Qualitative Analysis of semilinear Cattaneo Equations

Thomas Hillen University of Tubingen, Biomathematik and SFB 382, Auf der Morgenstelle 10, D{72076 Tubingen.
The linear Cattaneo equation appears in heat transport theory to describe heat wave propagation with nite speed. It also can be seen as a generalization of a correlated random walk. If the system admits non conservative forces (or reactions) then a nonlinear Cattaneo system is obtained. Here we consider asymptotic behavior of solutions of the nonlinear Cattaneo system. Following Brayton and Miranker we de ne a Lyapunov function to show global existence of solutions and to show that each !{limit set is contained in the set of all stationary solutions.


1 Introduction
A semilinear Cattaneo system is a system of the form
ut + r v = f (u); vt + Dru + v = 0;


where u(t; x) 2 IR and v(t; x) 2 IRn are functions of time t 0 and space x 2 IRn . The di usion constant D and the time constant are positive and f : IR ! IR is a nonlinear function with properties to be speci ed later. There are two interpretations of this equation. First it appears to describe heat transport with nite speeds ( 3]). Then u is a temperature distribution and v is the heat ow. It also can be seen as a generalization of a correlated random walk ( 9]). Then u is a particle density and v a particle ow. If heat transport is considered in a closed system then energy conservation is supposed. Let (x; t) 2 IR describe the temperature distribution at time t in a spatial domain IRn and let n q(x; t) 2 IR denote the heat ow, then conservation of energy requires the rst equation of (1) in the linear case (f = 0) (2) t + r q = 0: In Fourier's law it is assumed that the heat ow is proportional to the negative gradient of the temperature q = kr : (3) Equation (2) and (3) lead directly to the heat equation t = k . But the heat equation gives rise to in nite speed of propagation of heat. To avoid this unphysical property Cattaneo 3] assumed that the ow adapts to the negative gradient of the temperature by qt + q = kr ; (4) which is the second equation of (1) in terms of heat ow. Maxwell 22] derived the same equation in 1867 but he directly cast out the time derivative because it \... may be neglected, as the rate of conduction will rapidly establish itself." For = 0 Cattaneo's law (4) becomes Fourier's law (3). Cattaneo's law (4) and the conservation law (2) form a system of type (1). From (4) and (2) one can derive a telegraph equation for (5) +1 =k :
tt t

u for right and left moving particles. Then the correlated random walk is given by + u+ (u u+ ) t + ux = ux = (u+ u ): ut Written in terms of the particle density u and the particle ow v := u+ u this system reads ut + vx = 0 (7) vt + ux = 2 v: (8) Again (7) is a conservation law similar to (2) and (8) connects the ow to the gradient of the particle density in the form of a Cattaneo law (4). This assumption leads to a constitutive equation for the heat ow q(x. t s)ds. Goldstein 5] and Kac 18] we assume that particles move along the line with constant speed and they reverse direction according to a Poisson process with rate . 10]. x) + u (t. Throughout the paper we discuss the results in terms of particles and random walks. Following Taylor 25].a. We split the particle density u(t. and those of Guyer and Krumhansl 7]. x) = u+ (t. Hence q is the expectation of the negative gradient of the temperature with respect to a Poisson process. inertial energy) depend on the history of the heat and of the ow. x) into densities u+ . where f : IR ! IR is supposed to be continuously di erentiable. For correlated random walk in one dimension nonlinear models are derived and qualitative properties are studied in detail in Holmes 16]. Hadeler 8]. Obviously the results are also useful in the heat transport theory. where k= is the wave speed of second sound ( 17]). Lord and Sulman 21]. He described the connection to a damped wave equation. In the fundamental paper of Gurtin and Pipkin 6] it is assumed that the thermodynamic potentials (free energy. t) = p Z1 0 a(s)r (x. Gurtin and Pipkin 6] and Nunziato 23]. Thus the linear Cattaneo system can be seen as a generalization of the correlated random walk model (7). If we choose a(s) = k 0 (s) the {distribution (which is not allowed in the context of Gurtin and Pipkin. 14]. For more details see the review of Joseph and Preziosi 17] or Duan e. Thus Cattaneo's law says that the e ect of the gradient of the temperature on the R 1 low decays exponentially with rate 1= .This equation is known as equation for second sound. 15]. (8) to several dimensions. 13]. A n{dimensional generalization of the correlated random walk equations (7). Important are the models of Je rey type ( 17]) (the name Je rey appears by analogy. If we choose a(s) := ke s= (which is allowed) then Cattaneo's law (4) follows. If the particles undergo reactions (or if the physical system is active) then the conservation law is modi ed into ut + r v = f (u). 4]. The parameters of the one dimensional case are 2 =(2 ) = D and 1=(2 ) = . since they assume regularity) then Fourier's law (3) follows. (8) is the Cattaneo system (1) with f = 0. If k is chosen such that 0 a(s)ds = 1 then a(s) is a probability density of a Poisson process. entropy. In both interpretations (heat ow and random walk) the parameter 1= is the rate of a Poisson process. To get more realistic adaptations to physical realizations the law of Cattaneo is modi ed by many authors. Je rey considered stress and deformation). 9] and in 12]. (6) with some weight functional a(s). The nonlinear Cattaneo system (1) was introduced by Hadeler 9]. Another way to obtain Cattaneo's law is a generalization of a one dimensional correlated random walk ( 9]). Cattaneo's law has been modi ed in several ways to describe heat transport with nite speed in media with memory. Assume that solutions of the nonlinear system (1) are two times di erentiable then a reaction telegraph equation follows utt + (1 f 0 (u))ut = D u + f (u): 2 .

The dissipative character of the equations is given by condition (H2). Moreover a compactness property has to be shown. ( 9]): Two kinds of boundary conditions are investigated in 9] Dirichlet conditions: The ow in normal direction is proportional to the density u= r D v: (9) (10) Neumann condition: There is no ow through the boundary v = 0: In section 2 we prove local existence of (weak) solutions of the boundary value problems (1). Such Lyapunov functions were rst introduced by Brayton and Miranker 2] for systems of hyperbolic equations in one spatial domain. Hale 11]. Global attractors for damped wave equations are also studied by Ball 1]. To prove this result we construct a Lyapunov function on an appropriate Hilbert space. (10) the solutions exist globally. Webb 28] and many others (see the literature in 26]). (10) following a classical semigroup argument to make the paper self contained. Global existence follows from condition (H3). In 13] it is adapted to systems of one dimensional correlated random walk for several types of particles. and if n > 2 then jf 0 (y)j c(1 + jyj 1 ) with = nn 2 and c > 0 (H2) sup f 0(y) < 1 (H3) y2IR F (y) := Zy 0 f (u)du. (9) and (1). A generalization of these boundary conditions to the n{dimensional case leads to the following boundary conditions. The two di erent boundary conditions have to be considered separately. Then for each of the problems (1). Moreover each !{limit set is contained in the set of all stationary solutions. 2 Most of them use modi cations of the classical energy kuk2 L2 + kut kL2 which does not work in this case. Then the energy functional can be modi ed such that a Lyapunov function is given. This result is a rst step to prove the existence of a global attractor. In 9] a hint is given to the case of several space dimensions. which will be done elsewhere. (9) or (1). In the one dimensional case homogeneous Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions are introduced in 9] and 12]. jyj!1 lim F (y) = 1 Condition (H1) is necessary to to show local existence in the L2 {setting ( 11]).We consider the System of Cattaneo type (1) on a convex bounded domain IRn with C 1 { boundary @ . that the interior of the level sets of the Lyapunov function are bounded absorbing sets. We consider a variational problem such that the original system (1) appears as a gradient system. In the case of nitely many stationary solutions a convergence result follows from Theorem 1: 3 . The main result is the following Theorem which is proved in section 3 in the case of Neumann boundary conditions and in section 4 in the case of Dirichlet boundary conditions. Theorem 1 Assume (H1) f 2 C 1(IR). If we use the additional assumption that the set of all stationary solutions is bounded then it is not di cult to show. Temam 26]. Let denote an outer normal at @ . Kapitanski 19] Ladyzhenskaya 20].

with := Then system (1) is equivalent with ~(w) wt + r v = f vt + rw + 1 v = 0. B := G := B . A @n 0 1 where @j is the operator of the partial derivative in the direction of the j {th coordinate. G(w. v) 2 H1 : v = w for Dirichlet boundary conditions. (w..g ~ = 0 can be written as Then system (11) with f yt = Gy + By: (13) (14) Since B is a bounded operator on L2 . (H3) and that the set of all stationary solutions is nite and discrete. Proof: We consider the two boundary conditions separately. with f~(w) := f ( 1 w). D(G)) is dissipative and generates a strongly continuous semigroup on L2 . Then each solution converges to a stationary solution. and v = 0 for Neumann boundary conditions. (H2). . The domain of G is depending on the boundary condition D(G) := f(w. We introduce Hilbert spaces L2 := (L2 ( ))n+1 and H1 := (H 1 ( ))n+1: Let y := (w. s). Proof of Lemma 4: The tuple of functions (r. v) 2 L2 and de ne operator matrices G : D(G) ! L2 and B : IRn+1 ! IRn+1 by 1 0 0 1 0 0 @1 @n C B B C 1 @1 0 C B B C 1 C B B C . Neumann boundary conditions (10): Lemma 4 The operator G is skew adjoint. 2 Local existence To prove local existence for the linear problem we use a transformation w := u. (11) (12) whereas the Neumann boundary condition (10) is not modi ed. . v) 2 D(G): 4 . s) 2 H1 belongs to D(G ) if and only if < (r. G = G with D(G ) = D(G). 1. we rst investigate the operator G. A @ @ . C B C .. Theorem 3 For Dirichlet and for Neumann boundary conditions the operator (G. i. qD .Corollary 2 Assume (H1). v) >L2 8 (w. 1 j n. The Dirichlet boundary condition for (11) is w= v. v) >L2 =< G (r. . s). ..e.

T ). D( )) and (G. The domain of is D( ) := f(w. Dirichlet boundary conditions (12): In this case G is not skew adjoint. (w. v) > + ( w)(r + s)dS: @ Hence s = r for (r. v) 2 H1 : v = wg: Then P : D(G) ! D( ) is one to one. Then also G = P P 1 generates a strongly continuous semigroup ( 24]). v) 2 D( ) then it is easy to verify that Z < (r. : : : . v) >L2 . v) 2 H1 : v = u on @ g and in the Neumann case D := f(u. s). Hence ( . The transformation P satis es P 2 = I . s) 2 D( ) and (w. Proof of Lemma 5: Consider (r. H1 ) of the nonlinear Cattaneo boundary value problem (1). Instead of G we consider := P 1 GP with P := diag(1. (9) or (1). (10). D(G)) are representations of the same operator. since D(G ) = f(w. v) notation the domain of the in nitesimal generator is in the case of Dirichlet boundary conditions D := f(u. L2 ) \ C ( 0. (w. respectively. D(G)) is generator of a strongly continuous semigroup on L2 .With the integral formula of Gauss we have < (r. With (H1) a local existence result for the nonlinear Cattaneo{boundary value problems (1). v) 2 H1 : v = 0 on @ g: Theorem 7 For each initial data (u0 . In the original (u. s). 1). v) >=< (r. s). (w. v) > = Z = Z ( rr v s rw)dx ((rr) v + (r s)w)dx Z @ (rv) + (sw)dS: (15) The rst integral in (15) is < G(r. Corollary 6 With Dirichlet and with Neumann boundary conditions the operator ( G + B. 5 . v) 2 C 1 ( 0. (9) and (1). v) 2 H1 : v = wg 6= D(G). 2 Since B : D(G) ! L2 is bounded the equation (14) is solved. From the Lumer{Phillips Theorem ( 24]) it follows that G generates a strongly continuous semigroup of contractions. 2 Skew adjoint operators are dissipative and their spectrum belongs to the imaginary axis (Theorem of Stone 24]). v0 ) 2 D there is a T > 0 such that there exists a unique solution (u. It vanishes for all w 2 H 1 if s = 0 on @ . Hence G = G and D(G ) = D(G). Lemma 5 The operator is skew adjoint. With the Neumann boundary condition R the second integral is @ ( s)wdS . G(w. (10) follows (see Pazy 24] or Hale 11]). 2. s). s) 2 D( ). T ). 1. 2 Then is dissipative and generates a strongly continuous semigroup of contractions.

) 2 D we form the rst variation of P Since v satis es Neumann boundary conditions (10). d" "=0 where the functional gradient Py (u. v) is given by Py (u. 6 . ) >L2 . v) = (19) 2 D(f (u) rv) + (Dru + v) ]dx: Then we consider the functional L := Q P : D ! IR. We modify P by another functional which vanishes at the stationary solutions. v + Dru): (17) (18) The functional gradient Py vanishes exactly at the stationary solutions of (1). Z h1 1 D(f (u) rv)2 + (Dru + v)2 DF (u) L(y) = 2 2 1 v2 Dru vidx Z h1 2 2 1 2 = DF (u) 2 D(f (u) rv) + 2 (Dru + v) 1 D2 (ru)2 + 1 (Dru + v)2 idx 2 Zh 2 1 i 1 1 ( Dru + v)2 + D2 (ru)2 dx: (20) = F (u) + D(f (u) rv)2 + 2 2 2 Since F is continuous and satis es (H3) the functional L(y) is bounded below. v) = (Df (u) Drv. hence we have Z D(r') vdx = Z D(rv) 'dx: Thus the rst variation can be written as d P j =< Py (u. Proof: We consider y 2 D. (10). it follows that Z d P (u + "'. ('.3 Proof of Theorem 1 for Neumann boundary conditions For system (1) with homogeneous Neumann boundary conditions (10) on @ we consider a functional P : D ! IR de ned by Z 1 P (y) := P (u. v) 2 D and ('. Lemma 8 Assume (H1). Then for each with sup f 0(u) < < 1 the functional L is bounded below and limkykD !1 L(y) = +1. (H2) and (H3). To show that limkykD !1 L(y) = +1 we consider each term of the D{norm of y separately. v) = DF (u) + v2 + D(ru) v]dx: 2 For (u. where > 0 will be chosen appropriately. v + " )j"=0 = Df (u)' + v d" Z @ + D(r') v + D(ru) ]dx: (16) ( v)'dS = 0. Z 1 2 2 1 Q(y) := Q(u. Thus P is neither bounded above nor below. Hence P is not a Lyapunov function. v). The term (ru) v of P can be of either sign. Moreover if fyn gn2IN is a sequence in D such that fL(yn )g is uniformly bounded then also fyn g is uniformly bounded in D.

then kynkD c(L0 + max F (u)). (10). kukL2 ! 1: Since F satis es (H3). we get Z rut ]dx = Z @ ut ( vt )dS = 0: Hence d L(y (t)) Since the right hand side of (21) is continuous and well de ned on D we can de ne dt d L(y (t)) := lim for all solutions y 2 C 1 ( 0. 2 d L(y (t)) at a solution y (:) we have to di erWe show that L decays along solutions. If ru grows such that (Dru + v)2 is bounded. where yn is 1 1 any sequence in C ( 0. L2 ) \ C ( 0. 4. T < 1. If fyn gn2IN is a sequence in D such that L(yn) < L0 for all n 2 IN. then item 2. krvkL2 ! 1: If f (u) stays bounded then the second term in (20) leads to L(y) ! 1. the solution exists for all t 0. applies. yt >L2 dt Z = D(f (u) rv)ut + (v + Dru) vt ]dx = and d Q(y(t)) = dt Z Du2 t vt2 ]dx rv)(f 0(u)ut rvt) + 1 (Drut + vt )]dx Z Z 2 ]dx D u rv + v ru ]dx: = Df 0(u)u2 v t t t t t t D(f (u) ut r vt + vt Z Using Gauss theorem and the Neumann boundary condition (10). kruk(L2 )n ! 1: The last term (ru)2 ! 1. H 1 ) be a solution of (1).1. T ). To evaluate dt entiate ru with respect to time. the factor of (Dru + v)2 is positive. T ). Therefore we rst consider solutions y 2 C 1 ( 0. If ru is bounded then L(y) ! 1. If the term (f (u) rv) is bounded in L2 then u is unbounded and item 1. T ). L2 ) \ C ( 0. (H2) and (H3) and let y 2 C 1( 0. Z d L(y(t)) = D(f 0 (u) dt )u 2 t +( 1)vt2 ]dx: (21) Lemma 9 Assume (H1). H 1 ) by dt n!1 L(yn (t)). Then 1. Then P (y(:)) and Q(y(:)) are continuously di erentiable with respect to time and we have d P (y(t)) = < Py (y(t)). applies. 2. T ). the rst term in (20) diverges. 3. kvk(L2 )n ! 1: Since < 1= . H ) which approximates y. 7 . T ). Since the component u is only in C 1 ( 0. H 1 ) the time derivative of ru is not de ned. T ). H1 ). T ). u2IR where max F (u) is bounded since F is continuous and (H3) holds. L2 ) \ C ( 0. T ).

v(sn )) converges in D to y. If > 0 satis es sup f 0 (u) < < 1 then L is non increasing along the solution.e. For each sequence (tn ) ! 1 there is a subsequence (sn ) ! 1 such that y(sn ) ! y 2 L2 for n ! 1. v. a. Moreover there is a constant C > 0 such that d L(y(t)) dt C kPy (y(t))k2 L2 : (22) Proof: The bound (22) follows directly from (21). vj@ = bg: An element of V is denoted by y := (u. . Hence the solution exists for all t 0. On @ it is = . i. ) 2 V . As a consequence L(y(t)) is uniformly bounded From Lemma 5 it follows that y(t) is uniformly bounded in D for 0 t < T independent of T .2. we de ne V := f(u. a. Then by partial integration it follows that Z d Rj = Df (u)' + v d" "=0 Z Dur D(rv)']dx + p Z D @ ( v)( )dS Dur dx = Z Dru dx Z Now the rst variation can be written as @ Du( )dS: d Rj =< Ry (y). Then obviously y is a stationary solution of (1). uj@ = a. Since D is compactly embedded in L2 this semiorbit is relatively compact in L2. 2 4 Proof of Theorem 1 for Dirichlet boundary conditions The functional P : D ! IR of the previous section cannot be used to de ne a Lyapunov function for Dirichlet boundary conditions (9) since the boundary integral (16) does not vanish. Then all accumulation points in D of the positive semiorbit fy(t). Following Brayton and Miranker 2] we introduce the boundary values of the solutions as independent functions. 0 t < 1g are stationary solutions and Theorem 1 is proved in the case of Neumann boundary conditions. 2 To complete the proof of Theorem 1 it remains to show that each solution converges in D to the set of all stationary solutions. by the choice of the factors (f 0 (u) in t ) and ( L(y(t)) L(y(0)) =: L0 : 1) in (21) are negative. This means that each sequence (tn ) ! 1 has a subsequence (sn ) ! 1 such that y(sn ) converges to a stationary solution for n ! 1. >L2 ( )n+1 L2 (@ )n+1 d" "=0 8 . We solve formula (18) for the derivatives of u and v ! ! rv(sn) = f (u(sn)) Py (y(sn )): 1 ru(sn) D v (sn ) The right hand side converges in L2 . Indeed. hence y(sn ) = (u(sn ). . As shown in the proof of Lemma 9 the positive semiorbit fy(t). On V we de ne a functional R : V ! IR p Z Z 1 D 2 2 R(y) := DF (u) + v Durv]dx + 2 2 @ ( v) dS: We consider the rst variation of R(y + " ) in direction of an arbitrary := ('. b). From (22) it follows that Py (y(sn )) ! 0 for n ! 1 in L2 . (10). b) 2 H1 L2 (@ ) L2 (@ )n . v. 0 t < 1g is uniformly bounded in D.

H1 ). To study the behavior of R. 9 . D r D v u : (23) The functional gradient Ry vanishes exactly for stationary solutions of the Dirichlet problem (1). Then for each with sup f 0(u) < < 1 the functional L is bounded from below and limkykVD !1 L(y) = +1. The functional L can be written as Zh i 1 1 1 ( Dru + v)2 + D2 (ru)2 dx L(y) = DF (u) + D(f (u) rv)2 + 2 2 2 r Z 1 + D u 2 D v ( v)dS Since y satis es the Dirichlet boundary condition (9) the boundary integral of L reduces to @ ( v)2 dS 0: 2 @ The remaining terms in L are the same as in the Neumann case (20). the solution exists for all t 0. (9). Df 0(u)u2 vt2 ]dx D D= t q Z @ u2 t dS. Now we can proceed as in the Neumann case. If > 0 satis es sup f 0 (u) < < 1 then L is non increasing along y(t). Similar to the prelious section we have the following result. (9) for 0 t < T . y satis es Dirichlet boundary conditions (9)g: Again Q : VD ! IR is de ned by (19) and L := Q R : VD ! IR with an appropriate constant > 0. Q and L can be extended to VD . )u2 t +( 1)vt2 ] D D= q Z @ u2 t dS: Again the expressions on the right hand sides are well de ned and continuous on the whole space VD . Then 1. Then analogous to Lemma 8 we have Lemma 10 Assume (H1). The Dirichlet boundary condition appears as an Euler boundary condition for the variational problem of R (see 27]). We de ne a Lyapunov function on the space of solutions VD := fy 2 V . Lemma 11 Assume (H1). v + Dru.with the functional gradient of R Ry (y) := D(f (u) rv). Hence the time derivatives of R. T ). D d R(y(t)) = dt d Q(y(t)) = dt d L(y(t)) = dt p Z Z Z Z Du2 t D(f 0(u) vt2 ]dx. Moreover if fyn gn2IN is a sequence in VD such that fL(yn )g is uniformly bounded then also fyn g is uniformly bounded in V . (H2) and (H3). (H2) and (H3) and let y(t) 2 VD be a solution of (1). 2. Moreover there is a constant C > 0 such that d L(y(t)) dt C kRy (y(t))k2 L2 ( )n+1 L2 (@ )n+1 : (24) To complete the proof of Theorem 1 in the case of Dirichlet boundary conditions we use the same arguments as at the end of the previous section. 0. Q and L along solutions we again consider solutions z (t) 2 VD with z 2 C 1 ( 0.

9] K. Nichtlineare hyperbolische Systeme zur Modellierung von Ausbreitungsvorgangen und Anwendung auf das Turing Modell.A. Sulla conduzione de calore. 433{448.. Mat. Dynamical Systems and their Applications in Science. Proc. Mech.D.P. 35. 1992. 370{373. Dissertation. 8] K. Rat. 22(4). 1964. 358{376. Kac. Qualitative analysis of hyperbolic random walk systems. J. Adv. Univ. 12] T. 10] K. Rocky Mountain J. Math. Uni. Rational Mech. 1977. Reviews of Modern Physics. 1996. 63. 779{795. Preziosi. Phys. 148. Modena. 16] E. Apll. Are di usion models too simple ? A comparison with telegraph models of invasion. A Turing model with correlated random walk. 1988. Strien and S.P. Anal. 43. Amer. A general theory of heat conduction with nite wave speed. 49{72. 6] M.. Rhode Island. 11] J. Goldstein. In: S. 1994.. Random walk systems and reaction telegraph equations. Miranker. Heat waves. 2] R.L. 223{233. 10(3). Rev. Ball. Pipkin. Lunel. 1951.V. Arch. Math. Wang. 1997.E. 17] D. 3] C.C. Ana. 113{126. Atti del Semin. Krumhansl. 1968.. Quart. Soc. 1993.A. 1995.H. Anal. 4] Z. 766. 7] R. Hillen. 1966.K. v. Mech.M. Hale. American Math. 1988. Mech. Y. Guyer and J. Hillen. e Fis. A stability theory for nonlinear mixed initial boundary value problems. 3. Fu. Solution of the linearized phonon Boltzmann equation. Hadeler. Hillen. Quart. Math. 3. 5] S. 61. 17.. 13] T. Hadeler.P. Research advances in the study of heat waves. Soc. Holmes.E. Brayton and W. 2. Joseph and L. 1995. (eds). On di usion by discontinuous movements and the telegraph equation. Royal Academie of the Netherlands. 142. 129{156. Canadian Applied Math. American Naturalist. 41{73. Hillen. 4.. 4.. Report Nr:. FORMA. A stochastic model related to the telegrapher`s equation. 1995. Gurtin and A. 1948. SFB 382. and W. Japan. 1956. 18] M. Travelling fronts for correlated random walks. Travelling fronts in random walk systems. Hadeler.. 497{509. Tubingen. 15] T. Math. Providence. Strongly continuous semigroups. Duan. 14] T. Appl.References 1] J. J. weak solutions and the variation of constants formula. 1996.. to appear. Arch. Zhou. 31. Asymptotic Behavior of Dissipative Systems. Journal of Mathematical Biology. 10 .. Invariance principles for hyperbolic random walk systems. Y. Cattaneo.

New York. Introduction to the Calculus of Variations and its Applications. 1983. 1303{1323. 1920.C. Soc. Soc. Springer. A bifurcation problem for a nonlinear hyperbolic partial di erential equation. Cambridge University Press.W.F. 22] J. 187. On the dynamical theory of gases.19] L. Comm... Cambridge. SIAM J. 29. Q. 196{ 212. J. 23] J. Di usion by discontinuous movements. Mech. 1995. Attractors for Semigroups and Evolution Equations. 1988. 25] G. Lord and Y. 49. 7. Taylor. 11 . Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Di erential Equations. Springer. Solids. 26] R. Math. 1967. 20] O. Phys. 1995. New York. Mimimal compact global attractor for a damped semilinear wave equation. 28] G. London. in Partial Di erential Equations. Math..A. 24] A. Temam. Ladyzhenskaya. A generalized dynamical theory of thermoelasticity. 1971.I. 10(10). 922{932. Wan. London Math. Proc. Pazy. 1991. Webb. Trans. 157. 15. Maxwell. Anal. On heat conduction in materials with memory. Nunziato. 20. 299. Appl. Sulman. In nite{Dimensional Dynamical systems in Mechanics and Physics.W. Chapman and Hall. 1979. 1867. 27] F. 21] H. Kapitanski.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful