The present paper aims to investigate some semi-separation axioms relating to the Alexandroff one point compactification (Alexandroff compactification, for short) of the digital plane with the Marcus-Wyse (MW-, for brevity) topology. The Alexandroff compactification of the MW-topological plane is called the infinite MW-topological sphere up to homeomorphism. We first prove that under the MW-topology on Z2 the connectedness of X(⊂Z2) with X♯≥2 implies the semi-openness of X. Besides, for the infinite MW-topological sphere, we introduce a new condition for the hereditary property of the compactness of it. In addition, we investigate some conditions preserving the semi-openness or semi-closedness of a subset of the MW-topological plane in the process of an Alexandroff compactification. Finally, we prove that the infinite MW-topological sphere is a semi-regular space; thus, it is a semi-T3-space because it is a semi-T1-space. Hence we finally conclude that an Alexandroff compactification of the MW-topological plane preserves the semi-T3 separation axiom.
Citation: Sik Lee, Sang-Eon Han. Semi-separation axioms associated with the Alexandroff compactification of the MW-topological plane[J]. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(8): 4592-4610. doi: 10.3934/era.2023235
[1] | Shahida Bashir, Rabia Mazhar, Bander Almutairi, Nauman Riaz Chaudhry . A novel approach to study ternary semihypergroups in terms of prime soft hyperideals. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20269-20282. doi: 10.3934/math.20231033 |
[2] | Shahida Bashir, Ahmad N. Al-Kenani, Maria Arif, Rabia Mazhar . A new method to evaluate regular ternary semigroups in multi-polar fuzzy environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 12241-12263. doi: 10.3934/math.2022680 |
[3] | Moquddsa Zahra, Dina Abuzaid, Ghulam Farid, Kamsing Nonlaopon . On Hadamard inequalities for refined convex functions via strictly monotone functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(11): 20043-20057. doi: 10.3934/math.20221096 |
[4] | Adnan, Waseem Abbas, Sayed M. Eldin, Mutasem Z. Bani-Fwaz . Numerical investigation of non-transient comparative heat transport mechanism in ternary nanofluid under various physical constraints. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 15932-15949. doi: 10.3934/math.2023813 |
[5] | Tao Yan, Ghulam Farid, Sidra Bibi, Kamsing Nonlaopon . On Caputo fractional derivative inequalities by using strongly (α,h−m)-convexity. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(6): 10165-10179. doi: 10.3934/math.2022565 |
[6] | Tareq Saeed, Muhammad Adil Khan, Hidayat Ullah . Refinements of Jensen's inequality and applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5328-5346. doi: 10.3934/math.2022297 |
[7] | Yang Pan, Yan Liu . New classes of few-weight ternary codes from simplicial complexes. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4315-4325. doi: 10.3934/math.2022239 |
[8] | M. Zakarya, Ghada AlNemer, A. I. Saied, H. M. Rezk . Novel generalized inequalities involving a general Hardy operator with multiple variables and general kernels on time scales. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 21414-21432. doi: 10.3934/math.20241040 |
[9] | Ling Zhu, Zhengjie Sun . Refinements of Huygens- and Wilker- type inequalities. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(4): 2967-2978. doi: 10.3934/math.2020191 |
[10] | Muhammad Adil Khan, Josip Pečarić, Yu-Ming Chu . Refinements of Jensen’s and McShane’s inequalities with applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 4931-4945. doi: 10.3934/math.2020315 |
The present paper aims to investigate some semi-separation axioms relating to the Alexandroff one point compactification (Alexandroff compactification, for short) of the digital plane with the Marcus-Wyse (MW-, for brevity) topology. The Alexandroff compactification of the MW-topological plane is called the infinite MW-topological sphere up to homeomorphism. We first prove that under the MW-topology on Z2 the connectedness of X(⊂Z2) with X♯≥2 implies the semi-openness of X. Besides, for the infinite MW-topological sphere, we introduce a new condition for the hereditary property of the compactness of it. In addition, we investigate some conditions preserving the semi-openness or semi-closedness of a subset of the MW-topological plane in the process of an Alexandroff compactification. Finally, we prove that the infinite MW-topological sphere is a semi-regular space; thus, it is a semi-T3-space because it is a semi-T1-space. Hence we finally conclude that an Alexandroff compactification of the MW-topological plane preserves the semi-T3 separation axiom.
In this paper, we consider the following nonclassical diffusion equation on a bounded domain Ω⊂Rn with smooth boundary ∂Ω:
ut−νΔut−Δu+f(u)=g,inΩ×R+. | (1.1) |
The problem is supplemented with initial data
u(x,0)=u0(x),x∈Ω, | (1.2) |
and the boundary condition
u(x,t)|∂Ω=0,for allt∈R+, | (1.3) |
where ν is a positive constant and g=g(x)∈L2(Ω). For nonlinearity, we always assume that
f(s)∈C1(R,R),f(0)=0, | (1.4) |
and it satisfies the following conditions: For any s∈R,
α|s|p−β≤f(s)s≤γ|s|p+δ,p≥2, | (1.5) |
where α,γ,β and δ are positive constants given, and there is a positive constant l such that
f′(s)≥−l. | (1.6) |
This equation appears as an extension of the usual diffusion equation in fluid mechanics, solid mechanics and heat conduction theory (see e.g., [1,2,3]). The Eq (1.1) with a one-time derivative appearing in the highest order term is called pseudo-parabolic or Sobolev-Galpern equation [4]. The existence of global attractors or uniform attractors for this equation has been considered in many monographs and lectures (see e.g., [5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13] and the references therein). As nonlinearity satisfies arbitrary polynomial growth condition, the asymptotic behavior of the solution for the nonclassical diffusion equation, especially the existence of exponential attractors, has received considerably less attention in the literature. In some cases similar to Eq (1.1) for some recent results on this equation, the reader can refer to[14,15,16,17].
In recent years, the existence of exponential attractors for different types of evolution models has been studied by many works of literature (see, e.g., [18,19,20,21] and references therein). Generally, exponential attractors can be constructed for dissipative systems which possesses a certain kind of smoothing property. Actually, not only does the smoothing property provide us with an exponential attractive compact set M(i.e. the exponential attractivity of the semigroup), but also it ensures the finite dimensionality of this set. In order to obtain the smoothing property of dissipative systems, we need split the solution of our problem into two parts, one part exponentially decay, and the other part is in some suitable phase spaces with higher regularity (for example, the domain of a suitable fractional power of the operator Δ). For our problem, we note that the two terms which are Δ∂tu and the nonlinearity f make problem (1.1) differ from usual reaction-diffusion equations or wave-type equations. For the Eq (1.1), if initial data belongs to H10(Ω), then its solution is always in H10(Ω), and has no higher regularity, that is similar as hyperbolic equations. Furthermore, when "n>4" the imbedding D(A)↪L∞(Ω) is not true, so it's very difficult to obtain the squeezing property for the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 associated with this equations. These characters cause some difficulties in studying the existence and the regularity of exponential attractors for equation (1.1) when the nonlinearity f satisfies the polynomial growth of arbitrary order and f∈C1. For the limit of our knowledge, the existence and the regularity of exponential attractors of equation (1.1) is still not confirmed when the nonlinearity f satisfies (1.4)–(1.6).
The main purpose in this paper is to consider the existence of exponential attractors for Eq (1.1). In particular, by verifying the asymptotic regularity of global weak solutions of problem (1.1), we also obtain the regularity of the exponential attractor M, i.e. M⊂D(A) with u0∈H10(Ω). First, to obtain the finite fractal dimension of global attractors in H10(Ω), we verify the asymptotic regularity of the semigroup of solutions corresponding to problem (1.1) by using a new decomposition method (or technique) as in [22]. It is worth noticing that authors only proved the the existence of global attractors (autonomous) or uniform attractors (non-autonomous) under a polynomial growth nonlinearity in [22,23,24]. Second, to obtain an exponential attractor in H10(Ω), we prove that the semigroup is Frˊechet differentiable on H10(Ω). Obviously, the result obtained in this paper essentially improve and complement earlier ones in [25,26] with critical nonlinearity.
This paper is organized as follows. In section 2, we recall some basic concepts as to exponential attractors and useful results that will be used later. In section 3, by using the ideas in [22], we first verify the asymptotic regularity of the semigroup for problem (1.1). Then we obtain the existence and regularity of global attractors of problem (1.1). Finally, the existence and regularity of exponential attractor is proved by using the ideas in [27].
For conveniences, hereafter let |u| be the modular (or absolute value) of u, |Ω| be the measure of the bounded domain Ω⊂Rn, |⋅|p be the norm of Lp(Ω)(1≤p≤∞) and (⋅,⋅) be the inner product of L2(Ω). C denotes any positive constant which may be different from line to line even in the same line. For the family of Hilbert spaces D(As+12), s≥0, their inner products and norms are respectively,
((⋅,⋅))s=(As+12⋅,As+12⋅)and‖⋅‖s=|As+12⋅|2. |
Let X be a complete metric space. A one-parameter family of (nonlinear) mappings S(t):X→X(t≥0) is called semigroup provided that:
(1)S(0)=I;
(2)S(t+s)=S(t)S(s) for all t,s≥0.
Furthermore, we say that semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 is a C0 semigroup or continuous semigroup if S(t)x0 is continuous in x0∈X and t∈R.
The pair (S(t),X) is usually referred to as a dynamical system. A set A⊂X is called the global attractor for {S(t)}t≥0 in X if
(i)A is compact in X,
(ii)S(t)A=A for all t≥0, and
(iii) for any bounded set B⊂X, dist(S(t)B,A)→0 as t→0, where
dist(B,A)=supb∈Binfa∈A‖b−a‖X. |
A set B0 is called a bounded absorbing set for (S(t),X) if for any bounded set B⊂X, there exists t0=t0(B) such that S(t)B⊂B0 for all t≥t0. A set E is called positively invariant w.r.t. S(t) if for all t≥0,S(t)E⊂E.
Lemma 2.1. [19,20,28] A continuous semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 has a global attractor A if and only if S(t) has a bounded absorbing set B and for an arbitrary sequence of points xn∈B(n=1,2,⋯.), the sequence {S(tn)xn}∞n=1 has a convergence subsequence in B.
In fact, we know that
A=⋂t≥0¯⋃s≥tS(s)B. |
Now, we briefly review the basic concept of the Kuratowski measure of noncompactness and restate its basic property, which will be used to characterize the existence of exponential attractors for the dynamical system (S(t),X) (the readers refer to [29,30] for more details).
Let X be a Banach space and B be a bounded subset of X. The Kuratowski measure of noncompactness κ(B) of B is defined by
κ(B)=inf{δ>0|B admits a finite cover by sets of diameter≤δ}. |
Let B,B1,B2⊂X. Then
(1)κ(B)=0 if and only if B is compact;
(2)κ(B1+B2)≤κ(B1)+κ(B2);
(3)κ(B1)≤κ(B2), for B1⊂B2;
(4)κ(B1∪B2)≤max{κ(B1),κ(B2)};
(5)ifF1⊃F2⋯are non-empty closed sets in X such that κ(Fn)→0 as n→∞, then F=⋂∞n=1Fn is nonempty and compact. In addition, let X be an infinite dimensional Banach space with a decomposition X=X1⊕X2 and let P:X→X1,Q:X→X2 be projectors with dimX1<∞. Then
(6)κ(B(ε))=2ε, where B(ε) is a ball of radius ε;
(7)κ(B)<ε, for any bounded subset B⊂X for which the diameter of QB is less than ε.
Definition 2.2. [19,28] A semigroup S(t) is called ω-limit compact if for every bounded subset B of X and for any ε>0, there exists a t0>0 such that
κ(⋃t≥t0S(t)B)≤ε. |
Definition 2.3. [19,20] Let n(M,ε),ε>0 denote the minimum number of balls of X of radius ε which are needed to cover M. The fractal dimension of M, which is also called the capacity of M, is the number
dimfM=¯limε→0lnn(M,ε)ln1ε. |
Definition 2.4. [18,20,31] Let {S(t)}t≥0 be a semigroup on complete metric space X. A set M⊂X is called an exponential attractor for S(t), if the following properties hold
(1) The set M is compact in X and has finite fractal dimension;
(2) The set M is positively invariant, i.e., S(t)M⊂M for any t>0;
(3) The set M is an exponentially attracting set for the semigroup S(t), i.e., there exist two positive constants l,k=k(B), such that for every bounded subset B⊂X, it follows that
dist(S(t)B,M)≤ke−lt. |
Definition 2.5. [27] Let (X;d) be a complete metric space. A continuous semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 on X is called global exponentially κ-dissipative if for each bounded subset B⊂X, there exist positive constants k and l such that
κ(¯⋃s≥tS(s)B)≤ke−lt, ∀t≥0, |
where κ is the Kuratowski measure of noncompactness.
Let X be a Banach space with the following decomposition
X=X1⊕X2, dimX1<∞, |
and denote projections by P:X→X1 and (I−P):X→X2. In addition, let {S(t)}t≥0 be a continuous semigroup on X. Using the idea in [29], the concepts "Condition (C∗)" is introduced in [27].
Condition (C∗): For any bounded set B⊂X, there exist positive constants t0,k and l, such that for any ε>0, there is a finite dimensional subspace X1⊂X satisfying
(I) {‖PS(t)B‖X}t≥0 is bounded, and
(II) ‖(I−P)S(t)B‖X<ke−lt+ε, for t≥t0,
where P:X→X1 is a bounded projection.
Lemma 2.6. [27] Let X be a Banach space and {S(t)}t≥0 be a continuous semigroup on X for which Condition (C∗) holds. Then {S(t)}t≥0 is a global exponentially κ−dissipative semigroup.
Lemma 2.7. [27] Let X be a Banach space, and {S(t)}t≥0 be a continuous semigroup on X. If {S(t)}t≥0 is global exponentially κ−dissipative and has a bounded absorbing subset B0⊂X, then there exists a compact subset M such that
(i) M is positive invariant,
(ii) M exponentially attracts any bounded subset B⊂X.
Theorem 2.8. [27] Let {S(t)}t≥0 be a continuous semigroup on a Banach space X, if {S(t)}t≥0 is a global exponential κ−dissipative semigroup and satisfies
(i) the fractal dimension of global attractor A is finite, i.e., dimf(A)<∞,
(ii) there exists a constant ε>0, such that for any T∗>0, S=S(T∗):Nε(A)→Nε(A) is a C1 map.
Then there exists a exponential attractor M with the finite fractal dimension.
The following general existence and uniqueness of solutions for the nonclassical diffusion equations can be obtained by the Galerkin approximation methods, here we only formulate the results:
Lemma 3.1. [22,32] Assume that g∈L2(Ω), and f satisfies (1.4)–(1.6). Then for any initial data u0∈H10(Ω) and any T>0, there exists a unique solution u for the problem (1.1)–(1.2) which satisfies
u∈C1(0,T;H10(Ω))∩Lp(0,T;Lp(Ω)). |
Moreover, we have the following Lipschitz continuity: For any ui0(ui0∈H10(Ω), denote by ui(i=1,2) the corresponding solutions of Eq (1.1), then for all t≥T
‖u1(t)−u2(t)‖20≤Q(‖u10‖0,‖u20‖0,T)(‖u10−u20‖20), | (3.1) |
where Q(⋅) is a monotonically increasing function.
By Lemma 3.1, we can define a semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 in H10(Ω) as the following:
S(t):R+×H10(Ω)→H10(Ω), |
u0→u(t)=S(t)u0, |
and {S(t)}t≥0 is a continuous semigroup on H10(Ω).
Lemma 3.2. [22,23] Let (1.4)–(1.6) hold, and g∈L2(Ω). Then for any bounded subset B⊂H10(Ω), there exist positive ρ0 and T0=T0(‖B‖0) such that
|S(t)u0|22+‖S(t)u0‖20⩽ρ0,for allt⩾T0and allu0∈B, | (3.2) |
where ρ0 depends only on |g|2 and is independent of the initial value u0 and time t.
Combining with (3.1), we know that S(t) maps the bounded set of H10(Ω) into a bounded set for all t⩾0, that is
Corollary 3.3. Let (1.4)–(1.6) hold and g∈L2(Ω), then for any bounded (in H10(Ω)) subset B, there is an MB=M(‖B‖0,|g|2) such that
|S(t)u0|22+‖S(t)u0‖20⩽MBfor allt⩾0and allu0∈B. | (3.3) |
Lemma 3.4. [23] Let (1.4)–(1.6) hold, g∈L2(Ω) and B be any bounded subset H10(Ω), then there exists a positive constant χ which depends only on |g|2 and ρ0, such that for any u0∈B, the following estimate
|u(t)|pp≤χ, |
holds for any t≥T0 (from Lemma 3.2).
For brevity, in the sequel, let B0 be the bounded absorbing set obtained in Lemma 3.2 and let ρ1=ρ0+χ, i.e.,
B0={u∈H10(Ω)∩Lp(Ω):|u|22+‖u‖20+|u|pp≤ρ1}. | (3.4) |
Lemma 3.5. Let (1.4)–(1.6) hold, g∈L2(Ω) and B be any bounded subset of H10(Ω), for any u0∈B, then there exist positive constants C which depends on ‖B‖0, such that
|ut(s)|22+‖ut(s)‖20≤C |
holds for any t≥0.
Proof. Multiplying (1.1) by u, and then integrating in Ω, it now follows that
12ddt(|u|22+ν|∇u|22)+|∇u|22=−<f(u),u>+(g,u). | (3.5) |
Using the assumptions (1.4)–(1.6), we have
−<f(u),u>≤β|Ω|−α∫Ω|u|p. | (3.6) |
By the H¨olderinequality, combining with (3.5) and (3.6), it follows that
12ddt(|u|22+ν‖u‖20)+α|u|pp≤β|Ω|+|g|222λ1, | (3.7) |
where λ1 is the first eigenvalue of −Δ with the boundary condition (1.3).
Taking t≥0 and integrating (3.7) over [t,t+1], we obtain
∫t+1t|u(s)|ppds≤M0, | (3.8) |
where M0=1α(2β|Ω|+(1+ν)MB+|g|22λ1).
We can infer from (3.8) that for any τ>0, there exists τ0∈(0,τ] such that
|u(τ0)|pp≤M0. | (3.9) |
Multiplying (1.1) by ut(t) and integrating in Ω, we have
|ut|22+‖ut‖20+ddt(12‖u(t)‖20+∫ΩF(u(t))−(g,u(t)))≤0, | (3.10) |
whence
∫ΩF(u(t))≤1λ1|g|22+MB+∫ΩF(u(τ0)), | (3.11) |
and
F(s)=∫s0f(υ)dυ. |
From assumptions (1.4)−(1.6), then there are positive constants ˜α,˜β,˜γ,˜δ, such that
˜α|s|p−˜β≤F(s)≤˜γ|s|p+˜δ, | (3.12) |
holds for any s∈R.
Plugging (3.12) and (3.9) into (3.11), then there exists a positive constant M2=M2(MB,|g|22) (of course M2 also depends on these coefficients, e.g., ˜α,˜γ etc.) such that
|u(t)|pp≤M2 | (3.13) |
holds for all t≥0.
From (3.10), there exists a positive constant M3=M3(MB,M2,|g|22) such that
∫t0(|ut(s)|22+‖ut(s)‖20)ds≤M3. |
Similarly, for any τ>0, there exists τ1∈(0,τ] such that
|ut(τ1)|22+‖ut(τ1)‖20≤M3. | (3.14) |
In order to obtain the estimate about ut, differentiate the first equation of (1.1) with respect to t and let z=∂tu, then z satisfies the following equality
zt(t)−νΔzt(t)−Δz(t)+f′(u(t))z=0. | (3.15) |
Multiplying (3.15) by z(t), and integrating in Ω, we have
12ddt(|z|22+ν‖z‖20)+‖z‖20≤l|z|22. | (3.16) |
Taking t≥τ1 and integrating (3.16) over [τ1,t]. Thus, we obtain
|z(t)|22+ν‖z(t)‖20≤|ut(τ1)|22+ν‖ut(τ1)‖20+l∫t0|ut(s)|22ds. |
Let C=M3lmax{1,ν}min{1,ν}, then the proof is completed.
In the following, we will prove the asymptotic regularity of solutions for the Eq (1.1) with initial-boundary conditions (1.2)–(1.3) in H10(Ω) by using a new decomposition method (or technique).
In order to obtain the regularity estimates later, we decompose the solution S(t)u0=u(t) into the sum:
S(t)u0=S1(t)u0+S2(t)u0, | (3.17) |
where S1(t)u0=v(t) and S2(t)u0=ω(t) solve the following equations respectively,
{vt−Δv−νΔvt+f(u)−f(ω)+μv=0,v(0)=u0,v|∂Ω=0, | (3.18) |
and
{ωt−Δω−νΔωt+f(ω)−μv=g,ω(0)=0,ω|∂Ω=0, | (3.19) |
where the constant μ>2lmax{β,1} given, l is from (1.6).
Remark 3.6. It is easy to verify the existence and uniqueness of the decomposition (3.17) corresponding to (3.18) and (3.19).
In fact, we can rewrite (3.19) as the following
{ωt−Δω−νΔωt+f(ω)+μω=g+μu,ω(0)=0,ω|∂Ω=0, | (3.20) |
where u is the unique solution of Eq (1.1) with (1.2), so g+μu∈L2loc(R+,L2(Ω)) is known. The existence and uniqueness of solutions ω corresponding to Eq (3.20) can be obtained by the Galerkin approximation methods(see e.g., [19]). By the superposition principle of solutions of partial differential equations, the existence and uniqueness of solutions v for Eq (3.18) can be proved.
We will establish some priori estimates about the solutions of Eqs (3.18) and (3.19), which are the basis of our analysis. The proof is similar to [24]. We also note that this proof was mentioned in [22].
Lemma 3.7. Let f satisfy (1.4)–(1.6) and B be any bounded set of H10(Ω). Assume that S1(t)u0=v(t) is the solutions of (3.18) with initial data v(0)=u0∈B. Then, there exists a positive constant d0 which only depend on l,μ and ν such that
|S1(t)u0|22+‖S1(t)u0‖20≤k0e−d0t. | (3.21) |
for every t≥0 holds, where k0=k0(‖u‖0)>0 is a monotonically increasing continuous function about ‖u‖0.
Proof. Multiplying (3.18) by v(t), and integrating in Ω, we obtain
12ddt(|v|22+ν|∇v|22)+|∇v|22+∫Ω(f(u)−f(ω))v+μ|v|22=0. | (3.22) |
By assumptions (1.4)–(1.6), we have
∫Ω(f(u)−f(ω))v=∫Ω(f(u)−f(ω))(u−ω)≥−l|v|22, |
It follows that
12ddt(|v|22+ν|∇v|22)+(μ−l)|v|22+|∇v|22≤0. |
By the definition of μ, then μ−l≥l>0. Let
d0=2min{μ−l,1ν}, |
then we have
ddt(|v|22+ν|∇v|22)+d0(|v|22+ν|∇v|22)≤0. |
By the Gronwall Lemma, for all t≥0, we have the following estimation
|v|22+ν|∇v|22≤(|u0|22+ν|∇u0|22)e−d0t. |
Taking
k0=max{1,ν}min{1,ν}(|u0|22+‖u0‖20), |
then for all t≥0, we have
|S1(t)u0|22+‖S1(t)u0‖20≤k0e−d0t. |
This proof is completed.
Next, we will consider the asymptotic regularity of the solution u(t) for (1.1), that is to verify the regularity of the solution ω(t) for Eq (3.19). Concerning the solution ω to Eq (3.19), we have the following result, which shows asymptotic regularity of the solution u to Eq (1.1) with the initial-boundary conditions (1.2)–(1.3).
Lemma 3.8. Let f satisfy (1.4)–(1.6), ω(t) be the solutions of the Eq (3.19). Then the solution satisfies the following estimate: there is a positive constant ρ2 such that
‖ω‖21≤ρ2 | (3.23) |
for every t≥T1, where T1=T1(T0)≥T0 is a constant.
Proof. Multiplying the first equation of (3.19) by ω(t), and integrating in Ω, we have
12ddt(|ω|22+ν|∇ω|22)+μ|ω|22+|∇ω|22+∫Ωf(ω)ω=(g,ω)+μ(u,ω). | (3.24) |
Using the assumptions (1.4)–(1.6), we have
∫Ωf(ω)ω≥−β|Ω|+α∫Ω|ω|p. | (3.25) |
Combining with (3.24) and (3.25), we obtain that
12ddt(|ω|22+ν‖ω‖20)+μ2|ω|22+‖ω‖20+α|ω|pp≤β|Ω|+1μ|g|22+μ|u|22. | (3.26) |
Therefore, for all t≥T0, we have
ddt(|ω|22+ν‖ω‖20)+μ|ω|22+2‖ω‖20≤2β|Ω|+2μ|g|22+2μ|u|22. |
Let d1=min{μ,2ν}≥d0, then
|ω|22+‖ω‖20≤2min{1,ν}d1(β|Ω|+1μ|g|22)+2μmin{1,ν}e−d1t∫t0ed1s|u(s|22ds≤2min{1,ν}d1(β|Ω|+1μ|g|22+μρ0)+2μMBd1min{1,ν}e−d1(t−T0) | (3.27) |
where MB from Corollary 3.3.
Furthermore, by (3.26), we obtain also
ddt(|ω|22+ν|∇ω|22)+2α|ω|pp≤2β|Ω|+2μ|g|22+2μ|u|22. |
For any t≥T0, it follows that
∫t+1t|ω(s)|ppds≤1α(β|Ω|+1μ|g|22)+μα∫t+1t|u(s|22ds+max{1,ν}α(|ω(t)|22+‖ω(t)‖20). | (3.28) |
Taking
M=2min{1,ν}d1(μρ0+β|Ω|+1μ|g|22),M1=Mα(min{1,ν}d12+max{1,ν}),K0=2μMBd1min{1,ν}, |
and
T∗0=max{T0,T0+1d1ln2K0M}, |
then for all t≥T∗0, we have that
|∇ω(t)|22≤2M, ∫t+1t|ω(s)|ppds≤M1. | (3.29) |
Multiplying (3.19) by −Δω(t) and integrating in Ω, we obtain
12ddt(|∇ω|22+ν|Δω|22)+|Δω|22=∫Ωf(ω)Δω−μ(v,Δω)−(g,Δω). | (3.30) |
By the Hölder inequality and assumptions (1.4)–(1.6), we have
∫Ωf(ω)Δω≤l|∇ω|22, | (3.31) |
−μ(v,Δω)≤μ2|v|22+14|Δω|22, | (3.32) |
−(g,Δω)≤|g|22+14|Δω|22. | (3.33) |
Plugging (3.31)–(3.33) into (3.30), it follows that
ddt(|∇ω|22+ν|Δω|22)+l|∇ω|22+|Δω|22≤3l|∇ω|22+2μ2|v|22+2|g|2. |
Let d2=min{l,1ν}<d0 and ϱ=max{3l,2μ2} then
ddt(|∇ω|22+ν|Δω|22)+d2(|∇ω|22+ν|Δω|22)≤ϱ(|∇ω|22+|v|22)+2|g|2. |
Combined with (3.29) and Lemma 3.7, by the Gronwall Lemma we have
|∇ω|22+ν|Δω|22≤ϱe−d2t∫t0ed2s(|∇ω(s)|22+|v(s)|22)ds+2d2|g|2≤ϱe−d2t(∫t0ed2s(|∇ω(s)|22)ds+∫t0ed2s|v(s)|22ds)+2d2|g|2≤2d2|g|2+ϱ(M+K0ed2T0)d2e−d2(t−T∗0)+k0d0−d2e−d2t+ϱe−d2t∫tT∗0ed2s|∇ω(s)|22ds≤2d2|g|2+(ϱ(M+K0ed2T0)d2ed2T∗0+k0d0−d2)e−d2t+2ϱ(d2+1)Md2 |
Let
T1=max{T∗0,1d2lnd2(ϱ(M+K0ed2T0)d2ed2T∗0+k0d0−d2)2(|g|2+ϱM(d2+1))}, |
then it follows that
|∇ω|22+|Δω|22≤4d2min{1,ν}(2|g|2+ϱM(d2+1)) |
holds for any t≥T1. Let ρ2=ρ0+4d2min{1,ν}(2|g|2+ϱM(d2+1)), by Lemma 3.2, we get
|ω|22+|∇ω|22+|Δω|22≤ρ2. |
This proof is completed.
Remark 3.9. By the proof of the Lemma 3.7 and the Lemma 3.8, we find that the existence and regularity of global attractor A also can be proved under g∈H−1(Ω).
In order to obtain the exponential attractor, we verify that the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 satisfies globally exponential κ−dissipative. Let λk(k=1,2,⋯) be the eigenvalues of −Δ in D(A) and wk(k=1,2,⋯) be the eigenvectors correspondingly, {wk}∞k=1 is an orthonormal basis in L2(Ω). Then we have
(wi,wj)=δij={1, i=j,0, i≠j, i,j=1,2,⋯. |
Further more, {wk}∞k=1 also form an orthogonal basis for H10(Ω) and D(A) and satisfies
−Δwk=λkwk, k=1,2,⋯,0<λ1<λ2≤λ3≤⋯, and limk→∞λk=+∞.((wi,wj))0=λjδij=λiδij, i,j=1,2,⋯. |
If we take an element of L2(Ω) and project it onto the space spanned by the first m eigenfunctions {w1,w2,⋯,wm}, we get
Pmu=m∑j=1(u,wj)wj=m∑j=1ujwj. |
We also define the projection orthogonal of Pm, Qm=I−Pm,
Qmu=∞∑j=m+1(u,wj)wj. |
Let u1=Pmu,u2=Qmu=(I−Pm)u, then u=u1+u2 and it follows that
|u2|22=∞∑j=m+1|(u,wj)|2≤|u|22, for any u∈L2(Ω); | (3.34) |
‖u2‖20=((u2,u2))0=∞∑j=m+1λj|(u,wj)|2≥λm|u2|22, for any u∈H10(Ω). | (3.35) |
‖u2‖21=((u2,u2))1≥λm‖u2‖20, for any u∈H2(Ω)∩H10(Ω). | (3.36) |
Lemma 3.10. Let Ω be a bounded domain in Rn with smooth boundary, f satisfies (1.4)–(1.6). Assume further that g∈L2(Ω), and the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 associated with the Eq (1.1) satisfies Condition(C∗), that is, for any bounded subset B⊂H10(Ω), there exist k,l,T2>0 and k(m), such that
‖(I−Pm)⋃s≥tS(s)u0‖20≤ke−lt+k(m),for any u0∈B, |
and
limm→∞k(m)=0 |
hold provided that t≥T2.
Proof. For any t>0, the solutions u=S(t)u0, corresponding to (1.1)–(1.3), can be decomposed in the form
S(t)u0=S1(t)u0+S2(t)u0, |
where S1(t)u0 and S2(t)u0 are the solutions of system (3.18) and system (3.19)respectively. Then we have
‖(I−Pm)⋃s≥tS(s)u0‖0≤‖(I−Pm)⋃s≥tS1(s)u0‖0+‖(I−Pm)⋃s≥tS2(s)u0‖0. | (3.37) |
By Lemma 3.7, we have
‖v2‖20≤‖v‖20≤2k0e−d0t. | (3.38) |
For any t≥T1
‖ω2‖20≤1λm‖ω2‖21≤1λm‖ω‖21≤ρ1λm. | (3.39) |
Let k=√2k0, l=12d0 and k(m)=√ρ1λm, then we have
‖(I−Pm)⋃s≥tS(s)u0‖0≤ke−lt+k(m), for any u0∈B, |
and
limm→∞k(m)=0 |
provided that t≥T2. This proof is completed.
It follows from the conclusions in Lemma 2.7 and Theorem 3.10 that the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 associated with the Eq (1.1) satisfies the globally exponential κ-dissipative, then the semigroup has a compact and positive invariant set M, which attracts any bounded subset B⊂H10(Ω) exponentially. Next, we are aiming to prove that the fractal dimension of the set M is finite, to this end, the following result is necessary.
Lemma 3.11. Assume further that f satisfies (1.4)–(1.6) and g∈L2(Ω). Then the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0, corresponding to (1.1)–(1.3), possesses a global attractor A in H10(Ω). Moreover, this attractor A is bounded in D(A) and the fractal dimension of global attractor A is finite, i.e., dimf(A)<∞.
Proof. By Lemma 3.8, we just need to verify that the fractal dimension of global attractor A is finite. It's obvious A⊂D(A) for all t≥0. Take T>0 fixing and let Sn=S(nT), obviously Sn is a discrete dynamical system. The measure of non-compactness is exponentially decaying for Sn. Let θ=e−lT and r=kθ (l,k from Lemma 3.10). Since A is compact, for r there exist x1,x2,⋯,xN such that
A⊂N⋃i=1B(xi,kθ)⊂N⋃i=1{xi+kθB(0,1)},A=N⋃i=1({xi+kθB(0,1)}∩A). |
Because {xi+kθB(0,1)}⋂A is precompact, so there exists a precompact set Bi⊂B(0,1) such that {xi+kθB(0,1)}⋂A={xi+kθBi}. For this θ, there exists q∈N such that Bi⊂⋃qj=1B(yij,θ), so we have
A=(N⋃i=1q⋃j=1{xi+kθB(yij,θ)})⋂A=(N⋃i=1q⋃j=1{xi+kθyij+kθ2B(0,1)})⋂A. |
Then there exist Nq open balls with radius kθ2 in H10(Ω) covering A. For any n∈N, after iterations, we obtain that there exist at most Nqn−1 balls with radius kθn in H10(Ω) covering A. So for all ε>0, let n≥[lnk−lnεlT]+1, then kθn=ke−nlT<ε. We get
dimf(A)≤¯limε→0lnNqn−1lnε−1≤¯limε→0lnN+(n−1)lnqlnε−1≤limε→0lTlnN+(lnk−lnε)lnq−lTlnε≤lnqlT. |
This proof is completed.
Lemma 3.12. For any t>0, the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 is Frˊechet differentiable on H10(Ω).
Proof. Let S(t∗)(u0+hv0)=v(t∗) and S(t∗)(u0)=u(t∗) be the solutions at the time t∗ for the following equations respectively,
{vt−Δv−νΔvt+f(v)=g,v(0)=u0+hv0,v|∂Ω=0, | (3.40) |
and
{ut−Δu−νΔut+f(u)=g,u(0)=u0,u|∂Ω=0. | (3.41) |
And then, setting ωh=v−uh=S(t∗)(u0+hv0)−S(t∗)(u0)h, which clearly satisfies the following equation
{∂∂tωh−Δωh−ν∂∂tΔωh+f′(u+θ(v−u))ωh=0,ωh(0)=v0,ωh|∂Ω=0, | (3.42) |
where f′(u+θ(v−u))=f(v)−f(u)h and 0<θ<1.
Multiplying Eq (3.42) by ωh and integrating over Ω, we have
12ddt(|ωh|22+ν‖ωh‖20)+‖ωh‖20≤l|ωh|22. |
Then ωh(t∗)∈H10(Ω) and
|ωh|22+‖ωh‖20≤Celt(|v0|22+‖v0‖20), | (3.43) |
where C is a constant independent of h. On the other hand, we denote W=W(x,t) which satisfies the following equation
{∂∂tW−ΔW−ν∂∂tΔW+f′(u)W=0,W(0)=v0,W|∂Ω=0. | (3.44) |
Multiplying Eq (3.44) by W and integrating over Ω, we get
12ddt(|W|22+ν‖W‖20)+‖W‖20≤l|W|22. |
Then
|W|22+‖W‖20≤Celt(|v0|22+‖v0‖20), | (3.45) |
where C is a constant independent of h.
Obviously, W(t∗)∈H10(Ω) and the linear version S′(t∗)(if existed)
S′(t∗)=L:v0(∈Tu0(H10(Ω)))↦W(t∗)(∈TS(t∗)u0(H10(Ω))), |
where Tu0(X) denotes the tangent space at the point u0 in Banach space X.
From (3.42) and (3.42), the difference Uh=ωh−W satisfies
{∂∂tUh−ΔUh−ν∂∂tΔUh+ghωh+f′(u)Uh+lUh=lUh,Uh(0)=0,Uh|∂Ω=0, | (3.46) |
where gh=f′(u+θ(v−u))−f′(u) and l from (1.6).
The homogenization of the above Eq (3.46) gives
{∂∂tU−ΔU−ν∂∂tΔU+f′(u)U+lU=lU,U(0)=0,U|∂Ω=0. | (3.47) |
It is obvious U≡0 for the homogenization Eq (3.47).
Next, we consider the non-homogeneous Eq (3.46). It is obvious that ghωh∈H−1(Ω), Uh∈H10(Ω) and ghωhUh∈L1(Ω). Multiplying Eq (3.46) by Uh and integrating over Ω, we get
12ddt(|Uh|22+ν‖Uh‖20)+‖Uh‖20≤l|Uh|22+|∫ΩghωhUh|. |
Combining with (3.28), (3.43) and (3.45), we get ghωhUh is uniform (w.r.t h) bounded, for a.e. x∈Ω. Note that the non-homogeneous term ghωhUh→0, a.e. x∈Ω. And applying the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem, one can deduce
limh→0∫Ω|ghωhUh|=0. |
So we obtain that
limh→0|∫ΩghωhUh|=0. |
for any t∈[0,+∞). By the standard theory of ordinary differential equation, one see that Uh→0 in H10(Ω) as h→0, that is, ωh→W in H10(Ω) as h→0. It implies that the semigroup {S(t∗)}t≥0 is Frˊechet differentiable on H10(Ω). This proof is completed.
Lemma 3.13. There exists a constant L, such that for any u0∈B0, the solution u(t) of the equation (1.1) with the initial-boundary conditions (1.2) and (1.3) satisfies
|u(t1)−u(t2)|22+‖u(t1)−u(t2)‖20≤L|t1−t2|2, |
for any t1,t2≥0.
Proof. Recalling Lemma 3.5, for any t≥0, there exists a constant C such that
|ut(t)|22+‖ut(t)‖20≤C, and |u(t)|22+‖u(t)‖20≤C |
It follows that
|u(t1)−u(t2)|22+‖u(t1)−u(t2)‖20≤C|t1−t2|2. |
This implies for any T>0, the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0 is uniformly Hölder continuous w.r.t t on [0,T]. This proof is completed.
Theorem 2.14 (Exponential attractor). Let Ω be a bounded domain in Rn with smooth boundary, and f satisfies (1.4)–(1.6). Then the semigroup {S(t)}t≥0, corresponding to (1.1)–(1.3), possesses a exponential attractor M in H10(Ω).
Proof. Combining with Lemma 3.2, Lemma 3.10, Lemma 3.12 and Lemma 3.13. as a direct application of the abstract theorem 1, we obtain the existence of a exponential attractor M in H10(Ω). The proof is completed.
This paper mainly investigate the long-time behavior for nonclassical diffusion equations with arbitrary polynomial growth nonlinearity, including the following three results: (i) the existence and regularity of global attractors is obtained, it is worth noting that a new operator decomposition method is proposed; (ii) the global attractors have finite fractal dimension by combining with asymptotic regularity of solutions; (iii) we confirm the existence of exponential attractors by verifying Fréchet differentiability of semigroup. The above conclusions are more general, and essentially improve existing some results, it should be pointed out that these methods in this paper can also be used for other evolution equations.
The authors declares no conflict of interest in this paper.
The authors would like to thank the referees for their many helpful comments and suggestions. The research is financially supported by Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Mathematical Modeling and Analysis in Engineering (Changsha University of Science and Technology) and National Natural Science Foundation of China (Nos. 11101053, 71471020, 51578080).
[1] | J. R. Munkres, Topology: A First Course, Pearson College Div, 1974. |
[2] | P. Alexandorff, Uber die Metrisation der im Kleinen kompakten topologischen Räume, Math. Ann., 92 (1924), 294–301. |
[3] |
N. Levine, Semi-open sets and semi-continuity in topological spaces, Mathematics, 70 (1963), 36–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/00029890.1963.11990039 doi: 10.1080/00029890.1963.11990039
![]() |
[4] | C. Dorsett, Semi-regular spaces, Soochow J. Math., 8 (1982), 45–53. |
[5] | S. N. Maheshwari, R. Prasad, Some new separation axioms, Ann. Soc. Sci. Bruxelles 89 (1975), 395–402. |
[6] | S. N. Maheshwari, R. Prasad, On s-regular spaces, Glasnik Math., 10 (1975), 347–350. |
[7] | T. Noiri, A note on s-regular space, Glasnik Math., 13 (1978), 107–110. |
[8] | P. Bhattacharyya, B. K. Lahiri, Semi-generalized closed set in topology, Indian J. Math., 29 (1987), 375–382. |
[9] | N. Biswas, On some mappings in topological spaces, Ph.D thesis, University of Calcutta, 1971. |
[10] |
S. G. Crosseley, A note on semitopological properties, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 72 (1978), 409–412. https://doi.org/10.1090/S0002-9939-1978-0507348-9 doi: 10.1090/S0002-9939-1978-0507348-9
![]() |
[11] | S. G. Crosseley, S. K. Hidelfrand, Semi-closure, Texas. J. Sci., 22 (1971), 99–112. |
[12] |
S. G. Crosseley, S. K. Hidelfrand, Semi-topological properties, Fund. Math., 74 (1972), 233–254. https://doi.org/10.4064/fm-74-3-233-254 doi: 10.4064/fm-74-3-233-254
![]() |
[13] | M. C. Cueva, R. K. Saraf, A research on characterizations of semi-T12 spaces, Divulg. Math., 8 (2000), 43–50. |
[14] | C. Dorsett, Semi-separtaion axioms and hyperspaces, Int. J. Math. Sci., 4 (1981), 445–450. |
[15] | N. Hamllet, A correction to the paper "Semi-open sets and semi-continuity in topological spaces" by Norman Levine, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 49 (1975), 458–460. |
[16] | S. E. Han, Study on topological spaces with the semi-T12-separation axiom, Honam Math. Jour., 35 (2013), 717–726. |
[17] |
S. E. Han, Hereditary properties of semi-separation axioms and their applications, Filomat, 32 (2018), 4689–4700. https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL1813689H doi: 10.2298/FIL1813689H
![]() |
[18] |
S. E. Han, Topologies of the quotient spaces induced by the M-topological plane and the infinite M-topological sphere, Topol. Appl., 264 (2019), 201–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2019.06.016 doi: 10.1016/j.topol.2019.06.016
![]() |
[19] | S. E. Han, Semi-topological properties of the Marcus-Wyse topoloigical spaces, AIMS Math., 7 (2022), 12742–12759. |
[20] |
S. E. Han, W, Yao, Homotopy based on Marcus-Wyse topology and its applications, Topol. Appl., 201 (2016), 358–371. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2015.12.047 doi: 10.1016/j.topol.2015.12.047
![]() |
[21] | D. Jankovic, I. Reilly, On semi-separation axioms, Indian J. Pure Appl. Math., 16 (1985), 957–964. |
[22] |
N. Levine, Generalized closed sets in topology, Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo, 19 (1970), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02843888 doi: 10.1007/BF02843888
![]() |
[23] | J. P. Penot et M. Thera, Semi-continuous mappings in general topology, Arch. Math., 38 (1982), 158–166. |
[24] | V. A. Chatyrko, S. E. Han, Y. Hattori, Some Remarks Concerning Semi-T12- spaces, Filomat, 28 (2014), 21–25. |
[25] |
S. E. Han, Low-level separation axioms from the viewpoint of computational topology, Filomat, 33 (2019), 1889–1901. https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL1907889H doi: 10.2298/FIL1907889H
![]() |
[26] |
S. E. Han, Semi-Jordan curve theorem on the Marcus-Wyse topological plane, Electron. Res. Arch., 30 (2022), 4341–4365. https://doi.org/10.3934/era.2022220 doi: 10.3934/era.2022220
![]() |
[27] | F. Wyse, D. Marcus, , A special topology for the integers (problem 5712), Amer. Math., 77 (1970), 1119. |
[28] |
S. E. Han, S. Özçaǧ, The fixed point property of the infinite M-sphere, Mathematics, 8 (2020). https://doi.org/10.3390/math8040599 doi: 10.3390/math8040599
![]() |
[29] | P. Alexandorff, Diskrete Räume, Mat. Sb., 2 (1937), 501–519. |
[30] |
S. E. Han, Continuities and homeomorphisms in computer topology and their applications, J. Korean Math. Soc., 45 (2008), 923–952. https://doi.org/10.4134/JKMS.2008.45.4.923 doi: 10.4134/JKMS.2008.45.4.923
![]() |
[31] |
S. E. Han, Generalizations of continuity of maps and homeomorphisms for studying 2D digital topological spaces and their applications, Topol. Appl. 196 (2015) 468–482. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.topol.2015.05.024 doi: 10.1016/j.topol.2015.05.024
![]() |
[32] |
S. E. Han, Roughness measures of locally finite covering rough sets, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 105 (2019), 368–385. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2018.12.003 doi: 10.1016/j.ijar.2018.12.003
![]() |
[33] | T. Y. Kong, A. Rosenfeld, Topological Algorithms for the Digital Image Processing, Elsevier Science, Amsterdam, 1996. |
[34] | J. ˇSlapal, Digital Jordan curves, Topol. Appl., 153 (2006), 3255-3264. |
[35] | S. E. Han, Topological graphs based on a new topology on Zn and its applications, Filomat, 31 (2017), 6313–6328. |
[36] | W. Dunham, T12-spaces, Kyungpook Math. J., 17 (1977), 161–169. |
1. | Humaira Mustanira Tariq, Rabia Hameed, Ghulam Mustafa, A Study on the Class of Non-Symmetric 3-Point Relaxed Quaternary Subdivision Schemes, 2022, 10, 2169-3536, 132164, 10.1109/ACCESS.2022.3230281 |