Surface quasi-geostrophic equation

From nonlocal pde
Revision as of 20:06, 18 May 2011 by imported>Luis (Created page with "$ \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb{R}} $ The surface quasi-geostrophic (SQG) equation consists of an evolution equation for a scalar function $\theta: \R^+ \times \R^2 \to \R$. In the ...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search
The printable version is no longer supported and may have rendering errors. Please update your browser bookmarks and please use the default browser print function instead.

$

 \newcommand{\R}{\mathbb{R}}

$

The surface quasi-geostrophic (SQG) equation consists of an evolution equation for a scalar function $\theta: \R^+ \times \R^2 \to \R$. In the inviscid case the equation is $$ \theta_t + u \cdot \nabla \theta = 0,$$ where $u = R^\perp \theta$ and $R$ stands for the Riesz transform.

Fractional diffusion is often added to the equation $$ \theta_t + u \cdot \nabla \theta + (-\Delta)^s \theta = 0.$$

The equation is used as a toy model for the 3D Euler equation and Navier-Stokes. The main question is to determine whether the Cauchy problem is well posed. In the inviscid case, it is a major open problem as well as in the supercritical diffusive case when $s<1/2$. It is believed that inviscid SQG equation presents a similar difficulty as 3D Euler equation in spite of being a scalar model in two dimensions. The same comparison can be made between the supercritical SQG equation and Navier-Stokes.

For the diffusive case, the well posedness of the equation follows from perturbative techniques in the subcritical case ($s>1/2$). In the critical case the proof is more delicate and can be shown using three essentially different methods. In the sueprcritical regime ($s<1/2$) only partial results are known.