International Journal of Modern Nonlinear Theory and Application
Vol.04 No.03(2015), Article ID:58922,13 pages

Inertial Manifolds for 2D Generalized MHD System

Zhaoqin Yuan, Liang Guo, Guoguang Lin*

Department of Mathematics, Yunnan University, Kunming, China

Email:, *, *

Copyright © 2015 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY).

Received 5 June 2015; accepted 16 August 2015; published 20 August 2015


In this paper, we prove the existence of inertial manifolds for 2D generalized MHD system under the spectral gap condition.


MHD System, Spectral Gap, Inertial Manifolds

1. Introduction

In [1] , Yuan, Guo and Lin prove the existence of global attractors and dimension estimation of a 2D genera- lized magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) system:


where u is the fluid velocity field, v is the magnetic field, is the constant kinematic viscosity and is constant magnetic diffusivity. is a bounded domain with a sufficiently smooth boundary,. More results about inertial manifolds can be founded in [2] - [11] .

In this paper, we consider the following 2D generalized MHD system:


where u is the fluid velocity field, v is the magnetic field, is the constant kinematic viscosity and is the constant magnetic diffusivity. is a bounded domain with a sufficiently smooth boundary, .

This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we introduce basic concepts concerning inertial manifolds. In Section 3, we obtain the existence of the inertial manifolds.

2. Preliminaries

We rewrite the problem (1.2) as a first order differential equation, the problem (1.2) is equivalent to:


where, , and

Let H is a Banach space, , is norm of H, is inner product of H, ;, for any solution of the problem (2.1), , is norm of.

Definition 2.1. Suppose denote the semi-group of solutions to the problem (2.l) in, subset M is an inertial manifolds of the problem (2.l), that is M satisfying the following properties:

1. M is a finite dimensional Lipshitz manifold;

2. M is positively invariant under, that is, for all;

3. M is attracts every trajectory exponentially, i.e., for every,

We now recall some notions. Let is a closed linear operator on satisfying the following Standing Hypothesis 2.2.

Standing Hypothesis 2.2. We suppose that is a positive definite, self-adjoint operator with a discrete spectrum, compacts in. Assume is the orthonormal basis in consisting of the corresponding eigenfunctions of the operator. Say


each with finite multiplicity and.

Let now and be two successive and different eigenvalues with, let further P be the orthogonal projection onto the first N eigenvectors of the operator.

Let the bound absorbing set, we define a smooth truncated function by setting is defined as


Suppose that the problem (2.1) is equivalent to the following preliminary equation:


Denote by is the orthogonal projection of H onto, and. Set, then Equation (2.4) is equivalent to



Lemma 2.3. Defined by of the problem (2.1) on the bounded set of is a Lipschitz function, for every, there exist a constant such that



Proof. Assume, and let, use the fact that and using Poincare inequality, we have


where, so we can get


Lemma 2.3 is proved.

Lemma 2.4. Let be fixed, for any and all, there exist such that


otherwise, there exist constants and are dependent on such that




for all

Proof. Let with initial values respectively, are two different solutions of the problem (2.1), we have the fact that,. Put, so we obtain that




For, taking the derivative of Equation (2.14) with respect to t,we have


From Equation (2.13) and Equation (2.15), we have


We notice that Equation (2.14)

so we have


By Equation (2.16) and Equation (2.17), and use the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality, we obtain


Then using Lemma 2.3,we have

For, integrating the above inequality over, we obtain


where is given as in Lemma 2.3.

By multiplying (2.13) by, using Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and Lemma 2.3, we have


Using Holder inequality, from Equation (2.20) we have


In Equation (2.19) setting, we obtain




By Equation (2.21) and Equation (2.22), we have


Integrating Equation (2.24) between 0 and, we obtain


To complete the proof of Lemma 2.4, we consider the following two cases,




We only consider Equation (2.26), in this case,


where is N + 1 eigenvector of the operator. By Equation (2.25) and Equation (2.28), we obtain


since, in Equation (2.29) setting, which proves Equation (2.11), where and. Using again Equation (2.20), we have

then we obtain


Integrating Equation (2.30) between 0 and, which proves Equation (2.12). Lemma 2.4 is proved.

3. Inertial Manifolds

In this section we will prove the existence of the inertial manifolds for solutions to the problem (2.1). We suppose that satisfies Standing Hypothesis 2.2 and recall that P is the orthogonal projection onto the first N orthonormal eigenvectors of.

Let constants be fixed, we define and denote the collection of all functions satisfies


Note that


is the distance of. So is completely space.

For every and the initial data, the initial value problem


possesses a unique solution.


where and the unique solution in Equation (3.4) is a successive bounded mapping acts from into. Particularly, the function


by, note that, we have


We need to prove the following two conclusions:

1. For and are sufficiently large, is a contraction.

2. is a unique fixed point in T, is a inertial manifold of 2D generalized MHD system.

So we give the following Lemmas.

Lemma 3.1. Let, so we have


Proof. The proof is similar to Temam [3] .

Lemma 3.2. Let, for, there exists constant such that




Proof. For any and, we denote, using Lemma 2.3 and see ([3] , Chapter 8: Lemma 2.1 and Lemma 2.2), we derive that there exists constant such that




which proves Equation (3.8). We now prove Equation (3.9), by the definition of, we have


And we have


Substituting Equation (3.13) into Equation (3.11) we obtain Equation (3.9). Lemma 3.2 is proved.

Lemma 3.3. Let, one has and where for is sufficiently large one has.

Proof. Let, according to the definition of, we have, from Equation (3.6) and Equation (3.10), we have


Let and, suppose that and

So we obtain


Further more, for, we have


Setting in, then substituting into Equation (3.15) and Equation (3.16), and from Equation (3.14) we can derive that


Lemma 3.3 is proved.

Lemma 3.4. Let


so for every, one has






Proof. For any given, let are the solutions of the following initial value problem,




here Suppose that, so we have


Multiplying the first equation in Equation (3.25) by, using Equation (3.9) in Lemma 3.2, we obtain


So we have


For, from Equation (3.27) we have


By Lemma 2.3, to do the following estimate,using Equation (3.11) and Equation (3.28) we obtain


here. From Equation (3.15), we have





Then from Equation (3.15) we have


Combining Equation (3.31) and Equation (3.32), we obtain


Substituting Equation (3.33) into Equation (3.29), we obtain

Lemma 3.4 is proved.

Lemma 3.5. Let is defined as in Lemma 3.4, for all,


here is defined by Equation (3.20), is defined by Equation (3.2).

Proof. Let and let is the solution of the initial value problem (3.25), then by the same way as in Lemma 3.2 we can prove that


From the first inequality of Equation (3.26) and the following estimate, we have

then from the last inequality of Equation (3.35), we obtain


From Equation (3.36), we have


Due to, integrating Equation (3.37) over, we have


From Equation (3.6), Equation (3.35) and Equation (3.38), we have


Then using Equation (3.16), Equation (3.33) and, we have


Lemma 3.5 is proved.

Lemma 3.6. Suppose that



we have and, where is defined as in Lemma 3.5,


Proof. From is equivalent to


where and are defined as in Lemma 3.4. To find a sufficient condition of Equation (3.44), suppose that Equation (3.44) hold, so we have


To make, if and only if it satisfies



Equation (3.46) is equivalent to


If Equation (3.48) is satisfied, so Equation (3.47) is equivalent to or is equivalent to


Suppose that Equation (3.41) is equivalent to






Therefore Equation (3.49) follows from Equation (3.52). From Equation (3.41) we conclude that, Equation (3.48) follows from Equation (3.41), Equation (3.46) follows from Equation (3.48), Equation (3.46) follows from Equation (3.49), and from Equation (3.46) and Equation (3.47) we have. The last we need to prove is, from Lemma 3.5, we obtain


we notice that. Lemma 3.6 is proved.

From Lemma 3.1 to Lemma 3.6,we can obtain the following conclusions.

Theorem 3.1. Suppose that is Lipschitz mapping space. satisfy Equation (3.1) and Equation (3.2), and is the unique solution of Equation (3.3) and Equation (3.4) for, respectively. Hence the transformation is a contraction, and exists a unique fixed point, is inertial manifolds of the problem (2.1).

Theorem 3.2. Suppose that is the mapping of, for any, there exists such that, for,


where, is defined as in Lemma 2.3.

Proof. Let with initial value, respectively, be two solutions of the problem (2.1). For any arbitrary and for, and use the fact there exists a constant

such that Equation (2.10) or Equation (2.11) is satisfied. From Equation (2.12), we have


Assume and for, therefore Equation (2.10) and Equation (2.11) can rewrite



Let is absorbing set, the orbital solution satisfies. Let such that


Substituting and into Equation (3.56) and Equation (3.57), we have


If Equation (3.56) is satisfied, assume, so we have the cone property


In a word, for, whenever By the properties of semigroups, for, we have


Theorem 3.2 is proved.


This work is supported by the National Natural Sciences Foundation of People’s Republic of China under Grant 11161057.

Cite this paper

ZhaoqinYuan,LiangGuo,GuoguangLin, (2015) Inertial Manifolds for 2D Generalized MHD System. International Journal of Modern Nonlinear Theory and Application,04,190-203. doi: 10.4236/ijmnta.2015.43014


  1. 1. Yuan, Z.Q., Guo, L. and Lin, G.G. (2015) Global Attractors and Dimension Estimation of the 2D Generalized MHD System with Extra Force. Applied Mathematics, 6, 724-736.

  2. 2. Lin, G.G. (2009) An Inertial Manifold of the 2D Swift-Hohenberg Equation. Journal of Yunnan University, 31, 334-340.

  3. 3. Temam, R. (1988) Infinite Dimensional Dynamical Systems in Mechanics and Physics. Springer, New York.

  4. 4. Constantin, P., Foias, C., Nicolaenko, B. and Temam, R. (1989) Integral Manifolds and Inertial Manifolds for Dissipative Partial Differential Equations. Springer, New York.

  5. 5. Lin, G.G. (2011) Nonlinear Evolution Equations. Yunnan University, Kunming.

  6. 6. Babin, A.V. and Vishik, M.I. (1992) Attractors of Evolution Equations. North-Holland, Amsterdam.

  7. 7. Chow, S.-N. and Lu, K. (1988) Invariant Manifolds for Flows in Banach Spaces. Journal of Differential Equations, 74, 285-317.

  8. 8. Chueshov, I.D. (1992) Introduction to the Theory of Inertial Manifolds, (Lecture Notes). Kharkov Univ. Press, Kharkov (in Russian).

  9. 9. Chueshov, I.D. (1999) Introduction to the Theory of Infinite-Dimensional Dissipative Systems. Acta, Kharkov (in Russian) (English Translation, 2002, Acta, Kharkov).

  10. 10. Henry, D. (1981) Geometric Theory of Semilinear Parabolic Equations, Lecture Notes in Math. 840. Springer, Berlin-Heidelberg and New York.

  11. 11. Leung, A.W. (1989) Systems of Nonlinear Partial Differential Equations: Applications to Biology and Engineering. MIA, Kluwer, Boston.


*Corresponding author.