arxiv:math/ v1 [math.pr] 1 Dec 2004

Transcription

1 A Probabilistic Representation of Solutions of the Incompressible Navier-Stokes Equations in R 3 arxiv:math/ v1 [math.pr] 1 Dec 2004 Mina Ossier Department of Mathematics Oregon State University February 1, 2008 Abstract A new probabilistic representation is presented for solutions of the incompressible Navier- Stokes equations in R 3 with given forcing initial velocity. This representation expresses solutions as scaled conditional expectations of functionals of a Markov process indexed by the nodes of a binary tree. It gives existence uniqueness of weak solutions for all time under relatively simple conditions on the forcing initial data. These conditions involve comparison of the forcing initial data with majorizing kernels. 1 Introduction. The 3-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations governing the velocity of incompressible fluids with viscosity ν initial velocity u 0 are given by u t + u u = ν u p + g u = 0 1 u 0 x = ux,0 Here u : R 3 [0, R 3 is the velocity vector, p : R 3 [0, R is the pressure g : R 3 [0, R 3 is the external forcing. Although these equations have been studied extensively over the last century important open questions remain concerning existence uniqueness of smooth solutions. Extensive background development of results can be found in Temam [18], Doering Gibbon [6], Foias, Manley, Rosa Temam [8], Lemarié-Rieusset [14]. Ladyzhenskaya [12] provides a recent interesting accessible review of results. AMS 1991 subject classifications. Primary 35C15,60H30; Secondary 60J85. Key words phrases: tree-indexed Markov process, branching rom walk, incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. This research was partially supported by NSF FRG collaborative award DMS

2 There are two classes of existence uniqueness results for solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations; existence uniqueness for all time if the forcing initial data are small enough in some specified function space, or existence uniqueness for a short time for larger initial data. This paper falls into the former camp in giving a probabilistic representation in physical space of the solutions of 1 when a smallness condition is satisfied by the given forcing initial velocity. This results in a method of demonstrating existence uniqueness of weak solutions in the sense of Lemarié-Rieusset [14] for all time under straightforward bounds on forcing initial data. The focus is strictly on the Navier-Stokes equations in R 3. Indeed the method developed relies heavily on an integral formulation of the Navier-Stokes equations in R 3 incorporating Leray s projection onto the subspace of divergence free vector fields. The stochastic representation given here has parallels with the representations given by McKean [15] for solutions of the Kolmogorov-Petrovskii-Piskunov equation Le Jan Sznitman [13] for solutions of the Fourier transformed Navier-Stokes equations. In the seminal paper [15] McKean gives the solution of the KPP equation u t = 1 2 u 2 x 2 + u2 u with initial data ux,0 = fx, 0 fx 1 for all x R, as Nt ux,t = E x i=1 fw i t where W = {W i : i 1} is a branching Brownian motion in R with initial value x. Roughly here one can think of the Laplacian term 1 2 u 2 as producing the Brownian motion, the u 2 term x 2 yielding the binary branching, the u term resulting in the exponential waiting time between branches. The existence of the solution is a consequence of the bound imposed on the initial data. LeJan Sznitman in [13] give the solution of the Fourier transformed Navier-Stokes equations in R 3 ûξ,t = e ν ξ 2tû 0 ξ 2 t { } + 2π 3/2 e ν ξ 2 s ip ξ ûη,t sξ ûξ η,t sdη + P ξ ĝξ,t s ds R 3 s=0 in the form of a scaled expectation if both ûξ,t = HξE ξ,t M û 0 ξ Hξ ĝξ, t ξ 2 Hξ are uniformly small enough. Here M is a multiplicative functional of a stochastic cascade rooted at ξ at time t with inputs derived from initial data forcing scaled as in 3 above. The scalar function H : R 3 0, ] is given by either Hξ = ξ 2 or Hξ = α ξ 1 e α ξ for some α > 0. The vector projection P ξ onto the plane perpendicular to ξ has eliminated the pressure p. The term ûη,t sξ ûξ η,t s yields binary branching in space according to the normalized Markovian kernel HηHξ η ξ Hξ the coefficients e ν ξ 2t result in exponential waiting 2 3

3 times between branches. This general framework is elaborated extended via the introduction of Fourier multiplier majorizing kernels in Bhattacharya et al [2] [3]. Again the existence of solutions is a consequence of the functional bounds imposed on the forcing initial data. The goal of this article is to construct a binary branching process with jumps that corresponds naturally to a formulation of solutions in physical space to the Navier-Stokes equations. It is not too surprising that this stochastic representation is more complicated than representations of solutions to the KPP equation or the Fourier transformed Navier-Stokes equations. Majorizing kernel pairs h, h are introduced to be used as scaling multipliers. As such they both dominate the forcing velocity allow the construction of transition densities. Additionally, combined with the Laplacian term ν u, their presence can give rise to a h-brownian motion. The binary nature of the branching derives from the term u u. In this representation, the waiting time between branches is related to first passage times for Brownian motion rather than being exponential in nature. This somewhat complicated relationship is in part due to the incompressibility constraint. This leads to the construction of a Markov process indexed by the binary tree rather than a Markov process in time. Analogous to the work of LeJan Sznitman [13] Bhattacharya et al [2], [3], the existence of solutions is a consequence of the bounds imposed on the forcing initial data via majorizing kernel domination. The following theorem is representative. Theorem 1.1 Let h : R 3 0, ] h : R 3 [0, ] with h locally square integrable h, h jointly satisfying h 2 x y y 2 dy hx hx y y 1 dy hx for all x R 3. 4 R 3 R 3 If for all x R 3 t > 0, 4πνt 3/2 u 0 x ye y 2 /4νt dy < πνhx/11 R 3 gx,t < πν 2 hx/11, then there exists a collection of probability measures {P x : x R 3 } defined on a common measurable space Ω, F, a measurable function Ξ : 0, Ω R 3, a weak solution ux,t to the Navier- Stokes equations 1 with P x {ω : Ξt,ω < 2πν/11 for all t > 0} = 1 for all x R 3 ux,t = hx Ξt,ωdP x ω for all x R 3,t > 0. Ω Furthermore, the solution u is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : vx,t < 2πνhx/11 for all x R 3,t > 0}. The probabilistic representation gives the scaled solution of the Navier-Stokes equations as the expectation of {Ξt : t 0}, which is defined in Sections 4 5 as a function of a Markov process indexed by the nodes of a binary tree. The scaling, h, is a non-negative majorizing kernel that controls the magnitude of the initial data u 0. The kernel h is paired with a second kernel h that controls the magnitude of the forcing g. The conditions stipulated by 4 allow the definition of stochastic transition probabilities for an underlying branching Markov rom walk while controlling the magnitude of the function Ξ. For example, two majorizing kernel pairs satisfying 4 are hx, hx = 3

4 π 3 x 1,2π 2 x 1+ x 2 hx, hx = π 3 1+ x 1,4π 4 x 1+ x 3 1. This representation also gives a connection between Brownian motion in R 3 solutions to the Navier-Stokes equations. The results of this paper are largely self-contained. The organization is as follows. Section 2 gives a definition of the solution space involved along with the derivation of an integral formulation of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations incorporating Leray s projection. The integral formulation is given explicitly in terms of the transition density of Brownian motion in R 3. Majorizing kernel pairs are defined some important properties of classes of majorizing kernels are derived in Section 3. Section 4 gives a probabilistic representation of the scaled weak solution to 1 in the case of excessive majorizing kernels. This representation involves Doob s h-brownian motion in R 3. This section also contains existence uniqueness results in the case that the initial data u 0 is dominated appropriately by an excessive kernel h. An alternate probabilistic representation for general classes of majorizing kernels is given in Section 5. The existence uniqueness results given in this section are consequently more general as well. The proof of Theorem 1.1 is included in Section 5. Section 6 contains a few concluding remarks. 2 An integral reformulation of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equations. The delineation of the definition of solutions the function spaces in which solutions exist is as follows. Throughout elements of R 3 are treated as 3 1 vectors. The usual vector dot product Euclidean norm are used. DR 3 = C0 R3 DR 3 0, = C0 R3 0, where C0 is the space of C functions with compact support. S R 3 0, is the space of tempered distributions on R 3 0,. Definition 2.1 A weak solution of the Navier-Stokes equations with initial velocity ux,0 = u 0 x is a vector field ux,t S R 3 0, 3 satisfying the following: i. u is locally square integrable on R 3 0,, ii. u = 0, iii. there exists p S R 3 0, with u t + u u = ν u p + g. After incorporating incompressibility via the Leray projection P applying Duhamel s principle, the pressure term can be dropped the Navier-Stokes equations written in integral form as u = e νt u 0 u 0 = 0 t 0 e νt s P u usds + t 0 e νt s Pgsds 5 where the Leray projection P onto the space of divergence free vector fields of a vector-valued function v is defined as Pv = v 1 v. 4

5 See Foias et al [8] or Lemarié-Rieusset [14] for discussion. The integral formulation above is expressed explicitly in Proposition 2.1 that follows. Definition 2.2 A function h : R 3 R is uniformly locally square integrable if for all ϕ DR 3, ϕx yhy 2 dy <. R 3 sup x R 3 Definition 2.3 A weak solution u of the Navier-Stokes equations on R 3 0, is uniformly locally square integrable if for all ϕ DR 3 0, ϕx y,tuy,t 2 dydt <. sup x R 3 R 3 0, The following equivalence theorem can be found in Lemarié-Rieusset [14]. Theorem 2.1 If u is uniformly locally square integrable, then u is a weak solution of 1 if only if u is a solution of 5. The following definitions are useful in stating Propostion 2.1. Let Ky,t = 2πt 3/2 e y 2 /2t, t > 0, y R 3 denote the transition density of a 3-dimensional Brownian motion starting at the origin at time t = 0. For y R 3 with y > 0, let e y = y/ y denote the unit vector in the direction of y let P y denote the 3 by 3 matrix that projects vectors onto the space perpendicular to y; so that the entries of P y are P y i,j = δ i,j e y i e y j. Define the bilinear forms b 1 b 2 on R 3 \ {0,0,0} R 3 2 via b 1 y;u,v = u e y P y v + v e y P y u b 2 y;u,v = b 1 y;u,v + u I 3e y e t y v e y. Proposition 2.1 If u : R 3 0, R 3 is locally square integrable satisfies ux, t = u 0 x yky,2νtdy R 3 t { z + s=0 R 3 4νs Kz,2νs b 1z;ux z,t s,ux z,t s z Kz,2νs 3 4π z 4 Ky, 2νsdy b 2 z;ux z,t s,ux z,t s + {y: y z } Kz,2νsP z 1 4π z 3 I 3e ze t z then u is a weak solution to 1. 5 {y: y z } } Ky, 2νsdy gx z,t s dzds,

6 This integral formulation incorporating incompressibility is key to the proof of Theorem 1.1 the other existence uniqueness results given in Sections 4 5. The following lemmas are used in the proof of the proposition. Throughout the Fourier transform on R 3 is defined as ˆfξ = 2π 3/2 R 3 e ix ξ fxdx understood in a distributional sense. Then also fx = 2π 3/2 R 3 e ix ξ ˆfξdξ. The bilinear forms b 1 b 2 defined above the matrix I 3e z e t z can be bounded as follows. Lemma 2.1 For any y R 3 with y 0 u,v R 3, b 1 y;u,v u v, 7 b 2 y;u,v 2 u v, 8 I 3e y e t y u 2 u. 9 Proof: Fix y,u,v R 3 with y 0. Let α = e u e y, β = e v e y, γ = e u e v. For a,b [0,1], fa,b := a1 b 2 1/2 +b1 a 2 1/2 1 with equality for a 2 +b 2 = 1. The triangle inequality gives To derive 8, first notice that b 1 y;u,v = u v αp y e v + βp y e u u v f α, β u v. b 1 y;u,v 2 = u 2 v 2 α 2 1 β 2 + 2αβγ αβ + β 2 1 α 2 Then γ αβ = e u P y e v P y e u Pe v = 1 α 2 1/2 1 β 2 1/2. b 2 y;u,v 2 = b 1 y;u,v 2 + u I 3e y e t y v2 To verify 9 note that = u 2 v 2 α 2 + β 2 + α 2 β 2 + γ 2αβ 2 u 2 v 2 α 2 + β 2 + α 2 β α 2 1/2 1 β 2 1/2 + αβ 2 = u 2 v α 2 β αβ f α,1 β 2 1/2 u 2 v αβ 2 2 u v 2. I 3e y e t yu 2 = u I + 3e y e t yu = u α 2 4 u 2. 6

7 Lemma 2.2 Suppose that for each fixed s > 0, Γ,s : R 3 R 3 3 has Fourier transform ˆΓξ,s = 2π 3/2 e ν ξ 2s P ξ. Then for x R 3 with x 0, Γx,s = Kx,2νsP x 4π 1 x 3 I 3e x e t x {y: y x } Ky, 2νsdy. The result presented in Lemma 2.2 is not new; it goes back at least to Solonnikov [17], who used it to calculate estimates of solutions of the linearized Navier-Stokes equations. It appears again in Koch Solonnikov [11] in a study of the Stokes problem. More recently, Thomann Guenther [19] use it to compute an explicit formula for the fundamental solution of the linearized Navier-Stokes equation in terms of special functions. The representation given here is more explicitly stated in terms of K, the transition density for Brownian motion, than that of Solonnikov [17], Koch Solonnikov [11] or Thomann Guenther [19]. The derivation is included for completeness. Proof: Fix s > 0 notice that ˆKξ,s = 2π 3/2 e ν ξ 2s. Suppose that ˆγ 0 ξ = 2π 3/2 ξ 2 e ν ξ 2s. Some computation gives x γ 0 x = 2π 3/2 2νs 1/2 x 1 e ρ2 /4νs dρ. 10 For computational details of the Fourier transform for radial functions, see Foll [9], page 247. If γ i,j : R 3 R is defined via then γ i,j x = 2 x i x j γ 0 x Combining gives ρ=0 ˆγ i,j ξ = 2π 3/2 ξ iξ j ξ 2 e ν ξ 2s, = 2π 3/2 2νs 1/2 { δ i,j x 2 e x 2 /4νs x 3 x Γ i,j x,s = Kx,2νsδ i,j + γ i,j x ρ=0 e ρ2 /4νs dρ +x i x j x 2 x } 3 x 3 e ρ2 /4νs dρ 3 x 2 + 2νs 1 e x 2 /4νs. 11 = Kx,2νsP x i,j ρ=0 2π 3/2 2νs 1/2 x 3 x e ρ2 /4νs dρ x e x 2 /4νs δ i,j 3x i x j x 2 ρ=0 To complete the proof note that Ky,2νsdy = πνs 1/2 x e ρ2 /4νs dρ x e x 2 /4νs. 12 {y: y x } The following lemma is given without proof. ρ=0 7

8 Lemma 2.3 Suppose that V : R 3 R 3 has Fourier transform ˆV ξ = i2π 3/2 R 3 ˆvηξ ˆvξ ηdη. Then V is given by V k x = 3 j=1 x j v k xv j x. Lemma 2.4 For V as defined in Lemma 2.3, { Γy,sV x ydy = 4νs 1 y Ky,2νsb 1 y;vx y,vx y R 3 R 3 } + y 1 Ky,2νs 34π 1 y 4 Kz, 2νsdz b 2 y;vx y,vx y dy. {z: z y } Proof: Lemma 2.2 gives where for r > 0 Γ i,j y,s = δ i,j g 1 y + y i y j g 2 y g 1 r = 4πνs 3/2 e r2 /4νs 4π 1 r 3 g 2 r = 34π 1 r 5 {y: y r} {y: y r} Ky, 2νsdy Ky,2νsdy 4πνs 3/2 r 2 e r2 /4νs. A term by term integration by parts leads to the vector-valued function { Γy,sV x ydy = 2νs 1 Ky,2νs e y vx y 2 y y vx yvx y R 3 R 3 } + g 2 y 2y vx yvx y + vx y 2 5e y vx y 2 y dy { = 4νs 1 y Ky,2νsb 1 y;vx y,vx y R 3 } + y g 2 y b 2 y;vx y,vx y dy. Proof of Proposition 2.1: The incorporation of Leray s projection into the Fourier transformed Navier-Stokes equations as seen in 2 gives a convenient formulation for weak solutions u of 1. For fixed s, apply the inverse Fourier transform to the Fourier Navier-Stokes equations 2, letting V represent the vector-valued function with V k x,s = 3 j=1 x j u k x,su j x,s, use Lemmas 2.2, to see that ux, t = u 0 x yky,2νtdy R 3 8

9 = { t } + Γy,sV x y,t sdy + Γy,sgx y,t sdy ds s=0 R 3 R 3 u 0 x yky,2νtdy R 3 { t + 4νs 1 y Ky,2νsb 1 y;ux y,t s,ux y,t s s=0 R 3 + y 1 Ky,2νs 34π 1 y 4 {z: z y } b 2 y;ux y,t s,ux y,t s dy } + Γy,sgx y,t sdy ds. R 3 Kz, 2νsdz 3 Navier-Stokes majorizing kernel pairs. The majorizing kernel pairs defined below are used to control the magnitude of the forcing the initial velocity in a way that allows the control of the magnitude of the velocity over time. The first component of the pair, h, dominates the velocity. The second component, h, dominates the forcing in a way tailored to maintain the velocity domination. The conditions specificing the majorizing kernels allow construction of transition probabilities based on the integral representation of the Navier-Stokes equations given in Proposition 2.1 above. These kernels play a role in physical space analogous to the role played in Fourier space by the scaling functions of Le Jan Sznitman [13] the Fourier multiplier majorizing kernels introduced by Bhattacharya et al in [2]. Definition 3.1 The pair h, h : R 3 R 3 0, ] [0, ] is a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0, [0, if h is lower semi-continuous uniformly locally square integrable, R h 2 x y y 2 dy 3 = γ <, 13 hx sup x R 3 sup x R 3 R 3 hx y y 1 dy hx = γ <. If γ = γ = 1, we say that h, h is a stard majorizing kernel pair. Notice that both h h are finite a.e. with respect to Lebesgue measure hx = 0 a.e. if only if γ = 0. A simple scaling argument shows that if a majorizing kernel pair h, h has constant pair γ, γ with γ > 0, then γ 1 h,γ γ 1 h is a stard majorizing kernel pair. 9

10 Recall from potential theory that an excessive function h : R 3 0, ] satisfies both R hykx y,2νtdy 3 1 lim hykx y,2νtdy = hx. hx t 0 R 3 sup x R 3,t>0 See Bass [1] or Doob [7] for background. Majorizing kernel pairs of particular interest are those with the first member h being excessive. Definition 3.2 A majorizing kernel pair h, h is an excessive majorizing kernel pair if h is excessive. The initial data u 0 the forcing g will be compared, respectively to h h. Definition 3.3 The pair u 0,g = u 0, {g,t : t 0} is h, h-admissible if u 0 x gx, t sup < sup <. x R 3 hx x R 3,t 0 hx Example 1: Let h 0 x = x 1 let hx = h 0 x with hxdx R = 4π 3 r=0 r2 h0 rdr <. Then h 0, h is an excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair π 3,4π 2 r=0 r2 h0 rdr. This can be seen by observing that h 0 is uniformly locally square integrable for x 0, y 1 Kx y,tdy = x 1 P Z < x / t, R 3 where Z is a stard normal r.v., R 3 y 2 x y 2 dy = π 3 x 1, x y 1 hx ydy = 4π min{r, x } r h 0 rdr. R 3 r=0 The value on the left above increases to 4π r=0 r2 h0 rdr = R 3 h 0 y dy as x. As an example, let h 0 r = r r 1+ε for some fixed ε > 0. Then u 0,g is h 0, h-admissible if sup x R 3 x u 0 x < sup x R 3,t>0 x x 1+ε gx,t <. The Fourier transform of the function h 0 given here is the Le Jan-Sznitman scaling function ξ 2 that arises naturally in the study of the Fourier Navier-Stokes equations. See Le Jan Sznitman [13] for the original study. See also Bhattacharya et al [2] for refinement of the Fourier space majorizing kernel method. See also the remark following Example 4. The following propositions illustrate some of the structure of the class of majorizing kernel pairs. 10

11 Proposition 3.1 Let h, h be a stard excessive majorizing kernel pair. a Then h µ, h µ, µ R, σhσ,σ 3 hσ, σ > 0, ha, ha, A a 3 by 3 matrix with A t A = I, are also stard excessive majorizing kernel pairs. b Let F denote a probability distribution function on R 3. Then h ydfy, h ydfy R 3 R 3 is also a excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0, 1] 0, 1]. Proof: Part a is easily checked via the appropriate change of variables. Part b follows from an application of the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality followed by Fubini s Theorem. Proposition 3.2 Let {h j, h j : j 1} be a sequence of excessive majorizing kernel pairs with corresponding constant pairs {γ j, γ j : j 1}. a Then h 1 h 2, h 1 h 2 is a excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,γ 1 γ 2 ] [0, γ 1 γ 2 ]. b For any p 0,1 h p 1 h1 p 2, h p 1 p 1 h 2 is a excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,γ p 1 γ1 p 2 ] [0, γ p 1 γ1 p 2 ]. c For {p j : j 1} with j=1 p j = 1 p j 0 for each j 1 p j h j, p j hj j=1 is a excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0, j=1 p jγ j ] [0, j=1 p j γ j ]. j=1 Proof: Part a is obvious. Apply Hölder s inequality to deduce b. Part c again follows from the Cauchy-Schwartz inequality Fubini s Theorem. Definition 3.4 The functions h j : R 3 0, ], j = 1,2 are equivalent if for some c 1,, c 1 h 1 x h 2 x ch 1 x for all x R 3. Proposition 3.3 If h 1 h 2 are equivalent h 1, h is a majorizing kernel pair, then h 2, h is also a majorizing kernel pair. 11

12 Proof: The proof follows easily from the definitions. Example 2: The majorizing kernel h 0 of Example 1 has a singularity at the origin. Propositions , can be used to construct a kernel with a countable number of singularities as follows. Take {µ j : j 1} to be a sequence in R 3 {p j : j 1} with j=1 p j = 1 p j 0 for each j 1. Let hx = p j x µ j 1 hx = j=1 p j h0 x µ j j=1 for some h 0 : [0, [0, ] with r=0 r2 h0 rdr <. Note that if h 0 has a singularity, then h itself will have a countable number of singularities as well. h, h is a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,π 3 ] 0, R 3 h 0 x dx]. Example 3: The operations of Propositions can also be used to produce bounded kernels based on h 0. For example, convolving h 0 with the probability density fy = 2π y y 3 yields the bounded kernel h 1 x = 1 + x 1. Taking hx = R 3 h 0 x y fydy yields a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,π 3 ] 0, R 3 h 0 x dx]. Using Proposition 3.3 we see that any radial function h that decreases as x increases with lim x 0 x hx = c [0, lim x x hx = C 0, can be used as a majorizing kernel when paired with an appropriate h. Indeed kernels h of this description are in the Marcinkiewicz space L 3, ; see Cannone Karch [5] for a related study of stability results for Navier-Stokes equations. Example 4: Let Hx = 1 + x 2 1. Although H is not excessive, it is uniformly locally square integrable R 3 HyKx y,tdy 1 + 3e 2/3 Hx for all x R 3. Additionally, R 3 H 2 y x y 2 dy = π 2 Hx for all x R 3. However, it is not difficult to show that for any h with hydy R > 0, 3 sup Hx 1 y 1 hx ydy =. x R 3 R 3 This gives the majorizing kernel pair H,0 with constant pair π 2,0. Thus u 0,g being H,0- admissible corresponds to sup x R 31+ x 2 u 0 x < the forcing g being identically 0. Note that Ĥξ = π/2 ξ 1 e ξ. This is the second of the two Fourier Navier-Stokes majorizing kernels introduced by Le Jan Sznitman [13]. 12

13 Remark: Although Examples 1 4 are suggestive, it is not generally true that the Fourier transform of a majorizing kernel h satisfying 13 is a Fourier multiplier majorizing kernel or vice versa. The key to the correspondence in Examples 1 4 is the equality h 2 x y y 2 dy = γhx. On the Fourier side, this becomes ĥ ĥξ = cγ ξ ĥξ for a fixed constant c. The condition h hξ C ξ hξ is that required by Bhattacharya et al [2] for Fourier multiplier majorizing kernels for the Fourier transformed Navier-Stokes equations. Example 5: For p 1,2], let H p x = 1 + x p. Then H p,0 is a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ,0, γ π 4 p 1+1/ 2 p 1. This can be deduced by first noting that H as defined in Example 4 is equivalent to 1 + x 2 with c = 1 + 1/ 2 then applying b of Proposition 3.2 using H the kernel 1 + x 1 of Example 3. 4 Construction of the stochastic representation existence uniqueness with excessive kernels. This section opens by introducing the notation necessary to define tree-indexed Markov processes. After defining some crucial transition densities, the integral equation 6 of Proposition 2.1 is reformulated in terms of the transition densities the velocity forcing scaled respectively by h h for a majorizing kernel pair h, h. The underlying tree-indexed Markov process stochastic recursion are then defined described. The existence uniqueness results for excessive kernels follow. Let V := n=0 {0,1}n denote the full binary tree with root φ = {0,1} 0. Let V := {0,1} N denote the boundary of V. For v =< v 1,...,v n > {0,1} n, we say that the magnitude of v, v = n. For v V define v 0 = φ for v φ n 1, v n =< v 1,...,v n >. If for some n < v, v n = w, we say that w is an ancestor of v, conversely, that v is a descendant of w. For v V with v = n, 0 n <, set v = v v 1 v k =< v 1,...,v n,k >, k = 0,1. Thus v is the child of v has children v 0 v 1. Although it may currently seem nonsensical, it is convenient in the sequel to interpret φ as the precursor of the root φ. For v,w V with v w, denote the last common ancestor of v w as v w. This is defined as follows. Let n v,w = max{m 0 : v m = w m} then take v w = v n v,w. We say that W V is a rooted binary sub-tree if φ W, for any v W, v k W for all k < v, for any v j W, j = 0,1, then v 1 j W as well. For a finite rooted binary sub-tree W, define the boundary of W, W, as the elements of W which have no descendants in W; that is W = {v W : v 0 W}. The interior of W, W = W \ W, consists of the elements of W that have descendants in W. For example, a Galton-Watson tree with a single progenitor offspring distribution concentrated on 0 2 is a rooted binary sub-tree. If the expected number of offspring is less than or equal to 1, then the binary sub-tree is finite with probability 1. 13

14 Let B, B be a measurable space let X = {X v : v V} be a V-indexed collection of B- valued rom variables defined on a common probability space. Let F v = σx v, G v = σ{x v n : n v } denote the σ-field generated by the collection of r.v. s indexed by v v s ancestors, H v = σ{x w : w v = v} denote the σ-field generated by the collection of r.v. s indexed by v v s descendants. Let F φ denote the trivial σ-field. Definition 4.1 X is a V-indexed Markov process if for any v V with v <, H v 0 H v 1 are conditionally independent given F v, so that PA 1 A 2 F v = PA 1 F v PA 2 F v a.s. P for A k H v k,k = 0,1, for any v,w V any H w -measurable rom variable Y with E Y <, EY G v = EY F v w a.s. P. The distribution of a V-indexed Markov process is completely specified by the conditional distributions of the X v given F v for v V. The integral form of the incompressible Navier-Stokes equation will be expressed in terms of an expectation of a functional of a V-indexed Markov process. The following conditional densities involving the majorizing kernel pairs will be used to specify the transition probabilities thus the distribution. Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair. Fix x R 3 define a probability density on R 3 R 3 via fy,z x = y 1 z 4 h 2 x z1[ z > y ] 2π R z 2 h x zdz 3 If h is not identically 0, likewise define fy,z x = y 1 z 3 hx z1[ z > y ] 2π R z 1 hx. 15 zdz 3 The above densities will provide spatial transition densities for our V-indexed Markov process. Define two conditional waiting time densities for s > 0 y R 3 via f 0 s y = 2π 1/2 2ν 3/2 s 5/2 y 3 e y 2 /4νs = 2πs 1 y 3 Ky,2νs 16 f 1 s y = 4πν 1/2 s 3/2 y e y 2 /4νs = 4πν y Ky,2νs. 17 Adjoin a trap state θ to R 3, define hx 1 hykx y,2νt if x,y R 3, hx < ; 1 hx Jy,t x = 1 R hykx y,2νtdy if x R 3,y = θ; if x = y = θ 0 otherwise. If h is excessive, this is the transition density of a h-brownian motion on R 3 {θ}. 14

15 For a majorizing kernel pair h, h x R 3 {θ}, define { hx χ 0 x = 1 u 0 x if x R 3 0 if x = θ 19 Also let mx = mx = ϕx,t = gx,t hx. 20 R y 2 h 2 x ydy 3, 21 8πνhx R y 1 hx ydy πνhx Proposition 4.1 Suppose that the majorizing kernel pair h, h is used to define f, f, f 0, f 1, J, χ 0, ϕ, m, m as given in 14 through 22. If hxχx,t is locally square integrable χ satisfies χx, t = χ 0 yjy,t xdy 23 R 3 t { + mx f 0 s zfy,z xb 1 z;χx z,t s,χx z,t s s=0 y R 3 z R 3 + 2f 1 s zfy,z x 3f 1 s yfy,z x b 2 z;χx z,t s,χx z,t s + mx 2f 1 s z fy,z xp z ϕx z,t s f 1 s y fy,z xi 3e z e t zϕx z,t s } dzdyds then ux, t = hxχx, t is a weak solution to 1. Proof: Suppose that χx,t satisfies 23 above define ux,t = hxχx,t. Note that Then ux, t = + z 2 h 2 x z fy,z xdy = y R 3 R y 2 h 2 x ydy 3 y R 3 fy,z xdy = z 1 hx z R 3 y 1 hx ydy. u 0 ykx y,2νtdy y R 3 { hxmx f0 s z s=0 z R 3 R y 2 h 2 x ydy z 2 b 1 z;ux z,t s,ux z,t s 3 t 15

16 = + 2f1 s z 3f 1 s y + z 2 y z 2π y z 4 dy b 2 z;ux z,t s,ux z,t s hx mx 2f1 s z + R y 1 hx P z gx z,t s ydy z 3 } f 1 s y y z 2π y z 3 dy I 3e ze t zgx z,t s dzds u 0 ykx y,2νtdy y R 3 t { z Kz,2νs b 1 z;ux z,t s,ux z,t s s=0 z R 3 4νs Kz,2νs + 3 z 4π z 4 Ky, 2νsdy b 2 z;ux z,t s,ux z,t s y z + Kz,2νs P z gx z,t s 1 } 4π z 3 Ky,2νsdy I 3e z e t z gx z,t s dzds. y z The result then follows from Proposition 2.1. It is helpful to combine the spatial temporal transition densities f, f, f0 f 1 given in equations 14 through 17 via the following romization. Let {p k : 1 k 5} satisfy p k > 0 5 k=1 p k = 1. To appropriately balance the romization, fix p 0,1/2] take p 1 = p/11, p 2 = 4p/11, p 3 = 6p/11, p 4 = p 5 = 1 p/2. Note that p 1 + p 2 + p 3 = p 1/2. For fixed x R 3 let fy,z,s,k x = p 1 f 0 s zfy,z x if k = 1 p 2 f 1 s zfy,z x if k = 2 p 3 f 1 s yfy,z x if k = 3 p 4 f 1 s z fy,z x if k = 4 p 5 f 1 s y fy,z x if k = 5. This can be thought of as the joint conditional density of a quadruple Y, Z, τ, κ taking values in R 3 R 3 0, {1,2,3,4,5}. We now define the tree-indexed Markov process that underlies our probabilistic representation. Let X = {{V v t : t 0},X v,y v,z v,τ v,κ v : v V} be a V-indexed Markov process with the following transition probabilities. First assume that, given that X v = x, {V v t : t 0} is a h- Brownian motion with initial value x transition density J as defined in 18 above. Note that each V v is itself a Markov process which can be assumed to be continuous with probability 1; see Doob [7], Part 2, Chapter X for background. Take the transition density of Y v,z v,τ v,κ v given that X v = x to be given by fy,z,s,k x as defined in 24, then set X v = X v Z v. Finally assume that for all v V, the process {V v t : t 0} the ensemble X v,y v,z v,τ v,κ v are conditionally independent given X v

17 Notice that the distribution of {V v t : t 0},X v,y v,z v,τ v,κ v only depends on the ensemble {V v t : t 0},X v,y v,z v,τ v,κ v through the r.v. X v. The ensemble {X v : v V} is itself a branching Markov rom walk. The distribution of X then depends on the initial value X φ. Denote the probability measure corresponding to X φ = x by P x the expectation with respect to this probability measure by E x. For v V, define the rom functional Υ v as follows. Let B v denote the rom bilinear operator { b1 Z B v, = v ;, if κ v = κv b 2 Z v ;, /2 if κ v = 2,3 C v denote the rom matrix C v = { PZv if κ v = 4 I 3e Zv e t Z v /2 if κ v = Then set Υ v t = χ 0 V v t + 11mX v p B v Υ v 0 t τ v,υ v 1 t τ v 1[κ v = 1,2,3] [τ v t] + 4 mx v 1 p C vϕx v,t τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] [τ v t]. 27 Notice that the recursion implicit in the definition of Υ v terminates if τ v > t or κ v = 4 or 5. That is Υ v t1[τ v > t] = χ 0 V v t 28 Υ v t1[κ v = 4,5]1[τ v t] = χ 0 V v t + 4 mx v 1 p C vϕx v,t τ v. 29 The rom space-time branching mechanism giving rise to Υ φ can be explained as follows. Initialize the Markov process X by taking X φ = x R 3. Activate the h-brownian motion V φ t starting at X φ at time t = 0. This motion will run until time t with χ 0 V φ t being used in calculating the first term of Υ φ t. If V φ has entered the trap state θ this term has value 0. Although the process V φ runs until time t, if τ φ is less than t the path is deactivated at time τ φ. If deactivation occurs before time t, there are two possibilities. If κ φ = 4 or 5, the forcing is input into Υ φ by evaluating C φ ϕ at location X φ time t τ φ. If κ φ = 1,2 or 3, two new active paths V 0 V 1 are started at location X φ at time τ φ. The distributions of these newly activated paths are conditionally independent given X φ. If the paths V 0 V 1 have been activated, then the process repeats on each of them with X φ taking the place of X φ t τ φ taking the place of t. This is illustrated in Figure 1. Notice that all paths activated by time t are used in calculating Υ φ t, even though they may be deactivated before time t. For example evaluating the stochastic recursion for Figure 1 gives Υ φ t = χ 0 V φ t + 11mX φ B φ Υ 0 t τ φ,υ 1 t τ φ p with Υ 0 t τ φ = χ 0 V 0 t τ φ + 4 mx φ 1 p C 0ϕX 0,t τ φ τ 0 17

18 V 10 V 11 X 1,τ φ + τ 1 V1 V 0 Time V φ X 0, τ φ +τ 0 X φ, τ φ Space Figure 1: An illustration of an initial segment of the rom process X with κ φ = 1,2 or 3, κ 0 = 4 or 5, κ 1 = 1,2 or 3. The deactivated paths are represented by dotted lines. Υ 1 t τ φ = χ 0 V 1 t τ φ + 11mX φ B 1 χ 0 V 1,0 t τ φ τ 1,χ 0 V 1,1 t τ φ τ 1. p Here t is evaluated at the end of the time interval illustrated. Remark: Although it is not obvious from the construction above, the waiting times τ v can be tied to first passage times for Brownian motion. Here s a sketch of an alternate construction that highlights the relationship. For simplicity, just consider a single v V. Let {Wt : t 0} be a Brownian motion in R 3 with W0 = 0 transition density Ky,2νt, independent of X v the ensemble {V v t : t 0},X v,y v,z v,κ v. Write Wt = W 1 t,w 2 t,w 3 t for a > 0 let T i a = inf{s > 0 : W i s = a} for i = 1,2,3. The T i a s are independent stopping times with individual densities 4πν 1/2 s 3/2 ae a2 /4νs. Let 3 T 0 a = T i a 1 1. i=1 It is easy to check that T 0 a has density 2π 1/2 2ν 3/2 s 5/2 a 3 e a2 /4νs. Note that T 0 is not 18

19 a stopping time with respect to the usual filtration associated with the Brownian motion W. Let T 0 Z v if κ v = 1 τ v = T 1 Z v if κ v = 2,4 T 1 Y v if κ v = 3,5. It is easy to check that, conditioned on the value of X v, the joint distribution of {V v t : t 0},X v,y v,z v, τ v,κ v, is the same as that of {V v t : t 0},X v,y v,z v,τ v,κ v. This allows us to think of the τ v s as waiting times that reflect excursion levels in orthogonal directions of a hidden independent Brownian motion in R 3. Theorem 4.1 Let h, h be an excessive majorizing kernel pair. If Υ φ is as defined in 27 E x Υ φ t M < for all x t, then ux,t = hxe x Υ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations. Proof: Υ 0 t τ φ Υ 1 t τ φ are conditionally independent given F φ, giving E x Υ φ t F φ = χ 0 V φ t { +mx p 1 1 b 1Z φ ;E x Υ 0 t τ φ F φ,e x Υ 1 t τ φ F φ 1[κ φ = 1] + 2p 1 2 1[κ φ = 2] 3p 3 1 1[κ φ = 3] } b 2 Z φ ;E x Υ 0 t τ φ F φ,e x Υ 1 t τ φ F φ 1[τ φ t] { } + mx 2p 1 4 1[κ φ = 4]P Zφ p 5 1 1[κ φ = 5]I 3e Zφ e t Z φ ϕx Z φ,t τ φ 1[τ φ t]. Since also E x Υ i t τ φ F φ 1[Z φ = z,τ φ = s] = E x z Υ φ t s for i = 0,1, 30 E x Υ φ t = E x E x Υ φ t F φ = Jy,t xχ 0 ydy R 3 t { + mx f 0 s zfy,z xb 1 z;e x z Υ φ t s,e x z Υ φ t s s=0 y R 3 z R 3 + 2f 1 s zfy,z x 3f 1 s yfy,z x b 2 z;e x z Υ φ t s,e x z Υ φ t s + mx 2f 1 s z fy,z xp z ϕx z,t s f 1 s y fy,z xi 3e z e t zϕx z,t s } dzdyds. Then ux,t is uniformly locally square integrable since ux,t = hx E x Υ φ t Mhx. From Proposition 4.1 the function hxe x Υ φ t is a weak solution to 1. 19

20 Theorem 4.2 Existence Uniqueness Let h, h be an excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,8πνp/11] [0,2πν1 p] for some p 0,1/2]. If u 0,g is h, h- admissible with u 0 x gx, t sup αε sup βε x R 3 hx x R 3,t 0 hx for some α [0,1 ε, β 0,1 α, then ux,t = hxe x Υ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup ε. x R 3,t 0 hx Furthermore, this solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx ε}. The conditions of Theorem 4.2 are sometimes more easily checked in the following form. Corollary 4.3 Let h, h be an excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ, γ > 0, suppose that u 0,g is h, h-admissible with u 0 x sup 8πνpαε x R 3 hx 11γ gx, t sup 4πν2 p1 pβε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ γ for some p [0,1/2], α [0,1 ε, β 0,1 α, then ux,t = hxe x Υ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup 8πνpε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ. This solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx 8πνpε 11γ }. Proof of Corollary 4.3: Rescale h, h consider the majorizing kernel pair 8πν 11γ h, 4πν2 p1 p h 11γ γ with constant pair 8πνp/11,2πν1 p. The next corollary treats the case of no forcing. Corollary 4.4 Let h,0 be an excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ,0 suppose that u 0 x sup 4πναε x R 3 hx 11γ for some α [0,1 ε 0,1 α, then ux,t = hxe x Υ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup 4πνε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ. This solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx 20 4πνε 11γ }.

21 The proof of Theorem 4.2 depends upon Proposition 4.2 that follows. Proposition 4.2 Let h, h be an excessive majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,8πνηp/11] [0,2πνη1 p] for some p 0,1/2] η > 0. Suppose that for some α [0,1 ε,β 0,1 α/η, u 0,g is h, h-admissible with u 0 x gx, t sup αε sup βε. x R 3 hx x R 3,t 0 hx Then for all x R 3 t > 0 Υ φ t ε a.s. P x. The following lemma is used in the proof of the proposition. Lemma 4.1 Let W V be a finite binary sub-tree. Suppose that {b v : R 3 R 3 R 3 : v W} has sup b v x,y x y for all x,y R 3, v W {y v,z v,η v,σ v R 3 R 3 [0, {0,1} : v W} satisfies sup η v η < v W sup y v αε sup z v βε for some α [0,1 ε,β 0,1 α/η]. v W v W Then x v defined iteratively on W via { yv + σ x v = v η v z v if v W y v + η v b v x v 0,x v 1 if v W. satisfies sup x v ε. v W Proof: The result follows by induction starting on W. If v W, then x v y v + η v z v αε + ηβε ε. If v W x v k ε for k = 0,1, then x v y v + η v b v x v 0,x v 1 αε + ηε 2 ε. Proof of Proposition 4.2: Let W = {v V : κ vj = 1,2,3 for all j < v }. Then W is a rom binary sub-tree. Indeed, W corresponds to a Galton-Watson tree with each individual having either 0 or 2 offspring. The probability of 2 offspring is p = Pκ v = 1,2,3 1/2 the probability of 0 21

22 offspring is 1 p = Pκ v = 4,5. With probability 1, W is finite; see for example Harris [10]. Set X φ = x R 3 S φ = 0. For v W with v > 0, let S v = v 1 k=0 τ v k. For fixed t <, Υ φ t is a functional of the rom ensembles indexed by the nodes of the a.s. finite binary sub-tree Wt W defined by Wt = {v W : S v < t}. 31 Recalling 28 29, if v Wt, Υ v t S v = χ 0 V v t S v + 4 mx v 1 p C vϕx v,t S v τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] [τ v t S v ]. From 27, for v W t Υ v t S v = χ 0 V v t S v + 11mX v B v Υ v 0 t S v τ v,υ v 1 t S v τ v 1[κ v = 1,2,3]1[τ v t S v ]. p This is the setting of Lemma 4.1 with y v = χ 0 V v t S v, b v = B v, z v = C v ϕx v,t S v τ v, 4 mx v 1 p if v Wt η v = 11mX v p if v W t σ v = 1[κ v = 4,5]. Lemma 2.1 gives B v x,y < x y for all x,y R 3. By assumption we have χ 0 V v s αε for all s, again using Lemma 4.1, C v ϕx v,s βε for all s. The multipliers η v are bounded as follows: 11mx p = 11 R 3 y 2 h 2 x ydy 8πνphx 11γ 8πνp η 4 mx 1 p = R y 1 hx ydy 3 2πν1 phx γ 2πν1 p η for all x R 3. Lemma 4.1 gives Υ φ t ε a.s. P x. From Theorem 4.1 then ux,t = hx E x Υ φ t hxe x Υ φ t εhx. Proof of Theorem 4.2: The existence of the weak solution ux,t = hxe x Υ φ t follows immediately from Theorem 4.1 Proposition 4.2 with η = 1. Uniqueness is derived using a martingale argument as follows. Suppose that v is a solution to 6 with vx, t sup ε. x R 3,t>0 hx Set ρx,t = vx,t/hx. Take X φ = x R 3 fixed, fix t > 0 let W n t = {v Wt : v n} 32 22

23 where Wt is as defined in 31. For n 0 v Wt, define the rom functionals Ψ n v via the iterative construction, for n 1, Ψ 0 v t = χ 0V v t + 11mX v B v ρx v,t τ v,ρx v,t τ v 1[κ v = 1,2,3] [τ v t] p + 4 mx v 1 p C vϕx v,t τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] [τ v t] Ψ v n t = χ 0V v t + 11mX v p B v Ψ n 1 v 0 t τ v,ψ n 1 v 1 t τ v 1[κ v = 1,2,3] [τ v t] + 4 mx v 1 p C vϕx v,t τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] [τ v t]. Notice that for each n, Ψ n φ t depends only on those ensembles in X indexed by v Wn t. If W n t = Wt, then Ψ n φ t = Υ φt. Since vx,t is a solution to 6, for all v, vx,t = hxρx,t = hxe x Ψ 0 φ t E x Ψ 0 v t S v G v 1[t S v 0] = ρx v,t S v 1[t S v 0]. If for some n 1 all v V, E x Ψ n 1 v t S v G v = ρx v,t S v on the set [t S v 0], then E x Ψ v n t S v G v 1[t S v 0] = χ 0 V v t S v { + 11mX v /pb v E x Ψ n 1 v 0 t S v τ v G v,e x Ψ n 1 v 1 t S v τ v G v 1[κ v = 1,2,3] } + 4 mx v /1 pc v ϕx v,t S v τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] 1[τ v t S v ] = χ 0 V v t S v { + 11mX v /pb v ρx v,t S v τ v,ρx v,t S v τ v 1[κ v = 1,2,3] } + 4 mx v /1 pc v ϕx v,t S v τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] 1[τ v t S v ]., on the set [t S v 0], E x Ψ v n t S v G v = E x E x Ψ n v t S v G v G v = Jy,t S v X v χ 0 ydy R 3 t Sv { + mx v f 0 s zfy,z X v b 1 z;ρx v z,t S v s,ρx v z,t S v s s=0 R 3 R 3 + 2f 1 s zfy,z X v 3f 1 s yfy,z X v b 2 z;ρx v z,t S v s,ρx v z,t S v s + mx v 2f 1 s z fy,z X v P z ϕx v z,t S v s f 1 s y fy,z X v I 3e z e t z ϕx v z,t S v s } dzdyds = ρx v,t S v. 23

24 By induction then, E x Ψ v n t S v G v 1[t S v 0] = ρx v,t S v 1[t S v 0] for all n v. In particular, E x Ψ n φ t = ρx,t for all n. Since Wt is finite a.s. P x, there exists with probability 1 some rom N with W n t = Wt Ψ n φ t = Υ φt for all n N. The rom functionals Υ φ Ψ n φ are all bounded by ε in magnitude, so ρx,t χx,t = E x Ψ n φ t E xυ φ t E x Ψ n φ t Υ φt 2εP x W n t Wt. This probability goes to 0 as n goes to. Example 1: Take p = α = 1/2 to see that if sup x u 0 x < ν/11π 2 sup gx,t < h 0 x for all x R 3 x R 3 t>0 for some h 0 : [0, [0, ] with R 3 h 0 x dx ν 2 /11π, then there exists a unique weak solution ux,t to 1 with sup x,t x ux,t < 2ν/11π 2. Example 2: Again take p = α = 1/2. If there exists {µ j : j 1} in R 3 {p j : j 1}, p j > 0, pj = 1 with u 0 x < ν/11π 2 p j x µ j 1 sup gx,t < p j h0 x µ j for all x R 3 t for some h 0 with R 3 h 0 x dx ν 2 /11π, then there exists a unique weak solution ux,t to 1 with sup t ux,t < 2ν/11π 2 p j x µ j 1 for all x R 3. Example 3: If sup 1 + x u 0 x < ν/11π 2 sup gx,t < hx for all x R 3 x R 3 t>0 for some h with 0 hx R 3 h 0 x y 2π y y 3 dy where R 3 h 0 x dx ν 2 /11π, then there exists a unique weak solution ux,t to 1 with sup x,t 1 + x ux,t < 2ν/11π 2. Notice that Examples 1,2 3 all give existence uniqueness in a sub-space of the Marcinkiewicz space L 3, ; c.f. Cannone Karch [5]. 5 Non-excessive kernels an alternate probabilistic representation. The following representation can be used with both non-excessive excessive majorizing kernels. Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair let X 1 = {X v,y v,z v,τ v,κ v : v V} be the V-indexed Markov process with the transition density of Y v,z v,τ v,κ v, given that X v = x, as defined in 24 again let X v = X v Z v. To define the stochastic recursion, let m 0 x,t = R 3 u 0 x yky,2νtdy hx 24

25 let χ 0, ϕ, m, m be as defined in equations 19 through 22. We will also use the rom operators B v C v as defined in Now define the rom recursive functional Ξ on V via Ξ v t = m 0 X v,t + 11mX v B v Ξ v 0 t τ v,ξ v 1 t τ v 1[κ v = 1,2,3] [τ v t] p + 4 mx v 1 p C vϕx v,t τ v 1[κ v = 4,5] [τ v t]. If h, h is excessive, this rom recursion essentially replaces the first term of Υ v, χ 0 V v t, with m 0 X v,t, the conditional expectation of χ 0 V v t given G v. Proposition 5.1 Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,8πνηp/11] [0,2πνη1 p] for some p 0,1/2] η > 0. Suppose that for some α [0,1 ε,β 0,1 α/η, u 0,g is h, h-admissible with R u sup 3 0 x yky,2νtdy gx, t αε sup βε. x R 3,t 0 hx x R 3,t 0 hx Then for all x R 3 t > 0 Ξ φ t ε a.s. P x. Proof: The proof of this proposition exactly parallels that of Proposition 4.2. Here the y v of Lemma 4.1 is equal to m 0 X v,t S v, so by assumption, y v αε. The proof is then identical. The conditions appearing in the following corollary are somewhat simpler. Corollary 5.1 Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,8πνηp/11] [0,2πνη1 p] for some p 0,1/2] η > 0 R hx yky,2νtdy 3 M <. hx sup x R 3,t>0 Suppose that for some α [0,1 ε,β 0,1 α/η, u 0,g is h, h-admissible with u 0 x gx, t sup αε/m sup βε. x R 3 hx x R 3,t>0 hx Then for all x R 3 t > 0 Ξ φ t ε a.s. P x. The proofs of the following theorems are omitted due to their similarity to proofs appearing in the previous section. Theorem 5.2 Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair. If E x Ξ φ t M < for all x t, then ux,t = hxe x Ξ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations. 25

26 Theorem 5.3 Existence Uniqueness Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ 0,8πνp/11] [0,2πν1 p] for some p 0,1/2]. If u 0,g is h, h-admissible with R u sup 3 0 x yky,2νtdy gx, t αε sup βε. 33 x R 3,t 0 hx x R 3,t 0 hx for some α [0,1 some ε, β 0,1 α, then ux,t = hxe x Ξ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup ε. x R 3,t 0 hx This solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx ε}. Three useful corollaries follow. The first imposes separate bounds on the magnitude of the initial velocity relative to h the size of h K relative to h. In the last two corollaries a single bound is imposed on the magnitude of u 0 h relative to h. The last corollary treats the case of no forcing. This is of particular interest in regards to regularity; see remark 4 in the following section. Corollary 5.4 Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair with R hx yky,2νtdy 3 hx sup x R 3,t>0 M <. 34 constant pair γ, γ 0,8πνp/11] [0,2πν1 p] for some p 0,1/2]. If u 0,g is h, h- admissible with u 0 x gx, t sup αε/m sup βε 35 x R 3 hx x R 3,t 0 hx for some α [0,1 ε, β 0,1 α. Then ux,t = hxe x Ξ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup ε. x R 3,t 0 hx This solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx ε}. Proof of Corollary 5.4: Combining gives 33. The next corollary relies on the rescaling seen in the derivation of Corollary 4.3. Corollary 5.5 Let h, h be a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ, γ, γ > 0, suppose that u 0,g is h, h-admissible with R u sup 3 0 x yky,2νtdy 8πνpαε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ gx, t sup 4πν2 p1 pβε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ γ 36 26

27 for some p [0,1/2], α [0,1 ε, β 0,1 α, then ux,t = hxe x Ξ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup 8πνpε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ. 37 This solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx 8πνpε 11γ }. Proof of Theorem 1.1: Equation 4 guarantees that 36 is satisfied with γ = γ = 1 p = α = 1/2. Then 37 holds for any ε < 1/2. Corollary 5.6 Let h,0 be a majorizing kernel pair with constant pair γ,0 suppose that R u sup 3 0 x yky,2νtdy 4πναε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ for some α [0,1 ε 0,1 α. Then ux,t = hxe x Ξ φ t is a weak solution to the Navier-Stokes equations with ux, t sup 4πνε x R 3,t 0 hx 11γ. 38 This solution is unique in the class {v S R 3 0, 3 : sup x R 3,t 0 vx,t hx 4πνε 11γ }. Example 4: If sup x 1 + x 2 u 0 x 11π/16ν1 + 3e 2/3 the forcing g is identically 0, then there exists a unique weak solution to 1 with sup x,t 1 + x 2 ux,t < 11π/8ν. Example 5: Taking H p x = 1 + x p for p 1,2] fixed, R 3 H p x yky,2νtdy 1 + 3e 2/3 p/ / 2 p/2 H p x for all x R 3 t > 0. Then, if sup x 1+ x p u 0 x π p 3 ν1+3e 2/3 p/2 1+1/ 2 1 3p/2 /11 the forcing g is identically 0, there exists a unique weak solution to 1 with sup x,t 1 + x p ux,t < 2π p 3 ν1 + 1/ 2 1 p /11. 6 Remarks. 1 It appears that the integral formulation on which the probabilistic representation is based can also be used as the basis for Picard iteration. The advantage of the probabilistic approach as it appears here is that it allows, with probability 1, the assumption that there are a finite number of iterates. This permits easy derivation of bounds via inductive arguments. 2 The probabilistic representations of the Fourier transformed Navier-Stokes equations given by Bhattacharya et al [2] give both short time existence uniqueness of solutions for large initial 27

28 data decay over time of the Fourier transformed solution. It is possible that a physical space representation related to the ones given in this paper will also indicate short time existence uniqueness as well as the time decay of solutions. 3 A semi-group approach underlies this probabilistic representation. Montgomery-Smith [16] uses such an approach to demonstrate blow-up in finite time of an equation related to the Navier- Stokes equations. A more complete understing of the integration of the bilinear forms b 1 b 2 may aid in understing possible blow-up of the Navier-Stokes equations in R 3. 4 In some cases the results given in this paper can be used to demonstrate regularity consequently uniqueness in a larger class of functions. The argument is as follows: assume that u 0 L 3 2 R3 is regular take the forcing to be identically 0. Take h,0 to be a majorizing kernel pair with h L 2 R 3 L q R 3 for some q > 3. If sup x,t u 0 x yky,2νtdy /hx is small enough, then sup x,t ux,t /hx < ε for suitable ε > 0 for any r > 0 T < T 0 ux,t q dx r dt < ε qr T 0 h q xdx r dt <. That is, the Ladyzhenskaya-Prodi-Serrin condition is satisfied, the solution u is regular unique in a larger function space; c.f. Temam [18], Chapter III. A suitable kernel here is h = H p of Example 5 with p 3/2,2]. References [1] Bass, Richard F., Probabilistic techniques in analysis, Springer-Verlag 1995 [2] Bhattacharya, Rabi N., Larry Chen, Scott Dobson, Ronald B. Guenther, Chris Orum, Mina Ossier, Enrique Thomann, Edward C. Waymire, Majorizing kernels stochastic cascades with applications to incompressible Navier-Stokes equations, Transactions of the AMS, 235, [3] Bhattacharya, Rabi N., Larry Chen, Ronald B. Guenther, Chris Orum, Mina Ossier, Enrique Thomann, Edward C. Waymire, Semi-Markov cascade representations of local solutions to 3d-incompressible Navier-Stokes, the Proceedings of the IMA, [4] Cannone, Marco Grzegorz Karch, Smooth or singular solutions to the Navier-Stokes system?, J. Differential Equations, 197, [5] Cannone, Marco Grzegorz Karch, About the regularized Navier-Stokes equations, preprint 2003 [6] Doering, Charles R. J.D. Gibbon, Applied analysis of the Navier-Stokes equations, Cambridge University Press 1995 [7] Doob, Joseph L., Classical potential theory its probabilistic counterpart, Springer-Verlag, New York 1984 [8] Foias, C., O. Manley, R. Rosa, R. Temam, Navier-Stokes equations turbulence, Cambridge University Press

29 [9] Foll, Gerald B., Fourier analysis its applications, Brooks/Cole Publishing Co., Pacific Grove, California 1992 [10] Harris, Theodore E., The theory of branching processes, Springer-Verlag 1963 [11] Koch, Herbert Vsevolod A. Solonnikov, L q -estimates of the first-order derivatives of solutions to the nonstationary Stokes problem, Nonlinear problems in mathematical physics related problems, Int. Math. Ser. N.Y., 1, [12] Ladyzhenskaya, O.A., Sixth problem of the millennium: Navier-Stokes equations, existence smoothness, Russian Math. Surveys 58, [13] Le Jan, Y. A.S. Sznitman, Stochastic cascades 3-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations, Probab. Theory Relat. Fields, 109, [14] Lemarié-Rieusset, P.G., Recent developments in the Navier-Stokes problem, Chapman Hall/CRC 2002 [15] McKean, H.P., Application of Brownian motion to the equation of Kolmogorov-Petrovskii- Piskunov, Comm. on Pure Appl. Math., 28, [16] Montgomery-Smith, Stephen, Finite time blow up for a Navier-Stokes like equation, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 129, [17] Solonnikov, Vsevolod A., Estimates for solutions of a non-stationary linearized system of Navier-Stokes equations, Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov., 70, [18] Temam, Roger, Navier-Stokes equations, North-Holl, the Netherls, revised edition 1979 [19] Thomann, Enrique A., Ronald B. Guenther, The fundamental solution of the linearized Navier Stokes equations for spinning bodies in three spatial dimensions- time dependent case, to appear in J. of Math. Fluid Mechanics