AAA Abstract and Applied Analysis 1687-0409 1085-3375 Hindawi Publishing Corporation 620320 10.1155/2013/620320 620320 Research Article Stability Analysis of the Supercritical Surface Quasi-Geostrophic Equation Jia Yan Gui Xingguo http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2511-9430 Dong Bo-Qing Córdoba Diego School of Mathematical Sciences Anhui University Hefei 230601 China ahu.edu.cn 2013 1 10 2013 2013 09 06 2013 21 08 2013 2013 Copyright © 2013 Yan Jia et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

This paper is devoted to the study of the stability issue of the supercritical dissipative surface quasi-geostrophic equation with nondecay low-regular external force. Supposing that the weak solution θ(x,t) of the surface quasi-geostrophic equation with the force fL2(0,T;H-α/2(2)) satisfies the growth condition in the critical BMO space θL1(0,;BMO), it is proved that every perturbed weak solution θ̅(t) converges asymptotically to solution θ(t) of the original surface quasi-geostrophic equation. The initial and external forcing perturbations are allowed to be large.

1. Introduction and Main Results

Mathematical models in fluid dynamics play an important role in theoretical and computational studies in meteorological and oceanographic sciences and petroleum industries, and so forth. In this paper, we consider a simple mathematical model of large scalar ocean and atmosphere dynamics (see Pedlosky )—the dissipative surface quasi-geostrophic equation which is first introduced by Constantin et al. : (1)θt+u·θ+κΛαθ=f,(x,t)2×(0,),θ(x,0)=θ0,x2. Here κ>0 is a dissipative coefficient and Λ is the Riesz potential operator defined by the fractional power of -Δ: (2)Λ=(-Δ)1/2,Λαg^=(-Δ)α/2g^=|ξ|αg^.θ(x,t) is an unknown scalar function representing potential temperature. u(x,t) is the velocity field determined by (3)u=-(-Δ)-1/2θ=-θ=(2θ,-1θ), where j, j=1,2 is the 2D Riesz transform, θ0(x) is the initial data, and f(x,t) is the nondecay external force.

The surface quasi-geostrophic equation shares many features with fundamental fluid motion equations. When κ=0, it is comparable to the formation of sharp fronts between masses of hot and cold air (see Majda and Tabak ). When α=0 (1) can be looked to as a nonviscous wind driven circulation equation (see Pedlosky ). What is more, (1) with α=1 shares many similar features with three-dimensional incompressible Navier-Stokes equations . Thus α=1 is therefore referred to as the critical case, while the cases 0<α<1 and 1<α2 are supercritical and subcritical, respectively.

Due to the importance in mathematics, there is much attention on the well-posedness and large time behaviors of the surface quasi-geostrophic equation. When 1<α2, Constantin and Wu  proved that this equation possesses a unique and global smooth solution for a sufficiently smooth initial function. When α=1, Kiselev et al.  showed the existence of global smooth solutions for smooth periodic initial data. At the same time, Caffarelli and Vasseur  also constructed a global smooth solution with θ0L2(n). In the supercritical case 0<α<1, however, the question of the global regularity is still generally not clear although many efforts have been made on the small regular solution or regularity criteria (see ). One may also refer to some interesting results of the generalized quasi-geostrophic equations (see ).

However, it is desirable to understand the asymptotic stability issue of the supercritical dissipative surface quasi-geostrophic equation. More precisely, we consider the perturbed quasi-geostrophic equation: (4)θ-t+u-·θ-+κΛαθ-=f+g,000000(x,t)2×(0,),θ-(x,0)=θ-0=θ0+w0,x2, where w0(x) and g(x,t) are the initial data and external forcing perturbations. The stability problem of (4) has been studied by many authors and a lot of good results have been obtained. To go directly to the main points of the present paper, in what follows we only review some former results which are closely related to our main results. First, when the surface quasi-geostrophic equations (1) has zero external force or time-decay external force, some interesting time decay results  have been obtained which essentially show the asymptotic stability for the trivial solution θ(x,t)=0. For the stability issue of the nontrivial solutions, Chae and Lee  studied the asymptotic stability of critical quasi-geostrophic equation in Besov space under the small initial perturbation. The nonlinear stability and instability analysis of the subcritical quasi-geostrophic equation is recently investigated by Chen and Price . Dong and Chen  recently considered the asymptotic stability problem in the Serrin-type critical Lebesgue space Lp(2) (p<) under the L2(2) external force. It is natural and interesting to further investigate the asymptotic stability for the nontrivial global solutions in the larger critical spaces, especially in the margin case p=.

The main purpose of this study is to investigate the asymptotic stability for the global solution of the supercritical surface quasi-geostrophic equation in the critical BMO space with nondecay low-regular external force. To state our main results, we first give the definition of the weak solution of the dissipative surface quasi-geostrophic equation (1).

Definition 1.

Letting θ0L2(2), fL2(0,T;H-α/2(2)). A measurable function θ(x,t) is said to be a global weak solution of the surface quasi-geostrophic equation (1) if the following conditions hold true.

θ(x,t)L(0,T;L2(2))L2(0,T;Hα/2(2)) for all T>0.

θ(x,t) is continuous on [0,) in the weak topology of L2(2) and (θ(t),ϕ)(θ0,ϕ) as t0 for all ϕL2(2).

For 0st, and any test function φC1([s,t];Hα/2(2)), (5)(θ(t),φ(t))+st{-(θ,τφ)+κ(Λα/2θ,Λα/2φ)-(θ,u·φ)}dτ=(θ(s),φ(s))+st(f,φ)dτ,

where (·,·) denotes the inner product of the space L2(2).

Energy-type inequality (6)θ(t)L22+2κstΛα/2θ(τ)L22dτθ(s)L22+2st(f,θ)dτ0st.

Now our results read as the following.

Theorem 2.

Letting 0<α<1, θ0L2(2). Assume θ(x,t) is a global weak solution of the supercritical dissipative surface quasi-geostrophic equation (1) with the nondecay low-regular external force fL2(0,T;H-α/2(2)) and satisfies the critical growth condition in BMO space: (7)θL1(0,;BMO). Then, for any perturbations w0L2(2) and gL2(0,;H-α/2(2)), every weak solution θ-(x,t) of the perturbed quasi-geostrophic equation (4) converges asymptotically to solution θ(t) as (8)θ-(t)-θ(t)L20(t).

Remark 3.

The critical space-time mixed space (7) in Theorem 2 is scaling invariant under the scaling transformation θλ(x,t)=λα-1θ(λx,λαt). Moreover, according to the result of Dong and Chen , the weak solution θ(x,t) satisfying (7) is actually regular. Furthermore, our results also show that the weak solutions θ-(x,t) of the perturbed equation (4) do not need to satisfy the energy-type inequality (6) and then they do not have to be regular.

Remark 4.

On one hand, compared with the stability result by Chae and Lee , there is no any smallness restriction on the perturbation functions w0 and g in Theorem 2. That is to say, the initial and external forcing perturbations from θ(t) are allowed to be large. On the other hand, our result here extends the previous result  to the margin case p= due to the embedding relation LBMO. Moreover, in comparison with , we require less regularity for the external force.

Remark 5.

Although Theorem 2 shows that the decay property of difference between the global solution and the perturbed solution θ-(t)-θ(t)L20, however, it is different from the time decay issue of the zero-forced surface quasi-geostrophic equations (see [22, 23] and references therein) θ(t)L20. The latter indeed shows the asymptotic stability of the trivial solution θ=0 for the surface quasi-geostrophic equation with zero external force. However, when the surface quasi-geostrophic equation (1) has the nonzero low-regular external force fL2(0,T;H-α/2(2)), θ=0 is obviously not a solution of (1), therefore, our result here essentially shows the asymptotic stability of the nonzero global solution of (1).

Remark 6.

The main idea in the proof of Theorem 2 is based on some new observations due to the special structure in nonlinear term u·θ which is different from the classic Navier-Stokes equations. Additionally, in order to derive an auxiliary decay estimate in the framework of the critical BMO space, we also need to choose a suitable test function and derive some average decay properties. It is worth noting that although the study of the classic incompressible Navier-Stokes equations is beneficial to that of quasi-geostrophic equation, compared with some asymptotic stability results of three-dimensional Navier-Stokes equations (refer to ), we do not know, however, whether our result in the framework of the critical BMO space is still valid for the Navier-Stokes equations. We will focus on that problem in the future.

The remains of this paper are organized as follows. In Section 2, we will investigate the global L2 estimates of the difference between the original surface quasi-geostrophic equation and the perturbed equation. In Section 3, we will further derive an average decay estimates of the difference. Finally, we will prove the asymptotic stability of large solution to the surface quasi-geostrophic equation (1) under the large initial perturbation in Section 4.

Let us end this section by some notations. In what follows, C stands for the abstractly positive constant. Lp(2) with 1p denotes the usual Lebesgue space. Hs(2) with s is the fractional Sobolev space with the norm: (9)fHs=(2|ξ|2s|f^|2dξ)1/2.

BMO is the space of the bounded mean oscillation defined by (10)BMO={Br(x)|f(y)-f-Br(x)|dy<fLloc1(2);  supx,r1|Br(x)|fLloc1(2);  supx,r1|Br(x)|×Br(x)|f(y)-f-Br(x)|dy<fLloc1(2);  supx,r1|Br(x)|}, where (11)f-Br(x)=1|Br(x)|Br(x)f(y)dy is the average of f over Br(x). In particular, BMO is the dual space of the Hardy space 1.

2. Global Estimate of <inline-formula><mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M89"><mml:mi>θ</mml:mi><mml:mo> </mml:mo><mml:mo mathvariant="bold">-</mml:mo><mml:mo> </mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>

In this section, we will investigate the global L2 estimates of the difference w=θ-θ- between the global solution θ of the original equation (1) and the weak solution θ- of the perturbed equation (4). It is mentioned that some necessary smooth properties of the difference w is required in the derivation of the global L2 estimates below. As stated in Remark 3, the global weak solution θ of the original equation (1) satisfying the regular condition (6) is actually regular. However, the perturbed weak solution θ- is not smooth, in order to derive the global estimates of the difference w=θ-θ-. We first seek a smooth function to approximate the weak solution θ- of the perturbed quasi-geostrophic equation (4). To do so, we apply the standard Galerkin method to construct the smooth approximate solutions: (12)θ-m(x,t)=k=1mgkm(t)ϕk(x),mN Here {ϕk}k=1C(2) is an orthonormal basis of L2(2).

Instead of the perturbed quasi-geostrophic equation (4), for any test function ϕXm = the space spanned by ϕ1,ϕ2,,ϕm,θ-m(x,t) satisfy (13)(θ-mt+u-m·θ-m+κΛαθ-m,ϕ)=(fm+gm,ϕ),θ-m(x,0)=k=1m(θ-0,ϕk)ϕk, where (14)fm=k=1m(f,ϕk)ϕk,gm=k=1m(g,ϕk)ϕk.

It is worth noting that, for fixed integer m, equations (13) are indeed ordinary differential equations. The theory of existence and uniqueness for such ordinary differential equations is standard. Therefore, we can prove that the approximated solutions θ-m exist globally and smoothly and are uniformly bounded in the following space: (15)θ-mL(0,T;L2(2))L2(0,T;Hα/2(2)),T>0.

Furthermore, it allows us to prove that the approximates smooth solutions θ-m converge to the weak solution of the perturbed quasi-geostrophic equation (4) when m tends to infinity. Indeed, we only need to obtain the strong convergence of θ-m in space Lloc2(2×(0,)). To do so, for example, with the aid of Hölder and Sobolev embedding estimates, it follows that (16)|(u-m·θ-m,ϕ)|  Cu-mL2θ-mL4/(2-α)ϕL4/αCu-mL2θ-mHα/2ϕH(4-α)/2 for ϕH(4-α)/2. This implies the uniform bounds of (17)θ-mt=-u-m·θ-m-kΛαθ-m+fm+gm00in the space  L2(0,T;H-(4-α)/2(2)). By the compactness theorem [4, Chapter 3, Theorem 2.1], the sequence θ-m admits a subsequence denoted also by θ-m converging to the weak solution of the perturbed equation (4): (18)θ-mθ-(m)  strongly  in  Lloc2(2×(0,)), from which and uniformly bounds of θ-m(t)L2 due to (15), we have (19)θ-m(t)θ-(t)(m)  weakly  in  L2(2) for almost all t(0,).

Thanks to the regular solution θL(0,T;L2(2)), we then derive from (19) that (20)00θ(t)-θ-m(t)θ(t)-θ-(t)(m)  weakly  in  L2(2) for almost all t(0,), which implies by Fatou Lemma that (21)θ(t)-θ-(t)L2liminfmθ(t)-θ-m(t)L2 for almost all t(0,).

Denoting by wm=θ-θ-m the difference between solution θ of original equation (1) and approximated smooth solution θ-m of the (13), with the direct computation due to the smoothness of wm, it is easy to examine wm satisfying (22)wm(t)L22+2κ0tΛα/2wmL22dτθ0-θ-m(0)L22+20t{(u·θ,θ-m)-(u-m·θ-m,θ)}dτ+20t(fm+gm-f,wm)dτθ0-θ-m(0)L22-20t((u-u-m)·θ,wm)dτ+20t(fm+gm-f,wm)dτ, where the divergence free property of the velocity is used. In order to deal with the nonlinear term of the right hand side of (22), we require the following important lemma.

Lemma 7 (Marchand [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">33</xref>]).

Assume that hL2(2), i (i{1,2}) is the Riesz transform, then there exists a constant C such that (23)hih1ChL22 is valid. Here 1 is the Hardy space.

Thus we have the following crucial estimates for the nonlinear term of (23): (24)|-20t((u-u-m)·θ,wm)dτ|C|0t2wm·θwmdxds|C0t(wm1wm1+wm2wm1)θBMOdsC0twmL22θBMOds, where we have also used the fact that BMO is the dual space of the Hardy space 1.

With the aid of the Hölder inequality and the Young inequality, one shows that for the external force term (25)|20t(fm+gm-f,wm)dτ|C0tgmH-α/2wmHα/2dτ+C0tfm-fH-α/2wmHα/2dτC0t(gmH-α/22+fm-fH-α/22)dτ+κ0twmHα/22dτ.

Plugging the above inequalities into (22) and taking the Gronwall inequality into consideration, we derive the global L2 estimate of wm: (26)wm(t)L22+κ0tΛα/2wm(τ)L22dτ(0t(gmH-α/22+fm-fH-α/22)θ0-θ-m(0)L22+C0t(gmH-α/22+fm-fH-α/22)dτ)×exp{C0tθBMOdτ}. Passing the limit m in the above inequality and applying (21), we have (27)w(t)L22+κ0tΛα/2w(τ)L22dτliminfm{wm(t)L22+κ0tΛα/2wm(τ)L22dτ}(w0L22+C0tgH-α/22dτ)exp{C0tθBMOdτ}(w0L22+C0gH-α/22dτ)×exp{C0θBMOdτ}=:E0< for the constant E0 independent of t>0.

Moreover, by the slight modification of the derivation of (22) and (27), it is not difficult to derive the following global estimates of w: (28)w(t)L22+κstΛα/2wL22dτw(s)L22+CstgH-α/22dτ+CstθBMOdτ for 0st.

3. Average Decay of <inline-formula><mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" id="M153"><mml:mi>θ</mml:mi><mml:mo> </mml:mo><mml:mo mathvariant="bold">-</mml:mo><mml:mo> </mml:mo><mml:mover accent="true"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>θ</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>-</mml:mo></mml:mover></mml:math></inline-formula>

In this section, we are devoted to investigating the average decay of the difference w=θ--θ which will play an important role in the proof of Theorem 2.

It is worth noting that Kozono  and Zhou  have investigated the average decay properties of the classic Navier-Stokes equation. For the surface quasi-geostrophic equation considered here, however, the fractional dissipative operators Λα=(-Δ)α/2 are nonlocal singular integral operators. the new difficulty on the uniformly estimates of w will rise if we directly follow the similar argument of the classic Navier-Stokes equations [30, 32].

Fortunately, we can avoid those additional difficulties with the aid of the theory of the analytic semigroup (see Pazy ). Since the Laplacian operator -Δ in whole space 2 generates a bounded analytic semigroup in each Lp(2) (1<p<), thus the fractional power Λα=(-Δ)α/2 can be redefined with the aid of the spectral decomposition: (29)Λα=0λα/2dE(λ), where E(λ) is a family of projection operators and λ(0<λ<) is the spectral of the Laplacian operator -Δ. Namely, the analytic semigroup e-tΛα generated by the nonlocal singular integral operators Λα is also defined in a satisfactory form: (30)e-tΛα=0e-tλα/2dE(λ). Furthermore, we may derive the embedding relation in a natural form (31)θLpCθHα=C|ξ|αθ^L2=CΛαθL2,with1p=12-α2, where Parseval equality is used in the last two equalities.

Now we carry out to study the average decay of the difference w=θ-θ-. Firstly, according to the definitions of the weak solutions in Definition 1, we choose a special test function φε as (32)φε(τ)=stηε(τ-σ)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2e-κ(2t-τ-σ)Λα×w(σ)dσ,ε>0, where ηε(t)=(1/ε)η(|t/ε|)>0 is the standard mollifier function with η(t)C0(-1,1) and -11η(t)dt=1. Thus w(x,t) satisfies the following weak formation (33)st(τw+κΛαw,φε)dτ+st(u·θ-u-·θ-,φε)dτ+st(g,φε)dτ=0 for 0st<.

We now give the estimates of (33) by passing the limit ε0. More precisely, we will prove the following lemma.

Lemma 8.

Under the same condition in Theorem 2, we have the following uniform estimates of the difference w: (34)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22-e-κ(t-s)Λα(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(s)L22CstΛα/2θL22dτ+CstΛα/2wL22dτ+CstgH-α/22dτ.

We will give the proof at the end of this section. Once the crucial uniform estimates (34) is obtained, we can obtain the average decay of the difference w. In fact, letting t in (34), since (35)limte-κ(t-s)Λα(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(s)L22=0,

then one shows that for (34) (36)limsupt(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22CsΛα/2θL22dτ+CsΛα/2wL22dτ+CsgH-α/22dτ,

and then letting s, we have (37)limsupt(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22=0.

Furthermore, employing the Parseval equality and the Hölder inequality, we obtain that for wL2(38)wL22=C2|w^|2dξ=C2(1+|ξ|2)(α2-3α)/6|w^|2α/3×(1+|ξ|2)(3α-α2)/6|w^|(6-2α)/3dξC(2(1+|ξ|2)-(3-α)/2|w^|2dξ)α/3×(2(1+|ξ|2)α/2|w^|2dξ)(3-α)/3C(2(1+|ξ|2)-(3-α)/2|w^|2dξ)α/3×(2(|w^|2+|ξ|α|w^|2)dξ)(3-α)/3C(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4wL22α/3  ×(wL22+Λα/2wL22)1-(α/3). Integrating in time from t/2 to t yields (39)1tt/2tw(τ)L22dτCtt/2t(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4wL22α/3  ×(wL22+Λα/2wL22)1-(α/3)dτC(1tt/2t(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4wL22dτ)α/3  ×(1tt/2t(wL22+Λα/2wL22)dτ)1-(α/3)C(1tt/2t(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4wL22dτ)α/3(1+1t)1-(α/3)Climsupt/2<τ<t(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(τ)L22. Together with (37) we derive the desired average decay of the difference w=θ-θ- between the global solution θ of the original quasi-geostrophic equation (1) and the weak solution θ- of the perturbed quasi-geostrophic equation (4): (40)limt1tt/2tw(τ)L22dτ=0.

Now it remains to prove Lemma 8.

Proof of Lemma <xref ref-type="statement" rid="lem3.1">8</xref>.

For convenience, the three terms of the left hand side of (33) are denoted by I, J, and K, respectively. For I, we have (41)I=st(τw+κΛαw,φε)dτ=stddτ(2wφεdx)dτ+st2(-wτφε+κwΛαφε)dxdτ=2(wφε)(t)dx-2(wφε)(s)dx+st2w(τ)(-τφε+κΛαφε)(τ)dxdτ=2(wφε)(t)dx-2(wφε)(s)dx-st2stτηε(τ-σ)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2×e-κ(2t-τ-σ)Λαw(σ)w(τ)dσdxdτ=I1+I2.

Applying the Fubini theorem, it is not difficult to obtain (42)limε02(wφε)(t)dx=limε02stηε(t-σ)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2e-κ(t-σ)Λα×w(σ)w(t)dσdx=122(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2w(t)w(t)dx=12(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22 and similarly (43)limε02(wφε)(s)dx=12e-κ(t-s)Λα(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(s)L22, thus we have for I1(44)limε0I1=12(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22-12e-κ(t-s)Λα(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(s)L22.

For I2 we have (45)I2=-st2stτηε(τ-σ)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2e-κ(2t-τ-σ)Λα×w(σ)w(τ)dσdxdτ=-1εst2stτη(|τ-σε|)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2×e-κ(2t-τ-σ)Λαw(σ)w(τ)dσdxdτ=1εst2stση(|τ-σε|)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2×e-κ(2t-τ-σ)Λαw(σ)w(τ)dσdxdτ=1εst2stση(|σ-τε|)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/2×e-κ(2t-τ-σ)Λαw(σ)w(τ)dσdxdτ=-I2 which implies I2=0.

Hence, combining the above inequalities, one derives the estimates of I: (46)limε0I=12(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22-12e-κ(t-s)Λα(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(s)L22.

For J, employing integrating by parts gives (47)J=st(u·θ-u-·θ-,φε)dτ=st2(u--u)·φεwdxdτ-st2u·φεwdxdτ-st2(u--u)·φεθdxdτ=:J1+J2+J3.

For J1, applying the Hölder inequality and the Gagliardo-Nirenberg inequality and (27) gives (48)J1=st2(u--u)·φεwdxdτstwL8/(4-α)φεL4/αwL8/(4-α)dτCstφεL4/αwL2Λα/2wL2dτC(sup0<τ<wL2)(stφεL4/α2dτ)1/2×(stΛα/2wL22dτ)1/2E01/2stΛα/2wL22dτ, where we have used the following estimates: (49)stφε(τ)L4/α2dτCstφε(τ)H1-(α/2)2dτ=Cst|ξ|1-(α/2)iξφ^ε(τ)L22dτCst|ξ|2-(α/2)φ^ε(τ)L22dτCst|ξ|2-αstηε(τ-σ)(1+|ξ|2)-(3-α)/2×e-κ(2t-τ-σ)|ξ|α|ξ|α/2w^(σ)dσstL22dτCststηε(τ-σ)|ξ|α/2w^(σ)dσL22dτCstΛα/2wL22dτ.

Similarly, for J2,J3, it follows that (50)J2+J3=-st2u·φεwdxdτ-st2(u--u)·φεθdxdτCstθL4/(2-α)φεL4/αwL2dτ+stwL2φεL4/αθL4/(2-α)dτCstΛα/2θL2φεL4/αwL2dτC(sup0<τ<wL2)(stΛα/2θL22dτ)1/2×(stφεL4/α2dτ)1/2E01/2(stΛα/2θL22dτ)1/2(stΛα/2wL22dτ)1/2E01/2stΛα/2θL22dτ+E01/2stΛα/2wL22dτ.

Plugging the estimates of Ji (i=1,2,3) into (47) yields (51)|J|E01/2stΛα/2θL22dτ+E01/2stΛα/2wL22dτ.

In order to estimate K, thanks to (52)stφε(τ)Hα/22dτCst|ξ|α/2φ^ε(τ)L22dτCststηε(τ-σ)(1+|ξ|2)-(3-α)/2×e-κ(2t-τ-σ)|ξ|α|ξ|α/2w^(σ)dσstηε(τ-σ)(1+|ξ|2)-(3-α)/2L22dτCststηε(τ-σ)|ξ|α/2w^(σ)dσL22dτCstΛα/2wL22dτ, together with the Hölder inequality and the Young inequality gives that (53)K=-st(g,φε)dτstgH-α/2φεHα/2dτCstgH-α/22dτ+CstΛα/2wL22dτ.

Inserting (46), (51), and (53) into (33), we obtain (54)(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(t)L22-e-κ(t-s)Λα(1+Λ2)-(3-α)/4w(s)L22|J|+|K|E01/2stΛα/2θL22dτ+(C+E01/2)stΛα/2wL22dτ+CstgH-α/22dτ which completes the proof of Lemma 8.

4. Proof of Theorem <xref ref-type="statement" rid="thm1.1">2</xref>

With the aid of the global estimates and average decay of the difference w=θ--θ between the original surface quasi-geostrophic equation (1) and the perturbed surface quasi-geostrophic equation, the proof of stability is straight forward.

The integration of (28) with respect to s on the interval ((t/2),t) gives (55)w(t)L222tt/2tw(s)L22ds+Ctt/2tstθBMOdτds. From the average decay property of w in Section 3, the first term of the right hand side of the above inequality tends to zero as t. For the second term of the right hand side, we have (56)1tt/2tstθBMOdτdsCtt/2t(τ-t2)θBMOdτCt/2tθBMOdτ, according to the regular condition on θ in Theorem 2, the second term also tends to zero as t. Hence, we derive the following stability property: (57)w(t)L20ast which completes the proof of Theorem 2.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to Professor D. Córdoba for the valuable comments and suggestions. This work is partially supported by the NNSF of China (11271019) and the NSF of Anhui Province (11040606M02), and is also financed by the 211 Project of Anhui University (KJTD002B, KJJQ005).

Pedlosky J. Geophysical Fluid Dynamics 1987 New York, NY, USA Springer Constantin P. Majda A. J. Tabak E. Formation of strong fronts in the n-D quasigeostrophic thermal active scalar Nonlinearity 1994 7 6 1495 1533 MR1304437 10.1088/0951-7715/7/6/001 Majda A. J. Tabak E. G. A two-dimensional model for quasigeostrophic flow: comparison with the two-dimensional Euler flow Physica D 1996 98 2–4 515 522 10.1016/0167-2789(96)00114-5 MR1422288 ZBL0899.76105 Temam R. Navier-Stokes Equations. Theory and Numerical Analysis 1977 Amsterdam, The Netherlands North-Holland Publishing x+500 MR0609732 Constantin P. Wu J. Behavior of solutions of 2D quasi-geostrophic equations SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 1999 30 5 937 948 10.1137/S0036141098337333 MR1709781 ZBL0957.76093 Kiselev A. Nazarov F. Volberg A. Global well-posedness for the critical 2D dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Inventiones Mathematicae 2007 167 3 445 453 10.1007/s00222-006-0020-3 MR2276260 ZBL1121.35115 Caffarelli L. A. Vasseur A. Drift diffusion equations with fractional diffusion and the quasi-geostrophic equation Annals of Mathematics 2010 171 3 1903 1930 10.4007/annals.2010.171.1903 MR2680400 ZBL1204.35063 Castro A. Córdoba D. Infinite energy solutions of the surface quasi-geostrophic equation Advances in Mathematics 2010 225 4 1820 1829 10.1016/j.aim.2010.04.018 MR2680191 ZBL1205.35219 Chen Q. Miao C. Zhang Z. A new Bernstein's inequality and the 2D dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Communications in Mathematical Physics 2007 271 3 821 838 10.1007/s00220-007-0193-7 MR2291797 ZBL1142.35069 Córdoba A. Córdoba D. A maximum principle applied to quasi-geostrophic equations Communications in Mathematical Physics 2004 249 3 511 528 10.1007/s00220-004-1055-1 MR2084005 ZBL02158321 Constantin P. Wu J. Hölder continuity of solutions of supercritical dissipative hydrodynamic transport equations Annales de l'Institut Henri Poincaré (C) 2009 26 1 159 180 10.1016/j.anihpc.2007.10.002 MR2483817 ZBL1163.76010 Dong B.-Q. Chen Z.-M. On the weak-strong uniqueness of the dissipative surface quasi-geostrophic equation Nonlinearity 2012 25 5 1513 1524 10.1088/0951-7715/25/5/1513 MR2921018 ZBL1241.35158 Dong H. Pavlović N. Regularity criteria for the dissipative quasi-geostrophic equations in Hölder spaces Communications in Mathematical Physics 2009 290 3 801 812 10.1007/s00220-009-0756-x MR2525640 ZBL1185.35187 Ju N. Existence and uniqueness of the solution to the dissipative 2D quasi-geostrophic equations in the Sobolev space Communications in Mathematical Physics 2004 251 2 365 376 10.1007/s00220-004-1062-2 MR2100059 ZBL1106.35061 Wang H. Zhang Z. A frequency localized maximum principle applied to the 2D quasi-geostrophic equation Communications in Mathematical Physics 2011 301 1 105 129 10.1007/s00220-010-1144-2 MR2753672 ZBL1248.35211 Wu J. Global solutions of the 2D dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation in Besov spaces SIAM Journal on Mathematical Analysis 2005 36 3 1014 1030 10.1137/S0036141003435576 MR2111923 Chae D. Constantin P. Wu J. Inviscid models generalizing the two-dimensional Euler and the surface quasi-geostrophic equations Archive for Rational Mechanics and Analysis 2011 202 1 35 62 10.1007/s00205-011-0411-5 MR2835862 ZBL1266.76010 Chae D. Constantin P. Córdoba D. Gancedo F. Wu J. Generalized surface quasi-geostrophic equations with singular velocities Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 2012 65 8 1037 1066 10.1002/cpa.21390 MR2928091 ZBL1244.35108 Fefferman C. Rodrigo J. L. Analytic sharp fronts for the surface quasi-geostrophic equation Communications in Mathematical Physics 2011 303 1 261 288 10.1007/s00220-011-1190-4 MR2775122 ZBL1228.35010 Khouider B. Titi E. S. An inviscid regularization for the surface quasi-geostrophic equation Communications on Pure and Applied Mathematics 2008 61 10 1331 1346 10.1002/cpa.20218 MR2436184 ZBL1149.35018 Miao C. Xue L. Global well-posedness for a modified critical dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Journal of Differential Equations 2012 252 1 792 818 10.1016/j.jde.2011.08.018 MR2852227 ZBL05986533 Dong B.-Q. Liu Q. Asymptotic profile of solutions to the two-dimensional dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Science China. Mathematics 2010 53 10 2733 2748 10.1007/s11425-010-4098-0 MR2728275 ZBL1214.35049 Niche C. J. Schonbek M. E. Decay of weak solutions to the 2D dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Communications in Mathematical Physics 2007 276 1 93 115 10.1007/s00220-007-0327-y MR2342289 ZBL1194.76040 Zhou Y. Decay rate of higher order derivatives for solutions to the 2-D dissipative quasi-geostrophic flows Discrete and Continuous Dynamical Systems 2006 14 3 525 532 10.3934/dcds.2006.14.525 MR2171725 ZBL1185.35203 Zhou Y. Asymptotic behaviour of the solutions to the 2D dissipative quasi-geostrophic flows Nonlinearity 2008 21 9 2061 2071 10.1088/0951-7715/21/9/008 MR2430660 ZBL1186.35170 Chae D. Lee J. Global well-posedness in the super-critical dissipative quasi-geostrophic equations Communications in Mathematical Physics 2003 233 2 297 311 MR1962043 ZBL1019.86002 Chen Z.-M. Price W. G. Stability and instability analyses of the dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Nonlinearity 2008 21 4 765 782 10.1088/0951-7715/21/4/006 MR2399824 ZBL1133.76024 Dong B.-Q. Chen Z.-M. Asymptotic stability of the critical and super-critical dissipative quasi-geostrophic equation Nonlinearity 2006 19 12 2919 2928 10.1088/0951-7715/19/12/011 MR2273766 ZBL1109.76063 Dong B.-Q. Chen Z.-M. A remark on regularity criterion for the dissipative quasi-geostrophic equations Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 2007 329 2 1212 1217 10.1016/j.jmaa.2006.07.054 MR2296919 ZBL1154.76339 Kozono H. Asymptotic stability of large solutions with large perturbation to the Navier-Stokes equations Journal of Functional Analysis 2000 176 2 153 197 10.1006/jfan.2000.3625 MR1784412 ZBL0970.35106 Zhang L. New results of general n-dimensional incompressible Navier-Stokes equations Journal of Differential Equations 2008 245 11 3470 3502 10.1016/j.jde.2008.04.016 MR2460031 Zhou Y. Asymptotic stability for the 3D Navier-Stokes equations Communications in Partial Differential Equations 2005 30 1–3 323 333 10.1081/PDE-200037770 MR2131057 ZBL1142.35548 Marchand F. Weak-strong uniqueness criteria for the critical quasi-geostrophic equation Physica D 2008 237 10–12 1346 1351 10.1016/j.physd.2008.03.011 MR2454593 ZBL1143.76339 Pazy A. Semigroups of Linear Operators and Applications to Partial Differential Equations 1983 44 New York, NY, USA Springer viii+279 Applied Mathematical Sciences 10.1007/978-1-4612-5561-1 MR710486