Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-8ctnn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T04:53:14.491Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A dichotomy theorem for minimizers of monotone recurrence relations

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 September 2013

BLAŽ MRAMOR  and
BOB RINK
BLAŽ MRAMOR
Affiliation:
Institute of Mathematics, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität Freiburg, Germany email [email protected]
BOB RINK
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, VU University Amsterdam, The Netherlands email [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Variational monotone recurrence relations arise in solid state physics as generalizations of the Frenkel–Kontorova model for a ferromagnetic crystal. For such problems, Aubry–Mather theory establishes the existence of ‘ground states’ or ‘global minimizers’ of arbitrary rotation number. A nearest neighbor crystal model is equivalent to a Hamiltonian twist map. In this case, the global minimizers have a special property: they can only cross once. As a non-trivial consequence, every one of them has the Birkhoff property. In crystals with a larger range of interaction and for higher order recurrence relations, the single crossing property does not hold and there can exist global minimizers that are not Birkhoff. In this paper we investigate the crossings of global minimizers. Under a strong twist condition, we prove the following dichotomy: they are either Birkhoff, and thus very regular, or extremely irregular and non-physical: they then grow exponentially and oscillate. For Birkhoff minimizers, we also prove certain strong ordering properties that are well known for twist maps.

Type
Research Article
Information
Ergodic Theory and Dynamical Systems , Volume 35 , Issue 1 , February 2015 , pp. 215 - 248
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press, 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Angenent, S. B.. The periodic orbits of an area preserving twist map. Comm. Math. Phys. 115 (3) (1988), 353–374.Google Scholar
Aubry, S. and Le Daeron, P. Y.. The discrete Frenkel–Kontorova model and its extensions: I. Exact results for the ground-states. Phys. D 8 (3) (1983), 381–422.Google Scholar
Bangert, V.. A uniqueness theorem for ${ \mathbb{Z} }^{n} $ periodic variational problems. Comment. Math. Helv. 62 (4) (1987), 511–531.Google Scholar
Bangert, V.. Minimal geodesics. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 10 (1990), 263–286.Google Scholar
Blank, M. L.. Metric properties of minimal solutions of discrete periodical variational problems. Nonlinearity 2 (1) (1989), 1–22.Google Scholar
Blank, M. L.. Chaos and order in the multidimensional Frenkel–Kontorova model. Teoret. Mat. Fiz. 85 (3) (1990), 349–367.Google Scholar
Llave, R. de la and Valdinoci, E.. Ground states and critical points for Aubry–Mather theory in statistical mechanics. J. Nonlinear Sci. 20 (2) (2010), 152–218.Google Scholar
Forni, G.. Analytic destruction of invariant circles. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 14 (2) (1994), 267–298.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Frenkel, J. and Kontorova, T.. On the theory of plastic deformation and twinning. Acad. Sci. U.S.S.R. J. Phys. 1 (1939), 137–149.Google Scholar
Golé, C.. Symplectic Twist Maps: Global Variational Techniques (Advanced Series in Nonlinear Dynamics, 18). World Scientific, Singapore, 2001.Google Scholar
Koch, H., Llave, R. de la and Radin, C.. Aubry–Mather theory for functions on lattices. Discrete Contin. Dyn. Syst. 3 (1) (1997), 135–151.Google Scholar
MacKay, R. S. and Meiss, J. D.. Cantori for symplectic maps near the anti-integrable limit. Nonlinearity 5 (1) (1992), 149–160.Google Scholar
MacKay, R. S. and Percival, I. C.. Converse KAM: theory and practice. Comm. Math. Phys. 98 (4) (1985), 469–512.Google Scholar
Mather, J. N.. Existence of quasiperiodic orbits for twist homeomorphisms of the annulus. Topology 21 (4) (1982), 457–467.Google Scholar
Mather, J. N.. A criterion for the non-existence of invariant circles. Publ. Math. Inst. Hautes Études Sci. 63 (1986), 153–204.Google Scholar
Mather, J. N.. Modulus of continuity for Peierls’s barrier. Periodic Solutions of Hamiltonian Systems and Related Topics (NATO ASI Series, 209). Springer, Netherlands, 1987, pp. 177–202.Google Scholar
Mather, J. N.. Destruction of invariant circles. Ergod. Th. & Dynam. Sys. 8 (1988), 199–214.Google Scholar
Mather, J. N. and Forni, G.. Action minimizing orbits in Hamiltonian systems. Transition to Chaos in Classical and Quantum Mechanics (Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1589). 1994, pp. 92–186.Google Scholar
Moser, J.. Minimal solutions of variational problems on a torus. Ann. Inst. Henri Poincaré 3 (3) (1986), 229–272.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mramor, B. and Rink, B.. On the destruction of minimal foliations, Proc. Lond. Math. Soc., to appear.Google Scholar
Mramor, B. and Rink, B.. Ghost circles in lattice Aubry–Mather theory. J. Differential Equations 252 (4) (2012), 3163–3208.Google Scholar
Salamon, D. and Zehnder, E.. KAM theory in configuration space. Comment. Math. Helv. 64 (1) (1989), 84–132.Google Scholar