alphaFeedback

WorksPhysics and Astronomy

An exact unstable mode of self-similar Yang–Mills solutionsin 5+1 dimensions

AI contributions
Not recorded for this paper
View details

Abstract

Self-similar solutions play an important role in the formation of singularities in the Yang–Mills equations. In five space dimensions, these equations admit infinitely many self-similar solutions with an increasing number of unstable modes. It was observed numerically that all excited profiles share the least unstable eigenvalue λ=5λ=5. We explain this remarkable spectral property by an elementary construction of the corresponding eigenfunction in terms of the profile.

Self-similar solutions

The spherically symmetric Yang–Mills equation in five space dimensions is

wtt=wrr+2rwr+3r2w(1−w2).(1)w_{tt}=w_{rr}+\frac{2}{r}w_r+\frac{3}{r^2}w(1-w^2). \tag*{(1)}

In terms of the similarity coordinates

y=rT−t,τ=−log⁡(T−t),y=\frac{r}{T-t},\qquad\tau=-\log(T-t),

where TT is the blowup time, equation (1) becomes

wττ+wτ+2ywτy=(1−y2)wyy+(2y−2y)wy+3y2w(1−w2).(2)w_{\tau\tau}+w_\tau+2yw_{\tau y}=(1-y^2)w_{yy}+\left(\frac{2}{y}-2y\right)w_y+\frac{3}{y^2}w(1-w^2). \tag*{(2)}

By definition, self-similar solutions are independent of τ\tau: w(τ,y)=u(y)w(\tau,y)=u(y). The profile uu therefore satisfies

(1−y2)u′′+(2y−2y)u′+3y2u(1−u2)=0,0<y<1.(3)(1-y^2)u''+\left(\frac{2}{y}-2y\right)u'+\frac{3}{y^2}u(1-u^2)=0,\qquad0<y<1. \tag*{(3)}

It was proved in [1] that there exist infinitely many smooth profiles unu_n, n=0,1,2,…n=0,1,2,\ldots, where unu_n has exactly nn zeros on (0,1)(0,1). Their endpoint expansions are

un(y)=1−any2+O(y4),y→0,(4)u_n(y)=1-a_ny^2+O(y^4),\qquad y\to0, \tag*{(4)}
un(y)=bn(1−y)+O((1−y)2),y→1,(5)u_n(y)=b_n(1-y)+O((1-y)^2),\qquad y\to1, \tag*{(5)}

corresponding to the regular center and the similarity horizon, respectively. The fundamental profile, found explicitly in [1], is

u0(y)=1−y21+35y2.(6)u_0(y)=\frac{1-y^2}{1+\frac{3}{5}y^2}. \tag*{(6)}

Numerical computations in [2] indicated that the fundamental profile u0u_0 acts as a universal attractor for generic blowup, while the first excited profile u1u_1 governs the threshold between dispersion and blowup. The nonlinear asymptotic stability of u0u_0 under small equivariant perturbations was subsequently established in [3, 4].

Further numerical computations revealed a remarkable feature: the least unstable mode has the same eigenvalue λ=5\lambda= 5 for every excited profile [1], raising the question of its structural origin. In this note we resolve this little spectral puzzle by constructing the corresponding eigenfunction explicitly.

Linearized eigenvalue problem

Substituting w(τ,y)=un(y)+εeλτv(y)w(\tau,y)=u_n(y)+\varepsilon e^{\lambda\tau}v(y) into (2) and retaining terms linear in ε\varepsilon yields the eigenvalue equation

(1−y2)v′′+(2y−2(λ+1)y)v′+[3(1−3un2)y2−λ(λ+1)]v=0.(7)(1-y^2)v''+\left(\frac{2}{y}-2(\lambda+1)y\right)v'+\left[\frac{3(1-3u_n^2)}{y^2}-\lambda(\lambda+1)\right]v=0. \tag*{(7)}

We seek eigenfunctions v∈C∞([0,1])v\in C^\infty([0,1]).

One such eigenfunction arises from differentiating the family of self-similar solutions with respect to TT:

∂Tun(rT−t)=−eτyun′(y),\partial_Tu_n\left(\frac{r}{T-t}\right)=-e^\tau y u_n'(y),

which gives the gauge mode

λ=1,vg(n)(y)=−yun′(y).(8)\lambda=1,\qquad v_g^{(n)}(y)=-yu_n'(y). \tag*{(8)}

It changes only the blowup time and is therefore not counted as a physical instability.

Self-adjoint formulation

For the spectral analysis and the exact-mode construction, it is convenient to introduce the reciprocal coordinate

x=1y,U(x)=u(y),V(x)=v(y),1≤x<∞.x=\frac{1}{y},\qquad U(x)=u(y),\qquad V(x)=v(y),\qquad1\le x<\infty.

In these variables, equation (3) becomes

(x2−1)U′′+3U(1−U2)=0.(9)(x^2-1)U''+3U(1-U^2)=0. \tag*{(9)}

At the similarity horizon x=1x=1 and the center x=∞x=\infty, the profiles have the endpoint expansions

Un(x)=bn(x−1)−3bn4(x−1)2+5bn16(x−1)3+O((x−1)4),x→1,(10)U_n(x)=b_n(x-1)-\frac{3b_n}{4}(x-1)^2+\frac{5b_n}{16}(x-1)^3+O((x-1)^4),\qquad x\to1, \tag*{(10)}
Un(x)=1−anx2+O(x−4),x→∞.(11)U_n(x)=1-\frac{a_n}{x^2}+O(x^{-4}),\qquad x\to\infty. \tag*{(11)}

The fundamental profile (6) becomes

U0(x)=x2−1x2+35.(12)U_0(x)=\frac{x^2-1}{x^2+\frac{3}{5}}. \tag*{(12)}

Equation (7) is transformed into

pV′′+2λxV′+[3(1−3Un2)−λ(λ+1)x2]V=0,p=x2−1.(13)pV''+\frac{2\lambda}{x}V'+\left[3(1-3U_n^2)-\frac{\lambda(\lambda+1)}{x^2}\right]V=0,\qquad p=x^2-1. \tag*{(13)}

Substituting

V=x1−λ2pλ2ϕ(14)V=x^{\frac{1-\lambda}{2}}p^{\frac{\lambda}{2}}\phi \tag*{(14)}

into (13) we obtain the self-adjoint Sturm–Liouville equation for ϕ∈L2((1,∞),p−1 dx)\phi\in L^2((1,\infty),p^{-1}\,dx):

−(pϕ′)′−3(1−3Un2)ϕ=Ep−1ϕ,E=−(λ−1)2.(15)-(p\phi')'-3(1-3U_n^2)\phi=Ep^{-1}\phi,\qquad E=-(\lambda-1)^2. \tag*{(15)}

Hereafter we refer to EE as the energy and to λ\lambda as the similarity eigenvalue. Although the transformation (14) relates the two differential equations for every λ\lambda, it identifies smooth similarity modes with square-integrable Sturm–Liouville eigenfunctions only when Re⁡(λ)>1\operatorname{Re}(\lambda)>1. To see this, consider a smooth mode with V(1)≠0V(1)\ne0. Near x=1x=1, its transform satisfies

ϕ∼C(x−1)(λ−1)/2,\phi\sim C(x-1)^{(\lambda-1)/2},

which is square integrable with weight p−1p^{-1} precisely for Re⁡(λ)>1\operatorname{Re}(\lambda)>1. In that half-plane the second branch is not square integrable. At infinity, the regular branch V=O(x−2)V=O(x^{-2}) corresponds to ϕ=O(x−3)\phi=O(x^{-3}), whereas the singular branch V∼Cx3V\sim Cx^3 corresponds to ϕ∼Cx2\phi\sim Cx^2. Only the regular branch is square integrable with weight p−1p^{-1} at infinity.

Thus, for Re⁡(λ)>1\operatorname{Re}(\lambda)>1, the similarity eigenmodes of (13) are in one-to-one correspondence with the eigenfunctions of the problem (15), allowing us to apply Sturm–Liouville theory. In particular, self-adjointness implies that EE is real and hence that λ\lambda is real. The analogous correspondence for wave maps is discussed in [5]. This equivalence does not apply to similarity modes with Re⁡(λ)<1\operatorname{Re}(\lambda)<1.

The gauge mode (8) becomes Vg(n)(x)=xUn′(x)V_g^{(n)}(x)=xU_n'(x), which under (14) gives the zero-energy resonance (a bounded but not square-integrable solution)

ϕg(n)=Un′.\phi_g^{(n)}=U_n'.

From the proof of existence in [1], it follows that the profile UnU_n and its derivative each have exactly nn interior zeros, which interlace. Therefore, the Sturm oscillation theorem implies that the spectral problem (15) has exactly nn negative energy levels. We order them as

0>E1(n)>⋯>En(n),(16)0>E_1^{(n)}>\cdots>E_n^{(n)}, \tag*{(16)}

where Ek(n)E_k^{(n)}, k=1,…,nk=1,\ldots,n, denote the negative energy levels for the profile UnU_n. The corresponding eigenfunctions are denoted by ϕk(n)(x)\phi_k^{(n)}(x). The associated unstable similarity eigenvalues are ordered as

1<λ1(n)<⋯<λn(n),(17)1<\lambda_1^{(n)}<\cdots<\lambda_n^{(n)}, \tag*{(17)}

with the corresponding eigenfunctions denoted by Vk(n)(x)=vk(n)(y)V_k^{(n)}(x)=v_k^{(n)}(y).

Numerical computations and asymptotic analysis in [1] indicated that the first eigenvalue in this sequence is independent of the profile:

λ1(n)=5for every n≥1.\lambda_1^{(n)}=5\qquad\text{for every }n\ge1.

Equivalently, every excited profile shares the same highest negative energy level E1(n)=−16E_1^{(n)}=-16, despite the dependence of the Sturm–Liouville operator on UnU_n. We now explain this spectral feature by constructing the corresponding eigenfunction explicitly and proving that it occupies this position in the spectrum.

Construction of the exact mode

The same energy level for every excited profile suggests seeking a corresponding eigenfunction given by a universal first-order expression in the profile (here we suppress the index nn on UnU_n):

ϕ=A(x)U′+B(x)U,(18)\phi=A(x)U^{\prime}+B(x)U, \tag*{(18)}

where AA and BB are independent of the particular profile UU. The gauge mode ϕg=U′\phi_g=U^{\prime} is the simplest example of such an expression. We now seek a nonzero energy for which an ansatz of this form solves the linearized equation for every profile.

Substituting the ansatz (18) into equation (15) and using the profile equation (9) and its derivative to eliminate U′′U^{\prime\prime} and U′′′U^{\prime\prime\prime}, we obtain

(pA′′+p′A′+2pB′+p′B+EpA)U′+(pB′′+p′B′+EpB−6A′)U+6(A′−B)U3=0.(19)\left(pA^{\prime\prime}+p^{\prime}A^{\prime}+2pB^{\prime}+p^{\prime}B+\frac{E}{p}A\right)U^{\prime}+\left(pB^{\prime\prime}+p^{\prime}B^{\prime}+\frac{E}{p}B-6A^{\prime}\right)U+6(A^{\prime}-B)U^{3}=0. \tag*{(19)}

A sufficient condition for this expression to vanish for every profile is that the three coefficients vanish separately. Setting the coefficient of the cubic term to zero gives B=A′B=A^{\prime}, so the ansatz (18) takes the total-derivative form ϕ=(AU)′\phi=(AU)^{\prime}, while the remaining coefficient equations reduce to

3pA′′+2p′A′+EpA=0,pA′′′+p′A′′+(Ep−6)A′=0.(20)3pA^{\prime\prime}+2p^{\prime}A^{\prime}+\frac{E}{p}A=0,\qquad pA^{\prime\prime\prime}+p^{\prime}A^{\prime\prime}+\left(\frac{E}{p}-6\right)A^{\prime}=0. \tag*{(20)}

Taking AA to be constant recovers the gauge mode with E=0E=0. To find a nonconstant solution, we seek AA bounded at infinity and allow a simple pole at x=1x=1, where every profile vanishes. The simplest rational ansatz in p=x2−1p=x^{2}-1 with these properties is

A=a+bp,b≠0.A=a+\frac{b}{p},\qquad b\ne0.

Substituting this into (20) and clearing denominators gives

(Ea+10b)p+(E+16)b=0,2bx(E+16)=0.(Ea+10b)p+(E+16)b=0,\qquad2bx(E+16)=0.

Since b≠0b\ne0, the second equation yields E=−16E=-16, and then the first one gives a=5b/8a=5b/8. Normalizing a=1a=1, we obtain

A=1+85p=5x2+35(x2−1)=1U0.A=1+\frac{8}{5p}=\frac{5x^{2}+3}{5(x^{2}-1)}=\frac{1}{U_0}.

Consequently, for every excited profile UnU_n, n≥1n\ge1, the first-order ansatz yields the mode, provisionally denoted by ϕn\phi_n,

ϕn=(UnU0)′(21)\boxed{\phi_n=\left(\frac{U_n}{U_0}\right)^{\prime}} \tag*{(21)}

which satisfies the eigenvalue equation (15) with E=−16E=-16, corresponding to λ=5\lambda=5.

It remains to verify the behavior of ϕn\phi_n at the endpoints. The endpoint expansions (10) and (11) give

ϕn=O((x−1)2) as x→1,ϕn=O(x−3) as x→∞.\phi_n=O\left((x-1)^2\right)\ \text{as }x\to1,\qquad\phi_n=O(x^{-3})\ \text{as }x\to\infty.

Hence ϕn∈L2((1,∞),p−1 dx)\phi_n\in L^2((1,\infty),p^{-1}\,dx), completing the proof that ϕn\phi_n is an eigenfunction of the spectral problem (15) with energy E=−16E=-16 for every $n\ge 1.

To locate this energy level in the spectrum, let us count the nodes of ϕn\phi_n. Since U0>0U_0 > 0 on (1,∞)(1,\infty), the quotient Un/U0U_n/U_0 has exactly nn zeros. Therefore, Rolle’s theorem gives at least n−1n-1 distinct interior zeros of ϕn\phi_n. On the other hand, the spectral problem (15) has exactly nn negative energy levels, so the Sturm oscillation theorem allows at most n−1n-1 interior zeros for an eigenfunction of negative energy. Thus ϕn\phi_n has exactly n−1n-1 nodes, and E=−16E=-16 is the highest negative energy level. In the notation (16), this reads

E1(n)=−16,ϕ1(n)(x)=(Un(x)U0(x))′.(22)E_1^{(n)}=-16,\qquad\phi_1^{(n)}(x)=\left(\frac{U_n(x)}{U_0(x)}\right)'. \tag*{(22)}

The corresponding similarity eigenfunction with λ1(n)=5\lambda_1^{(n)}=5, expressed in the original coordinate yy, is

v1(n)(y)=−y5(1−y2)4[(5+3y2)(1−y2)un′(y)+16yun(y)].(23)v_1^{(n)}(y)=-\frac{y}{5(1-y^2)^4}\left[(5+3y^2)(1-y^2)u_n'(y)+16yu_n(y)\right]. \tag*{(23)}

An underlying differential identity

It is instructive to recast the preceding calculation without imposing the profile equation. Writing

E[U]=pU′′+3U(1−U2),LU,E=p∂x2+p′∂x+3−9U2+Ep,\mathcal{E}[U]=pU''+3U(1-U^2),\qquad\mathcal{L}_{U,E}=p\partial_x^2+p'\partial_x+3-9U^2+\frac{E}{p},

we obtain, for arbitrary sufficiently smooth functions AA and UU,

LU,E[(AU)′]=(A∂x+3A′)E[U]+(3pA′′+2p′A′+EpA)U′+(pA′′′+p′A′′+(Ep−6)A′)U.\mathcal{L}_{U,E}[(AU)']=(A\partial_x+3A')\mathcal{E}[U] +\left(3pA''+2p'A'+\frac{E}{p}A\right)U' +\left(pA'''+p'A''+\left(\frac{E}{p}-6\right)A'\right)U.

With A=U0−1A=U_0^{-1} and E=−16E=-16, the last two terms vanish by (20), yielding the identity

LU,−16[(UU0)′]=U0−1(∂x−3U0′U0)E[U],(24)\mathcal{L}_{U,-16}\left[\left(\frac{U}{U_0}\right)'\right] =U_0^{-1}\left(\partial_x-\frac{3U_0'}{U_0}\right)\mathcal{E}[U], \tag*{(24)}

which is valid for any sufficiently smooth function U(x)U(x). In particular, for every excited profile UnU_n, the identity shows that (Un/U0)′(U_n/U_0)' satisfies the eigenvalue equation with E=−16E=-16, recovering the exact mode constructed above.

Comparison with reflected gauge modes in d=7d=7 and d=9d=9.

In dimension dd, the transformed spectral equation depends on λ\lambda through

E=−(λ−d−32)2E=-\left(\lambda-\frac{d-3}{2}\right)^2

and is therefore invariant under λ↦d−3−λ\lambda\mapsto d-3-\lambda. Consequently, the gauge mode vg=−yu′v_g=-yu' with λ=1\lambda=1 has the formal reflected partner

λref=d−4,vref=−yu′(1−y2)d−52.\lambda_{\mathrm{ref}}=d-4,\qquad v_{\mathrm{ref}}=-\frac{yu'}{(1-y^2)^{\frac{d-5}{2}}}.

For smooth profiles in d=7d=7 and 99, the behavior u(y)∼b(1−y)d−32u(y)\sim b(1-y)^{\frac{d-3}{2}} makes the apparent singularity removable. The reflection therefore yields admissible exact modes with λ=3\lambda=3 and λ=5\lambda=5, respectively. Clearly, these modes can also be readily recovered from the first-order ansatz (18), which in these cases reduces to the derivative term alone (B=0B=0). However, for d=5d=5, the case considered here, the reflection λ↦2−λ\lambda\mapsto2-\lambda fixes the gauge eigenvalue λ=1\lambda=1 and therefore produces no new mode.

References

  1. [1]P. Bizón, Formation of singularities in Yang–Mills equations, Acta Phys. Pol. B 33, 1893–1922 (2002).
  2. [2]P. Bizón, Z. Tabor, On blowup of Yang–Mills fields, Phys. Rev. D 64, 121701(R) (2001).DOI
  3. [3]R. Donninger, Stable self-similar blowup in energy supercritical Yang–Mills theory, Math. Z. 278, 1005–1032 (2014).
  4. [4]O. Costin, R. Donninger, I. Glogić, M. Huang, On the stability of self-similar solutions to nonlinear wave equations, Commun. Math. Phys. 343, 299–310 (2016).arxiv.org/abs/1502.06280
  5. [5]P. Biernat, P. Bizón, M. Maliborski, Threshold for blowup for equivariant wave maps in higher dimensions, Nonlinearity 30, 1513–1522 (2017).DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_aewj26bj
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 12

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Physics and Astronomy

Not recorded for this paper · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents