Abstract
A compressible, viscous and heat conducting fluid is confined between two parallel plates maintained at a constant temperature and subject to a strong stratification due to the gravitational force. We consider the asymptotic limit, where the Mach number and the Froude number are of the same order proportional to a small parameter. We show the limit problem can be identified with Majda’s model of layered “stack-of-pancake” flow.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Consider the motion of a compressible viscous and heat conducting fluid confined between two parallel plates. For simplicity, we suppose the motion is space–periodic with respect to the horizontal variable. Consequently, the spatial domain \(\Omega \) may be identified with
The time evolution of the fluid mass density \(\varrho = \varrho (t,x)\), the absolute temperature \(\vartheta = \vartheta (t,x)\), and the velocity \(\textbf{u}= \textbf{u}(t,x)\) is governed by the Navier–Stokes–Fourier (NSF) system:
supplemented with the Dirichlet boundary conditions
The viscous stress tensor is given by Newton’s rheological law
and the internal energy flux by Fourier’s law
The quantity \(s = s(\varrho , \vartheta )\) in (1.3) is the entropy of the system, related to the pressure \(p = p(\varrho , \vartheta )\) and the internal energy \(e = e(\varrho , \vartheta )\) through Gibbs’ equation
The potential G represents the effect of gravitation. The Mach number \(\textrm{Ma} = {\varepsilon }\) and the Froude number \(\textrm{Fr} = {\varepsilon }\) are both proportional to a small parameter. If \({\varepsilon }> 0\) is small, the fluid is almost incompressible and strongly stratified, cf. Klein et al. [11]. Our goal is to identify the limit problem for \({\varepsilon }\rightarrow 0\).
1.1 Asymptotic Limit
In accordance with the scaling of (1.2), (1.3), the zero–th order terms in the asymptotic limit are determined by the stationary (static) problem
Applying \(\textbf{curl}\) operator to identity (1.9), we successively deduce
and
where we have anticipated that the pressure also depends non-trivially on the temperature \(\vartheta \) and is such that \(\frac{\partial p(\varrho , \vartheta )}{\partial \vartheta } \ne 0\). Thus for the static problem (1.9) to be solvable, both \(\nabla _x\varrho \) and \(\nabla _x\vartheta \) must be parallel to \(\nabla _xG\). This fact imposes certain restrictions on the distribution of the boundary temperature \(\vartheta _B\). In particular, the motion in an inclined layer studied by Daniels et al. [5] does not admit any static solution. Accordingly, we focus on the particular case
Fixing the temperature profile \(\vartheta _B = \Theta (x_3)\) to comply with the boundary conditions (1.10), we may recover \(\varrho = r(x_3)\) as a solution of the ODE
Needless to say, such a problem may admit infinitely many solutions.
To simplify, we focus on the case \(\Theta _\textrm{bott} = \Theta _\textrm{up} > 0\). Accordingly, we consider the reference temperature profile \(\Theta = \Theta _\textrm{bott} = \Theta _\textrm{up}\) - a positive constant. Then it follows from (1.11) that the static density profile \(r = r(x_3)\) must be non–constant as long as \(g \ne 0\). Anticipating the asymptotic limit
we deduce from the equation of continuity (1.1)
Applying (formally) the same argument to the entropy balance (1.3) we get
Equations (1.12), (1.13) are compatible only if
As r depends only on the vertical \(x_3\)-variable, this yields
In view of the previous arguments, the limit fluid motion exhibits the “stack of pancakes structure” described in Chapter 6 of Majda’s book [14]. Specifically, \(\textbf{U}= [\textbf{U}_h, 0]\), and
Here and hereafter, the subscript h refers to the horizontal variable \(x_h = (x_1,x_2)\), \(\nabla _h =[\partial _{x_1}, \partial _{x_2}]\), \(\textrm{div}_h \textbf{v} = \nabla _h \cdot \textbf{v}\), \(\Delta _h = \textrm{div}_h \nabla _h\). The fluid motion is purely horizontal, the coupling between different layers only through the vertical component of the viscous stress.
To the best of our knowledge, there is no rigorous justification of the system (1.15)–(1.17) available in the literature except the inviscid case discussed in [7]. It is worth noting that a similar problem for the barotropic Navier–Stokes system gives rise to a different limit, namely the so–called anelastic approximation, see Masmoudi [15] or Feireisl et al. [8]. Furthermore, as observed in [3], the related case of a low stratification with \({\textrm{Ma}}={\varepsilon }\) and \({\textrm{Fr}} = \sqrt{{\varepsilon }}\) leads to a limiting system of Oberbeck–Boussinesq type with non-local boundary conditions for the temperature.
1.2 The Strategy of the Convergence Proof
We start with the concept of weak solutions for the NSF system with Dirichlet boundary conditions introduced in [4]. In particular, we recall the ballistic energy and the associated relative energy inequality in Sect. 2. Next, we introduce the concept of strong solutions to Majda’s system in Sect. 3. In Sect. 4, we state our main result.
The strategy is of type “weak” \(\rightarrow \) “strong”, meaning the strong solution of the target system is used as a “test function” in the relative energy inequality associated to the primitive system. In Sect. 5, we derive the basic energy estimates that control the amplitude of the fluid velocity as well as the distance of the density and temperature profiles from their limit values independent of the scaling parameter \({\varepsilon }\). In Sect. 6, we show convergence to the target system (1.15)–(1.17) anticipating the latter admits a regular solution. This formal argument is made rigorous in Sect. 7, where global existence for Majda’s model is established. The last result may be of independent interest.
2 Weak Solutions to the Primitive NSF System
Our analysis is based on the concept of weak solutions to the NSF system introduced in [4], cf. also [10].
Definition 2.1
(Weak solution to the NSF system) We say that a trio \((\varrho , \vartheta , \textbf{u})\) is a weak solution of the NSF system (1.1)–(1.7), with the initial data
if the following holds:
-
The solution belongs to the regularity class:
$$\begin{aligned}&\varrho \in L^\infty (0,T; L^\gamma (\Omega )) \ \text{ for } \text{ some }\ \gamma> 1,\ \varrho \ge 0 \ \text{ a.a. } \text{ in }\ (0,T) \times \Omega , \nonumber \\&\textbf{u}\in L^2(0,T; W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega ; R^3)), \nonumber \\&\vartheta ^{\beta /2} ,\ \log (\vartheta ) \in L^2(0,T; W^{1,2}(\Omega )) \ \text{ for } \text{ some }\ \beta \ge 2,\ \vartheta > 0 \ \text{ a.a. } \text{ in }\ (0,T) \times \Omega , \nonumber \\&(\vartheta - \vartheta _B) \in L^2(0,T; W^{1,2}_0 (\Omega )), \end{aligned}$$(2.1)where \(\vartheta _B\) is an extension of the boundary data to the whole \(\Omega \).
-
The equation of continuity (1.1) is satisfied in the sense of distributions,
$$\begin{aligned} \int _0^T \int _{\Omega } \Big [ \varrho \partial _t \varphi + \varrho \textbf{u}\cdot \nabla _x\varphi \Big ] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t&= - \int _{\Omega } \varrho (0) \varphi (0, \cdot ) \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \end{aligned}$$(2.2)for any \(\varphi \in C^1_c([0,T) \times \overline{\Omega } )\).
-
The momentum equation (1.2) is satisfied in the sense of distributions,
$$\begin{aligned} \int _0^T&\int _{\Omega } \left[ \varrho \textbf{u}\cdot \partial _t \varvec{\varphi }+ \varrho \textbf{u}\otimes \textbf{u}: \nabla _x\varvec{\varphi }+ \frac{1}{{\varepsilon }^2} p(\varrho , \vartheta ) \textrm{div}_x\varvec{\varphi }\right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t \nonumber \\ {}&= \int _0^T \int _{\Omega } \left[ \mathbb {S}(\vartheta , \nabla _x\textbf{u}) : \nabla _x\varvec{\varphi }- \frac{1}{{\varepsilon }^{2}} \varrho \nabla _xG \cdot \varvec{\varphi }\right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t - \int _{\Omega } \varrho _0 \textbf{u}_0 \cdot \varvec{\varphi }(0, \cdot ) \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \end{aligned}$$(2.3)for any \(\varvec{\varphi }\in C^1_c([0, T) \times \Omega ; R^3)\).
-
The entropy balance (1.3) is replaced by the inequality
$$\begin{aligned}&- \int _0^T \int _{\Omega } \left[ \varrho s(\varrho , \vartheta ) \partial _t \varphi + \varrho s (\varrho ,\vartheta ) \textbf{u}\cdot \nabla _x\varphi + \frac{\textbf{q} (\vartheta , \nabla _x\vartheta )}{\vartheta } \cdot \nabla _x\varphi \right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t \nonumber \\ {}&\quad \ge \int _0^T \int _{\Omega } \frac{\varphi }{\vartheta } \left[ {\varepsilon }^2 \mathbb {S}(\vartheta , \nabla _x\textbf{u}) : \mathbb {D}_x\textbf{u}- \frac{\textbf{q} (\vartheta , \nabla _x\vartheta ) \cdot \nabla _x\vartheta }{\vartheta } \right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t + \int _{\Omega } \varrho _0 s(\varrho _0, \vartheta _0) \varphi (0, \cdot ) \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \end{aligned}$$(2.4)for any \(\varphi \in C^1_c([0, T) \times \Omega )\), \(\varphi \ge 0\), where \(\mathbb {D}_x\textbf{u}= \frac{1}{2} ( \nabla _x\textbf{u}+ \nabla _x^t \textbf{u})\) is the symmetric gradient.
-
The ballistic energy balance
$$\begin{aligned}&- \int _0^T \partial _t \psi \int _{\Omega } \left[ {\varepsilon }^2 \frac{1}{2} \varrho |\textbf{u}|^2 + \varrho e(\varrho , \vartheta ) - \tilde{\vartheta }\varrho s(\varrho , \vartheta ) \right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t \nonumber \\ {}&\quad \quad + \int _0^T \psi \int _{\Omega } \frac{\tilde{\vartheta }}{\vartheta } \left[ {\varepsilon }^2 \mathbb {S}(\vartheta , \nabla _x\textbf{u}): \mathbb {D}_x\textbf{u}- \frac{\textbf{q}(\vartheta , \nabla _x\vartheta ) \cdot \nabla _x\vartheta }{\vartheta } \right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t \nonumber \\ {}&\quad \le \int _0^T \psi \int _{\Omega } \left[ \varrho \textbf{u}\cdot \nabla _xG - \varrho s(\varrho , \vartheta ) \partial _t \tilde{\vartheta }- \varrho s(\varrho , \vartheta ) \textbf{u}\cdot \nabla _x\tilde{\vartheta }- \frac{\textbf{q}(\vartheta , \nabla _x\vartheta )}{\vartheta } \cdot \nabla _x\tilde{\vartheta }\right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \,\textrm{d} t \nonumber \\ {}&\quad \quad + \psi (0) \int _{\Omega } \left[ \frac{1}{2} {\varepsilon }^2 \varrho _0 |\textbf{u}_0|^2 + \varrho _0 e(\varrho _0, \vartheta _0) - \tilde{\vartheta }(0, \cdot ) \varrho _0 s(\varrho _0, \vartheta _0) \right] \ \,\textrm{d} {x} \end{aligned}$$(2.5)holds for any \(\psi \in C^1_c ([0, T))\), \(\psi \ge 0\), and any \(\tilde{\vartheta }\in C^1([0, T) \times \overline{\Omega })\),
$$\begin{aligned} \tilde{\vartheta }> 0,\ \tilde{\vartheta }|_{\partial \Omega } = \vartheta _B. \end{aligned}$$
2.1 Relative Energy Inequality
In addition to Gibbs’ equation (1.8), we impose the hypothesis of thermodynamic stability written in the form
Next, following [4], we introduce the scaled relative energy
Now, the hypothesis of thermodynamic stability (2.6) can be equivalently rephrased as (strict) convexity of the total energy expressed with respect to the conservative entropy variables
whereas the relative energy can be written as
Finally, as observed in [4], any weak solution in the sense of Definition 2.1 satisfies the relative energy inequality
for a.a. \(\tau > 0\) and any trio of continuously differentiable functions \((\tilde{\varrho }, \tilde{\vartheta }, {\tilde{\textbf{u}}})\) satisfying
2.2 Constitutive Relations
The existence theory developed in [4] is conditioned by certain restrictions imposed on the constitutive relations (state equations) similar to those introduced in the monograph [9, Chapters 1,2]. Specifically, the equation of state reads
where \(p_\textrm{m}\) is the pressure of a general monoatomic gas,
enhanced by the radiation pressure
Accordingly, the internal energy reads
Moreover, using several physical principles it was shown in [9, Chapter 1]:
-
Gibbs’ relation together with (2.9) yield
$$\begin{aligned} p_\textrm{m} (\varrho , \vartheta ) = \vartheta ^{\frac{5}{2}} P \left( \frac{\varrho }{\vartheta ^{\frac{3}{2}} } \right) \end{aligned}$$for a certain \(P \in C^1[0,\infty )\). Consequently,
$$\begin{aligned} p(\varrho , \vartheta ) = \vartheta ^{\frac{5}{2}} P \left( \frac{\varrho }{\vartheta ^{\frac{3}{2}} } \right) + \frac{a}{3} \vartheta ^4,\quad e(\varrho , \vartheta ) = \frac{3}{2} \frac{\vartheta ^{\frac{5}{2}} }{\varrho } P \left( \frac{\varrho }{\vartheta ^{\frac{3}{2}} } \right) + \frac{a}{\varrho } \vartheta ^4, \quad a > 0. \end{aligned}$$(2.10) -
Hypothesis of thermodynamic stability (2.6) expressed in terms of P gives rise to
$$\begin{aligned} P(0) = 0,\ P'(Z)> 0 \quad \text{ for }\quad Z \ge 0,\quad 0 < \frac{ \frac{5}{3} P(Z) - P'(Z) Z }{Z} \le c \quad \text{ for }\quad Z > 0. \end{aligned}$$(2.11)In particular, the function \(Z \mapsto P(Z)/ Z^{\frac{5}{3}}\) is decreasing, and we suppose
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{Z \rightarrow \infty } \frac{ P(Z) }{Z^{\frac{5}{3}}} = p_\infty > 0. \end{aligned}$$(2.12) -
Accordingly, the associated entropy takes the form
$$\begin{aligned} s(\varrho , \vartheta ) = s_\textrm{m}(\varrho , \vartheta ) + s_\textrm{rad}(\varrho , \vartheta ),\quad s_\textrm{m} (\varrho , \vartheta ) = \mathcal {S} \left( \frac{\varrho }{\vartheta ^{\frac{3}{2}} } \right) ,\quad s_\textrm{rad}(\varrho , \vartheta ) = \frac{4a}{3} \frac{\vartheta ^3}{\varrho }, \end{aligned}$$(2.13)where
$$\begin{aligned} \mathcal {S}'(Z) = -\frac{3}{2} \frac{ \frac{5}{3} P(Z) - P'(Z) Z }{Z^2} < 0. \end{aligned}$$(2.14)In addition, we impose the Third law of thermodynamics, cf. Belgiorno [1, 2], requiring the entropy to vanish when the absolute temperature approaches zero,
$$\begin{aligned} \lim _{Z \rightarrow \infty } \mathcal {S}(Z) = 0. \end{aligned}$$(2.15)
Finally, we suppose the transport coefficients are continuously differentiable functions satisfying
As a consequence of the above hypotheses, we get the following estimates:
see [9, Chapter 3, Section 3.2].
3 Strong Solutions to Majda’s System
Problem (1.16)–(1.17) shares many common features with the \(2d-\)incompressible Navier–Stokes system solved in the celebrated work by Ladyženskaja [12, 13]. Indeed, we show that problem (1.16)–(1.17), endowed with the boundary conditions
is globally well posed in the framework of Sobolev spaces \(W^{2,p}\) with \(p > 1\) large enough. We report the following result that may be of independent interest.
Theorem 3.1
(Global existence for Majda’s system) Let \(\Theta > 0\) be given. Suppose that
Let the initial data \(\textbf{U}_{0,h}\) belong to the class
for all \(1 \le q < \infty \).
Then the system (1.16)–(1.17), with the boundary conditions (3.1) and the initial condition (3.3), admits a strong solution \(\textbf{U}_h\) in \((0,T) \times \Omega \), unique in the class
for any \(1 \le p < \infty \).
Remark 3.2
To avoid any misunderstanding we emphasize that by
for all \(1 \le q < \infty \) we mean
Similarly,
for all finite \(1 \le p < \infty \) means
4 Main Result
Having collected the necessary preliminary material, we are ready to state our main result.
Theorem 4.1
(Singular limit) Let the thermodynamic functions p, e, and s as well as the transport coefficients \(\mu \), \(\lambda \), and \(\kappa \) comply with the structural hypotheses specified in Sect. 2.2. Let
and let
Let \((\varrho _{\varepsilon }, \vartheta _{\varepsilon }, \textbf{u}_{\varepsilon })_{{\varepsilon }> 0}\) be a family of weak solutions of the scaled NSF system in the sense of Definition 2.1 emanating from the initial data
where
and \(\textbf{U}_{0,h}\) belongs to the class (3.3).
Then
where \(\textbf{U}_h\) is the unique solution of Majda’s system, the existence of which is guaranteed by Theorem 3.1.
Hypothesis (4.3) corresponds to well–prepared initial data. In view of the coercivity properties of the relative energy stated in (5.1), (5.2) below, relation (4.4) implies, in particular,
as \({\varepsilon }\rightarrow 0\).
The next two sections are devoted to the proof of Theorem 4.1.
5 Uniform Bounds
In order to perform the singular limit in the NSF system we need the associated sequence of weak solutions \((\varrho _{\varepsilon }, \vartheta _{\varepsilon }, \textbf{u}_{\varepsilon })_{{\varepsilon }> 0}\) to be bounded at least in the energy space. First, we introduce the notation of [9] to distinguish between the “essential” and “residual” range of the thermostatic variables \((\varrho , \vartheta )\). Specifically, given a compact set
we introduce
As shown in [9, Chapter 5, Lemma 5.1], the relative energy enjoys the following coercivity properties:
whenever \((\tilde{\varrho }, \tilde{\vartheta }) \in \textrm{int}[K]\), where the constant C depends on K and the distance
5.1 Energy Estimates for Ill-Prepared Data
We examine a slightly more general situation than in Theorem 4.1. Let \(\Theta >0\) be constant and r the solution of the static problem
Next, we consider a family \((\varrho _{\varepsilon }, \vartheta _{\varepsilon }, \textbf{u}_{\varepsilon })_{{\varepsilon }> 0}\) emanating from ill–prepared data \((\varrho _{0,{\varepsilon }}, \vartheta _{0,{\varepsilon }}, \textbf{u}_{0, {\varepsilon }})_{{\varepsilon }> 0}\),
The relative energy inequality (2.7) yields
Moreover, in view of (4.1) and (4.2), we deduce the stationary equation
hence (5.5) reduces to
5.2 Conclusion, Uniform Bounds for Ill-Prepared Data
In view of the estimates obtained in the previous section, we deduce from (5.7) for ill–prepared initial data satisfying (5.4) the following bounds independent of the scaling parameter \({\varepsilon }\rightarrow 0\):
Next, it follows from (5.8) that the measure of the residual set shrinks to zero, specifically
In addition, we get from (5.8):
Combining (5.10), (5.11), and (5.12), we conclude
Finally, we claim the bound on the entropy flux
Indeed we have
where the former term on the right–hand side is controlled via (5.13). As for the latter, we deduce from (5.10) that
hence it is enough to check
To see (5.15) first observe that
and, in view of (5.10) and Poincaré inequality,
Consequently, (5.15) follows by interpolation.
Of course, the above uniform bound remain valid also for the well-prepared initial data considered in Theorem 4.1.
6 Convergence to the Target System
We show convergence to the regular solution \(\textbf{U}_h\) in Majda’s system claimed in Theorem 4.1. To get a lean notation, we will identify the two-dimensional velocity \(\textbf{U}_h\) with its three-dimensional counterpart \([\textbf{U}_h, 0]\). The ansatz \((\tilde{\varrho }, \tilde{\vartheta }, {\tilde{\textbf{u}}}) = (r, \Theta , \textbf{U}_h)\) in the relative energy inequality (2.7) yields
where we have used the stationary equation
Next, seeing that
we deduce
Now, in view of the uniform bounds (5.9), (5.12),
where \(\mathcal {Q}({\varepsilon })\) denotes a generic function with the property \(\mathcal {Q}({\varepsilon }) \rightarrow 0\) as \({\varepsilon }\rightarrow 0\).
Next, in view of (5.9), (5.12), we may assume
up to a suitable subsequence, where
Similarly, using the bounds (5.12), (5.13) we may perform the limit in the entropy inequality (2.4) obtaining
However, thanks to the no–slip boundary conditions,
therefore
Combining (6.3), (6.4) we may infer
As entropy is given by the constitutive equation (2.13), (2.14),
and we conclude
Now,
In addition, since \(\textbf{U}_h\), \(\textbf{u}\) satisfy (1.17), (6.5), respectively, we obtain
Going back to (6.2), we deduce
Finally, exploiting weak lower semi–continuity of convex functions, we conclude
which, applying the standard Grönwall argument, yields the desired convergence as well as \(\textbf{u}= \textbf{U}_h\).
We have proved Theorem 4.1.
7 Global Existence for Majda’s Problem
Our ultimate goal is to show global existence of strong solutions to Majda’s model claimed in Theorem 3.1. To this end, it is more convenient to consider the (horizontal) vorticity formulation of (1.16), (1.17). With a slight abuse of notation in the definition of \(\textbf{U}_h\), this formulation reads
with the boundary conditions
and the initial condition
Here, \(\nu = \frac{\mu (\Theta )}{r}\), and
For given \(\omega \), the velocity field \(\textbf{U}_h\) can be recovered via Biot-Savart law:
Remark 7.1
Strictly speaking, the velocity \(\textbf{U}_h\) is determined by (7.7) up to its horizontal average
that can be recovered as the unique solution of the parabolic problem
7.1 Construction via a Fixed Point Argument
The desired solution \(\omega \) to (7.1)–(7.5) can be constructed via a simple fixed point argument. Consider the set
As the initial velocity \(\textbf{U}_{0,h}\) belongs to the class (3.3), the set \(X_M\) is a bounded closed convex subset of the Banach space \(C([0,T] \times \overline{\Omega })\). Moreover, \(X_M\) is non-empty as long as M is large enough to accommodate the initial condition.
We define a mapping \(\mathcal {T}[\widetilde{\omega }] = \omega \), where \(\omega \) is the unique solution of the problem
for some cut–off function \(b_L\). Specifically,
where
7.1.1 Maximum Principle
Applying the standard maximum principle, we deduce
Note carefully that the bound (7.12) depends solely on the initial data. In particular, it is independent of the specific form of the cut–off function \(b_L\).
7.1.2 Maximal \(L^p-L^q\) Regularity
In view of hypothesis (4.2),
Consequently, we can apply the maximal \(L^p-L^q\) regularity estimates, see, e.g., Denk, Hieber, and Prüss [6], to obtain
Here
while, by interpolation and (7.12),
for some \(0< \lambda < 1\). Consequently, it follows from (7.13) and our hypotheses imposed on the initial data that
for all finite p, q.
7.2 Fixed Point
It follows from the estimates (7.12), (7.14) that \(\mathcal {T}\) is a compact (continuous) mapping of \(X_M\) into \(X_M\) provided M is large enough, therefore, by means of Tikhonov–Schauder fixed point Theorem, there is a fixed point \(\omega \in X_M\) satisfying
Finally, as \(\textbf{U}_h\) is given by the Biot–Savart law, we get
in particular
Since this bound is independent of L, we may choose L large enough so that \(b_L (\textbf{U}_h ) = \textbf{U}_h\) to get the desired conclusion
Finally, it is easy to check that the solution is unique in the regularity class (3.4). As a matter of fact, a more general weak–strong uniqueness holds that could be shown adapting the above arguments based on the relative energy inequality.
We have proved Theorem 3.1.
References
Belgiorno, F.: Notes on the third law of thermodynamics, I. J. Phys. A 36, 8165–8193 (2003)
Belgiorno, F.: Notes on the third law of thermodynamics, II. J. Phys. A 36, 8195–8221 (2003)
Bella, P., Feireisl, E., Oschmann, F.: Rigorous derivation of the Oberbeck–Boussinesq approximation revealing unexpected term. Preprint available at http://www.math.cas.cz/fichier/preprints/IM_20220721120958_85.pdf
Chaudhuri, N., Feireisl, E.: Navier–Stokes–Fourier system with Dirichlet boundary conditions. Appl. Anal. 101(12), 4076–4094 (2022)
Daniels, K.E., Brausch, O., Pesch, W., Bodenschatz, E.: Competition and bistability of ordered undulations and undulation chaos in inclined layer convection. J. Fluid Mech. 597, 261–282 (2008)
Denk, R., Hieber, M., Prüss, J.: Optimal \({L}^p-{L}^q\)-estimates for parabolic boundary value problems with inhomogenous data. Math. Z. 257, 193–224 (2007)
Feireisl, E., Klingenberg, C., Kreml, O., Markfelder, S.: On oscillatory solutions to the complete Euler system. J. Differ. Equ. 269(2), 1521–1543 (2020)
Feireisl, E., Málek, J., Novotný, A., Straškraba, I.: Anelastic approximation as a singular limit of the compressible Navier–Stokes system. Commun. Partial Differ. Equ. 33, 157–176 (2007)
Feireisl, E., Novotný, A.: Singular Limits in Thermodynamics of Viscous Fluids. Advances in Mathematical Fluid Mechanics, 2nd edn. Birkhäuser/Springer, Cham (2017)
Feireisl, E., Novotný, A.: Mathematics of Open Fluid Systems. Birkhäuser, Basel (2022)
Klein, R., Botta, N., Schneider, T., Munz, C.D., Roller, S., Meister, A., Hoffmann, L., Sonar, T.: Asymptotic adaptive methods for multi-scale problems in fluid mechanics. J. Eng. Math. 39, 261–343 (2001)
Ladyženskaja, O.A.: Solution “in the large” to the boundary-value problem for the Navier–Stokes equations in two space variables. Soviet Phys. Dokl. 123 (3), 1128–1131 (427–429 Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR), (1958)
Ladyženskaja, O.A.: Solution “in the large’’ of the nonstationary boundary value problem for the Navier–Stokes system with two space variables. Commun. Pure Appl. Math. 12, 427–433 (1959)
Majda, A.: Introduction to PDEs and Waves for the Atmosphere and Ocean. Volume 9 of Courant Lecture Notes in Mathematics. New York University, Courant Institute of Mathematical Sciences, New York; American Mathematical Society. Providence, RI (2003)
Masmoudi, N.: Rigorous derivation of the anelastic approximation. J. Math. Pure Appl. 88, 230–240 (2007)
Funding
Open access publishing supported by the National Technical Library in Prague.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
On behalf of all authors, the corresponding author states that there is no conflict of interest.
Additional information
Communicated by K. Pileckas.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
The work of D.B. was supported by the Czech Sciences Foundation (GAČR), Grant Agreement 21–02411S. The Institute of Mathematics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic is supported by RVO:67985840. P.B. and F.O. were partially supported by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) in context of the Emmy Noether Junior Research Group BE 5922/1-1. The work of E.F. was partially supported by the Czech Sciences Foundation (GAČR), Grant Agreement 21–02411S. The Institute of Mathematics of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic is supported by RVO:67985840. This publication was made possible by NPRP Grant # S-0207-200290 from the Qatar National Research Fund (a member of Qatar Foundation). This research has benefited from the inspiring environment of the CRC 1114 “Scaling Cascades in Complex Systems”, Project Number 235221301, Project C06, funded by Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG).
This article is part of the Topical collection Ladyzhenskaya Centennial Anniversary edited by Gregory Seregin, Konstantinas Pileckas and Lev Kapitanski.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Basarić, D., Bella, P., Feireisl, E. et al. On the Incompressible Limit of a Strongly Stratified Heat Conducting Fluid. J. Math. Fluid Mech. 25, 56 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00021-023-00791-x
Accepted:
Published:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00021-023-00791-x