus on the variable region problems, for example, see [1, 4–8, 15, 16] and so on. Recently, the existence and uniqueness of variational solution of system (3) have been considered in [6] with monotonic increase region, and then \((L^{2}, L^{2})\) pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attractor has been established. In 2009, by means of differ-morphism, a similar conclusion of system (3) was obtained in [7]. Later, in [11], by the solution orbit being shifted via a fixed complete orbit, the authors obtained the pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attraction of \(L^{2}\) pullback attractor in higher-order integrable spaces.
The continuity of solution plays an important role in the study of dynamic systems, especially in pullback attraction, fractal dimension, and so on. For the invariant region, the continuity of strong solution with respect to the initial data in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O})\) was considered for the space dimension \(N\leqslant 2\), and the nonlinear term exponent \(p\geqslant 2\), but \(p\leqslant 4\) for \(N=3\) was required. For an autonomous system, in order to obtain continuity in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O})\) and \(L^{p}(\mathcal {O})\), the concept of norm-to-weak continuity was given in [12], and then the existence of global attractor was established. Then, the norm-to-weak continuity concept to the case of a non-autonomous system was studied in [10]. However, for a long time, the continuity of solution in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O})\) with respect to initial data has still been an open problem. Until 2008, when the nonlinear term f of autonomous system satisfying (4) and (5) was introduced, the author obtained the uniform boundedness of \(tu (t)\) by differentiating equation about time t, then considered the continuity of solution about initial data, see details in [14]. However, for a non-autonomous system, we cannot differentiate equation, so the method in [14] cannot be shifted to solve non-autonomous problems. In order to overcome the difficulties deriving from the non-autonomous character, in 2015, for the case of random equation, [2] discussed the continuity in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O})\) by studying the higher-order integrability of solutions difference near the initial time. Then, a natural problem arose: Does it still hold for variable domains? As far as the author knows, the continuity of solution in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) about initial data is still unknown.
Enlightened by the above, we consider the continuity of variational solution in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) with respect to initial data when the region of system (3) is monotonically increasing. As an application of continuity, we establish the pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) for any \(t \in \mathbb{R}\).
This paper is organized as follows. In Sect. 2, we recall some concepts and related results about variational solution. In Sect. 3, we prove higher-order integrability of difference of variational solutions near initial data (\(Theorem\)3.3) and the continuity in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) (\(Theorem\)3.4), then establish the pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) (\(Theorem\)3.5).
2 Variational solutions
For each \(t\in \mathbb{R}\), denoted by \((\cdot ,\cdot )_{t}\) and \(|\cdot |_{t}\) the usual inner product and related norm in \(L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) and by \(((\cdot ,\cdot ))_{t}\) and \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{t}\) the usual gradient inner product and associated norm in \(H^{1}_{0}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\). The usual duality product between \(H^{1}_{0}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) and \(H^{-1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) is denoted by \(\langle\cdot ,\cdot \rangle_{t}\). And \((\cdot ,\cdot )_{t}\) and \(\Vert \cdot \Vert _{L^{p}(\mathcal {O}_{t})}\) represent the duality product between \(L^{p}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) and \(L^{q}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) with \(\frac{1}{p}+\frac{1}{q}=1\) and the associated norm.
We consider a process U on a Banach space X, i.e., a family \(\{U(t,\tau );-\infty <\tau \leqslant t<+\infty \}\) of continuous mappings \(U(t,\tau ):X\to X\) such that
Suppose that \(\mathscr{D}\) is a nonempty class of parameterized sets \(\hat{D}=\{D(t):t\in \mathbb{R}\}\subset \mathcal{P}(X)\), where \(\mathcal{P}(X)\) denotes the family of all nonempty subsets of X.
Definition 2.1
([3])
The family \(\hat{\mathscr{A}}=\{\mathscr{A}(t): \mathscr{A}(t)\in \mathcal{P}(X), t\in \mathbb{R}\}\) is said to be a pullback \(\mathscr{D}\)-attractor for the process \(U(\cdot ,\cdot )\) if
- (1)
\(\mathscr{A}(t)\) is compact in X for all \(t\in \mathbb{R}\);
- (2)
\(\hat{\mathscr{A}}\) is pullback \(\mathscr{D}\)-attracting, i.e.,
$$\begin{aligned} \lim_{\tau \to -\infty }\operatorname{dist}_{X}\bigl(U(t,\tau )D( \tau ), \mathscr{A}(t)\bigr)=0 \quad\text{for all } \hat{D}\in \mathscr{D} \text{ and all } t\in \mathbb{R}; \end{aligned}$$ - (3)
\(\hat{\mathscr{A}}\) is invariant, i.e.,
$$\begin{aligned} U(t,\tau )\mathscr{A}(\tau )=\mathscr{A}(t) \quad\text{for any } {-} \infty < \tau \leqslant t< \infty. \end{aligned}$$
Fix \(T>\tau \), for each \(t\in [\tau ,T]\) denoted by
is the orthogonal subspace of \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) with respect to the inner product in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\). We may identify w with its null-expansion and by \(P(t)\in L(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\) the orthogonal projection operator from \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\) to \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})^{\bot }\), which is defined as
for each \(v\in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\). Consider the family \(p(t;\cdot ,\cdot )\) of symmetric bilinear forms on \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\) defined by
It can be proved that the mapping \([\tau ,+\infty )\ni t\rightarrow p(t;v,w)\) is measurable for all \(v,w \in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\). For each integer \(k\geqslant 1\) and \(t\geqslant \tau \), define
and denote by \(P_{k}(t)\in L(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\) the associated operator defined by
Then we know from the above that, for any integers \(1\leqslant h\leqslant k\), any \(t\geqslant \tau \), and any \(v,w\in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\),
For each \(T>\tau \), denote
Definition 2.2
A variational solution of equation (7) is a function u such that
- (C1)
\(u\in L^{2}(\tau , T; H_{0}^{1}( \mathcal {O}_{T})) \cap L^{p}( \tau , T; L^{p}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\);
- (C2)
\(u(t)\in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\text{ a.e. } t\in (\tau ,T)\);
- (C3)
for all \(\phi \in \mathcal{U}_{\tau , T}\),
$$\int _{\tau }^{T} \bigl[- \bigl(u(t), \phi '(t) \bigr)_{T}+ \bigl( \bigl(u(t), \phi (t) \bigr) \bigr)_{T}+ \bigl(g\bigl(u(t)\bigr),\phi (t) \bigr)_{T} \bigr]\,dt = \int _{ \tau }^{T} \bigl(f(t),\phi (t) \bigr)_{T}\,dt; $$ - (C4)
\(\lim_{t\to \tau }\frac{1}{t-\tau } \int ^{t}_{\tau } \bigl \vert u(s)-u( \tau ) \bigr \vert _{T}^{2}\,ds=0\).
The existence and uniqueness of variational solution for equation (7) have been derived as follows.
Theorem 2.3
([6])
Suppose that (1), (2), (4), and (5) hold; for\(f\in L^{2}(\tau , T;L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\)and\(u_{\tau }\in L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), there exists a unique variational solution\(u\in L^{2}(\tau , T;H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\cap L^{p}(\tau ,T;L^{p}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\)of equation (7), which satisfies energy equality a.e. \(t\in [\tau ,T]\), that is,
holds for a.e. \(t\in [\tau ,T]\). In addition, \(u\in C([\tau ,T]; L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\)and satisfies the energy equality for all\(t\in [\tau ,T]\). Moreover, if\(u_{\tau }\in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\cap L^{p}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), thenualso satisfies
Remark 2.4
([6])
If \(T_{2}>T_{1}>\tau \) and u is a variational solution of (7) with \(T=T_{2}\), then the restriction of u to \(Q_{\tau ,T_{1}}\) is a variational solution of (7) with \(T=T_{1}\).
We can also obtain the following result.
Theorem 2.5
Under the assumptions of Theorem 2.3, if\(u_{\tau }\in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\cap L^{p}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), then\(u\in L^{2}(\tau ,T;H^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\).
Proof
One can take an orthonormal Hilbert basis \(\{w_{j}\}\) of \(L^{2}\) and \(H_{0}^{1}\) formed by the elements of \(H_{0}^{1}\cap L^{p} \cap H^{3}\) such that the vector space generated by \(\{w_{j}\}\) is dense in \(H_{0}^{1}\) and \(L^{p}\). Then one takes a sequence \(\{u_{\tau n}\}\) such that \(u_{\tau n} \to u_{\tau }\) in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\) with \(u_{\tau n}\) in the vector space spanned by the n first \(w_{j}\).
Consider the equality
for a.e. \(t\in [\tau ,T]\).
Multiplying (10) by \(\lambda _{j} r_{k n,j}(t)\) and summing from \(j=1\) to n, we know that
for a.e. \(t\in [\tau ,T]\).
According to (5), it follows
Combining (11) and Hölder’s inequality, we have
a.e. \(t\in (\tau ,T)\), integrate the inequality above from τ to t,
so, we have
and
Note (8), we have
for a.e. \(t\in (\tau ,T)\), where c may be different from line to line, recall that \(u_{k n}(\tau )=u_{\tau n}, u_{\tau n} \to u_{\tau }\) in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\) as \(n \to \infty \). So, \(\{u_{kn}\}\) is bounded in \(L^{2}(\tau ,T;H^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\cap L^{\infty }(\tau ,T;H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\), there exists a subsequence, denoted still by \(\{u_{kn}\}\), such that as \(n\to \infty \)
therefore,
and also \(\{u_{k}\}\) is bounded in \(L^{2}(\tau ,T;H^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\cap L^{\infty }(\tau ,T;H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\). There exists a subsequence, denoted still by \(\{u_{k}\}\), such that it is convergent weakly, convergent weakly star to the uniqueness variational solution u of (7) in \(L^{2}(\tau ,T;H^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\cap L^{\infty }(\tau ,T;H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\) as \(k\to \infty \). □
Theorem 2.6
([15])
Suppose that\(u_{\tau }\in L^{\infty }(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\cap H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), \(f \in L^{\infty }(\tilde{Q}_{\tau , T})\)hold andgsatisfies (4). Then there exists a positive constantKwhich depends on\(\|u_{\tau }\|_{L^{\infty }(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })}\), \(\|f\|_{L^{\infty }(\tilde{Q}_{\tau ,T})}\), βand\(\alpha _{1}\)such that the variational solutionuof (7) satisfies
3 Pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\)
By \(Theorem\) 2.3 and \(Remark\)2.4, we know that, for any \(\tau \in \mathbb{R}\) and any \(u_{\tau }\in L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), there exists a unique variational solution \(u(\cdot;\tau ,u_{\tau })\) satisfying energy equality for a.e. \(t\in (\tau ,T)\) and any \(T>\tau \). Moreover, \(u\in C([\tau ,T]; L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\) satisfying energy equality for all \(t\in (\tau ,T)\) with any \(T>\tau \).
Define
By the uniqueness of variational solution for (7) and \(u\in C([\tau ,T]; L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{T}))\) satisfying energy equality for all \(t\in (\tau ,T)\) with any \(T>\tau \), we know \(U(\cdot ,\cdot )\) defined by (15) is a process for the family of Hilbert spaces \(\{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}), t\in \mathbb{R}\}\).
To obtain main results, the following lemma is necessary.
Lemma 3.1
([11])
For any\(k>0\)and any\(\phi \in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\cap L^{\infty }(\mathcal {O}_{t})\), the following equality holds:
where ⋅ stands for the usual inner product in\(\mathbb{R}^{N}\).
In the following, suppose
Due to the density of \(L^{\infty }(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) in \(L^{2}({\mathcal {O}_{t}})\), there exist sequences \(\{u_{\tau m}\}\), \(\{v_{\tau m}\}\subset L^{\infty }(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), \(\{f_{m}\}\subset L^{\infty }(\tilde{Q}_{\tau ,T})\) such that
and it can be done that, for each \(m=1,2,\ldots \) ,
Based on the above, applying the interpolation inequality to estimate the \(L^{2p-2}\)-norm of approximation solution, we can establish the higher-order integrability near initial time τ for approximation solution as follows.
Theorem 3.2
Suppose that (1), (2), (4), and (5) hold, \(f\in L^{2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb{R};L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}))\), \(u_{\tau },v_{\tau }\in L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\). Then, for any\(T\geqslant \tau \), any\(k=1,2,\ldots \) , there exists a positive constant\(M_{k}=M(T-\tau , k, N, l, |u_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })}, |v_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })})\)such that

and

where\(w_{m}(t)=u_{m}(t)-v_{m}(t)=U(t,\tau )u_{\tau m}-U(t,\tau )v_{\tau m}\),
and all constants\(M_{k}(k=1,2,\ldots )\)are independent ofm.
Proof
For any fixed \(\tau \in (-\infty , T]\), denote
where \(u_{m}(t), v_{m}(t)\) are the variational solutions of equation (7) corresponding to the data \((u_{\tau m}, f_{m})\), \((v_{\tau m}, f_{m})\) satisfying (18) respectively. By \(Theorem\)2.3 and \(Theorem\)2.6, we know
and
for any \(\phi \in \mathcal{U}_{\tau ,T}\).
For any \(\theta >0\), we have
and choose any \(\eta \in C_{c}^{1}(\tau ,T)\) to get
Hence, we can choose \(\eta |w_{m}|^{\theta }w_{m}\) as a test function to have
note that
for any \(\eta \in C_{c}^{1}(\tau ,T)\) holds. Therefore, for a.e. \(t\in (\tau , T)\),
By (5), for a.e. \(t\in (\tau , T)\), we have
thanks to \(w_{m}(t)\in H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) for a.e. \(t\in (\tau ,T)\), so \(\gamma w_{m}(t)=0\) for a.e. \(t\in (\tau ,T)\), it follows
In the following, we separate our proof into two steps.
Step 1. \(k=1\)
Firstly, taking \(\phi =w_{m}\) in (22), from the definition of variational solution and (5), we obtain that
which implies that
and then,
Consequently, combining with the embedding
we can deduce that
note that here the embedding constant \(c_{N,\tau ,T}\) in (24) depends only on the domain \(\mathcal {O}_{T}\).
Secondly, take \(\theta =\frac{2N}{N-2}-2\) in (23), by \(Lemma\)3.1, we have that
In the following we denote by \(c,c_{i}\) (\(i=1,2,\ldots \)) the constants which depend only on \(N,T-\tau \), and l, which may differ from line to line. Then the above inequality can be written as
and by multiplying both sides with \((t-\tau )^{\frac{3N}{N-2}}\), we obtain that
here \(b_{1}=1+\frac{1}{2}\).
One direct result of (27) is that
and so
Consequently, for any \(t\in [\tau ,T]\), integrating (28) over \([\tau ,t]\), we obtain that
hence,
Then, multiplying (27) by \((t-\tau )^{\frac{2N}{N-2}}\), we obtain that: for a.e. \(t\in (\tau ,T)\),
Integrating the above inequality over \([\tau ,T]\) with respect to t, we obtain that
Consequently, applying embedding (24) again, we can deduce that
Therefor, noticing (18) and (19), from (29) and (30) we know that there is a positive constant \(M_{1}\), which depends only on \(N,\tau ,T,l,|u_{\tau }|_{\tau }, |v_{\tau }|_{\tau }\) such that (\(A_{1}\)) and (\(B_{1}\)) hold.
Step 2. Assume (\(A_{k}\)) and (\(B_{k}\)) hold for \(k\geqslant 1\), in the following, we will show that (\(A_{k+1}\)) and (\(B_{k+1}\)) hold.
Take \(\theta =2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k+1}-2\) in (23), we obtain that
Multiplying both sides of (31) with \((t-\tau )^{2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k+1}\cdot b_{k+1}}\), we deduce that
i.e.,
At first, from (32) we have
and so,
Integrating (34) over \([\tau ,t]\) and applying (\(B_{k}\)), we deduce that
which implies that
Multiplying both sides of (32) by \((t-\tau )^{1+\frac{N}{N-2}}\), we obtain that
Then, from (35) and the definition of \(b_{k+2}\), we obtain that
Integrating the above inequality over \([\tau ,T]\) and using (35) again, we deduce that
Combining (36) with the embedding inequality (24), we obtain that
Therefore, by setting
(35) and (37) implies that (\(A_{k+1}\)) and (\(B_{k+1}\)) hold respectively. □
Next, we start to establish the higher-order integrability near the initial time τ for the variational solution of equation (7). This result shows some decay rate of variational solution in \(L^{2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k+1}}\)-norm near the initial time τ.
Theorem 3.3
Suppose that (1), (2), (4), and (5) hold, \(f\in L^{2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb{R};L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}))\), \(u_{\tau },v_{\tau }\in L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\). Then, for any\(T\geqslant \tau \), any\(k=1,2,\ldots \) , there exists a positive constant\(M_{k}=M(T-\tau , k, N, l, |u_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })}, |v_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })})\)such that
where\(w(t)=U(t,\tau )u_{\tau }-U(t,\tau )v_{\tau }\)and
Proof
For any (fixed) \(\tau \in \mathbb{R}\) and \(T\geqslant \tau \), choose two sequences \((u_{\tau m}, f_{m})\) and \((v_{\tau m}, f_{m})\) satisfying (18), (19).
Then from \(Theorem\)3.2 (\(A_{k}\)) we have that, for any \(k=1,2,\ldots \) , there exists a positive constant \(M_{k}=M(T-\tau , k, N, l, |u_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })}, |v_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })})\) such that
where \(u_{m}\) and \(v_{m}\) are the unique variational solutions of (3) corresponding to the regular data \((u_{\tau m},f_{m})\) and \((v_{\tau m},f_{m})\) on the interval \([\tau , T]\) respectively.
On the other hand, from [6] Proposition 11, there exist a subsequence \(\{u_{mj}\}\) of \(\{u_{m}\}\) and \(\{v_{mj}\}\) of \(\{v_{m}\}\) such that
Hence, by applying Fatou’s lemma,
□
The following result is the continuity of variational solution in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) w.r.t. initial data in \(L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\), which is necessary to deduce \((L^{2},L^{2})\) pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attractor in the topology \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\).
Theorem 3.4
(Continuity)
Assume that (1), (2), (4), and (5) hold, \(f\in L^{2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb{R};L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}))\). For any\(\tau \in \mathbb{R}\)and any\(t>\tau \), if\(u_{\tau }, v_{\tau }\in L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\)and\(|u_{\tau }-v_{\tau }|_{L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })}\to 0\), then
More precisely, the following estimate holds:
where\(\theta \in (0,1)\)is the exponent of the interpolation\(\|\cdot \|_{L^{2p-2}}\leqslant \|\cdot \|_{L^{2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k_{0}}}}^{1- \theta } \|\cdot \|_{L^{2}}^{\theta }\)with some\(k_{0}\in \mathbb{N}\)satisfying\(2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k_{0}}>2p-2\), and\(r_{0}=(\frac{N}{N-2})\frac{2-2\theta }{2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k_{0}}}+(2-2 \theta )b_{k_{0}}\); the constant\(M_{0}\)depends only on\(t-\tau \), \(\mathcal {O}_{t}\), \(\lambda _{1,t}\), \(\int _{\tau }^{t}|f(s)|_{s}^{2}\,ds\), β, \(\alpha _{1}\), \(|u_{\tau }|_{\tau }\), p, uniform bound of\(\{u_{\tau n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty }\)in\(L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{\tau })\)and\(M_{k_{0}}\).
Proof
For any fixed \(\tau \in (-\infty , T]\), denote
where \(u_{n}(s), v_{n}(s)\) are the variational solutions of equation (7) corresponding to data \((u_{\tau n}, f_{n})\), \((v_{\tau n}, f_{n})\) satisfying (18). Then the following holds:
for any \(\phi \in \mathcal{U}_{\tau ,T}\).
Noticing \(u_{n}\in L^{2}(\tau , T; H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})) \cap L^{\infty }( \tilde{Q}_{\tau ,T})\), so \(\eta |u_{n}|^{\theta }u_{n}\ (\eta \in C_{c}^{1}(\tau ,T), \theta >0)\) can be selected as a test function, hence, for a.e. \(s\in (\tau , T)\),
By (4) and the standard energy estimate (e.g., see [9]), we have the following a priori estimates:
where the constant M depends only on \(g, T-\tau \), \(\mathcal {O}_{t}\), \(\int _{\tau }^{T}|f(s)|_{s}^{2}\,ds\), \(\alpha _{1}\), β, p, \(u_{\tau n}, v_{\tau n}\) and \(\lambda _{1,T}\);
and
recall that \(\lambda _{1,T}\) is the first eigenvalue of −Δ on \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{T})\) and the constant l comes from (5).
Noticing \(u_{n}\in L^{2}(\tau , T;H^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}))\) in Theorem 2.5, let \(\phi =-\eta \Delta w_{n}\ (\eta \in C_{c}^{1}(\tau ,T))\) in (40), then
for any \(\eta \in C_{c}^{1}(\tau ,T)\). Hence,
where \(n_{s}\) is the outside unit normal vector, w is a velocity field. By trace theory and interpolation, for all \(\delta \geqslant \frac{1}{2}\) (reference [13]),
In particular, let \(\delta =\frac{1}{2}\) and by Cauchy’s inequality, for all \(s\in [\tau ,T]\), we have
On the other hand, by using (4) we have that
Combining (44)–(47), we obtain that
Since \(2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k}\to \infty \) as \(k\to \infty \), there is \(k_{0}\in \mathbb{N}\) such that
For this \(k_{0}\), by interpolation, we have
where \(\theta \in (0,1)\) depends only on \(p,k_{0}\).
Therefore, we have that
Denoting \(r_{0}= (\frac{N}{N-2})\frac{2-2\theta }{2(\frac{N}{N-2})^{k_{0}}}+(2-2 \theta )b_{k_{0}}\) and multiplying the above inequality by \((s-\frac{t+\tau }{2})^{r_{0}}\), we obtain that
where \(b_{k_{0}}\) is given by (20).
On the other hand, thanks to \(Theorem\)3.2, we know that there is a constant \(M_{k_{0}}\), which depends only on \(t-\tau \), N, \(k_{0}\), and the \(H_{0}^{1}\cap L^{p}\)-bounds of \(u_{\tau n}, v_{\tau n}\) such that
Therefore, we have the following estimate for any \(n=1,2,\ldots \) :
To ensure that the exponent \({r_{0}}\) is strictly larger than 1, we may multiply both sides by \((s-\frac{t+\tau }{2})\), and then we obtain that
Integrating the inequality above over \([\frac{\tau +t}{2},t]\) with respect to s, we finally obtain that, for any \(n=1,2,\ldots \) ,
Note that, from (42)–(43), we have that
For the estimate of \(I_{3}\), by Hölder’s inequality, we have
Combining with (42)–(49), it implies that
From (52) we know \(w_{n}\) is bounded in \(H_{0}^{1}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\), so there exists a subsequence \(\{w_{nj}\}\) such that
By [6] Proposition 11 again, it follows
hence, \(\chi =u(t)-v(t)\).
Combining (52), (53), (21), and (19), we deduce that
□
In [15], the existence of pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attractor defined in time varying domains has been considered. Then we can establish the regularity attraction of \((L^{2},L^{2})\) pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attractor.
Theorem 3.5
Suppose that\(U(t,\tau )\)is the process corresponding to a variational solution of (3), \(\hat{\mathscr{A}}=\{\mathscr{A}(t): t\in \mathbb{R}\}\)is the\((L^{2},L^{2})\)pullback\(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\)attractor associated with\(U(t,\tau )\)and\(f\in L^{2}_{\mathrm{loc}}(\mathbb{R},L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t}))\). Then\(\hat{\mathscr{A}}\)is pullback\(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\)attraction in\(H_{0}^{1}\).
That is, for any\(t\in \mathbb{R}\), any\(\hat{{D}}=\{{D}(t): t\in \mathbb{R}\}\in \mathscr{D}_{ \lambda _{1}}\),
Proof
For each \(t\in \mathbb{R}\), from the definition of the \((L^{2},L^{2})\) pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attractor \(\mathscr{A}\), we know that \(\mathscr{A}(t-1)\) is compact in \(L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\).
By \(B(t)\) being the 1-neighborhood of \(\mathscr{A}(t)\) for each \(t\in \mathbb{R}\) under the \(L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\) norm, \(B(t)\) is bounded in \(L^{2}(\mathcal {O}_{t})\). By (39), let t be fixed, \(\tau =t-1\), and \(u_{\tau i}\in B(t-1)\) (\(i=1,2\)), we have
where \(c_{1}, c_{2}\) are two constants. Now, for this fixed t and for any \(\varepsilon >0\), by the definition of the \((L^{2},L^{2})\) pullback \(\mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\) attractor again, for any \(\hat{D}=\{D(t):t\in \mathbb{R}\}\in \mathscr{D}_{\lambda _{1}}\), there is a time \(\tau _{0}(< t-1)\) which depends only on t, ε, and D̂ such that
Consequently,
Noticing the arbitrariness of ε and D̂, the conclusion is proved. □
References
Bonaccorsi, S., Guatteri, G.: A variational approach to evolution problems with variable domains. J. Differ. Equ. 175, 51–70 (2001)
Cao, D., Sun, C., Yang, M.: Dynamics for a stochastic reaction-diffusion equation with additive noise. J. Differ. Equ. 259, 838–872 (2015)
Caraballo, T., Łukaszewicz, G., Real, J.: Pullback attractors for asymptotically compact non-autonomous dynamical systems. Nonlinear Anal. 64, 484–498 (2006)
Crauel, H., Kloeden, P.E., Yang, M.: Random attractors of stochastic reaction-diffusion equations on variable domains. Stoch. Dyn. 11, 301–314 (2011)
He, C., Hsiao, L.: Two-dimensional Euler equations in a time dependent domain. J. Differ. Equ. 163, 265–291 (2000)
Kloeden, P.E., Marín-Rubio, P., Real, J.: Pullback attractors for a semilinear heat equation in a non-cylindrical domain. J. Differ. Equ. 244, 2062–2090 (2008)
Kloeden, P.E., Real, J., Sun, C.: Pullback attractors for a semilinear heat equation on time-varying domains. J. Differ. Equ. 246, 4702–4730 (2009)
Límaco, J., Medeiros, L.A., Zuazua, E.: Existence, uniqueness and controllability for parabolic equations in non-cylindrical domains. Mat. Contemp. 23, 49–70 (2002)
Łukaszewicz, G.: On pullback attractors in \(L^{p}\) for nonautonomous reaction-diffusion equations. Nonlinear Anal. 73, 350–357 (2010)
Li, Y., Wang, S., Wu, H.: Pullback attractors for non-autonomous reaction-diffusion equations in \(L^{p}\). Appl. Math. Comput. 207, 373–379 (2009)
Sun, C., Yuan, Y.: \(L^{p}\)-type pullback attractors for a semilinear heat equation on time-varying domains. Proc. R. Soc. Edinb., Sect. A 145, 1029–1052 (2015)
Zhong, C., Yang, M., Sun, C.: The existence of global attractors for the norm-to-weak continuous semigroup and application to the nonlinear reaction-diffusion equations. J. Differ. Equ. 223, 367–399 (2006)
Duvaut, G.: Mécanique des Milieux Continus. Masson, Paris (1990)
Trujillo, T., Wang, B.: Continuity of strong solutions of reaction-diffusion equation in initial data. Nonlinear Anal. 69, 2525–2532 (2008)
Xiao, Y., Sun, C.: Higher-order asymptotic attraction of pullback attractors for a reaction-diffusion equation in non-cylindrical domains. Nonlinear Anal. 113, 309–322 (2015)
Xiao, Y.: Pullback attractors for non-autonomous reaction-diffusion equation in non-cylindrical domains. Adv. Differ. Equ. 2016, 230 (2016)
Acknowledgements
We would like to thank the referees for their detailed suggestions that helped to improve the original manuscript.
Availability of data and materials
Not applicable.
Funding
This work is supported by introducing talent item for Northwest Minzu University :xbmuyjrc201701.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
The authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
Additional information
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Xiao, Y., Bai, Y. & Zhang, H. Pullback attraction in \(H_{0}^{1}\) for semilinear heat equation in expanding domains. Bound Value Probl 2020, 58 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-020-01354-z
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13661-020-01354-z