Abstract
In this paper, we consider the motion of incompressible magnetohydrodynamics (MHD) with resistivity in a domain bounded by a free surface. An electromagnetic field generated by some currents in an external domain keeps an MHD flow in a bounded domain. On the free surface, free boundary conditions for MHD flow and transmission conditions for electromagnetic fields are imposed. We proved the local well-posedness in the general setting of domains from a mathematical point of view. The solutions are obtained in an anisotropic space for the velocity field and in an anisotropic space for the magnetic fields with , and . To prove our main result, we used the - maximal regularity theorem for the Stokes equations with free boundary conditions and for the magnetic field equations with transmission conditions, which have been obtained by Frolova and the second author.
Keywords:
free boundary problem; transmission condition; magnetohydorodynamics; local well-posedness; Lp-Lq maximal regularity MSC:
35K59; 76W05
1. Introduction
In this paper, we prove the local well-posedness of a free boundary problem for the viscous non-homogeneous incompressible magnetohydrodynamics. The problem here is formulated as follows: Let be a domain in the N-dimensional Euclidean space (), and let be the boundary of . Let be also a domain in whose boundary is and . We assume that . Throughout the paper, we assume that are uniform domains, that the weak Dirichlet problem is uniquely solvable in (The definition of uniform domains and the weak Dirichlet problem will be given in Section 3 below.) and that with some positive constants , where denotes the distance of any two subsets A and B of defined by setting . Let and . The boundary of is . We may consider the case that is an empty set, and in this case . Physically, we consider the case where is filled by a non-homogeneous incompressible magnetohydrodynamic (MHD) fluid and is filled by an insulating gas. We consider a motion of an MHD fluid in a time dependent domain whose boundary is subject to an electomagnetic field generated in a domain by some currents located on a fixed boundary of . Let be the unit outer normal to oriented from into , and let be respective the unit outer normals to . Given any functions, , defined on , v is defined by for for , where . Moreover, what denotes that for and for . Let
for every point , which is the jump quantity of v across .
The purpose of this paper is to prove the local well-posedness of the free boundary problem formulated by the set of the following equations:
Here,
is the velocity vector field, where stands for the transposed M, the pressure fields, and the magnetic vector field. The v, , and H are unknows, while and are prescribed N-component vectors of functions. As for the remaining symbols, is the viscous stress tensor, is the doubled deformation tensor whose th component is with , I the unit matrix, the magnetic stress tensor, the doubled rotation tensor whose th component is , the velocity of the evolution of in the direction of . Moreover, , , , and are positive constants describing respective the mass density, the magnetic permeability, the kinematic viscosity, and the conductivity. Finally, for any matrix field K with th component , the quantity is an N-vector of functions with the ith component , and for any N-vectors of functions and , , is an N-vector of functions with the ith component , and an matrix with the th component . We notice that in the three dimensional case
where × is the exterior product. In particular, in the three dimensional case, the set of equations for the magnetic vector field in Equation (1) is written by
This is a standard description and so the set of equations for the magnetic field in Equation (1) is the N-dimensional mathematical description of equations for the magnetic vector field with transmission conditions.
In Equation (1), there is one equation for the magnetic fields too many, so that in this paper instead of (1), we consider the following equations:
Namely, two equations: in are replaced with one transmission condition: on . Employing the same argument as in Frolova and Shibata ([1], Appendix), we see that in Equation (3) if initially, then in follows automatically for any as long as solutions exist. Thus, the local well-posedness of Equation (1) follows from that of Equation (3) provided that the initial data satisfy the divergence zero condition: . This paper is devoted to proving the local well-posedness of Equation (3) in the maximal - regularity framework.
The MHD equations can be found in [2,3]. The solvability of MHD equations was first obtained by Ladyzhenskaya and Solonnikov [4]. The initial-boundary value problem for MHD equations with non-slip conditions for the velocity vector field and perfect wall conditions for the magnetic vector field was studied by Sermange and Temam [5] in a bounded domain and by Yamaguchi [6] in an exterior domain. In their studies [5,6], the boundary is fixed. On the other hand, in the field of engineering, when a thermonuclear reaction is caused artificially, a high-temperature plasma is sometimes subjected to a magnetic field and held in the air, and the boundary of the fluid at this time is a free one. From this point of view, the free boundary problem for MHD equations is important. The local well-posedness for free boundary problem for MHD equations was first proved by Padula and Solonnikov [7] in the case where is a bounded domain surrounded by a vacuum area, . In [7], the solution was obtained in Sobolev-Slobodetskii spaces in the framework of fractional order greater than 2. Later on, the global well-posedness was proved by Frolova [8] and Solonnikov and Frolova [9]. Moreover, the approach to the same problem was done by Solonnikov [10,11]. When is a bounded domain, which is surrounded by an electromagnetic field generated in a domain, , Kacprzyk proved the local well-posedness in [12] and global well-posedness in [13]. In [12,13], the solution was also obtained in Sobolev-Slobodetskii spaces in the framework of fractional order greater than 2.
Recently, the - maximal regularity theorem for the initial boundary value problem of the system of parabolic equations with non-homogeneous boundary conditions has been studied by using -solver in [14] and references therein and by using calculus in [15] and references therein. They are completely different approaches. In particular, Shibata [16,17] proved the - maximal regularity for the Stokes equations with non-homogeneous free boundary conditions by -solver theory and Frolova and Shibata [1] proved it for linearized equations for the magnetic vecor fields with transmission conditions on the interface and perfect wall conditions on the fixed boundary arising in the study of two phase problems for the MHD flows also by using the -solver. The results in [1,16,17] enable us to prove the local well-posedness for Equation (3) in the - maximal regularity class.
Aside from dynamical boundary conditions on , a kinematic condition, , is satisfied on , which represents as a set of points for , where is the solution of the Cauchy problem:
This expresses the fact that the free surface consists for all of the same fluid particles, which do not leave it and are not incident on it from inside . Problem (3) can be written as an initial-boundary problem with transmission conditions on if we go over the Euler coordinates to the Lagrange coordinates connected with x by (4). Since the velocity field, , is given only in , we extend it to defined on in such a way that
Let be a function, which equals 1 when and equals 0 when . The connection between Euler coordinates x and Lagrangian coordinates is defined by setting
Here, n is the unit outer normal to oriented from into , for any N-vector d, and the are nonlinear terms defined in Section 2 below.
Our main result is the following theorem.
Theorem 1.
Let and . Assume that , that is a uniform domain and a uniform domain, and that the weak problem is uniquely solvable in for q and . Let initial data and with
satisfy the conditions:
and compatibility conditions
Then, the there exists a time for which problem (7) admits unique solutions and with
possessing the estimate:
with some polynomial with respect to B.
Remark 1.
Finally, we explain some symbols used throughout the paper.
Notation We denote the set of all natural numbers, real numbers, complex numbers by ℕ, ℝ, and ℂ, respectively, and set . For any multi-index , , we set and . For a scalar function, f, and an N-vector of functions, , we set and . In particular, , , , and . For notational convention, and are sometimes considered as and column vectors, respectively, in the following way:
for , and .
For , , , and any domain , we denote the standard Lebesgue space, Sobolev space, and Besov space by , , and respectively, while , , and denote their norms. We write and . What means that for . For , the function spaces () and their norms are defined by setting
For any Banach space X, being its norm, denotes the d product space defined by , while the norm of is simply written by , which is defined by setting . For any time interval , and denote respective the standard X-valued Lebesgue space and X-valued Sobolev space, while and denote their norms. Let and be respectively the Fourier transform and the Fourier inverse transform. Let , , be the Bessel potential space of order s defined by
where denotes the set of all X-valued tempered distributions on R.
Let for any N-vectors and . For any N-vector a, let . For any two -matrices and , the quantity is defined by . For any domain G with boundary , we set
where is the complex conjugate of and denotes the surface element of . Given , let . Throughout the paper, the letter C denotes generic constants and the constant which depends on a, b, ⋯. The values of constants C, may be changed from line to line.
When we describe nonlinear terms in (7), we use the following notational conventions. Let ( be -vectors whose jth component is , and then denotes an vector whose th component is and the set is rearranged as and k is the corresponding number to some . For example, is an vector whose component is and is an vector whose component is . Here, the sets and are rearranged as and , respectively. Let be - vectors, let be matrices, where , and set . And then, we write
When there are two sets of matrices and , we write
2. Derivation of Nonlinear Terms
Let be the velocity field with respect to the Lagrange coordinates , and let be the extension of to satisfying the conditions given in (5). Let
and we consider the correspondence: for , which has been already given in (6). Let be a small constant and we assume that
Then, the correspondence: is one to one. Since when , if u satisfies the regularity condition:
then the correspondence is a bijection from onto , and so we set
In the following, for notational simplicity we set
where . The Jacobi matrix of the correspondence: is
Here and in the following, we set
for . The with denotes the independent variables corresponding to with . The is a matrix of analytic functions defined on with . Using this symbol, we have
where is the th component of the matrix .
By (18),
with . Analogously, for any matrix of functions, , we set and . Let be an N-vector of functions whose i-th component is , and then
On the other hand, using the dual form, we see that
Let , , and . By (19), (20), and (22), we see that the first equation in Equation (3) is transformed to
By (17) and (16), , and so we have
with
using the notational convention given in Notation, we may write
where is a set of matrices of smooth functions defined for Combining (21) and (22), we see that the condition in is transformed to
Thus, we set and , and then by using notational convenience defined in Notation, we may write
where () are matrices of smooth functions defined for . By (18),
and so noting (19) we see that the second and third equations in (3) are transformed to
with
Thus, using the notational convention given in Notation, we may write
where and , where are two sets of matrices of smooth functions defined for . In particular, we have the fourth equation in (7).
We now consider the transmission conditions. The unit outer normal, , to the is represented by
Choosing small enough, we may write
where is a matrix of smooth functions defined on such that . By (20)
Choosing small if necessary, we may assume that exists and we may write , where is a matrix of smooth functions defined on such that . Thus, setting
we have
Using the notational convention defined in Notation, we may write
where is a set of matrices of functions consisting of products of elements of n and smooth functions defined for .
Thus, setting
we have
Using the notational convention defined in Notation and noting that on as follows from (5), we may write
where and are a matrix and a set of matrices of functions consisting of products of elements of n and smooth functions defined for , and is a set of matrices of functions such that . In particular,
By (23),
and so setting
we have
where is a matrix of functions consisting of products of elements of n and smooth functions defined for . Notice that
For notational simplicity, we set
where is a set of matrices of functions consisting of products of elements of n and smooth functions defined for . Notice that
3. Linear Theory
Since the coupling of the velocity field and the magnetic field in (7) is semilinear, the linearized equations are decoupled. Namely, we consider the two linearlized equations: one is the Stokes equations with free boundary conditions on , and another is a system of heat equations with transmission conditions on and the perfect wall conditions on . Recall that and .
3.1. The Stokes Equations with Free Boundary Conditions
This subsection is devoted to presenting the - maximal regularity theorem for the Stokes equations with free boundary conditions. The problem considered here is formulated by the following equations:
To state assumptions for Equation (37), we make two definitions.
Definition 1.
Let be a domain given in the introduction. We say that is a uniform domain, if there exist positive constants , , and A such that the following assertion holds: For any there exist a coordinate number j and a function defined on such that for and
Here, we have set
Let be an homogeneous Sobolev space defined by letting
Let . The variational equation:
is called the weak Dirichlet problem, where .
Definition 2.
We say that is solenoidal if u satisfies
Let be the set of all solenoidal vector of functions.
In this paper, we assume that
- (1)
- is a uniform domain.
- (2)
- The weak Dirichlet problem is uniquely solvable in for indices and .
By assumption (2), we see that , where and the symbol ⊕ here denotes the direct sum of and .
Theorem 2.
Let with , and . Let and letf, g,g, hbe functions appearing in Equation (37) satisfying the following conditions:
Assume that , g andhsatisfy the following compatibility conditions:
where . Then, problem (37) admit unique solutions v and with
and possessing the estimates:
with
for some positive constants C and are independent of T.
Remark 2.
(1)Theorem 2 has been proved by Shibata [16] in the standard case where
But, in Theorem 2 one more additional regularity is stated, which is necessary for our approach to prove the well-posedness of Equation (3). The idea of proving how to obtain third order regularity of the fluid vector field will be given in Appendix A below.
(2)The uniqueness holds in the following sense. Let v and with
satisfy the homogeneous equations:
then and .
3.2. Two Phase Problem for the Linear Electro-Magnetic Vector Field Equations
This subsection is devoted to presenting the - maximal regularity due to Frolova and Shibata [1] for the linear electro-magnetic vector field equations. The problem is formulated by a set of the following equations:
To state the main result, we make a definition.
Definition 3.
Let be a domain given in the introduction. We say that Ω is a uniform domain with interface Γ if there exist positive constants , , and A such that the following assertion holds: For any there exist a coordinate number j and a function defined on such that for and
and for any there exists a coordinate number j and a function defined on such that for and
Here, we have set
Theorem 3.
Let , , and . Assume that Ω is a uniform domain with interface Γ. Then, there exists a such that the following assertion holds: Let and let , and let , and be functions such that , , , and for , where , , , and are functions given in the right side of (42), and the following conditions hold:
for any . Moreover, we assume that , h and k satisfy the following compatibility conditions:
provided ;
provided . Then, problem (42) admits a unique solution H with
possessing the estimate:
with
for any with some constant independent of γ.
Remark 3.
(1)Theorem 3 was proved by Froloba and Shibata [18].
(2)The uniqueness holds in the following sense. Let H with
satisfy the homogeneous equations:
then in .
4. Estimate of Non-Linear Terms
Let and be N-vectors of functions such that
and we shall estimate nonlinear terms appearing in the right side of Equation (7). Here, for and for () and is an extension of defined in (5). For notational simplicity, we set
Moreover, let and () be N-vectors of functions such that
We also consider the differences: . Here, for and for () and is an extension of defined in (5). For notational simplicity, we assume that
for some constant . In what follows, we assume that , and . To estimate nonlinear terms, we use the following inequalities which follows from Sobolev’s inequality.
By Hlder’s inequality and (5), we have
In the following, for simplicity, choosing small, we also assume that
We may assume that the unit outer normal n to is defined on and because is a uniform domain. Thus, setting
by (51), (49), (50), and (52) we have
with some constant for and , where we have set and .
By real interpolation theory, we see that
(). In order to prove this, we make a few preparations. For a X-valued function defined for , where X is a Banach space, we set
Then, for . If , then
In particular, we have
Let be a N-vector of function defined on and let be an extension of to for which
Let be an extension of to for which
For , let
be a analytic semigroup satisfying the condition: and possessing the estimate:
for . Let be defined on and set . Let be a function that equals one for and zero for and let
Set
Combining (55) with (48) leads to
because is continuously imbedded into as follows from , that is, . Moreover,
provided . In fact, we write with . Since , we have
for . On the other hand, choosing yields that is continuously imbedded into , and so by (55)
Since , we have (67) provided .
We next consider , which is represented by with
Representing
by (49), (51), (50), and (52), we have
for . Estimating in the same manner as in proving (68), we have
where we have used and . To estimate we use the fact:
To estimate and , we write and with
Employing the same argument as in proving the second inequality in (78), we also have
which, combined with (77) and (78), yields that
To estimate , we write with
By (49), we have
On the other hand, by (49),
To estimate , we write with
where , , , , and . By (70) and (83), we have
where we have used . Furthermore, by (49), (50), and (66)
which, combined with (53), yields that
We now consider and . We have to extend them to . For this purpose, Let be an extension operator satisfying (59). In view of (29), we have
on . Define the extension operator by (56) and let and be extension operators satisfying (59) and (60), respectively. Let and be the positive constants appearing in respective Theorem 2 and Theorem 3 and set below. Instead of (61), we set
We now define an extension . Let with
To estimate norm, we use the following lemma,
Lemma 1.
Let and . Let
Then, we have
Proof.
To prove Lemma 1, we use the fact that
where denotes a complex interpolation functor of order . We have
Moreover,
Thus, by complex interpolation, we have
Moreover, we have
Thus, combining these two inequalities gives the required estimate, which completes the proof of Lemma 1. □
Lemma 2.
Let . Then,
and
Proof.
For a proof, see Shibata ([17], Proposition 1). □
By (51), we may assume that
Employing the same as in proving (75) yields
and so noting that vanishes for , by Lemma 1, (90) and (91), we have
We now estimate . For this purpose we use the following estimate:
which follows from complex interpolation theory. Let
And then, . We further divide into with
Using (93), we have
Recalling the formula of in (87), we define an extension, , of by setting with
Analogously,
We now consider and . In view of (35), we define extensions of and to by setting
We finally define extensions of and by setting
5. A Proof of Theorem 1
We shall prove Theorem 1 by the contraction mapping principle. For this purpose, we define an underlying space for a large number and a small time by setting
Let B be a positive number for which initial data and for Equation (7) satisfying the condition (48).
Let be an element of , and let , , , , and be respective non-linear terms defined in (26), (29), (31), (33), and (34). Let H be a solution of equations:
Next, let , , and be respective non-linear terms given in (24), (25), and (28) by replacing with , where and H is a solution of Equation (110). And then, let v be a solution of equations:
Moreover, in view of (52), we choose in such a way that
Let . and , and let a symbol given in Theorem 3. By (83), (97), (105), and (107), we have
for any . We fix as . Let . Since , there exsit positive constants and for which
Applying Theorem 3 to Equation (110) yields that for some constant . Choosing in such a way that gives that
In particular, we choose so small that and so large that , and then by (112)
We next consider Equation (111). Let be a symbol given in Theorem 2. By (68), (76), (80), (112), and (113),
which yields that
for some constants and . Thus, applying Theorem 2 with to Equation (111), we have
for some constant . Recalling that and , choosing so small that and choosing so large that , we have , which implies that . In particular, we set . Let be a map acting on by setting , and then is a map from into itself.
We now prove that is a contraction map. Let () and set . In view of (51), (52), and (89), choosing as smaller if necessary, we may assume that
for . Set
for , and . Noticing that , and , by (110), (111) we see that H satisfies the following equations:
and that satisfies the following equations:
Applying Theorem 3 to Equation (114) and using (116) gives that
for some constant , where we have used and . Moreover, by (73), (79), and (82)
which, combined with (117), leads to
Thus, applying Theorem 2 to Equation (115) leads to
for some , where we have used and . Choosing so small that in (117) and in (118) gives that
which shows that the is a contraction map. Thus, the Banach fixed point theorem yields the unique existence of a fixed point, , of the map , which is a unique solution of Equation (7). This completes the proof of Theorem 1.
Author Contributions
Conceptualization, K.O. and Y.S.; formal analysis, K.O. and Y.S.; funding acquisition, K.O. and Y.S.; investigation, K.O. and Y.S.; methodology, K.O. and Y.S.; project administration, K.O. and Y.S.; software, K.O. and Y.S.; validation, K.O. and Y.S.; writing–original draft, K.O. and Y.S. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding
This research received no external funding.
Institutional Review Board Statement
Not applicable.
Informed Consent Statement
Not applicable.
Data Availability Statement
Not applicable.
Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Appendix A. A Proof of Theorem 2
Appendix A.1
To prove the maximal - regularity, according to Shibata [14,16,17] a main step is to prove the existence of -solver for the following model problem:
where , , and . The is a complex parameter ranging in with and . In [14,16], the existence of -solvers, , , were proved for Equation (A1), which satisfy the following properties:
- (1)
- , .
- (2)
- Problem (A1) admits unique solutions and for any and , where .
- (3)
- ,for with some constant depending on and .
Here, , denotes the norm of an operator family , being the set of all bounded linear operators from X into Y,
The , , , , , and are corresponding variables to f, g, , , h, and , respectively. The norm of is defined by setting
In particular, we know an unique existence of solutions and (Here, we just give an idea of obtaining third order regularities. An idea also is found in ([19], Appendix 6.2). To prove Theorem 2 exactly from the -bounded solution operators point of view, we have to start returning the non-zero f, g and g situation to the situation where , which needs an idea. We will give an exact proof of Theorem 2 in a forthcoming paper.) of Equation (A1) possessing the estimate:
We now prove that and provided that , , , and . Moreover, u and satisfy the estimate:
In fact, differentiating Equation (A1) with respect to tangential variables () and noting that and satisfy equations replacing f, , and h with , and , by (A2) and the uniqueness of solutions we see that and , and
for . To estimate and , we start with estimating . In fact, from the divergence equations it follows that , and so
which, combined with (A4) yields that
From the the N-th component of the first equation of Equation (A1) and , we have
and so, we see that and
From Equation (A1), we have
Differentiating the first equation of the above set of equations with respect to and setting , we have
Thus, setting , we have
Thus, by a known estimate for the Dirichlet problem, we have
Localizing the problem and using the argument above, we can show Theorem 2.
References
- Frolova, E.V.; Shibata, Y. Local well-posedness for the magnetohydrodynamics in the different two liquids case. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2003.00057. [Google Scholar]
- Cole, G.H.A. Fluid Dynamics; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1962. [Google Scholar]
- Landau, L.D.; Lifshitz, E.M.; Pitaevskii, L.P. Electrodynamics of Continuous Media, 2nd ed.; Landau and Lifschitz Course of Theoretical Physcs Volume 8; Butterworth-Heinemann: Oxford, UK, 1984. [Google Scholar]
- Ladyzhenskaya, O.A.; Solonnikov, V.A. Solvability of some non-stationary problems of magnetohydrodynamics for viscous incompressible fluids. Trudy Matematicheskogo Instituta imeni V. A. Steklova 1960, 59, 155–173. (In Russian) [Google Scholar]
- Sermange, M.; Temam, R. Some mathematical questions related to the MHD equations. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 1983, 36, 635–664. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yamaguchi, N. On an existence theorem of global strong solutions to the magnetohydrodynamic system in three-dimensional exterior domains. Differ. Integral Equ. 2006, 19, 919–944. [Google Scholar]
- Padula, M.; Solonnikov, V.A. On the free boundary problem of Magnetohydrodynamics. J. Math. Sci. 2011, 178, 313–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frolova, E.V. Free boundary problem of magnetohydrodynamics. J. Math. Sci. 2015, 210, 857–877. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Solonnikov, V.A.; Frolova, E.V. Solvability of a free boundary problem of magnetohydrodynamics in an infinite time intergal. Zapiski Nauchnykh Seminarov POMI 2013, 410, 131–167. [Google Scholar]
- Solonnikov, V.A. Lectures on evolution free boundary problems: Classical solutions. In Mathematical Aspects of Evolving Interfaces (Funchal, 2000); Lecture Notes in Math. 1812; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2003; pp. 123–175. [Google Scholar]
- Solonnikov, V.A. Lp-theory of free boundary problems of magnetohydrodynamics in simply connected domains. In Proceedings of the St. Petersburg Mathematical Society; American Mathematical Society Series 2, 232; American Mathematical Society: Providence, RI, USA, 2014; Volume 15, pp. 245–270. [Google Scholar]
- Kacprzyk, P. Local free boundary problem for incompressible magnetohydrodynamics. Diss. Math. 2015, 509, 1–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kacprzyk, P. Global free boundary problem for incompressible magnetohydrodynamics. Diss. Math. 2015, 510, 1–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shibata, Y. R boundedness, Maximal Regularity and Free Boundary Problems for the Navier-Stokes Equations. In Mathematical Analysis of the Navier-Stokes Equations; Galdi, G.P., Shibata, Y., Eds.; Lecture Notes in Mathematics 2254; Springer Nature: Cetraro, Italy, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pruss, J.; Simonett, G. Moving Interfaces and Quasilinear Parabolic Evolution Equations; Birkhauser Monographs in Mathematics; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2016; ISBN 978-3-319-27698-4. [Google Scholar]
- Shibata, Y. On the R-boundedness of solution operators for the Stokes equations with free boundary condition. Differ. Integral Equ. 2014, 27, 313–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Shibata, Y. On the R-bounded solution operator and the maximal Lp-Lq regularity of the Stokes equations with free boundary condition. In Mathematical Fluid Dynamics, Fresent and Future; Shibata, Y., Suzuki, Y., Eds.; Springer Proceedings in Mathematics & Statistics 183; Springer: Tokyo, Japan, 2016; pp. 203–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Frolova, E.V.; Shibata, Y. On the maximal Lp-Lq regularity theorem of the linearized Electro-Magnetic field equatins with interface condition. Zapiski Nauchnykh Seminarov POMI 2020, 489, 130–142. [Google Scholar]
- Danchin, R.; Hieber, M.; Mucha, P.B.; Tolksdorf, A.P. Free boundary problems via Da Prato-Grisvard theory. arXiv 2020, arXiv:2011.07918v1. [Google Scholar]
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2021 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).